Green Revolution in : A Case Study
Why Green Revolution?
The world's worst recorded food disaster happened in 1943 in British-ruled . Known as the Bengal Famine, an estimated four millionpeopledied of hunger that year alone in eastern (that included today's ). The initial theory put forward to 'explain' that catastrophe was that there as an acute shortfall in food production in the area. However, Indian economist Amartya Sen (recipient of the Nobel Prize for Economics, 1998) has established that while food shortage was a contributor to the problem, a more potent factor was the result of hysteria related to World War II which made food supply a low priority for the British rulers. The hysteria was further exploited by Indian traders who hoarded food in order to sell at higher prices.
Nevertheless, when the British left four years later in 1947, continued to be haunted by memories of the Bengal Famine. It was therefore natural that food security was a paramount item on free 's agenda. This awareness led, on one hand, to the Green Revolution in and, on the other, legislative measures to ensure that businessmen would never again be able to hoard food for reasons of profit.
However, the term "Green Revolution" is applied to the period from 1967 to 1978 and even into today. Between 1947 and 1967, efforts at achieving food self-sufficiency were not entirely successful. Efforts until 1967 largely concentrated on expanding the farming areas. But starvation deaths were still being reported in the newspapers. In a perfect case of Malthusian economics, population was growing at a much faster rate than food production. This called for drastic action to increase yield. The action came in the form of the Green Revolution.
The term "Green Revolution" is a general one that is applied to successful agricultural experiments in many countries. It is NOT specific to . But it was perhaps most successful in .
What was the Green Revolution in ?
There were three basic elements in the method of the Green Revolution:
1) Continued expansion of farming areas;
2) Double-cropping existing farmland;
3) Using seeds with improved genetics.
Continued expansion of farming areas
As mentioned above, the area of land under cultivation was being increased right from 1947. But this was not enough in meeting with rising demand. Other methods were required. Yet, the expansion of cultivable land also had to continue. So, the Green Revolution continued with this quantitative expansion of farmlands. However, this is NOT the most striking feature of the Revolution.
Double-cropping existing farmland
Double-cropping was a primary feature of the Green Revolution. Instead of one crop season per year, the decision was made to have two crop seasons per year. The one-season-per-year practice was based on the fact that there is only natural monsoon per year. This was correct. So, there had to be two "monsoons" per year. One would be the natural monsoon and the other an artificial 'monsoon.'
The artificial monsoon came in the form of huge irrigation facilities. Dams were built to arrest large volumes of natural monsoon water which were earlier being wasted. Simple irrigation techniques were also adopted.
Using seeds with superior genetics
This was the scientific aspect of the Green Revolution. The Indian Council for Agricultural Research (which was established by the British in 1929 but was not known to have done any significant research) was re-organized in 1965 and then again in 1973. It developed new strains of high yield value (HYV) seeds, mainly wheat and rice but also millet and corn. The most noteworthy HYV seed was the K68 variety for wheat. The credit for developing this strain goes to Dr. M.P. Singh who is also regarded as the hero of 's Green revolution.
Statistical Results of the Green Revolution
1) The Green Revolution resulted in a record grain output of 131 million tons in 1978-79. This established as one of the world's biggest agricultural producers. No other country in the world, which attempted the Green Revolution recorded such level of success. also became an exporter of food grains around that time.
2) Yield per unit of farmland improved by more than 30 per cent between 1947 (when gained political independence) and 1979 when the Green Revolution was considered to have delivered its goods.
3) The crop area under HYV varieties grew from seven per cent to 22 per cent of the total cultivated area during the 10 years of the Green Revolution. More than 70 per cent of the wheat crop area, 35 per cent of the rice crop area and 20 per cent of the millet and corn crop area, used the HYV seeds.
Economic results of the Green Revolution
1) Crop areas under high-yield varieties needed more water, more fertilizer, more pesticides, fungicides and certain other chemicals. This spurred the growth of the local manufacturing sector. Such industrial growth created new jobs and contributed to the country's GDP.
2) The increase in irrigation created need for new dams to harness monsoon water. The water stored was used to create hydroelectric power. This in turn boosted industrial growth, created jobs and improved the quality of life of the people in villages.
3) paid back all loans it had taken from the World Bank and its affiliates for the purpose of the Green Revolution. This improved 's creditworthiness in the eyes of the lending agencies.
4) Some developed countries, especially , which were facing a shortage in agricultural labor, were so impressed by the results of 's Green Revolution that they asked the Indian government to supply them with farmers experienced in the methods of the Green Revolution. Many farmers from and Haryana states in northern were thus sent to where they settled (That's why today has many Punjabi-speaking citizens of Indian origin). These people remitted part of their incomes to their relatives in . This not only helped the relatives but also added, albeit modestly, to 's foreign exchange earnings.
Sociological results of the Green Revolution
The Green Revolution created plenty of jobs not only for agricultural workers but also industrial workers by the creation of lateral facilities such as factories and hydro-electric power stations as explained above.
Political results of the Green Revolution
1) transformed itself from a starving nation to an exporter of food. This earned admiration for in the comity of nations, especially in the .
2) The Green Revolution was one factor that made Mrs Indira Gandhi (1917-84) and her party, the Indian National Congress, a very powerful political force in India (it would however be wrong to say that it was the only reason).
Limitations of the Green Revolution
1) Even today, 's agricultural output sometimes falls short of demand. The Green Revolution, howsoever impressive, has thus NOT succeeded in making totally and permanently self-sufficient in food. In 1979 and 1987, faced severe drought conditions due to poor monsoon; this raised questions about the whether the Green Revolution was really a long-term achievement. In 1998, had to import onions. Last year, imported sugar.
However, in today's globalized economic scenario, 100 per cent self-sufficiency is not considered as vital a target as it was when the world political climate was more dangerous due to the Cold War.
2) has failed to extend the concept of high-yield value seeds to all crops or all regions. In terms of crops, it remains largely confined to foodgrains only, not to all kinds of agricultural produce. In regional terms, only and Haryana states showed the best results of the Green Revolution. The eastern plains of the River Ganges in state also showed reasonably good results. But results were less impressive in other parts of .
3) Nothing like the Bengal Famine can happen in again. But it is disturbing to note that even today, there are places like Kalahandi (in 's eastern state of Orissa) where famine-like conditions have existed for many years and where some starvation deaths have also been reported. Of course, this is due to reasons other than availability of food in , but the very fact that some people are still starving in (whatever the reason may be), brings into question whether the Green Revolution has failed in its overall social objectives though it has been a resounding success in terms of agricultural production.
4) The Green Revolution cannot therefore be considered to be a 100 per cent success.
(From Saby Ganguly, http://www.indiaonestop.com/Greenrevolution.htm)
1. What were the causes and results of the Bengal Famine in 1943?
2. Briefly describe the three basic elements of the Green Revolution in India:
3. List two positive results of the Green Revolution in India:
4. List three positive economic, sociologic, or political results of the Green revolution in India:
5. Briefly describe two limitations of the Green revolution in India:
Questions to Article 39 (Annual Editions 05/06):
6. Discuss ONE solution to the paradox that the world is producing more food than ever before, but at the same time the number of the world’s hungry is on the rise.
7. Use data to prove that world does, in fact, produce enough food to adequately feed every person in the world.
8. Explain how people still go hungry in the world, even though we produce enough for every person.
9. Discuss TWO plans devised by the Group of Eight to combat world hunger.
10. How does the recent political change in India’s government illustrate a fundamental shift in its approach to combat hunger? How successful do you think this new approach will be?
The Green revolution is the answer to the world's food supply problem. Agree or disagree.
Create a three paragraph argumentative essay that introduces the opposite point of view you are taking. Read all of the Pro and Con statements and establish your thesis (you may use the concepts presented in the statements, but you cannot plagiarize or simply rewrite the statements in your essay). Your first paragraph should explain the opposite point of view (e.g. It is commonly accepted that the Green Revolution is the answer to the world's food supply problem ...) The following paragraphs will contain your main ideas that support your position and refute the ideas presented in the first paragraph.
This technique allows the reader to see both sides of the argument. Also, by explaining the opposite position, you solidify your claims because you demonstrate that you have studied both sides of the issue and have come to your conclusions through careful analysis.
The Green Revolution Essay
989 Words4 Pages
Broad Topic: The Green Revolution
Narrowed Topic: Pesticides and the Green Revolution: The impact on the environment and counter- measures. The green revolution technology phenomenon started in Mexico over sixty years ago. The technology which is still relevant today has, forever changed the way agriculture is conducted worldwide. According to Wilson (2005), green revolution technology “involved using high-yielding varieties (HYV) of seeds, pesticides and fertilizers in addition to irrigation” (para. 4). The technology was used mainly to boost the production of wheat and rice, so that developing countries could keep up with the growing demand of their rising population. The process has led to significant increase in…show more content…
One of the most worrying concerns for farmers associated with green revolution farming is probably the health risk, associated with prolonged exposure to pesticides. Wilson (2005) cited Wilson and Tisdell (2001), calls our readers’ attention to the fact that “insecticides are the most frequently used pesticides and are known to be toxic to humans, wildlife and the environment” (para.6). Toxic residue adds up over the years and can lead to long term and short term, chronic illnesses and life long complications and is even known to cause death. Furthermore, farmers who get ill from exposure to pesticides often suffer from, headaches, skin rashes, nausea, twitching of muscles, chest pains and a host of other illnesses. This has led to various stakeholders amplifying the need, for a new approach to pesticides usage. Shaebecoff (1983) highlighted the challenges of enforcing safety regulations in regards to the use and banning of pesticides, while Tillman (1998) called for the need of high-intensity agriculture with fewer environmental costs. However, established pesticide regulatory levels for intentional and unintentional presence of pesticides, are often not enforce, and where there are enforcement, fines for breaches are usually negligible. Regulations or not, it is imperative that farmers take some ownership of their own health, and employ every precautionary