Oliver Philippon

S Bainville

M Bruckert

L Ruiz

Members of the jury

Keywords: India, agrarian diagnosis, water resource, Operation Flood, Green Revolution Inde, diagnostic agraire, ressource en eau, révolution blanche, révolution verte

Agrarian diagnosis of Palamaner and Gangavaram mandals, Andhra Pradesh,

Table of figures

 .........................................................................................................................21
Table of illustrations

Table of contents

Glossary

Annual cropping: Distribution of the crops during one year on the agricultural surface of a farm (assolement in french).

Artificialization: Process by which humans modify or transform the natural environment.

Available water capacity: the range of available water that can be stored in soil and be available for growing crops.

Cation-exchange capacity (CEC): Measure of how many cations can be retained on soil particle surfaces. Negative charges on the surfaces of soil particles bind positively-charged atoms or molecules (cations), but allow these to exchange with other positively charged particles in the surrounding soil water.

Clay-humus complex: the formation of aggregates of organic fragments (such as humic substances) with inorganic particles (such as clay minerals).

Jaggery: traditional raw sugar obtained by evaporating water from sugarcane juice.

Man-day (MD): One person's working time for a day used as a measure of how much labor is required to perform a particular operation. In this study, one man-day is equivalent to 8 hours of labor.

Paddy: Threshed but unmilled rice. In the study area, a kilogram of paddy gives 600g of white rice and 400g of husk.

Pulses (or legume): plants in the family Fabaceae (or Leguminosae).

Acronyms and units

Equivalence of units and currency

Introduction

India is as warm and colorful as it's iconic seasoning, the masala, a mixture of ground spices. Likewise, the country is a complex mosaic of traditions, cultures, religions and social norms. This complexity can be difficult for a foreigner to decipher at first, but further understanding reveals a fascinating culture that is full of surprises. Its agricultural history is similarly captivating with the major transformations which have taken place throughout the last century. During the colonial period from 1757 to 1947, the British established an export-oriented agricultural system at the expense of the country's own food production. After Independence, the newly-formed government put food production as a top priority in a nation which had survived crippling famines during the preceding decades. The government made numerous reforms aiming to increase food production, including ambitious redistributionist land reform. The Green Revolution which followed established India's self-sufficiency in cereal production and propelled it to be a one of the world's top food exporters in 1995. Next, India tackled its dependence on milk imports dependence through Operation Flood, which aimed, and succeed, at flooding the country with milk. Organizing its milk production, largely through the creation of local cooperatives, the country managed to become the world's largest milk producer. Alongside these increases in food production occurred the groundwater boom, an essential increase in the amount of irrigated land. This combination of events has shaped the current Indian agricultural sector, resulting in a positive agricultural trade balance since the 1990's. However, from the standpoint of the rural population, these transformations are far from being as bright. 70% of the population live in rural areas, and 42% of the rural population lives below the poverty line (Narayan, 2011). Food insecurity affects 40% of the overall population, including the rural poor and farmers. The prices of food products have increased while the prices paid to farmers have decreased. The boom in yields and incomes created by the agricultural revolution led, at the same time, to an over-exploitation of resources. While the chemical fertilizers of the green revolution lowered the soil quality, the rise in well irrigation led to the overuse of groundwater (Shah, 2008).

That is the paradox of the Indian agricultural sector: the outputs of the rural farmers are highly demanded, but the farmers themselves are not valued. The rural population is characterized by social and resource inequalities. The juxtaposition of drying fields of groundnuts and auto rickshaws brimming with milk cans in the rural Palamaner and Gangavaram mandals puts into sharp focus the inequalities of rural life.

The systemic approach of this agrarian diagnostic study aims to comprehend the consequences of these major agricultural changes on the lives of Indian farmers, in particular to answer the following questions:

-Which different type of farmers are present in the study area? What environmental and social factors contribute to the inequality of their situations? -How was shaped the agricultural system over time? What technological, social and environmental modifications have led to the current situation? How have these evolutions differentiated the types of farmers? -What is the current dairy production like? How is each type of farmer, according to his or her resources and needs, involved in the dairy production ?

1. Methodology 1.1. Comparative agriculture to study agriculture development Comparative agriculture is a scientific discipline studying agriculture development and agrarian systems. The notion of agricultural development is defined by Hubert Cochet, one of the founders of the discipline, as « the general process of agricultural transformation, which is a long-term process and whose elements, causes and mechanisms can be both endogenous and the result of different contributions, enrichment or exogenous innovations». This discipline is based on the following hypothesis:

• « Farmers have reasons to do what they do, because they have the means and the interest to do so » (Jouve, 1992) Farmers do what they do in order to optimize the following objectives: (i) maximize their production or income compared to their scarcest resource, (ii) minimize the risks and precarious social relationships and (iii) maximize the income (in terms of in monetary exchange value or use value). The types of agriculture are the result of history and adapt themselves to the biophysical context.

• « Farmers do not all do the same and their practices are constantly evolving. » Consequently, the farms and the practices evolve differently according to each farmer.

The global objective is to answer the four following questions: Who are the farmers? What do they do? How do they do it? And why do they do it? This approach aims at understanding the agrarian system (see Concept 1), particularly the different types of farmers, their stakes and strategies. Understanding the evolution in the past and the perspectives for the future helps to formulate prospects, in order to allow agriculture to contribute as much as possible to the general interest.

Comparative agriculture is a systemic and multidisciplinary scientific discipline mobilizing, among others, agroecology, agroeconomics, agrogeography and socioeconomics. The knowledge is provided through observation and dialogue with local populations. It is a participatory approach in the sense that knowledge comes from the people and contribute to their own knowledge.

11 Concept 1: Agrarian system, by Mazoyer and Roudard, 1994 Type of agriculture historically constituted and geographically localized, composed by a defined cultivated ecosystem and productive social system, which can use durably the fertility of the cultivated ecosystem associated. The productive system is characterized by the type of equipment and the energy used to use the ecosystem, restore and exploit its fertility. The type of equipment and the energy used are themselves conditioned by the work division existing in the society at that period.

In comparison with the Anglo-Saxon Farming System Research (FSR) approach, the agrarian system concept includes social dynamics, history and the economic and political contexts. The agrarian system's concept therefore combines both the FSR and the peasant or agrarian studies [START_REF] Cochet | Comparative agriculture[END_REF].

The agrarian diagnosis method and the involved concepts

This method is taught for the engineering degree of "Resources, Agricultural Systems and Development" in Montpellier Supagro. Along with this course, Isabelle Touzard and Nicolas Ferraton's book Understanding family farming -diagnosis of the production systems provided helpful guide lines for the study.

1.2.1.Environment analysis

First of all, an analysis of the environment is necessary to understand the biophysical factors and to raise the first hypothesis about the distribution of agriculture in the landscape. It also helps to get familiar with the local crops, livestock, resources and means of production.

Starting with map studies allows to prepare the work and to have a global vision of the area. On the field, the observation starts from a global view to a more precise scale. For this step, the observation grid is not exhaustive and contains, among other criteria, the topography, the natural and artificial water network, the urban and agricultural infrastructures, the types of soils, the spontaneous vegetation, the present crops and livestock. The expected outcome of this step is an agroecological zoning of the area, each area being exploited similarly and the biophysical and agronomic characterizations of each of these units are identified and located on a visual representation.

1.2.2.Agrarian history study

Over time, the agrarian system evolves between stable and recomposition periods after crisis. During the stabilized periods, the agrarian system is sustainable and reproducible. If a crisis occurs (social, technical, political, economical, …), some type of farms regress and other emerge during the recomposition period.

On the field, this study is conducted with semi-directive interviews of the farmers, about both their personal and global history. The people willing to answer were met along the way in the villages of the area, with a preference toward elders who can explain the different period they have lives trough. Also, collecting information at all levels, meeting a diversity of castes, gender and farmers was a priority. This was made easier by my open-minded translator and by our gender. The questions of the interviews were as open as possible but the farmers tended to answer with short answers instead of telling their life story. It is certainly because the interviews with a translator and the classic interactions of local population with extension workers are not favorable to this kind of discussion. The interview guideline started with global questions, then got more precise as the understanding of the area improved. This step allows us to locate in space and time and characterize the succession of different agrarian systems in the area and to explain the differentiation of the farms. This temporal and spatial understanding can be illustrated by timelines and maps per identified periods.

The landscape and history studies allow to see the diversity of the farming systems, locating them in space and time. Thanks to this knowledge, we can design a draft of the typology of the production system. The production systems typology is built in a way of showing the diversity of the farms and of their strategies for their production. The main criteria are land surface, water access, the different cropping and livestock systems and the labor source.

1.2.3.Socio-technical analysis

After analyzing the different constrains and advantages linked to the environment and the historic evolution, the method takes interest at the practices of the farmers with their different means of production for the cropping and livestock systems. The different inputs, outputs, equipment and labor used for each system are informed. The interactions between cultural and livestock systems are also represented.

In practice, more interviews were conducted to understand the practices of the farmers for the technical itineraries for each system identified. After this phase of technical interviews, a socio-technical model is built for each of the production system identified, within which the flows in the farm (interactions between livestock and cropping systems, land and labor allocation) and outside the farm (laborers, inputs, outputs) are detailed. The working calendar of each production system is also realized to visualize the labor distribution, between the different crops and animals but also between family and exterior labor force.

13

Concept 2: Production system, by [START_REF] Reboul | Mode de production et système de culture et d'élevage[END_REF] Combination of land, workforce and equipment level mobilized for cultural or livestock production purposes, shared by a set of farms. Farms that have the same production system may be represented within a same model. It is modellized as the sum of the cultural and livestock systems ran by the the same means of labour and equipments.

Concept 3: Cropping system, by Sebillotte, 1990 Set of technical modalities implemented on cultivated plots identically. Each system is defined by (i) the nature of the crops and their order of succession, and (ii) the technical itineraries applied to those different crops, which includes the choice of the variety.

Concept 4: Livestock system, by Landais, 1992 Set of elements in dynamic interactions, organized by Men, in order to valorize ressources, by through domestic animals, to obtain diversified productions or answer to other objectives.

1.2.4.Economic analysis

The socio-technical step is complemented by an economic operation analysis, to quantify the differences of income between the farmers, hence to understand how they rationally choose to allocate their means of production. For this analysis, the economic indicators mobilized are the following:

For the cultural and livestock systems

Gross product (GP)

Value created by the cropping or livestock system. The quantity of product sold is multiplied by its selling price, while the quantity of product consumed is multiplied by the price at which farmers would buy it on the local market.

Intermediary consumption costs (IC)

Price of all the goods and services entirely consumed during a cycle of production. For the cropping systems it represents for instance the cost of the seeds, fertilizers, tractor or bulls rents etc. For the livestock system it can be the purchase of paddy straw, concentrate feed, veterinary fees, etc.

Gross added value (GAV)

Difference between the GP and the IC. It is the equivalent of the generated wealth of a system. This indicator helps to compare the economic performances according to different factors, like per unity of surface (acres) or labor (man-day).

14

IC= ∑ price of goods , services consumed for one cycle of production GP= ∑ quantity sold×selling price+ ∑ quantity consumed ×buying price on local market GAV = ∑ GP-IC Concept 5: Summary of the concepts mobilized for the agrarian diagnostic, by [START_REF] Cochet | Comparative agriculture[END_REF] For the production systems

Equipment depreciation (ED)

The equipment owned by the farmers have a limited life expectancy, like the manual tools, the bulls tools, the tractor and its tools and the buildings dedicated to production. Their degradation is economically quantified by the price of the equipment bought divided by its life expectancy.

Net added value (NAV)

Wealth creation at the scale of a production system. It is calculated by adding all the GAV of the different cropping and livestock systems and subtracting the equipment depreciation. The production systems' NAV are compared by units of surface (acre) or labor (man-day).

Agricultural income (AI)

As the wealth created at the production system scale is then redistributed among different actors, this indicator shows the share earned by the family. The salaries of the workers, the governmental taxes, bank interests and land rental price are deducted from the NAV and the subvention and land rental income are added to the NAV to obtain the FI.

The comparison of the sociotechnical and economical differences of the production systems is a way to understand their diversity, their links and the inequalities existing in the area. With this knowledge we are then able to formulate propositions of development actions adapted to the area for the general interest.

15

Subsidies

Environment

Localization of the studied area

The studied area includes all the Palamaner mandal and is extended above the highway to the southern part of Gangavaram mandal. The city of Palamaner is located in the center of the area at the cross of 4 roads, 3 being national highways. Before known as the "milk city of southern India", Palamaner hosts many dairies, both private (Tirumala, Dodla, Gowardhan, etc.) and a National Producer Company (Shreeja).

Two other agrarian diagnostics of IndiaMilk project were already conducted in the state of Andhra Pradesh, in the districts of Kurnool (Rémi Pédèches, 2017) and Guntur (Yvane [START_REF] Marble | Agrarian Diagnosis Vinukonda Mandal[END_REF].

16

Map 1: Location of the studied area (from www.mapsofindia.com)

Studied area

The boundaries of the area are the forest for the West and the South, the road 42 for the North and Pathikonda village and the forest at the East. 17

Map 2: Limits of the studied area (in yellow) and savanna area (green) (background map from Google Maps)

Geomorphology

2.2.1.Geology: an old and stable crystalline bedrock

As displayed on the Andhra Pradesh and Telangana map of bedrocks, the studied area in located on Archean rocks. The Archean rocks, or Precambrian rocks, are the oldest rocks on the earth's crust. They constitute the oldest cores of continents and are the remnants of mountains that were formed more than 600 million years ago. They have eroded into undulating plains that rise up to only a few hundred meters above the present sea level. The areas with stable and old continental lithosphere are called cratons, and this one is called Dharwar craton.

Just as the majority of the Precambrian rocks formed during that era, the basement complex is constituted of crystalline rocks. More precisely it is gneiss, a metamorphic rock formation derived from granite. This gneiss is The reorganization of the minerals in a foliation due to extreme pressure and temperature conditions. The gneissic banding process forms a foliation with alternating layers of dark and light minerals. Mineralogically, gneiss tends to include quartz, feldspar, mica, chlorite, and other clay minerals.

18

Map 3: Localization of the area on the Andhra Pradesh and Telangana map of bedrocks (from the Andhra Pradesh Groundwater Department)

Studied area

The Precambrian rocks constituting the bedrock of the area have a low permeability, so the rain water does not infiltrate well. Moreover, the water storage capacity of those materials is very limited due to its low porosity.

Several dykes were formed in the area. Those sheet of rock are formed in a fracture in a pre-existing rock body. Here, they are magmatic dikes formed when magma intrudes into a crack then crystallizes as a sheet intrusion. They are black and east-west oriented, which testify the orientation of the geological pressure in the area.

19

Picture 2: Patikonda quarry for gneiss slabs and gravel extraction Picture 1: Gneiss with horizontal schistosity (right) and dyke (left) at the top a hill

2.2.2.Topography: a hilly pediplain

The studied area is located on the border of the Deccan plateau (visible on the maps below in pink on the left map and brown on the right one).

The mandals topography follows a light slope oriented north to south. The maximum elevation, apart from the hills, is 750 meters above sea level (in Pathikonda in the north) and the lowest is 600 meters (in Mandipeta Koturu in the south). Due to the differences of resistance to weathering of the bedrock (rock resistance, cracks weakening the bedrock), the water network sculpted an undulating landscape with low ridges (talweg 1 ) and hills (interfluves 2 ).

From this erosion also result higher formations, which are dome-shaped granite hills called inselbergs. They are the highest points of the topography, in particular Pathikonda hill which peaks at 870 meters above sea level. Those blocs of gneiss are often surrounded by savanna.

Under those inselbergs, there are extensive plains formed by the coalescence of pediments due to erosion in a semi-arid context, which is called a pediplain (Demangeot et Bernus 2001).

1 A talweg is the line of lowest elevation within a valley or watercourse.

2 An interfluve is a narrow, elongated and plateau-like or ridge-like landform between two valleys. Whittow, more generally, defines an interfluve as an area of higher ground between two rivers in the same drainage system.

20

Map 4: Topographical maps (from openstreetmap)

Picture 3: Pathikonda hill

A savanna climate with uncertain rainfalls

According to the Köppen-Geiger climate classification, the Chittoor district is Aw, a savanna climate. It means that it is a tropical climate and that the rainfalls of the driest winter month are inferior to 60 mm and to 4 % of the total annual precipitations.

The aridity index (of De [START_REF] Martonne | L'indice d'aridité[END_REF] is 21 over year. It corresponds to a semi-humid area, 1 point only above the limit of the semi-arid climate. However, the indicator calculated monthly indicates 2 semi-arid months (December and May, under 20) and 4 arid months (January to April, under 5).

The monsoon is divided between the south-west monsoon from May to August, named Kharif, (310 mm, 4 months) and the north-east monsoon, named Rabi, from September to December (410, 4 months). The dry season, when the tube wells have lower flows and biomass available for grazing is the scarcer, lasts from January to April (42 mm, 4 month).

The average annual temperature is 25.2 °C with an amplitude 8.4 °C, May being the hotter month.

As the climogram displays, in kharif, the months of May and June are close to be dry. If the rainfalls are lower than average in June or 20 mm lower in May, they become dry months since the temperature line goes below to the rainfall bar. In that case, the dry seasons spreads over 6 months instead of 4, compromising the cultures. As the Figure 3 will show, it is quite likely to happen because of the interyear variability of the rainfalls. As displayed in Figure 3, the rainfall have a high inter annual variability, the two extremes during the last 50 years being 600 and 1450 mm over year. This variability is a difficulty for the farmers, especially for the rainfed cropping systems which rely entirely on the rainfalls.

21

Also, it is possible to distinguish periods of relatively better yearly rainfalls. The mean of the rainfall over selected periods of time show that from 1960 to 1980, the rainfalls were average during 2 decades. Afterwards, there are 2 periods shorter in time corresponding to lower average rainfalls: between 1980 and 1990, then starting from 2005 to 2010 at least (we cannot extrapolate from lack of data). Only the period between 1990 and 2005 is above the regression line with an average of 980mm of rain per year. This phenomenon reminds of the moving average of annual rainfalls on 5 years periods studied in similar latitudes and climate in Sahel and West Africa (Descoix et al. 2015). The result is that when there is a bad harvest, it is very likely to happen again during the following years.

Farmers also claim that the rainfalls decreased drastically during the last generation. Apparently, finger millet was cultivated rain fed and the groundnut yields were much higher before, since the rainfalls were sufficient. In comparison, the last decade (including 2016, 2017 and 2018 during the field work) the rainfalls came too late and were not sufficient, so the groundnut crops were spoiled and the yields below expectation (under 0.5 tons per acres compared to the average 1.8 tons). However, the linear regression line of the yearly rainfalls is constant, meaning that the rainfalls did not decline during this period. The bad harvest might be due only to a small inferior rainfall (only 20mm in May, then a few milometers in June) to delay the monsoon of 2 months and disturb the rainfed cropping systems.

Traditionally, all rainfed crops were planted in June. The groundnuts and the millets were harvested at the end of the Kharif (September), while the bairodlu was harvested in December at the end of the monsoon. Nowadays, with the tube wells, irrigation is possible year round and most of the crops can be planted anytime. Paddy has two cycles, the easiest from the water point of view is from July to November, and second one is from January to May. The groundnuts are still planted as before.

22 Farmers have access to two sources of water for irrigation: the surface network with the water tanks and the river or groundwater with tube wells.

Surface network

Water and erosion shaped the surface network as it is now. The Koundinya river crosses the studied area from north to south. It is dry most of the time and flows only during a couple of months per year in the monsoon period. All the talwegs flow onto this river, except for a few streams going down the Deccan plateau on the east side.

Nowadays, the agricultural use of the water from the river is not allowed, in order to preserve the little water left for the dam of Kahavapalle. This reservoir provides drinking water for the city of Palamaner.

For agricultural purposes, many water tanks have been built on this network as it will be explained page 28.

Underground water

The properties of the bedrocks implies that the rain, the only source to refill the groundwater, does not infiltrate nor stored well. Moreover, the use of groundwater tables is constantly increasing, with the tube wells, (see page 29). The level of underground water is going down year by year and the tube wells have to be dug deeper.

23

Map 5: Hydrographic surface network (background map from Google Maps)

Yellow: limits of the studied area Green: savanna area Sky blue: talweg Deep blue: riverbed flowing a few month a year 2.4.2.Soils diversity: the differentiation of the soils follows the topography All the soils seem to be formed by erosion of same the parent material: the gneiss, which is an acidic rock providing a small amount of nutrients.

In the higher parts of the landscape: the red shallow soils Close to the hills, the soil layer is very thin above the gneissic saprolite3 , which is an acidic parent material. The degraded gneiss is friable and the main mineral is white quartz, forming particles sand. Other minerals, such as feldspar and mica, break down forming silt or clay particles. On the top of the hills, it is quite common to have rocks and gravels in the plots. The upper soils have a vibrant red color, due to the presence of iron oxides (hematite) and the good draining condition. They are constantly supplied by new minerals as the shallow bedrock is eroding, providing nutrients to the plants. As they are rocky and sandy soils, they drain easily the nutrients and water, resulting a low available water capacity and low cation-exchange capacity.

In between: the white sandy soils While going down the slopes, the color gradient shifts from red to white. The white color is due to the high content of quartz gravels and lower content of iron oxides, the latter having migrated with silt and clay to lower parts of the landscape. The white soils are deeper than the red ones. The cultivated horizon of the soil has water storing properties intermediate between the red and black soils since the sandy particles are finer. There are fewer nutrients available compared to the red soils, since the eroding bedrock is deeper.

In the plains: the black soils Those areas, lower in the topography, were eroded first because of their relative less resistance to weathering. It is also the place where the particles leached from the upper soils accumulate, thus the content of clay and silts is higher than in the previous soils. The higher content of clay allows keeping organic matter in the soil in the form of clay-humus complex, which explains the dark color of the soils. The negative charges of the clay induces the adsorption of cations on the surface of those aggregates, which makes them available for plants and increases chemical fertility of the soil. The clay-humus complex also increases the available water capacity of the soil, making the water available longer for the roots. It also prevents the migration of the clay particles to low soils since they are linked to humified organic matter.

Being heavier and muddy, the soils with higher contents of clay are more difficult to work. However, those properties limiting water infiltration in the soil are ideal for inundated crops like paddy.

Illustration 1: Differentiation of the soils on a toposequence

2.4.3.Savannas of different statuses

The Koundinya wildlife sanctuary It is a tropical dry deciduous and thorny savanna with the denser vegetation compared to the other forests. The topography is rugged with high hills and deep valleys It is a reserve with an estimated 78 Indian elephants, who came back in the area in the eighties after leaving 400 years ago. The cultivated areas near this forest are exposed to the coming and going of elephants and wild boars causing considerable damage for the crops, even for the mango trees. A real conflict exists between humans and the animals: both men were killed by the elephants and elephants by men. This area is managed by the Andhra Pradesh Forest Department. Around the savanna, the Forest Department is digging big trenches to stop the elephants to come to the cultivated land and villages. Unfortunately, this protection seems of little use, since the animals always find a breach. There are no authorization to use this forest (grazing, wood and honey collection, etc.). No trespassing is allowed, except in the Cheta Penta bassin.

26

Picture 4: A gneiss surfacing in the Koundinya Wildlife Sanctuary Picture 5: Trenches against the elephants

The protected areas

The vegetation of thorny shrubs and Cactaceaes is more open than in the wildlife sanctuary. Those areas are also managed by the Andhra Pradesh Forest Department which allows grazing (for cows and sheep), but an authorization of 90 Rs per animal and per year has to be paid for browsing (for goats). The tree cutting is forbidden to the villagers, and the forest department is conducting afforestation where the forest very degraded with native species. The few eucalyptuses found in those areas were planted before the prohibition of this species for environmental reasons.

The savanna of the TTD farm

The TTD trust 4 is implanting an indigenous cows' dairy farm over 450 acres in the uplands in the northeastern part of the studied area. The objective of this farm is to produce milk with indigenous cows to supply the need of milk products of the TDD temples and to protect unproductive cows in the name of the Sri Venkateswara Foundation for Indigenous Cattle. The animals are not yet on the grounds of the farm, but the access to the savanna is already forbidden for pasture.

4 Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, the independent trust which manages the world famous Sri Venkateswara Temple at Tirumala in Tirupati 27 Picture 6: Young trees planted for the afforestation program

The modifications of the original ecosystem for agriculture

The ecosystem is a combination of "natural" areas, like the savannas, and "artificialized" areas where humans have modified the original ecosystem for agricultural purposes.

The water tanks

Created under the landownership of the Zamindars (see chapter 3. History), they allow the storage of water to make it available during a wider period. Some tanks, located on the border of the slopes of the savanna, are filled all year round (like in the villages of Yerapenta and Moram). Others are smaller, reserved for the animals and filled only a few months during the monsoon. Between those two extremes exists a wide diversity of tanks.

If the tanks can stock enough water, it is usually used for paddy cultivation. Gravity is used to irrigate the plots underneath though canals. The social management of water is quite individualistic: every farmer decides the implantation of his crops according to the water available at the beginning of the cycle. Then, all farmers have unlimited access to the water. The plots are irrigated one after another starting from the tank, using the amount of water wanted. No meeting for the organization of water distribution is conducted.

The soils of the pond are collected. The first layer (white soil) is used for construction while the underneath layer (black and rich in organic matter) is spread on the fields. This operation is generally conducted in summer when the pond is dry, to fertilize and condition the soil and to compensate the losses of soil due to erosion. However, only the farmers close to the tanks in the villages where the NREGA 5 has a program can benefit from this resource.

5 More info about NRGEA page 54 28 Picture 7: A water tank with harvested paddy plots underneath (Kotha Palle)

The terraces

The land cultivated is entirely in terraces. This modification allows water to infiltrate on the plot, avoiding the runoff due to the slopes. It also limits the erosion, which is especially important where the soils are shallow, and to keep the nutrients on the plots.

The border of the fields are vegetated. Apart from the production of fruit, wood or medicinal products, it participates to the processes mentioned above (the roots acting as an underground barrier) and to strengthen the structures of the terraces. It can be both trees or herbaceous species. The main species of trees planted for the fruits are the coconut trees, guava trees, blackberry trees (Syzygium cumini), old mango trees and old tamarind trees. Other planted trees are cut down for the wood or paper pulp, like the exotic Eucalyptus and Teak trees or the indigenous Wepa tree. Some trees were used for forage like Tabici or Leucaena leucocephala, but this practice has disappeared over time. Lastly, some are spontaneous and sometimes used for medicine purposes, like the Kanuga (Pongamia pinnata) and the Bandara (Dodonaea viscosa).

Individual installations

As the irrigation with collective installations (water tanks) is available on small surfaces only, farmers create their own supply of water by digging tube wells. This type of well is bored into an underground water table, and the required depth of the well depends on the depth of the water table. The drilling is costly and it is not guaranteed to find water. The water is pumped up to the fields with an electric pump placed 120 meters underground. The drilling, the pump and the plastic tubes inside the wells represent a high cost of investment, but the government provides 7 hours of free power per day for the pumps. Nowadays, gravity irrigation is receding with the spread of the drip irrigation which allows to irrigate a wider surface.

The rearing of silk worms and integrated poultry needs specific conditions and are reared in dedicated buildings.

For the prices and more details about equipment, see annex 3.

The agroecological zoning

The uplands On the highest parts of the landscape, the level of groundwater is deeper than in other areas (up to 300 meters), so the investment for a tube well is riskier and more expensive. Also, as the shallow red soils with good draining properties are dominant, the crops need more irrigation. Those reasons explain why the uplands are drier than the other areas.

Mainly rainfed crops are cultivated there, such as the rainfed association of pulses (groundnuts, cow peas, hyacinth beans, red gram) and sorghum and the mango orchards. The red soils are appreciated by the farmers for to grow the traditional association of pluses, as the drainage property is essential for the crops during the heavy monsoons, and the sandy soils allow the groundnuts to form under the surface. Also, the low chemical fertility due to a low organic matter content is compensated by the pulses ability to fix the nitrogen from the atmosphere. The rainfed mango orchards are young, under 10 years old, so most of them are not productive yet. No other crop is cultivated under the young mango trees, to avoid water competition with them. The mango trees can also be irrigated. Those orchards are typically composed by trees above 20 years old, more productive thanks to the water supplied locally to each tree by a buried network of pipes. However, it is still possible to find other irrigated crops in the uplands, where farmers could dig a tube well successfully.

Since the area is quite dry, the biomass available is low during the dry season. At that time, some landowners forbid the other villagers to go grazing on their land, like in the old mango orchards protected by fences, to preserve the biomass available for their own cows. Yet, some villages are close to protected forests where the grazing of animals is allowed. This lifts the constraint of the spontaneous biomass available for small ruminants herders, who are more numerous in those villages.

The lower plains

Located lower in the landscape, the topography of the lower plains has a more gentle slope and the white and black soils are predominant. There are some water tanks filled only during the rainy season, usually allowing a single cycle of paddy per year (or none if the monsoon is not sufficient). Tube wells are common in those areas, since the groundwater is closer to the surface, at an average depth of 150 meters underground. The proportion of irrigated land is much higher than in the previous area, allowing the cultivation year round.

Farmers can cultivate annuals with short cycles like vegetables or cereals. Vegetables and finger millet necessitate less water than the paddy that has to be inundated. The black soils underneath the water tanks are ideal for the paddy, since the repetitive inundations due to its monocropping have created a layer of soil able to keep the water better. Farmers also cultivate perennial plants like mulberry and elephant grass, to feed improved breed milking cows and silk worms. Most of the silk worms rearing shed are located in the lower plains.

In those areas, the food resource available for cows (spontaneous biomass, crop residues and cultivated fodder), is more important and reliable than in the uplands, because of the groundwater depth and soils properties.

Downstream of the dense savanna

Downstream areas of dense savanna, the water tanks are filled year round. The hills and forest allows the runoff of a large amount of water to supply the tanks. The white and black soils are dominant. All the land around the water tanks is irrigated with water from the tanks or tube and open wells, thanks to the groundwater close to the surface.

Thanks to the soils properties and large amount of water available, the farmers can cultivate crops very demanding in water like sugarcane and paddy (with the possibility of growing 2 cycles per year). They are the two major crops in those areas.

The vegetation is denser and the spontaneous biomass produced is more important than in both previous areas. There is a better availability of biomass, spontaneous or cultivated, for the cow and small ruminants pasture. However, the forest of the wildlife sanctuary is not allowed for grazing, excepted in Cheta Penta's basin, which limits the grazing areas even if the villages are close to the forest.

The organization of the different areas on the following schema will always be the same for all drawings to identify the agroecological areas more easily.

31

Picture 8: In the plain, from the foreground to the background: an elephant grass plot, a mulberry plot and a silk worm rearing building

The geologic formations have limited water storage properties and cannot keep well the limited and uncertain rainfalls. The water is available from water tanks for small irrigated areas, but it is thanks to the individual tube wells technology that large surfaces are irrigated.

The groundwater accessibility and the soils properties are distributed unequally among the different agroecological areas.

The environmental factors are not sufficient to explain this landscape, and a study of the history is mandatory to understand the formation of the current agricultural system.

32

Illustration 3: Overall view of the agroecological areas

History

For a better comprehension, one may refer to the annex 1 for a quick overview of the local culture and social organization of the area (castes, gender, Hinduism).

As the farmers are the main information source, it was only possible to go back as far as 3 generations ago with the childhood memories of the elders. At that time, the landholdings were already private and probably result from the Zamindar division of one large territory covering all the mandal after the Independence in 1947. This information was not confirmed.

3.1. After the Independence (before 1970)

3.1.1.The water tanks and rivers as the only possibilities for irrigation

The water tanks were created by the Zamindar lords under the British government, more than 50 years ago. The water was conducted to the plots underneath via canals for gravity irrigation. The quantity of water available varied according to the location and size of the tanks.

The farmers could also use the water from the river if their plots were nearby. It was brought to the field with animal labor force. At that time, the Koundynia river was flowing year round.

3.1.2.Cultivation of traditional food crops

The cultivated land were mainly rainfed. Without irrigation, farmers could cultivate pulses and cereals. The pulses were the same than nowadays: an association of groundnuts, cow peas, hyacinth beans and red gram. Sorghum was also cultivated on the border of those plots. Apart from sorghum, the cereals cultiated were a wide diversity of millets. Finger millet (ragi in Telugu) was the main one and was the staple food. Other millets like foxtail millet (koralu) and little millet (samalu) were also cultivated. All those crops were sown in June, at the beginning of the monsoon.

33

The information from complementary research is separated in boxes similar to this one, in order to differentiate it from the history gathered directly from the farmers.

The Zamindari system benefited from the traditional British landlords' aristocracy authority.

The owner of the land (a Zaminar, feudal lord) was an intermediary between the cultivators and the government to collect the taxes and for law enforcement. The cultivators had the right to cultivate the lands by paying a tax consisting of a part of their harvest (they were therefore considered as sharecroppers).

This system was abolished in the 50's in India.

Vani, 1992

Picture 9: Finger millet

With the water tanks it was possible to irrigate small surfaces of the land to cultivate vegetables and bairodlu. Bairodlu, was high stock cereal with big red seeds. The yields were lower than the current hybrid paddy, but the high straws were an important source of food for the cattle. Unfortunately I could not identify this crop with another name than in Telugu. The main vegetables cultivated were chili (to be harvested green or red), eggplants and ladies' fingers.

The staple food was finger millet balls (ragi mutta), which are flour cooked in water and shaped as balls. Sorghum was also eaten similarly. Bairodlu was cooked and prepared the same way than the rice nowadays and its taste was highly appreciated.

Indeed, talking about it brings back good memories to the elder farmers.

To complement the cereals, sauces were prepared with the pulses, leaves from trees and vegetables that were available in different quantities depending on the families. The groundnuts were eaten raw, toasted, or processed into oil, being the only vegetable fat in the food.

The farmers were already cultivating on terraces. All traditional crops grown were destined to human consumption, for the family in priority and for the market if they had surpluses. Human and cattle labor were used for the different operations and fertility renewal was realized with dung and tree leaves from Kanuga (Pongamia pinnata) and Wepa.

3.1.3.Cattle rearing for fertility renewal and labor

The fertility renewal was achieved mainly with animal dung, and many operations in the fields needed cattle labor. In order to do so, the families had herds of indigenous cows. The number of animal in the herds depended on the land owned by the families.The animals were grazing in the forest by day, accompanied by a family member and sometimes by an employee if the animals were too many. This task was done every day at all seasons and represented a considerable amount of time: the animals had to be shepherded around 8 hours a day. If the family could, the diet of the animals was complemented with the high straws of bairodlu, the millet straw of and leaves of sorghum, groundnuts and other pulses. The animals were kept in shed in the village at night and the manure collected and mixed with crop residues and dung from other animals. The animals were also used in the field for soil preparation and pulling carts for transportation (dung, harvests, water…). Bulls as well as cows could do those tasks. The meat of the animals was not consumed by Hindus, as the cow is sacred in their religion, but the milk was. Its production was of secondary importance, as it was collected only in the bigger herds and the families usually kept 2 to 3 liters a day for their own consumption. The rest was left for the calves.

The milk was processed into different food items still popular today: curd (pelugu), buttermilk (madjiga, a drink of curd mixed with water and salt that can also be eaten like a sauce with the cereals) and ghee (neyyi, eaten with the cereals or processed into sweet items). The families owning cows were eating daily milk products, as it was an abundant food if you had a big herd. The families who did not have animals (the landless mostly), did not eat any milk products back then. A few people were selling milk to the shops or market in town at around 1 rupee per liter.

For the sheep and goats, the feeding system and dung collection was similar. Their meat was consumed for special occasion, such as festivals or marriages. They were not used for labor but some families were milking them, a practice that has now disappeared.

The chicken and hens rearing for meet and eggs was also present, for the family consumption only.

3.1.4.The savanna, an area essential for the agrarian system

The forest used to be denser with bigger trees. It provided the food for the cattle, sheep and goats on an extensive surface. Wood was also collected and used for cooking. Those areas were protected by the British until the independence in 1947. Their authority was strict: officers were hunting down any fire, goat browsing or tree cutting on the back of horses, which was scary for the local people because they had never seen those animals before. After the Independence, the Indian government took the responsibility of the protection of the forest. To slash forest in order to cultivate more land people had to ask the permission from the government, but the allowance were restricted. In the history studied, the total land cultivated in the area did not change much since 1970 for those reasons.

35

The forest management was traditionally managed by the local communities. Starting from the 19 th century, the British took over the Indian forests in order to control their supply of wood. This resource was important for them for the industrial revolution.

After the Independence, the Indian government had a strong will to protect the forests too, with the National Forest Policy of 1952, for the management, protection and production of the forest areas. Concomitantly, the Indian Board for wild-life preservation was formed to preserve the biodiversity, as the creation of the Koundinya Wild life sanctuary in 1990 testifies.

Illustration 4: Agrarian system before 1970

3.1.5. An unequal distribution of the resources and different labor statuses

Back then, the society was not homogeneous: the landholding, in terms of surface and water access, was already unequal. The agricultural surface per family varied from 5 to 30 acres, and the landowners who had plots underneath the water tank or close to the river could grow bairodlu and vegetables. The larger landowners also had bigger herds of both cattle and small ruminants.

However, the main difference between the farmers was the labor source. The larger farmers could employ permanent laborers to cultivate over 30 acres of land of irrigated and rainfed crops and shepherd the animals to the forest. Temporary laborers were also necessary during the labor peaks. Medium farmers only had to employ temporary laborers for the crop production during the labor peaks such as plantation, weeding and harvest of the crops, both irrigated and rainfed. Work sharing without cash transaction was a popular practice for the smaller farmers, since they could achieve tasks faster together. They needed both extra labor on their farm but had too small land surface to be kept busy all the time. Then, the landless could only sell their labor force or find other activities creating income, like collecting wood from the forest to sell it in the village. As they were the overwhelming majority, they could provide all the labor that the landholders needed.

The wage for a full day of work was 1 to 2 rupees, and was sometimes paid by one meal only. To feed their families, the lower castes sometimes had to collect the leftovers of the other families.

37

Employs temporary laborers

Access to pond

Over 30 acres 50 bovines, 100 small ruminants Employs temporary and permanent laborers 3.2. The Green Revolution (1970-2000)

3.2.1.The expansion of the irrigated areas

The wealthiest farmers could invest in the creation of open wells. They were of approximately 10 to 30 meters deep and usually located around the water tanks, mainly in the agroecological areas of the plains and downstream of the forest. As for the tanks, the water was available at different quantity and period depending on the location. First, manual and animal power were used to bring the water up, then diesel pumps. The digging of those wells was done by laborers, which was a labor opportunity for landless and small farmers of the villages.

The water from the tanks and the river were still irrigating the same area than the previous period. In addition to this previous water source, the open wells made possible the irrigation of larger areas during a wider period of the year, increasing the irrigated crop production considerably.

3.2.2.Apparition of new crops and technologies and decline of the cattle population

During this period, the green revolution reached the area with the apparition of new high yield potential varieties and the chemical fertilizers (urea and DAP). To obtain the potential yields of those new varieties, heavy fertilization (with cheap chemical fertilizers) and irrigation (with a wider surface thanks to the open wells) were necessary. Simultaneously, farmers abandoned the cultivation bairodlu and millets (except finger millet).

38

In India, the Green Revolution was essentially based on the raise of the food production, with irrigation, chemical fertilizers and high yielding varieties. The introduction of semi-dwarf varieties of wheat (1967) and paddy (1968) iniciate the begging of that period. Meanwhile, the Food Corporation of India and the price support mechanisms created in the 60's, both combined with subsidies for the first chemical fertilizers, encouraged the farmers to participate to the green revolution.

During the 1960's, the food production of the country was stagnating since the extension of the cultivated areas was impossible. While the demographic evolution was still increasing, the food security of the country became very critical. It is though green revolution that the country succeed to increase its agricultural production to meet its food needs. Indeed, since 1995, India reached the international market as exporter of food products and is largely self sufficient in terms of cereals. [START_REF] Dorin | Nourrir l'Inde : perspectives et défis de la prochaine décennie[END_REF] Picture 12: One of the rare open wells still operating in the area (June 2018)

The irrigated crops were hybrid vegetables, paddy and sugarcane. The paddy varieties had the considerable advantage of yielding much more cereals on the same surface, yielding more per cycle than the traditional bairodlu and millets. This food production could provide enough cereals for the increasing population over fixed agricultural surfaces (slashing the forest areas was already forbidden at that time). Other crops were oriented towards the market, like mangoes and sugarcane.

The open wells allowed irrigation on wider surfaces, of several cycles of crops per year, of high yielding varieties from the green revolution. This increase of the production coupled to new market opportunities allowed farmers to keep a sufficient income and food production on a smaller cultivated area per farmer due to the demographic evolution.

The sugarcane was the main cash crop. This plant was cultivated 3 years in a row, ideally in black soils because it is a water and nutrient demanding crop, and was demanding in labor. The canes were processed in small units on the field, where they were pressed and the juice cooked in big metallic pans with fire underneath them. The product was the jaggery (also called gur, the traditional raw sugar obtained by evaporating water from sugarcane juice). The cane fibers after the pressing were dried then used as combustible for the jaggery process, and the sugarcane leaves were given to the cattle.

The irrigated surfaces spread in the plain and downstream of the forests, where the water tables were close enough from the surface to be accessible with open wells. There, the paddy and sugarcane fields flourished. Coconut trees were planted on the border of the irrigated plot to benefit from the excess of fertilizer and water of the fields without any additional maintenance.

The rainfed areas continued to be cultivated with the same crops than before, except in the upland areas where the first mango orchards were planted. Their relative water need compared to the other cash crops made them more attractive for the farmers of the drier areas.

In parallel, the cattle population was in decline. Indeed, the use of chemical fertilizers implied a lesser use of the animals. As the time spent for their care is consequent, this activity was not as necessary as before.

39

The sugar production in India was, as paddy and wheat, supported by the Indian government.

As the world prices were rising, India was sugar-unprofitable country in the 60's, which led to considerable losses of currency. The central government set a guaranteed price for the producers: the Statutory Minimum Price in 1966 (with the Sugarcane Control Order).

Landy, 1994

3.2.3.The upholding of the inequalities between the farmers

The new technologies brought by the Green Revolution were not available for all the farmers. Indeed, the first requisite to cultivate the high yielding potential varieties was the possibility to irrigate, which concerned a small part of the farmers.

Meanwhile, the land surface per family decreased as the population increases, by the mechanism of division of the land from the father to his children. As increase of the land productivity compensating this phenomenon is only possible with irrigation, the inequalities were widened: the rainfed farmers are in even higher difficulty, not able to take advantage of the green revolution. This new segmentation was exacerbated by the absence of any public irrigation infrastructure. In India at that period many dams and canals where created at large scale to provide water to many farmers. In the study area the green revolution only expended on private funds.

According to their financial possibilities, the farmers could invest at different steps to benefit from the Green revolution. The first step was to dig an open well, for a larger irrigated surface. All farmers with access to irrigation started paddy cultivation, because it had similar labor needs than the previous cereals. The higher yields provided a better food security for the families but also the possibility to sell the surplus.

Then, only the larger farmers who had temporary and permanent worker could start sugarcane cultivation with the purchase of a jaggery processing unit (1 crusher, 3 pans and trays costs 80,000 Rs in 2018). In the upland areas, some farmers invested in mango orchards. Since the first fruits sellable come after around 10 years, the plots were planted little by little, only by people who could afford to pay for the plantation and to have part of their land unprofitable during this period.

In parallel, the Indian agrarian reform was conducted at the country's scale to attempt to lower the inequalities in terms of land access. In the studied area, the land distribution from the government was quite discrete and only occurred in some villages (2 acres were given to all SC families of Patikonda and 5 ST and SC families received one acre each in Gollapalle). This land was not redistributed from the largest landowners but cleared from the forests, thus in the upland agroecological areas. In Kalavapalle the government announced that they would give similar land to SC and ST people at the same period, but it was never executed.

41

The Independence of India was only possible thanks to the mobilization of millions of farmers.

The land redistribution from the landlords to the landless laborers («the land to the tillers») was one of the main promises of the independentist movement. Thus, after 1950 started some land reforms decrees However, since agriculture is managed at the level of local assemblies at the state scale, those prescriptions were not applied equally among the country.

At the scale of India, in 1980, 10% of the population owned 50% of the land, while 40% of the people were left landless. [START_REF] Pouchepadass | Le monde rural[END_REF][START_REF] Landy | Paysans de l'Inde du Sud: le choix et la contrainte[END_REF][START_REF] Dorin | Nourrir l'Inde : perspectives et défis de la prochaine décennie[END_REF] Figure A new technology for irrigation, the underground pumps and tube wells, spread in the area. The wells are dug with heavy machinery and water is brought up with underground electric pumps. It allows farmers to have access to groundwater individually anywhere. The irrigated surfaces extended widely in the area, mainly in the agroecological areas of the plains and downstream of the savanna, but in the uplands as well since the water can be pumped from deeper underground than with the open wells. This investment is costly, but since the government supplies 7 hours of free power daily for the pumps, the use of water is free. The tube wells are individual, costly, and necessary to increase the land productivity.

43

Like the forests, the irrigation management was traditionally done at the scale of the farmers communities. This organization was disrupted by the British during the colonization, shifting to a centralized and bureaucratic management: the government became the architect, business owner and manager of the irrigation systems, while the farmers simply received the water. A turning point happened in the 70's with the green revolution: a permanent and stable access to water was necessary to grow several cycles of the high yielding crops per year. Then, tube wells multiplied everywhere, a phenomenon known as the Groundwater Boom. The organization of irrigation was radically transformed to an individual management. This new water access increased the irrigated surfaces and allowed an intensification of the production, particularly towards high added value productions such as milk and market vegetables. "Pump irrigation revolution, aided by irrigation service markets, has been among the most powerful rural poverty alleviation phenomena, without which the Indian sub-continent would arguably have been in the throes of massive social and political instability" writes Shah. Indeed, pump irrigation could irrigate land almost anywhere, unlike canal projects which targeted specific areas (which, by the way, were never implanted in the studied area). [START_REF] Dorin | Nourrir l'Inde : perspectives et défis de la prochaine décennie[END_REF][START_REF] Shah | India's groundwater irrigation economy, the challenge of balancing livelihoods and environment Trebbin A and Hassler M[END_REF] Picture 13: A tube well installation (with the cable to bring power to the underground pump) in an elephant grass plot

3.3.2.The expansion of cash crops and apparition of sericulture

Another new crop appeared: the mulberry. This fast growing perennial plant produces leaves that are the only food for silkworms. Along with the spread of this crop, the government gave subsidies to support sericulture (silk production), by paying around 10% of the investment needed to build a silk shed. This agro-industry started in the area for the on-farm sector (from the mulberry to the cocoons), with farmers producing their mulberry leaves to feed their own worms. Then, the cocoons were sold in the governmental silk market in Palamaner. It is the first non food production of the area.

All the irrigated cropping systems (sugarcane, mulberry, vegetables, paddy) expended widely. The rainfed areas remained cultivated with the pulses' association and finger millet. During that period, the use of chemicals (the fertilizers first, then the pesticides) got generalized to all farmers. The mechanization also started with the first tractors, bough by some farmers who rented it to the other. The first silk buildings where built in the plains close to the city of Palamaner. The diffusion of the mulberry cultivation and the silk worm rearing developed only in this area, replacing market vegetables or sugarcane. Meanwhile, the cultivated surfaces of sugarcane expanded and became the main irrigated cash crop in the plains and downstream of the forests, cultivated in monocropping or in rotation with paddy. Mango fields plantation also continued in the upland agroecological areas.

During that period, the first poultry production units were built. This production is fully integrated and conducted in concrete buildings, welcoming chicken for around 40 days.

44

The cocoon market was established in Palamaner in 1984, one year after the amendment of the Andhra Pradesh Silkworm Seed and Cocoon Act which aims at protecting this high added value production. Since then the quantity of silk transiting though the market kept increasing over the years. The market was the only place where it was allowed buy silk worm eggs and to sell silk cocoons. The price were, and still are, fixed every day by open auction between the buyers and the farmers. To access this market, is license is mandatory.

Director of the Palamaner Silk Market, 2018

Picture 14: Sericultors and white silk cocoons at the governmental silk market

3.3.3.Operation flood and the emergence of the dairies

Around 2000, the dairies appeared in the area. First came Tirumala dairy (now owned by the French group Lactalis), then Dodla (who built a dairy plant operating since 2004), two private dairies. Afterward came many other private dairies, and the National Producer Company Shreeja (called Balaji back then). The concept of the National Producer Company is explained in 4.3.1 Dairy livestock systems taking Shreeja's exemple. At the beginning, milk production as mainly from the indigenous cow fed with paddy straw and daily grazing in the savanna. Those cows had low milk productivity. The dairies took action to develop the production, transferring new technologies in the area like exotic breeds, fodder crops, feed and veterinary services. With the artificial insemination provided by the dairies workers, farmers started to cross their native cattle with improved exotic sperm of Jersey and Holstein-Friesian. Those exotic breeds have a higher milk production but are less adapted to the local climate.

To reach the milk production potential of those cows, grazing in the savanna was not sufficient. Fodder crops like elephant grass (called "foreign grass" by the farmers) and corn were cultivated on irrigated land to increase their productivity. Those crops are cut daily and fed to the cows in morning and night times. They still go grazing, but closer to the village.

Farmer started to buy cows again, sometimes selling their indigenous cows to invest in more productive cows. The cattle population and milk production increased. All the families able to do so started immediately to sell their milk to the dairies, since this new market is an opportunity to get a stable income throughout the year. Still, the most vulnerable families could not invest so much money and were left out the operation flood.

45

In the 50's and 60's, India was largely dependent on milk importations. Millions of Indian farmers were producing it but had no way of selling it. Indeed, the sector was not organized to collect, transport and process the milk, which is a fast perishable item. It is the success of a dairy cooperative created in 1946 in Gujarat which encouraged the Indian government to form the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB). It aimed at "flooding the country with milk" with the Operation flood led from 1970 to 1996, at the scale of the whole country.

At the farm scale, the milk producers were beneficiaries of new technologies. The local National Companies offered a stable market to sell the milk and rural employment. The program also mobilized the districts and states to shape and coordinate the whole sector.

India is now the first milk producer of the world and represents 19% of the world production. In 2007, the dairy sector represented at least 20% of the argicultural economy of the country and at least 70% of the rural population was involved in milk production. FAO, 2014; Cunningham, K. ,2009

3.3.4.The adoption of new productions still depends on the types of farmers

During this period, the dynamics of access to water of the previous period continued and was amplified by the tube wells. Also, many small landholders gained the treasury necessary to buy the equipment needed to process sugarcane at last and joined the sugar production. The wealthiest farmers started sericulture at that time, building silk shed with subsidies from the government. Poultry buildings were also built by both farmers and investors from non agricultural horizons and were usually operated by laborers paid by the owner.

As for the milk production, the first farmers able to sell milk were the one who had not sold their whole herd and the one able to buy new cows. This purchase is quite important, especially considering that treasury is needed afterwards to buy food for the cow if the farmers were not producing enough paddy grass and to pay for the veterinary fees.

47

+ sugarcane

+ mangoes

Outside investors

Employs temporary and permanent laborers 3.4. The start of the groundwater crisis (2010 -2018)

3.4.1.The water rush continues while the resource is getting scarcer

This period is particular in the way that there are no specific innovation in terms of water access, but is rather characterized by a change of the water resource itself. As the tube wells flourished, the level of the groundwater lowered. Now even tube wells are drying up and have to be dug deeper and deeper. However, people still take their chances at creating new ones, since it is the only way to have profitable agricultural activities for both cropping and livestock systems. Attempting to get a tube well is an investment with high risk nowadays. It's expensive to take a chance (a drilling costs in average 100,000 Rs, so 1250 €), and numerous attempts might have to be done before finding water. The deeper wells of the area reach to more than 300 meters down in the uplands.

The farmers who have access to water started drip irrigation, getting the equipment supply with government subsidies. The amount of the subsidies varies year per year, but is always above 50% of the investment and is free for ST and SC categories (which is quite ironic, since the overwhelming majority are landless or rainfed farmers). This technology allows the farmers to irrigate a larger area with the same water access. Many farms are already fully equipped and the rest of the farmers with access to water plans on applying for the subsidies.

3.4.2.The diversification of the cropping systems

All farmers complain that rainfalls are not sufficient anymore. Rainfed finger millet cultivation is not possible anymore and the groundnut harvests have been disastrous. Most of irrigated farmers also gave up sugarcane cultivation. This crop is now only present in the agroecological areas downstream of the forests where a lot of water is available, but even there farmers are quitting this crop little by little.

48

Picture 15: Drip irrigation set up in a groundnut plot in August 2018 (the plants are dry on the left, green on the right near the hoes). This crop was never irrigated traditionally.

The pulses' association and mango orchards appear to be the only two crops possible to grow without water access. The groundnut cultivation is supported by the government: with a land registration title, farmers have access to a 20% discount on the seeds compared to the market prices. However, for the most vulnerable families even groundnut cultivation becomes risky: the lack of water during the cycle or the heavy rainfalls around the harvesting period can spoil the harvest. And if by luck the production can be harvested, the yields are much lower than before. This cropping systems is still present in every agroecological area. People also keep planting mango trees in the uplands, where there is no irrigation opportunities. Even small landholder farmers started with free trees distributed by the government to anyone who applies to the program. They plant it on not irrigated land and water the trees manually or with water tanks the first 5 years to keep them alive. Afterwards they can survive with the rainfalls only.

The main cash crops are now mangoes, vegetables and mulberry. The silk production is still on a roll: the cultivated area of mulberry is spreading from the plain to the other agroecological areas and many farmers hope to receive subsidies to build their own silk building. The silk market of Palamaner receives between 3 to 12 tons of cocoon everyday though more and more farmers sell their cocoon in Karnataka, the neighboring state (see page 85).

The market vegetables are sold to Palamaner's market at fast changing rates. The paddy is cultivated once or twice a year depending on the water available, and is kept in priority for the house consumption. Some farmers still cultivate finger millet, but now irrigated. The traditional rained cycle during the monsoon (June to September) shifted to the dry season (January to April) to they take advantage of the monsoon to grow paddy which needs more water.

The finger millet balls (ragi mutta), the staple food, let place to white rice in the majority of the plates.

It is eaten cooked normally or prepared as idlies or dosa, and always eaten with a sauce made of vegetables, pulses and spices.

49

Picture 16: Women putting a tomato harvest in boxes for the market

In addition, a new trend started in the area. Many plots are left uncultivated for diverse reasons. For the most vulnerable farmers, who cannot afford to invest for crops if they are spoiled, do not take the risk of water shortage for paddy or groundnuts. For bigger farmers, some plots are left uncultivated because there is no water access, because the attempts for tube wells failed. The plots close to the forest are sometimes left out because the risk of elephants, wild boars and monkeys damages are too high. The danger of elephants, close to the wild life sanctuary, started during this period too. They destroy the crops (groundnuts, paddy, sugarcane, etc.) but are also life threatening for humans, as it was explained before.

The integrated poultry rearing units are still built everywhere, slower than silk rearing buildings.

3.4.3.The dynamics of the dairy production

All farmer families keep cows to sell milk. Only a few quit this production, either because they do not have the strength to continue (elder people) or the time (people with an activity outside the agriculture sector) or enough resources to feed their cow. The actual milk production systems differ on the cow breeds, number of animals and feeding system; and the limiting factor for all of them is the food, with a diet mainly based on paddy straw, grazing and complemented with bought feed.

As for the dairy products, the families now only keeps about 0,5L a day to prepare milk tea or coffee and make their own curd. They prefer to sell the milk rather than to consume it.

A few local bred herds like the ones common before the green revolution remain in the remote area of Cheta Penta bassin. Located 30 kilometers away from Palamaner, this village is surrounded by the forest with grazing allowance. Only 3 families still own over 20 indigenous cattle animals which they take daily to the forest (see Picture 11: A man taking one of the last herds of indigenous cattle to the forest in Cheta Penta). 50 3.4.4.The differentiation of the farmers is still operated by their ability to invest, but also to keep investing for water

The constant struggle for water is quite costly, to dig further old wells or create new ones. Now, the gap between the farmers is not only due to the ability to invest, since they can lose the gains of those investments: the farmers who had access to water with the water tanks or with tube wells and open wells can see their irrigation ability disappear. To invest now in a tube well is getting more costly as the groundwater tables are getting deeper. It is the long term effect of the groundwater boom and over use of the resource of the previous decade.

The farmers who could use the water first and benefited from it with the most remunerative crops have over-exploited the resource to create wealth and private capital, at the expense of the other farmers. They can continue to pay for deeper wells, while small or medium landowners are compelled to adjust to a reduced water access. So far, very few farmers have completely lost their access to water and most of them were still able to dig their wells deeper to compensate the water scarcity. They are only the first signs of the crisis.

Outside investors started to take interest in the area at two extremes of the land surface scale. Some build integrated poultry buildings on one acre of land with a well functioning tube well while other buy over 10 acres of mango orchards in the upland areas. Large farmers also invest in those productions.

A similar differentiation operates for the milking systems. Farmers who have access to irrigation can grow elephant grass to feed improved breeds like Jersey or Hostein-Friesian cows. Also, some landless families started milk production during this last period. They usually maintain a single improved breed cow and buy elephant grass to have the higher milk production possible. However, the poorer (mainly ST and SC families) do not own any livestock.

Many villagers of the new generation, and some adults, leave the rural areas to work in big cities such as Chittoor (40 km), Bangalore (140 km), Hyderabad (630 km) or even the U.S.A.. Those people had the chance to finish their primary and secondary education and pursue in university.

The different steps of the water control structure the agricultural history. The new technologies of irrigation transformed the landscape, increasing the irrigated surfaces, and the different cropping and livestock systems are the consequence of this domestication of the resource. It also explains the differentiation of the production systems. As presented in the agrarian history of the area, the different categories of farmers result from the global evolution of Indian agriculture combined to the capacity of the farmers to adopt new productions. The typology of the production systems is presented below, and will help to compare and understand the choices of the farmers during the rest of the study.

4.1.1.Landless people: precarious wages and insecure labor opportunities

The landless households are characterized by a wide diversity, but for the typology it is represented by a family of two workers, two children and one dependent parent. They own the ration card Below Poverty Line to buy some staple food at a lower price and have discounts in the case of health problems. They are usually from the ST, SC and BC categories of the official classification. Their previous generations were generally landless and labor workers as well.

The agricultural sector is still the main employer for rural poor. They are daily laborers who wait for opportunities to work in farms nearby. For the rest of the study the wage will be set at 250 Rs per day, but it varies according to the employer and the gender of the employee (50 to 100 Rs less for the women). The farm labor opportunities depend on the agroecological areas. The better areas are located in the plains and downstream of the savanna, were the irrigated surfaces are wider and the plots cultivated year round. It is quite common for some workers to go to other villages for labor opportunities, sometimes walking over 10 km daily.

In the areas near the savannas in the uplands are located remote ST or SC villages where the facilities (roads, school, etc.) are barely developed and the remoteness makes labor opportunities even scarcer.

The main income generating activities are still wood and honey collection in the forest, products that are sold at very low rates.

A few alternative options from collection and farm labor exist. The NREGA (National Rural Employment Guarantee Act of 2005), for instance, is an Indian labor law and social security measure.

The goal is to guarantee the right to work in rural areas by providing at least 100 days of employment per year to every household. In the area some villages have access to this kind of labor (digging water tanks to collect the black soil, digging holes to plant new mango trees for other farmers) for 200 Rs for 5 hours of work per day. However, the distribution of the programs among the villages does not seem very judicious, since the program is absent from the most backward villages. Complains about delay in payment and too low quotas of workers are also common.

Construction and quarries jobs are also available in specific areas. The wage is higher (300 Rs per day) because the work is more physical.

If landless families can invest to create a small business they can become drivers, tailors, barbers or laundry makers. The activity is often linked to their caste from the jati system. Finally, a few people have to migrate to Bengalore, which is 140 km away, because work adapted to their skills is more available (in construction for men or house keeping for women). The "good" wage of 300 Rs per day is easier to get. Some people go during the low season and other go year round depending on the financial difficulty. Yet, it concerns only a minority of villagers.

The wide majority only relies on labor work However, a few of the landless families have activities of livestock production:

PS 1 : Landless shepherds and laborers

Those landless families use the common grazing areas and forests to rear small ruminants. This system is very low in inputs, thus possible to maintain with a low investment capacity. However, it is quite risky since diseases can cause considerable damage on the herd, and the grazing resource is not stable. The majority of those families live close to a forest with grazing allowance, but other live far from the forest and take their animals on uncultivated lands only.

The herd has to be taken to pasture daily, at least 8 hours per day. For the small herds, one shepherd is sufficient, so the others can go working as laborers.

Remark : they are the only production system, along with the SP13, without milk production.

PS 2 : Landless milk producers and laborers

Those families own one improved breed cow, generally bought in the past 10 years. The investment to buy the cow is often possible with the help of a Self-Help Group (SHG)6 , and liquidity is necessary year round to buy the expensive inputs (fodder, feed, health). A lot of care is provided to the cow, since it is the only productive asset of the families. The portion of weeds collected on common areas is important in the cow's diet, which makes the families quite vulnerable during the dry season, when the biomass production on common areas is low. They often have to sell their cows at that time, and they will try to buy another one when they will be able to feed it.

Caring for the cow is less constraining than for the small ruminants, so all the family members can work as laborers whenever it is possible.

4.1.2.The small rainfed farmers: little surfaces of very low productivity

This category represents the majority of landholders in the area, by far. The household characterization is similar than for the landless families (2 workers and 3 dependents). They work on their own farm but go work for other farmers whenever it is possible, just like the landless people. For the work peaks (pulses weeding and harvesting) they also employ laborers. They usually have a ration card Below Poverty Line like the landless. Those families own from 0,2 to 2,5 acres.

Those production systems have in common that they do not have the possibility to invest in the creation of a tube well and own only manual equipment. They rent bulls and tractor when they need it. Also, as rainfed farmers, they cannot grow any elephant grass. The maintenance of improved breeds would thus not be interesting, so they maintain two crossed bred milking cows with bought paddy straw, groundnuts leaves from their land and biomass from the commons.

PS 3: Rainfed annual crop producers and laborers

Those families only cultivate the traditional rain fed pulses association existing since before 1970. They keep the beans and a part of the groundnuts for the family and sell the rest of the groundnuts to middlemen. This production system is vulnerable to the rainfall and the yields can vary greatly yearly.

PS 4: Rainfed annual and mango producers and laborers

Those families started planting mango orchard since 10 years ago. According to the farmers' choice, just a part of the land was planted, or all the land at different times. For the model, the most common situation is studied: only half of the land planted with mangoes and the other half is cultivated with the rainfed pulses association. While the government support this change by giving free mango trees to any landholder, the decision to plant mangoes requires some financial stability. Indeed, the plantation will have economic returns only after 8 years and during the unproductive period the plants need to be watered, which can be costly.

4.1.3.The small landholders with access to irrigation: taking advantage of their little surface

With water, those farmers have a wider opportunities for cultivation. Among others, they grow elephant grass which increases considerably the milk production of two improved breed milking cows.

PS 5 : Sugarcane specialized producers and laborers

This production system became quite rare and is located downstream of the savanna, especially in Cheta Penta' basin. They own around 2 acres of land, some of them with plots underneath the pond.

Around their villages, the forest is accessible for animal grazing. They cultivate all their land -except 0.25 acres for the elephant grass-with the same cropping system of sugarcane during 2 years followed by a cycle of paddy.

Those farmers work as daily laborers, but also employ temporary workers for labor peaks. They own a tube well which is usually not very deep due to their location. They also own the equipment to process the canes into jaggery.

PS 6 : Market vegetable specialized producers

They usually have insecure access to water, their tube well flow depending on the seasons. To take advantage of their 1 to 3 acres of land, they grow vegetables using drip irrigation. Since the vegetable crops last from 4 to 6 months, the risks from lack of water and bad market prices are lowered. They resort to temporary laborers, and as their cropping systems are highly labor dependent they do not work for other farms unlike all production systems mentioned above.

Most of the farmers grow 3 to 4 different kinds of vegetables, and tomato is by far the most popular.

The choice of the next vegetable is like choosing numbers for the lottery: the income will most likely depend on the price sold to the market which is impossible to foresee (even if it is generally a bit higher during the dry season).

PS 7 : Diversified annual crop producers

Those farmers have a little more land than PS 6 and their tube well flow is more reliable in quantity and seasonality. It allows them to grow paddy as much as their water resource permits (one or two cycles).

PS 8 : Specialized silk producers Some medium size farmers, with 3 acres of land, decided to grow only mulberry and elephant grass. They can make 4 cycles of 150 worms per year. They rent the buildings for silk worms rearing or sometimes install the trays inside an abandoned room in a regular house.

Those farmers depend on outside equipment for many operations since they do not own a tractor, bulls nor a silk building.

PS 9 : Diversified sugarcane producers

Those households still follow the traditional model of "Hindu joint families", where the brothers all stay in their parents' house and their wives come to settle with them. In those households live the parent couple, their sons, their daughters if they are not married yet, their daughters in law and their little children. The family usually separate itself when the parents expire, each couple forming a new household. This gathering is beneficial for the distribution of more family workforce on a wider surface. It explains the more diversified production systems. For the model, 3 family workers are counted (two brothers and one wife). They employ laborers for work peaks.

Those production systems are always located in the agroecological area downstream of the savanna and are larger than the previous, from 5 to 8 acres per family. They own 2 bore wells, which is enough to irrigate all their land for any crop. Though sugarcane monocropping is still present, most of the farmers cultivate 2 years of sugarcane in rotation with paddy. They also grow and paddyand finger millet for their own consumption. They grow a bigger plot of elephant grass than the previous production systems and have 4 improved breed milking cows.

Not studied production systems of similar size and water access Those cropping systems were not studied because they are a minority compared to the previous:

• Small specialized mulberry producers They produce mulberry but not silk since they have to little surfaces (under 2 acres) to start a cycle of worms. They sell the leaves to silk producers.

• Small farmers without tube well but with plots underneath a water tank They generally own 1 acre underneath the pond and 1 acre with no access to water. They cultivate pulses on their dry land and paddy underneath the pond (one or two cycles according to the water stored in the tank).

• Medium diversified with sugarcane production in Cheta Penta basin In Cheta Penta, families also have grazing rights for sheep, bulls and cows in the forest surrounding the village. With to this resource, the livestock systems are a bit different. They have herds of small ruminants, 2 improved breed milking cows and a pair of bulls. As mentioned before in 3.4.3, a few of those families still have herds of indigenous cattle.

4.1.4.The large landholders: diversification of the productions PS 10 : Large diversified silk producers

Like the previous production system, they are Hindu joint families. They have several tube wells and 4 improved breed milking cows. They also own a silk shed. The large agricultural land they own, combined to a sufficient water resource, allows those families to have a wide diversity of cropping systems. The main cash crop is the mulberry for the silk. Paddy and finger millet are cultivated for their own consumption, the rainfed plots are cultivated with groundnuts, and they also cultivate elephant grass. To work in their mulberry plots, they use their own pair of bulls.

PS 11 : Large very diversified producers

Sometimes, the family members of those households distribute among them the cropping and livestock system management. The sons share productive activities like the silk shed, the cereal production, etc. The wives are responsible of the laborers' organization (management, preparing lunch and tea break), the milk production, etc. Many day laborer are needed year round for this kind of production system, that is why they have both permanent and temporary workers. Those families have up to 40 acres, with plots distributed in every agroecological area. This allows them to have a very diversified production. Indeed, they own mango orchards, cultivate paddy, finger millet, vegetables, pulses, fodder and mulberry, with coconut trees on the border of the plots. The food production is in priority kept of self consumption (paddy, finger millet, green chili, groundnut, coconut oil, mangoes...) and the extra quantity is sold. So many productions demand considerable immobilized capital. For the water access, they usually have plots underneath a water tank, many bore wells and use drip irrigation. All the equipment is owned by the family itself, like a pair of bulls, a tractor and its tools and a building for silk production.

4.1.5.Managerial systems: investing on a wide range of surface PS 12: Managerial mango plantations owners Their mango orchards of 5 to 25 acres were planted between 20 to 30 years ago, by their previous generation or bought from other farmers. There are two categories of owners. The first are families of farmers living in the village, who planted and bought more orchards, still rear 4 improved breed milking cows and cultivate paddy for their own consumption. It is this type which is modelized in the study. The second are outside investors who bought mango plantations, have another income outside the agriculture sector and live in cities (Palamaner or Bengalore). Those cropping systems are very mechanized and the owners never work themselves on the crops.

PS 13: Managerial poultry producers

The integrated poultry production can be done by different types of people and generally on 1 acre of land with stable access to water. Some are outside investors living in the city of Palamaner and other from the large diversified producers. Both employ a couple of laborers living in rooms in the buildings to take care of the animals. Some smaller farmers also invested in smaller buildings on their land and do the work themselves. A bigger factory spreading over 12 acres is owned by the VH Group (Venkys), the largest fully integrated poultry group in Asia.

Cropping systems

All the technical itineraries of the different cropping systems are presented in the annex 5, and the prices of the operations and the different equipment used are described in annex 2.

4.2.1.General information about the cropping systems Water needs and temporality

In order to have a better overview of the cropping systems, they are numbered from the less to the more demanding in water. Rainfed systems are the CS1 and CS2, even though CS2 needs supplies of water when the trees are young. The rainfed pulses are planted in June, at the beginning of the monsoon. The 3 perennial crops (CS 3, 4 and 5) need little amount of water, but need to be irrigated year round. The tomatoes can be planted independently from the season as they have intermediate needs of water. Their irrigation is mandatory but the needs are inferior to the other annual crops, so farmers with tube wells of low flow can cultivate it. On the opposite, as it is an inundated crop, paddy requires large volumes of water, thus is cultivated on particular periods. The main cycle is the one realized during the monsoon, starting in July until November. According to the climogram page 21, it is supposed to rain at least 80mm per month during the 5 months after the transplantation. Very few farmers have enough water to cultivate a second cycle of paddy during the dry season, so they plant tomatoes or finger millet instead. For the soil preparation of the plots, tractors are commonly used. The choice between the tools (decompactor, cultivator, rotavator and caged wheels) depends on the crops cultivated. Some farmers have their own tractor, and the other rent it for fees between 1,000 and 1,200 Rs per acre, depending on the tool. Large farmers usually always own one, but farmers of all size can have one and offer to rent it. The inter-row operations (weeding and mixing fertilizers with the surface horizon) and creation of ridges are realized with bulls and wooden tools (as described in LS 6 page 84). The bulls, as the tractors, are either from the owner or rented to a neighbor at 1000 Rs per acre and per day. The farmers who own bulls are generally the mulberry cultivators because it needs a lot of inter-row operations.

As they are used for different operation, tractors and bulls are not competing, but are rather complementary.

All farmers employ laborers, whatever their size and income. All sowing, weeding and harvesting operations of annual crops are done manually. The only competitions existing are for the paddy harvest, which can be done by combine harvesters, and for creation of ridges, realized either with bulls or laborers.

4.2.2.Cropping system presentation CS 1 : Rainfed pulses association

Groundnuts + other pulses + sorghum // Groundnuts + other pulses + sorghum

Nowadays it is the only annual rainfed cropping system, cultivated in monocropping on all non irrigated areas. Those plants are associated in the sames plots because they have the same growing season and because they are complementary in space. The red sandy soils of the uplands are adequate since they are loose and allow the groundnut to grow in the soil. They also drain water in case of heavy rains to prevent the seeds from rotting.

It is a cropping system with low needs in inputs and labor. Most of the farmers never apply pesticides on their plots and use seeds from their last harvest, except for the groundnuts which they buy from the government who distributes it at a reduced price. Since farmers owning land have cows, they use their own dung to fertilize the land and they do not add any chemical fertilizers. As for labor, it is the lower need for annual crops of the area, needing workers for 3 operations only: planting, weeding (only once) and the groundnut harvest. The mechanized operations (soil preparation, transportation of dung and groundnuts) are usually done with a tractor, all the rest (even the threshing) is done manually. The crops are harvested at different times. The groundnuts are sold for oil to middle men and a few bags are kept at home for the family consumption. The other beans are kept for the family consumption only, to be cooked in sauce and eaten with cereals. Finally, the sorghum and pulses leaves are distributed to the cattle during a few months, the farmers appreciate it for their nutritional value (higher than the paddy straw).

As those plots are not irrigated, the yields depend entirely on the rainfalls. Farmers choose to sow as soon as possible after the firsts rains, to benefit from the water before it is drained by the red soils.

Afterwards, the harvest is never guaranteed: those last 3 years, the farmers interviewed had harvested less than 5 quintals per acre (compared to 18 in average).

Picture 18: Women gathered to remove the shell from the groundnuts before the plantation in mid-June 62 During the production, dung is applied yearly and pesticides twice a year. The plots are weeded mechanically two times, then ridges are created manually by laborers. The trees are pruned every September, after the harvest. The surveillance is done during 4 months by a family member. Then, the harvest is entirely managed by the middle men. Only 6 man-days of external labor force per year are needed, which is the lowest for all the cropping systems studied.

CS 3 : Irrigated mango orchards

Compared to the previous cropping system the trees are much older, since they were planted around 30 years ago, and cultivated on larger surfaces. No free saplings were given by the government at that time, but the plantation with NRGEA employees was already possible for some farmers.

The plots are fertilized yearly with dung and chemical fertilizers one month before the flower buds formation in April. A deep ploughing is done to weed and mix the fertilizer in the soil. Pesticides are applied 2 to 3 times with tractors equipped with water tanks and sprayers. After the harvest, the trees are pruned and a surface ploughing is done to remove the weeds. The maintenance of the fences (either living fences of agave and thorny shrubs or granite poles and barbed wires) is realized whenever it is needed. All the labor is fully realized by employees and more operations are conducted than in the previous cropping system. In particular, the surveillance is done by families living in the plots year round for 5,000 Rs per month in a small house with some rice provided by the owners.

The commercialization of the mangoes for the CS2 and CS3

The harvest of the early varieties (Senthoora, Benishan) is done in May-June and the late ones (Bangaloran, Neelum) in July-August. Locally, they are only eaten fresh (ripe or green with salt and chili) and the agri-food sector processes it into pulp and concentrate.

Farmers and middlemen agree on a price for a period of two years. The contract is generally done for all the plots of the owner, and the harvest is entirely at the responsibility of the merchantmen (who choose the day of harvest, choose and pay for the employees, the machines and the transportation). They also give advance to the farmers to give them some liquidity in the year in between.

In 2018, the market prices were lower than usual and many middle men did not collect all the plots they had under contract. They asked to the farmers the permission to pay them only the half of the amount they had agreed on, and all the farmers have accepted. Those low prices seem to be due to the increasing production of mangoes in the area.

Also, the relation with the middle men for the CS2 and CS3 are a bit different. The producers of CS3 have a better bargaining power, since they sell bigger volumes, a longer relation with the middlemen and could also sell their own production. Indeed, few farmers from the CS3 decide to manage the harvest and go to the market themselves. In the opposite, some farmers of the same CS make contracts not only about the price and the harvest, but also for the application of pesticides and surveillance, which reduces even more the role of the owners in the production.

It is hard to have the precise volumes of production since the merchantmen do not communicate the yields to the farmers. Also, the plantation of the rainfed orchard started around 2010, so most of them did not reach their optimum production yet. Moreover, when farmers plant rainfed mango trees, they do not have any idea on the future income they can get from it.

The irrigation and the age of the trees of the CS3 makes them more lucrative. The relation between the middlemen and the producers also makes them stronger in the negotiations. Both reasons result in a much better NAV for them: 18,000 Rs compared to 7,000 Rs for the CS2.

64

Picture 20: Late harvest varieties: the Bangaloran (big fruits) and Neelum (small ones) CS 4 : Fodder cultivation (Elephant grass) 5 All farmers who have access to irrigation grow their own elephant grass. This perennial tropical grass is planted in small plots of 0.25 to 0.5 acres, if possible near the house where the fodder is distributed to the cows.

The cuttings planted are usually from the farm itself, or from the neighbors if it is planted for the first time. Very little labor is needed for weeding, fertilization and surface ploughing after harvest. Some rare farmers apply pesticides on it.

The grass is cut just before the distribution to the cows in the morning and in the evening. Its high productivity allows a harvest every 3 month approximately. However, the growth is mainly dependent on the water supply, so the summer biomass production is lower than during the monsoon. For the same reason, the yields depend greatly between the farmers who have a stable or precarious access to water.

The output price of this cropping system used in the model is the selling price to other farmers, even though very few farmers commercialize it.

CS 4

Picture 22: A boy fetching bundles of elephant grass far from his house Picture 21: A plot of elephant grass CS 5 : Mulberry: the fodder of the silkworms

(Mulberry)10

The expansion of silk production in the area can be measured with the surface of mulberry cultivated. The leaves of this fast growing deciduous woody perennial plant are the only food of the silk worms. During the productive period, the mulberry is kept at a low height (under 2 meters) and removed after 10 years. If it is not pruned, the same plant could develop to become a tree.

The plantation of the cuttings (which are usually bought the first time, then home made) can be done anytime during the year as long as water is available. The only motomecanized operations needed are for the soil preparation before plantation, afterwards all works are manual or realized with bulls. Dung is applied once a year, while chemical fertilizers (DAP, urea and complex) are applied after every harvest. A few farmers who were victim of pests on their crops now use some pesticides. The application is realized 20 days at least before the harvest, in order protect the worms from the insecticide. The labor related to the harvest of the leaves, generally every 2 month depending on the water supply, has been counted in the silk worms' livestock system. The branches have to be cut in the early morning or late evening and given immediately to the worms, in order to be the fresher possible. It has good nutritional values so it can also be fed to milking cows. It concerns both the leaves not eaten by the worms at the end of the cycle and the leaves that cannot be used for sericulture (if the farmers do not find any silk building to rent for instance).

For the outputs of this cropping system, the selling price is the one of the mulberry leaves when they are sold to other farmers. However, they usually use it for their own sericulture.

CS 5

Picture 23: A man working the inter rows of his mulberry fields after harvest, with his own bulls CS 6 : Market gardening: intensive in labor and inputs

Tomatoes/ tomatoes

The diversity of market gardening in the area is wide: tomatoes, green chili, eggplants, ladies' finger, cabbage, cauliflowers, diverse beans and gourds, etc. The choice of the vegetable planted is made by the farmer according to the market prices, water availability and personal knowledge. The market rates, even though they fluctuate so fast that they cannot be foreseen, are often discouraging farmers to grow one crop again if they have sold it at a bad rate once. The different vegetables do not have the same water needs, so it is also a factor of choice according to the water available. Finally, farmers gained experience in some crops, and usually grow no more than 3 kinds of vegetables. However, the tomato cultivation is by far the most popular. Because of its popularity and its common points with other crops, it is used for the market gardening cropping system model.

One tomato cycle stays on the plot during 4.5 month, allowing 2 cycles per year in mono-cropping. Each cycle yields in average 8 tons of tomatoes per acre. It is sometimes grown with lines of corn (for cows), marigolds (to repel insects) and vegetables (climbing on the threads used to stalk the tomatoes), to take advantage of the small plots and the irrigation.

Those crops are highly dependent on inputs. The seedlings, chemical fertilizers, drip equipment, pesticides and stalking equipment needed make this cropping system the heavier, by far, in terms of intermediate consumption costs. Laborers are also needed for many operations and in large quantity year round. Thus, tomatoes, and vegetables in general, are high providers of labor.

The vegetables are sold to the Palamaner vegetables market, where the prices are set every morning by the different retailers present. The prices follow a double variability. Firstly, they vary between the dry and rainy season. In rainy season more farmers can cultivate tomatoes and the yields are higher. At that period, the bigger volume on the market is the reason of lower prices. Secondly, they fluctuate day by day, probably because of the randomness of the retailers demand. This second variability is over short periods of time (days and weeks) and, unlike the seasonal variation, is not predictable. A box of tomatoes can be sold from 10 to 500 Rs! Unfortunately, as the vegetables cannot wait to be harvested and sold, the farmers cannot choose the selling day. Vegetable cultivation is quite like a lottery: large amount of money is spent for the cultivation, but the prices are so unstable that the gross product, thus the gross added value, is unpredictable. Since the intermediate consumption and labor costs are so high, it is a constant bet against the retailers' prices. However, with the price of 200 rs per 15kg box set for the model, this CS is the highest in terms of gross added value.

CS 6

Picture 24: Tomato plot mixed with marigolds CS 7 : Paddy and tomato rotation Paddy / tomatoes Paddy is the staple food of the area, most of the families eat it three times a day. Farmers try to grow it as much as they can, that is to say as much as their water access allows: the cultivation of two cycles of paddy per year becomes rarer. For this cropping system, only one paddy cycle is possible during the monsoon. Farmers grow tomatoes on the same plot from January to May.

As paddy is cultivated inundated under 3 inches (8 cm) of water to reduce the weeds, it is the crop the most demanding in water. It can be irrigated with the water tanks or with tube wells, in the latter case the plots are located close to the well to limit the losses. The plots are always kept inundated if it is possible, starting 1 week before transplantation until 2 weeks before the harvest. Whenever it is possible farmers grow a 6 month paddy called Sona Masuri, which produces a mediumgrain white rice, the most popular as daily food. It also has better yields than shorter crops of 4 or 5 months, that farmers choose if they do not have enough water.

The seeds are sown around July (when farmers estimate that they will have enough water for the crop), in a nursery. The plot preparation is different from for the other crops. After fertilization with dung, the plot is inundated and several passages of caged wheels and rotavator are needed to prepare the soil, and the borders of the plots are repaired to maintain water.

The transplantation from the nursery to the main plot is done one month after sowing. On one acre, 10 workers plant a few seedling every 0.5*0.5 inches (15*15 cm) during one day. The next operation is the single weeding, with the same labor need, done 2 months after transplantation. Pesticides are applied twice and nutrients are supplied with chemical fertilizers when the first seeds are coming. The harvest is done either mechanically or manually in the area. It is the same price of harvest, but the combine harvester does also the threshing, while another 10 man-days per acre are needed to do it manually. For the straw, the residues are left to dry around 3 days on the plot before being collected manually, put on tractor loads, then transported and stored over the cow sheds.

The yield is about 15 quintals per acre. The families keep the 100 kg bags at home and go to the mill when they need to remove the husk in order to cook it. The husk represents about 40% of the weight of the harvest. It is given to the mill in exchange of the free service or bought at 1 Rs/kg to give to the cows. Only surpluses are sold, usually when the prices are higher (in August, during the plantation time) or ideally after the next harvest in case if it is a bad one. The price used for the model is not the selling price to the middle men (1,800 Rs per bag of 40kg of husk and 60 kg of white rice), but the price if the farmers had to buy their own Sona Masuri rice at the local price (2,000 Rs for 60 kg of white rice). The straw is kept for the cows and very rarely sold. Indeed, most of the paddy straw is imported to the area from neighboring districts.

CS 7

Picture 25: Women transplanting paddy seedlings CS 8 : Sugarcane and paddy Paddy // (Sugarcane) 2 Some farmers still grow sugarcane in rotation with paddy. It is a high water demanding crop which is only cultivated in the areas downstream of the savanna. After a cycle of Sona Masuri paddy (same technical itinerary than CS 7), the sugarcane is planted for 23 months. Only two harvests are done before removing the sugarcane, since the yields decrease year by year.

After the application of dung and passage of decompactor and cultivator, ridges are created in the plot with the help of bulls. The cuttings are generally home made from canes of the last harvest and planted with a density of 7,000 pieces per acre. The operations conducted after planting or after the 1 st harvest are the same. After 30 days the plot is weeded, then chemical fertilizers and pesticides are applied. The plants are tied 2 times to prevent the fall of the heavy ripe canes. The harvesting period is January, it is a labor peak since all the operation conducted simultaneously are labor demanding. While laborers cut canes, other process it into jaggery and also prepare cuttings for the next crop. To make jaggery, the canes are processed by a crusher powered with electricity. The juice is cooked in large pans placed over underground fireplaces, with a laborer constantly stirring the liquid which becomes very sticky over the hot pan. When the juice is caramelized enough, it is poured in trays to cool down. Then it is sold as powder or small cubes to middle men, around 3,2 tons of jaggery for the 1 st harvest and 3,0 tons for the second one. Farmers have a contract agreement with middle men, who come to give an advance for the expenditures (of about a quarter of the harvest value) around April.

CS 8

Picture 27: Sugarcane plant tied up 4 by 4 to prevent the canes from falling when they will grow Picture 26: A man in his sugarcane fields offering canes to eat fresh Finger millet was the staple food before rice. Many elder claim that only finger millet balls are nutritious enough to keep a body healthy, and that modern food makes people weak. Its needs in water are quite low. Most of the time, the harvest is kept for the family and only 0,5 acres are cultivated every 2 to 5 years. It is in rotation with paddy cultivated twice a year, with the same technical itinerary than CS 7 and 8 for both cycles. The cycle of finger millet is in the dry season since it does not need much water. Coconut trees are planted around the plots, and their yields are good since they benefit from a good water supply from the paddy cultivation.

The inputs for finger millet cultivation are low. Farmers still use their own seeds and the large majority does not apply pesticides nor chemical fertilizers. The seeds are sowed in a nursery, just like paddy. The only operations demanding laborers are transplantation, weeding (once) and the harvest of straw and seeds.

The yield is of 10 quintals of seeds per acre. The farmers go to a mill nearby to grind the seeds in flour in order to cook it in ragi mutta. The straw yields are low (1 cart only per acre) and it is often refused by improved breed cows and only fed to crossed bred cows. The large landowners let the laborer harvest their own straw for free.

Remark: While a decade ago it could be cultivated rainfed, irrigation is mandatory now. Among all the farmers interviewed, only one said he would try to grow it rainfed in the 2018. As an irrigated crop it is cultivated in the dry season (low need of water), but as a rain fed crop it was cultivated from June to September, as the other millets, in rotation with the association of rainfed pulses.

The density of the coconut trees around the plot is around 8 trees per acre. Planted in the border of the plots, they do not need any special care since both water and fertilizers are provided by the surpluses given to the annual crops cultivated. They were planted on the plots after the creation of tube wells to increase the gross added value per surface.

A tree receiving a correct amount of water can produce around 100 nuts, which can be sold fresh at 7 Rs/piece to retailers (who are responsible of the harvest operation). The nuts falling on their own are collected, opened, dried, cut in small pieces and taken to an oil mill. With 400 nuts, a family can get 20L, which they use during the year for hair care and prayers. In the area, coconut oil is not used for cooking purposes.

CS 9

Picture 28: Two women treshing millet with sticks Remark: The Gross Added Values do not take in account the price of the salaries for the laborers, thus it only illustrates the productivity of the land. Labor productivity measures the gross added value on one man-day of work for the cropping system, no matter if it is from family or external labor.

The land productivity of the rainfed cropping systems (CS 1 and 2) are much lower than all the irrigated systems. For the rainfed pulses, the labor productivity is close to the daily wage of laborers (250 Rs), so if the yields are good it is more an opportunity to guarantee some labor for the family rather than remunerating more than working for somebody else.

The labor productivity of both mango orchards systems (CS 2 and 3) is very low because of all the days spent for the plantations' surveillance. However, this is labor done by family members for CS2 (so without cost) or by a couple living in the fields for 100 Rs per day (under the labor productivity of the system).

Mangoes are profitable for the large irrigated farmers who compensate the low productivity of land and labor by having large areas of orchards in the upland areas, where water is the limiting factor. Conversely, the rainfed orchards planted on small surfaces are still the less lucrative cropping system, except the years of bad the rainfed pulses harvests. In the latter case, as the intermediary consumption costs are even lower than for the pulses' system, the losses for the rainfed farmers are lower.

The 2 perennial cropping systems of elephant grass and mulberry (CS 4 and 5) have both medium land and labor productivity with low intermediary consumption costs and labor. Indeed, the labor and operations are reduced since the plants stay on the land for a few years, and so far most of the farmers do not need to apply pesticides. Compared to the other irrigated productions, they have a lower land productivity. They are interesting only when they are associated with livestock systems (milk or silk production), which bring the bigger part of the gross added value. Nevertheless, their price remains high enough since there is a high demand in the area for both crops, even though most farmers grow it for their own use.

Market gardening, in particular the tomato monocropping, has the highest land productivity (CS6 and 7). It is an exception, with irrigated mangoes, among the cropping systems where the more water demanding have higher land productivity. This is possible because of the intensiveness in labor and inputs. This cropping system is interesting when both land and water quantity are limiting factors.

The 3 paddy cropping systems are the more demanding in water. When water is a limiting factor, it is in rotation with vegetables This rotation (CS7) has an intermediary land and labor productivity between the tomato monocropping and the other paddy systems.

If water is not a limiting factor, sugarcane appears to be interesting on extensive surfaces, since it is the cropping system with the higher labor productivity of the area. Indeed, the crop stays 23 months on the plot for two harvests, so the intermediary consumption costs and labor needs are lower. The paddy and finger millet cropping system has similar labor and land productivity (though the land productivity is a bit higher because of the coconut trees. This cropping system always represents a small part of the annual cropping because it is mainly for the family consumption, the selling price of paddy being lower.

The lower land and labor productivities are for the rainfed crops. Globally, the water needed by the cropping systems are proportionate to their land productivity, and farmers have different strategies according to their resources. On extensive surfaces of little water, mangoes appear to be the most interesting crop. All farmers who have access to irrigation grow elephant grass, essential for milk production with improved breed cows, and those who have silk buildings grow mulberry. Both crops have low needs in labor and intermediary consumption costs. Market gardening is the only possibility create income on small surfaces with a limited water access, a lot of labor and inputs, but for the highest land productivity. All the paddy cropping systems are in between, with a lower land productivity than vegetables but a higher labor productivity, which only farmers with a good water access can afford.

Remark: Some cropping systems of the area have not been studied. The reason they were left out the study is that they were cultivated by a limited number of farmers and had no interest to compose the production systems. They are the following:

-The eucalyptus and teak trees, which are sold for paper pulp every 3 to 5 years. No irrigation, fertilizers nor pesticides are necessary, and only the plantation necessitates labor as the middle men take care of the harvest. They are planted either on the border of cultivated areas or in dedicated plots. Eucalyptus has now a lower price because it has to be sold illegally: the Forest Department has banned its planting since 2016, blaming the cultivation of eucalyptus to cause depletion of groundwater.

-The vine of Betel (Piper betle) is cultivated for its leaves that are sold for 1 Rs per unit in the market. It is eaten with betel nuts (bark from another plant) and offered during festivals or other celebrations. The size of the plots are very small (100m²) and highly protected because of the high price of the leaves.

-Apart from elephant grass and sorghum, corn is also cultivated to provide fodder to the cows. It is generally cut green after 3 months.

Livestock systems LS 1 : Small ruminant herd

The herds are composed of goats or sheep, sometimes mixed, and the number of animals can vary between 10 to 80. In the model it is a herd of 28 animals, only sheep, the most common situation observed. For the goats, a license of 80 Rs per animal and par year is mandatory if they go to the forest, to compensate the damage caused to the trees by browsing. The fine for not paying this license is 150 Rs per animal. The demographic model above is ideal. The herd also fluctuates according to financial problems, that force the families to sell more animals than planned, or disease that can kill many animals at once. Both water and food resources are from the commons. At night times the animals are kept in a shed built with thorny shrubs, wood and granite blocs with no food nor water supply. They are taken daily to pasture, either on uncultivated land around the villages (empty plots, water tanks) or to the forest, depending on the area. Shepherds generally spend 8 hours a day outside, though they can go 5 hours earlier in summer when food is scarcer. In the forest, it is not possible to stay after 6 pm because of the danger of wild animals. As for the water, at least one stop has to be planned daily in a water tank, a pond in the forest or another villager's tube well.

The reproduction management is natural. The owners change the rams and/or billy goats every 3 years by buying a new one and selling the old one. There is no particular whelping period. After delivery, the lambs and kids stays in the shed at day times, waiting for their mother milk at night. After about 3 months they join the rest of the herd for grazing. Dung is collected daily while the herd is led to pasture and stored in a pile nearby before selling.

74

Factors of production

•

The different cattle breed The indigenous cattle, called nati by the local people, represent different bred with various characteristics in terms of draught power and milk production. Nowadays the pure naties become quite rare and are mostly maintained for labor in the field as it will be studied in the LS 6. The cows can produce up to 3L of milk per day, which is very low for the area nowadays. People do not rear nati cows for milk anymore for this reason. In the Cheta Penta village, 3 families still keep herds of over 15 animals at it was mentioned above. Operation flood introduced the improved breeds of Jersey and Hostein Friesian in the area. Those breeds have a much higher milk productivity but they are more sensitive to the local climate. In between, crossed bred cows have genes of both the previous breeds. The improved genes are propagating when indigenous cattle are inseminated with sperm of exotic breed. They have intermediate characteristics in terms of milk production and health resistance. For the farmers, the differentiation of those different cows brings some confusion. Often, they call "nati" a cow with a with the recognizable black and white robe of Holstein Friesian or "pure improved" a skinny cow with large ears.

•

The food resource of the area Food is the limiting factor for the dairy livestock systems of the area. Therefore, farmers take advantage of all the biomass available to feed their cows. There are 4 distinct categories of food: the fodder crops, the crop residues, the biomass not cultivated (from the common areas and uncultivated land) and the concentrated feed. The main fodder crop of the area is the elephant grass. Corn can also be cultivated with irrigation and sorghum without irrigation. Both are given totally to the cows (seeds and leaves). Residues from other cropping systems are a non negligible food source, like the groundnut, sugarcane and mulberry leaves or the paddy and finger millet straw. However, dry paddy straw remains the basis of the food provided to cows year round. Paddy growers use their own straw, but the area is not self-sufficient and imports most of is consumption from other mandals, close to Chittoor or further north from Nellore district. Farmers take advantage of common areas and uncultivated land for grazing and collecting biomass. The landowners who have land take their animals to graze there, so that their dung is left on their plots. The landless or small land owners go grazing anywhere possible. However, some farmers do not allow grazing on their land, like the mango orchards. In the dry areas where almost all land is covered by mango trees it is much harder to maintain cows. In a village, some mango owners offer other farmers to pay to collect weeds on their plot! Those weeds from spontaneous biomass are also part of the diet of many cows. Women can spend around 3 hours per day to collect bundles of this biomass to feed their cows, just like the women on the front page of this document. As for the concentrated feed, all milk producers buy some groundnut cakes, wheat or rice husk or grounded corn to distribute to their cows twice a day. The groundnut cakes are soaked over night with food leftovers of the family.

75

Picture 29: A nati cow nursing its calf

The outputs

•

Dung

The milk producers take their cow grazing all day, so if they don't go to their own plots they can collect only ½ of it from the dejections during night times. Dung is collected every morning with the food refusals (dry grass or straw) then put on the family pile, open in the wide in the village. They collect it with a tractor cart when they need to transport it to their plots.

•

Animals

All animals are bought and sold in Palamaner's market, either by the farmer himself of by a middle man. Most of the middle men are Muslims, and according to them the culled cows are exported to neighboring states (Tamil Nadu, Karnataka). The male calves are sold from 1 day to 6 months old, depending on the farmers and food availability. The culling age of cows varies according to the livestock systems (see Figure 15: Milking systems zootechnical performances) and the young cows are usually sold pregnant at 2 or 3 years old for a better price.

•

Milk

It is sold to dairies. If the families have no financial problems, they usually keep 1L per day for their milk tea of coffee and to make their own curd. Some part of the production is also left for the calves, usually around from 1 L per day during one month. For the milk production, the data used for model used is described in Erreur : source de la référence non trouvée. It combines the information obtained from the farmers and the theoretical lactation curve. For the model of lactation, the production is considered maximal during the 3 months following the delivery, then decreasing linearly during the 4 last months of milking until the minimum of 1 L per day collected.

Two types of dairy technical performances are identified: the improved breed fed with elephant grass (LS 2, 4 and 5) and the cross bred not fed with elephant grass (LS 3): 76 The dairies Many dairies are implanted in the area, like Tirumala (now owned by the French group Lactalis), Dodla, Hudson, Heritage Parag (Gowardam before), etc. Only Shreeja is not private, as it is a National Producer Company.

For the farmers, the choice of dairy is done according to the price most of the time. If several dairies are available in the village, shifting from one to another is easy.

The rates of the milk are set for the quality of the milk (Fat and Solid Non Fat percentages) and change regularly depending on the market prices and the quantity of milk collected. The prices are higher in summer season, since the volumes of milk are lower due to the lack of water. ⚠ Locally, people call it a cooperative but it is a National Producer Company! ⚠ Farmers' producer companies can be seen as hybrids between private companies and cooperative societies. The producer-company concept has the aim to combine the efficiency of a company with the spirit of traditional cooperatives. Producer companies want to integrate smallholders into modern supply networks, minimizing transaction and coordination costs while benefiting from economies of scale. They are run and owned by farmers, financially facilitated by the government or donor agencies, and managed by professionals.

Lanting, 2005 cited by Trebbin, 2011

The conditions for the milk producers to obtain Shreeja's membership are:

• To be a women (only one per household)

• To provide a minimum of 500 liters of milk per year

• To ensure at least 200 days of supply per year • To pay a nonrefundable application fee of 50 Rs for membership • To subscribe to a minimum of five shares of the company (the current value of each share is 100 Rs) • To subscribe for additional shares matching the annual milk supply, agreeing to pay 1 Rs per liter of milk supplied

The services offered to the producers are:

• Yearly bonuses (the revenue from the shares)

• Feed discount (which can be deduced directly from the payment)

• Well trained veterinary assistance

• Some villages are chosen to be followed by a field agent to check on the cows. The agent writes a feed back sheet with the animal's information and some advise about their management for the farmers.

• A new service of insurance, costing 700 Rs per cow, which guarantees to give 25,000 Rs in case the animal dies and that the company veterinary testifies the death.

Their ambition is to be among the top 10 dairy enterprises of the country by 2025.

Picture 32: Cow of the LS2 with an ear tag to certify its insurance Picture 31: A Shreeja milk collector during the check up of a cow in a selected village

There are 4 types of dairy productive systems in the area:

LS 2 : 1 improved breed cow without elephant grass production Some landless families can invest in a cow for milk production. They generally choose an improved breed cow, which they feed with free non cultivated biomass and bought feed, paddy straw and elephant grass.

The cow is taken to pasture daily in common areas and uncultivated land, generally tied to a rope. This tasks takes around 1 hour per day. Three more hours are dedicated daily to collect weeds to complete the food ration. The total amount of 6 hours per day can be done before and after a day of labor work for other farms.

Like all other milking livestock systems, food is the limiting factor of production. In summer, if the family cannot gather enough food, the cow is sold and the family will try to buy another one when there will be enough free biomass available.

For those families, the cow is their only productive asset, thus great care is given to it. The rain fed farmers cannot grow elephant grass. Therefore, they prefer the crossed bred cows who are more resistant to disease and for which dry fodder is sufficient to produce milk.

The basis of their diet is paddy straw, collected weeds and pasture. However, the groundnut leaves produced by the farmers on their own land provided a good nutritional value fodder during a few months. Irrigated farmers can grow elephant grass. Small to medium landowners generally dedicate 0.25 acres to this crop. Green fodder can improve the milk production of the genetically more productive cows (improved breeds).

In addition to elephant grass, the cows are still led to pasture and paddy straw is distributed during the dry season when the elephant grass production is slowed down by the lower amount of water provided. Farmers also distribute their crops residues to the cows (groundnut, sugarcane and mulberry leaves).

Remark: Those farmers usually do not collect weeds anymore, but some still do.

Weeds collection 3

Grass harvesting 1

Grazing 1

Total Hours/day 7 MD/year

This system is the same than before except that the owners are larger landowners with a more stable access to water. Thus, they can grow more elephant grass (0.5 acre) and take care of more animals (4 adult milking cows and their suite).

4.3.2.Economic comparison of the dairy systems

The gross added values of the dairy systems vary by a factor 6.

All have similar labor need (around 1MD per day). However, the 6 hours necessary for the LS2 can be done simultaneously of one day of labor, taking care of the cow in the morning and evening and not collecting weeds this day.

For all systems, the intermediary consumption costs are much higher than the gross added value. Indeed, many inputs are necessary for milk production, essentially for the concentrated feed which represent 40 to 47% of the expenses. For the LS 2, which has the highest intermediary consumption cost per cow, the return of 4 rupees spent is 1 rupee earned.

The LS 3 has lower intermediary consumption costs than LS 4 for the same number of cows as they spend less money on health and do not use elephant grass. However, the gross product per cow is lower, since the cows produce less milk during one lactation and the between calving interval is longer. Still, the families get only 1 rupee for 2,5 rupees spent. LS 4 and 5 do not buy the elephant grass and some of them also use their own paddy straw, even though they appear with the price as they were buying it on the graphs. However, they still happen to have the highest gross added value. As it was written before, those two systems have the same expenditures and milk production per cow. Only the number of animals and the number of animals sold vary. For both systems, the families earn 1 rs for 2.5 rs spent, as the LS 3.

Without considering the price of investment for the cows, this graph illustrates how the more resources and the more treasury farmers can invest in the milk production, the more income they can expect from it. * for the same amount of hybrid grass given to one cow, the expenses are higher for LS2 because they buy it, unlike the LS4 and LS5 who grow it LS 6 : Pair of bulls

83

The use of bulls as draught power is still common in the area, especially for the inter-row operations necessary for elephant grass and mulberry cultivation. The training is done by the owner by putting the young bull to work along an older one during a few days. They are calm animals who obey to the voice and noises of their owner. Farmers use them on their own farms, or can rent their services to other farmers for 1,000 Rs per day with a meal. A day of work represents 8 hours of presence of the owner (who is the only person able to use its bulls) and 7 hours of work for the animals.

The animals spend their resting days grazing freely or tied to a rope if the owners are too busy. They are also fed paddy straw and weeds daily, as well as groundnut leaves during a few months. On their working days, they are feed more paddy straw.

The tools are made out of wood collected in the forest, and only one plough has a metal piece. The carpenter fee for the creation of one tool is around 500 Rs, but some farmers still have the skills to make their own.

A few families still use nati cows for labor. The silk sector A governmental market is located near Palamaner city and it is the only place where it is allowed to buy white silk worm eggs and to sell cocoons of white silk in the area. The prices are fixed every day by open auction between buyers and farmers. To access this market, owning a license is mandatory. Nevertheless, many farmers of the area prefer to go to another market in Karnataka (the neighboring state) to sell their cocoons of yellow silk. Rates are better, despite of the transportation cost of 5 Rs/kg of silk, and no license is necessary. But most of all, the worms producing yellow silk are less sensitive to temperature and diseases so the production is easier. Since most of the farmers interviewed produce yellow silk, it is this production that is studied in the model.

Only the "on farm production" of silk is present in the area. The market place has a small unit of thread production but the "off farm production" from the cocoons to the final product (silk fabric) is done in other states, in Benglure (Karnataka) and Aryny (Tamil Nadu).

Silk production

The worms are raised in buildings. Government has supported the creation of white concrete buildings, providing around 10 % of subsidies to some farmers. Those buildings are painted in white to maintain a cool temperature inside and protected with mosquito nets to avoid the intrusion of other insects. For the last stage, worms are taken to smaller buildings and placed on bamboo panels. Both buildings can be rented for a cycle of production. Some silk producers dedicate a room of their house to raise worms when they cannot rent a building.

The worms are fed 2 times daily with fresh mulberry branches laid out on the trays. As the worms grow, they are distributed on more trays and shelves. During the 22 days of a cycle, there are 4 stages of development, and the food needs increase day by day. Four days before the harvest, the worms are not fed anymore as they start to make their cocoon.

After the harvest of the cocoons, the by-products (newspaper, dung, dry branches of mulberry) are burnt or given to families still cooking with fire. If some branches still have leaves on, they are given to cows.

85

Picture 35: The worms nibbling the mulberry leaves

LS7 and 8

Picture 34: A sericultor in his building

Two types of silk producers

The sericultors produce their own mulberry leaves. The farmers who do not own a building either sell their leaves or rent one. With the popularity of the production, it is becoming more and more difficult to find available sheds to rent.

The small and big sericultors are differentiated by both their building access and cultivated surface of mulberry. Each cycle of a 100 worms corresponds to the leaves produced over an area of 0.25 acre during a year. In the model, small sericultors rent the buildings for 5 cycles per year, to raise 150 worms per cycle with their 2 acres of mulberry. The big sericultors conduct 6 cycles of 250 worms in their own buildings thanks to their 4 acres of mulberry.

86

Picture 36: Women picking silk cocoon out the bamboo panels

GAV/MD 347

Frames for worm 4,800 5

Equipment depr 22,000 Rs/year

Yellow worms 2 nd stage For 1 cycle of 100 worms LS 9 : Integrated poultry Poultry rearing sheds are scattered allover the roadsides of the study area. This production is entirely integrated: the companies bring chicks, food and medicine and then collect the animals directly from the rearing buildings. Owners and companies are linked by yearly contract.

The producers receive recently hatched chicks (30g) and fatten them during 40 to 42 days, with all the inputs provided by the company except for the bedding and electricity. Only the dung is sold separately, at the benefit of the farmer.

The investment is quite important to build the sheds and buy all the equipment (feeders, water throughs, pipes…). The land must be close to a good road for the transportation of the animals to and from the buildings. A good water access with a reliable tube well is also mandatory.

The labor necessary for this production is permanent during the rearing cycle. The laborers have to sleep on the grounds to protect the hens and chickens from robbery and animals. Usually, 2 workers are enough for all stages of the production. They work 8 hours per day (4 hours in the morning and 4 hours in the evening) for around 16 000 Rs for one cycle of production, and the owner also provides rice and accommodation.

Small ruminants herd 1 improved breed cow 2 improved breed cows 4 improved breed cows

Sericulture with rented building

Sericulture with owned building

Livestock production is possible for landless families, using common resources or buying a lot of inputs. The small ruminant herders have the lowest intermediary consumption costs of all livestock systems, since they do not buy any food. In opposite, rearing one improved milking cow necessitates the purchase of all the inputs, which makes the intermediary consumption costs 4 times higher for about the same gross added value. Nonetheless, there are several benefits of having a single cow over a small ruminant herd: the income from milk production is more regular (every 2 weeks) and it is possible to go working as a daily laborer in other farms and to take care of the cow on the same day.

For the comparison of the dairy systems, see above page 83.

In opposite of the costly dairy systems, rearing a pair of bulls generates a good added value with low intermediary consumption costs, provided that the bulls can work 7 days as in the model. However, this system is not expanding. The offer is balanced with the current demand of animal labor in the area, as it was explained in General information about the cropping systems page 59.

On the opposite, the lucrative appeal of the silk production attracts farmers to start this production, which explains its fast expansion. The two sericulture types existing in the area are distinct by their size, the LS 8 having a gross product of 2,5 times the one of LS 7. They also differ by their intermediary consumption costs: having a silk shed, while being an important investment at first, reduces the cost of production by 15%. It is also considerably more secure, since silk buildings are not always available.

As for the more economically interesting livestock systems (LS 8 and 9), they are the one necessitating a high investment, for the buildings and equipment. The equipment depreciation is not included in this economic analysis, it will be discussed with the agricultural income in 6.1 Result analysis.

Globally, the higher the intermediary consumption costs and investments, the better the gross added value. It is the same conclusion than for milking systems. Two exceptions are made: for LS6, provided that you can find enough work opportunities or time to use the bulls, and for LS1 with very low inputs but demanding two times more labor.

About the labor productivity, the LS 1 to 5 are all under the average daily wage of 250 Rs per day. But they are still very interesting to increase the gross product on a few square meters near the house and to guarantee a remunerative activity daily. It is also the reason why farmers never employ anyone for those productions.

A day of labor with bulls (LS6) is more remunerative than the daily wage but the work is always carried out by the farmer, who is the only person that can make the bulls work.

The other, LS 7 to 9, need a lot of external labor. Many people are employed for silk production (per year : 144 MD for LS7 and 300 for LS8, see details on the figure page 85), for short periods of time.

On the opposite, for poultry rearing, there are only 2 employees present almost year round, which represents 504 MD of external labor. In some cases, the owners themselves are taking care of the poultry.

Remark: As for the cropping systems, some livestock systems were not modelized. They are the following:

-The free-range chicken, that some landless or small farmers rear around the house. They usually buy the young chicken and eat them when they want meat to celebrate a special occasion.

-The goat fattening, especially in the village of Samudrapalle. Families buy from 1 to 5 males goats to which they directly provide fodder, or take grazing around the village. They are sold or eaten by the family when they reach a good weight.

-The indigenous cattle herds, as it was explained in the last historical period the only remaining herds are located in Cheta Penta's basin.

Economic results

Presentation of the different production systems

The following production systems are models inspired by real families interviewed during the field work. They were made to represent as many farmers as possible and to illustrate the current dynamics happening in the area.

91

Landless shepherds and laborers The indicators used for the economic analysis are described in part 1.2. The agrarian diagnosis method and the involved concepts.

The agricultural surfaces (AS) of those graphs are the one observed during the field work. The maximal limit respects the family workforce available, that is to say 30 man-days per month.

In the production systems modelized, there are 3 different labor organization which explain the choice of the family work force (FWF):

-The nuclear families, like the one considered for the survival threshold and poverty line, are constituted of 2 family workers. It is the case of the production systems 1 to 8.

-The joint families, for the PS 9 to 11. They are composed by 3 family workers: 1 brothers and one of their wives.

-The managerial farms, for the PS 12 and 13. They are represented as 1 family worker who do not work on the farm, excepted for the SP 12 where a woman usually takes care of the cows.

For the following graphs, there are factors depending on the agricultural surface (the cropping systems, the salaries of the laborer, etc.) who influence on the slope of the lines. There are also factors not dependent on the agricultural surface (equipment like rearing buildings, the livestock systems, etc.) which set the coordinate of the Y-intercept.

99

5.2.2.The wealth creation of the different production system

The net added value per family workforce (NAV/FWF) is the wealth produced per one person working on the farm. It evaluated the technical and economic performances of one production system, without counting whether this wealth is stays in the family or not.

Equation of the line:

The rain fed agriculture: a low economic productivity (PS 3 and 4) The two rain fed production systems have the lower land productivity per family workforce. The slope of the lines are little, indicating that the land productivity is quite low and that most of the income is generated by livestock (LS3), which is independent from the agricultural surface.

The agriculture with water access on small to medium agricultural surfaces: systems with the higher land productivity (PS 5 to PS 9) They have more profitable and diversified cropping systems. Their line on the graphs have the steepest slopes, which illustrates their higher land productivity compared to the other production systems. The water access also allows a substantial increase of the wealth creation with a more remunerative milking system (LS4), thanks to the cultivation of elephant grass on a small surface of 0.25 acres (exception made for PS9, who has an even more remunerative milk production system LS5). Irrigation necessitates investments for the tube well (one per farm only for those families) and the drip equipment. Those farmers have no other fixed capital, even the silk producers have to rent buildings to raise the worms. According to their resources, the farmers choose among different productions. As discussed before (in Comparison of the performances of the different cropping systems), for a given agricultural surface, the lower VAN/AS/FWF is for the sugarcane producers (small and medium). Then, the diversified annual and silk producers have comparable results. The vegetable producers have the higher land productivity, intensifying the production in inputs and labor to take advantage of the little water accessible.

The agriculture with water access on large agricultural surfaces: investments in means of production allow a better wealth creation (PS 10 to PS 11) The fixed capital of those production system is higher. Indeed, to irrigate a wider area they need more drip equipment and several tube wells. They also own production equipment like tractors and silk buildings. They have a higher NAV/FWF/AS compared to the previous production system, but a lower one for a given agricultural surface.

Managerial systems: On large agricultural surfaces with limited water access (PS 12)

In the upland areas, the wealth creation per acre is much lower, because of the water availability. The best way to make those areas economically profitable is to own a large area. On small agricultural surfaces with water access (PS 13) The highest NAV/AS/FWF for one acre is for the poultry rearing (LS9). After a big investment (for 1 acre of land with water access and the equipment), it is the highest land productivity activity in the area.

Conclusion

There might be differences between land productivity due to the agro-ecological areas, but the major inequalities between the 4 groups of production system (rainfed/small and medium/ large/ managerial) come, in order, from land holding, water access, and capacity of investment. Indeed, investing allows the farmers to withdraw themselves from the environmental factor, buying new means of production for more profitable productions (tube wells, sericulture, mango orchards, poultry buildings, more land).

5.2.3.The agricultural income inequalities among the different production systems

Compared to the previous results, the following graphs show the wealth really earned by the family after redistributing the value created to other actors. In this particular area, it represents the salaries paid to the laborers only.

Equation of the line:

Two lines of references have been added to have a clearer representation of the reality: The only productive activities possible are livestock production which do not require landholding. The maintenance of a small ruminants herd necessitate some financial stability, since animals are sold if the family needs immediate liquidity. However, the low intermediary consumption costs make this production more affordable than a milking cow. Indeed, feed, fodder and veterinary fees are quite costly. Without considering the investment for the cow, 4 rupees spent for the cow maintenance earn only 1 rupee for the family.

From the model, the agricultural income provided by the small ruminant herd is higher than the one of the milking cow. This gap cannot be generalize, since the number of animals can vary from one shepherd to another and because the model is not that precise.

Neither of those production systems allow going over the survival threshold. Still, it is non negligible income, especially during the period of low labor available for other farms.

Small landholders (under 3 acres):

A specialization according to their water access PS 3 and 4 Rainfed Once again, both those production systems are below the survival threshold for the agricultural surfaces observed in the area.

The agricultural income of the mango growers is lower than for the farmers who only cultivate pulses. They shift production for a crop less remunerative for different reasons. On one hand, the repetitive years of very bad harvests of pulses discourage many farmers to plant again for no result, so mango orchards may be a lower, but safer, guarantee of income. On the other hand, the government provides free trees to anyone, independently from the agricultural surface, so the investment has a much lower price. Those farmers have a limited milk production, with only 2 crossed bred cows with limited genetic potential. However, this additional income provides a big share of the agricultual income (60% for PS3 and 70% for PS4, see further page 110).

Those farmers wish they could dig a tube well to grow different crops like elephant grass or vegetables.

PS 5

Good water access Located in the areas downstream of the savanna, those farmers take advantage of a very good supply of water on their small surfaces by specializing in growing sugarcane and paddy. The water access also permits the production of fodder, thus a better milk production by taking care of more productive cows than the latter. The milking system output represents 35% of the total agricultural income. Sugarcane has some advantages over vegetable production, even if it appears less remunerative. The prices of the jaggery paid per the middle men are more stable than the ones offered by the vegetable market, which is not visible on the graph. Moreover, sugarcane production needs less liquidity availability per cycle, both because the intermediary consumption costs are lower and because the middle men offer an advance before the selling of the final product. It also requires less family work, allowing the family members to take opportunity to work outside when it is possible. This production system is only present in Cheta Penta's bassin, a remote place where the water is abundant. In other areas, the sugarcane production is only done by larger landowners, modelized as the PS 9.

PS 6 Precarious water access With a precarious water access and a small agricultural land, those farmers choose to specialize in vegetable production on their irrigated land for a higher land productivity and a fast return on investment (firsts harvests 3 months after the beginning of a cycle). In order to do so, they intensify the cultivation with labor and inputs. This production system, while being pretty high when comparing the NAV/AS/FWF, is lowered down in the agricultural income comparison because of the price of the salaries of laborers.

They wish they had a more stable access of water, to irrigate their land in totality and all year. They also wish to grow paddy, which is not possible for them even in rainy season.

The family workers of the production systems above are daily laborer, all the production systems under do not need it.

Production systems with stable water access and good investment capacity: families that can live on their agricultural activities PS 7

Comfortable water access Being able to grow paddy is a wish for many farmers. When they can, they cultivate it along with finger miller over a few acres, for the family consumption. They also grow vegetables in rotation with paddy. Compared with the specialized vegetable producers who envy them (PS6), those production systems need less labor and inputs. It also brings food and income security with the paddy, which have more stable prices than vegetables. However, they contribute less to local employment opportunities.

PS 8 Limited but stable water access

With a similar agricultural income than the last PS, the medium silk producers grow only mulberry and elephant grass. Their water access allow them to cultivate those perennials crops which needs to be watered year round, on all their agricultural surface thanks to tdrip irrigation installations. Silk production necessitates more labor and inputs than the previous production system for a similar agricultural income on the same range of agricultural surface. It is a way to compensate its lower water availability, just like vegetable specialized producers do. The slope of the line is lower than PS7 because most of the remunerative activity is not proportionate to the surface (the silk worms rearing). Also, as they do not cultivate cereals, they have a lower food security than PS7.

Further on, they would like to receive subsidies to help them to build their own silk building to reduce the costs of each cycle of production and to be independent of the availability of the buildings for rent.

PS 9 Good water access

Just like the small sugarcane producers, those farmers still take advantage of their water access to produce jaggery. Nowadays they can only be found in the agroecological areas downstream of the savanna, far from the city of Palamaner.

In fact, if sugarcane production is still possible for them, it has a limited economical benefit since their agricultural income is under the medium specialized sericultors. Actually, the transition from sugarcane to mulberry happening at the present time. As the water availability of those production system is good, they still have correct yields and were not constrained to change yet. But most of the farmers interviewed have quit sugarcane a few years ago or will soon. The silk production is spreading from Palamaner city (the center of diffusion of the innovation) towards the more remote areas, as the families are attracted by a more lucrative production.

Big landowners (between 5 and 30 acres) :

Diversified productive systems with high capital investments Such families have an important fixed capital. They generally own 2 to 5 tube wells, a tractor and a silk building. There are usually located in the plains. For the family production systems, they are the only earning above 125,000 Rs per year and per family labor force.

PS 10

The PS10 focuses on silk production, the most remunerative of the area. At a given land surface, they are above the specialized medium sericultor (PS8) because they have their own building and a more economically effective milking system. They grow some pulses on dry land and a little paddy and finger millet for the family and laborers consumption.

PS 11 The PS 11 is very diversified in CS, LS and equipment: they have the same than previous system but even more diversified and they own irrigated mango orchards. For a given agricultural surface (under 8 acres), this PS is less remunerative than the previous system, because it is not specialized in mulberry, has a higher equipment depreciation and has productions that have a lower land productivity (like irrigated mango orchards). Thus, the slope of their line is intermediary between PS10 and PS12. However, this system can grow on larger agricultural surface, up to 30 acres, so the agricultural income can be much higher than the previous system.

The diversification of the production allows those families to limit the risks of bad prices or low yields. They are also very independent in terms of food production, since they can eat their own paddy, finger 107 millet, vegetables and fruits. The equipment they own makes them independent also, not having to rent bulls or tractors. Nevertheless, those production systems could never operate without the work of many laborers, which are plenty asking for job opportunities in the area.

Those farmers keep on investing as they can. The main opportunities in the area are buying more mango orchards, building a poultry rearing unit (some of them already have one), or investing in the city (real estate).

Managerial systems: Specialized productive systems with high capital investments

The investors have different profiles. Some are families still living in the villages, in which case they still keep 4 cows and grow some paddy and have some members working in big cities. There are also absent owners living in Palamaner or in Bengalore, who come sometimes to check on the production. The agricultural income of those production systems, which is for only one investor on the opposite of the other family farming, is much higher than for the other production systems.

SP 12

One way to invest is to buy large land surfaces where they have the lowest price: in the dry areas. For those investors, they either bought the land long ago and planted mango trees themselves, or they bought it more recently already planted. As the comparison of the graphs of net added value and agricultural income shows, with the gap between the lines for this production system, this crop relies on a lot labor of throughout the year. To compensate than, the middlemen sometimes offer to take care of different operations (harvest, surveillance, pesticides applications…).

SP 13 The poultry rearing is an opportunity for a regular source of income. The price of the investment is high, but on small surface. It can create a big income quite easily, since the production is integrated with the poultry companies. Yet, not everyone is investing in this production because it needs a considerable investment at the begging and also of treasury because of the high intermediary consumption costs. Also, as it is a sensitive production, it relies a lot on the care given by the laborers to avoid the spread of disease among the animals.

Conclusions

There are two concomitant agricultural dynamics in the area: the specialization for the farmers with limiting resources toward what they can value best and the diversification for the others. The small and medium landholders are specialized in some copping systems: the rainfed with the pulses, the good water access with sugarcane, the precarious water access with vegetables and the stable water access with sericulture. On the other end of the spectrum of landholding, the mango owners are specialized in a crop that takes advantage of large surfaces with little water. On the contrary, to increase the agricultural income, you need to have access to all resources: large land surface, water access, capital to invest and a lot of laborers. The production systems of the families who own both land and water (PS 10 and 11), all productions are possible.

It is also important to notice that the gap between the slopes of the NAV and FI lines are wider for the larger landowners, due to their higher need of labor work for their large land surface and diverse productive activities. For the smaller farmers, employing people is still costly and the preference is made on crops with lower laborer needs (like paddy over vegetables).

Discussion

Result analysis

The economic results testify of the financial difficulty of the landless and small landholders. From 0 to 3.5 acres of land, they stay under the survival threshold. To survive, they wait for irrigated farmers to offer labor. On the other end of the spectrum, the large landholders with more productive land earn more than 100,000 Rs per family worker per year, so 5 times more than the survival threshold.

6.1.1.A widening gap between the agricultural incomes

To make a living out of agriculture, farmers always have to invest in their production means. Water itself necessitates constant investments, as the groundwater level is going down. The lack of regulation of its use led to an over exploitation of the resource. In order to keep a stable water access, farmers have to pay considerable sums of money on irrigation. The cost of one attempt of drilling for a tube well costs in average 100,000 Rs, without the price of the underground pump and fee for its installation. The more remunerative crops do not only necessitate water, but also equipment like jaggery processing units or buildings. Since the farmers capable of always investing are the ones with the most remunerative productions, it is a vicious circle where the gap between the poorer and the wealthier becomes wider.

Over time, only a minority of the farmers could take advantage of all the agricultural innovations, accumulating land and capital to increase their productivity. The living capital (cattle and small ruminants herds) they had before 1970 changed to water and built capital. Meanwhile, they still own relatively large agricultural surfaces and maintain their food security with subsistence crops, to which they have added a financial security with market oriented productions. Most of the families have a much lower agricultural income. The "marginal farmers", as they are called in the handbook of statistics of Chittoor district, own less than 6 acres, represent 70% of the population and own 40% of the land. On the other side, the landowners above 25 acres represent only 7% of the population and 25% of the land (data from the census 2010-2011). At the scale of the production systems, the poorer have little or no possibility to invest in more remunerative activities. Thus, they have to compensate by being daily laborers for the minority who has gathered more means of production. At the scale of the agroecological areas, this trend is amplified since dry upland areas have lower land productivity, labor opportunities and biomass productivity available for milk production.

In addition to the financial gap between the farmers, there is also a difference of power. The commercialization of the mangoes depending on the different farmers (see page 63) illustrates this phenomenon. Bigger volumes of mangoes and the long relations with the middlemen (because they could invest first in this production) give a better bargaining power to the large landholders.

An interesting research question would be to see if the percentage of the laborers among the population evolved over time, to understand if the gap creation is coupled with a global impoverishment of the rural people.

6.1.2.Contribution of milk production sales to the agricultural incomes

Almost all farmers are milk producers. As it was discussed before, the productivity of the dairy systems also depends on the differences of means of production and access to resource of the farmers (see Erreur : source de la référence non trouvée Erreur : source de la référence non trouvée). Also, the net added value of the dairy livestock systems is quite low, staying under 60,000 Rs per family. It is easy to understand why farmers try to irrigate at any costs, the irrigated cropping systems allowing a much better income than the milking systems. This graph points out that milk production contributes from 15 to 100% to the agricultural income and that the less the milking systems are economically effective, the more they contribute to the agricultural income. Therefore, Operation flood and the dairies provide the major part of income to the livelihood of the more vulnerable farmers. Though they earn less money from milk, this small amount makes a greater difference for them. However, the amount is still very low, and does not allow families under 3.5 acres to have an agricultural income above the survival threshold. Moreover, the dairy sector is still interesting for the more fortunate able to maintain 4 improved breed cows: it generates between 15% to 25% of their agricultural income.

The limiting factor for all milk producers is food for the cows, and the more vulnerable categories of farmers are the more exposed to of food shortage. They have not enough land nor water to grow fodder, and in dry season the common areas are overgrazed. For most of the farmers, the gross added value of milk sales is lowered by the cost of the elephant grass: the demand is such that the prices are too high to lower the intermediary consumption of the landless who have to buy it for their only cow.

Operation flood could not meet the expectations of getting vulnerable farmers out of poverty in the study area. It managed to provide a large share of their income, but it is still not enough. Comparing the economic results from milk sales the other cattle livestock system is quite interesting: it is possible to earn as much or more money with a pair of bulls if they have labor opportunities. Many hazards threaten the farmers, like the market prices, the pests, the water availability and the elephants.

In the first place, the market prices of tomatoes already impact many families. The big volumes sold at Palamaner's vegetable market cause low prices, especially because this cash crop is spread over a large area (some sellers come from as far as Anantapur, 200 km away). It is possible that other products, such as silk, will also stop being interesting if more and more people produce it. Even prices supposed to be set by contracts, like mangoes, could go down as it was the case this year: middlemen did not respect the agreed price for the payment. As the prices decrease, the only persons able to continue will be the ones selling large volumes, thus the ones with more land and water.

The sanitary safety of some crops also started to show its limits. A minority of farmers located in the epicenter of mulberry production is victim of pests and are compelled to spray pesticides on their fields. A few farmers are in the same situation for elephant grass. Since those crops are expanding over time and surface, the sanitary pressure will be higher, which will be increased by the use of pesticides… In this vicious circle, the intermediary consumption costs and labor needs are increased with the use of pesticides, which lowers the economical productivity of land and labor of those productions.

Nowadays, the irrigation plays an important role in wealth creation in the study area: for more remunarative crops, more cycles year round and more security facing random rainfalls. This increase of land productivity is more than welcome with the demographic evolution, in order to provide more food and labor to a larger population on the same agricultural surface. As the groundwater resource is decreasing, all those benefits gained by irrigated farmers are jeopardized.

Finally, since about a decade, the elephants' population causes considerable damage to the crops in the plots near the wildlife sanctuary. This was not taken into account in the economical results, but all types of farmers in those areas are victim of trampling on their crops. Indeed, the animals can ruin entire cycles of production by stepping on paddy recently sowed or groundnuts about to be harvested, eating sugarcane or even destroying 30 years old mango trees. The only crop which seems to avoid this issue is mulberry, but it is until now mostly cultivated is the plains far from the endangered areas. This hazard is not likely to decrease or stabilize, as the elephant population is still growing.

Facing those hazards, all farmers have different vulnerabilities, depending on their volumes of production (market prices), crops (pests and market prices), water access (groundwater resource) and location (elephant trampling). The poorer farmers have a greater vulnerability for market prices and water availability, which is not very optimistic for their future. 111 Picture 38: Damages of pests on mulberry leaves

6.2.2.Evolution of the production systems

As it was explained in 1.1 Comparative agriculture to study agriculture development, one of the hypothesis of the discipline is that farmers do not all do the same and their practices are constantly evolving. In the current situation, the farmers have to choose how to maximize their production or income compared to their scarcest resource, minimize the risks and maximize their income. From my comprehension of the area, the most probable future scenarios are the following:

For the landless and rainfed farmers, the possibilities are very restricted, as labor is almost their only resource but the opportunities are limited. However, for the landowners, one way to limit the rainfall risks is to plant mango trees, which reduces land productivity. It will maybe end up more secure facing the rainfall hazard but less facing the market prices, especially because the surface covered by mango orchards is constantly increasing.

The farmers with a limited water resource might be constrained to quit the "water rush" if the investments to access water become too expensive. So far, some farmers had to abandon paddy cultivation but it seems that very few farmers have completely lost their water access yet. By loosing water availability their land productivity will decrease, as their agricultural income. They might be constrained to joint the ranks of laborers already too many for the labor opportunities.

Three risks concern the sericulture: market prices, sanitary security and groundwater resource. We can wonder is silk production was a temporary niche market. Meanwhile, many farmers start the production, like the remaining sugarcane and paddy producers who are shifting now to sericulture for its better price and lower water needs. This trend only increases the hazards. Maybe only farmers able to commercialize large volume will keep growing mulberry.

For all the reasons mentioned in 5.2.3 The agricultural income inequalities among the different production systems, integrated poultry is not an interesting opportunity for farmers currently.

Will water become a limiting factor for the richer? Or rather, when will it be? If water becomes out of their reach even with high investment capacity, those farmers might become vulnerable for the first time, since water is one of their main driving force. It seems that in the current conditions it would be the only thing that would stop them accumulating capital. The current dynamics are not sustainable, on one side because the poor people cannot go out of poverty and on the other side because even the wealthier farmers are jeopardized by the groundwater shortage.

Propositions for the rural development of the area

The perspectives of evolution are not bright, but several measures could limit the risks or their effects. The following thoughts are focused around 3 axes: the water resource, the agricultural employment and the resilience of the production systems. Those ideas are more palliative than curative, since they only aim at limiting the risks with the current inequalities. As I am a student, they are only thoughts. My lack of experience and eventual clumsiness in my modelization might lead me to propositions not beneficial to the general interest, which is not my intention.

6.3.1.Water: How to use this resource, essential to generate income, susainably?

"In the business-as-usual scenario, problems of groundwater over-exploitation in India will only become more acute, widespread, serious and visible in the years to come. The frontline challenge is not just supply-side innovations but to put in operation a range of corrective mechanisms before the problem becomes either insolvable or not worth solving." Shah, 2008 The management of the groundwater resource became a critical stake in many parts of India, and the situation in the study area fits to the global trends. To avoid a problem "insolvable" or "not worth solving", which could have a terrible impact on India's rural areas, some measures appear to be necessary at different scales: for the preservation of the resource and its optimized utilization to benefit as many people as possible.

The policies and public investments should make efforts toward a distribution of this resource more durably, among all categories of farmers and over time. To support this effort, the research sector should be mobilized, with systemic and scientific studies to plan an appropriate resource management. This should be done at a relevant scale. Environmentally, like at the watershed level, but also socially, taking into account the social organization for a collective management of the resource. Creating a secure and fair space of discussion should be a priority. Indeed, the farmers benefiting the most of the current situation are more influential compared to other categories of farmers who do not benefit from irrigation.

In practice, the management of the water could shift from individual to collective by a registration of the users with a license, laws and regulation of use and pricing of the resource. Currently, there are no collective management at all. The subsidies providing free power during 7 hours a day to operate the electric underground pumps of the tube wells encourage in the opposite way, toward a more individual management. About the quantity of the resource, making it last overtime necessitate a lower use than now, to recharge the groundwater while keeping advantage of it. Valorizing surface water use could also be beneficial, to refill the groundwater for instance. In the study area, no infrastructure of dam and canals were built at large scale. Only water tanks with small land coverage exist. And of course, orienting the farmers toward crops or practices less water demanding is necessary and also participates to their resilience. This will be discussed further in 6.3.3. The use of drip irrigation spread with the subsidies granted by the government and already increased drastically the irrigated surfaces for the farmers who have access to irrigation, with the millions of kilometers of plastic pipes and hoes distributed. The cultivation of crops needing a lot of water and little labor force, like paddy and sugarcane, are very questionable in this context. Sugarcane already shows its limits, since the cropping system associated is disappearing.

6.3.2.Labor: How to create agricultural employment?

"While the share of gross domestic product originating from agriculture has gone down from over 50% at the time of Independence to nearly 14% currently, the share of workforce engaged in agriculture, which was about 70% in 1951, still remains at over 50%. This has led to widening of gap between incomes in agricultural and non-agricultural sectors, which is perceived to be one of the major reasons for persistence of poverty in the country. The gap between the number of new rural workers and the number of new job opportunities created in agriculture is enlarging." Anjani Kumar et al.2011 The current distribution of means of production, in particular land and water, is unfair. Finding a way to make those resources profitable to all by creating labor appears necessary to reduce the rural poverty. Indeed, as described page 54, there are few labor opportunities outside the agricultural sector for the rural population without education. The few people who migrate in bigger cities for a wage of 300 Rs per day do so instead of waiting at home, because there are apparently more opportunities there.

Crops like paddy and sugarcane, besides being great water consumers, provide little labor per land surface. Productive activities adapted to each agroecological area could provide more work if they had more labor needs and a higher land productivity. Nowadays it would be mulberry and silk, tomatoes and poultry on irrigated land and mangoes for upland areas where water is scarcer.

Apart from the net creation of employment, improving the relations between employers and employees seem important for the well being of the communities. The contempt of the higher castes towards the lower ones is present in different forms, but can sometimes be quite shocking for an outsider of the caste system. Without overgeneralizing, while some OC are open minded and emphatic, some other have scornful speeches about lower castes. Nevertheless, it is a relieve to see that mentalities seem to change for the best. Initiating a space of dialogue between those social categories could catalyze this change, and the implementation of a collective management of the water resource with community meetings could be a great opportunity for that. Giving the opportunities to the poorer to rely less on labor work would even be better. Operation flood was successful in that way: the milking systems contribute to the agricultural income from 15 to 100%.

It generates an income on low to no agricultural surface, constituting some "self-employment" for many farmers, despite the fact that this income does not permit the landless and rainfed farmers earn enough money to go beyond the survival threshold. Moreover, the summer distress of biomass available seems to show the limit of the density of cows possible in the area with this current management of the common resources, which generates overgrazing.

The public investments could also be oriented toward the emancipation of the farmers from labor for other farmers. The NREGA, despite the corruption, its inequalities among the villages and delayed payments, has had several tangible positive effects in the country, such as increasing rural wages and reducing gender wage gaps; smoothing and stabilizing consumption by poor people; enabling better access to nutrition, health and education; increasing financial inclusion because of payments through bank accounts; and reducing distress migration (Report to the people, 2016, NREGA). However, the program seems to falter since 2010, with a decline in terms of financial outlay and employment generated. Essentially, central government has been slowly trying to end this program by starving it of essential funds [START_REF] Ghosh | India's rural employment programme is dying a death of funding cuts[END_REF]. If India wishes to dynamize its rural areas and reduce overall poverty, those choices appear inconsistent.

From non agricultural activities, the dairy sector provides labor in the plants (Dodla and Parag), but also in the villages for the collectors. It could be interesting to favor the poorer or landless people for the role of collector. During the fieldwork, the collector met all had land and access to water.

In addition to the net creation of local employment, education is still mandatory to reduce rural poverty, increase awareness and enhance skills to explore more lucrative opportunities, both in urban and rural areas. Unfortunately, the lower castes and tribes who would benefit from it the most are once again left out of this opportunity. Many do not finish their primary education by lack of financial resources, because they have to work as laborer to pay for immediate basic needs or because they cannot afford higher education away from the villages. However, a lot of attention is given to those inequalities of chances in education, with the positive discrimination of caste wise reserved seats in the universities.

6.3.3.Resilience: How to reduce the risks of the most vulnerable rural population?

The farmers are exposed to many uncontrollable factors, such as the rainfalls, the biomass shortage and the market prices. Only a minority of them can avoid it, investing in irrigation, growing fodder or choosing the more remunerative production for instance. Working on solutions to improve the resilience of the most vulnerable farmers appear essential to compensate this inequality.

A way to increase and stabilize their income is to rear milking cows. As the study of the milking systems indicates, the more vulnerable farmers are constrained to have a milking production system of low performance, due to their uncertain access to food for the animals. Removing this constrain would allow them so increase their volume of milk sold. A better management of the common resources of biomass might increase the total production, since most of the pasture areas seem to be over grazed.

The landowners already cultivate forage, such as sorghum and groundnuts that can grow rainfed with seeds supplied by the state at preferential rate. But the biomass produced during the rainy season does not compete with the rapid growth of the elephant grass year round. Also, in the frame of a animal husbandry scheme of the state, owners of Below Poverty Line ration cards of some villages received fodder like corn silage for free during one very dry summer. The forest, which was the main resource of food for the cattle in the past, is now abandoned in most of the areas. The wildlife sanctuary is not accessible anymore, but other areas still are. Very few farmers take their milking cows to pasture there, since it is not adequate to reach the milk production potential of the cows (low nutritional value and a lot of energy spent).

The dairies promote good practices via workshops with the farmers and regular visits of extension workers to support villages with low production, whom give advice about the practices of the farmers. However, this kind of support is often oriented toward the systems that can produce more milk (the majority of the cows affiliated to the program are improved breeds).

Another way to increase their income would be by improving the land productivity, especially for the rainfed cropping systems. The association of pulses is quite interesting in terms of resilience since it provides food, fodder and liquidity to the family if the harvest is good. To secure the yields, the easiest way would be to supply small amounts of water in case of severe drought, but it would be too costly for so big surfaces compared to the gross product possible to make. Another way to reduce the risks linked to the water scarcity would be to improve the soil fertility (CEC and Available Water Capacity) in order to keep nutrients and water available for the plant for a longer period. But the dung availability is limited, and the farmers often put all their own dung on their plot and cannot buy more. The Zero Budget Natural Farming (ZBNF) program initiated in 2015, has those objectives: enhancing farmers' welfare, consumer welfare and conservation of environment. The practices promoted aim at a zero net cost of production of all crops, with inputs locally available for the farmers. The result published by the ZBNF show that yields are improved with reduces intermediary consumption costs, generating a much better net added value. However, even if the success stories shared on their website are convincing, the issue for the rainfed farmers is not input costs but more water. It could be more useful to farmers with access to irrigation who cultivate soils with a low fertility because of monocropping (sugarcane, mulberry, tomatoes) and the use of chemical fertilizers (even though dung provided by the milk systems is always applied). Also only one research paper supports the practices promotes by the ZBNF and no sign of the program was seen or heard during the fieldwork. Hopefully, it will expend and be convincing.

It was surprising to see no home garden in the area and usually only one crop per plot. The only subsistence crops are paddy, finger millet and pulses beans, and in a lesser extend groundnuts and market vegetables. Also, some fruit trees like goavas, mangoes and "black berry" are planted close to the houses. Encouraging small farmers to grow their own food with little water (tube wells of the village) could create more food independence.

Loans to small landholders granted before the implementation of water use management would only encourage them to take their chances at digging tube wells, which would only worsen the water resource depletion. Similarly, land distribution without water access would also have little impact in this context, as rainfed fields have a very low land productivity.

Conclusion

"India may be a land of over 100 problems, but it is also a place for a billion solutions."

Kailash Satyarthi, Indian children's rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize recipient in 2014

On the oldest rocks on the earth's crust of the Deccan plateau, the savanna climate shaped an undulating landscape in Palamaner and Gangavaram mandals. Exposed to the randomness of the monsoon patterns and constrained by soils and rocks not storing water, Men had to adapt their agriculture in a context where water was always a limiting factor. Before 1970, food crops mainly for subsistence were cultivated with small irrigated surfaces thanks to water tanks. Large cattle herds were providing animal labor and fertility renewal. The new technologies and market opportunities brought by the green revolution reduced the need of dung with chemical fertilizers and increased the need of water for the new crops. In 2000, Operation Flood gave a new role to cattle rearing, offering market opportunities for milk. Along with crops demanding in water, those new productions were possible thanks to the groundwater boom, by extracting groundwater for the first time. The constant increase of irrigated surfaces overtime is now compromised by the groundwater over-use, jeopardizing both subsistence and market oriented productions.

In parallel of the constant struggle for water, the inequalities between the farmers widened over time. Indeed, the land and labor productivity of cropping systems is higher for water demanding crops, thus necessitates funds for water access. For lucrative livestock systems, investments in equipment are needed for silk and poultry. A considerable amount of treasury is mandatory as well, especially for feed and fodder, as the food resource for cows is an issue to all milk producers. As the poorer have low to no production means, their agricultural income is far behind the farmers able to take advantage of every innovations. The dairy production illustrates well this phenomenon: the farmers earning more money from agriculture are the ones producing the bigger volumes of milk, while the dairy production of the landless and rainfed farmers is not sufficient to escape poverty. Most of the farmers have to specialize to take advantage of their means of production. Only the ones who were always able to invest first can diversify in subsistence and cash productions, providing food security and high incomes.

As farmers are exposed to the market prices, groundwater shortage, developing pests and elephants; the current local agriculture is not sustainable. Poor people cannot go out of poverty and even the wealthier farmers are jeopardized by the upcoming risks. The local population is divided between laborers and farmers who can live from agriculture, the latter benefiting from the cheap labor force available. The new technologies and productions -while developing the territory with food security, bringing income and employment opportunities-have not been accessible to all. They rely heavily on labor force provided by the poor, without offering them decent livelihoods in return.

The agricultural changes since 1970 were able to rise the land productivity, providing food and income to an increasing population on a limited area. In parallel, inequalities among the farmers kept growing but this study is not able to determine whether those transformations have participated to the relative impoverishment of the local population. Are the laborers more numerous now than 50 years ago? We can also wonder, in the prospect of water shortage if its use is not regulated, how long farmers will be able to keep their water access by drilling deeper and what will be the consequences of the loss of the irrigation possibility.

Annexes

Annex 1: Some information about the social organization Annex 2: Prices of operation and inputs and labor for the cropping systems Annex 3: Equipment and equipment depreciation Annex 4: Survival threshold calculation Annex 5: Technical itineraries of all cropping systems Annex 1: Some information about the social organization

Indian culture, through their tradition and the Hindu religion, can be difficult to understand for foreigners at first. Those paragraphs aim at explaining a few of those norms to make the context easier to understand, without the pretentiousness to analyze their complexity.

The following information are valid in the studied area but cannot be generalized to a higher scale.

Castes: a frozen situation decided at birth The Indian social organization is structured by the caste's system. The different castes classified derive from the jati system, which means birth in sanskrit. Unike the varna system which classifies people in four categories (Brahmanes, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Shudras), it does not come from the sacred texts of the Hindu religion. In the past, each jati was associated to the exclusive practice of a particular profession. With the modernization and evolution of the social organization and occupations, the jatis now represent groups linked economically and socially. In the villages, the families of the same caste live in the same neighborhood. It is not rare to be shown the Reddy or Kamma neighborhood when people want to help to introduce you to farmers. Also, SC and ST neighborhoods are quite often recognizable by their the basic houses, of small size and sometimes with mud walls and leaf roofs.

The Indian government established an official classification of the jatis in 1950 with the Constitution Schedule Class Order. The aim was to encourage the upward social mobility with positive discrimination, orienting the development programs towards the lower castes and keeping quotas in universities and governmental jobs. Four categories were created, from the socially highest to the lowest: the Forward Castes (FC or OC), the Other Backward Castes (OBC or BC), the Schedule Castes (SC, also called Dalits or Untouchables) and the Schedule Tribes (ST). While the Indian Government claims to wish to abolish the caste's system 8 , this classification appears a bit contradictory.

Marriages are traditionally endogamous, within a same jati or at least in a same category of the official classification. However, it is now possible to see intercaste marriages. Sometimes they are accepted by the family. If not, the young couple is not supported financially nor socially by their parents. Apart from this system, the Muslims, Christians and Tribals live as distinct societies. As they are not part of the jati caste system, their organization is different. All those societies can be live within the villages in separated neighborhood or separately in distinct villages. They are also integrated in the official classification.

8 According the New Constitution of Independent India of 1950 discrimination and violence liked to castes are forbidden

The historic interviews with members of the SC and ST categories point that the direct discrimination decreased during the last generations. Childhood memories testify of harsh life conditions: they always walked bare foot, were not allowed to the temples nor into the house of higher caste… Upper castes' behavior toward them was rough, as they did not want to touch them at any cost, and gave food and water directly in the hands of their employees in the field.

Nowadays this kind of discrimination became rare, even though it unfortunately did not completely disappear. It is still common to serve ST and SC with paper cups for tea and banana leaves for wood, and not in metal tableware for other guests. However, if the direct violence towards them decreased, the well established difference in the material and social capital of the different castes inevitably sustains this well established hierarchy.

Women: the gender discriminated through marriage

Marriage is a crucial event in the life of Indians, especially for women. Indeed, she will leave her family's house to join her husband's family, who will have control over her. Depending on the distance between the two houses, the wealth and the wish of the husband family, the bride might not be able to visit her old family as often as she wishes.

The choice of the partner is done by the families, regarding the financial and social capital of the proposals. In the area, the dowry practice seems not to be practiced anymore. Before, the bride's family has to pay a dowry, often very important, to the husband's family. For vulnerable families, they can be constrained to decapitalize their farm (sell animals, land…). This practice is illegal in the Republic of India since 1961 with the Dowry Prohibition Act. In addition to the financial loss of the dowry, the bride's family looses a family worker.

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Summary of the different economic indicators.......................................................................14 Figure 2: Climogram of Palamaner (from www.climate-data.org).........................................................20 Figure 3: Evolution of yearly rainfalls from 1960 to 2010 (data from the Handbook of statistics of Chittoor district 2013).............................................................................................................................21 Figure 4: The different production systems before 1970........................................................................36 Figure 5: The evolution of the different production systems between 1970 and 2000...........................41 Figure 6: The evolution of the different production systems between 2000 and 2010...........................46 Figure 7: Cropping calendar...................................................................................................................58 Figure 8: The crops cultivated in association in the CS1........................................................................60 Figure 9: Outputs from the CS1..............................................................................................................61 Figure 10: Outputs of CS8......................................................................................................................68 Figure 11: Outputs of CS9......................................................................................................................69 Figure 12: Economic performances of the different cropping systems..................................................70 Figure 13: Land productivity decomposed in IC and GAV for the different cropping systems.............70 Figure 14: Labor productivity for the different cropping systems..........................................................70 Figure 15: Milking systems zootechnical performances.........................................................................75 Figure 16: Rates of the milk for Shreeja dairy in July 2018...................................................................76 Figure 17: Gross added values and intermediary consumption cost for the milking systems................82 Figure 18: Economic performances of the different livestock systems..................................................87 Figure 19: Productivity decomposed in IC and GAV for the different livestock systems......................87 Figure 20: Gross added value per day of work for the different livestock systems................................89 Figure 21: Sum up of the production systems.........................................................................................98 Figure 22: Net added value (NAV) comparison for the different production systems...........................99 Figure 23: Net added value (NAV) comparison for the different production systems.........................100 Figure 24: Agricultural income (AI) comparison for the different production systems.......................103 Figure 25: Agricultural income (AI) comparison for the different production systems.......................106 Figure 26: Milk production in the agricultural income for the different production systems...............109 Figure 27: Employment creation for different productions...................................................................113

Figure 4 :

 4 Figure 1: Summary of the different economic indicators.......................................................................14 Figure 2: Climogram of Palamaner (from www.climate-data.org).........................................................20 Figure 3: Evolution of yearly rainfalls from 1960 to 2010 (data from the Handbook of statistics of Chittoor district 2013).............................................................................................................................21 Figure 4: The different production systems before 1970........................................................................36 Figure 5: The evolution of the different production systems between 1970 and 2000...........................41 Figure 6: The evolution of the different production systems between 2000 and 2010...........................46 Figure 7: Cropping calendar...................................................................................................................58 Figure 8: The crops cultivated in association in the CS1........................................................................60 Figure 9: Outputs from the CS1..............................................................................................................61 Figure 10: Outputs of CS8......................................................................................................................68 Figure 11: Outputs of CS9......................................................................................................................69 Figure 12: Economic performances of the different cropping systems..................................................70 Figure 13: Land productivity decomposed in IC and GAV for the different cropping systems.............70 Figure 14: Labor productivity for the different cropping systems..........................................................70 Figure 15: Milking systems zootechnical performances.........................................................................75 Figure 16: Rates of the milk for Shreeja dairy in July 2018...................................................................76 Figure 17: Gross added values and intermediary consumption cost for the milking systems................82 Figure 18: Economic performances of the different livestock systems..................................................87 Figure 19: Productivity decomposed in IC and GAV for the different livestock systems......................87 Figure 20: Gross added value per day of work for the different livestock systems................................89 Figure 21: Sum up of the production systems.........................................................................................98 Figure 22: Net added value (NAV) comparison for the different production systems...........................99 Figure 23: Net added value (NAV) comparison for the different production systems.........................100 Figure 24: Agricultural income (AI) comparison for the different production systems.......................103 Figure 25: Agricultural income (AI) comparison for the different production systems.......................106 Figure 26: Milk production in the agricultural income for the different production systems...............109 Figure 27: Employment creation for different productions...................................................................113

  Abstract, résumé...............................................................................................................................................................1 Acknowledgment.............................................................................................................................................................2 Foreword, Table of maps.................................................................................................................................................3 Tables of figures and illustrations....................................................................................................................................4 Table of pictures...............................................................................................................................................................5 Glossary...........................................................................................................................................................................8 Acronyms and units, Equivalence of units and currency.................................................................................................9 Introduction....................................................................................................................................10 1. Methodology......................................................................................................................................11 1.1. Comparative agriculture to study agriculture development.........................................................11 1.2. The agrarian diagnosis method and the involved concepts..........................................................12 2. Environment.......................................................................................................................................16 2.1. Localization of the studied area....................................................................................................16 2.2. Geomorphology............................................................................................................................18 2.3. A savanna climate with uncertain rainfalls...................................................................................21 2.4. The original ecosystem.................................................................................................................23 2.5. The modifications of the original ecosystem for agriculture........................................................28 2.6. The agroecological zoning...........................................................................................................30 3. History................................................................................................................................................33 3.1. After the Independence (before 1970)..........................................................................................33 3.2. The Green Revolution (1970-2000).............................................................................................38 3.3. The groundwater boom accompanied the expansion of the green revolution and Operation Flood (2000-2010).........................................................................................................................................43 3.4. The start of the groundwater crisis (2010 -2018)........................................................................48 3.5. Trajectories...................................................................................................................................53 4. Description of the production systems...............................................................................................54 4.1. Typology of the production system..............................................................................................54 4.2. Cropping systems.........................................................................................................................59 4.3. Livestock systems.........................................................................................................................74 5. Economic results................................................................................................................................91 5.1. Presentation of the different production systems.........................................................................91 5.2. Comparison of the economic performances of the production systems.......................................99 6. Discussion........................................................................................................................................109 6.1. Result analysis............................................................................................................................109 6.2. The future of the local agriculture..............................................................................................111 6.3. Propositions for the rural development of the area....................................................................113 Conclusion....................................................................................................................................................................117 Bibliography.................................................................................................................................................................118 Annexes........................................................................................................................................................................120 6

  Summary of the different economic indicators ED= ∑ ( price of the equipment life expectancy of the equipment ) FI =NAV -(workers wages+taxes+ interests+land rental)+subsidies +land income NAV = ∑ (VAB)-ED City of Palamaner

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Climogram of Palamaner (from www.climate-data.org)

Figure 3 :

 3 Figure 3: Evolution of yearly rainfalls from 1960 to 2010 (data from the Handbook of statistics of Chittoor district 2013)

34

  Picture 10: A plate of ragi mutta, cow pea sauce and red chili pickle Picture 11: A man taking one of the last herds of indigenous cattle to the forest in Cheta Penta

Figure

  Figure 4: The different production systems before 1970 Landless with small ruminants

  Figure 5: The evolution of the different production systems between 1970 and 2000 1970 Landless with small ruminants

  The open wells dried up and more people dug tube wells to keep a water access. Nowadays, most of the dry open wells are closed and filled with rock to prevent accidents, only a few remain open and a fewer still contain water. The barrage across Koundinya river was built in 2008. It retains the water from flowing to Tamil Nadu. It is not used for farming but to supply Palamaner with drinking water.

Figure 6 :

 6 Figure 6: The evolution of the different production systems between 2000 and 2010 1970 2000

  Figure 7: Cropping calendar

Figure 8 :

 8 Figure 8: The crops cultivated in association in the CS1

Figure 9 :

 9 Figure 9: Outputs from the CS1

  Picture 19: In the upland agroecological area, where the old mango orchards abound

Figure 10 :

 10 Figure 10: Outputs of CS8

Figure 13 :Figure 14 :

 1314 Figure 13: Land productivity decomposed in IC and GAV for the different cropping systems

Figure 15 :

 15 Figure 15: Milking systems zootechnical performances

FatFigure 16 :

 16 Figure 16: Rates of the milk for Shreeja dairy in July 2018

Figure 17 :

 17 Figure 17: Gross added values and intermediary consumption cost for the milking systems

Figure 20 :

 20 Figure 20: Gross added value per day of work for the different livestock systems

Figure 21 :

 21 Figure 21: Sum up of the production systems

Figure 22 :

 22 Figure 22: Net added value (NAV) comparison for the different production systems

  Figure 23: Net added value (NAV) comparison for the different production systems

  104

Figure 24 :

 24 Figure 24: Agricultural income (AI) comparison for the different production systems

Figure 25 :

 25 Figure 25: Agricultural income (AI) comparison for the different production systems

  110

Figure 26 :

 26 Figure 26: Milk production in the agricultural income for the different production systems

Figure 27 :

 27 Figure 27: Employment creation for different productions

to 30 acres + open well 10 bovines + 10 small ruminants

		+ open well				Owner of tube well	+	Adquisition
	<5 bovines	+ paddy		+ sugarcane	Outside investors	-	Abandonment
	Work sharing						Major investment
	15 + paddy			+ tube well
	Employs temporary laborers	+ sugarcane		+ elephant grass
		+ mangoes	+ tube well	+ elephant grass -sugarcane
	Over 30 acres	+ open well	+ tube well	+ elephant grass
	50 bovines, 100 small ruminants	+ paddy	+ mulberry + silk buildings

managerial mango plantation owners Over 30 acres 50 bovines, 100 small ruminants Employs temporary and permanent laborers

	3.5. Trajectories 1970 4. Description of the production systems 2000 2010	2018
	Landless with small ruminants 4.1. Typology of the production system				PS1	Landless shepherds and laborers
								PS0	Landless laborers
	Landless without livestock
					+ 1 milking cow		PS2 Landless milk producers and laborers
	5 to 10 acres							PS3	Rainfed annual crop producers and laborers
	<5 bovines
	Work sharing				+ mangoes			PS4	Rainfed annual and mango producers and laborers
						+ vegetables		PS5	Sugarcane specialized producers and laborers
	10 to 20 acres <5 bovines Work sharing	+ open well + paddy		+ sugarcane	+ tube well + elephant grass	-sugarcane + elephant	+ vegetables	-paddy PS6 Market vegetable specialized producers PS7 Diversified annual crop producers
						grass	+ mulberry -all other crops	PS8	Specialized silk producers
	15 to 30 acres	+ open well						PS9	Diversified sugarcane producers
	10 bovines + 10 small ruminants	+ paddy + sugarcane		+ tube well + elephant grass	+ mulberry + silk buildings	-sugarcane	PS10	Large diversified silk producers
	Employs temporary laborers	+ mangoes Large + open well + tube well + elephant grass -sugarcane + land PS12 -sugarcane + land PS11 Large very diversified producers + paddy + sugarcane + tube well + mulberry + silk buildings + + elephant grass mangoes
				Outside investors		+ land + poultry buildings	PS13	Managerial poultry investors
		LEGEND
		Land status of farmers		Dynamics
		Landless		Decapitaliztion if financial problem / investment if liquidity available
		Rainfed farmers		Digging of a new well / drying up of old well
		Access to pond		Land purchase
		Owner of open well		Land distribution
		Owner of tube well	+	Adquisition
		Outside investors	-	Abandonment
				Major investment
				53

LS 1 Total number of animals: 28

	4.3.1.Dairy livestock systems
									Breeding males	3		OUTPUTS
		INPUTS			Breeding females	10					Rs/unit Quantity Price (Rs)
	Unit	Rs/unit Quantity Price (Rs)					First reproduction 3 years old	Animals Males	1-2 yo	5,000	2 10,000
	Vet consultation	1,000	10	10,000	2	First pregnancy 3 years old	Culling age	8 years old		8 yo (culling)	3,500	1	2,100
	Male of 3 years ol	1,500	0	500	1	Culling age	6 years old					Females 7 yo (culling) 3,000	3 10,000
												Dung	Load	2,000	2	3,000
	LABOR			Young: 2 to 3 years old			BCI (m)	17
		MD/ year		2	2			Lamb /litter 1
		Grazing	365	Females	Males			Mortality	1				GP	25,100
	Shed maintenance and cleaning	20		3								IC	500
	Total	385											GAV	24,600
				Young: 1 to 2 years old	4		Lambs: 0 to 1 years old
				3	3			3	3				FWF (MD)	385
				Females	Males			Females	Males				EWF (MD)	0
													GAV/MD	64
			Animal losses 1	1				1

1 improved breed cow 2 improved breed cows 4 improved breed cows

			2 cross bred cows
	GAV	10,339	18,213	28,964	59,356
	Groundnut leaves	0%	4%	0%	0%
	Paddy straw	22%	39%	27%	27%
	Elephant grass*	27%	0%	13%	13%
	Feed	40%	45%	47%	47%
	Health	11%	12%	13%	13%
	Total IC	41,730	50,865	75,460	150,920

INPUTS PER CYCLE OF 100 WORMS OUTPUTS

		Unit	Price (Rs/unit) Quantity		Price (Rs)	Yellow silk sold in Karnataka	28,000 Rs
	Mulberry leaves	Acre	60,000	0.25	15,000	80 kg
		100 worms	200	1	200	350 Rs/kg
	Newspaper	kg	20	10	200	Sticks, newspaper, old plants: burnt or used to cook0 Rs
	Cleaning products	L	50	1	50
	Transport silk to Karnatak /kg silk	5	80	400
	Rent shed LS7	25 days	2,000 -		2,000		GP	28,000
			TOTAL LS7	17,850		IC	15,850
			TOTAL LS8	15,850	FOR 1 CYCLE of 100 WORMS	GAV	12,150
						Duration (days)

LABOR PER CYCLE OF 100 WORMS

				Days of feeding	13		GP	###
		Duration (days)Labor (WF/day)	Days of cocoon	7	For LS7 per year	IC	###
	Building cleaning	2	1	Harvest	2		GAV	76,125
	Stage 1	4	1	Total	22
	Stage 2	4	2			Rented building	Labor (MD)	263
	Stage 3	5	3	Gap	4 to 10 days	5 cycles/year	FWF (MD)	119
	Stage 4	7	0			150 worms cycles	EWF (MD)	144
	Harvest	2	3				GAV/MD	290
		Total MD	35
							GP	###
		CAPITAL				For LS8 per year	IC	###
	Shed	60*30*60 ft					GAV	###
		0.25 ac
		300 worms capacity			Owned building	Labor (MD)	525
		10% subsidies from the government			6 cycles/year	FWF (MD)	225
		Price (Rs)	Use (years)			250 worms cycles	EWF (MD)	300
	Shed	700,000	30

Small ruminants herd 1 improved breed cow 2 improved breed cows 4 improved breed cows Sericulture with rented building Sericulture with owned building

  Figure 19: Productivity decomposed in IC and GAV for the different livestock systems

												LS9
			LS1	LS2		LS3	LS4	LS5	LS6	LS7	LS8	LS9
							2 cross bred cows			Pair of bulls		Integrated poultry
	GP			25,100	52,069	69,078	104,424	210,276	88,000	210,000	420,000	637,500
	IC			10,500	41,730	50,865	75,460	150,920	22,000	133,875	237,750	264,000
	GAV Bags of food (50 kg) Labor (MD/year)	INPUTS	14,600 385	10,339 251	18,213 320	28,964 297	59,356 365	66,000 197		76,125 263	182,250 525	373,500 504
	Chicks (30g) GAV/MD			38	0 Rs	41	57	98	163	336		290	347	741
	Medicine											OUTPUTS
	Electricity Bedding			264,000 Rs		5 Cycles per year 40 days 20 days	Chicken (2.3 kg/animal)	kg per cycle Rs/kg 22,500	5	112,500 Rs
	TOTAL			264,000 Rs		12,000	chicken (8,3/m²)	Gap	Dung		3 loads	5,000 Rs/load	15,000 Rs
										TOTAL per cycle		127,500 Rs
			LABOR				Mortality rates		TOTAL per year		637,500 Rs
	Workers			504 Man-day/year	Winter	5%
	Wage workers			80,000 Rs/year		Summer	10%			GP	637,500
							Mean over year	6%			IC	264,000
		CAPITAL									GAV	373,500
	Number of buildings	3
	Surface of buildings	8*60 (m²) 25*200 (ft²)								FWF (MD) EWF (MD)	0 504
	Surface of land (acre)			1						GAV/MD	741
		Price (Rs)		Use (years)
	Buildings	2,500,000		20
	Plastic equipment	50,000		6
	Equipment depreciati			130,000 Rs/ year
			LS1	LS2		LS3	LS4	LS5	LS6	LS7	LS8	LS9
							2 cross bred cows			Pair of bulls		Integrated poultry
	GAV		14,600	10,339		18,213	28,964	59,356	66,000	76,125	182,250	373,500
	Groundnut leaves	0%	0%		4%	0%	0%	0%	0%	0%	0%
	Paddy straw Elephant grass Rs per worker plus the rice. This guaranteed 0% 24% 39% 27% Per day, it represents 200 0% 24% 0% 13% Feed 0% 42% 45% 47% and stable income appears quite interesting Health 95% 10% 12% 13% compared to the average wage of 250 Rs for daily laborers with few opportunities of work. Other 5% 0% 0% 0% Total IC 10,500 41,730 50,865 75,460	27% 13% 47% 13% 0% Picture 37: Inside a poultry rearing building 91% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 9% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 150,920 22,000 133,875 237,750 264,000 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
								87

4.3.3.Comparison of the performances of the different livestock systems 88 Figure 18: Economic performances of the different livestock systems

  It corresponds to the minimal amount of money needed for a family of 2 adults and 2 dependents (children, elder or disabled persons), for food, health, housing expenses, hygiene and clothing. It has been calculated with data from interviews conducted with families in financial difficulties, who save as much money as possible (for instance, they cannot afford to buy fruits, milk or tea). With a ration card BPL (Below Poverty Line), those families can buy cereals such as rice and finger millet, pulses, groundnut oil and sugar at a lower price. All the details are in the table of the annex 3. The threshold has been set to 40,000 Rs per year for a family of 2 adults and 2 dependent persons. It was set by the Indian Government in 2014 at 32 Rs per day and per person to live and undertake a dependent person in rural areas. Corrected of the inflation, multiplied per two to form a family and calculated for a year it is an amount of 30,000 Rs per year for a family of 2 adults and 2 dependent persons.

	AI FWF	=	(GP per acre -IC per acre -salarieslaborers per acre )× AS FWF	-	IC not surfacedependant + salarieslaborers not surface dependant FWF	-	ED FWF
			Landless agriculture :
			Few opportunities for productive activities
					PS 1 and 2
			103

•

The survival threshold.

•

The national poverty line.

Saprolite is a chemically weathered rock. Saprolites form in the lower zones of soil profiles and represent deep weathering of the bedrock surface.

It is not visible on the drawing, but the surfaces of the agricultural land per family have reduced since the last period, due to the demographic evolution and fixed surface of agricultural land of the area.

Called Velugu groups in the area, it is part of the Velugu programme undertaken by the Government of Andhra Pradesh for a comprehensive eradication of poverty in rural and urban areas in order to develop, strengthen, and empower the women. They are micro credit groups. The primary aim of the SHG-Bank linkage program in India is to integrate informal savings and credit groups with mainstream banking by providing them credit to enhance their fund base. Many of the women in the villages are part of such a group.

Agricultural surface per family worker or investissor (acres/FWF) Agricultural income per family worker or inestissor (Rs/FWF)

m. after plant. every

d. during 40 d.

Acknowledgment

"In homage to all the farmers of the world.

Specialized sugarcane producers and laborers

Religion: Hinduism as a structural element The importance given to religion for Hindus has many impacts on their social and economical lives. When the family has enough money, a prayer room (pooja room) in the house is dedicated to the gods. They are decorated with icons and valuable objects, where they do many offerings like food and flowers, burn incense and decor with turmeric and red powder. Similar offerings and money are also given in the temples.

To honor the gods, many festivals are celebrated. The period is September to April, the dates vary according to the villages. Around 15 festivals can be celebrated per year per village. The programs differ depending on the festival, but for all friends and relatives are welcomed and the host family prepares food for everyone (some families can offer food to over a hundred people!). Sometimes a parade is conducted to the sound of tambourines and firecrackers. Some festivals imply non vegetarian food, so animals are bought and sacrificed before eating. The expenses can be very important (food, animals to kill, offerings, money for the workers…). For a Ganga Jatara festival in a OC village, up to 20,000 rupees (250€) can be spent per family, which is the equivalent of half of the survival threshold calculated for a family of 5 member for a year in the area (see annex 4 for more details).

Offerings and festivals are regular and occasional expenses that can be consequent for a family. For some poor families, the expenses for festivals are the highest expenses of the year, and for this period they have to borrow money from their employers.

The Hindus also worship cows for their many uses. Indeed, the milk, the ghee, the urine and the cow dung are 4 sacred elements in their religion. This is the reason why they do not eat bovine meat, which makes the culling of the cows and male calves a real issue in the country as the Muslims and Christians who consume it are the minority of the population.

Man -day

The agrarian diagnosis approach used for this study enables to assess the current situation of the agrarian system of Palamaner and Gangavaram mandals, studying the diversity of the farmers of the area and their different agricultural practices.

The territory is composed of agroecological areas distinguished by, among other, their access to water and soil quality. Traditionally, the crops were mainly rainfed and associated to pastoral livestock in the forests. Since the green revolution of the 1970's, the irrigated crops kept increasing in surface. The years 2000 saw the transformation of the cattle rearing switch to milking production. New cash production appeared in the area thanks to the access of groundwater by the dissemination of tube wells. This dependence to water starts to show its limits since the last decade : those wells are drying. Those cash production necessitate private capital ; which explains the income gap between the different farmers. The inequalities were widened over time by the capacity to invest and the agroecological conditions. The many landless and small rainfed farmers have an agricultural income below the survival threshold. Indeed, the agricultural sector could not help them to escape poverty, and now even the wealthier farmers are jeopardized. As farmers are exposed to the market prices, groundwater shortage, developing pests and elephants; the current situation is not sustainable.

Keywords: India, agrarian diagnosis, water resource, Operation Flood, Green Revolution.

Pour quote this document : Buttard Céline, 2018, Agrarian diagnosis of Palamaner and Gangavaram mandals, Andhra Pradesh, India. Master thesis presented for graduation of Agronomist Engineer, Montpellier SupAgro.

Montpellier SupAgro, Centre international d'études supérieures en sciences agronomiques de Montpellier, 2 place Pierre Viala, 34060 Montpellier cedex 02. http://www.supagro.fr