Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T22:31:47.647Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factor markets and the narrative of economic change in India, 1750–1950

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2009

TIRTHANKAR ROY
TIRTHANKAR ROY
Affiliation:
Department of Economic History, London School of Economics and Political Science.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article revisits an argument that land, labour and credit market transactions in India were restructured by colonialism and globalization, in a manner that left peasants and labourers worse off than before. It shows that the process of change was more diverse than this approach considers, and that it was shaped also by social institutions. I argue further that growth and welfare outcomes of the process cannot be fully understood in terms of market imperfection and state policy. For that purpose, it is necessary to pay more attention to environmental factors and local society.

Les marchés de facteurs de production et l'histoire traditionnelle de l'évolution économique de l'inde, 1750–1950

L'auteur réexamine la thèse selon laquelle les transactions intervenant sur les marchés de la terre, du travail et du crédit en Inde ont été restructurées par le colonialisme et la globalisation, de sorte que paysans et travailleurs se sont retrouvés dans un état pire qu'auparavant. Il montre que la façon dont les choses ont évolué a été bien plus diverse que cette thèse ne l'implique et que ce furent aussi les institutions sociales qui y contribuèrent. Ajoutons que la croissance et les conséquences de ce processus pour le bien-être social ne sauraient être complètement comprises en se bornant à souligner les imperfections des marchés et la politique de l'Etat. Il faut aussi s'intéresser de plus près aux facteurs environnementaux et aux sociétés locales.

Faktormärkte und das narrativ des ökonomischen wandels in indien, 1750–1950

Diese Beitrag dient der kritischen Überprüfung des Argumentes, in Inden seien Transaktionen auf dem Boden-, Arbeits- und Kreditmarkt durch Kolonialismus und Globalisierung so umstrukturiert worden, dass Bauern und Arbeiter danach schlechter dran waren als zuvor. Dabei zeigt sich, dass der Prozess des Wandels mannigfaltiger war als dieser Ansatz annimmt, und dass er auch durch soziale Institutionen geprägt wurde. Ich behaupte ferner, dass die Wachstums- und Wohlstandseffekte des Prozesses sich nicht verstehen lassen, wenn man nur unzulängliche Märkte und staatliche Politik im Blick hat. Dazu ist es vielmehr erforderlich, den Umweltfaktoren und der örtlichen Ausprägung der Gesellschaft mehr Aufmerksamkeit zu widmen.

Type
Research Article
Information
Continuity and Change , Volume 24 , Special Issue 1: FACTOR MARKETS IN GLOBAL ECONOMIC HISTORY , May 2009 , pp. 137 - 167
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ENDNOTES

1 On the mainstream view, see Habib, Irfan, ‘Colonialization of the Indian economy, 1757–1900’, Social Scientist 3, 1 (1975), 20–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and ‘Studying a colonial economy without perceiving colonialism’, Modern Asian Studies 19, 4 (1985), 355–81; Bipan Chandra, ‘The colonial legacy’, in Bimal Jalan ed. The Indian economy (Delhi, 1992); Sumit Sarkar, ‘The colonial economy’, in his Modern India: 1885–1947 (Delhi, 1983); and A. K. Bagchi, The political economy of underdevelopment (Cambridge, 1982), and ‘Markets, market failures, and transformation of authority, property and bondage in colonial India’, in Burton Stein and Sanjay Subrahmanyam eds., Institutions and economic change in south Asia (Delhi, 1996). On a critique of the immiseration story, see Roy, T., ‘Economic history and modern India: redefining the link’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 16, 2 (2002), 109–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On measurement of the performance of the economy, see S. Sivasubramonian, The national income of India in the twentieth century (Delhi, 2000). Several key essays on factor markets are compiled in Sugata Bose ed., Credit, markets and the agrarian economy of colonial India (Delhi, 1994); Gyan Prakash ed., The world of the rural labourer in colonial India (Delhi, 1992); and Rajat K. Ray ed., Entrepreneurship and industry in India 1800–1947 (Delhi, 1994).

2 James Grant, An inquiry into the nature of zemindary tenures in the landed property of Bengal (London, 1791).

3 See discussion in Kumar, Dharma, ‘Private property in Asia? The case of medieval south India’, Comparative Studies in Society and History 27, 2 (1985), 340–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Irfan Habib, ‘The eighteenth century Indian economic history’, in P. J. Marshall ed., The eighteenth century in Indian history (Delhi, 2003), 100–22. See the discussion on population growth in the seventeenth century by Shireen Moosvi, ‘The Indian economic experience 1600–1900: a quantitative study’, in her People, taxation and trade in Mughal India (Delhi, 2008), 1–34.

5 See the ‘introduction’ in Muzaffar Alam and Sanjay Subrahmanyam eds., The Mughal State 1526–1750 (Delhi, 1998), 1–71.

6 Kumar, ‘Private property in Asia?’

7 Desai, A. V., ‘Population and standards of living in Akbar's time’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 9, 1 (1972), 43–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Heston, Alan, ‘The standard of living in Akbar's time: a comment’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 14, 3 (1977), 391–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Burton Stein, ‘Eighteenth century India: another view’, in Marshall ed., The eighteenth century, 62–89.

9 Rulers, townsmen and bazaars: north Indian society in the age of British expansion 1770–1870 (Cambridge, 1983), 46.

10 Stein, ‘Eighteenth century India’.

11 Irfan Habib, ‘Agrarian economy’, in Tapan Raychadhuri and Irfan Habib eds., The Cambridge economic history of India, vol. 1 (Cambridge, 1982), 48–75.

12 See Dharma Kumar, ‘A note on the term “land control”’, in Peter Robb ed., Rural India (Delhi, 1992), 62–77.

13 Tapan Raychaudhuri, ‘The state and the economy: the Mughal empire’, in Raychaudhuri and Habib eds., Cambridge economic history, 172–92.

14 Stein, ‘Eighteenth century India’.

15 Bayly, Rulers, townsmen, 163.

16 Guha, Sumit, ‘The land market in upland Maharashtra’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 24, 2 (1987), 117–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar. These peasant rights were in the nature of miras rights, which were in principle rights over shares of the village produce, but in practice rights of land control were vested in dominant peasant lineages. The miras rights were common in Tamilnadu region as well, and were technically saleable. See Tsukasa Mizushima, ‘Mirasi system as social grammar – state, local society, and raiyat in the 18th–19th South India’, available at www.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~zushima9/pdf(for%20hp)/1-28.doc.

17 ‘Agrarian relations: eastern India’, in Dharma Kumar ed., The Cambridge economic history of India, vol. 2 (Cambridge, 1983), 93.

18 Robb, Peter, ‘Hierarchy and resources: peasant stratification in late nineteenth century Bihar’, Modern Asian Studies, 13, 1 (1979), 97–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Evidence of A. Forbes (former Secretary to Tagore), British Parliamentary Papers (hereafter BPP), 1859 Session 1 (198), Select committee to inquire into progress and prospects for promotion of European colonization and settlement in India: report, proceedings, minutes of evidence, index (London, 1859), 148.

20 Robb, Peter, ‘Peasants' choices? Indian agriculture and the limits of commercialization in nineteenth century Bihar’, Economic History Review 45, 1 (1992), 97–119Google Scholar.

21 Kumar, Dharma, ‘Land ownership and inequality in the Madras Presidency: 1853–54 to 1946–47’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 12, 3 (1975), 229–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Haruka Yanagisawa, A century of change: caste and irrigated lands in Tamilnadu 1860s–1970s (Delhi, 1996).

22 On the Marxist literature on peasant differentiation, a selection of relevant essays can be found in Utsa Patnaik, Agrarian relations and accumulation: the ‘mode of production’ debate in India (Bombay, 1990).

23 Sumit Guha, ‘Agricultural rents in India c. 1900–1960’, in M. Hasan and N. Gupta eds., India's colonial encounter: essays in memory of Eric Stokes (Delhi, 1993).

24 M. A. Reddy, Lands and tenants in south India: a study of Nellore District, 1850–1990 (Delhi, 1996).

25 BPP, 1878 (143), Mr. Robertson's report of tour in Coimbatore (Madras), 11.

26 D. Rajasekhar, ‘Commercialization of agriculture and changes in distribution of land ownership in Kurnool District of Andhra (c. 1900–50)’, in S. Bhattacharya et al. eds., The south Indian economy (Delhi, 1991), 78–119.

27 K. M. Mukerji, ‘The growth of the land market in India: a long period analysis’, Arthaniti 15, 1–2 (1972).

28 Chaudhuri, ‘Agrarian relations’.

29 Guha, ‘Land market’.

30 See T. Roy, The economic history of India 1857–1947 (Delhi, 2006), 90–1.

31 Jacques Pouchepadass, ‘Land, power and market: the rise of the land market in Gangetic India’, in Robb ed. Rural India, 78–108.

32 Crispin Bates, ‘Regional dependence and rural development in central India: the pivotal role of migrant labour’, in David Ludden ed., Agricultural production in Indian history (Delhi, 1994), 345–68.

33 For example, Bengal; see Report of the Land Revenue Commission Bengal, vol. I (Calcutta, 1940), 34.

34 Bhaduri, Amit, ‘A study in agricultural backwardness under semi-feudalism’, Economic Journal 83, 2 (1973), 120–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and ‘The evolution of land relations in eastern India under British Rule’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 13, 1 (1976), 45–53.

35 Roy, T., ‘Roots of agrarian crisis in interwar India: retrieving a narrative’, Economic and Political Weekly 41 (2006), 5389–400Google Scholar, and Roy, T., ‘A delayed revolution: environment and agrarian change in India’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 23, 3 (2007), 239–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36 BPP, 1878 (143), Mr. Robertson's report of tour in Coimbatore (Madras), 12.

37 Nariaki Nakazato, ‘Regional patterns of land transfer in late colonial Bengal’, in Peter Robb, Kaoru Sugihara and Haruka Yanagisawa eds., Local agrarian societies in colonial India: Japanese perspectives (Delhi, 1997), 250–79.

38 D. Rajasekhar, ‘Commercialization of agriculture’.

39 Neeladri Bhattacharya, ‘Lenders and debtors: Punjab countryside, 1880–1940’, in Bose ed., Credit, markets, 197–247.

40 Washbrook, David, ‘Law, state and agrarian society in colonial India’, Modern Asian Studies 15, 4 (1981), 649–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 Hatekar, Neeraj, ‘Information and incentives: Pringle's Ricardian experiment in the nineteenth century Deccan countryside’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 33, 4 (1996), 437–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42 For some examples, see Kerr, Ian J., ‘On the move: circulating labour in pre-colonial, colonial, and post-colonial India’, International Review of Social History, Supplement, 51 (2006), 85–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On artisan migration, see Haynes, Douglas E. and Roy, Tirthankar, ‘Conceiving mobility: weavers' migrations in pre-colonial and colonial India’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 36, 1 (1999), 35–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 See S. J. Patel, Agricultural labourers in modern India and Pakistan (Bombay, 1952). See also the essays in Patnaik, Agrarian relations.

44 Dharma Kumar, Land and caste in south India: agricultural labour in Madras Presidency in the nineteenth century (Cambridge, 1965).

45 Thorner, Alice, ‘The secular trend in the Indian economy, 1881–1951’, Economic Weekly 14 (1962), 1156–65Google Scholar; Daniel Thorner, ‘“Deindustrialization” in India, 1881–1931’, in D. and A. Thorner, Land and labour in India (New York, 1962); Krishnamurty, J., ‘The growth of agricultural labour in India’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 9, 4 (1972), 327–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Tirthankar Roy, Rethinking economic change in India: labour and livelihood (London, 2005).

47 Kumar, Land and caste.

48 Roy, ‘Economic history and modern India’.

49 Madhavan, M. C., ‘Indian emigrants: numbers, characteristics, and economic impact’, Population and Development Review 11, 4 (1985), 457–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

50 In the context of the eighteenth century, the argument has been made by Ahuja, Ravi, ‘The origins of colonial labour policy in late eighteenth-century Madras’, International Review of Social History 44, 2 (1999), 159–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On overseas migrants, see Mohapatra, Prabhu P., ‘Eurocentrism, forced labour, and global migration: a critical assessment’, International Review of Social History 52, 1 (2007), 110–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Mohapatra criticizes McKeown's contention that overseas migration from India and China in the nineteenth century was voluntary and a response to economic opportunities; see McKeown, Adam, ‘Global migration, 1846–1940’, Journal of World History 15, 2 (2004), 155–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Jan Breman, Taming the coolie beast: plantation society and the colonial order in southeast Asia (New Delhi, 1989).

51 Dipesh Chakrabarty, Rethinking working-class history: Bengal, 1890–1940 (Princeton, 1989), 112.

52 Chandravarkar, R., ‘Industrialization in India before 1947: conventional approaches and alternative perspectives’, Modern Asian Studies 19, 2 (1985), 623–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 See also Roy, T., ‘Sardars, jobbers, kanganies: labour contractors and the economic history of colonial India, Modern Asian Studies 42, 5 (2008), 971–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

54 The literature on the uneasy relationship between the agents, workers and employers in the cotton textile mills is quite large. For a recent reappraisal of this theme containing a fuller discussion of the scholarship, see Roy, T., ‘Labour institutions, Japanese competition, and the crisis of the cotton mills in interwar Mumbai’, Economic and Political Weekly 43 (2008), 37–45Google Scholar.

55 I explore this dimension in Rethinking economic change.

56 Roy, T., ‘Globalisation, factor prices, and poverty in colonial India’, Australian Economic History Review 47, 1 (2007), 73–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57 See Roy, ‘Globalisation’, and Mayer, Peter, ‘Trends of real income in Tiruchirapalli district and the upper Kaveri delta, 1819–1980’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 43, 3 (2006), 349–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

58 Jose, A. V., ‘Agricultural wages in India’, Economic and Political Weekly 23 (1988), A46–A58Google Scholar; Moni Mukherjee, Selected papers on national income (Calcutta, 1995).

59 David Washbrook, ‘Some notes on banking in India’, paper presented at conference on ‘Toward the twentieth century in Asia’, Durham, 2005.

60 Bayly, Rulers, townsmen, 8–9.

61 Cited in Habib, ‘Eighteenth century Indian economic history’.

62 Moosvi, ‘Indian economic experience’.

63 Ibid.

64 Ray, Rajat Kanta, ‘Asian capital in the age of European domination: the rise of the bazaar, 1800–1914’, Modern Asian Studies 29, 4 (1995), 449–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

65 Adas, Michael, ‘Immigrant Asians and the economic impact of European imperialism: the role of the south Indian chettiars in British Burma’, Journal of Asian Studies 33, 4 (1974), 385–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

66 David W. Rudner, Caste and capitalism in colonial India: the Nattukottai Chettiars (Delhi, 1995).

67 See Bose ed., Credit, markets, for a selection of relevant essays.

68 See for example Shahid Amin, ‘Small peasant commodity production and rural indebtedness: the culture of sugarcane in eastern U.P., c. 1880–1920’ in Bose ed., Credit, markets, 80–135.

69 Malcolm Darling, ‘Prosperity and debt’, reprinted in Bose ed., Credit, markets, 29–56, extract taken from Darling's The Punjab peasant in prosperity and debt (London, 1925).

70 Perrott, H. R., ‘Voices from the Indian up-country: banking and money-lending’, The Economic Journal 19, 4 (1909), 450–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

71 Ibid.

72 The problem is studied in Roy, T., ‘Price movements in early twentieth century India’, Economic History Review 48, 1 (1995), 118–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

73 India, Report of the Controller of the Currency in India (Calcutta, 1934–1935), 1.

74 The financial development of India, 1860–1977 (New Haven, 1983).