PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 5/08 K:/Proleoc&PresJClRC/DaleDue.indd THE NEED AND PROBLEMS OF FARM MECHANIZATION IN INDIA BY Ashok Annasaheb Shinde An AB 811 TECHNICAL PROBLEM REPORT Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Agricultural Engineering 1973 Dedicated to: THE FARMERS OF INDIA ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express sincere thanks to Professor Chester J. Mackson for his guidance and suggestions which made this report possible. I should also like to express my thanks to my parents for sending the valuable information from India. ?—/" fl / Approved x. L -44 41.1." fa Ma or Professor ,// l ,. Approved 4' (Department Chairman) iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT . . . . Location and Area . . . . . TOpOgraphy . . . . . . . Climate O O O O O O O O SOils O O O I O O I O 0 II. AGRICULTURE IN INDIA . . . . Agricultural Regions . . . . Land Use and Distribution . . CrOp Production . . . . . Level of Technology . . . . III. NECESSITY OF FARM MECHANIZATION . Need for Increased Food Production Increased Land for Human Food Production (Reduction in Numbers of Animals) Farm Power Requirement (Lack of Power) Reclamation of Waste Land . . Increasing Labor Productivity . Economic Advantage of Utilizing Improved Implement and Machinery Better Use of Seasonal Cycle by Using Mechanical and Electrical Power iv Page vi viii \l mmww \DKDCDQ 13 13 17 18 28 29 33 35 Chapter Page IV. PROBLEMS OF FARM MECHANIZATION . . . . . 38 Problem of Displacement of Labor . . . 38 Land Holdings . . . . . . . . . . 45 Size, Distribution and Fragmentation of Holding . . . . . . . . . . 46 Land Ownership . . . . . . . . . 48 Land Reform Laws . . . . . . . . . 51 Scarcity of Capital Resources . . . . 51 Education and Training . . . . . . . 55 V. CONCLUSION. . . . . . . . . . . . 57 LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 LIST OF TABLES Classification of Area (in thousand hectares) . . . . . . . . . Type and Number of Farm Equipment . Population, Food Production, Consumption and Deficit . . . . . . . . Number of Livestock, Poultry, and Agricultural Machinery and Implements--All India . . . . . Number of Draft Animal and Improved Implements and Machinery (All India) Number of Tractors Per Acre in Different Countries . . . . . . . . . Number of Cultivable Land Per Draft Animal and Per Tractor (All India) Farm Power Spectrum . . . . . . Relation Between Agriculture Productivity, Labor Force, and Tractor Population in Selected DevelOping Countries . . Percentage of People in Agriculture to Total POpulation in Advanced Countries as Compared to India (1965) . . . Summary of Comparative Study Made by National Productivity Council in 1966-67 0 o o o o o o o 0 Agriculture Population and Population Economically Active in Agriculture as Estimated for 1970 . . . . . Vi Page 10 12 14 19 23 24 25 28 3O 32 36 38 Page Distribution of Working Forces (All India--1951 and 1961) o o o o o o o o 40 Extent of Agricultural Labor Unemployment . . 43 Number of Persons DiSplaced by Different Machines . . . . . . . . . 45 Average Size of Holding in India and Other Countries . . . . . . . . . . 46 Cumulative Percentage Distribution of Operational Holdings and of Area . . . . 47 Estimated Number of Parcels and Its Average Area by Size-Group of Operational Holding: 1959—60 , (All India) . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Relationship Between Land Holding and Ownership of Agricultural Machinery and Implements and Cattle and Buffaloes Owned by Cultivating Rural Household: All India (1959-62) . .. . . . . . . 53 Per Capita Income in India and Some Advanced Countries . . . . . . . . . 55 vii LIST OF FIGURES Map of India . . . . India's Problem--Too Many PeOple, Too Little Food . . . Human Horse Power in Agriculture Relationship Between Yields in Kg./Hectare and Power in Horsepower per Hectare Agriculture and Non—Agriculture Labor (Graph) 0 o o o 0 Land Fragmentation . . Land Owner-Cultivators viii Page 16 26 27 41 49 52 INTRODUCTION India is an agricultural country and is likely to remain so for a long time to come. It employs about three- fourths of the total population directly or indirectly. India's agriculture is a big source of national income as out of total national income of RS. 16,692* crores Rs. 7,560 crores (at 1960—61 prices) were contributed by agri— culture alone in 1967-68 [11]. The government was not enthusiastic in introducing mechanization due to reasons such as surplus labor, small holdings, etc. But it realized the importance of large scale mechanization programs during third five-year plan. The reasons for its change in policy was predicted food shortage due to increasing population. The government gave incentive for production of improved equipment and machines. The indigenous tractor production was started in 1960, but still it has to import large numbers of tractors to meet the demand. In case of diesel and electrical pump sets it has exportable surplus. It is *RS. 7.50 = 1 dollar. estimated that as against a consumption of 2.23 lakh* diesel and 1.66 lakh electric pump sets in the second plan, the correSponding figures were 3.12 lakh and 3.33 lakh respectively in the third plan [3]. The country lacks the much needed research in agriculture mechanization which is necessary to decide about the type of machinery to develop, manufacture and import. Recently this type of work has started in many parts of the country, but will take some time before some results can be achieved. As Indian farms are small in size, and capacity of farmers to invest in large machinery is meager, the use of small tractors (5-7 h.p.) was suggested by some engineers. The trials were conducted in India with many imported power tillers, which proved that they are not suitable under India's condition, because of hard soils. The Indian soils lack in organic matter and moisture con- tent which makes them hard to work. This study is divided into two parts. The first part points out the necessity for mechanization on Indian farms and second section deals with the socioeconomic problems in implementing mechanization policy. *50 lakh = 5 million. CHAPTER I PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Location and Area India lies between latitude 8°4' and 37°6' north and longitudes 68°7' and 97°25' east. India is separated from the rest of Asia (except for Pakistan borders) by natural barriers—-the Himalayan mountain chain in the north, the Bay of Bengal on the east, and the Arabian Sea on the west. The country extends over 2,000 miles from north to south and 1,850 miles from east to west at the maximum point. It has over 9,000 miles of land border and a coast line of over 3,000 miles. India ranks as the world's seventh largest country in area with 1.3 million square miles (refer to Figure l—l). Tomgraehy India has three main topographical regions: the northern mountain zone or the Himalayas; the Indo- Gangetic plain and the Deccan plateau. The Northern mountain zone consists of a series of a series of parallel ranges with large plateaus and valleys. These mountains rise to a height of 29,000 feet. Pomccod. map mm”; 0} 1ND!“ Hnull runwnamm»oaaolun 0"“. ' “T?“ ”‘0“ 1 fl “NEWMAN «an» M PM!” 3 i: “ ‘bflfia (1NDWQ) In. NWGNMGQ Figure l-l.--Map of India. The factors such as high elevations, steep lepes and cold weather severely restrict the growth of agriculture crops in this region. The Indo-Gangetic plain is about 1,500 miles long and 150 to 200 miles wide. It is formed by river basins-- the Indus, Gange and Brahamputra. This is one of the largest alluvial plains in the world and is very important to India's agriculture. The Deccan Plateau consists of most of India's south of the Indo-Gangetic plain. It is separated from the plain by mountain and hill ranges varying in height from 1,500 to 4,000 feet. The central part of the plateau is a relatively dry area. The flow of the rivers depends on the seasonal or monsoon rains. Climate The climate throughout most of India is trOpical monsoon. The three main seasons during the year are: very hot and dry summer from March to June, the monsoon or rainy season from June to October, and the mild winter from October to March. The rainfall is unpredictable and varies in intensity, duration and distribution. The areas of heaviest precipitation are the lower Ganges Valley, north— eastern India, and the coastal area along the Western Ghats. Areas of scant rainfall are located mostly in western India. The principal growing seasons in India are the winter (Rabi), which begins in November and summer (Kharif), which begins in June with the arrival of Southwest monsoon. Of the eight major soil types in India, three-- the alluvial, black, and red soils--are basically fertile and arable and can usually be cultivated with the addition of appropriate fertilizer. A second group consisting of peaty and marshy soils, the saline and alkaline soils, is potentially arable, but needs extensive irrigation (semi-arid regions of U.P. (Iujarath Bihar, Rajasthan), drainage or desalinization. A third group, the laterile soils and the forest and hill soils, which is found in western Andhra pradesh, Mysore, Kerala, southern Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, and Assam, is virtually useless for cultivation. CHAPTER II AGRICULTURE IN INDIA Agricultural Regions India is divided into five agricultural regions based on rainfall, temperature, altitude, latitude, natural vegetation soils and crops. Temperate Himalayan region (Assam west-Bengal, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh). Rainfall is heavy in the outer ranges of the eastern portion but the northern portion is comparatively dry. Horticulture is important to the regions economy. Other cultivated crOps are tea, potato, maize and rice. Dry Northern Region (North Gujrath, Western Madhya Pradesh, Punjab [excluding hilly region], Rajasthan, Western Uttar Pradesh and Delhi, and a small part of Maharashtra)has an annual average rainfall of less than 30 inches, and in many places it is even less than 8 inches. The chief crOps of this region are: wheat, barley, corn and cotton. Eastern Region (Assam Excluding hilly parts], West Bengal, Bihar, Orrisa, Eastern Madhya Pradesh, eastern Uttar Pradesh and parts of Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu), has an annual rainfall averaging over 60 inches in most places. The main crops are rice, jute, sugar cane and tea. Southern Region (Maharashtra, Western Andhra Pradesh, Eastern Mysore, small parts of <3ujrat, and Madhya Pradesh), has an annual rainfall which ranges from as little as 20 inches to as much as 40 inches. Millets, sorghum, cotton and peanuts are the principal crops in this region. Coastal Region (Coastal strip in South India, Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands), has annual rainfall of over 90 inches in most places. Plantation agriculture is dominant with coconuts, coffee, rubber, and spices as the major crops. Land Use and Distribution Total cropped area is 52 percent of the total area (reported area in 1964-65 is 756 million acres). Fifty million acres of 340 million acres under cultivation are sown more than once, 51 million acres was fallow, 90 million acres were cultivable but not cultivated. The irrigated area is 16.5 percent (65 million acres) of total cropped area. Between 1950 and 1965 total cropped area increased by 64 million acres or almost 20 percent. The ratio of total crOpped area to population has dropped during the past century as population growth out- stripped the increase in the land under cultivation (see Table 2.1). Most of the farmers in India use bulk of their cultivated land to grow grains and pulses. Assam, Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Manipur and the island groups are only states or territories that have less than 10 percent of their total area under cultivation. CrOp Production India grows a wide variety of tropical, sub- trOpical, and temperate crops for subsistence and commer— cial use. Production of subsistence crops such as rice, wheat, other cereal and pulses fall short of domestic requirements. India produces a surplus, however, of commercial crOps which brings in country's foreign exchange earnings. By far the principal export crop is tea. The important commercial crOps include oilseeds, cotton, jute, sugar cane, nuts, tobacco and Spices. Agricultural yields are among the lowest in the world. The average rice and wheat yields are about two- thirds of the world's average. Level of Technology The small size and fragmentation of most farms make them ill-adapted for modern farming techniques. 10 TABLE 2-1 Classification of Area (in thousand hectares) 1950—51 1955-56 1960-61 1964-65 1966-67* (R) (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 1. Area under forest 40,482 51,343 54,032 60,351 62,305 (14.2) (17.6) (18.1) (19.8) (20.4) 2. Area not available 47,517 48,396 50,751 50,197 48,293 for cultivation (16.7) (16.6) (17.0) (16.4) (15.8) (i) Land put to 9,358 13,920 14,840 15,442 15,534 non-agri- (3.3) (4.8) (5.0) (5.0) (5.1) cultural uses (ii) Barren and un- 38,159 34,476 35,911 34,755 32,759 culturable (13.4) (11.8) (12.0) (11.4) (10.7) land 3. Other unculti- 49,446 38,895 37,637 36,226 35,296 vated land (17.4) (13.3) (12.6) (11.9) (11.6) excluding fallow land (1) Permanent 6,675 11,473 13,966 14,747 14,085 pastures and (2.3) (3.9) (4.7) (4.8) (4.6) other grazing land (ii) Land under 19,828 5,885 4,459 4,113 4,110 misc. tree (7.0) (2.0) (1.5) (1.3) (1.4) creps and groves not included in net areas sown. (iii) Cultural 22,943 21,537 19,212 17,366 17,101 waste (8.1) (7.4) (6.4) (5.7) (5.6) 11 TABLE 2-1--Continued 1950-51 1955-56 1960-61 1964-65 1966—67* (R) (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 4. Fallow land 128,124 24,127 22,819 20,362 22,639 (9.9) (8.3) (7.7) (6.7) (7.4) (i) Fallow land 17,445 12,544 11,180 9,166 9,357 odmrthmi (6JJ (43) (18) (10) ($1) current fallows (ii) Current 10,679 11,583 11,639 11,196 13,282 fallows (3.8) (4.0) (3.9) (3.7) (4.3) 5. Net area sown 118,746 129,156 133,199 138,120 137,047 (41.8) (44.2) (44.6) (45.2) (44.8) 6. Total reporting 284,315 291,917 298,458 305,256 305,610 area** (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) 7. Area for which 42,494 34,892 28,351 21,553 21,199 no return (13.0) (10.7) (8.7) (6.7) (6.5) exists 8. Total geographical 326,809 326,809 326,809 326,809 326,809 area*** Notes: (R) = Revised Figures in parentheses indicate percentages to reporting area. In case of "Area for which no return exists" percentages are to "Total geographical area." *Provisional the **Due to change in coverage the figures are not comparable from year to year. ***According to Surveyor General of India. Source: Indian Agriculture in Brief [11]. 12 Indian farmers living in large numbers on the margin of subsistence are frequently heavily burdened with debt. They can seldom save to invest in selected seeds, ferti- lizers and better equipment. Farm Implements Because of small nature of holdings, lack of finance, and for other similar reasons, majority of farmers in India have to depend on small implements. A strong public resistance to mechanized agriculture arises from farmers' dependence on the land and their fear of joblessness. This opposition is weakening somewhat under the pressure of changing economic conditions. The need for large-scale farm mechanization program was recognized during the third plan period. But still the typical farmers in India do not have usual mechanical devices for farming that are in common use on farms in more developed countries. In 1966, the following farm equipment was reported (see Table 2-2). TABLE 2-2 Type and Number of Farm Equipment Type of Equipment Number (thousands) (1) Plows 43.4 (million) (2) Oil engines 471 (3) Electric pumps 415 (4) Sugarcane crushers 695 (5) Tractors 54 Source: Indian Agriculture in Brief [11]. CHAPTER III NECESSITY OF FARM MECHANIZATION Need for Increased Food Production India has the second largest population in the world. This large pOpulation has come to be regarded by virtually all observers of the Indian economy as a deterrent to economic development. According to 1961 Census the total population of India was about 438 million out of which 70 percent of the people were engaged in agriculture for their livelihood [16]. Although such a large number of peOple are engaged in agriculture more land area is under cultivation than that in U.S.A. India is not self-sufficient in food production. It has to depend on imported food grains at an average rate of 2 to 3 million tons a year to meet the internal food shortage. In 1966-67 the import was highest, which reached to an all-time high figure of 12 million tons, of which 8 million tons were supplied by the United States alone (see Table 3-1). There have been increased efforts by the govern— ment to raise the production, but it is falling short of 13 14 need due to sharp increase in pOpulation (decrease in death rate). TABLE 3-1 Population, Food Production, Consumption and Deficit Total home Total require— Deficit Year POp. production ment for (million (mill.) food grains consumption tons at the (million (million tons rate of tons) at the rate of 18 ounces) 18 ounces) 1961 438 76.0 90.0 14 1966 492 82.0 110.0 28 Source: Development of Indian and American Agriculture [16]. The food grain production since independence has increased substantially almost 52 percent from 52 million tons in 1947 to 79 million tons in 1966 (the 1971 produc- tion was 105 million tons) [9]. The major reasons for this increase are increased acreage under food grains, expanded use of chemical fertilizers, the introduction of improved seed and the expansion of irrigation systems. However, this is not enough to increase the production. And now there is very little "new" land left that can be put into agriculture. It was reported in the United States that it has increased its production through use of improved seeds, 15 fertilizers and improved machinery. S. E. Johnson holds that of 28 percent increase in farm output in U.S.A. above the average of 1934-39 "only about 1/4 is due to better weather probably less than 15 percent has resulted from expansion of crop land acreage and the rest about 60 percent is largely accounted for by the fuller use of the improvements in crops, livestock and machinery [8]." Even in India, increase in the yield of crops, due to mechanization of farms, has been traced from 40 to 50 percent in the case of maize, 15 to 20 percent in Bajra and paddy, 30 to 40 percent in Jowar, groundnut and wheat. This example indicates that India should increase the use of power in agriculture. The Indian agriculture is very deficient in power supply. The power supplied by bullock and human labor in combination with indigenous implements such as wooden plow, persian wheel, is far short of need. The estimated requirement of power for adequate and timely operation to be performed on the field are 112 million h.p. However, only 43 million h.p. is available in India [15]. So only alternative left to increase the food production is by intensive use of land such as multiple cropping, which is only feasible if enough power is available to cultivate the land within a short period of time in combination with improved seeds of chemical fertilizers (see Figure 3-1). RnTes Lpev thousand populahon) 16 700 ’roo ma n 90 le .. 9 p P Population. 50 .. J. - 500 \\ . 4o - 490 Dead: (on, \\ 30 - 300 l; \\ \ 20 \\\ ' 200 co 4 too a '0 W 0' I9! I can ISM (94! H5) I90 (9?! WC! Too hrfle Food (SUD'fl'W) NOLLV‘med ALL F0 0 n GRAINS (millions of ham) .0 F Home Produchon 8° 70 . 7o 60 4 60 20, (20 (MPOV'S' 0 O IQSG 195? I958 I453 I950 ran In: 19s: as“ [965 to“ "5" ~58 ~59 ~60 -¢' ~52 43 ~44 ~55 4: ~51 Figure 3—l--India's Problem--Too Many People, Too Little Food. Source: Kingsbury R.C. [9] . 17 Increased Land for Human Food Production ITReduction’in Numbers of Animals) In India cattle population per 100 acres of land is 54 as compared to 25 in Egypt, 15 in China and 6 in Japan. Out of its total livestock population of 228.98 million, India had only 81.40 million working cattle and buffaloes in 1966. Again, among the remaining 147.58 million cattle, 33.8 million were milk cattle, 0.76 breeding bulls, and 66.64 million were young stock. The rest, 46.38 million, were other cattle and buffaloes which were not put to any work, hence were unproductive and un- serviceable [11]. It may be said that India definitely has a surplus cattle population, which is burden on land. If this surplus cattle population is discarded, more land could be put to produce foodstuffs and other raw materials, which the country needs most. In the U.S.A. more than 65 million acres of land previously used to produce fodder for animals has been released for producing food grains and fiber crops, after the introduction of machinery. Up to the year 1959, nearly 5 million hectares of land was made available for crop production for human consumption throughout the world due to use of machinery [19]. As mentioned previously in this paper, India has a shortage of food grains. It also lacks the necessary power supply for food production on farms, even though it has more cattle population per acre than any other country 18 in the world. It is absolutely necessary to increase food production and necessary power required to produce it. Which is only possible by introducing improved implements and machinery. If it is assumed that in India, a 25 h.p. tractor with the plows of 14 inches each in depth, can plow at the rate of 6 acres a day and therefore a 25 h.p. tractor can replace about 6 pairs of bullocks for each working day. (This is a rough guess, not taking into account any special technical problems.) If these tractors are used only on holdings above 20 acres, will replace 22.6 million draft animals thus making more land available for food and fiber production [2]. Tractor can be put to more use than the bullocks. At the same time the tractor and other equipment increases the speed of work and thus is possible to cultivate more land and multiple cropping, increasing production. Farm Power Requirement (Lack of Power) A number of investigators have concluded that more farm power is essential for Indian agriculture to achieve the production target of the future. With 165 million workers engaged in agriculture, India produces only 105 million tons of food grains a year from 137 million hectares under cultivation. With a large work force, 1.2 worker per hectare-—the annual production is only 640 kilograms 19 TABLE 3-2 Number of Livestock, Poultry and Agricultural Machinery and Implements--All India Percentage Item 1956 1961 1966 change of ----in millions ---- Col. 4 over Col. 3 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Cattle (a) Males over 3 years: (i) Used for breeding only 0.44 0.36 0.43 (ii) Used for breeding and work both —- 1.97 2.26 (+)l.l (iii) Used for work only 62.48 68.70 69.18 (iv) Others 1.95 1.50 1.46 (-)2.1 Total 64.87 72.53 73.33 (+)l.1 (b) Females over 3 years: (i) Breeding: (a) In milk 20.10 20.67 20.97 (+)l.5 (b) Dry and not calved even once 27.16 30.33 30.80 (+)l.5 (ii) Working 1.83 2.15 1.98 (-)7.8 (iii) Other 0.81 1.05 0.93 (-)1.7 Total 49.90 54.20 54.68 (+)O.9 (c) Young Stock 43.81 48.83 48.05 (-)l.6 Total Cattle 158.67* 175.56 176.06 (+)0.3 Buffaloes (a) Males over 3 years: (i) Used for breeding only 0.33 0.29 0.33 20 TABLE 3-2--Continued 1956 1961 1966 Percentage Item change of —---in millions ----- Col. 4 over Col. 3 (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (ii) Used for breeding and work both -- 0.49 0.62 (+)6.6 (iii) Used for work only 5.96 6.65 6.97 (iv) Others 0.22 0.25 0.27 (+)6.0 Total 6.51 7.68 8.19 (+)6.6 (b) Females over 3 years: (i) Breeding: (a) In milk 11.32 12.46 12.93 (+)3.7 (b) Dry and not calved even once 9.87 11.78 12.59 (+)6.9 (ii) Working 0.42 0.49 0.39 (-)20.8 (iii) Other 0.24 0.30 0.24 (-)18.0 Total 22.35 25.03 26.14 (+)4.4 (c) Young Stock 16.09 18.50 18.59 (+)0.4 Total Buffaloes 44.95 51.21 52.92 (+)3.3 Sheep 39.26 40.22 42.01 (+)4.5 Goats 55.45 60.86 64.57 (+)6.l Horses and Ponies 1.48 1.33 1.15 (-)13.4 Other Livestock** 6.81 7.25 7.16 -- Total Livestock 306.62 336.43 343.87 (+)2.2 Poultry 94.76 114.25 115.12 (+)0.8 Number of Agricultural Machinery: (1) Plows (in millions) 37.5 40.7 43.4 (+)6.6 21 TABLE 3-2--Continued 1v. 1956 1961 1966 Percentage Item change of ---in millions--- Col. 4 over Col. 3 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (ii) Sugarcane crushers (in thousands) 568 624 695 (+)1l.4 (iii) Oil engines (in thousands) 123 230 471 (+)104.8 (iv) Electric Pumps (in thousands) 47 160 415 (+)159.4 (v) Tractors (in thousands) 21 31 54 (+)74.1 Fishing Boats (in thousands) N.C. N.C. 196 —- Fishing and Carrier Boats worked by Power (in thousands) N.C. N.C. 11 -- Fishing Nets (in thousands) N.C. N.C. 3658 -- Note: N.C. = Not Collected. *Includes 0.09 million for which details are not available. **Includes camels, mules, donkeys, pigs, yaks and mithuns. Source: Indian Agriculture in Brief [11]. 22 of foodgrains per worker or 720 kilograms per hectare [6]. Far below that which is produced by farmer in U.S.A. or Japan. Unfortunately there are no Indian studies in the general area of farm power input and agricultural produc- tion output. Consequently, many investigators have attempted to estimate the power requirement for the estab- lished productivity targets by studying the comparative power supply and production data for agricultural opera- tions in other countries of the world. This approach reveals that high levels of agricultural production is consistently associated with high levels of power input [refer to Figure 3-3]. Taiwan with double the human labor input and double the tractor power input, realizes a five-fold increase in agricultural production, and Japan with three times the labor input and a ten-fold more input of tractor power realizes a ten-fold increase in agricultural production [22]. This approach to estimate Indian agriculture power requirements results in a very large number of horsepower. The present available power from human, animal, mechanical and electrical sources makes about 0.2 h.p. per hectare. This again is available only for about five hours a day, giving due allowance for the rest. In the advanced countries such as the U.S.A. and Japan, the avail- able power is 10 to 15 times more and is available for a full 24 hours [20]. President Johnson's science advisory committee observed that the optimum power input for improved agri- culture is 0.8 h.p. per hectare [6]. For intensive agri- culture in India it is necessary to multiply the present available power by four times. Tables 3-6 and 397.) (See Figure 3-3 and There seems to be no chance to reach the 0.8 h.p. per hectare requirement with the present rate of increase in bullock and implement number. The following table indicates the number of draft animals and other improved implements of machinery in different years. TABLE 3-3 Number of Draft Animal and Improved Implements and Machinery (All India) Oil Year No. of Engine Electric Draft Iron Pumps Pumps Cgfisus Animals Plows for for Tractors (million) Irriga- Irriga- ‘ tion tion 1951 67.2 920,887 81,377 26,174 8,635 1956 70.69 1,376,099 122,511 47,034 21,005 1961 77.8 2,298,215 229,972 160,168 31,016 1966 81.40 3,521,223 470,968 414,610 54,012 Source: "Indian Agriculture in Brief" [11]. 24 TABLE 3-4 Number of Tractors per Acre in Different Countries Country Area in Acre per Tractor India 12500 West Germany 33.30 U.K. 106.40 Denmark 57.1 Japan 9.6 France 104.2 U.S.A. 217.40 Source: Agriculture and Agro-Industries Journal [18]. At present the available draft animal population is 54 per 100 acres, which means one bullock has to culti- vate 2 hectares of land and there is one tractor for every 12,000 acres [7]. S. C. Jain [7] reports that a pair of bullocks can plow one acre in a day which means it will take four days to prepare an acre of land for sowing (assuming average of 4 Operations are required). With this rate it is impossible to do multiple crOpping which needs to perform operations in very short time. Both men and animals are unable to perform the necessary seasonal work in farming to satisfactory standards and in prOper time: the reason is their physical status. The cycle of food availability and of peak work 25 demand never coincide. Only after the harvest, man and animal are relatively well fed; at that time there is no heavy work. On the other hand during the busy season of plowing, cultivating and sowing the food supply is at its lowest. Efforts are therefore needed to augment power by encouraging the use of engines, motors, tractors and power tillers for a number of other operations for which they are now being used (see Table 3-5). TABLE 3-5 Number of Cultivable Land per Draft Animal and per Tractor (All India) Total No. of No. of No. of Cropped Acres NO' Of Acres Year Draft Tractors Area per er Animals (thou.) (mill. Draft Tp . ractor acres) Animal 1951 67.2 9 325.9 4.85 36,211 1961 77.8 31 377.3 4.85 12,500 - Source: "Indian Rural Problem" [13]. In India it was widely thought that introducing machinery would merely increase unemployment or under- employment of labor. But no thought was given to the importance of timing in performing many agricultural tasks such as planting, harvesting and implications of technological change. Additional labor, it was felt, could supply whatever increased power needs were required. 26 '/ HUMAN H0085 POWER IN Aa-Rucuuukt Human How". Pawn PM It» Hum. .. '/ Human pow p» loo heck»! o! arable land under: perineum!“ Camps, mutual-ed on five basic 0]- |/Ig he?“ power P01 WM!" Figure 3-2.--Human Horse Power in Agriculture. 27 MAJOR FOOD CROPS 7‘09) ‘ 3 .° . 600. ' .',' U ' ' UK M O o o i Soon» 4”” ’i‘ . . (E. Inca ' ' 5 15mm», ' ,- Elmo" u o . o o o 0 a 2 ,0» P “-5-“. 0 . . I E I h. 0 o I o mum. 3 I / -- Man 1‘! LATIN ' _ ' . " 2000 I 0mm . u 0 I- , . . I 3 . 3 0 ' ICO‘VGCIO p.“ - C ' .C.. OuIUMC, c: 0 sum - Susan crops (7094 Sugar), 3 .3 Porches, costume. 01%». g E 3 MC. Tomatoes. : '2 " oz . - ' - . Iooo » . 5 I: ‘ a E‘°‘““'“8 Mamlomd China AFRICA -Z 3° 900 .0 0m»: 0 ‘ “In - ' 9- . 80 u mom " 0 0'5 Lo {.5 2.0 2.5 I-M’. pm Mutant “HARM human View I. Fowl! Impul- b Figure 3—3.--Relationship Between Yields in Kg./Hectare and Power in Horsepower per Hectare. 28 TABLE 3-6 Farm Power Spectrum Power Farm Size Holdings Land Area Source (Hectares) (Numbers/%) (Hectares/%) Hired 0-2 31,320,000 26,000,000 61.7% 19.3% Bullock Pair 2-5 12,814,000 38,000,000 24.9% 28.9% Small Tractor 12-15 h.p. 5-10 4,538,000 30,600,000 8.9% 22.9% 35 h.p. Above 2,294,000 38,600,000 Tractors 10 4.5% 28.9% Reclamation of Waste Land The Indian union has 87 million acres of cultivable waste land which is not being put to any use [1]. It is exceedingly necessary to reclaim as much of this area as possible, because of rapidly growing population and the increasing shortage of food grains and raw materials in the country. Obviously this work cannot and human power, which at present is be done with bullock not able to meet the existing demand. The reclamation of lands infested with deep rooted grasses such as kans and harali is only possible with deep plowing. Bullock drawn implements are useless in such places because of their shallow plowing. 29 So the use of powerful tractors with other improved machines and implements is indispensable for breaking new land, clearing land under jungle, eradication of deep- rooted weeds and soil conservation work. Dr. Punjabrav Deshmukh, Former Agriculture Minister of India mentioned in his article "mechanization of agriculture our basic industry" that the clearing of jungle land especially in areas which were not under cultivation. Tarai area (U.P.) can be done only by tractors. He further writes that initial reclamation work cannot be done economically by any other means except by the use of heavy tractors [5]. Increasing Labor Productivity In India at present there is excessive pressure of population on land, much in excess of what it can reason— ably maintain. Quite a large number of people are engaged in work on overcrowded holdings where their productivity is nil or almost nil. This problem becomes more patent when we compare India's position with that of the indus- trially and agriculturally more advanced countries of the world (refer to Table 3-7). The actual participation of labor force in agri- cultural production in terms of putting in a given number of working hours (i.e., labor time) depends on the supply of water, fertilizer use, plant protection methods, use .mMMIhN .02 deD “OOHDOm Haama zmz .aHmmo .>fio mundaH .m4 30 «z mm.H OHH a.a~ ooflxmz az vm.aa nmm v.44 HmmumH «z Hm.o Ha m.mm maecH az ma.o mma m.mm amumflxmm 42 08.0 mMH m.mm mmcflmmflaflsm az Gm.o ans n.88H sesame az mm.a mam n.88H mas ~m.~mm mm.a Ham 0.0mm gamma Amv Amv AHV Adv Hawam among Amanmuaw Amflnmuav .Mwomwwtmma .sa.wm lwaa mumm.wm..wmm ....goa mmfluucsou mcflmon>mo pmuomamm Ca coflumasmom uouomue cam .mouom uonmq .>DH>Huoscoum musuadoflumd cmmzumm coflumamm film mqmdB 31 of high-yielding varieties and other complementary agri- cultural inputs. These factors engage the labor force in various activities of farming, resulting into the increase in the intensity of cultivation and cropping. But in India the fertility of soil is low due to absence of adequate water supply and less use of fertilizers, and thus the existence of surplus farm labor indicates a very low agri- cultural output per head. The productivity gap between India on the one hand and Japan and the U.S.A. on the other hand, shows that farm output per worker in terms of wheat units is 2.22, and 10.7 and 96.2 reSpectively [12]. Thus the conclusion is that the level of agricultural output per worker is considerably low, which is due to surplus agri- cultural 1abor. Mr. Mishra [12] in his article in Eastern Economists concludes that (l) the level of agricultural yields per hectare is low because the prOportion of water supplied for irrigation to total arable land, the consump- tion of fertilizers and application of other complementary inputs per hectare are small; (2) the level of agricultural productivity per worker is low because the ratio of ferti- lizer and machinery use to labor force working in agri- culture is very low (see Table 3-8). Employment which is time-wasting and unproductive, amounting to digging holes and filling them again, is of no importance under normal circumstances, so there is need to withdraw the surplus number of people from agriculture. 32 TABLE 3~8 Percentage of Pe0p1e in Agriculture to Total POpulation in Advanced Countries as Compared to India (1965) “w Percentage of peOple Country engaged in agriculture to total pOpulation United States 6 Canada 11 U.S.S.R. 33 Japan 24 Australia 10 Argentina 18 France 18 U.K. 4 Mexico 52 Italy 25 India 70 Source: Indian Agriculture in Brief [11]. 33 Economic Advantage of Utilizing Improved Implement andIMachinery Reduction in Cost of Production While comparing the cost of production of crOps in India with that of other countries, it becomes clear that the cost is comparatively very high, mainly because much of human and animal power is wasted in simple agricultural Operations. It is very essential to bring the cost down, to compete in international markets for products such as sugar, cotton, etc. In advanced countries, fewer agricultural workers are required to produce more agricultural surplus needed for consumption by non-farm pOpulation which ultimately reduces the cost of production. It has also been recog- nized that other methods of reducing the unit cost is to enlarge the size of farm and go in for more intensive farming. It is not possible for India to increase the size of farm due to many reasons such as fragmentation ceiling laws, etc. The only possibility left is intensive farming. In U.S.A. and many other European countries, labor is paid five to ten times higher wages than in India, and yet the cost of agricultural production in those countries is lower. One of the factors contributing to low cost of production is the use of efficient tools and implements and scientific and mechanical processes applied to agriculture. 34 In one study, on improved and indigenous bullock- drawn implements, it is estimated that a complete set Of improved equipment Operated by a pair Of large bullocks which is capable of controlling a unit Of approximately 6 hectare in size, and which consists Of an improved yoke, moldboard plow, disc harrow, cultivator shovels, ridger, furrower, buck scraper, float, seed-cum-fertilizer drill, reaper, cart body and a mechanical thresher would cost approximately Rs.5000. But it would bring down the cost of farm Operations to Rs.100 per hectare at the most compared to Rs.1000 per hectare with the use Of the usual indigenous equipment, which costs less than Rs.800 initially. Thus, the Operational cost per controllable unit Of 6 hectare would be Rs.500 in the case Of improved set Of new equipment versus Rs.6000 in the case Of using existing indigenous equipment. This means that within a season, a farmer would have made good his investment on improved machinery considering the saving in cost of Operation alone, if labor costs are paid for. In 1966-67 the National Productivity Council (India) made a study Of comparative cost Of bullock and tractor drawn implements and came to the conclusion that the average cost of cultivation per acre around Delhi in northern India comes to Rs.403 for mechanized farm and Rs.515.12 for non—mechanized farm, using mostly bullock driven or manually Operated machines. 35 This clearly indicates that economy is in favor Of the mechanized farms in spite Of the lower utilization Of tractor and equipment in individual farms (Table 3-9). Better Use Of Seasonal Cycle by Using MechanicaIiand Electrical Power The new high-yielding dwarf wheats and rice raises exciting possibilities for Indian agriculture. The shorter growing season Of the new varieties and their ability to mature without regard to day length, make dOuble and multiple cropping possible. Thus, after the first crOp Of rice is harvested, another may be planted, to be followed by still another, or alternatively sorghums, wheat or potatoes can be planted after the rice is har- vested, if water is available and if harvesting, land preparation and planting are done quickly. The margin Of time during which the various Opera- tions for the preparation Of the soil and for sowing must be performed, may also in some cases be narrow, for each agricultural Operation must be adjusted to changing weather and moisture in the soil, and delay may Spoil the growth Of the crOps. According to S. C. Jain [7] a pair Of bullock can plow one acre a day, as compared to 10 acres during the same time period by 20 h.p. tractor. Thus, the short period between the harvesting and sowing Of crOps needs machine rather than bullock power. 36 TABLE 3-9 Summary Of Comparative Study Made by National Productivity Council in 1966-67 Item Mechanized Non-mechanized Farms Samples taken Average area per farm Average cultivated area Area utilized Area irrigated Intensity Of farming Average investment/acre Cost Of cultivation per area (in rupees) Wheat Maize Bajra Average cost of cultivation per acre 10 39.35 acres 37.90 " 96.3% 84.5% 1.607 Rs.636.82 537.28 409.82 244.99 403.00 10 22.5 acres 18.9 " 84% 59.8% 1.34 Rs.171.14 800.9 368.7 285.8 515.12 Note: (The farm holding size of non-mechanized farms varied from 10 to 50.5 acres within case Of mechanized farm the holding size varied from 10 to 81 acres.) 37 Other studies carried out at several research centers indicate that with a good set of tillage implements seed bed preparation which normally takes over 175-250 hours per hectare with traditional plows, can be done in about 75-100 hours. Similarly studies with ferti-seed drills have recorded an average saving in time Of 4 hours per acre and increase in yield varying from 10-25 percent [20]. Thus introducing and develOping high-yielding varieties emphasizes the need for mechanization--tractors, power tillers, irrigation pumps and related equipment, in farm production. CHAPTER IV PROBLEMS OF FARM MECHANIZATION Problem Of Displacement Of Labor According to 1970 F.A.O. estimates, India has approximately 372 million agricultural pOpulation, which is 68 percent Of the total 550 million. With such huge population dependent on agriculture, mechanization is Often Opposed on the ground that not only the scope for employing the employed and underemployed is reduced, but also the risk Of reducing employment at a time when the labor force is swelling because Of increase in birth rate as well as longitivity. TABLE 4.1 Agriculture Population and Population Economically Active in Agriculture as Estimated for 1970 -—B-.- § -~-‘-‘ n—. we. 0 nan-=8 :. Economically Active T3221 Ag. POp. % in Ag. Population Total Ag. Pop. % in Ag. 550,376 372,605 68 220,999 149,616 68 Source: F.A.O. Production Year Book (1972) [6]. 38 39 In western countries, on an average 5 to 6 laborers have been diSplaced by one man and a machine in mechanical cultivation. Thus assuming that one worker will be required instead Of 6 in India, under mechanized farming 77.5 percent Of the total workers will still have to be provided with alternative occupation. Which seems impossible under present conditions. The industrial sector in India is not even able to provide employment to non-agricultural popula- tion which is only 30 percent of the total population. The problem Of labor displacement is more serious in India, though it currently uses half the number Of farm workers .per hectare of crop land when compared to paddy-growing countries with high yields. Japan north and south Korea and Taiwan are four Asian countries where the yield Of paddy is more than double that Of India. Japan is most mechanized paddy-growing country and at the same time uses 2.04 farm workers per hectare Of crOp land, which is double that employed in India. Japan and other countries Offer ample evidence that high intensity Of crOpping is essential to have profitable use of mechanization and labor inputs. In the case Of India intensity Of cropping, and the yields are very low, not enough to provide employment to all working population. The introduction of machines without increasing the cropping intensity, and promoting use Of high-yielding 40 TABLE 4-2 Distribution Of Working Force (All India--l951 and 1961) 1951 1961 Class Of Workers Total Percentage Total Percentage Workers to Total Workers to Total (millions) Workers (millions) Workers Cultivators 69.8 50.0 99.5 52.8 Agricultural laborers 27.5 19.7 31.5 16.7 Total agricultural classes 97.3 69.7 131.0 69.5 Mining, quarrying, livestock, forestry, fishing, plantations, orchards, and allied activities 4.1 3.0 5.2 . Household industry Not collected 12.0 6.4 Manufacturing other than household industry 12.4 9.0 8.0 4.2 Construction 1.5 1.1 . . Trade and commerce 7.3 5.2 7.6 4.0 Transport storage and comm. 2.1 1.5 3.0 1.6 Other services 14.6 10.5 19.5 10.4 TOTAL Workers 139.5 100.0 188.4 100.0 41 MILLION MILUNI a.» ”o I" ' I.’ d" ’ 0 I u- - ‘ :’ In 95',’ t I I It MO ~ ‘o’ 4’/ "‘ “ ’ cf" I 'I I” - no I I / I00 I- I00 .0 I- ‘0 ‘0 ‘0 4o 40 o . . g . N 5'0 I160 I9” I"? I18. Figure 4-l.-—Agriculture and Non-Agriculture Labor (graph). 42 varieties, fertilizers, irrigation facilities, etc. will add to the problem of unemployment. Objection to governments mechanization policy came from all quarters on the ground such as: (1) mechanization became necessary in countries like U.S.A. because Of acute shortage Of labor and vast resources for extension of cultivation; (2) there is abundance Of cheap human labor lying idle in the villages Of India; (3) machines are very costly and beyond the reach Of farmer and investment in them will be an unnecessary pressure on already limited resources Of the country. In India agricultural laborers do not have full employment around the year. Table 4-3 gives the different man-days unemployed per agricultural laborer and unemployed per thousand of male labor force in the rural areas of the different states of India. The All-India figures of these two aSpects of unemployment of agricultural labor, 90 and 4.78 percent respectively are very significant. A few studies have been undertaken to assess the impact of mechanization on labor. One study relates tO a ten-acre farm in Punjab which was irrigated by wells and had the normal cropping pattern. The technology that was used, was the traditional one, including Persian wheels as means of irrigation. This study showed that on an average the demand for labor per acre was 51 man days. Subse- quently, when high-yielding varieties were used on this 43 TABLE 4-3 Extent Of Agricultural Labor Unemployment Man Days Unemployed Unemployed per 1,000 State Per Agricultural of Male Labor Force Worker in Rural Areas Assam 70 7.94 Bihar 85 3.28 Maharashtra 128 3.88 Madhya Pradesh 76 0.69 Orissa 53 2.61 Punjab 162 7.10 Rajasthan 100 0.94 South India (combined) 113 -- Andhra Pradesh -— 1.97 Kerala —- 28.08 Tasmil nadue -- 4.80 Mysore -- 1.78 Uttar Pradesh 48 1.77 West Bengal 94 18.12 All India 90 4.78 Source: Eastern Economist [12]. 44 farm along with inputs such as fertilizers, the demand increased slightly above 60 man days. When, however, a pump set, corn sheller, power cane crusher and a tractor were introduced without any change in crOpping pattern, the demand for labor went down, tO about 26 man-days. From these figures it seems that a change in tech- nology diSplaces labor but at the same time the study also found out that with electric pump sets, tractors, etc., the intensity may well go up to 200 percent, thus increasing the demand for labor. For an intensity Of 220 percent, the demand for labor would be 49.4 man-days per acre which is only 3 percent less than that involved in the basic tradi- tional Persian wheel technology [24]. Thus it is very essential to change the whole system Of cultivation tO increase the intensity. Otherwise intro- duction Of improved implements and machines in same Old tradition method Of cultivation will decrease already scarce employment. In another study relating to the use Of combine harvesters, indicated that the use of this machine will diSplace tOO many people, and thus will have an undesirable effect on employment structure. The number of persons displaced by use Of different types Of combine harvesters is indicated in Table 4-4. There seems to be no chance Of decrease in number Of workers in agriculture in near future. The problem can 45 TABLE 4-4 Number of Persons DiSplaced by Different Machines Type Of Machine Persons DiSplaced Self-prOpelled combine' (100 h.p. machine with 14' cutter bar) 250 Tractor-trailed combine 80 Tractor-mounted reaper 40 Source: National Productivity Council, New Delhi. be solved by increasing the intensity of cropping. Indian farmers can profitably use more labor per hectare with new high-yielding varieties. Higher yields will require more labor per hectare for land preparation, water manage- ment, weed control, insect and disease control, harvesting and threshing. Selective mechanization can be Of considerable help in creating employment. The relation Of machine and labor—displacement should be analyzed in detail and in- depth. Now is the time for government to step in and formulate certain clearcut policies regarding the use, manufacture and import of implements and machines, other- wise wrong decisions may lead tO more serious troubles. Land Holdings Indian farmers cultivate about 400 million acres Of land, which is almost half the country's total land 46 area, a far greater percentage than is cultivated in United States or the Soviet Union. Even though large area is cultivated than any other country, India has its own prob- lems regarding size of holding, its fragmentation and ownership. TABLE 4 -5 Average Size of Holding in India and Other Countries Country ' Year Hectares India 1961-62 2.63 U.S.A. 1959 122.53 Japan 1960 1.18 Indonesia 1963 1.05 Canada 1961 145.20 Mexico 1960 123.86 Source: Indian Agriculture in Brief [11]. Size, Distribution and Fragmentation Of Holding The average size of holding for the country as a whole, according to results of 1961-62 census was 2.63 hectares. In addition to that the lands are not equally distributed which is indicated by the area of land com- prised in different size groups. The distribution pattern Of holdings and area is uneven, more so in small size and large size holdings, which is indicated in Table 4-6. 47 TABLE 4-6 Cumulative Percentage Distribution of Operational Holdings and Of Area 51:2.22?“p Nfifiiéingi Area Up to 1.00 19.42 1.32 5.00 62.96 18.88 10.00 81.81 38.83 15.00 89.42 52.68 25.00 95.26 69.30 50.00 98.93 87.82 100.00 100.00 100.00 Source: Farm Management in India (1966) [10]. It will be seen that size group below five acres Of land accounts for nearly 63 percent Of the holdings but only about 19 percent Of the total cultivated area, as against this the size group above 50 acres which accounts for only 1.07 percent Of the holdings farms 12.18 percent Of the cultivated land among them. On an average the holding is very small, un- economic and in many cases this acreage is insufficient to support a family prOperly.‘ The size of small holding is due to subdivision and the primary cause Of subdivision is the pressure Of 48 pOpulation on land, apart from the laws Of inheritance in vogue among the Hindus and Muslims in India. Fragmentation Not only the holdings are small, but there is another problem and that is fragmentation. It is illus- trated by the map (Figure 4-2). In a village near Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh) a farmer cultivated 17 different fields located on 11 plots of land widely scattered around the village and separated from each other by considerable distance. All plots were small and could be reached only by walking along the field division lines. Because of such fragmentation, tractors are useless. Table 4-7 gives the latest information on the extent Of fragmentation. Due to fragmentation and small size Of holding, most Of them are below or at subsistence level and are therefore uneconomical even for a wooden plow and a pair Of bullocks, so the question of using improved implements or tractors does not arise, which are very expensive and thus beyond the reach Of the majority of the cultivators. Land Ownership This is another factor which is holding back the develOpment of Indian agriculture. There were many dif- ferent kinds of tenure systems, but some of them have been .cOHumucmemmum pcmquu.mlv ouzmflm 2.» .o .m Paiumcmx 350$ 49 Avndmwlw con \1/ co-hwhcweomyl um. \\ W \Mv/ 3:582:38 \ I AUV .\3 / “VfihfiW|~ .\~ ~\\%u / x . / . .Auv / x / \ 1...... xx / JV 1.. a 7 x x .4 I ~ ~ I .\o \o / \ . s We? / \ zux V / / \\ I/ I 816$ Inuit 3.. Icon»: I I I 1. WIANNV I I: a \0.’ 0 090(4) ; t: 83 one. o a\ 50 TABLE 4-7 Estimated Number of Parcels and Its Average Area by Size-Group Of Operational Holding: 1959-60 (All India) a Number of Parcels per Operational Size-Group of Operational Average Area Of Parcels Holding (Acres) Holding 0.00 Acres Less than 0.49 1.61 0.15 0.50 - 0.99 2.82 0.26 1.00 - 2.49 4.41 0.38 2.50 - 4.99 6.30 0.58 5.00 - 7.49 7.60 0.80 7.50 - 9.99 8.30 1.04 10.00 — 12.49 8.47 1.31 12.50 - 14.99 8.43 1.62 15.00 - 19.99 8.87 1.93 20.00 - 24.99 8.66 2.55 25.00 - 29.99 8.50 3.21 30.00 - 49.99 9.06 4.12 50.00 and above 9.39 8.06 All sizes 5.82 Sourc e: The Indian Rural Problem [13]. 51 abolished and some are modified since independence. But still absentee landlords control large acreages. The following map (Figure 4-3) shows the pattern of ownership by indicating the percentage of the farmers who own the land they work. In the darkest areas, over 50 percent Of land is not cultivated by the peOple who own it. The tenants are not secured and thus lack the interest in land and do not want to invest money in develOp— ing land and buying the machinery. Land Reform Laws As mentioned before, the land is not evenly dis- tributed, a large number Of farmers cultivate very small acreage of land and thus has created political problems. This has forced the government to implement land reforms laws such as consolidation, and ceiling on present and future land holdings. Due to new ceiling laws, the hold- ings are getting smaller and smaller. This has depressed the rate of investment by redistributing land from those who have a better capacity to invest to those who lack necessary resources 0 Scarcity Of Capital Resources The mechanization of agriculture will require huge capital resources which are not available in the country. As India's economy is backward, savings are small, and since savings are small, economy is underdevelOped. The 52 I‘ “ 0 D0. .3“. "'j'j“ Land Owner- Puuil‘ , . CUIIIVdIOYS Rajasthan Godiva; VQIIcy E “now-rum: \o . . .0 "d W Malabar -' ° , «In: ma . ., " . u 50 44 "1 can» Cont o o , o I Less than 0 o ‘0 '0' COII’ Source Kinngu'rg R.C. (‘1) Figure 4-3.--Land Owner-Cultivators. 53 TABLE 4-8 Relationship Between Land Holding and Ownership Of Agricultural Machinery and Implements and Cattle and Buffaloes Owned by Cultivating Rural Household: All India (1959-62) Agricultural Machinery t B 's and Implements (%) (Percen age a51 ) (%) Size Group (Acres) PlOW Eiigggic Tractors Cattle Buffalo Wooden Iron Less than 1 6.01 6.26 -- 1.14 10.43 10.96 1 - 5 37.80 21.65 6.02 9.20 31.41 27.80 5 - 10 23.41 21.98 32.62 18.64 22.20 21.83 10 - 15 12.65 16.07 21.72 10.32 12.93 14.16 15 - 25 10.35 15.69 14.79 16.30 11.05 12.16 25 - 50 6.95 13.19 13.70 18.00 8.24 _ 9.15 Over 50 2.83 5.16 11.50 26.50 3.74 3.94 Source: T. R. Sundaram, in resource position of small farmers in Seminar on Problems of Small Farmers [21]. 54 hands of government are said to be already full, with various developmental and other schemes. In view of this it is said that if an attempt is made to mechanize agri- culture, it will increase the shortage still further, creating thereby many more complications. Tractors, harvesters, etc., will then compete with other essential capital goods. The recent study has concluded that even if only tractor power is utilized for 10 percent of the farming Operation (by the end of next 30 years), we will require a tractor production capacity of 459,000 units per year (present production 20,000) in the size of 5 h.p., 20 h.p., and 35 h.p. or larger. This tractor manufacturing dis- tribution and servicing industry would be a major industry with a total investment of Rs.17.74 billion. This rate of mechanization represents a Rs.9.44 billion annual invest— ment in agriculture and may require Rs.12.09 billion in credit flow to sustain it. It is not anticipated that Indian agriculture will be able to invest in mechanization at this rate. In the advanced countries due to huge farm sur- pluses, the farm population has sufficient saving potential to invest for capital formation. But the situation in India is quite different. The saving potential of agri- culture depends largely on producers surplus, and this producers surplus in Indian agriculture is meager as 55 compared to other highly industrialized and advanced countries, due to overdependence of population on agri- culture in India. Thus at present the sc0pe for any capital invest- ment in agriculture is meager, till the India withdraws its surplus human labor from agriculture, which shares a huge portion of farmers income which otherwise could have been saved and invested in improvement of agriculture. TABLE 4-9 Per Capita Income in India and Some Advanced Countries Country Per Capita Income in Rs. India 543 (1967-68) U.S.A. 23,992 Canada 15,057 Argentina 5,361 Mexico 3,392 Note: 1 Dollar = Rs.7.50. Source: Indian Agriculture in Brief. Government of India, New Delhi, 1970 [11]. Education and Training There is also another problem attending the mech- anization of agriculture and that is getting trained Operators. The majority of farmers are too illiterate to 56 understand and handle the complicated modern farm machines and equipment. The present facilities for such training are mostly inadequate. There are two tractor training centers run by the government of India. One at Budni (Madya Pradesh) and another at Hissar (Haryana). Tractor manufacturers dis- tributors and dealers offer certain facilities. But all these facilities have to be multiplied several times to cope with the requirements. The maintenance cost of farm machinery in India is comparatively very high. Operators do not have prOper awareness of the need for preventive maintenance, and this makes maintenance very expensive. A survey conducted in 1967 showed that 56 percent of the owners employed drivers, most of them had no prior training in maintenance or small repair work. Due to the non-availability of prOperly trained Operators, farmers do not want to invest their money in costly machines and thus have to depend on custom contractors for farm Operations, which ultimately affects the sale of machines and equipment. CHAPTER V CONCLUSION The mechanization program unfortunately received less attention than it deserves in India. Its importance has been continuously underestimated on the grounds that India has large numbers of small holdings and an abundance of human labor. It is true that there are certain limi- tations to farm mechanization in a situation such as Indias, but that is no reason for neglecting such mechanization as is possible or economic. An intensive agricultural prOgram automatically reduces the time available for completing each individual Operation, conventional devices have to yield place to mechanized practices if the farmer is to benefit from the program. There will always be a very large number of farmers for whom equipment will never prove economic due to the small size of their holdings. Sometimes collective farming on COOperative lines is the remedy suggested for the Indian conditions. But the experience gained by the 57 58 attempts for consolidation of holdings here has led to believe that due to social customs, ignorance and illi- teracy it is very difficult to carry on mechanized farming. The success of mechanization depends to a great extent on the technical efficiency of the machines, since it depends on the peOple who should be enterprising and mechanical minded. In India peOple lack prOper education and training necessary to handle the machines. With these points in view it appears that if mechanization is adopted as such, it will be at a low level of efficiency. Even then there are Spheres where mechanization can be adopted. On large farms where sugarcane, cotton, potato, wheat and fodder is grown mechanization can be introduced. Again, the reclamation of waste land can very well be done by power-driven machinery. The government should buy the machines and equipment and hire them out to farmers in cases where cultivators have large farms and mechanization is a necessity. LITERATURE CITED 10. LITERATURE CITED Agarwal, A. N. 1953. Indian Agriculture and Its Problems. Ranjit Printers and Publishers, Delhi, 123 pp. Bergmann, Theodor. 1963. "Problems of Mechanization in Indian Agriculture," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics [Bombay], XVIII, No. 4 (October-December), 26 pp. Dagli, Vadilal. 1968. Foundations of Indian Agriculture, Vora and Company Publishers, Pvt., Ltd. [Bombay], 176 pp. Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations. Production Yearbook [Rome]. 1972. Gadkary, D. A. 1957. Mechanical Cultivation in India. Indian Council of Agriculture Research, Government Of India, New Delhi, 9 pp. Jain, B. K. S. 1971. Production of Agricultural Machinery in India, Agriculture Mechanization in Asia [Japan].(Autumn), 105 pp. Jain, S. C. 1967. Towards a Revolution in Agriculture. Agriculture DevelOpment in India, Kitab Mahal, ALLAHABAD, 249 pp. Johnson, S. E. 1943-47. Science in Farming. Yearbook of Agriculture, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 922 pp. Kingsbury, Robert C. 1969. South East Asia in Maps. Denoyer-Geppert Company, Chicago, 58 pp. Ministry of Food and Agriculture. 1966. Farm Management in India: A Study Based on Recent Investigations. Government of India, New Delhi, 8 pp. 59 11. 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 60 Ministry of Food and Agriculture. 1970. Indian Agriculture in Brief. Government of India, New Delhi, 38-39 pp. Mishra, G. P. 1971. "Planning in Agriculture Backwardness," Eastern Economist [Calcutta], Annual Number (December), 1131 pp. Nanavati and Anijaria. 1970. "The Indian Rural Problem," Indian Society of Agricultural Economics [Bombay], 182 pp. Randhawa, M. S. 1962. Agriculture and Animal Husbandry in India. Indian Council of Agriculture Research, Government of India, New Delhi, 22 pp. Roy, S. E. 1968. Machinery Requirement of Progressive Wheat Farmers Towards Dynamic Agriculture. Government of India, New Delhi, 215 pp. Shariff, Ismail. 1966. The Development of Indian and American Agriculture--A Comparative Study. University of Wisconsin [Green Bay], 1 pp. Shinn, Rinn-Sup; Folan, John B., et al. 1970. Area Handbook for India, Foreign Area Studies of American Universities [Washington] (May), 13 pp. Singh, L. P. 1971. SCOpe of Mechanizing Wheat Threshing in India, Agriculture and Agro- Industries, Journal [Bombay], IV, No. 5 (May). 23 PP- Sisto, N. 1959. Statistical Note on Progress in Farm Mechanization, F.A.O. Monthly Bulletin of Agriculture and Statistics, III, No. 12 (December), 6 pp. Sridharan, C. S. 1968. Reducing the Tiller's Toil, Agriculture and Agro-Industries Journal [Bombay], 1, No. 2 (April), 17 pp. Sundaram, T. R. 1970. Resource Position of Small Farmers, Seminar on Problems of Small Farmers, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics [Bombay], Seminar Series VII, 18 pp. 61 22. United States Department of Agriculture. 1964. Agriculture in India, Economic Research Service [Regional Analysis Division] (January), 3 pp. 23. . 1965. Changes in Agriculture in 26 Developing Nations. Economic Research Service, Report No. 27, September. 24. Venkatappiah, B. 1972. Farm Mechanization in India. Seminar on Problems of Farm Mechanization, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics Seminar, Series IX, 12 pp. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LI 0 3 1293 BRARIES 3062 5481