Rice Industry in Burma during Colonialism - Essay Example

Rice Industry in Burma during Colonialism The work will be devoted to the discussion of the rice industry in Asian countries, and in Burma in particular, as having been one of the British colonies in Asia, and the influence of colonialism itself, and the rice industry, in particular, on the economy and culture of the colonial and ruling countries. It should be started from the general characteristics of colonial period in Asia, which was started in the 16th century by Portuguese, and was continued through the 17th and 18th centuries by England and Holland, and was not interrupted until the middle of the 19th century with the process of getting independence by the ex-colonial states. Private merchant companies served as the instrument of expansion – these were the English East-Indian company (1600) and the Dutch East-Indian company (1602), having gained monopolistic rights from their governments to have trade relations with Asian countries. By the middle of the 16th century, Portuguese have been almost pushed away from their Asian possessions, while the English and the Dutch became masters of the biggest territory of Southern and Eastern Asia. (Wilson) Asian countries have always been known as the main producers and exporters of rice and during the colonial era Burma became the main world center of cultivation and exporting rice. (Frank, 2002, p. 261) At the beginning of the 19th century Burma attracted the English not only by its strategic location, but by its raw materials, and the abundance of rice and teak. After the second English – Burma war of 1852-53, the English gained the control on the Lower Burma, which was hardly populated at the time, and only 5% of the land, suitable for cultivation, was used for agriculture. This very region was going to become the new granary of the whole Burma, and thus, a big economic center. (Frank, 2002, p. 259) The English made huge investments into the development of the region, they built roads, performed reforms and innovations, the laws, concerning land taxes and the use of the land, were changed. Immigrants from India, Upper Burma and other countries were attracted by the new beneficial conditions of work there. But for twenty years (1852-1872) the flow of immigrants equaled only 1 million people, which was evidently less than the English had expected, plus the settlers didn’t stay at one place for long. At the end of the 19th century there was the lack of working force in Burma, its cost was 2-3 times higher than this of India, which caused import of techniques and machinery together with the cheap Indian working force. (Frank, 2002, p. 240) In the middle of the 1870s as the cause of English agricultural policy, the situation changed: big territories were constantly worked, and at that time the Lower, and not the Upper, Burma became the rice granary; there was a rapid growth of raw rice production, which caused the increase of the number of rice mills. It is already at the end of 1850s, that the English began modernization of Burmas rice industry. (Twanghmung, 2003, p. 300) In 1859 the first steam rice mill was put into operation in the Basin. In 1867 there appeared two automatic rice mills in Akyaba and Rangoon. By the end of 1870 there were 20 rice mills in Burma, only two of which were producing the white rice, others being concentrated at rice-cargo production. By 1894 there were already 54 rice mills in Burma, twenty-one of them being located in Rangoon, while others 26 were situated not far from Akyaba. "The industry of Burma at that time looked more like small primitive production. The most developed were the extractive and food branches. But during the era of English colonialism, Burma became the main producer and exporter of rice in the world." (Brown, 2005, p. 28) There are two different opinions as for the influence of the British colonialism on the rice industry of Burma. One of them states, that the influence of Britain was beneficial for the population of Burma, making it a progressive and industrial country (Twanghmung, 2003, p. 299), others deny the benefits and try to prove, that people of Burma didn’t gain anything from the British (Woodman, 1962, p. 74) It is known, that traditionally the economy of Burma was aimed at redistribution, and the concept of the command economy was accepted in all spheres of life, including culture and society. The state confirmed all the prices, and there have never existed market notions of supply and demand. Burma has always been an agricultural country, but its rice industry was small and existed only for satisfying inner needs. Trade was not of primary importance for the countrys economy. “The British impact on this system proved disastrous, as Burmas economy became part of a vast colonial export economy tied to global market forces. The cause of this was not so much the usual economic exploitation of a country by a foreign ruler as it was the effects of an economy designed to benefit the colonial power.” (Woodman, 1962, p.76) The British have always dreamt of creating a ‘golden road’ to Burma through China, but these plans were not realized. In 1869 there was opened the Suez Canal, and this event became the cause for the drastically increased demand for rice, which Burma produced. Many vast forests were destroyed, and huge rice fields were appearing instead, which at that time corresponded to British needs. In 1857 the price for the Burma’s rice was increased 25%, and by the end of 1890 the price has doubled. It should be also noted, that this was not the limit, and the rice price was increasing till the period of great depression. The area of the rice fields, starting from 1850s, and during the next 70 years, has grown almost 20 times, and has reached 10,000,000 acres. Due to these changes, there was caused the shift in the population structure, as well as in its location. (Twanghmung, 2003, p. 300) It is stated, that in order to start rice cultivation, a farmer had to borrow the starting capital. This capital was given to the farmers by Indians, at the highest possible interests. Though Britain was interested in making Burma the rice country, because the demand for rice was very high in the world, it has never established any banks for land mortgage in the country, and it has never granted loans to local farmers. The wholesale rice trade was controlled by the British, while the retail rice trade was under the control of Indians and Chinese; the prices for this production were kept too low inside the country, while in the world the price was constantly growing. In such situations it often happened, that mortgages were foreclosed. (Woodman, 1962, p. 99) Farmers were losing their land; they could not find any other job, as far as thousands of Indian immigrants came to their country to work, and their labour force was several times cheaper than that of Burma; they could not even work on the lands they had lost. Being unemployed, and in order to survive, local residents turned to crimes and theft, and by the end of the 19th century the reputation of the local population was deeply worsened. (Woodman, 1962, p. 100) According to some opinions, despite the fact, that Britain has invested huge finances into developing Burma’s infrastructure and economy, it was of no benefit for local people, and on the contrary, has changed the life of Burma’s people to the worse. Despite the fact, that the main aim was achieved, and Burma became the main exporter of the rice in the world, it was of little benefit for local people. But this is only one side of the rice industry in Asia, and there should also be shown another point of view. Europe, with its huge scientific, technical and cultural experience and capitals, the energy of European migrants has created the base of modern transport and communication, and new economic activities. “Colonialism opened up South East Asian agriculture to the world market and new kinds of economic instability linked to world market forces.” (Twanghmung, 2003, p. 302) Before the British expansion, as it has already been said, Burma was the traditional command economy. The price for the rice in good years was low and in bad years it was high, thus the total income of the local farmers was rarely different. But with becoming British colony, the relations of the farmers and wholesale traders were becoming more commercialized. They had to learn the main laws of the world market; they had to hire workers, to rent animals and machinery, which made the country get acquainted with the main postulates of the market economy. But this acquaintance was painful for Burma. At first it could seem, that the regions with the best nature conditions would become the most flourishing in the country, but this appeared to be a mistake, for the regions of Burma with monocrop production, that is, those which produced rice for export and not for local consumption, greatly suffered from the variations of prices on the world market. The production in such regions was commercial, and the more it was specialized on export, the more vulnerable it was in front of the global market changes. But this problem could be solved to some extent, as in case there was excessive amount of product on the market, it could finally be consumed by local population, which cannot be said about rubber or tobacco production. (Frank, 2002, p. 264) The deviations of market rice prices influenced all layers of Burmas society, both rich and poor. Both landlords and peasants income became dependent on the situation on the world rice market. It should be pointed out, that the economy of Burma was deeply influenced by the colonial rice production, which was displayed in the following: - the inner resources of Burma were controlled by the ruling country, and not by the local population, as it had been before. As far as earlier Burma had represented a kind of moral command economy, with the rich being pressed by the poor, at the time rice industry was developing, local elites changed their attitude towards peasants, because they knew that the ruling state would defend them in case there was any disagreement. For that time it was clear, that the wealth of local landlords became dependent on the outer elites. - as during the pre-colonial era Burma was presented by the redistribution economy, during the colonial development of rice production these characteristics were weakened. The British have implemented the existence of the private property. (Brown, 2005, p. 11) It is necessary to outline, that though the rice export amount during British colonialism reached 3 million tons a year, which was the highest rate ever existing in Burma, and which at first sight may seem as a very positive factor for the economy of the country, at the same time many local farmers lost free access to many cheap resources. Many products, which had manually been produced in Burma, were replaced by the similar machine made products from Europe, thus depriving many local manufacturers of the possibility to make their ends meet. They had to become dependent on the wages they were paid by their landlords. The implementation of the private property had its negative influence on the peasants income. As far as people had been used to go fishing for free or to have free wood from the forest, at the time British started to develop rice industry in Burma, everything became private and had to be paid for. ((Twanghmung, 2003, p. 302) "Colonial rice production had a huge impact on the relations between the landlords and the tenants. The system of sharecropping, which had existed in the country before, put the risks of the future crops on both the landlord and the tenant, while the new system of fixed rent offered no subsistence for the tenant in case there was a bad crop, and the landlord always received his part, no matter how good or bad the year had been. So, colonial development of rice industry had a tendency for eliminating the 50/50 sharecropping types of relations". (Twanghmung, 2003, p. 305) With the development of rice industry in colonial Burma, landlords tended to become stronger and less flexible in terms of rent payments, while the positions of tenants were weakening. The landlords were no further afraid of loosing their tenants, and the tenants on their side were loosing their stability through the changing economic system and the loss of the free resources. (Woodman, 1962, p. 98) "The depression of the 1930s greatly influenced the rice production of Burma. Many tenants and landlords were losing their lands due to the drastic decrease of the world rice price". (Brown, 2005, p. 29) In the 1948 Burma became independent, but in the light of wrong rice-cultivation policies of its military governments, the country will hardly ever reach the trade amounts of the period 1890-1920s. Though much has been said about negative influence of the British on Burmas economy, society and culture, the rice industry was still flourishing at the time, and now it is in constant stagnation, farmers are mostly poor and they still use old traditional methods of rice cultivation. The fact cannot be denied, that colonial development of the rice industry has greatly influenced the whole life of Burmas people. This influence was both negative and positive. The positive side of the rice industrys influence is that the country has acquired the whole cycle of infrastructure, which became the base of its transition to market relations. Due to the development of rice industry, Burma, as well as other parts of Asia, became integrated into the global economy. The ruling countries have acquired the access to the cheap resources of Asian countries, through which they were able to set the rice industry going. Burma received considerable investment. It is possible to state with confidence, that the period of British colonial domination was the period of flourishing for the rice industry, though from the objective point of view, it didnt add much to the welfare of the simple farmers, and at present time the rice industry of Burma is in continued stagnation, with peasants returning to the obsolete means of rice cultivation. (Twanghmung, 2003, p. 290) Rice industry was the instrument of Asian countries to become market economies, though this transition was painful, and at the example of Burma it is clearly seen that this transition was not completed, neither was it successful. Honestly speaking, all the benefits of developing rice industry were kept by British and other foreign elites. The local population of Burma was used as the means of enrichment for landlords and ruling layers of Burmas society. Through the development of the rice industry, the relations in the society were totally changed. They became more commercialized and less human. To add to the negative side of rice industry development, it should be noted, that the ecology of Burma was greatly influenced through cutting away forests for acquiring additional rice fields area. (Twanghmung, 2003, p. 298) Conclusion Nowadays Burma takes only the sixth place among the world leading exporters of rice with export amount, equaling to 300,000 thousand tons a year, and Thailand, being the world leader of the branch. It is clear, that if correct government policies towards rice industry were developed in Burma after its becoming independent, it could keep its leading positions and make these positions beneficial for the local population. The infrastructure, founded by the British, was not further developed, and in combination with high state military expenditures and inability to cope with inflation, the country was placed into economic depression. During the colonial period, two thirds of the national income was created in the sphere of rice cultivation, though this capital was mainly concentrated in the hands of British, Chinese and Indian elites. The influence of the rice industry in Asia during colonialism cant be considered only negative or only positive. On the one hand, local people were not given the benefits for the work they fulfilled, but on the other hand, the basis of the market economy, founded by Britain, could become the way to flourishing, if used in proper way and in proper state policies. The influence of colonialism on Asian countries in the 19th century led to the total restructuring of their economic and administrative, as well as social and cultural systems. And some countries were able to cope with problems and use the acquired possibilities to their advantage. In fact, the development of rice industry in Asia during the era of colonialism was the impelling motive for the countries to turn to the development of market relations and integration into the global economy. Works Cited Brown, Ian. A Colonial Economy in Crisis: Burmas Rice Cultivators and the World Depression of the 1930s. London: Routledge Curzon, 2005, 26-75. Fernandes, Leela. Why study colonialism? Frank, Andre. The world economic system in Asia before European hegemony. The Historian 56 (2002): 259-270. Twanghmung, Ardeth Maung. The socio-economic impacts of rice policies implementation in rural Burma/ Myanmar. Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 18 (2003): 299-307. Wilson, Constance. Colonialism and Nationalism in Southeast Asia. Woodman, Dorothy. The Making of Burma. London: Cresset Press, 1962, 74-101 Read More