Document(s) 8 de 38

Abstract: This paper discusses the major issues concerning on-farm genetic diversity in Kerala. The farms of this wet-tropical region had traditionally sustained a high degree of biodiversity. Many exotic species were also introduced here and later on, emerged as major economic assets. However, in Kerala, the efforts of genetic upgradation in paddy have failed to increase yield rates significantly. The challenges in this state are two-fold: conserving the large number of locally-adapted varieties of paddy; and improving the biodiversity of the homestead. The spread of rubber plantations, replacing both homesteads and paddy fields, is posing a serious threat to on-farm diversity. If valuation measures take account of short-term and long-term benefits and consider the need-satisfying ability of the non-monetizable entities, land with high degree of diversity is shown to be economically comparable to that in mono-culture plantations.

Introduction

This short paper is organized around the following sections:

• The characteristics of the traditional agricultural system that existed in humid-tropic Kerala;
• The successful and not-so-successful efforts to introduce exotic species and genetic material into the farm-land of this region;
• The implications of the reduction of on-farm biodiversity in Kerala;
• The approach of different groups of farmers towards biodiversity;
• The mechanisms which are appropriate to the socio-economic conditions of Kerala and which can conserve and improve on-farm genetic diversity.

This paper draws information on various sources as follows:

1. Details of the traditional agricultural system have been compiled from the natural history studies conducted during the last century (Mateer, 1883; Logan, 1906; Nagam,1906) and from the oral history of the inhabitants of a few villages of mid-land Kerala;

2. The description of the contemporary status of on-farm genetic diversity is based on a field project (in which the author was the co-principal investigator) which aimed to study and develop packages for the integrated management of land, water and biomass resources of a few representative micro-watersheds of Kerala (James et.al., 1992).

3. Analysis of the impact of the technological packages used for the management and development of natural resources in Kerala is based on the dissertation and on-going research work of the author.

4. Description of the problems and the potentials of eleven farmers living in different agro-climatic zones of Kerala emerges from a field study by the author (Santhakumar, 1995).

5. The "active background" of this paper draws on the experience of the author as a resident and a farmer of mid-land Kerala.

As this is a brief paper, citation of statistics and references are generally avoided. For greater detail on any aspect, please contact the author.

Traditional agricultural in wet-tropical Kerala

Human subsistence patterns in Kerala were shaped primarily by its physical, climatic and ecological characteristics. The greatest natural endowment of this humid-tropic region was the existence of a high degree of biodiversity. The agricultural settlements of Kerala, which evolved nearly two thousand years ago, have depended on this biodiversity as their prime resource. People in this area traditionally used their own "homesteads" [a small garden surrounding the house] for a variety of needs such as food, energy, shelter, medicines, etc....¹ Unlike other parts of tropical India, inhabitants of the agricultural land of Kerala have not depended on forests or community-owned lands for their biomass requirements (with the latter, community-owned lands, generally absent).

A relatively small piece of land² could provide a variety of commodities for human sustenance due to the high degree of biodiversity of the region. A typical farmer had three pieces of land. The first one, a small piece of water-logged valley situated at the lowest level of one of the several micro-watersheds, was used for paddy cultivation. The second was the homestead (situated in the dryland adjacent to the paddy field) which sustained a mixed plant/tree system. The third, situated generally on the hill slope near the top of the micro-watershed, also had a mixed-tree land-cover with the characteristics of a rural forest. These three components were inter-related in terms of the resource flow and in regard to human patterns of use. The bottom of the valley provided a part of the staple food (paddy) and the straw (as a feed of cattle and in some areas, also as a roofing material). The homestead provided the other part of the staple food (tubers, jackfruit, etc.), non-staple food, timber and other materials for house construction, organic manure, medicinal materials, etc.... The upland patch was used basically for grazing and for collecting organic manure. Organic manure was the important input for paddy cultivation at the valley bottom.

Table 1 lists a few of the most common homestead plants and trees and their uses:

Table 2 lists the various energy requirements of the family and the homestead energy sources. While such sources provided energy in many traditional societies, the interesting aspect of agricultural Kerala was that such an impressive amount of energy was derived from such small land areas (i.e., less than a hectare in size)---due to the high degree of biodiversity.³

Successful and not-so-successful adoptions of foreign species and genetic material in the farmlands of Kerala

Kerala has a very long history of trade in agricultural commodities. This exchange started much before the arrival of the Europeans in India, with commodities like pepper reaching distant markets even during the beginning of this millennium. These commodities also played an important role in the early trade with the European merchants.

However, it was the European traders who started introducing exotic species to Kerala. The Portuguese introduced the cashew, which later on led to the emergence of a large number of processing and exporting units of cashew nuts in Kerala. This small-scale industry supported considerable sections of population and earned significant amounts of foreign exchange. During the nineteenth century, the British introduced Tapioca , which emerged as a major semi-staple food and became the prime source of carbohydrate for poor people, whenever this rice-importing state faced shortages of food grains. British planters also introduced rubber, which became the most important cash crop of the state. Since many Indian states do not have the climatic features suitable for rubber cultivation, the natural rubber produced in Kerala has a large domestic market. This situation, coupled with the restrictions on the import of natural rubber (and the production fluctuations in other rubber producing countries of South Asia) has resulted in high profits for the rubber producers Rubber cultivation has thus emerged in Kerala as the most important economic activity. While Europeans also introduced other plants and trees such as glyricidia and breadfruit, (the former used in thirties and forties as a major source of organic manure), their impact was not as great as that of the three other crop introductions.

The post-independent governments also tried to introduce exotic plants and genetic materials into Kerala. These include the genetic upgradation of traditional crops like paddy and coconut and the upgradation of local livestock and the introduction of exotic plants such as cocoa and acacia. The net effect of these introductions is briefly discussed below.

Genetic upgradation in rice

The import of new varieties or genetic material of rice to Kerala started only during the 1950s. Previously, scientific efforts focused on making pure-line seeds of the locally-used varieties. During the 1940s, there were also some efforts to cultivate non-native varieties of paddy in Kerala. Varieties from other states of India and from countries like China were tried in different areas of Kerala. However, none of these varieties emerged as superior to the locally-adapted ones. As in the case of other Indian states, the cross-breeding between the indica and the japonica varieties did not meet with success in this state. However, intensified efforts of cross-breeding took place during the Green Revolution, when the mixing was done between the semi-dwarf varieties of Thailand and the local indica types.

A number of studies on Kerala's agriculture have observed that "the state has not come under the influence of any Green Revolution" (Pillai, 1982; Kannan and Pushpangandan, 1991; Nambiar, 1983). This is shown by the stagnation in total production and the yields (per hectare) of the major food crop, rice, during the last three decades. While the yield of paddy increased by 55% during the period 1955-1971, the increase between 1972 and 1986 was only 18%. It was the latter period that covered the phase of Green Revolution, marked by considerable increases in the productivity of food crops in many regions of India.

Why did the Green Revolution not occur in Kerala? Agricultural studies of the last decade give some indications of the climatological factors that influence the performance of the Green Revolution package in humid-tropical regions. Environmental factors such as the seasonal availability of sunlight are now considered as limiting factors on the effectiveness of the Green Revolution package (Gangadharan, 1985; Panikkar, 1973). The wide variations in the success rate of this technology between temperate and tropical countries, between dry tropical and humid-tropical areas and between irrigated and monsoon-fed areas have been interpreted in terms of the influence of the environmental factors.

Based on a long-term analysis of the experimental results of the agricultural research stations, Santhakumar and Rajagopalan (1995), showed that the performance of the Green Revolution package was not impressive even in the research stations of Kerala. This analysis found that the highest yields achieved in majority of Kerala stations are significantly lower than those recorded in the semi-arid areas situated within and outside Kerala. In all these locations, cultivation is done mainly during monsoon months. Thus, the locations where summer cultivation is not possible have yield values consistently lower than those obtained at the locations sustaining summer cultivation. Summer cultivation is possible in Kerala only in a few places. The regions which cover 65% of the gross area of paddy continue to be monsoon-dependent. The shortage of sunlight is an important limiting factor in these areas. Even in those areas where high yields of 4.5 to 5 tons per hectare are achieved, the local varieties also perform at this high rate. In sum, the net effect of the genetic upgradation even in such places is found to be marginal.

The increase in yields of paddy achieved by the high-yielding varieties (HYVs) in Kerala is found to be less than 40%. This increase achieved by the HYVs in Kerala was not sufficient to overcome the relative advantages of the traditional varieties, such as the higher amount of rice straw.

The study also analyzed the effect of chemical fertilizers. In the case of nitrogen (N), the percentage increase in yields due to its application varied from 23 to 41%. The maximum yields were obtained when the quantity of N was around 60 kg per hectare. Increasing the quantity of N beyond that level did not result in yield increases in humid-tropical Kerala, while the corresponding figure for other parts of India was 150 to 200 kg per hectare. While the real potential of HYV may lie in the increased consumption of N and the corresponding increase in yield, the central factor that limits the productivity of HYV in Kerala is this lack of positive response to higher doses of N.

The study concluded that the so called HYVs could increase the productivity of paddy in Kerala only marginally due to environmental factors. The effect of high-yielding varieties and chemical fertilizers was not significant compared to that of the previously used inputs such as pure-line or traditional varieties and organic manure. Since their effect was not significant, the transition to the Green Revolution paradigm by the farmers critically depended on factors such as cost of cultivation. Based on farmers' data, one study observed that the cultivation using the new package increased the cost by 30%, while the output increased only by 40%.

Thus, the genetic upgradation in rice through the cross-breeding with exotic varieties was a not-so-successful attempt in Kerala.

Coconut cultivation

There have been efforts to breed high-yielding varieties of coconut (especially through crossing tall indigenous with dwarf exotic varieties). However, the spread of such varieties has been limited as farmers do not note much difference between HYVs and local varieties, when the two are grown under farmer management and in farmers' fields. The major constraint concerns lack of water for irrigation during the summer. Scientists have recommended use of large quantities of water during this period as it has been clearly demonstrated that sufficiently irrigated coconut trees yield significantly higher than non-irrigated ones. A number of farmers practice irrigation for coconut. However, several problems arise due to this practice. First, once started, irrigation has to be continued at sufficient doses across years as reduced watering in any one year will affect the tree and the yield significantly. This is basically because of the reduction in the drought-surviving ability of the tree. Secondly, since coconut is grown in dry-land and because its cultivation has extended to even drier lands, such as hill slopes during last few decades, providing irrigation is not an easy task. Sufficient water is not available in nearby dryland areas as the only source is the open well used for collecting drinking water. Moreover, the seepage into the dry soil (not clay, but sandy and gravelly ones) is very high. Only a few farmers, who own sources such as ponds, are able to irrigate coconut during summer. These farmers also find it difficult to irrigate at the doses recommended by the scientists. Some others who initially tried to irrigate coconut, have abandoned the practice. Farmers also believe that local varieties yield for a longer period of time and have higher timber value. This consideration, coupled with the insignificant yield difference between non-irrigated local and hybrid varieties, has led farmers to continue with the traditional varieties.

We have seen two cases where the genetic upgradation failed even on a short-term basis. Let us take a look at a successful case (on a short-term basis) in Kerala. This known as the "White Revolution."

Genetic upgradation of local cattle

Milk production in Kerala is one sector where governmental policies succeeded in attaining the target. The White Revolution program, started in the 1970s, aimed at the genetic improvement of traditional cattle through cross-breeding. The intensive efforts of cross-breeding drastically changed the genetic composition, sex ratio and the milk production capability of Kerala during the last two decades. Traditional cattle have almost disappeared from Kerala. Maintaining male cattle has also almost stopped as breeding is done through artificial insemination centers and the use of bullock power has been greatly reduced.

The success of the White Revolution is based on several factors and one outcome of this process has been the complete separation of animal husbandry from farmland. Animals are maintained in stalls with factory-made feed and fodder imported from other states. Such livestock raising could utilize a part of the underemployed labor available in Kerala. Changes in consumption patterns have ensured sufficient demand for the milk produced.

However, this occupation faces certain long-term challenges. The first is the increase in the cost of milk production. Efforts to increase feed production within farms have not been very successful. Dependence on market for inputs and the continuous reduction in the comparative advantage of labor power (through the increase in wage rates in comparable occupations) will continue to reduce the profitability of animal husbandry.

Unless a part of the feed material is generated on-farm in a non-competing manner (that is, use of waste materials and byproducts will not necessitate the use of land which can be used for producing commodities for human consumption), farmers will not be able to gain profits from the "advantages" of cross-breeding. Thus, the basic direction of sustainable animal husbandry in Kerala may lie in the reintegration of cattle into the agricultural system and not in the continuous upgradation of the genetic structure.

Implications of the reduction of biodiversity in homesteads

The biodiversity of Kerala homesteads has declined drastically during the last four to five decades. The majority of the homesteads have been converted into small-scale coconut plantations or have moved toward cropping systems with but a few crops. The naturally-grown trees have almost disappeared. Anjili, a variety of the Autocarpus species which, with the jackfruit tree, supplied the bulk of timber for house construction, has disappeared from farmlands because farmers just haven't replanted it. The number of jackfruit trees has also declined considerably because of the low-market price for many indigenous varieties of jackfruits.⁴ Thus, people now depend on the marketed timber, which is taken mostly from the forest areas. This has resulted in excessive pressure on forest timber, increased price, and the increased cost of house construction. The non-use of farm-made construction materials (partly due to the non-availability and partly due to the changed concepts of house) created a situation whereby house construction has become the biggest burden even of middle-class rural families.

Laurel that provided the non-edible oil, which was the main source of lighting fuel, has completely disappeared from agricultural lands. The practice of manufacturing, selling and using laurel oil has also stopped due to the availability of subsidized kerosene and electricity. Till recently, no effort was made to improve the usage of laurel oil as a lighting fuel. The fact that the region faces severe shortage of electricity, that the quality of supply is quite poor, and that the prospects of increasing supply at a reasonable cost are not that bright, have compelled a few people relook at non-edible oils as a possible source of energy.

Though coconut still provides the bulk of the cooking fuel for homesteads, the total biomass available for that purpose has come down. Even medium-size households depend on other fuels, partly due to the scarcity of the biomass and partly due to the availability of "clean" petroleum-based fuels at subsidized prices. During the last few years, there has been an increased effort to popularize "high-efficient chulas" (stoves). However, they are not used widely among the middle-class due to the easy availability of petroleum-based fuels.

The major limitation of the contemporary homestead concerns the availability of organic manure. Certain plants and trees, which were grown solely for collecting organic manure, have not been integrated into commercialized plots. Presently, cultivation is almost fully based on chemical fertilizers and/or commercially-purchased organic manure. The shift to external inputs has not been problem-free and has created a peculiar crisis in Kerala. The failure of the Green Revolution in Kerala at one level and the proven superiority of organic manures at the other level have led to the following situation. Changeover to fertilizers (NPK) has not increased the yield and organic manure is indispensable. This means that farmers are forced either to ignore requirements for organic manure or to purchase it at a high price from the market. (The price of the organic manure has increased faster than that of chemical fertilizer).

Thus, the most important activity needed in Kerala is to conserve the biodiversity of the homesteads. The mixed system provides the much-needed organic manure for further cultivation, apart from providing a variety of commodities. Moreover such systems do not upset the farmer's financial position when the price of any single commodity declines.

Relying on biodiversity may not increase the short-term economic benefits generated from agriculture. However, biodiversity will improve the stability of the system, improve the quality and diversity of commodities available for home consumption, improve the ability of the farmer to make his own dwelling unit, and reduce fluctuations in cash income. It is because of this that, even in the this context of generally declining biodiversity, farmers remain interested in preserving it. Within the constraints of distorted market, lack of information, habit change, lack of awareness and lack of concern for long-term impacts, farmers still use diverse plant and genetic material for their survival and their economic improvement.

Any attempt to increase on-farm genetic diversity should be based on an analysis of the survival strategies of the farmers. For example, in Kerala, one can define three groups of farmers based on their response to diversity. They are as follows:

• Marginal farmers generally depend on whatever resources (including the plant and genetic resources) they have or have access to for their survival. There is not much intentional choice on their part. For example, even in an area where most of the cattle are the cross-bred ones, certain families depend on local cattle. These local cattle fit in well with farmer resources. They are maintained by female and old-age labor, consume only the wastes generated within the farm-family, graze in public spaces and yield milk (for both home consumption and local selling), cowdung (for subsequent cultivation) and draft power. Farmers continue with the local cattle because they do well under a regime that farmers can maintain--not because cross-breeds are unavailable. This group of farmers depends on a particular "plant-mix" or "gene-set" as a survival strategy. For others, who depend on hired labor for maintenance, whose land does not generate substantial amount of cattle-feed, and who depend crucially on the cash income generated through selling milk, maintaining cross-bred cattle is the viable option.
• The middle class farmers of Kerala, who cultivate a major part of their land with a monoculture cash-crop (mostly hybrid rubber), keep a small piece of land for growing a number of plants and trees in a mixed system. One may not see explicit economic rationality in this practice. However, farmers feel strongly that at least a certain part of the commodities for home consumption (like coconut, banana, tubers, vegetables, and fruits) should be grown within the family farm. Moreover, people generally prefer to build their house within such a "mixed homestead" rather than within a rubber plantation. These "non-monetizable aspirations" encourage these farmers to maintain the mixed system.

  Farmers who go for the most improved varieties of rubber in their cash crop cultivation are found to be rather reluctant to use cross-bred or hybrid varieties of paddy. As said earlier, this reluctance to use HYV paddy is mainly due to their awareness on the insignificant increase in yields achieved by these new varieties. Moreover, Kerala farmers prefer red-kernel varieties and those with a higher amount of straw. This differential attitude towards genetic material shows that farmers use both economic and non-economic criteria when judging new plants and varieties and that the overall availability (through an elaborate distribution infrastructure) and the popularization mechanisms do not necessarily lead to changes in diversity on-farm.

• The third group of farmers, who own relatively larger farms, make direct choices in terms of genetic diversity. The majority of these farmers have plantations of mono-crops. However, they also maintain mixed crop-systems in other pieces of land, a practice which is economically as profitable as, if not more than, mono-crop cultivation. Cultivation of a number crops, for example, coconut, pepper, cocoa, tubers, pineapple, clove, banana, arecanut, nutmeg, etc., is common in such farms. These farmers also cultivate timber crops such as teak and manchium, with long-term economic objectives in mind. The current economic interest in timber trees, reflected in the booming of "plantation share business," also motivates these farmers to grow trees as a money-making proposition.

This third group also includes experimental farmers, who look at farming as a more meaningful occupation. A number of them are interested in what is known as "sustainable agriculture" and are trying to recycle the wastes generated within the farm, to reduce the use of external (chemical) inputs and, consciously, to increase on-farm biodiversity. The number of such farmers is significant in Kerala because of the states' high literacy rate, wide circulation of newspapers and heightened awareness of environmental and ecological issues---as well as because of the presence of a large number of small farmers deriving significant amounts of cash through the cultivation of crops like rubber.

Appropriate strategies for improving on-farm genetic diversity in Kerala

Since the genetic upgradation of varieties like paddy has not led to a significant yield increases in Kerala, there is not much conflict between conserving the genetic resources of paddy and the economical needs of the farmer. For example, most of the paddy farmers that I encountered use the seeds that are available on their own farm. These seeds are neither truly local ones nor pure HYVs. The non-use of the traditional variety is solely due to its non-availability. Thus, if these varieties can be made available to the farmers, the conservation of the germplasm of paddy at the farm level is not an impossible task in Kerala. Almost all the farmers showed a preference for traditional varieties. (This might a reflection of the non-commercial cultivation of paddy in many areas of Kerala.)

One reason cited for the insignificant impact of HYVs in Kerala is the absence of breeding for different micro-agroclimatic zones of the state. There are ten different zones situated within this small state. Traditional varieties suited to each zone were available earlier. The research establishments function in such a way that they could not adequately consider the distinct characteristics of each zone in their breeding programs. An appropriate breeding strategy for Kerala would both be tuned to the variety of requirements of these different agro-climatic zones and not be oriented only to supplying genetic material from the national and the international breeding programs. Though scientists of the Kerala Agricultural University have been trying to develop a climatic-zone-based breeding strategy, their organizational and disciplinary frameworks, as well as the absence of farmers' participation, make these efforts quite inadequate. Close collaboration between the scientists and the farmers of each zone and increased prominence to farmers' trials (that is, trials within the resource constraints of the farm-family) might be helpful in evolving acceptable and locally-appropriate "better yielding varieties." This may require structural changes in the agricultural research of Kerala. However, overall, I am not that optimistic about the prospects for further genetic improvement in paddy in Kerala.

The case of homestead is more interesting in terms of their potential for conserving on-farm biodiversity. As noted in the cases of two groups of farmers, economic and non-economic interests promote the cause of conservation. Several objectives should be pursued further:

1. Farmers need to increase the production of organic manure within the farm. This manure is needed for paddy-cultivation and the crops grown in the homestead itself.

2. Farmers need to increase the timber production within the farm. The non-replanting of many trees was generally due to the lack of awareness and the non-availability of planting material. If material were made easily available and if modest efforts can be made for creating awareness, the planting and maintaining of these trees within the farms would be possible. The possibility should also be explored for multiplying seedlings of certain local as well as exotic (and harmless) varieties. This could be done through tissue culture, in collaboration with scientific organizations (like the Tropical Botanical Garden and Research Institute, Trivandrum) and the forest department. The seedlings distributed through the Social Forestry Program of the Kerala Forest Department do not have adequate representation of local varieties.

3. Adoption of high-efficient chulas (stoves) should be encouraged. Ideally, the biomass production within the farm should be sufficient enough to meet the fuel needs. However, one can see that even families with adequate on-farm fuel, go for kerosene and liquidified petroleum gas (LPG). It is not clear to what extent this is due to subsidies given for petroleum fuels. Though the high-efficient-chulas are being widely popularized in Kerala, people are still very attracted to petroleum fuels, even in rural households. However, at a macro-level, the increase in the production of fuel wood at the farm-level would definitely reduce the pressure on forests.
4. To promote biodiversity and reduce household dependance of any single case crop, farmers should also be encouraged to cultivate a number of crops for income. The wide price fluctuations of certain commodities have already led many farmers to rethink their dependance on one or two commodities. Certain crops like cashew, which were less remunerative some years ago, are fetching better prices today. Farmers who removed those trees in order to plant coconut now face a resource crunch, owing to the generally low price of coconut. Since these crops are perennial trees, farmers cannot change the land-use quickly to meet the market requirements. Whenever a commodity fetches a high market price, these marginal farmers make changes in their investment pattern and become severely frustrated and indebted when the price falls. Crops like coconut, pepper, cocoa, arecanut, cashew, etc. are all vulnerable to price fluctuations and a crop combination is a better economical option.

5. This multiple system should not be limited to crops alone but should also include animal husbandry. As observed in the case of cattle, the sustainability of that occupation depends crucially on the ability of the farm to contribute at least a part of the feeding material. Thus, the two-way relation, (i.e., cattle providing organic manure for cultivation and cultivation providing feed for cattle) should be reestablished wherever (and to whatever extent) it is possible. In the case of poultry, farmers generally prefer the local breeds which produce small reddish eggs and have harder meat than the broilers. These birds rarely consume external feeds and survive with the waste produced within the farms.

It is the general preference for short-term profits, the lack of concern for longer-term impacts, and the perennial nature of many crops, which constrain most from becoming more diversified. However, demonstration farms, campaigns on the economic benefits of the mixed systems, easy availability of the planting material, etc.., should be sufficient to strengthen the already visible shift towards a multi-crop production system in Kerala.

Demonstration and the awareness-building programs need assistance from external agencies. The demonstration units of mixed production systems should show attractive economic returns-- on par with, if not more than-- the mono-culture units of similar size. Valuation of the by-products, of the commodities with long gestation periods, and of those normally not integrated into the market are the real challenges in calculating the economic return of these mixed-system units. If the economic returns are comparable, then the non-economic attractions of the mixed systems would become quite obvious to the farmers.

In the case of distribution of genetic material, the socio-economic climate of Kerala can make good use of market channels, with such a mechanism being preferable to free or subsidized distribution. As visible in the case of a few tree crops, the farmers are quite equipped to buy planting materials on the market. One objective for the project of improving genetic diversity in Kerala is to develop an adequate number of entrepreneurs willing to grow and diffuse genetic and plant materials.

However, one should not forget the impact of macro-level policies and market signals on the genetic and plant composition of a region. These issues limit the success of the micro-level efforts to conserve and improve on-farm genetic diversity. One issue relevant in Kerala is the spread of rubber plantations, replacing the homesteads and even the paddy fields. What are the long-term implications of such a replacement? This large-scale conversion may have harsh economic consequences, if technological or market development leads to the lowering of the natural rubber price. The present production situation in countries like Malaysia is such that even the import of rubber will not affect the high price that is prevalent in Indian market. Thus, the spread of rubber is the greatest threat to the on-farm genetic diversity of Kerala. However, in the present situation, it would be very difficult to tell the farmers about the possible unsustainability of large-scale conversion into rubber plantations.

Epilogue

Conserving the biodiversity may not be economical on a short-term basis. However, such aa move will strengthen the stability of the system, improve the quality and diversity of commodities available for home consumption, improve the ability of farmers to make their own dwelling unit, provide the much-needed organic manure, and reduce fluctuations in cash income. This author has a strong but unsubstantiated feeling that conserving on-farm genetic diversity in Kerala will not affect the economic interests of the farmers. Proper methods for valuating the short-term and long-term benefits and considering the need-satisfying capacity of other non-monetizable entities might show the comparability, if not superiority, of mixed farms. How far this valuation can be done through conventional means (using discount rates and shadow prices, etc.) is yet to be ascertained.

References

Gangadharan, C., 1985. 'Breeding' In Jaiswal, P.L., ed., Rice research in India. New Delhi: Indian Council of Agricultural Research.

Gleissman, S.R., ed., 1990. Researching the ecological basis of sustainable agriculture. New York:Springler-Verlag.

James, E. J., V. Santhakumar and C. Krishnan, 1992. Report of the project on `Integrated Land and Water Management of Selected Micro-watersheds in Kerala'. Palakkad, Kerala:Integrated Rural Technology Centre.

Kannan, K.P. and K. Pushpangadan, 1991. Dissecting agricultural stagnation in Kerala. Economic and Political Weekly, XXV(35-36):1991-2004.

Logan, W., 1906 (reprint 1989). Malabar. Madras,India:Asia Educational Services.

Mateer, S., 1883. Native life in Travancore. London: W.H.Allen & Co.

Nagam, A., 1906. Travancore State Manual, vol.III. Trivandrum, India:Travancore Government Press.

Nambiar, K.V.. et.al., 1983. Rice production in Kerala: problems and prospects. Proceedings of the seminar on Stagnation of rice production in Kerala, Kerala Agricultural University, Trivandrum, India.

Panikkar, P.G.K., 1973. Environmental factors in production and productivity of rice in Kerala. Working Paper No. 15, Centre for Development Studies, Trivandrum, India.

Pillai, P.P., 1982. Agricultural development in Kerala. New Delhi: Agricole Publishing Company.

Santhakumar, V., 1995. Issues of sustainability in Kerala's agriculture. manuscript, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras.

Santhakumar, V. and Rajagopalan, R., 1995. Green revolution in Kerala: a discourse on technology and nature. manuscript, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras.

Footnotes:

1 Agro-ecologists have recently shown greater interest in the complex agro-forestry systems of the homesteads (Gleissman, 1990) (BACK)

2 The average size of a land holding in Kerala has always been lower than in other parts of India. (BACK)

3 Note that biodiversity was highest in the forest areas of humid-tropics. When farmers converted parts of forest into agricultural lands, crop-specialization occurred and diversity was drastically reduced. Many trees and plants which survived in the agricultural lands in humid-tropics were used for different purposes. (BACK)

4 Earlier, jackfruit was a staple food. Today, rice has evolved as the only staple food and jackfruit is taken only as a fruit. Hence the number of jackfruit varieties which are not very good as fruits has reduced. (BACK)

Document(s) 8 de 38