E-Kantipur

International (read, American) agricultural development projects began in the early 1950s in Nepal and many other parts of Asia. In the early days, these projects aimed to improve the overall living conditions in predominantly farming, rural areas. Introduction of modern agricultural technologies, health and sanitation services, and literacy and formal education, among others, constituted the main focus of these projects. These projects were implemented in the context of larger geopolitics of the Cold War. The then Soviet Union had made remarkable strides in industrialisation. The tide had already turned in China. The colonies were rebelling for independence and self-rule. Most often than not, the bikas projects were part of a larger project of checking the rising tides of radical nationalism and communism.

Behind these bikas projects was a very straightforward idea. The competition between the communist world and the non-communist one was between different ways of improving societies.  Therefore, if the non-communist (read American) ways of improving societies could deliver better results, there would be less threat of communist expansion into the rural hinterlands of Asia. These days, there is a new name for all this: “winning the hearts and minds.”

During the last six decades this geopolitical landscape has changed beyond recognition. The Soviet Union-led communist block has disappeared. It is hard to figure out what is happening in the hermetically sealed North

Korea, but China has changed beyond recognition. Many who were born after 1990 in Nepal may not even know that we had bikas-dictatorship in place for thirty years. 

Despite these changes, some parables of that bygone era seem to have a remarkable capacity to stay with us, almost intact. Among these is what Nick Cullather calls in his book, The Hungry World: America’s Cold War Battle Against Poverty in Asia, a “parable of seeds.” The parable runs like this: the focus on the overall transformation of rural life through community development projects did not deliver the desired results in the 50s. The most important failure was in the area of food production. By then, demographers had already gathered several rounds of data from across the world .In the early 60s, the growing population posed a serious challenge for ensuring adequate food. In the laboratory and experimental stations, many scientists were labouring hard to produce seeds that could deliver more food. Many considered it a race against time. But, thank god, these scientists were able to deliver these seeds just in time. In Mexico, they got the dwarf wheat. In the Philippines, they got dwarf rice.  With these seeds in hand, the world’s policy makers, agricultural scientists and development donors produced what is now popularly known as the green revolution. The story of agricultural development ever since is the story of these miracle seeds.

Serious studies from around the world have shown that the results of this green revolution were, at best, mixed. In the Philippines, for instance, even before the results of the tests in the International Rice Research Institute’s farm were out, the then president Marcos began promoting the new “miracle rice” seed as a sure panacea for the food deficit in the country.

In his above-mentioned book, Nick Cullather writes, using a vast body of intelligence and other sources, that the actual evidence pointed out that there was almost no change in the total rice production in the country. The gap between production and consumption for the rice was about 10 percent, Cullather writes citing several reports. That was roughly the case before the miracle rice was introduced. “Marcos administration, which first claimed national self-sufficiency in 1968, maintained the illusion well into the 1970s through the simple device of exporting small quantities amind great fanfare while secretely importing tons of rice from Hong Kong and faking the figures,” Cullather further writes.

During the last two months we have seen this parable at play in blogsphere, print media, radio and even Nepal’s television. The United States Agency for International Development made public its project of piloting Monsanto’s hybrid maize seeds. These seeds

were supposed to be producing more—if properly managed. The same

seed parable was at work. Claims

and counterclaims are being made about the seed’s ability to produce for the growing population.

Following widespread media attention and virtual and grounded campaign against USAID’s proposed project, US ambassador DeLisi has uploaded his new facebook post, “Setting the record straight on hybrid seeds.” In it, among many other things, he wrote, “the critical discussion is not about the role of a single company but about the future of agricultural development in Nepal.”

The seed parables have dominated the agricultural discussions for far too long. By focusing on particular seeds as panacea for our ills, we have overlooked many other important things about agriculture. It is time to shift our focus away from ‘a single company’ as DeLisi says or from any particular kind of seeds. We definitely need to focus on broad agricultural vision. In that sense, his invitation for dialogue is welcome

By emphasising the need to focus on broader goals, he perhaps did not find it fit to address some of the serious questions raised about the proposed Monsanto seed project. However, even if we begin reflecting on broader issues, we still need to know more details of this particular Monsanto project because it is part of a broader agricultural vision—of a different kind.

Bhattarai is writing his doctoral dissertation on ecological agricultural practices in Nepal

anilbhattarai@gmail.com

Post Your Comment

Please note that all the fields marked * are mandatory.
* Full Name
* Address
* Email Address
* Comment
* Captcha	Get another CAPTCHA code
Note:	Comments containing abusive words or slander shall not be published.