Indian Economy

Q. Discuss the link between land reform and socioeconomic justice in the context of india. Explain why india has been slowest (1.25%) in land reform( through ceiling and redistribution) whereas as china ( 40%) , South Korea and Japan ( 33%) have been much better in this regard.  7 marks

 

4 thoughts on “Indian Economy”

  1. If one looks at justice in its distributive form, then there is a direct relationship between land reform and socioeconomic justice.
    In India most of the farmers were landless at the time of independence and were victims of atrocities conducted by landlords and Middlemen. Land reform was thus important to redistribute lands among the masses and liberate them from the dominance of landlords. Moreover land reforms could facilitate better livelihood to the masses. All this contribute to establishment of socioeconomic justice in a society.
    A recent study conducted by Punjab government found that between 2010 and 2016, the no.of people commiting sucide due to loan burden were more landless than peasants who possessed lands. This emphasizes the importance of land reforms in maintaining economic well-being of the rural people thus adding to socioeconomic justice.
    India has been slowest in land reform while China, south Korea, Japan have been fast at it. There can be numerous reasons for it. Primary of it however are as follows.
    1. Following BOP crisi India had to undergo economic reforms and accept LPG. This gave less incentive for state controlled act especially in accordance with WTO/IMF guidelines.
    2. Much proportion of the distributed lands to the masses were of poor quality and uncultivable.
    3. Pro liberalization period saw reluctant attitude of the government towards labd reforms. Proponent of capitalism did not consider land reforms as economically sound decision. Meanwhile, Strong lobby emerged in indian society who strongly criticized land ceilings and land redistribution.
    4. In comparison to India all the above mentioned countries adopted favourable attitude towards land reform. They could see a strong relationship between land reform and social welfare and GDP growth.
    This is not true only for Communist china but also for capitalist Japan and South Korea.
    Moreover, in india there were some economist groups who found it less productive decision as they argued that distributing lands to those who could not make maximum use of it was not so wise decision. In short, India lacked huge support for the land reforms, which is one of the prerequisite of any reform to get success.

    1. You are having sufficient information and facts to deliver a balance answer. But, the first part of the question needs further clarifications, given the fact that landlessness is one of the core cause of rural poverty…..
      Second part is somewhat up to the mark,but some crucial facts like failure of state governments to implement land reforms in their states…Are missing.
      You can do better.

  2. Land reform led to series of reforms like abolition of Zamindari system, Land ceilings and tenancy reforms. All these lead to elimination of forced labor, reduced income inequality, reduced rents. Land owners could no longer evict the farms by their whims and fancies, provided land to landless labors. Thus it changed the rural power structure, upper class dominance decreased and there was empowerment of schedule castes, tribes and other backward classes. It also helped in increasing the production and in abolishing intermediaries. Hence, we can say there is direct relationship between land reform and socio-economic development.

    India has slowest land reform among various nations and it could be understood by the distribution of powers between central and state government.
    Land is a state subject under constitution and various states have evolved differently in the field of land management. Union government can play only limited role in this regard. At most they can frame policies but implementation rests in the hands of state governments. Consequently there is considerable variations in the results achieved by various states. Due to difference in political will of central governement and state govt. coupled with outdated land records, lack of budgetary support, bureaucratic apathy, lack of civil society/NGO action led poor implementation of land reforms.
    Success of land reforms in countries like China, Japan, South Korea can be traced to their political structure of their governments, where decision and implementation are more or less centralized.

    1. A balanced and well thought answer. Up to the mark. Some more facts might be added,but for examination point of view a good answer.
      Keep it up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.