I.
Green Revolution and Peasant Agriculture
What
is the Green Revolution?
1. Package of Inputs and Modern Varieties (Mvs),
High yielding varieties (HYVs)
2.
Means for increasing surplus
a.
To avoid land
redistribution
b.
Industrial inputs
to production
b. To provide cheap food both as food and feed
See Mexican Miracle
What
is traditionalı Peasant Agriculture?
1. Package of inputs and Traditional Varieties
2. Method of generating stable, dependable yields
without capital investment and input purchases
What
are the criticisms of the green revolution?
1.
Disruption of traditional agriculture
2.
Production instability
3. Increase in inequality due to differential
access to rents
4.
Partial acceptance of GR package by peasant producers
II. Green Revolution vs. Peasant crops
1.
GR: Package of Inputs and Modern Varieties (MVs, HYVs): how do they affect crop
varieties?
OR
a plantıs view of the green revolution
i.
breeding, genetic manipulation to get more energy to grain
reduce
height, foliage
increase
nutrient uptake
ii.
Agrochemical nutrient and biocide packages facilitate these changes
Fertilizer
increases yields
Pesticides
protect monocultures
Herbicides
Reduce
weeds which overcome shorter crops
Enforce
monocultures by division specificity
1. PEASANT: Traditional Varieties
('view
from traditional plant')
i. high, leafy stature to reduce weed competition
ii. lower nutrient uptake adapted to low nutrient
levels, sustaining production for many years
iii. 'mutualist' (polycultural) relationships with
other plants (e.g., the native American corn/beans/squash triad) to maximize
total productivity
2.
GR and the State: Means for increasing surplus
a. To
avoid land redistribution
b. To
provide cheap food
c. GR ideally stimulates industrialization by:
i. increasing
demand for agrochemical inputs (fertilizer factories)
ii.
reducing food costs for industrial workers
d. State subsidizes GR technologies heavily as part
of development drive
2. Peasant: Generate stable, sustainable yields
without external inputs
Subsistence farming
i. Fertilizer from animal source
ii. High intra/interspecific crop diversity reduces
risk, and need for biocides
iii. small, multiple grain heads resistant to
insects, animals (in field and storage)
iv. stability enhanced through multiple, diverse
croppings (beans vs. fava beans)
3. State hostility to peasant agriculture
Modernization
History
of state hostility to 'backwards, indolent' peasants: Why?
'Developmentalist'
states concerned to marshal peasants for national development
i. peasant labor power absorbed, little available
for wage labor (USSR after the October Revolution 1917)
ii. Peasants do not stimulate industry through
purchase of agrochemical inputs
iii. Peasants may 'withdraw' from production for
market if prices are low, making it difficult to obtain cheap manufacturing
inputs (Head taxes)
IV. Limits/Impacts of Green Revolution Technology
1.
Disruption of traditional agriculture by GR packages
i. Herbicides reduce polycultures
ii. Monocropping changes labor utilization patterns
iii. Reduced genetic variability of MV's reduces
yield stability
2. Production instability with partial acceptance
i.
Soil mining when fertilizers not used
ii.
pest problems
3.
Increase in inequality due to differential access to rents
Scale
neutrality versus Resource neutrality: 'Scale neutral' technologies often favor
richer farmers
i. Packages unavailable to poor farmers unable to
'command' institutional rents
ii. Rich farmers earn relatively greater incomes:
differentiation increased
4. Scale neutral technologies lead to utilization
of non-scale neutral technologies
As
yields increase, technologies previously uneconomic due to low production
volumes become economic (e.g. mechanical threshers, combines)
Increased
wealth of larger farmers may capitalize purchase of non-scale neutral
technologies even when the state does not subsidize them