METHODOLOGY AND CLASSIFICATION OF HOUSEHOLDS
The fieldwork for the thesis involving a rural household survey was
undertaken between February, 2006 and August, 2006 in the district of Bardhaman in
West Bengal and Anantapur and Karimnagar districts in Andhra Pradesh. Bardhaman
is one of the most prosperous districts in West Bengal. The eastern and south-eastern
part of the district is almost entirely covered by highly fertile young and old alluvial
soil with a multi-crop characteristic. The district has a net sown area of 466630 ha., {)f
which 71.98 percent is irrigated (District Statistical Handbook, Bureau of Applied
Economics and Statistics, GoWB). Rice and potato are the main crops cultivated in
the district. The yield rate of rice in the district stood at 3063 kg/ha. in 2003-04 and
compared favourably with the average yield for West Bengal, which was 2504 kg/ha.
in the same year (DSH, BAE&S, Go WB). It is also worth taking note that the district
yield for rice grew at a trend growth rate of 3.29 percent between 1999-00 and 2003-
04, which is slightly higher than that for the state. Although the yield for potato, the
{)ther major crop, has remained stagnant during this period, it has been consistently
higher than the state average. In 2003-04, the yield rate for potato in the district was
27135 kglha. compared to 24711 kg/ha. for the state (DSH, BAE&S, GoWB). These
figures clearly point towards the advanced nature of agriculture in the district. The
enhanced agricultural activity in the district actually absorbs seasonal labour supply
from other districts of the state and occasionally from outside the state as well.
Given the fact that Bardhaman is one of the agriculturally advanced district in
the state, we have purposively chosen the district for our study in West Bengal. The
Methodology & Classification of Households 69
district also has a few industrial centers like Durgapur, Asansol, Chittaranjan, etc. as
well as the ECL coalfields in its western part, which still absorbs a considerable share
of the workforce in spite of rising number of sick units and closures that has been
witnessed in the region over the last decade. According to the 2001 Census, the share
of Cultivators and Agricultural Workers to Total Workers in the district was 14.8
percent and 29.9 percent respectively. This indicates that more than half of the
workforce is employed in sectors other than agriculture. Within West Bengal,
Bardhaman has a stronger economic situation, which provides us with an appropriate
area required for the study. It would be necessary for us to examine the impact of neo- ,
liberal economic policies on the viability of agriculture in such an agriculturally
prosperous area. It would be equally interesting to determine the production relations
that predominate in such a region, which bas witnessed agricultural growth, especially
post Operation Barga, and has somewhat maintained it during the era of deflationary
economic policies in the period since 1991.
On the other hand, Andhra Pradesh ts one of first states that saw the
precipitation of the agrarian crisis m the country. The phenomenon of rising
indebtedness and farmer suicides were almost synonymous with cotton farming,
especially the BT cotton variety in the mid-nineties when it started. Gradually, the
crisis has spread to encompass regions growing other crops and in other states as well.
For our purpose, we have selected the advanced region from Karirnnagar district.
Situated in the Telengana region of the state, the district is a primarily black-soil
region and has an irrigated area of 49.77 percent (District Census Handbook, 2001).
The yield of the primary crop, cotton in the district has been volatile at 261, 373 and
212 Kg/ha for the years 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 respectively (DSH, 2004-05,
Karirnnagar) indicating a certain degree of instability in cultivation. Between 1998
and 2002, the number of farmer suicides was 1297 in this district (Patnaik, 2005).
The volatile cotton prices in the world market adversely affected the
cultivators in the early nineties. The subsequent losses in cotton cultivation converted
this region into a zone of debt-driven farmer suicides by the latter half of the nineties.
There were high default rates of the cultivators in dearing their debt commitments
and citing this, the banks stopped providing credit to farmers. This was an added blow
for the cultivators given the already low institutional credit availability in Andhra
Pradesh (already discussed in Chapter 2). This led to a dominance of the credit market
by private moneylenders pushing the farmers into a more vulnerable situation. The
Methodology & Classification of Households 70
impact of this situation on the production relations in cultivation and on market
interactions of rural households needs to be assessed.
The backward region has been selected from the Anantapur district. It is one
of the most dry districts in the country with only 11.85 percent of irrigated land
(DCH, 200 l ). It is primarily a groundnut-growing region, a crop that was protected at
least in the initial years of liberalization through comparatively higher tariff rates.
However, over the years the groundnut production in this district has also plunged
into a crisis. The number of farmers committing suicides in this region has also shown
a rising trend in the recent years. During the eighties and early nineties, there was a
decline in the domestic demand for groundnut and a majority of the oil mills, which
absorbed the supply of groundnuts from the farmers, were closed down. The prices of
groundnuts consequently declined and adversely affected the profitability of
cultivation. The gradual worsening of the agricultural situation over a long period
turned into a crisis after 2000 due to the successive drought years in 2002 and 2003 in
the region. Repeated crop failures due to insufficient rainfall and lack of adequate
groundwater led to indiscriminate investments by farmers in digging bore wells, most
of which did not yield any water. The returns to such investments have been close to
nil and have led to an accumulation of farm indebtedness and increasing distress in
the region. The frequent crop failures, low prices, high cost structures and paltry
returns to private investments in irrigation were factors contributing to the crisis and
has caused increasing number of farmers to commit suicide in this region in the recent
past.
Selection of Regions
A two-tier selection process was adopted to identify an economically
advanced and backward region, primarily in terms of agriculture, in each of the states.
While in West Bengal, the advanced and the backward regions have been selected
from the same district, in case of Andhra Pradesh; we have chosen the advanced
region from the cotton growing district of Karimnagar and the backward region from
the Anantapur district. We have used the block level data published in the District
Census Handbook, 2001 to calculate certain variables and used the latter to rank the
blocks and select them.
Methodology & Classification of Households 11
Table 3.1.1: First tier selection ranks for different blocks: Bardhaman district
No. of No. of First tier Percentage Percentage of educational medical Gross
S.No. Block of cultivable irrigated area institutions care Rank on area to total to total per '000 centers per scale of 1 area cultivable area '000 persons persons {Rl)
1 SALANPUR 66.28 22.31 1.114 0.190 0.934 2 BARABANI 76.09 32.62 0.916 0.436 0.811 3 JAMURIA-1 78.56 6.09 1.128 0.344 0.792 4 RANIGANJ 37.13 27.07 1.026 0.205 0.991 5 ONDAL 54.29 21.34 1.112 0.126 1.000
6 FARIDPUR- 68.52 8.58 1.248 0.708 0.726 DURGAPUR 7 KANKSA 51.20 37.58 1.204 0.291 0.830 8 AUSGRAM-11 56.18 45.98 1.710 1.115 0.491 9 AUSGRAM-1 78.97 77.46 1.703 0.431 0.434 10 MANGOLKOTE 80.84 72.01 1.402 0.782 0.425 11 KETUGRAM-1 81.39 91.31 1.337 0.185 0.528 12 KETUGRAM-11 83.61 87.84 1.448 0.971 0.236 13 KAlWA-I 80.48 72.96 1.099 0.307 0.679 14 KAlWA-II 78.62 73.68 1.280 0.191 0.679
15 PURBASTHAU- 84.11 67.00 1.051 0.169 0.736 I
16 PURBASTHAU-77.02 96.19 1.035 0.643 0.566 II
17 MANTESWAR 93.73 84.16 1.349 0.206 0.453 18 BHATAR 80.83 88.52 1.446 0.947 0.302 19 -bALSI-1 74.31 71.56 1.355 0.265 0.670 20 GALSI-11 94.84 99.91 1.553 1.217 0.066 21 BURDWAN 82.60 87.47 1.249 0.358 0.472 22 MEMARI-1 82.78 92.93 1.221 0.504 0.387 23 MEMARI-11 83.69 65.40 1.275 0.295 0.538 24 KALNA-1 72.54 88.60 1.189 0.241 0.670 25 KALNA-11 88.14 85.70 1.425 0.280 0.396 26 JAMALPUR 78.77 78.08 1.265 1.183 0.453 27 RAINA-I 79.96 88.50 1.105 0.203 0.679
28 KHANDA-81.59 95.38 1.427 0.746 0.264 GHOSH
29 RAINA-II 82.64 99.58 1.638 0.655 0.208
Source: District Census Handbook, 2001
In the first tier of the selection process for West Bengal, five most advanced
blocks and five most backward blocks from Bardhaman district were identified based
on four variables namely, percentage of cultivated area to total area, percentage of
irrigated area to total cultivable area, number of educational institutions per 1000
persons and number of medical care centers per 1000 population. The first rank is
assigned to the best performing block for each variable such that each block has four
ranks for the four variables. To calculate an aggregate rank for each block, we take
the sum of the four ranks for each block and then normalize the sum on a scale of 1
Methodology & Classification of Households 72
for the 29 blocks in this district We call this 'First-Tier Gross Rank on scale of I'
denoted by Rl (Table 3.1.1). From this ranking, we can identify that Galsi-2, Raina-2,
Ketugram-2, Khandaghosh and Bhatar are the most advanced blocks in the region
while Jamuria-l, Barabani, Kanksa, Salanpur and Ondal are the most backward ones.
Although, Raniganj had one of the lowest five ranks, we have not selected the block
for the second tier selection process, as the percentage of cultivable area in this block
was exceptionally low at 3 7.13 percent.
Table 3.1.2: Second tier selection ranks and Gross Final Rank for different blocks: Bardhaman district
No. of No. of No. of seed No. of No. of No. of fair
fertilizer banks PACS price stores livestock Block R1 depots per'OOO per per shops R2 per '000 per '000 '000 per
'000 person person person person '000 person rson
GALSI·II 0.066 0.78 0.0000 656.7 0.045 0.403 0.403 0.609
RAINA-II 0.208 0.29 0.0728 895.9 0.073 0.400 0.284 0.457
KETU-0.236 0.50 0.0093 699.4 0.065 0.327 0.346 0.565
GRAM-II
KHANDA-0.264 0.48 0.0059 772.5 0.065 0.382 0.329 0.609
GHOSH
BHATAR 0.302 0.55 0.0930 837.1 0.055 0.283 .0.288 0.543
JAMURIA-0.792 0.11 0.0177 437.7 0.071 0.204 0.301 0.848
1
BARABANI 0.811 0.07 0.0181 477.6 0.054 0.208 0.317 0.891
KANKSA 0.830 0.34 0.0132 516.0 0.046 0.383 0.238 0.848
SALANPUR 0.934 0.03 0.0192 208.7 0.058 0.262 0.205 1.000
ONDAL 1.000 0.06 0.0474 166.9 0.030 0.509 0.326 0.804
Source: District Statistical Handbook, Bureau of Applied Economics and Statistics, Government ofWest Bengal
In the second tier of the selection process, the most advanced and most
backward blocks out of these ten blocks are determined. This is done by further using
six variables calculated from the data in the District Statistical Handbook,
Bardhaman, 2004, Govt of West Bengal. The variables that have been used are
number of fertilizer depots per 1000 population, number of seed stores per 1000
population, number of livestock per I 000 population, number of banks per I 000
Final Gross Rank
'R'
0.337
0.332
0.401
0.436
0.423
0.820
0.851
0.839
0.967
0.902
s. No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Methodology & Classification of Households 73
population, number of PA CS per l 000 population and number of fair price shops per
l 000 population. Using the same ranking method as in the first tier, we got six ranks
for each of the ten blocks in this tier and derived the 'Second-Tier Gross Rank on a
scale of 1' denoted by R2. A 'Final Gross Rank' denoted by R was arrived at for each
block by taking a simple average of the two ranks Rl and R2. From Table 3.1.2, we
can see that Raina-2 is the most advanced block with an 'R' of 0.332 and Salanpur,
the most backward one with an 'R' of0.967.
Using the same methodology in the case of Andhra Pradesh, the advanced
region was taken from the Karimnagar district (Saidapur mandai) and the backward
from Anantapur district (Anantapur (rural) mandai). The data sources used for this
purpose was District Census Handbook, 2001 and District Statistical Handbook,
Karimnagar, 2004, GoAP and District Statistical Handbook, Anantapur, 2003-04,
GoAP. From the first level of selection, we identified five most advanced
blocks/mandals in Karimnagar district namely Julapalle, Kamalapur, Saidapur,
Pegadapalle and Ramadugu. Although, the Huzurabad mandai ranked in the top five
blocks, we have not considered it due to non-availability of data required for the
second tier selection process. While the same variables (as used for West Bengal)
have been used in the first tier of selection, in the second tier, the number of fertilizer
depots per 1 000 population and number of seed stores per 1000 population have been
replaced by the number of pump sets per 1000 persons and number of tractors and
power tillers per 1000 persons. The Saidapur block emerged as the most advanced
block among these five blocks through the second level of selection with as 'R' of
0.407 (Table 3.1.4).
Table 3.1.3: First tier selection ranks for different blocks: Karimnagar district
Percentage Percentage No. of No. of First tier of cultivable of irrigated educational medical care Gross Rank Block area to total area to total institutions centers per on scale ofl cultivable per'OOO area '000 persons (Rl) area ersons
Ibrahimpatnam 68.20 51.98 1.48 0.35 0.663
Malta pur 72.28 64.12 1.49 0.34 0.567
Raikal 43.10 44.69 1.56 0.20 0.957
Sarangapur 45.18 53.38 1.79 0.27 0.738
Dharmapuri 50.48 61.05 1.50 0.20 0.856
Velgatoor 67.65 66.16 1.67 0.25 0.636 Ramagundam 71.28 27.63 2.07 0.78 {).433
Kamanpur 36.91 37.73 1.68 0.24 0.898
Methodology & Classification of Households 74
Table 3.1.3 contd.
Percentage Percentage of No. of No. of First tier educational s. Block of cultivable irrigated area institutions medical care Gross Rank
No. area to total to total per '000 centers per onscaleofl area cultivable area '000 persons (Rl)
ersons 9 Manthani 52.03 38.53 2.70 0.32 0.578
10 Kataram 63.19 46.95 2.34 0.54 0.433
11 Mahadevpur 25.46 28.62 2.32 0.42 0.-679
12 Mutharam 31.43 79.% 1.63 0.56 0.604
13 Malharrao 48.97 23.72 1.64 0.34 0.909
14 Mutharam 49.73 26.31 1.92 0.24 0.834
15 Srirampur 55.48 31.46 2.23 0.24 0.706
16 Peddapalle 70.17 48.13 1.81 0.43 0.513
17 Julapalle 75.40 69.07 1.93 0.64 0.273
18 Dharmaram 68.18 64.09 1.67 0.20 0.722
19 Gollapalle 75.77 57.69 1.85 {}.31 0.444
20 Mallia! 60.72 26.91 1.55 0.20 1.000
21 Jagtial 68.71 85.23 2.12 0.22 0.422
22 Medipalle 67.62 34.63 1.65 0.72 0.610
23 Koratla 73.44 43.11 1.48 0.54 0.588
24 Metpalle 68.18 32.54 1.78 0.17 0.845
25 Kathlapur 67.41 28.74 1.47 0.68 0.733
26 Chandurthi 52.86 34.00 1.97 0.20 0.807
27 Kodimial 59.14 24.34 1.79 0.21 0.893
28 Pegadapalle 70.41 69.93 1.78 0.67 0.380
29 Gangadhara 67.81 48.72 2.09 0.62 0.401
30 Ramadugu 72.03 70.82 2.01 0.27 0.385
31 Choppadandi 78.16 53.46 1.71 0.47 0.439
32 Sultana bad 69.19 75.64 2.29 0.25 0.385
33 Odela 52.15 92.22 2.02 0.18 0.588
34 Manakondur 82.15 89.12 1.74 0.23 0.444
35 Karim nagar 48.86 64.74 1.60 0.82 0.594
36 Boinpalle 84.36 34.42 1.81 0.53 0.444
37 Vemulawada 71.88 22.25 1.88 0.33 0.647
38 Konaraopeta 56.98 23.58 1.84 0.29 0.802
39 Yellareddipet 32.26 34.09 1.47 0.44 0.882 40 Gambhiraopet 61.57 29.55 1.58 0.50 0.770 41 Mustabad 77.21 30.96 1.74 0.29 0.636 42 Sircilla 64.98 25.70 1.96 0.37 0.663
43 Ellanthakunta 28.54 40.89 2:00 0.20 0.802 44 Bejjanki 69.55 32.67 1.89 0.39 0.561 45 Timmapur 57.81 70.36 1.81 0.62 0.460 46 Veenavanka 77.77 46.32 1.95 0.25 0.487 47 Jammikunta 74.97 58.86 2.11 0.17 0.513 48 Shankarapatnam 66.89 73.01 1.47 0.23 0.733 49 Chigurumamidi 62.54 59.51 1.88 0.20 0.695 so Koheda 24.56 50.54 1.79 0.93 0.604 51 Husnabad 72.59 50.22 1.98 0.25 0.497
Methodology & Classification of Households 15
Table 3.1.3 contd.
Percentage Percentage of No. of No. of First tier educational s. of cultivable irrigated area medical care Gross Rank
Block institutions No. area to total to total per '000 centers per on scaleofl
52
53
54
55
56
area cultivable area rsons '000 persons (Rl)
Saidapur 87.11 40.69 2.34 0.29 0.374
Huzurabad 76.07 71.24 2.39 0.42 0.214
Kamala pur 79.60 75.74 1.68 0.71 0.289 Bheemadevarpalle 65.81 50.51 1.82 0.28 0.620
Elkathurthi 79.56 73.44 1.77 0.23 0.487
Source: District Census Handbook, 2001
Table 3.1.4: Second tier selection ranks and Gross Final Rank for different blocks: Karimnagar district
No. of No. of No. of No. of Tractors/ No. of No. of PACS fair pump Power livestock banks price Block Rl sets per tillers per per'OOO per '000 per shops R2
'000 '000 '000 person person per'OOO person person person person
Julapalle 0.273 11.09 6~96 993.81 0.022 0.022 0.38 1.00
Kamala-pur
0.289 21.17 1.51 735.88 0.067 0.050 0.59 0.96
Sa ida- 0.374 pur 123.82 1.74 1123.51 0.078 0.104 0.62 0.44
Pegada- 0.380 69.59 1.52 1309.05 0.022 0.067 0.71 0.64 palle Rama- 0.385 67.89 1.99 1349.81 0.042 0.084 0.61 0.56 d u
Source: District Statistical Handbook, Karimnagar, 2004-05, Government of Andhra Pradesh
In case of Anantapur district, we selected the five most backward
blocks/mandals through the same process initially. These blocks were Rayadurg,
Gorantla, Kanaganapalle, Gudibanda and Anantapur (rural). Among these blocks,
Anantapur (rural) emerged as the most backward block with an 'R' of 1.00 (Table
3.1.6).
Table 3.1.5: First tier selection ranks for different blocks: Anantapur district
Percentage No. of
Final Gross Rank 'R'
0.636
0.624
0.407
0.510
0.473
Percentage No. of of of irrigated educational medical First tier
s. Block cultivable area to institutions care Gross Rank No. area to total per '000 centers per on scaleofl
cultivable '000 (Rl) total area persons area rsons 1 0. Hirehal 74.91 11.84 1.015 0.228 0.746 2 Rayadurg 71.49 7.49 1.043 0.182 0.912 3 Kanekal 80.67 18.33 1.234 0.938 0.356
Methodology & Classification of Households 76
Table 3.1.5 contd
Percentage Percentage No. of No. of
of of irrigated educational medical First tier s. Block cultivable area to institutions care Gross Rank No. area to total per '000 centers per on scaleofl
cultivable '000 (Rl) total area .persons
area rsons 4 Bommanahal 82.83 32.62 0.977 0.718 0.341
5 Vidapanakal 93.61 19.14 0.745 0.207 0.634
6 Guntakal 70.72 8.46 2.262 0.141 0.732
7 Gooty 60.85 12.49 1.239 0.375 0.741
8 Peddavadugur 76.15 13.04 4.165 0.238 0.420
9 Yadiki 45.99 6.60 1.587 0.542 0.790
10 Tadipatri 73.02 15.59 2.904 0.922 0.273
11 Peddapappur 69.67 24.36 3.010 1.192 0.229
12 Pamidi 58.15 22.93 1.542 0.203 0.780
13 Vajrakarur 78.98 1.67 0.850 0.580 0.707
14 Uravakonda 87.30 2.26 0.876 0.639 0.649
15 Beluguppa 78.31 2.19 1.406 0.493 0.678
16 Gummagatta 63.49 18.07 1.230 0.189 0.839
17 Brahmasamudram 74.08 14.01 1.493 0.531 0.507
18 Kalyandurg 75.99 3.49 1.447 0.540 0.659
19 Atmakur 58.49 14.15 1.778 0.639 0.576
20 Kudair 66.07 5.92 2.987 0.251 0.654
21 Garladinne 65.41 29.61 1.587 0.244 0.585
22 Singanamala 51.92 28.93 1.918 0.291 0.605
23 Putlur 65.92 21.54 1.684 0.217 0.639
24 Yellanur 64.89 22.31 1.778 0.296 0.556
25 Narpala 63.85 26.42 4.176 0.213 0.493
26 Bukkarayasamudram 78.79 31.72 0.981 0.528 0.424
27 Anantapur (rural) 59.42 9.64 1.091 0.125 1;000
28 Rapthadu 83.88 7.77 3.046 0.205 0.517
29 Settur 75.38 2.82 1.463 0.549 0.668
30 Kundurpi 75.51 6.50 1.016 0.768 0.624
31 Kambadur 73.52 4.34 1.091 0.663 0.688
32 Kanaganapalle 61.73 4.23 1.465 0.244 0.922
33 Dhamavaram 68.97 7.36 1.278 0.205 0.863
34 Bathalapalle 77.58 11.50 4.049 0.510 0.322
35 Tadimarri 65.19 10.17 2.364 0.315 0.580 36 Mudigubba 74.93 2.98 2.027 0.395 0.629 37 Talupula 64.10 8.98 5.283 0.428 0.512 38 Nambulapulikunta 49.03 11.09 2.555 0.232 0.722 39 Gandlapenta 55.86 6.03 2.571 0.290 0.751 40 Kadiri 73.58 7.19 1.658 0.438 0.624 41 Nallamada 55.14 10.40 2.350 0.511 0.615 42 Bukkapatnam 38.09 8.38 1.794 0.344 0.805 43 Kothacheruvu 64.28 12.40 3.052 0.310 0.517
Methodology & Classification of Households n
Table 3.1.5 contd
Percentage Percentage
No. of No. of
of of irrigated
educational medical First tier
s. Block cultivable
area to institutions
care Gross Rank No.
area to total
per'OOO centers per on scale of 1
cultivable '000 {R1) total area persons
area ersons
44 Chennekothapalle 66.48 6.54 1.915 0.591 0.590
45 Ramagiri 75.81 4.76 2.415 0.667 0.459
46 Roddam 76.09 7.54 1.721 0.218 0.683
47 Madakasira 80.33 9.18 3.141 0.205 0.502
48 Amarapuram 71.93 5.40 1.138 0.209 0.898
49 Gudibanda 61.62 5.83 1.5~ 0.167 0.976
50 Rolla 63.64 30.55 2.150 0.287 0.507
51 Agali 71.10 15.72 2.110 0.251 0.527
52 Parigi 52.31 24.49 2.516 0.189 0.673
53 Penukonda 39.80 13.13 1.851 0.630 0.620
54 Puttaparthi 39.56 14.94 1.238 0.260 0.824
55 Obuladevaracheruvu 65.24 13.84 2.192 0.226 0.620
56 Nallacheruvu 77.43 10.42 1.888 0.663 0.400
57 Tanakal 78.10 14.07 2.865 0.293 0.376
58 Amadagur 64.66 14.63 2.644 0.268 0.532
59 Gorantla 60.58 6.40 1.807 0.201 0.917
60 Somandepalle 58.92 9.85 1.442 0.348 0.785
61 Hindupur 66.58 21.71 1.931 0.395 0.463
62 lepakshi 78.19 21.46 2.043 0.214 0.468
63 Chilamathur 63.50 8.83 2.134 0.431 0.629
Source: District Census Handbook, 2001
Table 3.1.6: Second tier selection ranks and Gross Final Rank for different blocks: Anantapur district
No. of No. of No. of
No~ of No. of fair pump Tractors/ No. of
banks PACS price Final
sets Power livestock Gross Block R1 tillers per per'OOO
per per shops R2 Rank per
'000 '000 '000 '000 per
'R' person person person '000 person person
rson Raya-
0.912 18.76 0.19 495.3 0.065 0.032 0.46 0.92 0.916 durg
Gorantla 0.917 10.28 1.39 735.1 0.086 0.072 0.56 0.60 0.759
Kanaga-0.922 40.34 0.87 3890.8 0.054 0.109 0.87 0.40 0.661 napalle
Gudi-0.976 30.52 0.52 1420.5 0.042 0.063 0.73 0.68 0.828 banda
Ananta-1.000 3.74 0.32 265.2 0.097 0.013 0.41 1.00 1.000 pur
Source: Handbook ofStatistics, 2003-04, Anantapur, Government of Andhra Pradesh
Methodology & Classification of Households 78
Design of the Sample
The field enquiry comprised of a survey of 254 households in the two states,
132 in West Bengal and 122 in Andhra Pradesh. A stratified random sampling
methodology has been adopted for this household survey. The stratification is done on
the basis of operated area in order to include in the sample, households from the
groups with large land-holdings, which due to their thinness always have the
possibility of being left out when a simple random sampling is employed. In West
Bengal, the stratification is defined by households below 5 acres of operated area and
those above 5 acres. In case of Andhra Pradesh, the same is determined by households
below and above 12 acres. The precise reason for using different definitions for
stratification for the two states is due to the significant difference in the average size
of land holding. In fact, these definitions have been arrived at after analyzing the
house listing data and demarcating the operational holding size above which the top
I 0 per cent households were placed.
The surveyed households have been classified according to two criteria,
specifically operated area size-class and economic classes. The classification of the
households into economic classes has been done on the basis of hired-labour use and
land-lease relations by employing Patnaik's Labour Exploitation Criterion, which has
been briefly mentioned in Chapter 1. The application of this criterion resulted in 3
households being classified as petty employers while another 3 are found to be
unclassifiable. As we have excluded these households from our structure of analysis,
the sample size of our analysis stands at 248, 128 in West Bengal and 120 in Andhra
Pradesh. The break-up of the sample is given in the following Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Sample Design
Type of Sample Population State
region District Block Villages House- House-
holds holds
Advanced Bardhaman Raina-2 Deno 24 209 West Adampur 53 446 Bengal
Backward Bardhaman Salanpur Kalishanko 32 173 Seakulberia 19 75
Ramchandra-28 291
Advanced Karim-
Saidapur pur
Andhra nagar Ghanpur 13 489 Pradesh Bommakal 19 637
Backward Anantapur Anantapur Katiganikalva 27 272 (rural) Mannila 33 397
Source: Primary Field Survey
Methodology & Classification of Households 19
Cross-classification of the Households
As mentioned earlier, the households have been cross-classified in a matrix
framework. The classification according to operated area size-class is a
straightforward exercise based on the primary data collected on Owned Area, Land
leased in and Land leased out using the relation-
Operated area= Owned Area+ [Land leased in- Land leased out]
The households have been grouped into six size-classes starting with zero or nil
operated area up to the size-class operating more than I 0 acres.
The classification of the households into peasant classes has been done by
calculating the Labour Exploitation Index (E) considering both direct labour
exploitation through hiring-in and hiring-out as well as indirect exploitation of labour
through leasing-out and leasing-in of land. The Labour Exploitation Index is given by
the following expression,
E = XIF = [(Hi- Ho) + (Lo- Li))/F
where, Hi, Hoare labour days hired in and out respectively, Lo, Li are the total labour
days on land leased out and land leased in respectively and F is the family labour in
self-employment. Although leasing-out of land is not very significant in our sample
but leasing-in plays an important role in determining the class positions of the
households, more of which has been discussed later. This index is a measure of the
net exploitation of labour by a household relative to the self-exploitation of labour.
Table 3.3: Details of Economic Classification
Economic Class Value ofE Comments
Rural labour E =- ro X < 0 and lXI is very large, F = -o. Poor Peasant E ::>- 1 X < 0, F > 0, lXI is large and lXI ~ F.
Small Peasant O~E>-1 X ::> 0, F > 0 and lXI < F.
Middle Peasant 1>E>O X > 0, F > 0 and X < F.
Rich Peasant E~1 X > 0, F > 0, X is large and X ~ F.
Landlord E = ro X > 0 and X is very large, F = 0.
Source: Adopted from Patnaik (1976)
The economic classes into which the households have been classified are rural
labour (RL), poor peasant (PP), small peasant (SP), middle peasant (MP), rich peasant
(RP) and landlords (LLD), each class -determined by the actual value of E (See Table
Methodology & Classification of Households 80
3.3). The poor and small peasants are the labour hiring out classes and belong to the
lower peasantry. We differentiate between them by the quantum of labour they hire
out relative to their family labour. On the other hand, the middle and rich peasants are
the labqur hiring in classes and comprises the upper peasantry. The rural labour and
the Landlord class both have zero family labour as the former is not able to cultivate
mostly due to landlessness and the latter does not toil in the fields. The rural labour
hires out large quantum of labour while the landlords employs large amount of hired
labour for cultivation on their fields or leases out land to tenants in exchange of
ground rent.
Table 3.4.1a : Number of households by size-class and peasant class: All region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total
0 13 0 0 0 0 0 13 0.01-1.0 1 32 13 11 6 0 63 1.01-2.5 4 20 14 10 15 0 63 2.51-5.0 0 20 13 16 11 0 60 5.1-10.0 0 6 7 6 7 1 27 10.1 &. above 0 2 1 4 13 2 22 Total 18 80 48 47 52 3 248
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.4.1b: Percentage of households by size-class: All region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total 0 72.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 0.01-1.0 5.6 40.0 27.1 23.4 11.5 0.0 25.4 1.01-2.5 22.2 25.0 29.2 21.3 28.8 0.0 25.4 2.51-5.0 {).0 25.0 27.1 34.0 21.2 0.0 24.2 5.1-10.0 0.0 7.5 14.6 12.8 13.5 33.3 10.9 10.1 &. above 0.0 2.5 2.1 8.5 25.0 66.7 8.9 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.4.1 c: Percentage of households by peasant class: All region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total 0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.01-1.0 1.6 50.8 20.6 .17.5 9.5 0.0 100.0 1.01-2.5 6.3 31.7 22.2 15.9 23.8 0.0 100.0 2.51-5.0 0.0 33.3 21.7 26.7 18.3 0.0 100.0 5.1-10.0 0.0 22.2 25.9 22.2 25.9 3.7 100.0 10.1 &. above 0.0 9.1 4.5 18.2 59.1 9.1 100.0 Total 7.26 32.26 19.35 18.95 20.97 1.21 100.0
Source: Primary Field Survey
The cross-classification of the household for the entire sample as well as for
the different regions based on this twin-classification is given in Tables 3.4.l.a to
Methodology & Classification of Households 81
3.4.5.c. As is evident from the Table 3.4.l.c, rural labour forms 7.26 percent of the
total sample. The poor peasant dass is the broadest strata in the sample constituting
32.26 percent of all househoids. The small peasant and the middle peasant classes
respectively comprise 19.35 and 18.95 percent ofthe entire sample. The rich peasant
class forms 20.97 percent of the sample while the landlord class is found to be the
thinnest strata of the sample with a size of only 1.21 percent. Alternatively, it can also
be stated that, not considering the rural labour and the landlord class, 51.61 percent of
the sample are cultivators who are net hirer-out of labour while cultivators who are
net hirer-in oflabour constitute 39.92 percent of the sample.
On the other hand, 5.2 percent of the sample has nil operated area but it should
be noted that this size-class does not cover the entire rural labour class, as there are
another 5 rural labour households in different regions, which has positive operated ~
area but shows characteristics of rural labour due to the fact that these lands are not
cultivated and left fallow for the entire year. The size-classes between 0.01 to 5.0
acres covers 75 percent of the sample almost equally divided between the three
classes. 10.9 percent of the sample lies in the bracket of 5.1 acres to I 0 acres and 8.9
percent of the households are operating more than I 0 acres.
In the advanced region of West Bengal i.e. Raina-2 block, a significant feature
of the sample is the small size of land holdings. The 0.01-1.0 acre and 1.01-2.5 acre
classes enclose 77.9 percent of the households and another 11.7 percent of the
households are operating land between 2.51-5.0 acres. While land holdings have been
historically smaller in West Bengal, this also indicates the lesser variation or
inequality of land distribution that have emerged due to the land struggles and land
reforms programme that the state has experienced. An examination of the distribution
of operated area amongst the households provides a more concrete picture regarding
this aspect, which we would discuss subsequently. The other very striking feature of
this region is that the rich peasant class forms the largest economic class, close to
around 39 percent and comparatively higher than any other region that has been
covered in the survey. The field investigations revealed the high levels of demand for
labour in this region due to the cultivation of two to three crops in a year, which is not
sufficed by local supply of labour alone and depends on migration of labour from
other parts of the state. This high level of net hiring-in of labour is obviously a major
reason for a large rich peasant class.
Methodology & Classification of Households BZ
Table 3.4.2a: Number of households by size-class and peasant class: West Bengal advanced region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.01-1~0 0 24 2 11 4 0 41 1.01-2.5 0 1 2 3 13 0 19 2.51-5.0 0 0 0 2 7 0 9 5.1-10.0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 10.1 &above 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Total 2 25 4 16 30 0 77
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.4.2b: Percentage of households by size-class: West Bengal advanced region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total
0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 il.O 2.6 0.01-1.0 0.0 96.0 50.0 68.8 13.3 0.0 53.2 1.01-2.5 0.0 4.0 50.0 18.8 43.3 0.0 24.7 2.51-5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.5 23.3 0.0 11.7 5.1-10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 3.9
10.1& 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 3.9 above
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.4.2 c: Percentage of households by peasant class: West Bengal advanced region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total
0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.01-1.0 0.0 58.5 4.9 26.8 9.8 0.0 100.0 1.01-2.5 0.0 5.3 10.5 15.8 68.4 0.0 100.0 2.51-5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 100.0 5.1-10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 10.1 &above 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 Total 2.60 32.47 5.19 20.78 38.96 0.00 100.0
Source: Primary Field Survey
In fact, the higher peasant classes (RP and MP) constitute a much higher
percentage (59.74 percent) of the sample households than the lower ones (SP and PP,
37.66 percent). More interestingly, while 96 percent of the poor peasant households
are concentrated in the lowest size-class (0.01 to 1.00 acres), the rich peasant
households are distributed between all the size-classes. This indicates that higher
demand for labour is being generated not only from the larger land-holdings but also
from holdings of all sizes, an issue which we discuss below.
In the advanced region of Andhra Pradesh, a primarily cotton growing region,
the distribution of the households across land size-classes is more spread out
compared to that of West Bengal (Table 3.4.3b). The percentage of households
Methodology & Classification of Households 83
operating 5 acres and above in this region was 25 percent, which is significantly
higher than the 7.8 percent in the advanced region in West Bengal. The rural labour
class comprises 11.67 percent of the households, which is higher than the average for
the entire sample. The small peasant class, the largest class in the region, is 41.67
percent. It is also found to be spread out among the four size-classes between 0.01 and
10 acres with its percentage share in each class falling as we move towards the higher
size-classes. Unlike the advanced region of West Bengal, the rich peasant class is not
only thinner at 13.33 percent but is also confined to the two highest size-class
brackets (5 acres and above). The poor peasant and middle peasant classes constitute
11.67 percent and 20 percent of the households respectively. The small peasant and
the middle peasant classes jointly comprise more than sixty percent of the households.
This indicates that in spite of being a region primarily growing commercial crop, the
use of family labour is at least as important as hired labour for a significant number of
households. The landlord class is only 1.67 percent of the sample in this region.
Table 3.4.3a: Number of households by size-class and peasant class: Andhra Pradesh advanced region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 0.01-1.0 0 3 8 0 0 0 11 1.01-2.5 1 1 6 2 0 0 10 2.51-5.0 0 3 9 6 0 0 18 5.1-10.0 0 0 2 4 4 0 10 10.1&
0 0 0 0 4 1 5 above Total 7 7 25 12 8 1 60
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.4.3b: Percentage of households by size-class: Andhra Pradesh advanced region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total 0 85.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 .. 0 0.0 10.0 0.01-1.0 0.0 42.9 32.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.3 1.01-2.5 14.3 14.3 24.0 16.7 0.0 0.0 16.7 2.51-5.0 0.0 42.9 36.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 5.1-10.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 33.3 50.0 0.0 16.7
10.1&above 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 8.3
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source: Primary Field Survey
Methodology & Classification of Households 84
Table 3.4.3 c : Percentage of households by peasant class: Andhra Pradesh advanced region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total 0 100.{) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.01-1.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 1.01-2.5 10.0 10.0 60.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.51-5.0 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.1-10.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 100.0
10.1 &above 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 100.0
Total 11.67 11.67 41.67 20.00 13.33 1.67 100.0
Source: Primary Field Survey
Salanpur, the backward region in West Bengal exhibits stark differences with
the advanced region of the same state and the other regions also. With subsistence
farming playing a predominant role in this region and hiring out of labour to non
agricultural activities being equally important, the rural labour and poor peasant
classes comprise dose to sixty percent of the households. The rural labour, poor
.. peasant and small peasant classes are 13.73 percent, 45.1 percent and 17.65 percent of
the households respectively (Table 3.4.4c). The rich peasant and middle peasant
classes i.e. the net labour hiring-in classes are 13.73 percent and 9.8 percent of the
households and are much smaller in size compared to the net labour hiring-out
classes. In fact, the size of the upper peasantry classes in this region is also smaller
compared to that for the entire sample. Typical to the character of West Bengal, in
this region also, the land holdings are small to the_ e~tent that we fmd only one
household operating more than 5 acres. In other words, 98 percent of the households
are found in the size-classes between 0 to 5 acres.
Table 3.4.4a: Number of households by size-class and peasant class: West Bengal backward region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total
0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0.01-1.0 1 4 3 0 2 0 10 1.01-2.5 1 10 5 3 2 0 21 2.51-5.0 0 8 1 4 1 0 14 5.1-10.0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 10.1 &above 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 7 23 9 7 5 0 51
Source: Primary Field Survey
Methodology & Classification of Households 85
Table 3.4.4b: Percentage of households by size-class: West Bengal backward region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total
0 71.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.8
0.01-1.0 14.3 17.4 33.3 0.0 40.0 0.0 19.6
1.01-2.5 14.3 43.5 55.6 42.9 40.0 0.0 41.2 2.51-5.0 0.0 34.8 11.1 57.1 20.0 0.0 27.5 5.1-10.0 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 10.1& 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 above Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0
Source: Primary Field Suroey
Table 3.4.4 c :Percentage of households by peasant class: West Bengal backward region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total
0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
0.01-1.0 10.0 40.0 30.0 0.0 20.0 0.{) 100.0 1.01-2.5 4.8 47.6 23.8 14.3 9.5 0.0 100 . .0
2.51-5.0 0.0 57.1 7.1 28.6 7.1 0.0 lOO.O
5.1-10.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 o.o 0.0 0.0 100.0 10.1 &above 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0:0 0.0 Total 13.73 45.10 17.65 13.73 9.80 0.00 100.0
Source: Primary Field Suroey
Anantapur (rural), the backward region surveyed in Andhra Pradesh clearly
reveals the differences with the advanced region in the state. The poor peasant and
small peasant classes are 41.67 percent and 16.67 percent of the households
respectively. This is a clear indication of the higher levels of hiring out of labour in
this region compared to the advanced region of the state. The rich peasant and the
middle peasant classes account for 15 percent and 20 percent of the households
respectively. Also, both rural labour and the landlord classes are considerably thin in
this region each having a size of 3.33 percent. The rich peasant and the landlord
households are found to be concentrated only in the higher size-classes. Unlike the
backward region of West Bengal, the average land holdings are larger in this dryland
region. In fact, around 45 percent of the households operate at least 5 acres of land or
more. The corresponding figure for the backward region in West Bengal is only 2
percent.
Methodology & Classification of Households 86
Table 3.4.5a: Number of households by size-class and peasant class: Andhra Pradesh backward region
RL pp SP MP RP UD Total
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01-1.0 0 1 0 0 0 1) 1 1.01-2.5 2 8 1 2 0 0 13 2.51-5.0 0 9 3 4 3 0 19 5.1-10.0 0 5 5 2 0 1 13 10.1 &above 0 2 1 4 6 1 14 Total 2 25 10 12 9 2 60
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.4.5b: Percentage of households by size-class: Andhra Pradesh backward region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.01-1.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.01-2.5 100.0 32.0 10.0 16.7 0.0 0.0 21.7 2.51-5.0 0.0 36.0 30.0 33.3 33.3 0.0 31.7 5.1-10.0 0.0 20:0 50.0 16.7 0.0 50.0 21.7 10.1 &above 0.0 8.0 10.0 33.3 66.7 50.0 23.3 Total 100.0 100.0 100.n 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.4.5 c: Percentage of households by peasant class: Andhra Pradesh backward region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total
0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.01-1.0 0.0 100.0 0.{} 0.0 n.o 0.0 100.0 1.01-2.5 15.4 61.5 7.7 15.4 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.51-5.0 0.0 47.4 15.8 21.1 15.8 0.0 100.0 5.1-10.0 0.0 38.5 38.5 15.4 0.0 7.7 100.0 10.1 &above 0.0 14.3 7.1 28.6 42.9 7.1 100.0 Total 3.33 41.67 16.67 20.00 15.00 3.33 100.0
Source: Primary Field Survey
As is evident from Table 3.5, the average operated area (Avg. OA) bears a
direct relationship with the peasant classes with the higher economic classes operating
a higher average area. This is true for all regions except the backward region in West
BengaL In the latter region, agriculture is nearly at a subsistence level and non
agricultural activities are almost equally important. This ensures that the latter also
plays a more or less significant role in determining the class positions of the
households and hence there is an absence of any clear relationship between the
economic classes and the average operated area in this region.
Methodology & Classification of Households 87
Table 3.5: Average and Total Operated Area by peasant class and size-class: All regions
Region WBAdvanced APAdvanced WB Backward APBackward
No. Total Avg. No. Total Avg. No.
Total Avg. No. Total Avg. Class of of of of
hh OA OA hh
OA OA hh OA OA hh
OA OA
RL 2 0.00 0.00 7 1.50 0.21 7 2.40 0.34 2 3.76 1.88 PP 25 12.12 0.48 7 16.50 2.36 23 56.80 2.47 25 115.62 4.62 SP 4 4.70 1.18 25 67.00 2.68 9 13.20 1.47 10 67.75 6.78 MP 16 19.44 1.22 12 55.50 4.63 7 17.00 2.43 12 95.13 7.93 RP 30 110.92 3.70 8 85.00 10.63 5 9.00 1.80 9 126.93 14.10 LLD 0 0.00 0.00 1 26.00 26.00 0 0.00 0.00 2 83.00 41.50 Total 17 147.18 1.91 60 251.50 4.19 51 98.40 1.93 60 492.19 8.20
0 2 0.00 0.00 6 0.00 0.00 5 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0-1.0 41 23.68 0.58 11 9.50 0.86 10 6.60 0.66 1 0.70 0.70 1-2.5 19 29.50 1.55 10 18.00 1.80 21 36.00 1.71 13 26.19 2.01 2.5-5 9 34.80 3.87 18 64.00 3.56 14 48.00 3.43 19 79.83 4.20 5-10 3 20.80 6.93 10 75.00 7.50 1 7.80 7.80 13 95.02 7.31 >10 3 38.40 12.80 5 85.00 17.00 0 0.00 0.00 14 290.45 20.75 Total 17 147.18 1.91 60 251.50 4.19 51 98.40 1.93 60 492.19 8.20
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.5 also suggests that the average size of operated area in West Bengal
(both regions) is smaller when compared to Andhra Pradesh. The figure is 1.91 acres
and 1.93 acres for the advanced and backward region respectively in West Bengal. In
case of Andhra Pradesh, the average operated area is 4.19 acres and 8.20 acres
respectively for the advanced and backward region. It must of course be mentioned
that the advanced area in West Bengal has a multi-crop soil characteristic and has a
higher Gross Sown Area, which clearly differentiates it from the backward area.
In Table 3.6. I to 3.6.4, we have presented the net labour days hired-in per
household for the four regions. From these results, it is evident that in the advanced
region in West Bengal, the net hiring-in of labour-days increases from the lower
economic classes to the higher ones and turns positive for the middle peasants, rich
peasants and landlords. The net hiring-in oflabour days also increases across the size
classes and only the two lowest size-classes are hiring out labour in the net while the
others are hiring in. In the advanced region in West Bengal (Table 3.6.1), we observe
that the poor peasants are hiring out their labour at a quantum slightly more than the
rural or agricultural labour. This implies that a significant number of households in
the poor peasant class bears the characteristics of rural proletariat but owns small
plots of land, which gives them food security to an extent and also classifies them as
Methodology & Classification of Households 88
poor peasants. A majority of these small plots of land were acquired by this class as
pattas (plots of land distributed by the government) through the Operation Barga
programme. The other noteworthy feature of this region is the high level of net labour
hiring-in by the rich peasants at around 437.41 labour-days per holding. In fact, the
net labour hiring-in by the rich peasants starts from 72.55 labour-days per holding for
the lowest size-class, increases upwards and is as high as 1693.67 labour-days per
holding for those households operating more than 10 acres. On the whole, the
households in this region are net labour hiring-in with 114.12 net labour-days hired in
per holding annually.
The advanced area in Andhra Pradesh is also a net labour hiring-in region. The
households annually hire in 67.65 labour-days per holding in the net. Unlike the
advanced region of West Bengal, only the highest two size-classes are hiring in labour
in the net while the rest are hiring out. The reason for this of course is the
concentration of the rich peasants and the landlords, which use large quantum ofhired
labour in their land, in the two highest size-classes. An important observation in this
region is the significantly low net hired-out labour among the poor peasants, which
suggest that a number of households in this class is leasing in land from others to
cultivate (with family labour or hired labour) instead of directly selling their labour In
the labour market. In other words, a significant number of households in this region
resort to an indirect exploitation of their labour through rent payments, as they do not
have sufficient employment opportunities in the labour market. In fact, the uppermost
size-classes for both the poor peasant and the small peasant are hiring in labour in the
net. This implies that the land-lease market also plays a significant role in determining
the economic positions of the households in this region.
Table 3.6.1: Net Labour-days hired in per holding by size-class and by peasant class: West Bengal advanced region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total
0 -190.00 0.00 0.{)0 0.00 0.00 0.00 -190.00 0.01-1.0 0.00 -205.67 -48.75 53.50 72.55 0.00 -101.34 1.01-2.5 0.00 -59.00 -83.73 80.50 187.38 0.00 129.00 2.51-5.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 237.50 448.21 o,oo 401.39 5.1-10.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 725.83 0.00 725.83 10.1&
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 •1693.67 0.00 1693.67 above
Total -190.00 -199.80 -66.24 81.56 437.41 0.00 114.12
Source: Primary Field Suroey
Methodology & Classification of Households 89
Table 3.6.2: Net Labour-days hired in per holding by size-class and by peasant class: Andhra Pradesh advanced region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total
0 -241.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -241.67 0.01-1.0 0.00 -176.00 -128.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 -141.55 1.01-2.5 -360.00 -185.00 -105.75 50:00 0.00 0.00 -107.95 2.51-5.0 0.00 9.67 -117.00 109.67 0.00 0.00 -20.33 5.1-10.0 0.00 0.00 231.50 305.38 371.75 0.00 317.15 10.1& 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 855.28 1919.00 1068.02 above Total -258.57 -97.71 -90.14 164.96 613.51 1919 . .00 67.65
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.6.3: Net Labour-days hired in per holding by size-class and by peasant class: West Bengal backward region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total 0 -318.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -318.00 0.01-1.0 -240.00 -352.50 3.33 0.00 32.25 0.00 -157.55 1.01-2.5 -140.00 -183.50 -69.20 15.50 119.25 0.00 -96.95 2.~1-5.0 0.00 -251.00 -34.00 90.74 280.00 0.00 -99.93 5.1-10.0 0.00 -67.50 0.00 0.00 .0.00 0.00 -67.50 10.1& 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 above Total -281.43 -231.33 -41.11 58.50 116.60 0.00 -130.75
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.6.4: Net Labour-days hired in per holding by size-class and by peasant class: Andhra Pradesh backward region
RL pp SP MP RP LLD Total 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01-1.0 0.00 -387.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -387.00 1.01-2.5 -375.00 -338.56 -89.00 59.00 0.00 0.00 -263.81 2.51-5.0 0.00 -409.17 -94.33 51.38 189.00 0.00 -168.05 5.1-10.0 0.00 -240.70 43.30 99.50 0.00 1830.00 80.15 10.1&
0.00 -100.25 -58.00 245.13 467.25 1091.00 329.75 above Total -375.00 -327.28 -21.35 125.25 374.50 1460.50 -22.52
Source: Primary Field Survey
The backward region in West Bengal due to the lower absorption of labour in
its near subsistence level agricultural activities, is a predominantly labour hiring-out
region. On the whole, the households in this region are hiring out 130.75 labour-days
per holding in the year. The quantum of net labour days hired-out by the rural labour
and poor peasant classes are high enough so as not to be offset due to the moderate
hiring-in by the middle and rich peasants in agricultural activity. In fact; this is the
only region where all the size-classes are net labour hiring-out classes although the
quantum of net labour hired out declines as we move up to the higher classes. The
Methodology & Classification of Households 90
non-agricultural sector ensures that hiring out of labour is significantly high in this
region.
111 the backward region of Andhra Pradesh, the hiring in of labour by the
middle peasant, rich peasant and the landlords is moderately high but so is the hiring
out of labour days by the rural labour and poor peasant classes. The region emerges as
a marginally labour hiring-out region. The households in this region in the net
analysis are hiring out only 22.52 labour days per holding yearly. Like the advanced
region of the state, here also we find evidences of households (not finding enough
direct employment on their own land or on others' land) interacting more with the
land-lease market instead of the labour market. The households in the 5 to 10 acre
bracket in the small peasant class are actually hiring in a net 43.3 labour days per
'holding annually. The only reason for such households to be classified as small
peasant is that they are indirectly allowing the exploitation of their labour through
leasing in land from others for cultivation. In fact, there is evidence of interaction with
the land-lease market among the other economic classes as welf1•
Test for Association Between the Twin Classification and its Measurement
The two methods that we have used to classifY the households i.e. into
economic classes and size-classes are expected to have some association between
themselves. We use the Chi-Square test of Association for inquiring whether there
exists any such association or not. First, we will test for the null hypothesis that the
two classification methods are independent of each other. For the Chi-Square test to
be valid, it is required that none of the frequencies should be less than 5. For this
purpose, we have grouped the rural labour and the poor peasant classes together on
one hand and the rich peasant and landlord classes on the other. Among the size
classes, we have also clubbed together the zero size-class and 0.1-1.0 size-class on
one hand and the 5.1-10 size-class and the 10 & above size-class on the other.
Through these modifications, we have formed a contingency table with 9 degrees of
freedom (Table 3.7.1). We have also formed a contingency table with 1 degree of
21 The fact is that among different classes (all regions), both economic and size-class, there are evidences of leasing in of land by cultivators. This can be checked by comparing the value of net labour days hired-in or out per holding with X per holding. X is the numerator of the Labour Exploitation Index (E) and also captures the indirect exploitation of labour through the land-lease market apart from the direct exploitation of labour. The X per holding values for all classes for all regions is provided in the Appendix A (Tables AIS to Al8).
Methodology & Classification of Households 91
freedom by a further grouping of the economic and size-classes as can be seen in
Table 3.7.2. We perform the chi-square test for these two contingency tables with
different degrees of freedom at 5 percent and I percent levels of significance.
Table 3.7.1: Contingency Table with 9 DF
Rl+ PP SP MP RP + LLD Total
0-1.0 46 13 11 6 76 1.01-2.5 24 14 10 15 63 2.51-5.0 20 13 16 11 60 5.1 &above 8 8 10 23 49 Total 98 48 47 55 248
Table 3.7.2: Contingency Table with 1 DF
Rl + PP + SP MP + RP + LLD Total 0-5.0 130 69 199
5.1 &above 16 33 49 Total 146 102 248
In the case of the test with 9 DF, the Chi-Square (X2) value is computed to be
40. 71. As the critical values for 9 DF at 5 % and I % levels of significance are 16.92
and 21.67 respectively, the null hypothesis that the two classification methods are
independent gets rejected at both levels of significance. Rather, we conclude that there
exists some association between the two. The Chi-Square value for the test with I DF
is 17.34, which is also higher than the critical values for 1 DF at 5 % and I % levels
of significance (Table 3.7.3). The critical values for 1 DF at 5 % and 1 % levels of
significance are 3.84 and 6.64 respectively. The null hypothesis gets rejected in this
case also.
Table 3.7.3: Results of Chi-Square Test of Association and Pearson's Coefficient of Contingency
Degree Chi-Square Critical value Critical value Pearson's of Value at at Coefficient of Freedom 5 °/o level 1 °/o level Contin en 9 40.71 16.92 21.67 0.38 1 17.34 3.84 6.64 0.26
In order to make an estimate of the degree of association, we use the measure
Pearson's Coefficient of Contingency (C). The value of C is 0.38 for the contingency
table with 9 DF and is considerably less at 0.26 for the contingency table with 1 DF.
The maximum value that C would have assumed if the two methods were identical is
Methodology & Classification of Households 92
0.87. Therefore, a Pearson's C of 0.38 indicates that the two classification methods
are moderately associated.
Structure of households and Work Participation Rates
In Tables 3.8.1 to 3.8.4, we have presented the data on the structure of
households in the different regions. We have calculated the consumer-worker ratio,
worker per household and consumer per household according to the economic classes
and size-classes. The work participation rates have also been derived by multiplying
the worker-consumer ratio by 100. In the advanced regions of both the states (Tables
3.8.1 and 3.8.2), we find that both the consumer-worker ratio and the consumer per
household broadly increases from lower to higher economic classes. Consequently,
the participation rate falls as we move into the higher economic classes (except for
small peasants in West Bengal advanced region, which has a higher participation rate
than the trend). It emerges clearly from the data that the higher economic classes are
not only maintaining larger families (family size represented by consumers per
household here) but also using larger amounts of hired labour in their economic
activities and have lower than average participation rates.
Table 3.8.1: Household structures and Work Participation Rates by economic class and size-class: West Bengal advanced region
Consumer Worker Consumer No. of Total Total Participation
Class hh Workers Consumers I Worker per per Rate
Ratio Household Household
RL 2 5 9 1.80 2.50 4.50 55.56 pp 25 39 125 3.21 1.56 5.00 31.20 SP 4 10 24 2.40 2.50 6.00 41.67 MP 16 21 71 3.38 1.31 4.44 29.58 RP 30 60 211 3.52 2.00 7.03 28.44 LLD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 77 135 440 3.26 1.75 5.71 30.68 0 2 5 9 1.80 2.50 4.50 55.56 0-1 41 59 189 3.20 1.44 4.61 31.22
1-2.5 19 29 87 3.00 1.53 4.58 33.33 2.5-5 9 22 84 3.82 2.44 9.33 26.19 S-10 3 5 21 4.20 1.67 7.00 23.81 > 10 3 15 50 3.33 5.00 16.67 30.00 Total 77 135 440 3.26 1.75 5.71 30.68
Source: Primary Field Survey
When we look at the same variables across size-classes, we find that the
participation rates have more of an ambiguous relationship with the size-classes. The
family size exhibits a clear direct relationship with the size-classes in Andhra Pradesh
Methodology & Classification of Households 93
advanced region but the same cannot be said for West Bengal. This indicates that the
family size and work participation rates are determined primarily by the economic
position of the households in these two regions. The overall work participation rate in
the advanced region, West Bengal is 30.68, significantly lower than the advanced
region in Andhra Pradesh, where it stands at 57.43. This may be due to the higher use
of hired labour in the former region, which we shall discuss in a short while.
Table 3.8.2: Household structures and Work Participation Rates by economic class and size-class: Andhra Pradesh advanced region
Consumer Consumer No. of Total Total Worker per Participation Class
hh Workers Consumers I Worker Household per
Rate Ratio Household
RL 7 16 23 1.44 2.29 3.29 69.57 pp 7 18 28 1.56 2.57 4.00 64.29 SP 25 63 105 1.67 2.52 4.20 60.00 MP 12 27 48 1.78 2.25 4.00 56.25 RP 8 17 38 2.24 2.13 4.75 44.74 LLD 1 2 7 3.50 2.00 7.00 28.57
Total 60 143 249 1.74 2.38 4.15 57.43 0 6 12 19 1.58 2.00 3.17 63.16
0-1 11 27 43 1.59 2.45 3.91 62.79 1-2.5 10 24 39 1.63 2.40 3.90 61.54 2.5-5 18 49 74 1.51 2.72 4.11 66.22 5-10 10 20 49 2.45 2.00 4.90 40.82 > 10 5 11 25 2.27 2.20 5.00 44.00 Total 60 143 249 1.74 2.38 4.15 57.43
Source: Primary Field Survey
In case of the backward regions in both West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh
(Tables 3.8.3 and 3.8.4), we find that neither the family size nor the participation rates
have any clear relationship with the economic or size-classes. A plausible reason for
this can be the relative importance of non-farm activities in these regions; However, a.
noteworthy fact is that in the backward region, West Bengal, the participation rates
for the lower peasant classes (PP and SP) are higher than the average while that for
the higher peasant classes .(MP and RP) are lower than the average. In case of the
backward region in Andhra Pradesh, while the poor peasants have a higher than
average participation rate, the next three higher peasant classes have a lower than
average figure. Such similar relationship however, -cannot be traced out between the
size-classes and the participation rates in either of the two regions.
Methodology & Classification of Households 94
Table 3.8.3: Household structures and Work Participation Rates by economic class and size-class: West Bengal backward region
No. Total Total Consumer Worker per
Consumer Participation Class I Worker per
ofhh Workers Consumers Ratio Household Household
Rate
RL 7 14 43 3.07 2.00 6.14 32.56 pp 23 77 155 2.01 3.35 6.74 49.68
SP 9 18 34 1.89 2.00 3.78 52.94 MP 7 16 41 2.56 2.29 5.S6 39.02 RP 5 15 36 2.40 3.00 7.20 41.67 LLD 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 51 140 309 2.21 2.75 6.06 45.31
0 5 11 33 3.00 2.20 6.60 33.33 0-1 10 23 53 2.30 2.30 5.30 43.40
1-2.5 21 54 108 2.00 2.57 5.14 50.00 2.5-5 14 47 102 2.17 3.36 7.29 46.08 5-10 1 5 13 2.60 5.00 13.00 38.46 > 10 0 0 0 0.00 0;{)0 0.00 0.00 Total 51 140 309 2.21 2.75 6.06 45.31
Source: Primary Field Survey
Table 3.8.4: Household structures and Work Participation Rates by economic class and size-class: Andhra Pradesh backward region
No. Total Total Consumer
Worker per Consumer Participation Class ofhh Workers Consumers I Worker Household per Rate
Ratio Household
RL 2 7 16 2.29 3.511 8.00 43.75 pp 25 81 138 1.70 3.24 5.52 58.70 SP 10 22 so 2.27 2.20 5.00 44.00 MP 12 26 56 2.15 2.17 4.67 46.43 RP 9 14 43 3.07 1.56 4.78 32.56 LLD 2 5 16 3.20 2.50 8.00 31.25 Total 60 155 319 2.06 2.58 5.32 48.59 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0-1 1 2 5 2.50 2.00 5.00 40.00 1-2~5 13 31 66 2.13 2.38 5.08 46.97 2.5-5 19 50 91 1.82 2.63 4.79 54.95 5-10 13 33 64 1.94 2.54 4.92 51.56 > 10 14 39 93 2.38 2.79 6.64 41.94 Total 60 155 319 2;{)6 2.58 5.32 48.59
Source: Primary Field Survey
Next, we analyze the household data on family labour (FL), labour-days hired
in (Hi) and hired-out (Ho), which has been grouped by economic classes and size
classes (Tables 3.9.1 to 3.9.4). This will be insightful in not only comprehending the
dynamics of interactions of the households from different class with the labour market
but also in detecting the more specific characteristics of some of the peasant classes in
the different regions.
Methodology & Classification of Households 95
In the advanced region of West Bengal, the most important feature is the high
levels of labour hiring-in. We have earlier cited this to be a credible reason for the
rich peasant class being as large as 39 percent of the -households in this region. From
Table 3.9.I, we can observe that the labour-days hired in per household annually is
28.72 for the poor peasant and increases up to 448.57 for the rich peasant. It also has a
direct relationship and a higher range with the size-classes starting from 4 7.54 for
those households operating less than I acre and rising to 1693.67 for the households
with more than I 0 acres of operated area. The overall percentage share of hired labour
in the total labour employed in one's own operating area i.e. family labour and hired
labour taken together is as high as 7I.26 percent for this region.
While this share of hired labour broadly increases for the higher classes of
households, both economic and size-classes, the interesting feature of this region is
the incidence of a high share of hired labour in all size-classes. Even the households
operating less than 1 acre are using 47.67 percent of hired labour in their operated
area and this figure steadily rises across the size-classes reaching more than 80
percent for the households with operated area more than 5 acres. This implies that the
high demand for hired labour in this region is generated from all sizes of land
holdings. This further illustrates the reason why the large rich peasant class in this
region is spread across the different size-classes as we have mentioned earlier.
Again, if we look at the figures of labour days hired out by the households, we
find that the share of hired labour in the total labour worked by a household strictly
declines from lower to higher peasant classes (in fact, the same is true for all the
regions). This share of hired labour in the total labour worked by a household in one's
operated area or in the labour market for other employers (i.e. taking family labour
and hired-out labour together) is as high as 90.48 percent for the poor peasant class. A
point that we have made earlier about the poor peasant class in this region being more
proximate to the rural labour class in its characteristics, is amply exemplified by this
figure. We have also calculated the percentage share of labour hired in to the total
labour worked by a household (i.e. Hi/(FL + Ho) multiplied by I 00) in order to
capture the different patterns of interactions with the labour market that the different
classes demonstrate. This figure not only rises from lower to higher classes but also
shows a great degree of variation. While this percentage is only 1I.37 for the poor
peasants, the same is as high as 337.61 for the rich peasants. This indicator displays
Methodology & Classification of Households 96
approximately the same trend across the size-classes and for the other regions also
(Tables 3.9.1 to 3.9.4).
In the advanced region in Andhra Pradesh, it is observed that the use of family
labour at 240.17 labour days per household annually in one's operated area is the
highest amongst the four regions. However, the high quantities of labour hired in
annually per household (from 62.29 labour days for the poor peasants to as high as
613.51 and 1919.0 for the rich peasant and landlord class respectively) still leads to
the percentage of hired labour out of the total labour used on the household operated
area to be moderately high at 44.57 percent. This is lower when compared to the
advanced region in West Bengal but that is mainly on account of higher amount of
family labour employed in cultivation.
It is in fact associated with this that the percentage of labour hired out of the
total labour days worked by the households is also the lowest among the four regions
at 34.31 percent. Actually, if we compare this region with the backward region of
Andhra Pradesh, we find that the share ofhired labour in household cultivation in the
latter is higher at 56.07 percent. Moreover, the share of hired-out labour in the total
labour worked by the household is also much higher at 58.72 percent. This divergent
behaviour in the labour market actually prevents the peasant classes in the advanced
region from being worse-off when -compared with those in the backward one. This is
captured by the percentage share of labour hired in for cultivation to the total labour
worked by the households. The figure is 52.81 for the advanced region and marginally
higher than the 52.68 percent of the backward region.
A further comparison of the share of labour hired-out m the total labour
worked by the households of the poor peasant class in these two regions give a better
insight into the whole issue. While the poor peasants in the advanced region are hiring
out only 44.27 percent of the total labour worked by them, the same figure for this
class in the backward region is 82.72 percent. This revelation point towards the sharp
difference in the characteristic of the poor peasants, which is one of the labour hiring
out classes in the two regions. While the poor peasants in the advanced region are
closer to the small peasants in their economic behaviour, a point we have made
earlier, the same class in the backward region bears the attributes of a rural proletariat.
Methodology & Classification of Households 97
Table 3.9.1: Labour-days per holding: West Bengal advanced region
FL Ho FL + Ho FL Hi FL +Hi per Share Hoper FL +Hoper Share per per per Share
Class per hh per hh hh Hi hh hh Ho worker worker worker Hi/FL+HO
RL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 190.00 190.00 100.00 0.00 76.00 76.00 0.00 pp 24.04 28.72 52.76 54.44 228.52 252.56 90.48 15.41 146.49 161.90 11.37
SP 154.25 113.76 268.01 42.45 180.00 334.25 53.85 61.70 72.00 133.70 34.04
MP 106.00 102.88 208.88 "49.25 21.31 127.31 16.74 80.76 16.24 97.00 80.81
RP 121.70 448.57 570.27 78.66 11.17 132.87 8.40 60.85 5.58 66.43 337.61
LLD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 85.26 211.38 296.64 71.26 97.26 182.52 53.29 48.63 55.47 104.10 115.81 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 190.00 190.00 100.00 0.00 76.00 76.00 0.00
0.01·1.0 52.20 47.54 99.74 47.67 148.88 201.07 74.04 36.27 103.46 139.73 23.64 1.01· 2.51 92.00 166.11 258.11 64.36 37.11 129.11 28.74 60.28 24.31 84.59 128.66
2.51·5.0 143.67 434.72 578.39 75.16 33.33 177.00 18.83 58.77 13.64 72.41 245.61 5.01· 10.0 138.00 725.83 863.83 84.02 0.00 138.00 0.00 82.80 0.00 82.80 525.97
>10.0 323.33 1693.67 2017.00 83.97 0.00 323.33 0.00 64.67 0.00 64.67 523.81
Total 85.26 211.38 296.64 71.26 97.26 182.52 53.29 48.63 55.47 104.10 115.81
Source: Primary Field Survey
Methodology & Classification of Households 98
Table 3.9.2: Labour-days per holding: Andhra Pradesh advanced region
FL Ho FL + Ho FL Hi FL +Hi per Share Hoper FL +Hoper Share per per per Share
Class per hh per hh hh Hi hh hh Ho worker worker worker Hi/FL+HO
RL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .. 258.57 258.57 100.00 0.00 113.13 113.13 0.00 pp 201.43 62.29 263.71 23.62 160.00 361.43 44.27 78.33 62.22 140.56 17.23 SP 292.00 91.30 383.30 23.82 181.44 473.44 38.32 115.87 72.00 187.87 19.28
MP 298.33 169.96 468.29 36.29 5.00 303.33 1.65 132.59 2.22 134.81 56.03
RP 265.00 613.51 878.51 69.84 0.00 265.00 0.00 124.71 0.00 124.71 231.51
LLD 0.00 1919.00 1919.00 100.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 240.17 193.09 433.25 44.57 125.43 365.60 34.31 100.77 52.63 153.40 52.81 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 241.67 241.67 100.00 0.00 120.83 120.83 0.00 0.01-1.0 230.91 24.45 255.36 9.58 166.00 396.91 41.82 94.07 67.63 161.70 6.16 1.01-2.51 212.00 43.05 255.05 16.88 151.00 363.00 41.60 88.33 62.92 151.25 11.86 2.51· 5.0 328.89 101.89 430.78 23.65 122.22 451.11 27.09 120.82 44.90 165.71 22.59 5.01· 10.0 263.00 371.15 634.15 58.53 54.00 317.00 17.03 131.50 27.00 158.50 117.08
>10.0 240.00 1068.02 1308.02 81.65 0.00 240.00 0.00 109.09 0.00 109.09 445.01
Total 240.17 193.09 433.25 44.57 125.43 365.60 34.31 100.77 52.63 153.40 52.81
Source: Primary Field Survey
Methodology & Classification of Households 99
Table 3.9.3: Labour-days per holding: West Bengal backward region
FL Ho FL + Ho FL Hi FL +Hi per FL +Hoper per per per Share
Class per hh- per hh hh Share Hi Hoper hh hh Share Ho worker worker worker Hi/FL+HO RL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 281.43 281.43 100.00 0.00 140.71 140.71 0.00 pp 182.22 31.07 213.28 14.57 262.39 444.61 59.02 54.43 78.38 132.81 6.99 SP 176.00 13.33 189.33 7.04 54.44 230.44 23.63 88.00 27.22 115.22 5.79 MP 126.43 62.78 189.21 33.18 4.29 130.71 3.28 55.31 1.88 57.19 48.03 RP 53.00 116.60 169.60 68.75 0.00 53.00 0.00 17.67 0.00 17.67 220.00 LLD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 135.78 36.41 172.20 21.15 167.16 302.94 55.18 49.46 60.89 110.36 12.02 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 318.00 318.00 100.00 0.00 144.55 144.55 0.00 0.01·1.0 89.40 13.45 102.85 13.08 171.00 260.40 65.67 38.87 74.35 113.22 5.17 1.01· 2.51 155.05 29.71 184.76 16.08 126.67 281.71 44.96 60.30 49.26 109.56 10.55 2.51·5.0 189.64 57.57 247.21 23.29 157.50 347.14 45.37 56.49 46.91 103.40 16.58 5.01· 10.0 120.00 292.50 412.50 70.91 360.00 480.00 75.00 24.00 72.00 96.00 60.94 >10.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 135.78 36.41 172.20 21.15 167.16 302.94 55.18 49.46 60.89 110.36 12.02
Source: Primary Field Survey
Methodology & Classification of Households 100
Table 3.9.4: Labour-days per holding: Andhra Pradesh backward region
FL Ho FL + Ho FL HI FL +HI per FL +Hoper per per per Share
Class per hh per hh hh Share HI Hoper hh hh Share Ho worker worker worker HI/FL+HO RL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 375.00 375.00 100.00 0.00 107.14 107.14 0.00 pp 88.80 97.92 186.72 52.44 425.20 514.00 .82.72 27.41 131.23 158.64 19.05 SP 259.50 119.65 379.15 31.56 141.00 400.50 ·35.21 117.95 64.09 182.05 29.88 MP 222.50 155.58 378.08 41.15 30.33 252.83 12.00 102.69 14.00 116.69 61.54 RP 196.00 374.50 570.50 65.64 0.00 196.00 0.00 126.00 0.00 126.00 191.07 LLD 0.00 1460.50 1460.50 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 154.15 196.72 350.87 56.07 219.23 373.38 58.72 59.67 84.86 144.54 52.68 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01·1.0 60.00 13.00 73.00 17.81 400.00 460.00 86.96 30.00 200.00 230.00 2.83 1.01-2.51 101.15 42.35 143.50 29.51 306.15 407.31 75.17 42.42 128.39 170.81 10.40 2.51·5.0 118.37 87.74 206.11 42.57 255.79 374.16 68.36 44.98 97.20 142.18 23.45 5.01· 10.0 197.31 279.69 477.00 58.64 199.54 396.85 50.28 77.73 78.61 156.33 70.48 >10.0 218.57 424.04 642.61 65.99 94.29 312.86 30.14 78.46 33.85 112.31 135.54 Total 154.15 196.72. 350.87 56.07 219.23 373.38 58.72 59.67 84.86 144.54 52.68
Source: Primary Field Survey
Methodology & Classification of Households 101
The backward region in West Bengal has completely different characteristics
compared to the other three regions. The agricultural activity being predominantly
subsistence in nature (except some evidences of vegetable cultivation, which is done
for the market), it leads to low levels of hired labour use in household cultivation. The
share of hired labour in household cultivation is only 21.15 percent indicating the
relatively high level of dependence on family labour for cultivation. The households
in the region also exhibit high levels ofhiring out of labour in both farm and non-farm
activities. The share of labour hired out in total labour worked by the households is
moderately high at 55.18 percent. It is noteworthy that while this share is high for the
rural labour and poor peasants and remains at a low level for other economic classes,
it is not less than around 45 percent for any of the size-classes. This indicates that
hiring out of labour by the households is predominant amongst all size-classes due to
the low employment generation from farm activities.
We have reported the employment intensities per acre for the four regions in
Tables 3.10.1 to 3.10.4. As expected, the employment generated per acre (FL +Hi per
acre) is the highest in the advanced region in West Bengal, which has a multi-crop
characteristic. In each acre, 155.19 labour-days are employed annually, of which
110.59 labour-days are hired in by the households. In sharp contrast to this, the
backward region in the state employed only 89.25 labour-days per acre in a year, of
which hired labour is rather low at 18.87 labour-days.
Table 3.10.1: Employment Intensity per acre: West Bengal advanced region
Class FL Workers Hi FL+Hi per acre per acre per acre Per acre
RL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 pp 49.59 3.22 59.24 108.83 SP 131.28 2.13 96.82 228.10 MP 87.24 1.08 84.67 171.91 RP 32.92 0.54 121.32 154.24 LLD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 44.61 0.92 110.59 155.19 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01-1.0 90.37 2.49 82.31 172.69 1.01-2.5 59.25 0.98 106.98 166.24 2.51-5.0 37.16 0.63 112.43 149.58 5.1-10.0 19.90 0.24 104.69 124.59 >10.0 25.26 0.39 132.32 157.58 Total 44.61 0.92 110.59 155.19
Source: Primary Field Su17Jey
Methodology & Classification of Households 102
Table 3.10.2: Employment Intensity per acre: Andhra Pradesh advanced region
Class FL Workers Hi FL+ Hi per acre per acre per acre Per acre
RL 0.00 10.67 0.00 0.00 pp 85.45 1.09 26.42 111.88 SP 108.96 0.94 34.07 143.02 MP 64.50 0.49 36.75 101.25 RP 24.94 0.20 57.74 82.68 LLD 0.00 0.08 73.81 73.81 Total 57.30 0.57 46.06 103.36 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01-1.0 267.37 2.84 28.32 295.68 1.01-2.5 117.78 1.33 23.92 141.69 2.51-5.0 92.50 0.77 28.66 121.16 5.1-10.0 35.07 0.27 49.49 84.55 >10.0 14.12 0.13 62.82 76.94 Total 57.30 0.57 46.06 103.36
Source: Primary Field Survey
On the other hand, in the advanced area in Andhra Pradesh, each acre
employed 103.36 labour-days annually but the hired labour (46.06 labour-days) is
lower than the family labour (57.30 labour-days) used in cultivating an acre. The
backward region's performance in employment generation through farm activities is
quite poor in comparison to all other regions. Each acre is employing an abysmally
low amount of labour at 42.77 labour-days annually. On the whole, from the
employment intensity results, we can infer that the agricultural activity in the West
Bengal regions in relatively more labour intensive.than that in the regions of Andhra
Pradesh.
Table 3.10.3: Employment Intensity per acre: West Bengal backward region
Class FL Workers Hi FL+ Hi per acre per acre per acre Per acre
RL 0.00 5.83 0.00 0.00 pp 73.79 1.36 12.58 86.36 SP 120.00 1.36 9.09 129.09 MP 52.06 0.94 25.85 77.91 RP 29.44 1.67 64.78 94.22 LLD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 70.38 1.42 18.87 89.25 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01-1.0 135.45 3.48 20.38 155.83 1.01-2;5 90.44 1.50 17.33 107.78 2.51-5.0 55.31 0.138 16.79 72.10 5.1-10.0 15.38 0.-64 37.50 52.88 >10.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 70.38 1.42 18.87 89.25
Source: Primary Field Survey
Methodology & Classification of Households 183
Table 3.10.4: Employment Intensity per acre: Andhra Pradesh backward region
Class FL Workers Hi FL+ Hi per acre per acre per acre per acre
RL 0.00 1.86 0.00 0.00 pp 19.20 0.70 21.17 40.37
SP 38.30 0.32 17.66 55.96
MP 28.07 0.27 19.63 47.69
RP 13.90 0.11 26.55 40.45
LLD 0.00 0.06 35.19 35.19
Total 18.79 0.31 23.98 42.77
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01-1.0 85.71 2.86 18.57 104.29
1.01-2.5 50.21 1.18 21.02 71.23 2.51-5.0 28.17 0.63 20.88 49.05 5.1-10.0 26.99 0.35 38.27 65.26 >10.0 10.54 0.13 20.44 30.97 Total 18.79 0.31 23.98 42.77
Source: Primary Field Suroey
An important pattern that emerges from the employment intensity results is the
roughly lower employment intensities of the higher economic and size-classes as
compared to the lower classes. Although there is no strict inverse relationship
between employment intensity and the economic or size-classes, a tendency of the
higher classes to use less labour-intensive cultivation techniques and replace labour
with capital as compared to the lower classes can be definitely affirmed.
The cross-classification of the households in the different regions that we have
discussed in this chapter provides us with our basic framework of analysis. The
economic classification of the rural households based on labour-use defines the
exploitative relationships that exist between the various peasant classes. A detailed
discussion of the labour-use patterns by the economic classes and size-classes also
equips us with a comprehensive understanding of the economic behaviour and
characteristics of the households in the different peasant classes. The knowledge of
the pattern of their interaction with the labour market and the land-lease market,
which is determined by the class position of the households, will complement our
analysis of the asset structure, cost structure of cultivation, farm income and
indebtedness in the subsequent chapters.