Methodological Issues and Data

This section is based on an exploratory field survey conducted during April 2008, where information was collected both at the households levels. The sample consists of 30 households (196 persons in total) selected purposively such that at least some of the family members of the household had been engaged in agricultural work prior to land acquisition. Questionnaire was canvassed at both household and individual level. Though the study is based upon small sample size and hence does not employ rigorous statistical analysis, it has been able to bring out significant issues that pave the pathway for further research.

Analysis and Results

Change in Primary and Secondary Occupation

Within the rural economy, owing to the seasonality of agricultural activity and uncertainty associated with it, farm households generally dwell upon multiplicity of activities. It often spans various types of activities associated with the farm-like crop cultivation along with livestock rearing and fishing. It may also comprise of a mix of farm and non-farm enterprise. In essence, such multiplicity of livelihood activities renders the household resilient to unforeseen perturbations that may potentially affect their sustenance. Hence, to effectively understand the working of the rural economy, it must look into at least the principal and subsidiary occupations of a household.^[1]

Broadly it may be noted that following land acquisition, 15 out 36 persons who reported agriculture as their principal occupation have been displaced such that the

Table 1 Change in the shares of the broad principal and subsidiary occupation categories (2007-2008)

Source Field Survey (2008)

Note Population above 5 years of age has been taken as often children are also engaged in agriculture as secondary occupation

share of workers having agriculture as principal occupation has declined from 18.4 to 10.7 % within just one year (Table 1). While a marginal increase in the share of workers in non-agriculture has been observed, there has been an increase in the share of non-workers from 7.1 to 12.2 % within 1 year. In terms of absolute numbers, out of the 15 people who were displaced from agriculture as principal occupation, only six of them have been able to secure alternative employment in the non-agricultural sector while the remaining nine have become jobless.

With respect to agriculture as subsidiary occupation, it has been observed that out of the 86 members who reported being in agriculture, 16 got displaced such that the share declined from 43.9 to 35.7 % within 1 year (Table 1). Out of the displaced agricultural workers, only one has been accommodated in non-agriculture while the remaining 15 persons have become unemployed with respect to subsidiary status work. So, the share of workers having no subsidiary occupation increased from 49.5 to 57.1 % (Table 1). The erosion of subsidiary activities has rendered households more vulnerable.

The displacement of the farmers and the virtual absence of their subsequent absorption into non-agricultural work highlights the incapability of the ensuing urban labour market to accommodate the additional labour released from agricultural sector. On the other hand, it also reflects the inability of the land dispossessed farmers to seize whatever opportunities exists. There is adequate evidence from earlier studies to insist upon the possibility of a stark mismatch between the stock of skill of the hitherto farmers and the human capital demand of the jobs available. The Act of 1894, in spite of its prevalence for now over a century, has not addressed this issue adequately. Although it mentions passingly that the land requiring body must impart skill to the “affected families” (by the 1894 Act it refers to the land owners and registered tenants only), it has rarely been effectively implemented. Also, by not including the most vulnerable group, that is the non-land owning but land dependent households, much of the relevance of this provision is self defeating.

• [1] Although the initial analysis discusses the trends of both principal and subsidiary occupations,the later part of the analysis pertains to the former only to focus on the major trends only.