3.B. Requirements of Different Land Tenure Categories

The last chapter showed that the current main activities of IRDP do not correspond to the situation and requirements of most of the land tenure categories, and that the vested interests of some groups prevent others from participating in the services offered by the scheme. This chapter attempts to outline the requirements of different land tenure categories for their betterment. This analysis is not meant to be complete, but rather to give an indication of the variety of requirements and the multitude of approaches which are necessary - if IRDP is supposed to become what its name suggests: a programme for the benefit of the whole rural population.

Landlords usually have the necessary information and contacts for the implementation of modern agriculture. Their most serious problem is the timely supply of inputs, a problem beyond the possibilities of IHDP and calling for the expansion of input-production. In principle, they do not need cooperatives to arrange for their supplies, credit and marketing, and they usually make little use -of these institutions (unless inputs are channelled through them). The private sector (banks, merchants, etc.) is able to satisfy their needs. Even for their technical information, they hardly depend on the extension worker and the level of field staff is too low to give the type of information required. Technical assistance of the type required by landlords, i.e. farm management, change of f-v- organization, etc. is too difficult to be rendered by the extension staff. By ara large, landlords can handle their affairs with the private sector and do not need •the special attention of IRDP.

Family owner-operators (and most tenants of better standing) need a solution to the physical supply problem as well as an institution which would combine the more limited 'quantities of inputs and marketed produce of individuals in order to bring the economies of scale to them. Because of their non-profit character, well-managed cooperatives are best suited for this purpose. It is in these categories that cooperatives can work moat effectively. They cater not only for input and marketing, but also for credit requirements. Here, the combination of these activities provides for proper use of inputs as well as for repayment of credit. For this group, credit should be combined with farm management advice to ensure the most productive and economic use of resources. This will require an individual farm approach by high calibre extension staff. Cooperative activities should go further than already mentioned and include cooperation to increase production by organizing activities which are beyond the possibilities of the individual farmer. Change of land tillage technology is often a prerequisite for the intensification of cropping but in many cases this exceeds the means of the individual. The construction of tubewells and plant protection are other examples which require joint action.

Marginal owner-cultivators are in an economically weak position and, therefore, definitely require the services of a non-profit institution like a cooperative. The type 01' services they need, however, is quite different. Supply plays a less important role, and marketing is not their problem. They need assistance to increase their income by opening possibilities to apply more labour to the little land they have. This could include promotion of vegetable cultivation or animal husbandry by opening the market for these products, providing special technical advice and supplying special inputs. The shortage of milk, ghee and meat seems to offer possibilities for small peasants. By keeping goats, sheep and buffaloes, they could increase their income considerably, not lastly by investing their family labour in collecting fodder at roadsides, near canals, etc. The prerequisite - besides opening the marketing channels - is a specially desired credit scheme corresponding to their limited possibilities. In view of the limited repayment capacity, credit to purchase an animal might be repaid later in the form of a youngstock, etc.

Organization of land tillage is another urgent requirement. Tractor stations which in time will serve not only the big farmer but the small holder as well, could free numerous areas in which fodder for bullocks is now being cultivated or allow a shift from bullocks to buffaloes. For this group of rather poor people, any credit programme has to incorporate a component for consumptive purposes so as not to drive the small holder into the hands of moneylenders. As not all will be able and willing to engage in the intensified type of agriculture, provision of non-agricultural employment plays an important role in the needs of this category. This may take the form of permanent jobs in rural industries, etc. so that with the change of generation, some will shift to non-agricultural activities and perhaps rent out their land or take the form of public works programmes. Integration of the People's Works Programme into the IRDP activities is the prerequisite for a meaningful participation of poor people.

Tenants-at-will are probably the category whose needs are most difficult to satisfy, as their basic requirements are of a completely different character to those of other groups. A change of their tenure situation should be given top priority if their level of life is to be improved. As, in their work, they are more or less dependent on the landlords, the services offered are not likely to influence them much because they are not free to use them. In theory, landlord and tenant pool their resources for their joint benefit, the landlord offering land, capital, know-how, and the tenant labour and perhaps a little capital as well. In practice, it is often different: the decisive factor is only the landlord's interest, and this is not always to increase production. Usually, he takes little interest and the tenant does mn benefit from the landlord's better knowledge and information. The tendency is for the active "positive" landlord to change to self-cultivation, while those less interested continue with share-cropping without partaking economies of scale and the benefit of their better management abilities to the tenants. Tenants, especially in remote areas, see hardly any alternative to their meagre level of life and stay on the land without hope that their lot will change. They were born in dependency and remain in this status, and lucky indeed is he who has got a "good" landlord.

The necessary change in the tenure situation, in principle, can be brought about in different ways. Details are beyond the scope of this paper. In centres of the green revolution, there is already a tendency for abolishing the share-cropping system, and former share croppers sometimes have a better life as wage labourers. Even if the transfer might cause frictions, (in the long run ) this change will improve their prospects. Another alternative might be to ensure greater independence and security of the tenants. Share-cropping is not basically wrong, only the excesses of the completely biased landlord-tenant relationship prove to be so. One of the prerequisites of a successful share-cropping system is that the landlord fulfils his obligations. Among other things, he has to organize farm management. If he shows no interest or is not able to undertake this task, one might discuss vesting it into other hands. Still another possibility to change the tenure system is a transfer from share rent to fixed rent, a process which in recent years has already been going on in certain areas with remarkable success. Whatever the solution -possibly a variety of approaches - growing unrest among tenants indicates that it is high time to change this tenure system.

In time landless labourers will benefit from development in the farming sector. Already a certain number could improve their situation by becoming specialists in operating machinery, etc. This process will become more popular and will be promoted by training labourers and preparing them for the skill requirements of advanced agricultural technology. For instance, upgrading courses for village carpenters and blacksmiths could do a lot to increase their chances and promote agricultural development as well. Credit programmes will be required for setting up workshops for these people. Other needs to improve living conditions are more non-agricultural employment opportunities and, last but not least, training to prepare them for migration to centres of development. Especially the dry regions of the country might offer little hope for an accelerated development so that people have to migrate. The frictions are likely to be less important if these migrants have training and skills in a certain craft to offer to their prospective employers.

This short outline indicates that requirements of various tenure categories differ greatly. A whole set of new activities have to be added to the current IKDP scheme if this programme really is to work for the benefit of the total population.