Agricultural Development in India Before Independence

India’s agricultural history before 1947 is a story of paradoxes. The country had one of the oldest farming traditions in the world, yet by the time independence arrived, its agriculture was in a state of deep stagnation. Under British colonial rule, agriculture employed more than two-thirds of the economically active population in South Asia, yet growth rates remained stagnant and inequality rose steadily . The colonial period reshaped nearly every aspect of Indian farming – from who owned the land, to what was grown, to where the produce ended up. Understanding these pre-independence developments is essential for anyone studying Indian agriculture today, because many structural issues that emerged under British rule continued to shape the sector long after 1947.

Pre-colonial agriculture: a self-sufficient system 🔗

Before the British arrived, Indian agriculture was largely oriented toward local needs. Farming was dominated by subsistence practices organized in small village communities, where the farmer usually grew just enough to feed himself and the non-agricultural people of the village . When harvests were good, surplus grain was stored for lean years – a simple but effective buffer against famine. India’s farming knowledge was ancient and well-developed. The subcontinent had been cultivating crops like wheat, rice, barley, and cotton for thousands of years. Per-capita agricultural output and standards of consumption in 17th-century Mughal India were comparable to or higher than those in 17th-century Europe, according to economic historians like Irfan Habib and Percival Spear . Irrigation systems existed, village-level governance managed land use, and local trade kept the rural economy functional. This self-sufficiency, however, would be systematically dismantled under colonial rule.

British land revenue systems and their impact on farmers 🔗

One of the most consequential changes the British introduced was a complete overhaul of the land tenure system. Three major systems were implemented across different parts of the country, each designed primarily to maximise revenue collection for the colonial government.

The Zamindari system 🔗

The permanent land settlement introduced by Lord Cornwallis in 1793 affected Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, creating a class of zamindars – a social elite with the right to collect tax on behalf of the British . Zamindars became permanent landlords and intermediaries between the colonial rulers and the actual cultivators. This system became a major cause of agricultural stagnation, as zamindars exploited the cultivators rather than investing in land improvement . Peasants were required to pay fixed sums of money regardless of crop output or weather conditions, and most cultivators became landless labourers trapped in cycles of debt to moneylenders .

The Ryotwari system 🔗

Introduced mainly in the Madras and Bombay Presidencies, the Ryotwari system dealt directly with individual cultivators (ryots) rather than through intermediaries. Under this arrangement, the farmer was recognised as the owner of the land and was responsible for paying revenue directly to the government. While this removed the zamindar middleman in theory, the revenue demands were often excessively high. Even when drought or floods ruined crops, farmers still had to make their tax payments, forcing many to borrow from moneylenders at exploitative interest rates . The result was often the same – crushing debt and dispossession.

The Mahalwari system 🔗

The Mahalwari system, introduced in parts of the United Provinces, Central Provinces, and Punjab, made the village (mahal) collectively responsible for paying revenue. Village headmen or communities jointly shouldered the tax burden. Although this system acknowledged collective ownership, the revenue demands were periodically revised upwards, placing increasing pressure on farming communities. Together, the Zamindari, Ryotwari, and Mahalwari systems played a central role in the stagnation of Indian agriculture during the colonial period .

Commercialisation of agriculture 🔗

Beyond restructuring land ownership, the British fundamentally changed what Indian farmers grew. Starting around the 1860s, agriculture shifted from cultivation for home consumption to cultivation for the market, with cash transactions replacing the traditional barter system . Crops like indigo, opium, cotton, jute, and tea were promoted because they served British industrial interests.

The commercialisation of agriculture was not driven by Indian industrial demand but by British industrial needs – policies like the Tinkathia system in Bihar forced farmers to devote one-third of their land to indigo cultivation . The value of India’s agricultural exports reportedly increased by over 500 per cent between 1859-60 and 1906-07 , but the profits mostly flowed to British business families, large farmers, and moneylenders. For ordinary cultivators, this shift from food crops to cash crops meant reduced food security and greater vulnerability during droughts and famines.

Famines and their colonial roots 🔗

The period between 1850 and 1900 witnessed some of the most devastating famines in Indian history. The British demanded exorbitant land taxes, and even when crops failed, farmers still had to make payments – many took on ruinous loans as a result . The famines were made worse by colonial policies that prioritised exports over domestic food security.

Even during the severe famine of 1876-77, agricultural exports continued to grow to meet land revenue demands . In 1897-98, in the midst of widespread famine and starvation, 17 million sterling of land revenue was collected, with cultivators raising the money largely by selling food grains for export . The Bengal Famine of 1943, which killed an estimated two to three million people, remains one of the most tragic examples of how colonial priorities could devastate the food supply.

Multiple Famine Commissions were appointed to study the causes and recommend solutions. The Famine Commission of 1880 recommended improvements in irrigation, transportation, and storage facilities. The commissions of 1898 and 1901 continued this work. These commissions found that British India produced surplus food grains overall – famines were caused not by an absolute shortage of food, but by the inability of impoverished farmers to afford the food that existed . Despite these findings, implementation of the recommendations remained slow and inadequate.

Establishment of agricultural departments and research institutions 🔗

Not every colonial development was purely extractive. The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw the creation of institutional structures for agricultural research – albeit primarily motivated by the desire to increase revenue and serve British interests.

The Voelcker Report (1893) 🔗

In 1889, the British government invited Dr. John Augustus Voelcker, a consulting chemist to the Royal Agricultural Society of England, to study Indian agriculture. His 1893 report, titled “The Improvement of Indian Agriculture,” established the principle that agricultural progress in India must be firmly based on research . The report recommended establishing agricultural experiment stations, improving seed quality, and expanding irrigation – ideas that would shape institutional development in the following decades.

The Agricultural Research Institute at Pusa (1905) 🔗

A landmark moment came in 1905 with the founding of the Agricultural Research Institute at Pusa, Bihar. The institute was established with a generous grant of £30,000 from American philanthropist Henry Phipps and initially operated with five departments: Agriculture, Cattle Breeding, Chemistry, Economic Botany, and Mycology . The foundation stone was laid by Lord Curzon on 1 April 1905.

The institute’s name was changed to the Imperial Institute of Agricultural Research in 1911 and then to the Imperial Agricultural Research Institute in 1919 . Its location in Bihar was chosen for proximity to indigo plantations that needed research support. After the devastating Bihar earthquake of January 1934, the institute was relocated to New Delhi, where it was inaugurated at its new campus in July 1936 . After independence, it was renamed the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI) and went on to play a pivotal role in the Green Revolution.

Provincial agricultural departments 🔗

Following recommendations from the Voelcker Report and other assessments, the British established provincial agricultural departments across India in the early 1900s. These departments were tasked with promoting improved farming techniques, distributing better seed varieties, and conducting extension work. However, their impact was limited. Most farmers lacked access to credit and could not afford new technologies, so the benefits of these departments largely reached only wealthier landowners.

The Royal Commission on Agriculture (1928) 🔗

The most comprehensive study of Indian agriculture during the colonial period came from the Royal Commission on Agriculture in India. Appointed in 1926, the Commission was tasked with examining the conditions of agriculture and rural economy in British India and making recommendations for improvement and the promotion of welfare of the rural population .

The Commission’s report, published in 1928, covered an enormous range of issues – from agricultural research and education to credit, marketing, irrigation, and animal husbandry. It recommended strengthening agricultural research through better funding and coordination, expanding cooperative credit to free farmers from moneylenders, improving rural education, and developing marketing infrastructure so farmers could get fair prices for their produce.

One of its most significant outcomes was the creation of the Imperial Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) in 1929, which became the coordinating body for agricultural research across India. ICAR continues to function today as the apex body for agricultural research and education in India.

Other key commissions and initiatives 🔗

Several other bodies addressed specific problems in pre-independence agriculture:

The Grow More Food Campaign (1940s) was launched during World War II to address food shortages caused by wartime disruptions and the catastrophic Bengal Famine of 1943. This campaign, along with the later Integrated Production Programme of the 1950s, aimed at boosting food and cash crop production .

The Indian Famine Codes, developed from the 1880s onward based on the Famine Commission recommendations, provided administrative guidelines for famine relief operations, including public works programmes for employment and food distribution. While these codes improved the government’s response to famine, they did not address the structural causes of food insecurity.

The state of agriculture at independence 🔗

By 1947, Indian agriculture was in a dire condition. In the fifty years before independence, average annual agricultural growth was roughly 0.3 per cent, and around 93 per cent of agricultural credit came from moneylenders . Between 1891 and 1946, annual growth of all crop output was just 0.4 per cent, while food grain output was practically stagnant – and population growth in the interwar period outpaced food production, leading to declining food availability per person .

Irrigation facilities and technology were poorly developed, and around 85 per cent of the population depended on agriculture for their livelihood . The partition of India in 1947 further disrupted agricultural patterns, as key crop-growing regions were divided between India and Pakistan.

Yet the colonial period also left behind institutional foundations – research bodies, agricultural departments, famine management frameworks – that independent India would build upon. The challenges of low productivity, fragmented landholdings, and inadequate infrastructure would drive the new nation’s agricultural policies, eventually leading to land reforms in the 1950s and the Green Revolution of the 1960s and 70s.

What do you think? Could the research institutions established under colonial rule – despite being created for British interests – be considered a genuine positive legacy for Indian agriculture? And how much of India’s post-independence food insecurity can be traced directly to the colonial land revenue systems?

References

1. https://www.environmentandsociety.org/exhibitions/famines-india/changing-land-ownership-agricultural-and-economic-systems
2. https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1902-02-03/debates/b2bc1f40-50c5-49ac-a1d7-c63c5a0054c6/IndianFamineCommission
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Agricultural_Research_Institute
4. https://www.iari.res.in/en/about-iari.php
5. https://academic.oup.com/book/10430/chapter/158263588