IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v89y2023i3p657-679.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mises's dynamics of interventionism: Lessons from Indian agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Shruti Rajagopalan

Abstract

Despite trade liberalization, industrial delicensing, and deregulation in other sectors of the Indian economy since 1991, the agricultural sector is stifled by arbitrary, complex, and ever‐increasing regulation in both input and product markets. This article resolves this puzzle of the Indian economy and, using Mises's theory of interventionism, explains the growth of regulation and subsidies in Indian agriculture. I argue that each intervention in agriculture created distortions in the market, necessitating the subsequent intervention in agricultural inputs and/or outputs. Land ceiling policies led to a large number of farmers with small and marginal landholdings. Attempts to increase agricultural productivity and income on small holdings led to interventions, and consequent distortions, in factor markets for seeds, fertilizer, electricity, water, credit, insurance, as well as in output markets in the form of minimum support prices. Indian agriculture policy serves as a cautionary tale of interventionism and needs systematic and comprehensive reforms.

Suggested Citation

  • Shruti Rajagopalan, 2023. "Mises's dynamics of interventionism: Lessons from Indian agriculture," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 89(3), pages 657-679, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:89:y:2023:i:3:p:657-679
    DOI: 10.1002/soej.12621
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12621
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/soej.12621?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Pennington, 2004. "The Dynamics of Interventionism: A Case Study of British Land Use Regulation," Advances in Austrian Economics, in: The Dynamics of Intervention: Regulation and Redistribution in the Mixed Economy, pages 335-356, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    2. Shruti Rajagopalan, 2015. "Incompatible institutions: socialism versus constitutionalism in India," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 328-355, September.
    3. Klaus Deininger & Songqing Jin & Yanyan Liu & Sudhir K. Singh, 2018. "Can Labor-Market Imperfections Explain Changes in the Inverse Farm Size–Productivity Relationship? Longitudinal Evidence from Rural India," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(2), pages 239-258.
    4. Timothy Besley & Robin Burgess, 2000. "Land Reform, Poverty Reduction, and Growth: Evidence from India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(2), pages 389-430.
    5. Ayal Kimhi, 2006. "Plot size and maize productivity in Zambia: is there an inverse relationship?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 35(1), pages 1-9, July.
    6. Ashok Gulati & Ranjana Roy & Shweta Saini (ed.), 2021. "Revitalizing Indian Agriculture and Boosting Farmer Incomes," India Studies in Business and Economics, Springer, edition 1, number 978-981-15-9335-2, June.
    7. Bardhan, Pranab K, 1973. "Size, Productivity, and Returns to Scale: An Analysis of Farm-Level Data in Indian Agriculture," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(6), pages 1370-1386, Nov.-Dec..
    8. Adam Martin, 2011. "Rational choice without closure: the microfoundations of virtuous cycles and vicious circles," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 345-361, December.
    9. Roy, Tirthankar & Swamy, Anand V., 2022. "Law and the Economy in a Young Democracy," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226799001, December.
    10. Regy, Prasanth Vairavana & Sarwal, Rakesh & Stranger, Clay & Fitzgerald, Garrett & Ningthoujam, Jagabanta & Gupta, Arjun & Singh, Nuvodita, 2021. "Turning Around the Power Distribution Sector: Learnings and Best Practices from Reforms," OSF Preprints xd2he, Center for Open Science.
    11. Desiere, Sam & Jolliffe, Dean, 2018. "Land productivity and plot size: Is measurement error driving the inverse relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 84-98.
    12. Maitreesh Ghatak & Sanchari Roy, 2007. "Land reform and agricultural productivity in India: a review of the evidence," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(2), pages 251-269, Summer.
    13. John Briscoe & R.P.S. Malik, 2006. "India's Water Economy : Bracing for a Turbulent Future," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 7238.
    14. Chatterjee, Shoumitro & Kapur, Devesh, 2017. "Six Puzzles in Indian Agriculture," India Policy Forum, National Council of Applied Economic Research, vol. 13(1), pages 185-229.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Steven Helfand & Matthew Taylor, 2018. "The Inverse Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity: Refocusing the Debate," Working Papers 201811, University of California at Riverside, Department of Economics.
    2. Fang Xia & Lingling Hou & Songqing Jin & Dongqing Li, 2020. "Land size and productivity in the livestock sector: evidence from pastoral areas in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 867-888, July.
    3. Taylor, Matthew P.H. & Helfand, Steven M., 2021. "The Farm Size – Productivity Relationship in the Wake of Market Reform: An Analysis of Mexican Family Farms," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315138, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Bevis, Leah EM. & Barrett, Christopher B., 2020. "Close to the edge: High productivity at plot peripheries and the inverse size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    5. Rangalal Mohapatra & Bondona Lama, 2024. "An analysis of the determinants of productivity of Assam tea growers," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 4(12), pages 1-33, December.
    6. Mensah, Edouard R. & Kostandini, Genti, 2020. "The inverse farm size-productivity relationship under land size mis-measurement and in the presence of weather and price risks: Panel data evidence from Uganda," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304477, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Helfand, Steven M. & Taylor, Matthew P.H., 2021. "The inverse relationship between farm size and productivity: Refocusing the debate," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Takada, Jun & Shuto, Hisato, 2023. "Causal linkages between land reform and factor demand under tenure insecurity: Evidence from Amhara Region, Ethiopia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    9. Aragón, Fernando M., 2015. "Do better property rights improve local income?: Evidence from First Nations' treaties," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 43-56.
    10. Sonia Bhalotra & Abhishek Chakravarty & Dilip Mookherjee & Francisco J. Pino, 2019. "Property Rights and Gender Bias: Evidence from Land Reform in West Bengal," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 205-237, April.
    11. Roy, Susmita, 2012. "Land reforms and social unrest: An empirical investigation of riots in India," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 249-251.
    12. Klasen, Stephan & Reimers, Malte, 2017. "Looking at Pro-Poor Growth from an Agricultural Perspective," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 147-168.
    13. Aragón, Fernando M. & Restuccia, Diego & Rud, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Are small farms really more productive than large farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    14. Besley, Timothy & Leight, Jessica & Pande, Rohini & Rao, Vijayendra, 2016. "Long-run impacts of land regulation: Evidence from tenancy reform in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 72-87.
    15. Ibrahim Demir, 2016. "The firm size, farm size, and transaction costs: the case of hazelnut farms in Turkey," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 81-90, January.
    16. Pranab Bardhan & Dilip Mookherjee, 2011. "Subsidized Farm Input Programs and Agricultural Performance: A Farm-Level Analysis of West Bengal's Green Revolution, 1982-1995," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 186-214, October.
    17. Omotilewa, Oluwatoba J. & Jayne, T.S. & Muyanga, Milu & Aromolaran, Adebayo B. & Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O. & Awokuse, Titus, 2021. "A revisit of farm size and productivity: Empirical evidence from a wide range of farm sizes in Nigeria," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    18. Dagdeviren, Hulya & Elangovan, Arthanari & Parimalavelli, Ramanathan, 2023. "Land tenure and food security in South India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    19. Julien, Jacques C. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Rada, Nicholas E., 2019. "Assessing farm performance by size in Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 153-164.
    20. Desiere, Sam & Jolliffe, Dean, 2018. "Land productivity and plot size: Is measurement error driving the inverse relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 84-98.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:89:y:2023:i:3:p:657-679. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.