Centre for Development Studies National Research Programme on Plantation Development (NRPPD) National Stgakeholder Consultation On National Rubber Policy

2 August 2014

Report on the Discussion by Different Groups

Session 1 & 2 : Natural Rubber Growers’ group/ Labour related issues

1. Natural Rubber Growers’ Group

Chair : Prof C Bhaskaran, Member (KAU) &

NRPPD Research Advisory Committee

Co-Chair*: Shri Siby J Monippally, General Secretary, (IRGA)

2. Group on Labour Related Issues

Chair : Dr S Mohanakumar, IDS Jaipur

Co-Chair : Adv. Lalaji Babu, President, All India Plantation Workers Federation , CITU

Session Co-ordinator: Ms Sajitha Ananthakrishnan

The session starts with a brief introduction by Prof. C. Bhaskaran on various aspects of natural rubber which is dominated by small holdings. He mentioned that, natural rubber (NR) cultivation is considered to be a source of livelihood for both growers and rubber plantation workers. At this juncture, there is a need of the hour to initiate necessary steps to make this sector more viable and attractive to both the parties. Various speakers have presented their views on the challenges involved in natural rubber with respect to production and labour and also recommended some remedial measures to cope up the vulnerable situation. Detailed descriptions of various recommendations are as follows:

Production related recommendations

In a situation where the price of the natural rubber turns to be less than the cost of production and an increase in the import from 4 per cent in 2001 to 39 per cent in 2013-14, there is a need to address the challenges involved to protect the domestic rubber industry. Some of the recommendations suggested by the group to enhance the production aspects are given below:

a) Land Use Policy should be clearly defined

In most of the cases, land under cultivation of natural rubber is treated as forest land. In this situation, growers are struggling to carry forward the cultivation. Hence, there is a need to provide security of land assets to the cultivators. For this, a clear land use policy on rubber covering is required.

b) Scientific calculation of production cost involved in the NR cultivation

As per the rough statistics, the cost of production for 1 kg of rubber is nearly comes between 150-160 rs. The replanting and other developmental activities lead to increase the level of expenditure. In this situation, a proper analysis on the calculation of cost of production of natural rubber assumes importance before making any policies for cost minimization.

c) Financial assistance towards modernization and development of natural rubber

The cultivation of natural rubber involves heavy social and infrastructure cost. To overcome this, there is a need for a separate financial source to the NR cultivation.

d) Revise the existing agro-management scheme for harvesting, tapping etc

As per existing agro- management scheme, support will be given to the growers after 3 years of initial harvesting. Recommendation on this issue is to revise the existing structure of the scheme and make available the benefit of the scheme from pre harvesting period onwards.

e) Upward revision in replanting schemes

The existing subsidies for replantation are not adequate to meet the expenditure involved in the replantation. Further, majority of the growers are not benefitted out of this scheme. In this context, a thorough examination of the existing scheme is required and a reasonable hike is necessary to meet the cost involved in the cultivation.

f) Minimum support price for natural rubber

There is a need to fix a floor price for the natural rubber to help the growers from unforeseen decline in the price level.

g) Participation of growers in the price decision process

Growers are treated to be the price takers wherein prices are determined mainly by big tyre industries. In order to reduce the exploitation from tyre industries, there is a provision to give space to the growers to participate in the price decision process.

h) Price Stabilization fund

In a situation where in the existing price stabilization scheme is not effective, there is a need to recheck and make it more effective.

i) Insurance scheme

There is a need to implement insurance schemes for the crop to cope up all the risks and vulnerabilities involved in the cultivation.

Labour related recommendations

The discussion on labour related issues by the chair (Mohanakumar) admitted the fact that volatility in price level has an adverse impact on the employment of rubber plantation workers especially tappers. One of the major issue raised is, how far the respective agencies can guarantee 200 days of employment to the rubber plantation workers? In tune with this, lot of issues have been discussed and come out with few recommendations for the upliftment of the workers in the NR which is discussed below:

a) Minimum support wages to be fixed to the rubber plantation labours in par with industrial workers

b) Skill development programmes to the rubber sector workers

To enhance the capability and skill of rubber plantation workers on various aspects, there is a need of some skill development programmes likes ASAP (Acquired Skill Acquisition Programme)

c) Socio-economic development to the rubber plantation labours

Issues of social importance like housing (both construction and maintenance) and health care for rubber plantation workers are need to be consider while designing the polices for their upliftment.

d) Welfare schemes for the labourers

State government should take necessary steps to provide welfare fund to the workers

e) Inclusion of women workers (those who are working in Group Processing Centres) into the welfare schemes

Other recommendations

a) Financial assistance to strengthen RPS

To revive the strength of RPS, there is a need to provide financial assistance towards the functioning of RPS. Further, a support is given to the RPS to start buffer stock facilities.

b) Uniform tax policy

c) Control on unaccountable imports

d) Check on the quality of imports

e) Increase the export incentive by at least 10 per cent

In earlier periods, the export incentive was Rs 3 which turns to be 14 per cent of the total price. However in recent period, it is only 2 per cent of the total price. This adversely affects the export of NR from India.

f) Enhancing the consumption of NR

To increase the demand for NR, there is a need to have a clear policy to enhance the consumption of natural rubber eg. Road rubbarisation

g) Clear specification of methodology regarding area and production in the Indian Rubber Statistics

h) Protection of rubber timber industry i) Control on tax free imports

To protect the domestic NR sector, there is a need to control the import from all the channels.

Session 3. Group on Rubber Industry Related Issues

Chair : Prof K J Joseph, CDS

Co-chair : Shri.Virendra Rathod, Head, Synthetic Rubber Business, Reliance

Session Co-ordinators: Mr Kiran Kumar and Mr Sanjay Kumar Malik

At the outset of the discussion it has been highlighted that India’s rubber industry in global

market is dismal. It was pointed out that during 1980’s India and China was on similar trajectory

in terms of rubber production and consumption. Nonetheless, while China improved its

production by manifold, India’s performance in production is not impressive like China. In fact,

per capita production and consumption of rubber is far below the leading producers in the world.

In this context, the discussion highlighted various problems leading to the sub-optimal

performance of rubber industry in terms of its broad product structure. First, they highlighted the

need for increase in plant size to reap economies of scale which in turn requires expansion of

investment in the sector, the main short coming in the industry. They argued that India has huge

capacity to produce rubber in India and only 30 per cent of capacity is utilized due to shortage of

raw materials. The concern was raised that the shortage raw materials is mainly because India

restricted import of block rubber, even after major companies have accepted it. This particularly

led to increase in cost of production in processing. Secondly, the discussion was mainly centered

on Inverted Duty Structure in Rubber Industry. Under the Inverted duty structure, producers or

manufacturers of rubber products have to pay a higher tax or duty on import of raw materials,

whereas the import of final or finished products are taxed lower. This very nature of duty

structure has taken us into two situations: in one situation, it disincentives the producers to

undertake production of (finished) rubber products as it shut up cost of production compared to

their counterpart in foreign countries, and in another situation, it drains away the demand or

market of indigenous rubber producers as the domestic producers have to compete with the

cheap imports from the neighboring countries, say for e.g., China. The inverted tax system has

therefore been very deleterious towards the Rubber Industry and thereby affecting the innovation

and production of the industry in India. Therefore they suggested doing away with the tax

anomaly and creating an incentive environment for a sustainable rubber industry in India.

4. Group on RPS Related Issues

Chair : Prof P S George Member, NRPPD Research Advisory Committee

Co-Chair : Shri.Suresh Koshy, President, National Federation of Rubber

Producers Societies (NFRPS) Session Co-ordinator: Ms Namratha Thapa and Mr Thomas Mathew

Lack of programmes sponsored by The Rubber Board and minimal representation of RPS members in the Board have hindered the prospects of the development of RPSs. In Palghat and Thrissur regions, RPS presidents have had to take loans on personal accounts in order to run their respective RPSs. This is due to the high costs of construction and maintenance of latex collection, scrap collection and sheet processing units, which are not even partially financed by the Government. (In Thrissur region, RPSs are not functional owing to the above-mentioned practical difficulties, despite land being available). Grants and soft loans must be provided to RPS units in this regard. It also requires that the Rubber Board is strengthened and its relations with RPSs revitalized.

A perceptive bias against the rubber plantation sector and planters looms at the administrative levels as well. Though there is provision for local self governments to use 40 per cent of the funds allocated to them under their own discretion, they hesitate to allocate any fund to the development or sustenance of RPS units even in areas where rubber plantation provides for the sole economic activity. Since 96 per cent of the rubber planters are small cultivators, restraining fund flows to RPS units, assuming them to a wealthy class, is baseless. The Planning Board must effectively communicate to the LSGs regarding the ambits within which these funds could be used.

RPS units and RPS-run companies must also be exempted from Value Added Tax (VAT) like how Kudumbashree and Padasekharam units were exempted long ago. Tappers must be brought under the purview of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) just like coir & cashew workers and cattle feeders.

The Parliament must pass the Seeds Act with immediate effect in order to enhance research & development, keeping in mind the scarcity of land and rise in demand for rubber.

An effective Price Stabilization Fund has to be in place. Planters must be taken into confidence while constituting this fund. It should also serve the purpose of being disbursed among small cultivators in case of a steep fall in prices.

In order to enhance scale economies and make decisions viable when taken as a group, consortiums of RPS should be created. These consortiums must account for region-wise flexibilities, and should build up RPSs as a profitable institutional ‘system’. Quality rubber can be assured to industries provided collection, processing, storing and marketing are integrated

under this system. For the purpose, a godown must be created at each consortium and activities of the Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) must be spread across all areas.

RPSs must be guided by the spirit of social entrepreneurship and the motto of social capital formation. RPS-centred regional economies where the respective RPS undertakes diversified activities, as in Kallara, is a case to be explored as regards the core plantation areas.

Industrial production of latex-bitumen and creamed latex, which are demanded by industries, must be produced by RPSs in an eco-friendly manner. For this, government intervention is required in the form of land allocations (at secluded areas) and research projects. This evolution of RPSs as a ‘system’ will also help local rubber to stand external competition and plummeting prices. Nevertheless, it also requires that our trade policies are more inward-looking. In order that the local rubber recovers at least the costs of production, import duties on imported rubber must be raised from 8 to at least 20 per cent so that it becomes relatively dearer for the Indian industries.

5. Group on Issues Specific to North East

Chair : Dr. P K Viswanathan, Associate Professor, GIDR, Ahmedabad

Co-Chair : Dr. Indraneel Bhoumik, Associate Professor in Economics, Tripura University

Note prepared by P K Viswanathan This note is being prepared with an objective to share some important points based on the empirical research undertaken by the author on various aspects of smallholder rubber development in Kerala and the North Eastern States over a period of last one and a half decades. It is anticipated that the points as elaborated in the note may provide some useful inputs for the proposed National Rubber Policy (NRP). This note covers some important areas of Indian rubber production sector, concerning: (a) potential and challenges in the development and expansion of rubber in the traditional rubber growing regions of Kerala as well as the North Eastern states; (b) the institutional interventions in rubber development and their outcomes; the emerging issues of labour shortage in the traditional rubber growing regions in Kerala; (c) the likely potential implications of the free trade agreements (FTAs) on the rubber plantation sector and the gender impacts; (c) the compatibility of institutional interventions for rubber development in the NE states; etc. Introduction: The International Rubber Study Group (IRSG) has predicted that the natural rubber (NR) share of the global elastomer consumption will increase from approximately 42% in year 2010 to slightly above 46% in year 2020. At the same time, rubber producing countries, including India are facing serious challenges in catching up with the projected increasing demand for NR, due to a host of problems arising from: (a) the unpredictability of climate and the consequent fall in latex yield; (b) shortage of skilled manpower, especially, rubber tappers; (c) consequent rising labour cost; (d) non-availability of agro-climatically suitable land for extending rubber cultivation. In so far as India is concerned, rubber prices, though have declined in the last two years from the peak levels reported during 2011 and 2012, the current prices still continue to be quite reasonable if we consider the relative profitability and viability of the alternate crops. Though the increasing price trend had given stimuli for rubber newplanting and replanting activities in India, the scale of new panting and replanting has not been at par with the scale seen during 2005-2008 in view of the limited availability of land on the one hand and the increasing shortage of labour, especially, rubber tappers. In India, the plantation sector development programmes in the case of rubber grossly suffer from long-term perspective plans and development strategies especially in matters related to sustainable management of plantations in the face of trade reforms on the one side and the emerging labour market crisis confounded by severe labour shortage on the other. These issues become more prominent and need suitable policies, institutional strategies and incentive mechanisms especially to retain and strengthen the existing workforce in the plantations.

As the sustainable rubber production in India greatly depends on the smallholder sector, the national as well as state governments and other important stakeholders should come together and discuss the pertinent issues and challenges facing the NR production, processing, marketing and trade sectors and draw long-term solutions in terms of policies, practices and institutional interventions to strengthen the vibrant smallholder sector. In what follows, we present the important points for policies specific to the various aspects of the rubber production sector in India.

1. Revamping the planting subsidies and incentive structure:

� Given that rubber plantation development in the present context entail significant initial investments, it may be important to revamp the existing planting (newplanting and replanting) subsidy sufficiently to meet a minimum of 60-70% of the initial investment requirements (paid out costs) especially in the non-traditional regions, including NER.

� Since the average rubber smallholding size in case of Kerala had declined over time

due to sub-division and fragmentation, it may be worth considering the restructuring of the planting subsidy scheme in terms of amount per tree rather than the current norm of subsidy per ha.

2. Revamping the Price Stabilization Fund scheme:

It has been observed that the adoption of the Price Stabilization Fund (PSF) scheme implemented by the Rubber Board in case of rubber has not been quite impressive, ie., hardly 10% at the national level as of 2011 (Annexure Table 1). As evident from a study (Varkey and Kumar, 2013), the farmers were continuously paying the installment amount and were not receiving any contribution from the PSF trust. Further, the PSF scheme offers low interest rate payable on the deposit amount and also does not enable the growers to withdraw the amount if they wish so. The real return by way of accrued interest on balances in savings account has also been negative as the inflation rates tend to be higher than the interest rates. This has naturally limited the enthusiasm of the farmers towards PSF (Rangachary, 2006).

� Given the lukewarm response to adoption of PSF and the weaker implementation outcomes, it is important to revisit the policy on PSF.

� An alternative scheme would be the introduction of a counter-cyclical income stabilization fund (CCISF) in place of PSF.

3. Systematic and indepth understanding of the smallholder rubber production sector

across states in India:

� Given that rubber production sector in India has been facing several challenges caused by the exogenous and endogenous factors, it is important to have a detailed assessment of the economic feasibility of rubber production as well as the assessment of the industry-specific value chains across states/ regions in India

� As a vast majority of the rubber small growers especially in the traditional rubber

growing region of Kerala have been facing the serious problems of shrinking land area for rubber development as well as increasing tapper shortage1, a special attention needs to be given for undertaking the economic evaluation including the assessment of the production conditions that prevail in the micro level contexts.

� Since rubber is relatively a new commercial crop being introduced in the non-traditional regions of NE India as well as other states, viz., Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, West Bengal, Maharashtra, etc, it is important to undertake a detailed Census of Rubber in these states.

4. Adverse impacts of Economic Crisis and Free Trade on Rubber Sector:

The gender dimension including status and livelihood of women workers forms integral part of the rubber sector, as employment in the rubber plantation sector in particular, has shown a definite trend towards increased participation by women even in rubber tapping (Viswanathan and Shah, 2012). Given the critical roles played by women in rubber production and processing activities, any serious setbacks in the production sector (such as employment decline due to labour retrenchment) as caused by price decline and such economic crisis as well as India’s increased engagements with FTAs may further worsen the otherwise deprived socio-economic status of women workers in particular. The adverse impacts due to the crisis may also cause concerns about the social security and sustainable livelihoods of the plantation workers especially, women. Even otherwise, the socio-economic status of women workers in the rubber plantation sector is a matter of serious concern, as a vast majority of them are tribals and or are migrants and hugely suffer from landlessness, illiteracy, widow-hood, ageing, etc.

� The features relating to the workforce and dependent labour households underscore that this large segment of the population are most vulnerable to the socio-economic disturbances caused by poverty, lack of access to resources, ill-health, under-nutrition, etc to mention a few. This calls for revamping the existing social security measures (as laid out under the Plantation Labour Act, 1951) and or launching new social security measures for the plantation workers with a definite focus on women.

5. Policies for addressing issues of tapper shortage and strengthening the domestic

labour market The unparalleled dynamism cast by the expansion of rubber in Kerala spearheaded by the smallholder sector has become severely challenged especially since the late 1990s in view of the emergent labour shortage, characterized by the paucity of skilled rubber tappers in both the smallholding 2 as well as the plantation sectors.

5.1. Devising incentive structure to enhance entry of youth and women in rubber tapping

The emerging tapper shortage increasingly caused by the lack of interest amongst the youth raises important policy issues. They are to:

� Explore sustainable solutions in terms of addressing the structural issues affecting the labour market such that younger generation can be motivated to opt for rubber tapping. This necessitates a critical review that: ‘whether policies/ interventions or institutions governing rubber development in Kerala have been quite sensitive (and responsive) to this issue by creating conducive environments (skill development, attractive wages, upward mobility, etc) that attract increased participation by youth in the labour market?’.

� Explore that ‘under what conditions the younger generations (of rubber farmers and

rubber tappers) would participate in the tapping labour market?’.

� Devising strategies and technological innovations for processing and product development programmes based on a closer understanding of the preferences of the youth in and around rubber growing regions in India.

� Guaranteeing a fixed monthly income for rubber tapping on par with the alternative employment options (like driving rickshaws, cabs, construction, other service providing activities) might help to a large extent to attract youngsters into tapping.

Though the share of women engaged in tapping work was found to be very low in the smallholder sector (hardly 10% at the state level in Kerala), women are reported to be actively participating in tappers’ training and rubber processing training programmes offered by the Rubber Board. Further, farm level surveys reveal that though women do not tap the rubber trees on their own, they are quite actively supporting their male counter parts (tappers and growers) in collecting the latex, carrying it to the sheet making point, coagulating, drying of the sheet, etc. This trend, coined by some as ‘wife assisted latex collection’ (WALC) has been on the increase in many areas3. The growing interest shown by women to acquire tapping skills is to be seen as an important aspect especially in the context of the emerging tapper shortage in Kerala in particular. The important policy suggestions needing exploration here are: (a) What type of interventions/ technological innovations could be introduced to motivate

women to join tapping and processing of rubber?; (b) To what extent their presence help reduce or mitigate the pressing problems of tapper

shortage?; and (c) If women actively participate in the tapping labour market, are they adequately compensated

for their contributions in tapping, latex collection, transporting the latex to the collection/ processing centre (point), sheet making, etc?

� This is a major challenge that institutional agencies, such as the Rubber Board could address in terms of evolving institutional support or appropriate incentive mechanisms leading to increased women participation in production and management of smallholdings.

5.2. Import and the use of migrant rubber tappers

The ‘import of non-Kerala tappers’ was one of the strategies being tried by the Rubber Board for addressing the issue of tapper shortage in Kerala through active involvement of the Rubber Producers Societies (RPSs)4. A few such instances of importing rubber tappers were undertaken from the North Eastern states of Assam (Naogaon, Jorhat), Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Meghalaya (Tura) as well as other states, such as Jharkhand (Ranchi), West Bengal, Orissa (Baripada), etc. However, such scattered attempts of bringing migrant non-Keralite tappers show mixed responses5 in terms of their successful outcomes. It was observed that such ad hoc crisis management strategies seem to work only under conditions where the migrant tappers are given adequate facilities for accommodation, recreation, other employment opportunities besides tapping, fulfilling the terms of contract, etc.

� As such, there are several limitations in broad-basing or scaling up such an innovative strategy across regions in Kerala due to many operational level constraints. It is also important to note that currently, much of such labour recruitment processes are based on individual grower initiatives (except for a few instances where the Rubber Board and the RPSs took the lead).

� There are several problems with respect to: (a) arriving at mutually beneficial

contractual terms; (b) provisions for social protection and health of the migrant tappers; (c) transaction costs involved in accessing information about the attributes of the workers, their assimilative capacity while learning tapping skills, integrity in performing the assigned tasks, etc (Viswanathan, 2013).

5.3. Recasting Labour welfare/ support programmes

Though labour welfare programmes of the Board have grown in heaps and bounds over the past decades, the assistances have been thinly distributed across labourers both in the plantation and smallholder sectors. It is important to note that while the allocations for labour welfare schemes by the Board had increased over time, the aggregate amount of support is nominal when compared to the support given for the rubber growers under the rubber plantation development (RPD) scheme. In a relative sense, the amount expended for LW schemes constitute hardly 4% to 5% of the total amount spent for RPD schemes at the national level. It is important to note that the labour welfare schemes in the current format is more broad-based and may not act as effective instruments to retain the existing tappers as well as attract newer ones into tapping.

� Attracting youngsters through various incentives and innovative programmes should form the integral aspects of labour welfare programmes of the Board in the emerging

context. At the same time, it is also important that new labour welfare programmes should also be specifically devised for attracting and retaining migrant tappers whose requirements might be different from the local tappers (Viswanathan, 2013).

� Feasible solutions to tapper shortage problems in the state lies in strengthening the

domestic labour market are through:

� Effectively retaining the existing tapping labour force, majority of whom are highly experienced, skilled and committed to the profession; Promotion of technological innovations in rubber tapping, including provision of incentives for wider adoption of LFTs; and

Being the sole institutional agency in the promotion of smallholder rubber system in Kerala, the Rubber Board may consider the following points for close scrutiny and examine their worthiness for possible implementation to overcome the crisis in the labour market.

1. Forming a Rubber Tappers’ Society (RTS) to be based at the RPSs;

2. Scaling up and increasing capacities of the existing group processing centres (attached with the RPSs) with the scope for providing employment to a minimum of five young tappers from the local areas, etc;

3. Creating locally feasible job opportunities at the RPSs for young tappers to engage into,

after doing tapping as in the case of the GPCs;

4. Providing partial financial assistances to younger tappers to start self-employment, small business, purchase of auto rickshaws;

5. A unified and consolidated legislation for social security schemes for rubber tappers in Kerala and other states.

6. Reserving job opportunities available at the Regional/ Field Offices to the young tappers;

7. Organising or offering support for skill development programmes in other activities with

increased upward occupational mobility;

8. Introducing a monthly pension scheme to old/ experienced tappers and new tappers who have a minimum of five years experience in tapping;

9. Creating a specific fund (realized through collection of rubber cess), called, ‘Tapper

Welfare Fund’ based at the RPSs, which is to be given to the needy workers/ tappers for medical expenses and other contingencies. A fixed amount can be distributed per annum to the registered tappers without seeking for certifications or proof of the expenses incurred;

10. Establishment of rubber wood primary processing factories in more locations, which could potentially employ a minimum of 15-20 tappers.

6. Policies/ interventions for Rubber Development in the NER and other states (inputs

received from Dr. Indraneel Bhowmik and Dr. Dharmendra Nath are also incorporated into this section)

6.1. Rubber Development in the NER

The NE region offers immense scope and potential for further expansion, as rubber production in the traditional rubber producing regions, including Kerala are severely constrained by several operational level issues, viz., a) the availability of agro-climatically suitable land; b) decline in the operational size of holdings along with increasing costs of rubber production; c) shortage of skilled labour for tapping; and d) growing dependence on hired labour (Viswanathan, 2005). The last two decades in particular, have also seen significant increase in area and output of rubber in the NER, with the region becoming the second major rubber production hub. However, rubber expansion in the NER faces several challenges, including the institutional support systems provided by the Indian Rubber Board as well as the state-specific institutional agencies. In this regard, it is important that the rubber development programmes in the NER should receive adequate attention in terms of region-specific policies and institutional interventions in view of the following reasons:

(a) Difference in yield between the north-eastern region and the traditional region (Kerala).

(b) Several factors like- agro-climatic variations, poor human capital (tapping quality), poor cultural practices, limited clonal variety along with spurious planting material, are attributed as the cause.

(c) Lack of authentic data regarding area, production, varieties planted

(d) Rubber has higher profitability as compared to other crops and has lured many to go for even illegal plantations occupying forest lands- political and administrative indifference/indulgence is a cause at times

(e) The changing cropping pattern in terms of rubber replacing crops, like arecanut, banana, coffee, and local vegetables, leading to severe imbalances in the availability/ high prices of such commodities in the local market

(f) The rubber development in the region, which has been promoted as a rehabilitation model, has significantly improved the economic standards of many tribals for the good, however, the second generation are not interested in tapping as it is arduous resulting in the increased use of hired labour.

(g) The existing land use rules and property rights regime limit occupancy right for all communities across the region6. Poor tribals are found to lease out their land and work as

wage labourer in the rubber holdings. As a result, the social outcomes of the rubber development in the region are thwarted.

(h) Ambiguity over land ownership especially in Assam (Goalpara) often leading to confrontation between the Forest Department and rubber growers.

(i) The introduction of Restoration of Forest Rights Act 2006 (RoFRA) has seen huge transfer of user rights in the forest lands of Tripura (172000 HHs given patta)

(j) Majority of those who received such patta, are interested in rubber, might lead to wide-scale development of rubber monoculture, which is a threat to biodiversity, as well as raises question about regional food security

(k) A recent phenomenon observed especially in Assam (Goalpara) is the emergence of sharecropping in rubber in a big way. Reportedly, land owners offer their available land to the growers on contract under which the growers will make investments for the establishment of the plantations and the land owners in return will get 40-50% of the matured trees or of the produce.

(l) Institutional finance and crop insurance for rubber are found to be almost non-existent. The subsidy provided by Rubber Board is very crucial for the growers to meet the variable costs. But, its disbursal is not timely (say first year subsidy reaches the grower by third year).

(m) Increasing plantation development and management costs in recent years affect the profitability/economic viability of rubber cultivation.

(n) The rate of enrollment into the Price Stabilization Fund reported in the NER is hardly 7%.

(o) Rubber based industrial development activities are yet to take place in the region.

(p) Economic empowerment has increased conspicuous consumption with very little human and social capital formation/ development

Specific policy suggestions for the NER

� Development of North East specific cultivars/ rubber clones

� Undertaking a Comprehensive Rubber Census

� Certification regarding quality of planting material

� Promotion of mixed cropping/ livelihood systems- Rubber Based Agro-forestry7: Rubber development in the NER needs to be approached from a sustainable livelihoods

perspective, in view of the socioeconomic significance of the rubber integrated farming systems that have immense potential in the region8.

� Higher density planting of rubber trees in plantations, which may lead to increase in

yield/ ha as well as increase the plant retention rate (PTR)

� Interventions to increase access to credit to tide over the initial requirement of large capital. This may discourage the development of share cropping as well as absentee landlordism in rubber.

� Extending the coverage of crop insurance to rubber (will help in taking care of fire

hazards and also crop destruction from wild elephants in Garo Hills/ Assam).

� Streamline the timely disbursement of planting subsidies.

� Revisiting/ redesigning the subsidy policy/ incentives specifically towards the NER

� Transferring land rights of existing plantations established on forest lands to the rubber growers on long-term lease or property rights framework

� Promoting rubber based industrialisation9: stepping up infrastructure facilities for: (a)

processing of rubber and manufacturing rubber products; and (b) processing and value addition in rubberwood produced in the region

� The rubber development agencies also need to support smallholders through integrated

efforts to provide extension, credit, transport and marketing facilities

� Creating an efficient and transparent rubber marketing/ trading system in the region so as to take the fuller advantage of the benefits arising from rubber production and manufacturing activities

� Given the pace of ongoing rubber development programmes in the NE states and their potential impacts on the socio-economic status of the tribal communities, it is more important to create synergy between external institutional (state/ policy) interventions10 and local institutions in mobilising the communities for collective action and enhancement of human and social capital so as to achieve sustainable development outcomes from rubber development in the NER.

7. Rubber Area Expansion and Environmental Implications

One of the critical aspects of the agrarian transition in Kerala has been the emergence and domination of rubber as a monoculture system across districts. Although monoculture rubber has been in existence in Kerala since the colonial times, by and large it was limited to areas in the form of large estates in few of the districts. The institutional interventions and support regimes evolved by the Rubber Board for promoting rubber cultivation in India (and Kerala) has been quite pervasive in terms of its focus on monoculture, as it was deemed (with some scientific

reasoning) that rubber grown in a mixed cropping system may not yield its fullest potential (Viswanathan and Shivakoti 2008; Viswanathan and Bhowmik, 2014).

� The rubber monoculture as emerged across districts in Kerala over the past 4-5 decades may have significantly impacted on the hydrological cycle and the diversity of agro-ecosystems of the regions, about which little is known.

� Another important issue is the degradation of water bodies (rivers, streams and groundwater sources), as caused by the inflow of effluents originating from rubber processing (rubber sheet making) units (Sreelakshmi et al. 2007), as well as the fertilizer and pesticide residues originating from rubber holdings. However, these issues still remain grossly under-reported in the state and, hence, there is an urgent need for detailed investigations across rubber growing regions.

� The existing method of processing of rubber sheet from latex using the rubber rollers

result in the use of huge quantity of freshwater as well as generation of effluents. Apparently, there are hardly any systematic assessments/ documentation undertaken either by the Rubber Board or by independent agencies or researchers of the implications of the current system of latex processing in terms of contamination of water bodies, including groundwater aquifers, rivers and streams downstream. This is an important area where policy interventions as well as technological innovations required on a priority basis. It may be explored as to how the latex processing activities can be made more environmental friendly along with minimizing the use of freshwater.

� Promoting rubber as a monoculture will have greater consequences to agri-biodiversity

as well as ecosystems in rubber growing regions in India, especially Kerala. While there has not been any serious attempt from the Rubber Board to address this issue in terms of understanding the implications of this model of rubber development, it becomes quite essential in the emerging context that rubber be promoted as an cropping system with proper integration of food crops or vegetable crops, such that it will have long-term positive benefit with respect to food security along with ecosystem integrity (Viswanathan, 2014).

� Adopting an action research method to analyze and test eco-certification of rubber integrated land uses as a mechanism for conserving biodiversity and enhancing the livelihood of rubber-growers in NER, as in the case of Jungle Rubber in Indonesia.

Select References: Fox J., Castella J.C. (2013): Expansion of rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) in Mainland Southeast Asia: What are the prospects for smallholders?, Journal of Peasant Studies 40(1): 155-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2012.750605 Rangachary, N. (2006): Task Force on Plantation Sector, http://commerce.nic.in/publications/PlantationReport.pdf?id=12 (Accessed on 24 July 2014).

Sreelakshmi, K., George K. T., A.P. Thomas, C.M. John and H. Vijith (2007): ‘Pollution impact assessment based on geographical information system: Preliminary observations on rubber processing industry in Kerala’, Working Paper ER/2, Rubber Research Institute of India, Kottayam. Varkey, L.M. and Pramod Kumar (2013): Price Risk Management and Access to Finance for Rubber Growers: The Case of Price Stabilisation Fund in Kerala, Ind. Jn. of Agri. Econ.Vol.68, No.1, Jan.-March 2013. Viswanathan, P.K., Tharian George K., and Toms Joseph (2003): ‘Informal Labour Market and Structural Devolution,’ Economic and Political Weekly, August 2, 2003: 3277-3281. Viswanathan, P.K.(2005): A Comparative Study of Smallholder Rubber and Rubber integrated Farm Livelihood Systems in India and Thailand, Report of the postdoctoral research study submitted to the Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, January 2006, 108p. Viswanathan, P.K. and Ganesh P. Shivakoti (2006): ‘Economic Integration of Tribal Societies in the Era of Globalisation: Perspectives on Rubber Based Farming Systems in North East India’, North East India Studies, 1(2): 80-106 (January). Viswanathan, P.K. (2008): ‘Co-operatives and Collective Action: Case of a Rubber Grower Co-operative in East Garo Hills in Meghalaya, North East India’, Working Paper No. 189, Gujarat Institute of Development Research, Ahmedabad, December 2008. Viswanathan, P.K. and Ganesh P. Shivakoti (2008): Adoption of rubber-integrated farm-livelihood systems: contrasting empirical evidence from the Indian context, Journal of Forest Research, 13(1): 1-14 (February). Viswanathan, P.K. Amita Shah (2012): ‘Gender Impact of Trade Reforms in Indian Plantation Sector: An Exploratory Analysis’, Discussion Paper No. 17, Centre for Development Studies, Trivandrum, Kerala, 69p. http://cds.edu/admin/homeFiles/nrppd%2017.pdf Viswanathan, P.K. (2013): ‘Regional dimensions of emerging Labour shortage in rubber Plantation sector in Kerala: An exploratory analysis’, NRPPD Discussion Paper 27, Centre for Development Studies, Trivandrum, 86p. http://cds.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/NRPPD27.pdf Viswanathan, P.K. (2014): ‘The Rationalization of Agriculture in Kerala: Implications for the Natural Environment, Agro-ecosystems and Livelihoods’, Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy, 3(1) 63–107 (Sage Publications). Viswanathan, P.K. and Amita Shah (2013): 'Trade Reforms and Crisis in India’s Plantation Industry: an analysis of Tea and Rubber Plantation Sectors', Social Change and Development, 10 (2): 31-85.

Viswanathan, P.K and Indraneel Bhowmik (2014): ‘Compatibility of Institutional Architecture for Rubber Plantation Development in North East India from a Comparative Perspective of Kerala’, NRPPD Discussion Paper 38, Centre for Development Studies, Trivandrum, 71p. http://cds.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/NRPPD-38.pdf Annexure Table 1: State-wise coverage under the Price Stabilization Fund Scheme for Rubber, 2011

State/ Region

Proposed no of small growers to be covered

No. of small growers covered as on

As on 31 March 2004

As on 31 March 2011

As (%) of covered (2011)

Relative share of each state/

region

Karnataka 7124 306 664 9.32 3.51

Kerala 165875 14860 16354 9.86 86.45 Tamil Nadu 6897

680 706 10.24 3.73

North East 17565 881 1137 6.47 6.01

India 197461 16727 18919 9.58 100.00 Source: http://commerce.nic.in/psft/progress_report.htm (estimated) Notes:

1 It may be observed that sustainability of smallholder rubber system will get affected, if market uncertainties as caused by drastic price fall emerges in future and persists for long, adversely affecting the fortunes of a vast majority of small and marginal producers in Kerala, majority of whom are currently

left with tiny plots of rubber with smaller number of tappable trees (even 50-100 trees). It is likely that in the face of growing market uncertainties and the increasing tapper shortage, a drastic decline in prices might disrupt the earnings of a large segment of the marginal rubber growers (Viswanathan, 2013). 2 The labour shortage, especially of rubber tappers in the dominant rubber smallholding sector has

become a serious issue in recent years, in view of several reasons, such as: (a) rise in area under rubber operated by smallholders along with a corresponding rise in rubber tapped area; (b) the inertia among younger generations to take up rubber tapping as an economic activity; (c) almost negligible presence and active participation of women in rubber tapping and related activities; (d) ageing of the existing labour

force engaged in tapping job, etc (Viswanathan, 2013). 3 This arrangement, which is getting widespread in Kerala at present, is an informal one and enables the tappers to complete their tapping commitments with other growers. However, a major drawback of this

arrangement is that the contributions by women are not at all compensated in terms of extra wages or any other types of incentives. Interestingly, the field level interactions reveal that in the absence of any such incentives or additional wages that compensates for the contribution by women, a large number of women, who earlier have been actively helping in latex collection and other activities, are now opt for participating in the NREGS, which is economically rewarding as well. Perhaps, this could also be one reason for the declining number of women members undergoing training in tapping in recent years (Viswanathan, 2013). 4 This initiative, known as Integrated Tapper Training Scheme for Non-Keralites (ITTSNK) by the Rubber Board was launched during 2010-11 with an objective to ensure regular supply of migrant labourers from non-traditional rubber growing states to perform tapping and other plantation based activities, such as

weeding, plant protection, etc. Reportedly, so far, 231 non- Keralite youths were trained and were allotted to various RPSs in Kerala (Rubber Board, http://rubberboard.org.in/scheme.asp) (Viswanathan, 2013).

5 By and large, the problems faced in such arrangements as reported by the growers and the non-Keralite tappers are related to the drastic changes to be brought in the food habits and life style in the new place. Absence of friendship networks, separation from the family as well as the problems in getting social

acceptance among the growers and other local people in the new areas are also reported to be major reasons for the retreat of the newly trained non-Keralite tappers. Also, there is a clear preference among the traditional growers in particular, for local tappers and this preference being so strong, all such migrant tapper-tying arrangements to overcome tapper (labour) shortage are most likely to have limited success and operational significance (Viswanathan, 2013). 6 The insecure property rights regime poses an important institutional bottleneck in the process of scaling up of rubber integrated systems among the tribal communities. In the current context, the communal lands are allocated by the Nokma (village head) for establishing rubber plantations. There are widespread ambiguities as regards the period for which lands are being allotted for cultivation of rubber. It has been reported that communal lands are distributed to the prospective rubber growers for a period of 15 years, while the entire cycle of a rubber plantation involves a total period of about 30 years, ie., 7-8 years of unproductive lag and 20-22 years of productive cycle. Understandably, there no formal institutional arrangements are in place to facilitate transfer of land for establishing rubber plantations in the regions where CPR regimes exist. As revealed by the rubber development experience in the region, the sustainability of the smallholder communities largely depends on their access to secure property rights (Viswanathan, 2005).

7 While the intensity of production of rubber grown in a diversified agro-forestry system is lower than that of monoculture rubber (and may even vary inversely with market prices), rubber grown in an agro-forestry system provides smallholders with independence from external economic and political influences, which has been the key to their historical success (Fox and Castella, 2013), in countries, such as

Indonesia.

8 It has been found that rubber integrated livelihood systems provide the smallholders with ample capability for resilience during crises and ensure a sustained flow of income. Studies (Viswanathan and

Shivakoti, 2008; Viswanathan and Bhowmik, 2014) suggest that rubber cultivation, when integrated into existing farming systems, can result in significant increases in household income and greater resilience in the face of volatile markets. 9 It is a matter of serious concern that in the absence of a policy perspective for development of integrated

farming systems or agro-based industrialisation, the entire region stands to lose in terms of drain of resources and industrial raw materials (rubber in this context) to outside this area even by means of illegal trading (Viswanathan, 2005).

10 In the East and West Garo Hills in Meghalaya, the strategic market interventions by the by a rubber grower co-operative, ie., the Mendipathar Multipurpose Co-operative Society (MMCS), have been instrumental in imparting economic dynamism with greater demonstration and linkage effects for scaling up of rubber development programmes. However, though the interventions by the MMCS have been effective in curbing the age-old exploitative trade practices, including removal of imperfections in the rubber market in the Garo Hills districts, rubber trading continues to be controlled by external and non-tribal actors in most of the rubber growing areas in the NE states. In this context, the successful community development outcomes as emerge from the interventions by the MMCS in the EG Hills need

to be properly assessed and integrated with the policy framework and institutional development agenda of the NE states targeted at the sustainable development of the rubber sector (Viswanathan, 2008).

6. Group on Trade and Marketing

Chair : Dr John Mano Raj, IIPM, Bangalore

Co Chair : Dr Sunny Sebastian, Former Director of Rubber Board

Session Co-ordinator: Ms Uma S and Ms Jannet Farida Jacob

Dr. John Mano Raj, IIPM, Bangalore chaired the Group on Trade and Marketing. Dr. Sunny Sabestin, Former Director of Rubber Board was nominated as the co-chair. The other participants in this group were Babu Josph, NRPS, Biju, Vice-President, Rubber Dealers’ Federation, Kottayam and Rajan Dhamu, Board Member, Rubber Dealers’ Federation, Kollam. Babu Joseph started the discussion by highlighting the Exim Policy 2004, chapter 4 (4.22) related to fulfillment of export obligation period and its extension. Based on this clause, the discussion was carried forward. Import duty of rubber is only 20 percent. Given this, he argued that, because of lower import duty and the longer export obligation period, which is 3 years (including extension period) companies are importing rubber more than what is required and are holding the stock of rubber. It is reflected in the last year’s import of rubber, which was around three lakh tonnes, however, the requirement was only 60,000 tonnes. In this context, Babu Joseph raised the following question: when the shelf-life of rubber itself is only six months then why is it that the export obligation period is 3 years? Because of this, when the domestic price for rubber is increasing, companies are reselling the stock of rubber which affects the smaller growers and dealers of rubber. Therefore, the suggestion was to restrict the extension period of export obligation to only six months and to raise the import duty to 30 percent. Further, there is a need for encouraging exports through incentives (in terms of handling and transportation costs), which needs to be increased from 2 to 5 percent. At present, penalty for extending the period of export obligation for the first six months is 2 percent and 5 percent for the next extension. Hence, Babu Joseph suggested that, penalty for extending the export obligation period should be equivalent to the import duty of rubber. As per clause 4.1.5 of EXIM policy, 2004, the imported rubber should not be re-exported or resold in the domestic market without any value addition. Since, this is not being followed, import should be restricted only to end users (Original Equipment Manufacturers) and not for the traders. In connection to this problem, another issue raised in the group was that, at present there is no mechanism to ensure that the imported rubber is used only for the value addition and not for reselling. Hence, it is suggested to build a monitoring mechanism for the same. The chair of the group raised the question of the role of RPS in exports. Babu Joseph from NRPS replied that due to the lack of financial resources RPS is not in a position to participate in exports. However, he suggested that, RPS can also participate in exports through the following three-tier system: 1) Forming a miniature of RPS in terms of SHGs 2) RPS - One RPS would consists of 10 SHGs 3) Rubber Producer’s Companies, who can take up the role of exports. Apart from this, issues indirectly affecting trade were also discussed in the group, which are as follows:

• At present, the Minimum Support Price (MSP) is Rs. 32.09 for RSS4 and Rs. 30.79 for RRS5, which were fixed in 2002. However, MSP has not been revised until now. Since the cost of production has increased by 5 to 6 times, it was suggested in the group to raise the MSP by Rs. 150 per kg for RSS4 and Rs. 140 per kg for RSS5.

• Biju suggested that the future trading should be regulated and transparent. • In order to increase the domestic consumption of rubber, product innovation and

diversifying the application of rubber is important, for example, in the case of rubberized road.

• The potentiality of carbon trading of rubber plantation and contribution to protecting environment, for instance, prevent deforestation, rubber wood needs to be completely exempted from duty.

• One of the suggestions in the floor was to reduce the processing cost (Rs. 40 per kg) of rubber through encouraging the direct deal between growers and oil companies.

7. Group on Environment and Sustainability

Chair : Dr Srikumar Chattopadhyay, CESS, Thiruvananthapuram

Co-chair : Shri.C.V.Joy, Joint Development Commissioner, Rural Development,

Wynad, NREGA,Government of Kerala

Session Co-ordinator: Mr C.E. Ajith Kumar

The Chair initiated the discussion. He noted that the floor is concerned mainly with the three issues raised in the ToR of the Expert Committee of the NPR 2014. They are:

a) Identify key opportunities and critical challenges in the production and marketing of NR, SR and RR sectors and tyre and non-tyre sectors.

b) Examine policy and programmes for Government support to rubber plantation and suggest ways of expanding areas under production particularly in NER and LWE affected areas, and improving productivity.

c) Suggest development and promotion measures necessary for promoting rubber plantation, through integration of rubber production policies and programmes at the State and Central level.

More than 90% of the rubber cultivators is small holders, and though there still remain many opportunities that could be explored, the challenges are also not very few. Area expansion can not be attempted without regard of the suitability of the geographic characteristics and the soil chemistry of the area to the agronomic requirements of the crop.

Dr. K. Soman picked up the deliberation from where Dr Srikumar left it. He argued that there are already many reports cautioning against the indiscriminate spread of rubber crop especially into the catchment areas of the main rivers of Kerala. While one study which his team in CESS, Thiruvananthapuram once conducted at the region of origin of the river Periyar (Western Ghat Hill regions). The water that was sampled out was seen to be of very good quality, with high concentration of dissolved O2 and a neutral pH (about 7.0). But the samples taken from the down-streams of the rivers Killi, Ittikara was rather acidic (with about 3-4 pH), and were “not conducive to normal aquatic life”. One could note that the cropping pattern of the catchment areas of upper-order streams of these rivers were more or less rubber-based. The evapo-transpiration rate of rubber plant being low, the atmosphere around rubber is with “higher temperature ambience than in the surroundings”. The note he prepared and distributed to the participants of the session read thus: Presence of benzothiazole, dibenzylamine and dicyclohexylamine derivatives used in rubber processing in Cochin back waters reported in a recent publication also calls for investigations as to their impact on the biotic life in the estuary. Soil nutrient abundances from the run-off waters of rubber plantations also require a thorough scrutiny to evaluate their impact on the aquatic system (rivers, estuaries and coastal seas)”. This rubber-induced ecological impact has contributed to the global warming also. Dr Soman had serious apprehensions about the cover up for deforestation through “economical and livelihood supportive” land use change by the mining mafia in the low-rainfall but high temperature regions of central India where plantation crops are being vigorously propped up by the authorities.

Sri Jose, while joining the earlier speakers in their concerns and arguments, went on to say that formic acid that is being used in large quantities for making rubber sheets out of latex, became very harmful to the environment particularly when it was allowed to seep directly into the water bodies. But this harm could, to a great extent, be averted if the effluence was directed to a bio-gas pit.

The session coordinator then requested the Chair that it would be better if we confined the discussions to the issues in the list of ToR.

Sri CV Joy, the co-chair expressed dismay at the alarming rate of spread of rubber and the socio-economic changes it made in the area. But were the accrued benefits sustainable? Drinking water scarcity was reported to be a serious menace in rubber growing regions. The farmer should get reasonable income sustainably. At the same time, the cropping practice should not damage the environment.

Sri Chandrasekharan Nair, complemented the arguments of Dr Soman especially with regard to the indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides with his experience in organic mode of agriculture which he practiced for long. He found it a good alternative for attaining ecological safety and economic sustainability of small farms. The Rubber Board (RB) largely served the interests of the big cultivators and industries. A study by Prof KJ itself put it clear that the RB recovered through tax/ cess much more than what they provided to the farmers as subsidy. He also presented before the floor certain inadequacies and inaccuracies in the Rubber Statistics that is published by the RB. While presenting the time-series data corresponding to the production and consumption of NR from 1991-92, he noted that there was a widening gap between the data of consumption and production. He also opined that these omissions could be even deliberate with the intention to promote the interests of the industry. But when some participants expressed their fear that these issues were really related rather to another parallel session on ‘Rubber marketing’ he withdrew himself from the session to present them in the other session.

Chair: The photo-synthetic active radiation is more in rubber.

Dr Soman pointed out that a study on ground nut revealed that 1 percent change in atmospheric temperature resulted in 23.8% reduction in the productivity of the crop. One degree of added atmospheric temperature will have a direct impact on the society around. It increased the electricity and water consumption and decreased their availability. Sri Jose shared the concern raised by the scientist and added that even an RB study found that when the atmospheric temperature rose by one degree Celsius the latex yield reduced by 20%. In Kerala, expansion of rubber acreage should be attempted only after making appropriate environmental studies and environmental clearances like the industry standard of EAA. After all matter related to rubber is governed by the Ministry of Commerce and not Agriculture. It became increasingly evident that global warming would have a very deleterious effect on crop yield in tropical and sub-tropical

regions. Ground experience showed that water shortage was very acute in rubber areas. He mentioned some specific cases also.

Dr Srikumar then alarmed that maximum rainfall now occurs in ocean, and the human habitations in the shore do not obviously benefit from it. Rubber growing started in Kerala in 1905 and history showed that the crop catered well to the growing needs of the automobile industry. The industry always ensured an unhindered supply of NR. On the other hand, rubber expanded at the detriment of tapioca, a crop that augured well for the food security of the poor.

Sri Jose: Integrated cultivation only is sustainable in small holdings. But RB does not provide subsidy if other crops are accommodated in the land for which subsidy was sought.

Dr Srikumar: Promote rubber as a part of a crop system, and mono crop system should be discouraged. Area based approach is good.

Sri Jose: Why watershed-based agriculture is not being promoted by the RB, despite that the government-sponsored watershed development schemes are plenty.

Dr Soman: The external application of chemical nutrients of N P K and carbon should be moderate and balanced. Over dose of one nutrient in relation to other will reduce the absorption ability of the other. These un-absorbed nutrients will eventually transform into their salt forms and finally these solid particles reach water streams, polluting the aquatic systems. The ecological and economic damage caused will be huge. The nutrient dosage prescribed by the research and extension systems does not appear to be situation-specific. Averages or blanket recommendation will not work.

Dr Srikumar: Kerala soils come under group 4 and group 5, according to all India classification of soils. But the broad recommendation of nutrients in India was based on the condition and crop pattern in group 3 and group 2 soils. Without nutrient overload and contamination with human excreta, unwanted and un-hygenic water organisms like water-hyacinth will not flourish in water bodies. He warned that fish stock had diminished in Kerala water bodies after 1995-96. The Kerala model of development that the economists and other social scientists have been celebrating about is rather a creation of natural endowment in Kerala. Adequate rainfall, unpolluted water bodies, soil with good nutrient-absorption capacity, good climate; all these contributed much to the over all welfare of the people and this evolved a model of development. Kerala model does not seem to work any further wonder in Kerala.

A couple of woman members expressed their concerns on the condition of labour, especially woman labour, in rubber plantations, and rubber industries. The smoke and other pollutants of the industry should be taken care of and well-monitored.

With this, the Chair concluded the deliberations highlighting the salient points that emerged. The floor deputed the Co-chair to prepare the draft of the proceedings and present it before the Open House to be held in the afternoon. The session came to a close at 1:35 pm.

Comments of the Session coordinator:

Though the number of participants was very few, the session was very vibrant and lively. The deliberations seemed very technical in nature, mainly because of the two CESS scientists who shared a lot of inputs on the incompatibility of rubber to the many agro-climatic zones of Kerala, and also the ecological and environmental impact the current style of cultivation that is practiced by rubber growers in Kerala and other agro-ecological zones of India including the NER and LWE affected areas. On the other end, a couple of grower-turned environmentalists who while complementing the inputs that was being offered by the scientist-participants with their actual experiences in the field, expressed their concerns about the continued over use of chemicals in the plantations and processing units and the indiscriminate expansion of rubber into many ecologically sensitive areas. They voiced their apprehensions of the sustainability of the riches the crops brought in the recent past, in view of the environmental damages it made to the human habitats of the rubber dense areas. Though the background of the participants was diverse in nature the deliberations were, by and large, seen converging in their outcome. However, it is to be admitted that the discussions and their outcome are not confined to the frame of the ToR of NPR, despite occasional reminders of the session coordinator to that effect. After all, the ToR of the Expert Committee for NPR do not seem to have given its due weight to the environmental aspects of the rubber industry, about which only the session was all concerned.

CE Ajith Kumar Programme Associate, NRPPD