Land Reforms and the Green Revolution for CUET Economics

AnswerB · low productivity and dependence on the monsoon

1. Colonial rule left farming stagnant: yields were low, irrigation was scarce and most farms depended on the rains.

AnswerD · land reforms

1. Land reforms changed who owned the land (institutions); the green revolution changed how it was farmed (technology).

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. Where there is no irrigation, the crop depends on the rains.

2. R explains A.

AnswerA · Only I

1. Industry and services grew faster, so agriculture's share of output fell sharply: I is true.

2. The share of people depending on it barely moved, from about 67.5% to 64.9%: II is false.

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. Output shifted to industry and services, but jobs did not follow, so people stayed on the land.

2. R explains A.

AnswerA · to give ownership of land to the tiller

1. 'Land to the tiller': the person who works the land should own it.

AnswerB · removing the zamindars between tiller and state

1. Zamindars stood between the cultivator and the government; abolishing zamindari brought tenants into direct contact with the state.

AnswerC · the maximum area of land one person may own

1. A ceiling fixes the most land an individual can hold; land above it is taken and given to the landless.

AnswerC · Owners keep all the gains and so invest more in the land

1. A tenant who pays a large rent keeps little of any extra output; an owner keeps all of it.

2. So ownership gives an incentive to invest in irrigation, seeds and care.

AnswerC · 200 lakh

1. The abolition of intermediaries brought about 200 lakh tenants into direct contact with the government, freeing them from the zamindars' exploitation.

AnswerA · to cut the concentration of land in a few hands

1. Ceilings were meant to promote equity: surplus land from big owners would go to the landless.

AnswerD · went to court and put land in relatives' names

1. Landowners delayed the laws through the courts, and registered land in the names of relatives to keep it within the family.

AnswerC · Kerala and West Bengal

1. Their governments were committed to the policy of land to the tiller.

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. Where governments were committed, the laws were carried out.

2. R explains A.

AnswerA · Only I

1. Loopholes such as 'self-cultivation' let some zamindars keep land: I is true.

2. Inequality fell but did not end, so II is false.

AnswerA · A-II, B-IV, C-I, D-III

1. Each measure attacked one weakness of the old land system.

AnswerC · Both I and II

1. Both are true: land reforms are the institutional side and the green revolution the technological side of farm policy.

AnswerC · A is true, but R is false.

1. A is true.

2. Zamindars took rent and invested little, which is why zamindari was abolished. R is false.

AnswerC · A is true, but R is false.

1. Spreading land promotes equity; ownership raises incentives: A is true.

2. They succeeded in a few states and lagged in many, so R is false.

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. Moving land from the few to the many spreads ownership more evenly.

2. R explains A.

AnswerC · A is true, but R is false.

1. Where tenants became owners, they invested and output rose: A is true.

2. Ceiling laws were evaded in many states, so R is false.

AnswerB · a big rise in grain output from new seeds and inputs

1. High-yielding varieties (HYV) of seed, used with fertiliser, pesticides and regular water, raised the output of food grains sharply.

AnswerC · the part of output that farmers sell

1. Marketed surplus = output sold in the market, after what the farm household keeps for itself.

AnswerA · high-yielding variety

1. High-yielding varieties produce much more grain per hectare when given the right inputs.

AnswerD · fertiliser, pesticides and regular water

1. HYV seeds respond to inputs: without fertiliser and assured water, their yield is no better than old seeds.

AnswerA · Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu

1. From the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, HYV seeds were limited to the better-off states such as Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.

AnswerD · Wheat

1. The HYV seeds first transformed the wheat-growing regions.

AnswerB · HYV seeds spread to more states and crops

1. In the second phase the new technology spread to a larger number of states and benefited more crops.

AnswerC · food grain prices fell relative to other goods

1. A large marketed surplus pushed food prices down relative to other goods.

2. Poor households spend a large share of their income on food, so they gained most.

AnswerB · build up a buffer stock of food grains

1. With more grain sold in the market, the government could procure enough to hold a buffer stock for times of shortage.

AnswerD · HYV crops were more prone to attack by pests

1. HYV crops were more open to pests, and a small farmer who lost a crop could be ruined.

2. Research institutes advised farmers and the government gave loans and subsidies to cut this risk.

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. Higher yields meant India no longer had to import food grains to feed its people.

2. R explains A.

AnswerD · Abolition of the zamindari system

1. Fertilisers, irrigation and pesticides went with HYV seeds. Abolishing zamindari was a land reform, an institutional change.

AnswerD · 12.8 million tonnes

1. Wheat: 23.8 − 11.0 = 12.8 million tonnes.

AnswerC · 8.5 times

1. 55.1 ÷ 6.5 ≈ 8.5.

AnswerC · Wheat gained far more than rice in the 1960s

1. Wheat rose from 11.0 to 23.8 (more than double); rice from 34.6 to 42.2 (about 22%).

2. The early HYV seeds were mainly wheat.

AnswerD · A-III, B-I, C-IV, D-II

1. Each term names one part of the farm policy of 1950–90.

AnswerD · Neither I nor II

1. HYV seeds need assured water, so they went first to irrigated areas. I is false.

2. Wheat gained most, then rice; pulses gained little. II is false.

AnswerC · A is true, but R is false.

1. Self-sufficiency in food grains was the green revolution's main achievement: A is true.

2. Big and small farms alike used them, so R is false.

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. The new technology reached wheat first, so wheat output jumped first.

2. R explains A.

AnswerB · 28 quintals

1. Marketed surplus = output − own use = 40 − 12 = 28 quintals.

AnswerC · Both I and II

1. The inputs cost money, which small farmers lacked, so the fear was real: I is true.

2. Government loans and subsidies spread the gains to small farmers: II is true.

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. States such as Punjab gained first and fastest; rain-fed regions were left behind.

2. R explains A.

AnswerA · 1960-61 to 1970-71

1. 1950s: 4.5 ÷ 6.5 ≈ 69%. 1960s: 12.8 ÷ 11.0 ≈ 116%.

2. 1970s: 12.5 ÷ 23.8 ≈ 53%. 1980s: 18.8 ÷ 36.3 ≈ 52%.

3. The 1960s, when HYV wheat arrived, more than doubled output.

AnswerC · B, D, A, C

1. Permanent Settlement 1793; zamindari abolished in the early 1950s; first phase mid-1960s to mid-1970s; second phase mid-1970s to mid-1980s.

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. A bigger marketed surplus means more grain on sale, which lowers its relative price.

2. R explains A.

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. The new seeds needed costly inputs and carried more risk; small farmers had the least to fall back on.

2. R explains A.

AnswerB · the government pays part of the price

1. A subsidy lowers the price the user pays; the government meets the difference.

AnswerB · they were needed to get farmers to try the new technology

1. A new technology is risky; a subsidy lowers its cost, so farmers are willing to adopt it.

AnswerA · most of the gain goes to fertiliser makers and richer farmers

1. Once a technology has spread, the subsidy no longer changes behaviour; it is a large burden on the budget that mostly helps those who are already better off.

AnswerC · Both I and II

1. Both views are part of the subsidy debate, so both statements are true.

AnswerD · A is false, but R is true.

1. Every buyer gets the lower price, so big farmers, who buy more, gain more. A is false.

2. R is true.

AnswerB · Both A and R are true, but R is not the correct explanation of A.

1. Subsidies cost the government money: A is true.

2. R is true, but more wheat does not explain the cost of subsidies.

AnswerA · Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.

1. Without the subsidy, fertiliser costs more; farmers who cannot pay use less and lose output.

2. R explains A.