-
Who Benefits Most From the “Green Revolution”?Awake!—1972 | July 22
-
-
Unevenly Distributed
Because of such reasons as the foregoing, the book India’s Green Revolution declares: “The gains of the new technology have been very unevenly distributed.”
This conclusion is backed up in the book The Survival Equation, which says this:
“One must say that the revolution is highly ‘selective,’ . . . It is enough to recall that three-fourths of India’s cultivated acreage is not irrigated, and ‘dry’ farming predominates. If for no other reason, vast parts of the country have not been touched by the transformation at all and equally vast parts can boast only of ‘small islands within.’ . . .
“The green revolution affects the few rather than the many not only because of environmental conditions but because the majority of the farmers lack resources . . . Waiting to be part of it and yet not getting there create potentially disturbing social, economic and political issues. And this is the other side of the coin in any assessment of the course of the green revolution.”
Hence, while total harvests and income may go up, they are not evenly distributed. For example, in two of India’s major wheat-growing areas, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, an estimated 80 percent of all farms are less than eight acres in size. This means that they usually do not have the resources to take advantage of the new technology. So a relatively small percentage of the really needy are benefited. In fact, in all India, it is said that 185 million people live on farms which are less than five acres in size.
-
-
Who Benefits Most From the “Green Revolution”?Awake!—1972 | July 22
-
-
The number of landless workers in rural areas is staggering. In India alone those who own no land are said to be over 100 million persons. That is in addition to the millions of poor people crowded into the cities.
These landless workers in India, together with the 185 million others operating less than five acres, represent nearly 309 million people! That is the majority of India’s rural population. And most of them live in abject poverty. Their average income is said to be only 200 rupees (about $21) per person per year.
The results? India’s Green Revolution states that this has “actually led to an absolute deterioration in the economic condition” of the poorer people. And an economist writes in The Survival Equation that ‘the rich get richer, but the poor poorer.’
Thus, the very people that the “green revolution” was to help are the very ones it is helping the least. And in the underdeveloped nations of the world, that is a problem of huge proportions.
“Green Revolution” Could Turn “Red”
The scope of the problem can be seen by noting the words of India’s Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi. Addressing the Chief Ministers of all the states in India, she said: “The warning of the times is that unless the green revolution is accompanied by a revolution based on social justice the green revolution may not remain green.”
The implication is that it could turn “red,” that is, Communistic, as a reaction against continued poverty, hunger and injustice. That has happened before where the poor have seen their situation deteriorating while others, especially the wealthier, benefited from new technology.
-
-
Will the “Green Revolution” Be Enough?Awake!—1972 | July 22
-
-
India’s present population of some 570 million increases by about 14 million each year. Concerning this the New York Times says: “Unless the rate is reduced significantly India will have a billion people by the year 2000, far outstripping any increase in food output.”
-
-
Will the “Green Revolution” Be Enough?Awake!—1972 | July 22
-
-
In some areas, the increasing population has already resulted in the steady denuding of natural vegetation. It is said that deforestation and overgrazing of grasslands in western India have created dustbowl conditions. And many plots of land have been divided and subdivided over generations within family groups so often that they cannot be divided any further and be farmed economically.
-