in India (Yadav, 2007; Solomon, 2016). Mechanizing the rice and wheat harvest is done using combines, which data from the Agricultural Input Survey shows are present throughout India prior to the implementation of MNREGA but tend to be present at higher levels in areas with higher use of fire.

The relationship between mechanization and the use of fires is driven by the fact that harvesting with a combine leaves more residue on the field than harvesting by hand (Yang et al., 2008). Specifically, combine harvesting leaves stocks that tend to be around 30-40cm as opposed to the 10-15cm that harvesting by hand leaves. The higher stalks interfere with the ability of farmers to plant the following season’s crops and must be removed to facilitate planting (Jain et al., 2014; Smil, 1999; Cassou, 2018; Bhuvaneshwari et al., 2019).<sup>35</sup> Burning is the least expensive way of dealing with this residue (Cassou, 2018), as interviews with farmers indicate: “Ankit Choyal Jat...offers an answer. ‘If I can clear my farm using a one-rupee matchbox, why will I spend thousands? (Jitendra et al., 2017)’” While combines were used in harvesting prior to the implementation of MNREGA, the shock that MNREGA provided to agricultural labor markets led to a substantial increase in their use. The only existing study of the impact of MNREGA on agricultural production processes (Bhargava, 2014) shows that the use of labor saving animal-based production processes increased after the implementation of MNREGA. Data from the Agricultural Input Survey shows a substantial increase in the average number of combines from 2006 to 2011 (Figure A3) – an increase that is much larger both in absolute and percentage terms than the increase from 2001 to 2006. Such an increase is consistent with broad state level trends from the Cost of Cultivation survey that show a decline in the amount of labor used in agriculture and an increase in the amount spent on machine inputs to production over the period that MNREGA was implemented.

The notion that farmers responded to the impact of MNREGA on agricultural labor markets by mechanizing is supported by their own statements as well. Media interviews with farmers from areas that have seen the largest increase in burning frequently include quotes like the following (Jitendra et al., 2017): Hari Ram Karore, a 71-year-old farmer who owns more than 10 hectares (ha) in the same village, says, “We started using combine harvester machines to tide over the labour scarcity. The machine finishes the task of reaping, threshing and winnowing in a few hours and is also economical,” he adds.

and Residents of villages around Kota say that mechanisation has killed the practice of using wheat stalk and straw as fodder, and burning is the only way out. “The cuttings left by the machines are too sharp. Not only do they injure us, even animals find it difficult to graze on,” says Shital Devi.

These quotes are supported by more formal work interviewing farmers (FLA, 2012) that indicates farmers believe the supply of unskilled agricultural labor has declined as a result of MNREGA. This is consistent with survey data from the 2011 India Human Development Survey that suggest a large share ( _≈_ 33%) of surveyed villages believe there to be fewer agricultural laborers than in the past and individual households report a 30% decline in the hours worked in agriculture. Fewer households in the IHDS report traveling for work after MNREGA as well.

> 35There are alternatives to clearing the residue after a combine harvest. Namely tilling the standing residue back into the field. However this requires specialized planting equipment that is both expensive and not widely present in India (Jain et al., 2014; Bhuvaneshwari et al., 2019).

51