IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iffp21/42125.html

Incentives and Constraints in the Transformation of Punjab Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • McGuirk, Anya M.
  • Mundlak, Yair

Abstract

The introduction of modern crops varieties in the mid-1960s caused a dramatic change, known as the “green revolution”, in agricultural production in Asia, as elsewhere. However, in spite of their yields, the process of adoption of these varieties has taken a long time, and even today traditional varieties are still widely grown. Various reasons, such as imperfect information, uncertainty, inadequate human capital, and institutional constraints, have been given for this slow diffusion. This research during 1960-79 emphasizes the role of economic incentives and resource availability in determining the pace of technology adoption. Only three years after their introduction, the modern wheat varieties accounted for 70 percent of the wheat area in Punjab. Thereafter, their spread wad more gradual. From this pattern, the authors conclude that the main determinant of the pace of adoption could not have been uncertainty or lack of information. The modern varieties perform best under irrigation and heavy doses of fertilizer, and therefore their expansion of these inputs required mobilization of resources from other activities. The improvement in yield increased the rate of returns to investment in irrigation and fertilizer production and thus generated a gradual expansion in their supply. Since total resources are scarce, such a shift is time-consuming. This explanation illustrates what the authors see as a general and important aspect of the implementation of new technology. When the resource requirements of the new technology are different from those of the existing technology, the pace of the implementation will be determined by the speed at which the resources can be shifted to the new technology. This speed depends on the difference in productivity between the new and existing techniques and on prices and overall resource availability. This identification of the process has far- reaching implications for policies directed toward agricultural growth. This study is part of IFPRI’s continuing research efforts in analyzing the nature and economic consequences of technological change and follows earlier work on the green revolution.

Suggested Citation

  • McGuirk, Anya M. & Mundlak, Yair, 1991. "Incentives and Constraints in the Transformation of Punjab Agriculture," Papers 42125, Research Reports.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iffp21:42125
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.42125
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/42125/files/rr87.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.42125?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. S. Mahendra Dev, 2017. "Poverty and Employment: Roles of Agriculture and Non-agriculture," The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Springer;The Indian Society of Labour Economics (ISLE), vol. 60(1), pages 57-80, March.
    2. Kalamkar, S., 2018. "Adoption of Recommended Doses of Fertilisers on Soil Test Basis by Small and Marginal Farmers in Gujarat, India," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277333, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Abler, David G. & Sukhatme, Vasant, "undated". "Indian Agricultural Price Policy Revisited," 1991 Annual Meeting, August 4-7, Manhattan, Kansas 271262, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Rud, Juan Pablo, 2012. "Electricity provision and industrial development: Evidence from India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 352-367.
    5. Jeff Alwang & Jaime Ortiz & George Norton, 1995. "Interacciones entre Políticas de Precios y Gastos en Investigación Agropecuaria," Latin American Journal of Economics-formerly Cuadernos de Economía, Instituto de Economía. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 32(96), pages 199-216.
    6. Singh, Nirvikar, 2015. "Punjab’s Agricultural Innovation Challenge," Santa Cruz Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt4716p3vr, Department of Economics, UC Santa Cruz.
    7. Butzer, Rita & Larson, Donald F. & Mundlak, Yair, 2002. "Determinants Of Agricultural Growth In Thailand, Indonesia And The Philippines," Discussion Papers 14979, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Department of Agricultural Economics and Management.
    8. Rao, N. Chandrasekhara, 2004. "Aggregate Agricultural Supply Response in Andhra Pradesh," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 59(01), pages 1-14.
    9. Lalmani Pandey & P. Parthasarathy Rao & P.S. Birthal & Cynthia Bantilan & Hans P Binswanger, 2012. "Supply Response and Investment in Agriculture in Andhra Pradesh," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 9(2), pages 31-46, December.
    10. Murgai, Rinku, 1999. "The green revolution and the productivity paradox : evidence from the Indian Punjab," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2234, The World Bank.
    11. Goyari, Phanindra, 2014. "Irrigation Difference and Productivity Variations in Paddy Cultivation: Field Evidences from Udalguri District of Assam," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(01), pages 1-18.
    12. Kerr, John M., 1996. "Sustainable development of rainfed agriculture in India:," EPTD discussion papers 20, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    13. Huang, Jikun & Rozelle, Scott, 1996. "Technological change: Rediscovering the engine of productivity growth in China's rural economy," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 337-369, May.
    14. Goundan, Anatole & Sall, Moussa & Henning, Christian H. C. A., 2020. "Modeling interrelated inputs adoption in rainfed agriculture in Senegal," Working Papers of Agricultural Policy WP2020-05, University of Kiel, Department of Agricultural Economics, Chair of Agricultural Policy.
    15. Julieta Caunedo & Elisa Keller, 2021. "Capital Obsolescence and Agricultural Productivity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(1), pages 505-561.
    16. Yair Mundlak, 2005. "Economic Growth: Lessons from Two Centuries of American Agriculture," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 43(4), pages 989-1024, December.
    17. Maurice Ogada & Germano Mwabu & Diana Muchai, 2014. "Farm technology adoption in Kenya: a simultaneous estimation of inorganic fertilizer and improved maize variety adoption decisions," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 2(1), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Xiaobo Zhang & Timothy Mount & Richard Boisvert, 2004. "Industrialization, urbanization and land use in China," Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(3), pages 207-224.
    19. Smale, Melinda & Bellon, Mauricio R. & Gomez, Jose Alfonso Aguirre, 1999. "The Private and Public Characteristics of Maize Land Races and the Area Allocation Decisions of Farmers in a Center of Crop Diversity," Economics Working Papers 7669, CIMMYT: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.
    20. Niek Koning & Nico Heerink & Sjef Kauffman, 2001. "Food Insecurity, Soil Degradation and Agricultural Markets in West Africa: Why Current Policy Approaches Fail," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 189-207.
    21. Sylvain Dessy & Jacques Ewoudou & Isabelle Ouellet, 2006. "Understanding the Persistent Low Performance of African Agriculture," Cahiers de recherche 0622, CIRPEE.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:iffp21:42125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.