India's Green Revolution

The Green Revolution: Long Term Consequences?

            Norman Borlaug, an agronomist working in Mexico developed a strain of wheat that was partially disease resistant, had a higher yield, and was dwarfed so that the crop would not fall over and be wasted. The winner of a Nobel Peace Prize, Borlaug launched what is now known as the “Green Revolution,” a period between the 1940s and 1970s filled with the creation of agricultural technology and an increase in research and development. Crops such as wheat and rice became more productive as farmers began using more resistant types, known as High Yield Varieties (HYVs). Irrigation techniques were also developed, enabling more arid areas to also increase agricultural productivity.

            The Green Revolution diffused from the West to India around the 1960s, starting in Punjab and working its way across the country. Irrigation, pesticides, technology transfer, introduction of “semi dwarf high-yielding varieties of wheat and rice, which could yield 2 to 3 times more” than other strains, increase in education, and the creation of a National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) all contributed to India’s revolution (Swaminatham, 2010).  When India was plagued by drought and famine, only about “12 million tons of wheat were produced in the country. By 1968–69, after the [high yielding varieties] had been introduced, wheat production jumped to around 16 million tons and by the early 1980s it was double that of the mid 1960s” (Baker, 2007).

            Starting in the wheat growing lands of Northern India, the Green Revolution slowly worked its way farther south, spreading different farming technologies and irrigation practices. More often embraced by large scale farmers who were willing to take risks, use of the HYVs was able to greatly increase production and thus increased the farmers’ profits. However, there is now evidence that the Green Revolution may have sparked “a widening gap between rich and poor, even though the ‘bottom line’ was encouragingly higher than it used to be” (Baker, 2007). Though this may have been a byproduct, such income discrepancies exist all over the world and the good effects, such as averting hunger and famine, are well noted.

            Another possibly unexpected result of Green Revolution technology is contamination of water supply due to the liberal use of pesticides. Villagers in Uttar Pradesh reported “increases in formerly unknown ailments such as strokes, heart disease and ‘mystery illnesses,’ particularly of children. These were attributed to the poisoning of water supplies by overuse of chemical fertilizers, insecticides and pesticides” (Baker, 2007). For the rural poor, who live in such close contact with the land, using too many chemicals too close to the living space has proven detrimental. When harsh chemicals seep into the groundwater or drain into surface water, villagers have no other source of hydration to rely upon. They neither have access to filtration systems nor access to tap water and often do not even know that their water is contaminated.

            As mentioned in an earlier blog, our environment directly affects the minerals and chemicals that we consume. The presence of fertilizer and pesticide chemicals in the water supply is a serious matter and cannot easily be remedied. Villagers may also be ingesting residues of applied chemicals once the crops are harvested, and consumers buying the exports will also be affected. In time, increased build up of chemicals on and below the soil could decrease crop yields, thus reversing the original purposes of the Green Revolution.

            Although crop yields, production, and exports dramatically increased during the Green Revolution, with the new technology also came new problems. For every issue, one must always examine the long term effects though the immediate benefits may be dazzling. For example, creating large scale dam projects are often exciting for those living downstream who may have future protection from flooding and an increase in available energy through hydropower. However, what will happen if that dam breaks in twenty-five, fifty, or even one hundred years? What if the dam has to be removed because the technology or infrastructure has become outdated? What then will happen to the river ecosystem or the residents who once felt so well protected? Every action has a consequence, and when dealing with one’s environment, the consequence is often far more complex than first imagined. The Green Revolution saved India from widespread famine in the 1960s, but more sustainable agricultural practices must now be spread and utilized before adverse effects begin to outweigh the benefits.

 References

Baker, K., & Jewitt, S. (2007). Evaluating 35 years of Green Revolution technology in villages of Bulandshahr district, western UP, North India. Journal of Development Studies, 43(2), 312-339. doi:10.1080/00220380601125180.

Swaminatham, M. (2010). Beyond the Green Revolution. In M.S. Swaminathan’s, From Green to Evergreen Revolution: Indian Agriculture: performance and Challenges. New Delhi: Academic Foundation.