A. FINDINGS
|
I. Agricultural growth slackened continuously by half from 4% during 1985-86/89 to 2% during 2000-01/2004-05. |
| Period |
1980-81 to 84-85 |
85-86 to 89-90 |
1990-91 to 94-95 |
1995-96 to 99-2000 |
2000-2001 to 2004-05 |
| Compound Av. growth rate |
3.86 |
4.08 |
3.57 |
2.96 |
2.03 |
|
| II * Expenditure on Rural development declined sharply by half during 1990s. |
| |
1985-90 Average |
1993-94 |
95-96 |
97-98 |
2000-01 |
2004-05 RE |
1-Rural Dev Expenditure as % |
3.8 |
2,8 |
2.6 |
2.3 |
1.9 |
2.3 |
1-Above plus infrastructure |
11.1 |
8.4 |
6.9 |
6.4 |
5.8 |
6.2 |
|
III. Nineteen nineties were marked by low investment in agriculture affecting the rate of growth of output.
Gross Capital Formation in Agriculture
(Rupees crore, 1999-2000 prices) |
Year |
Total |
Public sector |
Private sector |
| 1980-81 |
27,450 |
12,521 |
14.929 |
| 1990-91 |
35,573 |
7,882 |
27,691 |
| 2002-03 |
46.823 |
7,962 |
38,861 |
| 2004-05 |
48,576 |
10,267 |
38,309 |
|
IV. Decline in public investment in Agriculture
Over the years there is a decline in the share of agriculture investment |
| Period |
Share in total investment |
Share of Public Sector Investment in total investment |
| 1970s |
15% |
14.3% |
| 1980s |
11% |
11.6% |
| 1990s |
8% |
6.5% |
| 2005-06 |
5.7% |
Below 1990s |
|
| Moreover, the share of the agricultural sector investment in GDP declined from 2.2% in the late 1990s to 1.9% in 2003-04 and has remained unchanged up to 2003-06. |
V * Growth rate slowed in coverage of irrigated area in all the main crop categories from late nineties. The growth of expenditure on irrigation declined from 14% from the first half of 1990s to 10% in the second half of 1990s and further to 4% in the subsequent period.
Trend Growth Rate in Area
(% per Year) |
| Period |
1980-81 to 90-91 |
1990-91 to 96-97 |
96-97 to 03-04 |
| Gross irrigated area |
2.28 |
2.62 |
0.51 |
|
VI * Rate of growth of expenditure on extension services has declined manifold since the nineties.
Growth in Real Public Expenditure on Research and Extension (Per cent) |
| Year |
Research& education |
Extension& training |
| 1960s |
6.5 |
10.7 |
| 1970s |
9.5 |
0.00 |
| 1980s |
6.3 |
7.0 |
| 1990-2005 |
4.8 |
2.0 |
|
VII. Continuous decline in the share of plan outlays
There has been continuous decline in the plan outlays for Agriculture. |
| Share of |
Agriculture |
| VI Plan |
5.8% |
| IX Plan |
4.9% |
| X Plan |
3.9% |
|
| The total expenditure on Agriculture fell from 13% in the 90s to 10% in the early part of the current decade. |
| VIII * Flow of investment credit to agriculture is declining. |
Growth of credit to agriculture was only 12 per cent during 1986-87 to 1994-95 as against target of 18%. The share of long-term loans to agriculture in outstanding credit by SCBs to agriculture declined sharply from 76% at end-March 1991 to 59 % at end-March 1996, to 40 % at end-March 2005 and further to 35 % at end-March 2006 before showing an improvement to 40% per cent at end-March 2007. |
| WAY FORWARD: |
1. Increasing expenditure on rural development to 20% of total expenditure.
|
2 Increasing budget allocation to Agricultural sector to 20% of the total Budget.
|
3. Increasing public investment in Agri Sector substantially to reach the level in 1970s i.e., 15% from the present level of 6%, to sustain higher Agri GDP growth.
|
4. Doubling investment in Agri Research and trebling investment in Extension services.
|
5. Allotment of Rs one lakh crore for accelerating completion of ongoing irrigation projects. |
| 6. Increasing direct credit (loans of less than Rs one crore) to agriculture to 18% of net bank credit and half of this credit to be given to small holders. Term Loans to be increased to 50% of the total credit. |
| B. RESULTANT EXTREME WIDE INEQUALITIES IN RURAL/URBAN INCOMES, EXPENDITURE, SAVINGS, CREDIT AND WEALTH |
FOOD SECURITY FIRST-FARMERS WELFARE A MUST
1*DISPARITIES IN SECTORAL INCOMES |
*Share of Agri Sector in National GDP declined sharply from 55% in 1950s to 20% in 2000s. But people dependant on Agriculture which was 70% in 1950s declined only marginally to 60% in 2000s. With the result, per capita income of those dependant on Agriculture is drastically reduced vis-à-vis those dependant on non-farm Sectors.
*The Eleventh Plan candidly confesses: “GDP per agricultural worker is currently around Rs.2,000 per month, which is only about 75% higher in real terms than in 1950 compared to a four-fold increase in overall real per capita GDP
*Studies by the planning commission and others show that while the income ratio between agri workers and non-agri workers during 1950-51 was 1:1.8, it got widened to 1:5.2during by 2004 and it is estimated by the Centre for Development Economics that by 2012 the gap in incomes will get further widened even if Agri GDP grows at 4% during XI Five Year Plan is achieved.
*Such wide unacceptable disparities in farm and non farm incomes have occurred mainly because agriculture produce is under priced for decades and the amount is transferred in disguised forms to non-farm sectors. Continuous under pricing of their produce to benefit the people working in non-farm sectors, is iniquitous and perilous to the nation’s food security and farmers’ welfare. |
| 2* DISPARITIES IN EXPENDITURE, INCOMES and SAVINGS |
Monthly Per Capita Expenditure (MPCE) of the rural individual increased by only 95% in real terms between June 1988 and June 2007 (Compound Annual Growth Rate of just 1.3%) the urban individual increased by 164 % (CAGR of 3%). The average urban MPCE at all India level was nearly twice that of the average rural MPCE.
*Urban income levels are around 85% more than rural ones.
*The average urban household saves nearly double that of a rural household.
*At every level of education and occupation, rural income is lower than those in urban areas. The average salaried household in urban area earns almost double the average for all rural households.
* The incomes of around 25 per cent of Indian households are below their total expenditure; three fourth of such households are located in rural India |
3* DISPARITIES IN WEALTH |
Nearly 30% of the rural population is in the lowest wealth rung, in contrast only 3% of the urban population is in the lowest rung. Nearly half of urban population is in the highest wealth rung; in contrast only 7% of the rural population is in the highest wealth rung. |
4* STUDIES BY VARIOUS BODIES CONFIRM THESE DISPARITIES |
*The Standing Committee on Agriculture in their Report dated 22nd July 2008, have stated that the prices of agricultural produce received by the farmers are lower than the prices of the same prevailing in a free market and are often less than the cost of cultivation. The focus of our development is more towards raising industrial production and recently on the service sector; this lop-sided growth of our economy is increasing the gap between the rich of the cities & poor farmers of the villages. Farmer centric policies which can only solve our food security and unemployment problem are not on the agenda of the successive governments,
*A study conducted by ANGRAU, Hyderabad brought out startling revelations about non-profitability of agriculture.” In order to get Rs4000 per month (equivalent to salary of a peon), a farmer needs 15 to 20 acres. of dry land in Telengana and Rayalaseema areas and 5 acres wet plus 2 1/2 acres dry land in coastal area in A.P.
*The Commission headed by Arjun Segupta revealed that Average monthly income per family household (Rs/Month) from cultivation (2003) of small farmer and big farmer was Rs1578 and Rs 8321 respectively. In comparison, the lowest paid government employee now gets pay and perks exceeding Rs 10,000 per month.
*The NCF recommended that the “net take home income” of farmers should be comparable to those of civil servants. There is absolutely no comparison between the paltry amount a farmer gets for producing life sustaining food to the pay and perks of bureaucrats. How can such wide disparity be justified in economic terms?
*While many marginal farmers are demoted as landless labourers and small farmers as marginal farmers during their life time, Government have assured three promotions to employees during their service. |
5* DISPARITIES IN BANK CREDIT DISPENSATION |
Agriculture, which is the mainstay of 60% of people, received only 9% (Y-O-Y Aug 2007-08) of incremental bank credit as against 13% during 2006-07. And only 6% of it goes to farmers as direct finance. Credit to industry increased from 40% to 45% during the same period despite IIP growth (during April 08- Jan 09) being 3%, one-third of 9% during the corresponding period of the previous year. The ratio of agricultural credit to agricultural GDP was only 33% at end-March 2007 where as the ratio of industrial credit to industrial GDP was a whopping 94%. The mandated lending to agriculture, 18% of net bank credit was never achieved since 1990s (reforms period). |
6* CONCLUSIONS |
*‘Economic growth which bypasses a large population is joyless growth and not sustainable in the long run. What then is the future for India’s rural population numbering over 700 million? We cannot be silent onlookers to a situation where 30% of India is shining and 70% is weeping. Prof.M.S.Swaminathan.
*Statements like “Everything else can wait, but not agriculture”- Jawaharlal Nehru, 1947”Agriculture is a high-risk economic activity” “Agriculture is not just a food producing machine for the urban population” PUTTING FARMERS FIRST, remain mere slogans bereft of any benefit to the provider of food to the nation’s teeming millions.
“Wherever it may wander, the world must follow the farmer. Thus despite all its hardships, farming is the most esteemed work. Farmers are the linchpin of the world, for they support all those who take to other work, not having the strength to plow. When those who plough the fields stand by with folded arms, even completely desireless ascetics will not subsist.” Saint Tiruvalluvar
krsr-230309 |