The Case of India 105 



(G.O.I. , 1952, p. 44). Whether this was actually the case is another 

 matter, but what is significant is that the principal objectives of 

 the Second Plan did not even include a mention of agriculture 

 (G.O.I. , 1956, p. 24). Table 6.7 clearly shows the larger accent on 

 industrialization in the Second Plan Period. 



The increase in both production of foodgrains and in their 

 yields per hectare had been quite steady until the mid-1950s but 

 was stagnating by 1957-58. The Third Five- Year Plan Document 

 appeared to note this fact when it stated once again that the first 

 priority belonged to agriculture (G.O.I. , 1961, p. 49). Although the 

 outlays for agriculture do not bear out this concern, there was 

 some shift in priorities from the Second Plan. In 1958-59 the 

 Government of India had already invited an agricultural produc- 

 tion team (sponsored by the Ford Foundation) to study the coun- 

 try's food problem and to make recommendations for coordinated 

 efforts to increase production on an emergency basis. The team 

 issued a report entitled India's Food Crisis and Steps to Meet It 

 (G.O.I. , 1959a) which the government accepted, and asked a sec- 

 ond team of agricultural experts to recommend specific measures. 

 The first team had already provided a rationale for an lADP-type 

 program, but the second team expanded this into a specific ten- 

 point program (G.O.I., 1959b).'° According to the Third Plan, the 

 lADP was to contribute both to rapid increase in agricultural pro- 

 duction in the selected areas and to serve as a "pace-setting, path- 

 finding" experimental program developing new ideas in agricul- 

 tural development (G.O.I. , 1961, p. 316). It is important to note 

 here that the perception of the looming food shortage led the 

 government to focus almost exclusively on increasing food 

 output. 



10. The len-poinl program was: (1) provision of adequate credit to cultivators; 

 (2) assured supplies of all inputs— fertilizers, pesticides, improved seeds, imple- 

 ments at bullock-cart distance of each village; (3) assured prices; (4) improved 

 market structure; (5) intensive technical, water management, and farm manage- 

 ment assistance; (6) direct and individual farm planning; (7) village planning; (8) 

 public works program; (9) analysis and evaluation of the program; (10) extraordi- 

 nary organizational and administrative changes necessary to carry out the 

 program. 



