|
Veeru
and Veena Nagpal have a nice way of socializing.
Every Monday at 4.30PM, few old and retired
gentlemen and mostly ladies get together at his
residence, and sing religious songs (bhajans and
kirtans). We reached today a little early. Veeru
and me were two males sitting in one corner. And
as usual, some conversation started. Veeru
enquired about my views on the large-scale
suicides of the farmers in the country. (Veeru
runs an NGO also for waste management in Noida.)
I have my own opinion about these suicides that
I shared with him:
Farmers are of two categories- the landless ones
taking land from the land holding farmers to
till on rent against certain cash or percentage
of the produce and the others with land of their
own. The list of deceased constitutes farmers of
the both categories. We are to differentiate
between the two categories. The landless tillers
never consider the land as their own and don’t
bother much to get the best out of the land.
They just wish to have yield good enough to pay
the rent and get some extra to carry on.
However, those with land of their own are
ambitious, take to new ways of farming, and do
take risks sometimes a little more than what
they should.
However, the main issue is the profitability of
farming. Can it give earning (output price-input
cost) good enough to sustain the family that own
the land or till the land at rent?
It is either the government through minimum
support price or the buyer generally the traders
in business in the open market decide the farmer
produce’s unit price. Open market traders
normally try to pay the minimum that they can
manage taking advantage of the prevailing
situation (both of the market and personal
urgency of the farmer) when the crops get ready
for sale. With no other source of income to run
the day-to-day expenses and under the pressure
to return the loans taken for the inputs in
farming, the farmers are not in a position to
store the produce to sell it when the price is
the best that he can get. Sometimes, even they
lack the facilities to store.
The biggest reason of farmers’ miseries is the
poor price that they get for their produce.
Normally the farmers receive too tiny a
proportion of the price their produce gets when
eventually sold at to the direct consumers. The
more are the middlemen, the lesser is the
proportion. Can the proportion be improved by
cutting down the middlemen? If the government
can find a practical way for that, it can be a
win-win situation for both the consumers and the
producer farmers. Farmers can get better price
through contract farming, when there is a
reliable corporate buyer is to lift the produce
as soon as it is ready. ITC procurement through
e-Choupal is a success story and so are the
PepsiCo and other MNCs initiatives for contract
farming. However, the interest of farmers must
be monitored through some independent agencies
so that the buyers of the farmers’ produce don’t
exploit them. Farmers may also be trained and
helped to do some value addition to their
produce to get a better price, if possible. It
will also mean some more employment
opportunities in rural areas of the country.
Naturally, the second biggest problem is about
the financing of the inputs for the farming.
Most of the farmers don’t maintain a fund for
the farming inputs. Neither do they keep a bank
account. Less than a third of India’s population
is connected to the banking system. In rural
India, the proportion will be even worse. The
farmers are among them. Most of them are to
depend on private moneylenders, who charge huge
interest that keeps on accumulating with a
little lapse, and it is many times more than the
regular banks charge. Why can’t here be a
special drive to bring all the farmers in some
tie up with the banking system that can separate
out the credibility of individual farmers based
on the past records and provide credits as and
when required by the farmers?
Many things can be done to improve the
conditions of the farmers, but they must
understand today that cultivation or farming is
also a management and it requires the desired
skill to succeed. It can’t be any more done in
ad hoc manner, as was the practice many years
ago when the landholdings used to be
substantial. Moreover, the extra effort for some
additional earning through horticulture,
fisheries and livestock farming will also be
essential, where all the family members must
work physically forgetting the social
restrictions and practices.
I am not convinced that the suicides of farmers
relate only to failures of crops. As I
understand the reasons for indebtedness for the
farmers used to be four: family functions such
as son/daughter’s marriage or even for the
ritual after the death of the family member;
legal expenses; child education; and emergency
medical expenses. We never heard of indebtedness
because of the excessive expenditure in farming.
A detail study by some institution with
expertise is necessary to understand the real
causes and take preventive steps. No amount of
ad hoc payment as charity to the deceased family
can be of any help for the solution of the
social problems.
I was amazed when someone suddenly asked me if I
knew that it was only in Congress ruled states.
I didn’t reply.
|
Comments: |
|
No comment so far. |
|
Discussion on this topic is now
closed. |
Return to previous Page |