Regional Variations in Agricultural Development – Geography UGC NET – Notes

Introduction

• Regional differences in growth have followed unequal trajectories, widening gaps in economic and social opportunities and creating polarising and undesirable growth patterns.

• While some regions have achieved high living standards, backwardness remains concentrated in a few areas; southern states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu show indicators comparable to developed countries, whereas northern states such as Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Odisha and Madhya Pradesh resemble the poorest global regions.

• Regional inequality in India has increased over time, with already disadvantaged regions drifting further apart in terms of poverty, income, consumption and access to basic services.

• Governments have tried to reduce these gaps through public investment and policy interventions, but disparities persist.

• The study analyses regional differences in agricultural growth (1962–2008) using datasets by GS Bhalla and G Singh, grouping districts into agrarian regions to identify key drivers of regional differentiation.

• Revisiting regional inequality is highly relevant today due to state reorganisation and the growing role of regional parties in national politics.

• The paper examines historical roots of regional differences, contrasts agricultural growth experiences, studies selected regions in detail, and draws policy implications to address regional inequalities.

Regions in Indian History

• Regional identities in India were well formed even before colonialism, shaped by territorial boundaries, agro-ecological conditions, physiography, administrative control and long-term social processes.

• Each region developed a distinct social and economic structure, with unique class relations, caste composition, production techniques, labour circulation, commodity flows, state formations and cultural exchanges.

• Several regions had early commercial agriculture, cultivating crops like cotton, tobacco and sugarcane for higher market value, and systems of wage labour and even forms of slavery existed prior to British rule, showing sharp inter-regional differences.

• Colonialism selectively integrated regions into the global economy and restructured society through land tenure changes, private property rights, new technologies (railways), market expansion and public investment in irrigation, with uneven regional impacts.

• Public investment, especially in irrigation, was highly uneven, favouring regions like the canal colonies of Punjab over areas such as eastern Uttar Pradesh, reinforcing regional inequalities.

• Two parallel processes emerged under colonial rule: commercialisation of agriculture linking regions to global markets and strengthening regional identities, and national integration that tied regions into a common economic and political framework.

• Daniel Thorner’s regional classification around 1930 highlights agrarian regions defined by physical and economic factors, while emphasising that relationships among people, resources, markets and the state lie at the core of agrarian change.

• Comparing regions over time, using Thorner’s framework, helps trace the dynamics of regional transformation and understand how agrarian structures evolve differently across India.

• In the post-independence period, the developmental state pursued balanced regional development through public investment, land reforms and community development, aiming to homogenise regions and transform rural society.

• Expansion of the national market, rise of the national capitalist class, democratisation and social movements promoted inclusion and challenged old hierarchies, yet often produced uneven regional outcomes.

• Public investment frequently reinforced pre-existing regional inequalities, with tribal, hilly and rain-fed regions receiving less irrigation and infrastructure, leading to persistent pockets of backwardness.

• Democratisation also encouraged identity politics, consolidating regions around caste and community, creating region-specific patterns of inclusion and exclusion.

• Regional identities have survived homogenisation and at times reasserted strongly through demands for nationhood or statehood, while uneven rural transformation reflects differing initial conditions, resources and power relations.

• Effective policy requires recognition of regional typologies, as one-size-fits-all approaches fail; regions shape policies just as policies shape regions, forcing continual policy re-imagination.

• Analysis of 613 districts shows that highly irrigated districts have higher productivity, urbanisation, non-farm employment, diversified cropping, higher female literacy and lower SC/ST population share, while poorly irrigated districts show the opposite pattern.

• SC/ST concentration is closely linked with lower urbanisation, irrigation, productivity, diversification and female literacy, reinforcing regional disadvantages.

• Spatially, more diversified and urbanised districts cluster in the northwest, south and west, whereas less developed, rain-fed and tribal districts are concentrated in the central, eastern and north-eastern regions.