Article on how railways has affected agriculture
Answers
Answered by
6
Starting its career on 16 April 1853, when the first railway passenger train was opened, India’s railway system expanded rapidly to become, by 1910, the fourth largest in the world.
This huge railway network altered India’s transport system. As a result, transport costs were greatly reduced thereby permitting new opportunities for profit.
Regional specialisation began to occur and trade (both domestic and foreign) flourished. India became a nation with its local centres linked by rail to each other arid to the world.
Railways made possible the establishment of a well-knit market. Railways, by establishing these links, had an impact throughout the economy. Karl Marx observed that the railway system in India would become “truly the forerunner of modern industry”.
“It was believed that railways would assist the economic development of India and help the import and distribution of manufactures and the collection and export of raw materials and agricultural produce. The official view was that the “the benefits covered by railways were at all-time great.”
But nationalists lambasted against this official claim and pinpointed that it was the railway which was responsible for the eclipse of some important industries of India. Despite massive investment in the nature of a ‘big push’ in railways rather than irrigation, ‘take off’ stage was hard-to come by. But this was too much for nationalists. Railways did certainly help the process of industrialisation.
The railway system in India became the forerunner of limited industrial development. This, in its turn, brought about a social revolution. It brought “social advancement of the people” of India. Let us see how did railways affect India’s overall development.
The impact of railways was felt in all sectors of the Indian economy. Both people and goods made an extensive use of the railways. Vera Anstey, the distinguished British authority on economic development of India, argued that the construction of railways in India undoubtedly extended and revolutionised trade—both internal and external.
Before the advent of the railways in India, only a very small proportion of agricultural output was exported as agriculture was carried on only for subsistence. But railways transformed its very nature by commercializing it. Railways made India’s agriculture internationally competitive and, as a result, a floodgate of exports of agricultural products such as wheat, rice, jute oilseeds, and cotton was opened up.
As an example, before the construction of railways, India exported no wheat at all, but, by 1886, she was supplying 23 p.c. of Britain’s imports of wheat. In real terms, the value of exports rose phenomenally by 230 p.c. between 1862 and 1929. The value of imports of mainly manufactured items such as cotton textiles, yarn, and capital goods rose by 350 p.c. as against exports of 230 p.c. during the same time period.
“By the 1880s Britain had become both ‘India’s largest customer and the source of fully three-quarters of the sub-continent’s imports. Railways, therefore, not only reshaped the pattern of India’s foreign trade but helped tie India to the British economy.”
If external trade expands, can internal trade be far behind! Actually, railways gave strong stimulus to internal trade. In doing so, railways were instrumental in transforming the structure of prices in India. The more direct effect of railways extension was the leveling of prices between different regions.
Before railways came into being, price differences were pronounced between regions as prices of agricultural products fluctuated randomly with the change in local supply conditions. Every expansion in railways brought down interregional differences in prices dramatically. Thus, because of the falling costs of import, “markets were not only widening but were becoming national markets”.
Railways led to increased agricultural output, export of food-grains, widening of markets, commercialization of agriculture, and, hence, cropping pattern. As railways widened the markets for the agricultural sectors, Indian agriculture became linked to the world trade cycles. Farmers now became price responsive while determining their cropping pattern.
This huge railway network altered India’s transport system. As a result, transport costs were greatly reduced thereby permitting new opportunities for profit.
Regional specialisation began to occur and trade (both domestic and foreign) flourished. India became a nation with its local centres linked by rail to each other arid to the world.
Railways made possible the establishment of a well-knit market. Railways, by establishing these links, had an impact throughout the economy. Karl Marx observed that the railway system in India would become “truly the forerunner of modern industry”.
“It was believed that railways would assist the economic development of India and help the import and distribution of manufactures and the collection and export of raw materials and agricultural produce. The official view was that the “the benefits covered by railways were at all-time great.”
But nationalists lambasted against this official claim and pinpointed that it was the railway which was responsible for the eclipse of some important industries of India. Despite massive investment in the nature of a ‘big push’ in railways rather than irrigation, ‘take off’ stage was hard-to come by. But this was too much for nationalists. Railways did certainly help the process of industrialisation.
The railway system in India became the forerunner of limited industrial development. This, in its turn, brought about a social revolution. It brought “social advancement of the people” of India. Let us see how did railways affect India’s overall development.
The impact of railways was felt in all sectors of the Indian economy. Both people and goods made an extensive use of the railways. Vera Anstey, the distinguished British authority on economic development of India, argued that the construction of railways in India undoubtedly extended and revolutionised trade—both internal and external.
Before the advent of the railways in India, only a very small proportion of agricultural output was exported as agriculture was carried on only for subsistence. But railways transformed its very nature by commercializing it. Railways made India’s agriculture internationally competitive and, as a result, a floodgate of exports of agricultural products such as wheat, rice, jute oilseeds, and cotton was opened up.
As an example, before the construction of railways, India exported no wheat at all, but, by 1886, she was supplying 23 p.c. of Britain’s imports of wheat. In real terms, the value of exports rose phenomenally by 230 p.c. between 1862 and 1929. The value of imports of mainly manufactured items such as cotton textiles, yarn, and capital goods rose by 350 p.c. as against exports of 230 p.c. during the same time period.
“By the 1880s Britain had become both ‘India’s largest customer and the source of fully three-quarters of the sub-continent’s imports. Railways, therefore, not only reshaped the pattern of India’s foreign trade but helped tie India to the British economy.”
If external trade expands, can internal trade be far behind! Actually, railways gave strong stimulus to internal trade. In doing so, railways were instrumental in transforming the structure of prices in India. The more direct effect of railways extension was the leveling of prices between different regions.
Before railways came into being, price differences were pronounced between regions as prices of agricultural products fluctuated randomly with the change in local supply conditions. Every expansion in railways brought down interregional differences in prices dramatically. Thus, because of the falling costs of import, “markets were not only widening but were becoming national markets”.
Railways led to increased agricultural output, export of food-grains, widening of markets, commercialization of agriculture, and, hence, cropping pattern. As railways widened the markets for the agricultural sectors, Indian agriculture became linked to the world trade cycles. Farmers now became price responsive while determining their cropping pattern.
Similar questions