Its the PPT I have presented for registration in Ph.D. Programme.

1. Rural- Urban Transformation and the
Pattern of Rural Labour Absorption
SUBMITTED BY
Indu Pareek
UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF
Dr. Niti Mehta
Professor
Sardar Patel Institute of Economics and Social Research
Thaltej Road, Ahmedabad.
Academic Year : 2013-2014

2. Conceptual Framework
• During pre- reforms, India has experienced a reasonable high
growth in both the sectors. However, there was a decline in farm
sector in the post reform period . While during the same period
the economy grew at 5.9 percent (0.3 percent increase).
Table 1
GDP and agricultural GDP growth, India (1970-98)
Year
GDP Growth rate
GDP Growth rate originating from agriculture
1970-80
3.4
1.8
1981-90
5.6
3
1991-98
5.9
2.6
Source: Abstracted from Rural Non- Farm Sector and ‘lessons from Asian Experience (Rao,
2005)
• Fluctuations in GDP growth rate have had some consequences on
the employment generation of rural farm as well as non-farm
workers.

3. Occupational Diversification: Contrary
Viewpoints
• The model of “Demand led Growth” suggests that a sustained rise
in farm output and incomes can act as a prime mover, initiating
the expansion of local non-farm activities, which in turn sets off a
chain reaction of sufficient magnitude to sustain the shift of
workers from agriculture to non-agricultural occupations.
• Consumption and Production linkages are crucial pattern of
growth. (Mehta, 2001)
• There are contrary views about the forces which lead to rural
workforces’ diversification. Often slow agricultural growth and
overall incomes result in distress conditions that lead to lack of
demand for non-agriculture goods. On the other hand extent of
marginal to total land holdings have been found to be positively
related to non-farm employment as revealed by some in-depth
studies.

4. • Growth in urbanization and the resulting growth in non-agricultural
employment opportunities are considered as an index of
development. This remarkable rise of 5.22 percent in the urban
population in the last one decade is the highest in the country and
much ahead of even the national average of 3.35 percent (DNA,
2011).
• It is important to note that urban areas are designated based on
four criteria. A village transformed into a town by satisfying 3
criteria’s
1. Size (Population of 5000 or more)
2. Density (at least 400 per sq. kms)
3. Nature of work (At least 75% of the male workers should be
engaged in non-agricultural work) (Sivaramakrishna et.al, 2005).

5. Table 2a
Changes in workforce composition and workers participation rates, 1991 -2011.
Rural
Urban
Total
1991
9.9
2001
10.6
70.2%
2.6
92.90%
65.0%
3.8
92.70%
Total Workers (M)
12.5
14.4
% of Total workers
74.0%
70.6%
Main Workers (M)
% of Total Main
Workers
Marginal Workers (M)
% of Total Marginal W
2011
11.9
2001
5.7
2011
8.5
1991
14.1
2001
16.3
2011
20.4
58.3% 29.8% 35.0%
3.7
0.2
0.3
83.9% 7.1% 7.3%
41.7%
0.7
16.1%
100%
2.8
100%
100%
4.1
100%
100%
4.4
100%
9.2
16.9
20.4
24.8
37.1%
100%
100%
100%
15.6
1991
4.2
4.4
6
62.9% 26.0% 29.4%
Source: census of India (2011), Directorate of census operations, Guj
Note: M: Millions

6. 1991
Population
1 (M)
Rural
Urban
Total
Table 2b
Workforce composition and workers participation rates, 1991 -2011.
2001
Male
13.8
7.4
21.2
Female
13.2
6.7
19.9
7.5
3.8
11.3
2.4
0.4
2.8
0.2
0.8
1
2.4
0.2
2.6
54.5
50.9
53.3
17.8
6.0
13.7
0.5
0.2
0.4
18.3
1.2
12.5
55.0
51.1
53.6
36.0
7.2
26.2
2
Rural
Urban
Total
3
Rural
Urban
Total
4
Rural
Urban
Total
5
Rural
Urban
Total
6
Rural
Urban
Total
27
14.2
41.2
Male
Female
Total
15.5
14.7
30.2
9.7
8.5
18.2
25.2
23.2
48.4
Main workers (M)
9.9
7.8
2.8
10.6
4.2
5.1
0.6
5.7
14.1
12.9
3.4
16.3
Marginal workers (M)
2.6
0.8
3
3.8
1
0.15
0.18
0.33
3.6
1
3.1
4.1
Worker's Participation Rate
Main workers (% of Total Population)
36.6
50.4
18.9
35.1
29.5
52.6
7.0
31.3
34.2
51.3
14.5
33.7
Marginal workers (% of Total Population)
9.2
5.2
20.1
12.4
0.7
1.5
2.1
1.8
6.2
3.8
13.5
8.4
Total workers (% of total population)
45.8
55.6
39.0
47.6
30.2
54.1
9.1
33.1
40.4
55.0
28.0
42.1
Total
Source: census of India (2011), Directorate of census operations, Gujarat.
Note :M -million
2011
Male
17.8
13.7
31.5
Female
16.9
12.1
28.9
Total
34.7
25.7
60.4
9.1
7.4
16.6
2.7
1.1
3.8
11.9
8.5
20.4
1.0
0.4
1.4
2.7
0.3
3.0
3.7
0.7
4.4
51.4
54.2
52.6
16.2
8.8
13.1
34.2
33.0
33.7
5.8
2.9
4.6
15.8
2.6
10.3
10.6
2.8
7.3
57.1
57.2
57.2
32.0
11.4
23.4
44.9
35.7
41.0

7. Category of workers
engaged as/ in
Cultivators
Agricultural Labourers
Activities
Household
Other industries
Total
Source: same as table 2
Table 3
Distribution of rural workforce by activity 1991 -2011.
1991
2001
Percentage of main workers
46.1%
30.7%
3.6%
1.4%
18.2%
100.0%
Percentage of Total workers
38.3%
33.6%
1.6%
26.5%
100.0%
2011
Percentage of Total
workers
38.5%
35.4%
1.0%
25.1%
100.0%

8. Statement of the problem:
Evidently relative prosperity and a tendency towards rural
secondary and tertiary workforce concentration can and quite
commonly go together. Almost all the states experienced at least
one decade in which rural workforce concentration took place in
the non-farm sector. During the late 1970’s and throughout the
1980’s there was a sea change in the empowerment prospects of
rural – urban workers (Bhalla, 2005). In the wake of globalization,
employment pattern in rural and urban areas have shifted. The
thesis aims to study the rural transformation process and the
pattern of rural labour absorption in Gujarat.

9. Objective
The thesis broadly aims to study the pattern of rural labour
absorption in Gujarat and the processes associated with it in terms of
workforce diversification especially given the changing rural-urban
economic structure with deepening of the reforms. Specifically the
objectives are:
(1) To outline and study salient features (economic and demographic
issues) associated with the ongoing rural transformation through
detailed review of literature.
(2) To trace the pattern of agricultural growth in Gujarat in the recent
decade and examine the association of high growth of agriculture
with changes in rural labour absorption if any. Juxtapose this with
the growth of census towns with help of case studies.
(3) To examine the demographic and workforces changes in decades
of 2000s and pattern of emergence of census towns across
Gujarat.

10. 4) To examine spatial pattern (between districts, rural-urban) of rural
labour absorption and whether workforce changes are distress
driven or the result of growth processes and hence sustainable.
5) To examine the importance of infrastructural development in
creation of the Rural Non-Farm Employment opportunities and
workforce diversification and changes in rural economic structure in
the census towns.

11. Research Hypotheses
1) Economic Reforms seems to have stabilizing and growth
accelerating impact on Gujarat’s Economy. The Secondary and
tertiary sector shows statistically high rates of growth.
2) Infrastructure development has a positive impact on Rural NonFarm Employment.
3) The pull factor (growth induced) diversification is found to be more
important than push factor (distress driven) and is characterized by
changing nature of the rural economy. To support the stated fact,
real non agriculture wages have always been higher than
agriculture wages.

12. Secondary Sources
• Preliminary data for the study would be sourced from
secondary and government agencies, mainly for demography
(census) and employment (NSSO, Bureau of Economics and
statistics) and income (CSO). Published reports, books, and
journal articles would also be used as sources of data.

13. The chapeterisation sequence would be as follows
Chapter 1: Introduction (Definitions, Conceptual framework,
methodology, need for case studies and plan of research study).
Chapter 2: Literature Review to identify issues associated with ongoing
rural transformation process (relevant published reports, articles and
reports will be reviewed).
Chapter 3: Pattern of growth in agricultural and rural sector in Gujarat.
Chapter 4: Changes in employment and income structures the trend in
Gujarat.
Chapter 5: Details of demographic, economic and social profile of the
selected census towns.
Chapter 6: This chapter would present a brief summary of the
preceding analysis and the main findings from the study. It would
indicate the policy interventions required for growth of workforce
diversification.

14. References
Bhalla, S (2005), “Rural Workforce Diversification and Performance of Unorganised Sector
Enterprises” In Nayyar R and Sharma A (ed.), (PP.75-104)
Census of India (2011), Gujarat-Workers and their Characteristics, Paper 3 of 2001, Gujarat,
Directorate Census Operations.
Daily News and Analysis http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/report-urbanisation-has-touched-tribal-areasin-gujarat-manish-bhardwaj-1600124 accessed on 19th February, 2014.
Jodhka, S. (2012), “Agrarian Changes in the Times of (Neo-Liberal) “Crises” Revisting Attached
Labour in Haryana” Economic Political weekly VolXLVII no. 26 & 27.
Kashyap, S.P (1995), “Industrial scene in Gujarat- A contract of Two Patterns”, Anvesak, Vol.25,
No.1
Kundu, Amitabh (2011b), “Method in Madness: Urban Data from 2011 Census” Economic and
Political Weekly, 46 (40).
Mehta N. and S.P. Kashyap (2005), “Rural Non-farm Sector in Gujarat: Growth and Emerging
Nature” In Nayyar R and Sharma A (ed.), (PP. 221-238).
Mehta, Niti (2001), “Development Process and Occupational Diversification: A Case of Kheda”,
Ph.D. Thesis, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad.
Nayyar R and A Sharma (2005) (ed.),”Rural Transformation in India The Role of Non-farm Sector”
Institute for Human Development, New Delhi : Manohar Publishers & Distributors.
Papola T.S. and A. N. Sharma (2005), “Towards a Policy Agenda for Rural Non-farm Sector” In
Nayyar R and Sharma A (ed.), (PP.509-516).
Rao, C.H. (2005), “Growth in Rural Sector: some Lessons from Asian Experience” In Nayyar R and
Sharma A (ed.), (PP.29-34).
Shah AM (2012), “The village in the City, the City in the Village”, Economic and Political weekly,
December 29.
Sivaramakrishnan, K C, Amitabh Kundu and B N Singh (2005): Handbook of Urbanisation in India
(Delhi: Oxford University Press).
Vaidyanathan, A (1986), “Labour Use in Rural India: A Study of Spatial and Temporal Variation”,
Economic Political weekly, Vol.21, No.52.

15. Thank You!!!