the political economy of farmers' suicide in india

The political economy of farmers’ suicide in India

Jonathan Kennedy

Department of Sociology, University of Cambridge and Department of Political Science, UCL

SUICIDE IN INDIA

• In 2010 187,000 people died from suicide in India.

• Indian suicide rates are among the highest in the world–26·3 (per 100,000) for men and 17·5 for women.

• Suicide is the second leading cause of death among young adults in India.

FARMERS’ SUICIDES

No India-wide quantitative evidence

• One major study on suicide in India published in The Lancet (Patel et al. 2012). Uses a nationally representative mortality survey of 1·1 million households.

• They state: “our findings do not suggest that suicide is any more prevalent in agricultural workers (including farmers) than it is in any other profession”.

How do we explain this contradiction?

• Patel et al do not correctly operationalize the mechanism that many identified as linking farmers to increased suicide rates.

• They compare the primary occupations of those people who committed suicide.

• Who is a “farmer” is and what is a “farmer suicide”?

• Patel et al. reify social structure of rural India and assumes all suicides involving farmers are farmers’ suicides.

Figure1:The%ofmarginalfarmersandsuiciderates(r=0·241,p=0·378)

Figure1:The%ofmarginalfarmersandsuiciderates(r=0·241,p=0·378)

42

Figure1:The%ofmarginalfarmersandsuiciderates(r=0·241,p=0·378)

Figure1:The%ofmarginalfarmersandsuiciderates(r=0·241,p=0·378)

Figure1:The%ofmarginalfarmersandsuiciderates(r=0·241,p=0·378)

Figure2:The%ofcrashcropsandsuiciderates(r=0·628,p=0·005)

Figure3:The%ofindebtedfarmersandsuiciderates(r=0·729,p=0·018)

Figure3:The%ofindebtedfarmersandsuiciderates(r=0·729,p=0·018)

Conclusions

• Redistribution of land is a desirable policy prescription, but perhaps not a realistic one.

• State interventions to stabilize the price of cash crops and relieve indebted farmers may be effective at reducing suicide rates in India.

• Fallibility of large N statistical analysis in public health when they are not combined with sound operationalization of mechanisms as specified by qualitative studies.

Future research…

• More and better quantitative data

• Qualitative study using carefully selected comparative cases

• Possible role of GM crops – RCT?

!

Table 3: Linear regressions showing the political and economic determinants

of farmers’ suicide, 2001-05

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Marginal farmers % ·252 ·381* ·402* ·437***

(·233) (·123) (·163) (·095)

Cash crops %

·683§

·801** ·518*

(·355) (·240) (·209)

Indebted farmers %

·670*

·806** ·549*

(·214) (·231) (·187)

Model N 90 90 90 90 90 90

Model F 1.17 3.70 9.83* 13·97*** 6·53* 18·06***

Model adjusted R2 ·086 ·359 ·365 ·566 ·591 ·738

Notes:- * p<=·05 (5%), ** p<=·01 (1%), *** p<=·001 (0.1%), § p=·071 (7.1%).

Constants calculated but not reported.

Table 4: Linear regressions showing the effects of income, poverty, inequality on

farmers’ suicide, 2001-05

(7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

Income ·554 ·051

(·491) (·223)

Poverty

-·063 ·233

(·339) (·133)

Inequality

·322* ·092

(.115) (·073)

Marginal farmers % ·441***

·428***

·429***

(·099) (.099) (·093)

Cash crops %

·514*

·549*

·448§

(·208) (·205) (·215)

Indebted farmers %

·542*

·571*

·395*

(·189) (·184) (·169)

Model N 90 90 90 90 75 75

Model F 1.27 14·83*** ·03 16.39*** 7.88* 14·12***

Model adjusted R2 ·038 ·738 ·010 ·757 ·361 ·735

Notes:- * p<=·05 (5%), ** p<=·01 (1%), *** p<=·001 (0.1%), § p=·056 (5.6%).

Constants calculated but not reported. For inequality there is no data for Himachal

Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, and the north eastern states.

!