Best regards, Andrew Stewart
Begin forwarded message: > From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <[email protected]> > Date: February 8, 2021 at 11:37:02 AM EST > To: [email protected] > Cc: H-Net Staff <[email protected]> > Subject: H-Net Review [H-Environment]: Lewis-Nang'ea on Hurt, 'The Green > Revolution in the Global South: Science, Politics, and Unintended > Consequences' > Reply-To: [email protected] > > R. Douglas Hurt. The Green Revolution in the Global South: Science, > Politics, and Unintended Consequences. Nexus Series. Tuscaloosa > University Alabama Press, 2020. Illustrations. 280 pp. $49.95 > (cloth), ISBN 978-0-8173-2051-5. > > Reviewed by Amanda Lewis-Nang'ea (SUNY-Geneseo) > Published on H-Environment (February, 2021) > Commissioned by Daniella McCahey > > _The Green Revolution in the Global South_ is a history of the > unintended consequences of the Green Revolution. R. Douglas Hurt, a > historian of agricultural history in the United States, took on a > global project in this exploration of the history of agricultural > technology in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. The book focuses on > these geographic regions with the aim of understanding how > agricultural and social scientists theorized and assessed the Green > Revolution. Hurt examines a wealth of literature on the effects of > the twentieth and twenty-first centuries' efforts to alleviate > hunger. > > Norman Borlaug's (1914-2009) efforts to introduce hybrid high yield > varieties (HYV) of maize, wheat, and rice had unintended > consequences, but he continued to believe that the benefits > outweighed the consequences of the movement he started. However, > there were many opinions on the outcomes of agricultural > modernization, and in this book, Hurt examines how these ideas > changed over time and across geographical locations. These > assessments focused on the uptake of new HYV plants and the > corresponding technology scientists created to accompany the seeds, > such as manufactured fertilizers, machinery, and monocropping field > techniques. > > The book starts in Latin America where the Green Revolution began. > Hurt describes Borlaug's involvement in Mexico to introduce new > agricultural technology. The Mexican government eagerly took up new > methods of wheat production in order to become self-sufficient in > food production. The outcome was that the institutions set up by the > Mexican government and international organizations, such as the > Rockefeller Foundation, prioritized large landholding farmers who > could grow large amounts of food. This left small farmers on the > outside unable to compete. Nor could they experience the purported > benefits of the Green Revolution. It is in this chapter that the > author introduces a common theme of the book. The Green Revolution in > Mexico increased food production, even to the point that Mexico began > exporting wheat, but its benefits did not reach those who were > actually food insecure. In response to the critiques lodged against > the use of HYV and chemical fertilizers that continued to privilege > those with access and disadvantage those who did not have access, > Borlaug's response was: "Our primary concern has to be to produce > food. We're not in the business of a land-reform agency; we can't > decide to split up land into small pieces" (p. 43). The chapter > describes similar outcomes in such countries as Colombia and > Guatemala. Each nation had its own specific implications for how > plans did not work as expected, but the theme was the same. > > Chapters 2 and 3 cover south, east, and southeast Asia, a region with > as much variance in the application of Green Revolution technology as > Latin America. As with Latin America, success was uneven across the > region. Pakistan and India, in particular, both greatly increased > their wheat production, but politics, war, class, caste, and gender > all shaped farmers' access to necessary seed and fertilizers. The > unequal distribution of land enabled some to access farming > technology and the profit from sales to urban dwellers, while others > continued in poverty. The theme of the Green Revolution's ability to > produce large quantities of food while nearby people remained poor > was particularly stark in India. In some areas where new agricultural > practices were adopted, many found themselves without work because > tractors replaced their labor. Many social scientists argued that in > South Asia, as in other parts of the global south, the Green > Revolution may have brought modern agricultural technology, but it > ignored the social dynamics of poor countries. Despite the Indian > government's focus on a scientific approach to agriculture, parts of > the country remained food insecure. Particular groups, such as women > and lower castes, could not access resources. Gender is not discussed > at length in any of the chapters. In the developing world, gender > plays an important role in food production and distribution, but it > is possible that the literature, which includes development impact > assessments, government analysis documents, and peer-reviewed > articles from agricultural-related disciplines, does not take it into > account. > > Since most of the sources came from the global north, some scientists > overlooked the importance of gender in making agricultural programs > successful. Borlaug's argument was that agricultural scientists were > just offering the technology; they had nothing to do with the social > spaces where these HYV crops would grow. This was the central > critique of many social scientists and development organizations. > Case studies from Japan to Vietnam demonstrated the hesitancy on the > part of both farmers and governments to take up HYVs. South Korean > farmers continued to plant the traditional varieties of rice > alongside the _Tongil_ HYV, a Korean-produced hybrid seed, the > government required them to grow because they trusted the reliability > of the heritage variety. Hurt points out that this was a good thing > because disease ruined _Tongil_ crops in the early 1960s. Although > the war in Vietnam prevented farmers from planting crops, the nation > still benefited from the Green Revolution, albeit through importation > from other countries. These two chapters offer Asian examples of > governments attempting to legislate price protections and other > incentives to alleviate fears that the adoption of HYVs would force > many into crowded urban areas. > > China is examined in its own chapter, given the history of the rise > of Mao Zedong and the Great Leap Forward. The agricultural history of > China during this time was rather different in that rather than > adopting Western-created HYV or depending on foreign experts, they > established research institutions to create their own HYV. Many of > these, however, did not grow well, exacerbating famines. This all > came at the same time as collectivization and a rapidly growing > population. China also differed from other nations in that HYVs and > fertilizers were attainable by more farmers because of direct > government intervention in providing assistance. But the outcome was > often the same in many parts of China. Crops were sent to urban areas > and many rural dwellers remained food insecure. > > Hurt opens the chapter on sub-Saharan Africa with a quote from the > _New York Times_ in 1985 that "Africa is the tragic example" (p. > 129). As with the rest of the global south, there was uneven adoption > of Green Revolution strategies. Some states did try to encourage, and > sometimes force, the adoption of HYV. But Africa is no stranger to > forced agricultural schemes. Colonial governments also wanted African > farmers to grow high-yielding crops for export.[1] It is no wonder > that many Africans were skeptical of adopting unfamiliar varieties > after the hunger and poverty induced by growing for the state. The > Green Revolution in Africa picked up steam in the 1980s. This > coincided with an increase in international development programs by > both nongovernmental organizations and foreign states. African states > began agricultural programs incentivized by aid from international > donors and lending agencies. As with the rest of the case studies, > some areas experienced an increase in food production, but other > areas suffered. Many common varieties of high-yielding crops did not > do well in drier African environments. Some observed that there was > not enough technical know-how on the continent to enable more > widespread adoption. This seems like a rather stereotypic, and > racist, view of African ability to modernize. > > The final chapter is a departure from the geographic overview of the > Green Revolution. The "Gene Revolution" introduced new varieties of > crops that were genetically modified (GM) rather than using more > traditional hybridization. The implications of this are still playing > out. Many countries have been skeptical of adopting GM varieties. > China, for example, would not use foreign GM varieties, seeing the > importation of American seeds as an invasion. Some countries like > Guatemala were concerned about the safety of GM varieties. They were > wary of the environmental consequences of using GM crops and the > damage it would have on the cultural significance of some traditional > varieties. But because of global food supply chains, some countries > were forced to adopt GM if they wanted to continue to trade. > > _The Green Revolution in the Global South_ is a good source for a > nonexpert on the history of this region or those working in the field > of development. It provides a thorough synthesis of how scientists > and observers understood agricultural modernization in its > application. The literature backing the history of the scientific > perspectives on the Green Revolution in the global south is > thoroughly researched. It would be helpful to have more discussion of > who exactly was doing the observing and assessing within the text to > better understand the politics of science. The approach to this book > also means that the personal experiences of farmers are not included. > Area specialists will find the broader geographic overview helpful in > its coverage of a topic of interest beyond their own area specialty. > > This book highlights the dangers of seeing a problem from only one > point of view or thinking that all points of view are considered but > they really are not because so much of the research and researchers > come from the global north and cannot imagine other ways of thinking > and doing. Since so many were left out of agricultural improvement, > it raises the question, what could have been done instead of the > Green Revolution? > > Note > > Citation: Amanda Lewis-Nang'ea. Review of Hurt, R. Douglas, _The > Green Revolution in the Global South: Science, Politics, and > Unintended Consequences_. H-Environment, H-Net Reviews. February, > 2021. > URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=55547 > > This work is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States > License. > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#6202): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/6202 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/80481826/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
