Ancient Indian Economics in the Modern Context
The study of Arthashastra or the science of state craft is older than Kautilya (300 B.C.). The very opening sentence of his great work Arthashastra bears testimony to this.
“Prithivya labhe Palane cha yavanthyarthashastrani, Purvacharyaihi Prasthapithani Prayashasthani, samhruthyekamidam arthashastram krutham.”
This Arthashastra is made as a compendium of almost all the arthashastras, which in view of acquisition and maintenance of the earth, have been composed by ancient teachers.
In the course of the work, Kautilya has mentioned the names of twelve ancient teachers of Arthashastra. They are Brihaspathi, Ushana, Prachethasa Manu, Parashara, Ambhi, Vathavyadhi, Pisuna, Vishalaksha, Bharadwaja, Kaunapadantha and Bahudanthi puthra. However none of their works are available to us. As such we can safely consider Kautilya’s Arthashastra as the quintessence of Ancient Indian Thinking.
The word Arthashastra cannot be translated as Economics as we use it today. Arthashastra is much wider than Economics. Arthashastra includes - apart from Economics, Public administration, External affairs, Military science, Human Resource Management and so on.
Kautilya’s Arthashastra contains 15 sections, 150 chapters and 180 sub chapters. It consists of 6000 Sholakas and Suthras.
Even though Kautilya wrote his Arthashastra 2300 years ago, it is still relevant to the modern times in several respects.
The Importance of treasury
Kosha or treasury is absolutely important for king or the modern governments. In this context Kautilya writes,
“Kosha purvaha sarvaarambhaha, Thasmath Purvam kosham avekshetha.”
All activities start with treasury. Therefore the king has to give top priority to kosha. He further warns,
“Alpa Khoshohi Raja Poura janapadanyeva grasathe.”
A king with a depleted treasury makes the life of the citizens miserable.
He also describes 9 ways of filling the treasury and 8 ways in which the treasury is depleted.
An Ideal King
Kautilya describes the qualities of an ideal king (Government) which is relevant for all times – past, present and future.
“Praja sukhe Sukham Ragnaha
Prajananthu hithe hitham
Nathma priyam hitham ragnaha,
Prajananthu priyam hitham.”
An ideal king is he who considers the welfare of his subjects as his own welfare. What is good for the subjects is considered good for him and not what is good for him personally.
The need for such rulers is all the more greater today.
Importance of Money
[Financial Capital]
Kautilya believes more in human spirit and Enterprise rather than Astrology. In this connection he says,
“Nakshtramathi Pruchantham
Balamarthothi varthathe
Arthohyarthasya Nakshatram
Kim Karishyathi tharakaha.”
Wealth will slip away from that childish man who always consults stars. The only guiding star of wealth is wealth itself. What the stars can do?
“Arthasya mulam utthanam
Anarthasya viparyayaha.”
The root of wealth is economic activity/enterprise. Lack of it brings material distress.
Don’t we emphasize the human effort and the spirit of enterprise, in economic development even today on the lines of Kautilya?
I may conclude this short paper stating that Ancient Indian Economics as crystalised in Kautilya’s Arthashastra is in several respects, all the more relevant today than it was during Kautilya’s time i.e. 300 B.C.
Sunday, 25 December 2011
What Karnataka needs from the Central Budget
What Karnataka needs
from the Central Budget
1.Separate Budget for Agriculture
I fully endorse and appreciate the initiative taken by the chief minister of Karnataka to present a separate Budget for Agriculture. I hope the central government will also appreciate this and follow suit from next year.
Agriculture in the country has been facing grave crisis for the last 20 years of Globalised Economic Policy. The fact that more than 200,000 small and marginal farmers have committed suicide since 1997, all over the country is ample proof of the mess in Indian Agriculture. From 1997 to 2008, more than 25,000 farmers have committed suicide in Karnataka. It works out to 2740 suicides a year. It is in this background a separate Budget for Agriculture in Karnataka is justified. It focuses attention, exclusively on agricultural sector and steps taken for strengthening it.
The situation of the Agriculture Sector in the country as a whole is no different from what it is in Karnataka. Therefore I urge the central government also to present a separate Budget for Agriculture at least from next year and make an announcement in this year’s budget
2. Set up Farmers’ Income Guarantee Commission
As rightly pointed out by well known Food Policy Analyst Dr.Dhirendra Sharma, in a seminar held in Bengaluru recently, the average income of an agricultural family in the country, is far below the monthly salary of a peon in government service. In Karnataka it is even below the national average. Therefore I, urge the Union Finance Minister to set up a Farmers’ Income Guarantee Commission (F.I.G.C.) on the lines of Pay Commission for the government servants. The Farmers’ Income Guarantee Commission should aim at providing a minimum monthly income for every Agricultural Family, which is equivalent to the monthly salary of a peon in government service. F.I.G.C. should be announced in the current Budget.
3. Emphasise dry land farming
Karnataka has the dubious distinction of having the second largest desert like area, in the whole country after Rajasthan. To mitigate this situation I urge the union finance minister to allocate liberal funds to Karnataka for undertaking on a large scale, minor irrigation projects such as construction and restoration of Tanks, check dams and water harvesting schemes.
4. Skill Development Programmes
One of the serious problems facing the Agricultural sector in Karnataka as well as the country is large scale migration of the youth from the villages. Therefore it is absolutely essential to create favourable atmosphere in which the youth stay in their own villages and find attractive employment facilities. From this point of view I urge the Union Budget to establish micro and small food processing units at village level, start Industrial Training Centers at Taluk level with emphasis on Food Processing, Dairy Farming, Repair of farm equipments and such other rural need based courses.
5. Protection of River Catchment areas
Western Ghats in Karnataka are the sources of many rivers such as Kaveri, Hemavathi, Thunga, Bhadra, Sharavathi, Kali and so on. These rivers are the lifeline of the entire South India. However in the recent years Rainfall in the catchment areas of these rivers is fast decreasing on account of deforestation and mono culture plantations. Hence the union Budget should have urgent and appropriate schemes to protect the catchment areas of the major rivers of Karnataka and their tributaries, with dense tree cover with local species rather than exotic species.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
from the Central Budget
1.Separate Budget for Agriculture
I fully endorse and appreciate the initiative taken by the chief minister of Karnataka to present a separate Budget for Agriculture. I hope the central government will also appreciate this and follow suit from next year.
Agriculture in the country has been facing grave crisis for the last 20 years of Globalised Economic Policy. The fact that more than 200,000 small and marginal farmers have committed suicide since 1997, all over the country is ample proof of the mess in Indian Agriculture. From 1997 to 2008, more than 25,000 farmers have committed suicide in Karnataka. It works out to 2740 suicides a year. It is in this background a separate Budget for Agriculture in Karnataka is justified. It focuses attention, exclusively on agricultural sector and steps taken for strengthening it.
The situation of the Agriculture Sector in the country as a whole is no different from what it is in Karnataka. Therefore I urge the central government also to present a separate Budget for Agriculture at least from next year and make an announcement in this year’s budget
2. Set up Farmers’ Income Guarantee Commission
As rightly pointed out by well known Food Policy Analyst Dr.Dhirendra Sharma, in a seminar held in Bengaluru recently, the average income of an agricultural family in the country, is far below the monthly salary of a peon in government service. In Karnataka it is even below the national average. Therefore I, urge the Union Finance Minister to set up a Farmers’ Income Guarantee Commission (F.I.G.C.) on the lines of Pay Commission for the government servants. The Farmers’ Income Guarantee Commission should aim at providing a minimum monthly income for every Agricultural Family, which is equivalent to the monthly salary of a peon in government service. F.I.G.C. should be announced in the current Budget.
3. Emphasise dry land farming
Karnataka has the dubious distinction of having the second largest desert like area, in the whole country after Rajasthan. To mitigate this situation I urge the union finance minister to allocate liberal funds to Karnataka for undertaking on a large scale, minor irrigation projects such as construction and restoration of Tanks, check dams and water harvesting schemes.
4. Skill Development Programmes
One of the serious problems facing the Agricultural sector in Karnataka as well as the country is large scale migration of the youth from the villages. Therefore it is absolutely essential to create favourable atmosphere in which the youth stay in their own villages and find attractive employment facilities. From this point of view I urge the Union Budget to establish micro and small food processing units at village level, start Industrial Training Centers at Taluk level with emphasis on Food Processing, Dairy Farming, Repair of farm equipments and such other rural need based courses.
5. Protection of River Catchment areas
Western Ghats in Karnataka are the sources of many rivers such as Kaveri, Hemavathi, Thunga, Bhadra, Sharavathi, Kali and so on. These rivers are the lifeline of the entire South India. However in the recent years Rainfall in the catchment areas of these rivers is fast decreasing on account of deforestation and mono culture plantations. Hence the union Budget should have urgent and appropriate schemes to protect the catchment areas of the major rivers of Karnataka and their tributaries, with dense tree cover with local species rather than exotic species.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
TRIPS Agreement – A threat to India’s rich Bio-diversity and Food and Health Security
TRIPS Agreement – A threat to India’s rich Bio-diversity and Food and Health Security
“An unprecedented corporate power grab is under way within the Uruguay Round Negotiations of a new version of the GATT, the treaty which governs most of the world’s trade. By clever manipulation of free trade symbols and dependency between nations, multinational corporations hope to harmonise downwards: consumer protection, environmental and worker safety standards and wage levels. Special burdens are in store for Third World Countries whose sovereignty the multi national companies are hoping to further erode.”
- Ralph Nader, USA’s foremost Consumer Rights Activist
The TRIPS (Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights) Agreement happens to be the most sinister of all agreements of G.A.T.T – 94 forced on the developing countries by the western M.N.C.s through their governments. The TRIPS agreement forces all the developing countries to have I.P.R. legislations which are similar to the western IPR legislations. This is intended to help the western M.N.C.s especially in the farming and pharmaceutical business to gain complete control over the rich biological and genetic resources and associated vast indigenous knowledge built over centuries, to boost their private profits. In fact the basic frame work for the TRIPS patent system was conceived and shaped by a group of 13 large American M.N.Cs represented by the Intellectual Property Committee (I.P.C) of USA. The members of the I.P.C were Bristol Myers, Dupont, General Electric Motors, Hewlett Packered, IBM, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Monsanto, Pfizer, Rockwell and Warner. There is no wonder then that the TRIPS agreement is out and out pro-M.N.Cs and anti-people.
Indian Patent act 1970
The Indian patent act 1970, as it was prior to 1995 was truly a patent act drafted by true nationalists and tailor made for the specific needs of India’s developing economy. Indian Patent Act 1970 had a non-patentability clause. The Act provided that inventions in the fields of Atomic Energy, Agriculture and Horticulture are not patentable. Life forms are also non-patentable. It provided only process patent for Food, Agro chemicals and Medicines. The patent period was only 7 years for process patents. For effectively protecting the misuse of patent monopoly by the patentees, the Act provided for Compulsory Licensing and Licensing of Rights
For the purpose of encouraging domestic production of drugs and medicines and national self reliance, the Act considered imports as not working of the patent.
The Indian Patent Act 1970 protected the interests of both the inventor and consumer in a balanced manner. It also gave priority to national interest over the interests of the Patentee. It was hailed by many countries and the UNCTAD as one of the most progressive statutes and an ideal act for developing countries.
The TRIPS agreement however has forced India, being a signatory to GATT 94 to adopt a TRIPS compliant patent Act. Some of the features of it are;
i. Patent shall be available for all inventions – provided that they are new, involve one or more inventive steps and are capable of industrial application.
ii. Protection will also be extended to micro organisms, Non biological and microbiological processes and plant varieties either by patents or by effective sui generis system.
iii. Product patent shall be granted for Drugs, Medicines and Agro chemicals.
iv. Patent period to be 20 years.
v. Imports also should be treated as working of the patent.
Thus the TRIPS patent system enforced on India is diametrically opposite to the Indian Patent Act 1970 – our own Act. While the Indian Patent Act 1970 was India centric, the TRIPS Patent system is global M.N.C centric. Further while Indian Patent Act 1970 balances the rights and responsibilities of the patent holders, the TRIPS patent system gives only rights and no responsibilities to the patent holders – the M.N.Cs. Hence helping the Indian population by providing them sustainable food and health security at affordable cost is only subservient to the commercial interests of the Global M.N.Cs.
India as a faithful member of the WTO has already complied with all the TRIPS requirements by enacting a series of substantive amendments to the Indian Patent Act 1970 in 1999, 2002 and 2005. The Indian Patent (amendment) Act 2005 is only a ghost of the earlier Indian Patent Act 1970. There is nothing in it to be called Indian.
Fall outs
Onslaught on Indian Bio-Diversity resources and Indian traditional knowledge base.
CBD Vs TRIPS
The historic UNCED Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro held in June 1992, resulted in a landmark agreement called Convention on Biological Diversity – CBD.
The Preamble of the CBD recognizes and reaffirms,
The intrinsic value of biological diversity
The sovereign rights of states over their biological resources
The fundamental requirement of insitu conservation of eco system and natural habitats.
The supporting role of exsitu measures.
The vital role of local communities and women in the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.
The desirability of sharing equitably the benefits arising from the use of traditional knowledge, skills, innovations and practices.
The importance and the need to promote regional and global cooperation for conservation and
The requirement of substantial investments to conserve biological diversity.
The CBD is an excellent effort at conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity on the basis of benefit sharing.
171 countries signed the CBD with the lone exception of the USA.
The USA on the other hand, spearheaded the TRIPS patent regime and prevailed upon all the member countries to adopt IPR legislations facilitating patenting of micro organisms and other life forms and patenting of seeds.
The CBD and TRIPS patent regime are again diametrically opposite. While CBD recognizes the intrinsic value of bio diversity for the welfare of humanity, TRIPS treats bio diversity found mostly in the developing countries of the tropics as a commercial gold mine to be exploited by the global M.N.Cs for their private commercial gains.
The CBD recognizes the vital role of local communities and especially women in the conservation and sustainable use of bio diversity and emphasizes fair and equitable sharing of benefits. The TRIPS on the contrary facilitates and encourages commercial exploitation of bio diversity of developing countries such as India and traditional knowledge of local communities and denying them any benefit through bio piracy by M.N.Cs.
CBD recognizes bio diversity resources and traditional knowledge as common property resources and heritage, The TRIPS treats them as private property of M.N.C.s, exploitable through patent regime. It is an irony that today the exploitative TRIPS has gained precedence over the egalitarian CBD.
Bio diversity – wild as well as cultivated, and associated traditional knowledge happen to be a common property resource in the traditional societies on which the poor and the marginalized majority depend for the food and medicines. It is their source of culture too. Throwing open the bio diversity to the exploitative TRIPS regime under the pressure of US and its M.N.Cs has put the food and health security of the majority of people in India and other developing countries under great stress and threat.
The US which forces all other countries especially the developing countries like India to amend their IPR acts to make them TRIPS compliant, refuses to amend its own Acts. The US Act called The Uruguay Round Agreement Act provides under section 102 (a) that if there are inconsistencies between the provisions of WTO and the US laws, the latter will prevail. This brings out clearly the duplicity of the American attitude.
Bio Piracy
Global M.N.Cs have engaged in pirating vital genetic resources found in the developing countries and associated traditional knowledge to get patent for them in their own countries. In this process, the developing countries are continuously denied of the benefits which legitimately belong to them. The patenting of Indian basmati rice variety by the Rice Tech company of the US, granting of patent by the European Patent Office to Monsanto over Nap Hal - an Indian traditional wheat variety, patenting of entire gene sequences of rice by the Swiss M.N.C Syngenta, patenting of medicinal properties of turmeric, neem, jamoon, bittegourd and such other Indian varieties and the associated knowledge, by the US and the European M.N.Cs are only a few well known cases of bio piracy of Indian biological diversity and traditional knowledge. The list goes on.
Patenting of seeds in the name of Breeders Rights has been facilitated in India by the enactment of The Plant Variety Protection and Farmer’s Rights Act. The Seeds Bill 2004 which punishes the breeding, processing, storing, selling and exchanging of non certified seeds and plant materials, is already before the parliament. Both of them are intended at destroying the traditional seed rights of the Indian farmers and empowering the global seed companies such as Monsanto, Syngenta and so on.
A horde of Genetically Engineered bio products such as GE Paddy, Wheat, corn, Oil seeds and vegetables are descending on the farming sector of India. All of them have strong IPR Protection and are corporate controlled. They will soon destroy the rich agro bio diversity of India, erode the seed sovereignty of the farmers, increase the strangle hold of global M.N.Cs on Indian agriculture, make seeds costlier and supply GE Foods which are dangerous on human and animal health and destroy the soil and environment through genetic pollution. Add to this the terminator technology for producing sterile seeds and the Genetic Use Restriction Technology (GURT)
The third amendment to the Indian Patent Act brought about in the year 2005, providing product patent to drugs and pharmaceuticals is another case of making medicines unaffordable and inaccessible to the vast majority in the country.
As Vandana Shiva rightly argues “The TRIPS agreement militates against people’s human right to food and health by conferring unrestricted monopoly rights to corporations in the vital sectors of health and agriculture.”
I would request all the participants in the seminar to focus attention on evolving ways and means to safeguard the food security, health security of the Indians and the rich Bio Diversity of the country from the rapacious TRIPS Patent regime.
=================================
Prof. B. M. Kumara Swamy
Convener-Swadeshi Jagaran Manch
Karnataka
References:
1. PATENTS
myths & reality. By Vandana Shiva
2. TRIPS Agreement on Patent Laws: Impact on Pharmaceuticals and Health for all. By B.K. Keayla
Articles:
Threat to Bio diversity. By Suman Sahai.
Swadeshi Patrika May 2006
From Seed to Retail, creating Monopolies in Agriculture. By Vandana Shiva.
Swadeshi Patrika Feb 2006
Gene Revolution is Dangerous. By Suman Sahai.
Swadeshi Pathrika Feb.2006
Protect Bio resources. By Ashok. B. Sharma.
Swadeshi Pathrika March 2004
The Corporate Rice. By Devinder Sharma.
Swadeshi Pathrika March 2004
“An unprecedented corporate power grab is under way within the Uruguay Round Negotiations of a new version of the GATT, the treaty which governs most of the world’s trade. By clever manipulation of free trade symbols and dependency between nations, multinational corporations hope to harmonise downwards: consumer protection, environmental and worker safety standards and wage levels. Special burdens are in store for Third World Countries whose sovereignty the multi national companies are hoping to further erode.”
- Ralph Nader, USA’s foremost Consumer Rights Activist
The TRIPS (Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights) Agreement happens to be the most sinister of all agreements of G.A.T.T – 94 forced on the developing countries by the western M.N.C.s through their governments. The TRIPS agreement forces all the developing countries to have I.P.R. legislations which are similar to the western IPR legislations. This is intended to help the western M.N.C.s especially in the farming and pharmaceutical business to gain complete control over the rich biological and genetic resources and associated vast indigenous knowledge built over centuries, to boost their private profits. In fact the basic frame work for the TRIPS patent system was conceived and shaped by a group of 13 large American M.N.Cs represented by the Intellectual Property Committee (I.P.C) of USA. The members of the I.P.C were Bristol Myers, Dupont, General Electric Motors, Hewlett Packered, IBM, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Monsanto, Pfizer, Rockwell and Warner. There is no wonder then that the TRIPS agreement is out and out pro-M.N.Cs and anti-people.
Indian Patent act 1970
The Indian patent act 1970, as it was prior to 1995 was truly a patent act drafted by true nationalists and tailor made for the specific needs of India’s developing economy. Indian Patent Act 1970 had a non-patentability clause. The Act provided that inventions in the fields of Atomic Energy, Agriculture and Horticulture are not patentable. Life forms are also non-patentable. It provided only process patent for Food, Agro chemicals and Medicines. The patent period was only 7 years for process patents. For effectively protecting the misuse of patent monopoly by the patentees, the Act provided for Compulsory Licensing and Licensing of Rights
For the purpose of encouraging domestic production of drugs and medicines and national self reliance, the Act considered imports as not working of the patent.
The Indian Patent Act 1970 protected the interests of both the inventor and consumer in a balanced manner. It also gave priority to national interest over the interests of the Patentee. It was hailed by many countries and the UNCTAD as one of the most progressive statutes and an ideal act for developing countries.
The TRIPS agreement however has forced India, being a signatory to GATT 94 to adopt a TRIPS compliant patent Act. Some of the features of it are;
i. Patent shall be available for all inventions – provided that they are new, involve one or more inventive steps and are capable of industrial application.
ii. Protection will also be extended to micro organisms, Non biological and microbiological processes and plant varieties either by patents or by effective sui generis system.
iii. Product patent shall be granted for Drugs, Medicines and Agro chemicals.
iv. Patent period to be 20 years.
v. Imports also should be treated as working of the patent.
Thus the TRIPS patent system enforced on India is diametrically opposite to the Indian Patent Act 1970 – our own Act. While the Indian Patent Act 1970 was India centric, the TRIPS Patent system is global M.N.C centric. Further while Indian Patent Act 1970 balances the rights and responsibilities of the patent holders, the TRIPS patent system gives only rights and no responsibilities to the patent holders – the M.N.Cs. Hence helping the Indian population by providing them sustainable food and health security at affordable cost is only subservient to the commercial interests of the Global M.N.Cs.
India as a faithful member of the WTO has already complied with all the TRIPS requirements by enacting a series of substantive amendments to the Indian Patent Act 1970 in 1999, 2002 and 2005. The Indian Patent (amendment) Act 2005 is only a ghost of the earlier Indian Patent Act 1970. There is nothing in it to be called Indian.
Fall outs
Onslaught on Indian Bio-Diversity resources and Indian traditional knowledge base.
CBD Vs TRIPS
The historic UNCED Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro held in June 1992, resulted in a landmark agreement called Convention on Biological Diversity – CBD.
The Preamble of the CBD recognizes and reaffirms,
The intrinsic value of biological diversity
The sovereign rights of states over their biological resources
The fundamental requirement of insitu conservation of eco system and natural habitats.
The supporting role of exsitu measures.
The vital role of local communities and women in the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.
The desirability of sharing equitably the benefits arising from the use of traditional knowledge, skills, innovations and practices.
The importance and the need to promote regional and global cooperation for conservation and
The requirement of substantial investments to conserve biological diversity.
The CBD is an excellent effort at conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity on the basis of benefit sharing.
171 countries signed the CBD with the lone exception of the USA.
The USA on the other hand, spearheaded the TRIPS patent regime and prevailed upon all the member countries to adopt IPR legislations facilitating patenting of micro organisms and other life forms and patenting of seeds.
The CBD and TRIPS patent regime are again diametrically opposite. While CBD recognizes the intrinsic value of bio diversity for the welfare of humanity, TRIPS treats bio diversity found mostly in the developing countries of the tropics as a commercial gold mine to be exploited by the global M.N.Cs for their private commercial gains.
The CBD recognizes the vital role of local communities and especially women in the conservation and sustainable use of bio diversity and emphasizes fair and equitable sharing of benefits. The TRIPS on the contrary facilitates and encourages commercial exploitation of bio diversity of developing countries such as India and traditional knowledge of local communities and denying them any benefit through bio piracy by M.N.Cs.
CBD recognizes bio diversity resources and traditional knowledge as common property resources and heritage, The TRIPS treats them as private property of M.N.C.s, exploitable through patent regime. It is an irony that today the exploitative TRIPS has gained precedence over the egalitarian CBD.
Bio diversity – wild as well as cultivated, and associated traditional knowledge happen to be a common property resource in the traditional societies on which the poor and the marginalized majority depend for the food and medicines. It is their source of culture too. Throwing open the bio diversity to the exploitative TRIPS regime under the pressure of US and its M.N.Cs has put the food and health security of the majority of people in India and other developing countries under great stress and threat.
The US which forces all other countries especially the developing countries like India to amend their IPR acts to make them TRIPS compliant, refuses to amend its own Acts. The US Act called The Uruguay Round Agreement Act provides under section 102 (a) that if there are inconsistencies between the provisions of WTO and the US laws, the latter will prevail. This brings out clearly the duplicity of the American attitude.
Bio Piracy
Global M.N.Cs have engaged in pirating vital genetic resources found in the developing countries and associated traditional knowledge to get patent for them in their own countries. In this process, the developing countries are continuously denied of the benefits which legitimately belong to them. The patenting of Indian basmati rice variety by the Rice Tech company of the US, granting of patent by the European Patent Office to Monsanto over Nap Hal - an Indian traditional wheat variety, patenting of entire gene sequences of rice by the Swiss M.N.C Syngenta, patenting of medicinal properties of turmeric, neem, jamoon, bittegourd and such other Indian varieties and the associated knowledge, by the US and the European M.N.Cs are only a few well known cases of bio piracy of Indian biological diversity and traditional knowledge. The list goes on.
Patenting of seeds in the name of Breeders Rights has been facilitated in India by the enactment of The Plant Variety Protection and Farmer’s Rights Act. The Seeds Bill 2004 which punishes the breeding, processing, storing, selling and exchanging of non certified seeds and plant materials, is already before the parliament. Both of them are intended at destroying the traditional seed rights of the Indian farmers and empowering the global seed companies such as Monsanto, Syngenta and so on.
A horde of Genetically Engineered bio products such as GE Paddy, Wheat, corn, Oil seeds and vegetables are descending on the farming sector of India. All of them have strong IPR Protection and are corporate controlled. They will soon destroy the rich agro bio diversity of India, erode the seed sovereignty of the farmers, increase the strangle hold of global M.N.Cs on Indian agriculture, make seeds costlier and supply GE Foods which are dangerous on human and animal health and destroy the soil and environment through genetic pollution. Add to this the terminator technology for producing sterile seeds and the Genetic Use Restriction Technology (GURT)
The third amendment to the Indian Patent Act brought about in the year 2005, providing product patent to drugs and pharmaceuticals is another case of making medicines unaffordable and inaccessible to the vast majority in the country.
As Vandana Shiva rightly argues “The TRIPS agreement militates against people’s human right to food and health by conferring unrestricted monopoly rights to corporations in the vital sectors of health and agriculture.”
I would request all the participants in the seminar to focus attention on evolving ways and means to safeguard the food security, health security of the Indians and the rich Bio Diversity of the country from the rapacious TRIPS Patent regime.
=================================
Prof. B. M. Kumara Swamy
Convener-Swadeshi Jagaran Manch
Karnataka
References:
1. PATENTS
myths & reality. By Vandana Shiva
2. TRIPS Agreement on Patent Laws: Impact on Pharmaceuticals and Health for all. By B.K. Keayla
Articles:
Threat to Bio diversity. By Suman Sahai.
Swadeshi Patrika May 2006
From Seed to Retail, creating Monopolies in Agriculture. By Vandana Shiva.
Swadeshi Patrika Feb 2006
Gene Revolution is Dangerous. By Suman Sahai.
Swadeshi Pathrika Feb.2006
Protect Bio resources. By Ashok. B. Sharma.
Swadeshi Pathrika March 2004
The Corporate Rice. By Devinder Sharma.
Swadeshi Pathrika March 2004
Poisoning the Food The story of Bt. Brinjal
On 14th October 2009, the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee – G.E.A.C. gave the approval for the commercial cultivation of Bt.Brinjal. As this news was flashed in T.V. and the news papers, it caused a stir in the whole country and the farmers, the common people and the N.G.O.s organized protest rallies, seminars and speeches all over the country against Bt.Brinjal. What is this Bt.Brinjal, and what caused the public to protest against it?
The Indian Brinjal
Brinjal is one of the most popular vegetables of India. In fact India is the country of origin of Brinjal. The credit of domesticating Brinjal, which was a wild plant, goes to the ancient Indians. Brinjal has been cultivated in the country, for at least 4000 years. A wide variety of brinjals suitable for different agro climatic conditions, social and cultural requirements have been evolved by the Indian farmers. It is said more than 2000 varieties of brinjals are grown in India. That is the rich bio-diversity of brinjal cultivation in India. In Orissa state alone about 226 varieties of brinjal are cultivated. In India about 76 lakh tons of brinjal is grown in 472,000 hectares of land. Orissa, Bihar, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Andhrapradesh and Karnataka are in the fore front of brinjal cultivation. In Karnataka 37,000 acres are under brinjal cultivation with an annual output of 360,000 tons. In fact there is no shortage of brinjal in the country as made out by the Bio-technology Industry.
What is Bt.Brinjal?
Most of the agricultural crops are attacked by fruit and shoot borers. Brinjal crop also faces this problem. Earlier the crop scientists recommended the spraying of chemical pesticides to control the fruit and shoot borers. They were also telling that the pesticide sprays would not cause any harm to human, animal and ecological health. Now the very same crop scientists have started shouting from house tops, that the use of pesticides is not only harmful to human, animal and ecological health but also increases the cost of cultivation to the farmers. They say they have come up with a new technology to tackle the problem of fruit and shoot borers. That new technology is called Bio-Technology or Genetic Engineering – G.E.
Bacillus Thuriengensis - Bt. is a widely found soil bacterium. It produces a chemical, which is toxic to fruit and shoot borers. The scientists of Monsanto (World’s largest American Bio-Technology MNC) have developed a technology in which the gene-cry 1 Ac of the Bacillus thuringiencis, which is responsible for the production of the toxin, is cut and removed and the gene is inserted into the cell of brinjal seed. The brinjal plant grown out of such a seed produces the toxin in all its various parts such as the roots, the stem, the leaves, the flower, the fruit and so on. When the insect pest attacks the shoots and fruits of the brinjal plant, it consumes the toxin and dies. Since the bio-pesticide is produced by the plant itself, Monsanto says that there is no need to spray pesticides externally. Thus the farmers are not only protected against fruit and shoot borer insect pests, but also the expenditure on pesticides. Such a brinjal which carries an alien gene of Bacillus thuriengensis is called Bt.Brinjal. It is also called Genetically Modified Brinjal or G.M.Brinjal. Food products grown from this technique are called G.M.Food. So Bt.Brinjal is a G.M.Food.
Today scientists are carrying disgusting experiments such as implanting pig gene into cabbage, human gene into rice, firefly gene into peas, and cows, fish genes into tomatoes, spider gene into goats and scorpion gene into corn etc. Such experiments may be described as genetic pollution. Genetic Engineering and the production of G.M.Food are against the principles of Nature and therefore the consumption of G.M.Food may cause serious adverse effects on the health of the people, animals and environment.
The Bt.Brinjal development programme in India is being carried on under Agri Biotechnology Support Programme – ABSP of United States Agency for International Development – USAID. The various agencies participating in this programme are,
1) Monsanto – (U.S.A.)
2) Mahico (Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company) – Mumbai
3) Vegetables Research Institute of India – Varanasi
4) University of Agricultural Sciences – Dharwad (Karnataka)
5) Tamilnadu Agricultural University – Coimbatore.
The University of Agricultural sciences, Dharwad has conducted Bt.Brinjal experiments in 5 centers namely Brahmavara and Kalloli in Karnataka, two centers in Maharashtra and one center in Goa. 5 local brinjal varieties were used to develop their BT varieties, namely, Kudachi, Malapur, Mattugulla, Rabakali and Goa 112.
Bt.Brinjal is the first G.M.Food to be grown in India. It is a test case for Monsanto/Mahico. If it succeeds in getting the approval of the Ministry of Environment and Forests for commercial cultivation, it is prepared to flood the country with more than 50 G.M.Food such as G.M.Cabbage, G.M.Corn, G.M.Cauliflower, G.M.Chickpea, G.M.Groundnut, G.M.Maize, G.M.mustard, G.M.Okra, G.M.Pigeonpea, G.M.Potato, G.M.Papaya, G.M.Rice, G.M.Sorghum and G.M.Tomato. The fight against Bt.Brinjal is very important because if we fail in it, the country will be flooded with G.M.Food with disastrous consequences.
Dangers of G.M.Food
1) The Monsanto scientists and other kept scientists of the government are claiming loudly that Bt.Brinjal and for that matter all G.M.Foods are safe and they will have no adverse effects on the health of the people, animals and environment.
But these scientists of India have lost all credibility. It is the very same scientists who claimed that using chemical fertilizers and chemical pesticides in Agriculture are good and safe. Now after 40 years today everybody knows the havocs caused by chemical fertilizers and pesticides on Indian agriculture. Now they have changed their tunes and started advocating G.M. as safe. How can we believe these chameleons? Today everybody knows that scientists have kept themselves for sale.
2) According to Dr.Pushpa.M.Bargava, a well known scientist and founder of the centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, “Bio safety cannot be guaranteed in a short span of time. It’s a long process. There are a whole lot of protocols to be carried out, which were not done in the case of Bt.Brinjal.”
3) BT. Cotton was also claimed to be safe. But several cases of allergic reactions like mild to severe itching, red and swollen eyes have been reported among agricultural labourers from Madhya Pradesh.
Large number of goats and cattle have reportedly died by eating BT. Cotton leaves in Warangal District of Andhra Pradesh.
4) French geneticist Gilles Eric Seralini, commissioned by Green Peace, to check the claims made by Mahyco at the GEAC, has pronounced that the data submitted was insufficient and misleading on several counts and the GEAC wanting in diligence.
5) Scientists with social concern are warning that consumption of G.M.Food may harm intestines, kidneys and reproductive systems. Children may be more prone to such consequences.
“Bt.Brinjal will be a catastrophe as it contains antibiotic resistant marker gene, which has the potential to unleash super diseases that are not known to us now. It will turn our intestinal bacteria into living pesticide factories, says Jeffrey M. Smith, Founder Director, Institute for Responsible Technology, Iowa U.S.A.
6) Brinjal flower is conducive to high rate of crosspollination. Therefore there is the danger of desi brinjal varieties getting spoilt due to cross pollination from fields in the vicinity cultivating Bt.Brinjal.
7) Bt.Brinjal destroys the bio-diversity of Brinjal in the country.
8) Monsanto and its kept scientists claim that Bt.Brinjal is superior to indigenous varieties and it is quite safe. But if that is true why are they afraid of labeling them? Bt.Brinjal looks similar to desi brinjal. One cannot make out the difference. Danger lies here. Therefore it is necessary for us to demand labeling of Bt.Brinjal.
9) Every consumer has right to choose safe food. If Bt.Brinjal and other G.M.Foods are not labeled, it violates consumers’ rights. Thus Bt.Brinjal and other G.M.Foods violate Consumer Protection Act of India.
10) However it is very difficult to find out whether brinjal or any food carries alien genes. India does not have such sensitive equipments and laboratories. Therefore labeling of G.M. Foods is impossible at present. Till such time as such facilities are created in adequate numbers, we must demand that the government should not permit commercial cultivation of G.M.Foods.
11) G.M.Foods will not benefit Nature, the Environment and certainly not the mankind. The only beneficiaries are a handful of Multinational Agri. business corporate such as Monsanto, Syngenta, Dupont, Bayer and so on.
Anti G.M. Movement
180 countries in the world do not allow G.M.Foods. 22 countries in Europe have regions wanting to be G.M. Free. States in Australia, regions in New Zealand and Brazil, the countries of Venezuela, Zambia, Sudan, Angola and others all want to be G.M. Free. France, Hungary, Italy, Greece, Austria, Poland and Romania have all banned Monsanto’s Mon 810 G.M. corn because of its documented hazards to bio diversity and human health.
G.M.Crops are against the principles of Nature and therefore they cannot be safe.
G.M.Crops are protected by strong Intellectual Property Rights Acts. They destroy farmer’s traditional freedom to save, share and use seeds. It will lead to corporate tyranny over Indian Agriculture and Agriculturists.
G.M.Crops will destroy the low cost, natural and sustainable agriculture which India has practiced for thousands of years.
It is our sacred duty to preserve, protect and perpetuate the farmer centric; low cost natural and sustainable Agriculture of India, which has sustained our economy, society and our rich culture since thousands of years. Come! Let us all protest against the onslaught of G.M.Crops.
Do you know?
A recent research report by the Austrian Government States that consumption of one of the GM Foods – Bt corn – For instance can lead to infertility.
In UK, a study found that soya allergies skyrocketed to 50% after GM soya bean were imported.
Russian Academy of Sciences reported six times higher mortality rate for new-born rats when the mother rat was fed on a diet of modified soya.
Italian researchers have found that GM soya affected the liver and pancreas of mice.
Even seed giant Monsanto’s own studies have shown that some rats fed on Gm corn had smaller kidneys and variations in the composition of their blood, while the rats fed on normal maize were healthy.
Australia had even to abandon a decade – long attempt to develop Genetically Modified Peas when an official study found it caused lung damage.
Independent analysis of Mahyco’s Bt.Brinjal biosafety data proved that the Genetically Modified (GM) Brinjal is unsafe for human consumption. The study team led by Prof. Gilles-Eric SEralini of committee for Independent Research and Information on genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), France concluded that Bt.Brinjal release into the environment, for food, feed or cultures may present a serious risk for human and animal health and the release should be forbidden.
Quotable Quotes
“Have mercy on the planet. Stop using Genetically Modified food.”
Sri Sri Ravi Shankar – Guruji
“This time it involves you, through the food you eat. If there is a reason to get angry, it is now!”
Devinder Sharma
Prominent Food & trade Analyst
“GMO is man’s heinous act of playing God and can lead only to total destruction of the planet.”
Jai chaitanya Dasa, ISKON
“Production and promotion of Genetically Modified Foods is an act of Bio-terrorism. Question is – should we remain a mute spectator and let the biotech companies use our bodies as their slaves in India?”
Mahesh Bhatt
Film maker & presenter of Poison on Platter
Source – “MY RIGHT TO SAFE FOOD”
*******************************************************************
Cows are not for eating
Cows are not for eating
The Government of Karnataka is to be congratulated for enacting the Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act with stringent provisions. A small section of the people is raising objections against the Act especially on the ground that it deprives a section of the people of their food namely beef. However we must know that beef is not a staple food in Karnataka for any religious group, as it is in America. It may cause only small inconvenience for a short period which is not insurmountable. But the economic and environmental advantages of cow protection far out-weigh the small inconvenience.
Several studies have been published on the serious economic and environmental impacts of beef industry in the U.S. They say,
1. It takes 16 pounds of grain to produce one pound of beef.
2. About 20 vegetarians can be fed on the land that it takes to feed one beef eater.
3. 56% of all agricultural land in the U.S. is used for beef production. If all of the Soya beans and grain fed yearly to U.S. livestock were set aside for human consumption, it would feed 1.3 billion people.
4. One pound of beef from cattle raised on feed lots represents the loss of 35 pounds of top soil.
5. In the U.S. about 260 million acres of forest have been cleared for a meat centered diet.
6. Each pound of hamburger made from Central American or South American beef costs about 55 square feet of rain forest vegetation.
7. 25 gallons of water is needed to produce one pound of wheat, but 2500 gallons of water is needed to produce one pound of beef.
(Source: Divine Nature by Michael Crème and Mukunda Goswamy)
The above facts will reveal that beef eating is economically irrational and environmentally destructive. The Gnanapeeta Awardees who are opposing the cow slaughter prohibition Act on the grounds of beef shortage should take note of these.
The Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court of India in its judgement dated 26/10/2005 (Civil Appeal Nos. 4937-4940 of 1998) has upheld the ban on slaughter of cow progeny imposed by section 2 of Bombay Animal Preservation (Gujarath Amendment) Act 1994. It must be noted that the judgement is mainly based on great economic benefits from protection of cow and its progeny as against the claimed benefit of killing and eating them.
National Commission on Cattle. Recommendations
Vide its resolution dated 2nd August 2001, the Government of India established a National Commission on Cattle, comprising of 17 members. The commission was given the following terms of reference.
a) To review the relevant laws of the land (Centre as well as States) which relate to protection, preservation, development and well being of cow and its progeny and suggest measures for their effective implementation.
b) To study the existing provisions for the maintenance of Goshalas, Gosadans, Pinjarapoles and other organizations working for protection and development of cattle and suggest measures for making them economically viable.
c)To study the contribution of cattle towards the Indian economy and to suggest ways and means of organising scientific research for maximum utilization of cattle products and draught animal power in the field of nutrition and health, agriculture and energy, and to submit a comprehensive scheme in this regard to the Central Government.
d) To review and suggest measures to improve the availability of feed and fodder to support the cattle population.
The Committee after extensive research has given a list of recommendations. Some of them are,
1. The prohibition of slaughter of cow and its progeny, which would include bull, bullocks etc. should be included in the Fundamental Rights are as a Constitutional Mandate anywhere else, as an Article of Constitution. It should not be kept only in the Directive Principles or Fundamental duties as neither of these or enforceable by the courts.
2. The amendment of the Constitution should also be made for empowering the Parliament to make a Central Law for the prohibition of slaughter of cow and its progeny and further for prohibition of their transport from one state to another.
3. The Parliament should then make a Central Law applicable to all States, prohibiting slaughter of cow and its progeny. Violation of the Law should make a non-bailable and cognizable offence.
The above recommendations of the National Commission and the Supreme Court Judgement clearly emphasize the great role played by cow and its progeny in promoting a sustainable agriculture, inclusive development of the country and an environment friendly life style. Surely COWS ARE NOT FOR EATING.
Prof.B.M.Kumaraswamy,
Shivamogga.
*************************************************************
The Government of Karnataka is to be congratulated for enacting the Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act with stringent provisions. A small section of the people is raising objections against the Act especially on the ground that it deprives a section of the people of their food namely beef. However we must know that beef is not a staple food in Karnataka for any religious group, as it is in America. It may cause only small inconvenience for a short period which is not insurmountable. But the economic and environmental advantages of cow protection far out-weigh the small inconvenience.
Several studies have been published on the serious economic and environmental impacts of beef industry in the U.S. They say,
1. It takes 16 pounds of grain to produce one pound of beef.
2. About 20 vegetarians can be fed on the land that it takes to feed one beef eater.
3. 56% of all agricultural land in the U.S. is used for beef production. If all of the Soya beans and grain fed yearly to U.S. livestock were set aside for human consumption, it would feed 1.3 billion people.
4. One pound of beef from cattle raised on feed lots represents the loss of 35 pounds of top soil.
5. In the U.S. about 260 million acres of forest have been cleared for a meat centered diet.
6. Each pound of hamburger made from Central American or South American beef costs about 55 square feet of rain forest vegetation.
7. 25 gallons of water is needed to produce one pound of wheat, but 2500 gallons of water is needed to produce one pound of beef.
(Source: Divine Nature by Michael Crème and Mukunda Goswamy)
The above facts will reveal that beef eating is economically irrational and environmentally destructive. The Gnanapeeta Awardees who are opposing the cow slaughter prohibition Act on the grounds of beef shortage should take note of these.
The Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court of India in its judgement dated 26/10/2005 (Civil Appeal Nos. 4937-4940 of 1998) has upheld the ban on slaughter of cow progeny imposed by section 2 of Bombay Animal Preservation (Gujarath Amendment) Act 1994. It must be noted that the judgement is mainly based on great economic benefits from protection of cow and its progeny as against the claimed benefit of killing and eating them.
National Commission on Cattle. Recommendations
Vide its resolution dated 2nd August 2001, the Government of India established a National Commission on Cattle, comprising of 17 members. The commission was given the following terms of reference.
a) To review the relevant laws of the land (Centre as well as States) which relate to protection, preservation, development and well being of cow and its progeny and suggest measures for their effective implementation.
b) To study the existing provisions for the maintenance of Goshalas, Gosadans, Pinjarapoles and other organizations working for protection and development of cattle and suggest measures for making them economically viable.
c)To study the contribution of cattle towards the Indian economy and to suggest ways and means of organising scientific research for maximum utilization of cattle products and draught animal power in the field of nutrition and health, agriculture and energy, and to submit a comprehensive scheme in this regard to the Central Government.
d) To review and suggest measures to improve the availability of feed and fodder to support the cattle population.
The Committee after extensive research has given a list of recommendations. Some of them are,
1. The prohibition of slaughter of cow and its progeny, which would include bull, bullocks etc. should be included in the Fundamental Rights are as a Constitutional Mandate anywhere else, as an Article of Constitution. It should not be kept only in the Directive Principles or Fundamental duties as neither of these or enforceable by the courts.
2. The amendment of the Constitution should also be made for empowering the Parliament to make a Central Law for the prohibition of slaughter of cow and its progeny and further for prohibition of their transport from one state to another.
3. The Parliament should then make a Central Law applicable to all States, prohibiting slaughter of cow and its progeny. Violation of the Law should make a non-bailable and cognizable offence.
The above recommendations of the National Commission and the Supreme Court Judgement clearly emphasize the great role played by cow and its progeny in promoting a sustainable agriculture, inclusive development of the country and an environment friendly life style. Surely COWS ARE NOT FOR EATING.
Prof.B.M.Kumaraswamy,
Shivamogga.
*************************************************************
Saturday, 24 December 2011
20 years of Globalisation A (im) balance sheet
20 years of Globalisation
A (im) balance sheet
The I.M.F. thrust the Policy of Globalisation on a helpless Government of India in July 1991, when the foreign exchange reserves of the country had touched the bottom of the barrel. It is 20 years since we are living with the policy of Globalisation and it is long enough time to make an evaluation of it.
GAINS
1] G.D.P. Growth Rate
a) In the 80s India’s G.D.P. Growth rate was just 5% to 6%. However since 2003-04 it has exceeded 8%
2003-04 -------- 8.5%
2005-06 -------- 9.5%
2006-07 -------- 9.7%
2007-08 -------- 9.0%
2008-09 -------- 6.8%
2009-10 -------- 8.0%
2010-11 -------- 8.5%
b) G.D.P. 2010-11 Rs Cr
At current prices 78, 77,947
At 2004-05 prices 48, 79,232
c) India a Trillion Dollar Economy. There are only 12 countries in the world with a G.D.P. of more than a Trillion Dollars. U.S.A., Japan, Germany, China, U.K., France, Italy, Canada, Spain, Brazil, Russia and India. India became a Trillion Dollar Economy in 2007-08 (Rs. 42, 83,000 Cr).
d) G.D.P. Composition (%)
Ag Ind Services
1950-51 55 15 30
1980-81 38 24 38
2008-09 17 25 58
2] Size of the Union Budget
Year Revenue Expenditure
(Rs. Cr) (Rs. Cr)
1980-81 12,830 14,540
2001-02 2, 01,450 3, 01,610
2009-10 6, 14,497 8, 97,232
2011-12 8, 00,000 12, 00,000
3] Balance of Payments
Trade Balance 1985-86 ----- 1989-90
Annual Average (Rs. Cr)
Imports Exports B/T
25,112 17,382 -7730
2009-10
3, 00,609 1, 82,235 -1, 18,374
4] Foreign Capital (In Million Dollars)
Year F.D.I. Portfolio Total
1991-92 129 4 133
1999-2000 2155 3026 5181
2007-08 34360 27271 61631
2008-09 35168 -13855 21313
LOSSES
1] Agricultural Crisis
a) Agriculture is fast losing out. Agricultural growth rate has hovered between 0-3 percent over this 20 year period.
The contribution of Agriculture sector to G.D.P. has come down to 15%
b) Farmers’ suicides
(National Crime Records Data)
1997-2002 ---------------- 96,708
2003-2008 ---------------- 102424
Total 199132
Big Five States
1. Maharashtra ------------ 41404
2. Andhra Pradesh--------- 23279
3. Karnataka ---------------- 25685
4. M.P.& Chhattisgarh ---- 32454
Total ---------------------122, 822
62% of total Farmer suicides.
2] Unemployment
Jobless Growth
Casualisation of Labour
(N.S.S. 66th Round Report)
Casual workers increased by 2004-05 ---- 2009-2010 ---> 219 lakhs.
Casual labour as a percentage of total workforces increased in 2009-10 to
Rural Areas ------------------- 38.6%
Urban -------------------------- 17.5%
(2004-05)
Rural ---------------------------- 35%
Urban --------------------------- 15%
3] Poverty
B.P.L. Estimates.
1. Planning Commission ------- 28%
2. Suresh tendulkar ------------- 37.2%
3. N.C.Sexena --------------------- 50%
4. Arjun Sengupta --------------- 78%
(N.C.U.E.S)
5. U.N.D.P. Multi dimensional Poverty Index --- 55%
6. 45% of children below 5 years are severely malnourished. India is home to world’s largest food insecure population.
4] Human Development Rank
2007 ------------ 128/177
2008 ------------ 132/179
2009 ------------- 134/182
2010 ------------ 119/169
2008 H.D.R.
Srilanka ----------- 104
Vietnam ----------- 114
China --------------- 94
Cuba ----------------- 48
National co-convener Prof.B.M.Kumaraswamy
Swadeshi Jagaran Manch Shivamogga
******************************************************
********************************************************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)