You can Download Change and Development in Rural Society Questions and Answers, Notes, Plus Two Sociology Chapter Wise Questions and Answers Kerala Chapter 4 help you to revise complete Syllabus and score more marks in your examinations.
Kerala Plus Two Sociology Chapter Wise Questions and Answers Chapter 4 Change and Development in Rural Society
Change and Development in Rural Society Questions and Answers
What are the factors of the New Economic Policy?
d) All the above
All the above
Whose was the usage “A change from patronage to exploitation”?
a) Jan Breman
b) M.N. Srinivas
d) M.S. Swaminathan
According to ………… system, real farmer should pay the tax.
The Jati which had more members and more land was called ……….. by M.N. Srinivas.
Prabala Jati (Strong Jati)
According to the … Act, the land a family can keep was limited
Match the following
|Green Revolution||Exploitation of agricultural workers|
|Globalization||Working like slaves|
|Halpati System||Working like slaves|
|Jan Breman||Exploitation of agricultural workers|
What is the relation between agriculture and culture?
There is close relation between agriculture and culture. The natur@4nd manner of agriculture will differ according to the region in the country. This difference will be reflected in the culture of those regions. The social structure and culture of rural Indian is related to agriculture and the lifestyle of agriculturists.
Critically examine the influence the land reform made in Indian villages during the colonial period.
Before the colonial rule, the people who did agriculture were members of the Upper Castes. But they were not owners of the land. The land was in the control of regional kings and zamindars. The zamindars. who were politically strong, were Kshatriyas of such higher caste people. Zamindars were not owners of the land. Their duty was to collect the tax and give it to the government. They got a shore of the tax they collected.
These zamindars collected a got part of the harvest as tax from the farmers. When the British colonized India, they ruled many parts through zamindars. With the intention of maximizing their income, the British brought new land tax systems and reforms. The most important of them were the Zamindari system (Permanent Settlement) and the Ryotwari system. The Zamindars had to pay huge amounts to the government.
So they started collecting big amounts from farmers. The zamindari system was harmful to both zamindars and farmers. As a result agriculture got stunted and ruined. Many farmers left their homes as they could not stand the torments from zamindars. Constant famines, earthquakes, and wars reduced the population considerably.
The British implemented the zamindari system in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. In the regions which they were directly ruling, they brought another land tax system. This is known as ryotwari system. ‘Ryot’ in Telugu means farmer. It was an agreement between the British government and the farmer. There were no middlemen. Farmers gave the tax directly to the government. As per the ryotwari system, the farmers became the owners of the land.
In the ryotwari regions, the tax was comparatively less. So the farmers were ready to invest money in their lands. There was much progress and prosperity in these regions. To know about the present agricultural structure we should know the background of land tax system in the colonial rule. The present system came from the changes that were brought during the colonial period.
Critically examine the land reform laws of India after independence.
After independence, the Nehru government started a planned development process. The stress was on agricultural reforms and industrialization. The condition of agriculture in India at that time was pitiable. The country depended on imported foodstuff. People in the villages were in poverty. In the circumstances, the government felt the need to reform the agricultural sector. It realized that there should be drastic changes in the ownership of the land and its distribution. To bring these changes there was a series of land reform bills. The reforms were carried. out at the Centre and in the States.
The first important land reform law was to end the zamindari system. With this, the middlemen between the government and the farmers were ceased to exist. The ownership of the land by zamindars was canceled. The land of the zamindars was taken from them and it was distributed to the farmers who farmed it. With this, the power of zamindars weakened. It improved the condition of the real farmers.
Although zamindari system was ended by this law, landlord-ship, tenancy, share-cropping, etc. did not end. In the agricultural sector, there were many layers and zamindars were the top layer. The top layer was removed but other layers remained. The second series of land reforms tried to end tenancy system. It made a condition that till the tenant paid the rent, he could not be ousted from the land. This law could offer some kind of protection to the tenants. The rent to be given to the landlord was also reduced by this law.
But in many States, this law was not properly implemented. Since the tenants were not given any written documents, the law proved useless in many cases. Only in Wet Bengal and Kerala, the law was effectively implemented. These States were able to restructure the agricultural system by giving the tenants the right to their land. The third land reform law related the maximum land a family could own. The limit for maximum land would depend on each region. For example, in Assam, it could be 50 acres but in Bengal, it might be only 25 acres. The ceiling was determined according to the type of land and fertility of soil.
If the land was well- productive and fertile, the land area one could retain would be smaller than less productive and infertile land. The extra land taken from the families would be taken and distributed among the landless poor. But all this did not happen as planned. Landowners used different techniques to keep their land by using various loopholes of the law Many landowners escaped from the law by giving away their extra lands to their relatives.
Even their servants were given land. Thus they were able to keep control of their land. To escape from the land ceiling laws, in some regions, rich landowners and farmers officially divorced their wives, although they lived together. This way they could keep the land by giving a share to the wives. The efficacy of the land reform laws was not similar in all States. It is true that some changes did happen. But there was hardly any big difference in the inequality prevailing in the agricultural sector. It affected the production of agricultural goods. The land reform laws are important in India. Such reforms will remove the poverty i villages and bring social justice.
Examine the social repercussion of the Green Revolution in India.
Green Revolution is part of the programme that the Government implemented in the 1960s and 70s. In the 1960s there was a serious food shortage. To overcome it, government came out with an agricultural plan and this led to the Green Revolution. For this financial assistance was obtained from International Agencies. The government gave farmers high-yield seeds, insecticides and fertilizers at subsidized prices. They were also given agricultural loans. The government gave them guarantee that it would buy the produce at a minimum fixed price.
This was the basis of the Green Revolution. The Green Revolution took place only in places which had irrigation facilities. The new seeds and manner of agriculture needed a lot of water. It concentrated on areas fit for wheat and paddy cultivation. Therefore initially the benefit of this scheme went to Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.
Green Revolution had a great impact. Since latest technology was used, there was a huge increase in the production. India became self-sufficient in food grains. The Green Revolution was considered as a great achievement of the Government and the scientists who helped in the process. But sociologists say that it also had its negative results. It helped only middle class and high class farmers.
The small scale farmers did not get any benefit from it. To carry out the programme a big capital was needed. Small farmers did not have the capital to buy new breed of seeds, fertilizers and insecticides. They could not afford to use latest technology. The small farmers did not do farming aiming at the market. They did it for their own use. But the middle class and rich fanners did farming with the market in their mind. They produced a lot and sold the extra yield in the market making huge profits. Thus agriculture was commercialized.
Thus in fact, in the first stage of the Green Revolution, the inequalities only increased It also caused the ousting of tenants from their lands. Since agriculture became profitable, the landowners topk their land back from the tenants and that way he tenants lost their means of livelihood. Rich fanners became richer. The tillers, tractors harvesters and threshers that were brought took away the jobs of the poor people who managed their lives doing different jobs in the farms. It was they who ploughed the land, harvested, and threshed. Many of these people went away to cities seeking employment. Thus migration to cities increased.
It is true that because of the high demand for labor, laborers got better wages. But this rise did not help them as the price of essential commodities shot up. There was another thing also. Before the Green Revolution, the laborers got their wages in kind (various agricultural products). But now they got their wages in cash and this made thing s worse for him because of the high prices he had to pay for various products.
The second stage of the Green Revolution was carried out in areas which were dry and where availability of water was less. There were great changes now. Government made arrangements for better irrigation facilities. The way of planting, the kinds of crops, etc. were changed. Agriculture was commercialized. Stress was given to cash crops like cotton. This also increased the insecurity of farmers.
Before the Green Revolution, farmers produced different things for their use. But now they concentrated on one crop. When concentrating on crops there would be problems at times. Fall in the prices, crop failure etc. would be very dangerous then. Some farmers suffered from these dangers. Green Revolution led to regional inequalities. Some places prospered greatly. But others stayed backward. Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh prospered. But Bihar, Eastern Uttar Pradesh, Telangana, etc, remained poor. The gross inequalities there later led to riots.
Green Revolution also proved harmful to the traditional ways of agriculture. It was hoped that scientific methods would improve the condition of the farmers. New style of farming, new breeds of seeds, chemical fertilizers and insecticides created serious environmental problems. In this situation, scientists and agricultural organizations asked the people to go .back to their traditional methods of cultivation. The high-yield seeds were found harmful to health.
Evaluate the changes that globalization and liberalization brought to the Indian village communities.
It was in the 1980s that India started its liberalization policies. It was a policy stressing free market, privatization and globalization. Liberalization made it necessary for India to become part of the World Trade Organization. The purpose was to bring free International trade and open Indian markets for imports. Liberalization policy had a big influence in agriculture and village communities.
Before liberalization, the Indian farmers had the support of the nation and protection in the market from imported goods. But as a result of liberalization and globalization, farmers faced competition from global market. We can see imported fruits and other food items even in the small shops of our villages. But a few years ago such imported things were not available here. There was heavy import duty and so many things were not imported. But globalization removed all such restrictions.
This badly affects the farmers here. For example, India decided to import wheat. This adversely affected the wheat farmers. Some farmers in Punjab and Karnataka entered into contract with Multinational companies to grow some crops like tomato and potato. The companies had agreed to buy these crops for export. There are some dangers in this ‘contract agriculture’. The company decides what should be grown. It is the company that provides seeds, capital, and technology. The company also agrees to buy the product at a fixed price.
This contract-agriculture is common in India. It may look as if it is good for the farmers as it gives them financial guarantee. But the problem here is that the farmers have to depend on the companies for their livelihood. It removes the freedom of the farmer to grow what he likes. He has to work like an employee of the company. Sometimes they have to produce only flowers for export and so they cannot cultivate any food crops.
Local knowledge of agriculture does not have any role here. The farming is to be done as suggested by the company. Through contract-farming, things need by the rich people are produced. Ordinary people have no use of such things. Moreover these crops need a lot of chemical fertilizers and insecticides which will bring .a lot of damage to the environment. Agriculture has now become highly globalized. The multinationals entered this field as sellers of seeds, insecticides, chemical fertilizers and so on. But now they dictate to the farmers what to cultivate and how to cultivate it.