Skip to main content

Is Occupational Transformation in India Pro-Poor? Analysis of Rural Labour Market in the Reform Period

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Changing Contours of Indian Agriculture
  • 295 Accesses

Abstract

Dual-sector model propounded by Lewis (Manchester Sch 22(2):39–191, (1954) and Kuznets (Am Econ Rev 63(6):247–258, 1973) holds that with the economic development workers move from farm to off-farm sector. The off-farm occupation diversification contributes to household/individual well-being as well as in overall economic growth and development through increase in productivity. In India, occupational structure remained stagnant for a long period and non-farm diversification of occupation started only in the 1980s, the rate of which has been faster in the recent period. However, the positive implication of the diversification is not satisfactory, particularly in rural area. Based on the NSS data, analysis in the chapter shows that in rural area farm employment is still important as around 65% of workers were dependent on agriculture for livelihood in 2011–12. Non-farm employment generated is mostly casual and is largely driven by the construction sector in the urban vicinity. Even though non-farm employment has been poverty reducing, given the increase in the unskilled casual employment, but the uncertainty of earnings associated with casual employment sheds doubt on stability of upward economic mobility. It has not had much positive effect on investment in human capital formation at the household level. Through multinomial econometric model, determinant of access to various occupation in rural has been examined. Mean predicted probability estimated out of multinomial model shows mix trend in access to various occupations in the reform period for 1993–94, 2004–05 and 2011–12. At the same time, caste and education are still strong determinants of most sought after regular employment. Interestingly, education remained as a strong tool of transformation since those better educated have better employment opportunity, irrespective of the caste.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Compound annual growth rate of non-farm employment has declined in urban area from 3.7% in the period between 1993/94 and 2004/05 to the rate of 2.7% in the period between 2004/05 and 2011/12.

  2. 2.

    Here, the source of increase in non-farm employment in the rural area has not been analysed. Presumably, it may be the result of both dynamism in the rural economy and demand for employment generated in the urban vicinity.

  3. 3.

    Average odds ratio is calculated as the ratio of share of non-farm workers to total workers in income quintile to the average share of non-farm workers in total workers. It follows the method discussed in Kijima and Lanjouw (2005).

References

  • Abraham V (2009) Employment growth in rural India: distress-driven? Econ Pol Weekly 44(16):97–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee A, Newman AF (1993) Occupational choices and the process of development. J Pol Econ 101(2):274–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker GS (1964) Human capital. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker G (1993) The economic way of looking at behavior. J Polit Econ 101(3):385–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau PM, Gustad JW, Jessor R, Pames HS, Willock RC (1956) Ocupational choice: a conceptual framework. ILR Rev 9(4):531–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haggblade S (2010) The rural non-farm economy: prospects for growth and poverty reduction. World Dev 38:1429–1441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Himanshu Joshi B, Lanjouw P (2016) Non-farm diversification, inequality and mobility in Palanpur. Econ Pol Weekly 51(26 & 27):43–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Himanshu, Lanjouw P, Murgai P, Stern N (2013) Non-farm diversification, poverty economic mobility and income inequality: a case study in village India. Policy research working paper 6451, World Bank

    Google Scholar 

  • Kijima Y, Lanjouw P (2005) Economic diversification and rural poverty in India. Ind J Labour Econ 48(2):349–373

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S (2016) Agrarian transformation and the new rurality in Western Uttar Pradesh. Econ Pol Weekly 51(26 & 27):61–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuznets S (1973) Modern economic growth: findings and reflections. Am Econ Rev 63(6):247–258

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanjouw P, Murgai R (2008) Poverty decline, agricultural wages and non-farm employment in rural India. Policy research working paper 4858, World Bank

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanjouw P, Shariff A (2004) Rural non-farm employment in India: access, incomes and poverty impact. Econ Pol Weekly 39(40):4429–4446

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis WA (1954) Economic development with unlimited supplies of labour. Manchester Sch 22(2):39–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macmillian MS, Rodrik D (2011) Globalisation, structural change and productivity growth. Working paper 17143, National Bureau of Economic Research

    Google Scholar 

  • NSSO (2014) Employment and Unemployment situation in India. Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation, Government of India. New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Piketty T (2014) Capital in the twenty first century. Harvard Business School Press, India

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranis G, John CHF (1961) A theory of economic development. Am Econ Rev 51(4):533–565

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy B (2015) Changes in intergenerational occupational mobility in India: evidence from national sample surveys, 1983–2005. World Dev 76:329–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz TW (1980) The economic of being poor. J Pol Econ 88(4):639–650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari S (2016) Public works and rural labour market: impact on poverty and inequality. Unpublished thesis submitted to CSRD, JNU

    Google Scholar 

  • Todaro MP (1969) A model of labor migration and urban unemployment in less developed countries. Am Econ Rev 59(1):138–148

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants of seminar at CSRD, JNU, held on 12–13 March 2016.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amaresh Dubey .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 10.9, 10.10 and 10.11.

Table 10.9 Multinomial results of occupational access in rural India, 1993–94
Table 10.10 Multinomial results of occupational access in rural India, 2004–05
Table 10.11 Multinomial results of occupational access in rural India, 2011–12

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dubey, A., Tiwari, S. (2017). Is Occupational Transformation in India Pro-Poor? Analysis of Rural Labour Market in the Reform Period. In: Bathla, S., Dubey, A. (eds) Changing Contours of Indian Agriculture. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6014-4_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6014-4_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-6013-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-6014-4

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics