The widespread aspect of Globalisation of agriculture is the entry of multinationals into this sector as sellers of agricultural inputs such as seeds, pesticides and fertilisers. Over the last decade or so, the Govt. has scaled down its agricultural development programmes, and agricultural extension agents have been replaced in the villages by agents of seeds, fertilisers, and pesticides companies. These agents are often the sole source of information for farmers about new seeds or cultivation practices with of course interest in selling their product. This increased dependence of farmers on expensive fertilisers and pesticides, which has reduced their profits and put many farmers into debt and created ecological crisis in rural areas.
Due to these economic and ecological crisis the spate of farmer's suicide have been occurring in different parts of the country since 1997-98. These suicides can be linked to changes in economic and agricultural policies. These include : the changed pattern of landholdings, changing crop patterns, shift to cash crops, liberalization policies that have exposed Indian agriculture to the forces of Globalisation; heavy dependence on high-costs inputs and individualisation of agricultural operations. According to official statistics, there have been 8,900 suicides by farmers between 2001 and 2006 in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra.
Green revolution was not a great success widely because :
(1) It was targeted only at wheat and rice producing areas
(2) The farmers did not know the use of technology
(3) Lot of money was required
(4) Local governing bodies didn't cooperate
Answer & explanation
Correct answer: option 1
The correct answer is Option (1) → It was targeted only at wheat and rice producing areas
Note: The given answer is as per the official NTA Answer Key. However, Option (3) can also be considered correct, as explained below.
Option (1) It was targeted only at wheat and rice producing areas — Correct as per NTA. The Green Revolution was introduced only in areas that had assured irrigation, and it was targeted mainly at the wheat and rice-growing areas. So only certain regions, such as Punjab, western U.P., coastal Andhra Pradesh and parts of Tamil Nadu, received its first wave; the rest of the country was left out, and its success was not spread widely.
Option (2) The farmers did not know the use of technology — Incorrect. This is not a reason for the uneven spread. Where the new technology was taken up, agricultural productivity increased sharply; the limit lay in where it was introduced and who could pay for it.
Option (3) Lot of money was required — Can also be considered correct. The new seeds needed fertilisers, pesticides and other inputs that had to be bought. The inputs were expensive, and small and marginal farmers could not afford to spend as much as large farmers on them, so in most Green Revolution areas it was mainly the medium and large farmers who benefited.
Option (4) Local governing bodies didn’t cooperate — Incorrect. Local governing bodies have no part in the account of the Green Revolution. The reasons for its uneven spread are the choice of irrigated wheat and rice areas and the cost of the inputs.
NCERT (2025-26): “4.3 The Green Revolution and its Social Consequences … It was largely funded by international agencies that was based on providing high-yielding variety(HYV) or hybrid seeds along with pesticides, fertilisers, and other inputs, to farmers. Green Revolution programmes were introduced only in areas that had assured irrigation, because sufficient water was necessary for the new seeds and methods of cultivation. It was also targeted mainly at the wheat and rice-growing areas. As a result, only certain regions such as the Punjab, western U.P., coastal Andhra Pradesh, and parts of Tamil Nadu, received the first wave of the Green Revolution package.… …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.…” |