Co-operative Farming in Uttar Pradesh

Agarwal

This is a report on the. working of three different types of co-operative farms in Uttar Pradesh
based on a first-hand study which throws interesting light on the questionCan co-operative farming
solve the problem of the small peasants, each cultivating his tiny and fragmented plot?
Dr Agrawal finds that co-operative farming can succeed with landless labourers, if proper management and supervision is available, and also with, prosperous farmers with plenty of land, but it has little
attraction for farmers with land above the economic holding unless there are exceptional advantages to be
derived from pooling.Ed.
R I O U S L Y enough, though
C U the
volume of opinion in

favour of co-operative tanning as the

best solution to the problem of cultivation of small uneconomic and scat
tered holdings has been growing
there are very few objective studies
on the subject. The material for
such a study may not be adequate
yet but there are some 83 co-operative hunting societies in UP and an
examination of sonic of them selected
by types may go part of the way in
fulfilling this need. It: is with this
end in view that the study, the
results of which are presented below,
was undertaken. Only those co-operative farms were selected which were
working relatively well. They are of
three different types: (1) Co-operative farms with a heterogenous membership consisting of large and small
owner-farmers, non-cultivating lando w n e r s and landless labourers;
(2) with a homogenous membership consisting exclusively of land
less labourers; and (3) a co-operative
farm run by well-to-do Sikh farmers
from Punjab and Pepsu mostly related to one another who had migrated
to UP.
In the first type are two of the
oldest co-operative farms in UP in
the villages of Dharauna and Nain
wara in the district of Jhansi which
were registered in 1948. The conditions under which these were started
were by no means propitious for cooperative farming. The farmers of
this locality are even more illiterate,
individualistic and conservative than
farmers in general in UP. They
joined together for co-operative farming not from an understanding and
appreciation of the principles of cooperation but as a result of official
initiative and persuasion. Neither is
the soil and climatic conditions of
the farms favourable for improved
techniques of agriculture, nor was
any special advantage to be derived
from pooling their resources as the
majority of the members had holding
larger than the minimum necessary
for full utilisation of the smallest
indivisible unit of agricultural equipment,.viz,
a
pair
of
bullocks

plough.
The second owes its Origin to the
co-operative spirit, of the organiser, ;an
ex civil servant, who resigned a lucrative job in order to devote himself
to co-operative farming, collected a
a number of landless labourers for the
purpose, took some cultivable waste
land on lease, started farming and
has made a fine job of it. The third
is a 1200-acre farm in two large
blocks, is fully mechanised but not
run on paid labour as the members
do all the work on the farm and
(outside labour is engaged only at the
time of harvest.
The following is a detailed analysis of the working of all three:

Case Study I
M i x e d Membership
As already mentioned, the farms
have not got: very good soil. The
rami all is uneven and irrigation facilities n i l The soil is not unfertile,
hut it gets very sticks and unworkable because of bad drainage during
rains. The rains are most undepend
able, usually heavy and concentrated
in one or two months resulting in
sod erosion and damage to crops.
In some years, the early cessation of
rams adversely affects the preparation
of land for rabi sowings and reduces
the area sown under rabi, while the
kharif crops often fail owing to execs
sive rains. If winter rains fail or arc
delayed, which is not uncommon, the
rabi crop also fails or its yield is
meagre. There is on top of all these,
the ever present menace of ' Kans',
an obnoxious weed. Dry fanning
conditions and the prohibitive cost
of wells, the only possible source of
irrigation, l i m i t seriously the scope
for intensive cultivation on these cooperative farms. 'Therefore even if
capital and technical guidance were
available, these farms would not be
in a position to benefit from them.
The majority of the members'
'holdings being above the minimum
necessary for the proper utilization
of a pair of draught cattle and a
plough, there was only a limited
scope for economy in bullocks when
1223

the bind was pooled. The members

have mostly pooled such land in the
co-operative farm as they were notable to cultivate themselves for various reasons, eg, heavy ' Kans' infestation, lack of labour and capital
and inability to supervise the farming operations personally. Under the.
State scheme of ' Kans" reclamation,
the land of a number of members,
which bad been lying uncultivated,
was reclaimed. But many of them
lacked the necessary resources for the
cultivation of this additional land.
The crop had failed successively in
two preceding years when the cooperative farms were started. This
had affected the economic position,
of the farmers very adversely and
was also one of the reasons for their
joining the co-operative farm.
The land alone, however, has been
pooled, the members maintain the
bullocks and implements individually
.and charge the co-operative farms for
their services. The farmers who
hold larger area of land in the cooperative farm want that the dividend on land should be paid at the
highest rate and the small-holders
and the landless members, whose
contribution of labour to the farm
work is more than that of largeholders, want a high rate of bonus
on the wages.
To compare the efficiency of "cooperative farms with that of the
individual farmers, a study of farming costs and earnings was also made
in a nearby village with similar soil,,
climatic and agricultural conditions
on twelve randomly selected holdings, three from each of the four
size-groups of holdings, viz, 0-5 acres,
5-10 acres and 5-20 acres.
ADVANTAGES

Before the introduction of cooperative farming, the area commanded per pan of bullocks was 8.9 acres.
It has increased to 10.1 acres now.
This has been achieved at the cost of
certain tillage operations which are
no longer regularly carried out on
the co-operative farms, and have been
supplemented to some extent by
occasional mechanical harrowings.

November 5, 1953
The smallholders, however, have
more work for their bullocks now
than before and bat for the co-operative farm, many of them would
have preferred to keep their bullocks
idle lather than work on hire for
others.
Many of the members and their
families who work on hire on the
co-operative farms would not have
accepted wage labourer for others as
it would have lowered their social
prestige to do so. Then contribution of labour to farm work which,
in the absence of cooperative farm
ing, would have gone waste, is,
indeed, a significant gam, particularly
in this region where labour is scarce.
A further, advantage is the better
facility for getting credit, apart from
considerable saving in the interest.
charges on loans secured from the
co-operative bank instead of the
moneylender. Without the credit
that was made available at the time
of starting the co-operative farms
and is assured to them in yens of
bad harvest, it is doubtful whether
the hind now under cultivation
could have been cultivated at all.
Among the crops produced on
these farms, jowar alone has to be
marketed in appreciable quantities.
Because of: bulk sales, it has been
possible to get the advantage of the
mandi rates on the farm, thereby
saving the transport charges up to
the mandi. The tanners are also
saved
from
underweighment, un
authorised deductions, etc.
The
Darauna and Nainwara farms were
able to sell then jowar to the Government and get the benefit of a
premium of 12 per cent over the
market rates. The members also
receive appreciable quantities of the
produce as payment against- their
wages and often in advance also.
This means substantial saving to
them as they avoid marketing charges and unfavourable market rates on
both occasions, ie, on their sates after
harvest, and on their purchases of
foodgrains during off-seasons.
The operating cost is lower being
Rs 48.6 per acre as against an average of Rs 57.9, per acre on individual holdings. The lower cost is
not due to better management but
has mainly been achieved by a reduction in the number of agricultural
operations. The usual practice of
bakharing ( ploughing) the fields
during summer is not billowed.
Jowar is given one hoeing only instead of the usual three. The savings in interest charges also contribute to economy in operating costs.
For soil and moisture conservation, bandhis are very useful in
this area but for economy and efficiency-, they have to be constructed

over an area comprising the fields of

several farmers. It is often difficult
to secure the consent of individual
fanners to the construction of
bandhis, but antler co-operative
farming, where the land is pooled,
there is no question of individual
consent. This makes the task much
easier. Still it has not progressed
any further after the construction of
the first two buudhis on the farms,
one at Darauna and one at Nain
wara, in 1948. Even these are notbeing maintained properly because
of the indifference of the members.
The economic position of members is better t h a t that of the nonmember farmers, especially in agriculturally bad years, The members
get paid for their labour and for the
bullocks, whether the crops on the
co-operative farm are successful or
not, They also get credit for their
personal needs from the cooperative
society. Others have to pay not
only high interest charges on loans
from money-lenders, they cannot get
loans in adequate amounts, and are
often unable, because of lack of
capital, to cultivate then land properly in the season immediately following a bad year.
THE

DRAWBACKS

In both these cooperative farms,

the efficiency of management is
prcity low. The daily output of
the member-worker and his pair of
bullocks compares very unfavourably
with that of hired labour, eg, the
area ploughed by a member with
his pair of bullocks is about onefourth of an acre as against one third
acre usually ploughed by hired labour.
The members do not treat the work
on the co operative farm as their
own. Their tendency is to complete
their work first on their individually
cultivated fields and then to start
the work on the co-operative farm.
At. the same time, they grumble if
outside labour is engaged for getting,
the farm operations completed in
time. Even in daily work, the
general tendency is to start laic, to
work less, to clamour for wages at
higher rates than those prevalent in
the locality and to claim equal payments for good as well as inferior
bullocks and for the children as for
grown up workers.
The existence of a general body,
an executive and even the working
parties is in ore a matter of theoretical interest than of any practical
use in regard to general supervision
and day to-day management. None
of them, nor any individual member
wants to incur the displeasure of the
fellow-members by attempting to
curb their unco-operative spirit and
actions. This attitude has encour1224

aged the tendency among the

bers to avoid work when in the
beginning, was confined to a few
individuals only, but is now spreading and has caused frustration among
the more responsible members. In
the circumstances, effective control
and supervision over the day-to-day
work is difficult. Less of factions
and greater personal interest taken
by some of the members is perhaps
responsible, among other factors, for
a better standard of management at
Nainwara as compared to Darauna.
As compared
with individual
holdings, the cooperative farms do
not show any demonstrable increase
in yield per acre; on the contrary,
their yields are lower. The probable causes arc;
(i) As the farms do not have
their own bullocks and are situated
in a labour scarcity area, and as the
members come to work on
the
farms after completing the agricultural operations on their individual
holdings, agricultural operations are
often delayed.
(ii) Due to lack of cooperative
spirit, the various operations are not
carried out as thoroughly and carefully as on the individual holdings.
(iii) The unfavourable agricultural
conditions of the area exclude all
possibilities of improved and intensive cultivation, partly because they
have not yet been fully investigated,
and no improved variety of crop or
unproved practice suitable for this
area has been found yet. And it is
in more intensive methods that co
operative farming has an advantage
over individual farming.
The gross income per acre in
1951-52 on the farms at Darauna
and Nathwara was Rs 45.2 and
Rs 52.0 respectively as against the
estimated gross income of Rs 57.9
per acre on individual holdings.
The net earnings per acre after deducting expenses was Rs 14.1
on
the Darauna and Rs 31.1 on the
Nainwara farm as against Rs 33.3
per acre earned by other cultivators
in the area. The net earnings of
the co-operative farms include the
amount paid to members.
The practice of subletting pooled
land on batai to members has been
adopted on the Darauna farm and it
is being extended to other co-operative farming societies also. In 195253 at the Darauna farm, of the total
area of 256 acres, 37.25 acres under
kharif and 76.14 acres under rabi
were cultivated by the members as
share-croppers on behalf of the farm.
Tins is nothing but a reversion to
individual
cultivation.
Notwithstanding wide differences in the
social, economic, educational and
organisational progress, exactly the