Dr. Jayati Ghosh, professor at JNU, interviewed by The Hindu

-The Hindu

The AP government should keep the MoUs (with investors) in the public domain. Let there be a debate on the MoUs

-- Jayati Ghosh, economist

VIJAYAWADA: Noted economist Jayati Ghosh does not agree that civil society has been indifferent to the problems presented to farmers due to the land acquisition tactics adopted by the State Government in gathering land for its capital city project.

The academic, who headed a commission that investigated the problems afflicting agriculture in Andhra Pradesh 10 years ago, says Andhra Pradesh has a long history of farmers surrendering their lands for Special Economic Zones (SEZs), either because they were satisfied with the compensation packages given to them or because they were coerced into doing so due to the circumstances built up around them by the government.

Visiting Vijayawada for a series of lectures, Ms Ghosh aired her views on the present crises being faced by farmers, in an interview with The Hindu . Excerpts

* Do you think civil society in Andhra Pradesh has been indifferent to the land acquisition problems posed by the capital city project?

I don’t feel that civil society here has been indifferent to the issues. It has been vigilant enough. But then, Andhra Pradesh has previously acquired land for several projects from farmers though civil society was vigilant. Governments generally acquire land by two methods: by informing and through consensus among the affected people. Or they create an atmosphere in which farmers feel that agriculture is no longer viable. Those are the two methods available and used.

* What are your views on the debt redemption scheme in AP?

The AP government should not have announced the debt redemption scheme. It will prove to be a disincentive to farmers who have genuinely repaid their loans. In future, they too will wait for a loan waiver. The government, instead, should have waived loans case by case. A debt redemption corporation, which is free from political and local pressures, should be entrusted with the job.

* The farmers’ suicide phenomenon has spread to tobacco in AP. Where do you think the problem lies?

It’s important to remember that no farmer who has cultivated paddy has committed suicide. Suicides have tended to be among those who switched over to commercial crops.

The market for commercial crops is unstable and unpredictable. Tobacco is one such crop. The government is not taking up proper awareness programmes among farmers on commercial crops. Tobacco is a very volatile market. The government should have taken proper steps such as educating farmers on market conditions.

* The latest quarterly figures show that agriculture has done better in AP than industry and services? Does that indicate any trend?

Agriculture might have performed well compared to industry and services in AP. But that is sheer accidental growth. There have been no concrete measures to give a fillip to the agriculture sector. The government did nothing. Its sole focus is on construction of the capital city.

* What do you think of the state’s efforts to invite investment from China or Singapore to build the capital city?

The government can accept such investments if there is technology transfer and people benefit from the agreements that it will enter into with Singapore or China or Malaysia or any other country. But the problem is that such agreements tend to be kept out of access to the public.

None knows what the terms and conditions in the agreements are. The AP government should keep the MoUs in the public domain and let there be a debate on the MoUs.

* Looking back at the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, do you think it has worked as well as envisaged?

It has had a very positive impact on the rural economy. There have been several tangible positive effects. Rural wages have incresed, gender wage gaps have been bridged. It has enabled better access to nutrition, health and education. It has reduced distress migration. Those are some of the positive effects.

* But farmers complain that their costs have gone up due to NREGS.

That’s not true. The wage component of agriculture cost is just 8 per cent.

That impression may be due to some farmers being unwilling to pay decent wages to farm workers.

 

The Hindu, 24 September, 2015, http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Vijayawada/no-farmer-w
ho-cultivated-paddy-has-committed-suicide/article7682857.e
ce