Introduction
The attainment of Independence, according to the National Commission on Agriculture, created the essential pre-conditions for restructuring the rural economy with a view to putting it on the path of progress and accelerated development. The situation called for far-reaching structural reforms in the agrarian system and basic changes in the socio-economic relations of production. Comprehensive land reforms and rural development programmes have been formulated by the national and the state governments towards this goal since independence.
Land reforms: Aims and objectives
In the First Five Year Plan it was for the first time that the land reforms policy was concretised at the government level. In the successive Five Years Plans also various measures have been undertaken to use land reforms as the effective instrument in attaining economic development with social justice in the rural areas. Hence the main objectives of the land reform have been:
- Abolition of intermediaries.
- Imposition of ceiling restrictions on landholding
- Distribution of surplus vested land among the rural poor.
- Tenancy reforms
(v) Increase in agricultural production:
1) Land Reform Measure of 1950s –1960s: The legislative measures for the abolition of intermediaries were introduced
soon after independence in the United Province and were followed up in West Bengal, Bihar, Orissa and some other states. The major facets of this land reform were the abolition of zamindari system, fixation of land ceiling, providing tenurial security to the under-ryots and the sharecroppers. For example, West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act 1953 abolished the intermediary rights of all kinds on land and fixed a land ceiling at 25 acres per individual holder. The under-ryots holding land from ryots were upgraded as ryots and came in direct relationship with the state (W.B.E.A. Act 1953). Again, with regard to the sharecroppers the West Bengal Land Reforms Act 1955 stipulated that i) The produce of the crops shall be divided between the sharecroppers and the landowners equally if the required inputs are supplied by the landowners. In all other cases the produce shall be 60% in favour of the sharecroppers.
It, however, empowered the landowners to terminate the sharecroppers to bring their land under self-cultivation.
The Problem of Implementation of Land Reform Laws
However, all over India there had been a gap between the land reform ideology and the implementation of the same in this period. Neither the intended beneficiaries were aware of these laws nor had the Government taken popular initiative to implement these laws. Even where the tenants were aware of their rights they were generally in too weak a position both socially and economically to insist on their rights. All these in general led to malafide land transfer, termination of the sharecroppers by the landowners losing of lands by peasants and insecurity of the rural poor.
a) Malafide Land Transfer: Many of the big landowners transferred their land in the name of their close relatives or reliable persons to keep their land under ceiling restrictions.
b) Termination of the Sharecroppers: The landowners took the opportunity to bring their name under self-cultivation. This led to large-scale eviction of the sharecroppers from land.
c) Loss of Lands by Poor Peasants: Due to poverty and increasing burden of indebtedness many small and marginal cultivators lost their lands to village money-lenders and landowners.
d) Insecurity of Rule Poor: There was no significant improvement in distribution of surplus still vested lands among the rural poor. Again there was unabated increase of the unemployment in the rural areas. These led to seasonal migration and destitution.
Under the given situation though the zamindars were abolished, many of the old landlords still remained in the agrarian hierarchy with unquestioned social and economic power. This class was united among themselves to protect their landed interest. They significantly influenced the political will and mechanisms of the government in weakening the implementation of the land reform laws rigorously they also introduced large-scale commercial farming, modern technology and multi-crop cultivation in land. However, the economic conditions of the lower strata deteriorated steadily in this period. Deprived of economic security and legal protection they were tied up with the landlords class with extreme dependency relations. It is important that the extent of implementation of the land reform measures were relatively, higher in these areas where socialist movement was strong.
Land Reform Laws of 1970s : Experiencing the loopholes of the land reform laws, the gap between land reform legislations and their implementation and their resultant impact on the agrarian society many of the state government introduced new amendments in the land reform laws in conformity with the national guidance issued in 1972.
The state governments introduced progressive land reforms laws. For example, West Bengal new land reform laws were introduced in the 1970s to (i) make the tenure of the sharecropper hereditary (ii) to raise share of the sharecroppers from 60% to 75% of the produce (iii) to impose ceiling restriction to 7 (approximately 17 acres) hectares and (iv) to empower the sharecroppers to be a ryot of the surplus vested land provided the amount of such land cultivated by him does not exceed one hectare. In the late seventies the newly elected Left Front Government of West Bengal introduced the Operation Barga programme for quick recording of name of the sharecroppers to provide them with all the institutional facilities of cultivators and the tenurial security. In this process the lower strata of the agrarian society were organised for the rapid implementation of Operation Barga, distribution of surplus vested lands among rural poor etc. All these affected the pre-existing organisation of production in agriculture and the agrarian class structure as well.
Rural Development Programmes
Besides land reforms, various rural development measures are undertaken to restructure the agrarian economy in India since the early fifties. The Community Development Programme (1952), National Extension Services(1953), Khadi and Village Industry Programme (1957), Intensive Agricultural District Programme (1960), Rural Industries Projects (1962), Intensive Agricultural Areas Programme (1964), High Yielding Variety Programme (1966), Farmer’s Training and Education Programme (1966), Tribal Development Block (1968), Small Farmers Development Agency (1971), Command Area Development Programme (1974), Integrated Rural Development Programme (1979), Jawahar Rojgar Yojana (1988) are only a few to name various programmes initiated for rural development. It is important to mention here various society in India experiences a phenomenal change in the mid sixties with the adoption of a new strategy of agricultural development which is widely known as the Green Revolution. This strategy opts for the introduction of modern technology in agriculture for high yielding variety cultivation. Indeed, the rural development helped enormously to bring change in the agrarian economy along with
significant improvement in the infrastructural arrangement of organisation of production in many parts of the country.
Changing Class Structure in Agriculture
Agrarian reforms and rural development strategies in India which aimed at brining economic development with social justice in its agrarian society, in turn brought regional disparities and sharp inequalities among the agrarian people. In terms of agricultural mechanisation and extensive high yielding variety crops cultivation and other infrastructural facilities of rural development a few of the states like Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh have been ample variation in terms of technological advancement and agricultural development.
For example, some districts of southern part of West Bengal have been highly agriculturally developed while others still remained agriculturally backward. Western Uttar Pradesh has been highly agriculturally developed, while the eastern part it is mostly the big landowners who has taken maximum advantage of the measures initiated for rapid agricultural modernisation and economic development. They have introduced all modern means of cultivation for the commercialisation of agriculture and their economic betterment. These altogether have led to the concentration of the means of agricultural production
in the hands of a few. But the process of class formation has not been a uniform one all over the country. Examining the emerging class inequalities in the rural society scholars have identified various agrarian classes.
- (a) To Kotovsky, in the stratified rural social structure in India there have been the bourgeoisie landowners, sharecroppers and agricultural labourers
- (b) To Alavi (1974) the rural society of India has been highly stratified in the process of agricultural development and commercialisation of agriculture. He pointed out that rural economy of India has been a part of colonial capital. To him the major agrarian classes in India are the bourgeoisie landowners, colonial landowners, sharecroppers and agricultural labourers. In the agrarian society of West Bengal,
- (c) Chandra (1975) identified, the upper class landed families (including landlords. Jotedars, rich peasants, Marginal peasants) and the lower class (including poor peasants and the agricultural labourers) to be the conflicting agrarian classes.
- (d) Beteille points out that agricultural development has produced a class of progressive farmers’ in Punjab who invest significantly in agriculture and use all modern means of cultivation and have nexus with the wide markets.
- (e) Ashok Rudra (1981) suggest that agricultural development has brought polarisation in the rural society. To him there has been a class of landowners who occupy not only the vast areas of cultivable lands, but also posses all the modern means of cultivation. This class of big landowners reinvest a significant portion of their capital in agriculture to further their economic interest. Here he identifies two broad classes in the agrarian society of India viz. the class of big landowners and the classes of agricultural labourers.
- (f) Hayami (1981), after examining the major facets of the agrarian transformation in contemporary India, points out that there has been the emergence of upper and the middle strata of the peasantry.
Agrarian class structure
Against backdrop we can present a broad outline of the agrarian class structure in India. This is as follows:
i) Rich Farmers
They own and control substantially big areas of cultivable land. However, they do not involve themselves in the process of cultivation directly. They employ mostly agricultural labourers to get their land cultivated and accordingly they may either be terms as the rentier class of supervisory class of landowners. Since the sharecropping system of land cultivation has been reduced substantially because of the eviction of the sharecropper by the landowner, the supervisory farming is getting more and more importance in the contemporary agrarian society. The economic position of the supervisory farmers has been
strengthened enormously in recent years with the introduction of modern tools and techniques of cultivation by them. They introduced commercial crop cultivation in their land and the main motive their capital investment is to maximise profit. They reinvest a substantial amount of their profit in the process of commercial and cash crop cultivation. Indeed they give priority to
commercial crop cultivation. They have significant control over the rural market.
ii) Middle Farmers
They also own and control substantially large areas. However, their operational areas are smaller than the rich farmers which can be cultivated entirely by the family member. If they have excess lands they may lease them out to the sharecroppers. They themselves are not labourers. Like the landlords they also introduce modern technology and cash crop cultivation in their lands and they are left with a marketable surplus after meeting their household consumption requirements. In the agriculturally developed regions of the country they have got prominence in the recent years because of the command
they acquired over modern technology and local market.
iii) Poor Peasants
They own and control small and marginal areas of cultivable land. They cultivate it by employing family labour mostly. However, they cannot meet their household subsistence requirement from the produce of the land. Hence they are
to hire themselves out in the labour market. If available they also lease in small areas of lands. Though usually they do not hire in labourers, in the peak season of agricultural operation they may have to hire in a few labourers. The poor peasants are mostly the subsistence producers.
iv) Landless Labourers
They belong to the bottom of the agrarian hierarchy. They sell out their labour power for the maintenance of their subsistence. Various types of labours relations emerge in the agrarian society based on the duration of the work contract, basis of payment, frequency and medium of payment, interlink with the landowners in terms and credit etc. according to Bardhan and Rudra there are broadly two types of agricultural labourers: Unattached and attached labourers.
i) Unattached Labourers belong to the category of casual labourers. They come into, day-to-day contract with employers. Their wage rates vary seasonally depending on the seasonal demand of agricultural operation. (ii) Attached Labourers have continuity of association with a particular employer. However, there are various types of attached labourers.
a) Extremely Attached: They are bonded labourers. They continuity of association with a particular employer for generations. They are indebted to a particular employer and have no freedom to deny the terms and conditions of work imposed on them by the landowner. Though bonded labour system has practised, though not openly.
b) Fully Attached Labourers: They have usually a contract duration of around one year. They receive payment partly at end of the year or party in regular instalments over the years.
iii) Semi-Attached Labourers: They have continuity for more than just a few days and they the freedom to work for the other employers for a part of the year. However, continuity of association with a particular employer also leads to the development of back and call relationship. Many a time poor labour household take advance loan in the loan seasons of agricultural operation from a particular landowner. The landowners, while giving loan to the labourers imposes a condition that the labourers would be obliged to work in their field whenever they need it at stipulated wage, whatsoever may be the market price. Usually this wage rate is much lower than the prevailing market rate. However, in those days when the
landowner has no work for them, the labourers are free to work in others field at the prevailing wage rate of the market.
Irrespectively of the categorisation, agricultural labourers are extremely insecured economically. They do not get employment through the year. The situation is worst in the agriculturally backward regions. Since they don’t get full employment in these regions to earn the subsistence requirements of the family. You may be aware of the large-scale inter-district and interstate
migration of the agricultural labourers. However, agricultural labourers don’t get even the minimum wage prescribed by law in most parts of the country. Indeed in the absence of legal protection and political commitment for their betterment
they suffer from extreme economic insecurity, unemployment, poverty and ignorance. The benefits of growth have not reached this class.
Conclusion
According to A.R. Desai this process of development in fact created a setting where in large sections of the people belonging to various categories of poor, particularly in rural areas became poorer, as they were caught in the growing network of market relations, losing old securities and getting trapped more and more in the rapidly accelerating price rise. This had created enormous tensions in rural areas. Scholars have noted that in rural areas tensions and conflicts have been intensified between the upper strata and the lower strata of the agrarian hierarchy. They pointed out that the process of agricultural modernisation and rural development have consolidated the economic interest of the upper strata of the agrarian society. The extent of poverty, insecurity, sufferings and exploitation of the lower strata of the agrarian society have increased enormously. These altogether have led to intensify the tensions and conflict in the rural society. Agrarian classes in India have been a part of a long historical process. In this historical process the lowest section of the agrarian society has been subjected to utter poverty, insecurity, and unscrupulous exploitation. A large section of the rural population has been pauperised in this process. Many of the poor peasants were forced to sell off their land due to indebtedness and poverty. Many of the sharecroppers were evicted from the land, village artisans and craftsmen also lost the traditional avenues of their employment. They jointed mainly the army of agricultural labourers for their livelihood. On the other hand, the upper strata of the peasantry also consolidated their economic interest. In this process of class formation, each class in the agrarian society has a common objective position against the others. There also has been a good amount of subjective consciousness of each class against the other classes. This consciousness has been manifested in the agrarian movements in various parts of this country.