4'wu-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-u-n-I-I-I FARM MECHANIZATION AND AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT: A CASE STUDY OF THE PAKISTAN PUNJAB Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D.. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSlTY BASHIR AHMAD 1972 '.,W3-.-a.,~,.,. 0‘ BR ,, ‘ LI i n » O - C A-‘ Lz‘. ‘f‘ng'au “t, l .‘ stctS-‘fiik’ {l ' an». --*=.-M='".-"'* 1‘ .13 This is to certify that the thesis entitled Farm Mechanization and Agricultural Devélopment: A Case Study of the Pakistan Punjab presented by Bashir Ahmad has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for ' PhoDo degree in Agricultural Economics 54W,“ 04/, ”306% Major professor ! Date September 8 , 1972 0-7639 4‘V—‘—- -. ‘ -r-¢ 4—» v...— .— ABSTRACT FARM MECHANIZATION AND AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT: A CASE STUDY OF THE PAKISTAN PUNJAB BY Bashir Ahmad This study investigated the economic and social implications of tractor mechanization in the Punjab province of Pakistan. It analyzed the influence of mechanization upon cropping intensities, yields per acre, cropping patterns, and the rate of return on investment in tractor and equipment. .The social aspects include the influence of mechanization on employment of labor, tenurial relation- ships, and structure of farming. The method of study included (1) an analysis of the existing situation based on a field survey of a cross-section of tractor and bullock farms and (2) predictions based on a linear programming model developed for the wheat-cotton area in the Punjab. The study encompassed two systems of irrigation, canal irrigation only and canal plus tubewell irrigation. The canal plus tubewell irrigation included two cropping patterns, wheat-cotton and wheat-rice. .- .A;:‘ ‘t”‘ hub. on“ . . Q ..~ ....c:I< c l O Q «ya-urzoan O «9.... .4 .b'u :IA n“ tn» .1“ ‘ Q ‘."“ NR '0: '.C.u.‘, W a a ‘.2='~'~— h “Ovt‘ .IQA'. ' ‘- _.:‘" idol . F'A“ ' “l '04 :r-ng '3‘2: .- ,; "rune“ :~.- ~o~~.e. e“ I I ‘v “N; . U Ma,an;l --.‘Q ~ A ‘ I.‘V:'( C ’ E ‘u- ‘M V bun "F " fl ‘1 VA‘ ‘ 5 N u fi ‘ I “"-.e: 4 ~ “5‘“? I dd‘ "F .“V Bashir Ahmad .The results of the field survey and the programming model indicated that, on the whole, tractor as compared to bullock cultivation led to a cropping pattern relatively dominated by high value crops but had no significant influ- ence on the yields per acre. The lack of influence on yields was because tractor farmers lacked the necessary auxiliary equipment and had made no significant change in the use of improved inputs and practices as compared to the bullock farmers. The most important influence of the tractor mechan- ization had been on cropping intensity. There were, however, important differences due to the system of irrigation and cropping patterns. Without a tubewell, irrigation water remained a constraint, and therefore, tractor cultivation had no influence on cropping intensity. As expected, the rate of return on tractor mechanization on a SO-acre farm in this area was only 3 per cent. Where tubewell water supplemented canal irrigation, tractor cultivation led to substantially higher cropping intensities as compared to bullock cultivation. The difference was greater under the wheat-cotton compared to the wheat-rice cropping system. In the wheat-cotton area the rate of return on mechanization reached 46 per cent. The rate fell to 32 per cent when major inputs and outputs were priced at the world market level. The results of the programming model indicated that the thresher with bullock in the "without" tubewell area 1:6 the t :cst arc-f but us '1 l . ‘ 0‘0 5’” fl bflb UIQ‘L mm. 4 0. iv EV. . the CaSL c. ' anon " :1" -9¢-L ~"‘V c ' I UU‘bQ'iat] OI -£ 539:: :izeya‘e :1 Date: one ‘ :u‘ :"". it “|.' b: .“f‘r weasel ‘A ‘. v. brie e 70: h‘ ‘ ' n: ”2‘16 L,‘ IN \"t3[ Bashir Ahmad and the tractor with thresher in the tubewell were the most profitable forms of mechanization. The tractor farms had relatively less family labor but used more hired labor per cultivated acre compared to the bullock farms. The structure of the hired labor on the tractor farms had changed, however, with less permanent and more casual labor being used. Tractor mechanization led to large scale tenant ejectment. The tractor farmers resumed land for self— cultivation; they also purchased and rented land to increase the Operational size of their holding. The effects of tubewell mechanization on tenants and the farm size of the owner operator were very similar to those of tractor mech— anization. It is hypothesized that not only the tractor but anything that increases the productivity of land and/or increases the land handling capacity of the landlord leads to the ejectment of tenants. Implications of this research for agricultural development policy in Pakistan are numberous. It was recommended that under the existing situation steps should be taken to encourage thresher instead of the tractor mechanization in areas without a tubewell. In the tubewell area where the adoption of the thresher instead of the tractor results in a smaller increase in productivity, the loss or gain needs to be considered against the likely benefits in the form of foreign exchange savings, improved , . 87.27.3515 of i cuts varies Lye A.» can make and ~‘ . \ Dan Bashir Ahmad off-farm linkages and, possibly, less tenant displacement. The agricultural extension service should place more emphasis on persuading the farmers to use a broader package of inputs and improved practices required to obtain optimum results from technological changes. Agricultural research can make very important contributions by shortening the growing seasons for wheat and especially for cotton, thus offsetting, at least partially, the speed advantage of the tractor in achieving higher cropping intensity. To reduce imbalanced growth between the tubewell and non-tubewell areas, diversion of some canal water from the former to the latter needs consideration. Finally, several areas for further research have been identified. These are (l) to study ejected tenants and determine the process by which they have or have not been readjusted into the labor force; (2) to study whether there is a shortage of permanent hired labor and, if so, for what reasons; (3) to study the economic profitability of the tractor equipment and other improved inputs and practices; and (4) research towards deve10ping short season, disease-resistant cotton varieties. FARM MECHANIZATION AND AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT: A CASE STUDY OF THE PAKISTAN PUNJAB BY Bashir Ahmad A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Agricultural Economics 1972 Dedicated To My Father For all the sacrifices he made for my education in Pakistan that laid the groundwork for my Ph.D. study program. ii 1)) f ,. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I exPress my deepest gratitude to Dr. L. W. Witt for the imaginative guidance and the helpful cooperation he gave throughout the entire graduate program at Michigan State University. I also feel greatly indebted to Dr. Carl Eicker for his continuous contributions toward the enrich— ment of my study program. The contributions made by Dr. L. V. Menderscheid and Dr. Warren Vincent at various stages of this dissertation are appreciated. The help of Dr. Robert D. Steven is recognized. At the preparatory stage of this research I had some useful discussions with Dr. Bruce F. Johnston of the Stanford Food Research Institute and Dr. Jerry B. Eckert (then with the Ford Foundation Pakistan); their contribution is recognized. Most of the dissertation research was done at the Harvard University. I express my sincere thanks to Dr. Carl M. Gotsch for providing me access to the Harvard Library and computer facilities and for his guidance and reviewing of the first draft of this manuscript. My thanks are also due to many officials of the Punjab Agriculture Department and to many of my relatives and friends in Pakistan for their generous help in the field iii a“ w ‘ ‘1 ‘ naming sudy ar survey work in the Punjab. I am grateful to the Punjab Planning and Development Department for sparing me for this study and to the Ford Foundation for financing the whole of the study program at Michigan State University and the field survey in Pakistan. Finally, my sincerest thanks are due to my wife, Saleema, for her patience, understanding, and encouragement. Without her sacrifices this undertaking would not have been completed. Bashir Ahmad iv “J C“ = ...pte II Chapter I. II. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCT ION O O O O O O O O O O O Technological Change, Agricultural Growth, and Development . . . . . . . . . Overview of Several Major Studies on Farm Mechanization in Asia . . . . . . . The Objectives of the Study . . . The Conceptual Framework . . . . . . Organization of the Study . . . . THE CHARACTERISTICS OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT POLICIES, AND DIFFUSION PATTERN OF FARM MECHANIZATION IN WEST PAKISTAN . . . . . Characteristic Features of Agriculture in West Pakistan . . . . . . . . . . Natural Endowments--The Land and the Water . . . . . . . . . . . . Land and People . . . . . . . Farm Size and Distribution of Landholdings 6 . . . . . . . . . Government Policies with Respect to Mechanization . . . . . . . . . . Import Policy . . . . Taxation Policy . . . Credit Policy . . . . Other Policies . . . . Diffusion Pattern of Farm Mechanization in West Pakistan.. . . . . . . . . . Ownership Pattern . . . . Mechanization Pattern and the Holding Size 0 O O I O I O 7 O O O I O Mechanization and the Water Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . Page 11 20 25 27 27 27 34 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 42 43 47 H F—C H o III. IV. V. Summary . . . . . . . . . DESIGN AND PROCEDURE OF THE SURVEY The Design of the Survey . . . Sample Stratification Based on Irrigation System . . . . . . Sample Stratification Based on Cropping Patterns . . . . . . Pairing of the Sampling Units . The Survey Procedure . . . . Selection bf the Districts . . Selection of the Sampling Units Interviewers and Interviewees . Summary . . . . . . . . . THE OUTPUT AND SOCIAL EFFECTS OF TRACTOR MECHANIZATION IN THE PAKISTAN PUNJAB Output Effects . . . . . . Cropping Intensities . . . . Yields Per Acre . . . . . Cropping Pattern Effect . . . Extent and Pattern of Tractor Custom work 0 O O O O O 0 Number and Use Pattern of Bullocks on the Tractor Farms . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . Social Effects of Tractor Mechanization Impact of Farm Mechanization on Farm Employment . . . . . . . Influence of Farm Mechanization on Tenurial Relationships and the Size of the Farm 0 O I O I O I O I Summary . . . . . . . . A PROGRAMMING APPROACH TO THE ECONOMICS OF TRACTOR MECHANIZATION IN THE PAKISTAN PUNJAB The Linear Programming Model . . Structural Specification of the Model vi Page 48 so 51 51 52 54 55 SS 56 60 61 63 63 64 77 90 94 96 99 102 103 122 129 131 131 131 VI :9 .. unfit Model Data and Their Sources Initial Results of the Programming Exercise: The Basic Solution Tractor Versus Bullocks Tractor with Thresher Versus Thresher . . The Rate of Return on Mechanization in the Pakistan Punjab Employment Effects of Mechanization . Summary . . . VI. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF THE PROGRAMMING MODEL RESULTS . . . Size of the Farm and Rate of Return on Mechanization . Farm Size and Employment Input-Output Price Distortion and Profitability of Mechanization Tubewell Water and the Rate of Return on Mechanization . Summary . . . VII. Conclusions . The Economics of Mechanization CONCLUSIONS, POLICY IMPLICATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH Bullock with The Social Consequences of Mechanization Policy Implications Future Research BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . APPENDICES APPENDIX A . . . . APPENDIX B . . . . APPENDIX C . . . . APPENDIX D . . . . vii Page 141 145 150 159 164 172 176 178 178 181 181 186 189 191 192 192 194 195 201 205 213 217 234 236 Table 2010 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. 2.6 Table 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. 2.6. 2.7. 2.8. 2.9. 2.10. 2.11. LIST OF TABLES Land Utilization in West Pakistan and the Punjab 1967-68 O O O O O O O O O O O The Cultivated Area and the System of Water Supply in West Pakistan in 1967-68 . . . . The Cropping Pattern in West Pakistan and the Punjab in 1967—68 . . . . . . . . . . The Share of Agriculture in the Total Labor Force in West Pakistan . . . . . . . . The Percentage Distribution of the Agricultural Labor Force in West Pakistan by Tenure in 1961 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O The Percentage Size Distribution of the Farms and the Farm Area in West Pakistan 1960 . . The Percentage Distribution of the Farm Operators and the Farm Area by Tenure in West Pakistan in 1960 . . . . . . . . . . Ownership Pattern of Tractors in West Pakistan, 1969 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Percentage Distribution of Tractors by Horsepower in West Pakistan, 1969 . . . . Percentage Distribution of Tractors and Owners According to Size of Ownership and Operational HOIdings O O O O O O O O O O O O O The Percentage Distribution of Tractors and Owners with Respect to the Irrigation System, 1968—69 O O O O O O O O O O O O O viii Page 28 30 33 34 35 36 37 43 44 46 47 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5. 4.6. 4.7. 4.8. 4.9. 4.10. 4.11. 4.12. 4.13. 4.14. The Relative Share of Wheat, Cotton, and Rice in the Leading Districts of the Punjab, 1960 O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ranking of the Punjab Districts by the Number of Private Tractors in 1969 . . . . . Farm Management Survey of Tractor and Bullock Farmers in the Pakistan Punjab . . . . Cropping Intensities on Different Types of Farms in Tubewell and the Non-Tubewell, Canal Irrigated Areas . . . . . . . . . The Percentage Share of Different Rabi (Winter Season) and Kharif (Summer Season) Crops in the Total Cropped Area on Bullock Farms in the Cotton and the Rice Zones during 1970-71 The Sowing and Harvest Calendar for Wheat, Cotton, and Rice in the Punjab . . . . Crop Rotations in the Rice Zone in the Punjab Crop Rotations in the Cotton Zone in the Punjab O O O O O O O O O O O O CrOp Rotations on Cotton Zone Farms (Summary) Yields on the Tractor and the Bullock Farms in Various Areas . . . . . . . . . . Tractors and Equipment on Nineteen Mechanized Farms Surveyed . . . . . . . . . . Level of Inputs and Improved Practices . . Input Level and Improved Practices . . . . Level of Inputs and Improved Practices . . Aggregate Input Levels and Improved Practices Cropping Pattern on Different Types of Farms in Different Areas . . . . . . . . The Percentage of the Plowings and the Plankings Performed by CrOp With Tractor on the Tractor Custom Farms . . . . . . ix Page 53 57 62 65 69 71 74 75 76 78 80 83 85 87 89 91 95 4.15. 4.16. 4.17. 4.18. 4.19. 4.20. 4.21. 4.22. 4.23. 4.24. 4.25. 4.26. 5.1. Working Bullock Pairs on Different Types of Farms in Various Survey Areas . . . . . . The Percentage of Plowings and Plankings Performed, by Crop, With Bullocks on the Tractor Farms in Different Areas . . . . . The Total Family Male Labor in the Tractor and the Bullock Farm Households Surveyed on the Punjab and Their Distribution Between Farm and Non-Farm Jobs, 1971 . . . . . . . . The Level of Education of the Family Labor Force in Mechanized and Bullock Farm Households Surveyed . . . . . . . . . Previous Occupation of the Present Family Labor Force on the Tractor Farms . . . . . . . Total Family and Permanent Hired Male Labor Working on the Tractor and Bullock Farms surveyed O O O O O O O O O O O O O The Number of Permanent Hired Labor and Family Labor Before and After the Tractor on the Mechanized Farms Surveyed . . . . . . . Casual Labor Used Per Cultivated Acre on Tractor and the Bullock Farms Surveyed . . . A Total Use of Casual Labor on Tractor and Bullock Farms in the Punjab 1970-71 . . . . Total Labor Used Per Cultivated Acre on the Tractor and Bullock Farms Surveyed in the Punjab, 1970-71 O O O O O O O O O O The Effect of the Tubewell on the Operational Holding of the Tubewell Owners and on their Tenants . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Influence of the Tractor on the Operational Holding of the Tractor Owners and on Their Tenants O O O O O O O O O O O O O Schematic Representation of the Linear Programming Model . . . . . . . . . . Page 97 98 106 107 110 114 115 117 118 121 123 125 133 503O 5.10. 5.11. 5.12. 5.13. 5.14. SO15O 5.16. Page The Fixed Resources Available to a 50—Acre Farm in the Cotton Area of the Punjab, 1971 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 142 Gross Revenue, Variable Costs, and Net Revenue per Acre of Crop Activities Used in the Programming Model . . . . . . . . . . 146 Variable Costs Per Acre of Crop Activities Used in the Programming Model . . . . . . . 148 Cropping Intensities for Tractor and Bullock Farms in Model and Survey Results . . . . 150 Cropping Pattern Percentages for Tractor and Bullock Farms from Model Results . . . . . 152 Shadow Prices of Resources Fixed to the Farm . 155 Net Farm Revenue for Tractor and Bullock Farms from Model Results . . . . . . . . . 158 CrOpping Intensities with Thresher Added for Tractor and Bullock Farms from Model Results . 160 Cropping Pattern Percentages with Thresher Added for 50-Acre Tractor and Bullock Farms from Model Results . . . . . . . . . 161 Shadow Prices of Fixed Farm Resources with Thresher Added for SOvAcre Tractor and Bullock Farms . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Net Farm Revenue with Thresher Added for 50vAcre Tractor and Bullock Farms from Model Results O O O O O O O O O O O O O 163 Cost of Tractor and Bullock Technology . . . 166 The Rate of Return on Tractor Mechanization in the Punjab--All Bullocks Disposed of, Market Prices 1970-71 . . . . . . . . 168 Rates of Return on Tractor Mechanization in the Tubewell Area, With and Without Bullocks and Thresher . . . . . . . . . . . 171 Rate of Return on Mechanization With Tractor— Thresher Replacing Bullock-Thresher . . . . 173 xi 5.17. 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. 6.4. 6.5. 6.6. 6.7. 6.8. 7.1. 1.1 R2 310 LA) 6.3. 6.4. 6.5. 6.6. 6.7. Page Employment Effects of Mechanization in the Pakistan Punjab, Model Results . . . . . 174 The Rate of Return on Tractor Mechanization at Market Prices, 1970-71 . . . . . . . . 179 Rates of Return on Tractor Mechanization on a Tubewell Farm, with and without Bullocks and ThreSher O O O O O O O O O O O O O 180 Size of the Farm and Employment Effects of Mechanization in the Tubewell Areas of the Punjab O O O O O O O O O O O O O 182 Cost of Mechanical and Bullock Technology Package . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 Prices of Internationally Traded/Import Competing Agricultural Crops . . . . . . 185 Rates of Return on Mechanization at WOrld Prices Compared with Domestic Prices . . . 185 The Amount of Canal and Tubewell Water Used by SO-Acre Tractor and Bullock Farms in the MOdel O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 187 Rates of Return on Mechanization at Various Levels of Tubewell Water on SO-Acre Farms . . 189 Effect of Additional Tubewell Water on Utilization of Canal Water, for a SO-Acre Bullock Farm . . . . . . . . . . . 200 The Casual Labor Used Per Acre of Different Crops on Bullock and Tractor Farms Surveyed in the Punjab O O O O O O O O O O O 214 Net Farm Revenue on a Tractor and a Bullock Farm in the Tubewell and the Non-Tubewell Areas O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 234 Net Farm Revenue With Tubewell Under Different Forms of Mechanization Compared to Bullock Cultivation . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 Net Farm Revenue on a Tractor and a Bullock Farm in the Tubewell and Non-Tubewell Areas . 234 xii Page A.5. Net Farm Revenue on a SO-Acre Tractor Farm and a SO-Acre Bullock Farm at Different Levels of Maximum Restrictions on the Tubewell Water Pumping . . . . . . . . 235 xiii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Technological Change, Agricultural Growth, and Development The decade of the 1960's was marked by at least two critical developments in the theory and the practice of development economics. A concensus emerged, firstly, that agricultural growth was essential for the general economic growth and, secondly, that technological change was critical to agricultural modernization. Previously development economists associated economic growth with industrialization and were more concerned with the role of agriculture in the structural transformation than with the process of agri- cultural growth as such. As this issue was settled during the 1960's, the process of agricultural modernization re- ceived added attention. During the 1950's "diffusion models" based on improving the allocative efficiency of existing inputs had led to an extension bias in the choice of agri- cultural deve10pment strategies. The limitations of this approach became apparent as the technical assistance and the community development programs failed to generate any significant output increase in the traditional agriculture. It was realized that it was not the allocative inefficiency but primitive technology that was the root cause of agri- cultural stagnation in a traditional society. T. W. Schultz in his 1964 book Transforming Traditional Agriculture (60) emphasized that peasants in a traditional agriculture are rational and efficient resource allocators but that they remain poor because in most poor countries only limited investment opportunities are available. According to him, the key to modernizing a traditional agricultural sector is to make modern "high-pay-off" inputs available to farmers and thereby change the "state of the arts." According to Ruttan and Hayami, "the significance of the (Schultzian) high-pay-off input model is that policies based on the model appear capable of generating a sufficiently high rate of agricultural growth to provide a basis for overall economic development consistent with modern pOpulation and income growth requirements" (55). By the later sixties, some further redirections emerged in the approaches to develOpment. It became in- creasingly evident that agricultural growth alone was not a sufficient condition for raising the welfare of the masses of rural inhabitants. The result was that such social ob- jectives as employment and income distribution moved up from their peripheral position and were given equal im- portance with economic growth (see 12, 21, 56, and 61). Indeed, by the turn of the decade, it was being argued that growth itself in many societies was dependent upon a more equalitarian distribution of income. In the past, however, economic growth was the overriding objective of development, and it was assumed that the growth itself would take care of the social ob- jectives of employment and income distribution. The development policies and strategies pursued in the develop- ing'countries over the past two decades aimed at economic growth. The development programs were primarily designed to achieve a certain rate of growth in terms of real income per capita; employment was a by-product of such programs. The creation of adequate jobs was assumed to be a function of the rate of economic growth. Furthermore, in order to achieve high levels of savings and investment and, there- fore, economic growth, the development strategies in the past permitted (if not encouraged) income inequality. The underlying assumption here was that as the size of the "pie" grew bigger everybody would share in the fruit of economic growth, though unequally. Contrary to expectations, the development efforts of the past decades led to divergent trends in economic growth as compared to the social welfare consideration. Considerable evidence has accumulated that past economic growth took place without creating enough jobs (43 and 70). Furthermore, the available evidence suggests that the employment problem is likely to be even more serious during the 1970's. Millions of young people born two decades ago will be entering the labor market. According to Turnam, the labor force in the developing countries is expected to grow at 2.3 per cent per annum as compared to 1.7 per cent per annum during 1950-1965, thereby increasing the number of those requiring employment by at least 25 per cent (70, pp. 1-3). As regards the distribution of the fruits of growth, it was not only extremely skewed but also the position of certain social groups deteriorated in absolute terms. For example, the real wages of the unskilled ‘ industrial workers in Pakistan, after remaining stagnant from the early 1950's, declined by one-third during the 1960's at a time when the industrial sector was expanding at a rapid rate (see 52, pp. 12-13; 63, pp. 1-7). Mass unemployment along with the concentration of the benefits of the economic progress in a few hands and the deprivation of the majority has already created serious social tensions, led to violent confrontation, and posed a threat to political and social stability (28, 29, 39, and 72). As might be expected, these socio-political conse- quences emerging from the past pattern of economic growth have proved to be more persuasive arguments for reconsider- ingl priorities than any straight forward appeal based on the welfare of the masses. The focus on employment and income distribution has reinforced previous diagnoses concerning the crucial role 1Dudley Seers, for example, proposes that employment should replace income as the target of development programs see 62). of the agricultural sector in development. This is due to the agricultural sector having a dominant share of the total rapidly growing population and the limited capacity of the non-farm sector to absorb more people. In most developing countries, more than 50 per cent of the total population depends on agriculture for their livelihood and jobs. With the expected rapid population growth rate of around 3 per cent per annum during the next decade or so, the available evidence suggests that the absolute number of people in agriculture will continue to grow in the near future. The manufacturing sectors in the developing countries have shown a limited employment creating capacity in the past (see 5 and 70), and the future prospects are not very encouraging. JohnSton (34) has demonstrated that even a rapid growth of employment in the industrial sector in these countries in the near future can make only a minor contribution to the expansion of the total employment. Thus, given the present position and the future prospects of the agricultural sector, it is evident that agricultural development tech- niques and strategies and the emerging structure of agri- culture will affect a large section of the society in terms of their incomes and jobs and thus will have far reaching economic and social consequences for the society as a whole. Our previous discussion indicates that, in the con- text of the changed development objectives, the greatest attention is now centered on the technological change in agriculture and its economic and social implications. In order to predict its influence on agricultural output, employment, and income distribution, technology must be considered not only in relation to the nature of the resource endowment in a country but also the institutional environ- ment and the government's policies. A technology may be suitable to the resource en- dowment of a country but still have undesirable socio- economic consequences if the institutional structure and the government policies are not apprOpriate. For example, the technology associated with the green revolution, i.e., seed, fertilizer, and water, is considered to be appropriate 1to the resource endowment of most of the developing countries where capital is scarce and the land-man ratio is low. It increases output by making use of the abundant factor--labor --and augments the scarce factor--1and. It is neutral as to scale and can be widely adopted, and so the gains of the technological advance are shared more equitably. Several studies (40, 45, and 57) show that the effect of the seed- fertilizer revolution on output and employment have been favorable and its adoption has been fairly dispersed. However, where there is unequal distribution of land, the large farmers with greater receptiveness to new ideas, less aversion to risk, and easy access to the input market and the technical knowledge have been the first to adopt. The small farmers have adopted after some time lag. In such a situation it is quite possible that the benefit of the new technology: in terms of the upward shift of the production function, might be squeezed out by a fall in the output prices or a rise in the input prices by the time the tech- nology is adopted by the small farmers. The actual outcome can be determined by the government policies with regard to the output and input prices. An OECD study (77), after considering all the available survey data, concludes that the short and the long run implications of the seed- fertilizer revolution should be treated as strictly region specific. The effect may differ among regions due to the level of development, institutions, and the availability of water. The problem of technological borrowing is most acute in cases where mechanization is involved. The introduction of machine power for farm operations is the subject of greatest controversy. The nature of the mechanical tech— nology often is inappropriate for the resource endowment of most of the developing countries. It makes intensive use of capital and foreign exchange, the two scarcest (and, hence, eXpensive) resources in these countries and makes relatively less use of labor which is an abundant (and, hence, cheap) resource. It is argued that the government policies, the land tenure system, and distribution patterns, however, have led to a divergence between the private and social profitability and the widespread use of the machine power on the farms (3, 14, 15). The government policies of low interest rates, overvalued rate of foreign exchange and its preferential allocation for the import of farm .0 EC! nine 1:. A.‘.. or :th inter :2“ A lone: #v be Vera .Susy W mac AM Any Q.» s: uni... A.» uh I. by C E... «L L. machinery, rebates on fuel, subsidized training for drivers and mechanics, and subsidized repair facilities reduce the capital and the variable cost of the farm equipment and machinery considerably below their social opportunity cost. Moreover, where land distribution is skewed, the labor costs to the large farmers who pay the market wage rate are greater than the social opportunity costs. Given these factor prices, it becomes profitable for large farmers, with greater access to land and capital, to use capital intensive technology.1 In the controversy over the farm mechanization, many take extreme positions. In the scheme of agricultural modernization suggested by some there is no place for the tractor (46). There are others who think that increasing the use of tractors (and only big tractors) is the only way to increase agricultural production (23). A range of intermediate steps are, however, available. Emphasis on stationery threshers and tractors used for seed-bed prepar- ation only has been suggested to break the seasonal peak labor and bullock power bottlenecks (32). The problem with tractors, however, is that once the machine power is lKeith Griffin (22) provides a very good theoretical basis of how a distortion of the input prices leads to a non-optimum technology from the social point of view. It becomes clear from his analysis that the actual technologi- cal path may diverge from the socially optimum path of Ruttan and Hayami's (55) "Induced DevelOpment Model" when their assumptions about the institutional structures do not hold. l“? V‘f‘;C AYE-CV: EXCESS (I) r) {u "f (2 ()5 l 0 LI; (D —-\ §.‘b.. ‘ introduced in this form, the economics of utilizing the excess capacity pushes its use for more than one purpose. It is mechanization in the form of large tractors and combine harvestors that is the subject of much of the controversy. The most serious concern about the mechanical technology arises from its predicted social consequences. Tractors, it is said, pose a conflict between growth and social justice. Alternative technologies are available which can increase output and employment and spread the benefits more evenly. Often cited as examples are Japan and Taiwan, where technological change has been of the land-augmenting and labor-absorbing type, increasing agri- cultural employment and more equitably shared output. It is argued that tractor power, by speeding up the farm operations, would lead to displacement of labor and ac- centuate the already serious unemployment problem. More- over, the tractor, being a "lumpy" input, has economies of scale and gives a cost advantage to the large farmers. In order to realize the economies of scale and reduce their average costs, the large farmers would eXpand the size of their farm through displacement of tenants and the purchase of new land (provided there are no legal limits on the farm size). If higher production on the larger farms leads to excess supply and a fall in the output prices, this will be disastrous for the small farmer who does not share in the benefits of the technology but loses due to a fall in 10 his output prices. This process, it is argued, would lead to a "bi-modal" distribution of the farm size and polari- zation of society with serious consequences for the social and political stability (see 77, 22, 37, and 35). In favor of tractor mechanization, it is argued that custom services can deal with the scale factor and small’ farmers can also benefit. The tractor power allows timely and effective farm operations (deep tillage that would activate the soil fertility) that increases per acre yields. Speeding harvesting and land preparation allows multiple cropping, which increases labor productivity and employment. Labor may be displaced on particular Operations, but the overall employment increases due to the increase in the cropping intensities, higher yield, change in cropping patterns, etc. Tractors replace bullocks and so release the fodder land for food crops (see 64, 58, 36, and 41). It is generally agreed that mechanization will have very far-reaching consequences for the socioeconomic structure of the societies where it is being introduced. According to Shaw (64), "So important is mechanization in defining the future of the agricultural sectors in the deve10ping countries that their governments should give the highest priority to conceiving coherent national strategies to deal with the whole set of issues raised." There is not, however, enough information on the economic and social consequences of the mechanical technology to 11 serve as a basis for a general policy for or against mechanization. According to Ridker, There is so little information and the little that exists is of such poor quality that we just can not say with confidence much about the nature of the problem, let alone what, if anything, should be done about it. . . . Any general recommendation on mechani- zation appears to be out of the question at this juncture. The effects appear to be highly specific to the form of mechanization applied, to cropping patterns, and to geographic regions. (58) Overview of Several Major Studies on Farm Mechanization in_Asia A Review of several major studies (along with the theoretical arguments for and against mechanization dis- cussed in the previous section) will be useful in a number of ways. It will help to delineate the objectives of the study, to formulate the hypotheses to be investigated, and to suggest how to design this study. In recent years, a number of relevant studies have been conducted in India. Baghat Singh (65) studied twenty- eight wheat farms in four districts of the Indian Punjab to assess the benfits of the use of tractors. He concluded that: l. The cropping pattern on the tractor farms shifted from low to high value crops. 2. The use of tractors did not affect the cost of cultivation of wheat per maund. 3. There was a substantial substitution of capital for 12 labor. As a result, the tractor farms used less labor per acre as compared to the bullock farms. Singh concentrated on one crop (wheat) only and did not examine the employment pattern Of the tractor farms for all crOps and all agricultural Operations on an average annual basis. The average size of the holding for tractor owners was more than twice that of the non-owners. Such a big difference in the farm size weakens the comparability Of the two types Of farms. The shift in the cropping pattern from low to high value crops on the tractor farms identifies an aSpect that could contribute to the profitability Of a tractor. Another study, also in the Indian Punjab, was made by S. S. Johl in 1971 (36). Using secondary farm manage- ment data for a sample Of progressive farmers for the period 1966-67 to 1969-70, he concluded: Over a period of four years average cultivated area increased by about 11 per cent. Cropped area increased by over 26 per cent with an overall intensity of crop- ping increasing from 126.69 per cent in 1966-67 to 144.26 per cent in 1969-70. As a result of this ex- pansion in crOp acreage horizontally as well as verti- cally labor-use on the farms increased by over 58 per cent during this period. This increase in intensity was made possible through the use of tractor power and water pumping machines. Tractor power use increased by over 44 per cent. Tractors and pumping sets coupled with wheat thrashing machines replaced bullock power, reducing its use to less than 28 per cent of what it was in 1966-67. These data show a high degree of com- plementarity in mechanical power use and labor employ- ment on farms. Substitution took place only for bullocks (animal draft power). Singh hi the mac? at the s consist. 13 Singh highlighted the important mechanisms by which use Of the machine power may lead to higher output and employment at the same time. His mechanization package, however, consisted Of threshing machines, water pumping machines, and tractors. It is generally agreed that water pumping machines and threshing machines will have positive output and employment effects; it is the tractor that is the subject Of controversy. There is no way to separate the effect of the tractor from the other two types of machinery in this study. A study in the Pakistan Punjab (24) on the output effects Of tubewell alone showed that cropping intensities increased from an average Of 90 to 135 per cent and labor input increased by 57 per cent after the installation of the tubewells. (The study was undertaken before the intro- cution of high yielding varieties of foodgrains.) The two figures are very comparable to the output and employment effects given by Singh. However, Singh's study covered a period during which the high yielding seed varieties were Spreading rapidly. When agriculture is undergoing such a rapid all-around technological transformation, a cross- sectional study would be more relevant than a time series analysis. Johl quoted another study (53) to show that yields per acre were higher for all crops on the tractor farms. In the absence of information on the use Of the accompanying inputs, the farm size, etc., it is hardly appropriate to 14 attribute the higher yeilds to tractors. Cline (8) attempted to separate the effects Of mechanization on yeilds from the influence Of other inputs using data for 117 rice farms in the south Of Brazil. His results showed a statistically significant positive effect Of mechnaization on yields, but .the magnitude Of the influence was small. Singh also showed a substantial increase in the non-farm employment for the manufacture, repair, and sale Of agricultural machinery. Two other studies in different parts Of India focused on employment effects Of tractor mechanization. While the study in Mysore State (66) concluded that mech- anization leads to some displacement of labor, the study in the state of Uttar Pardesh (73) indicated positive employment effects. Inukai (32) studied the effect of tractor mechani- zation on the labor input and output Of rice in Thailand. He showed that although the use of the tractor for land preparation reduced the demand for labor for this particular Operation, it led to an increase in the total labor input per unit Of land. Deep and timely plowing by the tractor increased the yield per acre, which also increased the demand for labor. The rapidity Of land preparation enabled the farmers to change the method of rice sowing from broad- casting to transplanting. The transplanted rice increased both the yield per acre and the labor requirements for sowing and harvesting. He concluded, "In a dynamic setting, selective mechanization may create more jobs than it O ’O n; n) ( ) 15 eliminates." In fact, "these labor-saving devices [such as tractors, diesel pumps, and medium-sized tubewells] have provided farmers with an Opportunity to spread work over several seasons. As such, they have on balance enabled farmers to increase the labor input to their agriculture." Using macro level secondary data, this study attempted to establish likely linkage between tractor mechanization and higher farm output and employment. Exami- nation Of such a relationship would be helpful in organiz- ing future research on mechanization. The study, however, provided no guidance for the policy makers. A number of studies have been undertaken in Pakistan on various aspects Of mechanization. Bashir Ahmad (2) of the Agricultural University, Lyallpur, studied the economics Of bullock farming versus tractor farming in the Lyallpur district Of the Punjab. He concluded that the tractor farms grow more cotton and fruits (the relatively high value crops) as compared to the bullock farms which had relatively higher acreage under cereals, fodder, and sugar— cane. The cropping intensity was almost the same on both types of farms. The yield per acre of wheat, cotton, and maize was higher on the tractor farms, but the difference was not significant statistically. The labor input per acre was significantly lower and capital input higher on the tractor farms as compared to the bullock farms. In this study the average size of the tractor farm was more than five times the size Of the bullock farm. Such 16 a big difference in size seriously affects their compara- bility. Different studies (24, 32) show that both intensity and yield per acre tend to decline with increase in the size Of the farm. Bose and Clark (6) looked into the profitability Of tractor mechanization in West Pakistan. Their analysis concluded that at full tractor mechanization,1 the direct costs to society would be about 300 million rupees, and the direct benefits would be around 200 million rupees. The indirect costs, including unemployment of farm labor, would be much greater than the possible indirect benefits. The mechanization is, therefore, not socially profitable. But it is profitable to the farmer because Of divergence between both social and private costs as well as benefits. In their analysis, Bose and Clark assumed that an alternative technique in the form Of improved bullock implements and threshers (selective mechanization) is available which will enable the farmers to handle the seasonal power bottle- necks and prepare the land effectively. They argued that from a social point of view it is not the power but water which is a constraint to the higher cropping intensities. With these assumptions, the findings of their analysis do not include any yield and cropping intensity effect of mechanization. They also made no allowance for a shift in 1When all the farms susceptible (all farms of 25 acres and above) to mechanization to mechanize. the only valu foe: 17 the crOpping pattern. According to their analysis, the only direct social benefit Of mechanization would be the value Of the alternative crops that can be raised on the fodder area released as a result of elimination of bullocks. This study suggests a useful framework for analyzing the private and social costs and benefits Of tractor mech- anization. However, it is not helpful for policy formula- tion because Of its hypothetical data and assumptions, which have not been tested against empirical evidence. Lawrence (41) made a more recent study in Pakistan. He considered a situation where water is no constraint and a farmer is cultivating a wheat-cotton crop sequence using traditional techniques. By using farm budgeting techniques, he showed that the introduction Of mechanical power in the form of the thresher, tractor, and a pull combine will reduce the time required for wheat harvest-cotton sowing and shift the cropping intensities from wheat-cotton-cotton over a two year period to wheat-cotton-wheat-cotton. More- over, the per acre yields will increase due to deeper tillage and timely sowing and row cropping. He concluded, There is a consistent downward trend both in the market and Opportunity costs of a unit of production as one moves from techniques involving less mechanization to techniques involving more mechanization. The persistent downward trend also indicates that emphasis on so-called intermediate technologies involving improved bullock implements and stationary threshers is misplaced . . . There appears to be a clear-cut case for mechanization up to and including use Of tractors and pull combines when a wheat-cotton sequence is being farmed. About the employment effects, he concluded, The 1 when mecna binin field he study open up n conclusio tubewell constrain nit only Of the la to use "5 to go be. Iscarce" '1 different {Egard t( plOymEHt are larg. mm o the nUmb the infl Characte ability far? A“, on inclUdOd 18 The labor demand for field Operations fell only slightly when tractors were introduced, and lower levels Of mechanization actually increased labor demand. Com- bining, on the other hand, does reduce the demand for field labor considerably. . . . The study by Lawrence revealed that mechanization might Open up new possibilities in a given situation, but his conclusions are not applicable in other situations where tubewell water is not available, where water becomes a constraint, and also where soil and climate conditions per- mit only wheat-rice crop rotations. There are large areas of the latter two types in Pakistan. Also, he purports to use "social prices," but if there is not enough water to go beyond 150 intensity, we must introduce water as a "scarce" resource to the economy. This review of mechanization indicates that the different studies bring out conflicting conclusions with regard to the influence Of mechanization on output, em- ployment, and profitability. The conflicting conclusions are largely due to differences (1) in the form Of mechani- zation considered; (2) in the coverage of the study, i.e., the number Of crops and crop Operations covered tO assess the influence Of mechanization; (3) in the situational characteristics in terms of sources Of water supply, avail- ability Of technically feasible crop sequences, size Of the farm, quality of the soil, etc. A The mechanization considered by some Of the studies included tubewells, threshers, tractors, and even combines. 19 However, most of the studies were confined to tractor mech- anization. It should be realized that the influence of the tractor on output and employment will depend on the accom- panying implements and equipment and the use of the tractor. A tractor using a mouldboard plow, row crop planter, and cultivator will have different effects on yields as compared to a tractor using only a cultivator. Similarly, the em- ployment and output effects of a tractor will be different if used only for land preparation than when its use is extended to post-sowing Operations like hoeing and post- harvest Operations like threshing. None of the studies took into consideration the tractor implements and equip- ment and the uses of the tractors. Some studies, assuming a static setting for the farm firm, considered only one crop and one or few Oper- ations to assess the benefits of mechanization. The review as a whole, however, indicates that the introduction of a tractor will infuse a dynamism into the structure Of the farm firm leading to a change in the cropping patterns, cropping intensities, number Of operations performed per crop, intensity of such Operations, yields, etc. To determine the influence of mechanization on employment, output, and profitability, therefore, we should take into consideration all crops and all Operations and the total effect on the average annual basis. 20 As characteristics may differ among regions in the same country, the conclusions emerging under one situation may not be relevant for another. This necessitates separate studies for different situations or a sufficiently compie- hensive study to accommodate a sample Of regional varia- tions. The Objectives of the Study The first major breakthrough in the introduction Of machine power in Pakistan's agriculture took place during the 1960's with the use Of diesel engines and electric motors for pumping the underground sweet water. This led to a rapid tubewell development during the 1960's which continues up-to-date. The socio-economic impact Of the private tubewell development has been intensively explored (9, 10, 24, 25, and 44). These studies concluded that the availability of additional and flexible water supply on the tubewell farms resulted in substantial increases in output and employment. Besides direct increases in on-farm employment, tubewells also created substantial employment Opportunities through backward linkages in the non-farm sector (19, 67). The next major thrust in farm mechanization appeared in the form of tractors, whose number in West Pakistan increased from 1000 in 1959 to 19,000 in 1968-69, with 73 per cent of the total number coming in the three- year period from 1965-66 to 1968-69. More recently, quat rema poli set OO 21 threshers and combine/harvesters have been added to the list Of mechanical farm technology. Some studies (41, 74) have recently been made on threshers and combine harvesters. Their general consensus was that the overall socio-economic impact of the use of threshers will be favorable and those Of combine harvesters unfavorable. As revealed from the review of the previous studies on mechanization, tractor mechanization has not been ade- quately explored, and its socio-economic implications still remain a subject of controversy. To decide the future policy on mechanization, the government of Pakistan in 1968 set up a Farm Mechanization Committee for West Pakistan. This Committee has emphasized the need for research. To quote, "The Committee can't escape the conclusion that research and develOpment has been the weakest link in the progress of Farm Mechanization. . . . Research on socio- economic aspects must receive the highest priority to pro- vide necessary guidance" (48). The overall Objective of the present study on the tractor mechanization in the Punjab Province Of Pakistan is to attempt to find answers to some of the questions raised by the policy makers. Specifically, the study's major objectives are the following: 1. TO identify and measure the effect of farm mech- anization on agricultural output. 2. To identify and measure the effect on farm employment. 22 3. To investigate the tenant-landlord relationships and the effect Of mechanization on the structure of the farms Operated by landlords and tenants. 4. To study and estimate the private and social profitability of the mechanization. The Conceptual Framework The following conceptual framework will serve as a guide for the study. 1. Mechanization can affect output through the follow- ing variables. a. The yield effect: change in the yield per acre per crOp. b. The cropping intensity effect: change in average number Of crop acres raised per culti- vated acre per period. c. The cropping pattern effect: change in the crOpping pattern between high value and low value crops. d. The acreage effect: change in the total area under cultivation per farm.1 2. Similarly, the change in the labor input on a mech- anized farm could be studied through the following framework. 1This variable will not be taken into consideration because of the likely divergence between the micro and the macro acreage effect. 23 The Operations effect: change in the labor intensification of the already existing farm Operations, i.e., higher labor use for harvest- ing when crop yields increase and lower labor use for land preparation when the tractor re- places the bullocks. Moreover, the number Of farm Operations may change: some new Operations may be added or some Old ones eliminated. The cropping pattern effect: crops with higher intensity per acre may be substituted for those with lower labor input requirements per acre, i.e., fruits or vegetables may replace part Of the grain area. The cropping intensity effect: multiple crop- ping would increase the labor use per cultivated acre per period. The acreage effect: increase in the total area under cultivation could lead to greater demand for labor. Again, this variable will not be considered in our study for the reasons given in the previous section. The effect Of mechanization on the tenant-landlord relationships and the farm size could be examined through the following. a. The share effect: the ratio of the cost of inputs and output for the tenant to those for 24 the landlord might change after the landlord buys a tractor. The mechanized landlord might now insist on changing the share ratios in his favor because of his increased capability to handle larger areas himself. b. The terms effect: for the reasons given above, mechanization might change the cash tenancy into share cropping, thus transferring the managerial functions from the tentant to the landlord. c. The farm size effect: the mechanized landlord might increase the size of his Operational holding through: (1) partial tenant displacement whereby tenant is allowed to retain a reduced holding; (2) complete tenant displacement whereby the tenant is altogether evicted, reducing his holding to zero; (3) indirect tenant displacement whereby the mechanized landlord increases his Opera- tional holding through renting in land. 4. Profitability Of farm mechanization can be in- vestigated according to one of two approaches: a. Mechanization as an alternative source of power in a static farming system: This approach assumes that the replacement Of bullock with tractors induces no other change in the 25 combination of products and inputs. The in- vestigation Of profitability of mechanization involves comparison Of the cost of machine power with that of bullock power per cropped acre (see 30). b. Mechanical power as an initiator Of dynamism in the farming system: This approach assumes that the introduction Of the tractor changes the resource availability along with some Of the input-output coefficients to which the profit-maximizing farm firm will respond by changing the level and combination of his inputs and outputs. Following this approach, Lawrence used the farm budgeting technique in his study in Pakistan (41). In the present study we shall also follow this approach but develOp a programming model for a fifty-acre mechanized farm in the Punjab Province Of Pakistan. Organization of the Study The present chapter has been a description Of the basic framework for the study Of tractor mechanization in the Punjab. The following chapter will provide background information, including a discussion of the general features Of agriculture, government policies regarding mechanization, and the pattern Of mechanization that has emerged. 26 Chapter III will present a description Of the design and procedure of the farm level field survey under- taken in the Pakistan Punjab in winter, 1972. In Chapter IV the survey data will be analyzed and the resulting con- clusions will be presented. Chapters V and VI will be devoted to a normative study Of farm mechanization. In Chapter V discussion will be made of (l) the development Of the linear programming model for a representative farm firm in the Pakistan Punjab and (2) the results of the basic solution of the model. Chapter VI will involve an analysis of the sensitivity Of the programming model results to changes in (l) the farm size, (2) the tubewell water, and (3) the prices of agricultural machinery and commodities. In Chapter VII, the study and its conclusions will be summarized, the policy implications of these conclusions will be discussed, and areas for further research will be indicated. CHAPTER II CHARACTERISTICS OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT POLICIES, AND DIFFUSION PATTERN OF FARM MECHANIZATION IN WEST PAKISTAN Characteristic Features Of Agriculture in West Pakistan West Pakistan consists of four provinces: the Northwestern Frontier Province, the Punjab, the Sind, and Baluchistan. Although the present study relates to the Punjab alone, this section highlights some of the major structural elements Of agriculture in Pakistan in order to serve as a context for the study. Natural Endowments--The Land and the Water The geographical area of West Pakistan is 199 million acres. However, as an index of productive resource to provide a base for agricultural production, this figure is very deceptive. As shown in Table 2.1, Of 199 million acres only 79 million acres, i.e., 39.7 per cent Of the total area, was available for cultivation in 1967-68. Further, out of the 79 million acres available for culti- vation, 31 million, i.e., about 40 per cent, remained out of cultivation because Of the lack Of water. The area 27 gamma .muonmqv .mmlhwma new» on» How :mvmwxmm ummz mo uuomum mmuo cam commom .ousuaauwnmd mo ucmEOuommo .cmumwxmm umoz "mousow 28 w~.mm mm.am madmamucw mcflmmouo omouo>¢ .m m.mm >.¢N m.mm mmmmuom pmmmouo Hmuoa .m n.mm m.m~ m.ee leumc emum>eueeo «one sauce .a o.- m.m v.Hm mono mumm3 manmusuaso .m m.~v v.mm o.mh Avumv cowum>wuasu How mannawo>m mmum Hmuoa .m o.oa v.m v.~m Hmuoa .MWM MJMM mono umsuo .n o.H m.m mono ummuom .m gowum>wuaso How wanmawo>m no: moms .e m.em m.He e.Hme “also seem awesome“ Hence .m e.mH ~.a N.ao emuuomou so: «and .N h.m~ o.Hm o.mmH mono Hmowgmonmoom Hmpoa .H noncsm cmumwxmm cmumwxmm no a mo Duncan mound coaaawz cw mend .mouaema banana on» new enumexem name an eoeueneeeua nemAIu.H.~ mamas 29 under cultivation in 1968 was only 48 million acres on which 39 million acres of crOps were raised, giving an overall cropping intensity of 82 per cent. The Province of the Punjab with 26 per cent of the total geographical area has 56 per cent of the total cultivated area of West Pakistan. This indicates the importance of the Punjab in the agriculture of West Pakistan. The cultivated land area alone, however, is not a good indicator Of the productive capacity. It is the water along with the land which determines the production base available. In general, the country has an arid and semi- arid climate with hot summers and cold winters. The rain- fall is low and variable over space and time. In the Northern areas precipitation is above 25 inches per annum. But in the upper Indus Plain, which consists largely of the Punjab, the rainfall varies from 25 to 10 inches. In the Sind and Baluchistan Provinces, it is less than 10 inches per annum. Moreover, rainfall is concentrated in a few months Of the summer and the winter. The low and variable rainfall is the main reason why large segments of the land area available for cultivation could not be brought under the plow. As shown in Table 2.2, out Of 48 million acres under cultivation in 1968, 17 million acres had no other source Of water except rain. In general, the rainfed areas are 30 unusuauuw Hocoo on» no one) moan cw muao3onsu Hmuou ecu uo ucoo nod xwmlxuxwm .Amvv msuuu .mmum poummwuuw dunno on» so noun: wumucoeonmsm we uousom u no ucmuuoasw ouoe nose one maaozonda .Naco maaozonsu >3 poummwuufl noud O .a.~ manna new m< "wouOOm o.~v oo.ooa m.oo m.wm «.mw c.5w h.vm >.mm cmumwxmm umoz «o a we bungee w.~ no.0 m.H cm.~ v.c~ h.o~ m.m m.w~ noncsm m.m no.0 H.~ «m.~ H.~N m.om h.ua o.>v coumwxom umwz pouemwuun monomeuuH pwumwwuuH pmummauuH pout muueuo aces Hem: assesses dunno deuce voum>eueeo mesa coua>euHsO .pflucwuzv Hmwoa mend pouo>wuasu pouomwuuu poummwuuulc: .mmmalhwaa as emumwxme emu: ee seesaw “one: no soumam use one Immune coeeee: sec mesa coue>eueeo upe--.~.~ memes 31 characterized by low level Of cropping intensity and low yields. Under the climatic conditions of West Pakistan, irrigation is essential for intensive cultivation. Histori- cally, land has been irrigated mainly with the surface water. As indicated in Table 2.2, 22 million acres, i.e., 71 per cent of the total irrigated area of 31 million acres, received canal water in 1968. The development Of tubewells during the last decade and a half has added another important source of water. In 1968, about 3 million acres were dependent on tubewell water alone. But the major contribution Of the tubewells has been in providing supplementary water to the areas already irri- gated by canals. Sixty-six per cent Of the total tubewells have been installed in the canal irrigated areas (48, p. 61). The canals supplied only a limited amount of water per- mitting a cropping intensity varying from 80 to 100 per cent.1 The tubewells have provided a dependable and a flexible source of water, removing the historical water constraint and uncertainty and thereby raising intensities and yields.2 1As mentioned in (76) the quantity Of the canal water to be supplied was determined by the canal authori- ties with a View to permitting 80 per cent intensity. The farmers in the canal irrigated areas, however, reach a 100 per cent intensity partly due to the estimate generosity Of the canal authorities and partly due to their thin spreading of the water. 2By the end of 1967-68 about 76,000 private tube- wells had been installed with an average capacity of 1.4 cusecs which provided about 20 million acre feet Of 32 As the empirical data will indicate, the major thrust Of the tractor mechanization has been on these canals and on tubewell water farms. Tubewells, by removing the water constraints, appear to have created a power constraint, especially on the large farms. The Punjab with 56 per cent Of the total cultivated area of West Pakistan (Table 2.1) has 67 per cent Of the irrigated cultivated area (Table 2.2). Sixty-five per cent Of the canal irrigated area and 96 per cent Of the area irrigated by tubewells alone are in the Punjab. About 91 per cent of the total private tubewells have been installed in the Punjab (see 48, Table 33). The relative amount of water along with the cultivated land area in the Punjab clearly identify the pivotal position of the area in the agricultural economy of West Pakistan. This is reflected in its share Of the major crops area as shown in Table 2.3. The crop list in Table 2.3 indicates a considerable diversification in crop production. The aggregate value, however, is dominated by a small number Of crops. Wheat alone accounts for 39 per cent; combined with rice and cotton, the three crops comprise 60 per cent of the total cropped area. additional water (48) annually to supplement the 60 million available from the canals (31). The success story of the rapid agricultural development in West Pakistan during the 1960's has been described largely in terms of the addition Of tubewell water (see 20). 33 .H.N wanna cw we "mousom m.me o.ooe oee.e~ o.ooe moe.em Hence m.~e o.H mew m.o oem mmebeummm> m.me m.o mom H.e wee avenue ~.mm e.~ «me ~.m eeH.H memesa e.ae m.m Hmm e.e mos.e memmmeeo m.mm m.e ~ee.e m.m e-.H umeeom m.ea m.mH oa~.m m.ee mee.e eouuoo H.me e.m mmm e.m mem.e memo “seem e.se m.o me m.o nee ooomnoe e.me a.» ~mm.a «.5 eme.~ seem e.mm m.e eo~.H o.e mm~.~ euflem e.se ~.m ewe e.e wee.e meson m.me o.m ems o.e Hom.e mueez o.am o.e wee ~.H eme smeuem o.ee s.e ome.e e.m oem.m moem o.~a ~.me amm.oa o.mm ame.ee been; mowed pond mmuom “Hams” ”flame mews “MM. ”we”... no ucmo Hmm . . macho mm nmflczm Duncam :mumwxmm ummz .eeuaeee ea basque we» use enumexma new: ea eumuemm meemeouo meeu:.m.~ mamas 34 Land and People The total population of West Pakistan in 1968 was estimated to be 58.3 million, of which 34.8 million or 59.3 per cent lived in the Punjab (52, p. 547). According to the Population Census 1961 (51) 77 per cent of the total population of West Pakistan lived in the rural areas and 75 per cent were directly dependent on agriculture for their livelihood. As shown in Table 2.4 the total labor force in West Pakistan in 1961 was 12.8 million, agriculture's share of TABLE 2.4.--The Share of Agriculture in the Total Labor Force in west Pakistan. (Numbers in Thousands) Labor Force Percentage Share Years Non- . of Agricultural Total Agricultural Agricultural Sector 1951a 9,507 3,319 6,188 65.1 1961a 12,763 5,193 7,570 59.3 1965b 14,359 6,211 8,148 56.7 1970b 16,637 7,769 8,868 53.3 1975b 19,276 9,718 9,558 49.6 1980b 22,334 12,156 10,179 45.6 aCensus Projections Source: Hiromitsu Kaneda, "Economic Implication of the 'Green Revolution' and the Strategy of Agricultural Development in West Pakistan," Pakistan Development Review, IX (Summer, 1969), 111-143. 35 which was about 59 per cent. According to the projections given in the table, the agriculture labor force will con- tinue to grow in absolute numbers at least to 1980. Table 2.5 reports the distribution of the total agriculture labor force in 1961 among the cultivators, the TABLE 2.5.--The Percentage Distribution of the Agricultural Labor Force in West Pakistan by Tenure in 1961. Percentage of the Category 0f Tenure Agricultural Labor Force Farm Operators 54 Owner-operators (26) Owner-cum-tenant ( 9) Tenants (29) Unpaid family labor 28 Landless agriculture laborers 8 Total 100 Source: Pakistan Ministry of Home and Kashmir Affairs, Census of Pakistan Population 1961, Vol. 3, Karachi, 1963. landless laborers, and others. The cultivators, in the form of owner operators and tenants, provided 64 per cent, and another 28 per cent of the labor was provided by their family members. The landless agricultural laborers provided only 8 per cent of the total labor force. 36 Farm Size and Distribution of Landholdings According to the Pakistan Census of Agriculture 1960 (47), the average size of the farm in West Pakistan in that year was 10 acres, of which 7.7 acres were under cultivation. The distribution of the landholdings, however, is very skewed. As shown in Table 2.6, 49 per cent of the farms TABLE 2.6.--The Percentage.Size Distribution of the Farms and the Farm Area in West Pakistan 1960. Size of the Farm Percentage of Percentage of (Acres) the Farms the Farm Area less than 5 ' 49 11 5 to under 12.5 - 28 25 12.5 to under 25 15 29 25 to under 50 6 20 50 to under 150 2 10 150 and above * 5 All Sizes. 100 100 * Less than 0.5. Source: Pakistan Ministry of Agriculture and WOrks, Pakistan Census of Agriculture 1960, Vol. II, (West Pakistan, October, 1963) . . have holdings below 5 acres and comprise only 11 per cent of the total farm area. On the other hand, only 8 per cent of the farms have holdings of 25 acreas and above and consti- tute 35 per cent of the total farm area. According to the 37 various indications (see 6, 37, and 35), it is these 8 per cent of the farms which are mainly susceptible to the tractor mechanization. The data also show (see Table 2.7) that in terms of numbers the tenant farms were slightly more common than TABLE 2.7.-~The Percentage Distribution of the Farm Operators and the Farm Area by Tenure in West Pakistan in 1960. Percentage of Percentage of Type Of Tenure the Farms the Area Owner operated 41 38 Owner-cum-tenant 17 23 Tenant Operated 42 39 All types 100 100 Source: Same as for Table 2.6. those operated by owners. The tenants operated 42 per cent of the farms with 39 per cent of the total farm area as against 41 per cent of the owner operated farms with 38 per cent of the total farm area. These figures emphasize the weight of the tenants in West Pakistan's rural economy. Government Policies with‘Respect to Mechanization:L The government's policy with respect to technologi- cal change could be either "passive" or "active." When 1This section draws heavily on the report of the Farm Mechanization Committee (48). Unless otherwise indi- cated the Committee Report will be the source of information. A. 38 passive, it provides no signals through its incentive and disincentive mechanisms. An active government policy, on the other hand, uses the various policy instruments at its disposal either to encourage or to discourage a technologi- cal innovation. This section will review the government's policies in the various spheres that have a bearing on mechanization. Import Policy Pakistan meets its tractor and agricultural machinery requirements almost entirely from imports. With scarce foreign exchange resources, its allocation and rate have a considerable influence on the availability, prices, and, hence, the demand for tractors and other machinery. Unrestricted foreign exchange allocation at the official exchange rate1 was available for the import of tractors to the commercial importers until 1952 and to the individual farmers until the end of 1966. The allOcation was severely restricted after 1966 and completely stopped in 1969. The foreign exchange allocations at the overvalued official rate provided an important incentive for the import of the tractors. According to the Farm Mechanization Committee Report, "The present (1968-69) annual import of around 35 hundred tractors leaves an unsatisfied demand for 1The official exchange rate during the past few years has been Rs.4.70=$1 which has been now revised to Rs11=$1. This indicates the extent of overvaluation in the rate of foreign exchange. 39 at least an equal number of tractors." However, when foreign exchange allocation at the official rate was stopped in 1968 and the tractor importers were required to buy foreign exchange in the open market at rates varying between Rs.8-9 to a dollar, no import took place. Many argue (see 6 and 37) that tractor use in West Pakistan would not have been profitable to the farmers without the preferential allocation of foreign exchange at the overvalued official rate. Lawrence (41), on the other hand, presents this View: What is frequently overlooked is that agricultural output is also underpriced by the present exchange regime. In the cropping sequence considered here [in his study], it is clear that the underpricing of mechanical equipment has been almost exactly offset by the underpricing of output. The import of diesel oil is subjected to heavy import duty and other taxes. The market price of diesel oil in West Pakistan is more than double its social cost. The author's discussion with the Ministry of Agriculture and Works and the Planning Commission indicated that they believe the lower social cost of diesel at least compensates for the higher social cost of tractors. So, on the whole, the cost to the farmer of the machinery in operation is the same as to society, but he pays too little for the capital equipment and too much for the variable costs to operate it. Taxation Poligy Agricultural machinery was given a preferential treatment and no taxes were levied up to July, 1969, at a 40 time when the industrial machinery was subjected to a custom duty and a sales tax of 35 per cent (1). From 1969 onward, custom duty, sales tax, defense surcharge, and a rehabili- tation tax amounting to about 25 per cent of the import value of agricultural machinery have been levied. No reg- istration fee is charged, and the tractors do not have to pay the road tax if not used for non-agricultural commercial purposes. Thus, the preferential treatment continues but at a much lower rate, as compared with industrial machinery. Credit Policy The institutional sources in Pakistan provide only 15 per cent of the agricultural credit (see 1), and the remaining 85 per cent comes from private sources, namely friends, relatives, landlords, village shopkeepers, rural money lenders, and commission agents. The private sources, though important for short-term credit, cannot provide the large amounts needed for the purchase of agricultural machinery. So far as institutional credit is concerned, cooperatives and government Taccani loans are mainly for short and medium term lending, and the Agricultural Develop- ment Bank is the only major source of loans for the purchase of the agricultural machinery. In the four-year period from 1965-66 to 1968-69 the Bank sanctioned loans worth Rs.462 million in West Pakistan, of which 51 per cent was for tractors, 27 per cent for tubewells, and 22 per cent for all other requirements. The major sources of financing the 41 purchase of the tractor, however, have been the farmers' own resources, accounting for 62 per cent of the total ' amount while loans provided 38 per cent (see 50, Table 25). The Bank provides loans at a subsidized interest of 9 per cent per annum.1 For tractor loans, farmers holding less than 75 acres of land are not eligible for the loan purchase of the tractors received under International Development Association credit.2 Other Policies Government provides free training for drivers. In the past, besides free training, each trainee was provided a stipend. Repair workshops have been established in im- portant agricultural districts. A subsidy of about 35 per cent is provided by the government on its tractor custom work, but their main use is for land development. 1Lawrence (41) used 15 per cent per annum rate of interest as an opportunity cost of lending in Pakistan. 2"In recent years the dollar credits received from IDA by the Bank have constituted the major source of funds for loaning purposes. IDA has put some restrictions on the use of their funds under which the Bank is required to pro- vide the machinery on loan to the farmers and it cannot be sold against cash. Another condition is that farmers with less than 75 acres of land are not eligible for the pur- chase of tractors received under IDA credit." (48, p. 125) 42 Diffusion Pattern 9f Farm Mechanization in West Pakistan This section will discuss farm mechanization pat- terns as they emerge from the results of the survey "Farm Mechanization in West Pakistan" (60) conducted by the Paki- stan Agriculture Census organization in 1969. This dis- cussion will be helpful in determining where and what to look for in the present study of socioeconomic implications of mechanization in West Pakistan. OwnershippPattern The implications of the tractor mechanization will differ depending on who owns the tractor--the government, the cooperatives, or individual joint owners. In 1969, there were about 19,000 tractors in West Pakistan. Their ownership pattern is shown in Table 2.8. It is clear from the table that the tractor ownership is heavily concentrated in private hands and ownership by the government and the cooperatives is insignificant. The government's share con- sists mostly of crawler tractors for land development pur- poses. Among the private owners, joint ownership is very low, while individual owners, with 74 per cent of the total tractors, hold the major share. Thus the mechanization pattern has placed tractor power mainly in the hands of 43 TABLE 2.8.--Ownership Pattern of Tractors in West Pakistan, 1969. Ow r Percentage of the Total ne 3 Tractors Owned Private owners 86 Individual ownership (74) Joint ownership (12) Government and semi-government agencies 12 Cooperatives 2 All owners 100 private individual owners, thereby limiting its common sharing except through the custom services. Mechanization Pattern and the Holding Size It is the perceived economies of scale which de- termine for which size farm the purchase of a tractor is likely and, hence, which farms hold a central or peripheral position in the mechanization process. Furthermore, given the horsepower of the tractor, its holding size distribution pattern determines the extent of the excess power available. The potential excess capacity could be utilized, excluding the non-farm uses, either for hiring out tractor services or increasing the ownership and/or operational size of the holding. These two adjustment possibilities, the first where the tractor power is adjusted to the existing size 44 of the farm through custom operations and the other where size of the farm is adjusted to the tractor power through purchasing and/or renting in more land, will, evidently, produce quite opposite farm structures and social conse- quences. In West Pakistan, the most common size of the tractors in 1969 was 36 to 55 H.P. with 75 per cent of the total wheel type tractors falling in this category (Table 2.9). Only 1 per cent of the tractors were 25 H.P. and TABLE 2.9.--Percentage Distribution of Tractors by Horse- power in West Pakistan, 1969. Percentage of the Total Horsepower Wheel Type Tractors Less than 25 1 26-35 15 36-55 75 56-66 3 67 and above 1 below and 16 per cent 35 H.P. and below. Thus, West Pakistan (following the advice of international institutions and eXperts)1 has concentrated on relatively larger tractors. lThe WOrld Bank in their study in 1966 (see 30, Chapter 11, Mechanization) recommended that ". . . in order to catch up in mechanization standards farmers in under- developed areas should jump some of the stages of develop- ment that the pioneers have of necessity to undergo. If they are led upward by a gradual process, first through efficient ox-driven implements, then through a small basic tractor to the present type of relatively sophisticated :machine in general use today, then the net effect may well Pakistan in a sma 92 per 0 area 0w: constit‘ cent of ‘nder V be the hersepc he tr. 45 The nature of the mechanization process in West Pakistan is such that tractor ownership has been concentrated in a small percentage of the landowners. Whereas roughly 92 per cent of the farms with 65 per cent of the total farm area own holdings of less than 25 acres (see Table 2.6), they constitute only 10 per cent of the tractor owners with 9 per cent of the total number of tractors (see Table 2.10). Under West Pakistan conditions, 100 acres is considered to be the optimum size of a farm for a tractor of about 45 horsepower (30). As shown in Table 2.10, 26 per cent of the tractors belong to 29 per cent of the owners with hold— ing sizes of 50 acres and less. It appears that in this category, excluding the joint ownership, there is likely to be a substantial excess tractor capacity. Another 21 per cent tractors on a farm size of 51-100 will also have some excess power. A comparison of the percentage of tractors on different sizes of ownership and Operational holdings in Table 2.10 indicates that on small size tractor farms the excess capacity was partly used to increase be that they lag further behind as the technology of the developed countries increases their rate of advancement." Furthermore, Giles (23) in his 1967 report to the govern— ment of West Pakistan recommended that "It seems inadvisable for West Pakistan to spend precious resources on developing and/or importing the small tractors (5-15 H.P.), except possibly the 7-8 H.P. power tiller for rice. West Pakistan should concentrate on expanding a wide range of large tractors (30-100 H.P.). . . ." As 73 per cent of the total number of tractors were imported during the period 1965-66 to 1968-69, it seems that the recommendations of the World Bank (1966) and Giles (1967) played an important role in influencing the tractor size. 46 TABLE 2.10.-~Percentage Distribution of Tractors and Owners According to Size of Ownership and Operational Holdings. Percentage of Tractors and Tractor Owners Size of Holding Ownership Holdings Operational Holdings Owners Tractors Operators Tractors 0 3 3 1 1 Greater than 0 and less than 13 3 3 l 1 13-25 7 6 4 4 26-50 l6 14 15 14 51-100 22 21 27 25 101-200 20 19 26 24 200 and above 29 34 26 31 All holdings 100 100 100 100 Note: Ownership holding refers to the farm land owned, and Operational refers to the total farm land operated including both owned and rented. Operational holdings through land renting. Thus, while 29 per cent of the tractor owners owned 50 acres and less, only 21 per cent were operating farms in this size category. On the other hand, 42 per cent owned 51 to 200 acres but 53 per cent had Operational holdings in this category. Besides increasing the size of the farm, the tractor owners have also resorted to substantial amounts of custom services. In 1969, of the total area covered by the private tractors, 69 per cent was on self-Operated farms and 31 per cent on custom farms (see 50, Table 12). techaniza . ‘. Infrastrt f A the land, agricultu could p05 pattern 8' indicatic 93 per ce The insta provides and there 0f the tc farms whi Another 2 irrigate: UTEWell \ S: \ Cane Cane TUbs 0th: 47 Mechanization and the Water Infrastructure As mentioned earlier, it is the water, rather than the land, which is a constraining factor in West Pakistan's agriculture. If the water constraint is removed, then power could possibly become a binding factor. The mechanization pattern with respect to the water supply system gives some indication of this phenomena. The important factor is that 93 per cent of the tractors are on farms with irrigation. The installation of a tubewell on a canal-irrigated farm provides a very reliable and flexible water supply system and thereby appears to create a demand for more power. Thus, Of the total tractors, 63 per cent have been introduced on farms which have both tubewell and canal water available. Another 20 per cent are on the perennial (year round) canal- irrigated farms and 10 per cent on the farms with only tubewell water (see Table 2.11). TABLE 2.11.--The Percentage Distribution of Tractors with Respect to the Irrigation System, 1968-69. System of Irrigation Percentage of Tractors Canal and tubewell 63 Canals (perennial) 20 Tubewell 10 Others including rainfed 7 Total 100 wate: stan is l. avail 48 Summary To summarize this chapter: First, it was noted that water is critical for agricultural production in West Paki- stan. Due to scarcity of water, the area under cultivation is limited to 48 million acres against 79 million acres available for agricultural purposes. Within the cultivated area itself, production is concentrated in the canal-irrigated areas, especially those having supplementary tubewell water. Secondly, the distribution of land is very skewed. About 49 per cent Of the farmers have holdings less than 5 acres and 92 per cent less than 25 acres. The 8 per cent of the farms having land holdings of 25 acres and above have 35 per cent of the total farm area. Furthermore, it was seen that the agriculture sector, with more than 50 per cent of the total labor force in 1970, was the major source of employment. As suppliers of labor, the landless agricultural laborers, constituting about 8 per cent of the total farm labor in 1961, were relatively less important as compared to tenant and owner Operators. Tenants play a very significant role in the rural economy. In terms of farm labor supply, the number of farms operated and the farm area, the tenant Operators are roughly comparable to owner Operators. Lastly, before 1968 government encouraged mechanization through its import, taxation, credit, and other policies. The mechani- zation pattern emerging in the past showed that the private individual ownership of tractors was dominant and joint and and c0 tractc quarts concer both c tractc farms. 8 per and a} due tr total 49 and OOOperative ownership was relatively insignificant. The tractors were mostly of large sizes with more than three- quarters having 36 horsepower and above. Mechanization was concentrated on irrigated farms, especially on those having both canal and tubewell irrigation. The ownership of tractors was also concentrated on a small number Of large farms. About 88 per cent of the tractors were owned by 8 per cent of the farmers having land holdings of 25 acres and above. The tractor use, however, was quite widespread due to custom hiring. A little less than one-third of the total farm tractor use in 1969 occurred on custom farms. CHAPTER III DESIGN AND PROCEDURE OF THE SURVEY Empirical information is essential for an accurate analysis of the effects of the introduction of the tractor. For this reason, a farm management study comparing tractor and non-tractor farms was conducted in the winter of 1972. The author made a field survey among fifty of the larger farmers in the Pakistan Punjab. The purpose was (1) to add additional field evidence to the already existing data on the effects of mechanization and (2) to provide the empirical basis for a linear programming model that could be used to explore the implication of changes in a number Of economic parameters whose values are crucial in determin- ing the effect of mechanization. The strategy of this field survey was to keep the size of the sample small, design it carefully, and conduct the interviews in considerable depth. While this approach sacrifices the averaging effects of a larger sample size, it permits deeper probing into the adjustments and motiva- tions of tractor farmers and the likely long-run conse- Quences of basic alterations in the farming system. 50 51 The Design of the Survey It was Obvious at the outset that the effects of tractors would not be uniform across the Punjab. At least three major factors are responsible for this lack of uni- formity. First, there are locational differences with respect to the nearest city; second, the cropping patterns differ in different areas due to the soil and climatic conditions; third, the irrigation system is not the same everywhere. In each of these situations, the available choices differ as do the adjustment reactions of the farm firms. With such a heterogeneous pOpulation, the design of the study becomes critical for the accuracy of the results. In designing the survey it was decided to stratify and select typical rural situations, thereby excluding urban influences. To handle the other two sources of hetero- geneity, the sample was stratified on the basis of the major cropping patterns and the system of irrigation. Sample Stratification Based on Irrigation System Canals are the major source of irrigation water in the Punjab. The canal areas, however, differ with respect to (l) the quality of the underground water and (2) the seasonal distribution of their deliveries. Where the under- ground water is saline, agriculture is constrained to a fixed supply of canal water. In the sweetwater areas, 52 however, the farmers have removed the water constraint by installing private tubewells. As mentioned earlier, a major portion of the tractors have been introduced in these sweetwater canal areas (see Table 2.11). Previous studies (48) and our pre-survey field visits indicated that in the sweet ground water canal areas a large number of non-tractor farms with a tubewell hired tractor services: however, in the saline groundwater areas custom work was almost negligible. Thid led to a different com- position of the basic sampling unit in the two areas. In the canal plus tubewell areas, the sampling unit included three categories of farms: the tractor-owning farm, the tractor custom farm, and the farm using bullock power only. All farms had their own tubewell. In the case of canal irrigation only, the sampling unit consisted of two farm categories: the tractor owning farm and the farms having bullock power only. Out of the nineteen sampling units, twelve were allocated to the canal plus tubewell and seven to the area irrigated by canal only. Sample Stratification Based on Cropping_Patterns The part of the sample allocated to the canal plus tubewell area was further stratified on the basis of the cropping pattern. The major winter crop, wheat, is uni- formly grown throughout the Punjab and normally covers around one—third Of the total crOpped acreage. 53 Cotton and rice are the two major summer crops. Unlike wheat, however, soil and climatic conditions in different districts have considerable impact on the relative area devoted to the two crops. In the districts of Gujranwala, Sialkot, and Sheikhupura, rice is the major summer crop and cotton is relatively insignificant (see Table 3.1). These districts constitute the rice area of TABLE 3.1.--The Relative Share of Wheat, Cotton, and Rice in the Leading Districts of the Punjab. CrOp Area as Per Cent Of Total Cropped Area District Wheat Cotton Rice Sahiwal 32 14 5 Multan 36 23 l Lyallpur 38 ll 2 Sargodha 36 13 1 Jhang 42 12 l Rahim Yar Khan 34 25 l Bahawalpur 34 8 1 Bahawalnagar 27 13 2 Lahore 30 9 5 Gujrat 39 6 8 Sheikhupara 37 6 23 Sialkot 38 2 23 Gujranwala 38 3 26 fl Vfi fir fi fi fi i V ‘ v v V i ‘ ‘ Source: Pakistan, Ministry of Agriculture and Works, Pakistan Census of Agriculture, 1960, Volume II (October, 1963). 54 the Punjab. In the districts of Sahiwal, Multan, Lyallpur, Sargodha, Rahim Yar Khan, Bahawalpur, Bahawalnagar, and Jhang, the order is reversed, and cotton dominates as a summer crop. These districts form the cotton area. Out Of the twelve sampling units (each consisting of three obser— vations) allocated to the canal plus tubewell area, seven were assigned to the cotton area and five to the rice area. Pairing of the Sampling Units Farms owning tractors, hiring tractors, or owning bullocks may obviously differ in many ways other than the use of mechanical power. For example, they may differ in size, the quality of the farm land, the quality of the farm operator, the size and quality of the family labor force, the distance from a metalled. (hard surface) road, etc. All these factors have some influence on the profit- ability of mechanization. In order to identify the influence Of tractors from other factors, the different farm categories in the sample unit were paired together with respect to the following: 1. Size of the farm: As it was not considered possible that all farms be Of exactly the same size, a range of 25-75 acres was used with a preference for the farms of around 50 acres. 2. Quality of farm land: All farm categories should have a comparable farm land quality. 55 The Survengrocedure After reviewing the previous literature on mechanization, a detailed questionnaire was prepared while the author was in the United States. Consultations with the members of the thesis committee at Michigan State University led to considerable modification of the question- naire. Some further modifications were made after the questionnaire was pre-tested in the Punjab. A copy of the final questionnaire used for recording the answers of the respondents is attached as Appendix B. The author con- ducted the field survey in the Punjab from October, 1971, to March, 1972. Despite the problems of recall, the questionnaire was designed to ask questions about the Kharif (summer) crops of 1971 that were harvested from October to December and the preceding Rabi crops of 1970-71 harvested in April, 1971. This strategy permitted the recording of a full year of agricultural activity while ensuring the best recall possible under the given circumstance. Selection of the Districts The first step in initiating the field survey was to select districts that would represent each of the conditions previously described. An additional criterion for choosing a district was the size of the tractor popu- lation. Other minor considerations were their distances from each other and their accessibility from the cities 56 Of Lahore and Lyallpur where the author was stationed during the survey period. Table 3.2 gives the ranking of the eleven leading districts in terms of the private tractor population. On the basis of their tractor population ranking, the districts of Sahiwal and Gujranwala were selected in the cotton and rice areas, respectively. A third district was to be selected that would have tractor farms having no tubewells. At the time Of the questionnaire pre-testing, it was found that where underground water was sweet, it was not possible to find a tractor farm without a tubewell. The tubewell comes first or simultaneously with the tractor. This situation exists in most of the rice area. It was only in areas where underground water was saline that one could find tractor farms without a tubewell. Lyallpur district, which has saline water in most parts and ranks fourth in the tractor population, was chosen for the non-tubewell case. Selection of the Sample Units In the selected districts, the first point of contact was the agriculture officer in charge of the district. Designated as the Extra Assistant Director Of Agriculture, he was approached through the Secretary of Agriculture, Government of the Punjab. The objectives of the research and the design of the survey were explained to the Agriculture Officer, and with his consultations 57 TABLE 3.2.--Ranking of the Punjab Districts by the Number of Private Tractors in 1969. Ranking Within the Cotton or Rice Area Overall District Ranking Cotton Rice Area Area Sahiwal l 1 Multan 2 2 Lahore 3 3 Lyallpur 4 4 Sargodha 5 5 Rahim Yar Khan 6 6 Jhang 7 9 Bahawalnagar 8 10 Gujranwala 1 7 Sheikhupura 2 8 Sialkot 3 ll Note: Ranking of a district as 1 indicates that the number of tractors are largest there as compared to other districts. Source: Pakistan, Ministry of Agriculture and WOrks, Agriculture Census Organization, Farm Mechanization in West Pakistan (Islamabad, June, 1969). 58 the suitable area in the district was identified. The major consideration here was that the sample area, besides fulfilling other conditions, should be far away from the district Headquarters, sugar mills, and the centers of major construction activity. Thus, the next step was to move to a distant small Mandi Town and contact the local agriculture extension worker designated as the Agriculture Assistant. The Agriculture Assistants maintain a record Of the number Of tractor owners in their area. In some instances, they also have a record of the farm size. However, no records are kept on the bullock farms and on the farms hiring tractor services. After locating the tractor farms, the survey was begun, with the expectation that the custom and bullock farms would also be found in the same villages along with the tractor farms. This proved to be true in the case of Lyallpur district, but in the districts of Sahiwal and Gujranawala it was found that, while the custom farms were very common, it was not easy to find a bullock farm in the specified farm size range. This prompted a reversal Of stratng) through extensive tours, the author first searched for bullock farms and, after their identification, looked around them for tractor and custom farms. This proved more successful, and with the sample unit identi- fied in this way, the survey was started. 59 While locating sample units, considerable care was taken to be sure that the sample farms were away from the even small Mandi towns. This insured a cropping pattern that was typically rural with no sign of town proximity in terms of growing vegetables and fodder for sale. The sample farms were also checked to be sure that they were within the farm size range specified earlier. However, the questions about the quality of the farm land and the farm Operator were asked after reaching the sample village. Considerable reliance was placed on the judgments of local landowners regarding comparability of soil and drainage characteristics of various holdings. With respect to the quality Of the farm land, it was found that there were vast stretches of land of uniform quality in the Chickawatni /,l area of the Sahiwal district and so no problem was faced. But in the districts of Lyallpur and especially the Gujranwala, the quality of land in some cases differed even in the same village, depending on which side of the village the farm was located. In the Lyallpur district where the water supply is dependent on the canal system only, the water availability was not uniform. Two farms may be on the same water course, but still the water available could differ depending on whether the farm is located in the beginning or end of the water course. Due to non-comparability of the farm land quality in the Lyallpur and the Gujranwala and the water supply in the 60 Lyallpur district, it was necessary to drop a few sample units from the initial list. These were replaced by new Observations in the field. Regarding quality of the farm Operator, it was Observed that the excellent and the poor were very few and the majority belong in between. However, in a few cases it was necessary to drop the sample unit from the list because of non-comparability of the farm operators. Interviewers and Interviewees As originally planned, Agriculture Assistants were to be hired to conduct the interviews. For this purpose, three of them were given training. However, as the writer gained more experience with the field situation-~initially through pre-testing of the questionnaire and later through the selection of the sample units-~he became convinced that the survey questionnaire had become so complex that it would not be advisable to entrust the data collection to the hired interviewers. Except for two sampling units interviewed in his presence, the rest were interviewed by the author. Another factor affecting this decision was that the interviewees appeared much more suspicious of the government officials. The author introduced himself as a student and one belonging to a farm family (which he is) which appeared to lessen the farmers' suspicion. The most 61 important factor in this respect, however, was the use by the author of his rural social contacts. Summary A total of fifty interviews were completed in the survey, and the sample was stratified to take account of different systems of irrigation and cropping patterns in the Punjab. Out of the fifty interviews, fourteen were among farms having canal irrigation only and thirty-six were among farms having both canal and tubewell. The latter were further sub-divided to allocate 21 and 15 to the wheat-cotton and wheat-rice cropping areas, respectively. Considerable care was taken to standardize as much as possible all aspects of the units sampled, save those items which actually bear on the mechanization question. For example, it will be noted in Table 3.3 that the mean value of all categories of farms is approximately the same. Moreover when a tractor farmer was selected for interview, the corresponding traditional bullock farm was selected to reflect conditions in the same village, essentially the same soil, a similar position on the water course, etc. The result is a sample that is not random in its selection but one in to which a good deal of effort has gone to isolate mechanization as the major causal difference in the Observed data between tractor farms and the traditional bullock farms. 62 o.He m m.me b H.He b mEumm uouomua o.mv m m.He h manna muflm Houomua w.>e m m.me w o.mm n manna xOOHasm muflm nonesz muflm Honssz muwm HOQESZ cme cme com: mowm I pomsz cOpuOO I poms: couuoo I among umme Hams IOQOB msHm Hmcmu maam3smunso umum3 Hamsmnsa msHm Hmcmo Hezenmm waco umumz Hmcmu HDQHHM>A cmumwxmm may cw mumfinmm xOOHHsm pcm Houomua .nmflcsm mo mm>usm usmsmmmcmz summII.m.m Names CHAPTER IV THE OUTPUT AND SOCIAL EFFECTS OF TRACTOR MECHANIZATION IN THE PAKISTAN PUNJAB This chapter presents the results of the survey of farmers in the Punjab in two parts. The first section presents and analyzes output data relevant to the question of direct costs and benefits of mechanization. Section two is devoted to a discussion Of the social implications of mechanization, i.e., its influence on farm employment, and land tenure conditions. Output Effects The output effects of mechanization can be divided into three parts: (1) effects on cropping intensity, (2) effects on yields, and (3) effects on cropping patterns. Before and after comparisons will be based on a cross- sectional comparison of the machanized and non—mechanized farms. 63 64 CroppingiIntensities The most forceful argument advanced in support Of mechanization is based on the contention that mechanical power, by speeding up the farm operations, permits multiple cropping and, therefore, higher agricultural production from a given land area than would be possible with the slow moving bullocks. In this section the empirical evidence on cropping intensities as it emerged from the survey data is presented. Table 4.1 presents a detailed comparative picture Of the cropping intensities for the farms surveyed, by categories. Cropping Intensities in Non-Tubewell and Tubewell Canal Irrigated Areas It will be obvious from Table 4.1 that tractor mechanization has made little difference in cropping intensities in the non-tubewell areas. The intensity on mechanized farms was 109 per cent as opposed to 112 per cent Of the bullock farms. The saline groundwater rules out the possibility Of pumping supplementary tubewell water in this area. Sole dependence on canal water in a low rainfall area results in a water constrained farming system. The power and the speed provided by the tractor does not help to increase the cropping intensity since timeliness in removing one crop to plant another is of little value. 655 .oououua commouo Hauou 0:» ca mews» poucsoo aw «coo human mo mono Monaco on» have: noun use I auwocoucw mcwdmouuu o.an c.5n «.mv ~.~v m.nv w.hv o.nv O.Hv m.nv w.~v n.mv “nouudv sham no «new ounuo>¢ m.NHH o.moa m.mea o.HwH o.mwa ~.~wH m.voa m.m>a H.m~H h.MeH «.moa nauamcoucn ucwmmouo ma.>om wh.hm~ hm.mhn eo.va ma.wnm ~a.wmn mh.wmm mn.~om m~.man aH.oav oa.vam oomwuot commouu Hauoa oo.me~ om.eo~ om.~em oo.mom oo.-m oo.on~ oo.m- oo.mo~ om.eom oo.ea~ oo.hem immuoeuesu deuce pounuomo pouauomo pououomo EOumsu pmuuumno puuouomo soumsu poumuomo pouuuomo souasu puuoummo xOOHHsm nouomua xOOHHsm uououua uouooue xuOHHOm nououua uououua xUOHusm nououua uouonua guano finance Houoa «so» 00““ 0:0» couaoo HaozonsaIsoz AHHO3¢nfia mafia Honduv MOH< Hflmzvnaa .moOM< poummwuuH dunno .HaosonsbIcoz on» use aaozonda cw manna uo aware acouOuqu so nowuwmcmucu madamOuUII.H.v mqm<9 66 The situation is markedly different in the sweet groundwater area. Here tubewells provide supplementary water in addition to that available from the canal, thus removing or reducing the water constraint. Even on the farms having only bullock power, the intensity increased tO 143.6 per cent. The availability of tractor power further increased the intensity to 168 per cent on farms having their own tractors and to 161 per cent on the farms hiring tractor services. These results indicate the importance to the farming system of the water supply in determining the output effects of mechanization through multiple cropping. With the limited canal supplies in the non-tubewell areas, water rather than power appears to be the constraining factor. Once the water limitation is overcome, the cropping intensities can Often be increased up to a point. As Table 4.1 indicates, increased intensities occurred even with the existing bullock power. In part, the increase in intensity is due to the overall increase in water supplied. However, it was also a response to the removal of the rigidities of canal water deliveries. When water is limited to canal deliveries, temporal rigidities occur in the farm operations that produce a bunching up Of activities around canal turns. The flexibility of the tubewell water breaks up these rigidities in the farm Operations and allows their spreading out over time, 67 therefore allowing a more regular use of the bullock power. This is particularly apparent on the bullock farms in the cotton zone of the tubewell area where with 29 per cent less bullock power, a higher intensity was achieved than on the bullock farms in the non-tubewell area (Table 4.1). The data suggest, however, that where tubewell water is supplementing canal water, power does become the limiting factor. At least tractor farmers have attained a substantially higher intensity than bullock farmers. In the tubewell area, the farms hiring tractor services have also attained higher crop acreage per unit of cultivated area. With their cropping intensity of 161 per cent, they were very close to the level of 168 per cent on the tractor farms. This explains the widespread tractor hiring market that has developed in the tubewell area. In the non-tubewell area, on the other hand, tractor hiring for crop cultivation purposes was almost non- existant. Indeed, by implication, this finding suggests that mechanization in the non-tubewell areas is proceeding from at least partially different motivations than those underlying the investment decisions in the tubewell areas. (This point will be investigated further in the programming models where rates of return for the two areas are presented.) 68 Cropping Intensities in Cotton and Rice Zones Within the tubewell area, the influence of mechanization on the cropping intensities differs con- siderably with the cropping pattern. In the first place, the absolute level of intensities on all types of farms in the cotton zone was lower than in the rice zone. An interesting aspect of this difference is that the bullock farms in the rice zone have achieved a level of cropping intensity equivalent to that Of the tractor farms in the cotton zone. Secondly, the difference between the intensities on the mechanized and the non-mechanized farms was greater in the cotton zone than in the rice zone. In the cotton zone, the mechanized farms had an intensity of 162 per cent as compared to 129 per cent on the bullock farms. The tractor hiring farms were in between with an intensity level of 144 per cent. In the rice zone, the tractor hiring farms achieved the highest intensities, i.e., 184 per cent, and the tractor farms had 177 per cent as compared to 162 per cent on the bullock farms. Why did the intensities differ in the two zones, both before and after mechanization? An answer to this question requires a more detailed investigation of the interaction between cropping patterns and intensities as found in the survey data. For example, Table 4.2 gives the cropping pattern as found on bullock farms in the cotton and rice areas. 69 oo.ooH Hence mm.Hm mm.H oH.o mm.mm Hm.m mm.o opmnm onmfi w mfiumnu mfiumnu macaque ocau moflomuomo> poem powwow couuou macho Hmuoe -Houmfiz Inmmsm paw mufisnm no.me o~.o m~.o mH.o me.~ mo.oH o~.mm madam Huma w Ionme “new “bum msoocmH ooomomh moeoauomo> «finch Hutton paws: macho Hench -Hoomfiz new muflssm ocoN comm oo.ooH Hench nw.~m . . He.N H~.o oo.m oe.HH nm.em ouwsm oume w «Mung: Maseru msoocmfi ocmu mo~b~uomm> ouwm Hopped coupou macho Hench IHoomflz Inamsm was mafishm mH.ne o~.o um.o mm.o oe.o mm.w mm.om chasm Hume » Ionme poem “and msoocae ouompos mpomuomo> makes Hutton uses: macho Hmuoe -Hoomfiz use magnum OGON $099.00 .Hnaonma mcfiusp mocON mafia one use souuou on» cw mans» xooHHsm co wou< commonu fleece on» a“ macho anemmom Hoessmu mfismgx one haemwom noucflzv “9mm pcosommfio mo onmnm ommpcouuoa o:h--.~.e mqm ammo 3oz poem mcwumm>umm mewsom mumcmmucu mmHuwHum> om>oumEH no muouomuu no meOHHsn poms: moanofium> ammo mcfiuwsvmu mcflupsu mcwmmmooum pamwm msflsom mcw3om has no Haumm mo mcwzom couuou OODOHQEOU mcwumm>umm umnEOOOO HOQEO>OZ umnouoo mash mean an: Heumé mmouo mnucoz .QMncsm may ca mowm ocm .couuoo .ummgz How uwpcmamu unm>umm can mcwzom onBII.m.e mamas 72 area. In the wheat-cotton case, the harvesting of wheat and sowing of cotton overlap. Traditionally the farmers have handled this problem through late sowing of cotton. But the late sowing of cotton (late May or early June) delays the cotton harvest to December and so overlaps with wheat sowing. This clash has been the most serious, and historically very little wheat has followed cotton. (However, the new late-sowing varieties of wheat have lessened the extent of the overlap and are opening up new possibilities for increasing intensity.) With the wheat and rice sequence, there is almost no overlapping Of the sowing and harvest periods of the two crops. The sowing of the rice starts after the harvesting of the wheat is over. In the fall, the rice harvest time and the wheat sowing are close but the new early-maturing rice varieties and the new late-sowing wheat varieties have increased significantly the time between the rice harvesting and wheat sowing. Thus, in the rice zone most of the rice and the wheat follow each other. This explains the higher level of cropping intensities on all types of farms in the rice zone compared to those Obtained in the cotton zone. Because the question of overlapping crop sequence is a crucial parameter in efforts to explore the benefits Of mechanization, it is instructive to examine the crop rotations prevailing in the two areas in more detail. 73 Tables 4.4 and 4.5 give an account of the crop rotations with respect to the major £221 and kharif crops. As is evident from Table 4.4, most of the rice and wheat in the rice zone follow each other and the previous season fodder. The percentage of the two crops following the previous season crops was higher on the mechanized farms, which had 92 per cent of their wheat and 100 per cent of the rice after other crops. Thus, the multiple cropping possibilities have been substantially realized in the rice area by the mechanized farms with the bullock farms following closely. The situation was different in the cotton zone. On both the mechanized and the bullock farms, cotton mainly followed wheat. But most of the wheat did not follow cotton. About 71 and 86 per cent of the cotton on the mechanized and the bullock farms respectively followed wheat, but only about 14 per cent of the wheat followed cotton. Comparison Of the cropping intensities on the mechanized and the bullock farms in the context of their respective crop rotations can be used to examine the extent to which the double cropping potential has been exploited by mechanized and bullock farms. Table 4.6 is an abstract derived from the cotton zone crop rotation data given above. 74 he.nmso ”come magma w.m~ o.oe e.mm 8.0 NmH wmm xuosssm seas ensues nwmsv ”come magma «one m.m m.em ooH . . m.HeH mom Houueue Lampoon HOHM< Hmong Houm< Hm HOP flo.~HHV ”some mane» m.e m.mw mm NH o.em~ mmm xoosflsm Hk-okme apex fik.omse noomv aspen neon: w.o e.mw ~.~a a.» m.emH mow Hopueae Hoeeoa nopm< cope Hague Hence flee hmoHu :fi madam v—OOHHg 0&9 Ufim .HOHONHF 059 GO WVHOHVII.5.V SQ

.mv m m.m oo.mm umooom «.ma m.mm h.m v.5 oo.m~H umomB macs wowm .HH. abnorma flnmm . . . . m.~ e.¢ oo.ma mowm . . m.on w.m m.o om.m~ mafia: m.vH v.m~ m.~ m mh.m~ Hocoom . . >.H¢ m.~ b.¢ om.woa couumw Huma mwumnx . . m.ma w.o m.v oo.m canoe . . on H e om.a Educ . . . . m.H a.m oo.v~ umooom . . om m.~ m. oo.HmH umoAB Hunchma anon ocoN.couuoo .H mmcfixcmHm mmcwsoam mmcflxcmam mocw3oam . command amouo mcfiuam uouomua an mcwxcmam can mmcw3oam whom Hmuoa meHOMHmm mmmucmouom mom on» «o umnEsz momnm>¢ one .meumm Eoumau uouomua on» so uouomue nua3 .mouu an omEH0muom mmcflxcmam on» can mmcfi3oam 0:» mo momucooumm msall.va.¢ wands 96 The plankings are performed mostly with bullocks, and there is very little tractor hiring for this operation. Number and Use Pattern of Eullocks on the Tractor Farms Most of the tractor farms have reduced but not eliminated the bullocks. According to the Report of the Farm Mechanization Committee, "Amongst the major problems faced by the tractor owners is the short supply of spare parts and unsatisfactory repairs and servicing facilities" (see 48, p. 101). Under such a situation it is quite understandable that the tractor farms would continue to keep some of their bullock power to meet any emergencies arising from a tractor breakdown. In addition, the larger farmers may find it economical to keep several pair of bullocks for additional power during the peak power periods. Data for bullocks on tractor farms, farms hiring tractor services and those using only the bullock power are given in Table 4.15. Tractor farms, as a whole, maintained a number of bullocks equivalent to a little more than one- third of the number maintained on bullock farms. The reduction in bullocks on the tractor farms was greatest in the rice area. The farms hiring tractor services maintained about one quarter less bullocks as compared to the bullock farms. The use pattern of the bullocks on the tractor farms in different areas is given in Table 4.16. It is 97 ooH on ooH ev ooH an 5H ooH mm me menam xoofiasm mo 0mm uncooked a mu sovcm mm.o en.o no.H nv.o mo.H ms.o wH.o ms.o No.0 vm.o onus «\H NH you mxoofinsm mo mamas mxooHHsm souomnh mxooHHsm nopomnb mxoofifism on“: houoauh mxooflfism «Ham savanna muon< HH< poflspmwo usaaflmxg uouoane Houownb Hansonssucoz ocON coax econ couuou uon< fifiozondp .mmon< >o>h=m msownm> ca meson mo momxh econommmo co mnwmm xooaasm wsfixuozuu.ma.e mqmon¢ ocm Hmmwm m>on¢ 0cm Hmwwm mo m mam Hoonom some Hoonom some moaonmmsom Eumm xooaasm moaonmmsom Eumm Houomua # .me>m>usm moaocmmsom Emma xooHHsm. com omnwcmnomz cw mouom momma haflamm on» no coaumosmm mo Hm>oq m£9u|.ma.v mummy 108 education through high school and above. The reason for choosing the high school level as the dividing line was that the high school degree is the minimum requirement for most of the white collar jobs in the urban areas, and the social status and the level of income of the farm house— holds under study is such that their members normally go to the urban areas only for the white collar jobs or business. Moreover, these two levels of education differ in their importance for the employment problem. According to Ridker, the young, new labor force entrants appear to account for between 40 and 60 per cent of the urban unemployed in the Near East and South Asian Countries, and They are in the middle groups so far as education is concerned, typically the lowest unemployment rates are found among illiterates (and often among literates with less than a matriculate), the next lowest rates among those with college and graduate dgrees, and the highest rates among those with matriculate but less than graduate degrees (see 31, pp. 9—10). The evidence from Pakistan itself corroborates Ridker's general observation. According to the Pakistan Fourth Five Year Plan, . . . certain international comparisons indicate that Pakistan belongs to a group of countries in which second (matriculates and intermediates) and third (Degree holders) level education has developed faster than education at first (Grades 5-9) level. This impression is also supported by actual developments in the 1960's. . . . The growth of both second and third levels was well above requirements as derived from economic growth during the same period. The excess of availabilities over requirements is reflected in increasing unemployment among the educated youth (see 11, pp. 108 and 113). 109 The data in Table 4.18 indicate that the education of the labor force in the two types of farm households differed considerably. A substantially higher per cent of the total labor force of the tractor farm households had high school and higher education, as compared to the bullock households. Thus, a greater proportion (as well as the absolute number) of labor in the mechanized, as compared to the bullock, farm households are potential entrants in the white collar urban labor market. However, the tractor farms, as compared to the bullock farms, held a major portion of their educated labor on the farm. This has served two purposes. First, it has improved the relative educational quality of the tractor farm labor, and, secondly, the migration from the farm to the non-farm labor market has been reduced. The data in Table 4.18 show that the percentage of the family labor with high school and higher education going to non-farm jobs was considerably higher for bullock as compared to tractor farms. This survey also provides time-series data about the tractor farm family labor and its educational levels. The tractor farm operators were asked about the previous occupation of the present farm family labor before the purchase of the tractor. Table 4.19 presents the infor- mation based on their answers. 110 TABLE 4.19.--Previous Occupation of the Present Family Labor Force on the Tractor Farms. Education Level . Total PreVious Occupation Less than Matric and Number Per cent Matric Higher Working on the Farm 30 65.2 19‘ 11 Working off the Farm 3 6.5 1 2 Students 13 28.2 4 9 Total 46 100 24 22 It will be noticed that before the purchase of the tractor, 6.5 per cent of thelpresent family labor on the farm were working on the non-farm jobs and another 28.2 per cent were students. More than two-thirds of these new entrants to the farm labor market had an edu- cation level of matric and higher. The major conclusion that emerges from the analysis of both the cross-section andthe time series data on farm family labor appears to be that the presence of the tractor on the farm has led to increased participation in farm labor by the young educated members of the family who otherwise might have gone to the urban labor market in search of jobs. The answers to the unstructured questions 1" ill I.“ T . .‘ I ill-'1': 1| . I‘ll Ill {ii I Ill-ll“ 4.]. O. 111 by the author also corroborate this conclusion.1 Through- out the survey it was noticed that the younger generation, especially those having some level of schooling, were reluctant to accept the farm work with its traditional hardship. On the bullock farms the elderly people generally complained that the younger boys did not take an interest in the farm work.2 This, however, was not the case on the tractor farms where the older people were mostly appreciative of the younger ones.3 From the experience of the survey, the author feels that Abercrombie 1The answer of Chaudhry Ali Muhammad of Chak. No. 311/G.B. in the Lyallpur district was typical. Ali Muhammad had two years of college education and was working on his forty-five acre farm with the tractor. When asked about the advantage of the tractor cultivation his answer was, "Without the tractor, you would not have found me on the farm. The tractor has made the farm work acceptable to me and made me stay here instead of going to the city for a job. Without the tractor the farm work day extended from two to three hours before dawn to two to three hours after dusk. With tractor we generally start our daily work after sunrise and are back home before the sun sets." 2While interviewing Ch Mohd Ali Sahi, a bullock farm operator of village Kotli in the Gujranmala district, the author noticed a young boy of about eighteen in clean clothes and combed hair wandering around the farm. When asked by the author who he was, Ch Sahi (the boy's father) answered indignantly, "He is our 'Sahib.‘ He spent eight years in school and now he wants to have good food and clothing but does not like the farm work." Ch Sahi's answer to the question of why the boy does not like the farm work was, "It is not his fault. The younger gener- ation in general does not want to work on the farms, the way we have been doing." 3The three elder brothers of Ch Ali Muhammad, the tractor farm operator in the Lyallpur district, sat proudly and appreciatively around him while he answered the author's questions. 112 pinpoints an important complexity underlying the whole issue of mechanization and employment when he says, The lightening of agricultural toil is one of the most important effects of mechanization in the context of the employment problem. A major dilemma in determining a mechanization policy to meet employment needs is that, while tractors contribute to driving people out of agriculture, it is nevertheless difficult to see how the younger generation can be persuaded to stay in agriculture without some lightening of the work involved (see 4, p. 20). Next we will consider whether and how far the tractors on the farms surveyed in the Punjab have "con- tributed to driving people out of agriculture." Permanent Hired Labor The permanent farm labor in the Punjab is generally hired for a period of one year, though in some areas the practice of monthly contracts also exists. They are usually supposed to be present on the farm around the clock for twenty-four hours. Besides taking care of the draught and milk animals on the farm, their major assignment on the farm is land cultivation. Thus when the tractor replaces the bullock plow for the cultivation of land, the permanently hired labor is the most immediate group to feel the pinch. The influence of the tractor mechanization on permanent labor on the surveyed farms will be analyzed (1) through a cross sectional comparison with the bullock farms, and (2) by studying the "before" and "after" labor situation on the tractor farms. Since the demand for the 113 permanent hired labor is likely to be influenced by the supply of the family labor, the family farm labor picture will also be presented, to serve as a background against which to have a better appreciation of the influence of mechanization on the permanent hired labor. Table 4.20 gives a comparative picture of the permanent hired labor along with the family labor on the tractor and bullock farms surveyed. The data shows that there was not much difference in the number of the permanent labor hired on the two types of farms. The tractor farms hired only 3.7 per cent less labor as compared to the bullock farms. But the bullock farms had a considerably larger supply of family labor which tended to depress their demand for hired labor. Considering both the family and the hired labor, the tractor farms were using about 17 per cent less labor as compared to the bullock farms. Time series data on how the permanent labor employment on the tractor farms changed with the purchase of the tractor is shown in Table 4.21. The number of permanent hired and family labor on these farms are shown before and after acquisition of the tractor. After the tractor permanent hired labor decreased by 19 per cent. But at the same time family labor increased by about 32 per cent. In absolute numbers the tractor drove about 114 om.moH om.He Ho cow so.mw so.am as com pea m~.moH Ne mN.No m.msw m~.ew am mN.me om.omk mmmu< HH< moa< me OH mm MAN ma.em om.es mN.N~ om.oo~ magmas»; om.m~ AH om.NH me m.eH m.k a mom aon< coma moa< mk.~m ma mk.kH m.qom Hm AH 4H Nam coppou sauce humpssze Aumnaszv nmuuompmzu onz nouns sHmawa compm>muaso ucocmsaod :30 Home: ucmcmsuoa :30 sets: moa< Hmpoe mos< Hmpob msamm Mooaasm mshmm Hopomae mahmm xooHHsm mam monomhh .moxo>usm one no memxuoz Hones can: sense unmemshoa we“ smegma Hayes--.om.v mamm=m ucou mom muouuauh on» uouu< souuauh ecu vacuum area so; auouumuh one souw< souumsh on» vacuum Amos-=23 none; lama xmwamm Auonlflzv none.— pouwz usage“. .mo»o>h:m naked management on» so neuomhh on» souw< mam uneven uonmq xuwaum one some; may“: acmcmauoa we hen-:2 onh--.-.v mqnfluH50 mom musogcmzv Hosea 909mg scams gonna sobma aonmq nopmq nobmg Hosea HmuOH «topaz xHHsmm Hmuob amen“: xafismm Hmuoe atoaflm xafiEmm meu< nmuhv msamm mahmm xooaasm mshmm Houomae xo>asm xooHHsm souomue coozuom mosoaommwo mmmucoouoa .Ha-ckma .pmnesa on» ca moxm>ssm mshmm xooHHsm mam Houomnb one so ouo< mopm>fiuaso Hod mom: Hopmq Hmpohun.v~.e mqm oomuo>< momusouuom mumuo>< oumucoouom on» cw sawum>wuasu mucmcoa codum>wuasu some: must mean some: mend Hmuoa newum>wuasu acmcoa coHum>Huanu s30 .ousosos amuse so can mousse Haoioosa as» so mousse: assoauuuooo use so sausages on» no vacuum use--.m~.v momma 124 owner. The percentage of tenants ejected was higher in the rice area than the cotton area, although the average size of the land holding under the remaining tenants increased in both areas. Tubewell farm owners increased the area under their own cultivation after they installed the tubewell. As indicated in Table 4.25 there were three sources of the pressures that contributed to an increase of their own cultivation land holding. Tenant displacement, as already discussed, was the major source of the additional land. The second major source was land renting by the tubewell farm operators. The third source was land purchase. Influence of the Tractor The effect of the tractor on tenant displacement and the size of the operational holding of the tractor owners are indicated in Table 4.26. Table 4.26 suggests that the influence of tractor mechanization on the tenurial relationship and the size of the farm cultivated by the tractor owners and their tenants has been very similar to that of the tubewell. In all areas taken together, 82 per cent of the tenants were displaced, reducing their number from 17 to only 3. Eviction was greatest in the saline groundwater area where the tractors were not preceded by tubewells. In the cotton and the rice areas, tubewells displaced most of the tenants (6 out of 14 in the cotton and 16 out of 17 1225 .vcwucou used on out man moum as» aw oumeuocH .oamnousm used 0» 0:0 dam moum n 059 5 ”GGGHUCHQ soauu>aodso usosoa cowum>wuusu :30 no n ~.na v v.~m no m.mno.a «biased Hausa: ha h.~a «N o.on on m.oom uouomue ecu daemon amend HH< .>H mm H h m a.vm om mm.omn «plasma nouns: NH o.~a «v m.o~ mm o.mvn uouomue on» ouOuom scum Handsome one .HHH ooa . . . . . o.wv ooa no.om~ «plasma sound: A mm Ha m.on mm m.han uouomua 0:» «Haven mead wow“ 629 .HH om N ~.ma o o.vm No mmav «plasma nous“: v m.aa ea o.Hv on own uouomua on» muowom mou‘ souuoo one .H Awesome Amouu oomso>¢ mmmuceouom oumuo>< omeucoouom on» a“ cOwum>wuH=U nuances cOwum>wuHso mecca mou< ment some: mou¢ Hmuoa .aucmsea sauna so use auosao uouomua one no uswmaom demodumuomo one so uouomua.enu uo cososausu unall.w~.v uaudfi 126 in the rice area) and did not leave much to be displaced by the tractors. By reducing the land cultivated by tenants, the tractor owners increased the size of their operational holdings. Like the tubewells, the tractors also led to "indirect" tenant ejection when the tractor owners increased their cultivated area through land renting. The third source of increase in the area under the culti- vation of the tractor owners was the purchase of the land. While emphasizing the favorable output and the employment effects of the tubewell mechanization, previous studies (9, 24, 44) have ignored its impact on the tenant displacement. The present survey suggests that, insofar as the displacement of tenants is concerned, the impact of tubewells has been comparable to that of tractor mechanization. The theoretical explanations of the tenant dis- placement by the owner operator acquiring a tractor are well known. Since tractors require large input, it pays for him to increase the area under own cultivation in order to reduce per acre costs. Economic theory also provides explanation of why an operator installing his tubewell may displace his tenant to increase his operational holding. Assuming that the landlord and his tenant were in equilibrium with respect to their tenurial arrangement, the tubewell, by raising the agricultural productivity of 127 other factors, injects an element of disequilibrium into their relationship. The equilibrium might be restored by changing the rental share. But if the rental shares are not flexible enough, as they generally are not, then taking over the land for self-cultivation is one of the predictable courses of action that the tubewell owner might take.1 During the course of the survey the author noticed that in an environment of rising agricultural productivity, any arrangement that increases the land handling capability of the owner operator could lead to tenant displacement. For example, in a number of cases land consolidation enabled the tubewell farmers to reduce fragmentation and increase the ability of the larger cultivators to bring their entire holdings under self-cultivation. The result was to further increase the rate of tenant evictions. It was also noticed that because of their mobility, tractors can be used to farm several pieces of land as a unit that had heretofore been farmed separately. As Chaudry Ali Mohammed, a sample farmer, said, In addition to my 45 acre farm in this village, I own an area of 45 acres in the village of Noorpur at a distance of 1 1/2 miles from here. With the tractor I can handle that land myself and am therefore going to take over self-cultivation next year. 1For an elaborated explanation of the theory and its empirical verification in Taiwan see, Steven N. S. Cheung, The Theory of Share Tenancy (Chicago: The Uni- versity o C icago Press, 1972). 128 It appears that it is not specifically the tractor but any technological change that raises the productivity of land that generates economic incentives for the land- owners to eject the tenants and reclaim land for self- cultivation. As shown above, in the sweet groundwater areas most of the tenants were displaced before the tractor 'when tubewells were installed by the landowners. In the saline groundwater area, however, where tubewells were not possible, tenant displacement has been greatest after the tractor. As will be shown later (Chapter V), the net benefits from tractor mechanization in this area are negative. It is, therefore, not the tractor but, pre- sumably, the use of high yielding seed varieties which have provided the economic incentive to resume land for self-cultivation. It was shown earlier that most of the tractors were purchased after the new wheat varieties had been introduced in this area, i.e., within the five years before the survey in 1970-71. The role of the tractor in this area has been as an "enabling" factor to capture the benefits of higher productivity on the tubewell farms; however, as will be shown in Chapter V, tractor culti- vation itself is highly profitable and therefore provides an incentive to reclaim land for self-cultivation. 129 ' Summary A summary of the influence of mechanization on employment of labor and on tenant-landlord relationships follows: Labor Employment The number of working age males was greater in the bullock than in the tractor farm households. Moreover, the rate of participation in the labor force was higher in the bullock farm households mainly because a relatively smaller percentage of their members go to school. As a result, bullock farms has 61 family workers as opposed to 46 on a comparable area under tractor farms. The smaller family labor may be one reason why tractor farms decided to mechanize. About 48 per cent of the family labor on tractor farms have education through high school and above as compared to about 15 per cent on the bullock farms. Of the total family members having education through high school and above, 31 per cent in the tractor and 57 per cent in the bullock farm households left for off-farm jobs. It appears that the tractor cultivation has increased participation in the farm labor force by the young edu- cated members of the family who are the potential entrants to the white-collar urban labor market. The income level and social status of the farm households studied is such 130 that migration to the urban jobs is limited mainly to the educated members while the uneducated stay on the farm in preference to the blue-collar jobs in cities. Tractor farms used slightly less (3.7%) permanent labor as compared to bullock farms. On the tractor farms themselves, however, permanent labor decreased by 19 per cent after the tractor. The use of casual labor was about 19 per cent greater on the tractor compared to the bullock farms. 0n the whole, tractor farms were using 7 per cent less labor per cultivated acre as compared to the tractor farms. However, they had 7 per cent more hired labor but 24 per cent less family labor. Tenant-Landlord Relationships The influence of tubewell and tractor mechanization on tenurial relationships and the structure of the farm was very similar. In both cases there was widespread displacement of tenants and an increase in the size of the farm under own cultivation of the mechanized farms. The major source of increase in the farm size was tenant displacement. Land renting and purchase were the other sources a CHAPTER V A PROGRAMMING APPROACH TO THE ECONOMICS OF TRACTOR MECHANIZATION IN THE PAKISTAN PUNJAB In the preceding chapter, the present influence of tractor mechanization on output and employment was analyzed on the basis of the farm level field survey data. In this chapter a linear programming model will be described and used to predict the output and employment consequences on the assumption that farmers seek to maximize net revenues. Moreover, the rate of return on tractor mechanization will be calculated as well as the influence of several changes in the mechanization package upon this rate of return. The Linear Programming Model Structural Specification of the Model Mathematical and Schematic Representation The objective of the model is to maximize 2 (l) R = Z c.x. - Z d.x. - X e.x. 131 132 where ci = the per acre net revenue obtained from the i-th crOp activity di = the per hour variable cost of the i-th tubewell water pumping activity ei = the per hour wage paid for the i-th labor hiring activity The objective (1) is to be maximized subject to the following constraints: n . (2) z a..x. < b. , j=1' —————————————— P w (3) Z a..x. :_b. , j=P+1, —————————————— Z i=n+l 13 l 3 where ai. = the input-output coefficient of the j j-th resource for one unit of the i-th activity bj = a vector of resource availability The schematic representation of the model is given in Table 5.1. Description of the Model The Objective Function.--The objective of the model is to maximize the net revenue of the farm subject to the technical constraints of the production function and the level of available resources. Three types of variables influence the net farm income. The first is the net revenue (gross revenuef-variable costs) per acre of the different [a 133 4m. ocmu ummsm ca I ucosouwsuem mama H oumouod umosm ESwamz lmossss. Amocsmzv axooHHsm I I owed Hem smooch N How umomom EdEwcwz “mocsmzv Amossmzu mxooHHsm I I used new smooch N ecu bottom Edwam: AHV pom: Awesome I 3833 36335 I 3 >38de 36333. Amuo<\musom. ucosouwsvom Amusomv I I meson uouomue «H aufiomamu uouomue AHIV conga Amuo¢\musomv Amusomv uonmq Hmcofluwppd I ucmEouHsvwm Momma ea Momma wafiemm .ouo<\musomv ucoEeuwsvmm Amusomv I I uo3om xooHHsm ea uw3om xooHHsm AHI. umumz “monocH\ouo¢V Aweso:H\mHo¢v I teased Hmcowuwpom useEmuwsvem Houmz ea seam: Hmsmo Ase induces I I ucmeeuwsvom coma «H mama Ava. Away .va Asmnaszv mswuwm momma mesmesm mcouo madam mucwmuumcou auwaflnmaflm>< noumz Haozonsa condone“ mOHSOmmm Hflom\nm nosH 0H0<\mm 0u0¢\auozvmm sawuocsm o>wuooflno .Homoz msaaamumoum Hmocaq o . nu mo cowumucmmmuamm oa .umsozomII.H.m wands 134 field crops. The net revenue is entered with a positive sign for all crops except for the minimum fodder for the bullocks, which is shown with a negative sign. In this case, net revenue shown is equal to the variable cost per acre. The variable cost of bullock fodder, an intermediate product, is taken as a reward for the draught power sup- plied by them. Two other variables (activities) influencing net revenue are the variable cost of pumping an acre inch of tubewell water and the hourly wage for hiring the labor. Both of these are shown in the objective function with negative signs. The wage rates included are higher for the peak labor demand months of April to June and October to November. The Activities.--The model has two types of activi- ties: the field crop and the resource-augmenting activities. The selection of field crop activities is based on the re- sults of the field survey. They are representative of the crops grown in those irrigated areas of Punjab where wheat and cotton are the major winter and summer crops. In the survey, these areas are represented by the Sahiwal District in the sweet groundwater area and the Lyallpur District in the saline groundwater area. The model contains two types of crop rotations for wheat: wheat after fallow and wheat following the previous season's crops. The survey results indicated that bringing 135 in wheat after the previous season's crops is the main mechanism available for raising cropping intensities in irrigated areas. Crop activities have also been differentiated on the basis of technology. Thus, the same crop may enter the model as more than one activity depending on different technologies being applied in its cultivation. The survey identified two types of technological differences: the seed variety and the source of power input. Significant varietal improvements have taken place in wheat, rice, and maize (corn). The farmers have shifted, almost completely, from the traditional to the improved variety of wheat but both were being followed in the case of rice and maize. Thus, on the basis of variety, wheat appears in the model as a single activity whereas rice and maize are included as two activities. Each crop is further broken up into two activities corresponding to the bullock and the mechanical technology. The crop activities selected are: Rabi (Winter) Season Crops Bullock Technology Tractor Technology Wheat - improved Wheat - improved Berseem (Fodder for sale) Berseem (Fodder for sale) Berseem (Fodder for own - bullocks) Toria Toria Gram Gram 136 Kharif (Summer) Season Crops Bullock Technology Jowar (Fodder for sale) Jowar (Fodder for sale) Jowar (Fodder for own - bullocks) Rice - IRRI - improved Rice - IRRI - improved Rice - Basmati - Rice - Basmati - traditional traditional Maize - traditional Maize - traditional Maize - improved Maize - improved Mung Mung Sugarcane Sugarcane Two-Crop Joint Activities Crops Following Previous Season's Crops Bullock Technology , Tractor Technology Cotton - wheat Cotton - wheat Maize - wheat Maize - wheat Rice - wheat Rice - wheat In the joint crop activities, wheat, maize, and rice are all of improved seed variety. In addition to the crop activities, the model has two types of resource—augmenting activities, namely tubewell water pumping and labor hiring activities. These activities permit the farmer to augment the available canal water and the family labor through pumping tubewell water and hiring labor , respectively . The Constraints.——Besides some special constraints, the representative model farm operator has fixed amounts of 137 land, water, bullock power, family labor, tractor, and tubewell capacity. The amounts of these resources available over a year have been divided into monthly constraints ex- cept for October and November when it is bi-monthly. The monthly and bi-monthly split on the supply side of the resources is necessitated by the nature of the farm demand for them. Due to the highly seasonal nature and rigidity of the field crop's demand for resources, the quantity available in each season becomes extremely impor- tant. The months of October and November have been split because with the harvest of summer and sowing of winter crOps occurring in this period, the fortnightly break be- comes important for making the land freed by the summer crops available for the winter crops. The monthly and bi-monthly split of resources improves the ability of the model to capture the timeliness of harvest and sowing Operations. This achievement, however, is at the cost of resource supply rigidity because the inter-month and inter- fortnightly transfer of resources is not possible. Land Constraint.--The overall land area available for raising the field crops is limited by the size of the farm. The size of the representative model farm is taken at 50 acres, which closely corresponds to the average size of the farm emerging from the field survey (Tables 4.4 and 4.5). For reasons given above, the overall land constraint is expressed as 14 monthly and bi-monthly constraints. 138 Water Constraints.-—In the absence of a tubewell, water availability is limited by the amount of canal water allocated by the government for the farm. The canal water supply varies in proportion to the size of the farm. C. H. Gotsch has made a micro watercourse study in the Punjab and developed data on the monthly acre inches of canal water available at field level for a farm of 12.5 acres in the cotton area (see 70, Table 6.1). By pro- portionately varying this data we have obtained the monthly canal water available for a 50-acre farm. Again, for the peak months of October and November, the water availability is presented on a fortnightly basis. Bullock Power Constraint.--The survey results indicated that on the average, the farmers maintained four pairs of bullocks on a 50-acre farm. These results are corroborated by another study made recently by Naseem (see 45, page 141). For each pair of bullocks, the bullock hours available depend on the number of hours per day and the number of days per month worked by the bullocks. It has been assumed that the bullocks can work eight hours a day1 for twenty-four days a month, i.e., 192 hours a month or 96 hours a fortnight. 1Naseem (45) and Inderjit, et a1. (69) have also used eight hours per day. They, however, assume 269 and 250 days per year, respectively, against 274 assumed in this study. ' 139 Family Labor.--The availability of family labor has been determined on the basis of the survey results. The average number of male adults equivalent available for the farm work on a 50-acre farm was found to be as follows: Tractor Bullock Farm Farm Cotton zone of the sweet water area 2.5 3.5 Cotton zone of both the sweet and the saline water areas 3 4.3 For comparative purposes, the family labor force has been assumed as 3 for both the tractor and the bullock farms. The work capacity has been assumed at eight hours a day and twenty-four hours a month, which gives 576 man hours of family labor per month.1 Like other fixed re- sources, the family labor constraint also has been expressed in monthly and bi-monthly constraints. Tractor Capacity.--Theoretically, it is possible to run the tractor twenty-four hours a day. It is not possible in practice, however, when the tractor is supposed to work day after day over its lifetime. For short periods of time and in order to handle the seasonal peak work load, the tractor may work for relatively longer hours, but that will not be true for the year-round work. For the model 1The working hours per day and the days per year used here are very close to those used by Naseem (45). He uses eight hours a day and 282 days a year. 140 it has been assumed that the tractor can work for ten hours a day and thirty days a month,1 i.e., 300 hours a month or 150 hours a fortnight. Tubewell Capacity.--On the basis of observations made during the survey, it has been assumed that a tubewell can run sixteen hours a day for thirty days a month. This gives 480 tubewell working hours. With the average capacity of the private tubewells in the Punjab at l cusec, their water pumping capacity is therefore around one acre inch of water per hour. It is assumed that an acre inch available per hour is net of irrigation losses in distri- bution channels. Thus, 480 acre inches of tubewell water can be pumped per month and made available at the field head for the field crops on the farm. Special Constraints.--The model contains special constraints which restrict the feasible cropping pattern to one that includes a minimum of fodder for the bullocks on the bullock farms and not more than a certain minimum of sugarcane and fodder for commercial sale. Following Bose and Clark (6), the bullock fodder requirements have been taken at one acre per pair in each of the winter and summer seasons. The maximum acreage constraint on sugar- cane and fodder arises from market limitations. The 1Inderjit (69) also uses ten hours a day and thirty days a month. 141 distinctive feature of these crops is that they are very profitable at the micro level but have a limited and rela- tively inelastic total demand. If left unconstrained, they lead to a cropping pattern which cannot be sustained at the aggregate level. The maximum constraint on sugarcane is placed at three acres, which is equivalent to the level observed during the field survey on a 50-acre farm. In the case of fodder for sale, the maximum acreage has been somewhat arbitrarily fixed at four acres in each season. Table 5.2 gives a consolidated picture of the fixed resources available to a SO-acre farm as discussed above. Model Data and Their Sources To determine the parameters of the model, data were required on the fixed resources available to the farm, the inputs of different fixed resources required to produce a unit of various field crops, and the net revenue from a unit of output of these crops. The fixed resource avail- ability was discussed in the previous section; the latter two data categories will be considered in this section. To determine the input-output relationships, the output unit is taken as the produce per acre of a crop. Thus, the input-output relationships involve the determi- nation of the inputs required per acre to produce a given output. The calculation of net revenue involves data on the crop yields per acre, the harvest prices, and the 142 owe oom ohm mos mm om soosoooo oem oma mom «on on om mass osmIsdososoz osm oma mom son em on mass umHIHoosd>oz osm omH mam own on om mass osmIsoooooo osm omH mom «on em om mass umHIsmoouoo oms com mam mos mma om soofioooom owe oom ohm mos 44H om possum owe oom mam mos ova om sflso omo oom ohm mos ova om moon oms oom mam mos ooH om so: oms oom osm mos and om Hands owe oom osm mos sea om sous: owe oom mam mos mam om massages owe oom ohm mos NNH om sundown Amusomv Amusomv Amazon cmzv Amusom Mammy AmwnocH muodv Ammuodv MWWNMMMW mwwwmmww Honmq wawemm umzom xooaasm Hmum3 Hmcmu mama mnucoz moonsOmmm pmxwm .Hsoa .oonssd osu no mood souuoo we» as sums «Hudson s on oHosHao>< moossomom odxms oseII.~.m momma 143 variable cost per acre. The variable costs include the cost of seed, fertilizer, pesticides, water, land revenue, and marketing charges. The data were obtained from three main sources: published and unpublished documents; interviews with the officials and experts in government departments; research institutes and private agencies; and the field survey and unstructured questions asked of the farmers and the local agriculture extension workers. A new source did not always mean new information. Often they supplied information used for checking the earlier data. The checking and cross- checking facilitated our judgment in the final selection of data for inclusion in the model. Input-Ourput Relationship Initially, data were obtained from the World Bank study on the development of irrigation and agriculture in West Pakistan (30); "The Field Crop Technology in the Punjab, India" by Singh §£_§l. (68); Ph.D. theses by Naseem (4S) and Gotsch (27) and an unpublished report by Eisel on "A Mixed- Integer Programming Model for Punjab Agriculture" (17). The theses by Naseem and Gotsch, which developed programming models for small farmers in the Punjab, along with the Eisel report, provided a number of crude parameter estimates that were subsequently refined and supplemented by additional field work in the Pakistan Punjab. 144 The final input-output relationships were developed in Pakistan, mostly through discussions with the experts at the Punjab Agricultural Research Institute in Lyallpur. With the help of the Director, a team of experts consisting of the agronomist and two farm managers was organized, and about a week was spent in discussion with them. By this time, the (field survey and the preliminary coding of the data had been completed. During discussions the survey data and the crude data collected earlier from the published and unpublished documents were used for checking and cross-checking purposes. In addition to the fixed inputs, the variable inputs of seed, fertilizer, and pesticides were also considered in order to ensure that the output assumed correspond to the full package of inputs, both fixed and variable. The dis- cussion in the agronomy section had to be supplemented by specific interviews with experts in some other special areas, e.g., the engineering workshop and crop experiment stations, to fill in the remaining gaps in the data. Net Revenue The calculation of the net revenue uses data on the crop yields per acre, the harvest prices, and the variable costs. The yields per acre are taken from the input-output relationship calculations. The data on the harvest prices were available from the Directorate of Agricultural Econ- omics and Marketing, Lahore. The variable costs include seed, fertilizer, pesticides, water rate, land tax, and 145 marketing charges. The data on seed, fertilizer, and pesticide prices were available from the departments of Planning and Development and Agriculture, while their quanti- ties were determined during the discussion on the input- output functions. The water rate and the land tax data were obtained from the Irrigation and Revenue Departments, re- spectively. The marketing and municipal committees had data on marketing charges. Table 5.3 gives the yields, prices, variable cost, and net revenue per acre of crop activity used in the model. The details of the variable costs by items are presented in Table 5.4. Initial Results of the Programming Exercise: The Basic Solution This section presents the basic solution of the programming model. The analysis centers on the effect of mechanization on crOpping intensity, cropping pattern, and net farm revenue. The discussion will serve two purposes: (1) to check the "survey" with the "model" results and thereby provide evidence on the soundness of the former and realism of the latter and (2) to highlight the mechanisms through which the model generates benefits and thus to lay the groundwork for the study of the rate of return on mech— anization in the following section. The model is only for part of the survey areas, namely those irrigated areas of the Punjab where wheat and cotton are the major winter and summer crops. The data for 146 New o.mm ovm mH as on mxooHHsm mmH o.mvH oem mH as on Houomua HmmoIoNHmz own n.mHH own pH om on mxooHHsm mmH m.mmH owm 5H om om nouomua Humammm I oon Hum m.mvH omm NH co co mxooHHsm «mm w.mmH cum NH ov ow nouomue HmmH I mon AmxooHHsmv m.nm m.nm I I I I mxooHHsm Hoppom Hbmm mom o.mHv con H I 005 mxooHHsm AmHmmv mam o.mmH och H I cos uouomue umppom Hnmm mnH «.mn mom em m 0H mxooHHsm mNH N.mHH mom vN m 0H Houomue mHHOB mom v.nm mom mm m NH mxooHHsm mom v.m0H mom mm m NH Houomue ammo Nam v.mvH own nH co co mxooHHsm omm e.omH one 5H ov oe uouomue ummnz 1.mse 1.mme 1.mso i.mso 1.mmc ismssszo o mmmoH muod Mom muod Hem mnod mom 3mnum mscm>mm umoo msco>mm pcwwwummm \chuo umowwmmoma muwwwuom umz mHanum> mmouo . m U ouom.sod onHs .Hmpoz mcHEEmHmoum can :H poms mmHuH>Huo¢ mono mo ouod Hem osce>om umz pcm .mumoo oHanHm> .oscm>mm mmouoII.m.m mamde 147 new mph mmm man mOHH HMOH mNmH mvnH NHm ohm Hh mmH mvH 00H cum mvm mom o.am~ o.th o.mm~ o.~mm m.oom w.mbm o.Hmm o.hhw m.mvH o.mmH o.Hh m.m¢ m.Hm o.om~ o.mNH o.NvH o.¢mH HmHH HmHH HmHH HmHH movH movH omem omvm «mm «mm com ova mmm mmm omw omv sH\mH sH\mH nH\NH hH\NH sH\om sH\om ov ov om om cm on mm.o mm.o mH mH h.mm\ov h.wm\ov h.mm\o¢ b.mm\ov h.mm\NH h.mm\NH om om NH NH ov ow s.om\om s.om\om h.mm\ov h.wm\ov h.mm\b.vH h.mm\h.vH om om mH mH omv omv on on mxooHHsm uouomue mxooHHsm uouomue mxooHHsm uouomua mxooHHsm Honomue mxooHHsm uouomue mxooHHsm mxooHHsm Hosomue mxooHHsm uouomua mxooHHsm uouomse umos3\dsHmz ooos3\momm ooms3\souuoo “navy mcmoummsm couuou AmxooHHsmv Hoopom MHHmnx 0:92 AmHmmc smooch mHssss UHHnwmeNHmz 148 o.ma n.mH mH.NH o.a I o m.mv v.m oxooHHsm o.mvH n.o mH.NH o.o pm a m.nv v.m uouomua Have I ouHmz m.mHH s.mH mH.NH o.wH I mH m.nv m.HH nxooHHsm o.on h.m mH.NH o.wH hm mH m.mv m.HH uouomua Humsmmm I mon o.mvH h.mm mH.NH o.oH I mH o.nm o.wH mxooHHsm w.mNH h.MH mH.NH o.wH hm mH o.mm o.wH uouomua HmmH I mon AmxooHHsmv n.5w I mH.NH v.m I I o.vm o.mH mxooHHsm smooch Hbmm o.mHv 0.0mm mH.NH v.m I I o.vm o.mH mxooHHsm AmHmwv o.NmH I mH.NH v.o «NH I o.vm o.mH nouomue powwow Hnmm N.Nn c.0H mH.NH o.NH I a m.mN o.N mxooHHsm N.aHH w.m mH.NH o.NH Nm m m.mN o.N HOuomua mHuoe v.5m o.NH mH.NH o.m I I m.a o.mH mxooHHsm v.MOH m.m mH.NH o.m Nm I m.m o.mH scuomue Emuu v.mvH v.mm mH.NH v.OH I I m.om o.NN wxooHHsm v.oaH v.oH mH.NH v.0H No I m.mw o.NN uouomua umozk memumcu osco>om scum: nonmem pcm Hmuoe mcHuoxumx mama Hmcmo nuHmmom .Hosm mopHUHumom uUNHHHuuom poem muoHosnomB wuH>Huo< uo3om mono mooasm cw wand Hem munou oHanum> .Hmmoz mewssmquHm on» cH mom: moHuH>Huo< mono wo ouot Hem mumou oHanum>II.v.m mqmda 1u49 o.ooN o.Nhn o.nam o.non m.oom o.ohm o.Hmm c.55w o.mVH o.me o.Hh m.mv n.Ho o.wm~ o.wNH c.NvH o.va o.nw o.hN o.hw o.on o.mo n.mm o.mm w.mo o.mN o.hH H.b~ H.NH om.vN om.vN on.v~ on.vN om.vN on.vN mH.NH mH.NH mH.NH mH.NH mH.NH mH.NH mH.~H mH.NH mH.NH mH.NH mH.NH c.0N c.0N v.0N v.wN N.hN N.hN o.~m w.~m m.mH m.oH QHH wNH ucH mHH vv bu 5N mH mH hN hN 5N hm 5N hN hN hN o.hNH 0.5NH m.mHH m.mHH o.hNH o.hNH m.omH m.omH m.oo m.om m.mv m.me m.om m.ow v.hN v.5N o.mn o.mm o.om o.on o.ov~ o.ov~ mxooHHsm souomua exooHHsm uouomue axooHHsm uOuomua mxooHHsm uOuomue mxooHHsm nouomue mxooHHsm axooHHsm uouomua wxooHHsm nouomua axooHHsm uouomua umdn3\ouHmz usos3\oosm umonz\couuou assoc mcmoummsm couuoo AmxooHHDmc HOUOOM uHumSM mas: .oHuwc smooch ossoss smug»: I muss: 150 the basic model have therefore been drawn from the wheat- cotton area of the Punjab. In the basic model, the farm size is assumed to be 50 acres. Solutions are obtained for tractor and bullock technology and under a perennial canal system with and without a tubewell. In addition to investi- gating tractors, threshersl are also examined. Tractor Versus Bullocks Cropping Intensities Table 5.5 gives the model and survey results re- garding the cropping intensities on tractor and bullock TABLE 5.5.--Cr0pping Intensities for Tractor and Bullock Farms in Model and Survey Results. SO-Acre Farm Technology Irrigation System (Canal Irrigation Plus) Model Survey Results Results Bullocks No Tubewell 99.3 112.5 Tractor No Tubewell 94.3 108.8 Bullocks Tubewell 144.2 129.1 Tractor Tubewell 187.0 Bullocks + Tubewell 192.0 162.0 Tractor 1Threshers, however, were not studied in our field survey. Therefore, we have no empirical evidence to compare with the model results. 151 farms under different irrigation systems. It will be noted that for cropping intensity differences between tractor and bullock farms, both with and without tubewell, the model corroborates the survey results. In both cases the tractor without a tubewell has no influence on cropping intensities. This situation is indicative of the saline groundwater area discussed in Chapter IV. With a tubewell, tractor power leads to substantially higher cropping intensity on the tractor compared to the bullock farms. In one respect, however, the model results differ from the survey: the cropping intensity in the tubewell area is significantly higher, especially on the tractor farm, for the model as compared to the survey. This divergence supports the hypothesis advanced in Chapter IV, that in the sweetwater wheat-cotton area the tractor farms had not adequately exploited the cropping intensity potential by adopting the non-conventional "wheat after cotton" crop rotation. As indicated in Table 4.4, the change had been initiated by some but as yet not adopted by most of them. It is mainly through this crop rotation that the model farm operator achieves relatively higher intensities. (Table 5.6). Cropping Patterns The model results given in Table 5.6 show that, both with and without a tubewell, the cropping pattern on the tractor farms has a higher proportion of high value crops 152 TABLE 5.6.--Cropping Pattern Percentages for Tractor and Bullock Farms from Model Results. With Tubewell Without Tubewell Crops I TESI1ggks Tractor Bullocks Tractor Bullocks Wheat 43.0 40.4 27.6 40.7 29.7 Rabi Fodder 4.0 L 5.8 — 8.6 Toria - - - - - Gram - 11.5 31.4 - 1.0 Kharif Fodder 8.0 4.4 5.8 9.0 8.6 Rice - - - - - Maize - 5.9 23.1 ' 9.5 31.4 Mung 2.5 12.6 - 9.5 - Cotton 32.5 21.9 2.0 24.5 14.2 Sugarcane 3.0 3.3 4.3 6.8 6.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 of wheat and cotton as compared to the bullock farms. The explanation lies in their harvest-sowing overlapping and consequential seasonal peak power constraint in the month of May and in November/December! The tractor farm in the model was able to overcome the seasonal peak power con- straint of these high value crops but the bullock power farm could not. Bullock farms, therefore, grow relatively more 1For further clarification see the sowing and harvest calendar of wheat and cotton in Table 4.3 153 maize and gram which are low value1 but have less urgent seasonal power requirements. Maize is a short-season (July-October/November) summer crop to which the farm operator can turn when constrained in cotton sowing. Similarly, the winter crop of gram is chosen by the model because its early harvest in March avoids the May peak power constraint. The survey results analyzed earlier indicated cropping pattern differences between the tractor and bullock farms analogous to the model. For example, the tractor farms in the non-tubewell area had relatively higher per- centages of their cropped area under cotton as compared to bullock farms, which had relatively more gram and toria (Table 4.13). In the tubewell area, however, the high value crOps in which the tractor farms relatively exceeded were fruits and vegetables rather than cotton and wheat. Shadow Prices2 of Fixed Resources The shadow prices indicated by the programming model identify the type of resource constraints faced by a farm operator under different farm power technologies and systems of irrigation. The marginal value products of different resources when compared with their unit costs 1For net revenue per acre of maize and gram as compared to wheat and cotton see Table 5.3. 2In the primal solution of the L.P. problem, the "dual" of fixed resources represents their shadow prices or the marginal value products. 154 show the economic pulls that the model farmer feels under different situations. Table 5.7 presents the shadow prices (MVPSS) per acre of land, tractor hour, acre inch of water, and a bullock pair hour. The shadow prices indicate that without a tubewell, the bullock farm operator faces both water and bullock power constraints. The reason for the water con- straint is obvious, but the shortage of bullock power in this low intensity area (Table 5.5) needs explanation. The scarcity of bullocks appears in the month of May. In this month the bullock power is needed for the threshing of wheat and sowing of cotton, the two major crops accounting for more than 50 per cent of the total cropped acreage. The sowing of the summer fodder also takes place in this month. A comparison of the bullock pair hour MVP of rupees 10 (Table 5.7) to a unit cost of roughly rupee l per hour1 indicates a high profitability of additional bullock hours. There does not exist a market in the Punjab where bullock services can be hired. This, however, indicates the in- tensity of demand for power to handle the seasonal peaks. The water constraint appears during the months of September to November, when the winter crops are sown. (They account for more than 60 per cent of the total cropped 1A regular market does not exist but rupee l per hour is generally used for cost calculations. 1J55 mIH NI>Oz N.o uaom Anson uHmm mom GOHHQV OH am: «\2 oH so: <\z m No: mxooHHsm wH NI>oz No Doc mH HI>oz mv HI>oz mH NIuoo MOH NIuoo Acocm muom umo NN umwm vm HIuoo I I I I I I ooHumv moumz vH HI>oz Anson mom moHuQc «\z I I «\2 am so: mm so: souoose aw ooo m HI>oz mm HI>oz NHH HIuoo HHH HI>oz mm ms< I Houom moo I I I I em 094 cm umom MNH uo< ooHumv pcmH ooHHm ooHum oOHum MUHHm ooHum n so 30cmcm mnuco: 30pmnm mnucoz 30pmnm mascot 30pmcm mango: 3oomnm mu 2 m 00 s mxooHHsm u0uomua mxooHHsm souomua on” uwwowue monsoOmom HHosooss osososz HHozoosa some .Euom on» 0» QQXHW MQOHHHOmflm WC Rom“ CHV MOUHHQ 3OUM£mll.h.m mqmdfi 156 area--Table 4.13.) The MVP per hour of water is quite high1 as shown in Table 5.7. However, there are no sources for acquiring additional water. Canal water supplies cannot be supplemented due to the saline groundwater, and the scarcity is felt by everyone at the same time of the year. With the introduction of tractors in the area without tubewell, the power constraint in the month of May is re- moved (Table 5.7). This enables the farm operator to change his cropping pattern, as shown in Table 5.6, by bringing a higher percentage of his area under wheat and cotton. As shown earlier, the tractor farm operator cannot increase the total crop acreage because the water constraint faced previously is further accentuated and the supplies are limited by what is available from canal delivery. The situation is different in areas having sweet groundwater since a tubewell can be installed to supplement the water supplies available from canals. The results of the model indicate (Table 5.7) that the bullock farm oper- ator in this area, evidently not facing a water constraint, is confronted by bullock power limitation and land scarcity. The bullock power shortage now appears both in the month of May and in November (MVP = Rs. 1.2). This is due to differences in the bullock power demand of the major winter and summer season crops. While the winter crops need 1In tubewell areas water is sold at Rs. 3 per hour. 157 bullock power for both sowing and harvest operations, the summer crops use it for only sowing purposes. It is evident from the above that the need for additional power increases with the availability of supple- mentary water from tubewells. When tractor power is intro- duced in this situation, the bullock power shortage in the months of May and November is transformed into a tractor power shortage in the same months. The intensity of this shortage is indicated by the MVP of Rs. 53 and 14 per hour of tractor in the months of May and November, respectively.1 As shown earlier (Tables 5.5 and 5.6), tractor power leads to substantially higher cropped acreage and a change in cropping patterns and consequently creates further power needs. During the field survey it was observed that most of the tractor farmers were also keeping bullocks (Table 4.15). Although it will shortly be seen that the purchase of a thresher would have been more profitable than keeping bullocks, the model results indicate that even the latter choice makes economic sense. It will be noticed from Tables 5.5 and 5.6 that when the bullock supplements the tractor, it further increases cropping intensity and changes the cropping pattern in favor of high value crops. 1The tractor custom hiring rate is about Rs. 12 per hour. 158 Net Farm Revenue The previous discussion indicated the effect of tractor power and/or tubewell water on the level of cropping intensity and the crOpping pattern. These effects are ultimately reflected in the net farm revenue. Table 5.8 shows the net revenues obtained by different types of farms. TABLE 5.8.--Net Farm Revenue (in Rs.) for Tractor and Bullock Farms from Model Results. Net Farm Revenue Irrigation System (Gross Receipts - Technology (Canal Irrigation Plus) Variable Costs) for SO-Acre Farm Bullocks No Tubewell 14,531 Tractor No Tubewell 18,293 Bullocks Tubewell 18,473 Tractor Tubewell 30,928 Tractor + Tubewell 33,371 Bullocks It is evident that the lowest net revenue is on a bullock farm without tubewells. The addition of a tractor or a tubewell increases the net revenue by almost equal amounts (about 3.5 thousand rupees in both cases). The mechanism through which the additional revenue is generated, however, differs between the two cases. Whereas the addition of the tractor changes the cropping pattern from low to high value crops, the tubewell enables the bullock farmer to have a higher cropping intensity (Tables 5.5 and 5.6). The biggest 159 increase in net revenue is achieved with a combination of a tractor and a tubewell. Net revenue is even higher if bullocks are retained. The highest revenue is achieved when both higher cropping intensity and a high value cropping pattern can be pursued. Tractor with Thresher Versus Bullock with Thresher The farm equipment assumed in the basic model was changed by adding a thresher. The model results after this change are given in Tables 5.9 through 5.12. As expected, without a tubewell the acquisition of a thresher is of no value to the tractor farm. The cropping intensity, cropping pattern, and net revenue are not affected. The reason is that the constraining factor for the tractor farm continues to be water and not power. However, for the bullock farm without a tubewell, a thresher brings all the benefits that would have been brought by the tractor. Moreover, the capital investment required is substantially smaller. The cropping pattern changes in favor of high value crops and as a result brings net revenue almost equivalent to a tractor (Table 5.12). The reason is that the power con- straint appears only in the month of May and the wheat thresher, by easing the bullock power for cotton sowing, accomplishes almost the same results as tractor replacing the bullocks. 160 m.hHH m.mm m.vm m.vm o.NmH . N.¢¢H oom hmH Hocmonna Monmouna Hmnmonna Hmcmouna Hmcmmuss monmmuna Monmouna Honmouna son scoops: son oooson squ ooosqu squ usosqu mxooHHsm uouomua mxooHHsm Houomua HHozoooe ososqu HHozoose sass .muHsmom Homo: Eonm meumm xooHHsm ocm Houomue Mom cocoa Honmwune nqu moHuHmcmucH mcHQQOHUII.m.m mqmda 161 HHosoooe ososqu o.ooH o.oOH o.ooH o.ooH o.ooH o.ooH -IonooH o.ooH o.m m.o m.o m.o H.o m.o H.m m.m osoosomom s.mH ~.sH m.e~ m.om m.o~ o.N m.mm m.HN soouoo .I I m.o m.o I I m.m o.NH mass ~.o~ o.Hm m.o m.o s.m H.mm I. o.m ooHoz I I I I m.H I I I oon s.oH o.m o.m o.o m.m m.m H.o s.s sooeom - «Hooss I o.H I I I s.Hm I m.HH some I I I I I I I I mHHoe N.s o.m I I m.m m.m I I smooch Hnom m.~m o.oN s.os s.oo H.ms o.sN «.mo o.os noose nonmmuna Hmnmoune umsmoucs umnmouna Monmousa Honmmuza Monmouna Honmousa suHs poosqu squ usosqu oqu usosqu suHs usosuHs mxooHHsm uouomua Il. mxomHHsm II uouomua mmouo HHoaonoe son .mUHSmom Homo: Eoum mfiumh MooHHsm pom uouomua onodIom mom poppd “mundane cuH3 mommucmouom snouumm mchQouUII.0H.m wands 162 NIB 0mm m.H >oz Anson HHmm Hem oUHumv «\z m.H No: mxz mHOOHHsm mmH NI>oz Nm own he HI>oz me HI>oz hm NIuoo moH NIuoo AcocH ouom Hem mmH HIuoo em HIuoo I I I I ooHumv Houmz Anson pom oUHHmV ¢\z I I «\z Nm mm: Houomua Hoe HI>oz I Amaom you I I I I can HIooo so NHsn ooHsdo econ oUHHm sumo: mUHHm sumo: mUHum sumo: oOHHm cucoz If Honmouna + HooHHsm Monmouna + Houomus Honmoune + HUOHHsm Hmnmouca + Houomua HHozoosa ososuHs HHozoooe smog mooHsOmom .mfiflh ¥OOHHHHm OHM” HOfiUMIHm—p OHO¢Iom sou cocoa sosmosse son mooudomom soon ooxem mo H.om oHo moomud zooosmII.HH.m momma 163 HNN.mH Hmm.vH, mHm.mH mmNth r y r ' sonmmuna Monmoune umnmmune Monmoune son boosqu squ sooaon ' 1 {'1' mxooHHsm Houomna HHosonse ososon movamN mnv.mH ommtmm mNm.om nonmmuca nonmeHnB cqu usonqu umnmouca Monmouna sow: because ' exooHHsm uouomue r r '1[{ [’1’ y r r ’ r HHozoosa some r [1' .mpHsmmm Hove: EOHM mEHmm HUOHHsm cam Houomns muodIom How pmppd Hozmmhna nuH3 H.mm GHV mscm>mm Eumm HOZII.NH.m HHmom HosoHuHooa omoo Hosoaomooo a .HsoosmH mooHso possoz .mo oooodmwo msooHHsm HHoIIooHssd moo sH soHoooHdosooz souoosa so susuom mo ouom ossII.oH.m momma 169 enough even to pay the interest of 9 per cent on tractor loans charged by the Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan. When canal irrigation is supplemented with tubewell water, the tractor investment brings a return of 46 per cent per annum. Thus, in the tubewell areas the farmers have a net benefit of 37 per cent (46-9) after paying interest on the tractor loan. This provides a great economic incentive to mechanize. It is no wonder, therefore, that, as indi- cated in Chapter II, about 63 per cent of the tractors have been introduced on the farms having both tubewell and canal irrigation. Although the net benefit of mechanization from field crops cultivation in the canal-irrigated areas with- out tubewell has been shown to be negative (3-9), still 20 per cent of the tractors up to 1969 are reported to have been introduced in this area (see Chapter II). The explanation of this seemingly uneconomic behavior is given by two likely sources of economic gains not considered in our calculations. These are the benefits of the tractor in claiming the land from tenants for self-cultivation and from using it for transportation purposes. During the survey, both the tenant diSplacement (see Chapter IV) and the use of tractor for transportation were observed to be quite widespread. 170 Rate of Return with Bullocks and Thresher in the Tubewell Area The rate of return calculations discussed above were based on the assumption that the tractor completely replaces the bullocks. This assumption will be relaxed now to consider the effect on the profitability of mechan- ization when the tractor farm Operator continues to keep all his bullocks or has a tractor-thresher package. Table 5.15 gives the rate of return on mechanization under these different situations. The rate falls from 46 to 43 per cent when bullocks are retained with the tractor. But if the tractor is supplemented by a wheat_thresher the rate goes up substantially, i.e., from 46 to 63 per cent. During the field survey many tractor farmers were observed to be keeping bullocks instead of replacing them with tractors. The model results indicate that the farmers were not using the most economical package of mechanization. Rate of Return on Mechanization: Tractor-Thresher Package Replaces Bullock-Thresher In the above paragraphs the profitability of mechanization was discussed under three situations: (1) tractor replacing bullocks, (2) adding a tractor to bullocks, and (3) tractor-thresher replacing bullocks. The bullock-tractor-thresher sequence of mechanization used in the analysis is based on the field observation in Pakistan. In this section, however, the above sequence 1371 no roo.aH ova.on no man.cH own.Nn we om leave some ..aa. .Iosc .usoo some ..omc ..os. Ausoo some loosen. I acoenasvm I ucmsaHsvm acosnasum . usosaasvu Hm I imma+macc . I + oouooua Hm I .m+a._ . I + sooHHoo + MOOHHsm + senmouza + xuoHHsm + uouomue cusuom museum cusuom muHm uo esco>om no osco>mm no sump duos HosoHuHomm uooo HoooHuHomm doom HoooHuHmmm sooo HocoHuHomm uuos HOOHHsm + uouomua powwuwa .ueneeuaa mam axooHHsm usOAuHa use new! mauc HHosonsa one OH coHumuHsmnoo: uouumua co cusuou MO mflummIIImH.m mqmom HmOOHquO< umou HchHuHOpm Eumm .HocmoucaIxooHHsm msHomHmom MonmoudaIuouomuB cqu OOHumNHcmcooz co susuom mo mummII.mH.m mummy 174 Amm omH ANN one omH mom sosmosso pom mxooHHsm mom MOH omH mos oHH mmm sosmousu pom Houomua on omH omm sooHHso pom Houomue omm mOH mmH mos «NH own AHso soooosa sen HMH MHN mom HMH mom AHso msooHHsm Hmuoa MHHEmm OOHHm Hmuoe mHHfimm pouHm coHummHuHH Hmcmo HHosonsa squ soHuooHssH Hosoo Asumm ouodIomv mend poumaHuHsU Hem coonmfim noan mo mucoscmz mmoHoscooe .muHsmom Homo: .nmnssm cmumemm one OH OOHumNHcmnooz mo muoommm usoEWOHQEmII.hH.m mqmde 175 Besides favorable employment effects, thresher use, as noted earlier, was also the best form of mechanization in areas without tubewell water, from the farm income point of view. In the tubewell area all forms of mechanization, i.e., tractor alone, tractor plus thresher, bullocks plus tractor, and bullocks plus threshers, lead to increase in employment as compared to bullock cultivation. The survey results also indicated positive employment effects in the area (Table 4.23). With no water constraint, mechanical power through its cropping pattern and intensity effects tends to create more jobs than it displaces. The model results indicate that from an employment point of view the tractor plus bullocks is the best combination, but, as stated earlier (Table 5.15) the tractor plus a thresher is most apprOpriate for farm income. The combination involving bullocks has an employment bias because of the relative labor intensity of the fodder crOps emerging from multiple harvest Operations. The micro level conclusions about the employment effects of mechanization given in Table 5.17 are expected to hold at the macro level. The reason is that the in- creased overall production of the major food grain and cash crops is not likely to have any significant effect on the price received by the farmers. In the case of food grains, 176 imports provide a substantial1 part of the domestic con- sumption. Thus, increase in the domestic production of foodgrains will mainly substitute for imports. Therefore, the effect of increased domestic production on the prices of foodgrains supplied in the market will be negligible. Regarding export crops, mainly cotton, Pakistan produces such a small proportion of the world supply that she faces an almost completely elastic demand curve. Summary The results of the basic solution of the linear programming model show that without a tubewell tractor power has no influence on cropping intensity but with a tubewell it leads to substantially higher intensity (187 per cent) compared to the bullock farms (144 per cent). Cropping patterns on the tractor farms have a higher prOportion of high value crOps of wheat and cotton as compared to the bullock farms. The net farm revenue is lowest (Rs. 14,000) on a bullock farm. The addition of a tubewell or the re— placement Of the bullocks by a tractor increases the net revenue by almost equal amounts (i.e., about 3.5 thousand). Combining the tractor and a tubewell achieves the greatest increase (Rs. 15,000) in the net farm revenue. 1Even after the Green Revolution, Pakistan is im— porting about one and a half million tons of foodgrain this year. Roughly a million tons has been the historical yearly average import for more than a decade in the past. 177 Without a tubewell, the thresher has no influence when added to a tractor, but when added to bullocks, a thresher gives results equivalent to a tractor replacing the bullocks. With a tubewell, however, the thresher- tractor combination brings substantially higher net revenue (Rs. 38,000) as compared to thresher-bullock (Rs. 28,000). Without a tubewell, the rate of return on tractor mechani- zation on a 50-acre farm is 3 per cent, but with a tubewell it is 46 per cent per annum. If the tractor farmer uses a thresher, the rate increases to 63 per cent. The rate, however, falls to 35 per cent when the tractor-thresher package replaces the bullock-thresher combination. Without a tubewell, labor use per acre decreases with a tractor but increases with thresher mechanization. With a tubewell, however, all combinations of bullock, tractor, and thresher increase employment as compared to bullocks alone. The next step in the analysis will be to test the results of the basic model with respect to variation in the size of the farm, the prices of inputs and outputs, and the tubewell water as shown in Chapter VI. CHAPTER VI SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF THE PROGRAMMING MODEL RESULTS In the preceding chapter, results of the basic solution of the programming model were analyzed. The present chapter investigates the influence on the profit- ability of mechanization of three factors believed to be critical in the process. These factors are (l) the size of the farm, (2) the prices of the major inputs and out- puts, and (3) constraints on water that a tubewell farmer would be permitted to pump. Size of the Farm and Rate of Return on Mechanization In any discussion of economics of mechanization, the size of the farm holds a prominent position (see 6, 35, and 37). Due to the lumpiness of the tractor, the rate of return on tractor investment tends to change with the size of the farm. The analysis in the preceding chapter assumed a farm size of 50 acres. In this section the size of the basic farm will be increased and decreased by 50 per cent to study the influence of farm size on rate of return on mechanization. 178 179 Table 6.1 shows the rate of return on farms of 25, 50, and 75 acres. The rate tends to increase as the size TABLE 6.l.--The Rate of Return1 on Tractor Mechanization at Market Prices, 1970-71. (No bullocks retained.) Size of the Farm Per Cent Rate of Return (Acres) With Tubewell Without Tubewell 25 32 negative 50 46 3 75 41 10 1See Chapter V for the formula, Table 5.13 for the tractor and bullock costs, and Appendix C for the net farm revenue. Bullock pairs are assumed at four at 50 acres and vary proportionately with the size of the farm. of the farm expands upward from 25 acres. The pattern of change in the rate of return in relation to the farm size, however, differs between the tubewell and non-tubewell farms. Without a tubewell, the rate starting from negative at 25 acres continues to increase up to 75 acres. But with a tubewell, the rate declines between 50 and 75 acres. These results suggest that the system of irrigation is an important factor influencing the optimal size of the farm for tractor cultivation. With a tubewell, the Optimum size lies between 50 and 75 acres, while it is at 75 or above without a tube- well. As shown earlier, the additional water permits a higher cropping intensity on the tubewell as compared to the non-tubewell farm. Thus, on a tubewell farm it is both 180 the intensive and extensive cultivation that use tractor capacity, while it is only the latter in the case of non- tubewell farms. The analysis in the above paragraphs assumed mechanization consisting of only a tractor. Now this assumption is relaxed to study the influence of mechani— zation packages consisting of (l) tractor plus bullocks and (2) tractor plus thresher. Table 6.2 gives the rate of return on different mechanization packages on a tubewell farm. TABLE 6.2.--Rates of Return1 on Tractor Mechanization on a Tubewell Farm, with and without Bullocks and Thresher. Farm Size Per Cent Rate of Return (Acres) Tractor Only Tractor + Bullocks Tractor + Thresher 25 32 18 27 50 46 43 63 75 41 48 68 1 See Chapter V for the formula, Table 5.13 for the equipment costs of bullocks verses different forms of mech- anization, and Appendix C for the net farm revenue. The change in the rate of return with the size of the farm indicates that with the tractor alone, as discussed earlier, the economies of scale are exhausted between 50 and 75 acres. But when tractor capacity is supplemented by 181 bullocks or a thresher, the economies are present up to 75 acres. Thus, in the last two cases, the optimum size of the farm will be at 75 acres or above. These results show that the optimum size of the farm varies with the package of mechanization. Farm Size and Employment The employment effect of mechanization varies with the type of the mechanization. As shown in Table 6.3 the labor use per acre in the tubewell area tends to decline as the size of the farm increases from 25 to 75 acres for most types of mechanization. At 75 acres, however, the trend reverses in the case of tractor plus bullocks and stabilizes in the case of bullocks only. The explanation for these results lies in the fact that while bullock numbers change proportionately with the size of the farm, the fixed tractor and thresher capacity gets distributed over larger and larger areas. These capacity limitations begin to affect the level of crOpping intensity and patterns and, therefore, employment. Input-Output Price Distortion and Profitability of Mechanization The rates of return on mechanization discussed previously reflect a situation where the individual farm operator faced the prices of inputs and outputs prevailing in the domestic market in Pakistan during 1970-71. The review of literature in Chapter II, however, indicated that I182 OHv cm mNm mNm No mme NHm an mmN man No pom me new vHH mNm on oMH can Nov NNH omN mom HMH NON om Haw va pom mNm vHN mHm aHm va mmm va «MN mmH mN Houoa AHHsos oouHm Hoooa AHHsom noose Hobos AHHeom noses Hoooe AHHsom some: I Hmouocv sonmousa + uouomua nxooHHsm + uouomua cho uouomua tho mxooHHsm Eumm one I I no msHm whoa pom mason cm: .nmnssm on» no nmoud HHozonsB cw coHumchmcoo: mo muoowum uceESOHeem cam Eumm on» no ONHmII.m.w mHmda 183 some of the market prices critical to mechanization do not reflect true scarcity and that correction of the price distortion might change the rate of return drastically. In this section agricultural machinery, equipment and fuel on the cost side, and internationally traded agricultural commodities on the benefit side will be priced at the world market level to study their influence on the rate of retrun to mechanization. The underlying assumptions and the cal- culations at world market prices are shown in Tables 6.4 and 6.5. The rate of return to the private tractor farm Operator facing the world market or social prices of agri- cultural machinery and commodities is given in Table 6.6. It will be noted that without a tubewell the rate of return at world market prices is negative. With a tubewell, however, the rate, though less than at domestic prices, still remains very high, i.e., 32 per cent. Even if the rate on borrowing capital were increased from 9 to 15 per cent1 to reflect its scarcity value, the private farm Operator would still have net benefits of 17 per cent per annum. Given the nature of distortion in the prices of agricultural machinery and commodities as indicated in 1Rates varying from 10 to 15 per cent have been used as social cost of capital against the rate of 9 per cent charged by Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan. Lawrence (41) uses 15 per cent. 184 TABLE 6.4.--Cost of Mechanical and Bullock Technology Package. I. Mechanical Technology Domestic Market World Market Prices1 Prices Tractor 45 H.P. 17,500 29,550 Cultivator/tiller (9 tines) 1,610 2,473 Mouldboard plow 2,500 3,840 Wheat drill (l3 tines with fertilizer attachment) 3,730 6,536 Cotton planter 3,000 4,608 S-ton trailer 4,000 5,072 Total 32,340 52,079 Thresher 5,000 6,340 Fuel and lubricants per gallon 3.30 1.90 II. Bullock Technology3 Life Price Salvage Price Cost for (Years) (Rs.) After 8th Year 8 years One pair of bullocks 12 1800 600 1200 Implements set 10 500 100 400 Total 2300 700 1600 1The market prices were taken from Lawrence (41) and Rana Tractors Limited, Lahore. Here the foreign exchange component is valued at Rs. 4.7 = $1. 2WOrld market prices exclude all taxes and value foreign exchange component at Rs. 11 = $1. Most of the items have different foreign exchange components. 3Computed from Naseem (45, Table v.6). 185 TABLE 6.5.--Prices of Internationally Traded/Import Competing Agricultural Crops. Domestic Market World Market C Prices1 Prices2 rops (Rs.) (Rs.) Wheat 17 20 Rabi oil 24 58 Maize 15 19 Cotton 50 70 Rice--IRRI (Paddy) 12 22 Rice--Basmati (Paddy) 17 50 Sugarcane (Gur) 40 15 l The harvest prices prevailing during 1970-71. Among other things, these prices reflect the government taxation and price policies and the foreign exchange rate of Rs. 4.7 = $1. 2These are the prices likely to prevail in the domestic market on the basis of world market prices assuming no taxes and public control over prices and a foreign ex- change rate of Rs. 11 = $1. The world market prices were assumed to be the mid-way prices of the minimum and maximum used by Lawrence (42, Table A-8). TABLE 6.6.--Rate of Return on Mechanization at World Prices1 Compared with Domestic Prices. (Tractor Only) Per Cent Rate of Return Farm Size Prices With Tubewell Without Tubewell 50 World 32 negative 50 Domestic 46 3 1 See Table 6.4 for the equipment costs for Tractor and bullocks and Appendix C for the net farm revenue. 186 Tables 6.4 and 6.5, respectively, these results of the model for a tubewell farm are not uneXpected. 0n the cost side, the domestic market underprices tractor and equipment by about 38 per cent and overprices fuel and lubricants by about 74 per cent. On the benefit side, all agricultural products are underpriced except sugarcane. The extent of underpricing in the case of cotton, oilseeds, and rice (Basmati) is 29, S9, and 66 per cent, respectively. It is evident that when price distortions are corrected, the changes on the cost and benefit side are compensatory to a large extent. As a result the fall in the net revenue is modest rather than drastic. Tubewell Water and the Rate of Return on Mechanization In this analysis of the economics of mechanization, tubewell water has shown itself to be critical. It was seen in the preceding chapter that, whereas the return on investment in tractor mechanization in the non-tubewell farm was low, it was high on the farm having tubewell water. Hence, the sensitivity of the rate of return on mechani- zation to the quantity of tubewell water needs to be in- vestigated, through the programming model exercises. For this purpose the basic categories of a 50-acre farm culti- vated under either tractor or bullock technologies will be used for analysis. 187 The amount of total water, both canal and tubewell, used by the tractor and bullock farms and the level of their cropping intensities is given in Table 6.7. It will TABLE 6.7.--The Amount of Canal and Tubewell Water Used by 50-Acre Tractor and Bullock Farms in the Model. Difference Tractor Bullocks (Tractor-Bullocks) Cropping Intensity 187 144 Canal Water (acre inches) 1299 1112 187 Tubewell Water (acre inches) 418 267 151 Total Water 1717 1379 338 be seen that the tractor farm with 43 per cent points higher cropping intensity uses 338 more acre inches, i.e., about 25 per cent, as compared to the bullock farm. It is inter- esting to note that the additional water used on the trac- tor farm is not entirely drawn from the tubewell. About 55 per cent of it comes through increased utilization of the fixed water supply from the canal. The amount of canal water available to the tractor and bullock farms is the same, but tractor power, by overcoming the seasonal power constraint, increases the planted acreage and, therefore, off-season utilization of canal water. (The excess water supply in the off-season is usually dumped into such crops 188 as sugarcane, berseem, etc., and thus mostly goes to waste.) This contribution of the mechanical power to increasing the effective canal water supply has not been recognized by most of the earlier researchers on mechanization.l For reasons given earlier, tractor power also in- creases the utilization of tubewell water. As shown in Table 6.7, the tractor farm utilizes 418 compared to 267 acre inches of tubewell water. Assuming that the recharge of the acquifer per 50 acres is approximately 12002 acre inches per annum, the tubewell water withdrawals by both the tractor and bullock farms are considerably below the socially permissible level. These results indicate that it is not the total withdrawals but the supplies made available at critical times that reflect the true value of tubewell. This was further investigated through down- ward parametric variation of the total tubewell water with- drawals. The maximum withdrawals were varied by 50 per cent at each stOp from 400 through 12.5 inches. The rates of return on tractor mechanization at various levels of tube- well water are given in Table 6.8. lSee Bose and Clark (6) and Alvi (1). They emphasize water as a constraining factor limiting ability of the tractor to increase cropping intensity but fail to realize the increase in economic supply of water made possible by the mechanical power. 2Gotsch (25, pp. 31-32) assumes 1300 in the Northern Punjab. It is assumed that the recharge will be somewhat less in the Southern Punjab to which the model relates. 189 TABLE 6.8.--Rates of Return1 on Mechanization at Various Levels of Tubewell Water on 50-Acre Farms. Maximum Permissible Tubewell Water Withdrawals (Acre Inches Per Annum) 5760 (418)a 400 200 100 50 25 12.5 Nil Rate of Return 46 46 38 32 23 15 10 3 1See Table 5.13 for the tractor and bullocks costs and Appendix C for the net farm revenue. aActual. In all other cases maximum and actual are the same. The limit on monthly drawal is 480 acre inches. It is evident from the table that as expected the rate of return does fall when tubewell water is reduced below 400 acre inches. The proportionate fall in the rate, however, is considerably less than that of the water. It is noteworthy that the critical level of tubewell water after which the rate falls below the social cost (i.e., 15 per cent) of borrowing capital is at a very low level, i.e., 25 acre inches. Summary The sensitivity analysis indicates that without a tubewell the rate of return on tractor mechanization continues to increase (i.e., from negative to 10 per cent) when farm size varies from 25 to 75 acres. With a tubewell, the rate declines (i.e., from 46 to 41 per cent) between 50 and 75 acres if it is tractor alone but continues to 190 increase up to 75 acres when accompanied by bullocks or a thresher. The use of labor per acre declines with the farm size. At world market prices the rate of return falls to 32 per cent as compared to 46 per cent at domestic prices. Regarding the tubewell water, the rate of return is not affected even when the water withdrawals are reduced to one-third of the socially permissible level of 1200 acre inches per annum per 50 acres farm. The rate of return on mechanization is sensitive to farm size and prices of inputs and output but not to the amount of tubewell water. CHAPTER VII CONCLUSIONS, POLICY IMPLICATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH The object of the study was to investigate the economic and social implications of tractor mechanization in the Punjab province of Pakistan. The study of economics of mechanization involved analysis of its influence on cropping intensity, yields per acre, cropping patterns, and the rate of return on investment in tractor and equip- ment. The social aspect included the influence of mechani- zation on employment of labor, tenurial relationships, and structure of the farm. The methodology of the study in- cluded: (l) a field survey of a cross-section of fifty farmers in different areas of the Punjab to investigate the existing situation regarding the influence of tractor mechanization on output, employment, and tenurial relatiOn- ships and (2) the use of a linear programming model devel- oped for the wheat-cotton area in the Pakistan Punjab to examine the rate of return on mechanization and its sensi- tivity to different economic parameters, such as form of mechanization, size of the farm, prices of inputs and 191 output, 192 and the tubewell water availability, considered to be critical to profitability of mechanization. Conclusions The Economics of Mechanization l. The tractor had no influence on cropping intensity in the saline groundwater areas where tubewell water is not available to supplement the supply from canals because water remains a constraint. Tractor power in the tubewell areas where water is not a constraint made a considerable impact on cropping intensity. Tractor farms had considerably higher intensity level (168 per cent) as compared to bullock farms (144 per cent). In the tubewell areas a widespread market has developed for tractor custom hiring. The tubewell— bullock farms hire tractor services to meet their seasonal peak power requirement. In this way they have been able to achieve crOpping intensity close to the tractor farms (161 per cent). With a wheat-rice crop sequence in the tubewell area, the level of cropping intensity on both the tractor (177 per cent) and bullock (162 per cent) farms was higher and the difference between them smaller as compared to the tractor (162 per cent) and bullock (129 per cent) farms in the area with 193 wheat-cotton as the main crop rotation. The differ- ence in the influence of mechanization emerges from the fact that, whereas the sowing and harvest season do not overlap under wheat-rice, they do overlap under wheat-cotton cropping systems. The tractor farmers in the wheat-cotton area have not yet achieved the double cropping of which they are capable because most of the farmers have not yet accepted the "unconventional" crOp rotation of sowing wheat after cotton. In the wheat-cotton area, tractor cultivation led to a cropping pattern relatively dominated by high value crops. This is true both for "with" and "without" tubewell areas. The programming model exercises show that on a 50-acre model farm without a tubewell, the thresher- bullock technology will yield about the same effect on the cropping pattern and net farm revenue as thresher-tractor technology. With a tubewell, however, the thresher-tractor package is far superior to thresher-bullock in terms of higher cropping intensity (200 versus 152 per cent), crop- ping pattern, and net farm revenue (Rs. 38,000 against 28,000). Even a tractor-bullock combination is better than a thresher-bullock (having net farm revenue of Rs. 33,000 against 28,000). 194 Tractor cultivation has not shown any significant influence on yields per acre. The reason for this was seen to be that (l) the tractor farmers do not have the necessary tractor implements for deep plowing, row crOp planting, fertilization, etc.; and (2) the tractor farmers did not have any appraisable difference in the use of other agri- cultural inputs and improved practices as compared to the bullock farmers. At market prices of inputs and output, the rate of return on tractor mechanization on a 50-acre farm in the wheat-cotton area was very low (3 per cent) without a tubewell but very high (46 per cent) with a tubewell. At social prices the rate of return fell to negative without tubewell and to 32 per cent with tubewell irrigation. The Social Consequences of Mechanization 1. The family labor per cultivated acre on the tractor farm was lower as compared to the bullock farm. A larger percentage of them, however, were educated. After the tractor, family labor on the tractor farms increased because more of their educated members came to work on the farm. The tractor farms used more (7 per cent) hired labor as compared to the bullock farms. 195 The structure of the hired labor, however, changed. While the permanent hired labor decreased (19 per cent) on the tracor farms, the use of casual labor increased. Considering both the family and hired labor, tractor farms had less (7 per cent) labor per cultivated area than the bullock farms. Tractor cultivation led to large scale tenant dis- placement. The operational size of the tractor farms increased through tenant displacement, land renting, and purchase. The tubewell had very similar effects on tenant displacement and the size of the tubewell farm. Policy Implications The study indicates that no general policy recom- mendations would be appropriate for the province as a whole. The policy implications differ in different areas. For example, under the present crOp technology, tractor as a source of power is profitable on the tubewell farms in the canal- irrigated wheat-cotton areas of the Punjab province but unprofitable without a tubewell. In all cases, however, the conversion from the bullock to tractor leads to tenant displacement. Thus, while in the areas without tubewells the objectives of economic 196 growth and social justice dictate a common policy against tractor mechanization, these two objectives conflict in the tubewell area. This conflict also appears in the case of tubewell technology (and even high yielding seed varieties), but it is more serious in the case of the tractor because its foreign manufacture provides limited linkages in the non-farm sector and requires a relatively large scale use of foreign exchange resources. For policy purposes the economic and social consequences of mechanization and alternative technologies avail- able need careful reconsideration. For example, in the non-tubewell area, the thresher mechanization has the same influence on the crOpping pattern and net farm revenue as the tractor. Besides being less costly than the tractor, the thresher has more indirect benefits in the form of greater employment on the farm and stronger linkages with the off-farm economy because of its domestic manufacture. In the tubewell area, however, the adoption of the ‘ thresher instead of the tractor involves foregoing some opportunities in the form of higher produc- tivity which needs to be considered against the other benefits. Correcting the price distortions has often been recommended as a policy instrument to squeeze out 197 the private profits from mechanization and thereby control its adoption by the farmers. This study shows that such a policy may not be effective in some situations. For example, policy measures designed to correct the factor and output prices and interest rate distortions in Pakistan will not have any significant effect on the profitability of tractor mechanization to a tubewell farmer in the wheat-cotton areas of the Punjab province. Therefore, some other policy instruments would need to be used if policy makers decide to influence the pace or form of mechanization. It will be noticed that besides water and power, the sowing and harvest calendar of the major winter crop, wheat, and summer crops, cotton and rice, is an important determinant of the double cropping possibilities. Historically, for example, when the sowing season of the traditional wheat was mainly from early October to early November, little wheat could be sown after cotton, which was still in the field at that time. The development of new seed varieties with sowing season extending over most of December has created the double cropping Oppor- tunity by making it possible to sow wheat after cotton. As yet, the intervening time between the two crops is so short that the bullock power has 198 limited capability and therefore tractor power is needed to adequately exploit the double cropping potential. An alternative, at least a partial one, to tractor power seems to be the investment in agricultural research to further shorten the grow- ing seasons of wheat and especially cotton. De- pending on the time period that can further be generated between the harvest and sowing seasons of these two crops, research in this area could offset the speed advantage of the tractor and permit higher cropping intensity by bullock power. An example is available from the wheat—rice area sur- veyed in the Punjab where late sowing wheat and early maturing IRRI rice varieties have enabled the bullock farmers to achieve a cropping intensity of 162 against 177 per cent on the tractor farms. Technical change, as mentioned earlier, is critical for agricultural modernization. For optimum results, however, the change in technology mostly involves a bundle of inputs that should be introduced to- gether. The results of our survey in the Pakistan Punjab show that, in the process of technological transformation, the farmers in general have picked up the most profitable input and failed to use the full package. The tractor farmers, for example, have purchased the tractor but not the necessary 199 equipment for deep plowing, row crop sowing, and fertilization; they have mechanized but have not made any significant headway in the use of improved agricultural inputs and practices as compared to the non-mechanized farmers. It was also noticed that on both the mechanized and non-mechanized farms, while new seed and tubewells haVe spread very widely, the inputs and practices--e.g., the quantity and combination of fertilizers, sowing method, agri- cultural implements, even seed selection and treat- ment, hoeing, and weeding, etc.--have lagged behind. These results emphasize the importance of extension services in the process of agricultural growth through technical change. In the extension programs much more emphasis needs to be given than that previously given to persuading the farmers to make use of the broader package of inputs. In the case of tractor mechanization, a direct action could be taken by tying the purchase of the necessary implements with that of the tractor and providing the necessary finances through loans. The extension services should also focus on breaking the farmer's resistence to adopt the new crop rotation by sowing wheat after cotton. The agricultural growth pattern indicated by this study is such that, within the canal-irrigated areas 200 of the Punjab, agricultural intensification in terms of double cropping is limited to those areas where supplementary water is available from tubewells. Due to water constraint, the non-tubewell areas (having saline groundwater) have almost no oppor- tunity of participating in higher cropping intensi- ties. With continution of the existing pattern imbalanced growth between the tubewell and non- tubewell areas is inevitable. The results of the programming model exercises indicate that it is not the overall shortage of water but its scarcity at the critical sowing season which limits intensity level in non-tubewell areas. As indicated in Table 8.1, provision of additional water by tube- wells in the sweet-groundwater areas increases TABLE 7.l.--Effect of Additional Tubewell Water on Utilization of Canal Water, for a 50 Acre Bullock Farm. Source of Water Water Used in Acre Inches Without With Difference Tubewell Tubewell (With — Without) Canal 987 1103 116 utilization of the canal water. The reason is that the additional water at the sowing time enables the farmer to plant a crop which utilizes the previously surplus water in the offseason. In the past when 201 river waters were unregulated, it was not possible to provide such additional water in the saline groundwater areas. With the construction of reser- voirs in the upper reaches of the rivers in Pakistan, their waters are now being controlled. The regu- lated river waters over seasons open up the possi- bility of meeting the critical seasonal demand for additional water in the non-tubewell areas and thus permitting agricultural intensification. Diversion of some canal water from tubewell to the non- tubewell areas needs consideration for providing balanced growth opportunities to the two zones. Future Research The results of this study show that the most serious social effect of mechanization so far, both in the form of tractor and tubewell, has been in terms of large scale tenant displacement. The immediate question in need of research is: Where have the ejected tenants gone? Have they migrated to cities or adjusted within the rural economy? What has been the process and costs of adjustment and what is their present position versus tenant cultivators? The answers to such questions will indicate the magnitude of the indirect cost of mechanization which should be an important variable for consider- ation in any decision on mechanization policy. 202 Although tractor mechanization had a positive net effect on the total labor hired, the structure of the labor force changed whereby the permanent hired labor decreased. Research is needed to determine where the displaced permanent labor has been ab- sorbed. Another area in need of research is the supply position of the permanent hired labor. During our field survey in the Punjab most of the farmers indicated that it was difficult to get permanent labor but casual labor was easily available. The main reason for the shortage as given by the farm— ers was migration to cities due to higher wages, fixed working hours, and better working conditions --with which the farmers cannot compete. The importance of the landless agricultural laborers has been rather small in the Pakistan rural economy. They constituted about 8 per cent of the total farm labor in 1961. It is possible that the shortages reported by farmers are genuine ones and mechani- zation is, in part, a response to this permanent labor scarcity. It was noted that permanent labor has traditionally been provided by specific social communities and the rural labor in general does not compete for permanent farm jobs. On the other hand, the author observed that wages for permanent 203 labor differed substantially between different areas. This would suggest that there may be no overall shortage and the real problem may be lack of mobility between different areas. Research on the avail- ability of permanent labor is very significant because the case for bullock cultivation generally rests on the assumption that there is no shortage of labor for this purpose. The recommendations for Pakistan regarding the auxiliary tractor equipment and the package of other inputs and practices are mainly based upon technical considerations aimed at maximizing the output per acre. The farmer's response, however, is mainly determined by the economic profitability of these inputs. As rational economic decision makers they tend to "optimize" rather than "maximize" the input use. It is very essential, therefore, that research should be done on the economics of (l) tractor equipment for deep plowing, row crop sowing, etc.; and (2) other improved inputs and practices such as the level and combination of fertilizers, hoeing, weeding, etc. As discussed earlier, research towards shortening the growing season of cotton promises very high returns in terms of double cropping possibilities. Research efforts need to be concentrated on varietal 204 improvement in cotton to develop short season, disease-resistant varieties. Some success has already been achieved in developing a short season variety but its adoption by the farmers has been on a limited scale due to heavy pesticide require- ments 0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 205 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Alavi, A. Hamza. "Farm Mechanization in West Pakistan." Paper submitted to the President's Study Group, Rawalpindi, October, 1969. (Mimeographed.) "A Study into Economic Comparison of 2. Ahmad, Bashir. Bullock Farming Versus Tractor Farming in Lyallpur District." Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, Agricultural University, Lyallpur, 1970. 3. Abercrombie, K. C. "Fiscal Policy and Agricultural Employment in Developing Countries." Paper read at ILO meeting, Geneva, June, 1971. (Mimeographed.) "Agricultural Mechanization and Employment An article for the Inter- 4. O in Latin America." (Mimeo- national Labor Reyiew, January, 1972. graphed.) "Employment and Industri- 5. Baer, Werner, and Herve, M. alization in Developing Countries." Quarterly JOurnal of Economics, LXXX (February, 1966), 88—107. "Some Basic Consider- 6. Bose, S. R., and Clark, E. M. ations on Agricultural Mechanization in West Pakistan." The Pakistan Development Review, IX (Autumn, 1969), 273—308. "Mechanization and Rural Employment 7. Billings, M. H. with Some Implications for Rural Income Office of Agricultural Develop- Distribution." 1970. ment, U.S. Aid, New Dehli, March, (Mimeographed.) 8. Cline, William R. Economic Consequences offia Land Reform in Brazil. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company, 1970. Tubewell Develppment in 9. Clark, E. M., and Gaffar, M. West Pakistan: Purchase of Water from Private 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 206 Tubewells. Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, Research Report No. 70. . An Analysis of Private Tubewell Costs. Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, Research Report No. 79. Cheung, Steven N. S. The Theory of Share Tenancy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1969. Dorner, Peter. "Needed Redirections in Economic Analysis of Agricultural Development Policy." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, LIII (February, 1971), 8-16. Dawn. Karachi, July, 1972. Erickson, John R. "Fiscal Policies for Employment Promotion." Paper read at the ILO meeting, Geneva, June, 1971. (Mimeographed.) Eicker, Carl K.; Zalla, T.; Kocker, J.; and Winch, F. Employment Generation in African Agriculture. College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Research Report No. 9, Michigan State Univer- sity, East Lansing, Michigan, July, 1970. Eckert, Jerry B. "Rural Labor in Punjab: A Survey Report." Lahore, Nov., 1971. (Mimeographed.) Eisel, L. M. "A Mixed-Integer Programming Model for Punjab Agriculture." Unpublished Interim Report, Cambridge, Massachussettes, July, 1971. Frankel, Francine R. India's Green Revolution: Economic Gains and Political Costs. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1971. Falcon, W. P. "Agricultural and Industrial Relation- ships in West Pakistan." Journaiof Farm Economics, XLVIII (December, 1967), 1139-53. , and Gotsch, C. H. "Agricultural Development in Pakistan: Lessons from the Second Plan Period." Development Advisory Service, Harvard University, June, 1966. (Mimeographed.) . "Agricultural Employment in the Less Devel- Oped Countries: General Situation, Research Approaches and Policy Palliatives." Inter- national Bank for Reconstruction and 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 207 Development, Economic Staff Working Paper No. 113, April, 1971. Griffin, Keith. "Economic Aspects of Technical Change in the Rural Areas of Monsoon Asia." A working paper, U.N. Research Institute for Social De- velopment, Geneva, January, 1972. (Mimeo- graphed.) Giles, J. W. "Towards a More POwerful Agriculture." A Report to the Government of West Pakistan, Lahore, November, 1967. (Mimeographed.) Ghaffar, M., and Bose, S. R. "Output Effects of Tube- wells on the Agriculture of the Punjab: Some Empirical Results." The Pakistan Development Review, X (Spring, 1970), 68-86. Gotsch, Carl H. "A Programming Approach to Some Agriculture Policy Problems in West Pakistan." The Pakistan DevelOpment Review, VIII (Summer, 1968), 192-225. . "Regional Agricultural Growth: The Case of West Pakistan." Asian Survey, VIII (March, 1968), 188-205. . "Technological Change and Private Investment in Agriculture: A Case Study of the Pakistan Punjab." Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, September, 1966. Haq Mahbub U1. "Employment in the 1970's: A New Perspective." International Development Review, IV (1971), 9-13. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Current Economic Position and Prospects of Pakistan. Vol. I of the Main Report, ' Washington: IBRD, July, 1970. . Program for the Development of Irrigation and Agriculture in West Pakistan. Vol. X3 Comprehensive Report. Washington: IBRD, May, 1966. I . Program for the Development of Irrigation and Agriculture in West Pakistan. Vol. VIII Water Supply and Distribution. Washington: IBRD, May, 1966. 208 32. Inukai, I. "Farm Mechanization, Output and Labor Input: A Case Study in Thailand." Ipternational Labor Review, CI (May, 1970), 453-73. 33. Johnston, Bruce F. "Agriculture and Structural Trans- formation in Developing Countries: A Survey of Research." Journal of Economic Literature, VIII (June, 1970), p. 369-404. 34. . "Consequences of Rapid Population Growth: Unemployment and Underemployment." Stanford, 1970. (Mimeographed.) 35. , and Cownie, John. "The Seed—Fertilizer Revolution and Labor Force Absorption." American Economic Review, LIX (September, 1969), 569-82. 36. Johl, S. S. "Mechanization, Labor-Use and Productivity in Indian Agriculture." Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Ohio State University, 1971. (Mimeographed.) 37. Kaneda, Hiromitsu. "Economic Implications of the Green Revolution and the Strategy of Agricultural DevelOpment in West Pakistan." The Pakistan Development Review, IX (Summer, 1969), 111-143. 38. Khan, Taufiq M., and Bose, S. R. Report on Income of Agricultural Workers in Pakistan. Karachi: PakiStan Institute of Development Economics, November, 1968. 39. Ladejinsky, Wolf. "Ironies of India's Green Revolution.‘ Foreign Affairs, XLVIII (July, 1970), 758-68. 40. Lowdermilk, Max Kearns. "Diffusion of Dwarf Wheat Production Technology in Pakistan's Punjab." Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, 1972. 41. Lawrence, Roger. "Some Economic Aspects of Farm Mech- anization in Pakistan." August, 1970. (Mimeo- graphed.) 42. . "The Comparative Cost of Pakistan's Major Crops.” June, 1969. (Mimeographed.) 43. Meier, Gerald M. "Development Without Employment." Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro Quarterly Review, XXII (September, 1969), 309-19. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 209 Mohd Ghulam. "Private Tubewell Development and Cropping Pattern in West Pakistan." The Pakistan Development Review, V (Spring, 1965), 1-53. Naseem, Mohd. "Small Farmers and Agricultural Trans— formation in Pakistan Punjab." Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of California, 1971. Nair, Kusam. The Lonely Furrow: Farming in the United States, Japan and India. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1969. Pakistan, Ministry of Agriculture and Works. 1960 Pakistan Census of Agriculture. Vol. II West Pakistan Report I, October, 1963. . Farm Mechanization in West Pakistan. Report of the Farm Mechanization Committee. Islamabad, March, 1970. . "Report of the Study Group on Agricultural Policy." Islamabad, March, 1970. . Agricultural Census Organization, Farm Mechanization in West Pakistan. Islamabad, June, 1969. Pakistan, Ministry of Home and Kashmir Affairs. 1961 Census of Pakistan Population. Vol. III. Karachi, 1963. Pakistan, Planning Commission. The Fourth Five Year Plan (1970'75). Islamabad, July, 1970. Punjab Agricultural University, Department of Economics and Sociology. "Studies in Economics of Farm Management, Ferozpur District Punjab." (Unpublished) Ludhiana, India, 1968—69. Pakistan, Ford Foundation. "Fifth Annual Technical Report: Accelerated Wheat Improvement Program in Sind, Punjab and N.W.F.P. 1969-70." Islamabad, March 10, 1971. (Mimeographed.) Ruttan, Vernon W., and Hayami, Yujiro. "Strategies for Agricultural Development: The Evolution of Thought." Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Scientific Journal Paper Series 71 (October, 1971). 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 210 Ruetlinger, Shlomas; Donaldson, G. F.; Duane, Paul; Egbert, A. C.; and Hussain, Tarig. "Agri- cultural Development in Relation to Employment Problems." International Bank for Reconstruc- tion and Development Economic Staff Working Paper No. 112, May, 1971. Rochin, Refugio I. "Dwarf Wheat Diffusion and Impact on Small Holder Farms in 'Barani' Areas of Hazara District, West Pakistan." Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, 1971. Ridker, Ronal G. "Employment and Unemployment in Near East and South Asian Countries: A Review of Evidence and Issues." Employment and Unem- ployment Problems of the Near East and South Asia. Edited by Ronal G. Ridker and Harold Lubell. New Dehli, India: Vikas Publications, 1971. Rayner, A. J., and Cowling, Keith. "Demand for Farm Tractors in the United STates and the U. K." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, L (November, 1968), 896-912. Shultz, Theodore W. Transforming Traditional Agri- culture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1964. Seers, Dudley. "The Meaning of Development." Inter- national Development Review,XI (December, 1969), 2-6. . "New Approaches Suggested by the Columbian Employment Program. International Labor Review, CII (October, 1970), 337-90. Stern J. J., and Falcon, W. P. "Pakistan's DevelOpr ment: An Introductory Perspective." 22: velgpment Policy II——The Pakistan Experience. Edited by Walter P. Falcon and Gustaf F. Papanek. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971. Shaw, Robert. Jobs and Agricultural Development. Overseas Development Council Monograph, 1970. Singh, Baghat. "Economics of Tractor Cultivation-~A Case Study." Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, XXIII (January-March, 1968), 83-88. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 211 Sarkar, K. K., and Prahladachar, M. "Mechanization As a Technological Change." Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, XXIfi'(January-March, 1966), 171-82. Smith, Edward H. "The Diesel Engine Industry of Daska, Sialkot District." U.S. Aid Mission, Pakistan, April, 1969. Singh, I. J.; Day, R. H.; and Johl, S. 8. "Field CrOp Technology in the Punjab, India." Madison Social Systems Research Institute, University of Wisconsin, 1968. . "A Recursive Programming Model of Traditional Agriculture in Transition: A Case Study of Punjab, India." Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Economics, University of Wiscon- sin, 1971. Turnam, David, and Jaeger, Inglies. The Employment Probleminythe Less DevelOped Countries: A REview of Evidence. OECD DevelOpment Centre, Paris, 9 0. Tyrchniewicz, E. W., and Schuh, G. E. "Econometric Analysis of the Agricultural Labor Market." The American Journal of Agricultural Economics, LI (November, 1969), 770—87. U.S. Aid. Country Field Submission. India, September, 1969. U.P. Agricultural University. "Changing Agriculture and Rural Life in a Region of Northern India: A Study of Progressive Farmers in North Western Uttar Pradesh During 1967-69." Research Pro- ject Pantnagar, Vol. I, 1969. West Pakistan Agricultural University, Faculty of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology. "Report on Economics of the Use of Harvester Combined, Threshers and Conventional Method of Wheat Harvesting in West Pakistan." Lyallpur, October, 1969. West Pakistan, Department of Agriculture. Seasons and Crop Report of West Pakistan for the Year 1967- 68. Lahore, 1968. . Zarai Hidayaat for Lahore Region. Lahore, April, 1969. 212 77. Yudelman, Montague; Butler, Gavan; and Benerji, Ranadev. Technological Change in Agriculture and Employment in Devoping Countries. O.E.C.D. Development Centre, Paris, May, 1971. APPENDICES APPENDIX A CASUAL LABOR USED PER ACRE OF DIFFERENT CROPS 213 APPENDIX A CASUAL LABOR USED PER ACRE OF DIFFERENT CROPS Table A.l gives the details of the casual labor estimates shown in Chapter IV. The per acre labor used was derived on the basis of both structured and unstructured questions. Information on the amount of total labor (casual and permanent) used for the different crop operations was obtained by asking questions via the questionnaire. Differ- ent operations, however, varied in the casual component of the total labor used. Information on the crop operations using casual labor was obtained through informal discussions with a selected number of farmers in different areas. Local officials of the Department of Agriculture were also inter- viewed. In general, the use of the casual labor will vary with the size of the holding. With an increase in the size of the holding, the use of casual labor tends to increase due to the family labor limitations and the higher level of income and the social status of the farm operator. Since this study deals with farms having an average size of around 45 acres, these results may differ from other studies deal- ing with different farm sizes. According to the table, the use of the casual labor was concentrated on the harvest operations; it was only for 2214 o.omN o.mHN cave .mcoHoz xmszc moHnmuoao> .m o.NHN o.mh o.om o.mN o.Nw mend OOHm .0 o.NHm o.ovH o.o0H o.NN o.Nv mend couuou .n o.Acn oIOmH o.oNH o.aN o.av oeum usaHHNa .o ocmoummsm .m o.Nm o.Nn o.vH xooHHsm 0.0m o.Nm o.NH Houomua I wuHmz .h o.mNH o.NHH oIHH xooHHsm o.NMH o.OMH o.v uouomua I HOQHmeH .n o.va o.owH o.v xooHHsm o.HvH o.vMH o.N uouomue I mend couuou .m couuoo .o xOOHHsm o.Nm o.mH o.mH I c.0N uouomua I mmoud Honuo .O o.Na o.mn o.mm o.N o.mN xooHHsm o.mh o.wN c.wN o.N oIHN uouomua I mead oon .m OOHm .m o.NoH o.NHH o.oN o.Nm m.AH ooomboa .v o.mH o.mH Emuc .m o.Nm o.wH o.mH mHuoa .N o.Nn o.Nm o.ov xooHHsm o.NN o.Nm o.ov Iuouomue I amend monuo .O o.Nm o.VN o.mm xooHHom o.Nh o.Nm o.ov nouomua I mou< eon .m some: .H msHuooo ouo4 sea mchmmooum ocHHOHa mcHaocst ucHnmmuns umm>um= mcHoo: msH3Om WHHHOE CG: Hobos mono uom coHumuoso Hem mucom cm: OH :OHumuomo mouu new on: noan Hmsmmu mono .noAsod one so pome>usm neumm uouomuh pcm HOOHHsm co neouu acououmwo mo onus new con: soamH Hmsmmo onBII.H.< mamas 215 rice, sugarcane and tobacco that some casual labor was also used for the sowing operations. The pattern of the casual labor use indicated here is confirmed by a study by the WOrld Bank in 1966 (30) and a more recent study by Eckert. According to Eckert, "of all the possible agricultural operations , farmers most often engage temporary labor for those associated with harvesting" (16, p. v-l). Given the overall pattern of casual labor use, the underlying factors that determined the causal labor used per acre of different major crops are eXplained below. Cotton: Cotton picking involves female labor. Five women working for an eight-hour day can pick an acre of fully mature cotton. The female members of the farm households under study, except the old lady, do not go out for the field work. The old lady or the eldest female member of the family does the supervision and also picking along with the four casual female workers. The number picking will vary depending on the yield. 5122‘ Rice is the only major crop which uses casual labor for both the sowing and all of the harvest operations. As already mentioned, the rice sowing technology in the Punjab requires intensive land preparation, plowings, and plankings in the standing water. Moreover, most of the rice follows wheat and 100 per cent of the crop is transplanted. Under this situation the permanent labor force remains busy in preparing field after field, and most casual labor follows 216 with the transplanting of the rice. The harvest operations are also performed by casual labor, while the permanent labor undertake the land preparation for wheat, most of which follows rice. Moreover, at the rice harvest as well as the sowing time, the permanently hired labor will either leave the farm work or will have to be paid the higher peak season wages. Sugarcane: The sowing of the sugarcane is a short— term but very labor intensive operation. Specific labor teams are organized by bringing in a lot of casual labor for the sowing operation. The cutting and processing of the sugarcane, on the other hand, are performed over a period of three to four weeks per acre. This is why the family labor mostly handles these operations with casual labor accounting for about one-fourth of the total. Vegetables: The vegetables, in general, were grown on very small area for the domestic consumption. The musk melon is a special vegetable--rather half fruit, half veg- etable--which was grown on a substantial area by a small number of farmers. All post-sowing operations were per- formed by hired labor paid in the form of the share of the crop. Toria and Gram: Their winnowing requires special skills and was generally performed by the casual labor. Toria cutting, which falls during the sugarcane harvest and processing peak, also engages about 50 per cent casual labor. APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE 2137 Farm Mechanization in Pakistan Punjab Complete Before Interview“ . District Tehsil 7‘— “ Union Council [ Village - l Interviewer: Date: i i A _ Jr. QUESTIONNAIRE P_A_R_T 2L 1. Name of the Farmer: Age: Education: 2. Nlllsst Mandi/Town: Name Distance 3. Land owned in this Village Acres ._ 4. Land owned in other villages/districts: -Acres _P_A_R_T_- 5. Total Ataa.under own cultivation: Acres 6. Cropping Pattern, Yields and Requirements of Labor and Bullock and tractor power(See next two pages) 7. Which crops preceded in the acreage planted with cotton, maize, rice and Kharif Fodder. 1 Kharif I Total I Acreage efiggegg 85392.néh££_£§22t_1 _ Crops 1971 Acreage after E as 0 er . ram or a. Veg: Taller I l I 218 .II. - snort 933% 06‘ch w 3ch o zoAAob .o QAHQQV buses Hunks .N Son 9 kgg assess ORAOK _ set us oAszmEonQ 85o. mzoAA\ sexton .I. @Q. 43.. «aback II. RA AVQ 2V§ u a? meow .I. w VOAOQQN I k xrs VV§I XXVV\V% III a wicQ‘V I. N >5?me . E I mp >1waqu . II I l I . Iil I I I I I II] . WI I. I IIIIIL .. III. III I. \ I. .I II I I IIHII I fig - '5 It .' I Q Ifrll . lo - I... I - - -I WW I- I I.-. . III I . IR H III. M WI IR I .A I I I I I IIHHIHIIIIIIIIIIIH III I F I III I I IN! a .l .I ‘ z I r A 11.... I'm 1 m II IL .IlIIIiJINNIUIIIIirIINIIIHIII VIIHIIIIIILrw H $1 I I. I'Ml iv III IIIIIII.;‘A‘II II I Tamil! .I HIIIIIL |'IHIII.II|1 § 1: I: o z IIlIIIIII IIIIIIIrIIuIII IIIII IHILIIJ I. I.I.I.._-l. IIIIL IIuI III»!!! a. H I. u I I II I I It I I QNQ aII 1- cl 0 H 0 . IQ IIIIIIIIIIIIII QR. In III III III. I I . - o I - m. III I..- .I n .. 1T1 L 0 2x :95... New ,IesaiQ 61\ I was 046. Kb FWWAN ASSN 3.33 63% 6.3 23an _.a§oo 3.. «shoe. «saw Ixé. \oz Q IVQQOA QQIA .2wa Six See. «835% IIIII III I I‘I’I‘Ill ll: 6 (a) Method of Sewing: Brzadcast 2222 lbwvxflb~vr Hand pore Seed drill Seed-Cun- Fertili- zer drill s 5. Gram. 223 8. Which crops preceded in the acreage planted with Wheat Gram, Toria and Fodder during Rabi 1970-7l? Rabi 1970-71 Total Acreage t Crops Acreage. after ce a 26 0 on 0 er fgllow Wheat Rabi Fodder; Gran VI Toria 9. Livestock and poultry enterprises:- Kind of Starting I lresent Number in Employment (Man years) éézigisfk/ Year. : Number Nilk starting Year At present mil-L : i 92'; If m Other IIveatock W 10. Have you introduced new crops or left the cultivation of old crops during the last five years. Yes: No.57 If yes, crops: : Introduced: l 2 3 : Left 1 2 3 2224 PART-C Note:- 8: Before the tractor use N: Now Only 'N' Column applies to Non users of Tractor. 11. Family male Labor 1 I 1‘ Relation- Age Educa4 ship to tion __..1;£ns_naa A-gdnlts(lO-50) OdOUDhDI’O than 10 and i D-OthersUess E greater than so ) l 2 3 4 puma—-mmi-muvnw ._ 12. Number of permanent Hired Labor! Male Female Total a) In the year preceding the tractor use B) At present 13. Availability of Family and permanent hired labor(in man days) during the peak demand months iEKZEHRHIGGOIIQZIIGGRHIIHvido i l 1. Family labor ag Operator i l l b other Male 2 11 i 111) a t 3 iv) ' 2 v) l i I 3 v1 - v11; 3 1 g l } 225 2. Hired Per- ‘ manent: 1) ii) iii) iv) 1 t l4. Wages Paid _m_ m. a)Permanent Cash Kind Cash kind labor wage (Rs) 1 (Rs) 1 per month] 2 2 Year. 3 3 $1 4 b)Casua1 Apr-June father Apr-June ’Other labor we e a & sgr hour Sept-Nov Months Sept-Nov Months 7 Cash Kind Cash Kind. Cash Kind Cash Kind (Rs) 1 (Rs) 1 (Rs) 1 (Rs) 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 15. Labor Availabiltiy: a) Is additional permanent labor available? 1) Available at the going wage rate Easily L___/ With difficulty [:7 If so the kind of difficulty-um- ii) Available at higher wage rate Easily 57 With difficulty [:27 If so the kind of difficulty ......... iii) Reasons for the shortagee---- ------- Contd...... 226 b) Is additional casual labor available? 1) Available at the going wage rate 5 11) Available at a higher wage rate 5 iii) Not available 5 iv) Reasons for the shortage if any:~— _.H. J- c) Does labor migeration from other areas take place during the following months? Yes A: ND [.27 If yes:- i) From which area/District ii) What percentage migerants are of the local casual Labor? MONTHS PERCENTAGE April May June September October November Comments of the Interviewers P_A_R.T £9 16. (a) Do you own bullocks? Yes 5 N6 L: If yes, the pairs of working bullscks (b) Bullock drawn Implements: l. Desi Plough 2. Pakistan Plough/Mould board plough 3. Heston Plough 4. RaJa Pllugh 5. Dis c Harrow 6. SpikOtooth Harrow 7. Seed drill 8. Seedpcum-fertilizer drill Contd.... 227 Yes D It so continue with Q.No.l8. 17. Do you use a tractor? No /::2 If no, go to part F. 18. Do you own a tractor? Yes 5 If so continue with Q.No.19. No l 7 If no,go to part E. 19. How many tractors do you own? 20. Tractors ’ 1 2 3 Year of Purchase Horse-power Price paid 21. Reasons for the purchase of the tractor:- (a) (b) (c) (d) 22. Have the total production and yield per acre increased on your Farm after the purchase of the tractor, . Yes [::7 No 1::7 If Yes, the reasons for the increase in a) Total production:- 1 b) Yield per acre:- (DI-‘0) hmfilfi 23. Tractor drawn implements and equipment: Number Year of A . E a) Disc Plow b) Mouldboard Plow c) Cultivator d) Disc Harrow e) Steel Planker f) Rabi/Seed-Cum-Fertilizer g) Kharif Drill drill h) Row Crop Planter ‘9- 2228 i) Tractor Powered Sprayer 1) Farm Wagon k) Trailer 24. Uses of the Tractor Engine: (a) Thresher Yes‘[::::7 No [::::7 (b) Cane Crusher Yes :7 No D (c) Fodder Cutter Yes / Z No [:::7 (:1) Others Yes £7 No [:7 25. Do you hire out the tractor? Yes [:::7 If so, cogtigge with o. O No A: 26. Purpose for which tractor hired out at present and price received. NOTE:- A: Acres; p= price in Rs. a‘ Hiring Out for Farm Activities. My — Opatation Wheat Berseem Rice Maize Cotton Sugar- 3' W' S.Foddor 1 1 $229 1.Plow & A l will P 2.FYH 1’7 3. Threshing W 2 - "-—- flu..— 4.Tran3par- tation: .'—'_ 1W 4,... .12 b) Products ME“) ‘1 b) Hiring Out for Non-Farm Note:- T: Time in Hours; Ion-Farm ' TV Haulage. J F M MONTHS 1L 1L, J' Activities I = Income received in Rs. J 1A_ 8 J: 229. 27. Have you installed a tubewell: Yes :7 No :7 If yes, a) The year of Installation: b) Capacity: . l P_A_R_T - E 28. When was the tractor hiring started? Year 29. a) Hiring for Farm Activities, Purpose for which tractor hired at present and the price.ptid. A= Acres ‘0 ll Price in Rs. Operations Wheat Berseem Rice se Cotton S l. Plow d: ZbFYM 3.Thresh- 4.Transpor- b) Hiring for Non-Farm Activities . (T=Time in Hours; I: Income received in Rs. 1%-1Wi I l a . “%:%HH. xllengllllli P_LR_T- F 30' 133 you use a thresher? Yes D N If so, continue with No.31. e 31. Do you own the thresher? Yes z:::7'1f so, continue with No.32 No [:::7 If so, go to No.36 32. Year of purchase Price paid Rs. Contd..... 2230 33. Crops for which thresher used:- a>1msaL—__ b) Togig c) 34. Do you hire out thresher? Yes [:::7 If so, continue with No.35 No 35. Purpose for which thresher hired out and the price received. ‘ 1 1 Crops Time/Hours 3 Price per Hour/Mds _J i ‘2 a) Wheat 1 l! § b) Toria ) g c) z i h i. I (1} l 2 3!. when was the thresher hiring started? Year 3?. Purpose for which the thresher hired and the price paid. Y 1 Price per hour/Eds l 1,__z.!zP.LC . 21m g/H ours g Rs _% l (a) Wheat : g (b) Toria : g (e) l l l I 1 l l ' i i l 38. Size of the Farm: (a) Land Owned: __1 _Acres (1) Land Inherited: Total Acres Year Acres Year Acres Year __f Acres (ii) Land Purchased: Total Acres year .—— ‘XCPCS ._—— 2231 Year Acres Year Acres (b) Land rented in: Year _}§71, Acres (0) Land Rented out in Year 1971 Acres 39. Comments of Interviewers on Seller and Renter of Land: (a) What did he do with the sale/Rent money? (1) Seller (11) Renter (b) His total land area after selling/Renting? (1) Seller (ii) Renter (0) Reasons for selling/Renting (1) Seller (ii) Renter 40. Land under cultivation 1Y Acres Acres Num er Tube-well Install- ation. Tractor purchase Now 1971 Cash Kind 2232 PART- H 41. Processing Activity: Kind of Activity Starting Total I Year Investment I Employment Flour Mill Rice Husking Mill Fruit Processing Milk Processing Poultry Processing Vegetable Processing Wbol & Cotton Processing Saw Mill Brick Kiln Coal Making Rope Making Bee Keeping Sericulture chsreee 42. Non-Farm Investments:- Type of Enterprise I Year of Investment Amount of Invest- ment 4—Bia, Commerce Transportation Industry 43. Future (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) 233 Plans: Buying more land? Yes :7 No D If yes, how much? acres Renting more land? Yes :7 No D If yes, how much? acres Buying tractor/implant: nts and increasing the use of the tree tu' ? Yes :7 No 5 Increasing tractor hiring? Yes 5 No 5 Increasing liVestock and Poultry? Yes £7 No [:7 Increasing fruits and vegetables? Yes 0 No [:7 Increasing processing activity? Yes D No [:7 Increasing non-farm investments? Yes Z: No C If yes, in which enterprises? APPENDIX C TABLES ON NET FARM REVENUE ON TRACTOR AND BULLOCK FARMS 234 TABLE A.2.--Net Farm Revenue on a Tractor and a Bullock Farm in the Tubewell and Non-Tubewell Areas. (Market Prices 1970-71) Net Farm Revenue (Rs.) Slze °f Farm With Tubewell Without Tubewell (Acres) Tractor Bullocks Tractor Bullocks 25 20,894 10,548 ' 10,598 8,403 50 30,928 18,473 18,293 14,531 75 36,060 26,112 26,053 21,796 TABLE A.3.--Net Farm Revenue With Tubewell Under Different Forms of Mechanization Compared to Bullock Cultivation. Net Farm Revenue (Rs.) Size of Farm (Acres) Tractor Tractor + Tractor + Bullocks Only Bullocks Thresher Only 25 20,894 18,370 21,398 10,548 50 30,928 33,371 38,360 18,473 75 36,060 42,305 45,015 26,112 TABLE A.4.--Net Farm Revenue on a Tractor and a BulloCk Farm in the Tubewell and Non-Tubewell Area. (World Market Prices) Net Farm Revenue (Rs.) Size of Farm (Acres) Wlth Tubewell Without Tubewell Tractor Bullocks Tractor Bullocks 50 45,870 29,374 23,221 18,859 235 TABLE A.5.--Net Farm Revenue on a 50-Acre Tractor Farm and a 50-Acre Bullock Farm at Different Levels of Maximum Restrictions on the Tubewell Water Pumping. Permissible Maximum Net Farm Revenue (Rs.) Tubewell Water Pumping ‘— (Acres Inches Per Annum) Tractor Farm Bullock Farm 5760a (418)b 30,923 18,473 400.0 30,914 18,473 200.0 28,801 18,099 100.0 25,759 16,448 50.0 22,937 15,506 25.0 20,917 15,033 12.5 19,688 14,786 000.0 18,291 14,531 aMaximum permissible. b Actual utilization. APPENDIX D EXPLANATION OF INDIGENOUS TERMS 236 APPENDIX D EXPLANATION OF INDIGENOUS TERMS Rupee: The local standard currency. The term Rs. used in the text means rupees. Maund: The standard unit of measure. One maund = 82.28 pounds. Rauni: The field irrigation meant to facilitate the seed-bed preparation. Gur: Raw native brown sugar prepared from sugarcane juice. Gur is roughly one-tenth of the sugarcane. Paddy: Unhusked rice. Cleaned rice is about two—thirds of paddy. Rabi: Winter crops growing season. Kharif: Summer crops growing season. ICHIGRN STRTE UNIV. LIBRRRIES llIVINIIINHIIINIIIIIIIWllllIIIHHIIMIHIIIWMill 31293104560259