Historical trajectories and food security inverventions in the borderlands of the Eastern Gangetic...

Historical trajectories and food security interventions in the borderlands of the

Eastern Gangetic Plains

Toni DarbasCSIRO Land and Water FlagshipWith: Peter Brown, Onil Banerjee, Christian Roth & Yiheyis Marru

May 12th, 2015Global Change Institute, University of Qld

Food Systems Innovation (FSI) Initiative (June 2012 – Dec 2015)

1. Strengthen the analytical and evidence base for food security interventions

2. Link research outputs with improved development practice

3. Greater coordination and integration between Australian agencies

4. Promote organisational learning to build professional capacity

Development outcome: “Application of more effective, evidence‐based approaches to the development, implementation and evaluation of agriculture, food security and nutrition interventions”

Eastern Gangetic Plains Inquiry

‘The aim of this inquiry is to undertake a holistic analysis of the constraints to the wider adoption of climate‐resilient farming systems and potential entry points for intervention, with a particular focus on conservation agriculture, with appropriate links to the insights from the Ganges water basin programs in Ganges basin.’

Why Bother?

• Temporal and spatial scales matter – farming occurs in jurisdictions, in national political economies, in the global economy

• History matters: structural elites & poverty traps• Research history matters: What has already been learnt? What are

the pitfalls?• Frames & contextualises technologically driven solutions (is BAU

appropriate? Will it work here? Pathway to impact?) • Evidence based identification of best bet intervention points can

influence funder/partner thinking• Despite funder organisation and funding flow churn

Methods

Interdisciplinary team scoping studies (mid 2012 – mid 2013):

• Hydrology & crop modelling + gaps/uncertainties (review + modelling) onsustainable use of groundwater

• Political economy, value chain and livelihoods trajectory analysis• Review of the literature (~ 200; 1969 to date) thematically structured

in repository document • In‐country ground‐truthing & exploration of modalities with: State

Government Departments; Research Institutes; Agricultural Universities; Extension services; uplift NGOs

Followed by engagement in Sustainable & Resilient Farming Systems Intensification project as FSI case study (mid 2013 – ongoing)

New Institutionalist Lens

Sociological Institutionalism (deep norms/entrenched behaviour) What social pattern is being reproduced?

Historical Institutionalism(path dependence)To what degree do past institutional arrangements constrain responses to new problems?

Rational Actor Institutionalism(rules of the game)What are the current rules of the game and their beneficiaries?

Discursive Institutionalism(discussion, debate, conflict, experimentation)Are/how are the rules of the game changed?

Analytical approach the New Institutionalism

New Institutionalist Lens Example Research Questions Value Chain Variables

Sociological Institutionalism(deep norms/behaviour) What social pattern is beingreproduced?

Who constitutes the value chain and how are their roles distributed along the chain? Do middlemen tax the value chain?

Vertical organization and coordination of actors

Historical Institutionalism(path dependence)Does the past constrain the future?

What value‐added products exist, are other products possible and how much economic value does the chain create?

Product flows

Are there monopolies, price‐setting, or collusion? Imperfect markets

Rational Actor Institutionalism(rules of the game)What are the current rules of the game and their beneficiaries?

Can anyone participate, could participation be widened? Entry & exit conditions

What are the formal & informal costs of participating in this value chain

Transaction costs

Who exactly is excluded and why (caste identity, literacy, landlessness etc)

Information asymmetry

Who are the winners and losers in this value chain? Profit & cost structures

Discursive Institutionalism(discussion and debate)Are/how are the rules of the game changed?

Where/who did ideas come from; where/who do ideas circulate among?

Circulation of information & ideas

New Institutionalism applied to value chain analysis

Source: Khan (2012)

11/05/2015

From British Bengal to the East

Gangetic Plains

Source: Chattopadhyay & Spitz, 1987:X & 6

Feudal social relations, exploitative tenancy (sharecropping, tied labour, food wages), foodgrain stockpiling, coping migration

Recurrent famine, expansive PFDS, Green Revolution via state dominated ToT, Big dam/irrigation schemes, subsidies

Upper caste/class landed elites & middlemen benefit from leakage, subsidies, credit & extend investment to ag. machinery

Sociological (bounded rationality)

Historical (path dependence)

Rational actor (prevailing rules)

Institutional inertia

Land redistribution legislation

New Constitutional guaranteesPeasant movements & insurgencies

International aid & expertise

Concerted targeting

Crowding in market agents +Infrastructure provision

Enable cheap Chinese importsNGO micro‐credit

State deep tubewell +bamboo shallow tubewell +Informal water markets

Government/NGO partnershipsShift to AIS framing

Discourse, debate, conflict,

experiments re. rule change

Institutionalchange

Remittance migration

Punctuated Equilibrium

Institutional analysis as

systems research

May require concerted and systemic efforts for regime shift and transformations

Systems approaches Non‐linear dynamics

Complementary thresholds (barriers)

Complex problems

Persistent despite efforts

o Disadvantage, poverty and food insecurity

New and multiple perturbations

o Climate change and extreme events

Resilience

WI

Wp

WI

Wp

Lc

Wt

Capital

wellbeing

Linear growth

Non‐linear growth

Source: Barrett & Swallow 2006

Nepal’s Historical Trajectory

Following 100 years of isolation, skirmishes between Rana Regime and East India Company the border with British India was permanently mapped in 1815

Shocks

1950‐1 Rana Regime falls, first democratic period, Indian border opened

1980s Economic crisis, IMF loans, Structural Adjustment

1996 – 2008 Armed insurgency & peace process, CPN(M) wins power

Forests nationalised 1956 ‐

Koshi Barrage/Tappu Wetlands on Terai 1962 ‐

Royal National Chitwan Park on Terai 1973 ‐Sukumbasi landless/squatter movement on Terai 1979 ‐

Failed land ceiling/tenant registration reform 1964 ‐

1990‐1 Violent protest & reinstatement of democracy

1960 Royal coup, Partyless Panchayat System, Terai deforestation & settlement beginsBirta lands/Rakam tenure abolished 1959 ‐

2013 Caretaker Government to draftconstitution







Concerted targeting






Entrenched elites ensure land reform fails (1964 ‐ date)Tragedy of commons on Terai via squatter settlement (1960s ‐ 1970s)Decade long Maoist insurgency on Terai, Maoists win power (1996 – 2008)Caretaker Government constitutional debate not progressing (2013 – date)

Large landholders invest in irrigation, HYV, machinery to intensify while landless & smallholders shift to

subsistence + remittance livelihood. Agriculture feminised. Remittances

invested in consumption not agriculture

Entrenched government dependence on aid. Poor oversight of fragmented projects pluralise rules (subsidies, technologies, extension etc)

Incipient, from late 2000s

Structural adjustment settings (1990s) entrenchopen border disadvantage resulting in

proliferation of agrovets selling unregulated Indian inputs

Nepal

‐ 1990s liberalisation

The differentiation of Bengal

Bengal’s common (British colonialism, famines, WWII, partitioning) heritage1) tenurial sharecropping/absent landlords ‐ reform pressure2) tight control grain production, supply & distribution – budgetary pressure

Green Rev. Punjab, UP 1965 ‐

Decentralised RD 1970s ‐

National Rural Employment Guarantee 1980 ‐

1990s SA

National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005 ‐GFC 2008

Yadav Bihar Gov’t 1990‐2005 ‐

PDS targeting A&BPL 1997 ‐

‐ 1982‐1990 Ershad Regime

‐ 1970s Food Aid Flow

‐ 1980s Self‐targeted PDS

1945 End WWII

Left Front WB Gov’t 1977‐2006 ‐

Shocks

1971 Bangladesh Independence

Pakistan

Bangladesh

India

1947 Partitioning & Indian Independence

Self‐sufficiency 1995 ‐

1943 Bengal famine ~ 2 million died







Concerted targeting






West Bengal

Backward castes/tribes progressively scheduled (1950 to date) & NREGA 100 days paid labour (1980 to date). Successful land redistribution by Left Front Gov.t (1977‐2006) results in small & fragmented plots but increases agricultural viability of middle castes

Protectionist settings Indian manufacturers.State control foodgrain via PFDS/MSP& state input & machinery subsidy programs suffer chronic leakage so

favour large land‐owners

West Bengal government learns from north west Indian States to meter

electricity &license STWs to prevent overdraw of groundwater resource

Increasingly perceived asnecessary, e.g. establishment ofAg. Tech. Management AgencyBy choice but important source of new ideas

Targeting attempted with (leaky) Below Poverty Line cards (1997 to date)







Concerted targeting






Zamindars successfully resist land reform. Backward castes/tribes progressively scheduled (1950 to date) & NREGA 100 days paid labour (1980 to date).

Protectionist settings Indian manufacturers. Kosi & IAAP (1960s) failed. State control foodgrain via PFDS/MSP & state input &

machinery subsidy programs suffer chronic leakage so favour large land‐owners

BiharTargeting attempted with (leaky) Below Poverty Line cards (1997 to date)

Large landholders invest in irrigation, HYV, machinery to intensify while

sharecroppers shift to subsistence + remittance livelihood. Agriculture feminised. Remittances invested in

consumption not agriculture

Backward castes dominate parliament(from 1985), Yadav Govt (1990‐2005) puts voice above rural development & law & order collapses. Pro‐developmentDemocratic Alliance Gov.t (2005 to date)

World Bank funded Jeevika NGO (1997) now mainstreamed into Bihar’s Department of Rural Development. AIS framing increasingly

perceived as necessary, e.g. Ag. Tech. Management Agency

‐ 1990s liberalisation

The differentiation of Bengal

Bengal’s common (British colonialism, famines, WWII, partitioning) heritage1) tenurial sharecropping/absent landlords ‐ reform pressure2) tight control grain production, supply & distribution – budgetary pressure

Green Rev. Punjab, UP 1965 ‐

Decentralised RD 1970s ‐

National Rural Employment Guarantee 1980 ‐

1990s SA

National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005 ‐GFC 2008

Yadav Bihar Gov’t 1990‐2005 ‐

PDS targeting A&BPL 1997 ‐

‐ 1982‐1990 Ershad Regime

‐ 1970s Food Aid Flow

‐ 1980s Self‐targeted PDS

1945 End WWII

Left Front WB Gov’t 1977‐2006 ‐

Shocks

1971 Bangladesh Independence

Pakistan

Bangladesh

India

1947 Partitioning & Indian Independence

Self‐sufficiency 1995 ‐

1943 Bengal famine ~ 2 million died





New Constitutional guaranteesPartitioning Wars


Concerted targeting






India‐Pakistan war 1965 re. eviction Bengali Hindus. Pakistan‐ Bangladesh war of independence 1971 evicted Pakistanis. Communal violence & Enemy Property Act (1965 to date) took 45% Hindu land. Partial land redistribution of Khas (gov.t) lands to Muslims

BangladeshFamine in 1974 led to world’s 2nd largest food aid flow (1975–1995) until national food security achieved with HYVs, irrigation & cropping intensification. Donor conditionality under Structural Adjustment settings resulted in PFDS reduction from 1975 on by targeting beneficiaries via work for food schemes with less desirable wheat only. NGOs began proliferating in the 1980s with donor pressure for the government to collaborate with them. Development NGOs (Grameen Bank, BRAC, ASA etc) now have more authority than government. AIS framing evident.

Structural adjustment pressure ends inliberalisation of agricultural input

markets + heavy investment of aid flows into rural infrastructure deepened &

stabilised foodgrain markets

Bangladeshi NGO micro‐credit to asset‐less now aninternational phenomena

Micro‐credit permitssmallholders to invest in STW & agriculturalintensification

• Institutional settings more powerful variable for food security than natural resources

– Not yet accepted by most Conservation Agriculture researchers/organisations

• Targeting of subsidies tightly coupled to fiscal sustainability of state– Capacity for political steering is sacrificed by allowing vote banks to develop

• In federal system (India) ambition at centre depends on state capacity to implement

– Leakage can be controlled be ensuring local accountability (e.g. ICTs) but this varies by state

• International expertise and conditional $ can help but can also hinder– Variable responses to structural adjustment settings (embrace, shrug off, endure)

• Trajectories shift when crises drive rule change at multiple scales & sectors– Import rules, micro‐credit access, infrastructure, NGO‐government partnerships, subsidy

design, land redistribution, targeting

Conclusions

Questions and contacts

Insert document title hereSlide 21

Research ScientistToni Darbas, CSIRO Land & Water [email protected]

Historical trajectories and food security inverventions in the borderlands of the Eastern Gangetic...

Science

Transcript of Historical trajectories and food security inverventions in the borderlands of the Eastern Gangetic...