Focus on agriculture

THE current spike in the prices of basic food items and their scarcity are the outcome of external and domestic factors. It seems that a disproportionate emphasis has been placed on external factors, important though they are, and not the internal factors.

What are these internal factors? On the demand side, low-income groups spend about two-thirds to three-quarters of the family budget on food without meeting their nourishment needs. Any increase in the price of food, without a concomitant increase in income, translates into increased food insecurity. It seems that these groups have experienced little if any increase in their income: rising prices have more than offset the increase in nominal incomes.

However, perhaps the more serious constraint has been on the supply side, namely the production and distribution of food.

Both farmers and consumers are understandably unhappy about the state of agriculture in Pakistan. The reason is that overall productivity in agriculture is low and has not increased by much in the last decade at least. In the meantime, the cost of doing business has been rising as has the demand for agricultural products. What should be done to make agriculture more productive and profitable? There is no simple answer.

But one thing is almost indisputable: governments should leave greater space for the private sector to produce and distribute agricultural products and limit their role to providing public goods, facilitating farmers in raising farm productivity, regulating markets and protecting the interests of low-income consumers. Given this principle, public policy should focus on several fronts to let agriculture make its desired contribution to the economy and society.

1. Stop wasting water since water and not land is the binding constraint. Water should be treated as a private good, whereas its infrastructure (dams, canals and watercourses) is a public good. Make the irrigation system demand-driven to reduce waste this should apply equally to surface as well as ground water. Water users should pay the scarcity value of water or the value it adds to their well-being. Investment in the irrigation infrastructure should be adequate and the assets well protected.

The centralised supply-driven irrigation system has been a massive failure no matter how you look at it. Start from the top: restore trust between provinces about the distribution of river waters; hand over the canal commands to autonomous and privately managed organisations; and move from time-based to volume-based supply of water to farmers at the watercourse level.

2. Since the quantity of land available for agriculture is limited, it is necessary to rationalise its use. One way to do this is to help activate the land market and reduce costly disputes: give owners proprietary rights to land with titles, entrenched in law and well recorded. Another way is to reduce the concentration of landownership and protect the rights of tenants (variable or fixed rents): a well-designed and well-administered land reform programme can do this. A related issue is the protection of land quality: reduce dependence of farmers on chemicals and excessive tillage and make the supply of water reliable.

3. Increase investment in the production and transfer of technologies that increase the productivity and profitability of crops and livestock products. But investment alone is not the answer: make the public-sector institutions engaged in research and extension services responsive to the demand for new technologies. Co-ordination and collaboration are important within the public sector and between public- and private-sector agencies and enterprises.

The important point is that technology packages must focus on good crop seeds and breeds of livestock, reduced dependence on chemicals, and increased use of labour-intensive and resource-conserving technologies. It is absolutely essential to respect the intellectual property (or patent) rights of entrepreneurs, be they in the public or private sector.

4. Governments should not control the input and output markets but regulate them prudently. They should have no monopoly on mandis (markets for grains, fruits and vegetables, and live animals) and abattoirs. Also, they should not try to ‘cap’ the price of milk or meat or any other agricultural product. All of these intrusions are counterproductive and tend to encourage rent-seeking, and perverse mafia-like behaviour among the stakeholders.

Let the private sector run mandis, abattoirs and the rest as long as the government does its job well. This will help reduce the number of intermediaries and their margins: the gains will be shared by farmers and consumers. The primary task of governments should be to keep the markets fairly competitive and protect the quality and safety of agricultural products, pesticides, fertilisers and other chemicals.

5. Cut down on subsidies for farm inputs (private goods) since they tend to distort incentives and are unfairly distributed. If necessary, provide targeted support to producers and consumers but make sure that leakages are minimised and incentives not distorted. But this is easier said than done. What most farmers, especially the small ones, want is reliable access to capital from institutional sources, provided the cost is not quite as high as that of loans available from other, non-institutional sources.

6. Do not transfer the agricultural surplus to the rest of the economy through insidious (indirect) taxes or price discrimination, but do tax agricultural incomes and wealth as is the case for other forms of incomes and wealth in the economy. Getting prices right will reduce the burden of indirect taxes on agricultural producers and create the necessary incentive for increased production and productivity.

7. Increase public investment in building and maintaining the rural physical infrastructure and give fiscal and other incentives to the private sector to invest in transport, storage, cold chains, abattoirs, etc. However, governments should not create enterprises (corporations) that give little help to the private sector and drain the government budget.

8. Invest in farmer field schools to enhance literacy and numeracy. It is well known that education makes a big difference to farm productivity. In addition, the curricula for schools in rural areas should reflect the practical importance of farming to reduce youth alienation. Also, invest in creating non-farm skills which can help the landless improve their well-being.

9. Governments should facilitate production of niche products and support the export of horticultural and livestock products. In this context, their basic role is to provide market information, regulate the quality of products and maintain grades and standards.

10. Governments should not ban the movement of agricultural products across district and provincial boundaries. They lead to undesirable outcomes. Regulate foreign trade in agricultural products through rationalised tariffs while maintaining the internationally required standards for product quality and safety.

Poets & artists, we missed you

AS Aitzaz Ahsan’s poem became the anthem of the long march, it was recited like a mantra from Karachi to Khyber. Jalib and Faiz too were remembered but direly missed was the verse of the poets of the day.

Many of us are asking where were the artists and poets who with their visual and verbal expression at art exhibitions and mushairas tirelessly echo the angst of the people, and call for peace and justice.

We live in a strange time of social disconnect and economic realities that have led to a mutation of relationships and ideals. At one level dysfunctional government is a part of everyday conversation because poor security, power cuts and food inflation stalk our lives, and yet more citizens have become more apathetic towards developing citizen networks and addressing the collective plight.

The creative people of every society with their ultra-sensitive antennae respond spontaneously to social concerns and assimilate them in their expression. The poet has the gift to do it with words, and for the artist the canvas, drawings, sculpture, films and other forms become a mode of articulation. The scholar uses analysis to examine social issues in the wider context of society and the world.

In Pakistan, the response to social ills by artists has gone through different stages. Today we find that protest art has lost its edge and this might have something to do with empathy fatigue and disillusionment due to the country’s prolonged state of crisis.

Painted during the 1960s to the 1980s, Sadequain’s iconic murals ‘Saga of Labour’ (Mangla Dam), ‘Evolution of Mankind’ at Lahore Museum and ‘Arz-o-Samawat’ (Heavens and Earth) located at Frere Hall all offer an optimistic message with human potential portrayed as the key to empowerment and progress.

While he was Pakistan’s cultural attaché to Australia, Bashir Mirza painted his hard-hitting anti-nuke paintings, even at the risk of provoking the displeasure of his hosts, in response to the last major nuclear tests conducted in the Pacific Ocean in the ’90s. He was among a breed of politicised artists that did not shirk from playing their role and gave up painting to go back to advertising during the Ziaul Haq era to protest the overthrow of a people’s government and the judicial murder of ZAB.

Ali Imam was another such artist who refused to give legitimacy to dictatorship with his refusal to accept the Pride of Performance medal.

The changing rules of the game have weakened ideological stands and corrupted social ideals. The recent ‘enlightened moderation’ for culture and non-constitutional rule for the people has confused the nation and battered optimism. All this has seen the artist’s narrative gradually de-linked from the collective and become increasingly personalised.

In a recent exhibition of young talent, an artist brought up in a military household surrounded by cantonment culture painted the inner questioning as the institution central to her life was under heavy public critique. Her work which portrayed a little girl, around five years old, playing with heavy army boots weaves a biography into it as the artist employs her own image and memory. The large canvas is successful in conveying the vulnerability and innocence (of a young nation) oblivious to the controlling power and crushing violence symbolised by the presence of hard boots.It is ironic that this painting has been bought by the owner of a shoe company, probably for the leather product rather than its subtext.

The commodification of art has played a pivotal role in altering the way the artists view their art. Commercial gallery pressure, sometimes subtle and in other cases more overt, to avoid the portrayal of ugly truth and intensely provocative work has made the artist keep a safe distance from core issues. The absence of interfacing with the masses in public galleries also cushions the artist from a reality check, as only such an exchange can compel them to see their art from the perspective of the most affected.

This ritual of creativity can sometimes turn the discourse on social issues into a commodity, and the politicisation of the veil is one of them. Western galleries hungry for dissident art from conflict zones like Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan support media stereotypes and this can unknowingly compromise the content of serious artists.

Instead of supporting its thinkers with premier institutions such as centres of excellence in art education, think tanks and research institutes that can push the social and cultural debate to a higher level, the money that flows from corporations and collectors goes largely towards acquisition, particularly now when art has entered investment portfolios.

Mushairas are no longer open to the public like in the ’60s and ’70s when they contributed to social awareness. That was a time when Habib Jalib marched with the masses and stood his ground on picket lines. Now poetry recitals are ticketed social gatherings in cloistered halls where fiery verse offers momentary catharsis to the chattering classes.

As the lawyers’ long march was about to kick off from the Quaid’s mausoleum, the speech one could hear the loudest was from a religious party contingent on the liberation of Kashmir and fundamentalist agendas. As I stood there forced to listen to it, my mind went to the great leader buried a few yards away. How we the educated minority must have disappointed him with our withdrawal into the comfort zone of armchair politics and abdication of our place on the national podium to anti-democratic and extremist forces.

The late Akhtar Hameed Khan, founder of the Orangi Pilot Project, eminent social scientist and development activist, often equated our time with the decline of the Mughal era when the decadence of the elite and indifference of the intelligentsia were unable to provide the required leadership.

The visionaries of the creative fields have yet to close ranks with social activists to build a critical mass for change. I can almost hear many artists saying ‘this is not our job.’ We have said this for six decades. We did not stand up and be counted when East Pakistan was lost and we did the same when kalashnikovs began to rule the streets.

The choice is ours: to continue the lament or be a part of participatory development. History may otherwise record how time did not wait for a nation.

asnaclay06@yahoo.com

Threat to Sadr militia

ALL over Baghdad and southern Iraq, supporters of Muqtada al-Sadr, the anti-American Shia cleric, are harassed, on the run or in jail. The black-shirted gunmen of his Mehdi Army militia no longer rule in Shia parts of Baghdad, Basra and Amara where once their control was total.

A great survivor of Iraqi politics, Mr Sadr is living in the Iranian holy city of Qom, where he is studying to elevate his position within the Shia religious hierarchy. It was from there, to the dismay of many followers, that he ordered his Mehdi Army fighters to go home and allow the Iraqi army to penetrate their strongholds.

“Muqtada has acute political instincts but he is a terrible organiser,” said an Iraqi secular politician who knows him well. “He is a complete anarchist,” he added, with a laugh. “But the government is not going to succeed in destroying his movement, though his prestige has been damaged.”

Mr Sadr owes his authority to the reverence with which his family of Shia clerics is regarded by millions of poor Iraqis. This is because his father and two brothers were murdered by Saddam Hussein’s gunmen in 1999 and his father-in-law was executed in 1980. Before his father died, he built a movement based on Islamic revivalism, Iraqi nationalism and social populism, which Mr Sadr has inherited.

The Iraqi government is doing its best to liquidate or cripple this Sadrist movement before the provincial elections in October. An American military intelligence assessment this year suggested that Mr Sadr’s followers would win 60 per cent of the vote in Baghdad and southern Iraq.

They are unlikely to do so now. Though the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki pledged to Mr Sadr, when he ordered his gunmen off the streets, that it would not persecute his movement, anybody who belonged to the Mehdi Army in Sadr City is liable to arrest. In Basra, shops that used to sell CDs with songs in praise of Mr Sadr now sell gypsy music and have been told by soldiers to throw their old stock away.

Many Mehdi Army members blame Mr Sadr for letting them down when his men were holding their own. They also wonder why he did not set up monitoring committees to ensure the government implemented the terms of the ceasefires.

Iraqi politicians speculate about whether withdrawal is permanent. “Remember, Muqtada’s men were not militarily defeated,” warned one Iraqi leader.

A Shia politician said: “The main Mehdi Army bastions in Baghdad were Sadr City, with a population of 2.4 million people, and in al-Hurriyah and al- Shu’ala districts, with a further 1.1 million. That is more than half the people in Baghdad, and I suspect the Mehdi Army could take back these areas in 48 hours’ fighting.”

Leaders from Sadr City are more sceptical. Bashir Ali and Ahmed Mohammed, both sheikhs, say the Mehdi Army has become too unpopular to return, owing to its violence and corruption.

But Bashir Ali added: “We cannot express our views publicly because we would be killed. They would shoot us down when we go to the mosque.” He thought the Mehdi Army and the Sadrists were “too deep-rooted in Sadr City after five years in control to be uprooted”. He added: “Maybe if the government had acted two years ago it could have been done, but not now.”

He did not think the Sadrists were able to stage an uprising because of their unpopularity and because, although “they still have their Kalashnikovs and pistols, they have lost their heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenade launchers”.

Ahmed Mohammed said the only good thing the Mehdi Army had ever done was as a local defence force during the sectarian civil war in Baghdad in 2006-07. “When one Shia was kidnapped, they would go and kidnap two Sunni,” he said. With the ebbing of sectarian strife, the Shia in the capital feel less need for militiamen to rule their streets. Mr Sadr’s decision not to fight to the finish against the Iraqi army offensives in the first half of the year was motivated by two reasons. Ever since his militiamen suffered heavy losses fighting US marines in Najaf in 2004, he has tried to avoid fighting the US Army directly, or his Shia rivals when backed by the Americans.

And Mr Sadr learnt during the fighting that Iran was supporting Mr Maliki. The Iranian ambassador to Baghdad, Hassan Kazemi Qumi, said: “The idea in the government was to fight outlaws. This was the right of the government and the responsibility of the government.” Without Iranian support, Mr Sadr’s militiamen were bound to lose; even with it they would have had no answer to US firepower.

The Iraqi army by itself was getting nowhere in Basra and Sadr City before it was backed by the US military. Even in Amara today, there is a US battalion waiting to support Iraqi military forces. Nobody knows how the mainly Shia, 500,000-strong Iraqi security forces would respond if ordered to fight a resurgent Mehdi Army without US support.

— © The Independent, London