|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Globalisation: Any alternative? Globalising
Rural
Development. The debate on development has mostly revolved
round the role of the state: should it be the minimum as laissez-faire
requires or a pivotal one as it was in former socialist countries?
When the hands-off approach (laissez-faire) failed in the early 1930s,
Keynes advocated greater state interventions in economic management. The
50s and 70s saw Keynes policies at work in India. The government, in
line with the Fabian tradition, became a principal instrument of action
against poverty. A new development model started taking shape after
the Human Development Report came out in 1990, aimed at "enlarging
people’s choices". China turned pragmatic much earlier and
embraced market socialism. Russia and East European countries too
followed the same route to development, abandoning socialism. The book
on development in a jargon-ridden language can be pretty taxing for the
uninitiated. Comprising contributions from academics of varying
backgrounds, the book debates threadbare rural development in a
globalising world, exploring experiences of countries like Bangladesh,
the Philippines, Thailand, India, South Africa and Europe. Most
contributors are opposed to globalisation, but no credible alternative
available. Only a few of them make some concrete suggestions. Third
World biases surface here and there: developed nations use development
aid to capture markets in rural areas; ideas originate in the IMF, World
Bank, UNDP, the ILO, etc., and are imposed on the Third World;
"`85if the rise of the rich is not slowed down, inequality will
persist." How did the Green Revolution start? It was
initiated by the US under President Harry Truman to push its
petrochemicals and technology into the Third World. The Ford Rockefeller
foundations developed "wonder wheat" and "miracle
rice" in Mexico and the Philippines. These varieties required an
extensive use of fertilisers, pesticides, water and mechanisation. Even
family planning was promoted to sell contraceptives made by US
companies. The Green Revolution in Bangladesh hit its genetic
diversity. Out of some 15,000 varieties of rice that were once available
in Bangladesh, only 30 high-yielding varieties are left. The Green
Revolution in Punjab and Haryana, which has made India self-reliant in
food, has been widely praised, but its negative effects are yet to be
fully assessed. What should be done? One analyst talks approvingly of
Bangladesh’s "Nayakrishi Andolan" under which one lakh
farming families in 16 districts grow organic crops without using
chemicals and groundwater. Europe is pushing LEADER, a rural
development initiative that adopts local cultural, environmental and
community values. Another expert expects the government to ensure
markets are not biased against small farmers and pleads for the use of
alternative energy techniques using wind, water, solar power and biogas.
There is the obvious need for investment in infrastructure. "High
investment in human development" is another suggestion. In a
market-driven economy, the poor, the unskilled and the jobless can have
a hard time. The market forces ensure an efficient use of resources, but
competition and the profit-crazy can be inhuman too. Therefore, a safety
net is needed. Subjects like social security and latest rural uplift
initiatives like the job guarantee scheme and Bharat Nirman do not find
mention in the book. Prof Andre Beitelle is right when he says Indians
talk too much and write too long. The contributors to this book are
liberal in discussion. The jargon-ridden language of academics can be
quite taxing, especially for the uninitiated.
|
