Day 28 of farmers marching across India to save agriculture

The Kisan Swaraj Yatra, known as the farmers freedom tour, is mobilizing farmers and public opinion across states of India. It is a call to save Indian agriculture.

Logo of Kisan Swaraj Yatra. © Kisan Swaraj Yatra

A number of farmers and farmer organization have come together under the banner of Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture (ASHA, which literally means hope in many Indian languages) and are touring across the country. The Kisan Swaraj Yatra started on 2 October 2010, Mahatma Gandhi's 141st birthday, from Sabarmati, the same place from where Mahatma Gandhi had started his famous salt sayagraha or Dandi march on 12 March 1930. It will end on 11 December 2010 at Rajghat, New Delhi (Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi or crematorium) after having traveled across 20 states.

Today, on 29th October 2010, the Yatra has traversed Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Puducherry and Tamil Nadu and now reached Tamil Nadu Agriculture University, Coimbatore, a collaborating institute with Monsanto. Farmers' protested by donating money, which the authorities did not accept. The yatris message for the scientists is to take up research that benefit farmers and not the agribusiness corporations.

Farmers in their march as part of Kisan Swaraj Yatra protest against the Tamil Nadu Agriculture University's collaboration with Monsanto. © Kisan Swaraj Yatra

"The overwhelming message from farmers and non-farmers, rural and urban areas, is that such a large mobilization to save Indian agriculture is the crying need today. The Yatra is raising issues like support systems for farmers, remunerative prices, control over seeds, land and other resources, forced displacement and the vicious cycle of high-cost chemical agriculture. The Yatra has had ministers in Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka endorsing the demands, farmers taking out bullock-cart rallies, promising resolutely to be annadatas (providers of food) in the face of adversity and land-grabbing, adivasi (tribal) children laying out their vision of sustainable development, film personalities coming out in support, shopkeepers and transport officials donating money to keep the Yatra going."

To support their call, you may have a look at their petition to the Indian government. "The Kisan Swaraj Yatra is an initiative to strike out a new path in agriculture, which provides a dignified livelihood to all our farmers and farmworkers, and keeps our soil alive and our food and water healthy."

It questions the ethos that "there is no alternative" and throws up a world of possibilities where "many alternatives exist" (MAE).
-----

Those interested may have a look at their petition to the Government of India. If you agree then do sign and share the same.
-----

Other related articles are the coincidence of the Yatra's 35th day with Obama's visit, the tour across eastern regions and northern regions of India.

A similar write-up was first put up in Digital Journal, 29 October 2010, http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/299546.

Prospects and Challenges for India on the Ayodhya Verdict

A group of concerned citizens gathered to discuss the verdict of the Allahabad High Court with regard to the Ayodhya dispute between Ram Janmabhoomi versus Babri Masjid in India. A number of perspectives were put forth.

Left to right: Jyoti Punwani, Vasundhara Mohan and Asghar Ali Engineer at the round table discussion on 'Prospects and challenges of the Ayodhya verdict for the nation' on 23 October 2010 jointly organized by CSSS and IIC and held at the Conference Hall, IIC, Mumbai. © CSSS, Mumbai.

The Centre for Study of Society and Secularism (CSSS) and Institute of Indian Culture (IIC) jointly organized a round table discussion 'Prospects and Challenges of the Ayodhya Verdict for the Nation' on 23 October 2010 to discuss the judgment passed on 30 September 2010 by a three judge special bench from the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court with regard to the dispute between Ram Janmbhoomi and Babri Masjid (Mosque).

The discussions began with a brief history by Dr Asghar Ali Engineer, a scholar on the Constitution of India and Islamic scriptures. As per recorded texts, history of this litigation goes to a suit filed in Faizabad in 1885. At that time, the trial court as well as the subsequent appeal to the District Judge, Faizabad and Judicial Commissioner, Oudh led to a ruling in favour of maintaining status quo. Muslims prayed in the inner portions (the Babri Masjid) and the Hindus in the outer portion (comprising Ram Chabutara and Sita ki Rasoi). This continued till independence and partition of the country (midnight of 14/15 August 1947) and sometime after that in the wee hours of 23 December 1949 idols of Ram Lalla were placed inside the Masjid (or as some groups say, the idol of Ram Lalla emerged there).

The current judgment is with regard to four suits. The first litigation dating to 16 January 1950 is an appeal to be allowed to pray and an injunction against removal of idols of Ram Lalla. Subsequently, there were three suits filed claiming full title to land by Nirmohi Akhara on 17 December 1959, Sunni Wakf Board on 18 December 1961 and Ram Lalla Virajman on 1 July 1989. The two major question that the court had are who the land belonged to and whether Ram Lalla was born at that place. The judgment, Dr Engineer opines, have nothing to do with the cases filed. On the first question, they divided the property into three equal parts. On the second question, they used faith, rather than evidence. Justice Khan also invokes the faith of Muslims by referring to a peace treaty signed by Prophet Mohammad. This is against laid down principles of jurisprudence and constitutional propriety, which was also indicated by a former Chief Justice of India in a recent discussion.

Left view of participants of round table discussion on 'Prospects and Challenges of the Ayodhya Verdict for the Nation' on 23 October 2010 jointly organized by CSSS and IIC and held at the Conference Hall, IIC, Mumbai. © CSSS, Mumbai.

A human rights activist, Dr RM Pal, pointed out that the judgment cannot be independent of the Masjid being demolished on 6 December 1992 leading to rioting and violence that spread across the country. True, a separate case is being heard. But, the least that one can expect from the leaders espousing this cause is to apologize for this act.

The popular media perspective on the verdict is that this is a good judgment and we should accept and forget about it. Ms Jyoti Punwani, a journalist, does not accept this. On the faith question, she points out that Hindus believe that Ram Lalla was born in Ayodhya, but not on any particular location. Even if they agree that he was born there they do not want a temple constructed there. In any case, faith cannot be the basis of a judgment. In her discussion with the victims of the 1992-93 riots, many are happy with the absence of communal violence following the judgment. One victim remarked that "dono side ko kuch mil gaya, kuch acha hua," (both sides got something, something nice happened).

A medical practitioner and peace activist, Dr Arif Ali Sayeed, had helped victims of the riot said that there are different reactions to the judgment from the Muslim community. Youth are mostly indifferent, some are happy and there are few with extreme reactions "yeh desh unka hai, yeh adalat unka hai aur yeh zamin unha hai," (this country is theirs, this court is theirs and this land is theirs). Dr Engineer responded to this by saying that the court case should not be construed as Hindu versus Muslim; this dispute is, plain and simple, a matter of title. He further said that the "laws and rules laid down by the Constitution and the State have nothing to do with religion, language and ethnicity." Professor Anthony Kunnath, a political scientist, reacted by saying that "yeh mulk kisika nahin hai, yeh ham sabka hai," (this country belong to nobody, it belongs to all of us).

Arguing from a legal perspective, Advocate R Mishra, practicing in the Bombay High Court, mentioned that a judgment cannot be pro-Hindu or pro-Muslim. This is a sensitive issue and all the three judges gave separate judgments that together run into about eight thousand pages. If the judgments are not proper there are legal channels available to appeal in the Supreme Court and that we should refrain from questioning the judgment. He also mentioned about section 89 where one can go beyond evidence in the process of judgment to ensure mediation and solution.

Professor Kunnath reacted by saying that we can question a judgment. In particular, he raised the controversy surrounding the report of the Archaeological Society of India that the court relied on and whether the data prepared by them has been subjected to scientific scrutiny. It is relevant because court's judgment depends upon facts and figures put forth before the judges. There is an independent open appeal to look into this.

Right side view of participants of round table discussion on 'Prospects and Challenges of the Ayodhya Verdict for the Nation' on 23 October 2010 jointly organized by CSSS and IIC and held at the Conference Hall, IIC, Mumbai, © CSSS, Mumbai.

Speaking from a Muslim perspective, Dr Zeenat Shaukat Ali, a professor of Islamic history and religion and founder Director General of Wisdom Foundation, a World Institute of Islamic Studies for Dialogue, Organization of Mediation, Gender Justice and Peace, puts her point of view in three parts. First, the judgment needs to be dissected and analyzed by experts without judging the judges. Second, the issue has been politicized leading to sectarian strife that led to demolishing the Masjid by divisive forces, but today 18 years later the mind of India has changed with the need to take it to greater heights so that it finds a place among the league of nations.

Third, she invokes Maulana Wahiuddin, a revered Islamic scholar, to state that "this is an opportunity for Muslims of this country giving in good will something in which they believe that Lord Ram was born." The mosque can be shifted to another place and this should not be considered as an act of surrender but rather an act done in the interest of peace and communal harmony leading to nation building. She even cites two instances from the scriptures, one in which Prophet Mohammad refuses to pray in a Church because he does not want Muslims to claim this place of worship as their own and another case in which some Christians claim a portion of the land in which a Masjid stood and this portion was given to them. She reiterated that peace, and not divisiveness, is the central message of Islam.

To a proposal that Hindus should not build a temple and reciprocate this gesture. Dr Ali responded by saying that what Hindus do or will do is an independent act and irrespective of that Muslims should consider giving away their claim to this piece of land. Today, this could be a minority view but with deliberations and discussion efforts should be made to make this a more accepted view within the community. She also elaborated that such sectarian issues should be left behind so that we move forward to more substantive issues under a multicultural plural ethos, which she is proud to be a part.

A second media perspective, with particular emphasis on the Urdu press, was put forth by Mr Mohammad Wajjihuddin. Prior to the judgment being passed all leading newspapers put up messages addressed to Muslims to maintain peace and nothing was mentioned about those who demolished the Masjid. The leading daily applauded the judgment but the Urdu press was saddened and pointed out that the judgment is not acceptable to Muslims. This two positions were also evident from the leading weekly's with India Today thinking it to be a historic moment for reconciliation whereas Outlook highlighting it to be an injustice against Muslims. In subsequent days, the lead articles in the Urdu press where mere translations of English/Hindi writers who were against the judgment. But, by and large, the media played a responsible role and did not inflame passions.

Inside view of participants of round table discussion on 'Prospects and Challenges of the Ayodhya Verdict for the Nation' on 23 October 2010 jointly organized by CSSS and IIC and held at th Conference Hall, IIC, Mumbai. © CSSS, Mumbai.

The difficulty in ascribing the title to land was echoed by Professor Lionel Fernandez. He is also of the view that the demolishing of the Masjid should not be considered independently. It was an unholy act and by that the place has been devoid of divinity. It should not be used for any place of worship. Further, the people responsible for the act should be identified and punished. He bemoaned "it is a dismal present we are living in, we are not addressing the fundamental issues."

From a sociological perspective, Professor SM Michael mentioned that this is an example of politicizing religion. This will have long term consequences for our future, the future of India. In another fifty to hundred years time we will be judged in how we handled this situation. This is an opportunity for us and particularly for the Hindu leaders and also Muslim leaders to show their magnanimity, come down to talk and take the nation forward.

On the eve of the day of judgment, as Mr Sukla Sen observed, there was a perceptible fear. Roads and otherwise crowded places were empty, but by evening and in a day or two, things started being normal. The overall need of the hour, as the Chairperson Dr Vasundhara Mohan summed up the days meeting, is that the call of the nation is peace, reconciliation, to live and let live. With this, let us move forward!

(This write-up was first put up in Digital Journal, 26 October 2010, http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/299301)

World Statistics Day

The first World Statistics Day, 20 October 2010 (20.10.2010) went by without any formal activity on campus at the Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR), Mumbai. However, for the Research Methodology course there was a lecture on Measuring Government Output, which was apt for the occasion. This was preceded by a lecture on Price Indices in National Accounting the previous day (19 October 2010).


From a research methodology perspective, the two lectures also have some additional learning. Let me elaborate on two points.

The first is to go down to details. While looking into a problem, start asking questions and while answering some of the questions you will end up many more questions leading to a search for some more answers. The process of raising questions and answering is rewarding as it will take you a step closer towards unraveling 'curiosity', which is an unending journey.

This reminds of a folklore from the Indian Statistical Institute. Post-partition, post-independence in New Delhi a sizable proportion of Muslim population were staying inside the Red Fort. Food was provided to people inside, but there was a feeling in the establishment that large amounts were siphoned.

If I recall correctly, Pandit Nehru called up Professor Mahalanobis so that the Indian Statistical Institute could help them out. There was no way that they could do a survey because anybody going inside would have been killed and likewise someone coming out would have met the same fate.

The statisticians went about the problem in the following manner. They took expert advise to arrive at the minimum amount of salt an individual will consume per day. This figure was divided by the total amount of salt requisitioned (as a proxy for having been consumed) to arrived at an estimate of the total population. Similar expert advise helped them arrive at the maximum amount of rice and other items an individual will consume per day and and divided this by the total amount of that item requisitioned to get estimates of the population. Note that the minimum salt per day will give overestimates of population whereas maximum amount for rice and other items will give underestimates of population. Despite this, the population estimates through rice and other items were many times higher than that estimated by salt giving us an extent of the corruption.

The second is to inculcate self-doubt. This is easier said then done. But, then these are some of the first principles. It is only when we start doubting that we raise questions. When we put ourselves to scrutiny, we may be able to appreciate another point of view. As an aside, it reminds me of the proverbial statement, "if you point a finger at someone then do keep in mind that three of the fingers are pointing towards you."

Having said this, I would like to state that one should be careful in dealing with statistics. It has the potential to mislead. You must have heard about the story of how three persons repeat a lie and make a fourth person believe that the lie is indeed the truth. No wonder, it is often said that "there are three kind of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." It is for this that everyone in the business of statistics should work with honesty and integrity in their observation and analysis.

This takes me to Tycho Brahe, who till his death believed that the Sun went around the Earth, but despite this belief he did not tamper with his observations and it is for this that Kepler could come up the three laws of planetary motion. Brahe's observation also paved the path for least-squares curve fitting with the most popular being the linear regression analysis in statistics. Long live statistics!

Inspirational stories from 2010 Lindau meeting of Nobel laureates

The annual Lindau meeting of young scholars with Nobel laureates concluded its 60th edition in 2010. To celebrate this milestone, Nature has come out with a supplement. The collections are a must read for young scholars and their mentors.

This is the cover page of the Nature outlook: Science masterclass, a supplement brought out to acknowledge the 60th edition of Lindau Meeting of Nobel Laureates with Young Scholars in 2010. © Nature.com

Nature Outlook in a supplement Science masterclass comes up with with stories that arouse curiosity. There are ten question and answer (Q&A) sessions put here. The questions posed to Nobel laureates were selected through an online voting process.

Arno Penzias, Physics, 1978, in runaway success advises youngsters to 'ask questions' particularly, those that illuminate, and not those that destroy. Gerardus 't Hooft, Physics, 1999, says that one should not fear from making mistakes, rather, one should make it a honour to be the first one to fine out ones mistake, but even if someone else does it, they must be happy for having asked the right kind of questions.

Peter Agre, Chemistry, 2003, the family naturalist, adds that a young scientist should not work towards prizes, but rather pursue towards making discoveries, earning the respect of peers and training next generation of scientists. Christian de Duve, Medicine, 1974, in joy of discovery, highlighted to youngsters the need to excel intellectually and technically, as the endeavour in science has to be 'unashamedly elitist'.

"In conducting your research, observe total rigour and intellectual honesty in the analysis of facts, consider all possible hypotheses, plan your approach to test those hypotheses, and submit your conclusions to the verdict of observation and experimentation without preconceived ideas. Never conduct research with the aim of proving a theory, but, rather, to invalidate it if it should be wrong. The best proof is failure to disprove."

Oliver Smithies, Medicine, 2007, response to the question on convincing public about relevance of fundamental research with no applications in sight refers to the Hubble telescope and its image revealing the universe that satisfies 'curiosity' which is a basic part of human nature that builds science brick by brick.

In politics and prophecy, John Mather, Physics, 2006, adds that the public should feel inspired from the many stories of fundamental research leading to world-changing applications. Co-recipient, George Smoot's, thought in aeons points out the relevance of interdisciplinary research but there is a need to understand the differences - the complex biological systems with a difficulty in measurement and observation call for high level and rough understanding whereas physicists are trained for rigour and precision.

The relevance of interdisciplinary research was also highlighted by David Gross, Physics, 2004 in the frontier physicist and Paul Crutzen, Chemistry, 1995. The latter was trained in civil engineering who moved to computer programming to work on meteorological models that got him hooked to atmospheric chemistry. He is the one who coined the term 'Anthropocene man', that is a nuclear war will lead to 'nuclear winter' with more people dying from starvation and diseases than the bomb. Harold Kroto, Chemistry, 1996, working at the coal face, argues a case to delink science funding from peer-review because of the difficulty to foresee important breakthrough.

The annual Lindau meeting which started in post-war Germany to revive science, health and economy has now become a global meeting that fosters the culture of science and with the coming of the digital age the way we do science. In turning the tables, where the expert panel comprises of young scholars and the audience are selected laureates, the lessons learned for young scholars are:

• choose a supervisor who does not travel too much,
• don't try to please your supervisor all the time, be prepared to challenge them,
• put questions to your supervisor, but think of some possible suggestions beforehand,
• assume your supervisor is wrong and develop your own way to approach the problem,
• idealism regarding science in politics is good, but be aware that it will be a steep challenge, and
• don't give up too easily.

And that for laureates, rather for mentors are:

• reply to emails from students within twelve hours,
• don't dictate a student's life,
• give creative freedom,
• foster relationship among students in the lab, not just with them,
• let students develop their 'voice' when writing papers, and
• communicate your science to the public by using the media.

The supplement also has links to some collection from past issues to help the young scholars in their career, on alternative paths and how to prepare. Equally inspiring is the collection from the archives that include inspiration from the life of Dorothy Hodgkin, a female Nobel laureate, and how to make mentoring and networking work.

A small disappointment about this coverage is that it has excluded the interactions and discussions with the laureates of Literature, Peace and Economics. On a personal note, this is somewhat made up by the guide for mentors.

(This write-up was first put up in Digital Journal, 18 October 2010, http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/299076.)

Three share Nobel in Economic sciences for 2010

Economic sciences Nobel for 2010 is shared by Peter Diamond, Dale Mortensen and and Christopher Pissarides "for their analysis of markets with search frictions."

Peter Diamond, Dale Mortertensen and Christopher Pissarides are the three Nobel laureates of Economic Sciences 2010 "for their analysis of markets with search frictions". © Nobel Foundation

On the one hand, a lot of people are unemployed and on the other hand, there are a number of job vacancies. This gap is on account of search frictions and the work by Peter A. Diamond, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States, Dale T. Mortensen, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, United States, and and Christopher Pissarides, London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom, is to address this labour market problem, but the theory is also applicable to other markets.

Peter Diamond is well known for his contributions to growth, social security, public finance, economic of uncertainty and economic dynamics and search (see 'An Interview with Peter Diamond' by Giuseppe Moscarini, Macroeconomic Dynamics, 11, 2007, 543-565). It is his work on search and breach of contract that gave him this Nobel. Some of his co-authors who have already received Nobel in economic sciences are Tjalling C. Koopmans (1975), James Mirrless (1996), Daniel McFadden (2000), Joseph E. Stiglitz (2001) and Eric Maskin (2007).

Dale Mortensen has applied the search theory to labour market. His short bio, refers to

"His insight, that friction is equivalent to the random arrival of trading partners, has become the leading technique for analysis of labor markets and the effects of labor market policy." In fact, Mortensen's work "n the optimal labor contract with a Poisson process of changes in the environment" did have an impact on Peter Diamond also (see above mentioned interview).

Christopher Pissarides biographical note indicates that his work are on the economics of unemployment and theory and policy in the labour market. He has co-authored a good review on this subject 'Looking into the black box: a survey of the matching function', Journal of Economic Literature, 39, 2001, 390-431. He has already shared with Dale Mortensen the 2005 IZA prise in labour economics for their work on unemployment.

The Nobel press release suggests that generous unemployment benefits would lead to greater unemployment and longer search time. The search theory has been applied to housing market - variation in sales over time, time to find a buyer and agreement by the parties on a price. "Search has also been used to study questions related to monetary theory, public economics, financial economics, regional economics, and family economics."

For the lay public, search friction can also be explained by visualizing a barter economy. Peter wants to sell diamonds to buy ale, Mortensen wants to sell ale but in return he want to get a horse ride. Now if both have to transact then they have to search for a third person, say, Christopher who wants to give a horse ride to get diamonds. To wit, Christopher Pissa-rides to glory, Mortensen toasts D-ale and Peter shares his diamond for the Nobel economic sciences 2010 because of search frictions.

(This write-up was first put up in Digital Journal, 11 October 2010, http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/298785)

That water spray

Today is global handwashing day,
Life is in our hands, they say,
Use soaps to keep diseases away,
All we need is that water spray.

The farmers' crop in disarray,
A look up at the distant sky,
Their eyes like earth is dry,
All we need is that water spray.

Singling Violin Dr Rajam

2nd October, 2010 at 6:30 P.M.

Padma Vibhushan Dr. N. Rajam accompanied in the Tabla by Shri A Pathak gave a Violin concert at the Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR) as part of SPIC-MACAY. True to the occasion, she began with a rendering of Vaishnava Janatu, a light classical of the famous Bhajan. The difference, between lay people and classically trained musicians playing a bhajan is that they can bring in their imagination in between the stanzas. The variation of volume and the pauses all being deliberate to make the music more appealing, aesthetic and emotional.

The second composition she played was a classical one where she interacted with the people and explained by stating that we begin with the Stahi, which has two lines, each line played twice then the first line is played once and then we play the alap where again each of the two line are played twice and then we end with the stahi. The alap, boltan and tan are intersperced with the Mukhda. Her imagination along with the imagination of the Tablist was followed by a jugalbandi, which she referred to as the question and answer session - she questions through her violin and the tablist responds through his beats.

On the question of the differene between Hindustani and Classical she told that both have the same base 'Sa Re Ga Ma Pa Dha Ni' and the same way that the Stahi, Alap and other things are but only the way they present is different. She also responded by explaining the ascending and descending notes. On the question of how lay people can recognize a raga she suggested that buy CD of your liking and listen to it continuously for a month before going to the next one. This way you will be able to identify the raga. After all, it is a language one can only know by learning it.

Finally she along with the tablist played a nice composition where everyone was enthralled. All those who did not know the lines were also humming with her. And this is why she is referred to as the 'singing violin'. It was a nice day to spend the birthday of Mahatma Gandhi and Lal Bahadur Shastri.