FARMER SUICIDESAN ALL INDIA STUDY
Study Commissioned by Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare,
Government of India, New Delhi
A.V. MANJUNATHA K.B. RAMAPPA
July 2017
Agricultural Development and Rural Transformation CentreINSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGEBengaluru - 560 072
Agro-Economic Research Centre
Dr. A.V. Manjunatha, Principal Investigator
Dr. K.B. Ramappa, Co-Principal Investigator
Dr. Pesala Peter, Consultant Ms. D.T. Preethika, Research Associate
Ms. N.C. Mamatha, Research Associate
Mr. Keshav Murthy, Consultant
Mr. Bangarappa, Research Assistant
Mrs. K.M. Prema Kumari, Research Associate
Dr. Vijaya Sarathy, Research Associate
Mr. Narasimha Murthy, Research Assistant
Contact:
Dr. A.V. Manjunatha, Ph.D. in Agricultural Economics (Justus Liebig University, Germany)
Assistant ProfessorAgricultural Development and Rural Transformation Centre (ADRTC)Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bengaluru - 560 072Ph: +91-80-23397689 (O), +91 9448402848 (Mobile)Email: [email protected]; [email protected]
Draft Report submitted in June 2017
Final Report submitted in July 2017
Citation: A.V. Manjunatha and K.B. Ramappa (2017), Farmer Suicides : An All India Study, Agriculture Development and Rural Transformation Centre Report, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Karnataka
Design by: dataworx, Bengaluru; website: www.dataworx.co.in
Prepared by
Research Team
July 2017
Agro-Economic Research Centre
Agricultural Development and Rural Transformation Centre
INST ITUTE FOR SOC IAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGEBengaluru - 560 072
Report Submitted to Agro-Economic Research Division, Directorate of Economics & Statistics,
Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare,
Government of India, New Delhi
FARMER SUICIDESAN ALL INDIA STUDY
Study Commissioned by
Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi
A.V. MANJUNATHA K.B. RAMAPPA
ii
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
The study entitled “Farmer Suicides: An All India Study” was carried out by Agro
Economic Research Centre, Agriculture Development and Rural Transformation
Centre of the Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bengaluru in association
with nine Agro-Economic Research Centers covering 13 states. The study was
conducted on behest of the Agro-Economic Research Division, Directorate of
Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New
Delhi. We would like to extend sincere thanks to all concerned officials of the
Ministry for their help and cooperation. We profusely thank Shri.P.C.Bodh,
Advisor, Agro-Economic Research Division, Directorate of Economics &
Statistics, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare,
Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi, for
encouragement and support throughout the study. Special thanks to Ms.Yogitha
Swaroop, Additional Economic Advisor and Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Asst. Director of
the AER Division for their cooperation. We also thank Prof. Vasant Gandhi, Centre
for Management in Agriculture, IIM, Ahmedabad, for his valuable suggestions.
We are grateful to the Director of ISEC, Prof. M.G. Chandrakanth, Former
Director of ISEC, Prof. R.S. Deshpande and Senior Consultant of ADRTC, ISEC,
Dr. P. Thippaiah for their encouragement and support. We have received strong
support from the concerned officials of Department of Agriculture and other
concerned departments of different states. We highly appreciate their support
and cooperation.
We express our thanks to AERCs who were involved in the study, namely, GIPE,
Pune, Maharashtra; Waltair, Andhra Pradesh; University of Madras, Tamil Nadu;
JNKVV, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh; PAU, Ludhiana, Punjab; University of Delhi; S.P.
University, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat; University of Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh
and Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan, West Bengal.
Special thanks to our colleagues in the ADRTC, Dr. I. Maruthi and Prof. Parmod
Kumar for their constant support. We greatly thank the support rendered
by the research team: Dr. Pesala Peter, Ms. D. T. Preethika, Ms. N.C. Mamatha,
Mr.Keshav Murthy, Dr. Vijaya Sarathy, Mr. Bangarappa, Ms. K.M.Prema Kumari
and Sri. Narasimha Murthy. The secretarial assistance by Mr. N. Boopathi and
Mr.Muthuraja is thankfully acknowledged.
A.V. Manjunatha,
Principal Investigator
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iii
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii
ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY vi - xix
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 - 10
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Review of literature 3
1.3 Objectives 7
1.4 Data and Methodology 8
1.5 Structure of the report 10
CHAPTER 2 FARMER SUICIDES SCENARIO IN INDIA 12 - 21
2.1 Intensity of farmer suicides in India 12
2.2 Government initiatives to address agrarian distress and suicides 14
CHAPTER 3 SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CROPPING PATTERN 23 - 43
3.1 Type of respondents 23
3.2 Details of AAY, BPL and APL cards possessed by victim households 24
3.3 Socioeconomic characteristics of victims 24
3.4 Characteristics of operational holdings 28
3.5 Sources of Irrigation 30
3.6 Cropping pattern and net returns 31
3.7 Sources of income and expenditure 35
3.8 Details of credit 37
CHAPTER 4 CAUSES AND IMPACT OF FARMER SUICIDES 44 - 65
4.1 Symptoms of suicides noticed by the victim households 44
4.2 Causes of farmer suicides 46
4.3 Impact of suicides on victim households 58
4.4 Suggestions to prevent farmer suicides by victim households 60
CHAPTER 5 FINDINGS AND POLICY SUGGESTIONS 67 - 78
5.1 Findings 67
5.2 Policy Suggestions 73
REFERENCES 79 - 82
ANNEXURE 83-84
CONTENTS
iv
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Table No. Particulars Page No.
1.1 Suicides and indebtedness in farming 2
1.2 Sample size 9
2.1 Details of farmer suicides in sample states 13
2.2 Month-wise farmer suicides in sample states during 2015-16 15
2.3 State-wise details of compensation paid to victim households during 2015-16 19
3.1 State-wise details on the type of respondents 23
3.2 State-wise details of AAY, BPL and APL cards possessed by victim households 24
3.3 Gender, social status and age of victims 25
3.4 Educational status of victims 26
3.5 Marital status of the victims 27
3.6 Method and place of suicides 28
3.7 Details of operational holdings of victim households 29
3.8 Source-wise distribution of irrigated area 30
3.9 Crops cultivated and net returns realized by victim households 33
3.10 State-wise net profit from different crops 33
3.11 State-wise income and expenditure 36
3.12 Details of credit 37
3.13 Details of credit availed from institutional sources 43
4.1 Symptoms noticed by victim households prior to suicide 44
4.2 Social causes of farmer suicides 47-48
4.3 Farming related causes of farmer suicides 50-51
4.4 Indebtedness related causes of farmer suicides 54
4.5 Ranking of the social, farming and indebtedness related causes of suicides 55
4.6(a) State-wise top five causes of suicides by victim households during 2014-15 57
4.6(b) State-wise top five causes of suicides by victim households during 2015-16 58
4.7 Impact of farmer suicides on victim households 59
4.8 State-wise suggestions from victim households to prevent farmer suicides 62
LIST OF TABLES
v
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Figure No. Particulars Page No.
1.1 Reasons for farmer suicides in India (NCRB, 2014) 1
1.2 Farmer suicides in India (NCRB, 2015) 3
2.1 Suicides reported in agriculture in India 12
2.2 Month-wise number of farmer suicides in sample states during 2015-16 14
3.1 Area operated by different category of victim households 29
3.2 Percentage of operated area by crop categories 31
3.3 State-wise costs and returns from crop cultivation 34
3.4 State-wise income and expenditure of victim households 35
3.5 Source-wise credit 38
3.6 State-wise institutional loans availed by victim households 39
3.7 State-wise non-institutional loans availed by victim households 40
3.8 State-wise quantum of credit availed by victim households 41
3.9 State-wise comparison of credit availed and outstanding 42
4.1 Per cent of victim HHs who answered ‘Yes’ to the symptoms of suicide 45
4.2 Per cent of victim HHs who answered that the victim was consuming food regularly and slept adequately 46
4.3 Social causes of farmer suicides 49
4.4 Farming related causes of farmer suicides 52
4.5 Indebtedness related causes of farmer suicides 53
4.6 Social, farming and indebtedness related causes for suicides for which more than ten per cent of the HHs answered “Yes” 56
4.7 Impact of farmer suicides on victim households 59
4.8 Overall suggestions from victim households 60
LIST OF FIGURES
vi
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Background
Farmer suicides have become a major concern in India that has resulted in profound implications
on the quality life of farmers. The deterioration in farmers’ household status was clearly brought
out by the NSSO’s Situation Assessment Survey in 2003 and 2013. The United Nations Commission
on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) reported about one farmer committing suicide every 32
minutes between 1997 and 2005 in India. According to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB),
the tendency of farmers resorting to extreme measure of suicide was alarming in Maharashtra,
Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Karnataka during 2014. These five states together
accounting for 90 per cent of farmer suicides (5056), remained as hotspots of agrarian distress.
The unfortunate incidence of farmer suicides continued in the subsequent years. According to
NCRB data, number of farmers who committed suicide in 2015 went up by 42 per cent as compared
to 2014. Fifteen farmers committed suicide every day in the country during 2014 and this went
up to 21 in 2015. Five states remained hot spots in both years despite the efforts by the Central
and State Governments. Among these states, reduction in farmer suicides was observed only in
Chhattisgarh. It is important to note that half of the farmer suicides reported in 2014 and 2015
reported during July to November.
Many studies have addressed the reasons for suicides from various angles. A detailed perusal of
the literature in India suggests multiple causes for building the agrarian distress. This may be due
to the squeezing of income sources under the pressure of increasing cost of cultivation and higher
cash needs for the households. This is further aggravated by the climatic factors, low productivity
and market failures both in factor and product markets. But among these, the farm indebtedness
was considered as the major triggering factor by analysts. Even though indebtedness is the major
reason for farmer suicides, it originates due to inadequacy and continuous shrinking of the income
flow. The scenario of indebtedness vis-a-vis income generation in agriculture in the country also
supports this hypothesis. The per cent of indebted farm households to total farm households
was 57 per cent, 46 per cent and 37 per cent in Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh,
respectively. At all India level, prominent causes recognized for farmer suicides were namely,
bankruptcy or indebtedness (20.6%), family problems (20.1%), farming related issues (17.2%),
illness (13.2%) and drug abuse/ alcoholic addiction (4.4%).
The Situation Assessment Surveys of the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO, 2013) has
reconfirmed the worsening situation observed in 2003 by NSSO 59th round, of farm households
which indicated that 52 per cent of the farm households in India are indebted. Repeated failure
of crops lead to loss of income to the extent that the farmers could hardly earn to meet their
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
vii
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
livelihood expenses. Such circumstances compel the farmers to borrow from illegal money
lenders after exhausting all the institutional sources of borrowing and inability of repayment
mounts heavily. Over a period of time, ultimately, they encounter a debt-trap situation wherein
committing suicide turns out to be the only way to escape the mental agony.
Objectives
In order to avert agrarian distress and farmer suicides, the Government of India launched several
programmes. The prominent among them were Prime Minister’s Rehabilitation Package (PMRP)
launched in September, 2006 in 31 suicide prone districts covering Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra,
Karnataka, and Kerala with a budget allocation of Rs.16,978 crores. The package was designed
to meet short and long term needs of the distressed farmers. The package attempted to help
farmers who were finding it hard to repay the loans. The package also created irrigation facilities,
supplied seeds and other inputs. In addition to these, an ex-gratia amount of Rs.50 lakhs was
provided for each district. The distressed farmers of 31 districts found relief to a significant
extent (Bhende and Thippaiah, 2010). Radhakrishna Committee report (2007) on indebtedness
pointed out that the government did not optimally utilize the fund under PMRP.
Some other notable programmes of the Central Government for improving the income of farmers
are Kisan Credit Cards (KCC), revival package for short term cooperative credit structure,
concessional interest schemes, interest subvention schemes, interest subvention against
negotiable warehouse receipt, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act
(MGNREGA), National Agricultural Development Programme (NADP), National Mission on Micro
Irrigation (NMMI), National Horticulture Mission (NHM) and National Mission for Sustainable
Agriculture (NMSA). The recent prominent programmes aimed at addressing agrarian distress
are: Pradhana Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana, 2015 (PMKSY) and Pradhana Mantri Fasal Bima
Yojana (PMFBY), 2016. Despite all these measures, the agrarian distress culminating into suicides
remained a major challenge for the policy makers in the country. With this background, the study
addressed following specific objectives:
• To analyze the incidence and spread of farmer suicides in selected states and to map the
hotspots of suicides.
• To study the socioeconomic profile, cropping pattern and profitability in the victim’s
household.
• To study the causes leading to suicide.
• To recommend suitable policies to avert farmer suicides.
viii
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Methodology
The study is based on the primary data obtained from the victim’s family members and secondary
data obtained from Department of Agriculture and related departments of respective states.
The study included Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Telangana and Karnataka states
which are the major suicide prone states in the country and another eight states (AP, Kerala,
TN, UP, Gujarat, Punjab, Haryana, WB), where farmer suicides were noticed. Thus, a total of 13
states were included in the study covering 46 districts, 138 taluks, 388 villages and 528 victim
households.
Primary data was collected using multi-stage sampling technique considering number of suicides
per lakh hectare of net sown area. The highest number of victim households has been covered
in Karnataka (107), whereas the least was in Haryana (14). Fifty victim HHs each was covered
in major suicides prone states like Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Telangana and Chhattisgarh.
In the remaining states the sample size covered was 30. Thus, a total of 528 victim HHs were
interviewed, which accounts to 6.63 per cent of total farmer suicides (7959) in thirteen states
during 2015-16. The districts with highest number of suicides in respective sample states were
selected for the study. Members of the victim’s HHs were contacted using the information obtained
from Government departments and published reports.
Primary data was collected from the victim’s family members through a structured questionnaire
designed for the study. The questionnaire covered basic data such as family details, land holding,
income and expenditure pattern and credit details. One of the main focus of the study was to
elucidate the causes leading to suicide. Hence the households were enquired about causes
related to social, farming and indebtedness. Data for understanding the post suicide situation of
family was also collected.
Findings
The findings are presented under the following headings:
Household characteristics, cropping pattern and income status
• Nearly 58 per cent and 8 per cent of the victim HHs possessed BPL and AAY cards,
respectively. Andhra Pradesh (93%) has the highest percentage of BPL and AAY cards
followed by Telangana and Karnataka (86% each), Tamil Nadu (80%) and Chhattisgarh (78%),
whereas the least was in Punjab (10%). Maharashtra having witnessed highest number of
farmer suicides, had only 62 per cent of victims with BPL or AAY cards.
• Victim farmers consisted of 94 per cent of male farmers and six per cent of female farmers.
The female victims were reported in Telangana (36%), Gujarat (10%), Tamil Nadu (7%), West
Bengal (7%), Chhattisgarh (4%), Karnataka (4%), Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh (2% each).
ix
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• The highest percentage of victims belong to OBC (46%) followed by General (29%), SC (16%)
and ST (9%). The percentage of SC and ST victims was found to be higher in Chhattisgarh
(70%), West Bengal (50%), Uttar Pradesh (47%), Tamil Nadu (40%) and Maharashtra (32%),
whereas it was lower in Gujarat and Punjab (3% each).
• Seventy per cent of the victims were in the age group of 31 to 60 years, 17 per cent in
less than 30 years and 13 per cent in above 60 years. Victims in the age group of 31 to 60
years were fully involved in agriculture and are prone to agrarian distress. Special efforts
needed to counsel farmers of this age group to overcome distress situation. Relatively
higher number of farmer suicides in the age group of 31 to 60 years was reported in
AP (90%), Karnataka (83%), MP (82%), Haryana (79%), Punjab (73%), Chhattisgarh (70%),
Gujarat (70%), Maharashtra (62%), Telangana (60%) and West Bengal (60%).
• Nearly 56 per cent of the victims were educated upto matriculation, 33 per cent were
illiterates and 11 per cent were educated more than matriculation. The percentage of
illiterates was found to be highest in MP (62%) followed by AP (53%), UP (40%), Maharashtra
(40%), Karnataka (35%) and TN (33%).
• Most of the victim farmers (91%) were married and had two children on an average which
indicates the extent of dependence on the victim. The higher percentage of married
victims was found in AP (100%), MP (98%), Chhattisgarh (98%), TN (97%), Telangana (96%),
Karnataka (93.5%) and Maharashtra (92%) as compared to remaining sample states.
• The most common methods adopted for committing suicide included Poisonous/Plant
Protection Chemicals (PPCs) consumption (48%) and hanging (43%). Most of the victims
in Andhra Pradesh (77%), Punjab (73%), Madhya Pradesh (72%), Tamil Nadu (70%), Gujarat
(67%) and West Bengal (53%) resorted to suicide through poison consumption, whereas
victims resorted to hanging in Chhattisgarh (78%), Kerala (67%), UP (67%), Haryana (57%)
and Maharashtra (52%).
• Nearly 57 per cent of the victims committed suicide at their residence and 36 per cent in
farm. There were also instances where victims committed suicide in places like hotels/
lodges (7%).
• The average operational land holding of victim HHs was 3.4 acres, of which, 55 per cent
was irrigated with groundwater (70%) being the major source of irrigation. Groundwater
was the major source of irrigation in UP (100%), Haryana (100%), Kerala (97%), West Bengal
(91%), Telangana (91%), Gujarat (85%) and Maharashtra (80%). The highest land holding was
found in Haryana (18 acres) followed by 6.6 acres in Punjab, 6 acres in Gujarat, 4.1 acres
in AP and 4 acres in Maharashtra. Whereas the least operational land was found in West
Bengal (1.2 acres). It is to further note that victims in Kerala, TN, UP, Punjab, Haryana and
West Bengal had only irrigated land.
x
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• Marginal and small victim farmers constituted 76 per cent to the total victim HHs followed
by Medium (16%) and Large (8%). The percentage of marginal and small victim farmers
was relatively higher in UP (97%), West Bengal (97%), Telangana (96%), Kerala (93%),
Karnataka (80%), Chhattisgarh (90%), AP (78%), TN (76%) and Maharashtra (76%). Whereas,
the percentage of medium and large victim farmers was relatively higher in Haryana (86%)
and MP (53%).
• Marginal and small farmers among the victims operated 56 per cent of the total operational
land followed by Medium (27%) and Large (17%). Nearly 90 per cent of the land was
operated by marginal and small victim HHs in Telangana followed by 86 per cent in UP
and West Bengal, Maharashtra (82%) and MP (82%). Conversely, medium and large victim
HHs operated relatively higher area in Haryana (99%), Punjab (80%) and Gujarat (77%).
The distribution of land across categories clearly indicates inequity in distribution of land.
The extent of inequity was relatively higher in Gujarat, Punjab, Haryana, Karnataka,
Chhattisgarh and AP.
• The annual average net income realized per HHs was Rs.73,142, of which 72 per cent was
derived from agriculture and allied activities. The average annual expenditure incurred
was Rs.59,868, of which, 50 per cent spent on food and remaining on non-food items.
Overall, Rs.13,274 was the surplus amount realized after accounting for expenditure
which is just above poverty line income. The deficit was seen in Gujarat (Rs.78,823),
Maharashtra (Rs.63,787), Telangana (Rs.2,426) and West Bengal (Rs.2,466). The surplus
was relatively higher in Haryana (Rs.3,36,500) and Kerala (Rs.2,06,705). It is to note that
victim households in Maharashtra incurred loss of Rs.11,526 from agriculture and allied
activities, which are reflected in highest number of suicides during 2015-16.
• The net income of victim HHs depended on the cropping pattern. Cereals and cash crops
are the major crops grown in 57 per cent and 22 per cent of the gross cropped area,
respectively. The remaining crops include oilseeds (10%), pulses (5%), fodder crops (2%),
fruits (2%) and vegetables (1%). Among crops, the highest area was reported in Paddy (30%)
followed by Wheat (18%) and Cotton (16%).
• Among the various crops grown, the highest net returns per acre was realized from
cultivation of pepper (Rs.75,000), followed by ginger (Rs.71,284), fruits (Rs.70,334),
groundnut (Rs.44,321), and mulberry (Rs.38,227). The highest expenditure on cultivation
was incurred on pepper (Rs.1,59,375), followed by coffee (Rs.83,636), and ginger
(Rs.77,246). Relatively lower income per acre was registered from blackgram (Rs.12,327),
sugar cane (Rs.11,185), greengram (Rs.6,332), maize (Rs.6,197), coffee (Rs.5,060), redgram
(Rs.2,649), and jowar (Rs.431). It is quite significant to note that loss was incurred from
the cultivation of tobacco (Rs12,016/acre), ragi (Rs.741/acre), soyabean (Rs.301/acre)
and bajra (Rs.251/acre).
xi
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• At aggregate level, the highest net return per acre was derived from cultivation of fruits
and vegetables (Rs.1,00,172/acre), followed by oil seeds (Rs.71,392/acre). Loss was
incurred from the cultivation of oil seeds in Maharashtra (Rs.3,536/acre). Similarly loss
was also observed in the cultivation of fruits and vegetables in Karnataka (Rs.76,343/acre)
and Telangana (Rs.5,750/acre). At the time of survey, the victim HHs of Karnataka had not
realised yield from fruit crops and hence loss was reflected under fruits and vegetable
group.
• Credit was availed by the entire victim HHs and a majority of them borrowed from multiple
sources with the average borrowing being Rs.1.55 lakh and Rs.1.70 lakh from institutional
and non-institutional sources, respectively. Nearly 8 per cent of the institutional borrowing
and 39 per cent of the non-institutional borrowing was used for non-farming purposes. Per
cent of amount outstanding to the total credit availed was highest in borrowings from
traders and commission agents (162%), followed by landlords (108%), relatives and friends
(Rs.94%), and commercial banks (85%). The overall outstanding amount was to the extent
of 86 per cent of the total credit.
• Symptoms observed by family members before suicide indicated that 19 per cent of the
victims were not mingling, staying aloof from family members, 22 per cent were not
interacting with the community, 26 per cent were not friendly as usual with the neighbours,
27 per cent were not consuming food regularly and 30 per cent had inadequate sleep. These
symptoms were prominently visible in Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, WB, TN and Punjab as
compared to other states.
Causes of farmer suicides
The decision to commit suicide by the victim cannot be attributed to a single reason. It was spur-
of-the-moment triggered action with respect to 70 to 80 per cent of victims. The final action of
committing suicide was a combination of several cumulative causes which can be grouped into
social, farming and debt-related.
Social Causes
• Drug/Alcoholic addiction (26%), Illness (18%), fall in Social reputation (17%), family
quarrel (16%), daughter’s marriage (11%) and extra-marital affair (8%) are the major social
causes opined by victim HHs across 13 sample states. Drug/Alcoholic addiction and Illness
was common major cause reported by victim HHs in all the sample states. Fall in social
reputation was reported as one of the main cause for suicide by all the sample states
except UP.
xii
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• Gambling was reported by 33 per cent of victim HHs in Kerala, 27 per cent in TN, 18 per
cent in Chhattisgarh, 8 per cent in MP and 2 per cent in Telangana.
• Family quarrel was also reported by all states except TN. Disputes in partition of income
was reported by 4 per cent of the victim HHs in Maharashtra and 2 per cent in Karnataka.
• It is to note that dowry was reported as a cause for suicide in TN (10%), AP (3%), and
Gujarat (3%) Telangana (2%) and Maharashtra (2%). Daughter’s marriage was reported in all
states except Chhattisgarh, UP and Haryana. Only in Punjab (3%) victim HHs have reported
divorce as one of the reason for suicide.
• Social autopsy results revealed that the opinion of neighbours/relatives/ friends regarding
social causes are in-line with the opinions of victim HHs.
Farming related causes
• Expectation of non-institutional credit and failure of rain was reported as major farming
related cause by 37 per cent and 36 per cent of the victim HHs, respectively. This is
followed by non-realisation of higher output (35%), non-realisation of higher price (33%),
lack of access to expected institutional credit (33%) and lack of irrigation (32%).
• The failure of crop during the two successive years (2014-15 and 2015-16) in the sample
states was considered as a major setback, which was responsible for suicides. Lack of
access to expected credit (70%), non-realization of higher output and prices (68%) and
crop failure (60%) were the major reasons for suicides. The failure of crops due to attack
of pests and diseases was reported by all sample states. Lack of access to irrigation water
was reported by all states except MP, Chhattisgarh, UP and Punjab. The HHs of UP reported
crop failure due to pest and diseases (30%) and cyclones (30%) as two causes for suicides.
• Cyclone was reported as one of the cause by Kerala (56%), UP (30%), AP (3%) and Karnataka
(0.9%). Drought was common cause in all states except UP, Punjab and WB. Inability to sell
the output was mainly reported by the HHs of the Kerala (59%). Well failure was reported
by 40 per cent of victim HHs in Telangana.
• Non-realisation of higher output was one of the major causes in all states except UP and
MP. Similarly, the non-realisation of higher prices was also the major reason in all states
except Chhattisgarh and UP. Telangana (68% of sample HHs expected higher output and
60% expected higher price), West Bengal (60% of sample HHs expected higher output and
60% expected higher price), Tamil Nadu (50% expected high output and 80% expected
higher price) and Kerala (52% expected higher output and 81% expected higher price) are
the prominent states where expectation of higher output and price reported as a major
farming related cause of farmer suicides.
xiii
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• Failure to avail expected amount of credit was quoted as major cause in all the sample
states except Uttar Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Expectation of institutional credit was
highest in Tamil Nadu (80%), whereas expectation of non-institutional credit was highest
in Telangana (68%). Expectation of loan waiving was cited as a reason for suicide in West
Bengal (97%), Kerala (78%), Karnataka (67%) and Tamil Nadu (63%).
• Lack of extension services was highlighted as a farming related cause which was opined
by 73 per cent of victim HHs in West Bengal and 70 per cent in Punjab. Kerala (37%) is the
only state where high per cent of victim households committed suicide due to delayed
payment to the output sold. This cause was quoted by Karnataka (7%), Telangana (6%),
Andhra Pradesh (3%) and Haryana (7%).
Debt related issues
• Members of the victim’s household attributed causes of suicides to institutional loan (44%),
non-institutional loan (37%), pressure from money lenders (36%), non-agricultural loan
(28%), pressure from institutional sources (28%) and farm equipment loan (10%) were
major indebted related causes of suicides.
• Suicides committed due to institutional loan has been stated in Karnataka (87%), TN (77%),
Maharashtra (62%), Kerala (59%) and West Bengal (50%), whereas non-institutional loan in
Punjab (80%), Karnataka (71%), West Bengal (67%), Telangana (60%) and TN (50%).
• Pressure from institutional sources for repayment of loan was reported as major cause
for suicides mainly in TN (77%), Kerala (56%) and Karnataka (51%). Pressure from non-
institutional sources was majorly quoted in Karnataka (70%), Telangana (68%), Punjab
(63%), WB (57%) and TN (50%).
Ranking of social, farming and indebtedness related causes of suicides
• The foremost reason for suicides among 13 sample states include Indebtedness due to
crop loan (44.3%), indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (37.1%), expectation of
non-institutional credit (36.9%), recovery pressure from non-institutional sources (36.1%),
non-realisation of higher output (35.4%), non-realisation of higher prices (33.3%), lack
of access to expected institutional credit (33.1%), crop failure due to lack of irrigation
(32.2%), expectation of loan waiver (31.1%), Recovery pressure from institutional sources
(28.1%), indebtedness due to non-agricultural loan (27.5%), and drug abuse and alcohol
addiction (26.5%).
• State-wise major causes reported by the victim HHs widely vary across states. Crop failure
as a cause for suicide was reported in Haryana, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Telangana, AP,
xiv
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
TN and UP. Indebtedness as one of the causes was seen in Maharashtra, Telangana, AP,
Karnataka, TN, UP, Punjab, Haryana and WB. Non-realisation of higher output and price
reported in Telangana, AP, Kerala, TN, and Haryana. Expectation of credit was opined in
Telangana, Karnataka, Kerala, TN and Punjab. Expectation of loan waiving was opined in
Maharashtra, WB and Kerala.
Impact of farmer suicides on victim households and Suggestions offered by victim households to prevent farmer suicides
• Death of the bread winner was seen to have severely affected the HHs. This impact was
reported by 34 per cent of the HHs who mentioned that there was none in their family
to earn income. The land of such families was confiscated by the private money lenders.
Discontinuation of agriculture was another impact as seen in the case of 21 per cent of
the total HHs. Such situations were evident in West Bengal (63%), Haryana (57%) and Tamil
Nadu (53%).
• Insecurity in the family (33%) and family members under depression (25%) were among
the major impacts opined by victim HHs across states. Insecurity in the family was opined
majorly in TN (87%), WB (77%) and Telangana (58%), whereas family members under
depression were opined in TN (90%) and WB (80%).
• Interestingly none of the victim HHs in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh gave up farming
practices due to the loss of family member. Overall, nearly eight per cent of victim
households sold the land after suicide.
• MP (36%), Kerala (15%), Telangana (18%) and Andhra Pradesh (13%) are the four states
where the victim HHs who sold land was in large number.
• Large number of victim households had discontinued their children’s education in Madhya
Pradesh (32%), Tamil Nadu (27%) and Gujarat (27%). Among other states, it ranged between
nil in Haryana to 17 per cent in Uttar Pradesh.
• The most prominent suggestions offered by the victim households to prevent farmer suicides
across states were: (i) Counseling, (ii) Provision of credit facilities, (iii) Crop Insurance
and compensation during crop failure, (iv) Creation of irrigation facilities, (v) Creation of
alternative income generating activities, (vi) Extension activities, (vii) Increasing MSP or
extending the MSP to crops for which it is not there and (viii) supply of quality inputs at
subsidized rates.
xv
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Policy Suggestions
Suggestions that can be implemented immediately
• Crop failure and collapse of income was found to be the root cause for farmer suicides.
Therefore, it is suggested that individual farmers should be brought under the ambit of
crop insurance programme. More intensively the state must ensure through the proper
policy framework that indemnity be paid within a week after reporting of the failure. Crop
Insurance payment provided months after the crop failure is by design pushes the farmer
into the debt trap of the moneylender.
• One of the main causes for crop failure was insufficient availability of water. Hence
judicious use of available water is needed. Groundwater recharge, rain water harvesting
and, de-siltation of ponds / tanks can ensure increased water supply. To avoid under- or
overuse of water to crops, farmers should carefully monitor the weather forecast, as well
as soil and plant moisture and adapt their irrigation schedule to the current conditions.
Farmers can participate in the construction of percolation ponds and check dams in their
surrounding areas both in private and common land. This helps to increase the availability
of water.
• Poor awareness among the farmers regarding scientific and improved methods of
cultivation is one of the reasons for crop failure. This may be addressed through proper
extension activities. Instances in Andhra Pradesh indicate that in the absence of adequate
extension services, most farmers were misled by the traders and were found using
pesticides indiscriminately. The farmers were also supplied with low quality seeds. Proper
measures to eliminate such practices has to be made. The Seeds Act, 2004, Insecticide
Act 1968, Pesticide Control Act, Fertilizer Control Order, be implemented very strictly and
the abettors be punished. Special extension efforts are needed towards capacity building
of farmers for usage of quality inputs and efficient options in production and marketing.
• Though, this problem is highlighted by Andhra Pradesh victim households, the possibility
of existence of such unscrupulous dealers in other states cannot be ruled out. Hence,
Government intervention in the supply of seeds and other agricultural inputs by establishing
fair price retail outlets in rural areas, where quality of inputs is assured is required.
• It is suggested by the victim households that Government should make policy to waive or
reschedule the outstanding amount of farmers loan whenever the crop fails due to natural
calamities. This will save the farmers from debt trap. The same suggestions were offered
in the Report of the Commission on Farmers’ Welfare (2005). The report mentioned that
the interest should not be charged for the period of current rescheduling. Whenever an
area is declared as drought-affected, interest should be waived, without changing other
terms of rescheduling (GoAP, 2005).
xvi
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• Local money lenders are the main non-institutional sources who charge exorbitant rates
of interest and adopt harsh ways to recover borrowed amount. Farmers prefer to borrow
normally from institutional sources but they approach non-institutional sources only when
they are denied loans from institutional sources for various reasons. Hence the government
must implement stringent laws on informal lending through fixing a cap on the interest
rates equivalent to the institutional lending rates with sufficient monitoring.
• Release of loans in phased manner is needed. Thereby proper utilization of funds can be
ensured. Releasing of funds at one stretch (usually done in Kisan Credit Card) may result
in diversion of the borrowed amount to other activities rather than cultivation. Monitoring
of funds thus released is required to ensure proper utilization.
• Government may consider extending institutional credit without collateral security of
property for tenant farmers as well.
• The compensation was extended only to farmers who own land/lease in land (on record)
and have availed credit from institutional sources against land record. But the present
study reveals that a majority of the farmers borrow from non-institutional sources as they
are denied loans by institutional sources due to various problems pertaining to land records.
Thus, the victims who borrow from such sources can be considered for compensation if the
reason for suicide happens to be farming related and may also be covered under the ambit
of crop insurance.
• Though the study had not made an attempt to obtain the data on MSP received, a fair
majority of the victim households, at aggregate level, have mentioned that MSP does
not cover cost of production. This needs to be considered by CACP. CACP may review
the methodology for arriving at MSP considering explicit and implicit costs along with
reasonable profit margin. This was suggested by 84 per cent of the Telangana victim HHs
and 100 per cent victim HHs of Andhra Pradesh.
• The condition of the victim households was seen to be worsening after the suicide event
involving the main family member. Hence certain institutional mechanism for post suicide
welfare of the family is required.
• The victim families should be given preference in availing benefits of various developmental
schemes at least for a period of five years. Such schemes may also include social welfare
schemes of State and Central Government.
• NGOs, religious institutions and agriculture department should also be involved in providing
counselling to farmers to handle the distress situation through establishment of Farmer
Welfare Cell and Help Desk Services.
xvii
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• Maximum number of suicides occur during kharif season and mainly among highly indebted
farmers, therefore help lines may be established based on the information on crop failure
and extent of indebtedness. The helpline may act as immediate relief providers for the
distressed through helping them in sourcing finance to meet the immediate needs.
• Programmes aimed at addressing the health issues of marginal, small and medium rural
households should be launched. One such scheme in operation was launched by Government
of Andhra Pradesh (Aroggyasree). This programme helped the rural households to overcome
their health issues. This may be taken up on priority basis in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh
and Gujarat as 46 per cent, 44 per cent and 27 per cent of the households, respectively
indicated illness as a cause for suicide in these states.
• The study noticed that around 58 per cent of the victim HHs were BPL families. Field
evidence shows that food grains supplied is insufficient. Hence, the quantum of food grains
supplied to BPL card holders needs to be at least doubled to ensure food and nutrition
security for the victim households.
• Higher incidence of suicides among BPL, AAY card holders and among OBC category
necessitates special focus on strengthening their weakness to cope with distress conditions.
Special counseling to women farmers in Telangana may be done since the state has
witnessed highest number of women farmer suicides.
• Higher number of farmer suicides was reported in resource rich districts of Karnataka,
whereas the resource poor (drought prone) districts exhibited relatively lesser number
of suicides. This might be due to the ability of farmers in resource poor regions to cope
up with the distress and their awareness of alternate choices. On the contrary, farmers
from resource rich areas are left with fewer options to take up. For instance, in command
areas, main crops were paddy and sugarcane and during water crisis, they hardly have any
other option to sustain the crop since techniques like drip irrigation and mulching are not
viable options. Hence capacity building on coping strategies should be given to resource
rich regions as well.
Suggestions that can be implemented over a span of time
• Regulating the informal credit market through licensing and fixing the norms for charging
interest rate and terms of lending is required. There is a need to create indemnity to non-
institutional borrowers. Radhakrishna Committee recommendations (2007) regarding rural
informal credit market be implemented, which underlines the need for mitigating the
burden of farmers’ indebtedness to money lenders. It recommends a one-time measure of
providing long-term loans by banks to farmers to enable them to repay their debts to the
money lenders. Further, it recommends that Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs), civil society
xviii
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
organizations like farmers’ collectives and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) should
be involved in arriving at negotiated settlements with the Money lenders.
• Most of the victims HHs were not seen practicing crop and enterprise diversification.
Risk hedging through crop and enterprise diversification should be encouraged to reduce
farmers’ distress aiming at sustainable income.
• Establishment of farmers’ Welfare Fund / Farmers’ Welfare Department in every state is
the need of the hour to meet social consumption needs of farmers. The Central and State
Government should contribute to this fund. NABARD can also be roped into this scheme for
fund contribution. This has been suggested by Deshpande and Arora (2010), Bhende and
Thippaiah (2010) and Radhakrishna Report (2007) as well.
• Prime Ministers Rehabilitation Package may be reintroduced in the suicide prone states by
plugging the loopholes mentioned in the study by Bhende and Thippaiah (2010). The various
components of the package may aid the distress farmer to cope with the predicament.
• Farmers may include various effective water saving techniques in cultivation like drip
irrigation and protective cultivation as lack of water was mentioned by victim HHs in most
of the sample states.
• Most of the Cooperative banks of eastern region of Uttar Pradesh are bankrupt at present
and are not functioning. Hence, there is a need for its financial revival to eliminate the
illegal money lenders from remote rural areas. In this context, NABARD may provide the
financial help to cooperative banks.
• Fodder shortage was one of the issues of concern in Maharashtra. Most of the farmers were
compelled to sell their animals at low prices due to non-availability of fodder, thereby,
discontinuing livestock farming. Such a situation should not arise and there must be enough
fodder camps so that livestock farming is continued.
• It is also suggested that rural non-farm employment programme under MNREGS must be
enhanced.
• There should be a Compassionate Distress Consulting Officer at the Department of
Agriculture heading a special cell. This cell may be assigned with the responsibility of
counseling and financing the small ventures in the villages. This may be integrated with the
employment generating departments and agencies across states and nation as a whole. It
should encourage the farmers to start dairy, poultry, fishery and other livestock activities.
• At aggregate level, 17 per cent of 528 victim households mentioned illness as cause of
suicide. The discussion with victim households of Madhya Pradesh amply highlighted the
lack of access to mental health services in rural areas. Hence, Primary health care and
xix
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
support system to vulnerable farmers must be strengthened so that illness does not serve as
a trigger factor to an already indebted farmer. Without exception, the victim households of
all the states were honest enough to accept that victims were alcohol addicts. Therefore,
rehabilitation centre for drug abuse and alcohol addiction should be established.
• Health insurance programme for the farmers be enhanced not only covering the Government
Hospitals but should also include the private hospitals. A scheme like Employees State
Insurance (for industrial workers), called “Farmers’ State Insurance Scheme (FSIS)” that
will enable the farmer to seek medical treatment from the ESI hospitals may go a long way
(suggested by Deshpande and Arora, 2010).
Suggestions that can be implemented in long run
• Failure of rain, attack of pest and disease leads to crop loss. This was reported as one of the
causes for farmer suicides across states. Prominent states among them are: Maharashtra,
Punjab, Haryana and West Bengal. Hence, there is a need to install automated weather
stations so that farmers are alerted on natural calamities and can take precautionary
measures. The Government of Maharashtra launched the Crop Pest Surveillance Project
(CROPSAP) during 2009-10. Though the scheme was not a huge success, further refinement
and proper measures in implementation can aid the farmers in suicide prone states.
• Another important request of victim households was to improve the access to market
within their reach. For instance, cotton is purchased at a few agricultural market centres
rather than at affordable distance by Cotton Corporation of India (CCI).
• Construction of large tanks, watersheds, de-siltation of community tanks and completion
of irrigation projects has to be given top priority so as to ensure water availability.
1
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Chapter I : INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Farmer suicides has turned out to be a major socioeconomic concern in India that has resulted in
profound implications on the quality life of farmers. According to the United Nations Commission
on Sustainable Development (UNCSD), one farmer committed suicide for every 32 minutes between
1997 and 2005 in India. The prominent causes recognized for farmer suicides were bankruptcy or
indebtedness, family problems, farming related issues, illness and drug abuse/alcohol addiction.
These causes can be seen from Figure 1.1 [National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), 2014].
Farmers feel a repeated sense of hopelessness due to the loss of crops, income and land. Another
factor that increases suicides is the social isolation due to the loss of communities as well as
geographical remoteness. Lack of access to mental health services in rural areas and the stigma
attached to treatment is also a contributing factor. Depression arising from exposure to agricultural
chemicals/pesticides may increase the risk for mood disorders and ultimately suicide.
The Situation Assessment Survey of the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO, 2013) has
reconfirmed the worsening situation of farm households which indicated that 51.9 per cent of
Figure 1.1. Reasons for farmer suicides in India (NCRB, 2014)
Bankruptcy or Indebtedness
20.60%
Family problems20.10%
Farming related issues17.20%
Illness13.20%
Alcoholic Addiction
4.40%
Other Causes24.50%
2
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
the farm households in India are indebted (Table 1.1). The percentage of indebtedness was
highest in Andhra Pradesh (93%), followed by Telangana (89%), Tamil Nadu (83%), Kerala (78%) and
Karnataka (77%). It is to note that the NSSO in its 59th round survey has revealed that given the
choice, 40 per cent of farmers would like to quit farming because it is risky and not profitable
(NSSO, 2003). Interestingly, indebted farmers have taken higher credit from institutional sources
(60%) as compared to non-institutional sources (40%) (NSSO, 2013). The Intelligence Bureau in
its report had mentioned that there was an upward trend in the number of farmers resorting to
the extreme measure of suicide in Maharashtra, Telangana, Karnataka and Punjab. The report
also stated that the main reason for such incidents were natural and man-made factors. “While
natural factors like uneven rains, hailstorms, droughts and floods adversely affect crop yield,
man-made factors such as pricing policies and inadequate marketing facilities resulted in post-
yield losses” (GoI, 2014).
Table 1.1. Suicides and indebtedness in farming
Sl. No. States Number of
Suicides in 2014% of farmer Suicides to all India total in 2014
% of indebted farm HHs to total farm HHs
in 2012-13
1 Maharashtra 2,568 45.5 57.3
2 Telangana 898 15.9 89.1
3 Madhya Pradesh 826 14.6 45.7
4 Chhattisgarh 443 7.8 37.2
5 Karnataka 321 5.7 77.3
6 Andhra Pradesh 160 2.8 92.9
7 Kerala 107 1.9 77.7
8 Tamil Nadu 68 1.2 82.5
9 Uttar Pradesh 63 1.1 43.8
10 Gujarat 45 0.8 42.6
11 Punjab 24 0.4 53.2
12 Haryana 14 0.3 42.3
13 West Bengal - - 51.5
14 Other states 105 1.9 -
15 UT's 8 0.1 37.2
Total 5650 100.0 51.9
Source: NCRB, 2015 & GoI, 2013
Note: “-“ indicates data not available
The NCRB publication of 2014 reported 5650 farmer suicides in the country. Maharashtra,
Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Karnataka states together accounts for 89.5 per
cent of the total farmer suicides as per the details presented in Table 1.1.
3
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
The main consequence of agrarian distress was discontinuation of agriculture by marginal and
small farmers. The land holding status of the victim farmers revealed that 44.5 per cent and 28
per cent of victims were marginal and small farmers, respectively, which together accounts for
72.5 per cent of total suicides in farming. The report further revealed that 53.1 per cent and 14.5
per cent of small farmers who committed suicides were reported in Maharashtra and Telangana,
respectively during 2014. Among marginal farmers, 39.7 per cent and 25.5 per cent of farmer
suicides were reported in Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, respectively. Figure 1.2 represents
the overview of farmer suicides in India (NCRB, 2015).
1.2. Review of literature
The recent study in Yavatmal (major crop being Cotton) in Maharashtra and Sangrur (major
crop being Paddy) in Punjab, which have recorded relatively higher farmer suicides reported
inappropriate cropping patterns, rising resource costs, aspirational consumption, and the absence
of non-farm income in addition to indebtedness as major reasons for farmer suicides (Dandekar
and Bhattacharya, 2017).
Figure 1.2. Farmer suicides in India (NCRB, 2015)
4
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Dominic Merriott (2017) revealed that the socioeconomic factors are an important cause to
suicides rather than mental health problems. He found increased indebtedness playing the
predominant role among the causative factors. The vulnerability of the farmer amid financial
situation has become the major leading factor to get distressed through the manifestation of
lacking investment and irrigation improvement, use of cash crops and non-institutional credit
sources.
Kumar (2017) revealed that the discourse of farmer suicides advances with three mutually
interconnected arguments. First, it implicitly contends that the phenomenon constitutes an
unprecedented category of suicides that relates exclusively, or at least primarily, to a set of
farming related antecedents. Second, the distinct etiological category of suicide is statistically
significant. The cumulative number of such deaths is remarkably large for any of the concerned
states in any single year since 1998. Third, it has been conceived in the modal terms of an
agrarian economic crisis.
Anneshi and Gowda (2015) concluded that both small and large farmers borrowed relatively higher
proportion of the non-institutional sources as compared to institutional sources. Accessibility
to institutional borrowing is relatively higher for large farmers. Similarly, both small and large
farmers owed more outstanding debt to non-institutional sources as compared to institutional
sources.
Macharia (2015) investigated that a majority of marginal and small farmers depend on non-
institutional credit facilities (i.e. money lenders, micro financiers and traders). He also reported
farmer suicide incidents among the scheduled castes and scheduled tribe families who had
cultivated commercial crops. Low yields, extremely reduced profits and mounting debts, made
their life extremely difficult.
Singh et al., (2014) based on the research in Punjab found that the level of education, non-
farm income, farm size and non-institutional credit were the main factors which affect the level
of farmers’ indebtedness. The study also revealed that the farmers face multiple problems in
availing institutional credit, which drives them into the debt trap of the crafty and exploitative
non-institutional sources of credit.
Chikkara and Kodan (2014) opined that the informal mechanism of credit delivery played an
important role for marginal and small farmers in meeting their credit requirements in Haryana.
In addition, maximum indebtedness was found to be in the Monthly Per capita Consumption
Expenditure (MPCE) class farm households of Rs.615 to Rs.775.
Sarah Hebous and Stefan Klonner (2014) empirically analysed the various sources of extreme
economic distress in rural India by using district-level data on farmer suicides to estimate the
5
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
effects of transitory economic shocks and structural change in agriculture on the incidence of
suicides in farm households. Rainfall conditions are used as an instrumental variable and it was
found that transitory spikes in poverty caused by lack of rainfall increase suicides among male
and decrease suicides among female members of farm households. However, they concluded that
the combined causal effect of a poverty shock on suicides in farm households has been positive.
Also, a shift from subsistence crops to cash crops, especially cotton, was found to be associated
with a decrease in male suicides.
Mohanty (2013) in a study conducted in Amravati and Yavatmal district argued that crop loss and
egoistic factors led to suicidal tendency among small farmers. On the contrary, suicides of large
and medium farmers who belong to higher castes were attributed mainly to the anomic forces
generated by failure in business, trade and politics. The socio-cultural factors such as old age,
illness, family tension, etc., further added their urge to commit suicides. They concluded that
the suicides of farmers are neither properly anomic nor egoistic rather they are ego-anomic in
nature.
Mohanty (2013) views farmer suicides as having resulted from a combination of ecological,
economic and social crisis. He goes to say that it points to the modern agricultural practice,
which has become an independent, household or family enterprise, without requiring any link
and interaction among the cultivators themselves.
Vasavi (2012) explained in her book, Shadow Spaces, stated that, bewilderment, loss of meaning
and uncertainty among farmers due to the unrelenting failures of policies and responses is
doubtful to change unless there is a paradigm shift in the general outlook that starts with trusting
agriculturists’ knowledge and working towards those elements that enhance their capacities for
collective action.
Bhende and Thippaiah (2010) concluded that farmers in the suicide-prone districts of Andhra
Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Maharashtra states were aware of the PMs package and the
department of agriculture, gram panchayats and others had given due publicity to this programme.
Farmers had availed relief measures such as interest waiver, rescheduling of loans and also a
subsidy under various schemes, which enabled them to be eligible for fresh loans and augment
their incomes through subsidiary activities. It was also revealed that collusion between local
leaders and government officials, which had led to wealthy farmers receiving ex-gratia payment
bypassing the poor. Most of the farmers in the suicide-prone districts benefited from one or the
other scheme of the PM package. However, their capacity to cope with the drought conditions
has been weak and the PM’s package through its multiple schemes had limited positive impact
on this front.
Most studies on suicides fail to look at the phenomena from an interdisciplinary perspective.
Emile Durkheim (1896) a sociologist highlighted that suicide rates are dependent upon the
6
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
degree to which individuals were integrated into society and the degree to which society regulates
individual behaviour. He mentioned that in the modern society there are two major types of
suicides: (i) Increasing detachment from others resulting in egoistical suicide. For instance, the
unmarried and childless are less integrated and hence susceptible to a higher suicide rate, and
(ii) Dissatisfaction in relation to expectations resulting in anomic suicide. For instance, in times
of price crash of crops, there is more probability of suicides if the farmers’ price expectations are
not met (Lester, 1994 cited in Deshpande and Saroj Arora, 2010).
Kumar et al., (2010) examined the performance of agricultural credit flow and has identified
the determinants of increased use of institutional credit at the farm household level in India. The
result indicated that the quantum of institutional credit availed by the farming households was
affected by a number of socio-demographic factors which include education, farm size, family
size, caste, gender, occupation of household, etc.
Surinder Sud (2009) stated that the government’s response and relief packages have generally
been ineffective, misdirected and flawed. It has focused on credit and loan, rather than income,
productivity and farmer prosperity and also stated that the government has failed to understand
that debt relief postpones the problem and a more lasting answer to farmer distress can only
come from reliable income sources, higher crop yield per hectare, irrigation and infrastructure
security.
Behere and Behere (2008) reported that various factors like chronic indebtedness, inability
to pay interest over years, economic decline grain drain, rising costs of agricultural inputs and
falling prices of agricultural produce lead to family disputes, depression and alcoholism, etc.,
were eventually responsible for suicides among the farmers. It was also seen that compensation
post-suicide helped the family to repay debt. They also opined that the causes are multi-
factorial, cumulative, repetitive and progressive, leading an individual to a state of helplessness,
worthlessness and hopelessness, obviously influenced by his social strengths and weaknesses
along with his mental health status.
Golait (2007) acknowledged the positive role of crop diversification initiative announced in the
government’s response to farmer suicides. Indian agriculture still suffers from low productivity,
falling water levels, expensive credit, distorted market, middlemen and intermediaries who
increase cost, but do not add much value, laws that stifle private investment, controlled prices,
poor infrastructure, and inappropriate research. Thus, the approach with mere emphasis on
credit in isolation from the above factors will not help agriculture. Furthermore, a more pro-
active role in creating and maintaining reliable irrigation and other agricultural infrastructure is
necessary to address farmer distress in India.
7
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
According to Meeta and Rajivlochan (2006), some of the problems common among the suicide
victims were (i) hopelessness in being unable to resolve the dilemmas of personal life and an
inability to find funds for various activities or repay loans, (ii) absence of any person, group, or
institution to whom to turn to in order to seek reliable advice - whether for agricultural operations
or for seeking funds or for handling private and personal issues, (iii) little knowledge about
institutional mechanisms like the Minimum Support Price (MSP) that would affect marketing,
technical knowledge and no reliable sources from where such knowledge and advice could be
accessed and (iv) chronic alcoholism and drug abuse among the rural population.
Gupta (2005) aptly observes that Indian agriculture has always lurched from crisis to crisis. If
the monsoon is good then there is flood, if they are bad there is drought, if the production of
mangoes is excellent then there is a glut and prices fall, and if the onion crop fails, then that
too brings tears. The artisanal nature of agriculture has always kept farmers on tenterhooks, not
knowing quite how to manage their economy, except to play it by (y) ear thus shedding a light on
the plight of the Indian farmer.
Mohanty and Shroff (2004) revealed that though crop losses, indebtedness and market
imperfections cause economic hardship to farmers. Social factors are also at work which leads in
some cases to their suicides.
Deshpande (2002), attributed the causes of suicides to the culmination of four factors namely,
events, stressors, actors and triggers. This categorization stems from the mental set up of victims.
Events such as crop loss, bore-well failure, price crash, family problems, property disputes and
daughter’s marriage act as stress creators, when two or more events club together. Usually
illness of the individual or any family members, heavy borrowing, continued disputes in the
family or land related problems act as stressors’. These become lethal in combination with the
events, but further ignition comes through the actors and triggers incidence. Given this complex
nature of the phenomena, it is certainly difficult to pinpoint one particular reason for the suicide
(Deshpande, 2002).
Farmer suicides is a problem of the type that is theoretical and interpretative in nature. Although
there is an availability of empirical data, due to a lack of sufficient understanding of the trends
and complex patterns, there exists a deficiency in establishing interrelationships (Kaviraj, 1984).
1.3. Objectives
Ever since the initial incidences of farmers suicides, Government of India launched several
developmental programmes to avert agrarian crisis. Despite this, farmer suicides persisted.
The prominent among them were Prime Minister’s Rehabilitation Package (PMRP) launched in
September, 2006 in 31 suicide prone districts covered in Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka,
and Kerala with a budget allocation of Rs.16,978 crore. The package was designed to meet the
8
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
short and long term needs of the distressed farmers. The package attempted to help farmers
who were finding it hard to repay the loans. In the package, irrigation facilities was created,
seeds and other inputs were supplied. In addition to these, an ex-gratia amount of Rs. 50 lakhs
was provided for each district. The distressed farmers of 31 districts found relief to some
extent. However, the package did not meet the expectations (Bhende and Thippaiah, 2010).
The Radhakrishna report (2007) also pointed out that the Government did not optimally utilize
the fund under PMRP. Some other notable programmes of the Central Government for improving
the income of farmers are Kisan Credit Cards (KCC), revival package for short term cooperative
credit structure, concessional interest schemes, interest subvention schemes, interest subvention
against negotiable warehouse receipt, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee
Act (MGNREGA), National Agricultural Development Programme (NADP), National Mission on
Micro Irrigation (NMMI), National Horticulture Mission (NHM) and National Mission for Sustainable
Agriculture (NMSA). To name a few recent prominent programmes to address agrarian distress are
Pradhana Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana, 2015 (PMKSY) and Pradhana Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana
(PMFBY), 2016 have been implemented. Despite all these measures, farmer suicides remained
a major challenge in the country. It is with this background the Policy Division of Department
of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare with the approval of its Secretary, decided to
conduct the present study with the following objectives:
• To analyze the incidence and spread of farmer suicides in selected states and to map the
hotspots of suicide.
• To study the socioeconomic profile, cropping pattern and profitability in the victim’s
household.
• To study the causes leading to suicides.
• To recommend policies to avert farmer suicides.
1.4. Data and Methodology
The methodology was finalized in the workshop attended by representatives of DES / AER
division, Experts and Agro-Economic Research Centres at the Institute of Economic Growth, New
Delhi. National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) was the only primary source of data on farmer
suicides in the country. The publication of NCRB for the year 2014 under the title “Accidental
deaths and suicides in India - 2014” was the latest data source available. This publication had
recorded the number of suicides of agricultural laborers and farmers separately. In the previous
publications, NCRB had recorded both these categories as self-employed in agriculture. However,
the publication had not disaggregated the data at district level. The NCRB publication served
as a source for data at all India level. The state-wise farmer suicides data was furnished by the
9
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Department of Agriculture and related department of the respective states. The sample primary
data collection was confined exclusively to those victim households who were cultivating either
their own land or on lease basis.
The results of the study is based on the primary data obtained from the victim HHs and secondary
data obtained from Department of Agriculture and related departments of respective states. The
study included Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Telangana and Karnataka, which are
the major suicide prone states in the country and another eight states, where farmer suicides was
noticed. Thus, a total of 13 states were included in the study covered 46 districts, 138 taluks, 388
villages and 528 victim households, which can be seen in Table 1.2.
Table 1.2. Sample size
Sl. No. States No. of
Districts
No. of Taluka/Blocks
No. of Villages
No. of Victim HHs interviewed
% to the total
sample
1 Maharashtra 5 13 43 50 9.4
2 Madhya Pradesh 1 12 49 50 9.4
3 Telangana 2 15 45 50 9.4
4 Andhra Pradesh 2 13 29 30 5.7
5 Chhattisgarh 1 4 19 50 9.5
6 Karnataka 4 12 100 107 20.3
7 Kerala 4 10 17 27 5.1
8 Tamil Nadu 5 23 29 30 5.7
9 Uttar Pradesh 2 5 30 30 5.7
10 Gujarat 8 17 30 30 5.7
11 Punjab 6 20 30 30 5.7
12 Haryana 3 7 12 14 2.7
13 West Bengal 3 - - 30 5.7
Total 46 136 388 528 100.0
Note: “-” indicates data not furnished
Primary data was collected using multi-stage sampling technique. The sample size was fixed based
on the number of farmer suicides per hectare of net sown area which was highest in Maharashtra,
Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, and Karnataka. In each of these states, a minimum
of 50 samples was covered. However, 107 victim households were covered in Karnataka. In the
10
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
remaining states the sample size covered was 30 except for Haryana where it was 14 since the
state had witnessed the least number of suicides during study period. Thus, a total of 528 victim
HHs were interviewed, which accounts to 6.63 per cent of total farmer suicides (7959) in thirteen
states during 2015-16. The districts with highest number of suicides in respective sample states
were selected for the study. The victim HHs were contacted using the information obtained from
the Department of Agriculture of the respective sample states for the period, 1st July, 2015 and
30th June, 2016.
Primary data was collected from the victim households through a structured questionnaire. The
questionnaire designed covered basic data such as family details, land holding, expenditure
pattern and credit details. In addition, the households were enquired about social, farming
related, and indebtedness related causes of suicide. Data for understanding the post suicide
situation of family was also collected.
1.5. Structure of the report
The study is organized into five chapters. The first chapter focuses on background of study, review
of literature, objectives, data and methodology. The scenario of farmer suicides in sample states
was covered in second chapter. The socioeconomic profile of victims and their family members,
land holding, cropping pattern and particulars of credit was presented in Chapter three. Chapter
four presents the causes and impacts of farmer suicides and suggestions to prevent suicides. The
last chapter presents the major findings and offers policy suggestions.
11
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Field visit - Andhra Pradesh
Field visit - Karnataka
12
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Chapter II : FARMER SUICIDES SCENARIO IN INDIA
2.1. Intensity of farmer suicides in India
According to NCRB, suicides in agriculture had decreased by 26 per cent from 16,603 in 2000 to
12,360 in 2014. Figure 2.1 depicts the number of suicides reported in agriculture in the country
for the last fifteen years. The efforts of Central and State Government in addressing farmer
suicides can be clearly seen from the declining trend in the number of suicides overtime.
State-wise farmer suicides are presented in Table 2.1. There were 7,959 suicide incidents
recorded in the sample states as per the records of the state department of agriculture. It can
be seen from the table that Maharashtra, Karnataka and Chhattisgarh accounts for 73 per cent of
the total farmer suicides among the sample states. The intensity of suicides expressed in terms
of number of suicides per lakh hectare of - gross sown area, net sown area and farming families
were relatively higher in Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Telangana, Karnataka, and Chhattisgarh
as compared to remaining sample states. The intensity of suicides in these five states together
accounts for 14 farmers per lakh hectare of net sown area, 10 farmers per hectare of gross
cropped area, and 18 farmers per lakh farming families.
The intensity of suicides with respect to the number of suicides per lakh hectare of net sown area
was highest in Chhattisgarh (21), followed by Maharashtra (19), Telangana (15) and Karnataka
(15). The intensity of suicides with respect to the number of suicides per lakh farming families
Figure 2.1. Suicides reported in agriculture in India (NCRB, 2014)
16,603 16,415
17,97117,164
18,241
17,131 17,06016,632 16,796
17,368
15,964
14,027 13,754
11,77212,360
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Tota
l no.
of f
arm
er su
icid
es
13
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
was highest in Maharashtra (25), followed by Chhattisgarh (24) and Karnataka (19). This reflects
that these states are more vulnerable to farmer suicides as compared to the remaining states.
Table 2.1. Details of farmer suicides in sample states
Sl. No. States Data
pertains to
No. of farmer suicides
% of state total
No. of farmer suicides per lakh
hectare of NSA
No. of farmer suicides per lakh
hectare of GCA
No. of farmer suicides per lakh farming families
1 Maharashtra Jul 2015 to Jun 2016
3361 42.2 19.4 14.4 24.5
2 Madhya Pradesh 2014-15* 826 10.4 5.4 3.4 8.4
3 Telangana Jul 2015 to Jun 2015
626 7.9 15.0 12.8 11.3
4 Andhra Pradesh Jul 2015 to Jun 2016
79 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.0
5 Chhattisgarh Jan 2014 to Dec 2014
959 12.0 20.5 16.7 24.0
6 Karnataka Jul 2015 to Jun 2016
1490 18.7 15.0 12.0 19.0
7 Kerala 2015-16* 50 0.6 2.5 1.9 1
8 Tamil Nadu 2015-16* 45 0.6 0.9 0.8 1
9 Uttar Pradesh 2015* 324 4.1 2.0 1.3 1.4
10 Gujarat Jan 2014 to Dec 2014
45 0.6 0.4 0.3 1.0
11 Punjab Jan 2014 to Dec 2014
98 1.2 2.4 1.3 9.3
12 Haryana 2014-15* 24 0.3 0.7 0.4 1.5
13 West Bengal 26 cases refer to 2015 and 6 cases refers to 2016
32 0.4 - - -
Total 7959 100 0.1 0.2 0.1
Note: “-” indicates data not available; * Months not known
The peak of farmers’ frustration to the degree of committing suicide was during the four months
of Kharif from July 2015 to October 2015 which recorded 44 per cent of the farmer suicides. The
highest percentage of suicides during Kharif among sample states was reported in West Bengal
(62%), followed by Karnataka (56%), Andhra Pradesh (54%) and Telangana (51%). Whereas in
Maharashtra, the distribution was almost uniform across seasons, during kharif, Rabi and summer
being 38 per cent, 32 per cent and 30 per cent, respectively. Figure 2.2 and Table 2.2 depicts
the month wise number of farmer suicides. Hence extra efforts through counselling, and financial
help for distressed farmers are needed during the peak months of farmer suicides.
14
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
2.2. Government initiatives to address agrarian distress and suicides
The Central and State governments have launched several programmes to address issues
associated with farmer suicides. The Central Government hasn’t only tried to rehabilitate
victimized households, but also launched schemes to reduce farmer distress and suicides in India.
The recent prominent programmes include the Prime Minister Rehabilitation Package (PMRP),
Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) and Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana (PMKSY).
Some of the major Central and State Government programmes are discussed below.
2.2.1. Central Government Initiatives
2.2.1(a). Prime Minister’s Rehabilitation Package (PMRP)
This package was launched in September, 2006 in 31 districts covering 4 states. The districts
were identified mainly in those states with higher number of farmer suicides. By following this
criteria, 16 districts in Andhra Pradesh, six in Maharashtra, six in Karnataka and three in Kerala
were covered. The package included immediate and medium-term measures aimed at mitigating
the distress of farmers. The specific objectives of the package were: (i) debt relief to farmers;
(ii) improved supply of institutional credit; (iii) crop centric approach to agriculture; (iv) assured
irrigation facilities; (v) watershed management; (vi) better extension and farming support
services; and (vii) improved marketing facilities and subsidiary income opportunities through
horticulture, livestock, dairying and fisheries. An amount of Rs.16978.69 crores was earmarked
for this purpose (Bhende and Thippaiah, 2010), of this, 62.31 per cent was apportioned for
Figure 2.2. Month-wise number of farmer suicides in sample states during 2015-16
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800N
o. o
f far
mer
suic
ides
Telangana Karnataka MaharashtraAndhra Pradesh TN GujarathHaryana West Bengal Total
15
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Tabl
e 2.
2. M
onth
-wis
e fa
rmer
sui
cide
s in
sam
ple
stat
es d
urin
g 20
15-1
6
Sl.
No.
Mon
ths
Mah
aras
htra
Tela
ngan
aA
ndhr
a Pr
ades
hK
arna
taka
Tam
il N
adu
Guj
arat
Har
yana
Wes
t Ben
gal
Tota
l
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
% to
to
tal
no. o
f fa
rmer
su
icid
es
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
% to
to
tal
no. o
f fa
rmer
su
icid
es
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
% to
to
tal
no. o
f fa
rmer
su
icid
es
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
% to
to
tal
no. o
f fa
rmer
su
icid
es
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
% to
to
tal
no. o
f fa
rmer
su
icid
es
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
% to
to
tal
no. o
f fa
rmer
su
icid
es
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
% to
to
tal
no. o
f fa
rmer
su
icid
es
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
% to
to
tal
no. o
f fa
rmer
su
icid
es
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
% to
to
tal
No.
of
farm
er
suic
ides
1JU
L, 15
272
8.136
5.88
10.1
211
14.2
311
.54
9.51
2.620
15.9
519
10.1
2AU
G, 15
340
10.1
447.0
911
.422
615
.21
3.92
4.80
0.011
8.758
911
.4
3SE
P, 15
324
9.611
318
.111
13.9
162
10.9
27.7
614
.32
5.325
19.8
532
10.3
4OC
T, 15
344
10.2
125
20.0
1519
.023
715
.93
11.5
49.5
410
.522
17.5
629
12.2
5NO
V, 15
293
8.759
9.49
11.4
130
8.71
3.96
14.3
615
.813
10.2
458
8.9
6DE
C, 15
321
9.571
11.3
911
.411
07.4
27.7
12.4
410
.53
2.445
08.7
7JA
N, 16
240
7.149
7.83
3.810
77.2
27.7
511
.92
5.44
3.236
37.0
8FE
B, 16
214
6.449
7.88
10.1
805.4
27.7
12.4
410
.53
2.431
26.0
9MA
R, 16
259
7.726
4.22
2.574
5.03
11.5
511
.94
10.5
43.2
351
6.8
10AP
R, 16
263
7.815
2.45
6.476
5.12
7.73
7.14
10.5
75.6
360
7.0
11MA
Y, 16
254
7.622
3.50
0.051
3.42
7.71
2.41
2.66
4.831
56.1
12JU
N, 16
237
7.217
2.70
0.026
1.73
11.5
49.5
615
.88
6.328
45.5
Tota
l33
6110
0.0
626
100.
079
100.
014
9010
0.0
2610
0.0
4210
0.0
3810
0.0
126
100.
051
6210
0.0
Not
e: M
onth
-wis
e fa
rmer
sui
cide
dat
a w
as n
ot a
vail
able
for
Ker
ala,
MP,
Chh
atti
sgar
h, P
unja
b, a
nd U
P
16
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
subsidy/grants and the remaining 37.69 per cent for loans. The entire amount was proposed to
be utilized in four states covering 31 districts. Brief note about the services extended through
the scheme is stated hereunder:
• The programme aided the farm families in coping up with the distress situation. Rescheduling
of loan amount and waiving off the interest was one among the various provisions extended
by the programme in Karnataka.
• The programme also distributed certified seeds to farmers and increase in the productivity
was also reported.
• The scheme for development of micro irrigation was also included as a component in
the Prime Minister’s Rehabilitation Package to improve the efficiency of irrigation water,
resulting in increased per-hectare yield as well as the income of the farmer households.
• Strengthening of extension services was one of the components of the PM’s package.
Therefore, under this scheme, an effective and efficient extension service mechanism was
put in place in the identified districts for empowering the farmers. Agriculture Technology
Management Agencies (ATMA) was operationalized in all the districts to ensure extension
support and convergence at the district level in AP, Kerala, Karnataka, and Maharashtra.
• In order to augment / support the income of farmers, the livestock/dairy and fishery
activities were included as Subsidiary Income-Generating Activities component in the PM’s
package. The package included components like supply of high milk yielding animals, calf-
rearing, feed and fodder supply, animal health care, setting up of bulk milk-chilling plants,
fodder block-making units, provision of breeding services and estrus synchronisation, etc.
• In addition to these, the programme also included fisheries, NHM, minor irrigation
participatory watershed programme, as its components.
However, the programme was implemented till 2009-10 and was not extended. The programme
may be re-introduced by overcoming the shortcomings which are mentioned hereunder. The
major drawbacks in the PMRP are (Bhende and Thippaiah, 2010):
• There were no clear-cut guidelines for disbursement of ex-gratia. As such, the average
amount of ex-gratia received by the beneficiary varied widely not only across states but
also within the state.
• Distribution of certified seeds at subsidised rates, accelerated irrigation benefit programme,
watershed development programme and micro irrigation scheme did increase area under
irrigation as desired.
17
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• Many beneficiaries were not aware about the quantum of interest waived or the yearly
instalment he/she has to repay. As a result, many were unaware of the quantum of debt
relief received.
2.2.1(b). Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)
The programme envisages “One nation - One scheme” theme. It incorporates the best features
of all the previous crop insurance schemes and at the same time, shortcomings of previous
schemes was taken care. The PMFBY replaces National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) as
well as Modified NAIS. The Scheme was implemented during Kharif, 2016. Under this scheme, the
premium rate paid by the farmer will be to a maximum of two per cent of kharif crops and 1.5 per
cent of Rabi crops of the sum insured. The remaining amount of the premium would be paid by
the State and Central Government. In fact, the scheme will go beyond the usual norms and even
compensate for loss of seed plants and post-harvest damage. The scheme will give an immediate
payment of 25 per cent of compensation to farmers directly to their bank accounts and has the
goal of increasing it to 50 per cent.
2.2.1(c). Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana (PMKSY)
The scheme is aimed at improving irrigation facilities in the country through micro-irrigation
projects and end-to-end irrigation solutions. The scheme will also provide Rs.200 crores earmarked
as Agri-Tech Infrastructure Fund (ATIF), the corpus required to promote the National Agricultural
Market (NAM) for promoting easy access to markets for farmers.
2.2.1(d). Relief to farmers in input subsidy
In 2015, the Government announced that farmers would be eligible for input subsidy if 33 per
cent of their crop is damaged, as against 50 per cent or more which was followed earlier. Further,
the Government also announced that the input subsidy given to distressed farmers would be
enhanced by 50 per cent to the existing amount.
2.2.1(e). Soil Health Card (SHC)
The Government issues soil health cards to farmers containing crop-wise recommendations of
nutrients and fertilizers for promoting its efficient use, aiming at enhancing productivity. A total
of 14,752,382 (1.47 crore) SHCs was issued in the country as on 29th March 2016.
2.2.1(f). Agricultural debt waiver and debt relief scheme (2008)
The Government of India implemented the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme in
2008 to benefit over 36 million farmers at the cost of Rs.653 billion. This spending was aimed at
waiving off a part of loan principal as well as the interest owed by the farmers. Direct agricultural
loan to the distressed farmers under Kisan Credit Card (KCC) was also covered under this Scheme.
18
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
In addition to all these schemes, the Government increased the credit flow. This is evident
from the fact that the credit flow increased by 39 per cent from Rs.607376 crores in 2012-13 to
Rs.845328.23 crores in 2014-15 (Indiastat, 2017).
2.2.2. State Government Initiatives
Certain State Governments provide monetary compensation to the farm families whose member
had committed suicide. A few states have also resorted to waiving of loan from cooperative
societies, supplying seeds, promoting micro-irrigation in horticulture, construction of water
harvesting structures, etc.
2.2.2(a). Maharashtra Bill to regulate farmer loan terms (2008)
The State Government of Maharashtra passed the Money Lending (Regulation) Act, 2008 to
regulate all private money lending to farmers. The bill fixed maximum interest rates on any loans
to farmers. The interest rate was fixed slightly above the money lending rate by the Reserve Bank
of India. The bill had made provision to cover pending loans as well.
2.2.2(b). Maharashtra relief package (2010)
The State Government of Maharashtra made it illegal during 2010 for non-licensed money lenders
from seeking loan repayment. The Government also announced that it would form village farmer
self-help groups for disbursement of government financed loans. Low premium crop insurance
program was implemented where farmers had to contribute 50 per cent of the premium and
remaining was contributed by the government. The government further announced that it will
finance for a marriage fund under its ‘Samudaik Lagna’ with Rupees one crore per year per
district for community marriage celebrations to minimize the cost of marriage celebrations, a
cause of suicides among farmers.
2.2.2(c). Kerala Farmers Debt Relief Commission (Amendment) Bill (2012)
Kerala Farmers Debt Relief Commission Act, 2006 came into effect in 2012. The act provides
benefits to all distressed farmers through loans. Due to introduction of this Act, the farmer
suicides rate had declined in Kerala. The commission has engaged in a case-by-case scrutiny of the
magnitude of debt and the requisite relief in Wayanad district. The commission not only provides
financial relief measures but also provided moral support. Government had allocated Rs.220.8
crores for farmers’ debt relief from 2006 to 2011, but only Rs.62.4 crores had been disbursed.
Government had adopted farmer-friendly policies during 2006-11. Further the state’s debt relief
commission had provided relief to all indebted farmers and had doubled the procurement price
in a period of five years. The government had also expanded procurement, interest-free loans to
paddy farmers.
19
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
In addition to these programmes, compensation is being paid to the kith and kin of victimized
households in few states. The details of compensation paid to the deceased victim households
of Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and Gujarat are presented in Table 2.3. Only a few
states provided compensation to the victim households.
According to honourable Supreme Court “paying compensation to the families of such victims”
was not a real solution to avert suicides.
The Supreme Court of India expressed that the government was inefficient in tackling the
problem of farmer suicide. The issue of farmer suicides was of extreme importance and paying
compensation to the families of such victims “post-facto” was not the real solution. The remedy
to the problem is not paying compensation to farmers after the suicide, but the schemes should
try to prevent suicides (RStv, 2017).
Table 2.3. State-wise details of compensation paid to victim HHs during 2015-16
Sl. No. States No. of victim HHs
compensated
Total amount of compensation paid
(in Rs. Lakh)
Compensation paid per victim HHs (in Rs. Lakh)
1 Maharashtra 2312 2312.0 1.0
2 Andhra Pradesh 47 233.0 4.9
3 Karnataka 1192 3920.0 5.0
4 Gujarat 1 0.1 0.1
5 Telangana 320 1440.80 4.5
Note: Details of compensation not available for TN, Kerala, MP, Chhattisgarh, Punjab, Haryana, UP and WB
2.2.2(d). Various other state initiatives to address agrarian distress and farmer suicides
Maharashtra: The Government of Maharashtra stated that although it had no formal scheme for
providing assistance to families of farmers who committed suicide, Rupees one lakh is provided
on a discretionary basis from the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund. In January 2006, a policy decision
was made by the State Government to constitute a separate and independent committee for
each District with the Collector as its head.
Further, the assistance will not be from the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund, but from social security
and welfare fund which is a regular budgetary head. The state government further submitted
that initial assistance was being given only to those cases which satisfied a triple test, namely
(i) the deceased farmer should be an agriculturist; (ii) the deceased farmer should have been
indebted to a financial institution; and (iii) there should have been pressing for the recovery or
repayment of the loan at the behest of the creditor. However, on 27th February, 2006, a policy
decision was taken by the state government to broaden the criterion for providing financial
assistance to families of those farmers who had committed suicide. Under the new criteria, the
20
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
deceased farmer is to be presumed to be an agriculturist, if any member in the family holds
agricultural land.
The compensation package in Maharashtra was Rupees one lakh per victim family, out of which
Rs.30000 was paid in cash and Rs.70000 was deposited in the bank as a fixed deposit. Discussions
with the bereaved families revealed that in addition to the compensation of Rupees one lakh,
they also received seed and fertilizer as compensation in kind. Besides, these schemes, a number
of other schemes were also introduced and implemented by the government at the district level
to arrest suicides among the farming community. It was observed that spate of suicides among
farmers was highly concentrated in the districts of Yavatmal and Osmanabad and more or less
peaked in 2015. Thus, the Yavatmal district administration submitted a proposal to the state
government, which in turn issued a government resolution on 24th July, 2015, where it resolved
to make two districts – Osmanabad and Yavatmal, suicide free in two years.
The Government recommended these district administrations to launch a project “Baliraja
Chetana Abhiyan” with the purpose of creating mass awareness among the distressed farmers
across the districts with respect to government sponsored schemes for the overall welfare of
farmers so as to prevent them from taking any extreme steps. The state allotted Rs.32 crore
annually for the implementation of the scheme to be carried out in the district in the next three
years. The scheme entails mass marriages for the daughters of farmers, counselling to minimize
the mental stress of the farmers, boost the morale of the farmers through health care camps,
training to youths for setting up small industrial units and encouraging the farmers to join the
village based cooperative credit societies (Abraham, 2016).
Karnataka: Based on the Dr. G.K. Veeresh committee report Rupees one lakh was paid as
compensation to the families of those farmers who committed suicide during the 2003 - 04 period.
Subsequently, effective from April 2015, the compensation amount was increased to Rupees two
lakhs per victim household. But the amount was later revised to Rupees five lakhs in October
2015. Out of the total reported farmer suicides in Karnataka (1490), 53 per cent of the cases have
been accepted for compensation as the suicides have occurred due to farming related factors.
Compensation of Rupees five lakh has been distributed to these victim households amounting to
Rs.39.20 crores for the entire state. It is noted that in the case of 20 per cent of the victims, the
decision regarding compensation was pending and in the case of 27 per cent of the victims the
applications have been rejected.
Andhra Pradesh: Measures for comforting the distressed families were taken up well before
the final sanction of financial assistance. Considering the family in the aftermath of suicide in
the most vulnerable category as a single-parent family, the following unconditional support was
provided: Inclusion in Antyodaya scheme; support under National Family Benefit scheme (NFBs);
admission of children in government residential schools; free education to the children of victim
21
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
in private schools as a part of the provisions of right to education act; Housing under Indira Awas
Yojana (IAY) or equivalent state government scheme; pensions; eligibility for Aroggyasree scheme
was provided; priority in economic support under government schemes and eligibility relaxation
in government schemes was also given. Out of the total 79 farmers who committed suicide, only
59.49 per cent of farmer families could receive compensation during 2015-16. The total amount
of compensation paid in the state during the year 2015-16 was Rs.233.34 lakh. On an average,
the compensation amount paid per family is reported as Rs.4.96 lakh.
Gujarat: There is no compensation scheme for victim HHs. There was only one instance where
the victim household in Surendranagar district had received compensation of Rs.10,000 from
Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) of Rajkot district.
Tamil Nadu: During 2012-13, all the districts of the state were declared as drought affected
except Chennai. Government had compensated the affected farmers at the rate of Rs.15,000 per
acre including cost of cultivation. A compensation of Rs.3 lakh per victim HHs was also announced.
During 2014-15, Rs.5700 crores was announced for loan waiving, covering marginal and small
farmers, who have taken short and medium-term crop loan from cooperative banks. Nearly, 8.5
lakh farmers were benefited with this initiative. In total, Rs.20,000 crore was distributed in terms
of crop loan to the farmers from cooperative banks during 2011-16. During 2016, government had
distributed Rs.6000 crore through cooperative society as compensation.
Telangana: A total of 320 victim households were compensated during 2015-16. Total amount of
compensation paid was Rs.1,441 lakh, which accounted to Rs.4.5 lakh per victim household.
22
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Field visit - Madhya Pradesh
Field visit - Telangana
23
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Chapter III : SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CROPPING PATTERN
Results of the primary data on socioeconomic profile of the sample victim households covered
in 13 states are presented in this chapter. Additionally, cropping pattern, income derived from
agriculture and details of credit availed are also included.
3.1. Type of respondents
Considering that spouses are more aware of the socioeconomic status of their life partners than
any other family member, the study accorded top-priority to interview the spouse of the victim.
Only in the instance of spouse being unable to answer, children, parents or close relative of
victim were interviewed. It can be seen from Table 3.1 that 55.5 per cent of the respondents
across sample states was spouse or heir of the victim. The per cent of spouses as respondents
was lesser in Telangana, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat as compared to other states. However, special
care was taken in these states during data collection for data accuracy.
Table 3.1. State-wise details on the type of respondents
Sl. No. States
Data collected from
Spouse or Heir of victim (% to total sample of HHs)
Others like parents, brothers/ sisters, relatives, friends of
victim (% to total sample of HHs)
1 Maharashtra 48.0 52.0
2 Madhya Pradesh 94.0 6.0
3 Telangana 20.0 80.0
4 Andhra Pradesh 93.3 6.7
5 Chhattisgarh 40.0 60.0
6 Karnataka 69.2 30.8
7 Kerala 68.0 32.0
8 Tamil Nadu 73.0 27.0
9 Uttar Pradesh 30.0 70.0
10 Gujarat 30.0 70.0
11 Punjab 40.0 60.0
12 Haryana 42.9 57.1
13 West Bengal 46.7 53.3
Total 55.5 44.5
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
24
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
3.2. Details of AAY, BPL and APL cards possessed by victim households
Government provides mainly three types of ration cards to the citizens depending on the level of
poverty namely Above Poverty Line (APL), Below Poverty Line (BPL) and Antyodaya Anna Yojana
(AAY). The card held by victim HHs closely reflect their economic condition. It can be seen from
the Table 3.2 that two-third of victim HHs (66%) possessed BPL and AAY cards. The percentage
of victims belonging to AAY or BPL category was relatively higher in AP (93%), Karnataka (86%),
Telangana (86%), West Bengal (80%), TN (80%), Chhattisgarh (78%), Maharashtra (62%) and MP
(60%). A higher number of farmers who belong to BPL or AAY committed suicide in major suicide
prone states. The results support the positive relation between suicide and poverty. It is to note
that 64 per cent of victims in Haryana and 27 per cent in Punjab reported that they do not have
any ration card.
Table 3.2. State-wise details of AAY, BPL and APL cards possessed by victim households
Sl. No. States
Per cent of HHs to total sample of respective states Per cent of HHs who
do not hold any cardAAY BPL APL Total
1 Maharashtra 6.0 56.0 36.0 98.0 2.0
2 Madhya Pradesh 12.0 48.0 40.0 100.0 0.0
3 Telangana 22.0 64.0 14.0 100.0 0.0
4 Andhra Pradesh 10.0 83.3 6.7 100.0 0.0
5 Chhattisgarh 18.0 60.0 22.0 100.0 0.0
6 Karnataka 2.8 83.2 5.6 91.6 8.4
7 Kerala 0.0 26.0 74.0 100.0 0.0
8 Tamil Nadu 0.0 80.0 13.0 93.0 7.0
9 Uttar Pradesh 0.0 30.0 70.0 100.0 0.0
10 Gujarat 3.0 30.0 67.0 100.0 0.0
11 Punjab 0.0 10.0 63.0 73.0 27.0
12 Haryana 0.0 35.7 0.0 35.7 64.3
13 West Bengal 13.3 66.7 20.0 100.0 0.0
Total 8.3 57.8 29.2 95.3 4.7
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
3.3. Socioeconomic characteristics of victims
3.3.1 Gender, social status, and age of victims
Eight sample states witnessed suicide incidents of female farmers. Telangana reported highest
number of suicide of female farmers (36%) followed by Gujarat (10%), Tamil Nadu (7%), West
Bengal (6.7%), Karnataka (3.7%), MP (2%), and Maharashtra (2%). One fourth of the total victims
of 13 states were SC (16%) and ST (9%) and remaining three-fourth were either backward (46%)
or general (29%) category. Seventy per cent of the sample victims of Chhattisgarh were STs (56%)
25
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
and SCs (14%) which was followed by 50 per cent in West Bengal, 47 per cent in Uttar Pradesh and
40 per cent in Tamil Nadu. The per cent of SCs and STs ranged between three per cent in Punjab
to 70 per cent in Chhattisgarh (Table 3.3).
The highest number of victims across sample states belong to Hindu religion (90%) followed by
others (6.4%), Christian (2%) and Muslims (1.6%). It is to note that 33 per cent of the victims in
Kerala belong to Christian religion.
Seventy per cent of the victims were in the age group of 31 to 60 years, 17 per cent in less than
30 years and 13 per cent in above 60 years. Higher number of farmer suicides in the age group of
31 to 60 years has been reported in AP (90%), Karnataka (83%), MP (82%), Haryana (79%), Punjab
(73%), Chhattisgarh (70%), Gujarat (70%), Maharashtra (62%), Telangana (60%) and West Bengal
(60%) (Table 3.3). The results show that the highest number of suicides is in the middle age group
who are fully involved in agricultural activities.
Table 3.3. Gender, social status and age of victims
Sl. No.
States
Per cent to total sample of respective states
Gender Social status Religion Age group
Male Female SC ST OBC General Hindu Muslim Christian OthersUp
to 30 years
31 to 60
years
Above 60
years
1 Maharashtra 98.0 2.0 20.0 12.0 28.0 40.0 96 2 0 2 20.0 62.0 18.0
2 Madhya Pradesh 98.0 2.0 16.0 2.0 74.0 8.0 98 0 2 0 10.0 82.0 8.0
3 Telangana 64.0 36.0 10.0 0.0 38.0 52.0 100 0 0 0 24.0 60.0 16.0
4 Andhra Pradesh 100.0 0.0 13.4 3.3 43.3 40.0 96.7 3.3 0 0 6.7 90.0 3.3
5 Chhattisgarh 96.0 4.0 14.0 56.0 22.0 8.0 100 0 0 0 16.0 70.0 14.0
6 Karnataka 96.3 3.7 7.5 6.5 57.0 29.0 99.1 0.9 0 0 7.5 83.1 9.4
7 Kerala 100.0 0.0 7.0 0.0 89.0 4.0 60 7 33 0 3.0 56.0 41.0
8 Tamil Nadu 93.0 7.0 40.0 0.0 57.0 3.0 97 0 3 0 10.0 43.0 47.0
9 Uttar Pradesh 100.0 0.0 46.6 0.0 36.7 16.7 96.7 3.3 0 0 46.7 50.0 3.3
10 Gujarat 90.0 10.0 3.3 0.0 83.4 13.3 97 3 0 0 30.0 70.0 0.0
11 Punjab 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 97.0 0 0 0 100 17.0 73.0 10.0
12 Haryana 100.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 21.4 71.4 78.6 0 0 21.4 21.4 78.6 0.0
13 West Bengal 93.3 6.7 43.3 6.7 26.7 23.3 96.7 3.3 0 0 36.7 60.0 3.3
Total 93.7 6.3 16.1 8.7 46.0 29.2 90 1.6 2 6.4 17.2 69.7 13.1
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
3.3.2. Educational status of victims
Table 3.4 provides the educational level of victims across sample states. Nearly 56 per cent
of the victims were educated up to matriculation, 33 per cent were illiterates and 11 per cent
were educated more than matriculation at aggregate level. The results support inverse relation
26
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
between level of education and suicide. The percentage of illiterates among victims was found to
be highest in MP (62%) followed by AP (53%), UP (40%), Maharashtra (40%), Karnataka (35%) and TN
(33%). Education brings more resilience to adverse socio-economic condition among the farmers,
and enhances the ability to adopt to various crop and enterprise diversification, technology
adoption, state and central schemes, etc. is crucial to handle distress situation in these states.
Table 3.4. Educational status of victims
Sl. No. States
Per cent to total sample of respective states
Illiterate Primary Middle Matriculate Higher Degree Above degree
1 Maharashtra 40.0 12.0 28.0 6.0 10.0 0.0 4.0
2 Madhya Pradesh 62.0 0.0 12.0 22.0 4.0 0.0 0.0
3 Telangana 26.0 10.0 14.0 26.0 12.0 12.0 0.0
4 Andhra Pradesh 53.3 0.0 13.3 26.7 6.7 0.0 0.0
5 Chhattisgarh 22.0 54.0 10.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
6 Karnataka 34.6 11.2 18.7 19.6 12.2 3.7 0.0
7 Kerala 0.0 20.0 33.0 37.0 7.0 3.0 0.0
8 Tamil Nadu 33.0 17.0 30.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 0.0
9 Uttar Pradesh 40.0 0.0 23.3 30.0 0.0 6.7 0.0
10 Gujarat 16.7 16.7 26.6 30.0 6.7 3.3 0.0
11 Punjab 30.0 0.0 13.0 47.0 7.0 3.0 0.0
12 Haryana 28.7 21.4 14.3 21.4 7.1 7.1 0.0
13 West Bengal 23.3 30.1 10.0 33.3 0.0 3.3 0.0
Total 33.1 14.7 18.5 22.8 7.0 3.5 0.4
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
3.3.3. Marital status of victims
The details of average household size, type of family, location of the household and marital
status of victims are presented in Table 3.5. Majority (59%) of the victim households were nuclear
families at all India level. Andhra Pradesh (87%), Karnataka (86%), Telangana (78%), Chhattisgarh
(74%) and Uttar Pradesh (63%) witnessed relatively higher number of suicides who were among
nuclear families.
The average family size was 4.3 at all India level. This was higher in Kerala (6), Maharashtra (5),
Gujarat (5) and Chhattisgarh (5) as compared to other states. It is to note that the major farmer
suicides states reported higher family size except AP and Telangana.
The location of 89 per cent of victim households was within the village at aggregate level. This
percentage was relatively higher in West Bengal (100%), Telangana (100%), Andhra Pradesh (100%),
27
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Madhya Pradesh (94%), Punjab (93%), Karnataka (91%), Uttar Pradesh (90%), and Chhattisgarh (90%).
While staying in farm was reported relatively higher in Tamil Nadu (47%), Gujarat (30%), Haryana
(14.3%), Maharashtra (14%), Kerala (11%), Chhattisgarh (10%), Uttar Pradesh (10%), Karnataka
(9.3%), Punjab (7%) and MP (6%). Emile Durkheim hypothesis of suicides among individuals who
are less integrated with the society is clearly visible only in these states.
Most of the victims were married (91%) with arrange system of marriage (96%). Victims had
married within (48%) and outside (52%) relatives in equal proportions. On an average, every
victim was survived by spouse and one or two children across sample states.
Table 3.5. Marital status of the victims
Sl. No. States
Average HHs size
Per cent to total sample of respective statesNumber
of childrenFamily type (% to total sample)
Location of the Households (% to total sample)
Marital status Type of marriage Married to whom
Joint NuclearWithin
the village
In their own farm
Married Un married
Arranged marriage
Love marriage
Married within
relatives
Married outside relatives
Sons Daughters
1 Maharashtra 5.2 72 28 86 14 92.0 8.0 98.0 2.0 40.0 60.0 1.1 0.3
2 Madhya Pradesh 4 66 34 94 6 98.0 2.0 100.0 0.0 20.4 79.6 1.2 0.5
3 Telangana 3.3 22 78 100 0 96.0 4.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 1.0 1.0
4 Andhra Pradesh 3.4 13.3 86.7 100 0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 23.3 76.7 0.5 0.5
5 Chhattisgarh 5 26 74 90 10 98.0 2.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 2.0 1.0
6 Karnataka 4.09 14.0 86 90.7 9.3 93.5 6.5 93.5 6.5 15.0 85 1.0 1.0
7 Kerala 6 41 59 89 11 81.0 19.0 100.0 0.0 15.0 85.0 2.0 2.0
8 Tamil Nadu 4 57.1 42.9 52.9 47.1 97.0 3.0 80.0 20.0 50.0 50.0 2.0 2.0
9 Uttar Pradesh 4.3 36.7 63.3 90 10 80.0 20.0 93.3 6.7 67.0 33 0.8 0.7
10 Gujarat 5.1 70 30 70 30 80.0 20.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 1.0 0.4
11 Punjab 4.5 50 50 93 7 80.0 20.0 100.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 0.7 0.0
12 Haryana 3.2 85.7 14.3 85.7 14.3 78.60 21.4 78.6 21.4 28.6 71.4 0.8 0.8
13 West Bengal 3.8 56.7 43.3 100 0 86.70 13.3 96.7 3.3 13.3 86.7 0.9 0.3
Total 4.3 40.9 59.1 89 11 91.3 8.7 96.2 3.8 47.9 52.1 1.2 0.8
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
3.3.4. Method and place of suicide
Table 3.6 provides the details of method adopted for suicide and place of suicide. Poison
consumption and hanging were the two common methods used by victim to commit suicide.
Majority of the victims in Andhra Pradesh (77%), Punjab (73%) Madhya Pradesh (72%), Tamil Nadu
(70%), Gujarat (67%), and West Bengal (53%) have committed suicide by poison/plant protection
chemicals (PPC) consumption. While the victims in Chhattisgarh (78%), Kerala (67%), UP (67%),
Haryana (57%) and Maharashtra (52%) resorted to suicide by hanging. The house and farm were
the two main places where victims committed suicides in all the states. These places together
constituted 93 per cent at aggregate level.
28
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Table 3.6. Method and place of suicides
Sl. No.
States
Per cent to total sample of respective states
Method adopted Place of suicide
Poison consumption Hanging
Other method like Jumping into river / well, current shock, Railway track etc.
House FarmOther places like hotel /
lodge
1 Maharashtra 38.0 52.0 10.0 38.0 54.0 8.0
2 Madhya Pradesh 72.0 24.0 4.0 50.0 40.0 10.0
3 Telangana 40.0 40.0 20.0 80.0 18.0 2.0
4 Andhra Pradesh 76.7 23.3 0.0 66.7 23.3 10.0
5 Chhattisgarh 20.0 78.0 2.0 44.0 54.0 2.0
6 Karnataka 41.0 47.7 11.3 65.0 25.0 10.0
7 Kerala 30.0 67.0 3.0 81.0 19.0 0.0
8 Tamil Nadu 70.0 23.0 7.0 47.0 50.0 3.0
9 Uttar Pradesh 30.0 66.7 3.3 46.7 43.3 10.0
10 Gujarat 67.0 17.0 16.0 46.4 47.0 6.6
11 Punjab 73.0 10.0 17.0 43.0 40.0 17.0
12 Haryana 42.9 57.1 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0
13 West Bengal 53.3 40.0 6.7 76.6 16.7 6.7
Total 48.1 43.2 8.7 56.6 36.2 7.2
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
3.4. Characteristics of operational holdings
Particulars of operational holdings of victim households are presented in Table 3.7 and Figure
3.1. The average operational land holding of victim HHs was 3.4 acres, of which, 56 per cent
was irrigated, with groundwater (70%) being the major source of irrigation. Groundwater was
the major source of irrigation in UP (100%), Haryana (100%), Kerala (97%), West Bengal (91%),
Telangana (91%), Gujarat (85%) and Maharashtra (80%). The highest land holding was found in
Haryana (18 acres) followed by 6.6 acres in Punjab, 6 acres in Gujarat, 4.1 acres in AP and four
acres in Maharashtra whereas the least operational land was found in West Bengal (1.2 acres).
It is to further note that victim HHs in Kerala, TN, UP, Punjab, Haryana and West Bengal had
only irrigated land. The number of sample victims as a per cent to total victims in each of the
category and the per cent of area operated by them to total operated area of all the victim HHs
can be seen from the Figure 3.1. Nearly 50 per cent of the marginal farmers have operated 28 per
cent of land and 26 per cent of small farmers operated 28 per cent of land, 8 per cent of large
29
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
farmers operated 17 per cent of land and 16 per cent of medium farmers operated 27 per cent
of land. The above results indicate inequity in distribution of land which was relatively higher in
Telangana, AP, Chhattisgarh, Karnataka, TN, UP, Gujarat, Punjab and Haryana.
Table 3.7. Details of operational holdings of victim households
Sl. No.
States% of holding to total operated land # Number of HHs as a % to total no. of victim HHs
Average operated holding size per victim HH (Acres)
Marginal Small Medium Large Marginal Small Medium Large irrigatedun
irrigatedTotal
1 Maharashtra 40.0 42.0 10.0 8.0 40.0 36.0 18.0 6.0 0.5 3.5 4.0
2 MP 70.0 12.0 14.0 4.0 32.0 15.0 33.0 20.0 2.3 0.9 3.2
3 Telangana 37.9 52.1 10.0 0.0 58.0 38.0 4.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 2.2
4 AP 16.5 31.1 22.4 30.0 43.4 33.3 13.3 10.0 2.8 1.3 4.1
5 Chhattisgarh 29.4 18.9 12.6 39.1 76.0 14.0 6.0 4.0 0.6 3.0 3.6
6 Karnataka 19.6 26.0 45.7 8.7 59.7 20.6 17.8 1.9 1.1 1.8 2.9
7 Kerala 25.0 55.0 20.0 0.0 48.0 45.0 7.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.1
8 TN 20.0 28.0 52.0 0.0 50.0 26.0 24.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.6
9 UP 57.1 28.6 14.3 0.0 83.4 13.3 3.3 0.0 1.4 0.0 1.4
10 Gujarat 7.0 16.0 43.0 34.0 27.0 27.0 33.0 13.0 2.6 3.3 5.9
11 Punjab 7.2 13.3 20.0 59.5 33.0 27.0 17.0 23.0 6.6 0.0 6.6
12 Haryana* 0.0 1.5 13.1 85.4 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 17.9 0.0 17.9
13 WB 27 58.6 14.4 0.0 76.7 20.0 3.3 0.0 1.1 0.1 1.2
Total 28.2 28.1 27.0 16.7 50.3 25.9 15.9 7.9 1.9 1.5 3.4
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
Note: * Haryana state average operational land holding information is excluded for estimation of average operational holding at aggregate level; # Marginal: 0.1 to 2.5 acre; Small: 2.51 to 5 acre; Medium: 5.1 to 10 acre
Figure 3.1. Area operated by different category of victim HHs
28.2
28.1
27.0
16.7
49.824.9
15.87.3
Marginal Small Medium Large
% of operatedarea to total
operated area
% of farmers to total
30
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
3.5. Sources of Irrigation
Irrigation plays a crucial role for sustaining farm incomes and details on sources of irrigation
across sample states is presented in Table 3.8. Around 56 per cent of the net operated area (1.9
acres per HHs) at aggregate level was irrigated. Ground water accounted for 70 per cent of the
total irrigated area. Groundwater was the only source of irrigation among victim households of
Uttar Pradesh and Haryana. Majority of the area of victim households of Punjab (68%) and Tamil
Nadu (64%) were dependent on surface water. In Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, the area
irrigated by ground water and surface water was more or less the same. The victim households
mentioned that the recharge capacity of tube well was too low and the surface water source goes
dry in the mid of the crop season, resulting in crop failure as they could not get water at crucial
stages of the crop growth.
Table 3.8. Source-wise distribution of irrigated area
Sl. No.
States
Area irrigated per HH (Acres)
Per cent of irrigated to total
operated area per HH
Per cent of area irrigated by ground water (open well and tube well) to the total irrigated area
per HH
Per cent of area irrigated by surface
water (open well and tube well) to the total irrigated area per HH
1 Maharashtra 0.50 12.50 80.00 20.00
2 Madhya Pradesh 2.30 71.88 52.17 47.83
3 Telangana 1.10 50.00 90.91 9.09
4 Andhra Pradesh 2.80 68.29 53.57 46.43
5 Chhattisgarh 0.60 16.67 66.67 33.33
6 Karnataka 1.10 37.93 63.64 36.36
7 Kerala 3.10 100.00 96.77 3.23
8 Tamil Nadu 3.60 100.00 36.11 63.89
9 Uttar Pradesh 1.40 100.00 100.00 0.00
10 Gujarat 2.60 44.07 84.62 15.38
11 Punjab 6.60 100.00 31.82 68.18
12 Haryana* 17.90 100.00 100.00 0.00
13 West Bengal 1.10 91.67 90.91 9.09
Total 1.90 55.88 69.57 30.43
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
Note: *Operated area of Haryana was found to be very high as compared to other states and hence excluded for estimation of average operated area at aggregate level.
31
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
3.6. Cropping pattern and net returns
There is close relation between cropping pattern and availability of irrigation. At aggregate level,
Kharif covered 62 per cent and Rabi covered 28 per cent of the gross operated area. Remaining
10 per cent of the operated area was under summer and other perennial/ratoon crops like fruits,
sugarcane, coffee, etc. Kharif cultivation was prevalent in all the 13 states, while Rabi and
summer cultivation was practiced only in few states.
Cropping pattern in most of the states was confined to Kharif which reflect the dependence on
rainfall by the victim HHs. Victim HHs of Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Kerala and Haryana reported
40 to 50 per cent of operated area under Rabi. Summer cultivation was reported only in Tamil
Nadu and West Bengal which constituted one-third of total operated area. Millets was the main
summer crop reported by victim households of Tamil Nadu, whereas paddy and chilly were
reported in West Bengal.
Cropping pattern further revealed that the victim households were cultivating paddy, wheat,
maize, jowar and bajra among cereal crops. Important pulse crops were redgram, blackgram and
greengram. Tobacco, sugarcane, coffee and ginger were the major commercial crops grown by
victim HHs. Paddy was also grown during summer in West Bengal. In addition to these crops, there
were instances of victim HHs cultivating fruits and vegetables. The share of each crop category
to the total cropped area at aggregate level is provided in Figure 3.2. Cereals constituted 57 per
cent of the total cropped area. This was followed by commercial crops (22%) and oil seeds (10%).
Remaining area of 11 per cent was under pulses, fruits, vegetables and fodder crops.
Figure 3.2. Percentage of operated area by crop categories
Cereals , 57.29Pulses, 5.32
Oil seeds, 10.12
Cash crops, 21.61
Vegetables, 1.32
Fruits, 1.89 Fodder, 2.45
32
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
The victim HHs had grown about 23 different crops during 2015-16 period. Cereals, pulses and
commercial crops were prominent among them, which constituted 80 per cent of the gross
operated area considering eight states. Paddy was cultivated in all the states except Maharashtra.
Wheat was a popular crop among victim households of Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana and
Uttar Pradesh, which occupied 50 per cent, 43 percent, 42 per cent and 28 per cent of total
operated area, respectively. Negligible area under wheat was reported in Maharashtra, Karnataka
and Chhattisgarh.
Cotton emerged as an important commercial crop of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Telangana, Punjab
and Haryana, which constituted around 80 per cent of the total operated area. Tobacco was
cultivated only by victim HHs in Karnataka. It is to note that coffee along with pepper was an
important crop grown in Kerala.
The details of crops grown by the victim households are provided in Table 3.9. Among the
various crops grown, the highest net returns per acre was realized from cultivation of pepper
(Rs.75000), followed by ginger (Rs.71284), fruits (Rs.70334), groundnut (Rs.44321), and mulberry
(Rs.38227). The highest expenditure on cultivation was incurred on Pepper (Rs.159375), followed
by coffee (Rs.83636), and Ginger (Rs.77246). Relatively lower income per acre was registered
from blackgram (Rs.12327), sugarcane (Rs.11185), greengram (Rs.6332), maize (Rs.6197), coffee
(Rs.5060), redgram (Rs.2649), and jowar (Rs.431). It is quite significant to note that loss was
incurred from the cultivation of tobacco (Rs.12016/acre), ragi (Rs.741/acre), soybean (Rs.301/
acre) and bajra (Rs.251/acre).
At aggregate level, the highest net return per acre was derived from cultivation of fruits and
vegetables (Rs.100172/acre), followed by oil seeds (Rs.71392/acre). Loss was incurred from the
cultivation of oil seeds in Maharashtra (Rs.3536/acre). Similarly loss was also observed in the
cultivation of fruits and vegetables in Karnataka (Rs.76343/acre) and Telangana (Rs.5750/acre).
At the time of survey, the victim HHs of Karnataka have not realized yield from fruit crops and
hence loss was reflected under fruits and vegetable group. Though most of the states have
exhibited profits, the returns are not encouraging even after ignoring actual irrigation cost and
interest on fixed and working capital. The main reasons for low returns or loss are due to partial
failure or complete failure of the crops due to attack of pest and diseases; lack of irrigation or
failure of rain; drop in price immediately after harvest; low level of productivity and high cost of
inputs as opined by the victim HHs. More details on state-wise net profits derived from different
crops can be seen in Table 3.10.
33
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Table 3.9. Crops cultivated and net returns realized by victim households
Crop group Crop No. of HH cultivated
Area cultivated
per HH (Acres)
Yield per acre (in Qtls.)
Average price
received (per Qtl.)
Gross value of returns
(per acre in Rs.)
Cost of Cultivation (per acre in
Rs.)
Net returns
(per acre in Rs.)
Net returns
(per HH in Rs.)
Cereals
Paddy 284 2.78 19.15 2047 42018 12092 29926 83194Jowar 40 2.28 2.31 1992 5305 4866 439 1001Maize 48 2.12 11.58 1256 12688 6491 6197 13138Bajra 11 1.18 4.63 1139 5487 5738 -251 -296Wheat 113 4.19 21.73 1473 33665 9494 24171 101276Barley 1 5.00 35.00 1400 49000 18000 31000 155000Ragi 12 1.20 3.33 598 1993 2734 -741 -889
PulsesRed gram 43 1.25 2.13 3552 11457 8808 2649 3311Black gram 13 0.65 3.72 4600 16995 4668 12327 8013Green gram 34 2.24 2.17 5173 11969 5637 6332 14184
Oil SeedsGroundnut 41 3.40 13.58 5340 55105 10784 44321 150691Sesame 8 3.51 11.85 4056 38092 10720 27372 96076Soy bean 52 1.84 2.35 3306 7741 8042 -301 -554
Vegetables Vegetables 34 1.01 12.47 4100 48463 18625 29838 30136Fruits Fruits 21 2.34 13.16 4800 85976 15642 70334 164582
Commercial crops
Cotton 108 3.82 7.71 4170 31736 13240 18496 70655Pepper 1 1.28 4.69 50000 234375 159375 75000 96000Ginger 9 1.91 74.30 2077 148530 77246 71284 136152Sugar cane 45 1.96 109.18 1044 24383 13198 11185 21923Tobacco 20 1.88 2.13 3237 6887 18903 -12016 -22590Coffee 2 1.38 11.59 7650 88696 83636 5060 6983Mulberry 4 0.45 40.00 1789 71560 33333 38227 17202
Others Fodder 59 1.08 144.38 392 40992 4531 36461 39378Total 1003 4.92 20.93 0 34493 11440 23053 113421
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
Note: Haryana was excluded while computing net operated area. But while calculating gross cropped area Haryana is included. Hence, the gross cropped area and net operated area may not tally.
Table 3.10. State-wise net profit from different crops
Sl. No. States
Rs. per Acre
Paddy Wheat Other cereals Pulses Oil seeds Fruits &
vegetables CottonOther
commercial crops
Total
1 Maharashtra 0 -4548 -11005 1490 -3536 0 -678 0 -1812
2 MP 8834 6111 0 21048 6714 2977 0 0 7248
3 Telangana 3071 0 3173 0 0 -5750 8988 0 6226
4 AP 37540 0 17143 53074 11724 15563 4301 0 20694
5 Chhattisgarh 10418 8588 3950 10230 0 0 0 0 10406
6 Karnataka 3515 100 1989 -8025 6486 -76343 4002 33201 -6
7 Kerala 38957 0 0 0 0 97109 0 240101 74243
8 TN 59983 0 3830 6140 44531 0 29145 10655 36505
9 UP 13161 8836 2603 8073 8287 0 0 15888 11995
10 Gujarat 85601 0 45285 15942 71362 83334 34656 0 54473
11 Punjab 20768 15693 0 0 0 5522 2645 0 16251
12 Haryana 47498 44120 40000 0 36277 9300 47725 3600 43536
13 WB 19180 0 0 0 0 167670 0 0 27421
Total 29926 24171 36644 21308 71392 100172 18496 188740 23053
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
34
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Victim households complained about non-availability of quality inputs like seeds, fertilizers and
plant protection chemicals at right time and at reasonable prices. These are conspicuously visible
reasons. Ignorance about periodic soil testing among the farming community, incorrect dosage
and method of application of pesticides and fertilizers, unorganized marketing structures, dearth
of storage houses are important problems in crop cultivation. In many states, farmers tried to
manage crop production with the limited funds available with them, which ultimately results in
low returns.
Figure 3.3 presents the costs and returns across sample states. Relatively lower cost and returns
was realized in Telangana, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, and Maharashtra. Cost and
value of production was seen to be almost same in Karnataka, whereas cost (Rs.9,156/acre) was
higher than the returns (Rs.7,344/acre) in Maharashtra. Kerala (Rs.1,03,856), Gujarat (Rs.63,938),
Haryana (Rs.58,903), TN (Rs.47,677), WB (Rs.37,762), AP (Rs.36,777), Punjab (Rs.24,216) and UP
(Rs.23,323) have registered relatively higher returns per acre.
It can be summarized from analysis that many of the victim households regard agriculture as a
non-remunerative and many of them have discontinued cultivation after death of victim. Many
studies highlighted debt as the cause of farmer suicide. But in reality, debt in itself is not the
cause of farmer suicide. The real cause is the low income from farming. The current study
analysed status of crop cultivation and economic condition only for one year. However, farmers
Figure 3.3. State-wise costs and returns from crop cultivation
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
Amou
nt in
Rs.
per
acr
e Returns Cost
35
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
have been exposed to even pathetic situation in the previous years as opined by the victim HHs
across states. Thus, agrarian distress is not linked to only one year and one reason, but linked to
previous years and many reasons.
3.7. Sources of income and expenditure
It can be seen from the Table 3.11 that expenditure exceeded income in Maharashtra, Gujarat,
Telangana and West Bengal. The average income realized per HH was Rs.73,142, of which, 72
per cent was derived from agriculture and allied activities. The average expenditure incurred
was Rs.59,868, of which, 50 per cent was spent on food and remaining on non-food items.
Overall, Rs.13,274 was the surplus amount realized after accounting for expenditure which
is just above poverty line income. The deficit was seen in Gujarat (Rs.78,823), Maharashtra
(Rs.63,787), Telangana (Rs.2,426) and West Bengal (Rs.2,466). While surplus was relatively higher
in Haryana (Rs.336500) and Kerala (Rs.2,06,705). It is to note that only Maharashtra has incurred
loss of Rs.11,526 from agriculture and allied activities which is reflected in terms of highest
number suicides during 2015-16. The income and expenditure across states can be clearly seen in
Figure 3.4. A general discussion with the farmers of villages, other than the victim households,
reconfirmed that farmers are not inclined to continue agriculture. It was also mentioned that
those farmers who had the opportunity to get employed in other than agriculture sectors already
left agriculture and took-up other jobs. The famers who could not get jobs were either less
educated or over aged to get jobs or both.
Figure 3.4. State-wise income and expenditure of victim households
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
Amou
nt in
Rs.
Income Expenditure
36
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Tabl
e 3.
11.
Stat
e-w
ise
inco
me
and
expe
ndit
ure
Sl.
No.
Sour
ceR
s. p
er H
H
Mah
aras
htra
MP
Tela
ngan
aA
PC
hhat
tisga
rhK
arna
taka
Ker
ala
TNU
PG
ujar
atPu
njab
Har
yana
WB
Tota
l
1Ag
ricult
ural
and A
llied
272
8.136
5.88
10.1
211
14.2
311
.54
9.51
2.6
2Ot
hers
(Sala
ry /
Pens
ion / S
mall
busin
ess
340
10.1
447.0
911
.422
615
.21
3.92
4.80
0.0
3To
tal in
come
(A)
324
9.611
318
.111
13.9
162
10.9
27.7
614
.32
5.3
4Ex
pens
e inc
urre
d on
Food
344
10.2
125
20.0
1519
.023
715
.93
11.5
49.5
410
.5
5Ex
pens
es on
Non
food
293
8.759
9.49
11.4
130
8.71
3.96
14.3
615
.8
6To
tal ex
pend
iture
(B)
321
9.571
11.3
911
.411
07.4
27.7
12.4
410
.5
7Su
rplus
/ Defi
cit
(+ / -
) A- B
240
7.149
7.83
3.810
77.2
27.7
511
.92
5.4
Sour
ce:
Prim
ary
surv
ey (
2015
-16)
37
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
3.8. Details of credit
A fair majority of farming community consists of marginal and small farmers who starve for
funds to take up cultivation activities. Under such situations, they approach credit institutions
to avail loan. But during the events of crop failure or price crash, repaying the amount borrowed
will not be possible. Recurrence of rain failure, occurrence of pest and diseases, high cost of
inputs, unavailability of agricultural inputs at right time and low price drives farmers to debt-
trap situation. Indebtedness has been identified as a major reason for farmer suicides in the
Radhakrishna Committee report (2007) and the study by Deshpande (2002).
In order to comprehend the relation between credit and farmer suicides, credit details of
the sample victim households were collected. Different sources of the credit raised by victim
households are mainly grouped as institutional and non-institutional. The purpose for which
the loan was availed was grouped in to farming and non-farming. The aggregate details of the
institutional and non-institutional credit availed by the victim households for farming and non-
farming purposes is presented in Table 3.12. It can be clearly seen in the table that relatively
higher number of victim HHs have borrowed from non-institutional sources, which is in-line with
the findings of Devadas and Sunil (2014).
Table 3.12. Details of credit
Source
Total for entire sample size Farming purpose Non- Farming purpose
Outstanding Amt. in Rs. per victim
HH
Per cent of amount
outstanding to total credit availed
No. of victim
HHs as a % to total sample
Amt. in Rs. per
borrowing HH
No. of victim HHs (as a % to borrowing
HHs)
Amt. in Rs. per HH of those who borrowed
for farming purpose
No. of victim HHs (as a % to borrowing
HHs)
Amt. in Rs. per HH of those who borrowed for non- farming purpose
1. Institutional
Cooperative banks 32.77 110828 95.38 111870 4.62 89346 76646 69.16
Commercial banks 31.44 200093 87.95 196146 12.05 228907 170100 85.01
Others 5.11 166548 88.89 180345 11.11 56171 150875 90.59
Total institutional - 155425 91.53 153505 8.47 176175 124508 80.11
2. Non-Institutional
Landlords 8.71 73602 71.74 64838 28.26 95851 79744 108.34
Local money lenders 35.80 206174 66.14 196589 33.86 224895 141677 68.72
Traders and commission agents
10.04 205332 60.38 147403 39.62 293603 333964 162.65
Relatives and friends 18.37 130021 48.45 108830 51.55 149941 121636 93.55
Others 0.95 139320 40.00 235800 60.00 75000 129600 93.02
Total Non-institutional - 170625 61.28 154882 38.72 195543 155364 91.06
Total - 163266 - 154078 - 192244 140426 86.01
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
38
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
The average amount borrowed per HH was Rs.1.63 lakh. Total institutional borrowing per HH was
Rs.1.55 lakh and non-institutional borrowing was Rs.1.70 lakh. The amount utilized for farming
and non-farming purpose by HHs was Rs.1.54 lakh and Rs.1.92 lakh respectively. A majority of
the borrowers of institutional source utilized the amount borrowed for farming purpose. Per
cent of amount outstanding to the total credit availed was highest in borrowings from traders
and commission agents (163%), followed by landlords (108%), relatives and friends (94%), and
commercial banks (85%). The overall outstanding amount was to the extent of 86 per cent of the
total credit. It can be seen that the outstanding amount has exceeded the borrowed amount in
certain cases. This is due to the accumulation of loan over a period of time due to high interest
rates.
Figure 3.5 depicts the proportion of credit availed from different sources by the victim households.
Among all the sources, a major portion (32%) of credit was availed from moneylenders, followed
by commercial bank (27%), cooperative banks (16%), traders and commission agents (9%), and
relatives and friends (10%).
The state-wise per cent of farmers to total sample who had availed loan from institutional source
can be seen from Figure 3.6. Co-operative and commercial banks were the most preferred
institutional sources for loan. However, there were instances of victim households in Karnataka,
Maharashtra and Kerala who had borrowed from other institutional sources like Primary Land
Development Bank (PLDB) and Self Help Groups (SHGs). Farmers tend to borrow from institutional
sources due to varied reasons, firstly, the interest rate charged by institutional sources was
Figure 3.5. Source-wise credit (in per cent)
Co-op. Society/bank, 15.53
Commercial bank incl. RRBs, 26.91
Others (Institutional), 3.64Landlord, 2.74
Money lenders, 31.58
Traders and commission agents,
8.82Relatives and friends, 10.22
Others (Non-institutional), 0.56
39
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
significantly lower than the non-institutional sources; secondly, the institutional lenders are not
as rude as non-institutional lenders when it comes to recovery of loan; thirdly, the institutional
lenders are more considerate to farmers when the crop fails or when the farmers have some
genuine problems for repaying periodic installments. Therefore, the victim households of all the
states have availed loans from institutional sources. It is interesting to note that in Chhattisgarh,
which is one of the major suicide prone states of the country, victim HHs had availed institutional
credit only to an extent of four per cent of the total victim HHs. In spite of Chhattisgarh being
one of the prominent suicide prone states, the extent of borrowing from institutional and non-
institutional sources was only 8 per cent of the total credit.
It must be mentioned that the victims turned to non-institutional sources only when they could
not avail loan from institutional sources. The prominent reasons for their inability to avail
institutional credit were: few farmers were defaulters of the loans they had previously availed;
the farmers could not produce necessary documents; the interest charged by local money
lenders was almost 3-4 times higher as compared to institutional lenders. Hence, the victims had
approached local money lenders as a last resort or after exhausting other institutional sources.
Even within non-institutional sources, their first choice was friends and relatives, which was
prominent in Telangana (62%), Maharashtra (46%), Punjab (36%), and AP (33%). Local money
lenders, traders and commission agents were the other non-institutional sources. However,
victims had not borrowed from traders and commission agents in Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh,
MP, Karnataka, and UP and local moneylenders in MP, UP, and Gujarat. Highest borrowing from
commission agents was reported in Punjab (67%), whereas moneylenders were the major source
of finance in Karnataka (83%), Telangana (68%), AP (60%), Kerala (52%), TN (40%), and WB (40%).
Figure 3.6. State-wise institutional loans availed by victim households
38
6
36
20
0
59
89
63
713
37
147
2010
36
63
4
49
26 30 27
5360
07
0102030405060708090
100
Per
cent
to
tota
l Sam
ple
Co-operative Banks Commercial Banks
40
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
It can be seen from the Figure 3.7 that the per cent of farmers who took loan from non-institutional
sources is much lower in Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh which are classified as
the major farmer suicide prone states of the nation. The higher dependence of farmers on money
lenders was found to be highest in Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Telangana.
State-wise utilization of loan for farming and non-farming purpose is depicted in the Figure 3.8.
It could be seen from the figure that victims of Haryana had utilized all the loan amount availed
for farming purpose. Diversion of loan amount availed for non-farming purpose was higher in
Punjab, Maharashtra, AP, Karnataka, Kerala, TN, and WB.
This provides the hint that farmers are already in debt trap in these states. Normally the farmers
avoid borrowing from non-institutional sources especially from money lenders. Because, the
money lenders not only charge very high rate of interest but also pester the borrowers beyond
certain limits for recovery. As such, the farmers avoid money lenders unless and until they
need money very badly. Few farmers borrowed money from private money lenders for stop gap
arrangements or for personal expenses. The worst debt trap situation is borrowing from one
source to pay interest arrears at another source. Under such situations the farmers keep rotating
debt from one source to other. When they exhaust all sources they are left with no option but to
commit suicide. Thus, very meticulous observation of the study is that many of the victims did
not commit suicide because they had loan, they committed suicide when they could not raise
loan from any source for rotation accompanied with harsh behavior of moneylenders.
Figure 3.7. State-wise non-institutional loans availed by victim households
0102030405060708090
Per c
ent t
o to
tal s
ampl
e
Money Lenders Landlords Traders and Commission Agents Relatives and Friends
41
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Diversion of credit to non-farming purpose out of the credit taken for farming purpose is also a
reason for mounting debts of farmers. The results at aggregate level revealed that 8 per cent of the
institutional borrowers had diverted institutional credit to non-farming or for personal purposes.
With respect to non-institutional borrowers, 39 per cent of the non-institutional borrowers had
deviated credit to non-farming purposes. But, in its true perspective, the fact is that 61 per cent
of the victim HHs had to raise credit from non-institutional sources for farming purposes. In a
way, the gap between credit requirement the victims had and the credit available to them can
be measured. Because, generally the non-institutional credit, at higher interest rate, would be
availed for personal purposes.
State-wise details of credit availed is presented in Table 3.13. Among states, relatively higher
amount of borrowing was utilized for farming purpose in Haryana (Rs.497459), Punjab (Rs.280153)
and Karnataka (Rs. 244949). It is to note that none of the HHs in MP and Chhattisgarh had
borrowed from non-institutional sources for farming purpose. The highest borrowing for non-
farming purpose was seen in Punjab (Rs.444577) followed by Karnataka (Rs.257870) and Kerala
(Rs.254967).
It can be seen that all the institutional borrowers in Telangana, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat and Haryana
had utilized the credit for farming purpose. At aggregate level, 76 per cent of the HHs had
utilized the overall credit borrowed for farming purpose with relatively higher per cent of such
borrowers in Haryana (100%), Gujarat (85%), AP (84%), Karnataka (82%), Telangana (79%), Kerala
(76%) and Maharashtra (72%).
Figure 3.8. State-wise quantum of credit availed by victim households
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
Amou
nt in
Rs.
per
bor
row
ing
HH
Loan utilised for farming purposes Loan utilised for non-farming purpose
42
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Table 3.13 also provides insights of the outstanding amount across states. Outstanding amount
at aggregate level was 86 per cent. Highest per cent of outstanding amount was in Haryana
(351%), followed by Telangana (157%), Punjab (119%), AP (93%), TN (87%), and UP (80%). State-
wise comparison of credit availed and outstanding is given in Figure 3.9. It is quite surprising
to note that the victim HHs of Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh had availed lower credit as
compared to other states.
Figure 3.9. State-wise comparison of credit availed and outstanding
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
900000
1000000
Amou
nt in
Rs.
Per
HH
Per HH Credit Availed Per HH Credit Outstanding
Field visit - Andhra Pradesh
43
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Tabl
e 3.
13.
Det
ails
of
cred
it a
vaile
d fr
om in
stit
utio
nal s
ourc
es
Sl.
No.
Stat
es
Farm
ing
purp
ose
(per
HH
to
resp
ecti
ve b
orro
wer
s)N
on-f
arm
ing
purp
ose
(per
HH
to
resp
ecti
ve b
orro
wer
s)U
tilis
atio
n of
the
cre
dit
Out
stan
ding
am
ount
as
a pe
r ce
nt
to t
otal
bo
rrow
ed
amou
nt.
Inst
itut
iona
lN
on-
Inst
itut
iona
lTo
tal
Inst
itut
iona
lN
on-
Inst
itut
iona
lTo
tal
Per
cent
of
HH
who
use
d in
stit
utio
nal
cred
it f
or
farm
ing
purp
ose
out
of t
otal
in
stit
utio
nal
borr
ower
s
Per
cent
of
HH
who
use
d in
stit
utio
nal
cred
it f
or n
on-
farm
ing
purp
ose
out
of t
otal
in
stit
utio
nal
borr
ower
s
Per
cent
of
HH
who
use
d no
n-in
stit
utio
nal
cred
it f
or
farm
ing
purp
ose
out
of t
otal
no
n-in
stit
utio
nal
borr
ower
s
Per
cent
of
HH
w
ho u
sed
non-
inst
itut
iona
l cre
dit
for
non-
farm
ing
purp
ose
out
of t
otal
no
n-in
stit
utio
nal
borr
ower
s
Ove
rall
Per
cent
of
HH
w
ho u
sed
cred
it f
or
farm
ing
out
of t
otal
bo
rrow
ers
Per
cent
of
HH
who
use
d fo
r no
n-fa
rmin
g ou
t of
bor
row
ers
1M
ahar
asht
ra67
946
1821
4795
958
3783
317
2037
1528
6593
.02
6.98
41.9
458
.06
71.6
228
.38
71.0
6
2M
adhy
a
Prad
esh
1490
900
1490
9029
917
6166
745
792
62.5
037
.50
0.00
100.
0045
.45
54.5
528
.03
3Te
lang
ana
1697
953
816
4153
70
2795
927
959
100.
000.
0072
.38
27.6
279
.72
20.2
815
7.32
4An
dhra
Prad
esh
8466
412
1936
1068
9715
0045
2188
8020
6364
92.0
08.
0079
.07
20.9
383
.82
16.1
893
.43
5Ch
hatt
isga
rh95
000
095
000
060
000
6000
010
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.
0050
.00
50.0
031
.29
6Ka
rnat
aka
2201
8129
9988
2449
4972
678
2790
3825
7873
96.7
73.
2360
.67
39.3
381
.69
18.3
164
.18
7Ke
rala
1931
5919
7860
1948
3716
4857
3322
0425
4967
81.8
218
.18
68.1
831
.82
76.3
623
.64
67.2
5
8Ta
mil
Nad
u35
352
1226
9474
171
1654
7315
1725
1578
3571
.43
28.5
761
.54
38.4
666
.67
33.3
387
.40
9U
ttar
Pra
desh
5239
519
500
4581
610
0013
3000
053
338
80.0
020
.00
33.3
366
.67
62.5
037
.50
79.6
7
10G
ujar
at15
9320
2121
0016
4119
013
3125
1331
2510
0.00
0.00
33.3
366
.67
84.6
215
.38
71.6
4
11Pu
njab
2971
6224
7350
2801
5379
7074
4110
0644
4577
93.1
06.
9040
.00
60.0
064
.06
35.9
411
9.66
12H
arya
na49
9653
4952
6449
7459
00
010
0.00
0.00
100.
000.
0010
0.00
0.00
351.
05
13W
est
Beng
al68
701
3327
540
866
5602
8050
226
1012
3175
.00
25.0
055
.00
45.0
058
.33
41.6
727
.46
Tota
l15
3505
1548
8215
4078
1761
7519
5543
1922
4491
.53
8.47
61.2
838
.72
75.9
324
.07
86.0
1
Sour
ce:
Prim
ary
surv
ey (
2015
-16)
Not
e: P
er H
H is
cal
cula
ted
by d
ivid
ing
sum
of b
orro
wed
am
ount
by
HH
who
had
act
ually
ava
iled
loan
for e
ach
of th
e gr
oup.
Few
HH
had
take
n lo
an fr
om in
stitu
tiona
l and
non
-inst
itutio
nal s
ourc
es. H
ence
, the
to
tal o
f ins
titut
iona
l and
non
-inst
itutio
nal w
ill n
ot b
e eq
ual t
o to
tal s
ampl
e si
ze.
44
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Chapter IV : CAUSES AND IMPACT OF FARMER SUICIDES
This chapter presents the symptoms observed by family members before the suicides, social/
farming/indebted-related causes of suicides and its impact on victim HHs after committing suicide.
Additionally, suggestions to prevent suicides in future as opined by victim HHs are presented.
4.1. Symptoms of suicides noticed by the victim households
The person who is about to commit suicide may provide some clues about his/her inclination to commit suicide. During the last days before the suicide, the victim might gradually become reclusive, may consume food irregularly and might not sleep adequately. The victim might exhibit several other symptoms through behavioural changes like feeling agitated or anxious, mood swings and rage may also be observed. However, these psychological and social changes may not be displayed by all those who commit suicide. The symptoms may not be very conspicuous in the case of those suicides which are very spontaneous. With these limitations, an attempt was made to enquire the respondents if they had any hint about the possibility of victim committing suicide. The questions were framed to know the behaviour during the last few days of the victim in terms of their mingling with society, regularity in food consumption and adequacy of sleep. Table 4.1 presents the symptoms exhibited by
victims which was observed by family members in sample states.
Table 4.1. Symptoms noticed by victim HHs prior to suicide
Sl. No. States
Per cent of victim HHs who said ‘Yes’ to the total sample
Was the victim mingling with his/
her own family member?
Was the victim mingling with his/her own community?
Was the victim mingling with his/her neighbouring
households/ friends?
Was the victim consuming food
regularly?
Was the victim sleeping
adequately during nights?
1 Maharashtra 44.00 43.00 42.00 43.00 42.00
2 Madhya Pradesh 70.00 70.00 74.00 76.00 72.00
3 Telangana 94.00 96.00 88.00 80.00 84.00
4 Andhra Pradesh 96.67 96.67 90.00 76.67 70.00
5 Chhattisgarh 64.00 64.00 68.00 68.00 74.00
6 Karnataka 94.39 92.52 91.59 90.65 88.79
7 Kerala 96.00 81.00 70.00 78.00 78.00
8 Tamil Nadu 70.00 73.00 73.00 80.00 87.00
9 Uttar Pradesh 90.00 73.33 30.00 43.33 46.67
10 Gujarat 93.00 93.00 93.00 70.00 60.00
11 Punjab 80.00 77.00 77.00 73.00 60.00
12 Haryana 100.00 92.90 100.00 92.90 92.90
13 West Bengal 70.00 53.00 46.70 60.00 26.70
Total 80.84 77.68 73.83 73.00 70.11
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
45
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
It can be seen from the Table 4.1 that inadequate sleeping habits was reported by 30 per cent of
the victim HHs, followed by irregular food consumption (27%), not mingled with the neighbours/
family and friends (26%), not mingled with the community (22%) and not mingled with the family
members (19%). It is strange to note that symptoms of suicide were relatively visible only in a few
states like Maharashtra, MP, Chhattisgarh, Tamil Nadu and WB. The victims in these states mingled
lesser with the family, community, neighbours and friends, prior to suicide. The symptoms of
suicides were not seen in Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Gujarat and Haryana. Per cent
of victim HHs who observed the symptom of changes in mingling attitude of victim farmers across
states can be clearly seen in Figure 4.1.
Nearly 93 per cent in Haryana and 91 per cent of the victims of Karnataka consumed food
regularly. Nearly the same per cent of victims of these two states did not have any noticeable
change in their sleeping habits. They were sleeping adequately as per the observations of their
family members. Thus, only 10 per cent of victims of Karnataka and Haryana provided some hint
about the possibility of committing suicide through irregularities in food consumption and their
sleeping inadequacy. Nearly 20 per cent of victim HHs of Tamil Nadu and Telangana reported
that the victims were not consuming food regularly. The per cent of victim households who said
that the victim was not sleeping adequately was 13 per cent in Tamil Nadu and 16 per cent in
Telangana. The highest number of victim HHs who indicated that the victims were not consuming
food regularly and were not sleeping adequately was noticed in Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh.
These symptoms are indicated in Figure 4.2.
Figure 4.1. Per cent of victim HHs who answered ‘Yes’ to the symptoms of suicide
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Per c
ent w
ho sa
id 'y
es' t
o to
tal
Mingling with family ? Mingling with community? Mingling with neighbours?
46
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
4.2. Causes of farmer suicides
The decision to commit suicide by the victim cannot be assigned to any single reason. The final
act of committing suicide would be a combination of several causes which are broadly grouped
into social, farming and debt related.
4.2.1. Social causes of farmer suicides
Responses of victim households and neighbours / relatives / friends are presented in Table 4.2.
The respondents reported multiple and interconnected causes for committing suicides. Addiction
to alcohol and drug abuse (26%) was opined by victim HHs as one of the prominent social causes
followed by Illness (18%), family quarrel (16%), daughter’s marriage (11%) and extra-marital affair
(8%).
Fall in social reputation was reported as one of the causes for suicide by all the sample states
except UP. Gambling was reported by 33 per cent of HHs in Kerala, 27 per cent in TN, 18 per
cent in Chhattisgarh, eight per cent in MP and two per cent in Telangana. Family quarrel was also
reported by all states except TN. Partition of income was reported by four per cent of the victim
HHs in Maharashtra and two per cent in Karnataka.
It is to note that dowry was reported as a cause of suicide in TN (10%), AP (3%), Gujarat (3%),
Telangana (2%) and Maharashtra (2%). Daughter’s marriage was reported as social cause in all the
states except Chhattisgarh, UP and Haryana. Only three per cent of the victim HHs in Punjab
Figure 4.2. Per cent of victim HHs who answered that the victim was consuming food regularly and slept adequately
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Per c
ent o
f tho
se w
ho sa
id 'y
es' t
o to
tal
Consuming food regularly? Sleeping adequately?
47
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Tabl
e 4.
2. S
ocia
l cau
ses
of f
arm
er s
uici
des
Sl.
No.
Cau
ses
Per c
ent o
f vic
tim H
Hs
who
ans
wer
ed ‘Y
es’ t
o th
e to
tal s
ampl
e
Mah
aras
htra
MP
Tela
ngan
aA
PC
hhat
tisga
rhK
arna
taka
Ker
ala
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
APr
oper
ty Di
spute
1Pa
rtition
of La
nd
2.00.0
6.08.0
0.02.0
0.00.0
4.04.0
1.91.9
11.0
11.0
2Pa
rtition
of H
ouse
0.00.0
2.02.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
2.02.0
0.00.0
7.07.0
3Pa
rtition
of In
come
4.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.02.0
1.92.8
0.00.0
4Pa
rtition
of
jewell
ery
0.00.0
2.010
.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.07.0
7.0
BMa
rriag
e rela
ted is
sues
1Do
wry
2.02.0
0.00.0
2.08.0
3.33.3
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
2Ex
tra m
arita
l aff
airs
0.00.0
36.0
44.0
0.00.0
0.03.3
28.0
32.0
0.00.0
4.04.0
3Di
vorce
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
4Lo
ve fa
ilure
0.0
0.016
.018
.00.0
2.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.0
CFa
mily
prob
lems a
nd co
mmitm
ents
1So
cial fu
nctio
ns6.0
2.00.0
0.010
.036
.040
.040
.04.0
4.01.9
1.90.0
0.0
2Da
ughte
r’s
marri
age
16.0
14.0
4.06.0
20.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
0.00.0
14.0
15.9
4.04.0
3So
n’s m
arria
ge
4.00.0
0.00.0
4.06.0
13.3
13.3
0.00.0
4.75.6
30.0
22.0
4Fa
mily
quar
rels
6.06.0
24.0
22.0
10.0
24.0
50.0
70.0
36.0
36.0
0.90.9
7.07.0
DIlln
ess
10.0
6.046
.048
.06.0
8.010
.010
.044
.048
.05.6
4.74.0
4.0
EDr
ug/A
lcoho
lic
addit
ion12
.08.0
32.0
44.0
22.0
22.0
10.0
16.7
58.0
62.0
3.73.7
85.0
74.0
FGa
mblin
g/Bett
ing /
Chit f
und
0.00.0
8.012
.02.0
2.00.0
6.718
.010
.00.0
0.033
.026
.0
GFa
ll in s
ocial
re
putat
ion4.0
0.022
.018
.012
.08.0
33.3
33.3
24.0
26.0
2.84.7
7.04.0
Tabl
e co
ntd…
.
48
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Tabl
e co
ntin
ued
from
pre
viou
s pa
ge…
.
Tabl
e 4.
2. S
ocia
l cau
ses
of f
arm
er s
uici
des
Sl.
No.
Cau
ses
Per c
ent o
f vic
tim H
Hs
who
ans
wer
ed ‘Y
es’ t
o th
e to
tal s
ampl
e
Tam
il N
adu
Utta
r Pra
desh
Guj
arat
Punj
abH
arya
naW
est B
enga
lTo
tal
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
As
per
resp
onde
nt
As
per
Nei
ghbo
urs/
re
lativ
es/
frie
nds
APr
oper
ty Di
spute
1Pa
rtition
of La
nd
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
7.17.1
0.00.0
2.32.5
2Pa
rtition
of H
ouse
0.00.0
0.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.70.7
3Pa
rtition
of In
come
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.80.8
4Pa
rtition
of
jewell
ery
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.51.3
BMa
rriag
e rela
ted is
sues
1Do
wry
10.0
10.0
0.00.0
3.03.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
1.31.9
2Ex
tra m
arita
l aff
airs
0.00.0
0.00.0
3.03.0
0.00.0
21.4
14.3
10.0
13.3
7.68.9
3Di
vorce
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
3.03.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.20.2
4Lo
ve fa
ilure
0.0
0.06.7
6.70.0
0.00.0
0.014
.314
.310
.03.3
2.82.8
CFa
mily
prob
lems a
nd co
mmitm
ents
1So
cial fu
nctio
ns0.0
0.00.0
0.07.0
7.07.0
3.00.0
7.120
.00.0
6.57.4
2Da
ughte
r’s
marri
age
17.0
17.0
0.00.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0.00.0
13.3
0.011
.412
.0
3So
n’s m
arria
ge
10.0
10.0
0.00.0
7.07.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
5.04.6
4Fa
mily
quar
rels
0.00.0
26.7
26.7
7.07.0
10.0
10.0
7.17.1
50.0
10.0
16.1
16.1
DIlln
ess
3.03.0
6.76.7
27.0
23.0
23.0
0.07.1
7.140
.013
.317
.814
.9
EDr
ug/A
lcoho
lic
addit
ion60
.053
.06.7
6.713
.013
.033
.033
.035
.735
.720
.020
.025
.926
.5
FGa
mblin
g/Bett
ing /
Chit f
und
27.0
20.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.03.3
5.95.3
GFa
ll in s
ocial
re
putat
ion10
.010
.00.0
0.017
.020
.067
.067
.014
.314
.350
.03.3
17.3
14.0
Sour
ce:
Prim
ary
surv
ey (
2015
-16)
49
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
reported divorce as one of the reason for suicide. The various social causes are presented in
Figure 4.3. Social autopsy results of neighbours, relatives and friends about the social causes of
suicide are in line with the opinions of the victim HHs.
4.2.2. Farming related causes of farmer suicides
It is important to know the farming related causes for farmer suicides considering the focus of
the study. Hence the data was collected on farming related causes leading to suicides for two
consecutive years, 2014-15 and 2015-16, which is presented in Table 4.3. The overall responses
of the victim HHs for these years remain more or less same with minor changes.
Lack of access to expected non-institutional credit and failure of rain was reported as major
farming-related causes by 37 per cent and 36 per cent of the victim HHs, respectively. This is
followed by non-realisation of higher output (35%), non-realisation of higher price (33%), lack of
access to expected institutional credit (33%) and lack of irrigation (32%).
The failure of the crop during the successive years (2014-15 and 2015-16) in the sample states was
considered as a major setback, which was responsible for suicides. Lack of access to expected
credit (70%), non-realisation of higher output and prices (69%) and crop failure (60%) were major
reasons reported by victim HHs for committing suicides. Failure of crops due to attack of pests
and diseases was reported by all the sample states, and lack of access to irrigation water was
reported by all states except MP, Chhattisgarh, UP and Punjab. The HHs of UP have reported crop
failure due pest and diseases (30%) and cyclones (30%) as causes for suicides.
Figure 4.3. Social causes of farmer suicides
2.3 0.7 0.8 0.5 1.3
7.6
0.22.8
6.5
11.4
5.0
16.117.8
25.9
5.9
17.3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Part
ition
of l
and
Part
ition
of h
ouse
Part
ition
of i
ncom
e
Part
ition
of j
ewel
lerie
s
Dow
ry re
late
d iss
ues
Extr
a m
arita
l affa
irs
Divo
rce
Love
failu
re
Soci
al fu
nctio
ns
Daug
hter
’s m
arria
ge
Son’
s mar
riage
Freq
uent
qua
rrel
in fa
mily
Illne
ss
Drug
abu
se/A
lcoh
olic
addi
ctio
n
Gam
blin
g
Fall
in so
cial
repu
tatio
n
Property dispute Marriage related issues Family problems Others
Per c
ent t
o to
tal
50
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Tabl
e 4.
3. F
arm
ing
rela
ted
caus
es o
f fa
rmer
sui
cide
s
Sl.
No.
Cau
ses
Per c
ent o
f vic
tim H
Hs
who
ans
wer
ed ‘Y
es’ t
o th
e to
tal s
ampl
e
Mah
aras
htra
MP
Tela
ngan
aA
PC
hhat
tisga
rhK
arna
taka
Ker
ala
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
1Fa
ilure
of c
rop/
s
a.Pe
sts
and
Dis
ease
s36
.072
.06.
06.
04.
09.
033
.320
.06.
04.
03.
78.
47.
030
.0
b.La
ck o
f acc
ess
to ir
rigat
ion
wat
er22
.044
.00.
00.
096
.090
.060
.036
.70.
00.
028
.041
.130
.019
.0
c.O
ther
s sp
ecify
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.0
4.0
2D
ue to
nat
ural
cal
amiti
es
a.C
yclo
ne e
ffect
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.7
3.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
63.0
56.0
b.Fa
ilure
of r
ainf
all/d
roug
ht25
.050
.08.
08.
096
.090
.066
.733
.314
.018
.017
.844
.959
.063
.0
c.Ac
cide
ntal
fire
2.0
4.0
6.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
1.9
0.0
0.0
d.O
ther
s sp
ecify
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3In
abilit
y to
sel
l the
out
put
2.0
4.0
2.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
6.7
3.3
4.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
67.0
59.0
4W
ell f
ailu
res
5.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
60.0
40.0
10.0
6.7
0.0
0.0
1.9
1.9
0.0
0.0
5Q
uarre
l bet
wee
n th
e vi
ctim
& o
ther
s0.
00.
038
.056
.02.
03.
016
.713
.316
.012
.00.
00.
04.
04.
0
6a.
Non
-real
isat
ion
of H
ighe
r out
put
13.0
26.0
0.0
0.0
78.0
68.0
53.3
40.0
10.0
16.0
26.2
51.4
59.0
52.0
6b.
Non
-real
isat
ion
of H
ighe
r pric
es9.
018
.018
.016
.064
.060
.063
.333
.34.
00.
029
.037
.474
.081
.0
6c.
Expe
ctat
ion
of L
oan
wai
ving
16.0
32.0
2.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.4
67.3
89.0
78.0
6d.
Lack
of a
cces
s to
exp
ecte
d In
stitu
tiona
l cre
dit
11.0
22.0
2.0
2.0
30.0
26.0
20.0
16.7
0.0
0.0
71.0
72.0
81.0
78.0
6e.
Lack
of a
cces
s to
exp
ecte
d N
on-
inst
itutio
nal c
redi
t9.
018
.00.
00.
084
.068
.056
.730
.00.
00.
067
.368
.267
.067
.0
7La
ck o
f ext
ensi
on s
ervi
ces
3.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
1.9
0.0
0.0
8D
elay
ed p
aym
ent/
paym
ent i
n in
stal
men
ts fo
r the
sol
d ou
tput
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
6.0
3.3
3.3
0.0
0.0
7.5
6.5
41.0
37.0
9In
sura
nce
for t
he c
ultiv
ated
cro
p4.
08.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
01.
91.
948
.059
.0
10H
igh
cost
of B
t cot
ton
seed
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11H
igh
cost
of p
rodu
ctio
n (re
peat
ed
sow
ing;
poo
r ger
min
atio
n; h
igh
labo
ur c
harg
es)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12D
urin
g sp
rayi
ng, p
estic
ide
brea
thin
g0.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
0
Cont
d...
51
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Tabl
e co
ntin
ued
from
pre
viou
s pa
ge..
.
Tabl
e 4.
3. F
arm
ing
rela
ted
caus
es o
f fa
rmer
sui
cide
s
Sl.
No.
Cau
ses
Per c
ent o
f vic
tim H
Hs
who
ans
wer
ed ‘Y
es’ t
o th
e to
tal s
ampl
e
TNU
PG
ujar
atPu
njab
Har
yana
WB
In
dia
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
2014
-15
2015
-16
1Fa
ilure
of c
rop/
s
a.Pe
sts
and
Dis
ease
s37
.033
.030
.030
.020
.017
.043
.043
.050
.042
.946
.76.
719
.321
.5
b.La
ck o
f acc
ess
to ir
rigat
ion
wat
er80
.087
.00.
00.
040
.030
.00.
00.
050
.042
.943
.36.
732
.432
.2
c.O
ther
s sp
ecify
50.0
40.0
0.0
0.0
13.0
13.0
0.0
0.0
7.1
7.1
3.3
13.3
6.1
6.1
2D
ue to
nat
ural
cal
amiti
es
a.C
yclo
ne e
ffect
10.0
0.0
30 .0
30.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.9
4.9
b.Fa
ilure
of r
ainf
all/d
roug
ht57
.067
.00.
00.
047
.023
.00.
00.
050
.042
.910
.00.
031
.736
.2
c.Ac
cide
ntal
fire
33.0
73.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.1
7.1
3.3
0.0
3.2
5.7
d.O
ther
s sp
ecify
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.3
0.0
36.6
0.0
2.5
0.0
3In
abilit
y to
sel
l the
out
put
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
46.7
13.3
7.8
5.7
4W
ell f
ailu
res
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
13.3
6.7
7.9
5.9
5Q
uarre
l bet
wee
n th
e vi
ctim
& o
ther
s0.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
03.
03.
014
.314
.336
.710
.09.
18.
8
6a.
Non
-real
isat
ion
of H
ighe
r out
put
53.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
3.0
43.0
43.0
42.9
28.6
60.0
60.0
31.5
35.4
6b.
Non
-real
isat
ion
of H
ighe
r pric
es70
.080
.00.
00.
07.
03.
033
.033
.042
.928
.660
.060
.033
.033
.3
6c.
Expe
ctat
ion
of L
oan
wai
ving
57.0
63.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
10.0
10.0
21.4
21.4
46.7
96.7
26.9
31.1
6d.
Lack
of a
cces
s to
exp
ecte
d In
stitu
tiona
l cre
dit
87.0
80.0
0.0
0.0
7.0
0.0
53.0
53.0
28.6
28.6
33.3
10.0
34.7
33.1
6e.
Lack
of a
cces
s to
exp
ecte
d N
on-
inst
itutio
nal c
redi
t70
.060
.00.
00.
03.
00.
063
.063
.021
.47.
146
.746
.740
.036
.9
7La
ck o
f ext
ensi
on s
ervi
ces
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
67.0
70.0
7.1
7.1
73.3
73.3
8.8
9.3
8D
elay
ed p
aym
ent/
paym
ent i
n in
stal
men
ts fo
r the
sol
d ou
tput
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.1
7.1
43.3
0.0
7.4
4.2
9In
sura
nce
for t
he c
ultiv
ated
cro
p0.
00.
00.
00.
07.
07.
017
.017
.07.
17.
10.
00.
04.
85.
7
10H
igh
cost
of B
t cot
ton
seed
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
17.0
13.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.7
11H
igh
cost
of p
rodu
ctio
n (re
peat
ed
sow
ing;
poo
r ger
min
atio
n; h
igh
labo
ur c
harg
es)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.0
27.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
1.5
12D
urin
g sp
rayi
ng, p
estic
ide
brea
thin
g0.
00.
00.
00.
03.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
00.
20.
0
Sour
ce:
Prim
ary
surv
ey (
2015
-16)
52
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Cyclone was reported as one of the causes in Kerala (56%), UP (30%), AP (3%) and Karnataka (1%).
Drought was common cause in all states except UP, Punjab and WB. Inability to sell the output
was mainly reported by the HHs of Kerala (59%). Well failure was reported by 40 per cent of
victim HHs in Telangana.
Non realization of higher output was one of the major causes in all states except UP and
MP. Similarly, non realisation of higher prices was also the major reason in all states except
Chhattisgarh and UP. Non-realization of higher output was opined as a major reason for suicides
in Telangana (68%), West Bengal (60%), Tamil Nadu (50%) and Kerala (52%), while non-realization
of higher price was 60 per cent, 60 per cent in Telangana and West Bengal, and 80 per cent in
Tamil Nadu and Kerala each.
Failure to avail expected amount of credit was mentioned as a major cause in all the sample
states, except Uttar Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Lack of access to expected institutional credit
was highest in TN (80%), whereas expectation of non-institutional credit was highest in Telangana
(68%). Expectation of loan waiving was cited as a reason for suicide in West Bengal (97%), Kerala
(78%), Karnataka (67%) and Tamil Nadu (63%).
Lack of extension services was highlighted as a farming-related cause which was opined by 73 per
cent of victim HHs in West Bengal and 70 per cent in Punjab. Kerala (37%) is the only state where
Figure 4.4. Farming related causes of farmer suicides
21.5
32.2
4.9
36.2
5.7 5.7 5.98.8
35.433.3
31.133.1
36.9
9.3
4.2 5.7
0.7 1.50
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Pest
s & d
iseas
es
Irrig
atio
n
Cycl
one
Failu
re o
f rai
n
Acci
dent
al fi
re
Inab
ility
to se
ll ou
tput
Wel
l fai
lure
Qua
rrel
vic
tim v
/s o
ther
s
High
er o
utpu
t
High
er p
rices
Loan
wai
ving
Inst
itutio
nal c
redi
t
Non
-Inst
itutio
nal c
redi
t
Exte
nsio
n se
rvic
es
Dela
yed
paym
ent
Insu
ranc
e
High
seed
CO
ST
High
cos
t of c
ultiv
atio
n
CropFailure
Naturalcalamities
Nonrealisation
of
Expectation of Others
Per c
ent t
o to
tal s
ampl
e
53
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
a relatively higher percentage of victim households committed suicide due to delayed payment
to the output sold. This was followed by Karnataka (7%), Telangana (6%), Andhra Pradesh (3%) and
Haryana (7%).
4.2.3. Indebtedness related causes of farmer suicides
Over time, indebtedness has become one of the major problems leading to agrarian distress,
which is responsible for farmer suicide. Existing literature strongly supports this argument as
well. It can be clearly seen from Table 4.4 and Figure 4.5 that crop loan was identified as the
prominent indebted-related cause of farmer suicide. Forty four per cent of the total victim
households indicated crop loan as the major reason for farmer suicide.
Suicides due to institutional loan (44%), non-institutional loan (37%), pressure from money lenders
(36%), non-agricultural loan (28%), pressure from institutional sources (28%) and farm equipment
loan (10%) were the major indebted related causes of suicides as opined by the victim HHs across
sample states.
Suicides committed due to institutional loan was mainly stated by HHs of Karnataka (87%), TN
(77%), Maharashtra (62%), Kerala (59%) and West Bengal (50%), whereas as non-institutional loan
by Punjab (80%), Karnataka (71%), West Bengal (67%), Telangana (60%) and TN (50%).
Pressure from institutional sources was reported as a major cause for farmer suicides by TN (77%),
Kerala (56%) and Karnataka (51%), whereas pressure from non-institutional sources by Karnataka
(70%), Telangana (68%), Punjab (63%), WB (57%) and TN (50%). West Bengal (57%) and TN (53%).
Figure 4.5. Indebtedness related causes of farmer suicides
44.3
9.9
27.5
37.1
28.1
36.1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Due to crop loan Due to farmequipment loan
Due to non-agricultural loan
Due to non-institutional loan
Due to pressurefrom institutional
sources
Due to pressurefrom non-
institutionalsources (mainlymoney lenders)
Per c
ent t
o to
tal
54
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Table 4.4. Indebtedness related causes of farmer suicides
States Years
Per cent of HHs to total sample who answered ‘Yes’
Due to crop loan
Due to farm equipment
loan
Due to non-
agricultural loan
Due to non-institutional
loan
Pressure from
institutional sources
Pressure from non-
institutional sources
Maharashtra2014-15 31.0 7.0 9.0 8.0 6.0 7.0
2015-16 62.0 14.0 18.0 16.0 12.0 14.0
Madhya Pradesh2014-15 0.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
2015-16 0.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
Telangana2014-15 58.0 12.0 46.0 75.0 40.0 84.0
2015-16 48.0 4.0 39.0 60.0 26.0 68.0
Andhra Pradesh2014-15 63.3 43.3 50.0 66.7 26.7 63.3
2015-16 30.0 16.7 26.7 36.7 10.0 40.0
Chhattisgarh2014-15 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
2015-16 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Karnataka2014-15 85.1 14.0 48.6 71.0 44.9 65.4
2015-16 86.9 14.0 48.6 71.0 50.5 70.1
Kerala2014-15 - - - - - -
2015-16 59.0 4.0 22.0 15.0 56.0 15.0
Tamil Nadu2014-15 67.0 27.0 47.0 40.0 67.0 40.0
2015-16 77.0 20.0 53.0 50.0 77.0 50.0
Uttar Pradesh2014-15 - - - - - -
2015-16 0.0 0.0 13.0 10.1 36.7 16.7
Gujarat2014-15 17.0 10.0 7.0 17.0 10.0 13.0
2015-16 10.0 10.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Punjab2014-15 47.0 20.0 37.0 77.0 43.0 57.0
2015-16 47.0 20.0 37.0 80.0 47.0 63.0
Haryana2014-15 57.1 28.6 7.1 28.6 21.4 14.3
2015-16 42.9 28.6 7.1 14.3 14.3 0.0
West Bengal2014-15 50.0 16.7 43.3 66.7 10.0 60.0
2015-16 50.0 0.0 56.7 66.7 10.0 56.7
Total 2014-15 41.1 12.4 26.1 38.6 23.5 35.9
2015-16 44.3 9.9 27.5 37.1 28.1 36.1
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
Note: “-“ indicates data not furnished in state reports
4.2.4. Ranking of the causes of farmer suicides
Respondents were asked to rank the social, farming and indebtedness related causes of farmer
suicides. The responses assigned to each of the causes are presented in Table 4.5. It can be seen
from the table that indebtedness due to crop loan has been the top reason for committing suicide
after combining the causes of all the states.
55
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Table 4.5. Ranking of the social, farming and indebtedness related causes of suicides
Sl. No.
Causes Per cent of HHs who answered "Yes"
Ranking as per cent who answered "Yes"
1 Indebtedness due to crop loan 44.3 1
2 Indebtedness due to non-institutional loan 37.1 2
3 Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit 36.9 3
4 Failure of rain / drought 36.2 4
5 Recovery pressure from non-institutional sources 36.1 5
6 Non-realisation of higher output 35.4 6
7 Non-realisation of higher price 33.3 7
8 Lack of access to expected institutional credit 33.1 8
9 Crop failure due to lack of irrigation 32.2 9
10 Expectation of loan waiver 31.1 10
11 Recovery pressure from institutional sources 28.1 11
12 Indebtedness due to non-agricultural loan 27.5 12
13 Drug abuse and alcohol addiction 26.5 13
14 Crop failure due to pests and diseases 21.5 14
15 Family quarrel 16.1 15
16 Illness 14.9 16
17 Fall in social reputation 14 17
18 Daughter’s marriage 12 18
19 Indebtedness due to farm equipment loan 9.9 19
20 Lack of extension services 9.3 20
21 Quarrel between victim and others 8.8 21
22 Extra marital affairs 7.6 22
23 Social functions 6.5 23
24 Well failure 5.9 24
25 Gambling / betting / chit fund 5.9 25
26 Inability to sell output 5.7 26
27 Insurance 5.7 27
28 Accidental fire 5.7 28
29 Son’s marriage 5 29
30 Cyclone 4.9 30
31 Delayed payment 4.2 31
32 Failure of Love 2.8 32
33 Partition of land 2.3 33
34 High cost of production 1.5 34
35 Dowry 1.3 35
36 Partition of income 0.8 36
37 High seed cost 0.7 37
38 Partition of house 0.7 38
39 Partition of jewelleries 0.5 39
40 Divorce 0.2 40
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
56
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
The top ranked causes for suicides among 13 sample states include Indebtedness due to crop
loan (44.3%), indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (37.1%), Lack of access to expected
non-institutional credit (36.9%), recovery pressure from non-institutional sources (36.1%), non-
realization of higher output (35.4%), non-realization of higher prices (33.3%), Lack of access to
expectedinstitutional credit (33.1%), crop failure due to lack of irrigation (32.2%), expectation
of loan waiver (31.1%), Recovery pressure from institutional sources (28.1%), indebtedness due
to non-agricultural loan (27.5%), Drug abuse and alcohol addiction (26.5%) and crop failure due
to pest and diseases (21.5%). Figure 4.6 presents the social, farming and indebtedness related
causes of suicides for which more than ten per cent of the HHs have answered “Yes”.
State-wise top five causes of suicides during 2014-15 and 2015-16 presented in Table 4.6(a) and
Table 4.6(b). It can be seen from the tables that state-wise major causes reported by the victim
HHs widely vary across states during both years. Crop failure as a major cause for suicide was
reported in Haryana, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Telangana, AP, TN and UP. Indebtedness as one of the
main causes was seen in Maharashtra, Telangana, AP, Karnataka, TN, UP, Punjab, Haryana and
WB. Non-realisation of higher output and price was reported in Telangana, AP, Kerala, TN, and
Haryana. Lack of access to expected credit was opined by households of Telangana, Karnataka,
Kerala, TN and Punjab. Expectation of loan waiving was opined in Maharashtra, WB and Kerala.
The top five causes remained almost same in both years in most of the sample states with minor
variations in the percentages.
Considering sample states, top five causes in 2014-15 were indebtedness due to crop loan (41.06%),
Lack of access to expected non-institutional credit (40.04%), indebtedness due to non-institutional
loan (38.58%), indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money
lenders) (35.89%), and Lack of access to expected institutional credit (34.75%). While top five causes
Figure 4.6. Social, farming and indebtedness related causes for suicides for which more than ten per cent of the households answered “Yes”
44.3
37.1 36.9 36.2 36.1 35.433.3 33.1 32.2 31.1
28.1 27.5 25.921.5
17.8 17.3 16.112
05
101520253035404550
per c
ent t
o to
tal
57
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
in 2015-16 were Indebtedness due to crop loan (44.34%), Indebtedness due to non-institutional
loan (37.12%), Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (36.93%), Rain failure/drought
(36.18%) and Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money
lenders) (36.15%).
Table 4.6(a). State-wise top five causes of suicides by victim HHs during 2014-15
Sl. No. State First Second Third Fourth Fifth
1 MaharashtraCrop failure due to pests and diseases (36.00%)
Indebtedness due to crop loan (31.00%)
Failure of rain / drought (25.00%)
Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (22.00%)
Daughter marriage (16.00%)
2 Madhya Pradesh Illness (46.00%) Quarrel between victim and other (38.00%)
Extra marital affairs (36.00%)
Drug abuse and alcohol addiction (32.00%) Family quarrel (24.00%)
3 Telangana Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (96.01%)
Failure of rain / drought (96.00%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (84.01%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (84.00%)
Non-realistion of higher output (78.00%)
4 Andhra Pradesh Failure of rain / drought (66.68%)
Indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (66.67%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (63.35%)
Indebtedness due to crop loan (63.34%)
Non-realisation of higher price (63.33%)
5 Chhattisgarh Drug abuse and alcohol addiction (58.00%) Illness (44.00%) Family quarrel (36.00%) Extra marital affairs
(28.00%)Fall in social reputation (24.00%)
6 Karnataka Indebtedness due to crop loan (85.05%)
Lack of access to expected Institutional credit (71.03%)
Indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (71.02%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (67.29%)
Expectation of loan waiver (66.36%)
7 Kerala Expectation of loan waiver (89.00%)
Drug abuse and alcohol addiction (85.00%)
Lack of access to expected Institutional credit (81.00%)
Non-realisation of higher price (74.00%)
Inability to sell output (67.00%)
8 Tamil NaduLack of access to expected Institutional credit (87.00%)
Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (80.00%)
Non-realisation of higher price (70.01%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (70.00%)
Indebtedness due to crop loan (67.00%)
9 Uttar Pradesh
Indebtedness due to pressure from institutional sources (36.67%)
Crop failure due to pests and diseases (30.01%)
Cyclone (30.00%) Family quarrel (26.67%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (16.67%)
10 Gujarat Failure of rain / drought (47.00%)
Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (40.00%)
High cost of production (33.00%) Illness (27.00%) Crop failure due to pests
and diseases (20.00%)
11 PunjabIndebtedness due to non-institutional loan (77.00%)
Fall in social reputation (67.01%)
Lack of extension services (67.00%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (63.00%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (57.00%)
12 Haryana Indebtedness due to crop loan (57.10%)
Crop failure due to pests and diseases (50.02%)
Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (50.01%)
Failure of rain / drought (50.00%)
Non-realisation of higher output (42.90%)
13 West Bengal Lack of extension services (73.30%)
Indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (66.70%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (60.02%)
Non-realisation of high output (60.01%)
Non-realisation of high price (60.00%)
TotalIndebtedness due to crop loan (41.06%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (40.04%)
Indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (38.58%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (35.89%)
Lack of access to expected Institutional credit (34.75%)
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
Note: Figures in parenthesis indicate the per cent of HHs who said yes to total sample for respective states
58
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Table 4.6(b). State-wise top five causes of suicides by victim HHs during 2015-16
Sl. No. State First Second Third Fourth Fifth
1 Maharashtra Crop failure due to pests and diseases (72.00%)
Indebtedness due to crop loan (62.00%)
Failure of rain / drought (50.00%)
Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (44.00%)
Expectation of loan waiver (32.00%)
2 Madhya Pradesh
Quarrel between victim and other (56.00%) Illness (46.00%) Extra marital affairs
(36.00%)Drug abuse and alcohol addiction (32.00%) Family quarrel (24.00%)
3 Telangana Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (90.01%)
Failure of rain / drought (90.00%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (68.20%)
Non-realisation of higher output (68.10%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (68.00%)
4 Andhra Pradesh Family quarrel (50.00%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (40.20%)
Non-realisation of higher output (40.10%) Social function (40.00%) Crop failure due to lack of
irrigation (36.67%)
5 Chhattisgarh Drug abuse and alcohol addiction (58.00%) Illness (44.00%) Family quarrel (36.00%) Extra marital affairs
(28.00%)Fall in social reputation (24.00%)
6 Karnataka Indebtedness due to crop loan (86.92%)
Lack of access to expected Institutional credit (71.96%)
Indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (71.03%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (70.09%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (68.22%)
7 Kerala Drug abuse and alcohol addiction (85.00%)
Non-realisation of higher price (81.00%)
Expectation of loan waiver (78.10%)
Lack of access to expected Institutional credit (78.00%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (67%)
8 Tamil Nadu Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (87.00%)
Non-realisation of high er price (80.10%)
Lack of access to expected Institutional credit (80.00%)
Indebtedness due to crop loan (77.10%)
Indebtedness due to pressure from institutional sources (77.00%)
9 Uttar Pradesh
Indebtedness due to pressure from institutional sources (36.67%)
Crop failure due to pests and diseases (30.10%) Cyclone (30.00%) Family quarrel (26.67%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (16.67%)
10 Gujarat Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (30.00%)
High cost of production (27.10%) Illness (27.00%) Failure of rain / drought
(23.00%)Fall in social reputation (17%)
11 PunjabIndebtedness due to non-institutional loan (80.00%)
Lack of extension services (70.00%)
Fall in social reputation (67.01%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (63.10%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (63%)
12 Haryana Failure of rain / drought (43.20%)
Crop failure due to lack of irrigation (43.10%)
Crop failure due to pests and diseases (42.91%)
Indebtedness due to crop loan (42.90%)
Drug abuse and alcohol addiction (35.70%)
13 West Bengal Expectation of loan waiver (96.70%)
Lack of extension services (73.30%)
Indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (66.70%)
Non-realisation of higher output (60.10%)
Non-realisation of higher price (60.00%)
TotalIndebtedness due to crop loan (44.34%)
Indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (37.12%)
Lack of access to expected Non-institutional credit (36.93%)
Failure of rain / drought (36.18%)
Indebtedness cause due to pressure from non-institutional sources (mainly money lenders) (36.15%)
Source: Primary survey (2015-16) Note: Figures in parenthesis indicate the per cent of HHs who said yes to total sample for respective states
4.3. Impact of suicides on victim households
The impacts of farmer suicides on victim HHs are social, psychological and economic in nature.
The socioeconomic impacts of suicide on the victim HHs are presented in Table 4.7. The victim
was the only breadwinner in majority of the victim households. Hence loss of the breadwinner
was the prominent impact. This has been mentioned by 34 per cent of the victim HHs. Insecurity
in the family (33%) and family members under depression (25%) were other major impacts opined
59
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
by victim HHs across states. Discontinuation of agricultural activities was another impact as
indicated by 21 per cent of victim HHs. Such impacts were evident in West Bengal (63%), Haryana
(57%), and Tamil Nadu (53%). Insecurity in the family was opined majorly in TN (87%), WB (77%)
and Telangana (58%), whereas family members under depression was mainly reported in TN (90%)
and WB (80%). The overall impact on the victim HHs at all India level after the suicide is presented
in Figure 4.7.
Table 4.7. Impact of farmer suicides on victim households
Sl. No. State
Dis-continuation
of agri. activities
No earning member
Dis- continuation of
Schooling
Land sold
House sold
Other assets sold
Post-ponement of marriage of
children
Illness among family
members
Family members
under depression
Insecurity in the family
Others
1 Maharashtra 20.0 44.0 14.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 10.0 18.0 22.0 0.0
2 MP 0.0 40.0 32.0 36.0 0.0 2.0 18.0 2.0 4.0 18.0 0.0
3 Telangana 18.0 30.0 16.0 18.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 12.0 58.0 0.0
4 AP 10.0 13.3 20.0 13.3 3.3 26.7 0.0 3.3 6.7 16.7 0.0
5 Chhattisgarh 2.0 38.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.0 42.0 12.0
6 Karnataka 30.8 35.5 4.7 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.9 6.5 18.7 21.5 0.0
7 Kerala 3.0 10.0 1.0 15.0 3.0 0.0 9.0 18.0 18.0 22.0 0.0
8 Tamil Nadu 53.0 60.0 27.0 7.0 10.0 17.0 40.0 63.0 90.0 87.0 83.0
9 UP 0.0 10.0 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 33.3 30.0 0.0
10 Gujarat 33.0 43.0 27.0 3.0 0.0 10.0 10.0 20.0 43.0 30.0 6.0
11 Punjab 3.0 4.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 8.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 0.0
12 Haryana 57.1 42.9 0.0 0.0 7.1 14.3 0.0 7.1 35.7 21.4 7.1
13 West Bengal 63.3 56.7 13.7 3.3 3.3 10.0 3.3 30.0 80.0 76.7 20.0
Total 20.9 33.9 14.0 8.2 1.3 4.7 6.4 11.4 25.0 33.0 7.5
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
Figure 4.7. Impact of farmer suicides on victim households
33.9 33.0
25.020.9
14.011.4
8.2 7.5 6.4 4.71.3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Per c
ent t
o to
tal
60
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
4.4. Suggestions to prevent farmer suicides by victim households
An attempt was made to elicit suggestions from victim households to prevent farmer suicides
in the future and detailed responses are presented in Table 4.8. Suggestions were provided
by majority of victim households in all the sample states. The type and number of suggestions
offered by victim households varied across the sample states.
Majority of the suggestions originated from social causes, farming crisis and credit inadequacy
encountered by victims and also the impact being faced by victim households after death of victim.
Therefore, all the suggestions can be broadly grouped as: (i) Counseling, (ii) Provision of credit
facilities, (iii) Crop Insurance and compensation during crop failure, (iv) Creation of irrigation
facilities, (v) Creation of alternative income generating activities, (vi) Extension activities,
(vii) Increasing MSP or extending the MSP to crops for which it is not there and (viii) supply of
quality inputs at subsidized rates. Figure 4.8 highlights the major suggestions at aggregate level
expressed in terms of per cent to total sample.
Overall, the request for counseling for alcohol and drug de-addiction through establishment
of rehabilitation centres has come from most of the states. However, high percent of victim
households requesting counseling was received from MP (82%), Chhattisgarh (92%) and Kerala
(85%). The next important suggestion was related to credit, which include credit at low interest
rates, increasing credit amount and availability of loan without collateral security. The percent
Figure 4.8 Overall suggestions from victim households
5553 52
43 43
27
18 17
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Counselling Provision ofcredit facilities
Crop Insuranceand
Compensationduring crop
failure
Creation ofirrigationfacilities
Creation ofalternative
incomegeneratingactivities
Extensionactivities
IncreasingMSP and
coverage ofcrops under
MSP
Supply ofquality inputsat subsidized
rates
Per c
ent t
o th
e to
tal s
ampl
e
61
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
of sample households making credit related suggestion were found to be comparatively lesser
in states like Karnataka, Maharashtra and Haryana. The third common suggestions offered in
most of the states was related to crop failure. Therefore, the suggestion to compensate them
whenever the crops fails was not beyond expectation. But, this suggestion was not conspicuous
among the victim households of Haryana, Punjab, Maharastra, AP, Telangana and Gujarat. Fourth
suggestion was related to irrigation. Irrigation related suggestions came prominently from victim
households of Karnataka, Telangana, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh.
Another important suggestion was request for alternative employment generation - either within
farming (crop and enterprise diversification) or outside farming. Few of the victim households
felt the lack of extension services on creating awareness about government programmes for
agricultural activities, education about use of farm machineries, imparting knowledge on crop/
variety diversification including modern technology. However, the per cent of households offering
these suggestions were relatively higher in Kerala and Chhattisgarh. The request to increase MSP
was mainly from the states of Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Kerala and Telangana.
Households of Maharashtra having witnessed the highest number of suicides suggested about
addressing the issue of water scarcity (18%), increasing credit facilities and public investment in
agriculture (14%), and on increasing MSP (12%). Victim households of Andhra Pradesh provided
the common suggestion of extending loan at lower interest rate and fixing higher prices for the
output whereas the common suggestion provided by households of Telangana was to provide
irrigation facility.
Coverage of crop insurance schemes, adequate compensation during crop failure, Institutional
annual interest rate not more than 4 per cent, compound interest rate not be charged by credit
institutions, access to markets for realizing better price were the major suggestion made by the
entire households of UP.
The households of Haryana commonly suggested on extending loans at a lower interest rate, to
reschedule the loan, and to waive off the loan during distress condition. In the state of Gujarat as
less as 10 per cent of the sample households have offered suggestions. The suggestion made was
need of Government support during drought years and ban on alcohol consumption at villages,
Medical facilities to be provided by government, creation of awareness about saving and social
responsibility.
62
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Table 4.8. State-wise suggestions from victim households to prevent farmer suicides
Sl. No. Suggestions
Percent of HH to total sample of the
respective state
1. Maharashtra (Sample size=50)
1 To take measures to cope up with water scarcity 18
2 To increase credit facilities and public investment in agriculture 14
3 Increase MSP 12
4 To create a drought stabilization fund 10
5 To implement schemes for loan waiver 6
6 Reduce price of inputs especially seeds and fertilizers 4
2. Madhya Pradesh (Sample size=50)
1 A Psychologist should be appointed at least at district hospital for counsel distressed farmers 82
2 Establishment of rehabilitation centre for drug/alcoholic addiction 78
3 Skill up-gradation / capacity building centre must be established at block level 64
4 Compensation for crop damage/losses should at least meet input costs 62
5 Supply of better quality inputs 58
6 Increase/declaration of MSP for all crops 54
7 Creation of non/off-farm level employment opportunities at village level 52
8 Coverage of crop insurance scheme to all farmers 46
9 Awareness should be created about state and central department agricultural developmental programmes 42
10 Coverage of health insurance to all farmers 32
11 Crop/varietal diversification 22
12 Role of social institutions should be increased 16
3. Telangana (Sample size=50)
1 To provide - Irrigation facility to cultivation, Alternative income sources, Free cost for drilling bore wells 100
2 Provide higher output prices 84
3 Provide loans at lower interest 58
4 Supporting dairy enterprise 56
5 Providing loans at lower interest to leased farmers 46
Contd....
63
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Sl. No. Suggestions
Percent of HH to total sample of the
respective state
4. Andhra Pradesh (Sample size=30)
1 Provide - Loans at lower interest rate and higher output price 100
2 Support dairy enterprises 53
3 Provide loans at lower interest rate to leased farmers 37
4 Support alternate income sources 17
5. Chhattisgarh (Sample size=50)
1 A Psychologist should be appointed at least at district hospital to counsel distressed farmers 92
2 Coverage of crop insurance scheme to all farmers 88
3 Establishment of rehabilitation centre for drug/alcoholic addiction 82
4 Increase/declaration of MSP for all crops 78
5 Creation of non/off-farm level employment opportunities at village level 72
6 Compensation for crop damage/losses should at least meet input costs 66
7 Skill up-gradation / capacity building centre must be established at block level. 58
8 Awareness should be created about central and state agricultural developmental programs 48
9 Supply of better quality inputs 44
10 Higher role of social institutions 30
11 Coverage of health insurance to all farmers 22
12 Crop/varietal diversification 18
6. Karnataka (Sample size=43*)
1 Government should pay compensation when crop fails 19
2 Provide irrigation facilities 13
3 MSP of selected crops should be based on cost of cultivation plus profit margin 11
4 Tobacco cultivation should be banned 8
5 Immediate payment to the produce sold & Government should help to take-up allied activities like dairy, livestock rearing. 7
6 Loan should be given to all crops and on time 5
7 Loan waiving and reduction of bank interest rate 4
8 Only licensed money lenders should operate & Timely availability of inputs like seeds and fertilizers 2
Contd....
64
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Sl. No. Suggestions
Percent of HH to total sample of the
respective state
7. Kerala (Sample size=27)
1 Psychological counseling to farmers 85
2 Crop loan amount may be increased 81
3 Use of modern technology may be supported 67
4 Alcohol consumption should be banned 59
5 Reasonable output price should be provided & Reviving cooperative system 52
6 Compensation to be increased 44
7 Subsidy to be increased 33
8 Diversion of farm credit to other uses should be stopped through monitoring 11
9 Coverage of crop insurance to all the farmers 7
8. Tamil Nadu (Sample size=30)
1 Compensation of Rs. 25 lakh to be provided 90
2 Cauvery management Board to be established for regulating water dispute 73
3 Waiving of institutional credit 60
4 Per acre crop loan amount may be increased 53
5 Subsidies of diesel, power, fertilizers & pesticides should be enhanced 43
6 Supporting community bore wells 43
7 Supporting micro irrigation 40
8 Improving access to irrigation 27
9 Government job to be provided to a member of victim HH 20
10 Farmers development fund to be created at taluk 13
9. Uttar Pradesh (Sample size=30)
1
Coverage of crop insurance schemes, adequate compensation during crop failure, Institutional annual interest rate should not more than 4 per cent, compound interest rate should not be charged by credit institutions, access to markets for realizing better price.
100
2 Loan waving & access to loans without collateral security 90
3 Unemployed rural youth should be linked with MNREGA 80
4 Increasing higher access to institutional credit 75
5 Expansion of irrigation networks, efficient management of water & crop/enterprise diversification for realizing sustainable income 60
Contd....
65
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Sl. No. Suggestions
Percent of HH to total sample of the
respective state
10. Gujarat (Sample size=30)
Government should fully support in drought year & ban on alcohol consumption at villages 7
Medical facilities should be provided by government, create awareness about saving & social responsibility 3
11. Punjab (Sample size=30)
1 Increase in non- farm employment opportunities 63
2 Regularization of non-institutional credit 27
3 Increase MSP for all crops 20
4 Hike in input subsidies 13
5 Crop insurance 10
6 Compensation for crop damage/losses should at least meet input costs & provision of free education for children 7
7 Increased role of social institution 5
8Crop diversification, Supply of better quality inputs & health insurance
3
12. Haryana (Sample size=14)
1 Lower interest rate, rescheduling of loans, loan waving & compensation during distress situation 100
2 Creating employment opportunities & counselling for overcoming distress situation 21
3 Alcohol consumption should be prohibited at villages & increase MSP 14
4Loan waving, compensation, higher access to credit, supply of quality seeds, protecting farmers from exploitation from the moneylenders & commission agents through regulation
7
13. West Bengal (Sample size=30)
1 Provision of compulsory crop loan 27
2 Insurance during crop failure 23
3 Institutional support for marketing 20
4 Increasing MGREGA employment 17
5 Adequate medical care for poor farmers, Counselling from Panchayats 13
6 Agricultural mechanization, Provision of crop loan, Price protection for output 3
Source: Primary survey (2015-16)
Note: * 43 Victim households have provided suggestions out of 107
66
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Field visit - Karnataka
Field visit - Madhya Pradesh
67
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Chapter V : FINDINGS AND POLICY SUGGESTIONS
The findings and policy suggestions are presented under the following headings as follows:
5.1. Findings
5.1.1. Household characteristics, cropping pattern and income status
• Nearly 58 per cent and 8 per cent of the victim HHs possessed BPL and AAY cards,
respectively. Andhra Pradesh (93%) has the highest percentage of BPL and AAY cards
followed by Telangana and Karnataka (86% each), Tamil Nadu (80%) and Chhattisgarh (78%),
whereas the least was in Punjab (10%). Maharashtra having witnessed highest number of
farmer suicides, had only 62 per cent of victims with BPL or AAY cards.
• Victim farmers consisted of 94 per cent of male farmers and six per cent of female farmers.
The female victims were reported in Telangana (36%), Gujarat (10%), Tamil Nadu (7%), West
Bengal (7%), Chhattisgarh (4%), Karnataka (4%), Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh (2% each).
• The highest percentage of victims belong to OBC (46%) followed by General (29%), SC (16%)
and ST (9%). The percentage of SC and ST victims was found to be higher in Chhattisgarh
(70%), West Bengal (50%), Uttar Pradesh (47%), Tamil Nadu (40%) and Maharashtra (32%),
whereas it was lower in Gujarat and Punjab (3% each).
• Seventy per cent of the victims were in the age group of 31 to 60 years, 17 per cent in
less than 30 years and 13 per cent in above 60 years. Victims in the age group of 31 to 60
years were fully involved in agriculture and are prone to agrarian distress. Special efforts
needed to counsel farmers of this age group to overcome distress situation. Relatively
higher number of farmer suicides in the age group of 31 to 60 years was reported in
AP (90%), Karnataka (83%), MP (82%), Haryana (79%), Punjab (73%), Chhattisgarh (70%),
Gujarat (70%), Maharashtra (62%), Telangana (60%) and West Bengal (60%).
• Nearly 56 per cent of the victims were educated upto matriculation, 33 per cent were
illiterates and 11 per cent were educated more than matriculation. The percentage of
illiterates was found to be highest in MP (62%) followed by AP (53%), UP (40%), Maharashtra
(40%), Karnataka (35%) and TN (33%).
• Most of the victim farmers (91%) were married and had two children on an average which
indicates the extent of dependence on the victim. The higher percentage of married
victims was found in AP (100%), MP (98%), Chhattisgarh (98%), TN (97%), Telangana (96%),
Karnataka (93.5%) and Maharashtra (92%) as compared to remaining sample states.
68
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• The most common methods adopted for committing suicide included Poisonous/Plant
Protection Chemicals (PPCs) consumption (48%) and hanging (43%). Most of the victims
in Andhra Pradesh (77%), Punjab (73%), Madhya Pradesh (72%), Tamil Nadu (70%), Gujarat
(67%) and West Bengal (53%) resorted to suicide through poison consumption, whereas
victims resorted to hanging in Chhattisgarh (78%), Kerala (67%), UP (67%), Haryana (57%)
and Maharashtra (52%).
• Nearly 57 per cent of the victims committed suicide at their residence and 36 per cent in
farm. There were also instances where victims committed suicide in places like hotels/
lodges (7%).
• The average operational land holding of victim HHs was 3.4 acres, of which, 55 per cent
was irrigated with groundwater (70%) being the major source of irrigation. Groundwater
was the major source of irrigation in UP (100%), Haryana (100%), Kerala (97%), West Bengal
(91%), Telangana (91%), Gujarat (85%) and Maharashtra (80%). The highest land holding was
found in Haryana (18 acres) followed by 6.6 acres in Punjab, 6 acres in Gujarat, 4.1 acres
in AP and 4 acres in Maharashtra. Whereas the least operational land was found in West
Bengal (1.2 acres). It is to further note that victims in Kerala, TN, UP, Punjab, Haryana and
West Bengal had only irrigated land.
• Marginal and small victim farmers constituted 76 per cent to the total victim HHs followed
by Medium (16%) and Large (8%). The percentage of marginal and small victim farmers
was relatively higher in UP (97%), West Bengal (97%), Telangana (96%), Kerala (93%),
Karnataka (80%), Chhattisgarh (90%), AP (78%), TN (76%) and Maharashtra (76%). Whereas,
the percentage of medium and large victim farmers was relatively higher in Haryana (86%)
and MP (53%).
• Marginal and small farmers among the victims operated 56 per cent of the total operational
land followed by Medium (27%) and Large (17%). Nearly 90 per cent of the land was
operated by marginal and small victim HHs in Telangana followed by 86 per cent in UP
and West Bengal, Maharashtra (82%) and MP (82%). Conversely, medium and large victim
HHs operated relatively higher area in Haryana (99%), Punjab (80%) and Gujarat (77%).
The distribution of land across categories clearly indicates inequity in distribution of land.
The extent of inequity was relatively higher in Gujarat, Punjab, Haryana, Karnataka,
Chhattisgarh and AP.
• The annual average net income realized per HHs was Rs.73,142, of which 72 per cent was
derived from agriculture and allied activities. The average annual expenditure incurred
was Rs.59,868, of which, 50 per cent spent on food and remaining on non-food items.
Overall, Rs.13,274 was the surplus amount realized after accounting for expenditure
which is just above poverty line income. The deficit was seen in Gujarat (Rs.78,823),
Maharashtra (Rs.63,787), Telangana (Rs.2,426) and West Bengal (Rs.2,466). The surplus
69
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
was relatively higher in Haryana (Rs.3,36,500) and Kerala (Rs.2,06,705). It is to note that
victim households in Maharashtra incurred loss of Rs.11,526 from agriculture and allied
activities, which are reflected in highest number of suicides during 2015-16.
• The net income of victim HHs depended on the cropping pattern. Cereals and cash crops
are the major crops grown in 57 per cent and 22 per cent of the gross cropped area,
respectively. The remaining crops include oilseeds (10%), pulses (5%), fodder crops (2%),
fruits (2%) and vegetables (1%). Among crops, the highest area was reported in Paddy (30%)
followed by Wheat (18%) and Cotton (16%).
• Among the various crops grown, the highest net returns per acre was realized from
cultivation of pepper (Rs.75,000), followed by ginger (Rs.71,284), fruits (Rs.70,334),
groundnut (Rs.44,321), and mulberry (Rs.38,227). The highest expenditure on cultivation
was incurred on pepper (Rs.1,59,375), followed by coffee (Rs.83,636), and ginger
(Rs.77,246). Relatively lower income per acre was registered from blackgram (Rs.12,327),
sugar cane (Rs.11,185), greengram (Rs.6,332), maize (Rs.6,197), coffee (Rs.5,060), redgram
(Rs.2,649), and jowar (Rs.431). It is quite significant to note that loss was incurred from
the cultivation of tobacco (Rs12,016/acre), ragi (Rs.741/acre), soyabean (Rs.301/acre)
and bajra (Rs.251/acre).
• At aggregate level, the highest net return per acre was derived from cultivation of fruits
and vegetables (Rs.1,00,172/acre), followed by oil seeds (Rs.71,392/acre). Loss was
incurred from the cultivation of oil seeds in Maharashtra (Rs.3,536/acre). Similarly loss
was also observed in the cultivation of fruits and vegetables in Karnataka (Rs.76,343/acre)
and Telangana (Rs.5,750/acre). At the time of survey, the victim HHs of Karnataka had not
realised yield from fruit crops and hence loss was reflected under fruits and vegetable
group.
• Credit was availed by the entire victim HHs and a majority of them borrowed from multiple
sources with the average borrowing being Rs.1.55 lakh and Rs.1.70 lakh from institutional
and non-institutional sources, respectively. Nearly 8 per cent of the institutional borrowing
and 39 per cent of the non-institutional borrowing was used for non-farming purposes. Per
cent of amount outstanding to the total credit availed was highest in borrowings from
traders and commission agents (162%), followed by landlords (108%), relatives and friends
(Rs.94%), and commercial banks (85%). The overall outstanding amount was to the extent
of 86 per cent of the total credit.
• Symptoms observed by family members before suicide indicated that 19 per cent of the
victims were not mingling, staying aloof from family members, 22 per cent were not
interacting with the community, 26 per cent were not friendly as usual with the neighbours,
27 per cent were not consuming food regularly and 30 per cent had inadequate sleep. These
70
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
symptoms were prominently visible in Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, WB, TN and Punjab as
compared to other states.
5.1.2. Causes of farmer suicides
The decision to commit suicide by the victim cannot be attributed to a single reason. It was spur-
of-the-moment triggered action with respect to 70 to 80 per cent of victims. The final action of
committing suicide was a combination of several cumulative causes which can be grouped into
social, farming and debt-related.
Social Causes
• Drug/Alcoholic addiction (26%), Illness (18%), fall in Social reputation (17%), family
quarrel (16%), daughter’s marriage (11%) and extra-marital affair (8%) are the major social
causes opined by victim HHs across 13 sample states. Drug/Alcoholic addiction and Illness
was common major cause reported by victim HHs in all the sample states. Fall in social
reputation was reported as one of the main cause for suicide by all the sample states
except UP.
• Gambling was reported by 33 per cent of victim HHs in Kerala, 27 per cent in TN, 18 per
cent in Chhattisgarh, 8 per cent in MP and 2 per cent in Telangana.
• Family quarrel was also reported by all states except TN. Disputes in partition of income
was reported by 4 per cent of the victim HHs in Maharashtra and 2 per cent in Karnataka.
• It is to note that dowry was reported as a cause for suicide in TN (10%), AP (3%), and
Gujarat (3%) Telangana (2%) and Maharashtra (2%). Daughter’s marriage was reported in all
states except Chhattisgarh, UP and Haryana. Only in Punjab (3%) victim HHs have reported
divorce as one of the reason for suicide.
• Social autopsy results revealed that the opinion of neighbours/relatives/ friends regarding
social causes are in-line with the opinions of victim HHs.
Farming related causes
• Expectation of non-institutional credit and failure of rain was reported as major farming
related cause by 37 per cent and 36 per cent of the victim HHs, respectively. This is
followed by non-realisation of higher output (35%), non-realisation of higher price (33%),
lack of access to expected institutional credit (33%) and lack of irrigation (32%).
• The failure of crop during the two successive years (2014-15 and 2015-16) in the sample
states was considered as a major setback, which was responsible for suicides. Lack of
71
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
access to expected credit (70%), non-realization of higher output and prices (68%) and
crop failure (60%) were the major reasons for suicides. The failure of crops due to attack
of pests and diseases was reported by all sample states. Lack of access to irrigation water
was reported by all states except MP, Chhattisgarh, UP and Punjab. The HHs of UP reported
crop failure due to pest and diseases (30%) and cyclones (30%) as two causes for suicides.
• Cyclone was reported as one of the cause by Kerala (56%), UP (30%), AP (3%) and Karnataka
(0.9%). Drought was common cause in all states except UP, Punjab and WB. Inability to sell
the output was mainly reported by the HHs of the Kerala (59%). Well failure was reported
by 40 per cent of victim HHs in Telangana.
• Non-realisation of higher output was one of the major causes in all states except UP and
MP. Similarly, the non-realisation of higher prices was also the major reason in all states
except Chhattisgarh and UP. Telangana (68% of sample HHs expected higher output and
60% expected higher price), West Bengal (60% of sample HHs expected higher output and
60% expected higher price), Tamil Nadu (50% expected high output and 80% expected
higher price) and Kerala (52% expected higher output and 81% expected higher price) are
the prominent states where expectation of higher output and price reported as a major
farming related cause of farmer suicides.
• Failure to avail expected amount of credit was quoted as major cause in all the sample
states except Uttar Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Expectation of institutional credit was
highest in Tamil Nadu (80%), whereas expectation of non-institutional credit was highest
in Telangana (68%). Expectation of loan waiving was cited as a reason for suicide in West
Bengal (97%), Kerala (78%), Karnataka (67%) and Tamil Nadu (63%).
• Lack of extension services was highlighted as a farming related cause which was opined
by 73 per cent of victim HHs in West Bengal and 70 per cent in Punjab. Kerala (37%) is the
only state where high per cent of victim households committed suicide due to delayed
payment to the output sold. This cause was quoted by Karnataka (7%), Telangana (6%),
Andhra Pradesh (3%) and Haryana (7%).
Debt related issues
• Members of the victim’s household attributed causes of suicides to institutional loan (44%),
non-institutional loan (37%), pressure from money lenders (36%), non-agricultural loan
(28%), pressure from institutional sources (28%) and farm equipment loan (10%) were
major indebted related causes of suicides.
• Suicides committed due to institutional loan has been stated in Karnataka (87%), TN (77%),
Maharashtra (62%), Kerala (59%) and West Bengal (50%), whereas non-institutional loan in
Punjab (80%), Karnataka (71%), West Bengal (67%), Telangana (60%) and TN (50%).
72
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• Pressure from institutional sources for repayment of loan was reported as major cause
for suicides mainly in TN (77%), Kerala (56%) and Karnataka (51%). Pressure from non-
institutional sources was majorly quoted in Karnataka (70%), Telangana (68%), Punjab
(63%), WB (57%) and TN (50%).
Ranking of social, farming and indebtedness related causes of suicides
• The foremost reason for suicides among 13 sample states include Indebtedness due to
crop loan (44.3%), indebtedness due to non-institutional loan (37.1%), expectation of
non-institutional credit (36.9%), recovery pressure from non-institutional sources (36.1%),
non-realisation of higher output (35.4%), non-realisation of higher prices (33.3%), lack
of access to expected institutional credit (33.1%), crop failure due to lack of irrigation
(32.2%), expectation of loan waiver (31.1%), Recovery pressure from institutional sources
(28.1%), indebtedness due to non-agricultural loan (27.5%), and drug abuse and alcohol
addiction (26.5%).
• State-wise major causes reported by the victim HHs widely vary across states. Crop failure
as a cause for suicide was reported in Haryana, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Telangana, AP,
TN and UP. Indebtedness as one of the causes was seen in Maharashtra, Telangana, AP,
Karnataka, TN, UP, Punjab, Haryana and WB. Non-realisation of higher output and price
reported in Telangana, AP, Kerala, TN, and Haryana. Expectation of credit was opined in
Telangana, Karnataka, Kerala, TN and Punjab. Expectation of loan waiving was opined in
Maharashtra, WB and Kerala.
5.1.3. Impact of farmer suicides on victim households and Suggestions offered by victim households to prevent farmer suicides
• Death of the bread winner was seen to have severely affected the HHs. This impact was
reported by 34 per cent of the HHs who mentioned that there was none in their family
to earn income. The land of such families was confiscated by the private money lenders.
Discontinuation of agriculture was another impact as seen in the case of 21 per cent of
the total HHs. Such situations were evident in West Bengal (63%), Haryana (57%) and Tamil
Nadu (53%).
• Insecurity in the family (33%) and family members under depression (25%) were among
the major impacts opined by victim HHs across states. Insecurity in the family was opined
majorly in TN (87%), WB (77%) and Telangana (58%), whereas family members under
depression were opined in TN (90%) and WB (80%).
73
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• Interestingly none of the victim HHs in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh gave up farming
practices due to the loss of family member. Overall, nearly eight per cent of victim
households sold the land after suicide.
• MP (36%), Kerala (15%), Telangana (18%) and Andhra Pradesh (13%) are the four states
where the victim HHs who sold land was in large number.
• Large number of victim households had discontinued their children’s education in Madhya
Pradesh (32%), Tamil Nadu (27%) and Gujarat (27%). Among other states, it ranged between
nil in Haryana to 17 per cent in Uttar Pradesh.
• The most prominent suggestions offered by the victim households to prevent farmer suicides
across states were: (i) Counseling, (ii) Provision of credit facilities, (iii) Crop Insurance
and compensation during crop failure, (iv) Creation of irrigation facilities, (v) Creation of
alternative income generating activities, (vi) Extension activities, (vii) Increasing MSP or
extending the MSP to crops for which it is not there and (viii) supply of quality inputs at
subsidized rates.
5.2. Policy Suggestions
5.2.1. Suggestions that can be implemented immediately
• Crop failure and collapse of income was found to be the root cause for farmer suicides.
Therefore, it is suggested that individual farmers should be brought under the ambit of
crop insurance programme. More intensively the state must ensure through the proper
policy framework that indemnity be paid within a week after reporting of the failure. Crop
Insurance payment provided months after the crop failure is by design pushes the farmer
into the debt trap of the moneylender.
• One of the main causes for crop failure was insufficient availability of water. Hence
judicious use of available water is needed. Groundwater recharge, rain water harvesting
and, de-siltation of ponds / tanks can ensure increased water supply. To avoid under- or
overuse of water to crops, farmers should carefully monitor the weather forecast, as well
as soil and plant moisture and adapt their irrigation schedule to the current conditions.
Farmers can participate in the construction of percolation ponds and check dams in their
surrounding areas both in private and common land. This helps to increase the availability
of water.
• Poor awareness among the farmers regarding scientific and improved methods of
cultivation is one of the reasons for crop failure. This may be addressed through proper
extension activities. Instances in Andhra Pradesh indicate that in the absence of adequate
74
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
extension services, most farmers were misled by the traders and were found using
pesticides indiscriminately. The farmers were also supplied with low quality seeds. Proper
measures to eliminate such practices has to be made. The Seeds Act, 2004, Insecticide
Act 1968, Pesticide Control Act, Fertilizer Control Order, be implemented very strictly and
the abettors be punished. Special extension efforts are needed towards capacity building
of farmers for usage of quality inputs and efficient options in production and marketing.
• Though, this problem is highlighted by Andhra Pradesh victim households, the possibility
of existence of such unscrupulous dealers in other states cannot be ruled out. Hence,
Government intervention in the supply of seeds and other agricultural inputs by establishing
fair price retail outlets in rural areas, where quality of inputs is assured is required.
• It is suggested by the victim households that Government should make policy to waive or
reschedule the outstanding amount of farmers loan whenever the crop fails due to natural
calamities. This will save the farmers from debt trap. The same suggestions were offered
in the Report of the Commission on Farmers’ Welfare (2005). The report mentioned that
the interest should not be charged for the period of current rescheduling. Whenever an
area is declared as drought-affected, interest should be waived, without changing other
terms of rescheduling (GoAP, 2005).
• Local money lenders are the main non-institutional sources who charge exorbitant rates
of interest and adopt harsh ways to recover borrowed amount. Farmers prefer to borrow
normally from institutional sources but they approach non-institutional sources only when
they are denied loans from institutional sources for various reasons. Hence the government
must implement stringent laws on informal lending through fixing a cap on the interest
rates equivalent to the institutional lending rates with sufficient monitoring.
• Release of loans in phased manner is needed. Thereby proper utilization of funds can be
ensured. Releasing of funds at one stretch (usually done in Kisan Credit Card) may result
in diversion of the borrowed amount to other activities rather than cultivation. Monitoring
of funds thus released is required to ensure proper utilization.
• Government may consider extending institutional credit without collateral security of
property for tenant farmers as well.
• The compensation was extended only to farmers who own land/lease in land (on record)
and have availed credit from institutional sources against land record. But the present
study reveals that a majority of the farmers borrow from non-institutional sources as they
are denied loans by institutional sources due to various problems pertaining to land records.
Thus, the victims who borrow from such sources can be considered for compensation if the
75
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
reason for suicide happens to be farming related and may also be covered under the ambit
of crop insurance.
• Though the study had not made an attempt to obtain the data on MSP received, a fair
majority of the victim households, at aggregate level, have mentioned that MSP does
not cover cost of production. This needs to be considered by CACP. CACP may review
the methodology for arriving at MSP considering explicit and implicit costs along with
reasonable profit margin. This was suggested by 84 per cent of the Telangana victim HHs
and 100 per cent victim HHs of Andhra Pradesh.
• The condition of the victim households was seen to be worsening after the suicide event
involving the main family member. Hence certain institutional mechanism for post suicide
welfare of the family is required.
• The victim families should be given preference in availing benefits of various developmental
schemes at least for a period of five years. Such schemes may also include social welfare
schemes of State and Central Government.
• NGOs, religious institutions and agriculture department should also be involved in providing
counselling to farmers to handle the distress situation through establishment of Farmer
Welfare Cell and Help Desk Services.
• Maximum number of suicides occur during kharif season and mainly among highly indebted
farmers, therefore help lines may be established based on the information on crop failure
and extent of indebtedness. The helpline may act as immediate relief providers for the
distressed through helping them in sourcing finance to meet the immediate needs.
• Programmes aimed at addressing the health issues of marginal, small and medium rural
households should be launched. One such scheme in operation was launched by Government
of Andhra Pradesh (Aroggyasree). This programme helped the rural households to overcome
their health issues. This may be taken up on priority basis in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh
and Gujarat as 46 per cent, 44 per cent and 27 per cent of the households, respectively
indicated illness as a cause for suicide in these states.
• The study noticed that around 58 per cent of the victim HHs were BPL families. Field
evidence shows that food grains supplied is insufficient. Hence, the quantum of food grains
supplied to BPL card holders needs to be at least doubled to ensure food and nutrition
security for the victim households.
• Higher incidence of suicides among BPL, AAY card holders and among OBC category
necessitates special focus on strengthening their weakness to cope with distress conditions.
76
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Special counseling to women farmers in Telangana may be done since the state has
witnessed highest number of women farmer suicides.
• Higher number of farmer suicides was reported in resource rich districts of Karnataka,
whereas the resource poor (drought prone) districts exhibited relatively lesser number
of suicides. This might be due to the ability of farmers in resource poor regions to cope
up with the distress and their awareness of alternate choices. On the contrary, farmers
from resource rich areas are left with fewer options to take up. For instance, in command
areas, main crops were paddy and sugarcane and during water crisis, they hardly have any
other option to sustain the crop since techniques like drip irrigation and mulching are not
viable options. Hence capacity building on coping strategies should be given to resource
rich regions as well.
Suggestions that can be implemented over a span of time
• Regulating the informal credit market through licensing and fixing the norms for charging
interest rate and terms of lending is required. There is a need to create indemnity to non-
institutional borrowers. Radhakrishna Committee recommendations (2007) regarding rural
informal credit market be implemented, which underlines the need for mitigating the
burden of farmers’ indebtedness to money lenders. It recommends a one-time measure of
providing long-term loans by banks to farmers to enable them to repay their debts to the
money lenders. Further, it recommends that Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs), civil society
organizations like farmers’ collectives and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) should
be involved in arriving at negotiated settlements with the Money lenders.
• Most of the victims HHs were not seen practicing crop and enterprise diversification.
Risk hedging through crop and enterprise diversification should be encouraged to reduce
farmers’ distress aiming at sustainable income.
• Establishment of farmers’ Welfare Fund / Farmers’ Welfare Department in every state is
the need of the hour to meet social consumption needs of farmers. The Central and State
Government should contribute to this fund. NABARD can also be roped into this scheme for
fund contribution. This has been suggested by Deshpande and Arora (2010), Bhende and
Thippaiah (2010) and Radhakrishna Report (2007) as well.
• Prime Ministers Rehabilitation Package may be reintroduced in the suicide prone states by
plugging the loopholes mentioned in the study by Bhende and Thippaiah (2010). The various
components of the package may aid the distress farmer to cope with the predicament.
77
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
• Farmers may include various effective water saving techniques in cultivation like drip
irrigation and protective cultivation as lack of water was mentioned by victim HHs in most
of the sample states.
• Most of the Cooperative banks of eastern region of Uttar Pradesh are bankrupt at present
and are not functioning. Hence, there is a need for its financial revival to eliminate the
illegal money lenders from remote rural areas. In this context, NABARD may provide the
financial help to cooperative banks.
• Fodder shortage was one of the issues of concern in Maharashtra. Most of the farmers were
compelled to sell their animals at low prices due to non-availability of fodder, thereby,
discontinuing livestock farming. Such a situation should not arise and there must be enough
fodder camps so that livestock farming is continued.
• It is also suggested that rural non-farm employment programme under MNREGS must be
enhanced.
• There should be a Compassionate Distress Consulting Officer at the Department of
Agriculture heading a special cell. This cell may be assigned with the responsibility of
counseling and financing the small ventures in the villages. This may be integrated with
the employment generating departments and agencies across states and nation as a
whole. It should encourage the farmers to start dairy, poultry, fishery and other livestock
activities.
• At aggregate level, 17 per cent of 528 victim households mentioned illness as cause of
suicide. The discussion with victim households of Madhya Pradesh amply highlighted the
lack of access to mental health services in rural areas. Hence, Primary health care and
support system to vulnerable farmers must be strengthened so that illness does not serve as
a trigger factor to an already indebted farmer. Without exception, the victim households of
all the states were honest enough to accept that victims were alcohol addicts. Therefore,
rehabilitation centre for drug abuse and alcohol addiction should be established.
• Health insurance programme for the farmers be enhanced not only covering the Government
Hospitals but should also include the private hospitals. A scheme like Employees State
Insurance (for industrial workers), called “Farmers’ State Insurance Scheme (FSIS)” that
will enable the farmer to seek medical treatment from the ESI hospitals may go a long way
(suggested by Deshpande and Arora, 2010).
78
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Field visit - West Bengal
Suggestions that can be implemented in long run
• Failure of rain, attack of pest and disease leads to crop loss. This was reported as one of the
causes for farmer suicides across states. Prominent states among them are: Maharashtra,
Punjab, Haryana and West Bengal. Hence, there is a need to install automated weather
stations so that farmers are alerted on natural calamities and can take precautionary
measures. The Government of Maharashtra launched the Crop Pest Surveillance Project
(CROPSAP) during 2009-10. Though the scheme was not a huge success, further refinement
and proper measures in implementation can aid the farmers in suicide prone states.
• Another important request of victim households was to improve the access to market
within their reach. For instance, cotton is purchased at a few agricultural market centres
rather than at affordable distance by Cotton Corporation of India (CCI).
• Construction of large tanks, watersheds, de-siltation of community tanks and completion
of irrigation projects has to be given top priority so as to ensure water availability.
79
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
REFERENCES
Abraham, T. (2016). Baliraja Chetana Abhiyan helps arrest suicide rate in Yavatmal. Times of
India. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/nagpur/Baliraja-Chetana-Abhiyan-helps-
arrest-suicide-rate-in-Yavatmal/articleshow/52333219.cms
Anneshi, R. and Gowda, N.K. (2015). An Economic Analysis of Rural Indebtedness of Farmer House
Holds: A House Hold Study in Davanagere District of Karnataka. Indian Journal of Research.
4(7), pp.285-287
Behere, P.B. and Behere, A.P. (2008). Farmer suicides in Vidharbha Region of Maharashtra State:
A myth or reality?. Indian Journal of Psychiatry. 50, pp.124-127
Bhende, M.J. and P. Thippaiah. (2010). An Evaluation Study of Prime Minister’s Rehabilitation
Package for Farmers in Suicide-Prone Districts of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and
Maharashtra, Agricultural Development and Rural Transformation Centre (ADRTC), Institute
for Social and Economic Change, Bengaluru.
Chhikara, K.S. and Kodan, A.S. (2014). Farmers’ Indebtedness in Haryana: A Study. Journal of
Rural Development. 32(4), pp.347-365.
Dandekar, Ajay and Bhattacharya, Sreedeep. (2017). Lives in Debt: Narratives of Agrarian Distress
and Farmer Suicides. Economic and Political Weekly, 52(21), pp.77-84.
Dash, A.P. (1998). Failure of Cotton Crop and Its Impact on Farmers, Vaikunth Mehta National
Institute of Co-operative Management, Pune.
Deshpande, R.S. and Saroj Arora. (2010). Agrarian Crisis and Farmer Suicide - Land Reforms in
India, Volume 12, New Delhi: Sage Publication.
Deshpande, R.S. (2002). Suicide by Farmers in Karnataka: Agrarian Distress and Possible Alleviatory
Steps, Economic and Political Weekly. 37(26), pp.2601-2610.
Dominic Merriott. (2017). Factors Associated with the Farmer Suicide Crisis in India”, Journal of
Epidemiology and Global Health, 6, pp.217– 227.
Devadas, V.S. and Sunil, K.M. (2014). Final Report of NAIP subproject “Multi Enterprise arming
Models to Address the Agrarian Crisis of Wayanad District of Kerala”. Kerala Agricultural
University, Thrissur.
80
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Government of Andhra Pradesh. (2005). Report of the Commission on Farmers’ Welfare,
Government of Andhra Pradesh.
GoK. (2002). Farmers’ suicides in Karnataka - A Scientific Analysis (Report of the Expert Committee
for Study of Farmers’ Suicides.
GoI (2015). Economic Survey, 2014–15. http://indiabudget.nic.in/survey.asp, GoI. (2014). Spate
of cases of suicide by farmers. Intelligence Bureau, GoI. (2013). Debt and Investment Survey
NSS 70th round, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, New Delhi.
Golait Ramesh (2007). “Current Issues in Agriculture Credit in India: An Assessment”, Reserve
Bank of India Occasional Papers. 28(1), pp 79-98.
Gupta, D. (2005). Whither the Indian Village: Culture and Agriculture in ‘Rural’ India. Economic
& Political Weekly. 40(8), pp.751-758.
Indiastat. 2017. https://www.indiastat.com
Kanthi, J. (2014). Economics of Agriculture and Farmers’ Suicides – A Case Study of Warangal
District in Andhra Pradesh. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Osmania University.
Kaviraj. S. (1984). On the Crisis of Political Institutions in India’, Contributions to Indian Sociology.
Kumar, N. (2017). Unraveling farmer suicides in India egoism and masculinity in peasant life,
Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
Kumar, A. Singh, K.M. and Sinha, S. (2010). Institutional Credit to Agriculture Sector in India:
Status, Performance and Determinants. Agricultural Economics Research Review. 23,
pp.253-264.
Macharia, I. (2015). Determinants of farmers’ suicides in Andhra Pradesh: An analysis. International
Journal of Academic Research. 2(1), pp.81-87.
Meeta and Rajivlochan. (2006). Framers Suicide: Facts and Possible Policy Interventions.
Yashwant rao Chavan Academy of Development Administration. Maharashtra. Retrieved from
http://agrariancrisis.in/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2006-Farmers-Suicide-in-
IndiaYASHADA.pdf
Mohanty, B.B. (2014). Social Root of farmer suicides in Maharashtra. Gokhale Institute of Politics
and Economics, Pune. Retrieved from http://www.unipune.ac.in/snc/cssh/egp/6%20
Unpublished%20materials%20on%20EGS/14.pdf
Mohanty, B. B. (2013). Farmer Suicides in India. Economic & Political Weekly. 48(21), pp.45-54.
81
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Mohanty, B.B. (2005). ‘We are like the living dead’: Farmer suicides in Maharashtra, Western
India, The journal of peasant studies, 35(2), pp.243-276.
Mohanty, B.B. and Shroff, S. (2004). Farmers’ Suicides in Maharashtra. Economic and Political
Weekly. 39(52), pp. 5599-5606.
Mohan Kumar, S. and R. K. Sharma. (2006). “Analysis of Farmer Suicides in Kerala”, Economic and
Political Weekly, Vol. 41, No.16, April 22 - April 28, pp.1553-1558.
National Crime Records Bureau. (2015). National crime records bureau report 2014.
http://ncrb.nic.in/ADSI2015/adsi-2014%20full%20report.pdf
National Crime Records Bureau. (2014). National crime records bureau report 2014.
http://ncrb.nic.in/ADSI2015/adsi-2014%20full%20report.pdf
NSSO. (2003). Situation Assessment Survey of Agricultural Households: NSS 59th Round, National
Sample Survey Organisation, New Delhi.
NSSO. (2005). 61st Round Survey Report, National Sample Survey Organisation, New Delhi.
NSSO. (2013). Situation Assessment Survey of Agricultural Households: NSS 70th Round, National
Sample Survey Organisation, New Delhi.
Nirmala and Annie, K. (2003). Market Imperfections and Farmers’ Distress in Andhra Pradesh
(Visakhapatnam: Agro-Economic Research Centre, Andhra University).
Radhakrishna, R. (2007). Report of the Expert Group on Agricultural Indebtedness, Banking
Division, Department of Economic Affairs, Government of India.
Government of Andhra Pradesh. (2005). Report of commission on Farmers Welfare.
RStv. (2017). SC raises concern over farmer suicides, questions Govt. approach.
http://rstv.nic.in/sc-raise-concerns-farmers-suicide-questions-govt-approach.html
Sarah Hebous and Stefan Klonner. (2014). Economic Distress and Farmers Suicides in India: An
Econometric Investigation, Dept. of Economics, University of Heidelberg.
Sidhu, Aman and Inderjit Singh Jaijee. (2011). Debt and Death in Rural India: The Punjab Story
(New Delhi: Sage Publications).
Singh, S., Bhogal, S. and Singh, R. (2014). Magnitude and Determinants of Indebtedness Among
farmers in Punjab. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 68(2), pp.243-256
82
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Surinder Sud (2009). The Changing Profile of Indian Agriculture, Business Standard Books, ISBN
978-8190573559, pp.107-109.
Swaminathan, Mankombu S. (2010). From Green to Evergreen Revolution. Indian agriculture:
Performance and Emerging Challenges, New Delhi: Academic Foundation.
Swaminathan Committee on Farmers (2006), http://www.prsindia.org/parliamenttrack/report-
summaries/swaminathan-report-national-commission-on-farmers.
Vasavi, A. R. (2012). Suicides and the Predicament of Rural India. Shadow Space.
http://www.threeessays.com/books/shadow-space/.
Field visit - Telangana
83
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
ANNEXURE
Comments on Draft Report by
Centre for Management of Agriculture, IIM, Ahmedabad
The comments received on draft report from the Centre for Management of Agriculture, Indian
Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.
(i) Title of the Draft Study Report Examined
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
(ii) Date of Receipt of the Draft Report
June 19, 2017
(III) Date of Dispatch of Comments
July 4, 2017
(IV) Comments on the Objectives of the Study
The topic of the study is highly relevant in the current context. Against the backdrop of the alarming farmer suicides in India, the present study is attempting to analyse the extent of farmer suicides and the factors behind it. The study also analyses the socio-economic profile of the households, the cropping pattern and the profitability of the victim’s household. Among all the objectives listed, only analysis of the factors that is leading to farmer’s suicide had more of analytical content. So the study could have identified one or two more such objectives that have more of analytical content.
(V) Comments on the Methodology
The methodology is quite consistent with the study objectives. The primary data that is collected is quite extensive. The data is collected from 13 states that include 46 districts, 138 taluks, 388 villages and 528 victim households. Multi stage sampling technique was used in selecting the sample households. There were variations in the number of victim households selected from each state. For example, 107 from Karnataka and 14 from Haryana. It is better to include the reasons for this variation. Also are they proportional to the incidence of farmer suicides that took place in each state. Otherwise the sample will be biased.
84
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
(VI) Comments on the Presentation, Get up etc.
The report is very well structured and presented. The study is talking about various
government initiatives such as Prime Minsiter’s Rehabilitation Package (PMRP) Pradhan
Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) etc. in the report. However the study does not
make any analysis on the impact of these programmes in addressing the agrarian
distress. Neither study is discussing about it in the policy recommendation section.
Some discussions on the effectiveness of these programmes also will be useful.
The policy recommendation section of the report highlights that MSP received by the
farmers were not enough to cover the cost of production. However there is no data
on MSP received and the cost of cultivation at the household level. If any such data
is available, it would be good to include in the report and the data will substantiate
the argument that the MSP received is not covering the cost of cultivation. This is
especially important when we see that the net returns is much higher than the cost
of cultivation at the macro level in most of the states under study (chapter three the
graph (page 53)). The net returns and cost shows that the returns were higher than
the cost in most states except Karnataka and Maharashtra.
Minor comments
a. There is a typo on page 12 . (3rd paragraph). “”it is suggested by the victim households
that Government should make policy to waive or reschedule the outstanding amount
of farmers whenever” ..it is farmers loan.
(VII) Overall View on Acceptability of the Report
The report is an excellent attempt in terms of understanding the factors behind the
agrarian distress and farmer’s suicide in India. The report is well structured and the
data collected is very extensive. If feasible the study can shed some light into the
impact of government’s relief programme as well as the authenticity of farmer’s
view that the MSP does not over the cost of cultivation. Otherwise the report can be
accepted.
Action taken by the authors based on the comments received
All comments relavent to the objectives and methodology have been addressed at the
appropriate places in the report.
85
Farmer Suicides : An All India Study
Field visit - West Bengal
Field visit - Karnataka
Desi
gn b
y: d
ataw
orx,
Ben
galu
ru;
web
site
: w
ww
.dat
awor
x.co
.in
Dr. V.K.R.V. Rao Road, Nagarabhavi, Bengaluru - 560 072 Phone: +91-80-23215468, 23215519; Fax: +91-80-23217008
Email: [email protected]; website: http://www.isec.ac.in
Agro-Economic Research CentreAgricultural Development and Rural Transformation Centre
INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGE
Top Related