---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dr. B. Ekbal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Jun 29, 2006 4:12 AM
Please see below for the note prepared by Dinesh Abarol for AIPSN as a response to the Farmer's Draftr Policy.
Ekbal
--
Dr.B.Ekbal
Kuzhuvalil House, Arpookara East,
Kottayam-686 008, Kerala
Phone: 0481-2598305
Serving Farmers and Saving Farming
General comments
First of all,
it needs to be stated that the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) is appreciative
of the National Commission on Farmers (NCF) for taking an initiative
to formulate a draft national policy for farmers with the aim to update
the policy on agriculture to make it consistent with the contemporary
reality. We also welcome the idea of circulating in advance the draft
to all the relevant parties with the aim to obtain a consensus on the
policy document.
Second, we
concur with the commission on the stated objective of the draft NCF
policy that "progress in agriculture should be measured by the growth
rate in the net income of farm families" and that for the purpose
of this Policy, the term "farmers" will include landless agricultural
labourers, sharecroppers, tenants, small, marginal and sub-marginal
cultivators, farmers with larger holdings, fisheries, dairy, sheep,
poultry and other farmers involved in animal husbandry, pastoralists,
plantation workers, as well as those rural and tribal families engaged
in a wide variety of farming related occupations such as sericulture
and vermiculture. We also note with much appreciation that the term
will include tribal families engaged in shifting cultivation and in
the collection and use of non-timber forest products and that in all
cases, both men and women will receive equal attention. Further, while
we convey our broad acceptance of the mission statement it is being
suggested by us that the draft policy should also add to the mission
statement that to protect the food security of the nation in view
of the continuation of unequal trade and volatility in the prices of
agricultural commodities the farming population would be provided with
the necessary state support to achieve a high level of autonomy in food
production or in other words food sovereignty for their own respective
system of local or regional economy.
Third, we also
agree that today the greatest worry of the farmers relates to the price
he/she is likely to get for his/her produce at harvest time and assured
and remunerative price for farm produce is the core issue. We appreciate
the suggestion that farmers should be assured that there will be strong
intervention to prevent distress sales. But we believe that there is
a need to make the assurance on this account far more concrete and specific.
With the aim to make this assurance credible and effective, we suggest
that the policy of procurement of the produce by the governments at
the centre and states should be reiterated for the benefit of not only
its continuation but also be strengthened by extending the same to also
the remaining agricultural commodities.
Fourth, while
we have no problem with the recommendation of establishment of the Indian
Trade Organization (ITO) which would be supported by a trade advisory
body of small farmers to safeguard farmers' interests, it is our understanding
that it is necessary to recommend that the quantitative restrictions
(QRs) be reintroduced to effectively control the flow of imports and
exports of agricultural commodities. In our view, to safeguard against
the continuing erosion of the net incomes of farming population in India,
the introduction of this measure is absolutely essential at the moment.
Fifth, as far
as the asset reform agenda is concerned in the context of farming population,
we endorse the reiteration of the enforcement of land reforms including
joint pattas for women. In addition, it is also our demand that the
draft agricultural policy should prohibit the selling or leasing out
of wastelands for their regeneration to multinationals, domestic big
business and landlords. It should be distributed free to agricultural
labourers and poor peasants. The government should provide them with
adequate financial help and technology support to develop the land to
a level that these farmers are also able to increase their net incomes.
Sixth, we agree
that increase in small farm productivity and creating multiple livelihood
opportunities through crop-livestock integrated farming systems as well
as agro-processing have become urgent tasks. In order to ensure that
the policy steps being taken are converging and mutually reinforcing,
it is our suggestion that the draft policy should clearly lay down the
provision of enforcement of the entitlements of the landless and other
such rural poor in respect of both water and biomass when the enhancement
of these resources is taking place mainly through the implementation
of public investment based watershed and afforestation schemes.
Seventh, while
we agree that methods of providing the power of scale to small producers
will have to be developed and popularised on a win-win basis for all
concerned on an urgent basis, it is our recommendation that the exercise
of scale enhancement must be accompanied by appropriate technological
measures. But we find that the draft agricultural policy is still
beset with a basket of recommendations that are mutually contradictory.
For example, the commission has identified the crop-livestock integrated
farming systems quite appropriately as a key measure to be undertaken
to improve the small farm productivity. Needless to say, we should make
a complete success of the introduction of crop-livestock integrated
farming systems and agro-processing into the rural areas. But we also
find that the selected technological measure would only get weakened
in respect of its economic viability through the introduction of non-local
agricultural inputs and other such incompatible technological choices
like the introduction of tractors and other such farm equipment being
suggested by the commission for the benefit of improving the productivity
of small farms when it came to the recommendation on cooperative farming.
Eighth, we
are of the view that the option of contract farming can be utilized
only when the government is also willing to join the contractual arrangements
as a third party that guarantees the farmers their well being in an
adequate way. We therefore opine here explicitly that the proposed recommendation
of the "draft national policy" on contract farming is unacceptable
to the AIKS. It is inadequate to introduce it by adopting merely a code
of conduct for its regulation. Its other recommendation that the policy
should promote direct contracts between the producer and purchaser is
also likely to produce results that are contradictory and will only
weaken the beneficial outcomes to be gained through the introduction
of integrated farming systems. It is well known that the corporations
have a major interest in selling to the farmers their industrial inputs
that might not be again fully compatible with the recommendation of
adoption of not only the crop-livestock integrated farming systems but
also the generation of improved rural employment opportunities. It is
also the demand of the AIKS that the government must build soon a stronger
regulatory framework for the introduction of newer technologies and
institutional forms to avoid the deleterious effects on the incomes
of the farming population in India. Finally, in respect of the forms
of farming to be permitted by the government, the AIKS wants the draft
national policy on agriculture to completely reject the options of corporate
and company farming.
Tenth, we
endorse the recommendation that landless labour households should be
provided at least 10 cents per household, which will give them space
for kitchen gardening and animal rearing. In fact, we would like to
recommend that the qualifier term of wherever feasible be removed and
be recommended that a compulsory allotment of 10 cents of land per household
be recommended.
Eleventh, we
also reiterate our support to the proposition that water is a public
good and a social resource and not private property. In this context,
we may also mention that without a policy
being institutionalised for the entitlements to be granted to the landless
in respect of their access to the enhanced availability of water from
the public schemes of watershed development the institution of pani
panchayats would be essentially ineffective in delivering the desired
outcomes. Similarly, it is necessary that the draft national policy
should recommend a strict prioritisation in respect of water use to
benefit the practice of sustainable agriculture and the lot of rural
poor by providing them critical water input for improving the productivity
of their small farms.
Twelfth, keeping
in view that there exists a danger on account of the growing dominance
of the corporate agribusiness, which in experience is known to promote
genetic homogeneity and monocultures, it is necessary for the draft
national policy to make positive recommendations for the development
of a system of agriculture that is able to sustain the agro-diversity
and still be remunerative for the farmers as a whole.
This implies clearly the institutionalisation of a policy of going beyond
the measures of genome clubs and promoting a path of rural industrialisation
where the production for local markets based on local resources and
capabilities is the order of the day. With the aim to institutionalise
a path of development of sustainable agriculture the draft national
policy should get the government to reengineer the measures that are
already being taken in the opposite direction to promote a non-local
market and supply system oriented agribusiness as a part of the reported
new initiatives like the National Horticultural Mission and Integrated
Food law.
Thirteenth,
keeping in view that a bill for seed policy is already under consideration
which promotes corporate control of the seed agribusiness the draft
national policy on agriculture should recommend a reconsideration of
the seed bill on the basis of its provisions being incompatible with
the overall strategy of development of agriculture in the future.
Fourteenth,
we propose that in the case of each agro-climatic zone a regional planning
authority be established in the interest of identification and implementation
of the pro-active measures to enable the state to control and regulate
the adverse effects of climate change on the system of agriculture proposed
to be practised in the area for enhancing the farmers' net income
over the longer-term period. Needless to say, the draft national policy
will have to also recommend against the further development of predatory,
unsustainable urbanisation that we are seeing today happening at a very
rapid pace under the influence of neo-liberal globalisation. Although
it has already rightly stressed that there should be stringent restrictions
on the diversion of prime farmland for non-farm purposes, we recommend
that that the draft national policy on agriculture can at least contribute
positively to the management of climate change for the benefit of agriculture
if it recommends the development of energy usage for both agriculture
and industry to be based the rapid promotion of renewable energy resources
in the countryside.
Fifteenth,
the draft national agricultural policy should suggest steps to ensure
that would help the national agricultural research system (NARS) to
maintain its autonomy. It is not enough to recommend that the research
strategy should be pro-nature, pro-organic farming and pro-small farmer
oriented. Particularly when we already know that under the Indo-US Knowledge
Initiative for Agriculture the government has entered into an agreement
that allows the companies like Monsanto and Wall mart to control the
future plans of the Indian NARS. Keeping also in view that the NARS
base for basic sciences has to be upgraded in a big way and that the
government cannot abandon its responsibility towards the improvement
of the lot of small farmers and of semi-arid and dry land agriculture
in which the corporate world has a very little interest, it is necessary
that the section on science and technology is reviewed once again to
take into account the concerns raised here by us. Therefore,
the draft national agricultural policy should make a clear recommendation
to the government on the issue of how the autonomy of the NARS is going
to be maintained in the eventuality of the processes of development
of frontier technologies coming already under the control of corporate
world.
Sixteenth, it is necessary that the draft national agricultural policy makes a clear-cut recommendation of the strengthening of the extension system within the framework of the public sector to ensure the proper implementation of its recommendations on be agro-meteorology, agricultural bio-security and pro-small farmer orientation. We are also of the view that the draft national agricultural policy should make a recommendation to also keep the production and supply of agricultural inputs out of the hands of the corporate world whose interests are likely to take the system of agriculture towards the opposite direction and will only prevent the farmers from achieving the goals of the mission statement incorporated in the document issued by the National Commission on Farmers.
Specific comments on the policy in respect of tribal and other marginalized people
- One of the main strengths of the policy is that includes agricultural laborers as a part of the farming community. While the policy makes an attempt to include the concerns of the landless agriculture labour and recommends the creation of non-farm livelihood initiatives we also demand that the policy institute tripartite mechanisms for the fixing and implementation of minimum wages and a stricter application of the laws against bonded labour. Insurance and guarantee of a minimum employment and income should also be made a part of this policy. This is especially important because there are indications that the real wages of agricultural labourers are declining.
- Though the policy makes a strong reference to land reforms, it should clearly state that poor agriculture labourers, especially dalit and tribal people are the targets for land distribution. In this connection it is worthwhile mentioning that landlessness is growing because of increasing poverty and indebtedness (including the failure of commercial crops like soyabeans and cotton). The greater dependence on world market related crops has also had an adverse impact on land holdings. We therefore demand that the policy explicitly state that land be restored to those who have lost their lands and that there be an insurance against crop failures for small farmers who are prone to loosing their lands and becoming landless labourers.
- Though the policy makes a welcome reference to the development of women's skill and technology, joint pattas and the capacity building of SHGs, we also demand that this policy recognizes the non-implementation of law for equal wages for men and women. We therefore demand that the policy reiterates the commitment to implement equal wages in all areas and institutes mechanisms to monitor the implementation of these wages. Local trade unions should be involved in this. Further explicit mention should be made about the protection of women from sexual and non-economic exploitation by big landholders and traders.
- The policy argues for the need for aquarian reforms to modernize traditional fishing and suggests a number of measures to increase the income of poor fishermen families. But it needs to be ensured that the reforms of CRZ rules should not facilitate the shrimp farming and corporate tourism activities in the coastal areas. We demand that the policy explicitly recognizes that corporate multinational fishing corporations, big trawlers as destroyers of the coastline and recognize that small fishermen have the first right over coastal zone use. It should also recommend steps to ensure that these big corporations do not displace smaller fishermen either in direct or indirect ways from the coastline.
- The policy is ezplicit in acknowledging that tribal farmers need special protection. It states that there should be a clear statement relating to what has been 'the traditional domain of forest dwellers'. This is virtually an impossible task, and further with greater agrarian distress the dependence on forests is also increasing so it would be impossible to demarcate 'traditional areas'. We therefore demand that the policy be more realistic and state that the reclassification of forests is an urgent task. Those areas which have no trees on them or are at present being cultivated by tribal people should be declassified as forest lands and distributed to landless families on the basis of certain worked out criteria. Further forest pattas should also be distributed to those families who are living inside the forest on forest produce. We also demand that policy explicitly state that no evictions from forest areas will take place.
- For the first time the draft policy explicitly recognizes the problem of displacement and has added that a consent clause should be made a part of all development projects. This is a welcome step, but the policy needs to go a step further. We demand that the policy explicitly state that no displacement should take place not only without the consent of local tribal communities, but also till the time that full rehabilitation on a mutually acceptable basis has taken place. Further giving forest lands to big business and multinational companies should be stopped and exploitation of migrant tribal labourers in these companies put to an end.
- Unequal exchange between the traders and tribal people with respect to forest produce is one of the main problems of the tribal areas. The policy should make the elimination of trader and middle man as one the aims for the benefit for the tribal farmers. It is well known all small tribal farmers also depend seasonally on the collection of non-timber forest produce for their livelihood. Therefore we demand that the policy commits the state to creating an institutional structure for the procurement of all local forest produce, and a mechanism for ensuring a minimum support price for all forest produce be instituted. Further the removal of transit duties on non-timber forest produce should be reviewed. Further the introduction of value addition in non-timber forest produce should be guided by local priorities and the forward and backward linkages of value addition should ensure that maximum profit is made at the local level and not at the level of the big industry.
- Though the policy makes some mention of shifting cultivation and modernization of tribal agriculture, we demand that the responsibility of providing inputs for sustainable small scale agriculture should lie wholly with the state and inferior grains like millets and indigenous varieties of rice should also be included within the system of procurement and PDS in order to ensure food security for poor farmers. Further agro-forestry techniques and options should be explored to scientifically upgrade the system of shifting cultivation.
- The policy mentions the Joint Forest Management strategy as having been selectively successful though not gender sensitive in an effort to decentralize forest management. This assessment is not a fair one as problems with JFM have been analysed by many activists and scholars by now. The social tension and conflict between panchayats and JFM Committees, as well as the lack of decentralization with respect to benefit sharing, technology and cover strategy choices is well known. Further the JFM committees have no legal standing and exist on the basis of externally aided projects. Given these lacunae we demand that national policy announces a comprehensive review of the JFM system with the aim of ensuring equal benefit sharing mechanisms, the power for local committees to decide their cover strategies and technology choices according to their own needs, and the institutionalization of a complementary relationship between local panchayats and JFM committees.
- Though the policy makes explicit mention of pasture development by local committees for pastoralists, it should lay down guidelines to convert forest villages into revenue villages.
- The policy makes a mention of the problems of plantation labour and need to have a special focus on them. It talks about a price stabilization and minimum support price mechanism. But it needs to go further than this by stating that agro-forestry and post harvest operations in the plantation sector can be important strategies to rehabilitate the livelihoods of landless tribals and pastoralists. Agro-forestry and wasteland recovery for plantations should be done not only for rubber, pepper, coffee and tea, but also for local species which can support non-farm occupations for these people. Investment in non-farm post harvest operations along with mixed plantations should be pursued with an objective of upgrading the skills of the local tribals and pastoralists. Cooperatives of landless for wasteland recovery should also be promoted.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
greenyouth mailinglist is the activist support mailinglist for kerala run by
Global Alternate Information Applications (GAIA)
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
