On Civilians/Farmers
Economic Vulnerability: The transition from subsistence to cash cropping increased exposure to market risks.
==Disrupted Traditional Systems==: Colonial policies disrupted traditional risk-sharing systems, replacing them with individual risk-taking approaches. This transition negatively affected farmers’ traditional safety nets, making them more vulnerable during famines.
Environmental Degradation: Colonial interventions such as ==extensive deforestation and promotion of monoculture== severely undermined indigenous food sources and ecological balance. These actions increased the vulnerability of farmers by limiting their natural resources and food availability during famines.
Increased Mortality and Livestock Losses: Farmers faced severe ==cattle mortality during famines, directly impacting agricultural productivity and economic sustainability==.
Adaptation and Survival Strategies: Farmers responded by diversifying crops (especially low-cost cereals requiring less water), foraging from forests, and migration to areas offering better survival prospects.
Social and Economic Transformation: The promotion of private land ownership disrupted traditional entitlement systems, altering the social fabric and economic structures, and increasing inequalities.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/From-sharing-risks-to-taking-risks-Tanabe/a7082252172107ce2fd6944c8eb80ed306fa035b?utm_source=direct_link
transition from mirasi system to the colonial land system caused the agricultural production not able to sustain a large population
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Irrigation-and-imperialism%3A-The-causes-and-of-a-to-Attwood/bd99263fcc76e230363cffa3d4dac79dad3fc3bb?utm_source=direct_link
from food to cash crops
Perspective: Intellectual
One typical example: Dadabhai Naoroji expressed the Drain Theory. Through his work with economics, Naoroji sought to prove that Britain was draining money out of India. Naoroji identified himself as a fellow subject of the Empire and was able to address the economic hardships facing India to a British audience.
The factors were scene from an upper-level (https://vajiramandravi.com/upsc-exam/drain-of-wealth-theory/): - Unilateral Transfer of Wealth: The wealth of India was being transferred unilaterally to Britain without any corresponding return. Indian’s raw materials were exported at cheap price while British manufactured goods were sold with higher price. - Exploitation of Indian Resources: Voluminous resources of India, consisting of fertile lands and a huge mineral wealth, were exploited by the British for their industrial progress, while India remained backward. - Fiscal Exploitation: High taxes and land revenue systems siphoned off the wealth of Indian peasants and landholders. - Absence of Reinvestment: The surplus generated in India was not reinvested in the local economy but was repatriated to Britain.
Romesh Chunder Dutt reason (https://wellcomecollection.org/works/shrjn89c): - failure of rain - resourceless condition and chronic poverty of cultivators caused by over-assessment of soil - hard taxation in order to feed the cost government
The consequence, held by Romesh Chunder Dutt (https://archive.org/details/indianfaminesthe00duttrich): - Felt sad and humiliated by British Crown, criticizing its nature of colonialism (“a human cattle farm” worked for the benefit of England) - wish to increase Indian representatives in Legislative Council and establish more councils in smaller units (county and small provinces) to safeguard Indian’s interest
Cause (Economic Exploitation):
Dadabhai Naoroji saw the famine not just as a natural disaster but as the result of British colonial policies:
Drain of Wealth theory: India’s raw materials and wealth were exported cheaply, while expensive British goods flooded the market.
Heavy Taxation: Peasants were overburdened by high land taxes and had little left to survive drought. Dutt added that the taxation deterioted resourceless condition and poverty and over-assessment of soil
No Local Investment: Profits from Indian resources were sent to Britain, not reinvested.
Romesh Chunder Dutt described British rule as managing India like a “human cattle farm”, prioritizing British gain over Indian welfare. He saw famine as proof of systemic injustice.
Consequence (Political Awakening):
The famine sparked demands for reform:
More Indian representation in legislative councils
Establish more councils in smaller units (county and small provinces) for local interests