Regional disparities in agricultural development have widened. Worse, the trend has endured even in the post-economic reforms era. States like Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, which clocked moderate growth rates earlier, have begun to develop faster. Erstwhile developed states or regions like Punjab, Haryana, west Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra have continued to grow, even if at relatively moderate rates. But laggard states like Bihar, eastern Uttar Pradesh, Orissa and the like have remained, by and large, backward.
Several factors have often been held responsible for this imbalanced development — lack of infrastructure, inefficient implementation of development schemes, inadequate use of technology and poor resource base of farmers.
But the most significant cause seems to lie elsewhere. A study conducted by a public sector agricultural policy think tank has discovered that a critical reason for sluggish growth in a state is the unabated dependence of a large proportion of the rural workforce solely on agriculture. Given a level playing field on this count, most areas would follow a similar growth trajectory, it has concluded.
The findings of this study and their implications have been elaborated in a policy paper (Policy Brief No. 32) brought out by the New Delhi-based National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research (NCAP), a wing of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). This paper succinctly states: “If the poor states were to catch up with the rich states, it is imperative to reduce employment pressure on agriculture by forging strong backward and forward linkages of agriculture with non-agricultural sectors.”
The study has also indicated that rural connectivity, as reflected in road density, and literacy also contribute significantly to development. This broadly implies the need for greater investment in the expansion of public infrastructure and human capital. Investment in areas like roads, power and telecommunication facilitates access to markets, reduces transport and transaction costs, and paves the way for the flow of private investment in diversified economic activities to absorb a surplus labour.
Thus, the study suggests that reduction in the labour force engaged in farming and education are the most critical pre-requisites for speedy economic development in rural areas. As much as 58 per cent of the labour force still relies on agriculture for employment, as was the case in the 1970s. The share of agricultural GDP in the national income, however, has dropped from 45 per cent to below 18 per cent since then.
One way to reduce employment pressure on crop farming can be to promote labour-intensive, as also high-value, segments of agriculture, such as horticulture, livestock rearing, fisheries and the like. These activities require greater labour input and also generate higher income which, in turn, enhances the capacity of the farmers to invest more in productivity-boosting measures (read technology).
In any case, ventures like horticulture, animal husbandry and fisheries are deemed more suitable for the small farmers, who dominate the Indian agricultural scene, compared to large cultivators.
The other way to achieve this objective is to promote non-farm economic activities in the countryside. This would require basic facilities like electricity and communication, besides skilled or semi-skilled human resources.
Evening out regional imbalances in development is needed as much for ensuring the inclusive growth as for lifting the agriculture sector’s GDP. Moreover, considering that farm productivity in the developed states has already plateaued, boosting productivity in the laggard states to their level seems an easier way to increase overall farm output. Besides, most of the underdeveloped states possess large, untapped potential for additional production. This needs to be harnessed to bring about the second green revolution.
