Will The Government Force Farmers To Commit More Suicides?

Agriculture, the principal occupation in India has been acutely inequitable to its practitioners over the last couple of decades. With former late Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri’s credo ‘Jai Jawan Jai Kisan’ lain to waste, farmer suicides have since been the cause of much socio-economic debate. It is estimated that a farmer owning 15 acres of land and considered well-off has an income of just a little more than what he would have earned if he were to earn a yearly legal minimum wage. Budget 2010 earmarked considerations for automatic management systems and cold storage. Whether these will offer tangible relief to agriculture is still to be seen. Yet, it is becoming essential for the government to lay greater emphasis on the affairs of cultivation by developing adequate sensitivity to the support infrastructure required today.
A time bomb in the making is the issue of Endosulfan. Since India overtook the global production of Endosulfan, Indian farmers have reaped the benefits of the pesticide for a wide range of crops including cotton, tea and coffee. In use for almost three decades in India in the states of West Bengal, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh, the beneficial-friendly, cost-effective farming pest-protection costs a farmer Rs 250/litre. In case of a ban on Endosulfan, Indian cultivators will be forced to purchase patented European pesticides at much higher prices. Imidachloprid, a product touted as a replacement to Endosulfan costs Rs 2,000/litre. Other alternative pesticides such as Thiamethoxam (Rs 3,200/litre) and Coregen (Rs 700/litre) are expensive as well. Unlike Endosulfan, most alternatives destroy much-needed honeybees and other beneficial populations required for pollination. It may force farmers to look for highly expensive alternatives for pollination. Besides, the alternatives to Endosulfan also develop resistance of use within 3–5 years of product introduction.
In India, farmers depend on naturally occurring colonies of honeybees and beneficials like ladybird beetle, chrysoperla, trichograma for the pollination of their crops. As they are naturally occurring, they play their part at no cost to farmers. Most of Endosulfan’s substitutes are harsh on bees and are therefore banned in many nations. Today farmers in countries where Endosulfan is banned depend on the use of bee boxes for pollination. Such bumblebees initiate pollination at a cost of US$1 per bee (approximately Rs 45). At that rate, it would cost Rs 90,000 for the Indian farmer to pollinate a 1-hectare field of crops in the absence of honeybees. Not only will the use of such pesticides result in almost a ten-fold cost increase for farmers, but also destroy the agro-ecosystem.
Today, NGOs and local polity in southern India are heavily espousing the benefits of organic farming in Kerala where Endosulfan has been banned. However, with limited financial resources to purchase costly pesticides or absorb losses from ineffective pest-control, cultivators do not have many options. Recent news reports suggest that the situation has now compelled farmers in the region to resort to smuggling the pesticide into the state in common cans and bottles.
Due to increasing costs being incurred by farmers and not enough returns, most of them are already debt-ridden. Some are already selling off valuable stretches of their fertile lands to industries and urban developers. With no substantial scientific evidence to prove the Endosulfan claims in Kerala and Dakshina Kannada, it is prudent to decide whether the whims of vested interests are significant enough to effect a change that is sure to impact India’s colossal farming population.


References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farmers%27_suicides_in_India#cite_note-12
M Rajivlochan "Farmers and fire-fighters" in Indian Express, August 28, 2007

Farmers protest against the Endosulfan ban: The Real Endosulfan victims

HEAR OUR VOICE – ENDOSULFAN WORKERS OF INDIA

Followed is a letter from the endosulfan workers to the Prime Minister of India asking to support their efforts in seking withdrawal of NIOH report:

We are the union of Endosulfan manufacturing units in India. We have been reading several media reports related to Endosulfan and its alleged linkage to many physical ailments in Kerala, India. Endosulfan was invented, manufactured, traded also used in Europe for 55 years. Endosulfan is a generic insecticide manufactured and supplied on large scale by India at most reasonable prices since last 10 years. Endosulfan is safe to pollinators and beneficial insects and is one of the largest generic pesticides in use worldwide. Over 45 million litres of Endosulfan is used globally with an on farm value in excess of US$ 300 million (Rs.1350 crore). It is widely used in agricultural economies such as India, China, Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, etc. 

There have been allegations that exposure to Endosulfan is causing abnormal human health effects, birth defects, infertility, and a host of other illnesses. Most of these allegations have originated from Kasargod in Kerala where such abnormalities have been reported. The same allegations have also been made from Belthangady taluka in Karnataka. The phtograph of Shruti, a child with abnormal birth defects has been used as proof in both Kerala and Karnataka. All problems in Kerala are alleged to be happening due to aerial spray of Endosulfan. It would be interesting to know that there are no problems relating to aerial spray of Endosulfan anywhere in the world. It is extensively applied by aerial application in several countries and there are no reports of birth defects anywhere else. There are no problems health problems anywhere in India where Endosulfan is extensively used.

 In India alleged reports linking endosulfan to physical problems have been repeatedly investigated. Six committees appointed by the Government of India have concluded that there is no evidence linking Endosulfan to physical ailments. Endosulfan has undergone trial by media for over 8 years. Inspite of this a few NGO’s led by Ms Sunita Narain of CSE (Centre for Science and Environment) and Thanal and supported internationally by PAN (Pesticide Action Network), EJF (Environment Justice Foundation) and I-PEN (International POP’s Elimination Network) have used the internet and media to generate negative public perception against Endosulfan by repeatedly publishing gruesome photographs of children with abnormal birth defects. When eminent scientists like Dr M S Swaminathan, who is on the Board of CSE, also lend their voice supporting a call for a ban on Endosulfan without understanding the scientific facts and without choosing to talk to us, what do we do? There is extensive funding by the European Union to these NGO’s with an objective of forming pressure groups which in turn serve the interests of European business. Why should we lose our jobs just because their economy is under pressure?

We represent the Endosulfan family in India. We are 6000 families directly supporting over 24,000 persons and lakhs of farmers in India. We have had direct exposure to Endosulfan while working at the factory and the farmers while using them in the farm. Some of us have been exposed to Endosulfan for over 20, 25 and even 30 years. Yet none of us have had any health problems. We are ready to offer samples of our blood for testing to prove that Endosulfan does not cause any health issues. Among us are also Endosulfan workers from Kerala who are ready to offer their blood for testing. These workers, our brothers from Kerala are in constant fear as none of the elected representatives dare challenge the position orchestrated by the NGO’s. They are in fear of trial by media. 

Endosulfan has polarized the world opinion in the debate on generic versus patented chemicals. The European Commission few years ago decided to nominate Endosulfan for inclusion in Rotterdam Convention under Prior Inform Consent (PIC) and in 2007 for inclusion in Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). Based on the recommendation of POP Review Committee, the Stockholm Convention’s Conference of Parties is expected to decide on its listing as a POP during their meeting in April 2011. The estimated replacement value of Endosulfan is expected to be over US$ 1000 million (Rs.4500 crores).

Endosulfan has been proposed by EU for a ban citing precautionary measure for its impact on human health. EU-funded environmental NGOs and lobby at the international trade related conventions such as Stockholm and Rotterdam Conventions have extensively quoted judgments based on a study titled “Report of the investigations of unusual illnesses allegedly produced by Endosulfan exposure in Padre village, of Kasargode district (N. Kerala)” made by National Institute of Occupational Health, Ahmadabad.  

We have learnt that fundamental flaws in the NIOH study have been observed by scientists and lawyers. To understand the errors, several applications were made by experts under the Right to Information Act.  We have also learnt that NIOH did not respond to request for parting with raw data until the intervention of the Chief Information Commissioner, the appellate authority at the NIOH. The case was heard at the Information Commission and it took two orders by the Chief Information Commissioner for NIOH’s appellate authority to finally handover the 1700 pages of raw data. Experts examined the raw data and learned that the analysis conducted by NIOH had laboratory flaws beyond any doubt. The NIOH study has been referred to widely in international conventions and by regulatory authorities worldwide in seeking a ban on Endosulfan.

We are hurt. Our experience and our opinion are not even being considered. We have no option but to protest and let our voice be heard by the representatives that we elected to represent us in the Government. There are 6000 workers engaged in manufacturing of Endosulfan and lakhs of farmers who have a tangible experience of working with Endosulfan. The NGOs have failed to address this experience of farmers and workers of Endosulfan. On November 15, 2010 about 10000 families representing the workers as well as farmers walked a silent protest to present a memorandum to District Collector, Bhavnagar district – demanding immediate withdrawal of the NIOH report. The families were supported by the local Member of Legislative Assembly – Mrs Vibhavari Dave and the Member of Parliament – Mr Rajendra Sinh Rana.

Mr Rana has not only supported the workers by joining them in the rally but for the past one year has made several representations to the Prime Minister - Dr. Manmohan Singh, Minister of Environment & Forests – Mr Jairam Ramesh and Ministry of Health – Mr Gulam Nabi Azad seeking immediate action and withdrawal for the flawed report by NIOH. 

Please support our efforts in seeking a withdrawal of the NIOH report on Endosulfan by writing to the Prime Minister of India. Please help us to let our voice be heard.

‘Move to ban Endosulfan will hit Indian farmers’

The Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) expressed concern over European Union’s proposal to categorize Endosulfan as a persistent organic pollutant (POP).

According to PMFAI, EU’s proposed move to launch new, patented, expensive products in the Indian market will be against the interests of the farming community.

Currently, farmers use generic pesticides which are available at affordable prices. Interestingly, Anil Kakkar, director, Crop Care Federation of India, said in countries such as India where small acre farming and sustainable farming was widely prevalent, a ban on Endosulfan would deprive the Indian farmer access to an affordable and effective crop protection solution and alternatives are likely to be harmful to the farm ecosystem and destroy pollinators and beneficials.

“The European Union’s proposal to list Endosulfan as POP is against the interests of Indian farmers as they will be forced to buy patented pesticides at high prices,” said R Hariharan, chairman, International Stewardship Centre Inc (ISC). For instance, Imidachloride, a product touted as a replacement to Endosulfan costs `2,000 per litre, while other alternative pesticides such as Thiamethoxam costs `3,200 per litre and Coregen `700 a litre while Endosulfan is only `200 per litre.

According to estimates, the global crop protection industry is worth $40 billion and the top three companies alone account for over 50 per cent. “There is a strong motivation for the European multinationals to replace widely used, generic and low-priced pesticides with their high-priced patented alternatives,” said Pradip Dave, president, PMFAI.

Endosulfan is the third largest selling generic insecticide worldwide with global market in excess of 40 million liters valued at over $300 million with replacement cost of alternative estimated to be in excess of $1 billion. India’s share in global Endosulfan market is over 70 percent. Similarly, exports of Endosulfan from India are valued at $40 million.

Source: http://expressbuzz.com/cities/hyderabad/%E2%80%98move-to-ban-endosulfan-will-hit-indian-farmers%E2%80%99/246486.html

Proxy battle over endosulfan

Strange is the interplay of money power, business interests and NGO politics. In most cases, farmers turn out to be victims. A recent notification of the Kerala government is a good instance. The State Government recently issued guidelines which render sale of pesticides illegal , unless supported by a prescription from an appropriate agricultural officer.

Behind this apparently innocuous notification lies a complex interplay of various interests. The ostensible object of the notification is to ensure a proactive remedy against health hazards caused by certain pesticides. The real purpose is to effectively proscribe a particular pesticide, viz. endosulfan blamed for certain incidents of congenital abnormalities, cancer and other diseases.

DEBATE OVER ENDOSULFAN

Endosulfan has been the subject of intense debate and controversy. Sixty nations have banned it — 27 belong to the European Union; the 21 African countries that have banned it have substantial trade with Europe known for its reservations against GM foods and pesticides in agricultural produce.

India accounts for about 70 per cent of the world production of this pesticide — about 12 million litres annually, valued at Rs 4,500 crore. The controversy is very similar to that concerning GM foods. European Union countries do not favour GM food items as they harm European pesticide interests. They also oppose pesticides that have ceased to interest them.

On the other hand, endosulfan is used on a very large scale by Indian farmers, particularly in horticulture and pulses. It is considered to be soft on pollinators such as honeybees and other beneficial insects such as ladybird beetles, though effective as a pest killer, acting through the digestive system. It is used for aerial sprays in the cashew plantations in Kasargode district of Kerala.

In the incidents reported from certain villages in Kasargode district , no conclusive evidence has been produced to show that the diseases were linked causally to endosulfan and nothing else. An independent study demonstrates that the symptoms in reported cases correspond to those of handi godu, attributed to chronic inbreeding in the region. Kasargode district represents a peculiar topography that is not ideal for aerial sprays. Endosulfan by itself applied locally might have produced no adverse effects of the alleged type.

The timing of the Kerala notification is ominous. A group of 172 nations is scheduled to meet in April 2011, under the auspices of the Stockholm Convention, to take a final decision on declaring endosulfan as a persistent organic pollutant (POP). India is opposed to such listing…http://bit.ly/proxybattle

Ban on Endosulfan is meaningless

The ban on Endosulfan is meaningless. There is either very little or no agricultural activity in counties where Endosulfan is banned, or the use of Endosulfan in those countries was negligible. For example, in Europe only 201 tonnes of Endosulfan was used when it was banned.http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-76-06-669/EN/KS-76-06-669-EN.PDF In all other countries where it is banned, the land used for agriculture is very insignificant. In some of the counties like Singapore, there is practically no agricultural activity. In countries like Bahrain, Belize, St. Lucia etc., where Endosulfan is banned, the irrigated land is hardly 30-40 sq. km. In six other countries it is 130-750 sq km. In four countries it is 1k to 9k sq km and in one country it is 16k sq km.
Therefore there was nothing to lose in banning Endosulfan in those countries when the activists published wrongful information on Endosulfan. The authorities did not find it necessary to verify the statements made by activists as it was not going to make any difference in those countries!
US EPA has classified Endosulfan under the class of non-carcinogenic substances i.e., class-E. The activists created stories stating Endosulfan as "cancer causing substance" to draw attention of public.
In fact Endosulfan is very important substance as there are no viable alternatives for many of its uses.

http://www.whybanendosulfan.org

Fabricated False Evidence against Endosulfan

Activists have created stories and have fabricated false evidence against Endosulfan. Obviously they were funded for carrying out campaigns against Endosulfan. 

Many useful products like Endosulfan have become off-patent today, in due course of time. As anyone can manufacture these products, there is competition in the market. Consequently, these products have become available at an affordable price, and poor consumers are benefited. But some companies launch a campaign against such off-patent products through activists, with a view to prejudice people and impose a ban on such products. The result will be that, the off-patent products will be off-market. On one hand, the consumers will suffer as they will have to pay high price for patented products, and on the other hand, the small industry will also suffer, as the off-patent products which they manufacture will be banned with the help of activists.