Mention one drowback of green revolution
Answers
Answered by
0
1. Inter-Crop Imbalances:
The effect of Green Revolution is primarily felt on food-grains. Although all food-grains including wheat, rice, jowar, bajra and maize have gained from the Green Revolution, it is wheat which has benefited the most. It has wrested areas from coarse cereals, pulses and oilseeds. The HYV seeds in latter crops have either not been developed so far at all, or they are not good enough for farmers to risk their adoption.
2. Regional Disparities:
Green Revolution technology has given birth to growing disparities in economic development at interred and intra regional levels. It has so far affected only 40 per cent of the total cropped area and 60 per cent is still untouched by it. The most affected areas are Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh in the north and Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu in the south.
3. Increase in Inter-Personal Inequalities:
It has been observed that it is the big farmer having 10 hectares or more land, who is benefited the most from Green Revolution because he has the financial resources to purchase farm implements, better seeds, fertilizers and can arrange for regular supply of irrigation water to crop
As against this, the small and marginal farmers do not have the financial resources to purchase these farm inputs and are deprived of the benefits of Green Revolution Technology. There were about 1,053 lakh holdings in India in 1990-91 out of which only 1.6 per cent exceeded 10 hectares in size.
Francine R. Rankel has concluded from his study of Ludhiana (Punjab), West Godavari (Andhra Pradesh), Thanjavur (Tamil Nadu), Palghat (Kerala) and Bardhaman (West Bengal) that the greater beneficiaries are those farmers who own 10 to 12 hectares of land. Similar conclusion was drawn by G.R. Saini from his study of Ferozepur (Punjab) and Muzaffamagar (U.P.). G.S. Bhalla and G.K. Chadha have found out that Green Revolution has benefited the farmers in general but one-third of them are small farmers with 2.5 acres of land and are living below poverty line. (Poverty line is measured at Rs. 15.90 per capita monthly expenditure at 1960-61 prices and is inflated with consumer price index for agricultural labourers).
Another 24.0 per cent of the farmers own 2.5 to 5.0 acres of land and they are also living below poverty line. The land holdings are generally small in rice producing areas and the economic position of the farmers living in those areas is extremely miserable. In short, Green Revolution has made the rich richer and rendered the poor poorer resulting in wide-spread social and economic tensions.
4. Unemployment:
Except in Punjab, and to some extent in Haryana, farm mechanization under Green Revolution has created widespread unemployment among agricultural labourers in the rural areas. The worst hit are the poor and the landless people.
5. Other Problems:
Agriculture under Green Revolution has not grown at a rate which was expected in the beginning. The differential rates of growth of different crops and their regional variations have already been discussed. Some scholars have expressed serious doubts about the capability of HYV seeds itself.
Analysing the role played by miracle seeds in the Green Revolution, Vandana Shiva says that the term HYV is a misnomer. In actuality, these seeds are highly responsive to certain key inputs such as fertilizer and irrigation and as such they should have been called highly responsive varieties. Shiva says that there is increasing evidence that the indigenous varieties could also be high yielding given the required doses of inputs.
According to Shiva, “the inevitability of the Green Revolution option was built on neglecting the other avenues for increasing production that is more ecological such as improving mixed cropping systems, improving indigenous seeds and improving the efficiency of use of local resources.” Vandana Shiva further comments that having destroyed nature’s mechanisms for controlling pests through the destruction of diversity, the miracle seeds’ of the Green Revolution became mechanisms for breeding new pests and creating new diseases”.
The effect of Green Revolution is primarily felt on food-grains. Although all food-grains including wheat, rice, jowar, bajra and maize have gained from the Green Revolution, it is wheat which has benefited the most. It has wrested areas from coarse cereals, pulses and oilseeds. The HYV seeds in latter crops have either not been developed so far at all, or they are not good enough for farmers to risk their adoption.
2. Regional Disparities:
Green Revolution technology has given birth to growing disparities in economic development at interred and intra regional levels. It has so far affected only 40 per cent of the total cropped area and 60 per cent is still untouched by it. The most affected areas are Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh in the north and Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu in the south.
3. Increase in Inter-Personal Inequalities:
It has been observed that it is the big farmer having 10 hectares or more land, who is benefited the most from Green Revolution because he has the financial resources to purchase farm implements, better seeds, fertilizers and can arrange for regular supply of irrigation water to crop
As against this, the small and marginal farmers do not have the financial resources to purchase these farm inputs and are deprived of the benefits of Green Revolution Technology. There were about 1,053 lakh holdings in India in 1990-91 out of which only 1.6 per cent exceeded 10 hectares in size.
Francine R. Rankel has concluded from his study of Ludhiana (Punjab), West Godavari (Andhra Pradesh), Thanjavur (Tamil Nadu), Palghat (Kerala) and Bardhaman (West Bengal) that the greater beneficiaries are those farmers who own 10 to 12 hectares of land. Similar conclusion was drawn by G.R. Saini from his study of Ferozepur (Punjab) and Muzaffamagar (U.P.). G.S. Bhalla and G.K. Chadha have found out that Green Revolution has benefited the farmers in general but one-third of them are small farmers with 2.5 acres of land and are living below poverty line. (Poverty line is measured at Rs. 15.90 per capita monthly expenditure at 1960-61 prices and is inflated with consumer price index for agricultural labourers).
Another 24.0 per cent of the farmers own 2.5 to 5.0 acres of land and they are also living below poverty line. The land holdings are generally small in rice producing areas and the economic position of the farmers living in those areas is extremely miserable. In short, Green Revolution has made the rich richer and rendered the poor poorer resulting in wide-spread social and economic tensions.
4. Unemployment:
Except in Punjab, and to some extent in Haryana, farm mechanization under Green Revolution has created widespread unemployment among agricultural labourers in the rural areas. The worst hit are the poor and the landless people.
5. Other Problems:
Agriculture under Green Revolution has not grown at a rate which was expected in the beginning. The differential rates of growth of different crops and their regional variations have already been discussed. Some scholars have expressed serious doubts about the capability of HYV seeds itself.
Analysing the role played by miracle seeds in the Green Revolution, Vandana Shiva says that the term HYV is a misnomer. In actuality, these seeds are highly responsive to certain key inputs such as fertilizer and irrigation and as such they should have been called highly responsive varieties. Shiva says that there is increasing evidence that the indigenous varieties could also be high yielding given the required doses of inputs.
According to Shiva, “the inevitability of the Green Revolution option was built on neglecting the other avenues for increasing production that is more ecological such as improving mixed cropping systems, improving indigenous seeds and improving the efficiency of use of local resources.” Vandana Shiva further comments that having destroyed nature’s mechanisms for controlling pests through the destruction of diversity, the miracle seeds’ of the Green Revolution became mechanisms for breeding new pests and creating new diseases”.
Similar questions