Agrarian Structure: Caste And Class In Rural India

The Impact Of Land Reforms

The Colonial Period

Independent India

The Green Revolution And Its Social Consequences

Transformations In Rural Society After Independence

Circulation Of Labour

Globalisation, Liberalisation, And Rural Society

Agrarian Structure: Caste And Class In Rural India

Although urban areas are growing, India remains predominantly a rural society, with the majority of the population residing in villages (approximately 69% in 2011) and depending primarily on agriculture and related activities for their livelihood. Consequently, agricultural land is the most vital productive resource and form of property for a large segment of Indians.

However, land is more than just an economic resource; agriculture is deeply intertwined with the Indian way of life. Many cultural practices and festivals, such as regional New Year celebrations like Pongal, Bihu, Baisakhi, and Ugadi, are linked to the harvest cycle, highlighting the close connection between agriculture and culture.

The nature and practice of agriculture vary widely across India's diverse regions, and these variations are reflected in regional cultures and social structures.

While agriculture is the primary source of livelihood for the rural majority, the rural economy also includes many non-agricultural occupations that support agriculture and village life. Historically, a significant number of artisans (potters, carpenters, weavers, ironsmiths, goldsmiths) were integral to the village economy. Their numbers have declined since the colonial era due to the influx of manufactured goods competing with handmade products.

Rural life also supported various specialists and craftspersons (story-tellers, astrologers, priests, etc.). The diversity of these traditional occupations was reflected in the caste system, which often included specialist and service castes linked to specific trades. While some traditional occupations have declined, increasing connections between rural and urban economies have introduced new diverse occupations. Many rural residents now engage in rural non-farm activities, including government service, factory work, or military service.

Agrarian structure specifically refers to the distribution of landholding in rural society. Land distribution is highly unequal. While many households in some areas own small plots, a large percentage (40-50% in some regions) are landless, depending solely on agricultural labor or other work.

Access to land fundamentally shapes the rural class structure and one's role in agricultural production:

• Medium and Large Landowners: Typically earn substantial incomes from cultivation, although this can fluctuate based on market prices and environmental factors.
• Agricultural Labourers: Often earn very low incomes, frequently below the minimum wage, and face job insecurity due to seasonal work and underemployment (not having work year-round). Most are daily-wage workers.
• Tenants: Cultivators who lease land, earning less than owner-cultivators due to substantial rent payments to landowners.

There is a complex, though not always exact, relationship between caste and class in rural India. While one might expect a straightforward correspondence between high caste and high economic status (land ownership, income), this isn't universally true (e.g., Brahmins are not always major landowners). However, in most regions, major landowning groups belong to upper/middle castes who are often numerically significant. These are termed dominant castes (e.g., Jats, Rajputs, Vokkaligas, Lingayats, Kammas, Reddis, Jat Sikhs), holding significant local economic and political power.

Conversely, most marginal farmers and landless laborers belong to lower caste groups, including Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs). Historically, former 'Untouchable' or Dalit castes were often denied land ownership and formed the bulk of agricultural labor, facilitating intensive cultivation by landowners. This correspondence meant that upper/middle castes generally had better access to resources, power, and privilege.

Until recently, practices like begar (forced, unpaid labor) and hereditary labor relationships tied low-caste groups to landlords or dominant castes in parts of northern India. Although legally abolished, these exploitative practices persist in some areas.

The agrarian structure is closely linked to agricultural productivity; regions with assured irrigation allowing intensive cultivation often developed highly unequal agrarian structures with a large proportion of landless, low-caste, often bonded laborers.

The Impact Of Land Reforms

The Colonial Period

India's agrarian structure has undergone significant transformations over time. In the pre-colonial period, dominant castes were often cultivators, but ruling groups like kings or zamindars controlled the land, extracting produce from peasants. The British colonial government, in many areas, ruled through these existing zamindars, granting them enhanced property rights and increasing land revenue demands. This led to oppressive extraction from cultivators and agricultural stagnation or decline in Zamindari areas due to peasant flight and population reduction from famines and wars.

In areas under direct British rule, the Raiyatwari system made 'actual cultivators' (often landlords) responsible for taxes. With less tax burden and direct interaction with the state, these areas became relatively more productive. The land revenue administration under colonialism played a crucial role in shaping the agrarian structure that exists today.

Independent India

After independence, addressing the dismal agricultural situation (low productivity, food dependence, rural poverty) was a priority. The Indian government pursued planned development, including significant agrarian reform. From the 1950s to the 1970s, a series of land reform laws were enacted to restructure landholding and distribution.

Key land reform measures included:

• Abolition of the Zamindari System: This was the most effective reform, successfully removing intermediaries between cultivators and the state and weakening the economic and political power of zamindars, strengthening the position of actual landholders.
• Tenancy Abolition and Regulation Acts: Laws aiming to outlaw tenancy or regulate rents and provide security to tenants. These were largely ineffective in most states, but radical restructuring giving land rights to tenants occurred in West Bengal and Kerala.
• Land Ceiling Acts: Laws imposing an upper limit on the amount of land a family could own, with the state meant to acquire and redistribute 'surplus' land to landless families (especially SC/STs). These acts largely failed due to numerous loopholes, 'benami transfers' (transferring land to others fictitiously), and avoidance strategies by landowners (e.g., nominal divorces).

Despite these reforms, the agrarian structure remains significantly unequal across India, although it has changed from colonial times. This inequality hinders agricultural productivity and perpetuates rural poverty. Land reforms are crucial not only for boosting agricultural growth but also for achieving social justice and eradicating rural poverty.

The Green Revolution And Its Social Consequences

In contrast to the limited impact of land reforms in many regions, the Green Revolution (GR) (1960s-1970s) significantly transformed the areas where it was implemented. Funded by international agencies, the GR was a government program promoting agricultural modernization through High-Yielding Variety (HYV) seeds, pesticides, fertilizers, and other inputs.

The GR package was introduced only in areas with **assured irrigation** (essential for the new seeds) and primarily for wheat and rice cultivation. This targeted approach meant only specific regions (Punjab, western UP, coastal AP, parts of Tamil Nadu) benefited initially, leading to considerable social and economic changes and subsequent sociological studies.

The GR led to a sharp increase in agricultural productivity, enabling India to become self-sufficient in foodgrain production – a major achievement. However, it had negative social and environmental consequences:

• Increased Inequality: Primarily benefited medium and large farmers who could afford expensive inputs like HYV seeds and fertilizers. These 'farmers' (producing for the market, unlike 'peasants' cultivating for subsistence) significantly increased production and income.
• Displacement: Landowners took back land from tenant-cultivators for direct, more profitable cultivation, worsening the condition of the landless and marginal farmers. Mechanization (tractors, threshers) displaced service caste groups performing agriculture-related tasks, increasing rural-urban migration.
• Differentiation: The process led to the rich becoming richer while many poor stagnated or became poorer, despite some increase in demand for labor and wages in certain areas. However, changes in payment modes (from grain to cash) often worsened workers' economic condition.

The second phase of the GR (1980s onwards) spread to dry and semi-arid regions, promoting a shift to irrigated, commercial cultivation (e.g., cotton). This increased dependence on markets and a shift from multi-crop systems (spreading risk) to mono-cropping (concentrating risk), leading to greater livelihood insecurity and vulnerability to price drops or crop failure. This insecurity has been linked to farmer suicides in some areas.

The GR also exacerbated regional inequalities, with GR areas developing rapidly while others remained stagnant. Regions with persistent 'feudal' agrarian structures, characterized by entrenched caste/class inequality and exploitative labor relations, continue to face violence.

Furthermore, the GR devalued indigenous knowledge and traditional farming methods developed by Indian farmers over centuries. The promotion of hybrid/GM seeds led to the loss of traditional seed varieties. Concerns about the negative impacts of modern agriculture are leading some scientists and movements to advocate for a return to traditional, organic methods, reflecting a belief among some rural populations that traditional produce is healthier.

Transformations In Rural Society After Independence

The post-independence period, particularly in regions affected by the Green Revolution, saw significant transformations in rural social relations:

• Increased demand for agricultural labor due to intensive cultivation.
• Shift from payment in kind (grain) to cash wages for agricultural workers.
• Weakening of traditional, hereditary labor bonds (like bonded labor).
• Emergence of a class of 'free' wage laborers.

Sociologist Jan Breman described the change in relationship between landlords (often dominant caste) and laborers (often lower caste) as a shift from 'patronage to exploitation'. These changes occurred as agriculture became more commercialized and market-oriented. Some scholars interpret this transformation in labor relations as a move towards capitalist agriculture.

This process of rural economic transformation began during the colonial period but accelerated after independence. The state actively promoted modern cultivation methods and invested heavily in rural infrastructure (irrigation, roads, electricity, credit through banks/cooperatives), aiming for 'rural development'. Schemes like the Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gram Jyoti Yojna (2014) focused on providing uninterrupted power supply to rural areas, essential for agricultural growth.

A significant outcome was the enrichment and consolidation of medium and large farmers who adopted new technologies. In agriculturally prosperous regions, these dominant caste farmers diversified by investing agricultural profits into other businesses, giving rise to new entrepreneurial groups. These groups often moved to growing towns, forming new regional elites with economic and political dominance. The spread of higher education, including private colleges in rural/semi-urban areas, allowed their children to access professional jobs or start businesses, contributing to the growth of the urban middle class.

Thus, rapid agricultural development in some areas led to the transformation of traditional landed/cultivating groups into a dynamic rural-urban dominant class. However, regions with ineffective land reforms and less political mobilization (e.g., eastern UP, Bihar) saw fewer changes in agrarian structure and living conditions. States like Kerala followed a different trajectory, where political mobilization, redistributive policies, and external economic linkages (remittances from Gulf countries) created a mixed rural economy integrating agriculture with services, reducing dependence solely on farming.

Circulation Of Labour

Another major change in rural society, linked to agricultural commercialization and inequality, is the growth of migrant agricultural labour. As traditional labor bonds weakened and seasonal demand increased in prosperous GR areas, a pattern of seasonal migration emerged. Thousands of workers travel between their less productive home villages and regions with higher labor demand and wages (e.g., Punjab, Haryana farms; brick kilns; city construction sites).

Migration is also driven by increasing inequalities in rural areas that force households to diversify livelihoods; men often migrate seasonally, leaving women and children behind. Jan Breman termed these workers 'footloose labour', emphasizing their lack of rights and vulnerability to exploitation and wages below the minimum wage. Wealthy farmers often prefer hiring migrants over local workers for intensive tasks due to lower cost and easier exploitation. This can create a paradoxical situation where local laborers migrate out while migrants are brought in to work on local farms (common in sugarcane areas).

This large-scale labor circulation significantly impacts both the regions supplying and receiving labor. In poor sending areas, with men migrating, agriculture increasingly becomes a task primarily performed by women, leading to the 'feminisation of agricultural labour force'. These women laborers face greater insecurity and earn lower wages than men for the same work. Despite their crucial role in agriculture, women are largely excluded from land ownership due to prevailing patrilineal kinship and cultural practices.

Globalisation, Liberalisation, And Rural Society

The policy of liberalisation, adopted since the late 1980s, and India's participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO) have profoundly impacted agriculture and rural society. Liberalisation requires opening markets to international trade, exposing Indian farmers to global competition after decades of state support and protection. This is evident in the availability of imported food items and policy decisions like importing wheat.

This globalisation of agriculture integrates Indian farming into the global market with direct effects on farmers:

• Contract Farming: Farmers enter agreements with multinational companies (MNCs) to grow specific crops for processing or export. The MNCs provide inputs, know-how, and guaranteed purchase at a fixed price. While promising financial security, this can lead to dependence on companies, diverting land from food production to elite crops, and ecological issues due to high input use. It also marginalizes farmers' indigenous knowledge.

Another widespread impact is the increased role of MNCs as suppliers of agricultural inputs (seeds, pesticides, fertilizers). With the state reducing its agricultural development and extension services, company agents have become the primary source of information for farmers. This dependence on expensive inputs has reduced farmer profits, increased debt, and contributed to an ecological crisis.

The spate of farmers' suicides since the late 1990s is linked to 'agrarian distress' caused by structural and policy changes: shifts in landholdings and cropping patterns (towards cash crops), exposure to global market forces under liberalisation, reliance on high-cost inputs, reduced state support, increased debt due to investments, and vulnerability to market instability and natural disasters. The government has introduced various schemes (e.g., Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, Kisan Credit Card) to address this distress and improve rural life quality.