Question

Discuss the economic arguments in favor of land reforms in India. What have been the effects of land reforms on poverty and agricultural productivity in India? Answer in about 1000 words.

Answer 1

Land reforms in India usually refers to redistribution of land from the rich to the poor. Land reforms is often connected with re-distribution of agricultural land and hence it is related with agrarian reforms too. A rich-minority-landowning class and poor-landless-peasant class became symbols of Indian agrarian society. As the ownership of the land for some reason or other stayed with the rich Zamindar class, they became more powerful year after year, accumulating wealth. The peasants, who actually cultivated the land, was often in poverty and remained landless. When India adopted socialistic principles after independence, equality in all spheres – social, economic and political was envisioned. Land reforms are essential steps towards social and economic equality as land is a fundamental asset needed for healthy development of an individual. As per the Indian constitution, land reform comes under the list of state subjects, and hence the responsibility for bringing up regulations for effecting land reforms lies with individual states.

The Government of India is aware that agricultural development in India could be achieved only with the reform of India's rural institutional structure. It was said that the extent of the utilisation of agricultural resources would be determined by the institutional framework under which the various inputs were put to use. M. Dandekar observed: "Among the actions intended to release the force which may initiate or accelerate the process of economic growth, agrarian reform usually receives high priority". The First Five-Year Plan stated:"This (land reform) is a fundamental issue of national importance. The former Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, emphasised: "Land Reforms is the most crucial test which our political system must pass in order to survive." Land reforms therefore became one of the vital aspects of the agricultural development policy especially after the concept of the Five-Year Plan came to stay.

The important objectives of land reform measures in India were: (1) to enhance the productivity of land by improving the economic conditions of farmers and tenants so that they may have the interest to invest in and improve agriculture, (2) to ensure distributive justice and to create an egalitarian society by eliminating all forms of exploitation, (3) to create a system of peasant proprietorship with the motto of land to the tiller and (4) to transfer the incomes of the few to many so that the demand for consumer goods would be created.

The Second Five-Year Plan emphasised the objectives of the land reforms thus:

1. To remove the impediments in the way of agricultural production as may arise from the character of agrarian structure and to evolve an agrarian economy conducive of high levels of efficiency and productivity;
2. To establish an egalitarian society and to eliminate social inequality;

Again in the Third Plan, the Planning Commission summed up the objectives of land reforms thus "The first is to remove such impediments to increase in agricultural production as may arise from the agrarian structure inherited from the past. This should help to create conditions for evolving as speedily as possible an agricultural economy with a high level of efficiency. The second objective, which is closely related to the first, is to eliminate all elements of exploitation and social injustice within the agrarian system to provide security for the tiller of the soil and assure equality of status and opportunity to all the sections of the rural population". Thus the land reforms in India aimed at the redistribution of ownership holdings and reorganising operational holdings from the view point of optimum utilisation of land. It has also aimed at providing security of tenure, fixation of rents and conferment of ownership.

The land reform legislation was passed by all the State Governments during the Fifties touching upon these measures;

1. Abolition of intermediaries.
2. Tenancy reforms to regulate fair rent and provide security to tenure.
3. Ceilings on holdings and distribution of surplus land among the landlords.
4. Consolidation of holdings and prevention of their further fragmentation and
5. Development of cooperative farming.

Zamindari Abolition Act was passed by UP, Tamil Nadu, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, etc. Surplus lands were confiscated from zamindars. As in Golaknath case, Supreme court ruled that the provisions of Zamindari Abolition act contradicted with Article 31 of Indian Constitution, the parliament took steps to repeal Article 31. Later Land Ceilings Act was passed by different states. Successful legislation for redistribution of land with ceilings on private land property happened only in a few states. The most notable and successful land reforms happened in states of Kerala and West Bengal (Operation Barga). Only pockets of India like Jammu and Kashmir witnessed commendable steps in land reform but attempts in states like Andra Pradesh, Madya Pradesh and Bihar led to clashes within the communities. Though the Central land reforms committee has laid guidelines for land ceilings, there was purposeful delay in the implementation land reform policy in many states, giving gap for transactions to escape the tooth of land reform laws.

Land reforms has an angle other than cultivation purpose. The redistribution of land becomes a necessity often for development and manufacturing purposes too. This necessitates a proper land policy, which gives due importance to nature, development and inclusion. Deeper structural reforms will ensure that the exercise of land redistribution actually becomes meaningful, enabling small farmers to turn their plots into productive assets. When every citizen of the country enjoys the benefits of ownership of land, it can lead to social and economic upliftment.

Arguments in Favor of Land Reforms

• Equity – now majority of land in India is enjoyed by a minority of landlords.
• Inverse relationship between land size and efficiency – the smaller the land, better will be the productivity and efficiency.
• Owner-cultivation is more efficient than share-cropping.

Arguments Against Land Reforms

• If a centrally managed large agricultural land is divided among individual private owners, the peasants who take it up may not be efficient enough to individually carry out the cultivation.
• Results in Fragmentation of land and pockets of inefficiency. For large scale cultivation, the fragmentation of land normally won’t help (this has other side too – see the inverse relationship).
• Evidence suggests that land reforms had a negative effect on poverty.
• Land reforms had led to economic decline and food insecurity in countries like Zimbabwe.