Chapter Notes

Social Change and Development in India

Indian society is fundamentally a rural society, even as cities continue to grow. According to the 2011 Census, 69% of India's population lives in rural areas, with most people earning a living from agriculture or related work. This makes agricultural land the most important resource and form of property for millions of Indians.

However, agriculture in India is more than just a job; it's a way of life. Many cultural practices are deeply rooted in our agrarian background. The structure of society and its culture are closely connected.

The practices of agriculture and the cultures connected to them vary greatly across India's diverse regions. Beyond farming, rural life also includes many other occupations that support the village economy, such as artisans (potters, weavers, carpenters) and specialists (priests, astrologers). The diversity of these roles was often reflected in the caste system. While some of these traditional occupations have declined, the growing connection between rural and urban economies has created new types of non-farm jobs for people in villages.

Agrarian Structure: Caste and Class in Rural India

The term agrarian structure refers to the way land is distributed and owned. In rural India, this structure is highly unequal.

• Unequal Land Distribution: A small number of families own large amounts of land, while the majority either own very small plots or no land at all. In some regions, 40-50% of families are landless, depending on agricultural labour for their survival.
• Women and Land Ownership: Due to the patrilineal kinship system (where inheritance passes through the male line), women are typically excluded from owning land. Although laws grant them equal shares of family property, in reality, their access is very limited.

Access to land is the main factor that shapes the class structure in rural areas.

• Landowners: Medium and large landowners can earn a good income from cultivation.
• Tenants: Cultivators who lease land from others have lower incomes because they must pay a large portion of their produce (often 50-75%) as rent.
• Agricultural Labourers: This group is the most vulnerable. Their employment is insecure (often daily-wage work), their incomes are very low, and they are frequently paid below the minimum wage. Many face underemployment, meaning they don't have work for many days of the year.

The Link Between Caste and Class

In rural India, there is a complex and direct relationship between the caste system and the class structure.

• Dominant Castes: Sociologist M.N. Srinivas used this term to describe the major landowning groups in a region. These castes are economically and politically powerful and are usually from the upper or middle ranks of the caste hierarchy. [!example] Examples of dominant castes include the Jats and Rajputs in U.P., Vokkaligas and Lingayats in Karnataka, Kammas and Reddis in Andhra Pradesh, and Jat Sikhs in Punjab.
• Lower Castes: Marginal farmers and the landless population usually belong to lower caste groups, such as Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), or Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
• Historical Disadvantage: Historically, Dalit ('Untouchable') castes were forbidden from owning land and provided most of the agricultural labour for dominant landowners. This created a system where upper castes controlled resources and could command the labour of lower castes. Practices like begar, or free forced labour, were common.

The Impact of Land Reforms

The agrarian structure in India has changed significantly over time, especially from the colonial period to the present.

The Colonial Period

Under British rule, the land revenue system transformed the agrarian structure.

• Zamindari System: The British granted property rights to local zamindars (landlords), who were responsible for collecting revenue. To meet the heavy taxes imposed by the British, zamindars extracted as much as they could from the cultivators. This oppressive system led to agricultural production stagnating or even declining.
• Raiyatwari System: In areas under direct British rule, this system was used. The term raiyat means "cultivator." Here, the government dealt directly with the farmers or landlords for tax collection. The tax burden was generally less, giving cultivators more incentive to invest in their land, making these areas more prosperous.

Independent India

After Independence, the Indian government, under Prime Minister Nehru, initiated a program of agrarian reform to address low productivity and rural poverty. From the 1950s to the 1970s, several land reform laws were passed.

1. Abolition of the Zamindari System: This was the most effective of the reforms. It removed the layer of intermediaries (zamindars) between the state and the cultivators, weakening the economic and political power of the landlords and strengthening the position of the actual landholders.
2. Tenancy Abolition and Regulation Acts: These laws aimed to either outlaw tenancy or regulate rents to give tenants more security. However, they were not implemented effectively in most states, with the notable exceptions of West Bengal and Kerala, where tenants were given land rights.
3. Land Ceiling Acts: These laws set a maximum limit on the amount of land a single family could own. The state was supposed to take any surplus land and redistribute it to landless families, particularly SCs and STs. These acts were largely unsuccessful because of loopholes that allowed landowners to evade the law. For example, some landowners registered their land under relatives' names or even divorced their wives on paper to hold onto surplus land in what were known as 'benami transfers'.

The Green Revolution and its Social Consequences

While land reforms had a limited impact, the Green Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s brought about major changes. This was a government program of agricultural modernization that introduced high-yielding variety (HYV) or hybrid seeds, along with fertilizers and pesticides. It was implemented only in areas with reliable irrigation, primarily focusing on wheat and rice cultivation in regions like Punjab, western U.P., and coastal Andhra Pradesh.

Positive Outcomes:

• Agricultural productivity increased dramatically.
• India achieved self-sufficiency in food grain production for the first time in decades.

Negative Social and Environmental Consequences:

• Increased Inequality: The new technology was expensive, so only medium and large farmers could afford the inputs. This made the rich farmers richer while small and marginal farmers were left behind. This process is known as 'differentiation'.
• Displacement of Labour:
  • Landowners began taking back land from tenants to cultivate it themselves, as farming became more profitable. This worsened the condition of the landless.
  • The introduction of machinery like tractors and harvesters displaced service caste groups who traditionally performed these tasks.
• Shift to a Market Economy: The traditional system of paying agricultural workers in kind (a share of the grain) was replaced by cash payments. Along with rising prices, this often worsened the economic condition of rural workers.
• Increased Insecurity for Farmers: In the second phase of the Green Revolution (1980s), farmers began shifting from growing multiple crops for their own consumption to growing a single cash crop for the market (mono-crop regime). This made them vulnerable to financial ruin if the crop failed or market prices fell.
• Regional Inequalities: The regions where the Green Revolution was promoted became more developed, while other areas, particularly in eastern India, stagnated.
• Loss of Traditional Knowledge: The promotion of "scientific" hybrid seeds led to the loss of traditional seed varieties and farming knowledge that had been developed over centuries. Many rural people also believe that hybrid varieties are less healthy than traditional ones.

Transformations in Rural Society after Independence

The period after Independence, especially in Green Revolution areas, saw profound changes in rural social relations.

• A shift from traditional, hereditary relationships between landowners and labourers (patronage) to more impersonal, exploitative ones. Sociologist Jan Breman called this a shift from 'patronage to exploitation'.
• The rise of a class of 'free' wage labourers, indicating a transition towards capitalist agriculture, where workers are separated from the means of production (land) and work for wages.
• Rural areas became more integrated into the wider market economy, increasing the flow of money into villages.
• In agriculturally rich regions, well-off farmers from dominant castes diversified their profits into other businesses, creating new entrepreneurial groups and regional elites. They also invested in higher education for their children, who then moved into professional jobs, expanding the urban middle class.

The path of development varied by region. States like Kerala underwent transformation through political mobilization and remittances from abroad, creating a mixed rural economy. In contrast, places like eastern U.P. and Bihar saw little change due to the lack of effective land reforms.

Circulation of Labour

The commercialisation of agriculture led to a rise in migrant agricultural labour.

• Workers from drought-prone and less productive regions migrate seasonally to prosperous areas like Punjab and Haryana to find work and higher wages.
• Sociologist Jan Breman has called these workers 'footloose labour'. This term does not imply freedom; rather, it highlights their vulnerability, as they lack rights and are often exploited with low wages.
• Wealthy farmers often prefer hiring migrant workers because they are easier to exploit than local labourers.

This large-scale migration has had significant effects on rural society.

• Feminisation of the Agricultural Labour Force: With men migrating for work, women are increasingly taking on the role of primary cultivators and agricultural labourers.
• Despite their crucial role, women earn lower wages than men for similar work and continue to be excluded from land ownership.

Globalisation, Liberalisation, and Rural Society

Since the late 1980s, India's policy of liberalisation and participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO) has opened up its agricultural sector to global competition. This globalisation of agriculture has had a major impact on rural society.

• Contract Farming: Farmers enter into contracts with multinational companies (like PepsiCo) to grow specific crops (like tomatoes or potatoes). The company provides seeds, inputs, and an assured market at a fixed price.
  • Benefits: Provides some financial security to farmers.
  • Drawbacks: Increases farmers' dependency on corporations, diverts land from food grain production to export-oriented crops, makes traditional farming knowledge irrelevant, and is often not ecologically sustainable due to high use of fertilizers and pesticides.
• Increased Dependence on Corporations: Multinational companies have become the main sellers of agricultural inputs like seeds and fertilizers, replacing government support services. This has increased farmers' costs and pushed many into debt.
• Agrarian Distress and Farmers' Suicides: Since the late 1990s, there has been a tragic wave of farmers' suicides in several parts of India. This is linked to an 'agrarian distress' caused by:
  • A shift to high-risk cash crops.
  • Exposure to competition from global markets.
  • Heavy dependence on expensive inputs from multinational companies.
  • A decline in government support and subsidies for agriculture.