Class 12 Sociology · Chapter 11 NotesChange and Development in Rural Society

Agrarian structure refers to the distribution of landholdings in rural society. Land is the most important productive resource and form of property, but it is highly unequally distributed. In some regions, 40 to 50 per cent of families own no land at all and depend on agricultural labour. Women are largely excluded from land ownership because of patrilineal kinship and inheritance practices, even though the law gives them equal rights. Access to land shapes the rural class structure: medium and large landowners earn sufficient incomes, while agricultural labourers are often paid below the minimum wage, face insecure daily-wage work and underemployment, and tenants pay high rents. Caste and class are closely related. The major landowning groups usually belong to upper castes, and M.N. Srinivas called the most powerful landowning caste in a region the dominant caste. Examples include the Jats and Rajputs in U.P., the Vokkaligas and Lingayats in Karnataka, the Kammas and Reddis in Andhra Pradesh, and Jat Sikhs in Punjab. Most marginal farmers and landless labourers belong to SC, ST or OBC groups. Practices like begar (free labour) and hereditary labour ties, though legally abolished, still persist in some areas.

• Agrarian structurethe structure or distribution of landholding.
• Dominant castethe most powerful landowning caste in a region, economically and politically dominant.
• Underemploymentwhen workers do not have work for many days of the year.
• Begarunpaid or free labour that low caste groups had to provide to landlords.

The agrarian structure changed greatly from pre-colonial to colonial times. In the pre-colonial period, ruling groups such as local kings or zamindars controlled land, and peasants handed over a substantial portion of the produce. When the British colonised India, they ruled through local zamindars in many areas and granted them property rights, giving them more control over land than before. Heavy land revenue demands led zamindars to extract as much as possible from cultivators, and agricultural production stagnated or declined. Many districts were administered through the zamindari system. In other areas under direct British rule, the raiyatwari system was followed, in which the actual cultivators, often landlords themselves, paid tax directly to the colonial government. Because the burden of taxation was less and cultivators had more incentive to invest, these areas became relatively more productive and prosperous. This colonial background is important because the present agrarian structure evolved through changes that began in this period.

• Zamindari systemland revenue collected through zamindars or landlords.
• Raiyatwari systemland revenue settled directly with the cultivator (raiyat means cultivator in Telugu).

After Independence, Nehru and his policy advisors launched planned development with agrarian reform as a key focus, responding to low productivity, dependence on imported food grains and widespread rural poverty. From the 1950s to the 1970s, a series of land reform laws were passed. The first and most effective was the abolition of the zamindari system, which removed intermediaries between cultivators and the state and weakened the economic and political power of zamindars. Tenancy abolition and regulation acts tried to outlaw tenancy or regulate rents, but they were poorly implemented in most states; West Bengal and Kerala carried out radical restructuring that gave land rights to tenants. Land Ceiling Acts fixed an upper limit on land owned by a family and provided for redistribution of surplus land to landless families and categories such as SCs and STs. However, these acts were largely toothless because of loopholes and strategies like benami transfers. Overall, land reforms had limited impact, and the agrarian structure remains highly unequal.

• Land Ceiling Actslaws fixing the maximum land a family can own.
• Benami transferstransferring land in someone else's name to avoid ceiling laws.
• Land reforms were meant to boost agricultural growth, reduce rural poverty and bring social justice.

The Green Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s was a government programme of agricultural modernisation, largely funded by international agencies. It provided high-yielding variety (HYV) or hybrid seeds along with pesticides, fertilisers and other inputs. It was introduced only in areas with assured irrigation and was targeted mainly at wheat and rice growing regions such as Punjab, western U.P., coastal Andhra Pradesh and parts of Tamil Nadu. Agricultural productivity increased sharply and India became self-sufficient in foodgrain production for the first time in decades. However, sociologists pointed out negative social effects. It was mainly medium and large farmers who benefited, because inputs were expensive. The rich farmers who could produce a surplus for the market gained the most. In many cases, landowners took back land from tenants and cultivated it directly, displacing tenant-cultivators. Machinery such as tractors and harvesters displaced service caste groups and increased rural-urban migration. The outcome was 'differentiation' — the rich grew richer while many of the poor stagnated or grew poorer. The second phase from the 1980s spread to dry and semi-arid regions, where a shift to mono-cropping and market dependence increased livelihood insecurity. Regional inequalities also worsened.

• HYV seedshigh-yielding variety or hybrid seeds used in the Green Revolution.
• Subsistence agricultureproduction mainly for the family's own needs; such producers are called peasants.
• Differentiationthe process by which the rich grew richer and many of the poor stagnated or grew poorer.
• Mono-croppinggrowing a single crop, which increases risk if the crop fails or prices fall.

Several profound changes took place in rural social relations after Independence, especially in Green Revolution regions. There was an increase in the use of agricultural labour as cultivation became more intensive, a shift from payment in kind (grain) to payment in cash, a loosening of traditional bonds or hereditary relationships between landowners and workers (bonded labour), and the rise of a class of 'free' wage labourers. The sociologist Jan Breman described the change in the relationship between landlords and agricultural workers as a shift from 'patronage to exploitation'. These changes are seen by some scholars as a transition to capitalist agriculture, based on the separation of workers from land and the use of free wage labour. The state invested in rural infrastructure such as irrigation, roads and electricity, and provided agricultural inputs and credit through banks and cooperatives. In agriculturally rich regions, well-to-do farmers invested their profits in other businesses, giving rise to new entrepreneurial groups and regional elites. In contrast, regions like eastern U.P. and Bihar saw relatively few changes, while Kerala followed a different path of development with political mobilisation, redistributive measures and remittances from abroad.

• Bonded labourhereditary labour relationships in which workers were tied to landowners.
• Patronage to exploitationBreman's description of the changing relationship between landlords and agricultural workers.
• Capitalist agricultureproduction based on separation of workers from land and use of free wage labour.

The commercialisation of agriculture led to the growth of migrant agricultural labour. As traditional bonds of patronage broke down and seasonal demand for labour increased in prosperous Green Revolution regions such as Punjab, a pattern of seasonal migration emerged. Thousands of workers circulate between their home villages and more prosperous areas where there is more demand for labour and higher wages. Labourers also migrate because increasing inequalities in rural areas from the mid-1990s forced many households to combine multiple occupations. Men migrate periodically for work, while women and children are often left behind in villages. Migrant workers come mainly from drought-prone and less productive regions and work on farms in Punjab and Haryana, in brick kilns in U.P., or on construction sites in cities such as New Delhi or Bangalore. Jan Breman called them 'footloose labour', but this does not mean they are free; they usually do not get the minimum wage. Wealthy farmers often prefer migrant workers because they are more easily exploited and can be paid lower wages. In some areas, local landless labourers move out during peak seasons while migrant workers are brought in. Migration has led to the 'feminisation of agricultural labour force', as women become the main source of agricultural labour, though they earn lower wages than men and are largely excluded from land ownership.

• Footloose labourJan Breman's term for migrant workers who move in search of work but lack rights and security.
• Feminisation of agricultural labour forcewomen emerging as the main source of agricultural labour.

The policy of liberalisation followed by India since the late 1980s has had a significant impact on agriculture and rural society. It involves participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO), which aims at freer international trade and requires opening Indian markets to imports. After decades of state support and protected markets, Indian farmers are exposed to competition from the global market. This is the globalisation of agriculture — the incorporation of agriculture into the larger global market. In contract farming, farmers enter into contracts with multinational companies to grow certain crops; the company provides seeds, inputs, know-how and often working capital, and guarantees to purchase the produce at a predetermined price. Contract farming is common in cut flowers, fruits such as grapes, figs and pomegranates, cotton and oilseeds. While it appears to provide financial security, it can also lead to greater insecurity as farmers become dependent on companies. It diverts land away from food grain production, disengages people from the production process, makes indigenous knowledge irrelevant, and is often not ecologically sustainable. Multinationals have also entered as sellers of seeds, pesticides and fertilisers, replacing government agricultural extension agents. This has increased farmers' dependence on expensive inputs, reduced profits, pushed many into debt and created an ecological crisis. Farmers' suicides since 1997–98 are linked to agrarian distress caused by structural changes, liberalisation, high-cost inputs, declining state support and unstable markets. Government schemes such as Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, Kisan Credit Card and others aim to provide help to farmers.

• Liberalisationthe policy of opening up the economy, followed in India since the late 1980s.
• Contract farminggrowing crops for a company that provides inputs and buys the produce at a fixed price.
• Agrarian distressthe economic and social crisis in agriculture linked to debt, falling prices and high input costs.