I/II. http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Swaminomics/monsoon-proofed-india-shrugs-off-twin-droughts/
Monsoon-proofed India shrugs off twin droughts December 6, 2015, 12:01 AM IST SA Aiyar in Swaminomics | Economy, India | TOI I am amazed when people ask me why food prices, notably that of dal, have gone up. India has just suffered two consecutive droughts. The question to be asked is why, after a disastrous monsoon, food prices have risen so little. I became a journalist in 1965, when also India was hit by two consecutive droughts. Foodgrain production fell by 20%, starvation was rampant, and inflation went through the roof. India was pathetically, humiliatingly dependent for survival on US food aid, and lived a “ship to mouth” existence. Fifty years later, two back-to-back droughts years have made so little impression on the lives and minds of people that they wonder why food prices are up. GDP data shows that agricultural production actually went up marginally in 2014-15 despite a drought. In the current financial year, agricultural GDP rose by 1.8% in the first quarter and by 2.2% in the second quarter, although the rainfall deficiency was 14.3 % this year against 12% last year. TV cameramen have scoured the worst-hit districts for starving villagers but cannot easily locate any. The drought is simply not a big news story. A bad monsoon does not just hit agricultural production and prices: it hits industry and services too. Historically, many industries — notably textiles, jute, sugar and edible oils — were dependent on farm output for raw materials. Most jobs were created in sowing, weeding, harvesting, transporting and processing produce. This explains why economist Arvind Virmani once showed that in the first 50 years after independence, no less than 45% of changes in Indian GDP could be explained by changes in rainfall: other factors put together accounted for only 55%. The twin droughts of 1965 and 1966 led some foreign exerts to opine that India could never feed itself. Famine 1975, a bestselling book by William and Paul Paddock, predicted global famine by 1975. The authors said limited food surpluses of the West should be conserved for countries capable of being saved, while countries incapable of being saved, like India, should be left to starve, for the greater good of humanity. Indians were angered and horrified by the book, yet it was widely applauded in the West. Environmentalist Paul Ehrlich, author of The Population Bomb, praised the Paddock brothers sky-high for having the guts to highlight a Malthusian challenge. Farm Fare: Over the years, the share of traditional crops has dropped from two-thirds to just half of total production. Farm Fare: Over the years, the share of traditional crops has dropped from two-thirds to just half of total production. Today, we seem barely aware of two successive droughts. What accounts for the change? Some think the Green Revolution increased food grain availability per head. No, grain availability peaked in 1964 and then declined. Mass starvation ended in subsequent droughts mainly because of better distribution: rural employment programmes provided just enough purchasing power in affected districts. People were still hungry, but did not starve. Incomes rose over the years and Indians switched from cereals to superior foods. So, per capita consumption of cereals declined. This unexpectedly created grain surpluses. So, in the 1990s India became a substantial net food exporter, and the second largest rice exporter in the world. It continues to export food even in drought years. That is amazing for a country that used to be the greatest beggar for food aid. The Green Revolution raised yields, enabling more to be produced from the same area. Tubewell irrigation meant the rabi crop increased from one-third the size of the kharif crop to as much or more. The total irrigated area increased from one third to 60%. Drought proofing was substantial. More important, agriculture’s share in the economy fell steadily, from 52% in 1950 to just 14% today. Services now constitute 60% of the economy, and don’t depend on the monsoon. Industrial production has diversified into engineering and chemical products, and is no longer dominated by farm-based industries like cotton textiles, sugar, and jute textiles. As incomes rose in the 1970s, farming patterns changed. Per capita production of foodgrains declined, but that of superior foods (like dairy products, edible oil, sugar, tea, eggs, fruit and vegetables) went up. These superior foods provided farmers with more income even as they satisfied the changing needs of a society getting better off. The share of traditional crops — including cash crops like oilseeds, fibres and sugarcane — dropped from two-thirds to just half of total production. The other half consists mainly of fruits and vegetables, poultry, fisheries, and livestock. These activities are much less monsoon-dependent than traditional crops, and help explain why agricultural GDP managed to rise 2.2% in July-September this year despite a drought. However, this success has been accompanied by grave environmental damage. Free electricity to farmers has encouraged over-pumping and alarming aquifer depletion. Politicians refuse to charge farmers for power, saying this will lose them elections. One compromise may be to give a free solar pump to every farmer, and charge for other electric supplies. II. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/sunday-times/all-that-matters/The-future-of-India-Private-splendour-and-public-squalor/articleshow/50058339.cms? The future of India: Private splendour and public squalor? Ravi Venkatesan | Dec 6, 2015, 12.00 AM IST India, and most Indians, are getting wealthier. With a per capita income of $6,000 (PPP), India is now a lower middle-income nation. If our GDP continues to grow at a modest 7% CAGR, millions of Indians will gradually escape poverty and hundreds of millions of us will grow steadily more affluent. The probability of this seems fairly reasonable — not because of the competence of any government —but because of the aspirations, drive and entrepreneurship of millions of Indians, especially young Indians. But even as we grow wealthier, the quality of life especially in urban India will continue to plummet. I live in Koramangala, Bangalore, the epicenter of India's entrepreneurial ecosystem, a place brimming with talent and energy. But it is also brimming with mounds of festering garbage. The stench of sewage permeates the air. A commute to the airport that once took an hour now takes more than two. However, Koramangala's residents have it good compared to those who live in other suburbs like Whitefield. This story of unlivable cities is repeated across India. Delhi's residents complain about the barely breathable air and awful traffic. Mumbaikars lament the disappearance of public spaces. Rain has shut Chennai down. As population and consumption rise, we are seeing the degradation of everything public — infrastructure, justice, law and order, healthcare, education — from bad to unbearable. Our response to this degradation has been privatization by default. Companies create their own worldclass infrastructure. The affluent and growing middleclass retreat behind gated communities and highrise apartments and to a world of privatized education, privatized healthcare, private security and transportation. This retreat has given rise to what we see today: oases of private splendour in an ocean of public squalor. But how sustainable is this? What's the point in rising affluence if the quality of our life is plummeting? What's the point in owning more cars or better cars if it takes an hour or more to travel 10km? What's the point of rising GDP if we can't breathe our air, if most of our food is contaminated and the judicial system fails to deliver timely justice? As someone remarked about China, what's the point in growing the pie if the pie is inedible? The ocean of public squalor is beginning to engulf our private cocoons. It is very easy to get angry and blame "government" for this mess. Our deplorable situation is clearly the failure of successive governments of every political hue at the Center, the state and local level. They have failed to curb corruption and have failed even more miserably to build institutions. Institutions are the foundations of society. Even as our population surged and our economy multiplied, successive governments have allowed key institutions to atrophy; indeed, in many cases, they have been deliberately weakened. Weak institutions — regulatory institutions, institutions of administration, policing, and justice — are the root cause of government's inability to stem corruption and deliver essential services to citizens. Taking Control: To create a functional society citizens need to be responsible and engage in community work. But much as government is to be blamed, the bigger problem might be our own behaviour. Why is there so much rotting rubbish on the streets of Bangalore? It isn't primarily because the municipal contractor doesn't pick up the rubbish every day. It is that residents refuse to segregate garbage the way the law prescribes and most households furtively throw their garbage on the street corner. Why is corruption so rampant? Because fewer and fewer of us see anything wrong in either taking or paying bribes; bribery is simply a transaction cost. How many of us are willing to take the metro or bus to the airport instead of our car? The total refusal on the part of babus, politicians and middle-class citizens to use public services results in the lack of any incentive to improve these. How many talented executives are willing to give up their lucrative careers for just a few years to help rebuild public institutions or strengthen good NGOs? How many of us are willing to give up part of a weekend to participate in a community initiative to get rid of garbage, plant trees in our neighbourhood or attend meetings of the resident welfare association? How many business leaders are personally engaged in the CSR work of their company to ensure that financial contributions and employee talent are directed towards building institutional capacity? How many of us make the effort to vote in elections instead of seeing it as another holiday? It is time that we realize that we get the kind of government and society we deserve. To a very large extent, the sorry state of our society is the result of our own indifference. To make a democratic society work, we need to redefine what it means to be a citizen. Citizenship is not just a birthright, it is also an obligation. A democratic society is fragile and its success demands vigilance, collective action and even sacrifice from its citizens. It took great sacrifice to win our freedom. It will take at least as much leadership and sacrifice to create a functioning society. (The writer heads Social Venture Partners India) -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
