1. Agrarian Crisis and Farmers Suicides in AP
Centre for Sustainable Agriculture and
AP Rytu Swarajya Vedhika
1995-2012

2. Crisis in Indian Agriculture
• Andhra Pradesh recorded the first major spate of farmers suicides 1986
when more than 100 farmers committed suicide in Guntur and Prakasham
districts with failure of cotton due to high white fly incidence
• Second major spate of farmers suicides were seen in 1997-99 when cotton
crop failed in Warangal, Karimnagar districts due to high incidence of
bollworms. More than 3,000 farmers were reported to have end their lives
• Third major spate of farmers suicides were started in 2004 with more than
2500 suicides were reported and this time it was all kinds of farmers.
• Since 1995 Maharashtra also started reported farmers suicides particularly
from Vidharba region which is largely cotton growing in rainfed areas

3. What does governments say?
• Governments tend to deny the problem and attribute other
reasons for the tragedy
• As a long term strategy governments talk about low carrying
capacity of agriculture and moving people out of agriculture
(Draft Agril Policy, Govt of AP, 1999)
• Privatising extension and market services withdrawl of
government from providing basic services (Draft Agril Policy,
Govt of AP, 1999, Approach Paper to AP Agril, Ashok Gulati
2008)
• Technological solutions like synthetic pyrethroids or Bt cotton
• Crop diversification to high value crops (Draft Agril Policy,
Govt of AP, 1999, Approach Paper to AP Agril, Ashok Gulati
2008)

4. What does census say?
(40.87%)
(27.74 %)
(39.64 %)
(22.52 %)
(43.04 %)
(16.47 %)
(68.61 %)
(62.16 %)
(59.51 %)
• In last one decade 13,68,012 people have left farming and most of
them became agriculture workers
• This is on average 375/day

5. 0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
20000
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Farmers suicides in India
No. of suicides
Source: NCRB 1995-2012
Total 2,84,694 in 18 years
http://www.agrariancrisis.in

6. The table only includes States whose annual averages have risen or fallen by over 100 farm
farm suicides between the to periods. It also treats Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh as one
unit for data purposes.
Source: NCRB Accidental Deaths & Suicides in India Reports 1995-2012
Average
(2004-12)
Average
(1995-03)
Differe
nce
Andhra Pradesh 2376 1613 763
Assam 310 159 152
Jharkand 109 8 101
Madhya Pradesh+Chhattisgarh* 2513 2327 186
Maharashtra 3745 2656 1089
*MP state was formed in 2001
Increasing crisis

7. Farmers Suicides in India, 2012
Four major cotton growing states form 68% of the suicides
AP and Maharashtra form 46 %
Source: NCRB 1995-2012, http://www.ncrb.nic.in
Total 13754
http://www.agrariancrisis.in

8. Farmers Suicides in India, 2011
Four major cotton growing states form 64% of the suicides
AP and Maharashtra form 40 %
Source: NCRB 1995-2012, http://www.ncrb.nic.in
Total 14027
http://www.agrariancrisis.in

9. 0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
year
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Farmers suicides in Andhra Pradesh
NCRB data State Govt Recognised
Source: NCRB 1995-2012 http://www.ncrb.nic.in
Total 35,898 in 18 years
http://www.agrariancrisis.in

10. Farmers Suicides in Andhra Pradesh
Source: NCRB, 2012, http://www.ncrb.nic.in http://www.agrariancrisis.in
Total: 14,516 Avg 1613/year Total: 21,382 Avg 2375/year

11. Year
Suicides
according to
NCRB
Recognised
by AP Govt
1995 1196 0
1996 1706 0
1997 1097 0
1998 1813 104
1999 1974 180
2000 1525 192
2001 1509 256
2002 1896 321
2003 1800 304
2004 2666 1178
2005 2490 654
2006 2607 561
2007 1797 512
2008 2105 488
2009 2414 321
2010 2525 259
2011 2206 260
2012 2572 93
Total 35898 5683
• 5241: Total farmers suicides recognized as genuine
• 4879: Total families the study team met
• Caste wise distribution
– Backward classes: 2594
– Other classes: 1362
– Scheduled castes: 590
– Scheduled tribes: 382
• 3284: families receiving widow pension
• 561: families do not have ration card
• 2358: families not having pucca house, no sanction
under INDIRAMMA housing scheme
• 1109: families benefited under INDIRAMMA
• 3787: families still struggling to earn their livelihoods
• In the one lakh rupees paid as exgratia expenditure
was
• 46% to pay old loans
• 22% agriculture investments
• 17% miscellaneous expenditure
– In the 50 thousand as loan resettlement 45% was to clear off
bank loans
Rehabilitating victim families

12. Major Reasons
• Increasing costs of cultivation due to
– high input use
– increasing costs of inputs, and
– decreasing subsidies
• Stagnating yields
– Soil fertility going down
– Monoculture of crops
– Crops spreading into areas unsuitable for them
• Shift to water intensive crops leading to
– Ground water depletion
– Failure of tubewells
• Decreasing prices
– Lower MSPs
– Increasing price fluctuations after opening up of markets

13. Increasing small holders
Category No of holdings (in lakhs) Area (lakh ha) Average land holding (ha)
1995-96 2000-01 2010-11 1995-96 2000-01 2010-11 1995-96 2000-01 2010-11
Marginal
(< 1ha)
63
(59.42)
70.23
(60.91)
8484.24
(63.95)
29.04
(20.20)
31.04
(21.56)
3737.27
(26.08)
0.46 0.44 0.44
Small
(1 to 2 ha)
22.62
(21.33)
25.18
(21.84)
2929.18
(22.15)
32.29
(22.47)
35.65
(24.75)
4141.19
(28.83)
1.43 1.42 1.41
Semi
medium
(2 to 4 ha)
13.95
(13.16)
14.23
(12.34)
1313.99
(10.62)
37.36
(25.99)
37.95
(26.36)
3636.84
(25.78)
2.68 2.67 2.6363
Subtotal 99.57
(93.91)
109.64
(95.08)
127.42
(96.72)
98.69
(68.67)
104.64
(72.67)
115.3
(80.69)
Medium
(4 to 10 ha)
5.63
(5.31)
5.01
(4.34)
33.97
(3.01)
32.31
(22.48)
28.55
(19.83)
2222.08
(15.45)
5.74 5.7 5.5656
Large
(> 10 ha)
0.83
(0.78)
0.66
(0.57)
0.3535
(0.2727)
12.73
(8.86)
10.80
(7.5)
55.50
(3.85)
15.34 16.36 15.5050
Total 106.03
(100)
115.31
(100)
131.73
(100)
143.73
(100)
143.99
(100)
142.88
(100)
1.36 1.25 1.0808
Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics – 2012.
(figures in parentheses are percentage of total)

14. No. of holdings
Class No. of Holdings Growth rate
2005-06 2010-11
Marginal (0.5-1.0 ha) 74,17,460 84,27,700 13.58
Small (1.0-2.0 ha) 26,39,110 29,18,370 10.58
Semi-Medium (2.0-4.0 ha) 14,44,080 13,99,120 -3.11
Medium (4.0-10.0 ha) 4,87,430 3,97,260 -18.50
Large (above 10.0 ha) 56,040 35,650 -36.38
Total 1,20,44,120 1,31,75,100 9.39

15. Increasing tenancy
Loan Elgibility Cards
2011-12 2012-13
No.of Cards Reissued 0 244082
Fresh Issues 576147 179243
Total Cards Issued 576147 423325
No.of farmers accessed loan 197747 126157
% of Farmers accessed loan 34 30
• Increasing tenancy
• 40 lakh tenant farmers
• Increasing tenancy
• No access to credit, insurance, compensations
• During 2012-13 against the target
of Rs. 37,127.77 crore (Rs.
23,827.50 cr kharif target) loans
disbursed were 23,282.82 cr.
• Target was also to cover 12 lakh
tenant farmers (2000 cr) but only
Rs. 183 cr was sanctioned
• Among the targeted 12 lakh
tenant farmers loan elgibility
cards were given only to 4.23
lakhs (1.79 lakhs new and
remaining 2.44 were renewed)
and among them only 1.26 lakh
tenant farmers have got access to
credit
• Total amount sanctioned as loan is
Rs. 183.03 and more than half of it
goes to West Godavari district

16. Decreasing access to credit
Type of
Location
Number of Branches as on
March 31,2005 March 31, 2006 March 31, 2012
Rural 2,829 (47.19) 2,852 (46.42) 33,245(36.55)
Semi Urban 1,365 (22.72) 1,394 (22.69) 22,327(26.21)
Urban 1,206 (20.12) 1,278 (20.80) 22,096(23.61)
Metropolitan 594 (9.90) 619 (10.07) 11,210(13.63)
Total 5,994 6,143 88,878

17. Cotton Yields and Farmers Suicides in Andhra Pradesh
Source: NCRB, 2012, http://www.ncrb.nic.in, Cotton yields DES data http://www.agrariancrisis.in

18. Cotton yields in Andhra Pradesh (Lint in kg/ha)
Cotton yields DES data http://www.agrariancrisis.in

19. 1980-81* 1990-91* 2000-2001** 2010-11**
Crop Gross
Cropped
area
% Gross
Cropped
Area
% Gross
Cropped
Area
% Gross
Cropped
Area
%
Paddy 1453 28.92 2418.4 56.16 4243 36.40 4752 42.42
Coarse cereals
1796.4 35.76
239.8
5.57 1514 12.99 1137 10.15
Wheat 4.1 0.08 0.5 0.01 11 0.09 10 0.09
Pulses 437.9 8.72 620 14.40 1902 16.31 2131 19.02
Oilseeds 990.9 19.72 740.9 17.21 2697 23.13 2472 22.07
Cotton 232.8 4.63 93.7 2.18 1022 8.77 1784 15.93
Sugar cane
77.4 1.54
144.4
3.35 217 1.86 192 1.71
Tobacco 31.2 0.62 48.5 1.13 52 0.45 157 1.40
Grand Total 5023.7 100.00 4306.20 100.00 11658 100.00 11202 112.79
Source: * A.Vaidyanathan (2005) Report on the analysis of data of cost of cultivation
surveys undertaken by the Indian Society of Agricultural Economics CULTURAL
ECONOMICS and DES 2010-11 Season & Crop Report.
Changing Cropping patterns
(in lakh ha)

20. Cotton yields DES data http://www.agrariancrisis.in
Increasing Cotton Area 1956-2011

21. Problems in estimating yields
• Considerable divergence exists between yields obtained from Crop
Cutting Experiments (CCEs) and those from Comprehensive Scheme
(CS Scheme) to study Cost of Cultivations both by Department of
Economics and Statistics (DES) of Ministry of Agriculture
• In the last ten years between 2001-01 to 2009-10 on average the
yields estimated by CCEs were lower than CS Scheme across crops
viz.,
– Paddy (19.7%)
– Maize (10.80%)
– Tur (17.12%)
– Soybean (16.41%)
– Groundnut (-0.82%)
– Cotton (301.97%)
• CACP takes the yields from the CS scheme significantly
underestimating per quintal cost of production.
• CACP collects the data from CS Scheme through 5800 centres
through the state agriculture universities where as the CCEs are
done across 9,73,184 centres with the help of State Governments.

22. Year CCEs CS Scheme % Deviation
2000-01 2.77 12.42 348.93
2001-02 2.88 13.41 365.65
2002-03 2.30 17.66 668.62
2003-04 3.84 21.01 447.32
2004-05 3.16 18.05 471.12
2005-06 3.47 12.40 257.12
2006-07 3.81 21.77 470.72
2007-08 5.23 23.55 349.99
2008-09 4.34 17.83 311.12
410.10
Deviation between CCE and CSS estimates Cotton

23. Crop A2+FL/ha C2/ha A2+FL/q C2/q C3/q Yield
q/ha
Implicit
price/q
MSP/q
Paddy 35104.50 54202.54 603.62 932.35 1033.43 54.69 1122.25 1050
Cotton 27204.15 42919.35 1525.73 2405.53 2547.15 17.53 2905.54 3000
Jower 16012.21 23757.04 1000.62 1429.67 1572.64 14.17 1452.57 540
Maize 26735.73 35564.55 576.95 531.69 917.69 44.25 547.34 540
Redgram 16519.59 30960.04 1674.31 3149.79 3465.00 9.50 4316.33 2300
Moong 7351.55 12624.29 2340.03 4013.55 4414.92 3.14 5103.19 2750
Blackgram 14304.52 25555.33 1615.53 2554.59 3207.54 5.54 4422.75 2520
Groundnut 24771.12 35699.44 1765.24 2537.04 2791.30 13.27 2312.25 2100
Cost estimations for 2009-10

24. CACP classification

25. Suggestions for immediate action
• A comprehensive relief and rehabilitation package needs to be evolved to address the
distress conditions of bereaved families.
– Enough to take care of the problems related to immediate debt relief (public and private), release
of land from mortgage, livelihood support (agriculture and non agriculture), education of the
children and health needs
– widow pension to the tune of Rs.5000/- per month to meet the survival needs of the family
– simplifying the procedures of proving the case. The implementation of special package should be
given to Panchayat and block offices.
– The categorization of suicides into “genuine” and not genuine should be immediately scrapped.
– Linking of all the deceased families with all existing government schemes on special priority is
necessary. Schemes like MGNREGA, subsidized food grains of at least 35 kgs, insurance and
pensions.
• Address the issues of the families in extreme distress conditions and on the verge of suicide
without waiting for a suicide to happen. This could include: debt relief, insurance coverage,
release of land under mortgage, linking with existing food schemes etc.
• The government should invest more in support of sustainable agriculture
• Immediately expand and revise the MSPs to remunerative levels, and initiate procurement
operations. The prices should provide the farmers sufficient margins above their actual cost
of cultivation. Timely and effective procurement directly from the farmers by government
agencies such as FCI and CCI should be ensured, for paddy and cotton as well as dryland
crops.
• Provide effective crop insurance and credit to majority of farmers including tenant farmers
and non-loanee farmers and ensure proper implementation.

26. Addressing the root cause
• The government should introduce a “Price Compensation” system, especially for all the food
crops where MSP is declared. Whenever the MSPs or actual market prices do not meet the
target price (equal to Cost of Cultivation + 50%), the shortfall should be paid to the farmer
directly. The farmer should no longer be forced to bear the burden of keeping food prices
low for consumers.
• Government should ensure income security for all farm households, including resorting to
direct income support for covering living costs for dignified livelihoods if other measures
don’t provide the same.
• Promote sustainable agriculture that will reduce costs of cultivation and reduce crop risk by
agri-diversity based and agro-ecological farming. A programmatic thrust along with
appropriate and adequate support systems is required to spread sustainable agriculture like
the CMSA program in Andhra Pradesh. The importance of grassroots farmer institutions
cannot be overemphasized.
• For rainfed areas which constitute about 60% of the total cultivated area in India, there
should be a comprehensive mission to sustain agriculture and farmer livelihoods. This should
be focused on diverse cropping systems, ensuring protective irrigation and strengthening
livestock based livelihoods. Government investments in rainfed areas should be immediately
doubled.
• Provide bank credit to the farmers with adequate scale of finance, increase priority sector
lending for agriculture and ensure correct implementation to reach small farmers.

27. CENTRE FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE
http://www.csa-india.org
http://www.krishi.tv
http://www.agrariancrisis.in
http://www.sahajaaharam.in
http://www.indiaforsafefood.in
http://www.kisanswaraj.in
Ph. 040-27017735, mobile : 09000699702
csa@csa-india.org, ramoo.csa@gmail.com
Facebook: ramoo.agripage