Separating Wheat from the Chaff: Farm Acts, Farmers’ Protest and Outcomes

IF 1.3 Q1 AREA STUDIES
L. Singh, B. Shergill
{"title":"Separating Wheat from the Chaff: Farm Acts, Farmers’ Protest and Outcomes","authors":"L. Singh, B. Shergill","doi":"10.1177/09763996211063600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The farmers’ protest at the outskirts of Delhi has completed one year and still continuing. It was triggered after the Government of India enacted three farm Acts in September 2020 (now repealed) that strive to initiate sweeping reforms in agricultural produce selling, procurement, and storage and public distribution of essential commodities. In this context, an attempt has been made in this article to examine the claim of both the government and the farmers’ unions leading the protest movement. The contribution of this study is manifold: in terms of tracing the evolution of the current farmers’ protest movement, farmer unions’ negotiations with the government, loss of human lives, and outcomes. It is found that farm Acts are structurally flawed and risk the food security of the country besides preparing ground for eviction of smallholders from agriculture altogether. The analysis of the field survey based on characteristics of 460 deceased farmers during the participation in the protest reveals that they belonged to the lowest rung of the farmers. The support to the family members left behind has come from various quarters but is inadequate. The article argues that the state autonomy to take policy decisions regarding farm Acts should be protected. The union government should develop institutional mechanism to take along all stakeholders for resolving the international and inter-state issues concerning agriculture sector.","PeriodicalId":41791,"journal":{"name":"Millennial Asia","volume":"12 1","pages":"390 - 410"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Millennial Asia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09763996211063600","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

The farmers’ protest at the outskirts of Delhi has completed one year and still continuing. It was triggered after the Government of India enacted three farm Acts in September 2020 (now repealed) that strive to initiate sweeping reforms in agricultural produce selling, procurement, and storage and public distribution of essential commodities. In this context, an attempt has been made in this article to examine the claim of both the government and the farmers’ unions leading the protest movement. The contribution of this study is manifold: in terms of tracing the evolution of the current farmers’ protest movement, farmer unions’ negotiations with the government, loss of human lives, and outcomes. It is found that farm Acts are structurally flawed and risk the food security of the country besides preparing ground for eviction of smallholders from agriculture altogether. The analysis of the field survey based on characteristics of 460 deceased farmers during the participation in the protest reveals that they belonged to the lowest rung of the farmers. The support to the family members left behind has come from various quarters but is inadequate. The article argues that the state autonomy to take policy decisions regarding farm Acts should be protected. The union government should develop institutional mechanism to take along all stakeholders for resolving the international and inter-state issues concerning agriculture sector.
从谷壳中分离小麦:农业法案,农民抗议和结果
农民在德里郊区的抗议活动已经进行了一年,目前仍在继续。印度政府于2020年9月颁布了三项农业法案(现已废除),旨在对农产品销售、采购、储存和基本商品的公共分配进行全面改革。在此背景下,本文试图考察政府和领导抗议运动的农民工会的说法。本研究的贡献是多方面的:在追溯当前农民抗议运动的演变,农民工会与政府的谈判,人命损失和结果方面。研究发现,农业法案在结构上存在缺陷,除了为将小农从农业中驱逐出去提供理由外,还危及该国的粮食安全。对参与示威过程中死亡的460名农民的特点进行实地调查分析,发现他们属于最底层农民。对留守家庭成员的支持来自各个方面,但仍然不够。文章认为,应该保护国家在农业法案方面的决策自主权。联邦政府应该建立体制机制,让所有利益相关者一起解决有关农业部门的国际和国家间问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Millennial Asia
Millennial Asia AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Millennial Asia: An International Journal of Asian Studies is a multidisciplinary, refereed biannual journal of the Association of Asia Scholars (AAS)–an association of the alumni of the Asian Scholarship Foundation (ASF). It aims to encourage multifaceted, multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research on Asia, in order to understand its fast changing context as a growth pole of global economy. By providing a forum for Asian scholars situated globally, it promotes dialogue between the global academic community, civil society and policy makers on Asian issues. The journal examines Asia on a regional and comparative basis, emphasizing patterns and tendencies that go beyond national borders and are globally relevant. Modern and contemporary Asia has witnessed dynamic transformations in cultures, societies, economies and political institutions, among others. It confronts issues of collective identity formation, ecological crisis, rapid economic change and resurgence of religion and communal identifies while embracing globalization. An analysis of past experiences can help produce a deeper understanding of contemporary change. In particular, the journal is interested in locating contemporary changes within a historical perspective, through the use of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches. This way, it hopes to promote comparative studies involving Asia’s various regions. The journal brings out both thematic and general issues and the thrust areas are: Asian integration, Asian economies, sociology, culture, politics, governance, security, development issues, arts and literature and any other such issue as the editorial board may deem fit. The core fields include development encompassing agriculture, industry, regional trade, social sectors like health and education and development policy across the region and in specific countries in a comparative perspective.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信