Final Assignment

Social Change Campaign

Anirudh Nair SS112
Fall 2018
Solving the farmer suicide crisis in India through a social change movement 
 
 
Agriculture in India 
Agriculture, which can be defined as the cultivation of land and breeding of animals and plants 
to provide food, fiber, medicinal plants, and other products to sustain and enhance life, has 
had a long history in India. Dating back to the times of the Indus Valley Civilization, farming 
has been a centerpiece of daily life in the region for a long time (BBC, 2018). Even in recent 
history, since the Independence of India from the British Raj in 1947, agriculture has played an 
essential role in the economic development of the country (Tripathi & Prasad, 2009). 
 
Agriculture accounts for 15.4% of India’s GDP (CIA, 2018). Even though this percentage has 
come down from a higher number, agriculture is still the larger employer of people in India, 
employing close to 50% of the entire population (NSSO, 2014). Due to this high dependency of 
the country’s population on agriculture for employment, this particular sector has a tangible 
impact on the socio-economic fabric of India. 
 
The Problem  
Given the important role that agriculture plays in the Indian society and the number of people 
it employs, the farmers, who constitute the backbone of this sector, should have the right to 
reap the benefits from the profits that this sector brings into the society. However, when we 
zoom into the individual level of analysis and analyze the conditions of the average farmer in 
India, we find out that they are one of the most exploited and underrepresented communities 
in the country. This brings us to the social issue that this paper attempts to address: The rising 
phenomenon of farmer suicides in the country. 
 
Since the identification of this phenomenon in the 1990s, over 300,000 farmers have 
committed suicide in the country(Sainath, 2018). Even these estimates are much lesser than 
the actual amount as they only account for the data up to 2014. This is because the central 
government has refrained from collecting data on this issue since 2015, making it hard to find 
an exact quantification of the problem in its present form. 
 
By modeling the conditions of the average Indian farmer through a complex system lens, we 
can see how the system fails the interests of these farmers, forcing them to end their lives. 
  
We can break down the whole process that the farmer goes through in an intuitive way that 
accurately represents the situation that these farmers find themselves in. 
  
Procurement of Resources 
The green revolution of India was successful in eradicating India’s dependency on imports for 
food. The revolution was based on the foundation of providing High Yield Variety (HYV) seeds 
to these farmers and give them better access to fertilizers and pesticides through various 
government-funded subsidy program. The government set up various distribution centers 
throughout the agrarian rural areas that would help ease the process for the farmers to 
procure the necessary resources required for their farming activities. However, once the 
targeted aims of the green revolution had been achieved, the structure of these distribution 
centers started to decay.1 Beginning from the late 90s, the owners of these distribution centers 
became greedy and started selling the subsidized HYV seeds they obtained from the 
government at ‘black’ unregulated illegal markets. This drove up the prices for the farmers 
procure necessary supplies, nullifying the effect of the government subsidies (Anand, 2018). 
  
Farming 
Due to the rising pollution levels and the devastating impact of global warming, the farmers 
have had to face increased uncertainty with regards to natural phenomena such as rains and 
climate, as rains have become more irregular (a majority of the Indian farmers depend of 
monsoon for crop irrigation), there have been increased instances of drought, and the farmers 
have had to deal with an increased number of natural hazards, making it hard for them to 
produce a profitable quantity of quality produce. In fact, a recent study shows that a high 
percentage of farmers complained of repeated losses; 70 percent of respondents said their 
crops were destroyed because of unseasonal rains, drought, floods and pest attack (Sood, 
2018). 
 
Selling of Produce 
After navigating through all these obstacles, if the farmer is able to produce a good enough 
harvest, then the farmer is gifted for his efforts with even more corruption from the system, as 
these farmers are put at the mercy of middlemen traders, who dictate the price of the produce 
on their personal will. Added to this is the weak infrastructure that is unable to store and 
preserve this produce for a long period of time, making their produce susceptible to decay and 
damage, driving down the profits they earn from their produce (Mundle, 2017).  
 
 
At the end of the whole process, the farmer ends up with barely any money to ensure the 
survival of his family forcing him to take loans from any possible source, legal (such as 
co-operative banks or government loan programs) or illegal (unregistered local financial 
institutions giving out quick cash loans for abnormally high interest rates and absurd security 
deposits). Sometimes, these farmers even have to sell some piece of their land to be able to 
invest for their next season, 
 
Through the Figure 1, we can see how this whole process creates a feedback loop, pulling the 
farmers into a debt trap. 
 
 

1
#institutionaldecay: The institutions set up by the green revolution, which was initially a successful
mission in helping India become self sufficient in terms of food production, became subject to decay, and
here I have accurately identified the reasons that led to this decay.
  
 
Fig.1​ The Farmer Dept Trap  

As this debt keeps accumulating up, the farmers become more and more insecure about their 
future, forcing them to choose suicide as the only way out. 
 
 
Social Change 
The main objective of the movement would liberate the farmers from their present conditions 
and pull them out of this debt trap. By intervening into the feedback loop through efficient and 
sustainable policy measures and technological innovations, the system can be restructured to 
adhere to the interests of the farmers. 
 
The movement would aim to meet its objective by forcing the political parties to bring in 
reforms and innovations. These interventions would bring help to restructure the system in 
order to serve the farmers fairly. 
Thus, the movement would be divided into 3 phases, each targeting particular stages of the 
debt trap feedback loop in a sustainable manner using different theories of change to achieve 
its objectives of liberating the farmer from this trap. 
 
 
Phase 1: Social Mobilization 
This phase would focus on mobilizing people around the issue of farmer suicides by 
connecting them to the issue on a personal level so as to be able to influence their vote.  
 
The parties work around the scale and importance of this issue using different techniques for 
different audiences: 
Rural, Agrarian Audience​: The parties make them feel that the party identifies with their plight 
and will solve their issues using short-term solutions that seem attractive to this largely 
undereducated audience to win their votes. Political parties have been using the manifesto 
agenda of waiving off all the present debts of the farmers as a tool for influencing crowds and 
winning votes. For the farmers, this idea of waiving away debts seems to be an easy way out 
from their crisis, but little do they realize that such a measure does nothing to solve the stem 
of the crisis, and they would be pulled back into the same trap again within a short period of 
time. 2 
 
Urban Audience​: The urban audience is largely ignorant about this crisis as it does not directly 
impact them (since the price of the products for them remains the same, only the farmer gets 
lesser and lesser profits) which the political parties take advantage of by keeping them 
distracted and shifting their focus towards lesser important issues. 
 
Thus, the social mobilization for each audience would be achieved based on their respective 
characteristics and thus this phase would be divided into 2 parts: 
 
Phase 1.1: Social Mobilization (Rural) 
Rural, Agrarian Audience​: For the rural audience, the campaign would partner with the BKS: 
Bharatiya Kisan Sangh (All India Farmers Union), who are already aware of this false narrative 
that the parties propagate (Agha, 2018) and also have kisan sabhas (Farmer Town Halls) 
(​http://bharatiyakisansangh.org/Encyc/2016/1/12/2_07_47_37_akhil-bhartiya_pratinidhi_sabha
-suchi.pdf​) all over the country to hold sessions to educate the farmers about their crisis in 
detail so that they can figure out what solutions work best for them, and how to vote towards 
that solution . BKS can be incentivized to partner by offering to volunteer and use innovative 
tools to educate the farmers properly towards an outcome that are aligned with BKS’ interests 
as well. 
Phase 1.2: Social Mobilization (Urban) 
Urban Audience​: For the urban audience, due to their disconnect from the issue (Mundle, 2017) 
the campaign will have to use radicalism, by alluding to Alinsky’s Rule 9: ​"​The threat is usually 
more terrifying than the thing itself."​ ​The campaign could maximize the urban population’s 
interest in the issue by educating them about the radical stands that farmers could take to 

2
#constructivism: By decoding the rhetoric of the political parties, I have analyzed the constructivist ideas
that these parties are trying to propagate. But it is important to bring out that reforms that on the surface
attest to these constructivist ideas can also be used to make people believe that their ideals are being
held high, even though in reality, that is not the case.
make themselves heard3, which could have potential impacts on the pricing of produce for the 
urban population4. Such a radical step had been taken before when the prices of Onion went 
up the roof as the produce was hoarded by certain agents in protest (Magnier, 2010). 
 
 
Phase 2: Lobbying 
Once the campaign achieves a respectable following through the theories of change used 
above, the strength of this voting base can then be used to lobby for more detailed policy 
changes to be brought into the manifestos of the national parties in return for the campaign’s 
support for that party. The required policy changes would include: 
1. Legislation to create better infrastructure for farmers in remote areas to increase their 
access to irrigation facilities and storage facilities.  
2. Removing the trading middlemen and replacing the co-operative model, as adopted by 
the dairy industry of India (AMUL) to replicate the success that the dairy industry 
enjoyed (Pandathil, 2012). 
3. Giving farmers access to subsidized loans sponsored by the state to protect farmers 
from falling into the trap of debt. 
 
Phase 3 : Frontline Innovation 
Phase three, which would be running simultaneously with phases 1 and 2 would focus on using 
frontline innovation methods to streamline the process of distribution of farm inputs under 
the current subsidies at an operational level. This would primarily involve automation of the 
distribution process through seed and fertilizer vending machines, that use the pre-existing 
Aadhar Card as the authorization. Automating the process would make corruption impossible 
as machines are less likely to cause corruption issues. This model has already been tried and 
has shown results in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu. Also, the government can be incentivized 
to choose the automated machines as compared to the distribution centers by proving how the 
operational cost of the automated system in the long term is far lower than that of the 
distribution center.5 

Conclusion 
Thus, the proposed campaign for social change directly addresses the individual parts of the 
feedback loop which is the fundamental cause of the social issue of farmer suicides in India. 
Figure 2 illustrates how the different phases of the social movement aim for interventions that 
can have a sustainable impact on these issues. The primary of the whole campaign is to 
prevent farmer suicides, and that is the idea, which would be at the core of the entire mission. 

3
#rationalchoice: By bringing in stake for the uraban population into the matter, I have been able to
influence the rational choice that the urban actors might make in the interest of our social cause.
4
#radicalism: Herein, I have mentioned at what degree radicalism would be used as a strategic approach
to sensitize the urban population regarding thee farmer suicide crisis and have used an example from
history when such an approach had shown success.
5
#reformism: By accurately identifying the reasons for institutional decay, I have been able to identify the
kind of reform that would be able to fix the problem from its root (corruption) and have used a specific
type of reform from Cels’ Agents of Change to be able to provide a sustainable policy measure.
 

 
Fig2​: Strategy of intervention of the campaign 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Bibliography 
1. BBC. (2018, October 23). ​What was everyday life like in the Indus Valley?​ Retrieved from 
https://www.bbc.com/bitesize/articles/zghy34j 
2. Tripathi, A. and Prasad, A. (2009). ​Agricultural Development in India since Independence: 
A Study on Progress, Performance, and Determinants.​ [online] 
Digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu. Retrieved from: 
https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=jeke
m​. 
3. CIA. (2018). ​South Asia :: India — The World Factbook - Central Intelligence Agency.​  
Retrieved from 
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/in.html#field-anch
or-economy-agriculture-products 
4. National Sample Survey Office of India. (2014). R​ etrieved from 
http://planningcommission.nic.in/data/datatable/0306/table%20116.pdf 
5. Sainath, P. (2018). A Long March of the Dispossessed to Delhi. Retrieved from
https://thewire.in/agriculture/a-long-march-of-the-dispossessed-to-delhi
6. Anand, G. (2018). Green Revolution in India Wilts as Subsidies Backfire. Retrieved from
https://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic-policy/world-hunger/general-analysis-on-hunge
r/48763-green-revolution-in-india-wilts-as-subsidies-backfire.html
7. Sood, J. (2018, March 12). India's deepening farm crisis: 76% farmers want to give up
farming, shows study. Retrieved from
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/indias-deepening-farm-crisis-76-farmers-want-to-g
ive-up-farming-shows-study-43728
8. Mundle, S. (2017, July 20). Agrarian crisis: The challenge of a small farmer economy.
Retrieved from
https://www.livemint.com/Opinion/Y3Fp6CcumJhRIEwl2WeUMM/Agrarian-crisis-the-ch
allenge-of-a-small-farmer-economy.html
9. Agha, E. (2018, December 20). Loan Waivers Not Enough, Don't Treat Farmers Like
Minority Vote Bank: RSS-Backed Kisan Sangh. Retrieved from
https://www.news18.com/news/india/announcing-farm-loan-waivers-not-enough-cant-wo
rk-like-minority-appeasement-farmer-leader-1978829.html
10. Magnier, M. (2010, December 27). Indians in tears over skyrocketing onion prices.
Retrieved from
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/27/world/la-fg-1227-india-onions-20101227
11. Pandathil, R. (2012, December 10). Farmer empowerment: Is Amul model better than
retail FDI? Retrieved from
https://www.firstpost.com/election/farmer-empowerment-is-amul-model-better-than-retai
l-fdi-551382.html