Did India become a famine-prone country under colonial rule?

Do you agree with the

view that by the early twentieth century relief policies to combat famines became successful?

Answer - Famine Policy in Colonial India vs. Post-Independence: A Shifting Landscape

The question of whether India became more prone to famines under British rule and the
effectiveness of early 20th-century relief policies is a complex one, with arguments on both
sides. This analysis will delve into the evolution of famine policy in India, comparing pre-20th
century, early 20th century, and post-independence approaches, while incorporating insights
from various authors.

Pre-20th Century Famine Policy: A Laissez-Faire Approach with Limited Intervention

● Early East India Company (EIC) Response (Ravi Ahuja): The EIC, despite
subscribing to a laissez-faire economic ideology, intervened during famines to secure
labor for their commercial endeavors and maintain social order. Their methods included
direct food distribution, grain market regulation, and price controls. However, these
interventions were often limited and inconsistent.
● Shifting Policies and Shortcomings (Ira Klein): The early 19th century saw a minimal
intervention approach, leaving people to fend for themselves during famines. This
policy's harshness is evident in the horrific Bengal Famine of 1770. By the mid-19th
century, a shift towards some government intervention occurred, focusing on public work
schemes in exchange for food. However, these programs neglected the most vulnerable,
as argued by Klein.
● Limited Modernization and Persisting Problems (Late 19th Century) (Ira Klein):
While advancements like railways improved food distribution to some extent, famines
remained deadly due to limited government spending on relief efforts, influenced by
Malthusian theories that viewed famines as a natural population control mechanism.

The Famine Codes and The Influence of European Ideas

● Contrasting Approaches: Bihar (1874) vs. Bombay (1876-78) (David

Hall-Matthews): The Famine Codes, a product of European economic philosophies and
a desire to minimize financial burden, offered a framework for famine relief. However,
their implementation varied significantly. Sir Richard Temple's proactive approach in
Bihar, involving grain imports, village inspections, and ensuring food availability, stands
in stark contrast to the harsher policies of the Bombay Famine.
● Justifications for the Stricter Approach: A Mix of Concerns (David Hall): The
stricter Bombay policies stemmed from anxieties about fiscal strain, Malthusian
population pressures, and a tendency to blame famine victims for their circumstances.
Sir Richard Temple's shifting stance, advocating for a more proactive approach in Bihar
but later defending the harsher Bombay policies, suggests the influence of factors
beyond personal beliefs, possibly political pressures.
The Legacy: Limited Intervention Despite Evidence of Success (Hall-Matthews): The
Bombay Famine's experience, with its emphasis on limited intervention, left a lasting impact,
overshadowing the success of the Bihar approach. This potentially contributed to higher
mortality rates in subsequent famines. Hall-Matthews criticizes misconceptions about
dependency on relief, the focus on free trade that ignored market complexities, and the
oversimplification of the Famine Codes.

Harsh Mander acknowledges improvements in relief policies during the later half of the
19th century, with the Famine Codes establishing a framework for public works
programs. However, he criticizes their inadequacy and the neglect of those unable to
perform manual labor.

Early 20th Century: A Period of Transition

● Failures of Relief Efforts (Early 20th Century) (Ira Klein): By the early 20th century,
relief policies were still unsuccessful according to Klein. Restricted relief due to factors
like caste and physical condition, along with prioritizing infrastructure projects over
saving lives, and misinterpretations of affordability limited the effectiveness of these
policies.
● Exacerbating Factors (Salim Rashid): Colonial policies may have even worsened
famines by disregarding traditional coping mechanisms and focusing on free trade,
potentially leading to food exports even during scarcity within India.

A Glimpse of Change: While the early 20th century doesn't mark a definitive success story,
there were signs of a shift. The Bengal Famine of 1800, highlighted by Rashid, serves as an
example of a successful government intervention during a scarcity.

Post-Independence Famine Policy: Lessons Learned?

● Jean Dreze argues that famines remained a challenge throughout the colonial
period despite the Famine Codes. He criticizes their limitations: delays in recognizing
famines, cost-cutting measures leading to nutritional deficiencies, and an unwavering
commitment to free market principles even during critical food shortages. The Bengal
Famine of 1943 stands as a stark example of these limitations.

Case studies of famine relief:

● 1966-67 Bihar Drought (continued): The government's response was sluggish, with
long-term health consequences despite large-scale food grain imports and relief
measures. This case, highlighted by Dreze, suggests that even post-independence,
challenges remained in ensuring comprehensive relief.
● 1972-73 Maharashtra Drought: This case showcases a well-designed relief program
that effectively mitigated the crisis. The program combined public distribution systems
with private trade movements, ensuring food availability and preventing market failures.
Employment generation schemes with open-ended work and cash wages offered
targeted assistance, reaching the most vulnerable and stimulating the local economy.
 This success story, according to Dreze, demonstrates the importance of political will,
effective targeting, and well-designed public works programs.

Comparative Analysis: Pre-20th Century vs. Early 20th Century vs. Post-Independence

Pre-20th Century:

● Limited government intervention: The EIC's initial approach was inconsistent and
focused on maintaining social order and securing labor. Laissez-faire principles
dominated, with limited relief efforts.
● Focus on public works programs: By the mid-19th century, public works programs
became the primary relief strategy, but they neglected the most vulnerable populations.
● Malthusian influence: Limited government spending stemmed partly from Malthusian
ideas about population control.

Early 20th Century:

● Gradual shift towards more intervention: The early 20th century witnessed a gradual
shift towards more direct relief and targeting of vulnerable populations.
● Lingering limitations: Restricted relief, prioritizing infrastructure projects, and an
unwavering commitment to free-market principles hampered relief efforts.
● Early signs of change: The Bengal Famine of 1800 serves as an example of a
successful intervention.

Post-Independence:

● Increased government intervention: The government took a more proactive role in

food security and famine relief.
● Improved targeting: Relief programs aimed to reach the most vulnerable more
effectively.
● Challenges remain: The 1966-67 Bihar drought highlights the need for continued
improvement in response speed and comprehensiveness.
● Success stories: The 1972-73 Maharashtra drought demonstrates the effectiveness of
well-designed programs with a combination of food distribution, employment generation,
and cash wages.

Did India Become More Famine-Prone Under British

Rule?
The Bengal Famine of 1943-44 remains a stark reminder of the complexities surrounding
famines in colonial India. Here's a deeper exploration of the arguments and key historians
involved, along with the question of India's famine vulnerability under British rule.

Arguments Against British Famine Relief Policies:

 ● Amartya Sen (Entitlement Approach): Sen's groundbreaking work challenged the
prevailing "Food Availability Decline (FAD)" theory. He introduced the concept of
"entitlement failures," where famines arise not just from a lack of food, but from people's
inability to access it, even if it exists. In the Bengal Famine, agricultural laborers lost their
ability to purchase rice despite some remaining stock, highlighting the limitations of FAD.
● Madhusree Mukerjee: Mukerjee delves into the wartime context, exposing how British
policies prioritizing stockpiling for the war effort and the Denial Policy (restricting rice
movement within Bengal) significantly worsened the famine. These policies disrupted
markets and exacerbated shortages, leaving the Bengali population vulnerable.
● Paul R. Greenough: Greenough argues that British policies and wartime disruptions
created "involuntary unemployment," further diminishing people's ability to purchase
food. Marginalized populations, already struggling, were pushed deeper into poverty and
starvation.
● Felix Padel: Padel takes a critical stance, accusing the British government of
deliberately ignoring pleas for aid from Bengal. He argues that wartime needs took
precedence over the starving population, a decision with devastating consequences.

Arguments for Improved British Famine Relief:

● Michelle B. McAlpin: McAlpin offers a contrasting perspective. She acknowledges that

British policies like improved transportation networks and commercialization of
agriculture might have unintentionally reduced the frequency and severity of famines in
some areas. However, she highlights the uneven distribution of these benefits.While
wealthier farmers may have gained from better markets, landless peasants and poor
agricultural workers often became more vulnerable due to increased competition and
rising inequality. Additionally, market forces tend to favor areas with high purchasing
power, leaving famine-stricken regions further deprived.

Limitations of the Entitlement Approach:

● Mark Tauger: While Sen's framework offers valuable insights, Tauger argues that it
downplays the role of environmental factors. He proposes the "Environment-Production
Entitlement (EPE)" concept to acknowledge how natural disasters like the devastating
crop failure in 1942 caused by brown spot disease can disrupt food production and
contribute to famines.
● Omkar Goswami: Goswami critiques the official data on crop yields, suggesting it
underestimated the decline caused by cyclones, floods, and plant disease. He argues
that this decline, coupled with economic factors like stagnant real wages and rising food
prices, likely played a significant role in the famine alongside the issues raised by Sen.

Famine-Prone Under British Rule?

The answer is not a simple yes or no. Famines existed in India before British rule. However,
colonial policies and wartime disruptions likely increased India's vulnerability to famines in
several ways:
 ● Resource Extraction: The British prioritized extracting resources from India to fuel their
own economy,potentially neglecting investments in agricultural development and
infrastructure projects like irrigation canals.This left Bengal more susceptible to
fluctuations in crop yields.
● Land Tenure System: The exploitative land tenure system under British rule
concentrated landownership in the hands of a few zamindars (landlords), leaving the
vast majority of peasants landless or with very small holdings.This limited their ability to
produce food for their own consumption and made them more dependent on
often-volatile markets.
● Monoculture Cash Crops: The British often pressured farmers to cultivate cash crops
like indigo and jute, even if it meant neglecting food production for their own
consumption. This increased vulnerability to famines, as a poor harvest of cash crops
wouldn't necessarily translate into food security.
● Inflexible Administration: The British administration's slow and inflexible response to
the Bengal Famine is well-documented. Early warnings of a poor harvest were
downplayed, and the government clung to outdated theories like FAD while the situation
deteriorated.

Early 20th Century Relief Policies - Successful?

British famine relief efforts in the early 20th century showed some signs of progress, such as
improved early warning systems and infrastructure development projects. However, the Bengal
Famine exposed the limitations of these efforts.The focus on wartime needs, the lack of
attention to "entitlement failures," and an inflexible administration ultimately resulted in a
devastating humanitarian crisis.

In conclusion, the Bengal Famine serves as a case study of how a confluence of factors –
wartime disruptions,inappropriate colonial policies, pre-existing social inequalities,
environmental factors, and a breakdown in exchange entitlements – can create a catastrophic
famine.While British famine relief may have seen some improvements in the early 20th century,
the Bengal Famine exposed their limitations. The tragedy serves as a stark reminder of the
importance of addressing not just food shortages, but also the underlying factors that can leave
people vulnerable to starvation. It underscores the need for robust social safety nets,investment
in rural development and infrastructure, and a focus on building resilience in the face of potential
shocks.

Do I Agree with the View that By the Early Twentieth Century Relief Policies Became
Successful?

Based on the analysis, relief policies by the early 20th century were not definitively
successful. While there were signs of a shift towards more intervention and targeting,
limitations remained:
 ● Restricted relief: Many in need were still excluded due to factors like caste or physical
condition.
● Prioritization of development: Infrastructure projects sometimes took precedence over
saving lives.
● Misinterpretation of affordability: Relief efforts were limited due to a narrow view of
what the country could bear.
● Exacerbating factors: Colonial policies like disregarding traditional coping mechanisms
and focusing on free trade might have worsened famines.

However, there were glimpses of progress:

● The Bengal Famine of 1800 (Rashid): This example demonstrates a successful

government intervention during a scarcity.
● Gradual shift towards more intervention: The early 20th century saw a move towards
more direct relief and targeting of vulnerable populations.

Conclusion

Famine policy in India underwent significant evolution throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
The early colonial period was characterized by a limited intervention approach, often influenced
by laissez-faire economics and Malthusian ideas. The late 19th century saw the introduction of
the Famine Codes, but their implementation was often hampered by cost-cutting measures and
an unwavering commitment to free-market principles. By the early 20th century, there were
signs of a gradual shift towards more intervention and targeting of vulnerable populations.
However, significant limitations remained.

Post-independence India witnessed a shift towards a more proactive role for the government in
ensuring food security and providing famine relief. While challenges persist, success stories like
the 1972-73 Maharashtra drought demonstrate the effectiveness of well-designed programs that
combine food distribution, employment generation, and cash wages.