Articles
Ecological Democracy
Vol.1 Issue 2 May 2013
http://www.ecologicaldemocracy.net/archive/archive2/articles.php#
- The Question of Social Design of 'Who-Whom' in Technology Implementation (Dinesh Abrol)
- Health Care in the Indian Union Budget 2013-14 (Ritu Priya)
- Learning from the minds on the margin: towards a new social contract for responsible science (Anil K. Gupta)
- Mining boom, resistance and the future: Indias global position (Markus Kroger)
- Sadhya, Sadhan aur Sadhna (Anupam Mishra)
- Small Farmers,Institutions and 12th Five year Plan : Making the Triad Talk (Ranvir Singh / Biraj Swain)
-----------------------------------
The Question of Social Design of 'Who-Whom' in Technology Implementation
Dinesh Abrol (NISTADS)
Abstract
This paper describes the social shaping requirements of technology transformation involving a strategy of institutional transformation of the systems of technology implementation in agriculture and allied sectors for the benefit of weaker sections in India. It argues that the innovation system approach guided by the pursuit of competitive advantage where the emerging institutional arrangements sidestep the goals of social equity and ecological security is unlikely to achieve a favorable environment for the weaker sections oriented institutional transformation of innovation systems in India. It analyses the weaker sections oriented requirements of social shaping that are also consistent with the long-term goals of agriculture and allied sectors in India. It abstracts from the technological and innovation system design practices of the examples of social experiments designed by some of the people oriented S&T voluntary agencies. It employs the lessons drawn from the examples of work undertaken under these social experiments in respect of technology implementation and R&D to deal with the question of ‘who-whom’ in oilseeds processing, pulse processing, fruits and vegetables processing, watershed based development, wasteland development and milk production and processing. In the context of the emerging challenge of agricultural trade liberalization, it suggests that the approach of these social experiments has much to offer to the policymakers in respect of the social shaping by the weaker sections of agricultural R&D and technology implementation in India. The potential that the approach of network system of technology implementation for the development of people’s oriented technologies is analyzed with the aim to make a positive contribution to the formulation of a strategy of transformation of the institutions involved in the management of agricultural R&D and technology implementation in the age of agricultural trade liberalization. It makes concrete suggestions in respect of the policy for the development of a new set of organizations and institutions to tackle the question of social design of ‘who-whom’ in R&D and technology implementation.
Introduction
Technologies have not only social impacts but also are simultaneously social products that embody power relationships and social goals and structures. Technology system designs frequently embody particular images of how the organizations or cultures of user and implementing bodies’ function and what the role of their members should be. Once introduced, it is to be noted, these innovations, by embodying these images, can help either rigidify or alter the technology and the society. Therefore, one needs to be conscious of the ways in which a new technical invention can be inserted into an existing network of social relationships. In other words, this brings to the fore the question of design of who-whom in technology and innovation system, which must be consciously thought about from the standpoint of weaker sections. In agriculture and allied sectors, they are large in numbers, have substantial knowledge and skills, can contribute in a big way to the sustainable agriculture and must be made partners in the development of production systems that are also competitive in the emerging context of liberalization. This paper illustrates the policy implications of choosing to go for the weaker sections oriented shaping of technologies and the selection of strategies for technology implementation, adaptation and development that are consistent with the long term goals of development of agriculture and allied sectors in India.
A critical evaluation of the emerging policy approaches for the development of systems of rural innovation
When the goal of policymakers is to enable the weaker sections to improve their access to the national system of R&D for the benefit of S&T application in rural areas, it is quite clear that the currently popular policy approach of using the arrangements of public-private sector partnerships has little to contribute to the process of innovation for their benefit. For example, this fact is now beginning to be recognized in the sphere of agricultural biotechnological innovation. Big business has little interest in making the poor peasants as their partners in the projects of agricultural innovation. Even in the context of establishment of the relationships of public sector research with poor peasantry or landless the problems experienced in the course of implementation of green revolution technology during the pre-reform period were plenty. Rather than overcoming those problems during the period of reforms the country has experienced an ugly situation of the suicides of farmers. The existing system of innovation was unable to use the format of public private sector partnership to the advantage of rural poor for agricultural innovation in the country. Preference was given to the diversification of farm output which could benefit the forces of agribusiness.
The question of how improvements may be affected in the process of agricultural innovation has been directly addressed in the systems of innovation approach by many well meaning scholars. The innovation process has been viewed as suffering from merely the problem of policymakers not taking proper steps to tackle the barriers to interaction and integration of the system as a whole with the private sector. This is the case with even the analysis being undertaken by the well meaning scholars of agricultural innovation (A. Hall, et al (2001), Suresh pal & Joshi, P.K (1999). Although quite a few suggestions have also been made by these scholars to improve the ‘participation’ of these sections as end users in the system of innovation, yet these suggestions are quite inadequate from the standpoint of making the rural poor as the target of innovation process. Even in their analysis the patterns of interaction with end users have been viewed with the aid of an informational conception of barriers to interaction. When it comes to the strategies of development of knowledge markets, the target for ‘user development’ and development of user support organizations is the private or state sector organizations only. The end users like poor peasants, artisans and agricultural labourers are never targeted for the purpose of user development. Policies for the development of user support organizations in the case of rural poor are also not oriented to the task of improving the participation of these end users in the process of technology development that would help make them competitive and stand on their own in competition with the large and medium private sector organizations.
The perspective of the large-scale private organizations essentially guides the pursuit of competitive advantage. Technology transfer failures are viewed as a consequence of the poorly developed reach of the public sector research system, in which the private sector organizations should be encouraged to develop partnerships with the public sector research system. The calculations of economic viability of the technologies to be implemented by the potential adopters among the weaker sections are ipso facto undertaken as if they cannot organize themselves and their access to the knowledge markets must be viewed as individuals of small means whose role is to make the land and their labour available for agricultural production and at the best participate in the process of value addition as lower end producers in the long value chain controlled by the large scale private and public organizations.
Today the big and medium business groups are trying to capture the new technological opportunities including in the sphere of organics and natural products by establishing their control over the production and marketing system. These forces are trying to get the state governments to change also the legislation on land ceiling. Their strategy to overcome the constraints on the adoption of these new technological opportunities seems to be basically against the interests of rural poor. Reverse land reform is already on the agenda. Some state governments are already seriously considering amending the legislation. These developments can totally negate the possibility of achieving the goals of social equity and ecological security in the sector of agriculture. If they (the big business and their allies in rural areas) succeed mostly the rural poor will be integrated as labourers or ‘labourers like’ as will be the case in contract farming.
In our view, the most important question to be looked into is whether the policymakers should characterize and target the potential domains of multiple stakeholders based on the existing comparative advantages or look for the strategies of transformation of technological and innovation systems that go beyond the primitive conception of competitiveness of poor peasants, agricultural labourers and artisans who populate the production systems relating to Indian agriculture and its allied sectors. In identifying complementary linkages should the perspective and support of the private sector be mainly the guiding principle for the development of actions in the spheres of human resource development, development and modernization of research infrastructure, supply of inputs and services, development of contractual research for be medicinal and economic plants or horticulture, IPR and PVP legislation, and so on. In respect of the development of mechanisms of interfacing and institutionalization should the policymakers not look at the issues connected with the design of policies relating to the selection of objectives of technology development and the choice of partners for user development and user support organizations from the standpoint of how can the weaker sections offer through their appropriate organization and interfacing all the relevant economies of scale and scope and assure network and cluster effects, ignored so far in competitiveness evaluation
Formulation of strategies and action plans for the purpose of institutional transformation of the systems of agricultural R&D and innovation cannot be therefore limited to working out how do we set up the institutional framework for the development of public-private sector interaction and for the integration of research and non-research organizations. In the context of how to improve the access to the system of agricultural R&D and innovation for the weaker sections, the starting point has to be the analysis of needs with reference to the development of their competitiveness in respect of the development and implementation of technological innovations that are suitable for sustainable agriculture and upgrading of traditional manufacturing going on in non-farm/off-farm conditions in the sectors like agro industries, food processing, processing of fibers, plant based health system, biomass based energy, supply of seeds, external inputs and post-harvest operations. In the development of agriculture and allied sectors, rural non-farm employment will have a synergistic role if the competitiveness of production based on local resources and markets and skills is developed with a system approach in which the weaker sections are drivers and key partners of the public agricultural research system.
Current situation in agriculture and allied sectors
Experience suggests that in the case of agriculture and allied sectors the current mechanism of technology commercialization in India is mostly embedded in a technology push approach. Rural technologies are mostly created without a detailed assessment of the needs of potential rural users in terms of particularly the type of competition they face and the opportunities they can avail. For both agriculture and rural industries since the final end users lie mostly from among the rural poor, it is not possible to create the technologies required without an assessment of their current level of access to markets, resources and capabilities. The S&T agencies are not geared at all to help the rural poor to become competitive users of the technologies. To achieve commercial successes for the rural technologies the current mechanism of training and demonstration in the ready-made technologies is totally inadequate for the implementation of technology. The present passive approach is unable to help the weaker sections in rural areas to benefit from the technologies under development.
Indian Agriculture
Major agricultural development schemes have a bias towards preferring the inputs that are scarce & costly. Agricultural development schemes are focused on the application of inputs that are to be obtained from the economy in which the participation of rural poor is difficult. High yielding seeds requiring large doses of water are the basis of improvement in the agricultural production. More and more pesticides are being required to protect the output of crops from the ever-increasing attacks of the new generation of pests that have now emerged. The productivity gains achieved through irrigation and high input agriculture are concentrated in a small area and a privileged few have access to the water and energy sources developed at public cost. Further development of agriculture on the basis of the present technological package of varieties requiring large doses of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, water and energy will be a costly process. As the government is unable to sustain it through subsidies, even for the rich farmers it is seemingly a costly process.
The scope for increase in yield as well as area of high yield crops is small. The exhaustion of the present technological package for productivity gains in agriculture is becoming increasingly visible today in the field. The existing technological package is suffering from serious weaknesses. Salinity and water logging, build up of pests and toxins, continuing heavy soil losses due to erosion, declining input responsiveness, stagnation in productivity, distortions in food system due to loss of forage crops, pulses and oil seeds, unsustainable water and fertilizer intensive crop rotations are some indications. These weaknesses particularly afflict those areas that have contributed maximum to the production in the last thirty years. Within the framework of the present technological package, it is becoming difficult to obtain sustainable solutions to the problems of even the green revolution areas. Problems are far more severe when it comes to finding sustainable solutions in the difficult areas of wasteland development, water management in drought prone areas, deteriorating soil health increase in productivity in dry land agriculture. Increased production in well-endowed areas with the help of subsidized inputs is a central feature of the process of development of agriculture based on the present technological package. It cannot be extended to the new areas and sections without aggravating the above pointed out weakness to the level of a serious crisis that the nation will not be able to tackle for the years to come.
Productivity decline in less favored areas is on account of neglect of local water storages and soil protection. Production of pulses and coarse grains has stagnated because these crops are being grown on soils that are heavily eroded and seriously deficient in nutrients. Techniques for conserving moisture, reducing erosion, building soil fertility and raising yields and farm incomes in dry land areas are known, but they have not been profitable enough to induce widespread investments by individual farmers.
Rural non-farm employment
Experience of last fifty years of development of rural non-farm employment has similar important lessons on the issue of technological transformation. In the programmes of rural industries, the approach has been to promote the cottage scale units run by standalone rural producers: the individual halwai, the miller, the weaver, the potter, the blacksmith, and the village leather worker.
In generating technological inputs the approach of the Khadi and village Industries commission (KVIC) was to improve traditional technologies by scaling them up to intermediate levels and introducing power-driven machines. This approach increased the scale and costs for the small producers, made practical functioning difficult and affected adversely the formulations of viable projects. For example, the traditional ghani is fast disappearing but it has not yet been replaced by the power driven ghani. The large producer using solvent extraction/ expellers is more competitive. Improved gur furnaces have been developed but not adopted adequately. The power pottery wheel entered the market about two decades ago (1970). Yet the village potter continues to operate the traditional wheel. The semi-automatic improved loom was developed in 1972, 90% of handloom weavers continue to use the pit loom. In most of these cases technologies developed failed to incorporate local resources-raw materials, engineering materials energy sources immediately accessible by or with the people. Linkages with local economy were ignored.
Experience of poverty alleviation schemes is again not very different. These programmes were initiated with the aim of targeting households below the poverty line, and the idea was to provide each of them with a productive asset through a subsidized loan so that they can rise above the poverty line. The access provided to rural poor under these programmes included milch cattle, goats, sheep and poultry; equipment such as sewing machines, tool kits, camel carts, handcarts, rickshaws or bicycles for hiring out; or working capital for petty trading, tea or pan shops and the like. This approach of promoting small producers among the rural poor through the programmes for self-employment is failing to achieve the objective of large scale and reduce rural deprivation. Wrong selection of beneficiaries, `leakage', failures of enterprises, loss of assets, saturation of small markets for produce etc. have been found to be responsible for the non-achievement of objectives on large scale.
Further analysis shows that the approach taken is not able to ensure the economic viability of the income generating projects. Projects are not selected for cost effectiveness. Backward and forward linkages are absent; beneficiaries selected among rural poor are not adequately skilled and lack management competence; the role of the middlemen and contractors, is inimical, leading to `leakage', training is done in isolation without integrating with specific projects, and often without reference to local demand for skills.
Evaluations undertaken have been recommending priority to those income-generating projects, which fulfill certain criteria. The projects should be economically viable. They must be innovative and designed to diversify the beneficiaries into never areas of economic activity in a competitive way. The viability of projects must be ensured through assured forward/backward linkages, training should be given in improved technology to produce goods that have a market; provision of new skills should improve employability or productivity.
The moot question is how can we avoid the repetition of old failures and achieve positively the policy of technological transformation of petty production in a way that advances the options of sustainable development of agriculture and allied sectors in India. For the development a viable answer what type of strategy should the policymakers formulate to answer this problem? Foresight and assessment exercises of technology implementation being carried out by some of the S&T voluntary agencies tell us that there are many favorable technological opportunities available today.
Low external input and sustainable agriculture
The arising new technological opportunities offer a wide range of different solutions to the problem areas indicated to be critical to maintaining productivity gains through the formulation of strategies of transition to the appropriate system of low external inputs in Indian agriculture (BGVS, 1998). Given below is the system design under implementation in respect of low external and sustainable agriculture at several field sites in India which promises the peasantry and rural labour the opportunity to improve their own livelihoods and empower themselves against the attempts of big business to control the Indian agriculture.
Figure: Third level of integration. Addition of ‘Biodigester’ unit for recycling.
This is the Multi-subsystem Integrated Farming System that was.
As a whole, if we generalize the subsystem integration and resource flow, it will be
something like –
NTR= nutrients, Excr./Ex = Excreta
Figure: General scheme of integration.
Transition to an appropriate system of low external input agriculture is being understood to be consisting of a process of conversion from an unbalanced conventional (green revolution) or traditional farm system to an economically, ecologically and socially balanced one. Recognizing that transition process can be lengthy it is understood that the R&D and innovation systems would be working on a regular basis to extend those technological trajectories that favor the weaker sections in their pursuit of systemic development of agriculture and allied sectors.
Below we describe in brief the available major technological approaches where the national agricultural R&D system has quite a significant contribution to make, which would have to be extended by the R&D and innovation systems in a consistent manner in the interest of weaker sections:
Better cropping systems and agronomic practices in order to rationalize the use of fertilizers strictly matching the recommendation with soil and plant needs,
Promotion of varieties with low fertilizer requirements and resistance to diseases and tolerance of poor conditions of soil and water,
Increased use of bio-fertilizers and of practices such as green manuring and application of farm compost, development of cropping systems based on cover strategies which check soil erosion, improve soil health by building organic matter, promote efficient uptake of available nutrients in soils, exploit plant water micro-organism symbiosis,
Increased use of biological control and integrated pest management,
Farming systems which save on external inputs by making use of complementarities available in the combinations of livestock rearing, aqua-culture and crop planning,
Promotion of rain water harvesting and better water application systems, which conserve water and allow better drainage, etc.
Fine tuning the Livestock Sub System:
The livestock subsystem is a key component in any integrated farm system. While this has an important role in the resource cycling as farm inputs, this can also be instrumental in upscaling the farm economy through value addition in dairy produces. A number of group innovations are also possible with livestock based interventions.
Towards this the following are the constraints and possibilities:
1. Providing livestock to the farms that do not have it at present. A suitable credit institution has to be worked out for this.
2. Increasing the productivity of existing livestock.
3. Strengthening fodder production and feed enrichment.
4. Semi processing of surplus livestock produces (including fish) for forward marketing.
Semi processing of Crop Surpluses at Household level:
A common understanding from the ongoing phase’s experience has been that unless household supplementary income is improved food and nutritional security cannot be ensured. This is because; often small farmers are compelled to sell their crops before meeting the food and nutritional needs to meet various nonfarm expenditures. To meet this challenge, focus will be laid in the proposed phase on value addition of surplus crops wherever possible. Strengthening semi-processing process at household level would hence be a major focus.
B. Cluster Scale:
Towards replication of this mode of farming initiative, watershed level interventions become important. Here, focus is laid on rejuvenating the ecosystem health of the adjacent watershed, in order to improve the biological resource base. Focus is also laid on creating enterprises and institutions for large scale production of various biological agri-inputs, processing and marketing of semi-processed and processed surplus agri-produces and resource user associations at the community scale that would serve as interaction forum and would also look after various interventions after completion of the project phase.
Following activities may be taken up towards the above:
Watershed level interventions:
Creation and rejuvenation of community water harvesting structures wherever necessary
Creation of sylvi-pastures for fodder, high value aromatic crops and food forests in common lands for common use, to be managed by the landless and women’s groups.
Creation of nurseries to be managed by landless and women’s groups.
Soil conservation and water holding structures wherever necessary.
Inputs and Allied Services Centers:
Although, a major objective of the program was tighter resource cycling and thereby reduction of external farm inputs, with a larger number of farms taking up these activities, there would be a demand for such biological inputs like Microbial fertilizers, Biological control agents, Compost starter cultures, Vermi-composts and Vermi cultures etc. There would also be a demand for technical advisories on sustainable agriculture and skilled civil engineering services for creating vermin-compost cisterns, land shaping earthworks etc. Towards this, creation of BIOMARTS in respective project locations would be a meaningful intervention. BIOMARTS can be taken up as enterprises by rural educated youth for production of low cost biological inputs, technical advices and civil engineering services mentioned earlier.
Agri-Processing Centers:
A major activity in the proposed program would be creation of agri-processing centres. One such centre will be established in each farm cluster whose activities will be the following:
a. Final processing of the semi-processed surplus agri-produces supplied by the
farm families and marketing the same in suitable markets under a brand name.
For marketing, local markets will be given priority but external niche markets
may also be explored subsequently for higher returns. Profits generated from
these centres may be shared with the farmers.
b. Processing of produces from the sylvi-pastures like distillation of aromatic
crops etc. and sharing revenues with the stake holders.
c. These centres may also be run as enterprises by local educated youth.
Resource Users’ Association:
In order to make these activities self sustainable after the project phase is over, we propose constitution of Resource Users’ Associations comprising farmers, landless workers, and entrepreneurs involved in the aforementioned system. Activities of these associations would be the following:
Interactions and experience sharing
Monitoring the common facilities like sylvipastoral activities.
Liasoning with external resource groups for problem solving and reinforcements of activities relating to sustainable natural resource management.
Technology models for rural non-farm sectors
For technological upgrading of the rural non-farm sectors the users can at least make a start in respect of the development of local economies as a system in itself as there exist today a wide range of technology models available for rural application with the S&T voluntary agencies, CSIR laboratories and KVIC. Technology models amenable to adaptation for the proposed development strategy are available in the fields of agro processing, fruits and vegetables processing, fiber processing, processing of economic and medicinal plants, biomass based energy systems, etc. For further information see the following source books (CSSTD 1981, CSIR 2000, BGVS 1998, DST 2001).
PSM experience of the design of who-whom of rural innovation
Broadly speaking, the above-mentioned technological opportunities are essentially aimed at establishing the environment friendly trajectory of biological agriculture and reducing the use of chemicals for protection and fertilization in the country and developing the rural non-farm sector in a systemic way along the pathway of development of local economy as a system as such. PSM organizations have built so far successfully network system of units in the sectors of leather processing based on vegetable tanning of leather and carcass recovery, fruits and vegetable processing based on the production of niche products doing value addition to locally available perishable fruits and vegetables, agro-processing units based on oil and dhal mills supplying also co-products like compound cattle feed, processing of non-edible oilseeds based on value addition for the development of products that can be marketed locally and the creation of agro-ecological farming systems.
Evaluation of the experience of all the above-mentioned programmes including the BIOFARM programme of Department of Science and Technology (DST) and Peoples’ Science Movement (PSM) organizations for the development of agro-ecological farming systems tells us that farmers and artisans are required to cooperate in the planning of production on the basis of an area sometimes as wide as a full agro-ecological region to adopt all these technologies successfully. The minimal requirement of area over which the farmers must co-operate will certainly vary for the different technologies. This means that the strength of networking will determine what type of technological package the rural poor in the field can adopt. Depending on the strength of their network people will have to choose an appropriate scale of co-operation. Using new technological opportunities, we believe that people will be able to certainly produce all the required seeds, planting materials, bio-fertilizers, bio-pesticides and energy inputs on a competitive basis in the local economy.
The approach should not be of promoting stand alone small producer; it should be based on the principle of multi-sectoral co-operation in production. For the successful introduction of several biological agriculture technologies multi-sectoral collective actions will be a production imperative. For example, for the production of inputs, if people want social control, they will certainly require multi-occupational/ multi-sectoral collective actions. Production co-operation will also not be limited to merely the co-operation among farmers. We will prefer the agricultural labourers, artisans and technicians to co-operate among themselves to implement the input production strategy. They will have to come together to establish a taluk-wide production network to supply the required inputs to the farmers on a competitive basis. This means that a major effort will be needed for the locale specific rural industries that will be targeted to produce the locally needed inputs for the practice of biological/low external input agriculture. This will give an opportunity to involve the agricultural labourers as skilled workers in a big way in the production networks. This way we will be able to produce at the level of local economy itself the new inputs like vermicomposts, agro-organic manures, bio-fertilisers, neem based pesticides, parasitoids and predators, antagonistic and entomogenous microbes, biological control products, bio sensors, early pest warning systems & plant growth stimulants.
Needless to say, programmes for the promotion of co-operation in production in the existing ground realities will have to take into account the existing forms of co-operation in production among the rural poor in particular. Currently, the co-operation exists in the local economies for the supply and repair of agricultural implements. Small and marginal cultivators pursuing bullock-powered agriculture do have linkages with the local artisans and are served by a network of the blacksmiths and carpenters at the taluk and kasba level for the supply and repair of implements. Small and marginal cultivators also have linkages for the supply of seeds and manure amongst themselves. For the rural poor Adahari, zuari, mitan, padhyal, muiyallhu, are the traditional forms of co-operation in production.
Taluk wide peasant-artisan-agricultural labour co-operation as a driving system
Even today the existing local peasant-artisan economy is still not beyond the control of rural poor. For the establishment of a viable system of innovation the area to be tackled for the development of multi-sectoral production system is a taluk wide network. The strategy of development should be to develop the secondary and primary production being carried out today for the local markets by the poor people as a system in itself. This route to industrial development should receive a priority because through this route there is at least a fair chance for the rural poor to develop competitive rural industrial production. Rural poor will also be able to participate more effectively in the establishment of a large-scale networked system of collective production using this route because the local economy is already under their own control. They will have certainly less problem to develop a taluk wide network (U Trivedi, 1984).
It should be clear that no village can and should exist as a closed self-sufficient entity. The official Gandhian approach of village development is certainly inadequate. A viable unit for planned development is the taluk wide economy. Every Indian village, for all its major needs, is at least today closely dependent on the local taluk wide economy. This local economy exists as a multi-sectoral network. In this network the rural poor are themselves both producers and consumers. Occupations engaging the landless labour, artisans, small / marginal cultivators are mutually interrelated amongst themselves, as well as with that of cultivators pursuing bullock-powered agriculture and generally employing family labour. All existing techniques in order to be viable depend upon linked occupations/sectors for provision of inputs, utilization of outputs including that for domestic purposes, and for fabrication as well as repair and maintenance services. Improved/new technology for any occupation/sector too will need a system of forward and backward linkages. Rural poor will be able to benefit from the interventions if we can develop the occupations in an interconnected manner.
In the local economy the range of occupations engaging the rural poor is wide and varied. It includes agricultural labour; small/marginal cultivators, hides and skins occupations ranging over flaying, carcass utilization tanning, and product making; cloth weaving dyeing and printing; fibre collection/extraction, basket and mat weaving; animal husbandry, poultry, fishing, toddy tapping, etc. In the areas of allied secondary processing there are occupations like food processing; black smithy, carpentry, pottery, and masonry and other `engineering-artisan', or handicraft occupation; manual haulage and transportation including cycle rickshaw and scavenging.
A significant example of linked sector which has maximum inter connections and almost all the existing occupations into a local economy is that of rural engineering comprising black smithy, masonry and pottery which are technically critical to the occupations engaging the weaker sections including landless labour.
Further, as these systems of inter-related occupations also cover a spectrum of settlement patterns in a way that we can encourage the introduction and development of technology systems for the creation of area based, taluk-wide, multi-sectoral production networks comprising a mix of both large and small scales, the economies of scale and scope are obtained in this approach through the cooperation of individual small producers planning collectively in a complementary manner. For the rural economy systems in the plains, the `kasbas', i.e. `shandy' villages (B-point), with their characteristic concentrations of artisans and local markets in the form of weekly bazaars, service the nearby villages, are important nodes of secondary production. Therefore, at the kasbas we can easily locate those unit operations/sub T systems, which involve fabrication/manufacturing. Within each of the Kasbas level units of local economy, there are villages inhabited with/tolas/dhanis (M-points) comprising concentrations of agricultural labour. They make their living by going out to nearby cultivator settlements (S- Points) for daily labour, and these sub-areas which are also normally equal to panchayat area, form sub units (MS complexes) in the form of inter-linked villages. At these settlements we can locate intermediate processing functions. The kasbas in their turn are inter-linked to the local taluk town that provides access to non-local products. The town also serves as an outlet for local products to the non-local economies. At the Taluk town we can locate the functions of technological services, fabrication, sales and distribution.
Establishment of multi-sectoral production networks of rural poor
To be successful, it is suggested that in the area of agriculture and allied sectors the policymakers will have to abandon the approach of promoting stand-alone small producers. One major premise preventing the achievement of objectives of anti-poverty for rural poor has been that in anti-poverty strategy we must target each poor individual household separately and assist it to rise above poverty line by providing access to credit and training in traditional occupations. This premise has resulted in the approach of promoting small producers who are unable to compete with large producers in the market place by themselves. In some areas co-operatives or groups were formed for input procurement and or credit. This step, while in the right direction was inadequate. Mutual competition amongst the small producers resulted in breaking up of these co-operatives/groups.
Under competitive conditions the self-employed small producer has not only to come together for access to resources but has to emerge as multi-sectoral/multi-occupation collective of production, co-operating in production. Economies of scale are required to overcome adverse competition. It is necessary to organise the production units based on mutually complementing technological elements packaged into consciously networked production system that will be accessible to rural poor.
The implication is that rural poor will have to pool their resources and capabilities to raise the scale and scope of their existing production organisation. This change in the scale and scope of their collective production organisation is absolutely necessary to allow the participating technologies members to lower the barriers facing them in the adoption of improved technologies. For a superior access to resources and markets, and to technology improvements rural poor will therefore need to avoid mutual competition. Landless labour, artisans and poor peasants will have to look at the possibilities of upgrading the local economies as a system.
Studies show that in order to be competitive they will have to come together for the implementation of a taluk-wide area based multi-sectoral large-scale network of production. The short point is that these sectors should be upgraded in the interest of weaker sections on a competitive basis and this can be fruitfully done only if the approach is not of small producer and is based on the principle of co-operation in production.
Four new mechanisms of technology implementation
To develop this co-operation on a consistent basis experience indicates that interventions are required in respect of the following:
To improve the transferability of available technologies for the establishment of multi-sectoral production networks of rural poor the S&T oriented development agencies need an approach of active intervention in respect of:
Identification of the needs of peasants, artisans and agricultural labourers as producers, adaptation of the technologies to make them fully competitive in local markets,
Development of the users’ capabilities with the aim to make the local producers competitive against non-local goods,
Formation of the networks in production for the establishment of forward and backward linkages within the local economy area itself to achieve competitiveness and
Establishment of the linkages for continuous improvement on a competitive basis with the laboratories, financial institutions and governmental bodies
To take charge of these interventions the proposed approach of establishment of multi-sectoral network system of group enterprises requires a new system of technology implementation, called the network system of technology implementation. This system incorporates four new mechanisms of need identification, technology adaptation, user development and network formation.
These new mechanisms are needed to incorporate integrated solutions to the problems that the rural enterprises face while adopting the technologies, such as,
Choice of the markets, product-mix and production system design to tackle the competition arising from the large urban producers who have cheaper access to finance, raw materials, technological inputs and markets,
Adaptation of technology to connect the available technologies to local resources, capabilities and markets to improve the competitiveness of rural enterprises in the market,
Acquisition of the matching economic and technological competence by the enterprises for technology mastery and market development and
Selection and implementation of the strategy for network development to establish the required forward and backward linkages,
Need identification in the proposed approach to technology implementation is undertaken to provide integrated solutions to the above said problems faced by the users. Needs are identified in the form of a feasibility study through field investigations by the S&T field persons in collaboration with the technology generating scientists and the scientists identified for system development. In these field investigations the users participate actively through the S&T field persons.
User development efforts are needed to help the users to organise themselves for the competitive processes. In the case of the rural enterprises the industries under consideration are highly competitive. Special efforts are required for the success of rural enterprises. Through the processes of creation of ‘group enterprises’ and networked system of production’ and ‘participative management in production’, people’s oriented development is created. Successes in user development are achieved via the guidance and support for economic competence development to be provided through the S&T field persons who also stimulate the users to organise themselves to make use of the help.
Technology Adaptation efforts are undertaken by the technology generating laboratories through a field level programme of adaptive RDD in which the identified scientists collaborate with the S&T field activists and the scientists identified for the development of system functions. Through a programme of adaptive RDD the selected technological designs are made compatible with locally available resources, locally controllable markets and locally developable capabilities. The shaping process for technology package is guided by the design heuristics of networked system of production.
Network formation is provided for in the efforts for production network development, technology proving and technology replication to tackle the problems of establishment of appropriate forward and backward linkages. Development of the local economy as a system in itself is incorporated in the approach to system design of production technology implementation. It is again taken up as a collaborative programme between the S&T field persons, the scientists identified for bridging role and the technology generating team.
Bridging organizations for network system of technology implementation
For these mechanisms to be established the approach suggests the formation of bridging institutions as its key requirement. In the proposed approach of network system of technology implementation (NTI) the proposed bridging institutions to be set up have a very important role. Particularly, the organisation that plays the role of a system development group is critical. The network system approach to technology implementation suggests that as technology generating groups (TGs) the laboratories would be required to collaborate with the two new groups: the S&T field persons groups (FGs) and the system design and development persons groups (SGs). The proposal is that the S&T activists being identified for the bridging role should be asked to act as the system design and development persons (SGs). In this approach, the system design and development persons (SGs) take care of the functions of executive co-ordination of opportunity analysis, system design, technology specification, technology adaptation and proving, management information system, monitoring and. organisational guidance for enterprise development, network formation and technology replication. In this proposal the TGs are also required to collaborate with the S&T field persons or groups (FGs) who are capable of performing the functions of entrepreneurial leadership. The S&T field persons would be selected from among the users. They are also themselves users. They have been selected from among the users for the ability to provide entrepreneurial leadership to the local producers. They are an active interface of the technology generating institutions in the field. Their income comes from the participation in production. They participate in the tasks of need identification, user development, technology adaptation and network formation. They are selected and trained by the scientists identified for window development. They may be selected either from among the S&T voluntary agencies that are willing to perform this role, or from among the potential users who are willing to establish the role of mother units for the satellite users.
Needless to say, the above-mentioned collaborators will have to be nurtured by the agencies as close network partners in an interactive, bottom-up and user-oriented process of technology implementation.
Heuristics of network production system design
For the rural poor the problem of access to markets is a systemic problem. The markets for which the rural poor are able to compete are usually only the local markets. For the enterprises of rural poor to succeed the programmes of industrial and agricultural modernisation need to have therefore usually a strategy of developing the local economy as a production system in itself.
Need identification has been seen in this approach as the feasibility study preparation for the design and development of appropriate but locally competitive production systems for a taluk-wide area. In rural areas, for the local markets agro industrial production is carried out mainly through the efforts of self-employed artisans, peasants (small/medium/large) and agricultural labor. They are the unorganized small producers or workers who work with the locally available resources to meet many of the local needs. It is not surprising that for their upgradation most development approaches stress therefore the importance of utillsing local resources and meeting local needs. In most cases, however, the approach to technology implementation has been of promoting small producers among the rural poor who are unable to compete with large producers in the market by themselves. In some areas co-operatives were formed for input procurement and /or credit. This step, while in the right direction, has been inadequate for preventing mutual competition amongst small producers co-operating in production for credit and input procurement.
It is therefore our understanding that to overcome adverse competition from the large producers the small producers must come together to achieve the economies of scale. In this approach this is be achieved through the upgradation of the existing taluk wide rudimentary networks that are still in existence in the countryside at most of the places. These are networks existing between the artisans and agricultural labour themselves and between the peasants and the artisans and agricultural labour. In this approach they would have to be consciously networked for technological advancement.
Rural enterprise development schemes have started partially recognising already this type of requirement in the form of ‘group loaning’, mother-satellite scheme etc. The IRDP and DWACRA progammes give now group loans to the beneficiaries if they are willing to group themselves and apply collectively for loans. NABARD offers a scheme in which the mother units are even given separate funds for disbursing loans to the satellite units from whom the mother unit is required to buy the output to the extent of 50% only. In the case of non-farm sectors, the mother units can even obtain special funds, as grant in aid for providing to the satellite units the assistance required for training and production trials.
The proposed approach of rural enterprise development in the framework of establishment of multi-sectoral production network systems uses the model of mother-satellite units to establish ‘group enterpreneurship’ among artisans, agricultural labourers and small and marginal farmers. Entrepreneurs are encouraged to pool the resources and capabilities for raising the scale and scope of their collective production organisation. This change in the scale and scope allows the participants to lower the barriers facing them in the adoption of more sophisticated technologies, making their production more competitive than before in the local markets. They is addressed in terms of their immediate needs by focusing on the ‘pinches’ and the ‘problems, facing them in the supply of goods and services to the local markets. The design heuristics of network systems of production is utilised for the establishment of mother-satellite type production arrangements. These arrangements are consciously created to coincide with the existing division of labour evident in the taluk-wide rudimentary production networks. The approach clearly recognises that the occupations engaging the local producers are mutually inter-related among themselves and therefore encourage the introduction and development of technology for the creation of well organised taluk-wide multi-sectoral production networks comprising a mix of large and small scales. The stress is on encouraging local value addition through linking primary and secondary production, especially for perishable products. Those opportunities are given priority, which can help develop and diversify existing artisan based production networks to higher economically viable science based forms of organisation and production. Those technologies are encouraged which do not require subsidies for ‘sustainability’ and take into account the requirements of competitiveness of production. The approach desires that value addition by new/improved technologies and accompanying network formation should substantially augment the incomes of the participant producers and sustain the S&T persons engaged with them.
Heuristics of technology proving and replication
Technology proving and replication are seen as participatory jobs to be implemented in collaboration with the users through the system of field groups and system group
Technologies developed in the laboratories have to often go through a phase of participatory technology proving for successful technology replication. This is particularly applicable when the enterprises are of rural poor and are to operate in competitive markets. Such a phase helps the FG to also build in the process a skeletal production network in which the local people are fully involved. This way there is no alienation on the part of the commonly observed conditions of local people remaining alienated from the process of enterprise development are prevented from setting in. An understanding of the existing knowledge, resources, relations and culture to arrive at the location specific requirements of technological and organisational upgradation is considered a pre-condition for the success of technology implementation. It helps technologies to get replicated rapidly. The network development becomes easy.
Technology generating groups cannot be expected to provide ‘ready to implement’ technology variants to the field groups working in diverse environments. They will need persons who can interact with them for the identification of requirements of design modification and improvements in quality control protocols. Persons will be needed who can document the varied field experiences and create knowledge base, decision support systems and training manuals for use in the phase of multiplication of technology implementing units. Successful enterprise establishment needs not only technology which is adapted to local conditions but also support in terms of management information system, arrangements for access to finance, land and other resources and training. Such functions can be performed successfully when the persons provide these services in an integrated manner. This means that the capabilities required for interface are in the nature of system analysis cum synthesis and can be provided only if there is a dedicated group called ‘system design and development’ constituted to perform these functions. The persons comprising the System Design and Development Group, include who are/ were field activists/ or persons who have been intimately associated with the field activists for a period of time.
While implementing the programme of technology adaptation and development of skeletal production network, the field group activists are more or less fully engaged in the mobilisation of people, their organisation, and the operation of units. During this phase they have to firstly under take the upgradation of managerial and organisational capabilities of the workers to be deployed in the units. They themselves need support from people who are capable of providing or arranging the training, guidance, and follow up including field level consultation and supervision. Normally they are not in a position to get the best of the technology generating groups under these conditions
Heuristics of user participation
To function in the network mode for the establishment of a participatory technology implementation system the formation of the field group (FG) is a critical organisational requirement. The FG performs the crucial role of mother unit. The FG is going to organise the users for establishing the networked units, be these units are satellite or independent. For the supply and implementation of technological inputs, the role of field level interaction with the users, particularly from among artisans, landless labour and small farmers, is performed by it. The FG is not a parasite. It is to participate in production to ensure continuity and further development. It also undertakes interaction with technology generating institutions for the upgradation of skills of producers in new/improved technology and upgrades their organisation and management. Since the new/improved technologies are often not readily available, the approach also envisages the involvement of technology generators from various institutions in the functions of right from guiding field investigations and opportunities analysis to technology development & implementation. The TGs help the FGs perform the functions of guiding field investigations & opportunity analysis, training, design of manuals, assistance in start-up & trouble shooting, prototype design, pilot scale demonstration, adaptive research, etc. The SG co-ordinates the programme and integrates its various components. it interfaces between different FGs and TGs. It undertakes the task of training and orienting them for group enterpreneurship and participative management. It has the responsibility of developing and implementing the system design functions.
Process of network system of technology implementation
The proposed approach views the process of establishment of network system of technology implementation as consisting of three interconnected phases: ‘field investigations phase’, ‘technology proving phase’, and ‘technology replication phase’.
Field Investigations Phase
Following activities are required to be undertaken in the field investigations phase for need identification based on the field investigations done by the FGs in collaboration with the TGs and SGs:
Identification, training and orientation of the field persons selected from among the users to undertake field investigations,
Preparation of a feasibility study for need identification from which the users would be able to derive their entrepreneurial decisions regarding a) the technological system required and b) the strategy of sustainable enterprise development;
Investigations are accomplished using the exercises prepared earlier for: Analysis of preliminary data on occupational structure, to identify an outline of the existing distribution of occupational and settlement patterns;
Development of system diagrams and flowsheets for the existing systems of production;
Case studies of primary data analysis of felt needs and resource constraints under which production and learning is occurring in the local economy;
Samples of extracts from feasibility reports providing calculations of internal rate of return and break-even analysis;
Tools for segment specific analysis (questionnaires, interview methods and record keeping instruments)
Technology proving phase
the technology proving support phase in which the organisation of group enterprises, the generation of bankable proposals and their field operationalization for the nucleation of skeletal networks, on-the-job training of field persons, the implementation of adaptive RDD involving controlled field trials, bench-scale lab work and system design involving simulation studies are taken up by the FGs, SGs, and TGs in the form of collaborative programmes;
Hands on training of the field persons on technological aspects i.e. testing, quality control, operation and maintenance,
Formulation of their location-specific programme of adaptive RDD for technology proving, mobilization of the beneficiaries and workers with the aim to incorporate their suggestions on design, raw materials, engineering materials while finalising the design and process parameters for replication;
Implementation by the field groups of their field level programme for technology proving and mobilization of the workers and beneficiaries to from their self-help cooperation groups and to “finalize the technology for replication”
Technology replication phase
The technology replication phase involves replication of the networked system of group enterprises within the field area and the expansion into newer field areas to be taken up by the FGs, SGs, TGs, in the form of a long-term programme in multi-sectoral area based development to be taken up in collaboration with the agencies like NABARD, SIDBI and state S&T councils.
Replication of technology in the field through the establishment of viable group enterprises,
Formed sector wise, comprising a production network having a nodal unit at the taluk town and with linked units at the adjacent kasabas, the latter linked to their clusters /complexes of medium and small villages and there by inter-related to the self-help co-operation groups of farmers and of agricultural labour.
Methodology of network system of technology implementation
Methodology of field Investigations and analysis
In the proposed approach, during field investigations, for the selected field areas, we determine their pattern of concentration of artisans, and investigate in detail the involvement of artisans, peasants and agricultural labourers in the identified market segments. This step obtains for us the accurate picture of the network of settlements and occupations closely linked to the identified market segments. We would cover besides the taluk town, a set of linked 6-8 bazaar villages and 16-24 medium size villages with agricultural labour concentrations in each of the selected field area. We use interview method and group discussion to get all the information required. The artisans, eateries and shops, etc. at the bazaar villages have a wealth of information of the neighbouring villages/area through social links and through buyer-seller relationships.
An techno-economic analysis of the existing production is done using the data collected from the field for the activities specific to the segments listed in the project objectives. The thrust of these field investigations is normally to identify the micro-economy of the existing local systems of production in these segments. Data is collected regarding prices, cost structure, customer profile, technical system including details of equipment, raw materials and processes used, nature of transactions, connections and obligations involved in their relationships, be they financial or oriented towards supply of inputs and products or even information.
The output of the techno-economic investigations is in the form of analysis of opportunities for upgradation of skills and resources, which are available in the existing system of production. Examples of these have been given earlier.
Below we give the type of outputs obtainable from the analysis to be made during this step:
System diagrams of production-structures pervading the local food economy;
Technical system flow sheets, technologies involved and their detailed specifications and the problems being experienced by small producers;
Cost structure and break-even estimates required to quantify the nature and magnitude of constraints and opportunities in respect of collective investment, bulking and technological improvement;
The next major task is normally to make a feasibility analysis of the solutions. We identify technological solutions in close collaboration with the technology generation groups. With the help of the information supplied by the technology generators we make the required calculations of the break-even estimates for possible options; concurrently we check the response of the artisans, peasants and the agricultural labourers. In other words, we undertake a proper feasibility analysis leading to detailed project reports for action research that provides implementable solutions in 12 to 36 month time frames.
Technology proving & replication methodology
Technology generating groups undertake adaptive RDD work in collaboration with FGs by involving the local people. The process and equipment are suitably adapted to the conditions prevailing locally in respect of utilisation of local resources, capabilities and markets. The programme of adaptive RDD for its implementation in the field means involving the field groups’ activists and the technology generating groups, for the executive co-ordination of the work on technology adaptation & demonstration, enterprise start-up, and network development. The system development groups is required to co-ordinate and execute all the work on identification of technology adaptation requirements, documentation, manual preparation, training and follow-up, knowledge base development, decision support system development, MIS, organisational development guidance.
Examples of system designs for the development of R&D and innovation in agriculture and allied sectors
Low external input and sustainable agriculture
In the area of input production for low external input agriculture major opportunities lie in the mobilisation of rural poor on the provision of solutions to common problems being faced by the small and marginal cultivators. For a great majority of small cultivators land is a scarce resource. The holdings are small, productivity is poor, and often the land gets eroded and rendered non-cultivable. Cultivation is dependent on rainwater and due to the vagaries of nature productivity keeps fluctuating. Today the traditional water management systems consisting of tanks, ponds and wells face serious problems due to the unplanned interventions of administration, the breakdown of feudal land relations which provided stability to the traditional water management systems and the richer peasants changing over to the new irrigation sources. Currently the rural poor is experiencing serious water shortages. Similarly, the traditional methods of recycling of animal dung and urine, composting and green manuring have also been dwindling due to the unscientific and unplanned changes taking place in the traditional farming systems are not adequate to meet the needs of the small peasants
The approach of low external input agriculture does offer integrated solutions to the problems of small & marginal cultivators. To enumerate them in terms of the scope of interventions we have given below our suggestions:
High yielding seeds that take into account stresses generated in the local environment, and their resource constraints.
Water management practices that will allow the people to conserve water and generate additional water through rainwater harvesting measures.,
Access to low cost biological methods that can restore soil fertility and vitality;
Access to integrated pest management;
Wasteland recovery
There is an opportunity in the recovery of wastelands using particularly those farming systems, which are able to combine the advantages inherent in silvi-pastoral cover which also supports the secondary production in the sectors where artisans and agricultural workers can easily be the organizers of production.
In the recovery of wastelands the scope is enormous. The opposition will be comparatively less from the vested interests. Given below are the elements to be integrated in the package for wasteland recovery:
Recovery of wastelands using the practice of silvi-pastoral combinations to link this sector with the production of fodder required for the increase in milk supply;
Recycling of biodegradable wastes through the adoption of biogas for the supply of energy to the unit engaged in milk processing and of slurry as manure to the small and marginal cultivators pursuing bullock powered agriculture/wasteland recovery;
Recycling of biodegradable wastes through vermiculture, composting and pisiculture for the increase in productivity of primacy production;
Production of inocula of beneficial micro-flora (mycorrhiza and other nitrogen fixers) with culturing at the lab located in talk town, multiplication at the kasba level and inoculation of microbes in saplings/seeds at the medium scale village level;
Supply of seeds and planting materials for fodder crops, medicinal herds fibres through the establishment of production of production of seeds and nurseries in networked form,
Maintenance of breeding materials at the facilities located in taluk town, foundation seeds at the Kasba level and multiplication of certified seed at the medium scale village level;
Construction and maintenance of structures for improvement in the availability of water for small farm irrigation and off-farm occupations;
Development of facilities for storage and conveyance of water, distribution and delivery, in the form of treated timber bamboo cribs for check dam, diversion structures, embankments; development of low cost protection for seepage control and restriction of evaporation using non-woven fabric, clay lining;
Adoption of physical methods of treatment in combination with biological recovery for the prevention of soil loss on eroded lands and reclamation of saline, alkaline, mushy lands using local skills and materials
Introduction of cover management practices fulfilling ecological requirements and adaptable to stress factors like water scarcity, salinity, poor soil quality and resistant to pests and disease; use of measures requiring only low cost external inputs for increased productivity;
Adoption of methods for the assessment of climate, hydrology, soils topography and biotic factors such as potential stresses, weeds, pests, insects, diseases, vegetation game and animals using software incorporating local knowledge in respect of weather watersheds and soil and plant health.
Fruit and vegetable processing
Several organizations (STD Mandi, CTD Dehradoon, FOSET Calcutta, CSR Agartala, CARD Koraput, HESCO Garwhwal, HVM Rohtak, etc.) are already into the implementation of suitably designed systems of fruits and vegetables processing that are managed by the group enterprises. Products are being marketed using a common brand name called Farmers. The niche selected for intervention emphasizes the development of natural products. Technology models have been standardized under the field conditions of networked system of production for the operations of pulping/juicing/jamming, pickling/fermentation, drying /osmodehydration. The system design envisaged for processing and production involves a network of women beneficiaries organized at small village level units and a nodal processing unit at town/kasba level which receives the semi-processed materials from the previous level for drying and packaging.
System designs for the applied water system
In the compendium prepared by CASAD, Mumbai the organization provides details of its experience in respect of construction, cost and performance of earthern bunds, timber/bamboo gabion structures, ponds, low cost pipes with stage lift, reinforcement of walls, road bases, etc. The Compendium reports successful cases as well as of failure. Much of its work has been implemented in Konkan region. Efforts are being replicated in other parts of Maharastra, Gujarat and Orissa. Techniques developed use local materials; they encourage the use of small timber, non-woven fabric and reduce the inputs of plastics, cement and steel.
Milk production and processing
Milk production is essentially an occupation of small farmers and agricultural labourers. A rudimentary network exists in the form of milk vendors (dudhis) collecting milk from them for sale in the taluk and kasba markets to sweet mean makers, eateries, tea shops, and individual families etc’. In this network inputs for the milk production are supplied partly by dudhis who bring oil cakes, etc. from the taluk markets to the villages. The bulk of the fodder is even today obtained by the small producers from either their own fields or by spending hours on cutting weeds and wild plants. Veterinary care is supplied for the most part by under-trained vets and traditional medicinal men.
We also give below the examples of common problems being faced today by the rural poor:
Poor transportation facilities and spoilage of milk, particularly in areas distant from the taluk town
Conflict over the pricing of milk amongst producers and vendors
Adulteration of milk and dissatisfaction among the consumers
Gap between demand and supply; wide seasonal fluctuations
Lack of facilities for complete milk utilization for conversion into value added items such as cottage cheese, khoya, ghee, matha, etc,
Seasonal shortage of fodder and growing cost of cattle feed.
Lack of animal health care services
Unscientific dairy management practices.
Implement Rural Poor Oriented Solutions
Given below are some of the rural poor oriented industrial solutions that can be selected to implement the approach of large scale networked production systems for the milk sector:
Milk sterilisation and hot pack technology using biomass energy sources with implementing units located at medium size villages
Manufacture of balanced feed using bulking and locally available resources such as oil cake as a co-product of oil expeller located at medium sized villages/kasbas performing custom crushing, husk and bran from mini dal and wheat mills located at medium sized villages/kasbas performing custom milling.
Milk distribution through a dedicated network of vendors and depots located at kasbas and taluk, town which are also engaged in the transportation and sale of milk products.
Milk collection by the centres using the scheme of pricing based upon total fat which are also engaged in the supply of chopped ensiled fodder and concentrate to milk producers and are collecting dung and if required, transporting it to the biogas units located at medium sized villages from these centres.
Value addition through processing into butter, ghee khoya, etc,
With longer shelf-lives product diversification into flavoured milk, sweet curd, whey preparations, matha, etc. and these activities being taken up from the units located at medium size villages/kasbas as part of the network.
Potter, masons, blacksmiths and basket weavers joining hands to provide the improved equipment for sterilisation, milk processing, milk/transportation and storage.
Provision of breeding facilities and health cover through the establishment of Goshalas(cattle-shed for collective animal care.) development of bare-foot veterinarians located at medium size villages with the supply of medicines from pharmacy located at town.
Analysis of experience with technology implementation
Based on the approach of network system of technology implementation (NTI) a number of technology systems are already in place in the field. For example, there has been a successful introduction of the new technology in leather processing, which employs environment friendly technique of improved vegetable tanning. This technique was developed in the fifties by Central Leather Research Institute (CLRI), a laboratory of the CSIR system. It increases the productivity by 4 to 6 times for the tanners. It remained on the shelf of CLRI as process know-how. It was put to use by the KVIC in its common facility centres with the processing capacity of 100-200 hides a batch, but it failed to take off because it involved a number of serious problems. Artisans were required to use motorised transport to carry the hides and skins. They faced not only the problem of availability of transport, but also the problems of co-ordination and planning. Due to the scale of mobilisation of hides and skins involved in the KVIC technology system the costs of transport of raw materials and processed materials between the points of collection and the location of common facility centres. Remember the technique was to be implemented in a terrain where metalled roads are lacking even till this date. Also remember that artisans were not co-operating in production and were mutually competing artisans. Final processing and marketing was individual producer centred activities. Traders controlled the markets in which artisans were to do the selling. They were forced to get into destructive rivalry, which finally made the common facility centres itself an area of conflict. Based on its understanding of the local economies the PSMs took a very different route in the area of leather processing. Kasba was chosen as the location of secondary processing of hides and skins and the technology in respect of the scale of tannery to be set up was duly revised. It was found that a tannery that could process even just 10-20 hides a batch should be sufficient. The number was worked out on the basis of how many hides and skins can come from the fallen animals. It was worked out that without the aid of motorised transport only these many hides the flayers would be supplying, and this number should determine the scale. Tanners were grouped into group enterprises. Unit level co-operation in production was introduced. Tanneries were accordingly designed to suit these scales and operationalised at the kasba level locations in places like Mandi (Himachal Pradesh), Rohtak (Haryana), Dehradoon (Uttar Pradesh), Bastar (Madhya Pradesh), Pondicherry Islampur (W. Bengal). But even then there was a problem of supply of hides and skins in quite a few locations. This happened because the ‘flayers’ were still linked to the tanneries through the markets. Large traders, who could succeed in preventing them reaching the supplies to these tanneries, controlled the markets for supply of hides and skins from the areas. Work had to be started on the development of carcass recovery systems to bring the flayers into the production net of the technology system for leather processing under development for the small producers. The issue of how to engineer the choice of the scales of various sub-systems comprising the carcass recovery system, which would not eliminate the flayers but involve them in the network of production, has proved to be a major challenge. Experimental development is even today continuing. But what is certain that on an installation of the carcass digesters under the control of flayers themselves instantly the tanners could win them over to the production net in these areas. There was a radical change in the flayers’ attitude to the tanneries. They were now willing to co-operate with the tanners. They were a part of the network and did not have to be related through the market. Their social identity was changed It was now possible in the tanneries to plan for the utilisation of full capacity. Till date, work on the development of machines is continuing in respect of leather cutting, wrinkle removal, pressing and leather finishing. Without these machines some of the units like one in Tripura is yet not viable. Local markets are available for exploitation but to tap them you need the aid of complete system designs for technology and business. Technology, production organisation, business models and marketing strategies, all are inter-linked issues in any development strategy.
In the area of mustard processing, traditionally bullock driven ghanis were in use for the processing of mustard oil in India. KVIC tried replacing these ghanis using the technology of power ghanis. Economics did not work favorably for the ghanis except in the markets where the premium is available for pungency. There was too much residual oil being left in the oil cake. MERADO has developed an expeller that not only ensures pungency of oil through temperature control, but also leaves less residual oil in oil cake. In spite of this advantage the machine was incomplete on its release to the user, in this case a PSM organisation. The advantage was incomplete because the size of local market was insufficient to consume the oil that would be produced if run on its full capacity utilisation. The designed capacity of MERADO expeller is four times higher than the capacity of ghani. Large producers, who use modern expellers of varying capacities in combination with ghanis that are needed, when the pungent oil is to be marketed, have already penetrated the town markets. In the short run, for a new producer the reasonable solution turns out to be one of to sell the product in the non-local market niches where there are some niches available for co-operative production. Even when the enterprise is local, experience tells that it takes time for a new producer to establish itself in the local market. But for a tapping of the non-local market the producer should have a set up for filtration. The package did not contain appropriately engineered filtration set-up. To save on the investment new strategies had to be devised for filtration. In the large-scale units the practice of double filtration is a norm. They deploy usually two filters in series to undertake double filtration. In the case of small units it would not advisable to go for the establishment of two filters. The only answer was innovating in filtration. By combining appropriately the processes of double filter cloth, settlement and decanting the producer did the innovation by itself. Learning strategies used included talking to the workers, speaking to the technology generators and engaging in experimentation at the shop floor. For a group enterprise that is worker owned this kind of experimentation was easy to manage. It did equally well when it came to working out a solution in respect of the utilisation of oil cake. The option of selling this co-product to the solvent extraction units was ruled out. The option of preparing cattle feed was duly explored with a helping hand from the university nearby which specialises in agriculture and animal husbandry. Innovating was not easy. Cattle feed based on mustard oil cake was a new product for the local market where the preference for cotton oilseed or its cake are already well established due the animals having got used to these products. Formulations had to be adapted not only in terms of promoting the utilisation of local ingredients but also in terms of adapting the preparations to suit the palate and body of the local animals. Experimentation was undertaken by the group enterprise keeping in view that the new preparations are economically competitive. Cattle feed markets are sensitive to the prices of substitutes that come seasonally into the market after the harvests as a cheap source of bulk supply. The networked group enterprise model was of tremendous help, it has allowed both the oil processing and the cattle feed making units to survive the ups and downs going on in the local markets every at the time of the seasonal fluctuations. Thanks to the bridging organisations learning has been as per the requirements of systems designs needed.
Both the technology system and the business system are coming up as per the requirements of the outcomes that are also radical in nature. The rural poor have not been eliminated. They are in command of the production organisation. The model of worker-owned group entrepreneurship is getting ready for acceptance in the agro-industrial environment where the modern forms of management are even today scarce in the large-scale operations. Green natural products are on the way to get acceptance in the markets that are not elite and are competitive where price competition matters. In the sector of fruit processing, the PSMs have been able to launch very rapidly green natural fully safe healthy products at competitive prices. In India today UNDP is promoting the same fruit-processing model now through the PSM linked S&T voluntary agencies to the parties interested in commercialising the technology in newer areas. .
Lessons learnt from the experience of technology implementation
Collective production by rural poor can be built around the principle of worker co-operatives i.e. worker ownership, collective appropriation of surplus and full participation in decision-making. Worker ownership demands that production is owned and managed by the worker himself or herself. Ownership here refers to business and non-necessarily to capital. Ultimate control of business decision lay in the hands of workers. Non-worker as owner member is completely eschewed. Hiring of a separate managerial staff is also avoided. It means that S&T field activities are fully accountable to the participating worker members. They also participate in production. How to use the surplus generated is collectively decided. It is not privately appropriable. A part of the surplus is invested back for the expansion of business. Worker owners draw only wages for full time work. Wages are decided on the basis of productivity norm lay down collectively. They also decide the quantum of non-wage benefits to accrue to individual members. Skill levels are reflected in wide differentials within limits. Material and non-material incentives are used to improve the condition for learning and innovation.
For the management of funds and allocation of resources the rules to be used for site, sector and area wise planning are also decided collectively by the participating workers for the taluk wide network. Relations between units within & across the sector are determined through a planning process using the principle of surplus being made available as only loans to each other. Loans are provided based on the rules regarding performance and need. Whatever are the rules worker members decide them in the principle of participatory decision-making.
While the complete path of transition to a large-scale taluk wide networked system of collective production by rural poor is yet to be traversed, as nobody has covered the complete journey, but even the partial experiments made by the various S&T field groups of people's science movements indicate quite a few lessons regarding the strategy of implementation which we offer here as illustrations. Experience indicates that for getting started the S&T field activists should select those opportunities as hooks (entry points) which would help nucleate the S&T field group and embed them as leaders in the network of existing occupations. S&T field activists should give priority to the introduction of collective organization for bulk procurement with price advantage to effect savings for the producers/workers and income to sustain at least partly themselves. Only when they have stabilised themselves through these activities in the network of existing production of rural poor, the transition to higher forms of collective production should be attempted. Without going through any of these efforts it is difficult to establish the activists as leaders. They should not be seen as mere managers, though benevolent, of grant-in-aid/subsidy based initiatives. Collectives can be formed only when the alienation of workers has been tackled by involving them as worker owners capable of participating in decision-making process right from the beginning. In the area of leather network upgradation, this has been the experience of S&T field groups. They are struggling even today to overcome the alienation of workers participating in tannery units. .
S&T field activists should follow a strategy to organize and transform production only in stages acceptable to the people. Small/unorganised producers require encouragement and time for acquiring skills of management. They have to go through a process of establishing trust amongst each other. Only through a process of self organization they can get the confidence to develop into collective groups which are inter-linked amongst them to form a large scale networked production system. It would be better if the units are built through incremental innovation in a way of which gives them access to the process of decision making and serves the interest by developing solutions to their immediate problems. Then, they have fewer problems in accepting the framework of cooperation outlined for the formation of a large scale networked system of collective production. Therefore, to get started for the transition from household form to higher industrial forms priority should be given to solutions, which shift drudge domestic industry to local units organized by collectives of rural poor, e. g. from mortar-pestle to huller and chakki to dehusker for custom milling of grains and pulses, which also yield by products for diversification of value added production. Experience shows that even in the backward areas the shift takes longer not so much due to the competition offered by large-scale units but more due to the duality prevailing in the labour markets on the basis of the gendered divisions still persisting in a big way. Success was easy for the units involved in bhujia-making who could use the mini-dal mills to process dal for in-house use. S&T field activists have had more difficulties in developing the markets for dal for household consumption in the rural areas where the chakkis are still viable and are extensively getting used due to the availability of cheaper household female labour.
S&T field activists can easily make the error of shifting away from the path of strengthening the network of rural poor to the path of developing non-local markets far more, which often exerts a lot of pull and weaken the incentive to develop inter-links in the local economy. In the long run-this can prevent the network builders from strengthening control of rural poor over the units. The capacity to self-organize also suffers for the rural poor. Appropriate technological development should be given due attention in parallel. The inter-links among the occupations of rural poor in the new production systems are a function of technological choice. Delay in the development of suitable carcass recovery technologies has costed the field groups in leather sector. Inappropriate technological choices must be discouraged. The acid test of viability and whom it benefits must be applied rigorously to each and every technological choice. Take the example of chilling of milk as a technological means for the preservation of milk. It has eliminated the occupations of dudhia (milk vendor) and halwai(sweet-mart manufacturer). The choice of chilling weakened the networks that existed on the ground. Sterilization has much more potential of improving the connectivity of technology of rural poor.. Some of the TGs who have been attracted to the approach to some extent are trying to develop these options afresh. For the success of this approach it is necessary for the capable TGs to come forward for the collaboration with the S&T system and field groups. Technology generating groups have a very crucial role in the identification of appropriate technologies. But the problem of TG back up is today getting to be serious for the projects that do not have the legitimacy that the other sectors offer to the TGs for the time being. Today when the external liberalisation is already in place the institutional environment is far less conducive than the eighties when the pressure for internal competition was stronger.
The efforts made by the Department of Science and Technology (DST) to select and support the development and demonstration of the models of technologies using NTI approach by the PSM linked S&T voluntary agencies are though a better example in the design and implementation of partnerships for technology implementation but even in the case of DST programmes it has not been possible for the principal agents to monitor the partnerships in all cases. There have been failures in the mechanisms of monitoring. Grant in aid led technology demonstration has been so far the key mechanism of technology transfer. While there is the need for grant in aid for the partnership arrangements to emerge in respect of technology development and incubation, at the same time if not monitored properly it can act as a disincentive in respect of the requirement of user development. For a long time there can be failures persisting even in respect of the perusal of unviable system designs if the grant in aid approach goes on in a fashion of formally monitored but substantively not changed. Viability of the technologies identified by this programme is still a moot question for the sectors that have been picked up by the newer S&T voluntary agencies. Even within the PSM linked S&T voluntary agencies we see an uneven experience. Rohtak (Haryana) has had more difficulties in reaching the commercial levels than Mandi (Himachal Pradesh).
Experience has indicated that though it is quite possible for the rural poor based group enterprise to grow on the basis of the inter-related opportunities available in local markets through the introduction of suitable technology system but the development of local markets takes time. It has been clearly demonstrated that a wide range of factors could easily affect adversely the pace of development of local markets. It came out that often these factors are such that the rural poor would find them difficult to control. For example, right from the beginning the unit had to face the additional difficulty of unfair competition inflicted due to the import of cheaper palm oil on the sale of unadulterated, unblended, pure mustard oil. During this period all over India the markets of mustard oil were a heavy sufferer due to the lack of safeguards at both at the level of the legislation required on blending and labeling and the custom duty level of imported oils. The expected premium for pungency of mustard oil was also not easy to obtain in the local rural market segments of Hisar. As a result throughout the project period the unit established in Kanwari was definitely faced with a lot of competition in the local market. Local markets of Hisar were not sufficient as such to absorb fully the products yielded. The enterprise was induced to tap the mustard oil markets of Rohtak, Jind and Delhi where the field group had its contacts. For the successful tapping of local market and of non-local markets network development including competence development for the nodal group was found to be an essential condition for success in business.
Concluding remarks
Many more examples are available whose experience needs to be analyzed further. Experience of the partnerships entered into for the development of system designs indicates that the rate of success is much higher with this new approach. This type of networking also seems to be leaving the laboratory scientists not only far more equipped in respect of the management of knowledge of field requirements but also far freer to pursue innovative researches within the four walls of the public sector research institutions. The possibility of replicating these technologies on a systemic basis appears to be far higher within the weaker sections on a competitive basis in the case of this new approach to technology implementation. However, it should be noted that there are also challenges facing this new approach. Many of these challenges are related to user development and are not being faced squarely by the NGO partners who today spearhead the diffusion of these system designs. They must come up with appropriate user development strategies and provide solutions to accelerate the pace of introduction and replication in all parts of the country. There are other challenges that the scientists working in publicly funded laboratories can certainly help resolve faster. For example, in most sectors local market has not been found to be sufficient to absorb the products yielding from rural enterprises in all the field sites due to the still continuing weaknesses in the technology systems. Suitable consumer movements are needed to be encouraged to ease the process of transition to a system of production, which would be multi-level and optimize the development in the interest of weaker sections. At the higher levels, there is bound to be a role for SMESs and large enterprises in the process of this type of development strategy, for which the system of public-private partnerships may be appropriate. But for the development of agriculture and allied sectors the development of local economies as systems is critical if the policy makers want a strategy that is consistent with long term goals of development of agriculture and allied sectors.
Selected References:
Upen Trivedi, Approach and Direction for the Scheme of S&T for Weaker Sections, DST, 1984
Sushas Pranjape etal, ‘Watershed based Development; A Source Book’ BGVS, November 1998.
DST, Technology Models for Rural Application, DST, 2001
CSSTD (CMD), Gaon Ke Karigar Aur Science, CSIR, 1981, New Delhi
Suresh Pal & Joshi P.K, ‘New Paradigms of Agricultural Research Management’, NCAP, March 1999.
Hall, A. J, Yoganand, B, Rasheed Sulaiman, V, and Clark, N.G, ‘Sharing perspectives on public-private sector interaction’, NCAP and ICRISAT, 2001
Norman Clark, ‘Innovation systems, Institutional Change and the New Knowledge Market: Implications for Third World Development, INTECH, UNU, December 2001.
Abrol, D, 1998 Technological Transformation of Rural Areas: A Guidebook on Network System of Technology Implementation. National Institute of Science, Technology and Development Studies, New Delhi
Krisnaswamy, K.N., Reddy, A.K.N., 1994. The Commercialisation of Improved Technologies in Rural Areas, in Bhalla, A.S., Reddy, A.K.N., (Eds), the Technological Transformation of Rural India, Intermediate Technology Publications, London
Abrol, D., Menon U., Pulamte, L., Kumar, P.V.S., 1998, Evaluation of CSIR Rural Technologies National Institute of Science, Technology and Development Studies, New Delhi
Fischer, Thomas, Mahajan Vijay, 1997, The Forgotten Sector, Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd. , New Delhi.
*******************
Health Care in the Indian Union Budget 2013-14
Ritu Priya
The health component in the union budget of the Government of India for the year 2013-14 leaves one completely disappointed, especially since there has been serious policy discussion undertaken officially by the Planning Commission at least since 2011 on developing a system for universal health coverage by 2020. This discussion indicated an opportunity for strengthening of the health services and their 'architectural correction', but the budget does not address its central concerns and belies the hopes generated. Given the larger policy environment favouring privatisation and corporatisation, the discussion on universal health coverage also created an apprehension about the direction this 'universal coverage' would take; whether it would be centred on people's health and wellbeing or would it become a mechanism for channelising public funds into hands of the private medical services and industry. The present budget needs to be examined in this light. It also needs to be examined in light of the allocations recommended for mainstreaming and revitalising the knowledge systems other than the dominant allopathy, validating people's knowledge of health and healing practices and strengthening people's participation in health care. This article is divided into two sections that deal with the two major issues of architectural correction-- the relationship of the public and private services and addressing the issues of medical pluralism and the integration of all systems of health and healing. It does so from the perspective of optimal utilisation of all health related knowledge and services for the benefit of health and wellbeing of all, but more so of the most underserved.
We are also aware that health care in a society is about working and living conditions, the quantity of food intake and its quality, environmental sanitation and safety, the emotional and social environment, as well as social support structures available, every day practices related to childcare and home remedies, and about health services by various types of health care providers. The health services form one part of this whole gamut of dimensions that determine the health status of individuals, communities and populations. Other aspects-- such as economic development policies, employment, agriculture, nutrition, food processing, water and sanitation, housing, urban space planning, types of consumption-- also impact on people's health almost directly. Therefore, while the budget as a whole can be examined for its implications for the health and wellbeing for the majority of Indians, here we are commenting only on the allocation for health services, which is what the 12th plan chapter on health and the health budget covers.
Budgetary Allocations on Health Care
The government of India and state governments together spend about 5% of their total budgets on health services, while it ranges from 5 to 15% in most other countries. While most of the high income countries spend from 5-10% of their National Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on health, it was only 0.9% of the National Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the 10th plan (2002-2007) and increased to 1.04% over the 11th plan (2007-2012). However, this is with a significantly increasing GDP. This comes to approximately Rs. 200 per head per year.
The people of India spend about three times this amount from their own pockets directly for health care. This is what leads to what has been referred to as 'catastrophic medical expenditures', medical costs being a leading cause for indebtedness of households in the country and contributing significantly to financial distress. It has been found to be a major contributory cause of farmers' suicides and the second leading cause of indebtedness. Therefore, shifting from an out-of-pocket medical services system to one which ensures access to health care for all, irrespective of the ability to pay is urgently required.
The countries that have been able to successfully ensure universal health care include high, middle and low income countries. While the expenditure of high income countries on health can bring into question their model of health care; whether they can be viewed as sustainable models for all to emulate. However, what cannot be disputed is the need to increase government spending on health in our country.
What is positive in the 12th plan is increase in the allocation on health services. It promised to increase the public expenditure on health by 34% each year so that by 2020, there would be a substantial increase. If actually utilised, this is likely to bring public spending on health close to Rs. 2000/- per head per year, the figure that a few public health analysts using different methods have come to estimate as the cost of a system of universal access through a public system. The budget for the year 2013-14 is an increase of almost 32% over the previous year's expenditure. However, it is to be noted that this increase is not over the budget allocation but over the actual expenditure. As can be seen in table 1, only about 60% of the 11th plan allocation was actually released and spent. If we see the budget allocation increase, it is only about double. Therefore if the process of release and expenditure remains as it was last year and is not expedited this year, we can expect a doubling of spending, and will then not reach the estimated need of per head expenditure.
The next question is, what will the funds be spent on? Will it be through the public or private services, or a combination of the two? Also central is the nature of services and technology that are chosen as priority to be provided through the universal system. "Studies have shown that the application of new medical technologies extensively and intensively accounts for between a third and two-thirds of the growth in health spending in the US and France" (Savedoff, 2012).
Historical Trends
The low input into the health services since planned development after Independence led to a situation where the private sector in health care overtook the public services in the 1980s. When we succumbed to the global trend of shifting government policy in the 1990s from that of people's welfare to market led development, there has been the further thrust within the private sector towards corporate hospitals and private medical insurance. By the year 2000, it was recognised worldwide that there is a 'market failure' in health care. That the public services are essential was recognised even by the World Bank. The Government of India thereby initiated the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) in 2005-06 to strengthen public services and ensure accessible, equitable and affordable health care to all in rural areas. By now, however, 80 per cent of the doctors in the country were practicing in the private sector, 80 per cent of outdoor services were obtained from the private sector and over 50 per cent of indoor admissions too happened in the private sector.
The mindsets of the doctors and general public had been created to believe that public systems could not work as well as private institutions. This belief is contrary to all evidence worldwide that shows that the specialist-led, tertiary-care oriented private hospitals add to unnecessary interventions, thereby unnecessary costs and increasing iatrogenesis, i.e. doctor-generated illness!
The almost completely unregulated private medical services sector is free to engage in all forms of malpractice and negligence as well as to ask for whatever price it wants. The poor and even the middle classes are plagued by the costs of medical services. Medical expenditures have been found to be one of the major causes precipitating farmers’ suicides.
The NRHM has managed to reverse the trend of shift of patients towards the private sector in some small measure by strengthening the public services in several dimensions in almost all states. However, the by now well entrenched private sector is not only not willing to let go but is also attempting to garner more and more for its own profits, actively supported by the international corporations in managed care, medical insurance, pharmaceuticals and human bio-technology. This is where we are at the present juncture.
Questions before the 12th Plan
The 12th plan document correctly poses the following questions: "In our system, the initial conditions include a large but severely under-funded public sector, a growing but high cost private sector, with serious issues of inadequate quality and coverage in both, and an ineffective regulation. In moving forward, there are two key questions:
1. How to combine public and private providers effectively for meeting UHC goals in a manner that avoids perverse incentives, reduces provider induced demand, and that meets the key objectives specified above?
2. How to integrate different types and levels of services— public health and clinical; preventive and promotive interventions along with primary, secondary, and tertiary clinical care—so that continuum of care is assured? Inadequate prevention and inappropriate utilisation of secondary or tertiary care, when primary care should suffice, would result in much higher cost of care."
Answers are sought in the document by examining systems of other countries. Most of these are the ones with a combination of public and private provisioning of services with a public fund paying the bills--...... Missing from these are two that have demonstrated that public and community driven systems are possible, China in its previous avatar, and Brazil in the present which has successfully moved towards developing a universal public health service system for a large part of its people. Clearly, these are not considered relevant examples if it has already been decided that public-private partnerships are the way the system is to be developed. Ignoring them also means that the vision of a public system that is the main provider of health services is not under consideration. Researches across the world have shown that this is the system with the least cost, both in terms of financial requirements and minimising unnecessary diagnostic tests and treatments which add to side-effects. All experts are agreed on this, the only contestation is on the feasibility of operationalising universal health services in the public system.
In order to develop the system of universal health care for India, the Planning Commission set up a 'High Level Expert Group on Universal Health Coverage 2020' in 2011. It also set up two Steering Committees for developing the framework for the 12th Plan in 2012--one for general health and another for AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa Rigpa and Homeopathy). Several health activists and civil society networks such as the Medico Friend Circle and Jan Swasthya Abhiyan were involved and consulted. But finally, when the draft of the chapter on health of the 12th plan was prepared, it provoked a strong dissent since it proposed a 'managed care model'. No public health expert will accept this in the present context since it implies adopting the dominant model in the US that is largely dependent on private insurance and private providers and is one with the least results in terms of health outcomes. It is also the most expensive, with even companies such as Ford Motors finding their employees' medical bills so hefty that they contributed to the recession that hit the global economy in the past decade. The Planning Commission had to then get the chapter rewritten to make its language more acceptable.
The 12th plan has announced the decision to move from the NRHM to a National Health Mission that will initiate a National Urban Health Mission along with the NRHM. The Plan outlay for 2013-14 of the Department of Health and Family Welfare is 29,165.00 crore rupees. Of this 20,999 crores is for the National Health Mission and the rest 8166 crore for all other heads, including 1,975.00 crore for the Pradhan Mantri Swasthya Suraksha Yojana (PMSSY), aimed at strengthening the tertiary sector, envisages setting up of new AIIMS-like institutions and upgradation of existing Government Medical College Institutions. Development of Human Resources in the health sector is being given an outlay of 1,151.65 crore. The National Programme for Prevention and Control of Cancer, Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases and Stroke (NPCDCS) gets Rs. 365.00 crore.
Thereby, there seems to be a greater focus on the urban, on the non-communicable and on tertiary services. These are all required, but this additional focus must not be at the cost of the rural, the communicable diseases and the primary and secondary services. There is no separate bifurcation in the allocations for the rural and urban components, and there is the 12th plan statement about using the presence of the private sector in urban areas for the NUHM. The Steering Committee report for the 12th plan had also spoken of the need for contracting in the private providers, especially those who can provide integrated primary, secondary and tertiary services. Who other than the corporate sector can provide this range, other than the government? The 12th plan has also spoken of social insurance, and all recent experience of health insurance schemes, such as the RSBY, the Arogyashree and other such schemes, have shown a preponderance of private providers getting the funds. Therefore, there is a real danger of the budgetary allocations of public funds for health getting channeled to private services rather than really strengthening the public services for the underserved.
Apportioning Budget allocations across departments within the ministry
The total outlay on health services is distributed between the four departments of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare as given in table 1:
Table 1
Health Department Allocations and Expenditure over XIth and XIIth Plans
(Amount in crore of Rs)
SrNo
|
Departments in the MOHFW
|
XIth Plan Allocations
|
XIth Plan Expenditure
|
XIIth Plan Allocation
|
% increase over XIth plan expenditure
|
1.
|
Dept. of H & FW
|
1,31,651 (90%)
|
83,407 (93.11%)
|
2,68,551 (89.51%)
|
322%
|
2.
|
Dept. of AYUSH
|
3,988 (2.7%)
|
2,994 (3.34%)
|
10,044
(3.35%)
|
335%
|
3.
|
Dept. of Health Research
|
4,496 (3%)
|
1,870 (2.09%)
|
10,029
(3.34%)
|
536%
|
4.
|
National AIDS Control Org.
|
5,728
(4%)
|
1,305 (1.46%)
|
11,394
(3.80%)
|
873%
|
TOTAL
|
1,45,863
(100%)
|
89,576 (100%)
|
3,00,018 (100%)
|
335%
|
Figures in brackets = Percent of total allocation to Ministry
Sources of Data: XIth and XIIth Plans, Planning Commission, Govt. of India
Thus almost 90 per cent is for the Department of Health & Family Welfare, 3.5% for AYUSH and Health Research and 3.8 per cent for AIDS Control. In the 2013-14 budget (see table 2), the allocations other than to the Department of Health and Family Welfare are further skewed in favour of AIDS Control, with 5.5 per cent being allocated to it. The budget 2013-14 also apportions much less for health research compared to what the 12th plan did. AYUSH gets more in both, almost double of what it got earlier, and this is a good trend, but it may not meet the requirements recommended by the Steering Committee on AYUSH for the Twelfth Plan that gave several recommendations for strengthening the AYUSH services in the country. The conceptual frame of the health system used by the Steering Committee on Health for the 12th Plan endorsed the significant role of AYUSH by positing it, together with health research, as the two cross-cutting disciplines that impact all dimensions of the health system.
Table -2
Central Plan Outlay for Departments of Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
(In crores of Rupees)
Dept.
|
Actuals 2011-2012
|
Budget 2012-2013
|
Revised 2012-2013
|
Budget 2013-2014
|
Department of Health and Family Welfare
|
20669.36
|
27127.00
|
22000.00
|
29165.00
(89%)
|
Department of AYUSH
|
611.47
|
990.00
|
670.00
|
1069.00
(3.3%)
|
Department of Health Research
|
564.50
|
660.00
|
464.00
|
726.00
(2.2%)
|
Department of AIDS Control
|
1313.86
|
1700.00
|
1759.56
|
1785.00
(5.5%)
|
TOTAL
|
23159.19
|
30477.00
|
24893.56
|
32745.00
|
Source: Union Budget 2013-14
What the budget allocations indicate is only the financial allocation which indicates the priorities set by the Planning Commission, but it does not necessarily tell the perspective with which various heads will actually be spent. If it is to be a people-centred health care and service delivery, then people's own agency must be respected and promoted. The knowledge base and its control are crucial in this respect. It is here that AYUSH, local health traditions (LHT) as folk practices, and self care are critical.
Unfortunately, none of the documents give any space to LHT, nor does the budget seem to do so. So will it mean that even under budgetary allocation of the department of AYUSH, more funds will only translate into more for promotion of pharmaceutical companies that are increasingly getting into herbal and AYUSH products? One major focus of the Department of AYUSH in recent years has been promotion of AYUSH products abroad. Will the increase in funds get channelised there, or will it even marginally go into promotion of folk practitioners and practices that empower people and that are the only form of non-commercial health care?
In Conclusion
Thus, while welcoming the increase in outlay for health in the 2013-14 budget, and within it the outlay for AYUSH, the concerns are two-fold: one, that the increase is inadequate for the task of moving towards universal health coverage, and two, that in the name of both universal coverage and promotion of AYUSH, public funds are likely to be channelised to private corporate providers and producers, covering the needs of the better-off and not those that are of high priority for improving the health of the poor and underserved,
References:
Planning Commission 2011: High Level Expert Group on Universal Health Coverage. Planning Commission, Government of India, New Delhi
Planning Commission 2012: Steering Committee on Health for the 12th Plan. Planning Commission, Government of India, New Delhi
Planning Commission 2012: Steering Committee on AYUSH for the 12th Plan. Planning Commission, Government of India, New Delhi
Planning Commission 2012: Twelfth five Year Plan (2012-2017). Government of India, New Delhi
Planning Commission 2013: Union Budget 2013-14; Expenditure Budget Vol. I, 2013-2014. Government of India, New Delhi
Savedoff WD, de Ferranti D, Smith AL, Fan V. Political and economic aspects of the transition to universal health coverage. www.thelancet.com Vol 380 September 8, 2012
World Bank: Health Expenditure, Public as % GDP. Available at data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.PUBL.ZS
World Bank: Health Expenditure, Public as % of total Budget. Available at
*************
Learning from the minds on the margin: towards a new social contract for responsible science
Anil K. Gupta
Professor, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad
Innovations are imperative in the way agenda for inclusive and responsible science is evolved and pursued. Many of the problems that affect marginal environments, people and occupations have been ignored for a long time. Consequent alienation invariably generates anger and sometimes anomie among the bypassed communities. The struggles so caused further debilitate the will of the formal sector to engage with the knowledge, wisdom and insights of the people in the informal sector. Such a chasm needs to bridged for science to become responsible for addressing the neglected needs of the society.
My contention is that when formal system leaves certain social problems unaddressed for decades and sometimes centuries, people do not just wait passively. They try to solve some them through their own genius in a frugal, flexible and often friendly manner. By engaging with such frugal innovators, we can learn new ways of solving problems in partnership with local communities. Honey Bee Network has been engaged both with the creative communities and also the scientific institutions to build a bridge between formal and informal science, technology and other institutions. It is inevitable that traffic on a bridge need not always be equal in both the directions. It is also not necessary that both sides should equal earnestness to connect. However, the lessons from the linkages forged so far are very encouraging. In some cases, it is the individual scientists who have made a significant difference. And in other cases, it is the institutional policies that have facilitated the interface. There are also instances where institutional commitment is quite weak but individual support from the scientists is strong.
I would like to share the experiences of Honey Bee Network in forging the linkages between formal and informal sector in the first part. The lessons that can be drawn for possible wider application are discussed in the second part. And finally, the policy and institutional implications are drawn for forging the new social contract for responsible science.
Part I
Making a bridge:
One of the reasons we set up Honey Been Network 25 years ago was to forge linkages between formal and informal sectors, particularly of science and technology but also other sectors. It was realized that the approach of the formal sector in dealing with ideas, innovations and traditional knowledge practices was not always respectful of the knowledge rights of common people. The Convention on Biological Diversity echoed this concern in articles 8J and 15C. However, in practice, the policies and institutional structure of science has not changed much. The guidelines of various academies of science (natural and social science) still have not overcome their ambivalence in this regard. The norms of citation and acknowledgement with regard to insights learnt from people have not evolved to the extent that knowledge providers in the informal sector feel assured that their contributions will be dealt with in the most rigorous and responsible manner. A fear of being shortchanged still persists.
However, more than hundred thousand people have somehow felt assured in sharing their knowledge (not always unique) with the National Innovation Foundation (NIF), an institute of the Department of Science and Technology (DST), Society for Research and Initiatives for Technologies and Institutions (SRISTI) and Grassroots Innovation and Augmentation Network (GIAN) and other members of Honey Bee Network. This faith is further cemented through collaborations that NIF has forged with over 200 labs and scientists in the last few years in pubic as well as private sector. The fact that almost all the scientists have contributed their time and energy in validating people’s knowledge either without cost or at very low cost demonstrates a new sense of collective responsibility emerging in Indian science and technology institutional work. The knowledge rich, economically poor people of this country can, of course, not thank the scientific community enough. This bridge of responsible science could not have been built by any one institution or individual. There is a long legacy of scientists working for the social good in India and around the world. We have to salute this legacy and hope that the younger generation will only advance the social, ecological, industrial, cultural and ethical connect between formal and informal sectors of the knowledge, institutions and values.
The first issue of Honey Bee Newsletter deliberately began with a communication from two scientists of Gujarat Agricultural University (Dr. Kalyanasundaram and Dr. B.T. Patel) to highlight the fact that despite all the asymmetry and neglect the formal sector had scientists who not only learnt from people but also acknowledged it. Infact, the pioneer in this regard was Dr. Y.P. Singh who had taught me at Haryana Agricultural University (HAU), Hisar and had been a mentor even later when he was at Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI). Professor Kuldeep Mathur later honed my understanding of the socio-political context in which institutions work or refuse to work for disadvantaged sections of the society.
For the first 12 years of the Network, the linkages with formal Science and Technology institutions were more in the nature of comments and voluntary research by scientists.
Dr. Arun Kumar of the Central Arid Zone Research Institute (CAZRI) has researched on the effectiveness of whey and milk on diseases of pearl millet and published several papers acknowledging its effectiveness compared to the well known chemical pesticides or other treatments. There has been worldwide programme of using milk for controlling viral and other diseases in various crops. Post doctoral research on elucidating the exact mechanisms is going on in Australia. It is a different matter that Ministry of Agriculture and several universities and state government departments will still take some more time before including such low cost and high effect sustainable practices in their advisory for farmers. Incidentally, Department of Ontario in Canada has not hesitated from putting this advice on their website.
Which protein or enzyme in milk or whey interacts with which pathway of the insect, bacteria, virus or fungus to prevent these from replicating and thus affecting the crop is not a trivial question. Why aren’t we asking such questions more often? Why do our priorities in many cases (obviously not all) continue to be guided by colonial structures of thought where priorities of western journals become the valid and appropriate priorities?
Good science is also responsible science
The effectiveness of NIF in the last 12 years to forge linkages with individual scientists and institutions such as the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) reveal a changing mindset in the formal scientific establishment. In the agricultural sector, the ICAR may not have formally entered into any understanding but individual institutions and scientists in most universities and labs have been most cooperative. That testifies to the decentralized nature of governance and the autonomy that most institutions enjoy to forge partnership with institutions like NIF.
There are also institutions which expect the Honey Bee Network to pay some cost of validation as would be applicable to a large national or international commercial company. The fact that we don’t have national guidelines in the matter making it mandatory for public institutions to use differential norms without sacrificing scientific rigour shows the long way we still need to walk. The debate on social justice has been dominated far too much by affirmative action in terms of basic need and other entitlements of disadvantaged sections. We still have not recognized that in the knowledge economy ignoring the outstanding knowledge of the communities and individuals is even greater an injustice than ignoring their menial contributions. The bias against engagement with mental and not menial contributions of the people on the margins runs through several aspects of public policy. For instance, under MGNREGS 9 the largest public employment programme in the world) providing 100 days of employment to 250 million people, the documentation of ecological, occupational, cultural and other technological or social knowledge specific to a place is not considered a valid work. Thus, if climate scientist wanted to look at culture and space specific indicators of climate perception, change and impact from all over the country, this programme will not lend any helping hand. Similarly, if the ministry of water resources wanted to make an atlas of water quality and quantity in different seasons of the year by collecting samples from each well of the country the programme again would not cooperate.
One can find so many other examples where sanitation through locally made soap or low cost water filters or roof top water harvesting, etc will not be pursued through knowledge based employment. We will not map biodiversity and soil diversity through this programme and thus continue to make our assumptions for public policy and institutional interventions on extremely limited information. We could have built knowledge registers and updated them every year in just five days of employment around the country. Each panchayat could find so many opportunities of learning from each other through such registers available on their village websites. The scientists could engage with the specific communities to study certain patterns in the socio-ecological interactions. So many innovations will emerge from such mapping of minds that cannot be fully imagined today.
Some other lessons learnt and challenges identified are:
Institutional: In general, most institutions appreciate examples of creativity and innovation in the informal sector. However, given their own agenda and mandate, not most feel empowered to take up projects on their own or suggested by outsiders involving interface with the informal sector. In a few cases, the top leadership encourages independent linkages and does not either monitor or reinforce the same through annual planning and review mechanism. Some leaders have creaeed instituational framework of cooperation with an independent oversight mechanism (comprising outstanding scientists) so that linkages endure changes in the leadership. There are cases where individual scientists encourage their students to work on the ideas of the people as a apart of their postgraduate research and only seek supplemental resources since most of the students get their own fellowship. The budgets in which NIF could get validation done are extremely low.
There have also been some discordant notes in this cooperation. A particular faculty member took financial support for developing ideas of children into prototype but failed to acknowledge the idea providers in the research paper he co-authored with his students. Subsequently, it required considerable discussions to persuade him to at least mention the names of children in the body of the paper and not just as footnotes. Ideally, they should have been the co-authors. There are other colleagues who mentioned the source of the practice in the first publication and then in the subsequent publications based on the same led forgot to acknowledge the original contributor of the idea. These problems are not very rampant. These are also not very unique.
Knowledge rights of creative people
The very genesis of Honey Bee Network lay in correcting the existing asymmetry in norms and practice of acknowledgement and attribution in formal sector about the knowledge of people in the informal sector. We are all familiar with the literature on ethnobiology, much of which does not ever acknowledge the knowledge providers by their names, even in the cases of community knowledge. The question of prior informed consent does not even arise. I resigned from the editorial board of one of the CSIR journals precisely on this ground. I had tried to suggest three guidelines which the editorial board could not accept and practice. This first was that we should insist on acknowledging the knowledge provider/innovator traditional knowledge holder in the research papers or publications based on their knowledge, second, we should share the findings with the knowledge providers in local language and third, the unique knowledge of the communities and/or individual should not be published, lest their intellectual property rights are eroded. After protection of the IPRs, it can be published as is the practice in the academic world. An undertaking to this effect was suggested from the authors. I am sure sooner or later, such guidelines would become the only the knowledge exchange between formal and informal sector will take place.
Technological:
One of te persistent challenges face by the Network is the design of the experiments which should mimic the conditions of orginals use as closely as possible. Be it the water extract, or processing herbal lead exactly as the knowledge provider does or dispensing it the way he does. It is not proper to invalidate a particular local practice because of inappropriate protocol. Slowly and slowly, we are achieving convergence on this account. There are some scientists who are in fact, taking the trouble of visiting the knowledge provider/s to observe how exactly he/she makes the preparation and dispenses it to the patient. Some scientists have invited the local innovators to their labs to understand how the formal sector pursues research on their ideas.
When Regulations fall behind the innovations
In the case of mechanical technologies, we face many regulatory challenges. A large number of farm machineries are made by using old parts of automobile or other devices. This is done to keep cost low and also to harness the usused potential ofa second hand components. We all know that not all components of a machinery fatigue at the same rate. It makes no sense to junk all components at the same time when many of them have life left for many more decades. The local grassroots innovators know this and accordingly harness the potential of such second-hand components. The problem arises when regulatory and testing agencies do not approve machineries having seonc hand components. A large part of rural machineries will remain illegal even if these are highly legitimate for meeting local needs. The Regional Transport Officer is bound by the law which requires all traction vehicles to be certified for their road worthiness. The motorcycle based ploughing machines and various subsequent improved versions numbering more than 10000 are crucial for farming operations in Saurashtra. But none of these will be tested or certified. So far as safety is concerned, slow moving vehicles invariably may be safer than the fast moving ones. In any case, proper safety features must be incorporated and that is an issue on which formal and informal sectors can cooperate. The search for frugal solutions will require less entropic ways of innovation. Naturally, using a material to its fullest potential life without compromising safety and energy efficiency must be the prime goal of a policy for sustainable inclusive development. In the absence of engagement between those who set the standards and the ones who innovate, the standards become an inhibitor instead of promoter of innovation. For many innovative machines, there are no standards yet. Hopefully, the situation will change, the dialogue will begin and the inclusive innovation policies will draw upon the genius of creative communities and individuals.
Socio-cultural:
Most of the innovators may not know that they have done an innovation. It requires an appreciative peer group or an eye for detail of the outsider or greater awareness to get this realization. It is for this reason that almost 90 per cent of the knowledge that NIF has received comes through the voluntary contribution of the Honey Bee Network collaborators and members. Hardly ten per cent reaches us directly. If we do not go out and scout, we wouldn’t be able to find so much hidden talent in our country. Even among the children, same proportion of ideas is collected through idea workshops. Keeping this in view, Honourable President during his address to the Vice Chancellors of the central universities suggested three steps to promote innovations in society:
- Organisation of innovation exhibition during his visits to central universities and facilitation of his interactions with the innovators in the hinterland in different fields of social development.
- Setting up National Innovation Clubs which will aim at searching, spreading, sensing and celebrating the innovations all around. Unless young students get involved with innovation movement and faculty bring the experience of creative communities and people in the classroom, the courage to overcome inertia and attempt new heuristics for solving problems may not emanate.
- Interaction with inspired teachers who succeed in triggering extraordinary curiosity in the minds of students and thus motivate them to ask the unconventional questions.
Leveraging of grassroots innovations through exhibitions at the President’s House for last four years has given a very important message nationally and internationally. When the Head of the State honours common creative people, a new idiom of engagement gets evolved. Likewise, when former President recognizes the young children during IGNITE award function held every year at IIMA organized by NIF, once again an important message is conveyed about the significance of sourcing creative ideas from younger generation. One of the most remarkable things we have learnt through the ideas submitted by children is that they are far less patient with the problems of society than has been the case with our generation. This is the most redeeming thing that we can say about our country. Once this culture becomes pervasive, we would be able to overcome the widespread inertia and the tendency to live with the problems unsolved indefinitely.
Jugaad is a misnomer for majority of the grassroots innovations
Tremendous experimental ethic is evident among people while attempting local solutions. Some of the lazy intellectuals have tried to turn all frugal solutions as ‘jugaad’. A US$ 250 ECG machine by GE, low cost health care by Narayan Hrudalaya, clay refrigerator by Mansukhbhai, etc. are all supposed to be ‘jugaad’! Surely, a term used so loosely becomes meaningless to characterize any systematic aspect of frugal innovation. The tinkering, that is, makeshift arrangements for solving problems are tried everywhere in the world. When water leaked from the radiators of the car, people would use soap to plug the leak. If the wire has to be put in a socket and plug is not fitting properly, suing matchstick to create a tighter grip has been done by almost every electricity, regardless of safety. Using diesel engine for transporting people and goods has worked as a makeshift arrangement and may indeed be a ‘jugaad’. But, Mansukhbhai Prajapati has developed seven diffetn machines to make clay refrigerator and non stick pans. He has circular kilns and large sized vertical kilns. None of these can be called ‘jugaad’. We should be discreet in using terms which make sense and do not denigrate the experimental and innovative ethic of common people. It is true that many times people may do right things for wrong reasons. But then, identifying the right reason and feeding it back to the people is the responsibility of the scientists. Sometimes, people know the right thing but do not abstract the principle underlying it. Local communities have preserved milk by periodic heating and coling for long periods without using refrigerator. They may not have isolated the scientific principle underlying that. They have known how to prevent spolage of prickles for many years without any artificial chemical preservative. The science of the same may not have been isolated systematically. The social-cultural context of grassroots innovations and outstanding traditional knowledge needs to be understood more empathetically.
Part II
Learning from the bridge between formal and informal sector
There are several strategies Honey Bee Network has used to build bridges between formal and informal science. Inviting scientists to serve on the review committees and then hoping that some of them will get motivated to take up validation and value addition research is one way. Writing to the research institutions directly with a request to help in validation has helped in many cases. Sometimes, the informal interaction in various meetings and lectures like this also opens opportunities for cooperation. Formal agreements with scientific bodies have been tried in a few cases and generally there has been a positive outcome. At the end of the day, it is the interest of the concerned scientists that makes the maximum difference. Institutional agreements can only facilitate the linkage but actual bond gets formed when a scientist finds ideas of creative communities exciting enough to pursue. Preliminary research is done in several cases at Sadbhav SRISTI Sanshodhan Natural Product Lab at SRISTI. These results create conditions for congruence with scientists who would like to receive scientific leads rather than information about claims of common people. SRISTI Lab works on herbal technologies for agricultural, veterinary and human applications besides microbial diversity. In very Shodhyatra, we collect soil samples from which microbial diversity is isolated and further used for screening against different pathogens.
Frugality in Science
I would not argue that frugal innovations would invariably require frugal research. Sometimes, one needs to spend considerable amount of financial resources to get a solution which may be extremely affordable. But when an organization has limited funds, frugal budgets can take those resources very far. The average cost of validating engineering technologies by NIF in the last three years is Rs 2.21 lakh, as can be seen in Table 1.
Most agricultural universities and some of the research institutions have helped in validating agricultural, veterinary and farm machinery technologies. The human health practices have been taken up for validation in ICMR labs or other public and private labs. The average cost of validation ranges from Rs 18,666 in SRISTI Lab to Rs 2,44,125 in agriculture. In addition, 32 community fabrication workshops have been set up at the site of mechanical innovators in different parts of the country at an average cost of Rs 2.87 lakh. Such an economical outcome could not have been achieved if scientists had not been extremely responsive to the cause of promoting grassroots innovations and outstanding traditional knowledge. The journey from proof of concept to prototype, prototype to product development, product to utility and eventually to widespread diffusion is a long one. Most of the validation activities have only meant crossing the first hurdle. For the subsequent stages, one would need far more resources. Generally speaking, one should begin with 2000 leads so as to produce 200 products, out of which 20 may diffuse widely. Anothehr 20 or 50 may diffuse locally. It is apparent that with the available resources, NIF could only handle muc smaller nuber of tecnoliges. At this rate, it would perhaps take a few more centuries to do justice to the expectation of tens of thousands of knowledge hholders who hhhave already shared tyheir knowledge with the NIF. The proposed so call Inclusive India Innovation Fund by National Innovation council will not address thhe needs or early stage risky funding. It will only be invested in the companies providing ggoods and services for the common people. The fact that it is the early stage where private sector investments is almost absent, has been ignored and thus the innovation ecosystem continues to exclude the ideas of informal sector, children and young technology students. All the students awarded with gandhian Young Tecnological Innovation Award (GYTI, see techpedia.in/award) would not be eligible for any support at all. It is for society to judge whether such a conception of so called inclusive fund does justice to the aspirations of creative youth and other communities of our country.
Engaging technology students: www.Techpedia.in
SRISTI realized that one of the most potent force in our country for addressing the unmet technological needs of informal sector as well as MSME is the technological youth. A platform designed by SRISTI by drawing upon youthful energy of Hiranmay (then a third year student at SVNIT, Surat and now part of SRISTI team coordinating this platform) which now has titles of abstracts of about 150000 engineering projects by about 400,000 students from 500 institutions. Idea was that nobody should repeat what has been done before. Originality quotient should go up. The third year students in the summer should visit MSME clusters and villages and slums to identify technological problems in search of solutions. They should be given credit for the same. They should try to attempt a solution of one of these problems in their final year and get academic credit for the same as well. Gujarat Technological University joined hands with SRISTI. Quite extraordinary results have been achieved through this very fruitful cooperation supported by DST and led by Dr. Akshay Agarwal, VC of GTU. Should not this experience be replicated in other parts of the country and other disciplines and universities?
How do we learn from innovation?
There are four levels at which we can learn from innovations whether in formal or informal sector: (a) artefactual, (b) analogic, (c) heuristic and (d) gestalt or configurational.
- Artefactual: One learns from the material characteristics of the innovation, be it in terms of form, feature, or function of a mechanical or electronic technology. Or it could be method, material and applications in the case of biochemical or physico chemical or herbal innovation. If at least any one of the three dimensions out of material, method or application/use is new, one can learn from the novelty and develop further modifications for incremental or substantial innovation. In this case, the domain of the technology generally remains same though functionality may significantly vary because of improvements.
- Analogic: the innovation in this case is not drawn upon in its functional property but we try to learn from its metaphorical property. One can apply the technology even in a different domain using the original technology as an analogy. For instance, a farmer looked at the hook in a balance used by a vegetable vendor by which he coulse use of one the pans for delivering the vegetables to the customer. Using this detachable pan hung on the hook, he developed a similar mechanism for a tilting bullock cart in which without removing the harness from the shoulders of the bullock, he could tilt the cart to unload its content. Similarly, a larger number of innovations have been developed by applying a technology in a different domain by mimicking the properties of the original innovation.
- Heuristic: here one does not learn necessariy from the physical form or from its analogic implications. Instead, the focus is on the principles or the thumb rules underlying the innovations. As I will illustrate later taking the example of bamboo windmill, the principles underlying the original innovation were drawn upon which replicating the idea in another context. When a farmer listened to a long discussion that I had with him during Shodhyatra on the advantages of herbal pesticides instead of chemical ones, he summarized it in a sentence. He said, whatever I had said implied that any plant which was not eaten by cattle or other animals, could be a source of potential pesticide. He had captured the heuristic underling various examples I gave of herbal pesticide. He could see a pattern in them. The reason why animals don’t eat a plant could be because of its toxicity. Since one needed toxicity for killing pests, there was no need to buy it from outside. Of course, safety and other issues will have to be taken care of but the heuristic is very powerful and can be generalized almost universally.
- Gestalt or configurational: This is an institutional aspect of innovation. One does not learn only from the about three dimensions of innovations but also looks at the context in which innovations emerged and were nurtured. One cannot separate the institutional and cultural aspect from the technological dimension of innovation. That is why I have argued that ‘if technology is like words, then institutions are like grammar and culture is like thesaurus’. One cannot make a meaningful sentence without combining all three. Same way, an innovation cannot generally be understood without looking at its institutional and cultural context. The constellation of the factors or what is often called as ecosystem of innovation has to be learnt from rather than looking at an innovation in isolation.
As one can observe, higher the level of abstraction, greater is the degree of generalizability and more diverse are the domains in which lessons can be learnt.
Should scale be the enemy of sustainability?
One of the challenges Honey Bee network often faces is the criterion of scale by which the so called success should be judged. No doubt, to some extent, any innovator would wish more and more people to benefit from his or her innovation. However, there are problems which are limited in scope, space or social segments. During the Shodhyatra in Dhemaji district, Assam, we came across a serious problem of high iron content in the water. The local communities did have water filters made from local sand and clay. Even the filtered water, clean as it seemed, when filled in bottles turned brown after we walked for some distance. Obviously, not entire iron had been filtered. If special filters have to be designed, then their market may be restricted to a district or a few more districts, where such problems exist. Given the poverty and limited size of market large private companies manufacturing filters may not see this as a viable opportunity for either solving the problem or commercially launching the solution, that is specifically designed water filter. The state will have to play an active role. If the incentives in the scientific and technology institutions were to be determined only by the scale of diffusion of their solutions, then they may also not address the problems limited to certain niches. In the long tail of innovations, while some innovations diffused widely, large number of innovations remain localized. Should such niche specific needs be served or not? If the dominant ideology disincentivises the generation of solutions for small niches, then people in these regions or sectors will feel alienated. If local solutions are not optimal and if formal institutions are not willing to engage, social alienation and unrest are inevitable.
Alienating marginal people, fueling unrest:
Take the case of forest based products. Almost entire material form the forests where some of poorest tribals live is drawn out as raw material. Not even one per cent of local produce is valorized in situe. In the absence of value additona, there is a limit to which even the most compassionate contractor or employer can pay more than a limited amount of wages, keeping aside the corruption and exploitation. My argument is that even with the best intentions, we cannot remove poverty and generate sustainable livelihoods, maintain ecological balance unless we ensure that no material goes out of the forest region without some value addition. If one looks at the nature of technologies, some of them may be a few thousand years old. How does one join hands with local knowledge rich economically poor people and create conditions for experiements to take place innovations to emerge? Naturally, the engagement between formal and informal sector cannot just be left to the random chance events. It is not that the tribal communities don’t have lessons to teach us. In certain regards, they may have extremely rich knowledge system. While in other cases, because of lack of tools and other facilities they may not have been able to develop more efficient ways of processing forest products.
Learning from tribals: In Naryanpur, Bastar we came across an interesting sight. While there were no Christians or Muslims there but there were some graves outside the village. We were intrigued. When we asked the reason, we learnt something extraordinary. When a healthy person died they buried the body. When a sick person died they burnt it. It is difficult to surpass the elegance and wisdom of such a practice. Does it matter how widespread this practice is? Will we value it less if it is prevalent in one one village? Similarly, we found another village in the same region, where people had built some sculptures on the top of the graves. On closer scrutiny and discussion with the community, we realized that whenever an outstanding person died the community made his clay sculpture on the top of his grave/Samadhi.
During Shodhyatra in Purulia and Bankura, West Bengal, we came across a very interesting practice. In a potters’ village, some of the most beautiful terracotta horses were kept under a tree. When we enquired why had they kept such beautiful horses under a tree, the local potters replied, they had not kept just the beautiful ones, they had kept the best ones. We were still intrigued. Looking at our inability to understand the logic, they explained that when children walked by this tree, they could see what the current standard of designing best terracotta horses was. They had to do better. We had never come across such an outstanding example of open source standards of excellence. Even if we found only one village, where such a practice existed, it was still worth learning from. Niches-specific innovations can change our entire perspective of life. No point in ignoring them.
From Incubation to Sanctuary Model
The scaling up of innovation depends upon how well we mentor an idea, help in forging the appropriate linkages and try to convert an idea into a viable product. India has many incubators, some of which have done very well in terms of converting ideas into practices. However, in a society where a large number of middle class or lower middle class innovators have to take care of multiple responsibilities, it may not always be possible for such innovators to leave their filial responsibilities and shift to an incubator. That is why, a large number of incubators don’t have any incubatees. When GIAN was set up in 1997 to link innovation, investment and enterprise - the golden triangle for rewarding creativity, the principle was to provide incubation support at the doorstep of innovators. While redesigning mechanisms of incubation, it may be useful to look at emerging challenges in nurturing incremental innovations versus breakthrough innovations. There are known and unknown products and known and unknown markets. Four combinations are a) known product, known market; b) known product, unknown market; c) unknown product, known market; and d) unknown product, unknown market.
In case (a) incubation model may work well. While both are known, the greater fit between customer needs and technology features has to be achieved. One can mentor and manoeuvre the journey from product to utility through better market linkages and design support. In the second case (b), one needs to do business development, market research and reconfigure the product to suit market needs. In the case (c), market needs are known and one has to R&D to develop a solution. In the fourth case (d), when both are unknown, one needs a very flexible, playful environment for innovation, which I call the 'sanctuary model'. In the case of incubation, there is chaos outside and order inside. In the case of sanctuary (like a wildlife sanctuary), there is chaos inside and order outside. Breakthrough innovations will seldom take place in a context where institutional conditions are overbearing and may stifle highly risky and diversified approaches.
When we look at grassroots innovations which have transformed local conditions, extreme degree of stubbornness and unwillingness to take too much feedback into account has helped the fortitudinous spirit of innovators to thrive. It may look counter-intuitive but we found another instance where many centenarians, particularly grandmothers showed similar attributes. Just as headstrong and autonomous women with minds of their own often live very long, perhaps the innovators with similar characteristics can also come out with irreverent ideas leading to sustainable solutions.
There are many more lessons that we have learnt over the years from our engagement with grassroots innovators and the bridges that we have tried to build with formal science, technology and innovation systems.
Before I conclude, let me recall an incident about why large corporations feel hesitant in joining hands with grassroots innovators at an early stage. I was invited by Ludhiana Management Association chaired by Mr. Munjal (son of senior Munjal, famous for a worldwide brand of bicycles) to talk about innovations. Having so many bicycle manufacturers in the meeting, I made a special effort to show from our database many examples of bicycle based innovations. As usual, there was appreciateion and applause but I was not very happy. At dinner time, I asked Mr. Munjal, whose wife was also present, as to why did he not select any specific innovation related to his own industry (manufacturing largest number of cycles in the world), for further value addition. He replied: "Professor Gupta, we are doing very fine.”
I then realized that if large corporations continued to do very fine, where was the need for them to innovate or learn from common creative people? While I don’t wish a bad time for such corporations, so that they pay attention to grassroots innovators, the fact is that they had begun to take note only when economy has begun to squeeze. Never before so many large corporations had shown interest in open innovation platform as they do now. Honey Bee Network was one of the first open innovation platforms started 25-years ago. And yet, it has taken such a long time for corporations to begin to understand that not all good ideas can come from within. R&D is not equal to innovation. Innovations may require more freedom and flexibility and even frugality than the systems of large corporations often permit. Hence, the need to look out.
Summing Up
The tide is slowly turning. Many more public and private actors are taking interest in finding out how they can learn from common people. 'Deviant Research' is getting legitimized slowly and slowly. At the same time, the norms of acknowledgement, attribution and reciprocity have not yet been adequately internalized in the formal sector. The informal sector, unorganized as it is, does not feel sufficiently reassured of the intentions of the formal sector. It is not surprising that if we leave aside the Honey Bee Network, despite billons of dollars having been spent by international and national agencies, there are not many databases on the web demonstrating even a few thousand or a few hundred unaided innovations by common people. There must be something fundamentally odd in our approach! Why else would we share so much? Perhaps the demand for open access extremely frugal and affordable solutions to improve one’s life is going to increase. The Gandhian principle of self reliance and self help may not entirely be obsolete. Decentralized and diversified solutions provide diversity of thought for which cultural, institutional and even biological diversity are concomitants.
Let me conclude this paper with four recommendations:
a) every public institution into R&D must allocate at least 10 per cent resources for validating and value adding people’s knowledge,
b) when validation is pursued the conditions followed by the people must be carefully simulated and abstracted lest a good idea is invalidated because of bad protocol,
c) the criteria of evaluation should also be carefully developed keeping in mind that people make trade offs between accuracy, affordability and urgency all the time, and
d) enriching people’s own capabilities to solve problems using modern scientific tools and techniques is necessary to democratic science, technology and innovations.
The new social contract would require significant investments not just in creating scientific temper but in making scientific tools accessible to village and slum communities to understand the significance of science and technology based social transformation.
***
Anil K. Gupta teaches at Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Ahmedabad. This piece is excerpted from a the Prof. P.N. Srivastava Endowment lecture he delivered at Jawaharlal Nehru University on 11 April 2013.
******************
Mining boom, resistance and the future: Indias global position
Markus Kröger
The world’s mineral resources are limited and the extraction and consumption of minerals has expanded dramatically during the recent years. The current pace of expansion pace has brought the depletion of ores nearer, for example Steel manufacturers consider that high-quality iron ore would last for 30-50 years. In Finland leading politicians have said that the mining industry should be looked at in a long-term perspective, but meaning however only the next 30 years. The current generation is depleting the future generations’ right and share of the resources. New reserves can be found and technology be developed to extract and utilize low-quality ores, but these options are also limited.
Rising price is seen as a sign of a natural resources depletion. This, for instance, led China in the mid-2000s to start buying all the iron ore it could get. Besides steel production, it started to store ores for future use and export, as an investment whose value rises. The prices of natural resources declined for a long period in the 20th Century, but now a sharp turn has been experienced. For example, the world market price of iron ore is now at its all-time peak, at about 115 Euros per tonne. The profit margins on iron export are staggering, for example in India these are 80-90%. The extraction costs of iron ore (including salaries, machinery investment and other costs such as bribes and royalties but not transportation, of which the buyer takes care) in India are as low as 10 Euros per tonne, according to the local mining operators. Iron exporting has turned into one of the most profitable businesses in the world.
In this conjunction of rising prices and resource depletion, many countries, including in the global North (e.g. Finland), have allowed companies to export minerals asking for only very low royalties. It would be a good time to rethink on the nationalization of mines or at least to increase royalties substantially.
“Drink, eat and have merry today, forget about tomorrow”, so describes Ramchandra Singh Deo, an Indian politician from Chhattisgarh, the spirit of these days. Mining is the sale of wealth and property. Understanding this, many people in India have tried to stop the export of ores in the past years, realizing that soon they would have to buy back what they exported.
Countries may in the near future have to buy back, expensively, what they exported at the shortsighted pretext of creating a few thousand jobs and GDP increase. Governments and citizens should create a new, long-term mining policy. It is clear that the best investment now would be to hold on to mineral wealth.
In countries such as India and Brazil, the best remaining iron ore and bauxite reserves are located in the remotest forests with richest biodiversity and inhabited by indigenous populations. The same applies to other minerals, such as coal and gold. Extraction of these minerals inevitably means irreversible damage to nature as well as violent expulsion of people. Bauxite areas particularly are important water reservoirs that let out water into rivers throughout the year, also during drought. The environmental damages of mines spread to vast areas and are often seen only after some years of extraction. At this point, when agriculture and forest livelihoods have already been made impossible in the mining effected areas, the only option left for the locals is to accept the mining and the labour it provides.
All countries must be very careful about their mining projects. Mineral extraction and export have been very destructive almost everywhere. They have been correlated with increasing corruption, paying bribes to politicians’ secret bank accounts, corrosion of regulatory bodies, and increase in violence and human rights violations. No country, not even in the North, can hope to avoid this industry.
In Finland, national mining and metal production in value-adding industries was the base of mining industry, but this is now changing with the new mines. Multinational companies aggressively search for gold and other minerals from the depths of wilderness. People are talking about an arctic land grab, which is part of a global race to the last remaining resource peripheries, a category which Lapland has also been rendered into by the current mining policy.
Now is not the time to sell, extract, export or benefit. Now is the time to let minerals remain in the ground and stop expansion of production. Investments must be concentrated on the development of renewable resources and their sustainable and equitable use.
This requires building a new natural resource policy, which is human capital-intensive, providing jobs for the burgeoning human population in the countryside, and importantly on a long term. Once a mine is depleted the job-offering capacities of that natural habitat are gone. Where to go then?
The extraction pace should be set so that our generation would take only that part which belongs to it. (Many mining policy experts and activists in India argue that the safeguarding of mineral reserves should be calculated by at least 10,000 to 30,000 years. In the past two years, they have managed to close down through Supreme Court petitions most of the iron ore mines in Karnataka’s Bellary area and in Goa. The states are very important iron ore exporters in India. The same type of closing down of mining activities, due to illegalities and other problems, is happening through differing procedures and on different scales also in other Indian states. A similar large-scale stopping of mines has not been experienced anywhere else in the world, according to mining company directors.
This illustrates that in India activists and concerned citizens have managed to foster contentious agency and a judicial and political system that allows grassroots-level democratic steering of ecology in greater depth than in other countries, e.g. Brazil or even Finland. Seeing India in comparison to these countries’ natural resource politics, there is also a lot to be proud of in India. Particularly striking is the wide-spread contentious agency by people, active participation in politics, a legacy of mass movement based emancipation from colonialism, and sustained culture of questioning and political activism, among other things. This setting provides a good platform for developing a deeper notion of ecological democracy – given that the state is embedded by the contentious agency to a larger degree and to avoid state capture by the rising private interests.
The current generation must take the decision to also look into the future. For how long will people passively follow from the side the current mining rush, without understanding its real costs: a lost opportunity to ask and raise more fundamental questions about our human conduct and to provide future generations their share?
***
Markus Kröger is an Academy of Finland Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Helsinki, studying the politics of mining and forest industry, particularly the role of social movements. He is the author of Contentious Agency and Natural Resource Politics (Routledge, 2003).
****************
Sadhya, Sadhan aur Sadhna
Anupam Mishra
At the very outset I must confess that these three Hindi words are difficult to translate. They represent the means, the ends and a kind of penance. I did not choose this title to score a point or satisfy my ego. I chose it because all NGOs, their coordinators, workers, generous funding agencies – whether desi or foreign – and people’s movements, regardless of size and reach, should ponder over these three words.
A debate rages over the question of funding. It gets particularly stormy when it comes to foreign funding. Invariably, the debate centres on the ends and the means. Perhaps there would be some clarity if we stopped for a moment to consider sadhna or penance as well. For only penance will tell us what the people really want. And, when we know that and direct our energies at achieving it, the means and ends will fall in place.
In my opinion the source of funding is not very important. The money can be raised from the local village, mohalla or city. It could be sent across the seven seas. There can be divergent opinions on the best sources of funding. What is more important is the outcome. The end result must be what we the people want. Apart from a few exceptions we don’t have a clear idea of what we wish to achieve. NGOs or civil society movements keep shifting their focus.
Most of us will recall at one time social forestry fetched a high price on the environment stock market. Funding came from four corners of the globe and we rounded up a few million dollars. The best among us started implementing social forestry projects without first debating what precisely was “unsocial forestry”.
And then suddenly this flag was brought down. In its place, one fine morning the brand new flag of wasteland develpent was unfurled. This time, too, nobody cared to define wastelands. A lot of money, energy and time were spent by eminent members of society in the wasteland development venture. Initially, a small department in the central government handled the idea. It was replaced by a new ministry. Lots of NGOs, from Kashmir to Kanyakumari, began doing wasteland development.
But like its previous avatar, wasteland development died in its infancy. There were no condolence meetings to mourn the death of this “marvelous” scheme and we soon started celebrating the birth of a new movement called watershed development.
This programme has been translated and adapted into various languages. In Hindi speaking states, watershed development is called ‘Jalagam Vikas’. In Maharashtra, it is termed ‘Panlot’ and elsewhere it is called ‘Pandhal’. Despite the desi badge, the programme does not touch our hearts.
For the moment, our best NGOs are putting their most talented people, from urban and rural areas, into developing a few watersheds here and there. Nobody knows when we will begin shedding tears over this programme.
Running neck and neck with watershed development is Joint Forest Management (JFM). Here, too, some NGOs are ahead of the rest in providing a desi touch. So, JFM is called ‘Sanyukt Van Prabandh’ in some regional dialects. Grassroots NGOs who object to the Sanskritised world sanyukt, opt for the more colloquial sanjha. But essentially JFM is a programme and its end result has been dictated by the World Bank or some similar institutions.
I do not wish to narrate all this to poke fun. These are serious matters. If our society really needed the JFM programme, we should have first seriously reflected on the administration of forests by individual agencies and heir managers. Who were they? Ho long did their authority last? Whom did they snatch these forests from? How did the country’s forest cover dwindle to 10% when it should have been 33%? We have paid a price for deforestation. Floods in Orissa, Chattisgarh and Bihar and drought in 18 states are the net outcome.
The people who mismanaged these forests and the political leadership which protected them should have apologized publicly before JFM was launched.
We must also remember who the true managers of the forests were, how they were dispossessed by the British and looted of their green gold.
It is much the same story with programmes in areas other than the environment. Numerous plans exist on women’s empowerment, child rights, reproductive health and formation of self-help groups. Every NGO implements the same programmes, regardless of political ideology. The leftists, the rightists, the Gandhians, the missionaries, even the RSS display a rare consensus. The monoculture of ideas is alarming. It seems there is an invisible mint somewhere in the West, which constantly coins new terms for us to fill our pockets with.
So should we believe everybody has sold out? No, there are some heroes who have bravely fought the idea of monoculture. After the Emergency in the 1970s, a few drove out Coca-Cola and IBM. To commemorate this great victory, a cold drink called Double Seven was introduced. But Coca-Cola re-emerged, in the garb of our heroes, drowning Double Seven and our original champions. This is a beautiful example of co-existence.
So this debate on ends and means, funds from here and there, will lead us nowhere. The answer is to find a good mission and for that to happen we have to look within. Once we have our own ends, the means will follow.
A small example can be narrated from a village near Jaipur. In this drought prone area a routine NGO constructed a tank to harvest water. It invested some 30,000 rupees in the project. The tank narrowed the distance between the NGO and the community. At one of the meetings an elderly person suggested constructing a small temple and a chhatri on the embankment of the tank. But the cost of constructing the chhatri and the temple was not in the NGO’s budget.
The NGO explained that it could get a grant for the tank but not for the chhatri. But the elderly person politely replied that the village was not asking for money from the NGO. Within a month the villagers collected the amount and the chhatri was constructed.
Most of our NGO friends will consider the money spent as wasteful expenditure, but for the villagers this is the difference between a house and a home. They need water structures that belong to them. And when they own something they protect and maintain it. Otherwise it’s a kind of PWD structure.
We should not forget in this land of 500,000 villages and few thousand towns there were two million water structures before the British came. There was no water mission, no watershed development programme. Society created these structures using its own resources. There was no Zilla Bank or World Bank at that time but the Village Bank. There was an invisible and invincible structure to carry out this job in a country that has a Cherrapunji as well as a Jaisalmer.
Now we talk about people’s participation and PRA – Participatory Research Appraisal. We get funds from within and outside, but our aims and ends do not represent the needs of the people. We keep on pushing a different agenda. If we were to invest half our energy in understanding our society, we would generate enough means from within. But that requires a kind of penance.
*************
Small Farmers,Institutions and 12th Five year Plan : Making the Triad Talk
Ranvir Singh
Biraj Swain
Abstract
This paper is an empathetic look at the government of India’s claims on prioritizing agriculture and amongst it, the role of small farmers. The authors used the 12th Five Year Plan as the starting point and went back to major literature till 70s (two decades pre and post reforms) and did an institutional analysis ranging from institutional credit access, research and extension, agricultural data, inputs access to government’s line ministries’ proximity to the last mile farmers. The authors chose to not address the question of land, land-holding because the seriousness of that issue and the contested nature of discourse would have meant doing injustice to the same. Besides it is impossible to be empathetic to the government, any which way when the question of land arises. Empathetic optic notwithstanding the short-comings are glaring and the measures half-hearted. Te authors found the plan documents’ focus on farmers’ organization and collectivization as a very good beginning. But to stop it from reducing to well-begun but half-done, the authors emphasize a host of measures for truly giving the small farmer their due. This paper concludes by making an emphatic case for breaking silos, trans-disciplinary analysis amongst researchers, practitioners and government to make any credible progress in agriculture in general and for small farmers in particular.
Context:
Agricultural growth is central to any strategy of reducing poverty, hunger and malnutrition. The centrality of the role of the government in driving agricultural growth is well argued in the literature. The phenomenon of ‘market failures’ has come to be recognized almost universally (Stiglitz 1996). In developing countries, given the incompleteness, and often absence, of rural markets in a large number of spheres and the pervasiveness of information asymmetry, the role of the government in agriculture becomes even more crucial. Specific forms of public expenditure have direct and indirect impacts on agricultural growth.
Although agriculture now accounts for only 14 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (12th FYP), it is still the main source of livelihood for the majority of the country’s population. As such, rapid growth of agriculture is critical for inclusiveness. It provides employment to 53 per cent of the Indian workforce. This huge proportion of workforce represents the largest group engaged in any single economic activity in the country. Dev (2012) mentioned that agriculture not only contributed to overall growth of the economy but also reduced poverty by providing employment and food security to the majority of the population in the country. According to Fan, Hazell and Thorat (2000) who examined Indian data between 1970 and 1993, government spending on productivity-enhancing investments, such as rural infrastructure, irrigation and agricultural research, have significantly contributed to growths in agricultural productivity as well as rural poverty reduction (see also Sen 1997).
For 40 years (two decades’ pre-reform to two decades’ post reform), India’s agricultural growth rate has averaged less than one-third of the government’s modest target of 4% (Desai et al, EPW, Vol XLVI, No 53). The sector’s performance has been about the same before and after the economic reforms in the early 1990s. The reforms that brought a dramatic acceleration of growth in urban sectors have essentially had no effect on agriculture. Slow agricultural growth has had ill-effects on food security, food price inflation and poverty reduction because of the inadequate level and composition of public expenditure. Agricultural education, research, extension and a wide range of ancillary public institutions have also suffered. Agricultural growth always demands massive public goods provisioning and that in turn requires a radical reorientation of central, state and district government activities. During the reform period, these excluded sectors showed low growth and the spate of farmers’ suicides in recent time as a result of state failure.
I. Evolutionary Phases
Agriculture is a ‘state subject’ under the Constitution of India. However, the central government plays a crucial role in shaping agricultural policies. Although Indian agriculture is in private hands, government policies have greatly influenced its pace and character since independence. Following are the evolutionary phases in the sector and the challenges faced by some interventions:
1951-65 Institutional reforms and public investment packages
1966-80 Public Investment policies with Incentives for adoption of new technology
1981-95 Terms of trade has changed and private investment has increased
1995 Onwards Heavy input based agriculture, lead to agrarian distress and farmer suicide became a consequential phenomenon. Hunger became so prevalent that we have exceeded Sub-Saharan Africa's rate of child malnutrition in a few years and will be challenged by the upstart Rwanda in few years in the Global Hunger Index (Sainath, 2012).
Additionally, or rather centrally, the policy discourse should manifest in the implementation while getting connected with the last mile with the real toiling farmer. While analyzing the agriculture extension in India and suggesting a demand-driven model for its betterment, Birner and Anderson (2007) categorized the failure of existing extension through market, government as well as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) and also the Farmer Based Organizations (FBO) as:
- Market Failures - affect demand and supply sides
- State Failures - related to information, incentives, capacity, political interests, and bureaucratic procedures and attitudes
- NGO Failures – limited outreach capacity and absence of market mechanism, they are, in principle, subject to the same types of information problems as the public sector
- FBO Failures -the classical problem of collective action - the participants expected to benefit directly from their ‘participation’
II. Small Farmers’ BIG Role
The role of small farms in development and poverty reduction is well recognized (Lipton, 2006). While explaining the global experience of growth and poverty reduction, World Development Report (2008) mentioned that GDP growth originating in agriculture is at least twice as effective in reducing poverty as GDP growth originating outside agriculture.
Small and marginal farmers which comprise 83% of total agricultural workforce, form the backbone to agrarian economy. With an average land holding size of 1.37 ha. these smal farmers share in operational area is around 44%, but they contribute 41% of India's food grains. Therefore, the future of sustainable agriculture growth and food security in India depends heavily on their performance. Despite their immense contribution they face multiple forms of denial at various institutional levels.
The public support to agriculture is largely cornered by rich and large farmers. The glorious example of such discriminatory policy is limited coverage of food grain procurement through minimum support price which largely benefits large farmers in few states. Ghosh (2005) also analyzed that Small farmers were substantially affected by cuts in public credit support to farmers. The situation is much worse and is reflected by the distress of the those 42.4% of small farmer households in India surveyed by the NSSO 59th round reported that, they would quit farming, given a choice (GOI, 2005a).
III. Indebted Farmers and Growth in Agriculture Sector –The Enigma that begs unraveling
While there is no large scale survey capturing farmer’s plight after 2003, evidence strongly suggests of worsening condition. Between 1995 and 2010, a quarter of a million farmers’ have killed themselves. By the 2011 census re-analysis, Sainath (2011) pegs the numbers of agricultural abandonment by farmers at 2000/day or 7 million in a decade. Evidence suggests that most of the farmers get heavily indebted in the course of their farming and are pushed to take the extreme steps.
- Out of 89.35 million farmers’ households, 43.42 million (48.6%) were reported to be indebted (GOI, 2005a).
- More than 50% of indebted farmer households had taken loan for the purpose of capital or current expenditure in farm business (GOI, 2005a).
- The most important source of loan in terms of percentage of outstanding loan amount was banks (36%), followed by moneylenders (26%) (GOI, 2005a). Report of the Expert Group on Agricultural Indebtedness also mentioned that the major source of credit to farmers was informal sector, where the interest rates were predatory and ranged between 20 to 38 percent (GOI, 2007a).
- While considering the income, farmers majorly earn from the cultivation and in terms of wages. But surprisingly expenditure data reveals that they spend more on farm related activities and very less proportion of their income goes to non-farm related activities which also include other household affairs. On an average, 81% of the monthly expenditure of the farmer household on productive assets was for farm business, 13% was for residential building and 6% was for non-farm business (GOI, 2005b). It is evident, that this major expenditure on farming shares various imposed (by States’ Policies) costs and burden on the small farmers. Farmers' investment decisions are directly influenced by the investment climate in which they operate (Silva, 2012).
Formal credit flow to agriculture has to specifically target small and marginal farmers, and emphasis should move away from generating agricultural growth by channelling credit to agri-business firms and corporate players in agriculture. However, rural credit flow in the first decade of this century, India has mainly targeted export-oriented agricultural enterprises, corporate agri-business groups and big farmers. Widespread agrarian distress and farmer’s suicides in the same decade forced the government to announce a debt waiver scheme. Yet, the faulty design of the debt waiver scheme led to major exclusions of farmers from the scheme: farmer households who borrow from informal sources were left out; farmer households in dry regions of India with more than 2 ha of land received only partial waiver; and there have been widespread complaints that banks have been hesitant to provide further credit to beneficiaries of debt waiver.
Raising public investment in agricultural research and extension is central to bridging the yield gap that persists. While analyzing the agricultural growth since 1991, Balakrishnan et. al. (2008) mentioned that public spending on agricultural research in India was only 0.52 per cent in 2004-06, as compared to 2 to 3 per cent in the developed world and the same did not rise at all in most States in past two decades.
Washington Consensus-type agricultural policies in India in past two decades were deeply antithetical to agricultural growth and poverty reduction. Promotion of private corporate players and export-oriented commercial forms of agriculture; low agricultural growth and utterly failed public policy concern to address the persistent high levels of malnourishment and hunger put the interests of small and marginal farmers and agricultural labourers on the edge.
V. Bringing access to credit by farmers to the centre of the discourse:
Ostracizing small farmer is evident from shift of direct finance in agricultural credit to indirect finance to increasing tolerance to debt out-standings from large debtor with loan port-folio of Rs 10-25 crores and increasing intolerance to debt-outstanding of small and medium debt portfolio of Rs 1-2 lakhs (Ramakumar, 2012). This shift in last two decades is visible from the following table.
Table 1: Distribution of amount outstanding under total agricultural advances by scheduled commercial banks, by credit limit size-classes of loans, in per cent
Credit limit size
class of loans (Rs)
|
Share of amount outstanding in total amount outstanding (%)
| |||
1990
|
2000
|
2005
|
2010
| |
Less than 2 lakh
|
82.6
|
67.6
|
51.9
|
44.3
|
2 lakh to 10 lakh
|
4.3
|
11.7
|
17.9
|
22.6
|
10 lakh to 1 crore
|
7.6
|
6.6
|
6.4
|
6.4
|
1 crore to 10 crore
|
4.2
|
6.7
|
8.0
|
6.3
|
10 crore to 25 crore
|
1.3
|
1.7
|
3.3
|
2.7
|
Above 25 crore
|
5.7
|
12.6
|
17.7
| |
Total advances
|
100.0
|
100.0
|
100.0
|
100.0
|
Source: ‘Basic Statistical Returns’, Reserve Bank of India, various issues
An important policy intervention by the government in the sphere of rural credit was the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme (ADWDR), 2008, which was first large-scale debt relief programme after 1990, when the government had initiated the Agricultural and Rural Debt Relief Scheme (ARDR). The ADWDR was necessitated by reports of an acute “agrarian distress” from different parts of the country from the mid-1990s onwards. There was an overall breakdown of the institutional support structures in agriculture, albeit minimal, that the state had erected over the years. The breakdown of institutional support structures in rural areas took place in following ways:
- Major input subsidies were brought down relative to the size of the agricultural economy; as a result, the costs of inputs like seeds, fertilisers, electricity and energy (diesel) rose rapidly. The rising input costs were not compensated by rise in crop yields and output prices, and the minimum support price administered by the government was not available to all farmers, particularly the small and marginal farmers.
- Public expenditure on research and extension slowed down. Most cultivator households ceased to have access to extension machinery of the government in giving sound but limited information on how to deal with pests and further declining productivity of land.
- Weakening public credit provision system in rural areas caused a sharp increase in the dependence on informal sector loans.
An evaluation of the debt waiver scheme is deeply limited by the availability of disaggregated data. Perhaps, this explains why there have been very few evaluations of the scheme. Kanz (2011) attempted to study the debt waiver scheme using survey data collected from 2897 beneficiaries in Gujarat and mentioned, “debt relief does not improve the investment or productivity of beneficiary households, but leads to a strong and persistent shift of borrowing away from formal sector lenders”. On the same note, Rath (2008) also argued that while debt waiver would “bring some relief to many farmers”, the “long-term consequence” of the scheme would be “a gradual demise of the people’s own institutions like the cooperative credit societies and self-help groups”, driven by moral hazard.
A debt waiver, by itself, does not remedy a distress but can only be a useful starting point where a whole series of measures are required to rejuvenate the agrarian sector in post-waiver phase. Yet, in the case of the 2008 waiver, such a follow-up policy was conspicuous in its absence. As a result, a number of commentators have viewed the debt waiver as a politically motivated policy in the eve of general elections, rather than a genuine policy intervention. It is also important to note that in any debt waiver, the design of the scheme is important and should ensure that the benefits are fully passed on to the most acutely affected regions and classes. Have the affected regions and classes received adequate coverage under the debt waiver scheme? And the answer is a re-sounding no because of two fundamental flaws in designing the waiver: a) Exclusion of informal credit from the waiver and b) Exclusion of farmers with land-holding above two hectares
VI. A tale of Despair Suffering and (in)Equity in relief
While measuring and linking major aspects of the life in economic variables, farmers’ lives put on the threshold within a consideration for agriculture as unviable economic activity. Data on the change in the labour force and the shift of %age share of GDP from primary to tertiary sector substantiate the argument. High input costs and low return make farmers’ more vulnerable to the external forces (i.e. natural and manmade). This vulnerability differs from land holding, crop, time, region and the status in social hierarchy. Dhas (2009) explained this problem of income deficit in agriculture in three dimensions: first, adverse terms of trade; second, low productivity of resources engaged in agriculture leading to low level of production, and third, the excessive use (dependence) of inputs such as labour, fertilisers, pesticides, etc., causing the cost of cultivation shooting up compared to that of the final sale value of the crop output. During the period between 1976–80 and 2001–03 public investments in agriculture declined from over 4% of agriculture GDP to 2% dynamically contributed in already existed catastrophe.
Indian farmers’ entrapped in global economic shift and realized that agriculture is no more yielding remunerative income for them. Initially they altered the crop pattern (shift for cash crops) and when it disappointed them they altered their profession itself. Ironically, farmer suicides and the agrarian can be framed as many disruptions in Parliament, but when the time comes to discuss the issue, hardly anyone bothers to attend. Lack of political sensitization of the government[1] is clear enough from the fact that there were not even 60 MPs were present in the upper house of the parliament when the issue was in the panel for discussion (TOI, 2011).
Polarization of income is another major challenge which made this whole scenario worse than ever. A classic example has been pointed out by Sainath (2010) that when the media celebrate the Mercedes Benz deal in the Marathwada region as a sign of “rural resurgence,” the latest data show that 17,368 farmers killed themselves in the year of the “resurgence”. It is a matter of grief that in a country which considers agriculture as backbone of its economy is providing car loans at interest rate of seven per cent but for a tractor, farmers have to pay interest rate of 12 per cent. Micro-finance institutions (MFIs) do worse by providing small loans but on huge interest rates of between 24 and 36 per cent or higher.
Tail of despair suffering is getting highlighted by following limitations:
- Loan waiver criteria of <2.0 Hectare of land is not practical when small and marginal farmers account 80% of total farm households.
- Financial institutes consider their financial year (March) to announce loan waiver, but most of the agriculture loans face one year set-back because they have been availed as per crop season (mostly during monsoon, i.e. May-July).
- Relief plans projected in Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi are not truly fit for rural foreground (ref: hybrid cow story of Prime Minister Relief Package to Vidarbha region, Sainath (2011))
- Lack of fertilizer input on time make farmer more prone to loss when they rely only on rainfed irrigation
VI. Research and Extension Services (including input access):
Investment in research and extension has been compromised since so long that consecutively from four decades growth rate for public expenditure on research and education reached its lowest mark which is worse than the figure which was there half century ago (Table 2). From dwindling staff strength at state levels, to decreasing share of investments in extension to increasingly expensive credit access which makes adoption of new technologies by small farmers prohibitively expensive, from supply to demand side research and extension has been the victim. The naïve assumption of market reaching knowledge to farmers has also proven a non-starter and a dangerous premise at that.
Table 2: Growth in real public expenditure on agricultural research and extension, in per cent per annum
Period
|
Growth rate of public expenditure in
| |
Research and Education
|
Extension and Training
| |
1960s
|
6.5
|
10.7
|
1970s
|
9.5
|
-0.1
|
1980s*
|
6.3
|
7.0
|
1990-2005
|
4.8
|
2.0
|
Note: For Extension and Training, the figure for 1980s is for 1980-1994.
Source: Balakrishnan, Golait and Kumar (2008).
The share of public investment in agricultural research in agricultural GDP in India has always been lower than the corresponding shares for developed countries. As a share of the agricultural GDP, public spending on agricultural research in India was only 0.52 per cent in 2004-06, as compared to 2 to 3 per cent in the developed world (Ibid). Weak public representation gave enough space to private firms and they grabbed research and extension with full swing. Private sector agricultural research which is mainly focused on chemical induced interventions, storage and processing technologies; covers mainly those crops and food grains where they expect high level of profit. In this whole spectrum capital is the central theme which small farmers lack into.
The Prospective Framework: 12th FYP
The 12th FYP makes a recording of the past mistakes and the skewed agricultural policies and its impact on food security, poverty alleviation, agrarian institutions, departments and prospective programming. From recognizing the (i) centrality of small-holders, (ii) emphasizing on the importance of robust data-sets for planning, programming, monitoring and evaluation, (iii) cereal production and stocking, (iv) market access, (v) food security provisioning to (vi) need for protecting the consumer, it takes cognizance of all these issues and gives them due importance.
It is a progressive framework to locate the revival of agrarian sector and the farmers. Thorat et al (2010) have clearly demonstrated the caste-based discrimination in rural markets from land purchase, produce sale, to use of water resources and market linkage of milk and vegetables. There is enough scope in the FYP to also work on farmgate discrimination that Dalits and small and marginal farmers face.
To accelerate the growth in the sector government plans private investment in the farming and it is surprising that having majority of the workforce engaged in agriculture sector, government is still not assured with “adequate labour supply”. Following are some of the core challenges mentioned in 12th FYP, which needed to be taken care of:
- The extension system of State agricultural departments is the weakest link in the chain between research and the farmer.
- Lack of clear agricultural research strategy or definite responsibilities which prioritize the research agenda rationally.
- Imbalanced nutrient use coupled with neglect of organic matter has resulted in multi-nutrient deficiencies in Indian soils. Subsidy on fertilizer is much higher than anything else in agriculture, still farmers spends a larger share of their income on this entity.
- Scientifically impeccable operational protocols and a regulatory mechanism to permit GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) is needed which ensure rigorous tests.
- Some mechanism to strengthen the financial health of the Long-term Cooperative Credit Structure (LTCCS) is needed to meet the basic need of the farmers and to ensure the credit to be more accessible with less interest rate.
- A National Centre for Crop Statistics, independent of the present system, is needed for reliable quick estimates.
Way Forward: Action Agenda
Globally while evaluating the last four decades it became evident that technological innovation played a part, but the vast increase in food production has been largely driven by institutional reforms. And the key to institutional reform is to place farmers, the primary producers in central oversight and ownership positions (Ambler, 2012). However, it is yet to be realized in India. The experience from the performance during the 11th Plan realized the policy gaps and it has been mentioned in the current plan document that, “several policy imbalances exist that can prove to be major handicaps” (GOI, 2012).
Not just in India, but globally the agrarian sector, food production and hunger challenge has got a lot of visibility and traction. From inspirational examples like Brazil to propositional discourses on farmers’ role and leadership in ploughing investments into agriculture by FAO DG Graziano the world is in the middle of it all. The other
Recent developments in the sector which contribute to the energy and momentum for an apt course correction
- The recognition of small farmers/family farmers (in UN parlance): 2014 being declared the year of Family Farmers and recognizing their role in global food security
- The global movements on “Future of Agriculture” from Mindanao (Phillipines) to Maryland (USA)
- After lifting 28 million people out of extreme poverty in a decade, the FAO-DG’s Zero Hunger Challenge declared in Rio+20 summit in June 2012
- The global outrage on commodities speculation globally and German Banks and Inter-faith Investments banning the same and the international build-up of momentum on regulation/ban on core cereals’ speculation
- The focus on food price volatility and the vulnerability of small farmers and urban poor consumers which is breaking old barriers and building new alliances between the consumer and producer groups
- Last but not the least the global debate on food Nutrition has gained focus across India This is an opportune historical moment for meaningful collaboration:
- Making the nodal department fit-for purpose: From the Farmers’ Commission report to the 12th FYP, the organization of the nodal departments, have come under scanner. Both at national and sub-national level, departments have not been serving the purpose of the farmers. Human resource network from top to bottom is not well proportionate as per its requirement. It is serious concern that whether the organizational structure represents a shape of a normal pyramid or work like an inverted one in real scenario, where top level positions occupy the larger proportion and the end which supposed to be near to the farmer is too narrow to carry the whole burden of the institution. Spatial access/coverage is another major concern which needed to be taken care of on the same line of public health system, which works on the guidelines about specific radius and catchment area. Designing and supporting state departments and making them fit-for-purpose will go a long way in building the argument for:
- Appropriate Staffing levels
- Penetrating and delivering till the last mile
- Being proximate and accessible to farmers
- Adequate ratio of extension workers to staff: The current ratio is 1: 3000/5000 which is much above the 1:1000 which many experts (Desai et al) feel is still very indaequate for knowledge transfer purposes
- Making the radial distance travelled by the farmer realistic and making it equitable in hilly regions
- Waging war on food wastage: Food wastage, which has been under scanner, both by the hon’ble Supreme Court and through international hunger discourse through FAO’s work in the past year. From the SOFI 2012 to launching a campaign with UNEP and partners (Think Eat Save), FAO has been shedding a light on this perverse aspect of hunger where 868 million (revised estimates, though many academics and activists including the largest public broadcaster BBC still go by the 1 billion figure) go hungry and 1/3rd of all food produced, worth 1 trillion USD goes waste. Hence it will be logical and incumbent to provide knowledge, political will-enabling strategy and evidence review and modeling support to farmers’ organizations and line ministries for limiting/curbing food watsge from farm to the kitchen via retails and pop-and-mom-shops.
- Convergence among Ministry of Civil Supplies and Ministry of Agriculture for Better Procurement and Distribution System: It is irony of the biggest democracy of the world that 50% of its small farmers have no ration cards while they contribute 41% of the food grains which government distributes through PDS. Unabated high level of food inflation since 2007 makes these small farmers prone to harsh market. Situation calls for cohered approach at an urgent level so the support can be provided through
- Evidence Review for policy framework
- Best Practise Compendium
- Learning Visits
- Piloting the same at state/sub-national level as a test case.
- Support strengthening of Research and Extension: Special focus on bridging the gap between scientific explorations and farm realities is needed within a consideration of prioritizing research and extension services at national, state and regional level. It cannot be achieved without a proper support mechanism with policy discourse, evidence as well as infrastructural support. Some pilot is also suggested to analyze the expansion in the base while also focusing on human resource network through extension workers. Longitudinal impact in the mentioned framework can be assessed while monitoring the food production. The public agricultural research entities need to be reclaimed also for the farmers and the food security of Indians and not for agri-business majors. Public scrutiny on the research agenda of our public institutions is, hence, a necessity.
- Convene Policy Forum round-table on credit and compile global best practices on credit models: The Governor of Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has already highlighted the fact that only 40% Indians have bank account, which makes financial inclusion a challenge. The nationalized banks also do not penetrate beyond district head-quarters and if pushed, to the block head quarters. Indian farmers are at the mercy of rural banks linked SHGs, and usurious informal sector. In this context, a dispassionate discussion, evidence review, designing of credit instruments and structures to make them most accessible to small farmers at the best rates is called for.
- Supporting Agricultural Data Resource Centre: Several academics and practitioners have been raising issues with the quality of data on public investment in agriculture being generated by the Central Statistical Organisation. On the similar note 12th FYP also mention Vaidyanathan Committee’s concern on the crop cutting and yield data and strengthen the case for better agricultural statistics. The GoI is already equipped with AMIS (Agriculture Management Information System) where an Agricultural Data Resource Centre compiling investment and production data-sets could be an option in the near future.
- Systematic Review on Inflation, Hunger and Nutrition inter-sectionality and Policy Round Table on the same: The global evidence on linkage of food price to nutrition levels is inadequate resulting in policy paralysis and governmental inaction. India has been a concerning case of over seven years of run-away food inflation. The hunger levels are also going up. Many economists attribute it to the rising food and fuel component of domestic expenditure. Identify/collaborate and commission systematic review on the global evidence on food inflation and nutrition linkage, its knock-on impact on Public Distribution design and Public Procurement policies will be immense. Follow up the systematic review findings with a collaborative approach to support GoI with action plan.
- Support building of farmers’ institutions through small grants: The 12th FYP suggested that collectivization of farmers is a better response to address the market assymetries, limited access to the input and various other barriers. Breaking barriers, negotiating better rates and getting recognition are some factors which enhance the authority of farmers’ institutions. Some vibrant examples of the same are Kudumbashree (Kerala) and Deccan Development Society Model (Andhra Pradesh). These need to be studied and harnessed for larger dissemination and adoption for best practices while supporting NGOs, farmers led advocacy groups through a longitudinal project. I will support farmers’ collectivization process and making them inclusive institutions (farmers’ institutions have been known to be deeply discriminatory, victims of elite capture too in many instances, hence inclusive progressive institutions’ identification becomes necessary). The gains made by these institutions, the market access they broker and the rates they negotiate should also be part of the data-generation and tracking.
- Research and policy support on eliminating farm-gate discrimination: The multiple caste based discrimination in rural markets is evident in terms of land purchase to homestead ownership, market linkages to discrimination in access to irrigation water, input access to sale of perishables like milk and vegetables. The class based discrimination and the marginal farmers and their destiny of their farms being located in waste-lands is also well documented. The natural extension of this work will be to support the discriminations experienced/practiced on the inter-sectionality of multiple marginalisations (class, caste, gender, minority religion etc.). The programming and institutions needed to make services accessible to them and the enabling externalities required to make “working hard, work for them”.
- Drill holes through silo-ised institutional analysis and optics: The drafting of the paper and the literature and evidence review revealed a very concerning trend. There is plenty of analysis and data-sets on topical institutional analysis i.e. credit, market linkage, input access, research and extension services, inter-play with rural development, but no updated comprehensive analysis which looks at all these alongwith the state (national and sub-national) departments and farmers’ institutions. This specilised optic of looking at one area/issue throws robust data-sets and in-depth analysis but inadequate evidence and scenarios for policy formulation or programme design. Academia and research doesn’t have the incentive to delve into it considering the multiple skill-sets that will be required. But the need and time for this can not be over-stated and it could be under-taken by a multi-disciplinary team with a trans-disciplinary optic. Research/review/analysis (call it by any name) should be supported and it will be a landmark contribution to the agrarian discourse. This could be undertaken in collaboration with government and team of practicing researchers too.
References
Ambler, John (2012), How Institutional Reforms Saved the Agriculture and Us, OXFAM Online Discussion Essay – The Future of Agriculture, December 2012. (Online available at: http://blogs.oxfam.org/en/blogs/12-12-11-day-2-how-institutional-reform-saved-agriculture-us)
Balakrishnan, Pulapare, Ramesh Golait, Pankaj Kumar (2008), Agricultural Growth in India Since 1991, Development Study Group (Study no.27), Department of Economic Analysis and Policy, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai. (Online available at: http://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/content/pdfs/85240.pdf)
Birner, Ragina and Jock R. Anderson (2007), How to make Agricultural Extension Demand-Driven?: The case of India’s Agricultural Policy, IFPRI Discussion Paper 00729, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC.
Desai, Bhupat M et al (2013), Agriculture Policy Strategy Instruments and Implementation: A Review and Road Ahead, Volume XLVI, No 53, Economic and Political Weekly
Dev, S.Mahendra (2012), Small Farmers in India: Challenges and Opportunities, Working Paper 2012-014, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai.
FAO, IFAD, WFP, State of Food Insecurity report, 2012
Ghosh, Jayati (2005), ‘The Political Economy of Farmers’ Suicides in India’, Freedom from Hunger Lecture Series, December 9, 2005, India International Centre, Lodi Estate, New Delhi, pp 2-3
GOI (2005a), NSSO 59th Round (2003)-Situation Assessment Survey of Farmers: Indebtedness of Farmer Households, National Sample Survey Organisation, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India.
GOI (2005b), NSSO 59th Round (2003)-Situation Assessment Survey of Farmers: Income, Expenditure and Productive Assets ofFarmer Households , National Sample Survey Organisation, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India.
GoI (2007a), ‘Report of the Expert Group on Agricultural Indebtedness’, Banking Division, Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, July 2007.
GOI (2007b), ‘Nutritional Intake In India 2004-2005: NSS 61st Round, July 2004- June 2005’, Report No. 513(61/1.0/6), Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India, May 2007.
GOI (2012); 12th Five Year Plan 2012-17, Planning Commission, New Delhi
Kanz, Martin (2011); What does Debt Relief do for Development? Evidence from a Large Scale Policy Experiment, Paper presented in Session 4: Problems of Credit Markets, Northeast Universities Development Consortium Conference 201 (online available at: http://www.econ.yale.edu/conference/neudc11/papers/paper_229.pdf)
Lipton, M. (2006), “Can Small Farmers Survive, Prosper, or be the Key Channel to cut Mass Poverty”, Journal of Agricultural and Development Economics, Vol 3, No.1, 2006, pp58-85
Ramakumar, R. (2012), Large Scale Investments in Agriculture in India, IDS Bulletin, Volume 43, (Special Issue, July 2012)
Ramakumar, R, Public Investment and Expenditure in Agriculture in India: The case of 1990s and 2000s, Unpublished
Rath, Nilkantha (2008), Implications of the Loan Waiver for Rural Credit Institutions, EPW, Vol. XLIII No.24
Sainath, P. (2011), Census Finding Point to Decade of Rural Distress, The Hindu, 25 September, 2011 (Online available at: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/sainath/census-findings-point-to-decade-of-rural-distress/article2484996.ece)
Sainath, P. (2012), The Food, the Bad and the Ugly, The Hindu, 22 March, 2012 (Online available at: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/sainath/article3025560.ece)
Silva José Graziano da (2012), Farmers are the ones PloughingMoney into Agriculture, The Guardian, Thursday 6 December 2012 (Online available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2012/dec/06/farmers-ploughing-money-agriculture)
Swaminathan, MS et al, National Commission on Farmers Report, 2006
Thorat, Sukhdeao and Newman, Katherine, Ed, Blocked by Caste: Economic Discrimination in Modern India, OUP, 2010
Dhas, Albert Christopher (2009), Agricultural Crisis in India: The Root Cause and Consequences, MPRA report no.18930. (online available at:http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/18930/1/MPRA_paper_18930.pdf)
TOI (2011), Farmers crisis? Only 50 MPs stay to discuss it, Times of India, 16th December. Online Available at (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-12-16/india/30524267_1_farmer-suicides-agrarian-crisis-venkaiah-naidu)
Sainath, P. (2010), Of luxury cars and lowly tractors, The Hindu, 27th December, 2010 (online available at:http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/sainath/article995828.ece
Sainath, P. (2011), Cowed down by the Prime Minister, The Hindu, 13th May, 2011 (online available at: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/article2014092.ece)
A short-duration discussion on the agrarian crisis, led by BJP's Venkaiah Naidu and Congress's Mani Shankar Aiyar, turned into a routine debate with a majority of members from both the ruling party and Opposition benches absent. Even among those who spoke, on both sides, many left immediately after their speech.
About the author
[1] Ranvir Singh finished his PhD in Public Health from Jawaharlal Nehru University and has keen interest in spatial dimensions of the social aspects. He has expertise in information management system for efficient modeling, monitoring and evidence based planning. His expertise on Geographical Information System (GIS) and its usage in various settings further enhances his research and programme implementation skills.
[2] Biraj Swain is an independent researcher working on the inter-sectionality of food, nutrition and agriculture policy and the citizen-state interface. She has various teaching affiliations including the UN University Tokyo, Swedish University of Development and Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala and the Pondicherry Central University, India. She claims to be dedicated to working (read nomading over the poorest and hungriest parts of the world i.e. South Asia and East Africa respectively).
********************
No comments:
Post a Comment