It saved many nations like India from famine.
The introduction of ‘IR8’ — a new variety of rice in November 1967, by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in Manila, pioneered the green revolution in rice. This year , the world celebrated the 50th anniversary of IR8’s arrival.
Indeed, it was a milestone in the field of rice research, and for the rice-growing nations of Asia too. According to reports, the arrival of IR8 saved millions from starvation in countries like India, where very few varieties of rice were available at that time. Besides jump-starting agricultural production across Asia, IR8 has had a remarkable advantage over other rice types that were grown in Asia. This variety requires nearly about 130 days to get mature, whereas the traditional ones take around 160 to 170 days.
Many rice-growing farmers and seasonal cultivators took to IR8 for this reason. Eventually, it did bring miraculous results as it helped various nations address acute problems of food shortage. The story of IR8 and the emergence of subsequent varieties during what came to be known as Green Revolution, established the fact that concerted efforts in scientific innovation can change life.
India being a traditional rice- growing nation, gained immensely from the success of IR8. Indian farmers and scientists were widely consulted, while developing the world’s first high-yielding variety of rice at the IRRI. India’s top-notch agricultural scientists such as MS Swaminathan, then Director General of the IRRI, literally brought the Green Revolution home. The IRRI and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) had developed a long collaboration in the period before and after the coming of IR8; this continues till date.
Celebrating the success of half a century of the miracle rice IR8, Director General of the ICAR, Trilochan Mohapatra, remarked: “IR8 has been used extensively in the development of subsequent rice varieties.
We should take what we have learned from our partnership with the IRRI, and use it for our country to build the rice sector strategy so we can achieve more than what we had previously.” Also, the ICAR has provided institutional support to sustain the Green Revolution and subsequent developments in Indian agriculture. With massive application of science and technology, the ICAR has enabled the country to increase the production of food grains by five times since 1951 to 2014. Apart from promoting higher education in agriculture, the ICAR has heralded a visible impact on national food and nutritional security.
IR8 was first grown in India by a farmer named Nekkanti Subba Rao, in Andhra Pradesh. He even made serious efforts to promote the rice variety, which earned him the nickname, ‘Mr IR8‘.
Then gradually, IR8 moved towards other southern States like Tamil Nadu and also to the rest of the country. Today, to make rice-growing farmers more secure and productive, India needs a full-fledged application of advanced scientific methods to be adopted in agriculture — something Prime Minister Modi has been advocating. Time has come to turn the Indian rice research community more participatory, involving more farmers — and especially women — in the process. Meanwhile, the agricultural sector itself needs a fresh dose of holistic reforms.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
Steve Ovett, the famous British middle-distance athlete, won the 800-metres gold medal at the Moscow Olympics of 1980. Just a few days later, he was about to win a 5,000-metres race at London’s Crystal Palace. Known for his burst of acceleration on the home stretch, he had supreme confidence in his ability to out-sprint rivals. With the final 100 metres remaining,
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]Ovett waved to the crowd and raised a hand in triumph. But he had celebrated a bit too early. At the finishing line, Ireland’s John Treacy edged past Ovett. For those few moments, Ovett had lost his sense of reality and ignored the possibility of a negative event.
This analogy works well for the India story and our policy failures , including during the ongoing covid pandemic. While we have never been as well prepared or had significant successes in terms of growth stability as Ovett did in his illustrious running career, we tend to celebrate too early. Indeed, we have done so many times before.
It is as if we’re convinced that India is destined for greater heights, come what may, and so we never run through the finish line. Do we and our policymakers suffer from a collective optimism bias, which, as the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman once wrote, “may well be the most significant of the cognitive biases”? The optimism bias arises from mistaken beliefs which form expectations that are better than the reality. It makes us underestimate chances of a negative outcome and ignore warnings repeatedly.
The Indian economy had a dream run for five years from 2003-04 to 2007-08, with an average annual growth rate of around 9%. Many believed that India was on its way to clocking consistent double-digit growth and comparisons with China were rife. It was conveniently overlooked that this output expansion had come mainly came from a few sectors: automobiles, telecom and business services.
Indians were made to believe that we could sprint without high-quality education, healthcare, infrastructure or banking sectors, which form the backbone of any stable economy. The plan was to build them as we went along, but then in the euphoria of short-term success, it got lost.
India’s exports of goods grew from $20 billion in 1990-91 to over $310 billion in 2019-20. Looking at these absolute figures it would seem as if India has arrived on the world stage. However, India’s share of global trade has moved up only marginally. Even now, the country accounts for less than 2% of the world’s goods exports.
More importantly, hidden behind this performance was the role played by one sector that should have never made it to India’s list of exports—refined petroleum. The share of refined petroleum exports in India’s goods exports increased from 1.4% in 1996-97 to over 18% in 2011-12.
An import-intensive sector with low labour intensity, exports of refined petroleum zoomed because of the then policy regime of a retail price ceiling on petroleum products in the domestic market. While we have done well in the export of services, our share is still less than 4% of world exports.
India seemed to emerge from the 2008 global financial crisis relatively unscathed. But, a temporary demand push had played a role in the revival—the incomes of many households, both rural and urban, had shot up. Fiscal stimulus to the rural economy and implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission scales had led to the salaries of around 20% of organized-sector employees jumping up. We celebrated, but once again, neither did we resolve the crisis brewing elsewhere in India’s banking sector, nor did we improve our capacity for healthcare or quality education.
Employment saw little economy-wide growth in our boom years. Manufacturing jobs, if anything, shrank. But we continued to celebrate. Youth flocked to low-productivity service-sector jobs, such as those in hotels and restaurants, security and other services. The dependence on such jobs on one hand and high-skilled services on the other was bound to make Indian society more unequal.
And then, there is agriculture, an elephant in the room. If and when farm-sector reforms get implemented, celebrations would once again be premature. The vast majority of India’s farmers have small plots of land, and though these farms are at least as productive as larger ones, net absolute incomes from small plots can only be meagre.
A further rise in farm productivity and consequent increase in supply, if not matched by a demand rise, especially with access to export markets, would result in downward pressure on market prices for farm produce and a further decline in the net incomes of small farmers.
We should learn from what John Treacy did right. He didn’t give up, and pushed for the finish line like it was his only chance at winning. Treacy had years of long-distance practice. The same goes for our economy. A long grind is required to build up its base before we can win and celebrate. And Ovett did not blame anyone for his loss. We play the blame game. Everyone else, right from China and the US to ‘greedy corporates’, seems to be responsible for our failures.
We have lowered absolute poverty levels and had technology-based successes like Aadhaar and digital access to public services. But there are no short cuts to good quality and adequate healthcare and education services. We must remain optimistic but stay firmly away from the optimism bias.
In the end, it is not about how we start, but how we finish. The disastrous second wave of covid and our inability to manage it is a ghastly reminder of this fact.