For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/researchtimes.php#8

The labour market survey shows how many workers are employed in each sector, under some limitations. It represents how many workers are involved in the agricultural sector as well as in non-farm sector and the structural shift of agricultural workers to non-agricultural sectors (such as construction, retail trade, manufacturing and community or personal services) are depending on the season, an economic cycle and personal circumstances (Woetzel et al.,2017)

Indian labour markets are characterized by segmentations that are based on socio-political institutions such as gender, caste and religious groups. There is the existence of segmentation across regions, types of contractual arrangements such as formal and informal and different types of workers such as migrant and non-migrant workers. As a result due to segmentation in labour markets, there is a strong correlation between employment hierarchy and hierarchies based on caste and gender groups (Roy and Bose, 2021).

After Indian independence, there has been drastic changes in relations between the landless agricultural labourers and the landowning employer farmers. These major changes have been occurring in that area where green revolutions had become successful. It has been reported that in South Gujarat, the traditional dependency and bondage relations were undergoing a fundamental change (Jodhka, 1994). During the post-independence period (2004-05 to 2009-10) in economic history, around 23.7 million of India’s agricultural workforce has abandoned agriculture which is nearly 10 per cent of the total workforce in the agricultural sector, while the non-agricultural employment has grown by 25 million. In the years 2009-10 and 2011-12, non-agricultural employment increased sharply by 27 million while agricultural employment fell by 13 million (Mehrotra et al, 2014).

The Indian agricultural economy adopted an agricultural model in the 1960s. There was tremendous progress in food grains production after the adoption of this model and it has achieved self-sufficiency in food grains. The share of the agricultural sector in GSDP has continuously been decreasing but still, the agricultural sector plays a dominant role in employing a large proportion of the working population. Since independence, the State has conducted various surveys to understand the problems of agricultural labourers. Majority of the agricultural labourers belonged to Scheduled Castes and have the lowest share in national income. They are backward, illiterate and heavily indebted, belong to depressed classes and face a paucity of non-agricultural occupations in villages and get seasonal employment in agricultural sector (Singh, 2015).

The present study is basically based on primary data. The multistage sampling technique has been used to select the sample. At the first stage of sampling, three districts, namely Bathinda, Jalandhar and Tarn Taran, have been selected based on the high, medium and lowest proportions of agricultural and non-agricultural labourers among Majha, Malwa and Doaba regions in rural Punjab respectively. In the second stage of sampling, two villages have been selected randomly from each district based on the level of development. In the final stage of sampling, the labour households have been selected; those are involved in agricultural and non-agricultural sectors. Thus, a total of 6 villages are selected. Finally, a sample of 648 agricultural and non-agricultural labour households has been selected. The sample of 308 respondents, 65 and 275 labour households from Bathinda, Jalandhar and Tarn Taran districts has been surveyed.

The current situation of developing nations has changed and is rapidly moving from a poor economy to a developed economy with the development of social conditions. But these changes are not equal in all the regions. Rural areas are less developed as compared to urban areas in terms of social, cultural and economic aspects. The lifestyles of rural people are widely dependent on their economic status. Therefore, socio-economic characteristics are important tools for the measures of human development (Islam, 2014).

In this context, the present paper is an attempt to analyze the demographic and socio-economic status of agricultural and non-agricultural labour households in rural areas in Punjab.

Age, gender, religion and caste are important indicators that largely influence an individual’s role in the society. The sector-wise distribution of agricultural and non-agricultural rural labour households is presented in Table 1. In Bathinda district, 48.4 per cent of labour households have been involved in the agricultural sector and 47.1 per cent of rural labourers are involved in the non-agricultural sector. Similarly in Jalandhar district, only 5.7 per cent of rural labourers are involved in agricultural and 11.8 per cent of labour households are engaged in non-agricultural sectors. The proportion of rural labourers in the agricultural sector in Tarn Taran district is 45.8 per cent and 41 per cent in non-agricultural sector. The age, gender and caste-wise distribution of rural labour is presented in Table 2. In the age group of 15-30 years, only 17.7 per cent of rural labour households are working in the selected districts. 44.8 per cent of rural labour households belong to the age group of 31-45 years and 37.5 per cent of rural labour households belong to the age group of 46-60 years. Table 2 presents the gender-wise composition of rural labour households. 95.4 per cent of labourers are male and only 4.6 per cent are female labourers involved in agricultural and non-agricultural sectors in the selected districts. The caste-wise analysis shows that 81.5 per cent of rural labourers belongs to the scheduled castes, 9.7 per cent of rural labourers belong to the backward classes and  8.8 per cent rural labour households are belonging to the general category.

Table 1. Distribution of Labourers in Agricultural and Non-agricultural Sectors in Rural Punjab

 (Number)

Districts	Agricultural Labour Households	Non-agricultural Labour Households	Total
Bathinda	93 (48.4)	215 (47.1)	308 (47.5)
Jalandhar	11 (5.7)	54 (11.8)	65 (10.0)
Tarn Taran	88 (45.8)	187 (41.0)	275 (42.4)
Total	192 (100.0)	456 (100.0)	648 (100.0)

Source: Field Survey, 2018-19

Note: Figures in brackets are percentages

Table 2. Age, Gender and Caste-wise Distribution of Rural Labourer in Selected Districts 

(Number)

Age (in years)	Agricultural Labour Households	Non-agricultural Labour Households	Total
15-30	35	80	115
	(18.2)	(17.5)	(17.7)
31-45	77	213	290
	(40.1)	(46.7)	(44.8)
46-60	80	163	243
	(41.7)	(35.7)	(37.5)
Total	192	456	648
	(100.0)	(100.0)	(100.0)

Source: Field Survey, 2018-19

Note: Figures in brackets are percentages

Education is the most important factor for social, economic and political transformation. An educated person is considered more skillful. So, education and skill are directly related to each other. In the year 1991, the overall literacy rate was above 52.2 per cent in India, which increased to 64.8 per cent in 2001 and then to 74 per cent in 2011 (Tiwana et.al, 2017). Table 3 shows the level of education of rural labourers in the selected districts. It is clear from the table that 29.9 per cent agricultural and non-agricultural rural labourers are illiterate, whereas 15.6, 14, 22.1, 13, 4.5 and 0.9 per cent rural labourers has education up to primary, middle, matric, secondary, graduation and post-graduation level respectively. There are very few labour households who are graduates and post-graduates. The percentage share of illiterate persons in Bathinda district is the highest (42.5 per cent) followed by Jalandhar (20.0 per cent) and lowest (18.2 per cent) in Tarn Taran district. This analysis reveals the fact that due to their low income and poverty, the children belonging to poor families obtain only formal education up to middle and matric levels.  The family size, family type and marital status of rural labourers is presented in Table 4. The result clearly shows that the majority of rural labour households’ families are nuclear (80.9 per cent) while only 19.1 per cent of rural labour households are living in joint families. Moreover, the average family size of the majority of the rural labour households is 4-6 members (67.0 per cent) and only 14.0 per cent average size of family members is above 6 members. The marital status of sampled rural labour households shows that 93.5 per cent labourers are married, 2.9 per cent rural labourers are unmarried and 3.5 per cent  rural labouers are widows/widowers.

Table 3. Distribution of Rural Labourers based on Education

(Number)           

Education	Agricultural Labour Households	Non-agricultural Labour Households	Total
Illiterate	54	140	194
	(28.1)	(30.7)	(29.9)
Primary	32	69	101
	(16.7)	(15.1)	(15.6)
Middle	29	62	91
	(15.1)	(13.6)	(14.0)
Matric	50	93	143
	(26.0)	(20.4)	(22.1)
Secondary	24	60	84
	(12.5)	(13.2)	(13.0)
Graduation	2	27	29
	(1.0)	(5.9)	(4.5)
Post Graduation	1	5	6
	(0.5)	(1.1)	(0.9)
Total	192	456	648
	(100.0)	(100.0)	(100.0)

Source: Field Survey, 2018-19

Note: Figures in brackets are percentages

Table 4. Types of Family of Rural Labourers in the Selected Districts 

(Number)

Family Type	Agricultural Labour Households				Non-agricultural Labour Households
Joint	49				75
	(25.5)				(16.4)
Nuclear	143				381
	(74.5)				(83.6)
Total	192				456
	(100.0)				(100.0
Family Size
1-3 members		47	76		123
		(24.5)	(16.7)		(19.0)
4-6 members		114	320		434
		(59.4)	(70.2)		(67.0)
Above 6		31	60		91
		(16.1)	(13.2)		(14.0)
Total		192	456		648
		(100.0)	(100.0)		(100.0)

 

Marital Status
Married	183	423	606
	(95.3)	(92.8)	(93.5)
Unmarried	5	14	19
	(2.6)	(3.1)	(2.9)
Widow/widower	4	19	23
	(2.1)	(4.2)	(3.5)
Total	192	456	648
	(100.0)	(100.0)	(100.0)

Source: Field Survey, 2018-19

Note: Figures in brackets are percentages

Working location distance from the residence of rural labourers and modes of travelling are the most important determinant that influence the socio-economic conditions of rural labourers in Punjab. The majority of rural labour households (92.3 per cent) are going for work in agricultural and non-agricultural sectors up to the distance of 5 km while 5.1 per cent of rural labour households are going for work up to the distance of 6 to 10 km and 2.6 per cent of rural labourers are travelling above 10 km of distance for work. Further 81.3 per cent labourers are going on foot whereas 5.9, 7.3 and 5.6 rural labourers are commuting by bicycle/bike, bus and autorickshaw respectively in the selected district of Punjab (Table 5). The nature of work and working days of rural labourers are presented in Table 6. It is clear that 7.3 per cent rural labourers get work only for 15 days whereas 32.7, 19.6 and 40.4 per cent rural labourers get work for 16-20, 21-25 and 26-30 days respectively. Further 40.4 per cent of rural labourers are working as contractual labour while 59.6 per cent labour households from the selected sample are working as casual labour. Therefore, it is the major problem in rural areas that the rural labourers get work less than 30 days and more so as casual labour.

Table 5. Location Distance from Residence and Modes of Travelling of Rural Labourers

(Number)

Distance from residence (kilometers)	Agricultural Labour Households	Non-agricultural Labour Households	Total
1-5 km	179	419	598
	(93.2)	(91.9)	(92.3)
6-10 km	6	27	33
	(3.1)	(5.9)	(5.1)
Above 10	7	10	17
	(3.6)	(2.2)	(2.6)
Total	192	456	648
	(100.0)	(100.0)	(100.0)
Modes of Traveling
On foot	162	365	527
	(84.4)	(80.0)	(81.3)
Cycle or bike	12	26	38
	(6.2)	(5.7)	(5.9)
By bus	12	35	47
	(6.2)	(7.7)	(7.3)
By auto rickshaw	6	30	36
	(3.1)	(6.6)	(5.6)
Total	192	456	648
	(100.0)	(100.0)	(100.0)

Source: Field Survey, 2018-19

Note: Figures in brackets are percentages

Table 6. Nature of Work and Days of Work in Month in regard to Rural Labourers

(Number)

Working Days in month
Up to15	23	24	47
	(11.98)	(5.3)	(7.3)
16-20	51	161	212
	(26.6)	(35.30)	(32.7)
21-25	22	105	127
	(11.45)	(23.02)	(19.6)
26-30	96	166	262
	(50)	(36.40)	(40.4)
Total	192	456	648
	(100.0)	(100.0)	(100.0)
Nature of Work
Contractual	61	201	262
	(31.8)	(44.08)	(40.4)
Casual	131	255	386
	(68.2)	(55.92)	(59.6)
Total	192	456	648
	(100.0)	(100.0)	(100.0)

Source: Field Survey, 2018-19

Note: Figures in brackets are percentages

Loan borrowing of rural labourers also presents in their socio-economic conditions. Table 7 presents that 29 per cent of sampled rural labour households are not borrowing loans whereas 58.5 per cent of rural labour households are borrowing loans of amount less than Rs.25000, 8.2, 2.3 and 2.0 per cent labourers are getting loans Rs. 25000-50000, Rs. 50000-100000 and above Rs. 100000 respectively. Majority of rural labourers have taken loans for unproductive purposes such as marriage functions, construction of houses and medical treatment etc. Moreover, they have taken loans from non-institutional sources at high-interest rates.

Table 7. Loan Borrowing by Rural Labourers in Selected Districts

(Number)

Amount of loan (in  Rs.)	Agricultural Labour Households	Non-agricultural Labour Households	Total
Not Borrowed	57	131	188
	(29.7)	(28.7)	(29.0)
less than 25000	109	270	379
	(56.8)	(59.2)	(58.5)
25000-50000	20	33	53
	(10.4)	(7.2)	(8.2)
50000-100000	3	12	15
	(1.6)	(2.6)	(2.3)
Above 100000	3	10	13
	(1.6)	(2.2)	(2.0)
Total	192	456	648
	(100.0)	(100.0)	(100.0)

Source: Field Survey, 2018-19

Note: Figures in brackets are percentages

Table 8.Housing Conditions of Rural Labourers

(Number)

Housing Facility	Agricultural Labour Households	Non-agricultural Labour Households	Total
Source of Drinking water
Hand Pump	5	10	15
	(2.60)	(2.20)	(2.31)
Public Tap	168 (87.5)	415 (91)	583 (89.97)
Submersible pump	19 (9.9)	31 (6.8)	50 (7.72)
Total	192 (100.0)	456 (100.0)	648 (100.0)
Toilet Facility
Yes	162 (84.38)	441 (96.71)	603 (93.06)
No	30 (15.62)	15 (3.29)	45 (6.94)
Total	192 (100.0)	456 (100.0)	648 (100.0)
Type of House
Katcha House	42 (21.89)	20 (4.39)	62 (9.6)
Semi-pucca	98 (51.04)	220 (48.24)	318 (49.07)
Pucca	52 (27.08)	216 (47.37)	268 (41.35)
Total	192 (100.0)	456 (100.0)	648 (100.0)

 Source: Field Survey, 2018-19

 Note: Figures in brackets are percentages

The housing conditions of rural labourers are relating to types of houses, source of water and toilet facilities that are used by rural labourers in Punjab. The labourers have three types of sources of drinking water such as hand pumps, water taps and submersible pumps. The proportion of rural labourers who have a hand pump in their houses is 2.31 per cent while 89.97 per cent and 7.72 per cent labourers use water taps and submersible pumps respectively in the selected districts of Punjab. 93.06 per cent rural labourers have toilet facility in their houses whereas 6.94 per cent rural labourers do not have toilet facility in their houses. 9.6 per cent rural labourers are living in Katcha houses, 49.07 per cent labour households were living in semi-pucca houses and 41.35 per cent labour households are living in pucca houses. 

1. Islam, M.M. and Md, Mastaquim. (2014). Socio-economic status of rural population: An Income level Analysis. Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary. 2. Jodhka, S.S (1994). Agrarian Changes and attached labour: Emerging Pattern in Haryana Agriculture. Economic and Political Weekly, Sep. 24, 1994, Vol. 29. No. 39 pp102-A106. 3. Mehrotra, S., J. K. Parida.and A. Gandhi. (2014). Explaining Employment Trends in the Indian Economy: 1993-94 to 2011-12. Economic and Political Weekly, August, 2014. 4. Reddy, A.A. (2014), Rural Labour Markets: Insight from Indian Villages. Vol. 21, No.1, June 2014, Asia-Pacific Development Journal. 5. Roy, S. D. and M, Bose. (2021). Covid-19 crisis and Some Contours of the Rural Labour Markets. The Indian Economic Journal, 69 (3)479-500. 6. Singh, G. and K, Singh. (2015). Deplorable conditions of Agricultural Labourers in Rural Punjab. Journal of Economic and Social Development, Vol-XI, No. 2, December 2015. 7. Tiwana, B.S, Ravita and M, Kaur. (2017). Education and Employment situation in India: A Case Study of Rural Punjab. Indian Journal of Economic and Development, 13 (3), 424-433. 8. Venkatesh, P. (2013). Recent Trends in Rural Employment and Wages in India: Has The Growth Benefitted the Agricultural Labourers ? Agricultural Economic Research Review, Vol. 26 (conference Number)2013 pp13-20. 9. Woetzel, J., A, Madgavkar and S, Gupta (2017). India’s Labour Market: A New Emphasis on Gainful Employment. Mckinsey Global Institute discussion paper 2017.