Introduction
Indian village economy was traditionally subsistence economy. Jajmani system served as the basis of the economic organisation. The advent of British, consequent modernisation, expansion of market economy, expansion of transport and communication within the country, introduction of western education and technology influenced village social organisation to a great extent. It caused horizontal social mobility, and upward vertical and downward vertical social mobility.
In the pre-British period the village social organisation or agrarian social structure in India was characterised by the absence of demographic pressure on land, strong control of village councils on land, effective Jajmani system and comfortable living.
Classes and structure
In the Pre-British period there were two classes: (i) Privileged exploiting class, and (ii) Underevileged exploited class. The privileged class consisted of kings, feudal chiefs, priests and rich merchants. This class led a luxurious life. It did not participate in productive labour. The under-privileged class consisted of peasants, workers, artisans, craftsmen and slaves. This class participated in productive work. They lived in miserable conditions. But at the same time the Jajmani system brought together artisan castes and agricultural castes. There was a delicate balance between the two classes.
New land policy and class structure
During the British period this agrarian social structure has undergone numerous changes due to changed economic, political and social conditions. The new land revenue policy of British, which introduced Zamindari system, Rytowari system and Mahalwari system altered the existing village social organisation. New classes emerged in villages. These can be classified as Zamindars (tax gatherers), tenants (real cultivators) and agricultural workers (labourer class)
The new land revenue system of the British and payment of revenue in cash promoted monetisation of economy. It also facilitated the entry of land into market. Land became a saleable commodity and property. Entry of land into market has its own impact on the social organisation of villages. It facilitated the land lords to acquire more land because they took over the lands to settle the farmers debts. As a consequence a landless class came into being. Land could be owned by any individual without distinction of high or low caste status, if he had enough money to purchase land. Land owning castes became numerous. The land-owning class could control the political power in the village. That means along with economic power, political power also changed the Lands. Thus, land became a source of secular power. All these developments created upward vertical mobility of the land owner class and the downward vertical mobility of the old land owner class and altered village social organisation.
Change in crop pattern and class structure
Introduction of cash crops like cotton, jute, indigo, and tobacco expanded market economy. The fluctuations in prices in world economy affected the rural economy. For example, the civil war and famine in USA in 1860’s, world war I and world war II generated a lot of demand for cotton from India. This led to prosperity of many agricultural families in India. But at the same time fall in prices in these commodities in international market ruined many farmers. Thus, Indian village economy was linked to world economy.
The expansion of market economy weakned Jajmani system. Firstly, the market was flooded with industrial goods. The factory-made goods undermined the demand for handicrafts and traditional services. Secondly, zamindars and farmers planted cash crops in most of their land. In only small portion of land grains were cultivated. This restricted the artisan and other service rendering class to take their payment in grains. Thirdly, the availability of shoes, shaves and textiles in market undermined the local crafts and services. Fourthly, many clients who lost demand for their crafts or services adopted agriculture as an alternative. Finally, some clients who got education simply migrated to towns for jobs. These developments brought changes in the rural class structure.
Change in production and class structure
The Government introduced modern means of transport and communication. This led to full-fledged extension of market to villages. Now urban factory products flooded rural market. The emergence of rich peasantry class created demand for such products. Even now industry produces certain goods exclusively to villagers.
Extension of market economy changed the nature of production and consumption in villages. The prime motive behind production is surplus production for market. A.R. Desai identified four major trends of change in Indian villages:
- (i) Rapid transformation of rural society from subsistence economy to market economy.
- (ii) Rapid Transformation of agrarian society due to modern technology.
- (iii) Abolition of intermediaries like zamindars and biswedars.
- (iv) Emergence of associations and institutions having linkage with urban and national organisations.
Thus village social organisation which is promoted by market economy can be summarised as follows.
(a) It created new class of rich peasants, big traders, petty officials and political workers.
(b) It created polarisation of rich landowning and extremely poor landless labourers.
(c) Monetisation expanded the new avenues for social mobility. This intern disintegrated joint families into nuclear families
(d) Caste barriers to economic mobility are crumbled. New avenues like health care, and education have entered rural life.
(e) Finally, it indirectly promoted women empowerment.
However, the deep penetration of market economy into villages lead to over commercialisation of agriculture. This has its own effect on agrarian structure.
A.K. Vasavi in his study pointed out how this is causing suicide among farmers. He said that promotion of commercial agriculture based on utilization of hybrid seeds, chemical manures, pesticides in semi-arid region has had several repercussions. He also says that the need to engage in commercial agriculture forced small farmers to go for credit. It is difficult for them to get credit from govt institutions. So, they take money from private individuals at high rate of interest. Failure of crops due to unforeseeable conditions made them to fall into debt trap. This ultimately led them to commit suicide to save themselves from oppression or social insult.
Conclusion
Thus, the market economy extended to village now in its ugly face. The need of the hour is to make this extended market beneficial to rural peasantry. In this direction, the govt has to take some protective measures. Minimum support price mechanism is one of the steps in that direction. It has to do more in terms of credit facility, irrigation facility etc. prosperity to village mass should be goal of govt, since this class associated with food security of the country.