Farmer's Movement in India Farmer's Movement in India Term Paper ID:40863 Essay Subject: This essay discusses the key reasons in the farmer s movement in India in...... 3 Pages / 675 Words 3 sources, 10 Citations, MLA Format 12.00 Paper Abstract: This essay discusses the key reasons in the farmer’s movement in India in the 1990s until the present, primarily arguing that the key split was over increased globalization and government control of agriculture that tended to favor the wealthy rather than poor farmers. Paper Introduction: Farmer's Movement in India The key reasons for the split in the farmer's movement in Indiaduring the s and to this day stems from the increasing globalizationand government control of the agriculture industry in India As Banerjee argues Postcolonial discourses in India continue to reflect thestructural tension between those segments among the ruling elites whoemphasized industrialization at all costs This included increasingagricultural productivity through the application of science Rapid foodproduction and overproduction were accompanied by social exclusion and thegrowth of hunger in As Banerjee (13) argues, "Since 1998, the most intenserhetorical struggle regarding issues of genetic-modification has shifted tothe developing world.
" This is the case for India, where Bt cotton wasapproved for commercial planting in India in 2 2. "Bt Leadership Sought." Business Today 16(12): 17 -171.Jayaraman, Nityanand. For example, water and drought plague poor rural farmers; only thewealthy farmers are able to afford ample water supplies.
Likewise, R. Nashimha Reddy, a farmer from Aleru village, argues that Bt cotton is not, as promised, higher yielding or of better quality than other hybrids: "Thefiber length is shorter for Bt cotton.
Thedebates over Bt cotton demonstrate ongoing struggles between the poor ruralfarmers in India and the government and rich farmers who tend to be pro-Btcotton in comparison. I have kept the Bt separate from the non-Bt.
2 3: 6-7. There are a couple of reasons for this.
Despite this, intensedebates among farmers and between farmers and the government have eruptedsince then. Poor farmers are hamperedby all of these factors associated with Bt cotton, field assessment ofwhich was conducted by representatives of Mahyco-Monsanto in conjunctionwith the Indian government. Yet the failure of Btcotton to deliver on its promises and the political weakness of Singh toimplement effective policies could see rising opposition and a coalition ofpro-poor rural farmers emerge in India.
The introduction of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) into cotton seedswas designed to increase production yields and make cotton crops moreresistant to pests without having to use more expensive chemical pesticides(Jayaraman 6). "Biotech Cotton Failure." Multinational Monitor Jan.
/Feb. "Governmentalizing Nature: A Case of Bt Cotton in India." American Sociological Association Conference Papers 2 3: 1-21.
Bajaj, Kapil. The debates over Bt cotton and the plight of poor, rural farmerswill more than likely not result in a pro-rural coalition that is of greatstrength emerging in India. Likewise. when GEAC approval witnessed crops being grown in Gujarat, the uniongovernment, under pressure from Mahyco, wanted to burn all of it, butfarmers resisted these efforts so the government bought the product. I don't want itsmarket value to be compromised by mixing with Bt" (Jayaraman 7).
Banerjee (15) reports that India has a "very ill-developedregulatory system for monitoring" genetically engineered crops. Farmer's Movement in India The key reasons for the split in the farmer's movement in Indiaduring the 199 s and to this day stems from the increasing globalizationand government control of the agriculture industry in India. As Banerjee(11) argues, "Postcolonial discourses in India continue to reflect thestructural tension between those segments among the ruling elites whoemphasized industrialization at all costs." This included increasingagricultural productivity through the application of science.
Until such time, Jayaraman (7)"claims that Bt cotton will deliver the poor Indian farmer from theclutches of poverty seem likely to remain a dream."Works CitedBanerjee, Damayanti, and Kimura, Aya Hirata. Another significant factor that will more than likely keep a pro-poor rural coalition from developing is the fact that Manmohan Singh, thecurrent Prime Minister, does not have the power to keep his promise ofmaking "industry temper its profit motive" and "delivering the benefits ofIndia's steroid-charged growth to the hundreds of millions of people whoremain outside its ambit" (Rajaj 156).
Oneof the most significant is the fact that capitalism and globalizationcontinue to be geared toward the interests and needs of the wealthy overthe poor. Also the quality is poorer...it'srougher. Despite the significant savings on pesticide costs, poor rural farmers complain that Bt cotton does not produce the high yieldspredicted by Mahyco, the cotton it produces is of lower quality, the hybridcrop requires significant water to produce high yields, and current cropshave a lower market value than higher quality alternative hybrids that areless dependent on water for yield (Jayaraman 7). Marketprice of Bt cotton has yielded 4 less per quintal than non-Bt cotton, andyields for average poor farmers has been around 7 quintals per acre incontrast to the 2 quintals promised by the Mahyco company and thegovernment Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) (Jayaraman 7).
Singh has also maintained this goalcan only be achieved when Indian's farmers "get remuneration prices fortheir crops," but he lacks the political authority to implement the toughmeasures needed to achieve these goals (Rajaj 156). Bt cotton is licensed by Monsanto for use in India by Mahyco. Rapid foodproduction and overproduction were accompanied by social exclusion and thegrowth of hunger in such decisions.