An analysis of the Green Revolution

The tfGreen Revol-utJ-onr', à current debate on technological solutions to food problems (modernizing "TradíÈíonalt' agriculture) ln Èhe Thtrd l,lorld, has given ríse Ëo a rapldly growl-ng literature of hlgh quality.Especlally on Indíats t'Green Revolution" there have been more than a hundred contributions, many of which have been published in the Economl-c and PoliÈícal Inleeklv.Due to the failure of conventÍ.onalanthropological theories (such as cult,ural ecology and cultural rnateriall-srn) ín explalning Èhe phenomena of developmenË of underdevelopment ln the Third l,Iorld, thÍs theory searches for some explanation of underdevelopment 1n the Marxist theory of mode of production.The central arguement is that íË is the mode or modes of production thaü determines the soclal totality or social organization (in an anthropological sense) and not the technology, envíronment4] adaptaÈfon, or econortry as malntained by some anthropologists.The t'Green Revolution¡t is considered as a concrete example of the capitall-st mode of production.It is a partieular American developmenÈ strategy whfch offers "míracle" solutions to food problems of the underdeveloped countries wiËhout brlnging fundamental changes in the social structure.Sponsored by the Rockfeller Foundatíon, Ford Foundation, Agrícultural Developùrent Council (ADC), the "Green Revolutlon" has spread into saveral ThÍrd i^Iorld counËríes slnce the early I96Os.This thesis assesses the success and failures of the t'Green RevoluLíon ín Abstract the Third Þlor1d in general and in India in partícular.As a capitalist mode of produ.ctlon, the 'rGreen Revolutl-on".has brought about cerËaÍn contradíctions in the socíal relations of production (Agrarian unrest), destroyed the traditional mode. of production, and destroyed the ecosystem in Ëhe Indian count.rysideand created dependence relationships between the developed and underdeveloped countries.The najor beneficiarfes ln this strategy are the mulÈlnational corporaËions, rích merchants, large landholders, and the larger and wealt.híercontmercial f armers.Thus, as a development strategy, it has totally failed because of the capítalist system of production r¡hich always tends to favor a smal1 group of persons and pauperízes the peasants and rvorkers.Due to an lnadequacy of the capitalist system of production ín agrl-culture, tirís thesis explores brief,ly the Chinese and North Vietnamese styles of rural development (perhaps a socialist mode of production) and fínds contrasting results betvreen Ëhese tr^ro systems of production.In China and North Vietnam, agricultural development programs succeeded due to Èhe absense of capitalist relatíons.if This thesís concludes that the Third tr^Iorld countries ¡,¡ill not be able to solve their food problems as long as they contínue to maintain capitalíst relatíons both domesËically and internationally.I'1nally, the thesls describes a specific case of the penetration of American capiÈa1ism into the Third tr^lorld and is an exposition of iËs basic nature.Anthropologíeal research_ on South Asia is remarkably lacklng in studies dealing r,¡fth the dynanics of capit,alism as lrell as with hor¿ the capitalisË syst,e!û penetrates and destroys pre-capitalist modes of production.This thesis ís a modesÈ aËtempt Ëo invest,igate the I'Green Revolutl-onrl (agricultural developmenL ín the Thírd l^Iorld) , a particular American development strat.egythat has been introduced in South Asia as well as in other Third I^lorld countries since the early 1960rs.It also takes a brief look at Chínese and North Víetnanese styles of rural development.Preface A word about the method employed ín this study must be noted.To avoid this problem is Ëo risk serious misunderstandíng of our present investigatíon.In this study, Marxrs abstract-deductive method has been followed.In the Preface to Capital , Marx wrote, ttneíther microscopes nor cÌremical regenÈs are of use.The force of abstractlon must replace (c.f.Sweezy l97O:11)".Thís needs some clarificatíon.Accordlng to modern Èheorists in social sclence, it is called the nethod of t'successive approximationil which allows one to move from abst.ract to more concrete levels of investigation in a step-by-step f,ashion.This process of abstractíon removes, sinplífies assumptions/hypotheses at the successive st.ages of investigation so Èhat theory is able to take account and explain a r¿ider range of actual phenomena (Sweezy 1970:11).