This is a report on the first-ever census survey conducted on suicides by farmers in the two most affected districts of Punjab, Sangrur and Bhatinda. It tries to arrive at the number of farmer suicides, the reasons (whether they were caused by economic distress alone or they were due to the interplay of the forces of economic distress, social conflict, cultural backwardness and lack of community/state support) and also the present economic status of the families of the victims.

Authors are thankful to all the teaching/ research faculty and technical staff members of the Department of Economics and Sociology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, who supported us in the collection and digitisation of the data. We are also grateful to the families of the suicide victims, who cooperated with us during data collection despite such tragedies in their households. Our thanks are also due to the elected representatives and other peers of the villages of the two districts, where this study was carried out. We are also thankful to the Government of Punjab for providing financial support for this study.

R S Sidhu (sidhurajinder@gmail.com) is with the College of Basic Sciences and Humanities, Sukhpal Singh and A S Bhullar are with the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

P

Suicide is a complex phenomenon largely associated with economic, social and psychological distress of the family as well as of the victim. In recent years, many farmers in the state have committed suicides, most of which are linked with the problem of indebtedness (Jaijee 1999; AFDR 2000; Iyer and Manick 2000; Kumar and Sharma 2006) though there may be many other factors operating at the grass root level causing economic, social and psychological distress to the farming families. The National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) estimates have also revealed that the level of debt is the highest in Punjab among all states of the country. Further, the share of non-institutional debt, on which the rate of interest is very high, was around 57%. The studies conducted by the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU), have estimated the level of debt in the farming sector of the state around Rs 21,064 crore in 2006, out of which Rs 13,047 crore came from non-institutional sources (Singh et al 2007). Their coercive methods of loan recovery also cause psychological and social distress. The diversion of loans from productive to non-productive activities is also argued to cause loan default leading to suicides.

Because of the complexity of different factors involved in suicides, it is not appropriate to say that all suicides were committed due to indebtedness unless an objective assessment is made about the real cause(s) of suicides. The estimates on farmers’ suicides also vary widely, police records putting the number at 136 (19902008), while the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU) estimated that farmer suicides over the same period numbered more than 30,000 suicide cases. This study was initiated because of the very large difference between the BKU estimates and those of police records.

This census is a professionally conducted enumeration of the suicides committed by the farmers in the two most affected districts of the state, namely, Sangrur and Bathinda districts. The study objectively tries to assess the prime reasons for committing suicides among farmers and brings out how many of these were committed due to indebtedness.

1 Approach to the Study

Basically it is the “census” on suicides committed in rural areas conducted from village to village. This census survey was primary in nature and was conducted by our research team visiting every village of these two districts. To ascertain the exact number of suicides, village panchayat, chowkidar and elders of the community were contacted on the basis of which a list of suicide victims for each village was prepared and then families of each suicide victim was visited to identify the cause(s) of committing suicide. A questionnaire was specially structured for this purpose and was administered through personal interview method. Each victim’s family was approached personally and then an effort was made to assess the level of economic, social and psychological distress of the victim and his/her family at the time of the suicide. The information was collected on the level of debt (unpaid) from institutional and non-institutional sources owed by the victim’s family, the economic position, level of income and assets (including land) owned and assets sold by the family to pay-off the debt. The information on social aspects of the victims’ family such as social/marital discords among family members, mental stability of the victim, addiction to drugs, etc, was

Economic & Political Weekly Supplement

REVIEW OF AGRICULTURE

years accounted for about 65% of the total suicide cases. The economic loss to the society in general, and to the family in particular, can therefore, be well-imagined.

Economic distress is argued to be the most important d eterminant of suicides not only in the farming class, but in other sections of the society as well. Therefore, the suicides were directly linked with the asset/income position of the farmers (Table 3). Around 79% of the suicide victims belonged to the small and marginal farm size category owning less than five acres of land. Around 44% of these farmers came from the marginal farm category which highlights the economic position of such households with respect to their capacity to cope with economic distress in the environment of commercialisation of agriculture and growing social expenditure due to increased market connectivity of rural-urban areas. Only a small proportion of suicide victims (6%) came from large size farm households having more than 10 acres of land, indicating that the suicides had a very strong negative linkage with the income-generating capacity of the farm households.

Table 3: Farmsize-wise Distribution of Farmers, Who Committed Suicides in Bathinda and Sangrur Districts

Farm-size (Acres) Bathinda Sangrur Total No of Suicides No of Suicides No of Suicides

Percentages are given in parentheses. Source: Field survey.

Suicides were committed through various modes, but the most common mode was by consuming insecticides, which are freely available in every farm household in Punjab (Table 4). Around 74% of the

Table 4: District-wise Mode of Suicides (in numbers)

farmers committed suicides through this mode followed by hanging (around 11%), jumping in front of a train (4.6%), etc.

Debt was found to be positively associated with suicides in both the districts. In about 59% cases of farmers’ suicides, the debt was more than Rs 1 lakh, whereas for another 11% of the victims, the debt was in the range of Rs 50,000 to Rs 1 lakh. Suicide victims owed relatively higher debt in Bathinda than Sangrur districts because of the failure of the cotton crop during 1997-2003 (Table 5).

Compared with debt, low income was the main characteristic of most of the suicide victim households. In 46% of such households, the annual income was lower than Rs 50,000. Around 21% of the victims, households were so poor that their annual earnings were lower than Rs 25,000. Another 26% of households earned income between Rs 50,000 and Rs 1 lakh. Yet, 27.5% of households where such suicides were committed had an annual income of more than Rs 1 lakh.

To disaggregate the findings further, the frequency of suicide victim households was examined on the debt-income axis. About 30% of the victims owed debt more than Rs 50,000, while their income was less than Rs 50,000. Another 16% victims’ annual income was in the range of Rs 50,000 to Rs 1 lakh, while their debt was more than Rs 1 lakh. The average debt on these households was Rs 3.79 lakh, while their annual income was only Rs 63,000. The level of debt was very high in high income earning households, which pushed the victims towards suicide. In such households, the average annual income was Rs 1.61 lakh and the average debt was Rs 4.58 lakh. Such victims constituted 18% of total suicides. Cases of suicides were also witnessed in low income-low debt households. In about 15% of the total suicides, the average income as well as average debt was lower than Rs 50,000. But when we looked at their average income and debt figures, it was seen that their annual income was much lower than their debt. The debt was almost two to four times the average income. In fact, the income of such households is so low that they do not generate any surplus income after meeting their consumption needs to

etc, were the other important reasons leading to suicides in the farming families of rural areas.

2.1 Farmers’ Suicides Due to Indebtedness

The victim farmers were classified into “debt” and “other (non-debt)” categories on the basis of debt, income, assets sold, non-productive expenditure, etc, as well as on the basis of information gathered from the victims’ families and other key informants of the village. This classification shows that a very large proportion of suicides were caused by the indebtedness in both the districts (Table 6). Such proportion was 75% in Sangrur district and 71% in Bathinda district. Most of the victims were married. The size of the farm

EPW

REVIEW OF AGRICULTURE

holding was small, debt was large and the level of income was low. Therefore, such farming families were unable to repay the debt, which caused severe distress in these families. Per acre debt was as high as Rs 1.15 lakh in such victims in both districts.

In Bathinda district, 550 cases of suicides out of a total of 773 cases were found due to indebtedness. The average debt was Rs 2.95 lakh as compared to annual income of Rs 38,000. The debt- income ratio was as high as 7.75 indicating’ the household’s inability to pay-off the debts. Such households were mainly marginal and small holders cultivating on an average 3.2 acres of land. In Sangrur district, 984 farmers committed suicide, out of which 738 farmers (75%) committed suicide due to indebtedness, while the remaining 246 farmers (25%) committed suicide due to other reasons. In the case of debt-caused suicides in Sangrur district, the average size of the farm was 2.92 acres, which indicates that a very large proportion of such suicide victims belonged to small holders. Seventytwo per cent of the victims were married. The average level of debt in case of these households at the time of the suicide was Rs 3.36 lakh, which indicates that they were heavily indebted. The average annual income of such families was little more than Rs 73,000. After meeting their family needs, they were left with nothing to payoff debts. The debt-income ratio was as high as 4.57.

2.2 Sale of Assets

Suicide victim households tried to repay the debt by selling their assets like land, machinery, gold, etc, but the size of debt was so large that even disposing off assets did not help them. Rather sale of assets put more pressure on them because assets’ sale in the sociocultural milieu of rural areas is looked down upon. Table 7 reveals

Table 7: Value of Assets Sold by the Suicide Victims due to Debt

Source: Field survey.

that 227 suicide victim

households	(41%)	sold	800
land with average value
of Rs 3.24 lakh and 28	600
households	(5%)	sold
machinery with average	400
worth of Rs 1.25 lakh in
Bathinda district. The sit
	200
uation	was	similar	in
Sangrur district, where
42% of suicide victims	0 1990-91	1992-93

sold land and 3% sold machinery to payoff the debt.

2.3 Farmers’ Suicides Committed due to Other Reasons

In these two districts, 469 suicides (26.7%) were committed due to social and other reasons such as family conflict, marital discord, prolonged illness, drug addiction, etc (Table 6). In case of such suicide cases, the size of landholding was relatively large, size of debt was lower and the average level of income was higher compared to debt caused suicides. Such households were by and large comfortably placed so far as repayment of debt was concerned.

In 223 such suicide cases in Bathinda district, the average debt was only Rs 85,825 and the debt/acre was only Rs 16,749. The average income was more than Rs 1 lakh and the debt/income ratio was 0.85, which clearly indicates that farmers were in a position to repay the debt from their incomes/savings in a few years and the main cause of suicide was not debt. In Sangrur district, 246 farmers committed suicide due to other (non-debt) reasons. Their average debt was about Rs 80,000 and per acre debt was only Rs 13,600. Compared with this, the average level of income was Rs 1.53 lakh and these farmers were capable of repaying the debt. Their debt-income ratio was as low as 0.52 (Table 6).

3 Nexus between Economic Distress, Sociocultural Backwardness and Suicides

The tragedy of suicides in rural areas is largely concentrated in south and southwest areas of the state. Suicide is not a simple phenomenon, which can be explained with single cause but it is the broad landscape of socio-economic and cultural forces, which prevail in rural areas

and cause severe distress to the farming families culminating to suicides. Therefore, the problem has to be viewed in that context. French sociologist Emile Durkheim remarked that suicide is the outcome of weak social bonds and the rate of suicides increases with the occurrence of extremities in both the social integration and social regulations (Durkheim 1897). Social factors, cultural backwardness and lacking social and institutional mechanisms for coping with stress aggravate economic distress ultimately leading to tragic events of suicides.

Fall in income and increase in farm investments were the two most important factors, which caused an economic squeeze in farming households in this belt. In Bathinda district, cotton was the predominant kharif crop occupying 55% area and its productivity drastically fell during the period of 1997 to 2002 causing an erosion in farm incomes. The productivity of cotton was more than 600 kg of lint/ha in 1992-93, which continuously declined to touch the lowest level of below 200 kg of lint/ha in 1998-99 due to the severe attack of American cotton bollworm (Figure 1). It started improving thereafter but remained lower than the level of 1991-92 till 2003-04. The introduction of Bt cotton has lately revived the cotton productivity. The total economic loss to the farmers during 1997-98 to 2002-03 due to fall in productivity in comparison to the average productivity of 1990-91 to 1992-93 was Rs 1,188 crore. Such losses shattered their economic sustenance and their dependence on credit increased manifold. The average productivity levels of wheat were also lower than the state average in the Bathinda district, which further aggravated their economic squeeze.

In Sangrur district, the crop patterns are dominated by rice-wheat rotation due