Commercial manufacturing of Assam’s rice-based heritage brews: Current Excise Rules to benefit only the moneyed class brew problems for the communities

Assam and other states of India’s North East are home to a vibrant rice culture in terms of farming practices and consumption. Depending on the geographical terrain, farming practices vary - from wet rice cultivation to terracing and jhumming. The presence of thousands of endemic rice cultivars and the discovery of several wild varieties have convinced some scholars in identifying this region as one of the potential sites that witnessed early domestication of rice. Evidences of rice have been found in many of the Neolithic sites in the region. Given this, it is needless to mention that rice is the staple source of carbohydrate among the indigenous communities in the region. It constitutes the core of daily meal consumed two to three times a day.

Photo- Girimallika Saikia

Apart from the meals, different kinds of cakes and other delicacies are also prepared from rice. Among the assortment of traditional culinary items, beverage prepared out of rice is almost common among the various indigenous communities in the region. These beverages are an integral part of their traditional culture and ritualistic performances are incomplete in the absence of rice brew. Besides, it is also used during festivals and served along with various delicacies. Hence, rice brews are both sacred and mundane. Some of the fabled rice brews of Assam are Apong of the Mishings, Jou of the Bodos, Xaaj of the Ahoms and Judima of the Dimasas.

In December 2016, Youth Association for Development and Empowerment (YADEM) in association with Dibarai Mahila Samity (DMS) organized a festival in Haflong. Since then, four editions of the festival have been organized. Popularisation of Dima Hasao as a destination for cultural tourism was one the objectives of the festival. The other important objective is the need to explore the commercial possibilities of Judima, the traditional rice wine of the Dimasas. The idea was to ensure the commercial production of Judima through the involvement of women on a cooperative basis, somewhat on the lines of the cooperative dairy production in Gujarat. Incidentally, within a couple of months, as part of its budget for 2016-17, the Government of Assam also announced its decision to promote traditional brews in the state as ‘heritage drink’. Section 5.3, Part II of the budget stated:

Heritage Liquor: Assam's strength is its colourful culture and diverse ethnicity. The products pouring out of such diversity are many. As a Government, we are determined the build the economy deeply entrenched into the ethnicity of the State. There are several tribal brews which are healthy and of high medicinal values. Our Government proposes to conduct proper research on these brews so as to ensure the standardization, hygiene and proper bottling in attractive package. Such products will be promoted as licensed items to be sold in permitted shops and establishments. These products can beat Feni of Goa, Heritage wine of Rajasthan, Vodka of Russia and many other brands.

This initiative will help putting a stiff competition to the country liquor which is more injurious than local brews. Our Government will also consider the proposals for licensing the sale of local brews. It will be a good source of increasing income level of traditional families and also conserve the heritage.

It was indeed a good initiative on the part of the government to take interest in the protection and popularization of traditional brews in Assam. However, subsequently, on 6 May 2017, the Government of Assam published a gazetted order notifying new rules amending the Assam Excise Rules, 2016, and these new rules, on legalizing the production and sale of traditional brews as Heritage Brews, went against the spirit of what was laid down in the budget speech.

Photo - Girimallika Saikia

The amended rules allow the manufacture of heritage brews in breweries and micro-breweries like any other alcoholic beverages like beer and other IMFL. Moreover, it can be distributed and sold across the state by licensed agencies and in bars. On the face of it, this may seem encouraging. However, once we dig deeper, the problems with it become more evident.

To begin with, it restricts the production and sale of traditional brews, and the financial benefits accrued from it, to an entrepreneurial class who has the capital to invest, and leave the individual households who have been brewing these drinks for ages in the lurch. While the application fee is quite reasonable, the entire process of setting up of a brewery would entail an investment of not less than half a crore, may be far more. This is a huge amount of money for the ordinary farming population. Thus, the rule is restrictive as it leaves the field of producing and selling the brew open only to the moneyed section. Only a few will reap the benefit of commercialising an age old community knowledge and practice accessible to all.

Moreover, it unleashes certain adverse effects too. A brewery with an investment of half a crore will require a good number of workers. Local communities, such as the Dimasas, are not used to working in establishments like factories, which means, these breweries will have to be manned by labour from outside. This would not only adversely impact the local demography, but there is also a possibility of community knowledge being compromised.

Photo- Girimallika Saikia

The kernel of the argument in favour of modern mechanised brewery is quality control. Here, quality control is conceived in two aspects – hygiene and standardization of the product. It is assumed that mechanized brewing will ensure cleanliness during the process of preparing the brew and minimize the possibility of adulteration. As traditional brews are found to be different in taste, flavour and colour, it is also argued that the product would also become standardized if they were to be produced in the mechanized breweries. But to what extent are these arguments reasonable, especially when it comes to the production of traditional brews?

The most important constitutive element of hygiene is cleanliness. As far as cleanliness in the preparation of traditional brew is concerned, one requires hands on experience of brewing. Cleanliness is something inherent to how traditional brews are made. Hence, to tag these brews as heritage wines, on the one hand, and then assume that the way it is traditionally made is unhygienic and unclean is to mock at one’s cultural heritage and identity. Brewing is a result of the fermentation caused by microorganism called yeast. Any contact with unwanted element in the process of brewing can spoil the brew and make it sour. This is well known in the traditional societies. Therefore, utmost cleanliness is observed while brewing and also during the preparation of starter cakes. One may imagine the level of cleanliness observed from an example in the Dimasa society. It is believed that even a thought of sour things, such as lemon or tamarind etc., while brewing can turn the brew sour. Thus, cleanliness is not limited to the physical aspect alone, inner cleanliness is a must. Traditional brews also occupy a cultural significance in these societies. No rituals can be complete without it. Therefore, what is considered sacred by itself demands utmost cleanliness.

Even if we keep the sacredness of it aside and turn to commercialisation, any adulteration in a traditional brew is beyond question as adding any external element in the brew not only downgrades the quality, but also shelf life. For instance, adding water or any other substance in Judima would turn the brew sour in time scale proportionate to the quantum of external elements added. In this case, lesser shelf life of the brew minimises the commercial viability and no producers would wish that. Besides, adulterations in IMFL are a well-known fact in spite of all the monitoring measures laid down by the state at the source of its production and elsewhere. Thus, mere setting up of mechanised breweries doesn’t necessarily mean prevention of adulteration.

Another important aspect of the newly amended rule is the standardisation of traditional brews in terms of alcohol content. It recommends that the alcohol content of a heritage brew should not exceed 12%. Some of the traditional brews of Assam, especially Judima contains alcohol higher than this prescribed level. This can be done by killing microbial agents present in brew. But won’t this artificial capping of alcohol undermine the organic stature of heritage brews?

There are further questions about the viability of mechanised brewing. Will the brew produced under the mechanised system evince an interest of equal intensity as the home brewed ones among wine connoisseurs? Is it of utmost necessity to kill the diversity in tastes, flavour and colour by blending and stabilising the traditional brew into a singular scale? Can't this diversity be capitalized as a unique trait of the proposed ‘Heritage Brew’? In fact, the matter of standardization should not be a concern at all. One has already argued that setting up of cost and labour intensive mechanized brewery is not going to benefit the common people but only a few wealthy. In that case, how will the commercialization of traditional brews become ‘a good source of increasing income level of traditional families and also conserve the heritage’ as announced by the Finance Minister in his budget speech.

Photo courtesy - Jayanta Kumar Sarma

In another part of the budget speech, section 35, the minister himself laments the tardy pace of the cooperative movement in the state and backs up his argument with statistics that needs no mention here. The minister outlines the following in sub-section 1:

Hon'ble Members will agree with me that Co-operatives play a crucial role in the rural economy and it is necessary to create the conditions to enable the rapid development of a strong and vibrant cooperative sector in the State.

Further, in sub-section 2, it is stated:

Our Government is committed to encourage and facilitate the formation of viable Co-operative Societies as professional business organizations operating in the agriculture, fishery, diary, SME and other important livelihood - generation sectors with a view to promoting self-employment opportunities in the State. This is followed by fund allocations and restructuring plans etc. in the cooperative sector.

Given the abovementioned concerns, it is only apt that commercialisation of heritage brews be undertaken subscribing to a cooperative model. Only this will benefit the traditional families, and not setting up modern mechanised breweries under big capital.

Further, the government plan of putting the heritage brew of Assam in the world sommelier circuit can only be possible if it has a clear policy to support the sector to grow and compete. In that case an excise duty of 65% on heritage drink which is at par with well-established capital intensive IMFL is one of the biggest let downs. If the state government plans to compete with Goan feni, it must learn how the Goans popularised and marketed the pheni. In spite of a bustling pheni market, the Goan pheni brewers only pay 5% excise duty. Apart from it, the Goan brewers receive support in terms of promotion of feni and other activities related to it.

Therefore, the proposal of commercial manufacturing of heritage brew can only be a success only if it is backed by strong support from the government. The current act needs to be completely overhauled and the communities concerned must be involved as stakeholders while framing policies.

Uttam Bathari

(Uttam Bathari, is an Associate Professor at the Department of History, Gauhati University. He can be reached at [email protected] or [email protected] .)