P.

SAINATH

Rural Reporter

ABOUT P. SAINATH
Read

AGRARIAN CRISIS

MEDIA

RURAL INDIA

ELECTIONS

INEQUALITY

PARI

March 7, 2016 in Follow the Money: If This Is Pro-Farmer

Older articles

Home Agrarian crisis The slaughter of suicide data

The slaughter of suicide data

Welcome to Hotel
Selfie on the highway

Change the way of counting and the count changes

The house that Phules

family built

Posted on August 5, 2015 by P Sainath in Agrarian crisis

Source of the rivers,

scams of the rulers
The Benz and the
Banjara
If This Is ProFarmer
Official NCRB data shows dramatic increase in suicides under OTHERS
category

Like 998

Tweet

19

The total number of farmer suicides in the country since 1995 crossed
the 300,000-mark in 2014. However, the 2014 data are not comparable
with 19 earlier years of farm suicide data. This is so due to major
changes in methodology of the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB).

Search
To search, type and hit enter

Categories
Agrarian crisis
Announcements
Elections

With the new parameters, the number of farmer suicides in 2014 falls to

Farmer Suicides

5,650. Thats less than half their 2013 figure of 11,772. This happens

Follow the Money

simply by shuffling the suicide numbers across new or revised

categories in the NCRB tables. The fall in farmer suicides accompanies
a stunning increase in suicides by Others. Karnataka, the second
worst state for such suicides in the country, saw 321 farmers take their

Media
Miscellaneous
News

lives in 2014. Thats a big drop from the previous years figure of 1,403.

Paid News

In the same 12 months, though, suicide numbers in the Others column

Photo Spot

of that state went up by 245 per cent. From 1,482 to 5,120 suicides. On

Politics

average, the five worst states for farmer suicides saw a rise of 128 per

Reports/Writing

cent in suicides by Others.

Rural India

NCRB suicides data tables 2.6 and 2.7

The NCRB 2014 data also record thousands of tenant farmer suicides as
those by agricultural labourers. This too, helps dilute the numbers in
the main farmers column in a big way. By NCRBs own admission,
there has been no data audit of its new numbers. The agency simply

Water

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this
blog and receive notifications of new posts
by email.

says it has already decided to organize data audit in the year on

random basis. (Read: they will now audit numbers already published
as authentic). Nor were policemen at the lowest level stations those
who will record the data trained for this new exercise.
Further, a record 12 states and six union territories declared zero
farmer suicides in 2014. This includes three big farming states: West

Join 2,173 other subscribers

Email Address
Subscribe

Top Posts & Pages

Frontpage
Maharashtra crosses 60,000 farm suicides

Bengal, Rajasthan and Bihar. In 2010, by contrast, not a single big state

About P. Sainath

had claimed zero suicides. And just three union territories had done

Sainath's book: Everybody loves a good

so. Now, these states assert that not a single farmer, in the millions
amongst them, took his or her life in 2014. For any reason at all.

drought
Palagummi Sainath
Welcome to Hotel Selfie on the highway
Contact

On these counts, the NCRB says they may seek clarification from the

Farmer commits suicide, Adani gets the loan.

concerned states/ UTs where data is perceived to be abnormal

The house that Phule's family built

(emphasis added).
There is little explanation of how the data for the new/ revised

The slaughter of suicide data

Agrarian crisis

categories in the NCRBs Accidental Deaths & Suicides in India 2014 are

Farmer Suicides

collected. And when it comes to causes, the report goes, as always, by

The Benz and the Banjara

what state governments say were distress-driven suicides. Even so, the

The slaughter of suicide data

number of farmer suicides since 1995 touches 3,02,116. And while the
changes render comparisons dubious, the aggregate figure across all
farm-related suicides at 12,336 is marginally higher than in 2013.
Maharashtra, AP including Telangana, Karnataka, MP and Chhattisgarh
are the Big 5 states of farmer suicides. For a decade, they logged twothirds of all such suicides in the country. In the new accounting, the Big
5 recorded well over 90 per cent of all farmers suicides in 2014.
Maharashtra, whose 20-year total now stands at 63,318, witnessed over
45 per cent of all farmer suicides in the country last year. However,
serious questions on the changes in categories remain unanswered. As
do even more troubling ones on the data collection.
The NCRB is not a data collection machinery. It collates and tabulates
statistics coming in from the states. In that respect, it has no vested
interest in the numbers. However, the changes in formats seem to
further embolden and enable state government fudging of data.
Officials in state capitals will now find that job much easier.
A heavy distortion of the data began with Chhattisgarh in 2011. The
state had, in its own count, averaged 1,555 farm suicides each year
between 2006-10. In 2011 it went to zero, cold turkey. It declared nil
farm suicides that year, four in 2012 and zero again in 2013. West
Bengal followed suit from 2012. Others too began to massage their
numbers. Farm suicides had become a politically damaging issue. Now
with new categories and columns to shuffle the deaths across, state
governments can more easily reduce the numbers in the main farmers
group. The new (sub) categories include: farmers owning their land,
those working on contract / lease, agricultural labourers and more.
According to the NCRB, there is no reclassification here. Just further
segregation of a table that it has published for 19 years: Self-employed

Farmer commits suicide, Adani gets the loan.

Maharashtra crosses 60,000 farm suicides
When Leelabai runs the farm

persons in Agriculture/Farming. It doesnt wash. Never, at any time in

the past were agricultural labourers stated to be self-employed in
NCRB data or anywhere else. A defining characteristic of agricultural
labourers is that they are not self-employed. They roam the country
seeking work from others.
It gets worse.
The constable at the lowest police station in a district will apparently lay
down whether the person who committed suicide was a farmer, a
cultivator, a tenant, landowner or labourer. Something that is difficult
even for a trained surveyor. The NCRB does say that data is based on
official records of police stations. The data on unnatural deaths (UDs)
are fed to the district crime records bureaus (DCRBs). And upwards to
the state crime records bureaus which format them and sends them
on to the NCRB.
The NCRB says that in fact it held a one-month rigorous training of
trainers (ToT) last year. That is, for officials of the state crimes records
bureaus (SCRBs). These are people located in state capitals. Not at the
local police stations. The trained officials of the SCRBs, says the NCRB,
were requested to impart similar training for concerned officials of the
DCRBs/ police stations of their respective states for data feeding. Did
the SCRBs ever do that? It just never happened.
Police stations we contacted in high farm-suicide regions like Vidarbha
in Maharashtra and Mandya in Karnataka seemed baffled. So were top
police officials in four of the Big 5 states. We know of no circular
asking us to collect or collate the data this way, recording those
categories, said a senior police official in Andhra Pradesh.
In Telangana, a top police official said: The classification is not the job
of the constable but of the tehsildar. Who is a farmer or not, that is the
revenue departments call. A copy of the FIR goes to the tehsildar. The
policeman present simply notes the apparent reason of the suicide.
This means the classification can get done at the revenue department or
the state crime records bureau in the capital. And, when in doubt, he
said, the entry will likely go into the Others category. That last seems
to have happened with thousands of cases.
In Maharashtra, the worst affected state, senior police officials we
contacted were only aware of a 2006 state government circular on the
farm crisis. That required us to report any farm suicide to the district
collector, said one officer. He also forwarded us a copy of the circular.
In Karnataka, reeling under a spate of farm suicides at present, police
said they were mystified by the new data classification system. Local
stations had not been instructed to make such distinctions in the FIR or
its summary. Top police officials in Madhya Pradesh said that to their
knowledge, the constable in the field had not been asked to collect such
data.
The NCRB report itself reflects the confusion the new moves have

caused. The second paragraph of its note on farm suicides says quite
correctly: Farmers include those who own and work on field (viz.
cultivators) as well as those who employ/hire workers for field
work/farming activities. It excludes agricultural labourers. Then
how do the latter fit into a table of self-employed?
Take tenant farmers, those who cultivate the land owned by others,
paying a rent in cash or with a share of the produce. Most tenancy
contracts in India are informal and not recorded. So tenant farmers
struggle to get bank credit. They are deep in debt to moneylenders and
many have committed suicide. However, with no record of identity,
tenant farmers have all along been undercounted in the farmers suicide
category.
Now they will be even more decisively excluded. Only a tiny fraction
with recorded tenancy will make it to NCRBs new sub-category for
them. Most will simply be counted as agricultural labourers. And this
has clearly happened in the latest data. The number of agricultural
labourers across India committing suicide in 2014, at 6,710, is over a
thousand higher than farmers. In Andhra Pradesh, for instance. The
record shows just 160 farmer suicides for 2014 but nearly three times as
many agricultural labourer suicides in the same year.
The NCRBs response to this: It is presumed that the concerned police
station has fed the category of victims viz. agricultural labourers,
farmers, etc., based on finding of enquiry into such unnatural deaths.
However, the agency concedes that, given the potential problems, the
Bureau will seek clarification from the concerned state.
The NCRB knows there is a problem. And senior officials admit only
those whose tenancy has been recorded will have been counted. Yet, it
also says: NCRB at present does not intend to carry out detailed study
on tenancy rights/issues which varies from State to State. Alas, thats
precisely the point. The recording or lack of it, of tenant farmers is a
mess that wrecks the 2014 data. The NCRB 2014 misclassifies many
tenant farmers as agricultural labourers, says All-India Kisan Sabha
(AIKS) Vice President Malla Reddy.
Forced by the Kisan Sabha in 2011, the AP government had introduced
the Andhra Pradesh Licensed Cultivators Act to confer clear proof of
identity to tenant farmers. They were to be issued Loan Eligibility
Cards to enable them to seek bank credit. But 90 per cent of 32 lakh
tenant farmers in the present AP have not been issued the cards, says
Malla Reddy. How will they prove their identity? Tenants account for
a third of all farmers in AP. Incidentally, the AIKS counted more farmer
suicides in AP in seven months of 2014 than the NCRB does for that
whole year.
(Even the Indian Banks Association had recognised the problems of this
group across the country. It reported in 2008 that they faced a range of
problems dominantly stemming from the lack of official recognition of
tenancy and the fact that their status as actual cultivators is nowhere

recorded ).
Besides the tenant farmer issue, there are other problems that discredit
the latest farm suicides data. Most vital is the spectacular increase in
suicides recorded under Others. Particularly in the Big 5 States
where they have doubled in the 12 months of 2014. Others in
Karnataka shot up by 245 per cent in just that one year. In Andhra
Pradesh by 138 per cent. In Maharashtra by 94 per cent. In Madhya
Pradesh it was up by 89 per cent. Chhattisgarh, saw a rise of 30 per cent.

Official NCRB data shows dramatic increase in suicides under OTHERS

category

In the years 2011-14,when Chhattisgarh was declaring zero (or single

digit) farmers suicides, its average for suicides under Others grew by
83 per cent to 1,472. No prizes for guessing who many of those Others
were.
The Others overall has swollen as a result from 24,809 in 2013 to
41,216 in 2014. Astonishingly, the Others category balloons to that
figure despite the fact that 15,735 deaths have been withdrawn
from it to form the new category of daily wage earners.
Others in 2014 accounts for almost a third, 31.3 per cent, of ALL
suicides in the country. The Big 5 alone contribute 16,234 of those. In
2013, their number was 7,107.
There is also the Self-employed persons (Others) column within the
farm data whose numbers have shrunk. Creating the new categories
obviously implies a carving up of that grouping. In Chhattisgarh,
though, theres an obvious link between the farmer suicide and the
SEP (Others)columns. When the state reported a high farmer suicide
figure of 1,802 in 2009, its SEP (Others) figure was 861. When it claimed
zero farmer suicides in 2013 (for a third year running), the SEP
(Others) figure reaches 2077. If in the three years 2011-13, we add SEP
(Others) and the Others categories, they account for around 60% of

total suicides in the state.

Within their limits, the NCRB data gave us a fair trend, if not accurate
figures, for 19 years. Now that integrity is badly compromised.
Why did the government feel the need to reclassify farm suicides data?
Were the numbers proving an embarrassment? Hence a need to prove
that the data which is entirely gathered by arms of the government
were an overestimation?
The NCRB says format revisions are routine. A regular exercise
considering the data requests of various stakeholders. They say there is
nothing on record to show that the government or any particular
agency sought the revision. However, it does seem the agency acted on a
request from the agricultural ministry in 2013 (the time of Mr. Sharad
Pawar as agricultural minister).
The argument appears to be: oh, we were lumping all the categories
together earlier. So now were breaking them up to make sense. It
wasnt all farmers. That wont work because: The data up to 2013 refer
clearly to self-employed in agriculture. Agricultural labourers are NOT
self-employed. To questions raised in Parliament over the years, the
government cited the NCRB figures as being those relating to
farmers only, not to other categories.
Faced with a tragic, deepening crisis (of which the suicides are but one
symptom), how do governments react? Not by facing up to the problem,
but by fiddling the data in sometimes blatant, often ingenious ways. The
trend that began with the zero declarations has worsened. This years
fudging is more sophisticated. But there is also this self-delusion: If we
dont know the numbers there is no problem. Change the way of
counting and the count changes. And quiet flows the countryside.

Of Others and others

The Others column has long had a notorious history. In 2001, the district crime
records bureau had put down sickness as the cause of 1,061 suicides that had
occurred in Anantapur between 1997 and 2000. In a large number of these, the
sickness was reported as unbearable stomach ache. These, as it turned out,
were overwhelmingly farmers who had killed themselves by consuming pesticide.
Drinking pesticide guarantees a terrible stomach ache before death. But the police
had turned the process on its head. They recorded that the farmers had killed
themselves being unable to bear stomach pain. Consequently, Others and
sickness accounted for 82 per cent of all suicides in Anantapur in that period.
The new ways of classifying the data could mark a return to Anantapurs days of
creative accounting.
Not that there are no other dodges. Women farmers suicides are routinely
undercounted because conventional societies mostly do not acknowledge women
as farmers. And only a few have their names on title deeds or pattas. One result of
this is that the housewives category explodes in those years where states claim
nil women farmers suicides. In some states, housewives (including many who
are farmers but not so acknowledged) make up 70 per cent of all women suicides
in some years.
Caste prejudice also makes its entry in determining whether the persons killing
themselves were farmers are not. Dalits and adivasis rarely have a clear title to
land. They are often seen as encroachers and worse. Their suicides are rarely
recorded as those by farmers.
The point is that while these undercounting prejudices have long been around, the
new system will legitimize and institutionalise them. What was arbitrary or an
aberration can now become the norm. The fraud that began with Chhattisgarh
and West Bengal in 2011-12, can now legitimately be practised by other states.
The power this places in the hands of government officials in the state capitals is
enormous. Numbers will be tailored to the political situation. And state
governments can pretty much fit the figures into any category they like.
With all its drawbacks the NCRB data, while reflecting some flaws of state-routed
data, still gave us a very different picture from that of state governments. For
instance, the Maharashtra government declared 1,296 farmers suicides in 2013.
The NCRB figure for the same year was 3,146. Similar gaps show in the 2011-12
numbers. In 2014, though, the NCRBs count of 2,658 is much closer to the states
claim of 1,981. From the next year, you may just be getting the numbers cooked up
by officials in the states capital with an NCRB stamp on them.

Share this:

Twitter

Reddit

Like 998

Google

Facebook

Tweet

LinkedIn 13

Email

19

Previous article

Next article

Article Series

Original publication

Ashok Chavan

BBC

Stay connected

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to