GENETICALLY MODIFIED COTTON: AGRARIAN DISTRESS AND INDIA’S EMERGING ECONOMY A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Asmita Bhardwaj February 2010 © 2010 Asmita Bhardwaj GENETICALLY MODIFIED COTTON: AGRARIAN DISTRESS AND INDIA’S EMERGING ECONOMY Asmita Bhardwaj, Ph. D. Cornell University 2010 Farmer suicides were first reported in Vidharbha, eastern Maharashtra, a prominent cotton growing region in India in 2005. Similar farm crises that came to light in other cotton regions and rainfed India shocked the sensibilities of the policymakers and public alike. Simultaneously, in 2002, genetically modified (GM) cotton or Bt (Baccilus Thurigenesis) cotton, produced by agro-transnational corporation Monsanto, was introduced and adopted widely in Vidharbha and India's cotton belt. Even before their official release, “illegal” GM seeds were found growing in the central-western state of Gujarat, another prominent cotton growing region in 1998. GM cotton and GM crops are proposed to increase agricultural productivity and usher in a “second Green Revolution” or Gene Revolution in Indian agriculture. The 1960s Green Revolution is widely considered to be an important milestone in changing the face of Indian agriculture as it helped raise agricultural yields, increased agricultural incomes, and saved India from a food crisis. The Gene Revolution is posited to be that imperative sequel to the 1960s Green Revolution that will transform the state of agriculture in rainfed areas. What were the effects of the Green Revolution in Vidharbha and in rainfed areas of India? What impacts does the introduction of GM cotton have on farmers‟ livelihoods in Vidharbha? Will the use of GM cotton lead to positive gains in Vidharbha just as the use of Green Revolution technology did in irrigated areas of the country? In reality, the Green Revolution failed to raise the incomes of farmers in Vidharbha and in rainfed areas of India. By comparing the process of gains that farmers made during the Green Revolution with the Gene Revolution, this dissertation argues that first compared to the winners of the Green Revolution, the economic and ecological capabilities of cotton farmers adopting GM crops in Vidharbha are poor. Second, a supportive ―policy and institutional‖ infrastructure does not exist for the adoption of GM technology in Vidharbha. Such state support allowed the agricultural production process to become safe and profitable only for rich and middle class farmers during the Green Revolution. Third, post trade liberalization, the increasing exposure of the domestic economy to trends in the international trade of raw cotton and textiles, can affect cotton farmers‘ income negatively. As a consequence, GM cotton or the Gene Revolution will be unable to alleviate the crisis condition of cotton farmers. Government intervention is needed to provide cheaper or alternative technologies, such as introducing public sector Bt cotton, Integrated Pest Management or organic farming practices, as well as encouraging food farming and creating opportunities for non-farm employment. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Asmita Bhardwaj, an Indian national, has been a Ph.D. student at the Department of City and Regional Planning at Cornell University since 2002. Her thesis on the political economy of genetically modified cotton in India was funded by a four-year scholarship and small grants from the Department of City and Regional Planning, the Mario Einaudi Center and the Center for Transnational Contention at Cornell University. Previous to her affiliation to this Department, she was a Master‘s student at Virginia Polytechnic and State University in the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. Besides her doctoral dissertation, she has significant experience working with intergovernmental, governmental, academic and local communities on agricultural and rural development issues. She has been affiliated with the Tata Energy Research Institute (NGO, Delhi, 1999), International Institute of Sustainable Development (NGO, New York, 2005–present), International Institute of Sustainable Development Reporting Services (NGO, Winnipeg, Canada, 2004–2006), United Nations Framework of Climate Change Convention (Intergovernmental Organization, Bonn, 2003), Brookings Institute (NGO, Washington DC, 2007), Virginia Water Resources Research Institute (Academic Institute, Virginia, 2001), Virginia Polytechnic and State University (2001) and Cornell University (Academic Institute, 2002–2009). iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Imagining, researching and writing this thesis over the past six years has engendered many debts. First and foremost, I wish to thank Professor Barbara Lynch, who helped me initiate the research for this dissertation. She supported me in more ways than one at various stages of the research and writing. Without her help, this thesis would not have been possible. I am also indebted to Professor David Lewis who stepped in at an important juncture in the dissertation and helped me take it towards completion. I owe an equal amount of gratitude to Professor Stephen Hilgartner of the Science and Technology Studies Program. Professor John Forester at the Department of City and Regional Planning helped me improve my writing skills. Many friends contributed their ideas, time and companionship during this journey. In Nagpur and Delhi, I owe thanks to Pankaj Shiras, Vijai Jaywandhia, Vinay Deshpande, Hemachandra Gajbhiye, Bhagirath Chaudhury, Dr. Mahesh Rangarajan and Professor Abhijit Dasgupta. I appreciate the help provided by Dr. Dorceta Taylor, Professors Bruce Scholten and Pratyusha Basu for helping me get my work published. I am indebted to TACET Center and my family in India and the United States. I am grateful to friends at Cornell‘s City and Regional Planning Department such as Allyson Stoll, Sudeshna Mitra, Andy Rumbach, Razaack Kariem, Anouk Patel, Arvind Kannan, Becky Smith, Ashima Sood, Tarun Jain and Nilotpal Kumar who helped me put this dissertation together. I also thank Pratap Pandey with whom I thrashed out my dissertation ideas on multiple evenings. Lastly, I am grateful to the International Institute of Sustainable Development, Cornell‘s Einaudi Center, the Center for Transnational Contention and the Brookings Institute for providing grants and consultancies that helped fund this dissertation research. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................... iv LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... viii LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................ x Chapter 1 THE PROMISE OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS ................ 1 Research Significance ................................................................................................ 3 Argument in Brief ....................................................................................................... 4 Research Experience .................................................................................................. 6 Roadmap of the Dissertation ...................................................................................... 9 Chapter 2 UNDERSTANDING THE BENEFITS AND RISKS OF GM CROPS ...................................................................................................................................... 10 Gene Revolution Discourse ...................................................................................... 11 Social and Political in the Technical ........................................................................ 19 Research Design ....................................................................................................... 25 From a Technocentric to a Sociological Understanding of GM crop Impacts ......... 34 Chapter 3 REVISITING THE GREEN REVOLUTION ....................................... 36 Making and Aversion of a Food Crisis ..................................................................... 36 Green Revolution Technology: The Package ........................................................... 40 Policy and Institutional Support ............................................................................... 42 Social, Economic and Ecological Effects of the Green Revolution Technology ..... 47 Persistence of Green Revolution Ideologies and Institutions ................................... 63 The Gene Revolution as the Green Revolution ........................................................ 66 Chapter 4 CONDITION OF COTTON FARMERS IN VIDHARBHA ............... 69 Vidharbha, Dryland Maharashtra: The Location ...................................................... 70 Economic Conditions ............................................................................................... 71 Ecological Conditions .............................................................................................. 77 Economic Unviability of Farming in Rainfed India ............................................... 100 Facing the Economic and Ecological Challenges in Vidharbha ............................ 104 Chapter 5 POLICY