Tuesday, July 28, 2020

COVID-19 and its impact on the Agri Economy of Punjab

This article is by

Share this article

Article Contributor(s)

Syed Ahmed Uzair

Article Title

COVID-19 and its impact on the Agri Economy of Punjab

Publisher

Global Views 360

Publication Date

July 28, 2020

URL

Women planting paddy seedlings in agricultural field

Women planting paddy seedlings in agricultural field | Source: Diganta Talukdar via Wikimedia

The COVID-19 pandemic has hit the agricultural economy of the Indian state of Punjab really hard. Punjab’s paddy farmers have traditionally relied on migrant agricultural labourers who are mostly natives of the state of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Due to the pandemic, a large number of migrant labourers have returned to their native place causing a massive shortage of farm workers in Punjab.

Its impact became more severe as the paddy transplantation period was already around. Gurbachan Singh, a local paddy farmer told news agency ANI, "There is a shortage of labourers as the government sent back the migrant workers without proper planning."

The shortage of migrant workers forced the farmers to rely more on the local labourers. The local labourers used this opportunity to demand more wages which has resulted in almost doubling the labour cost. The migrant labourers used to charge around ₹2500 per acre for sowing paddy while the local ones were demanding ₹4000 per acre for the same work.

The  village panchayat (Local village council) tried to fix the labour charges of ₹3,000 per acre which did not go down well with local labourers. This caused a dispute which even resulted in a clash between labourers and farmers where the shots were fired as well.

The labour shortage does not appear to be ending soon as most migrant labourers are not willing to come back. Viresh Kumar, a labour contractor from Sonbarsa in Bihar’s Sitamarhi district who supplies workers to paddy farmers in Phagwara, told ThePrint, “Workers from Bihar and UP either don’t want to come back to fields in Punjab or they want farmers or us to bear the cost of bringing them back, which is a very expensive and complex procedure now. Due to the lack of sufficient number of regular trains, the cost of bringing a single migrant to Punjab is around Rs 3,000 to Rs 4,000 per person.”

The shortage of cheap labour has forced the local farmers to start looking for some alternative which could maintain the economic feasibility of farming.also provided some benefit

Agricultural Secretary of Punjab government, KS Pannu noted that some of the farmers have started employing new technology to cope up with the labour shortage. "Farmers have sown paddy at around 5 lakh hectare land with Direct Seeding of Rice technology this year. Some farmers, however, shifted back to the puddling method for cultivation as they could not adapt to the technology," Pannu told ANI.

Manpreet Ayali, a member of Punjab State Legislative Assembly, and a wealthy farmer, says that this labour shortage is a blessing in disguise for the farmers as it would make them more self-reliant, rather than depending on labour for the transplantation season.

The shortage of cheap migrant labour has forced many farmers to cut down the area of paddy cultivation. Experts believe that due to the reduced area of transplantation the groundwater levels might improve in the state which tops the country in over-exploitation of groundwater reserves.

It is still too early to give a definite verdict on the long term impact of the COVID-19 on the agricultural economy of Punjab, but in the short term it is nothing short of a disaster for the local farmers.

Support us to bring the world closer

To keep our content accessible we don't charge anything from our readers and rely on donations to continue working. Your support is critical in keeping Global Views 360 independent and helps us to present a well-rounded world view on different international issues for you. Every contribution, however big or small, is valuable for us to keep on delivering in future as well.

Support Us

Share this article

Read More

February 4, 2021 4:41 PM

Black Lives Matter: Why "All Lives Matter" is a False Equivalence

The phrase “All Lives Matter”, used in response to the slogan “Black Lives Matter”, has been causing a lot of controversy. The slogan is sometimes used by “colour-blind” people, who do not see colour as a basis of any of their decisions, and when they hear “Black lives Matter”, they want to add white lives to the mix, not understanding that race causes significant differences in what people face with respect to discrimination. 

In one of the incidents, a man spray-painted ‘White Lives Matter’ on the statue of Arthur Ashe, an African American Tennis legend, who was the first black Wimbledon men’s singles champion. After the man left, some people spray-painted “Black Lives Matter” over the previous paint. The man returned in a while to wipe off that message, and when asked why he had painted “white lives matter” on the statue. According to the video, the man replied "Don't all lives matter? Why is it okay to spray paint on this statue 'black lives matter,' but not 'white lives matter'? What's the difference? They all matter. Everybody matters, right?"

However, John Hayward on Breitbart throws a different light on the use of the all lives matter slogan. It talks about several instances of how people and organizations have used the phrase, like how the local authorities in Frankton, Indiana tried to have it on the side of the police cars out of general goodwill, and did not realize that the phrase was offensive to the Black Lives Matter movement.

The phrase “All Life Matters” may have been used as a slogan for joining all hands together, and expressing the fundamental right to equality. However it is found to be misguided and offensive by many people because they feel that the phrase invalidates the specific difficulties faced by the black community. For explaining this, they draw a comparison: if there is one house burning, if the other houses call out that they want the water poured on them too, that’s just counterintuitive and ignoring the burning house. Another comparison is that at a dinner table, a child has half a portion and the other has a whole. When giving another half a portion to the child with less food, if the other child demands half a portion too, it is evident that the child with the full portion is ignoring the fact that the other one has only the half. 

The intention about the usage of the phrase “All Lives Matter” doesn’t matter; it still negatively affects the “Black Lives Matter” movement. Speaking of “All Lives Matter” in response to someone asserting that “Black Lives Matter” is walking over the struggles that black people specifically face and it is a false equivalence.

Read More