POLITICAL ECONOMY OF FOOD 39 agricultural peak years) increased by 18.8 million tonnnes for India as a whole; about half of this increase, 9.7 million tonnes, come from only three states, Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. By contrast, states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maha-rashtra and Orissa showed either insignificant increases or even absolute declines in foodgrains between these two dates... Between 1960-61 and 1970-71, while total foodgrain output increased by about 26 million tonnes, almost half of this or 13 million tonnes, was the increase rigistered by wheat alone. If we take 1971-72 as the end point, the share of wheat in the total increase jumps dramatically to about 60 per cent.18 We have already seen this trend consistently being strengthened in the data on area under production; its break-up according to state and crop (rice and wheat); irrigated area; supply and utilization of fertilizers; agricultural implements, machinery and credit and also in the growth trend in HYV areas, by state and crop. , Lastly, as indicated already, the production of cereals and food» grains has been so fluctuating that except in a peak year during three or four year spans, availability of cereals from internal production has failed to meet the nation's requirements. That, of course, does not mean that whatever has been produced within the country has been entirely consumed in the same year or even marketed. However, the fact remains that even after 27 years of independence the government cannot ensure foodgrain production that would make the country self-sufficient. So far the biggest outlay of foreign exchange has been on import of foodgrains. What is more, even this much of growth has been achieved at the cost of raw materials for the industry, particularly jute and cotton. (To be concluded) 1 Introduction to Narora Background Paper, No 3. 2 Reference will however be made to HYV seeds. 8 This is one definition of landlords. About the peasantry, wherever possible we have used the terms rich, middle and poor. Rich peasant is one whose family labour is utilized for participation in major agricultural operations, though he also employs wage-labour in a sizable proportion and has a surplus. The middle peasant mainly depends on his family labour for cultivation, but may also employ some wage-labour. His produce gives him the income for his consumption, and his surplus, if any, is marginal. The poor peasant is one whose family labour is mainly occupied in cultivating others' land, and his land cannot provide him with subsistence. He is, therefore, also an agricultural labourer. 4 Narora Background ^aperj&lo 3^jp 10 s P Sundarayya, Central Committee Resolution on Certain Agrarian Issues, Appendix, e Census Data, 1961 and 1971. 7 See conclusion of this article. 8 BS Minnas, Planning and the Poor, Chapter II. < APQ^ Report on Kharif Cereals, for 1967-68. 10 Prabhat Patnaik, "Current Inflation in India" Social Scientist 30-31» January-February, 1975. »» Ibid., p 24. »a Ibid.,? 27. - . >» Ibid., p 28.