Green Revolution

The green revolution refers to a major transformation in agricultural practices in the developing world based on a specific technological and institutional package, including high-yielding variety seeds (HYV's), fertilizers, and irrigation. The package parallels industrial agricultural practices that developed in the United States after World War II. Western institutions began promoting the package aggressively in the mid-1960's as an answer to the developing world's accelerating population growth and mounting hunger problem. They also viewed the Green Revolution package as [Page 821]a means to foster capitalist economic development and to solidify their ties to developing countries in the context of the cold war. Although the package continues to spread today, the most transformative period was around 1966–1972.

Initially, the Green Revolution focused on just two crops: wheat and rice. The most important trait that was bred into an HYV was dwarfism. Dwarfs that are well fertilized and irrigated focus their energy on the growth of their seeds and produce strong stems to support the additional grain. The HYV's are only high yielding, however, if they receive the correct amount of fertilizers, irrigation, and weeding. The technology must be supported by four critical institutional resources: an irrigation infrastructure; a financial system to help farmers purchase the seeds, fertilizers, equipment, water, and labor inputs in advance; a transportation and marketing infrastructure to connect farmers with input sellers and grain buyers; and an educational system to teach farmers the management techniques.

In its early stages, the Green Revolution impacted only those parts of the developing world that cultivated wheat or rice, and that could marshal the four critical institutional resources. South and Southeast Asia experienced a significant impact, whereas only small parts of Latin America and the Middle East and very little of Africa adopted this early package. Later, HYV's were developed for additional crops and environmental conditions, increasing its geographic range. Impediments remain significant, however, in regions that have difficulty developing the institutional infrastructure, particularly in Africa.

In adopting countries, assessments of its impact are controversial. Those supportive of the Revolution emphasize how agricultural output has increased rapidly enough to keep up with population growth and keep food prices low, particularly for the urban poor. As well, many farmers increased their income, spurring rural economic development. The high-yielding technology also averted some deforestation, as less agriculture had to expand into forested land than might otherwise have occurred.

Those critical of the Revolution argue that it worsened socioeconomic differences within adopting countries, bringing prosperity to a few and hunger to many. Large farmers proved better able to access institutional resources and were more profitable than small farmers, forcing many small farmers to sell out. Those small farmers, who had previously produced much of their own food, were now dependent on wage labor, which proved to be unreliable and insufficient for many, spurring rural to urban migration. Many of those who managed to keep their land found themselves deep in debt as periodic crop failures left farmers unable to repay the cost of their inputs at the time of harvest. As well, the Green Revolution monocrops increased the need for pesticides, causing environmental contamination and health risks to farmers and consumers.

...