Agrarian Relation and Accumulation: The 'Mode of Production' Debate in India [First ed.] 019562565X

240 65 4MB

English Pages [279] Year 1990

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

Agrarian Relation and Accumulation: The 'Mode of Production' Debate in India [First ed.]
 019562565X

Citation preview

A

g

a n

T h e

r a r i a n d

A

‘M

R

e l a t i o n s

c c u m

o d e

o f

D e b a te

in

u l a t i o n

P r o d u c tio n ’ I n d ia

E d ite d by ■U t s a P a t n a i k

P u b lis h e d f o r SA M EEK SH A TR U ST O X FO RD

by U N IV E R S IT Y

PRESS

BO M BA Y D E L H I C A L C U T T A M ADRAS 1990

Oxfora University Press. O xford L undon Glasgow, New York Toronto Delhi Bombay Calcutta Madras Karachi Petaling Jaya Singapore H ong K ong Tokyo Nairobi D ar es Salaam M elbourne Auckland and associates in Berlin Ibadan

© Sameeksha T ru st 1990 First Published 1990 ISBN 0 19 562565 X

Typeset by Economic and Political Weekly, Bombay, printed by Modern Arts and Industries, lfrk A-Z InaU sm at 'Estate, Lower Parel, Bombay 400 013 and published ‘lif 'S'l'Kl Mookeijeej, Qxford University Press, Oxford Hoi1se, Apollo Bunder, Boniba'y/'lOO 039.

P re fa c e B e g i n n i n g ' i n t h e l a t e s ix tie s , s t r e t c h i n g w ell b e y o n d a f u ll d e c a d e , t h e E co n o m ic a n d P o litic a l W eekly h a d h o s te d i n its p a g e s a d e b a te o n th e d e v e lo p m e n t o f p r o d u c tio n r e la ­ tio n s a n d ' p ro d u c tiv e fo rc e s in I n d ia n a g ric u ltu re . I t w as a n e x c itin g d e b a t e , a n d t h e d is c u s s io n w a s m a r k e d b y b o t h in te r e s tin g fo rm u la tio n o f h y p o th e s e s a n d im p o r ta n t e m p i r i c a l in v e s tig a tio n s . T h e , p r e s e n t v o lu m e , f o u r t h in t h e S a m e e k s h a T r u s t p u b li c a t i o n s s e r ie s , b r i n g s t o g e t h e r s e v e r a l o f t h e a r tic le s w h i c h c o n s t i t u t e d t h e c o r p u s o f th e d e b a t e . I w o ^ d lik e t o p la c e on- r e c o r d th e ' T r u s t ’s g r a t i ­ t u d e to P r o f e s s o r U t s a P a tn a ik , e d i t o r o f t h e v o lu m e , a n d to t h e i n d i v i d u a l a u t h o r s . D e c e m b e r - 1 ,1 9 8 9

A s h ° k M it r a E d i t o r o f P u b lic a tio n s S am eek sha T ru s t

C o n te n ts Page P re fa c e

v

In tro d u c tio n I 1 2 3 4 5

6

7

8

9

10

U tsa P a tn a ik

1

ID E N T IF Y IN G T H E P R O C E SS O F C A P IT A L IS T P R O D U C T IO N

B ig F a r m e r s o f P u n j a b B D T a lib

A sh o k R u d r a , A M a jid , 13

I n s e a r c h o f t h e C a p it a li s t F a r m e r : C om m ent R S Rao

33

C a p ita lis t D e v e lo p m e n t i n A g r i c u l t u r e : N o te U tsa P a tn a ik

38

C a p ita lis t D e v e l o p m e n t in A g r i c u l t u r e : R e p ly A shok R u d ra

57

C a p ita lis t D e v e l o p m e n t i n A g r i c u l t u r e U tsa P a tn a ik F u rth e r C o m m e n t

62

O n t h e Q u e s t i o n o f t h e M o d e o f P r o d u c t i o n in I n d i a n A g r i c u l t u r e : A p r e l i m i n a r y N o te P a resh C hattopadhyay

72

O n t h e M o d e o f P r o d u c t i o n in I n d i a n A g r i c u l t u r e : R e p ly U tsa P a tn a ik

84

A n ‘A n t i - K r i t i k ’

98

P a re sh C hattopadhyay

O n ‘F e u d a l ’ M o d e s , M o d e ls a n d M e th o d s o f E s c a p in g C a p ita lis t R e a lity A n d r e G u n d er F rank

107

O n t h e E s s e n c e a n d M a n if e s t a t i o n o f C a p ita lis m in I n d i a n A g r i c u l t u r e R a n jit S a u

111

v iii

Contents II

11

A ‘C O L O N I A L M O D E O F P R O D U C T I O N ’?

F o r a T h e o r y o f C o lo n ia l M o d e s o f P ro d u c tio n Jairus- B a n a ji

119

12

I n d i a a n d C o lo n ia l M o d e o f P r o d u c t i o n H a m z a A la v i

132

13

I n d i a a n d t h e C o lo n i a l M o d e o f P r o d u c t i o n : C om m ent A sh o k R u d r a

15 6

I n d i a a n d t h e C o lo n ia l M o d e o f P r o d u c t i o n : C om m ent G a il O m vedt

161

S t r u c t u r e o f C o lo n ia l F o r m a ti o n s H a m z a A la v i

165

14 15

III 16 17

18 19

20

P R O B L E M S O F C L A SS F O R M A T IO N A N D A N A L Y S IS

H i r i n g o f L a b o u r b y P o o r P e a s a n ts R u d ra , M a d a n M o h a n M ukhopadhya

A sh o k 183

C la s s D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n w i t h i n t h e P e a s a n tr y : A n A p p r o a c h to t h e A n a ly s is o f I n d i a n A g ric u ltu re U tsa P a tn a ik

193

R e a c tio n a r y R o le o f U s u r e r ’s C a p ita l in R u r a l In d ia P r a d h a n H P ra sa d

227

C a p ita lis t D o m i n a ti o n a n d t h e S m a ll P e a s a n tr y : D e c c a n D is tr ic ts in t h e L a te N i n e t e e n t h C e n tu ry J a ir u s B a n a ji

234

C la s s R e l a t i o n s i n I n d i a n A g r i c u l t u r e R udra

251

In d e x

A shok 268

In tro d u c tio n U ts a P a tn a ik T H E d isc u ssio n , w h ich d e v e lo p e d in to a w id e -ra n g in g d e b a te , on'ithe gro w th o f capitalist p ro d u c tio n in In d ia n 'ag riculture, b egan in m e early ■sixties w ith a few p a p e rs by a u th o rs o f a b ro a d ly M a r x is t p e rsu a sio n , in d iv e r s e jo u r n a ls so m e o f w h ic h a re now d e fu n c t, T h e .d e b a te g a th e re d m o m e n tu m to w ards th e e n d o f th e d e c a d e a n d re a c h e d its m o st inten siv e p h a se in th e seventies, w ith a la rg e n u m b e r o f p a r tic ip a n ts .w ritin g in Economic and Political Weekly. T h e d ecad e o f th e e ig h tie s ‘ saw a n u m b e r o f review s o f th e d eb ate, while:; fu rth e r c o n trib u tio n s have . b e e n in the n a tu r e o f d isc u ssio n a n d / d e v e lo p m e n t o f its specific aspects. T h e n e e d ■h a s b e e n lo n g felt fo r a v o lu m e w h ic h w o u ld e n c a p ­ su la te th e ■m a in tre n d s o f th e -early d iscu ssio n s, w h ic h h a d so o n ac.qm red th e a p p e lla tio n o f ‘th e m o d e o f p ro d u c tio n ’ d eb a te . C o n ­ te m p o ra ry in te re st w as a ro u s e d a m o n g st sch olars o f d ev elo p m en t p ro b le m s in a n u m b e r o f c o u n trie s a n d , u n k n o w n to th e p a r ­ ticip an ts, tra n sla tio n s o f th e p ap ers in vario u s languages circulated in th e ir u n iv e rsitie s. T h e r e have b e e n sev eral a b o rtiv e p ro p o sa ls to e d it a v o lu m e, a n d o n e e a rly selection in a p ira te d e d itio n was b ro u g h t o u t fro m L a h o re b u t w as little c ircu late d . S urv ey s o f th e d e b a te c o n tin u e to appear-, th e m o st d e ta iled a n d c o m p re h e n ­ sive b e in g th a t b y A lice T h o r n e r . 1 Finally, so m e two_ d ec ad e s a fte r th e in c e p tio n o f th e d e b a te in th e p ag es o f E P W , w e have v e n tu r e d to p u t to g e th e r th is ed ited selection o f ■c o n trib u tio n s ..o v e r th e d e c a d e 1968 to 1978. T h e o b jectiv e h a s b e e n to cover th e m a in th em es o f th e d iscu ssio n s d u r in g this p e rio d m a in ly fo r th e b e n e fit o f th e n ew r e a d e r. T h is h a s b e e n a d ifficu lt task a n d d o u b tle ss th e c ritic a l r e a d e r w ill fin d m u c h to cavil a t b o th in. th e se le c tio n o f p a p e rs a n d in th e ed itin g ; n o m a tte r how ^--si.J:!cerely a n e d ito r tries, a su b jectiv e e le m e n t is b o u n d to be p r e ­ sen t. P a rtic u la rly a fte r 197^1, a la rg e n u m b e r o f p a p e rs d e a lin g w ith sp ecific to p ics su c h aS te n a n c y a n d la b o u r re la tio n s h av e a p p e a r e d , w h ic h p ro b a b ly re q u ire a se c o n d v o lu m e to do th e m ju stic e .

2 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation L o o k in g b a c k a f te r fifte e n years, w h a t a re th e sa lie n t fea tu re s o f th e d e b a te th a t o n e c a n identify? O c c a sio n a l e x a sp e ra tio n w ith th e a p p a re n tly sterile sem antics should n o t o b scure the substantive' a n d basic c o n c e p tu a l issues w h ich u n d e rla y it: w h a t is ag ricu ltu ral ‘c a p ita lism ’ p a rtic u la rly in a n ex -c o lo n ia l c o u n try ? H o w is ‘fe u d a lis m ’ a n d ‘s e m i-fe u d a lism ’ to b e c o n c e p tu a lise d ? I n w h a t w ay i f a n y d o p re v a le n t la n d lo r d - te n a n t re la tio n s c o n s tra in p r o ­ d u c tiv e in v e stm e n t? A n d h o w d o th e y sh a p e th e c o n to u rs o f c a p ita lis t a c c u m u la tio n in th e p o s t-in d e p e n d e n c e p e rio d ? T h e d isc u ssio n h a d s ta rte d w ith c e rta in sp ecific q u e stio n s a d ­ d re sse d b y eco n o m ists: w h a t w as m e a n t b y c a p ita list p ro d u c tio n in a g ric u ltu re , a n d h o w c o u ld its. g ro w th b e c a p tu re d s ta tistic a l­ ly w h e n c a rry in g o u t e m p iric a l su rv e y s o f f a rm in g h o u se h o ld s? C le a rly th e a p p r o p r ia te s ta tistic a l m e th o d s o f a g g re g a tio n a n d analy sis d e p e n d e d in t u r n o n th e th eo retical a p p ro a c h to th e q u es­ tio n o f c a p ita list d e v e lo p m e n t in th e a g ra r ia n sector. Seeking the a n sw e r to th ese specific q u e stio n s soon ra ise d b ro a d e r issues co n ­ c e rn in g th e n a tu r e o f th e c o lo n ial im p a c t o n I n d ia a n d .in p a r ­ tic u la r th e c h a ra c te r o f c o lo n ia l c o m m o d ity p ro d u c tio n a n d its d iffe re n c es fro m th e d e v e lo p m e n t o f c o m m e rc ia lisa tio n in the p o s t-in d e p e n d e n c e perio d . T h e s ta r tin g p o in t o f th e b ro a d e r d e b a te lay in a d u a l d issa tisfa c tio n as fa r as this a u th o r w as ,c o n ­ ce rn e d : first, w ith th e id e a th a t th e m e c h a n ism s a n d tra je c to ry ' o f d e v e lo p m e n t o f a n ex -co lo n ial c o u n try lik e I n d ia w e re in th e ir essen tials th e sa m e as th o se fo r th e w e ste rn c a p ita list c o u n trie s; a n d secondly, w ith th e id ea th a t In d ia w as p a r t o f a w orld capitalist ‘p e rip h e ry ’, a m e re a p p e n d a g e in te g ra te d th ro + g h exchange, w ith th e w e ste rn w o rld . F r o m th e b e g in n in g b ro a d ly tw o a p p ro a c h e s o r p o in ts o f view e m e rg e d . T h e first d i d n o t see a n y m a jo r q u a lita tiv e ‘b r e a k ’ b e t­ w e e n th e c o lo n ia l an d ' p o s t-in d e p e n d e n c e p e rio d s w ith re sp e c t to th e g ro w th o f c a p ita list re la tio n s o f p r o d u c tio n , o th e r th a n p e rh a p s o n e o f v a ry in g sp eed s o f tra n s itio n . A c c o rd in g to th is ' in te r p r e ta tio n , c o lo n ia l e x p lo ita tio n inv o lv ed th e g ro w in g c o m ­ m e rc ia lis a tio n o f a g ric u ltu re a n d g ro w th o f w a g e -p a id la b o u r, a n d su c h c o m m o d ity p r o d u c tio n in e v ita b ly im p lie d also th a t cap italist p ro d u c tio n re la tio n s w e re d eveloping. I f these re latio n s d id n o t ta k e th e p e rv a siv e fo rm o f d ire c t e m p lo y m e n t o f h ire d la b o u r fo r p ro fit, this w as so u g h t to . b e e x p la in e d by in v o k in g M a r x ’s d is tin c tio n b e tw e e n th e ‘f o rm a l’ versus ‘r e a l’ s u b s u m p ­ tio n o f la b o u r u n d e r c a p ita l, w ith th e a rg u m e n t th a t p e a s a n ts

P atnaik : Introduction 3 in d e b te d to m e rc h a n ts a n d m o n e y le n d e rs w e re ‘form ally, s u b ­ su m e d u n d e r c a p ita l’. (W h e th e r this w as a c o rre c t a p p lic a tio n o f M a r x ’s d istinction,- is a q u e s tio n w e d o n o t go in to h e re .) T h e la n d lo rd -p e tty te n a n t re la tio n w as also in te r p r e te d by som e as a ‘c a p ita list’ o n e, i e, th e a n a ly tic a ld is tin c tio n b e tw e e n p ro fit a n d re n t w as c o n sid e re d u n im p o r ta n t. P o st-in d e p e n d e n c e d e v e lo p m e n ts, o n this view, c o n tin u e d th e sam e tre n d s , o n ly a t a m u c h fa s te r p ace. T h e se c o n d a p p ro a c h , to w h ic h th is a u th o r su b sc rib ed , o n th e o th e r h a n d id e n tifie d a d e fin ite q u a lita tiv e ‘b r e a k ’ b e tw e e n th e co lo n ia l a n d s u b s e q u e n t p e rio d w ith re sp e c t to th e g ro w th o f c a p ita lis t p r o d u c tio n in a g ric u ltu re , a n d re la te d this b re a k p rim a rily to th e q u e stio n o f a c c u m u la tio n . I t a rg u e d th a t colonial re v e n u e -c u m -re n t e x p lo ita tio n p ro m o te d n o t th e p ro le ta ris a tio n o f p e a s a n ts so m u c h as th e ir p a u p e ris a tio n , since a s u b s ta n tia l sh a re o f e c o n o m ic su rp lu s w as tr a n s f e r r e d a b ro a d to fin a n ce m e tro p o lita n in d u strialisatio n ; a n d th a t th e -forms o f ca p ital w h ich fo u n d th e c o lo n ia l ec o n o m ic e n v iro n m e n t p a r tic u la r ly co n g en ia l w ere la n d lo rd , t r a d e r a n d u s u r e r c a p ita l. C o n s e q u e n tly these fo rm s m e d ia te d a p ro cess o f ‘fo rc e d ’ c o m m e rc ia lisa tio n o f a g ric u ltu re (‘fo rc e d ’ b e c a u se p e a s a n ts h a d to sell to p a y re n tc u m -re v e n u e ), m a rk e d b y a re la tiv e a b se n c e o f tra n s fo rm a tio n o f the p ro d u ctiv e b ase a n d stru c tu ra l d efo rm atio n o f th e economy. T h e p o s t-in d e p e n d e n c e a g ra ria n s tru c tu r e ca rried th e legacy o f th is p ro cess in th e fo rm o f e n d e m ic u n d e re m p lo y m e n t a n d u n e m p lo y m e n t. W h ile th e n ew e c o n o m ic e n v iro n m e n t o f sta te in v estm en ts a n d e n c o u ra g e m e n t o f cap italist p ro d u c tio n in itia ted a new p h ase o f a g ra ria n a c c u m u la tio n , it w as c o n s tra in e d by in h e rite d p ro d u c tio n relatio n s a n d i n p a rtic u la r b y p e tty tenancy. A ccepting th e a rg u m e n t re g a rd in g th e specificity o f the colonial e x p e rie n c e a n d th e in a d m issib ility o f a n an aly sis w h ic h w as m e re ly a h o m o lo g o u s tra n s f o r m o f th a t a p p lie d to so v ereig n in d u s tria lis in g c o u n trie s, so m e a u th o rs s o u g h t a so lu tio n by a d v a n c in g th e n o v e l c o n c e p t o f th e ‘co lo n ial m o d e o f p ro d u c ­ tio n ’. A little re fle c tio n co n v in c e d m o st o f those ta k in g p a r t in th e d e b a te th a t th is c o n c e p t was a th e o re tic a l n o n -sta rte r. N o t only w ere th e re g re a t v ariatio n s in th e in itia l socio-econom ic con­ d itio n s a n d in th e tra je c to rie s o f s u b o rd in a tio n a m o n g th e col­ o n ise d c o u n trie s: a c o ro lla ry w as th a t it w as im p o ssib le to id e n ­ tify a n y specifically c o lo n ia l ‘social e x iste n c e — fo rm o f la b o u r p o w e r’ (to u se T a k a h a s h i’s la p id a ry p h ra s e i in th e ‘T ra n s itio n ’

4

Agrarian Relations and Accumulation

d e b a te ). T h e c o n c e p t o f a m o d e o f p ro d u c tio n , th e o re tic a lly a n a n a ly tic a l c o n c e p t, c o u ld n o t b e cav alierly tre a te d as o n e m ig h t a n elastic glove, stre tc h in g it h e r e a n d th e re to- fit v a ry in g e m ­ p iric a l reality. S u c h .a p r o c e d u re w o u ld logically im p ly as m a n y ‘m o d e s o f p ro d u c tio n '. as th e r e w ere h isto ric a lly . e x iste n t social fo rm atio n s; a n d re p re se n t th erefo re a subversion o f th e an aly tical c o n c e p t o f ‘m o d e o f p r o d u c tio n ’ itself. S u b seq u en tly , th e d isc u ssio n v eered -b ack to th e o rig in a l q u e s­ tio n s o f class fo rm a tio n a n d class d iffe re n tia tio n in a g ric u ltu re . W ith o u t f u r th e r e m p iric a l in v e stig a tio n it w as n o t p o ssible to d e te rm in e a p rio ri w h a t w as th e e x te n t a n d im p a c t o f o n g o in g ca p ita list a c c u m u la tio n ; o n th e o th e r h a n d , th e p ro p e r inv estig a­ tio n o f e x iste n tia l social reality itself re q u ir e d th e a p p lic a tio n o f th e o re tic a l c a teg o ries o f class. T h e re s o lu tio n o f th is d ile m m a w as a tte m p te d b y th is a u th o r b y f o rm u la tin g a g e n e ra l in d e x o f e x p lo ita tio n o f la b o u r w h ic h d id n o t p re su p p o se e ith e r ca p ita list o r o th e r ty p es o f r e la tio n s .b u t s u b s u m e d b o th . O th e r a u th o rs o n th e o th e r h a n d em phasised- class fo r m a tio n in te rm s o f classfo r-itse lf r a th e r th a n class-in-itself. W e will n o t e n te r h e re in to a f u r th e r d isq u isitio n o n th e u n re so lv e d issu es o f th e d e b a te ; th e c o n trib u tio n s a re B efore th e re a d e rs, w h o h a s o n ly to r e m e m b e r h o w ev er th a t th ey re la te to a tim e -fra m e w h o se te r m in a l d a te is o v er a d e c a d e ago; c o n ­ trib u to rs m a y w ell h av e d ev e lo p e d a n d c h a n g e d th e ir view s. W e w o u ld o n ly like to in d ic a te b rie fly w h a t, in o u r view, c o n stitu te d th e m a in s h o rtc o m in g s o f th e d iscu ssio n s, fro m a p e rsp e c tiv e g a in e d fro m f u r th e r re fle c tio n . T h e m a in d ra w b a c k in o u r view w as a n in a d e q u a te a p p re c ia ­ tio n o f th e specific m a c ro e c o n o m ic p ro c e sse s e n ta ile d in In d ia h a v in g b e e n a colony fo r so lo n g , a n d .th e iw ay in w h ic h th is h a s a lte re d th e p ro b le m a tic o f d ev elo p m en t in th e p o st-in d e p e n d e n c e p e rio d . A g e n e ra l lack o f clarity o n these q u estio n s led to a n excessive e m p h a sis o n th e so m e w h a t te x tu a l a n d p h ilo lo g ic a l asp e c ts o f c o n c e p ts as a g a in s t an y a tte m p t to h o n e th e m a g a in st th e to u c h s to n e o f re a l h is to ric a l d e v e lo p m e n t. F o r ex am p le, the d istin c tio n this a u th o r w as w o n t to stress, betw een capital in p ro ­ d u c tio n a n d c a p ita l i n c irc u la tio n — in th e c o n te x t o f th e a r g u ­ m e n t th a t th e re w as a n in d e p e n d e n t d e v e lo p m e n t o f th e la tte r re la tiv e to th e fo rm e r— w as im p o r ta n t a n d n o t in itse lf in c o r ­ rect; b u t it w as c e rta in ly in a d e q u a te . W h a t r ^ l l y m a tte r e d was th a t colonial.exploitation entailed a n overall econom ic en v iro n m en t .

P atnaik ':- Introduction 5 o f r e la tiv e r e ta r d a tio n a n d s tr u c tu r a l sh ifts to w a rd s te rtia risa tio n o f th e econom y. E ven w h e n cap ital d id flow in to fin a n ­ c in g a g ric u ltu ra l p ro d u c tio n w ith in su c h a n e n v ir o n m e n t— as in th e case o f e x p o rta b le c o m m e rc ia l c ro p s — th e process re p re s e n te d m o re o fte n th a n n o t a relativ e d isp la c e m e n t o f ' dom estic c o n su m p tio n . T h is is a n en tirely d ifferent scenario fro m th e d y n a m ic e x p a n sio n o f c o m m o d ity e c o n o m y e x p e rie n c e d by sovereign in d u s tria lis in g c o u n trie s. T h e successful d riv e for exports co m b in ed w ith d o m estic fam ines; g ro w th o f in d u stry co m ­ b in e d w ith te r tia r is a tio n o f o c c u p a tio n s; a c h ie v in g th e seco n d la rg e st m e rc h a n d is e e x p o rt s u rp lu s in th e w o rld c o m b in e d w ith im p o rt o f capital; su c h w ere th e p aradoxes o f this ty p e o f ‘develop­ m e n t’, u n k n o w n in th e h isto ry o f th e c o u n trie s follow ing a n in d e p e n d e n t p a th o f in d u s tria lis a tio n . T h e p ro je c t o f a n a ly s in g th e m a c ro e c o n o m ic im p a c t o f col­ o n ia lism a n d im p e ria lis m o n th e I n d ia n econom y, a n d in p a rtic u la r its r u r a l se g m e n t, is fa r fro m o v e r; in d e e d it h as h a rd ly b e g u n . 2 A t th e h e a r t o f th e an aly sis m u s t lie th e q u e stio n o f unilateral transfers fro m th e co lo n y to th e m e tro p o lis; a n d as a c o r­ o lla ry to th is, th e c o m m o d itis a tio n o f p r o d u c tio n in v o lv in g in p a rtic u la r th e d riv e to e x p a n d ex p o rtab les. B etw een o n e -six th a n d th re e -te n th s o f th e to ta l ta x a tio n re v e n u e s o f B ritish In d ia w as tra n s fe rre d a b ro a d ev ery y e a r over arr u n c o n sc io n a b ly lo n g p e rio d o f som e 175 y ears b e g in n in g in 1765. I n sh o rt, a su rp lu s b u d g e t w as o p e ra te d b y th e colonial sta te , w ith a su b sta n tia l p a rt o f re v e n u e s n o t b e in g sp e n t fo r e ith e r d e v e lo p m e n ta l o r n o n d ev elo p m en tal purposes w ith in th e country, b u t b e in g ea rm a rk ed for ‘e x p e n d itu re s in c u rre d a b ro a d ’. I f th e re is a b a la n c e d -b u d g e t m u ltip lie r, th e w o rk in g o f th is ‘su rp lu s b u d g e t d e p re s s o r’ need s to be q u a n tifie d in its d iffe re n t ph ases. T h e u n ila te r a l tra n s fe r to B rita in o f a p a r t o f th e re v e n u e s col­ le c te d in ru p e e s in I n d ia e n ta ile d th e tra n s fo rm a tio n o f th is p a rt in to fo rm s u se fu l to th e m e tro p o lis, viz, e ith e r co m m o d itie s d ire c tly u sa b le in B rita in as ra w m a te ria ls a n d w age-goods, o r e x p o rta b le s to th ir d c o u n tries w h ic h e a rn e d fo re ig n exchange for B ritish use. T h e u n ila te ra l tr a n s fe r th u s r e q u ir e d a n e x p o rt s u rp lu s o f c o m m o d itie s fro m In d ia , a g a in s t w h ic h no claim s in fo re ig n e x c h a n g e a c c ru e d to th e I n d ia n p ro d u c e rs o f th is e x p o rt s u rp lu s. (T h e p ro d u c e rs w ere p a id in ru p e e s o u t o f th a t p o rtio n o f th e ta x a tio n re v e n u e s set asid e fo r th is p u rp o se : a n aly tic ally speaking, a p o rtio n o f to tal taxation th u s took th e form o f taking

6 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation a w a y e x p o rta b le s w ith o u t p a y m e n t.) A s to ta l re v e n u e s rose in th e c o u rse o f th e 19th cen tu ry , th e e ffectin g o f a stea d ily in c re a s in g re a l tr a n s f e r e n ta ile d a c o r re s p o n d in g rise in I n d ia ’s e x p o rt su rp lu s. W h e re a s b e fo re th e 1820s e x p o rts h a d co n siste d m a in ly o f m a n u f a c tu r e d goods, su b s e q u e n tly w ith th e o p e n in g u p o f th e c o lo n ise d ec o n o m y to free tr a d e in B ritish te x tile s a n d th e e m e rg e n c e o f n e t im p o rts o n th is account- (m a rk in g th e in c e p tio n o f d e in d u s tria lis a tio n ), th e d riv e w as fo r in c re a s in g e x p o rta b le s p ro d u c tio n in th e p rim a ry s e c to r— d ru g s, in d u s tria l ra w m a te ria ls a n d h ig h -g ra d e fo o d g ra in s. A m p le e v id en c e ex­ ists th a t th is d riv e fo r in c re a se d p r im a r y se c to r e x p o rta b le s p r o ­ d u c tio n , e sse n tia l fo r affectin g th e tra n sfe r, re ste d m a in ly o n a c o m b in a tio n o f ph y sical co e rc io n , a n d e c o n o m ic d u re ss im p o s­ ed o n c u ltiv a to rs b y th e n ecessity o f p a y in g re v en u e a n d ren ts. T h e p ro cess o f commoditisation under colonial conditions w as th u s q u a lita tiv e ly q u ite d istin c t fro m th e c o m m e rc ia lisa tio n o f a g ric u ltu re in so v ereig n c a p ita listic a lly d e v e lo p in g c o u n trie s (w h e re a re c ip ro c a l ex c h a n g e b e tw e e n to w n a n d c o u n try co u ld develop d e te rm in e d by co n sid eratio n s to p ro d u cers o f profitability a n d m u tu a l a d v a n ta g e . ) 3 O n e aspect o f th e forced n a tu re o f this d istin c tiv e p ro cess w as th a t in c re a se in e x p o rtab le s in In d ia to o k place v ery su b sta n tia lly a t th e ex p en se o f d o m e stic c o n su m p tio n , b e in g m a rk e d by a h ig h in c id e n c e o f fa m in es in th e 19th c e n ­ tu r y a n d fallin g p e r c a p ita av a ila b ility o f fo o d g ra in s in th e 2 0 th cen tu ry . W h e re a s u n ila te ra l tra n s fe rs im p lie d th a t th e colonial I n d ia n ec o n o m y h a d a n excess o f d o m e stic sa v in g o v er d o m e stic in v e st­ m e n t y e a r a fte r year, a t th e o th e r e n d . B rita in , th e re c ip ie n t o f th e tr a n s f e r fro m its tro p ic a l colonies, en joyed a n excess o f d o m e stic in v e stm e n t o v er d o m e stic savings, w ith o u t e x te rn a l in d eb ted n ess. T h e m a g n itu d e o f th e u n ila te ra l tra n sfers w as very s u b s ta n tia l relativ e to B ritish gross d o m e stic p ro d u c t a n d gross dom estic ca p ita l fo rm atio n . D u r in g th e crucial p e rio d o f in d u strial revolution fro m 1770 to 1820, o n th e basis o f h istorical tim e series d a ta o n tra d e , I e stim ate th a t th e tra n s fe r fro m A sia a n d W est In d ie s to g e th e r a m o u n te d in 1770 to 43 p e r cen t o f G D C F in B rita in , rose to 86.4 p e r c e n t b y 1801 a n d re m a in e d a t ' a sim ila r h ig h level o f 85.9 a n d 74.6 p e r c e n t in 1811 a n d 1821 respectively. 4 I n s u b se q u e n t d e c a d e s th e d riv e to e x p a n d p rim a ry p ro d u c ts exports, su p p le m e n te d b y sim ple m a n u fa c tu res by the en d o f th e century, m a d e In d ia by 1910 the largest producer

Patnaik. : Introduction 7 o f m e r c h a n d is e e x p o r t s u r p lu s in th e w o rld a fte r th e U S . ' I n th e age o f im p e ria lis m a n d c a p ita l e x p o rts fro m 1870, I n d ia ’s e n o rm o u s a n d in c re a s in g fo reig n ' ex c h a n g e e a rn in g s fin a n c e d a su b s ta n tia l p a r t o f th e d eficit a ris in g in th e B ritish b a la n c e o f p a y m e n ts as a c o n se q u e n c e o f its in v e stin g in p ro fita b le d ev elop­ in g a re a s vis-a-vis w h ic h it lack ed an y , o r a su fficiently larg e, c u r ­ re n t a c c o u n t su rp lu s. Yet, p a ra d o x ic a lly , d e sp ite ris in g e x p o rt su rp lu s, I n d ia h a d to 'im p o r t c a p ita l itse lf in o rd e r to su sta in th e ev en m o re s h a rp ly ris in g u n ila te ra l tr a n s f e r to B rita in . 5 ‘E x p o rt-le d r e ta r d a tio n ’ in In d ia w o u ld b e a n a p t c h a ra c te risa ­ tio n o f th is scen ario . M e a s u rin g eco n o m ic w ell-being in te rm s o f con v en tio n al indices o f p e r c a p ita in c o m e becom es p a rtic u la rly m is le a d in g in su c h a situ a tio n , w h e re a s u b s ta n tia l p a r t o f d o m e stic a lly p ro d u c e d in c o m e d id n o t a c c ru e to d o m e stic n a tio n a ls a t all. C onversely, a strik in g a sp e c t o f th e in d u stria lisa tio n experience o f b o th B rita in a n d J a p a n — th e p io n eers o f cap italist in d u stria lisa ­ tio n i n E u ro p e a n d A sia resp e c tiv e ly — is th e ir very h ig h o rd e r ' o f d e p e n d e n c e o n e x te rn a l so u rces o f food a n d ra w m a te ria ls on th e o n e h a n d , a n d o n e x te rn a l m a rk e ts for th e ir m a n u fa c tu re d goods o n th e o th e r h a n d . L o o k e d a t th r o u g h th e p ris m o f c o n ­ te m p o ra ry gro w th experience, th e p e rfo rm a n c e o f th e ag ric u ltu ra l sector in b o th co u n tries w as q u ite p o o r; th e in c rea sin g food needs o f a n e x p a n d in g econom y could n o t b e w holly m e t o u t o f dom estic p ro d u c tio n d u r in g th e c n ic ia l p h a s e o f in d u s tria lis a tio n . I n B rita in , th e ‘a g ric u ltu ra l re v o lu tio n ’ o f th e 1 8 th c e n tu ry b a se d o n e n c lo se d c a p ita lis t f a r m in g e v id e n tly c o u ld n o t ra ise p r o d u c - , tiv ity to a su fficien t e x te n t to m e e t d o m e stic d e m a n d , f o r in ten siv e a g ita tio n fo r free fo o d im p o rts e m e rg e d a n d r e m a in e d th e c ru c ia l p o litic a l e c o n o m y issu e fo r th re e d ec ad e s s ta rtin g a t th e t u r n o f th e c e n tu ry . G r a in im p o r ts a v e ra g ed a r o u n d 7 p e r c e n t o f d o m e stic p ro d u c tio n d u r i n g 1800 to 1820, w hile im p o rts o f all item s' o f final c o n su m p tio n as a p e rc e n ta g e o f dom estic proc d u c tio n (b o th re la tin g to th e p r im a r y se c to r) ro se fro m 18.3 p e r c e n t in 1801 to 42.6 p e r c e n t b y 1830 a n d to as h ig h as 60.3 p e r ce n t b y 1850. T h e tr a n s f e r s fro m th e tro p ic a l colonies p ro v id e d th e se c o n s u m p tio n ite m s d ire c tly a n d ■w ere also ex c h an g ed th ro u g h re -e x p o rt a g a in s t te m p e ra te re g io n ' p ro d u c ts . 6 I n J a p a n rice im p o rts relativ e to d o m estic rice p ro d u c tio n w as belo w 4 p e r c e n t b e fo re its d riv e to a c q u ire colonies; b u t it ro se fro m ju s t above 5 p e r c e n t in 1895-99 to a ro u n d 19 p e r cent' by

8 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation 1935-37, ev en th o u g h p e r c a p ita c o n s u m p tio n rose little . T h is is s e ld o m in te rp re te d , as it sh o u ld be, as th e fa ilu re o f J a p a n e s e a g ric u ltu re , u n d e r th e perv asiv e la n d lo rd -te n a n t system , fo m e e t th e c h a lle n g e o f in d u s tria l e x p a n sio n . S u c h a su b s ta n tia l o r d e r o f to ta l food im p o rts (rice a n d s u g a r f r o m K o r e a a n d F o rm o sa) p o sed n o p ro b le m s o f fin a n c in g as th e co lonies w ere s im u l­ ta n e o u s ly tu r n e d in to so u rces o f ta x a tio n a n d c a p tiv e m a rk e ts fo r J a p a n e s e m a n u fa c tu re s . 1 S im ila rly fo r B rita in , th e o v e r­ w h e lm in g ly im p o r ta n t role o f e x te rn a l m a rk e ts fo r it'^ se c o n d a ry secto r p ro d u c ts is w ell d o c u m e n te d a n d n e e d s little re ite ra tio n . T h e in fe re n c e w e w o u ld d ra w is tw o-fold: firstly, th a t th e p a r t p la y e d b y in te r n a l c a p ita lis t a c c u m u la tio n in tra n sfo rm in g , th e d o m e stic a g r ic u ltu r a l p ro d u c tiv e b a se a n d m e e tin g th e n e e d s o f in d u s tr ia l e x p a n sio n , h a s b e e n g rossly o v e re stim ate d h isto ric ally in th e case o f b o th th e se in d u s tria l p io n e e rs, w ith a c o rre sp o n ­ d in g u n d e re s tim a tio n o f th e ro le o f co lo n ial u n ila te ra l tra n sfe rs. I n b o th cases th e b a sic fa ilu re . o f d o m e stic p rim a r y se c to r p r o ­ d u c tio n w as m a sk e d b y v irtu a lly costless tra n s fe rs fro m th e col­ o n ies. C learly , th e in te r n a tio n a l c o n ju n c tu re in th e p o st-w a r e ra o f decolo n isatio n , facin g th e larg e A s ia n co u n tries lik e C h in a a n d In d ia , is q u ite d iffe re n t, p r e c lu d in g su c h a h im p o r ta n t ro le fo r th e e x te rn a l sector. T h e ra te o f d o m e stic p rim a ry se cto r g ro w th r e q u ir e d to s u s ta in a given ra te o f in d u s tria l e x p a n s io n h a s to b e fa r h ig h e r fo r these c o u n trie s to d a y th a n w as e v e r a ch iev ed h isto ric a lly b y to d a y ’s capita).iStically a d v a n c e d c o u n trie s in th e ir p h a s e o f tra n s itio n . F o r In d ia , th e p a th o f p riv a te . c a p ita list a c c u m u la tio n w h ich it h a s b e e n follow ing fo r th e last fo u r decades a p p e a rs to h o ld o u t little h o p e o f lo n g -te rm solution o f its specific . p ro b le m s, w h ich involve n o t m e re ly th e a c h ie v e m en t o f h ig h e r a g r ic u ltu r a l g ro w th b u t also' th e e lim in a tio n o f u n e m p lo y m e n t a n d poverty. S econdly, a n o th e r in fe re n c e we w o u ld d ra w fro m th e stu d y o f h is to ry is th a t th e a g r ic u ltu re -in d u s try lin k a g e h a s to b e c o n ­ c e p tu a lis e d in a ra d ic a lly d iffe re n t m a n n e r today. I t w ill n o t do to th in k o f a g ric u ltu re as a n a r e n a o f p rim itiv e a c c u m u la tio n fo r in d u s tria lis a tio n alo n e; its ro le as the- m a in se g m e n t o f th e h o m e m a rk e t fo r m a n u fa c tu re s is fa r m o re im p o rta n t th a n was h isto ric a lly th e case w ith th e c o u n trie s w hich could b a tte n p a ra sitic a lly o n c a p tiv e e x te rn a l .m a rk e ts. F ro m th e p o in t o f view' o f ra p id e x p a n s io n o f th e h o m e m a rk e t, too, p riv a te a c c u m u la ­ tio n in a g ric u ltu re is less th a n satisfacto ry . I t n ec essarily takes

P atnaik : Introduction 9 p la c e th r o u g h p rocesses o f class c o n c e n tra tio n as well as reg io n a l c o n c e n tra tio n o f th e g a in s o f g ro w th , leaving- o u t o f its a m b it m a jo r sections o f th e ru r a l p o p u la tio n d is trib u te d o v er a m a jo r p a r t o f th e country. In d ia ’s -e x p e rie n c e d u r in g th e last fo u r decades shows- th a t w h ile a n a d e q u a te , d e g re e o f c o m m o d itis a tio n o f o u t­ p u t m a y b e ach iev ed w ith in -a fa ir o v erall g ro w th ra te , th is p ro ­ cess d oes n o t n ecessarily raise th e e m p lo y m e n t a n d in co m es o f th e m ass o f th e r u r a l p o p u la tio n a n d te n d s to p e rp e tu a te a relative s ta g n a tio n o f th e m a ss m a rk e t for' c o n s u m p tio n goods by p e rp e tu a tin g relative poverty. T h is p ro p o sitio n is strikingly b o rn e o u t b y th e fact th a t p e r c a p ita fo o d g ra in s p ro d u c tio n h a s b een e ith e r c o n sta n t o r falling in eleven o u t o f th e fifteen la rg e st states o f th e In d ia n u n io n d u r in g th e q u a rte r-c e n tu ry b e g in n in g in . 1960, w h ile it h a s tre b le d in th e n o r th e r n re g io n o f th e co u n try . T h e a re a s o f fa s te s t g ro w th h av e seen a d ra m a tic fall in la b o u r-u se w ith m e c h a n is a tio n , a n d th is is re fle c te d in th e overall rise, in th e in c id e n c e o f u n e m p lo y m e n t in th e r u r a l eco n o m y . 8 A ll th is p o in ts to th e n ecessity o f a n e w a n d serio u s debate;after divesting itse lf o f som e o f th e a p rio ri p ro p ositions o f develop­ m e n t th e o ry w h ic h h a v e p ro v ed to be u n te n a b le , su ch a d e b a te m u s t a d d re ss itse lf n o w to th e c o n c re te q u e s tio n o f v ia b le a lte rn a tiv e strategies., ,

N O TES 1 A T horner, ‘Semi-Feudalism or Capitalism ? C ontem porary Debate on Classes and Modes of Production: in India’, Economic and Political Weekly, D ecem ber 4, 1 1 and 18, 1982. 2 O ne can hardly think of any contem porary n am e in th e Indian context other than that of A m iya K Bagchi who over the last two decades has both pioneered studies in this area and m ade innum erable contributions to our understanding of the multi-faceted phenom enon of the colonised economy. 3 Some aspects of this m echanism have been explored in my ‘The P ro ­ cess of Commercialisation under C olonial Conditions: A Hypothesis’, 1975, unpublished; also presented to Sem inar on Com m ercialisation in A griculture, Trivandrum , N ovem ber 1981, b u t not given for publication in the subsequent sem inar proceedings. 4 A pioneering estim ate was m ade by Sayera H abib, ‘Colonial Exploitation and C apital Form ation in E ngland in the Early Stages of the Industrial R evolution’, In d ian H istory Congress Proceedings, A ligarh Session 1975, Section IV; following basically the same

10 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation m ethod b u t w ithout adjustm ent for sm uggling, an estimate, was obtained for 1770 in U Patnaik, ‘In d ia and Britain: P rim ary A ccum ulation in R elation to In d ustrial D evelopm ent’, S em inar on K arl M a rx a n d th e A nalysis of In d ian Society, N ew Delhi, 1983. T his work was subsequently extended' in U ' Patnaik, ‘In d ia ’s A gricultural D evelopm ent in th e L ight of H istorical Experience’, Sem inar on State and Industrialisation in India, SOAS, London, A pril 1989. , 5 See S B Saul, Studies in British Overseas Trade, 1870-1914, Liverpool U niversity . Press- 1967; also T M orison, The Economic Transition in India, M urray, . 1916, 6 For Britain, these proportions are calculated from P Deane. and B R Mitchell, Abstract of British Historical Statistics, DAE, Cam bridge, 1971. 7 F o rJap an , th e basic d a ta are from Statistical Appendix to J C Allen,. Short Economic History of Modern Japan, Allen and Unwin, 1972 and J I N akam ura, Agricultural Production and the Economic Development o f Japan, 1873-1922, P rinceton U niversity Press, 1960. 8 These estim ates are from U Patnaik, ‘In d ia ’s A gricultural Develop­ m ent in the Light of H istorical E xperience’, op cit.

September 1989

I Identifying the Process of Capitalist Production

1

Big Farmers of Punjab Ashok Rudra A Majid B D Talib W E p re s e n t h ere som e p r e lim in a r y an d strictly te n ta tiv e re su lts ■ o f a sta tistic a l in v e stig a tio n o f b ig fa rm e rs o f P u n ja b u n d e rta k e n ' by th e a u th o rs o n b e h a lf o f th e A g ro -E c o n o m ic R e se a rc h C e n tre o f th e U n iv e rs ity o f D elh i. T h e b a sic in s p ira tio n w as o f co u rse o n e o f in te lle c tu a l curio sity , s h a re d b y all e c o n o m ists in In d ia , a b o u t w h a t is really h a p p e n in g in o u r a g ric u ltu re , especially in su c h re g io n s as P u n ja b w h e re it is b e in g c la im e d w idely th a t a v eritab le re v o lu tio n h as ta k e n place o r is ta k in g place. Yfet a n o th e r stra n d in o u r basic m o tiv a tio n w as d issatisfactio n w ith th e n a tu re o f in fo rm a tio n available a b o u t w h a te v e r ch anges are ta k in g place in th e c o u n try sid e . O n e h a s b een ta lk in g a g reat deal a n d over a lo n g tim e a b o u t a c e rta in g reen re v o lu tio n a n d th e e m e rg en ce o f a n e w ty p e o r e v en a n ew class o f farm ers. A ll th is ta lk has, how ever, b e e n b a se d o n m e re im p ressio n s. B u t q u a n tita tiv e id ea s ca n b e fo rm e d o n ly o n the' b asis o f surveys b a se d o n ra n d o m sa m p lin g . I t is th is c o n v ic tio n th a t led u s to c a rry o u t o u r in ­ v e stig a tio n in te rm s o f a sa m p le d ra w n stric tly a c c o rd in g to th e p rin c ip le s o f stra tifie d a n d m u lti-s ta g e r a n d o m sam p lin g . W e chose a sa m p le o f 261 fa rm s, all above 20 acres in size, d ra w n fro m d iffe re n t d istric ts in th e follow ing way: G u rd a sp u r A m r its a r K a p u r th a la J u llu n d e r H o s h ia r p u r R upar

26 25 18 17 28 7

L u d h ia n a F e ro z e p u r B h a tin d a S an g ru r P a tia la T otal

2 0

40 2 0 2 0

40 261 I n each d istrict w hich co n stitu ted a stra tu m w e drew the sam ple farm s th ro u g h a th re e -sta g e p rocess. A t first one o r tw o blocks

l 4 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation (d e p e n d in g o n th e size o f th e d is tr ic t in te rm s o f th e n u m b e r o f villages) w e re d ra w n b y follow ing th e m e th o d o f sim ple ra n d o m sa m p lin g w ith o u t re p la c e m e n t. T h e r e w ere 17 su c h blocks in all. F ro m e a c h b lo ck 4 villages w ere to b e selected a t ra n d o m w ith p r o b a b ility p r o p o rtio n a l to th e n u m b e r o f la rg e fa rm s (d e fin e d as ab o v e 20 acres in size). In fo rm a tio n a b o u t' th e d istrib u tio n o f la rg e fa rm s in th e villages w e re . co llected fro m th e block d e v e lo p m e n t office; a n d it w as to ta k e a d v a n ta g e o f th is th a t w e a rra n g e d th e b lo ck s to c o n s titu te th e first stag e o f selectio n . W e fo u n d fro m v isits to b lo ck d e v e lo p m e n t offices d u r in g th e c o u rse o f a p re lim in a ry t o u r o f so m e o f th e d istric ts th a t in fo rm a tio n a b o u t th e d is trib u tio n o f defacto la rg e fa rm s (irre sp e c tiv e o f th e size sh o w n o n p a p e r ) c o u ld b e o b ta in e d fro m th e block offices. T h e in fo rm a tio n co u ld n o t o f c o u rse b e p erfect, a n d th e n u m b e r o f a c tu a l la rg e farm s in th e selected villages so m etim es d iffere d fro m th e p r io r in fo rm a tio n so o b ta in e d . B u t th is d id n o t m a k e a g re a t d eal o f d iffe re n c e, b e c a u s e th e re a s o n w hy w e w a n te d to have a w e ig h tin g system w as to av o id h a v in g to go to villages w h ic h d id n o t h av e a n y la rg e fa rm s at all o r h a d v ery few. O n c e a village w as c h o se n a fresh list w as m a d e o f th e la rg e farm s (o n ce a g a in , se e in g th ro u g h p a p e r fa lsific a tio n s) a n d a sa m p le d ra w n w h ic h w as a m u ltip le o f 5 ( if th e re w e re a t all m o re th a n 5 la rg e fa rm s in th e villages) d e p e n d in g o n th e n u m b e r o f la rg e farm s. T h e su rv e y w as c a r r ie d o u t d u r in g th e s u m m e r o f 1968-69. T h e ta b u la tio n o f e stim a te s in v o lv in g th e u se o f m u ltip lie r w ere all d o n e o n th e desk co m p u ter, w hich takes m o re tim e th a n elec­ tro n ic c o m p u te rs n o d o u b t b u t p e rm its m u c h g re a te r qu a lity co n ­ tro l o v er th e d a ta a t all stages o f p ro cessin g . T h e p o p u la tio n sa m p le d th u s w as o f fa rm s ab o v e 20 ac re s in o p e ra tio n a l size. A few w o rd s in ju s tific a tio n o f th is p a r tic u la r fig u re a re called for. A s a m a tte r o f fact, th e re is n o sig n ifican ce a tta c h e d to 20 acres as such. F a rm s ab o v e 20 acres a re b ig no d o u b t b y In d ia n s ta n d a rd s , b u t h o w b ig is big? W h a t we have b e e n after, b e in g m o re in te re s te d in th e re d re v o lu tio n th a n in th e g re e n one, is really to get a t w h a t m a y b e called th e ‘capitalist fa rm e rs ’. U n d e r I n d ia n c o n d itio n s m a n y fa rm e rs m a y o p e ra te fa rm s sm aller th a n 2 0 acres o n c a p ita lis t lines, w h ereas m a n y a fa rm above 2 0 acres m ig h t n o t q u a lify to be a c a p ita list fa rm . B u t th e 're a so n w hy we sa m p le d a p o p u la tio n d e fin e d by size a n d n o t b y its c a p ita list c h a ra c te ristic s is th a t o n e o f o u r p u rp o se s h a s b e e n p recisely to discover w h a t co n stitu tes a capitalist farm er,

Table 1: Large Farms in the Districts, 1967-68 District

Gurdaspur Amritsar Kapurthala Jullundur Hoshiarpur Rupar Ludhiana Ferozepur Bhatinda Sangrur Patiala Total

(2 )



59,000 84,000 24,000 56,000 1 ,1 1 , 0 0 0 1 0 ,0 0 0

48,000 1,26,000 8 6 ,0 0 0

1,18,000 70,000 7,92,000

* Rounded to 'nearest thousand.

No of Farms Percentage of above 20 Acres*' Big Farms to Total No of Farms (4) (3) 1,700 5,600

2 .8 8

6.67 4.58

1 ,0 0 0

500 1,700 300

2 .6 8

2 ,0 0 0 2 0 ,0 0 0

13,000 1 1 ,0 0 0 1 0 ,0 0 0

67,000

■'

1.53 3.00 4.17 15.87 15.12 9.32 14.29 8.57

Size of Land Owned (in 000 Acres)

Size of Land Possessed (in 000 Acres)

Size of Land Cultivated (in 000 Acres)

(5)

(6 )

(7)

61.7 256.0 31:2 44.3 74:1 . 1 2 .2 58.4 689.1 563.7 363.9 348.8 2506.4

49:4 263.4 36.0 48:7 71.1

45.8 243.1 32.6 47.1. 58.8 7.1 64.3 801.9 609.7 367.7 340.9 2619.0

1 0 .8

64,6 807.6 619.7 376.9 353.9 2702.1

Rudra, M ajid, Talib : Big Farmers of Punjab

(1)

Total No of Farms*

15

16 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation if su c h a c a te g o ris a tio n p ro v es u sefu l. M o st o f th e c a p ita list fa rm e rs, we h av e p re s u m e d , w o u ld h av e a t le a st 2 0 acres o f cultivated la n d . T h e ratio n ale o f c u ttin g o u t a p o p u latio n o f farm s ab ove 2 0 ac re s w as m e re ly to enclose in it a very la rg e p o r tio n o f w h a t m a y e v e n tu a lly q u a lify as b e in g c a p ita list farm s. O u r e s tim a te o f th e to ta l n u m b e r o f fa rm s above 20 acres in P u n ja b is 6 6,600 c o v e rin g a b o u t 2 4 ,7 5 ,0 0 0 a c re s o f o w n e d la n d , a b o u t 2 6 ,9 5 ,0 0 0 ac re s o f la n d possessed a n d 26,13,000 acres o f la n d u n d e r c u ltiv a tio n . A n id e a o f th e e x p a n sio n o f larg e-scale fa rm in g is o b ta in e d b y n o tin g th a t la n d ow ned by th e b ig farm ers in c re a s e d b e tw e e n 1955-56 a n d 1967-68. b y a b o u t 9.5 p e r cent. T h is av erag e h id e s a s ig n ific a n t ra n g e o f v a ria tio n in th e rates o f ex p an sio n . F arm s o f th e size g ro u p 20-25 acres e x p a n d e d only b y 4 p e r cen t, w h e re a s th o se o f th e size g ro u p 100-150 acres increased ^b y a b o u t 40 p e r cent! M o st o f th e a d d itio n to size to o k p la c e th r o u g h p u rc h a s e s . A s to th e d e g re e o f m e c h a n is a tio n , o u r e stim a te o f th e n u m b e r o f tra c to rs .in u se a m o n g th ese fa rm e rs in 1967-68 is 21,000, th a t o f tube-w ells a n d p u m p -se ts 47,000. A n id e a o f th e e x tre m e ly ra p id ra te o f g ro w th o f m e c h a n isa tio n o f th ese fa rm s c a n b e h a d f ro m T ab le 2. A s to th e eq u afly fast ra te a t w h ic h c a p ita l fo rm a tio n h a s ta k e n place, th e fig u res in T ab le 3 a re tell-tale. A n id e a as to how th e state has been h e lp ­ in g th e g ro w th o f c a p ita lis m in a g ric u ltu re is given by th e follow­ in g . O f th e R s 29 c ro re in v ested in tr a c to rs in 1968, as m u c h as R s 7.7 c ro re w as ack n o w led g ed as h a v in g b ee n o b ta in e d fro m Table 2: Growth o f Mechanisation No of Tractors Purchased Purchased Purchased Purchased Purchased Purchased Purchased

before 1950 during 1950-60* during 1960-64 during 1965 during 1966 during 1967 during 1968**

No of Tube-Wells and Pump-Sets

330 1 ,0 1 0

2,465 2,975 4,590 5,450 4,040’*

3,775 8 ,1 1 0

5,160 10,680 13,535 5,625**

* The figures in the table do not represent the actual additions that—took plade at different dates but those dates in 1967-68. ** ThS dropjn the .figures for 1968 is explained by the fact that the investiga­ tion took place halfway through the year 1968-69.

Rudra, M d jid , Talib : B ig Farmers o f Punjab 17 th e sta te .b y w ay o f assistan ce. A g a in o u t o f th e a m o u n t o f R s 19 crore re p re se n tin g inv estm en t in pu m p -sets a n d tube-w ells, R s 2.9 c ro re w as re c e iv e d b y w ay o f assistan ce. . T h e in fo rm a tio n we h av e b e e n a b le to collect a b o u t th e social ch aracteristics a n d co n n e c tio n s o f th e b ig fa rm e rs o f P u n ja b belie certain- im p re ssio n s o n e h a s h a d a b o u t th e p h e n o m e n o n . T h u s, th e re h a s b e e n q u ite a lo t o f ta lk a b o u t a n ew class o f g e n tlem en fa rm e rs e m e rg in g , c re a te d o u t o f ex -a rm y m e n , re tire d civil se r­ vants, b u sin e ssm e n ta k in g u p a g ric u ltu re a s a n in d u stry , etc. O u r survey reveals th a t w h atev er th e ir p re se n t q u a n titativ e significance o r w h a te v e r q u a n tita tiv e sig n ific a n c e th e y m ig h t assum e in th e fu tu re , p erso n s o th e r th a n th o se w h o h av e always b ee n p e a s a n ts o r la n d lo rd s as y et p lay q u ite a n in sig n ifican t ro le in th e tra n s fo r­ m a tio n th a t is ta k in g p lace in P u n ja b a g ric u ltu re . L a rg e fa rm e rs o f a rm y a n d civil se rv a n t o rig in d o n o t ex ceed 3 p e r c en t o f the w hole lot, w h ereas 92 p e r cen t o f th e resp o n d en ts claim ed cu ltiv a­ tio n as th e o n ly o c c u p a tio n th e y h av e e v e r h a d . T h e m ix tu re o f fa rm in g w ith o th e r o c c u p a tio n s — tr a d e o r in d u s try — also fails to b e revealed. 96.7 p e r c e n t o f th e fa rm e rs d e n ie d th ey h a d any su b sid iary o ccu p atio n . O n ly 1 p e r cen t o f th e farm ers w ere fo u n d to h av e college-level e d u c a tio n , w h e re a s 69 p e r c e n t w ere e s tim a te d to b e illite ra te . E d u c a tio n c o u ld n o t th e re fo re have p lay ed m u c h p a r t in th e g re e n re v o lu tio n . T h is does n o t ru le o u t th e p ro b a b ility o f c e rta in aspects o f th e ir p e rfo rm a n c e b e in g co m ­ p a ra tiv e ly b e tte r a m o n g th e relatively m o re e d u c a te d fa rm e rs a m o n g th e 31 p e r cen t th a t is lite ra te — a p o in t th a t is b e in g looked into. W e shall p re s e n t so m e in te re s tin g fin d in g s w h ic h re late to th e p e rfo rm a n c e o f b ig fa rm e rs in re sp e c t o f th e h ig h -y ie ld in g Table 3: Capital Formation

Item of Capital Stock Tractors Pump-sets and tube-wells Trollies, threshers, winnowers, seed drillers, etc Draught cattle, bullocks, ' cows, all other equipment and buildings Total

Book Value (Rs Crore) 1968 1960-61 3.6 1 .6

29.0 19.0

0.5

5.7

65.3 71.0

145.7 199.4



18 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation varieties. It w ould a p p e a r th a t b etw een 1966-67 a n d 1967-68 there w as -a b ig sh ift o f la n d fro m o r d in a r y v a rieties o f w h e a t, rice, m aize, bajra a n d su g a rc a n e to c o rre sp o n d in g im p ro v e d 'varieties, b u t th ese shifts w ere a c c o m p a n ie d by s h a rp d ro p s in yield' p e r a c re . T h e r e is o n ly o n e h ig h -y ie ld in g vatiety , n am ely , L R M e x ic a n , th e y ie ld p e r a c re o f w h ic h w e n t u p b e tw e e n 1966-67 and. 1967-68. I n th e case o f rice, th e p e r ac re y ie ld o f T N 1 d r o p p e d a lm o s t by a th ird , b u t in th is p a r tic u la r case th e re w as n o in c re a se in acreag e. I n th e case o f o rd in a ry seeds, y ield p e r a c re in c re a s e d fo r bajra, m a iz e a n d ric e , b u t d e c lin e d fo r c o tto n a n d w h e a t. O n ly in th e ca se o f c o tto n , how ever, d id the av erage y ie ld p e r a cre o f b o th im p ro v e d a n d ' o rd in a r y v a rieties declin e. I n th e case o f w h e a t, th o u g h th e y ield p e r a cre o f b o th th e desi a n d all ' th e im p ro v e d v a rie tie s (e x c e p t L R M e x ic a n ) d e c lin e d , th e o v erall a v e ra g e y ield in c re a s e d as a re su lt o f th e sh ift o f la n d fro m o rd in a ry v a rie tie s to im p ro v e d v arieties. W h ile th is m o v e m e n t in o pposite d ire c tio n o f acrea g e a n d yield p e r a cre is n o d o u b t o f significance, we d e lib e ra te ly re fra in fro m d ra w in g a n y g e n e ra lise d co n clu sio n s. T h e r e c an be a w h o le lo t o f p la u sib le e x p la n a tio n s o f w hy th e av erag e p e r a c re y ie ld o f th e im p ro v e d v a rie tie s is less th a n th a t o b se rv e d in c o n tro lle d p lo ts a n d w h y th e av erag e y ield fell so d ra stic a lly w h ile a c reag e in c re a s e d su b sta n tia lly b e tw e e n 1966-67 a n d 1967-68. T h e av a ila b ility o f fe rtilise r is o n ly o n e c o n sid e ra tio n a n d th e n o te w o rth y fact fro m th a t p o in t o f view th a t gets re v e ale d is th a t th e d e c lin e in th e y ield o f im p ro v e d v a rie tie s o f w h e a t h as b e e n a ss o c ia te d w ith a lo w e rin g o f th e p e r a c re in p u t o f c h em ic al fer­ tilisers. O u r e stim a te s fo r n itr o g e n a n d p o ta s s iu m c o n te n t are 80 .6 4 k g o f n itro g e n in 1966-67 as a g a in s t 67.72 k g 'in 1967-68 a n d 5.05 kg o f p o tassiu m i n 1966-67 a s ag ain st 2.79 kg in 1967-68. T h is fa c to r h a s o b v io u sly p la y e d a p a r t, b u t w h a t o th e r facto rs h av e b e e n m a te ria l a n d w ith w h a t re la tiv e w eig h ts re m a in s to b e f u r th e r lo o k e d into. T h e d eclin e in th e pm ' ac re yield o f th e h ig h -y ie ld in g v arietie s d id n o t leave u n a ffe c ted th e p ro fita b ility o f the f a rm in g business. W e have, o f course, n o t en g ag ed ourselves in an y d etailed calcula­ tio n s o f p ro fit o r even o f in co m e, given all th e w ell k n o w n c o m ­ p lic a tio n s o f id e n tify in g a n d im p u tin g v a rio u s in p u ts in k in d . W e have, how ever, collected fig u res o f n e t cash re ce ip ts d e fin e d as sale re c e ip ts m in u s cash e x p e n se s o n seed, fertilisers, m a n u r e a n d la b o u r, b o th p e rm a n e n tly a n d casu ally em ployed, . a n d o th e r

Rudra, M a jid , Talib : B ig Farmers o f Punjab 19 c u r r e n t ite m s , a n d th e cost ■s tru c tu re ■tu r n s 'o u t to be as' given in T ab le 4. A s c a n b e seen, th e n e t p o sitio n as d e fin e d ab ove h a s o n th e w h o le re m a in e d u n c h a n g e d . A s ■a m a tte r o f fact, th e ca sh b a la n c e p e r fa rm is lo w er in 1967-68 th a n in 1966-67, b u t th e d ifferen ces m a y n o t a fte r all b e sig n ifican t. T h u s w hile cash ex p e n d itu re ' w e n t u p b y 31 p e r c e n t, sale receip ts w e n t u p by 25 p e r cent. In v e s tm e n t in w o rk in g cap ital d id n o t th e re fo re give a n y re tu rn s w h atso ev er. T h is is th e av erag e p ic tu re J e r all th e b ig fa rm e rs. C o m p a ris o n o v er d iffe re n t size g ro u p s w o u ld y ield fu r th e r in te re s tin g re su lts, b u t w e sh all r e f r a in fro m g o in g in to th a t m a tte r h e re . I t m ay, how ever, b e m e n tio n e d th a t th e ra n g e o f n e t c a sh re c e ip ts v a rie s fro m a b o u t R s 6,000 p e r a n n u m fo r th e 20-25 a c re size g ro u p to a b o u t R s 55,000 p e r a n n u m for those h av in g 150 acres a n d m o re. W e fin d th a t 92 p e r cen t o f th e b ig fa rm e rs re p o r t to h av e b ee n fa rm e rs all alo n g ; th e n u m b e r o f fa rm e rs w ho have a rm y o r civil Table 4: Cost Structure o f Big-Farms Item of Cost

Seeds Fertilisers Manures Permanent labourers Casual labourers Other cash items Total cash expenditure Total sales receipts Net cash receipts

Per Farm Cash Expenditure in 1966-67 (Rs)

Per Farm Cash Expenditure in 1967-68 (Rs)

515 1,160 215 1,030 1,265 1,680 5,860 16,340 10,480

645 1,750 300 1,330 1,630 2,040 7,660 17,340 9,680

Table 5: Distribution o f Large Farmem According to Caste Caste Jat Sikh Gujar Khamboj Non-Jat Sikh Others Total

Percentage 80.06 1.75 4.39 3.25 6.55 1 0 0 .0 0

20 Agrarian Relations and' Accumulation serv ice b a c k g ro u n d is less th a n 4 p e r c e n t o f th e to ta l; 69 p e r c e n t o f th e fa rm e rs a re illite ra te ; th o se h a v in g e d u c a tio n u p to college level a n d b e y o n d b e in g less th a n 4 p e r c e n t; 97 p e r ce n t o f th e fa rm e rs d o n o t h a v e a n y su b s id ia ry o c c u p a tio n ; n d 98 p er c e n t o f th e fa rm e rs h av e th e eld est m a le m e m b e rs as fa rm e rs (T ables 6 to 8 ). I t is tru e th o u g h th a t 3 9 p e r c e n t o f th e f a rm in g h o u se h o ld s h av e a d u lt m a le m e m b e rs o th e r th a n th e ' h e a d h a v ­ in g som e n o n -a g ric u ltu ra l o ccu p atio n s as su b sid ia ry occupations. T h e n u m b e r o f b ig f a c e r s , w ho m ig h t have b e e n lan d lo rd s before h a s v e ry likely b e e n u n d e rre p o rte d , b u t th e re is n o rea so n w hy arm y, civil service o r c o m m e rc ia l b a c k g ro u n d sh o u ld b e u n d e rs ta te d . I t is q u ite p ossible th a t th e 8 p e r ce n t o f b ig fa rm ers w h o h av e n o n -fa rm in g b a c k g ro u n d o r th e 4 p e r c e n t o f fa rm e rs w h o h av e su c h e d u c a tio n as m ig h t q u a lify th e m to b e d e sc rib e d as ‘g e n tle m e n ’ a re th e R o b esp ierres a n d D a n to n s o f th e so-called

Table 6: Age Distribution and Education Level o f Heads o f Households o f Large Farmers Age Group

Per Cent Level of Heads Education

20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60 + Total

1 0 .8 8

14.71 28.66 2 1 .6 8

24.07 1 0 0 .0 0

Level of Education

Illiterate Up to primary Up to secondary Up to college Highly educated Total

Per Cent

6 8 .6 6

13.40 ' 14.23 2.71 1 .0 0 . 1 0 0 .0 0

Table 7: Previous M a in Occupation o f Heads of Households o f Large Farmers Occupation No previous occupation Landlord Army Civil service Industry Others Total

Percentage 91.72 0 .2 1

1.47 1.26 — 5.34 1 0 0 .0 0

R udra, M a jid , Talib : B ig Farmers o f Punjab 21 g re e n re v o lu tio n , b u t w h a t c a n b e said as o f n o w is th a t th e y a re q u a lita tiv e ly a n u n im p o r ta n t factor. T ab le 9 gives so m e in te re s tin g in fo rm a tio n o n th e g ro w th p a t­ te rn s o f th e la rg e farm s. T h e larg e fa rm s h av e becom e, in th e c o u rse o f th e last 14 y e a rs— th a t is to say, sin ce th e d e c la ra tio n o f th e so cialist o b jectiv e fo r th e c o u n try — larg e r, th e r a te o f e x p a n s io n b e in g h ig h e r, th e b ig g e r th e in itia l size. T h e big g est size g ro u p , th a t is abo v e 150 acres, d o n o t show a n y e x p a n sio n , b u t c o n s id e rin g th e n u m b e r o f o b se rv a tio n s in th a t la st g ro u p , it is n o t p o ssib le to say w h e th e r th is in d ic a te s a re a l c h a n g e in th e p a tte r n th a t holds all o v er th e ra n g e fro m 20 acres to 150 acres. T a b le 10 rev eals th a t th e la rg e r fa rm e rs a re , o r a t least claim to be, p re d o m in a n tly c u ltiv a to rs o f o w ned lan d . H ow ever, th e re is sy stem atically a te n d e n c y to cu ltiv ate m o re la n d th a n th ey own: th e p ro p o rtio n o f n e t le a sin g in re m a in s a ro u n d 1 0 p e r cen t betw een 25 acre! a n d 50 acres b u t b e y o n d th a t the m a rg in reaches 2 0 p e r cen t. T h e r e h a s th u s b e e n tr a n s f e r o f la n d fro m th e sm a lle r c u ltiv a to rs to b ig fa rm e rs — th ro u g h sale, as seen in T able 9, as w ell as th ro u g h le a sin g , as se e n in T ab le 10. T h e o ld q u e s tio n o f th e ec o n o m ie s a n d d ise co n o m ie s go in g w ith th e size o f fa rm s gets so m e n ew in p u ts o f in fo rm a tio n fro m several o f o u r tables. O f c o u rse an y te n d e n c y rev ealed h e re w o u ld b e c o n fin e d o n ly to b ig fa rm s a n d th e re is n o re a s o n to believe th a t t h e s a m e te n d e n c y s h o u ld o p e ra te below th e 2 0 -a cre size.

Table 8: Fam ily. Involvement in Non-Agncultural Activities (Percentage) Households with Households with Eldest Head having Male Member Other Subsidiary Occupation than Head having a Non-Agricultural Occupation None Army Civil service Industry Others". Total

98.95 0.15 0.40 0.03 0.47 1 0 0 .0 0

.

96.74 — 2.26 0.94 0.06

1 0 0 .0 0

'

22

Size Groups of Land Possessed (in Acres)

(1 ) 20-25 25-30 ■ 30-40 40-50 50-75 75-100 100-150 150 + Total

No of Farms

Total Land Ancestral or Allotted in 1955-56 ( in 000 Acres)

Purchase of Land during the Period

(2 )

(3)

(4)

1 2 ,1 2 0

13,196 12,857 1 2 ,8 6 8

10,135 4,075 1,051 279 67,800

251.1 308.5 349.8 . 473.7 462.8 251.7 82.3 81.0 2291.5

+ 11.81 8.85 9.52 6.07 18.94 29.11 38.32

— 13.91

Total Land Owned in 1967-68

Sale of Land during the Period

Increase or Decrease in Size of Land Owned due to any Other Reason (Percentages of Column 3) (6 ) (5) -1.53. 1 .1 2 1 .6 6

1.04 1.38 6.87 '

— — 2 .1 0

(7)

- 6 .2 1 + 0.70 + 2.25 + 2.06 -1.23 - 1 .1 1

— — -2.44

104.07 108.44 1 1 0 .1 1

107.09 116.34 121.13 138.22 -

1 0 0 .0 0

109.35

Agrarian Relations and Accumulation

Table 9: Growth o f Large Farms According to Size. Groups of- Land Possessed

Rudra, M a jid , Talib : B ig Farmers o f Punjab 23 S u b je c t to th is re s e rv a tio n , h e re a re a few in te re s tin g fe a tu re s o bserv ed : (a) In te n s ity o f c ro p p in g declin es sy stem atically as fa rm size in ­ creases (T ab le 10). ■ (b ) A s to th e c a sh c o u n te r p a r t o f th e p e r a c re receip ts, e x p e n ­ d itu re a n d gross incom e, th e p a tte r n revealed is: no. size effect u p to 75 acres; b e y o n d th a t, steep rise in all th e th ree. (c) P r o p o rtio n o f c a sh p a y m e n t to p a y m e n t in k in d to fa rm se r­ v a n ts rises system atically w ith size. C a s h p a y m e n t is less th a n k in d p a y m e n t u p to 7 5 acres; b e y o n d th a t p o in t it goes above (T able 12). (d ) T h e in te n s ity o f u se o f th e services _o f fa rm se rv a n ts is m o re o r less in v a ria n t w ith fa rm size: th e ra te is a b o u t 30 acres p e r se rv a n t. {e) V alu e o f c a p ita l e q u ip m e n t (tra c to rs , p u m p s a n d o th e rs) p e r farm , o f course, goes u p w ith fa rm size b u t b eyond the 7 5-acre lim it, c a p ita l e q u ip m e n t p er acre too goes u p w ith size. T h e sa m e is tru e o f c a p ita l e x p e n d itu re o n b u ild in g s, im p ro v e ­ m e n t o f la n d , etc (T ab le 13). (f) V alu e o f o u tp u t p e r gross a cre c u ltiv a te d does n o t d e p e n d o n fa rm size u p to th e 7 5 -a c re lim it; th e n it goes u p sh a rp ly (T a b le 11). Table 10: L a n d Relations and Size Groups, 1967-68 Size Group

(1 ) 20-25 25-30 30-40 40-50 50-75 75-100 100-150 150 + Total

Total Ratio of Land Land Owned Rented (in 0 0 0 In to Acres) Total Land Owned (2 ) (3) 261 334 385 507 487 311 114 81 2506

Ratio of Ratio of Ratio of Ratio of Land Land Land Gross Rented Possessed Cultivat-Cropped Out to to Total ed to Area to Total Land Total Land Land Owned Land Cultiva­ Owned Owned ted (4) (6 ) (5) (7)

0.03 0.08

0.03 0.05

1 .0 1

1 .0 0

1.04

1 .0 2

0 .1 0

0 .0 1

1 .1 0

0 .1 1

0 .0 2

1.09

0 .2 1

0 .0 0

1 .2 0

0.60 0.06



.





0 .0 2

O.1 O

0 .0 2

1.06 1.06 0.98 1.08

1.09 1.06 1.14 1.04 1.06 0.73 1.04

1.56 1.43 1.43 1.36 1.37 , 1.24 1.03 0.85 1.36

24 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation. (g) V alu e o f o u tp u t p e r n e t a cre c u ltiv a te d d e cre ases u p to. th e 7 5 -acre lim it, th e n it goes up, o r a t le a st it does n o t d e cre ase a n y m o re (T able 11). (h ) P ro p o r tio n o f sales to v alu e o f p ro d u c tio n ' does n o t v a ry w ith size over a c e rta in ra n g e ; .th e n it goes up . T h e p o in t o f b re a k is 50 acres in 1966-67 a n d . 100 acres in 1967-68 (T able 11). (i) Y ie ld p e r a c re o f m o st o f th e im p o r ta n t cro p s is h ig h e r th a n th e ' sta te av erage fo r fa rm e rs above 2 0 acres ta k e n as a ■w hole. W e a re h e re faced w ith . a m o st in te re s tin g fin d in g . ■T h e r e a re Table 11: Production Per'Acre and Percentage Marketed, 1967-68 Size Group in Acres (!)

Value. of Production in Rs Per Gross Acre Per Net Acre (3) • (2 ) .

20-25 25-30 30-40 40-50 50-75 75-100 100-150 150+ All groups

.

523.25 514.25 494.00 504.51 504.13 708.24 643.77 725.58 539.10

:

814.28 734.92 i 706.82 684.15 672.82 883.33 . 660.20 868.80 734.27

1967-68 (4) 61 57 60 62 61 59 73 87 61 '

Table 12: Cash a nd k i n d Payments Per Farm Servant, 1 9 6 6 -6 7 and 1 9 6 7 -6 8 Proportion of Cash to Kind Payment (1967-68)

(1 )

Proportion of Cash to Kind Payment ' (1966-67) (2 ) .

20-25 25-30 30-40 40-50 50-75 75-100 100-150 150 + All groups

0.58. 0.60 0.69 0.75 0.97 2.36 1.26 . 1.92 0.91

0.62 0.82 0.98 0.62 0.93 2.54 1.67

Size Group in Acres

(3)

1 .8 6

0.97

;

Table 13: Stock o f Tractors, lube-wells and Other Equipment with Large Farmers According to Size Group in 1967-68 in Punjab Tractors Value in ■ Mn Rs Per Rs Farm

Assistance in Number* Rs Per ■ Mn Rs Farm

. (2 )

(3)

(4)

(5)

20-25 25-30 30-40 40-50 50-75 • 75-100 100-150 150 + All groups

1,945 1,760 4,270 4,050 5,250 2,240 700 650 •20,800

23.6 21.4 56.5 52.4 76.5 30.9 22.4 9.6 293.4

1,900 1,600 4,400 4,000' 7,600 7,500

7.0 1.3 10.5 14.4

1 ,0 0 0

2 1 .1

2 ,1 0 0

• Rounded to nearest 5.

2 1 ,0 0 0

34,400 4,300

1 .6

17.5 3.6 77.l

(6 )

(7)

6001

7,435

1 0 0

6 ,1 1 0

800

8,730 9,060 • 9,850 4,080 — 1,290 46,890

400 16,700 12,900 1 ,1 0 0

25. 7 20.9 28.7 31.4 47.5 30.6 — 5.9 192.5

2 ,0 0 0

1,600 2 ,2 0 0 2 ,0 0 0

4,700 7,400 — 2 1 ,1 0 0

2,800

9.5 4.1 3.0 3.3 8.4

800 300 2 0 0

1 1 .8

300 800

0 .6

1 0 0

12.9 ■19.4 5.9 7.4 3 .2 70.4

— ■— 29.3 ' 105,000 ■— —

5.6 4.5

500 300 900 1 ,0 0 0

1,900 1,400 7,000 11,SOO 1 ,0 0 0 \

M ajid,Talib : Big Farmers of Punjab

(1 )

Other Equipment Tube-Wells and Pump-Sets Assistance in Value in Value in Mn Rs Per Mn Rs Per Mn Rs Per Rs Farm Rs Farm Rs Farm (1 0 ) (9) ■ (1 2 ) (13) (1 1 ) (8 )

R u nra,

Size Group Number* (Acres)

25

26 Agrarian' Relations and Accumulation som e aspects o f fa rm , ec o n o m ics w h ic h d o n o t seem to d e p e n d o n size; th e re a re so m e o th e rs th a t seem to ■v a ry w ith size o v e r th e e n tire ra n g e b f size o b se rv e d . B u t fo r q u ite a n u m b e r o f v a ria b le s, th e re does n o t seem to b e a n y size effect over a ra n g e o f f a r m size, b e y o n d w h ic h th e re is, a n d q u ite a m a rk e d one. A m o n g th e fa rm e rs o f P u n ja b it seem s th a t such a b re a k in g p o in t com es so m ew h ere a ro u n d 75 acres. W e w o u ld also like to h a z a rd th e guess th a t th e re w o u ld b e a n o th e r b r e a k in g p o in t som ew here b etw een 0 a n d 2 0 acres, th e ra n g e ex clu d ed f r o m th e p re s e n t study. T h e r e c a n b e n o th in g a p rio r i a g a in st th e h y p o th e sis o f th e re b e in g such disco n tin u ities. T h e re is n o re aso n w hy variables re la tin g to fa rm e c o n o m ics sh o u ld rev eal c o n tin u o u s p a tte r n s o f d e p e n d e n c e o n fa rm size. O n th e o th e r h a n d , fa rm e co n o m ists as well as ru ra l sociologists a re in th e h a b it o f ta lk in g a b o u t th ree c ate g o rie s o f fa rm e rs: sm all p e a sa n ts, m id d le p e a sa n ts a n d b ig farm ers. M a rx is ts in p a r tic u la r a re w o n t to talk in te rm s o f th e re b e in g su c h sub-classes a m o n g th e p e a sa n try . Now, if all th e im ­ p o rta n t v a ria b le s re la tin g to fa rm e c o n o m ics a re re p re se n ta b le b y c o n tin u o u s fu n c tio n s o f size, th e n these co n cep ts o fb ig , sm all a n d m id d le m u st b e q u ite v acu o u s; fo r how b ig is b ig a n d how sm all is sm all? O n th e o th e r h a n d , if th e re a re significant d isco n ­ tin u itie s in th e size effect curves, th e n th e re is e v e ry a d v a n ta g e in a c c e p tin g these b re a k in g p o in ts as m a r k in g off one sub-class fro m a n o th e r. In th e p re c e d in g , we h a d set o u t to study n o t j u s t large-scale Table 14: Capital Expenditure on Buildings, Improvement o f Land and Repairs According to Size Group o f Holding in Punjab Size Group (in Acres)

1966 -67 Rs Rs Per Million Farm (2 ) (3)

(1 ) 20-25 25-30 30-40 40-50 50-75 75-100 100-150 150+ AH groups

'

16.6. 23.1 31.6 15.2 49.4 31.7 13.3 1 .6

183.1 -

1,400 1,800 2,4001 ,2 0 0

5,000 7,700 12,700 6,600 2,700 ■

1967-- 6 8 Rs Rs Per Million Farm (4) (5) 9.7 9.8 17.2 25.9 20.5 1 1 .1 0 .8

5.9 1 0 1 .2

800 700 1,300 2 ,0 0 0 2 ,0 0 0

2,700 800 ■2 1 , 1 0 0 1,500

Average of Cols 3 and 5 (6 ) 1 ,1 0 0

1,250 1,8501,600 3,500 5,200 6,750 13,850 2 ,1 0 0

R udra, M a jid , Talib ■: B ig Farm ers'o f Punjab 27 f u m i n g b u t cap italist fa rm in g , if such a categ ory co u ld b e defined scientifically a n d id e n tifie d em pirically. T h e re a so n w hy we took a sa m p le o f la rg e fa rm s is th a t, to d ra w a sa m p le , we have to have a d e fin itio n o f th e p o p u la tio n a n d w e d id n o t hav e a t o u r d isp o sa l a n y o p e ra tio n a l d e fin itio n o f a ■cap italist fa rm e r, w ith th e h e lp o f w h ic h w e c o u ld id e n tify c a p ita lis t fa rm e rs a n d d ra w u p a list o f su ch fa rm e rs in e a c h v illag e d ra w n in th e first stage sa m p lin g . T h e re a s o n w h y w e h av e d ra w n a sam p le o f la rg e fa rm e rs as a s u rro g a te fo r c a p ita lis t fa rm e rs is th a t, w e have a s s u m e d th e in te rs e c tio n o f th e s e t o f c a p ita list fa rm s a n d th e se t o f la rg e fa rm s to c o n ta in m o st o f th e e le m e n ts o f th e se t of cap italist farm s. W h ich , o f course, d o es n o t m e a n th a t m o st largescale fa rm s a re c a p ita lis t fa rm s; th o u g h it does m e a n th a t m o st c a p ita lis t fa rm s a re (a ss u m e d to b e , in P u n ja b ) large. W h a t th e n a re th e p rin c ip a l c h aracteristics o f cap italist farm s? W h ile th e r e is p e rh a p s n o rig o ro u s d e fin itio n o f w h a t c o n stitu tes a c a p ita lis t fa rm e r, th e follow ing fe a tu re s m a y b e ex p ected to be o b se rv e d in h im , esp ecially in P u n ja b : > (a) a capitalist fa rm e r w ill te n d to cultivate his la n d him se lf ra th e r th a n give it o u t o n lease; (b) h e w o u ld te n d to u se h ir e d la b o u r in a m u c h g re a te r p r o ­ p o r tio n th a n fa m ily la b o u r; (c) h e w o u ld te n d to u se fa rm m a c h in e ry ; (d) h e w o u ld b e m a rk e t-o rie n te d , i e, h e w o u ld te n d to m a rk e t a n im p o r ta n t sh a re o f his p ro d u c e ; a n d (f) h e w o u ld b e p ro fit-m in d e d , i e, h e w o u ld te n d to so o rg an ise his p r o d u c tio n as to y ie ld a h ig h ra te o f re tu rn o n in v e stm e n ts. I f th e a b o v e ex p e c te d fe a tu re s a re th e e x p lic a n d u m , we h av e u s e d as' e x p lic a ta th e follo w in g v ariab les: ( 1 ) p e rc e n ta g e o f la n d r e n te d o u t to to ta l la n d ow ned; ( 2 ) w a g e p a y m e n t in c a sh p e r a c re o f fa rm size ( X 2 ); (3) v a lu e o f m o d e r n c a p ita l e q u ip m e n t p e r a c re o f f a r m size ( X 3 ); (4) p e rc e n ta g e o f p ro d u c e m a rk e te d to to ta l p ro d u c e ( X 4); a n d (5) c a sh p ro fit ' p e r a c re ( X 5 ). A ll ex cep t ' th e first o f t h e v a ria b le s liste d above a re s tu d ie d in a d is a g g re g a te d fash io n ; t h a t is, th e y a re c a lc u la te d f ° r e a c h in ­ d iv id u a l sam p le fa rm f o r a n a ly tic a l p u rp o se s. T h e re a so n fo r th e

,

28 A g ra ria n Relations and AccumuLation e x c e p tio n w ill b e d iscu ssed shortly. T h e fo u r v aria b le s u s e d fo r an aly tical p u rp o ses a re d e sig n a te d b y X 2 , X 3 , X 4 a n d X 5 ^ T h e re is, o f co u rse, in an aly sis, a v a ria b le d e s ig n a te d X j a n d t^ a t is • p r o d u c tiv ity d e fin e d as v a lu e o f o u tp u t p e r ac re o f farm size. W e sh all first p re s e n t so m e n e g a tiv e resu lts. I f th e re w e re in ­ d e e d a c a te g o ry o f fa rm e rs w h o w ere c a p ita list fa rm e rs, a n d if c a p ita lis t fa rm e rs w ere to h av e (a ) a h ig h e r ra te o f cash e x p e n ­ d itu r e o n w age' p a y m e n ts ; (b ) a g r e a te r in te n s ity o f u tilis a tio n o f m o d e rn c a p ita l goods p e r a c re o f fa rm la n d ; (c) a g r e a te r m a rk e t o rie n ta tio n ; a n d (d) a h ig h e r r a te o f p ro fit p e r a c re o f fa rm la n d th a n n o n -c a p ita lis t fa rm e rs , th e n o n e w o u ld e x p ect to h a v e stro n g p o sitiv e asso ciatio n s as b etw een th e p a irs o f v a ria b le s X 2 a n d X 3 ; X 2 a n d X 4; X 2 a n d X 5 ; X 3 a n d X 4 ; X 3 a n d X 5 ; a n d X 4 a n d X 5 . O u r d a ta , how ever, fails to in d ic a te a n y s tro n g a sso c ia tio n b e tw e e n a n y o f th e s e p airs. T h a t is to say, m ark et-m in d ed n ess, p ro fit-m in d ed n ess, ten d en cy to em ploy h ired la b o u r, a n d te n d e n c y to use m o d e r n c a p ita l goods, these c h a ra c te ristic s se e m to v ary in d e p e n d e n tly , th u s b e ly in g th e a s s u m p tio n th a t th e se fe a tu re s go to g e th e r, g iv in g rise to th e ex­ isten ce o f a c e rta in c a te g o ry o f fa rm e rs. I t is, o f co u rse, p o ssible to p ic k o u t a n u m b e r o f fa rm e rs w h o h av e X 2 , X 3 , X 4 a n d X 5 all high. B u t if th e v ariab le values a re scattered m o re o r less ew;nly a m o n g all th e q u a d r a n ts d e fin e d by axes d ra w n th ro u g h th e m e a n s , th e n th e re is h a rd ly a n y p o in t in ca llin g th e c o lle ctio n o f p o in ts fa llin g in a n y o n e o f th e q u a d r a n ts as c o n s titu tin g a category. I n o r d e r to d e fin e m e a n in g fu l categ o ries, th e p o in ts m u s t b e su c h as to c o n c e n tra te ih so m e o f th e q u a d r a n ts a n d b e sp a rse in th e o th e rs; th a t is to say, th e v a ria b le s m u st reveal s tro n g p o sitiv e a sso c ia tio n . H a v in g re p o rte d th is v ery im p o r ta n t n eg ativ e fin d in g , we m a y p ro c e e d to give som e' d etails a n d c la rific a tio n s a b o u t th e m e a su re m e n ts involved. T h e first p o in t to p a y a tte n tio n to is th a t, in all cases o f v a lu a tio n o f inputs., w e h av e re stric te d ourselves strictly to th e p a r t tra n s a c te d in m oney, fo re g o in g a n y im p u ta ­ tio n s o f k in d tra n s a c tio n s . T h u s X 2 refers to w a g e p a y m e n ts in cash a n d excludes w ag e p a y m e n ts in k in d . A g a in X 5 is d e fin e d as c ash sale re c e ip ts m in u s c ash expenses, in c lu d in g cash w age p a y m e n ts, d iv id ed b y fa rm size in acres. X 3 refers to m o d e rn e q u ip m e n t as o p p o se d to tra d itio n a l e q u ip m e n t; as su ch e q u ip ­ m e n t, b y d e fin itio n , c a n n o t b e o b ta in e d e x cep t in ex c h an g e o f m o n ey , th e p ro b le m o f im p u ta tio n h a s n o t h a d to be faced h ere.

Rudra, M a jid , Talib : B ig Farmers o f Punjab 29 O n ly in th e case o f X j , r e p re s e n tin g v alu e o f o u tp u t p er a c re o f f a r m l a n d , h a v e w e a c c o m m o d a te d im p u ta tio n s . O u r re a so n fo r a v o id in g im p u ta tio n s is p rim a rily th e d ifficulties a sso c ia te d w ith th e v a lu a tio n o f n o n -m o n e ta ry tra n sa c tio n s. It is well k n o w n th a t th e p ro b le m o f a t w h a t ra te to im p u te fam ily la b o u r o r a t w h a t price to v a lu e c o w d u n g co llected w ith in th e fa rm a n d u se d as m a n u re , d efies th e o re tic a lly sa tisfa c to ry so lu tio n . T h e r e is n o d o u b t, th a t, b y d o in g th is we a re n o t e v e n a p p ro x im a tin g to th e tru e v alu es o f in p u ts o r p ro fits. T h u s , a c o m p a ris o n o f X 2 b e t­ w een tw o fa rm s does n o t c o m p a re th e in te n sitie s w ith w h ic h th ey use la b o u r, b u t th e in te n sitie s w ith w h ich th e y u se la b o u r p a id w ith c a sh w ages. A g ain , a c o m p a ris o n o f X 3 b e tw e e n tw o farm s does n o t m e a n a c o m p a ris o n o f th e ir re la tiv e p ro fita b ilitie s, b tit o f th e m o n e tis e d p a r ts o f th e ir p ro fits. T h is q u a lific a tio n o f th e u su a l a c c o u n tin g c o n c e p ts is, how ever, h e lp fu l to o u r analysis. T h a t is b e c a u se m o n e tis a tio n itse lf m a y b e re g a rd e d a s a c h a ra c te ris tic o f c a p ita list fa rm in g . T h u s X 2 is a c o m p o u n d o f tw o v ariab les, e a c h o f w h ic h is a n in d ic a to r o f th e c a p ita list m o d e o f fa rm in g . T h e sa m e is tr u e o f X 3. T h e second p o in t to p a y a tte n tio n to is th a t v a lu atio n o f capital goods, e v en w h e n d e a lin g w ith such cap ital goods as a re p u r ­ c h a se d a n d sold in th e m a r k e t, is alw ays difficult. A lso, th e q u a lific a tio n ‘m o d e r n ’ (as o p p o se d 1 0 ‘tr a d itio n a l’) h as b e e n , a t le a st in. o u r survey, k ep t som ew h at a m b ig u o u s so th a t th e coverage o f ite m s m a y be e x p e c te d to h av e v a rie d fro m fa rm to fa rm . A s a re s u lt o f a ll th is, d a t a p e r ta in in g to X 3 II).ay be tre a te d as o f m u c h in fe rio r q u a lity as c o m p a re d to d a ta re la tin g to th e o th e r v aria b le s, a n d w e n e e d n o t ta k e to o serio u sly any fa ilu re o f o u r a n a ly sis to rev eal X 3 as a sig n ific a n t e x p la n a to ry v ariab le . W h ile X 2 , X 3, X 4 a n d X 5 fail to rev eal a n y s tro n g positive asso ciatio n s, X j also does n o t seem to be p o sitively a sso c ia te d w ith X 2 o r X 3 o r X 4. T h e r e does, how ever, seem to be a s tro n g p o sitiv e a s s o c ia tio n b e tw e e n X j a n d X 5, th a t is b e tw e e n valu e o f o u tp u t p e r acre a n d cash p ro fit p e r a c re — b etw een p ro d u ctiv ity a n d p ro fita b ility (o f th e fa c to r la n d ). T h is is in d e e d in te re stin g . T h e ■in te r p r e ta tio n we h av e to th in k o f is th a t th e re a re fa rm e rs w h o a re ‘e ffic ie n t’ a n d o th e rs w h o a re ‘in e ffic ie n t’, a n d efficien t fa rm e rs excel in y ield p e r a c re o f fa rm la n d a n d also m ak e a good p ro fit p e r a cre o f 'fa rm la n d , w h e re a s in e ffic ien t farm ers fail in b o th . B u t th e e ffic ie n t fa rm e rs, so d e fin e d , d o n o t show, in c o m : p a ris o n w ith th e in efficien t ones, a n y g re a te r te n d en c y to m a rk e t

30 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation th e ir p ro d u c ts , o r e m p lo y h ire d la b o u r a g a in st c a sh p a y m e n t. G o in g b y th e rev e a le d d e g re e o f a sso c ia tio n b e tw e e n X 3 a n d ■X j a n d X 3 a n d X 5, o n e w o u ld say th a t u s e o f m o d e r n e q u ip m e n t h a s also n o th in g to d o w ith efficien cy in th e above sense. B ut as we have said before, any re su lts involving th e variable X 3 m ay n o t be a c c e p te d w ith o u t f u r th e r tests. W e h av e n o t ta lk e d u p till n o w a b o u t o n e o f th e v ariab les, nam ely, th e p ro p o rtio n o f la n d o w n e d th a t.is leased out. I t w ould a p p e a r th a t o n th e a v erag e th e big fa rm e rs stu d ie d satisfy th is o n e co n d itio n o f b e in g capitalists. O n ly 2. 7 p e r c e n t o f la n d ow ned b y th e farm ers s tu d ie d b y us is g iv en o u t o n re n t. T h e re is likely to b e a m o n g th e se fa rm e rs so m e w h o g iv e o u t a c o n sid e ra b le ■p a r t o f th e ir la n d o n re n t, b u t th e y m u s t be v e ry few. By th e v ery fa c t o f d e fin in g th e p o p u la tio n as o n e o f la rg e c u ltiv ato rs, We have fro m th e o u ts e t e lim in a te d th o se e le m e n ts (o ften loosely ca lle d ‘fe u d a l’) w h o g ive o u t ■th e ir la n d to o th e rs fo r c u ltiv a tio n a n d are, th e re fo re , n o t c a p ita lists. W e have" d r a w n a b la n k in o u r a tte m p t to disco v er an y ex p la n a to ry variab les a m o n g s t X j , X 2 , X 3 , X 4 a n d X 5 ^ W e now m ak e one im p o r ta n t c h a n g e in o u r m o d e o f analysis a n d fo r this we a re re w a rd e d by a w hole lo t o f in te re s tin g p o sitive results. In s te a d o*f tr y in g to tr e a t c a p ita l as a c o n tin u o u s v a ria b le (e g, X 3 ) we n ow tre a t it as a n a ttrib u te . W e co n sid er a classifica­ tio n o f th e fa rm e rs g o in g as follows: C lass A j , fa rm e rs h a v in g n e ith e r p u m p s a n d tu b e -w e llsn o r tra c to rs; C lass A 2, fa rm e rs h a v in g o n ly p u m p s a n d tube-w ells; C lass A 3 , fa rm e rs h a v in g o n ly tra c to rs; a n d C lass A 4 , fa rm e rs h a v in g b o th tra c to rs a n d p u m p s a n d tubew ells. O u r estim ates o f th e n u m b e r o f farm ers o f these f o u r categories in P u n ja b in th e y e a r 1967 are:

A, A2 A3 A4

E s tim a te d N u m b e r o f F a rm e rs ab o v e ■20-A cre " Size 24,200 23,200 5,300 15,200

T h u s , o u t o f th e n e a rly 6 8,000 fa rm e rs e s tim a te d to cu ltiv ate m o re th a n 20 acres, 24,000, o r ■m o re th a n a th ird , m a y be

Rudra, M a jid , Talib : B ig Farmers o f Punjab 31 d e sc rib e d as n o n -m e c h a n is e d ; a b o u t 15,000, o r m o re th a n 20 ' p e r cen t, m a y b e r e g a rd e d as' fu lly m e c h a n ise d . A s a m a t t e r ■o f fact, a la r g e r p e rc e n ta g e o f th e se fa rm e rs m u s t b e re so rtin g ' to m e c h a n is e d fa rm in g . T h o s e ■h a v in g ' tra c to rs o n ly m u s t b e h i r ­ in g th e use o f p u m p s a n d th o se h a v in g p u m p s a n d tu b e-w ells only' m u st' b e , ■in m a n y cases, ■h ir in g in tra c to rs. T h e a c c o m p a n y in g table. p re se n ts th e average' valu es o f th e v a ria b le s X i , X 2 , X 3 a n d X 5 fo r th e se a ttr ib u te . classes as also c e rta in o th e r re le v a n t av erag es. I f ■the. ta b le p e rm its u s to ■d ra w an y co n c lu sio n , th a t is th a t th e o p tim u m d e g re e o f m e c h a n is a ­ tio n seem s to c o n sists i n h a v in g p u m p s a n d tu b e-w ells, b u t ■n o t tra c to rs . T h e a d d itio n o f p u m p s a n d tu b e-w ells ■to fa rm s h a v in g n o n e (c o m p a re A j a n d A 2 ) seem s to have th e resu lt o f in c re a sin g th e ir p e r a c re v a lu e o f o u tp u t as' w ell as p e r ac re p ro fit re a lise d in cash. . B u t th e r e is n o f u r th e r in crease, as a m a tte r o f fact, th e re is p ro b a b ly a d e c re a se , w h e n tra c to rs a re also a d d e d (c o m p a re A 2 a n d A 4 ); o r w h e n , w h ile n o t h a v in g p u m p s a n d tube-w ells, a fa rm possesses tra c to rs (c o m p a re A 2 a n d A 3 ). I n ' te rm s o f e m p lo y m e n t\o f la b o u r, fa rm s h a v in g n e ith e r p u m p s a n d tu b e w ells n o r tra c to rs (A j) a n d fa rm s h a v in g o n ly tra c to rs (A 3 ) seem . to involve th e sa m e a m o u n t o f c a sh p a y m e n t o f w ages; b u t th e tra c to ris e d fa rm s r e q u ire re la tiv e ly m o re o f p e rm a n e n t h a n d s a n d , th e re fo re , re la tiv e ly less o f c a su a l la b o u r. E m p lo y m e n t o f (cash ) w a g e -la b o u r goes u p sh a rp ly w ith th e a d d itio n o f p u m p s a n d tu b e-w ells. T h e d iffe re n c es in th e cash w age b ill b e tw e e n fa rm s h a v in g tra c to r s as w ell as p u m p s a n d tub e-w ells ■(A 4 ) a n d fa rm s h a v in g p u m p s b u t n o tr a c to rs (A j) is n o t sig n ific an t, b u t th a t in th e n u m b e r o f p e r m a n e n t se rv a n ts is. I t is th u s c le a r th a t \the a d d itio n o f p u m p s calls fo r a s u p p le m e n t o f c a su a l la b o u r, w h e re a s th e a d d itio n o f tra c to rs calls fo r a s u p p le m e n t of_perm a n e n t servants. W h e n it com es to m a rk e t o rien tatio n , th e factor m a k in g a d iffe re n c e is th e p o ssessio n o f tra c to rs; th e possessio n o r o th e rw ise o f p u m p s a n d tu b e-w ells d o es n o t seem to m a k e a n y d ifferen ce. G iv e n th a t tra c to risa tio n seem s to low er th e efficiency .o f a farm w h e th e r ju d g e d b y the c rite rio n of o u tp u t p e r acre o r ca sh p r o ­ fit p e r a c re , o n e h a s to lo o k fo r a n e x p la n a tio n fo r th e in tro d u c ­ tio n o f tra c to rs , w h e re th e y d o g et in tro d u c e d . T h e e x p la n a tio n m a y b e e x p e c te d to lie to a la rg e d e g re e in th e size o f farm s. A s c a n b e seen, farm s h a v in g n o m a c h in e s a n d those h a v in g only ■ p u m p s a n d tube-w ells have th e sam e av erage size. B u t farm s th a t

32 Agrarian Relations and Accumulation h av e tr a c to r s h a v e a la rg e r a v erag e size. P u t t i n g it th e o th e r w ay ro u n d , w e m ay say th a t e v en th o u g h the u se of tra c to rs does, n o t in c re a se e ith e r th e v a lu e o f o u tp u t p e r a c re o r cash p ro fit p e r acre, la r g e r fa rm s te n d to go in fo r tra c to rs b ecause o f b e in g u n a b le to c o p e w ith th e d e m a n d s o f c u ltiv a tio n w ith o u t th e use o f tra c to rs. T h e r e m u s t b e in d iv id u a l la rg e fa rm s ■th a t m a k e u se o f tra c to rs to get as m u c h o r m o re o u tp u t p e r a c re a n d p ro fit p e r a c re as a n y sm a lle r f a r m n o t u s in g tra c to rs, for ■we have seen b efo re th a t th e re is n o p u re size effect reflected m th ese variables. B u t th e a v erag e p ic tu re is as g iv e n above. A d m itted ly , , th e in te re s tin g results p re se n te d above p e r ta in m o re to th e ec o n o m ic s o f m e c h a n is a tio n th a n to th e a n a to m y a n d physiology o f th e a n im a l w h ic h h a s ,b e e n n a m e d th e capitalist fa rm e r ev en b efo re his e x isten ce h a s b e e n e stab lish ed .

September■27, 1969; December 27, 1969 and June 27, 1970 '7

2

In Search of the Capitalist Farmer C om m ent R S Rao A S H O K R U D R A h a s m a d e a p e n e tr a tin g analysis o f econom ics o fla rg e -sc a le fa rm in g w ith a view to e m p iric ally id e n ­ tify in g th e c a p ita list farm ers. H e c a m e o u t w ith th e alm o st n e g a tiv e re su lt th a t th e ‘c a p ita lis t f a r m e r ’ m a y n o t exist: “T h e in te re s tin g re su lts above p e r ta in m o re to th e econom ics o f m e c h a n isa tio n th a n to th e a n a to m y a n d physiology o f th e a n im a l w h ic h h a s b een n a m e d th e c a p ita list fa rm e r even before. his ex iste n c e h a s b e e n e sta b lish e d .” T h e p re s e n t n o te lim its its e lf to th e m e th o d o lo g y R u d r a a d o p te d in h is exercise a n d does n o t go in to th e id e n tific a tio n o f c a p ita lis t fa rm e rs in P u n ja b . ' T h e r e c a n n o t b e m u c h d ifferen ce o f o p in io n o n th e d e fin i­ tio n o f a c a p ita list f a r m e r — th o u g h a n u m b e r o f o p e ra tio n a l d if­ ficulties a n d differences a re likely to exist ■w h en o n e tries to q u a n ­ tify. D e fin e d in th e sim p le st te rm s, th e c a p ita list fa rm e r is th e fa r m e r w h o uses h ire d la b o u r fo r th e p ro cess o f p ro d u c in g c o m ­ m o d itie s . a n d u tilises a s u b s ta n tia l p a r t o f h is su rp lu s fo r his b u sin e ss e ith e r to d e e p e n th e c a p ita l o r to w id e n it. I t a p p e a rs R u d r a to o ta k e s th is as a s ta rtin g p o in t a n d defines th e five v a ria b le s for p u rp o se s o f q u a n tific a tio n . T h e y are: (1) P e rc e n ta g e o f la n d r e n te d o u t to to ta l lan d ; (2) W age p a y m e n t in c ash p e r a c re o f fa rm size (X 2 ); (3) V alu e o f m o d e rn c a p ita l e q u ip m e n t p e r a cre o f fa rm sizeW ; (4) P e rc e n ta g e o f p ro d u c e m a rk e te d to to ta l p ro d u c e ( X 4); a n d (5) C a s h p ro fit p e r acre ( X 5). I f a f a rm e r is to b e te rm e d ca p ita list, he sh o u ld have, a c c o r­ d in g t