Volatility

February 23, 2015

The Indian Cotton Farmer Suicide Epidemic

>

As an individual tragedy drinking pesticide is a horrible way to die.
.

Shankara, respected farmer, loving husband and father, had taken his own life. Less than 24 hours earlier, facing the loss of his land due to debt, he drank a cupful of chemical insecticide.

Unable to pay back the equivalent of two years’ earnings, he was in despair. He could see no way out.

There were still marks in the dust where he had writhed in agony. Other villagers looked on – they knew from experience that any intervention was pointless – as he lay doubled up on the ground, crying out in pain and vomiting.

Moaning, he crawled on to a bench outside his simple home 100 miles from Nagpur in central India. An hour later, he stopped making any noise. Then he stopped breathing. At 5pm on Sunday, the life of Shankara Mandaukar came to an end….

“Pesticides act on the nervous system – first they have convulsions, then the chemicals start eroding the stomach, and bleeding in the stomach begins, then there is aspiration pneumonia – they have difficulty in breathing – then they suffer from cardiac arrest.”

.
The tragic story can be heard in village after village like a folk song too harrowing to be sung. When we add the psychological agony which must go before the desperate decision to die this way, and the traditional shame it leaves behind for the victim’s family, we know we’re seeing an individual in absolute despair.
.
But when this individual is part of an epidemic of hundreds of thousands acting out this same despair over just a few short years, we know we’re no longer dealing just with individual tragedies, but with a malevolent social arrangement, a crime against humanity.
.
By the official record 296,438 Indian farmers, the vast majority of them small cotton farmers, have committed suicide from 1995 through 2013. But precisely because these suicides are the victims of an artificially developed and politically chosen policy, nowhere has Stalin’s dictum seemed more appropriate, that an individual death is a tragedy, while a million deaths is a statistic.
.
To analyze the fact of the worst by far suicide epidemic in history, we must place it in the empirical context from which the rational theory then can be developed. First let’s pin down the facts. In India suicides are recorded by the police, collated by state governments, and reported by the states to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), which publishes what the states report. This reporting system was inaugurated in 1995. Through 2013 there have been tallied officially 296,438 farmer suicides. The annual carnage has gone from 11,000 in 1995 to a range of 16,000 to over 17,000 from 2002 to 2011. The official numbers have declined somewhat in 2012 and 2013. This has corresponded to a growing trend among the states to mess with the numbers, redefining many farmers as not farmers and suicides as not suicides, or not “farmer” suicides. From any point of view the number of farmer suicides has always been under-reported, and this practice is escalating, as I’ll get to shortly.
.
By all measures the epidemic has been worst in the states of Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, and Karnataka, along with Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala. Suicide among farmers is far higher than the rate among the general population. At the same time economic pressures are driving vast numbers of farmers and their families off the land. The 2011 census recorded 15 million fewer farmers than in 1991. Averaged out, from 1991 to 2011, 2035 farmers were driven out every day. (From 1981 to 1991 the number of farmers was increasing.)
.
It’s important to stress that the rising suicide rate is concentrated among a shrinking group. The 2011 census found 95.8 million “main cultivators”, those for whom farming is their main work. This is 8% of the population. A cultivator may or may not own the land, so this figure includes tenant farmers and women farmers who are unable to own land. The census also lists 22.8 million marginal cultivators (farming is not their main occupation) and 144.4 million agricultural laborers. Distress, exodus, and suicide are common among these groups as well, for the same reason these are common among officially-defined cultivators.
.
The NCRB uses a different system which grossly under-reports farmer suicides. The police often refrain from listing a farmer suicide as a suicide since they know the state governments want to depress this number. (Also, families often fail to report deaths as suicides out of a sense of shame.) The real chicanery occurs at the state level. The states consistently exclude all suicides which are outside the main cultivator category. Then within this category they exclude anyone who doesn’t have clear title to the land. This excludes suicides among women farmers, tenant farmers, eldest sons who are working land officially owned by their fathers. The rural unemployed are also a separate category. But often this is just the suppression of farmer suicide numbers through the subterfuge of turning dispossessed and liquidated farmers into something other than farmers. But if such people commit suicide their loss of farming livelihood must play a major role, and they should be classed as farmer suicides. Maharashtra and other states have invented other bogus categories to further redefine farmer suicides.
.
The most audacious example of such fraud has been Chhattisgarh state declaring zero farmer suicides since 2011 after admitting to 7500 from 2006-2010, this number itself no doubt a significant underestimate. West Bengal also reported zero in 2012 and 2013. Investigative journalist P. Sainath calculates that if we extrapolate from the previous reported averages then these two states together would add 2518 more farmer suicides a year.
.
To sum up: The official NCRB farmer suicide tally from 1995 to 2013 is 296,438. Compared to nationwide general suicide figures, there is a high concentration of suicides among farmers. The NCRB demonstrates this. What the NCRB doesn’t show is that this high concentration is further highly concentrated among cash croppers, especially cotton growers but also coffee and some other non-food crops. Suicide rates are much lower among growers of wheat, rice, and maize. We can’t stress enough that the farmer suicide rate is not only extremely high in an absolute sense, but is intensively concentrated among a small group of farmers, the great majority of them small cotton farmers. Finally, the NCRB farmer suicide number is grossly under-reported because it excludes many categories of farmers who don’t technically own the land or who have been driven off their land.
.
The Monsanto obscurantists have made lame attempts to obfuscate the farmer suicide numbers by submerging them within the frequently bandied figure of 600 million Indians, 53% of the population, who are said to be dependent upon agriculture. The pro-GMO activists simply proclaim that this number is the number of farmers, and that therefore the farmer suicide numbers are actually low. But as we saw with the census figures there were 95.8 million main cultivators in 2011, 8% of the population, and if we include marginal cultivators and agricultural laborers (which groups don’t appear in the official farmer suicide numbers) we have 263 million, 22% of the population. The rest of the 600 million are in various support occupations or are dependents like children and the elderly. It’s clear how flimsy the Monsanto lie is. The hacks use similar statistical fraud to claim farmer suicides are decreasing. As we’ve seen, they’re abetted in this by Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, and some other state governments.
.
Let’s say the issue was the incidence of concussions among football players and future effects on the brain. If you took data on concussions among football players and submerged that in the figures for concussions among participants in all sports, you could then claim your results showed that concussions aren’t a big problem for athletes. But we’re not talking about concussions among athletes in general, we’re talking about concussions among football players. That’s the kind of trick the Monsanto publicists use. They submerge the (already under-reported) suicide data among farmers and submerge farmers among all “agriculture dependent” Indians. And the category “main cultivator” has already submerged small cotton farmers among all farmers. But we’re not talking about a suicide epidemic among agriculture dependent people, and we’re not even talking about an epidemic among farmers in general*. We’re talking about a mass suicide epidemic among small cotton farmers. The official 296,438 figure and the real figure, which must be much higher, are heavily concentrated among this relatively small group.
.
[*Increasing numbers of commodity farmers other than cotton farmers have been committing suicide as well, but the numbers continue to come overwhelmingly from the ranks of small cotton farmers.]
.
We have the irrefutable fact of the numbers. Among its small cotton farmers India is experiencing history’s worst suicide epidemic. What is causing it? To answer this we need to understand the history. Prior to the 1990s Indian cotton farming was based on low-priced desi open-pollinated varieties which were saved and replanted. (If Vandana Shiva’s figures for contrasting seed prices ever sound far-fetched, keep in mind that she’s comparing the original low-priced desi varieties to the most expensive Bt seeds, including the exorbitant tax Monsanto adds on top of the seed price.) Farmers freely exchanged seeds. The cotton was grown for local ginners. It was often intercropped with food crops like pigeon peas. Cotton farmers also grew food for their families and for local/regional sale. Rainfall provided sufficient water. Farmers generally did without pesticides or used a derivative of leaves from the local neem tree for pest control. They didn’t need synthetic fertilizer. In general input costs were low. If a farmer needed a loan, there was a strong institutional rural credit system which lent on reasonable terms. The government supported farming in other ways. Cotton hybridization and cash cropping for export were limited mostly to some coastal regions.
.
This all changed in the mid 1990s when the Indian government collaborated with the IMF in gutting its institutional farmer supports and exposing the agricultural economy to the full savagery of globalization. Cotton farming was radically transformed from an economically sustainable occupation enfolded within a polyculture of locally based food production, to a dangerously expensive and unstable form of cash cropping. Farmers across the cotton belt were overwhelmed with government propaganda urging them to take up cash cropping for commodity export based on hybrid monoculture. They were warned this was the only way they could survive. As I described in my Bt cotton fraud series (parts one, two, three), farmers who heeded this government panic-mongering and relinquished their community farming role to become cogs in the commodity machine found themselves caught on a treadmill of escalating seed, water, fertilizer, and pesticide costs.
.
They couldn’t save or exchange seed from hybrid plants. The 70% of cotton farmers who depend on rainfall quickly found that hybrids don’t work well without artificial irrigation. Costs surged while the government reneged on its supports. Institutional credit branches in rural areas were shut down, to be replaced by usurious moneylenders who are often the same who sell the seeds and pesticides. From 1993 through 2007 thousands of rural banks were shut down. Farmers entered a vicious circle of ever-mounting debt. Hybrid yields did improve significantly for several years, but this couldn’t make up for the crashing price as the US dumped its heavily subsidized cotton on the Indian market. US cotton actually cost less than Indian cotton and India, the world’s third largest producer, became a cotton importer. As Glenn Davis Stone documented, the whole process has been a combination of mechanical, brainless application of industrial inputs with an opaque and confusing seed selection process where farmers had no reliable information and could only choose to believe corporate advertising or else plant what their neighbors were planting. This added up to a general loss of farming skills, which could only intensify an already bewildering and demoralizing psychological experience. Driven to desperation by this impossible situation, small cotton farmers began killing themselves in large numbers as early as 1995, the first year the statistics were compiled.
.
The crisis was exacerbated by the advent of GMO Bt varieties. These were legally approved in 2002 though they’d been illicitly grown commercially since the late 1990s. These aggravate every pathology we surveyed in the previous paragraphs. The seed costs vastly more on account of Monsanto’s extortionate tax on every bag of seed. Bt cotton requires far more water and fertilizer than non-GM hybrids. The promised pesticide dividend depends on the generous and expensive application of irrigation and synthetic fertilizer. Often small farmers were never able to reduce their pesticide use. Where this dividend did manifest, it lasted only a few years until the target bollworms developed resistance and/or secondary pests surged in to fill the void. By now Bt cotton growers often spend more on pesticides than non-GM conventional growers. Meanwhile yields have declined.
.
Almost the entire yield increase of the commodity era came from improvements in non-GM hybrids along with expanded irrigation in some of the richer states. This yield surge had exhausted itself by the 2004-2005 season, at which point Bt cotton had been adopted on only 5.6% of cotton acreage. In subsequent years, as Bt adoption rose to over 90% of the cotton acreage, yield per hectare increased only a small amount, then stagnated and declined.
.
This poor performance by the high-priced, high-maintenance Bt technology has only added to the magnitude of the disaster which has befallen India’s small cotton farmers. Debt, soil destruction, and the top-down policy-driven eradication of less expensive, more sustainable seed alternatives destroyed any alternatives for farmers. Mahyco-Monsanto, often with government help, aggressively drove non-GM varieties out of the market as much as possible. Farmers are trapped. In many regions they simply lack the option of switching from Bt to non-GM hybrids. And although an increasing number of agronomists are advising farmers to go back to the original desi varieties, not only are these varieties also hard to find, but a farmer who is in a debt trap and has destroyed his soil with Bt cotton will find this switch hard to make. (This is a hard dilemma everywhere around the world including in America, even as growing numbers of farmers come to realize that growing food on a direct retail basis for the local/regional market can mean much greater margins and a much better quality of life.)
.
That’s the cause of the cotton farmer suicide epidemic. The farmers are trapped by escalating input costs, falling crop prices, and mounting debt with no way out. Vast numbers of them reach such a point of desperation that suicide seems to be their only option. Hybrid commodification created the crisis, Bt cotton aggravated it.
.
As Sainath put it, “promoting [Bt cotton] in a dry and unirrigated area like Vidarbha was murderous. It was stupid. It was killing.” We can say the same everywhere that Bt cotton has been marketed to farmers dependent on rain. This is 70% of Indian cotton farmers, the farmers which are killing themselves in such vast numbers.
.
The pro-GMO activists themselves implicitly admit all this is true. But they absurdly try to attribute the economic plight of small farmers and the suicide epidemic to “debt” as such, as if debt is some kind of natural affliction which strikes people at random. This is tautological, since farmer debt is practically synonymous with their economic crisis. More important, it pretends the farmer economic crisis has no cause and no history. The farmers were driven into debt by corporate commodity agriculture. The hacks try to suppress this history, but this is really just an attempted semantic misdirection which is substantively identical to saying: The cause of the farmer economic crisis and suicide epidemic is the commodity and poison treadmill, exacerbated by Bt cotton. This has driven Indian small cotton farmers into a terminal debt crisis. In other words, the hacks themselves implicitly confess that their GMO is a main driver of the crisis, and that the cotton farmer suicide epidemic is 100% the result of their commodification of Indian agriculture. But they claim that a shooting victim was killed by the bullet, not by the shooter.
.
A 2014 analysis of a 2012 study that appeared in The Lancet confirms the high concentration of suicides among small cash-crop farmers who are in debt. The Lancet piece establishes the fact of a massive suicide wave among farmers while avoiding drawing that conclusion. It doesn’t deny it but engages in statistical rigmarole similar to that of the deniers. The Globalization and Health analysis applies more rigorous concepts and techniques to draw a clear conclusion. Basically the Lancet piece is a connect-the-dots drawing with a clear outline, but the authors refrain from connecting these dots. They demonstrate that most suicides are rural, and the large majority of these from drinking pesticide, but dodge the conclusion that these disproportionately are cotton farmers and ex-farmers who have been destroyed by commodity agriculture, The G&H piece goes on to connect these dots.
.
Their basic finding is that suicide in India is strongly correlated with being a small farmer growing a cash crop who is in debt. Being a small farmer in itself is positively but not strongly associated with suicide, but the association surges and becomes statistically significant when either of the other two factors is added and is strongest where all three are present. Overall, the G&H analysis found that 74% of the variability in state-level suicide rates is accounted for by these three variables. As we saw above, the rates are under-represented because the Lancet piece relied upon the NCRB data with some minor modifications. That’s part of how that study dodged the finding, by muddling the “farmer” category and illegitimately lumping into tendentious non-farmer categories large numbers of people who are farmers or ex-farmers by any rational measure. But the G&H analysis corrects these errors/obfuscations and finds that the data support the many qualitative studies which find that commodity cotton system has caused a mass suicide epidemic among small cotton farmers.
.
In an equation, Rising Costs + Dumping + Debt = Mass Suicide. Or to put it another way, the politically chosen, willfully aggressive commodity agriculture onslaught = mass suicide.
.
The five main features of the small cotton farmer experience since the mid 1990s have been:
.
1. Increased production costs, which have surged especially since the advent of Bt cotton.
.
2. Yield was temporarily up with hybrid cultivation, but in the Bt years has stagnated and declined.
.
3. US dumping crashed the commodity price.
.
4. Under IMF guidance the government gutted the institutional credit system, which was replaced by loansharking and usury.
.
5. In the same way the government gutted public investment in agriculture.
.
These have combined to ensnare the small cotton farmer in an impossible trap.
.
So we have our thesis, which fits all the evidence and continues to be upheld by all the new evidence. The Indian cotton farmer suicide epidemic is part of the neoliberal “green revolution” commodification onslaught. Governments and corporations want to economically destroy small farmers and their communities, drive the people off the land and into shantytowns, really displaced persons camps, the economic version of internment camps, and replace them with vast industrial plantations controlled by the corporations.
.
As for the masses incarcerated in the slums, as far as the elites and their flacks are concerned they can rot, wither, die. So a mass suicide epidemic, while somewhat politically embarrassing for the elites, is still a good outcome. That’s why the governments and corporations push on with the commodity agriculture onslaught in spite of the roaring evidence, pausing only for ad hoc, meager farmer bailouts when the political pressure becomes too great. There’s no doubt about a policy that consistently drives 2300 farmers a day off the land, and drives 16-18,000 a year to suicide.
.
Millions have been forced to flee the land as economic refugees. Far over 300,000 have been in such despair that they’ve killed themselves. This has been, as the Sanhati Collective called it, “a policy-induced disaster of epic proportions”. Can policy relieve the awesome crisis? So far the only thing governments have done to counteract the disastrous effects of their own aggressive promotion and enshrinement of commodification and Bt cotton has been a series of ad hoc bailouts – Maharashtra state in 2006 and 2007, the central government and Maharashtra again in 2008, Maharashtra again in 2011 and 2012, and Karnataka state in 2014. There’s also been some isolated attempts to rein in the cartel’s worst “abuses”. Thus Andhra Pradesh banned three Mahyco varieties for bad performance in 2005, and Maharashtra in 2012 and Karnataka in 2014 hit Mahyco with further bans. In 2006 the Monopoly and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission ordered Mahyco-Monsanto to lower the price of a bag of seeds. (The seed peddlers have done all they can to flout this order.) The sum of all this has been perhaps to help level off the cotton farmer suicide rate, but has not lessened it. The lack of will for any kind of real structural reform is exemplified in the Lancet study’s “Interpretation” section, where the only recommendation they can think of is to restrict access to pesticides. It’s hard to believe they’re not joking. How do you sell as much pesticide as you can to farmers while simultaneously restricting their access to pesticides?
.
More fundamentally, this is a typical example of the quack notion of trying to suppress a symptom while seeing no evil, hearing no evil, speaking no evil, as to the cause.
.
The G&H paper, on the other hand, calls for the kinds of reforms that are obviously the bare minimum needed: Land reform, or failing this, government action to stabilize the price of cash crops and relieve indebted farmers. In other words, they call for a return to the classical era of public institutional support for agriculture and farmers. This is the exact program which is anathema to neoliberalism. Since the neoliberal Indian government will never do these things, to point out the need for them is tantamount to calling for the overthrow of neoliberalism, which is in fact what’s necessary. Nothing short of this will suffice for humanity, in agriculture or in any other sector.
.
History’s most horrific outbreak of mass suicide has been caused by the socioeconomic and agronomic pathologies of corporate agriculture. The commodification of cotton farming, and the government/corporate campaign to induce or force the mass of small cotton farmers onto the treadmill of pesticides, high input costs, desperate competition with dumped subsidized cotton, and debt, have comprised a systematic, intentional policy of destroying the small farmers of India as a class. Control of the land is being shifted to Western corporations while the revenues of globalization for “the country” have gone exclusively to urban elites. (Globalization always operates at a loss for the people of any country, including the US. But the income it generates is easily embezzled by elites for their own power and luxury.)
.
The situation has become so dire that even many in the government are blanching. As Vandana Shiva wrote of a 2012 parliamentary committee report:
.

I am not the only one connecting farmers’ suicides to debt and seed monopolies. The Agriculture Committee has made this point. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture…has also stressed the link between Bt. cotton and farmers’ distress. Unlike the researchers who work separated from reality, the Parliamentary Committee has worked over 4 years, interacting with every sector of society – government, industry, scientists and farmers. The All Party Committee visited the epicenter of suicides, Vidarbha in Maharashtra, to interact with farmers and understand the ground reality. This is what they concluded unanimously:

“8.124 During their extensive interactions with farmers in the course of their Study Visits, the Committee has found there have been no significant socio-economic benefits to the farmers because of introduction of Bt. cotton. On the contrary, being a capital intensive agriculture practice, investments of the farmers have increased manifolds thus, exposing them to far greater risks due to massive indebtedness, which a vast majority of them can ill afford. Resultantly, after the euphoria of a few initial years, Bt. cotton cultivation has only added to the miseries of the small and marginal farmers who constitute more than 70% of the tillers in India.”

.
Bt has indeed exacerbated the crisis. India’s small cotton farmers are victims of history’s most monumental criminal fraud. That’s why they’re in such a desperate state, and this is fueling the suicide epidemic. Bt isn’t causing suicide in a special way which isn’t ensconced within cotton commodification. But with its higher production costs and inferior performance it is an added suicide driver. The same will be true if herbicide tolerant (HT) cotton (Monsanto would love to introduce Roundup Ready Flex), maize, or rice is commercialized in India. As the Technical Expert Committee reporting to the supreme court emphasized, the commercialization of HT varieties would only add to the socioeconomic devastation. The TEC stressed how much agricultural laborers depend upon hand weeding for work. But one of the basic purposes of HT GMOs is to serve as a typical “labor-saving”, i.e. job destroying, technology. HT crops would certainly escalate and accelerate the already massive exodus from the land to the displaced persons camps, and would almost certainly escalate the suicide epidemic.
.
I’ll add that HT technology is the same fraud and destroyer for small farmers that Bt is. HT cultivation doesn’t reduce production costs per acre. Rather, it temporarily simplifies farming, renders it more “efficient” and saves some time, so the farmer can expand his acreage. In other words HT crops fuel the classical vicious circle of overproduction and declining crop prices. It’s self-evident that this can only mean disaster for the small farmer, who can’t afford to expand his acreage and will only be clobbered by the further drop in the harvest price. Just as with Bt, HT GMOs are a rich farmer’s technology. And just as with Bt, any HT crop deployment can be effective for only a few years before the weeds develop resistance to the herbicide. In the end even the better-off farmers would have to go back to hand weeding. Small farmers would never see the slightest benefit, only increased costs and an even worse-destroyed soil.
.
So much for the standard Tower of Babel “solution” invariably bruited in the corporate media. For this crisis, as for every other crisis facing humanity and the earth, there can be no solution within the neoliberal framework of corporate rule. Corporate rule must be overthrown and corporations abolished. My piece of this great fight is to fight as a GMO abolitionist, but we need the same abolitionist fighters in every sector.
.
In the agricultural and food sectors we do have one big advantage over the mode of struggle in many other sectors. Short of total abolition, there’s a wide range of action we can take right now to build the new within the old. In the final post of this India series I’ll discuss what’s being done in India on the agroecology and food sovereignty fronts.
.

>

Advertisements

10 Comments

  1. […] greatest suicide epidemic. . I’ll investigate India’s farmer suicide epidemic in a subsequent post. In this post I want to focus on the fact that Bt cotton is the most clear-cut example of how GMOs […]

    Pingback by The Bt Cotton Fraud | Volatility — February 23, 2015 @ 4:39 am

  2. Very interesting. But as I’m reading you, the problem is not just corporate elites, it’s the industrial revolution, and the ideology behind it…

    Comment by Debra — February 25, 2015 @ 4:50 pm

    • The basic religions of the industrial era – capitalism, “progress”, and scientism/technocracy – are general plagues destroying the soul of humanity. The corporation has become overwhelmingly the main form through which these religions are organized, mustered, and used toward age-old greed, power, and tyranny goals. That’s why in counterattacking these religions I focus on fighting to to abolish the corporation, just as I think to counterattack scientism and the “progress” Big Lie may be a way to attack corporatism at a weak point.

      Comment by Russ — February 26, 2015 @ 2:36 am

  3. […] basis and subsequent ever-heightened vulnerability to pests and disease and endemic crop weakness; the socioeconomic evils; and how industrial agriculture promises to bring the worst evils of famine and disease. GMOs do […]

    Pingback by Climate Change Requires Change of Consciousness | Volatility — July 27, 2015 @ 2:03 pm

  4. […] an impossible technology for small farmers, which for them can never be anything but an assault and an often deadly trap. . Whenever you see someone in America complaining about the northward migration of Mexicans, remind […]

    Pingback by Maize in the Labyrinth | Volatility — September 16, 2015 @ 9:41 am

  5. […] Small farmers, especially those dependent on rainfall in lower-precipitation regions like India, don’t have a chance. . Of course, GMOs are most of all a technology for the very rich, the corporations and big […]

    Pingback by GMOs Are For the Rich Only | Volatility — December 23, 2015 @ 4:56 am

  6. […] deployed. Of the Indian state’s, Karnataka has been one of the most grievously bereaved by the small cotton farmer suicide epidemic, and its government has been one of the most exasperated and active in trying to reform the […]

    Pingback by GMO News Summary, December 25th, 2015 | Volatility — December 25, 2015 @ 4:35 am

  7. […] of farmers and rendering farming the extremely precarious profession it has become in India. Well over 300,000 farmer suicides can attest to that. Destroying farmers and driving millions off the land was always one of the core […]

    Pingback by GMO News Summary January 15th, 2016 | Volatility — January 15, 2016 @ 9:42 am

  8. […] companies pay farmer compensation. Karnataka is one of the states most severely devastated by the suicide epidemic among Indian small cotton farmers. The state really ought to launch a transformation program away from commodity production and toward […]

    Pingback by GMO News Summary, January 29th, 2016 | Volatility — January 29, 2016 @ 9:06 am

  9. […] very poor performance of the crop farmers can no longer afford to plant it. This is driving the suicide epidemic among small cotton farmers in India. This price control policy, along with the latest of the many Karnataka bailouts, is just the latest […]

    Pingback by GMO News Summary, February 5th 2016 | Volatility — February 5, 2016 @ 5:18 am


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: