After the introduction of HYV seeds and chemical fertilizers in a region, big farmers became much wealthier, but small tenants were displaced because they couldn’t afford the inputs. This unintended consequences of the Green Revolution is called:
Answer & explanation
Correct answer: option 3
The correct answer is Option (3) → Increasing rural inequalities
Option (1) Subsistence agriculture — Incorrect. Subsistence agriculture is farming in which agriculturists produce primarily for themselves and cannot produce for the market. The case is about who gained and who lost from the new inputs, not about farming only for the family.
Option (2) Social equality — Incorrect. The case shows the reverse: big farmers grew richer while small tenants lost their land, so the gap between them widened.
Option (3) Increasing rural inequalities — Correct. HYV seeds, fertilisers and pesticides were expensive, so the well-to-do farmers who had land, capital and know-how could invest in them and earn more, while small and marginal farmers could not afford them. Landowners also took back land from tenants to cultivate it themselves, leading to the displacement of tenant-cultivators. In its first phase the new technology thus seemed to be increasing inequalities in rural society.
Option (4) Land ceiling — Incorrect. Land ceiling is a land reform law that puts an upper limit on the land a family can own, meant to give surplus land to the landless. It is a policy aimed at reducing inequality, not a consequence of the Green Revolution.
NCERT (2025-26): “4.3 The Green Revolution and its Social Consequences … In most of the Green Revolution areas, it was primarily the medium and large farmers who were able to benefit from the new technology. This was because inputs were expensive, and small and marginal farmers could not afford to spend as much as large farmers to purchase these inputs. When agriculturists produce primarily for themselves and are unable to produce for the market, it is known as ‘subsistence agriculture’ and they are usually termed ‘peasants’. Agriculturists or farmers are those who are able to produce surplus, over and above the needs of the family, and so are linked to the market. It was the farmers who were able to produce a surplus for the market who were able to reap the most benefits from the Green Revolution and from the commercialisation of agriculture that followed.…” “4.3 The Green Revolution and its Social Consequences … Thus, in the first phase of the Green Revolution, in the 1960s and 1970s, the introduction of new technology seemed to be increasing inequalities in rural society. Green Revolution crops were highly profitable, mainly because they yielded more produce. Well-to-do farmers who had access to land, capital, technology, and know-how, and those who could invest in the new seeds and fertilisers, could increase their production and earn more money. However, in many cases it led to the displacement of tenant-cultivators. For landowners began to take back land from their tenants and cultivate it directly because cultivation was becoming more profitable. This made the rich farmers better off, and worsened the condition of the landless and marginal holders.” |