Why was there a sudden spurt in famines in colonial India since the mid-eighteenth century? Give reasons.
Approach · directive: “give reasons”
What it asks · Explain why famines became frequent and deadly under colonial rule, showing that drought was the trigger and colonial policy the cause of mass starvation.
Open with · The Bengal famine of 1770 opened a century of recurring famines, of which the Great Famine of 1876–78 and the Bengal famine of 1943 were among the worst.
Cover
- Revenue demand: high, rigid, cash-based land revenue under Permanent, Ryotwari and Mahalwari settlements forced peasants to sell grain and borrow, leaving no reserves.
- Commercialisation: indigo, cotton, jute and opium displaced food crops, exposing cultivators to world prices and moneylenders.
- Grain trade: food was exported and moved by rail to ports while local prices rose; officials refused to interfere with the market, as in 1876–78.
- De-industrialisation: the ruin of handicrafts pushed artisans onto land, raising dependence on rainfall and lowering earnings.
- Neglect: irrigation and famine prevention received little public money; railways served trade and troops more than relief.
- Late, minimal relief: the Famine Commission of 1880 led to Famine Codes, yet relief stayed stingy; wartime requisitioning and hoarding worsened Bengal in 1943.
Close with · Weather was the trigger; revenue extraction, commercialised farming and a doctrine of non-intervention turned scarcity into mass starvation.
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2022, GS Paper I — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 223 words (UPSC limit 150) · Minimalist IAS
The Bengal famine of 1770 came within five years of the Diwani (1765); famine then recurred for nearly two centuries, 1876–78 and Bengal 1943 among the worst. Drought triggered them; colonial policy turned scarcity into mass death.
Revenue and agrarian causes
- Rigid cash revenue: high, fixed demands under the Permanent Settlement (1793), Ryotwari and Mahalwari fell due even in bad years, so peasants sold grain at harvest and borrowed, keeping no reserve.
- Commercialisation: indigo, cotton, opium and jute displaced food crops, making cultivators price-takers dependent on moneylenders and distant markets.
- De-industrialisation: ruined artisans crowded onto the land, so more lives hung on a single monsoon.
Market and policy causes
- Grain kept leaving famine districts for ports and profitable markets while local prices climbed beyond the poor's reach.
- Laissez-faire: officials refused to interfere with prices or trade, as in 1876–78, and saw relief as a drain on the exchequer.
- Neglect of prevention: public works favoured railways over irrigation, and the remissions and village stocks of earlier rulers had gone.
Relief late and small
- The Famine Commission of 1880 produced Famine Codes, yet relief stayed stingy; in 1943 wartime requisitioning and hoarding, more than crop failure, caused mass death in Bengal.
Weather set the stage, but revenue extraction, commercialised farming, export-led trade and a doctrine of non-intervention made famine a recurring feature of colonial India.
Written by Minimalist IAS from facts checked at source (how we verify) — a little fuller than exam length, so every part of the question is covered; in the hall, keep the structure and trim the detail. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.