You are on page 1of 10

CHAPTER

JT 1. E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T
AND OCCUPATIONAL DIS-
TRIBUTION
B r o a d l y w e divide occupations into three types.
A g r i c u l t u r e , a n i m a l h u s b a n d r y , f o r e s t r y , f i s h e r y , etc., a r e
collectively k n o w n as " p r i m a r y " activities o r industries.
T h e y are p r i m a r y because their products are essential o r
v i t a l f o r h u m a n existence. T h e y are carried o n w i t h the help
o f nature. M a n u f a c t u r i n g industries, both small a n d
largescale, are k n o w n as "secondary" activities. M i n i n g i s
sometimes included under secondary activities, b u t
properly speaking, it is a primary activity. Transport,
communications, banking a n d finance a n d services are
"tertiary" activities w h i c h help the p r i m a r y and secondary
activities i n the country. T h e occupational structure o f a
country refers t o t h e distribution o r d i v i s i o n o f i t s

CCUPATIONAL population according t odifferent occupations.

C o l i n C l a r k , i n h i s w o r k 'Conditions of Economic

RUCTURE A N D Progress ', a r g u e s t h a t t h e r e is a c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n


development o f a n economy o n the o n e hand, a n d
occupational structure o n the other and economic progress
is g e n e r a l l y associated w i t h certain distinct necessary a n d
ECONOMIC predictable changes i n occupational structure. H e writes:
" A h i g h average level o f real i n c o m e per head is a l w a y s

EVELOPMENT associated w i t h a h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f the w o r k i n g popula-


tion engaged i n tertiary i n d u s t r i e s . . . l o w real i n c o m e per
head i s a l w a y s associated w i t h a l o w p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e
w o r k i n g population engaged i n tertiary production and a
high percentage i n primary production." 1

A . G . B . Fisher also reaches the same c o n c l u s i o n : " W e m a y


say that i n e v e r y progressive e c o n o m y there has been a
steady shift o f e m p l o y m e n t a n d i n v e s t m e n t f r o m t h e
essential 'primary a c t i v i t i e s ' . . . to secondary activities o f
all kinds a n d t o a still greater extent into tertiary
production." W h i l e s o m e economists have accepted the
2

thesis o f C o l i n C l a r k , about the relation between e c o n o m i c


d e v e l o p m e n t a n d occupational structure as valid, y e t
Tery progressive economy, there has others have refused to accept it. It w o u l d b e o f interest
to consider t h e empirical evidence i n this regard.
a steady shift of employment and
stment from the essential A n e x a m i n a t i o n o f T a b l e 1 reveals that higher per
try" activities . . . . to secondary capita i n c o m e isinversely correlated w i t h the proportion
rities of a l l kinds and to a still o f active population engaged i n agriculture. T h e advanced
ter extent into tertiary production." countries like the U . S . A . , the U . K . , G e r m a n y and Japan

- A.G.B. F i s h e r 1. C o l i n C l a r k , T h e Conditions of Economic Progress


(1940), p. 182.
Economic Progress and Scoial Security ( 1 9 4 5 ) , pp.
5-6. Q u o t e d b y N . A . K h a n i n Problems of Growth of an
Underdeveloped Economy, p. 1 2 1 .

83
O C C U P A T I O N A L S T R U C T U R E A N D E C O N O M I C DEVELOPMENT]

w i t h a l o w proportion o f active population dependent o n gathers m o m e n t u m . These structural changes result


agriculture reveal a higher per capita i n c o m e . A s against c h a n g e s i n t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f n a t i o n a l p r o d u c t a n d o f ttaJ
them, an underdeveloped country like India with a labour force. T h e most c o m m o n pattern o f structural
higher proportion o f active population engaged i n change f o l l o w s a sequence o f a shift f r o m agriculture
agriculture has v e r y l o w per capita i n c o m e . industry and then t o services. T h e s e structural changea
are observed b o t h i n the relative shares o f national
S e c o n d l y , as t h e l e v e l o f p e r c a p i t a i n c o m e product and i n labour force.
improves over the years the proportion o f labour force
dependent o n agriculture declines but that o n industry According to economists like Colin Clark
a n d services increases. T h e s e figures support C o l i n A G B Fisher, the basic argument i n support o f structu
Clark's thesis that w i t h greater e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t c h a n g e s i n n a t i o n a l p r o d u c t i s t h a t as i n c o m e l e v e
a n d rise i n n a t i o n a l and per capita i n c o m e s , there is a shift increase, t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f i n c o m e spent o n f o o d show
in occupational pattern f r o m primary to secondary and a decline a n d that o n n o n - f o o d i t e m s (or manufactures
tertiary sectors. s h o w s a relatively higher increase. A t still higher level <
i n c o m e , there is a h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f i n c o m e spent o
TABLE 1 : P e r Capita Income a n d Distribution of services. I n other w o r d s , l o w i n c o m e elasticity o f deman
Labour Force in Selected Countries. for agricultural products, tends t o shift the pattern c
p r o d u c t i o n i n f a v o u r o f manufactures w h i c h h a v e hig
Country Year Per capita Percentage of income elasticity o f demand. According to Fisher, t h a
income in labour force in is a saturation l e v e l f o r t h e d e m a n d f o r m a n u f a c t u r e !
US$ Agri- Industry Services C l a r k argued that d e m a n d f o r manufactured goods s
culture rates, setting at a r o u n d 2 0 t o 2 5 per cent, and, w i t h L
c o n t i n u i n g fall i n the d e m a n d for agricultural products
U.S.A. 1960 2,500 7 36 57 there is a n increase i n the d e m a n d o f services.
2010 47,153 1.6 16.7 81.2
U.K 1960 1,200 4 48 48 S h i f t i n d e m a n d pattern is thus the result o f diffes
2010 36,343 1.2 19.1 78.9 e n c e s i n e l a s t i c i t y o f d e m a n d . S h i f t i n t h e p a t t e r n <
Germany 1960 1,220 1.4 48 38 d e m a n d d o e s i m p a c t o n t r a n s f e r o f l a b o u r f o r c e froaj
2010 40,115 1.6 28.4 70.0 agriculture to industry and subsequently to services. E z
Japan 1960 420 33 30 37 B a u m o l (1967,2001), however, argued that employmea]
2010 42,830 3.7 25.3 69.7 o r shift i n l a b o u r force is not the consequence o f a changj
India 1960 70 74 15
i n final d e m a n d , b u t i s t h e r e s u l t o f d i f f e r e n t i a l p r o d u q
11
2010 51.1 26.5
tivity g r o w t h . Increasing share o f labour force e m p l o y e !
1410 22.4
i n services has, h o w e v e r , b e e n attributed b y m o s t econal
* D a t a f o r G e r m a n y ( t a k i n g together E a s t G e r m a n y a n d m i s t s t o l o w p r o d u c t i v i t y i n s e r v i c e s as c o m p a r e d a
West Germany). manufacturing.
SOURCE : W o r l d Development Indicators 2011 T a b l e 2 reveals great s i m i l a r i t y i n the pattern
o u t p u t a n d e m p l o y m e n t s h a r e s a m o n g t h e s e v e n sal
lected countries. Firstly, share o f agriculture i n the!
2. H I S T O R I C A L E X P E R I - G D P was b e t w e e n 1 and 2 percent indicating th_
ENCE OF STRUCTURAL agriculture accounts for a very s m a l l p o r t i o n o f tool
CHANGE IN DEVEL- output. S i m i l a r l y , the share o f labour force i n agricul
OPED ECONOMIES ture w a s b e l o w 5 percent. Secondly, the share q
industry i n G D P w a s i n the range o f 2 2 to 28 perceaj
S t r u c t u r a l c h a n g e s t a k e p l a c e i n e c o n o m i e s as t h e L i k e w i s e , the share i n e m p l o y m e n t b y i n d u s t r y range!
process o f economic development proceeds further and b e t w e e n 2 0 to 3 0 per cent. T h i r d l y , the share q
services i n G D P ranged f r o m 6 8 to 8 1 per c e i
Table 2 : Output and Employment S h a r e s i n S e l e c t e d D e v e l o p e d E c o n o m i e s (2010)
Country Snares i n Output (%) Shares i n Employment (%)
Agriculture Industry Services Agriculture Industry Services
United Kingdom 20* 78 1.2 19.1 78.9
U n i t e d States 22 79* 1.6 16.7 81.2
France 19* 79* 2.9 22.2 74.5
Japan 27* 72* 3.7 25.3 69.1
Germany 28 71 1.6 28.4 70.0
Italy 25 73 3.8 28.8 67.5
Australia 20 78 3.3 21.9* 75.5*
*2009
S o u r c e : W o r l d B a n k ( 2 0 1 1 ) , W o r l d Development Indicators.
OCCUPATIONAL S T R U C T U R E A N D E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 85
A l s o i t m a y be o b s e r v e d t h a t t h e s h a r e o f e m p l o y m e n t 26.5 percent. I n Pakistan, share o f e m p l o y m e n t i n agri-
a s i n t h e r a n g e o f 71 t o 7 9 per cent. F r o m this, t h e broad culture w a s 4 4 . 7 per cent, that o f industry 2 0 . 1 per cent
picture that e m e r g e s is a f o l l o w s : W i t h a shift o f G D P and o f services 35.2 per cent.
fcwn a g r i c u l t u r e t o i n d u s t r y , t h e r e w a s a n e a r l y p r o p o r - A v e r y striking feature o f the output pattern is that
fcoate s h i f t i n e m p l o y m e n t . S i m i l a r l y , a rise i n t h e s h a r e w i t h an increase i n G D P per capita ( P P P ) , the share o f
^ s e r v i c e s i n G D P was accompanied by a proportionate agriculture showed a very strong inverse correlation, but
this w a s n o t observed i n the G D P share o f industry and
urease i n e m p l o y m e n t .
services. T h i s i m p l i e s that w i t h a n i m p r o v e m e n t i n G D P
( P P P ) , the share o f industry and services depended o n
3. G D P A N D E M P L O Y M E N T other factors and policies pursued b y a country. F o r
instance, C h i n a has increased its share o f industry t o a
SHARES IN SELECTED
l e v e l o f 4 6 p e r c e n t a n d is d e s c r i b e d as t h e ' M a n u f a c t u r -
DEVELOPING COUN- ing H u b ' o f the w o r l d ' , w h i l e I n d i a seems to h a v e spe-
TRIES cialized i n I T Sector and thus has b e c o m e a ' B P O C e n -
tre' o f the w o r l d , r e s u l t i n g i n a sharp increase i n the share
T a b l e 3 provides i n f o r m a t i o n regarding shares o f
o f the service sector.
K D P and E m p l o y m e n t a m o n g agriculture, industry and
H o w e v e r , the e m p l o y m e n t pattern provides a very
n i c e s i n selected d e v e l o p i n g countries. T o indicate the
different picture. A substantial reduction i n the share o f
f a c v e levels o f development, G D P per capita figures o n
agriculture i n total e m p l o y m e n t c o u l d be observed i n the
c h a s i n g p o w e r p a r i t y ( P P P ) basis h a v e also b e e n g i v e n
case o f K o r e a n R e p u b l i c and M a l a y s i a t o a l e v e l o f 10
as t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e p a t t e r n o f d e m a n d p r o p e l l i n g per cent a n d 18 per cent r e s p e c t i v e l y . T h e s e c o u n t r i e s
e x i t shares. T h e data reveal w i d e v a r i a t i o n s i n the had a h i g h share o f e m p l o y m e n t i n services i n die range
t t x i t and e m p l o y m e n t pattern. T h e Republic o f K o r e a o f 6 0 % and 7 6 % respectively. O b v i o u s l y , there is a
A c * s G D P shares w h i c h are v e r y close t o those o f a greater shift o f e m p l o y m e n t i n services than that o f i n
e l o p e d e c o n o m y . T h e share o f agriculture is just 3 industry. Philippines indicates that whereas the share i n
K e n t and that o f services is 5 8 per cent. T h e share o f e m p l o y m e n t i n agriculture declined f r o m 5 2 per cent to
s t r y w a s also quite h i g h at 3 9 per cent. Indonesia, 3 5 . 2 per cent b e t w e e n 1 9 8 0 and 2 0 1 0 , its share i n indus-
jAauand, Philippines, C h i n a and M a l a y s i a indicated a t r y r e m a i n e d s t a g n a n t as a b o u t 15 p e r c e n t a n d t h e e n t i r e
d y similar pattern o f output i n w h i c h the share o f decline i n the share o f a g r i c u l t u r a l e m p l o y m e n t b y 17 per
B k u l t u r e r a n g e d b e t w e e n 1 0 t o 15 p e r c e n t , t h a t o f cent w a s absorbed b y a n increase i n services f r o m 3 3 per
H h s t r y b e t w e e n 3 2 t o 4 7 per cent a n d that o f services cent t o 50.3 per cent d u r i n g this period.
^ k e e n 3 8 t o 5 5 per cent. I n d i a a n d P a k i s t a n share a India and Pakistan shared a h i g h proportion o f
war- s i m i l a r p a t t e r n o f o u t p u t w i t h G D P s h a r e s i n a g r i - e m p l o y m e n t i n agriculture, i.e. 5 1 . 1 per cent and 44.7
p t o r e i n the range o f 1 9 - 2 1 per cent, i n industry 25 to per cent respectively. I n b o t h countries, the share o f
per cent a n d i n services a r o u n d 5 3 per cent. B u t e m p l o y m e n t i n i n d u s t r y w a s at l o w e r l e v e l o f
m e r i t s h a r e o f a g r i c u l t u r e is 5 1 . 1 p e r c e n t i n I n d i a , 2 0 - 2 2 p e r cent, but the service sector indicated 3 5 . 2 per
a " :: i n d u s t r y w a s 2 2 . 4 per c e n l a n d o f s e r v i c e s only- cent share i n P a k i s t a n a n d m e r e l y 26.5 per cent i n I n d i a .
T a b l e 3 : G D P a n d E m p l o y m e n t Shares i n Selected D e v e l o p i n g C o u n t r i e s (2007)

G D P per capita Shares in Output (%)"> Shares i n Employment (%)' '2

(PPP) 2007 Agriculture Industry Services Agriculture Industry Services

Korea, 29,101 3 39 58 6.6 17.0 76.4


Republic o f
Malaysia 14,730 11 44 45 13.5" 27.0" 59.5"
Thailand 8,553 12 45 43 41.5" 19.5" 38.9"
China 7,599 10 47 43 39.6' 27.2* 33.2'
Philippines 3,969 12 32 55 35.2" 14.6" 50.3"
hdonesia 4,325 15 47 38 38.3 19.3 42.3
India 3,435 19 26 55 51.1 22.4 26.5
Pakistan 2,688 21 25 54 44.7" 20.1' 35.2"

P e r capita G D P a n d G D P shares are f o r 2 0 0 3 . P e r capita G D P figures are o n P P P basis


, E m p l o y m e n t shares are f o r 2 0 0 0
F o r India, e m p l o y m e n t shares are t a k e n f r o m I A M R , Manpower Profile (2004) a n d a r e based on National Sample Survey,
Report No. 481, Employment and Unemployment in India, J u l y 2001-June 2 0 0 2 , 5 7 R o u n d . ,h

D a t a f o r C h i n a pertains t o 2 0 0 4 as revised b y The Eleventh Five Year Plan (2006-10)


W o r l d B a n k , World Development Indicators (2010-11)
i for E m p l o y m e n t pertains t o 2 0 0 8 .
OCCUPATIONAL S T R U C T U R E A N D E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T

E v e n t h o u g h the G D P share i n services o f I n d i a shot u p B u t the q u e s t i o n arises: D i d t h i s s t r u c t u r a l s h i f t i n


to 5 5 per cent, yet the share i n e m p l o y m e n t w a s m e r e l y G D P share have an impact o n the e m p l o y m e n t pattern or
26.5 per cent. O b v i o u s l y , o u t p u t - e m p l o y m e n t r a t i o i n distribution o f workforce in India? Data provided in
India remained very high, indicating a capital-intensive table 6 based o n the various rounds o f the N a t i o n a l
pattern o f g r o w t h i n t h e service sector. S a m p l e S u r v e y r e v e a l s t h a t t h e s h a r e o f w o r k f o r c e de-
p l o y e d i n agriculture declined f r o m 7 4 per cent i n 1972-
7 3 t o about 5 3 . 2 per cent i n 2 0 0 9 - 1 0 . A l o n g w i t h this
4. C H A N G I N G P R O F I L E O F declines, the share o f e m p l o y m e n t i n i n d u s t r y increased
f r o m 11.2 per cent i n 1972-73 t o 14.9 per cent i n 1993-
/ V \P A N D EMPLOYMENT 9 4 a n d further t o 21.5 per cent i n 2 0 0 9 - 1 0 . A l s o the
I N I N D I A (1950-51 T O share o f services i n total e m p l o y m e n t increased f r o m
2001-02) 14.6 percent i n 1972-73 t o 2 5 . 4 per cent i n 2 0 0 9 - 1 0 .
Changing profile o f G D P i n India during 1950-51
to 2 0 0 1 - 0 2 - o v e r a p e r i o d o f 5 1 years is g i v e n i n table 5. Table 5 : Distributiono f Working Force by
Industry Division i n India
T h e data reveal that G D P f r o m the p r i m a r y sector (viz.,
agriculture and allied entities like forestry and fishing)
Industry Division Total
declined f o r m 5 9 per cent i n 1950-51 to 4 6 per cent i n 1983 1993-94
1972-73 2009-10
1970-71 and thereafter, sharply declined to 16.1 percent
in 2 0 1 1 - 1 2 . T h i s w a s partially neutralized b y an increase Agriculture
Agriculture Forestry,
i n t h e s h a r e o f the s e c o n d a r y sector f r o m 13 p e r c e n t i n
Fishing and H u n t i n g 74.0 68.1 63.9 53.2
1950-51 to about 22 per cent i n 1970-71 and further Industry
increase to about 24.3 per cent i n 2 0 1 1 - 1 2 . B u t the M i n i n g and Quarrying 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.60
biggest h i k e i n G D P share occurred i n case o f services Manufacturing 8.8 10.7 10.6 11.0
f r o m about 2 7 per cent i n 1950-51 to 32 per cent i n 1970- Electricity, Gas and
Water 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.30
71 to 59.0 per cent i n 2 0 1 1 - 1 2 . T h e e m e r g i n g structural
Construction 1.8 2.3 3.2 9.6
change i n G D P shares witnessed a b i g decline i n the share Sub-total 11.2 13.9 14.9 21.5
o f agriculture, coupled w i t h a modest increase i n the Services
share o f industry and a m u c h sharper increase i n the share W h o l e s a l e and R e t a i l
o f services w h i c h n o w account for nearly h a l f o f the total trade and Restaurants
and H o t e l s 5.0 6.9 7.6 10.8
GDP.
T r a n s p o r t , Storage
Table 4 : G D P at Factor Cost by Industry o f and C o m m u n i c a t i o n 1.8 2.5 2.9 4.3
O r i g i n (at 1993-94 prices) - A l l I n d i a O t h e r Services 7.8 8.8 10.7 10.3
^crores Sub- total 14.6 18.2 21.2 25.4
Activities not
Year Primary Secondary Tertiary Total
Classified 0.2 0.4
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
1950-51" 83,154 18,670 38,642 1,40,466
(59.2) (13.3) (27.5) (100.0) F i g u r e s relate t o u s u a l status o f i n d i v i d u a l s .
1960-61' 1,12,848 34,239 2,06,103 W o r k f o r c e covers those i n v o l v e d i n gainful activity regu-
(54.8) (16.6) (28.6) (100.0) l a r l y + those i n v o l v e d i n g a i n f u l a c t i v i t y occasionally.
1970-71 1,37,320 64,258 95,331 2,96,909 S o u r c e : N a t i o n a l S a m p l e S u r v e y O r g a n i z a t i o n , 27"' 3 2 , 38*.
nd

(46.3) (21.6) (32.1) (100.0) 43" , 4 6 * , 4 8 * and 5 0 * R o u n d s w i t h reclassification o f Shares


1

1980-81 1,59,293 95,055 1,46,753 4,01,128 o f agriculture, i n d u s t r y a n d services as g i v e n i n I A M R , Man-


(39.2) (23.7) (36.6) (100.0) power Profile i n I n d i a ( 2 0 0 4 ) , P l a n n i n g Commission Elev-
1990-91 2,23,114 1,88,601 2,81,115 6,92,871 enth F i v e Year Plan.
(32.2) (27.2) (40.6) (100.0) The upshot o f this analysis is that whereas
2001-02 3,04.666 3,38,165 6,25,114 12,67,945 G D P share o f agriculture declined sharply, the corre-
(24.0) (26.7) (49.3) (100.0) sponding decline i n e m p l o y m e n t share did n o t take
2010-11" 8,18.524 12,49,305 28,18,155 48,85,954 place i n India. M e a n w h i l e , G D P share o f industry
(16.7) (25.6) (57.7) (100.0) r e g i s t e r e d a n i n c r e a s e o f 5 p e r c e n t d u r i n g t h e last
2011-12" 8,37,136 12,96,190 30,69,189 52,02,514 four decades ( 1 9 7 0 - 7 1 to 2009-10). B u t the corre-
(16.1) (24.3) (59.0) (100.0) s p o n d i n g increase i n e m p l o y m e n t share w a s o n l y 6
* F o r 1950-51 and 1960-61, P r i m a r y Sector includes agriculture, per cent d u r i n g the same period. T h i s o n l y indicates
forestry, fishing and m i n i n g & quarrying, but figures for 1970-71, that the process o f industrialization failed to absorb
1980-81, 1990-91 and 2001-02 include m i n i n g & quarrying i n the excess labour i n agriculture i n the expansion o f i n -
secondary sector, instead o f the primary sector. dustry. T h i r d l y , share o f services i n G D P increased
S o u r c e : G o v e r n m e n t o f I n d i a , E c o n o m i c Survey (2011-12) sharply to about 57 per cent, but they also
and C e n t r a l Statistical O r g a n i z a t i o n as reported i n R B I , Hand- failed to register a sharp increase i n e m p l o y m e n t
book of Statistics of the I n d i a n Economy (2010-11) w h i c h w a s b a r e l y 1 5 p e r c e n t as a g a i n s t a n 2 5 p e r
CSO, Press Release, M a y 31, 2012.
** Base year 2 0 0 4 - 0 5
JPATIONAL S T R U C T U R E A N D E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 87
crease i n G D P during 1970-71 and 2009-10. w o r k f o r c e to services even. I n a no v e r a l l v i e w , pattern o f
ibis i t follows that Indian d i d n o t experience G D P g r o w t h d i d n o tbring about a shift i n e m p l o y m e n t
ce i n the growth o f G D P a n d e m p l o y m e n t i n
pattern t o either i n d u s t r y ( m a n u f a c t u r i n g ) o r services.
iring the process o f industrialization, b u t
Table 6 : Gross Domestic Product, Employ-
ted t o t h e p o s t - i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n p h a s e o f i n c r e a s -
ment a n d Productivity per worker i n India
p chare o f G D P as w e l l as e m p l o y m e n t i n ser-
| though a relatively smaller increase i n e m - Gross Domestic Product
Bent i n the service sector t o o k place.We m a y (fcrores at 1 9 9 3 - 9 4 prices)
to w a i t f o r s o m e m o r e t i m e so that secondary a n d
sector are able t o absorb m o r e labour force i n Year Primary Secondary Tertiary Total
fwitib t h e i r r i s i n g s h a r e i n G D P .
1972-73 1,33,699 62,699 1,01,918 2 , 9 8 , 3 1 6
(44.8) (21.0) (34.2) (100.0)
1993-94 2,62,059 1,85,070 3,34,216 7,81,345
5. G D P , E M P L O Y M E N T A N D (33.5) (23.7) (42.8) (100.0)
PRODUCTIVITY P E R 2001-02 3,33,274 3,09,557 6,25.114 12,67,945
(26.3) (24.4) (49.3) (100.0)
W O R K E R IN INDIA
D i s t r i b u t i o n of Employment
Table 7 , w e present data about G D P a n d e m -
(In million)
t growth i n India f o r the period 1972-73 t o
F r o m this, w e have w o r k e d o u t productivity Year Primary Secondary Ternary Total
at 1 9 9 3 - 9 4 p r i c e s . D a t a r e v e a l s t h a t t h e r e i s
i n t h e g r o w t h rate o f p r o d u c t i v i t y p e r w o r k e r 1972-73 174.8 26.4 35.1 236.2
. 7 <fc i n P r i m a r y , 2 . 0 % i n S e c o n d a r y a n d 2 . 9 % i n (74.0) (11.2) (14.8) (100.0)
: Tertiary Sector during the 29-year period (1972-73 1993-94 240.4 52.8 78.9 372.1
)l-02) (64.6) (14.2) (21.2) (100.0)
It m a y a l s o b e n o t e d t h a t d i s p a r i t y r a t i o i n p r o d u c - 2001-02 260.4 73.2 94.6 428.2
1 p e r w o r k e r w h i c h w a s 1:3.1 b e t w e e n p r i m a r y a n d (60.8) (22.1) (100.0)
(17.1)
sector i n 1972-73 increased slightly t o 3.3 i n
But the disparity ratio between primary a n d Productivity per W o r k e r
sector increased f r o m 3.8 i n 1972-73 t o 5.2 i n (Tar 1993-94 prices)
2. T h e s e d i f f e r e n t i a l s i n p r o d u c t i v i t y e x p l a i n w h y Year Primary Tertiary Total
Secondary
S o r p t i o n o f w o r k e r s i n secondary a n d t e r t i a r y sec-
t kas been l o w e r i n India. I t also repudiates t h e c o m - 1972-73 7.649 23,749 29.036 12,630
K h e l d b e l i e f by the economists that increasing share 1993-94 10,901 35,051 42,359 20,998
force i n services is d u e t o l o w p r o d u c t i v i t y i n
as c o m p a r e d t o m a n u f a c t u r i n g . 2001-02 12,798 42,289 66,080 29,611
T h e question arises: H o w does o n e e x p l a i n t h e
LAVTK between
o f India becoming a post-industrial 'service 1972-73 a n d
iy', w i t h o u t passing t h o u g h the m a j o r phase o f 2001-02 1.7 2.0 2.9 3.0
lization, spearheaded by manufacturing? A very
explanation is: Technological changes during Disparity Ratios i n Productivity per W o r k e r
: few decades have induced a n increase i n d e m a n d Year Primary Secondary Tertiary
vices even at e v e n relatively l o w e r levels o f per 1972-73 1.0 3.1 3.8
income. Moreover, development o f communica- 1993-94 1.0 3.2 3.9
i technologies a n d reduction o f the barriers t o c o m - 2001-02 1.0 3.3 5.2
r. f l o w s a n d m o v e m e n t o f people, s p e c i a l l y s k i l l e d
due t o impact o f globalization, have produced N o t e : C A G R refers t o t h e c o m p o u n d a n n u a l g r o w t h rate.
ation effects r e s u l t i n g i n s h i f t i n g t h e pattern o f Source:
in developing countries i n f a v o u r o f those 1 . D a t a f o r sectoral d i s t r i b u t i o n o f G D P w a s t a k e n f r o m C S O
lg i n developed countries m u c h earlier than the as g i v e n i n E c o n o m i c Survey (2004-05)
experience w o u l d justify. A s consequences, 2 . D a t a f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n o f l a b o u r force w a s t a k e n f r o m I A M R ,
the p r o d u c t i o n a n d c o n s u m p t i o n o f services have M a n p o w e r Profile India (2004).
a q u a n t u m j u m p . Unfortunately, the pattern o f 3. P r o d u c t i v i t y p e r w o r k e r is calculated b y d i v i d i n g G D P
c t i o n o f services w h i c h is capital-intensive has w i t h t h e t o t a l n u m b e r o f w o r k e r s i n t h e respective sector.
to b r i n g about a significant p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e
88 OCCUPATIONAL S T R U C T U R E A N DE C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N "

E
if they were passing through the phase o f industrializa-
tion. T h i s should also help t o transfer labour from
6. R E L A T I V E S H I F T I N T H E agriculture to industry. H o w e v e r , i f the state has switched
SHARES O FNSDP AND over t o the post-industrial service e c o n o m y before com-
EMPLOYMENT IN AGRI- p l e t i n g t h e process o f i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n , t h e n a larger
CULTURE, INDUSTRY share o f G D P s h o u l d b e d e r i v e d f o r m t h e service sector
a n d a l a r g e r p r o p o r t i o n o f l a b o u r s h o u l d a l s o b e ab-
AND S E R V I C E S I N DIF- sorbed i n t h e service sector.
FERENT STATES
A close perusal o f t h e data reveals that there does
T a b l e 8 provides data about t h epercentage shares not exist a u n i f o r m pattern i n India that abides b y the
of N S D P for2009-10 and employment for2009-10 for experience o f developed countries. T a k e f o r instance.
agriculture, industry a n d services. F r o m these figures, P u n j a b a n d H a r y a n a - t h e t w o states w h i c h spearheaded
output e m p l o y m e n t ratios ( O / L ) have been derived. the G r e e n R e v o l u t i o n . I n P u n j a b as against t h e share o f
These ratios indicate productivity per unit o f labour. T h e 2 6 . 4 p e r cent i n N S D P f o r agriculture i n 2 0 0 9 - 1 0 , the
p e r c a p i t a N S D P f o r 2 0 0 9 - 1 0 at 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 prices as a n c o r r e s p o n d i n g s h a r e i n e m p l o y m e n t w a s 4 4 . 2 p e r cent;
i n d i c a t o r h a s b e e n j u x t a p o s e d a n d t h e states h a v e b e e n and s i m i l a r l y w i t h 16.5 percent share i n N S D P for
arranged i n a descending order o n t h e basis o f per capita agriculture o f Haryana, agriculture supported about 44.4
NSDP. percent o f l a b o u r force. B o t h these states h a d h i g h output
e m p l o y m e n t ratio o f 0.60 a n d 0.37 respectively i n agri-
It is expected that states w i t h a h i g h e r p e r capita
culture. I n Punjab, the N S D P share i n industry w a s 20.5
N S D P should be able t o reduce their share o f N S D P i n
percent a n d e m p l o y m e n t share w a s 2 6 . 2 percent. I n l
agriculture a n d consequently raise their share i n industry

T a b l e : 7: R e l a t i v e S h a r e s o f N S D P a n d E m p l o y m e n t i n A g r i c u l t u r e , I n d u s t r y a n d S e r v i c e s

Per Per centage share of Percentage share of Output Employment


capita N S D P at 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 Employment (2009-10) i n the sector r e l a t i v e to
NSDP f prices (2009-10) o v e r a l l r a t i o f o r the state
2004-05
State prices Agricu- Indus- Servi- Agricu- Indus- Servi- Agricu- Indus- Servi-
(2009-10) Iture try ces Iture try ces Iture try ces
3 4 8=2/5 9=3/6 10=4n

1. Punjab 42,727 26.4 20.5 53.1 44.2 26.2 19.5 0.60 0.78
2. Maharashtra 57,458 8.6 21.0 70.4 52.4 17.1 30.5 0.16 1.23
3. Haryana 54,884 16.5 18.2 65.2 44.4 27.2 28.3 0.37 0.67 2.3(
4. Tauiil Nadu 46,692 17.1 73.8 44.6 27.9 27.6 0.20 0.61 2.6'
5. Gujarat 48,511 13.0 27.9 59.1 53.4 19.5 27.0 0.24 1.43
6. Karnataka 38.646 15.4 17.5 67.1 55.8 18.3 26.9 0.28 0.96 0 AQ

7. Himachal Pradesh 43,305 19.3 11.8 68.9 59.7 20.7 19.6 0.32 0.57 3.52
8. Kerala 45,908 10.2 9.6 80.2 29.5 29.5 41.0 0.35 0.33
9. Andhra Pradesh 37,061 22.6 12.8 64.6 54.8 20.7 24.4 0.41 0.62
10. West Bengal 30,372 20.0 10.3 69.7 43.8 25.9 30.4 0.46 0.40
11. Rajasthan 24,166 19.4 16.5 62.9 52.8 27.1 20.1 0.37 0.61 3.15
12. Madhya Pradesh 21,095 26.5 15.9 57.6 68.8 15.5 15.6 0.39 1.03 3.69
13. J a m m u and Kashmir26,344 23.4 9.8 66.8 50.1 21.4 28.6 0.47 0.46 ^ 7j

14. Assam 20,193 24.4 13.7 61.9 64.2 8.7 27.5 0.38 1.57
15. Orissa 24,275 21.0 17.3 61.7 60.8 20.1 19.0 0.35 0.86
2 25
16. Uttar Pradesh 16,374 25.0 14.7 60.3 56.1 23.0 20.9 0.45 0.64
17. Bihar 12,012 21.3 4.6 74.1 61.9 16.6 21.6 0.34 0.28
All India 33,843 14.7 20.2 65.1 53.2 21.5 25.4 0.27 0.93 2 ^6
3.4?
S o u r c e s : 1 . C S O N a t i o n A c c o u n t s S t a t i s t i c s (2011)
2. N S S O 66' R o u n d
h
IOCCUPATIONAL S T R U C T U R E A N D E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 89
/ana, a n e a r l y s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n p r e v a i l e d and the has l a n g u i s h e d i n W e s t B e n g a l w i t h 10.3 percent share o f
i n d i c a t e d i t s p e r c e n t a g e s h a r e i n N S D P at 1 8 . 2 N S D P w i t h 2 5 . 9 percent share o f l a b o u r indicating a
;nt for industry w i t h a n e m p l o y m e n t share o f 27.2 comparatively lower level o f labour productivity. T h e
cent. C o n s e q u e n t l y the share o f the s e r v i c e sector i n f l i g h t o f c a p i t a l d u e t o a g g r e s s i v e trade u n i o n i s m ac-
>DP r e m a i n e d b e t w e e n 5 3 - 6 5 percent, b u t the e m p l o y - counted f o r the l o w N S D P share o f industry. T h e r e is n o
at s h a r e w a s o n l y 1 9 . 5 p e r c e n t i n P u n j a b a n d 2 8 . 3 d o u b t that l a b o u r p r o d u c t i v i t y i n a g r i c u l t u r e has i m -
snt i n H a r y a n a . p r o v e d i n W e s t B e n g a l , but this is v e r y l o w i n c o m p a r i -
s o n w i t h g r e e n r e v o l u t i o n states i n I n d i a . T h e S t a t e
B u t i n contrast, M a h a r a s h t r a w h i c h e n j o y e d a
G o v e r n m e n t is n o w m a k i n g amends f o r its past mistakes.
and place i n t e r m s o f p e r c a p i t a N S D P i n 2 0 0 9 - 1 0 ,
a small proportion o f N S D P being generated f r o m T h e n t h e r e is a g r o u p o f b a c k w a r d states, v i z . ,
riculture v i z . , 8.6 per cent, but i t carried a h e a v y Rajasthan, M a d h y a Pradesh, J a m m u & K a s h m i r , A s s a m ,
i e n o f l a b o u r e m p l o y e d at a r o u n d 5 2 . 4 per cent i n Orissa, Uttar Pradesh and B i h a r w h i c h have a very high
riculture. B u t w i t h 2 1 percent share o f i n d u s t r y i n proportion o f labour force dependent o n agriculture w i t h
>DP, its share i n e m p l o y m e n t w a s b a re l y 17.1 percent, A s s a m accounting f o r 64.2 per cent and B i h a r and
case o f services, t h e i r p r o p o r t i o n i n N S D P w a s 7 0 . 4 M a d h y a Pradesh account f o r 61.9 and 68.8 percent
:ent w i t h a l a b o u r a b s o r p t i o n o f a r o u n d 3 0 . 5 per cent. respectively. T h e share o f the service sector i n N S D P
implies that output labour ratio i n Maharashtra for ranges f r o m 61.9 percent i n A s s a m to 66.8 percent i n
i c u l t u r e w a s o n l y 0 . 1 6 f o r a g r i c u l t u r e , 1.23 f o r i n d u s - J a m m u & K a s h m i r . A s against it, the share o f industry i n
and 2.31 for services. O / L ratio indicates a l o w l e v e l N S D P r a n g e s from as l o w as 9 . 8 p e r c e n t i n J a m m u &
development i n agriculture, a high O / L ratio for K a s h m i r a n d 17.3 percent i n O r i s s a t o 16.5 per cent i n
astry s h o w s a c a p i t a l i n t e n s i v e p a t t e r n o f i n d u s t r i a l - Rajasthan. I n v i e w o f h i g h share i n e m p l o y m e n t i n
tion and m u c h higher capital intensive pattern i n post- agriculture, the shares o f e m p l o y m e n t i n i n d u s t r y and
istrial service sector. M a h a r a s h t r a is a n e x a m p l e o f services together fluctuate between 3 1 percent t o 5 0
icultural backwardness, accompanied by industrial- percent i n u n d e r d e v e l o p states. O b v i o u s l y , the s i t u a t i o n
tion, and entry into post-industrial service economy, i n these states is a l o w l e v e l o f e q u i l i b r i u m i n b o t h N S D P
i other w o r d s , it has an a s y m m e t r y i n the relative shares and employment. T h e l o w level o f productivity i n agri-
agriculture, industry and services. culture, failure to m o v e towards industrial or post-indus-
trial service e c o n o m y has been experienced i n these
T h e pattern o f development i n Gujarat follows a states. S o m e o f these states are m a k i n g e f f o r t s to boost
: o r less s i m i l a r pattern t o that o f M a h a r a s h t r a . T a m i l productivity i n foodgrains - A n d h r a Pradesh 2,294 kgs
i u , h o w e v e r , has been able t o reduce its labour force and U t t a r Pradesh 2,236 kgs per hectare i n 2 0 0 9 - 1 0 , a l l
i p l o y e d i n agriculture to 4 4 . 6 percent, t h o u g h N S D P o t h e r s t a t e s h a v e b e e n o p e r a t i n g at m u c h l o w e r l e v e l s o f
re s t o o d at 8.8 per cent. Its N S D P share i n i n d u s t r y p r o d u c t i v i t y . M o r e o v e r , i n these states, t h e r e is a p r e s s -
17.1 percent w i t h e m p l o y m e n t share o f 27.9 per- ing need to intensify the rate o f g r o w t h i n industry and
ent, b u t i t s s h a r e o f N S D P f o r s e r v i c e s w a s q u i t e h i g h services, but unless a second G r e e n R e v o l u t i o n i n agri-
73.8 % ) w i t h a n e m p l o y m e n t s h a r e o f 2 7 . 6 p e r c e n t , i t culture is not achieved, progress t o w a r d s industrializa-
also a case o f a state w i t h a r e l a t i v e l y less b a c k w a r d t i o n and post-industrial e c o n o m y w i l l also be restrained.
ricultural e c o n o m y j u m p i n g o n t o b e c o m e a post-
iustrial service economy. T h e s u r v e y o f N S D P and e m p l o y m e n t shares i n
v a r i o u s states reveals a w i d e disparity. I n P u n j a b a n d
Kerala showed a singularly different pattern w i t h
H a r y a n a , the h i g h share o f N S D P f r o m agriculture w a s
t'SDP share d e r i v e d f r o m agriculture d e c l i n i n g to 10.2
the result o f high productivity i n agriculture w i t h a s m a l l
ercent a c c o m p a n i e d b y l o w e m p l o y m e n t share o f 2 9 . 5
reduction o f e m p l o y m e n t share i n agriculture. H o w e v e r ,
srcent. T h i s w a s a c c o m p a n i e d w i t h 2 9 . 5 per c e n t share
the relatively h i g h shares o f N S D P i n agriculture i n p o o r
i e m p l o y m e n t i n industry and 4 1 . 0 percent i n services,
states l i k e A n d h r a Pradesh, R a j a s t h a n , M a d h y a Pradesh,
l e r e is n o d o u b t that K e r a l a w i t h N S D P s h a r e o f 8 0 . 2
J a m m u & K a s h m i r , Uttar Pradesh and B i h a r were due to
srcent i n services, has a l s o e n t e r e d t h e p o s t - i n d u s t r i a l
backwardness o f agriculture, l o w levels o f development
ervice e c o n o m y , b u t there is less d i s p a r i t y i n l a b o u r
i n i n d u s t r y a n d services b u t these states h a v e a v e r y h i g h
srce d i s t r i b u t i o n a s a l s o i n t h e o u t p u t l a b o u r r a t i o i n t h e
proportion o f workforce dependent o n agriculture, w i t h
ree sectors.
very small proportions drawing their livelihood from
W e s t B e n g a l has also f o l l o w e d a m o r e o f less industry and services. K e r a l a , A n d h r a Pradesh and W e s t
[similar pattern like K e r a l a w i t h the share o f N S D P B e n g a l , t h o u g h m e d i u m l e v e l states i n per capita N S D P
[agriculture g o i n g d o w n to 2 0 . 0 per cent w i t h an e m p l o y - indicate relatively l o w e r share o f N S D P originating f r o m
m e n t share being brought d o w n to 43.8 percent. Service agriculture (nearly 2 0 % ) and over 65 percent f r o m
s e c t o r c o n t i n u e s t o be t h e d r i v e r o f N S D P i n W e s t s e r v i c e s a n d a b o u t 1 0 t o 13 p e r c e n t i n i n d u s t r y .
Bengal w i t h a share o f 69.7 percent w i t h about 30.4
percent share o f l a b o u r absorbed i n services. I n d u s t r y T h e r e is a need to study the production and
90 OCCUPATIONAL S T R U C T U R E A N D E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T

e m p l o y m e n t pattern o f e v e r y state a n d e v o l v e suitable T A B L E 8. W o r k f o r c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s i n c e 1901


policies t o strengthen agriculture i n the first instance (in percentage)
w h i c h provides livelihoodor employment to nearly t w o -
Year Persons Males Females
third to three-fourth o f the labour. A break-through i n
a g r i c u l t u r e w i l l p r o v i d e a p u s h t o i n d u s t r y a n d s e r v i c e s as 1901 46 61 32
a consequence o f the increase i n labour and land produc- 1951 39 54 23
tivity i n agriculture. T h e industry sector (or m o r e popu- 1961 43 57 28
larly m a n u f a c t u r i n g ) has lagged behind the g r o w t h i n 1971 33 53 12
services. T h i s t r a n s i t i o n w i t n e s s e d i n m o s t o f the states t o 1981 37 53 19
a post-industrial 'service e c o n o m y ' w i t h o u t passing 1991 38 52 23
t h r o u g h a p r o c e s s o f i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n has b e e n n o t e d as 2001 39 52 26
a major weakness o f the outcome o f the development SOURCE Census Reports.
process u n d e r t a k e n i n the c o u n t r y d u r i n g t h e last 6 0
I n the 1 9 6 1 census, the basis o f w o r k w a s consid-
years. State l e v e l analysis indicates the policy directions
ered to be satisfied i f a person i n the case o f seasonal w o r k
that s h o u l d be p u r s u e d i n f u t u r e so that sectoral dispari-
like cultivation, livestock, dairying, household industry,
ties i n N S D P and e m p l o y m e n t pattern are reduced.
etc. h a d s o m e r e g u l a r w o r k o f m o r e t h a n o n e h o u r a day
t h r o u g h o u t t h e greater part o f t h e w o r k i n g season.
D u r i n g 1961 census, m a n y such persons w h o s e main
a c t i v i t y w a s n o t e c o n o m i c w e r e c l a s s i f i e d as w o r k e r s .
j m 7. W O R K F O R C E P A R T I C I - T h i s resulted i n an e x a g g e r a t i o n o f the w o r k force
A 1 PATION R A T E S IN INDIA participation rate and thus it rose to 43 per cent i n 1961.
Labour, being a p r i m a r y factor o f production, A rigorous and m o r e m e a n i n g f u l d e f i n i t i o n was
the size o f labour force is o f great i m p o r t a n c e f o r the a g a i n a d o p t e d i n 1 9 7 1 census. A w o r k e r , a c c o r d i n g to
level o f economic activity i n a country. I n the determi- t h e 1 9 7 1 c e n s u s , i s a p e r s o n w h o s e m a i n a c t i v i t y is
nation o f the size o f the labour force, it is customary to p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a n y e c o n o m i c a l l y p r o d u c t i v e w o r k by
e x c l u d e c h i l d r e n b e l o w t h e a g e o f 15 a n d o l d p e o p l e his physical or mental activity. W o r k involves not only
a b o v e the age o f 6 0 , t h o u g h i n I n d i a , p o v e r t y forces a c t u a l w o r k b u t e f f e c t i v e s u p e r v i s i o n a n d d i r e c t i o n or
people belonging to these groups also to w o r k for bare w o r k . T h i s i m p l i e s t h a t a m a n o r w o m a n w h o is e n g a g e d
subsistence. T h e w o r k force participation rate i n a p r i m a r i l y i n h o u s e h o l d a c t i v i t i e s s u c h as c o o k i n g for
c o u n t r y , i.e., p r o p o r t i o n o f w o r k i n g p o p u l a t i o n t o t o t a l o w n h o u s e h o l d o r a b o y o r g i r l w h o is p r i m a r i l y a student
p o p u l a t i o n , d e p e n d s u p o n s u c h f a c t o r s as a g e a n d s e x a t t e n d i n g a n i n s t i t u t i o n , e v e n i f s u c h a p e r s o n h e l p s i n the
c o m p o s i t i o n , attitude t o w o r k , a v a i l a b i l i t y o f w o r k etc. f a m i l y e c o n o m i c a c t i v i t y b u t n o t as a f u l l t i m e w o r k e r ,
A l l these factors differ i n different countries and m a y s h o u l d n o t b e t r e a t e d as a w o r k e r f o r t h e m a i n a c t i v i t y .
differ even w i t h i n the same country i n different periods.
T h e census o f 1981 carries f o r w a r d the tradition o i
In advanced countries like England, Japan and others,
the Census o f 1971 i n m a k i n g the definition o f "worker"
w o r k participation rate often ranges b e t w e e n 45 to 5 0 per
r i g o r o u s and m o r e m e a n i n g f u l and has classified t h :
cent, w h i l e i n I n d i a i t has been a r o u n d 33 per cent.
workers into 'main workers' and 'marginal workers'.
T a b l e 8 shows m a t the w o r k force participation M a i n w o r k e r s are those w h o h a v e w o r k e d i n some
rate h a d declined b e t w e e n 1901 and 1 9 5 1 f r o m 4 6 per economic activity over a period o f six months or more
cent to 3 9 per cent. Since 1 9 5 1 , h o w e v e r , there has
a n d m a r g i n a l w o r k e r s a r e t h o s e w h o h a v e n o t w o r k e d for
been a c o n t r a d i c t o r y trend. B u t i t s h o u l d be e m p h a s i s e d
a m a j o r part o f the year.
here that the w o r k force participation figures g i v e n i n
T a b l e 8 a r e n o t r e a l l y c o m p a r a b l e as t h e c o n c e p t o f T a b l e 8 r e v e a l s t h a t as a g a i n s t t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o i
" w o r k e r " o r labour force has been changing i n the rate o f 4 3 per cent o f t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n r e c o r d e d i n 1961
different censuses. F o r instance, the pre-Independence census, the proportion o f w o r k i n g population returned
censuses used the concept o f "status" o f w o r k e r s a n d 1971 census c a m e d o w n to 33 per cent. T h i s w a s m a i n l .
l u m p e d t o g e t h e r as p a r t o f t h e w o r k f o r c e b o t h p r i n c i p a l d u e to the fact that m a n y o f the h o u s e w i v e s a n d studen'
workers along with unpaid family workers. Naturally, w h o w e r e t r e a t e d as w o r k e r s o n t h e b a s i s o f s o r .
the w o r k force participation rate w a s h i g h i n pre- marginal contribution i n 1961 census were not includ~
Independence period. F o r the first t i m e , the 1951 i n 1 9 7 1 census as w o r k e r s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e r a t i o
census adopted a strict definition o f w o r k e r ~ a s one f e m a l e w o r k e r s i n total f e m a l e p o p u l a t i o n got considera-
gainfully employed or one w o r k i n g for a livelihood
bly r e d u c e d i n 1 9 7 1 census. W h e r e a s i n the 1 9 6 1 census,
and excluded unpaid family workers. T h e w o r k force
a b o u t 2 9 p e r c e n t o f t h e f e m a l e s w e r e r e t u r n e d as
participation rate naturally c a m e d o w n i n 1951 census.
w o r k e r s , i n 1971 census, o n l y 12 per cent w e r e recorded
The position was, h o w e v e r , reversed i n the 1961 census.
as w o r k e r s . T h e r e w a s n o m a j o r c h a n g e i n t h e 1 9 8 1
census.
/UPATIONAL S T R U C T U R E A N DE C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T 91
>rk P a r t i c i p a t i o n R a t e A c c o r d i n g t o 2. Increase i n W o r k Participation R a t e is m o r e
>1 C e n s u s perceptible i n rural t h a n i n u r b a n areas. W o r k participa-
t i o n rate i n r u r a l areas w a s 4 2 . 0 % i n 2 0 0 1 as against
The adoption i n 1991 a n d2001 Census o f almost
4 0 . 2 % i n 1991 a n d that i n u r b a n areas w a s 3 2 . 2 % i n 2 0 0 1
same definitions a n dconcepts o f w o r k e r s ( m a i n a n d
as a g a i n s t 3 0 . 4 % i n 1 9 9 1 .
lal) o f 1981 census has rendered t h e direct c o m -
o f t h e results possible. T A B L E 10 : T o t a l W o r k e r s i n I n d i a (2001)
and Work Participation Rates
TABLE 9 : W o r k Participation R a t e i n India
(1981-2001) (In million)

Persons Males Females


fcw Category Persons Males Females
Total Population 1025.2 530.4 494.8
Total 36.7 52.6 19.7 Workers 402.5 275.5 127.0
% ofworkers 39.2 51.9 25.7
Rural 38.8 53.8 23.1
Urban 30.0 8.3 Rural Population 740.2 380.4 359.8
49.1
Workers 310.6 199.2 111.5
Total 37.7 51.6 22.7 % ofworkers y n O A 31.0
4.U
Rural 40.2 52.5 27.2 Urban Population 285.0 150.0 135.0
Urban 30.4 49.0 9.7 Workers 91.9 76.3 15.6
Total 39.2 51.9 25.7 % ofworkers 32.2 50.9 11.6
Rural 42.0 52.4 31.0
Source : Registrar General o f India
Urban 32.2 50.9 11.6
3. I n t h e case o f males, W P R i n r u r a l areas w a s
p u c E : Census of India 1 9 9 1 Series-1, (India) Paper 3 of 52.4 p e r cent i n 2 0 0 1 w h i c h w a s also t h e l e v e l attained i n
1 9 9 1 , P r o v i s i o n a l P o p u l a t i o n Tables : Workers and
1 9 9 1 ; h o w e v e r , there is a slight i m p r o v e m e n t i n W P R i n
Their D i s t r i b u t i o n
urban areas i n t h e W P R rising t o 5 0 . 9 per cent i n 2 0 0 1 as
Main findings o f t h e 2 0 0 1 c e n s u s a r e as under: against 4 9 . 0 p e r cent i n 1 9 9 1 .
4. T h e w o r k participation rate f o r females i n r u r a l
1. I n g e n e r a l , t h e t o t a l w o r k p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e
areas has increased f r o m 27.2 p e r cent i n 1991 t o 3 1 . 0 p e r
| has s h o w n an increasing trend f r o m 1981 o n -
cent i n 2 0 0 1 a n increase b y 3.8 per cent, b u t i n t h e case
s. W P R w a s 3 6 . 7 p e r c e n t i n 1 9 8 1 , i t i m p r o v e d t o
o f u r b a n areas, W P R increased f r o m 9.7 p e r cent i n
7 per cent i n 1 9 9 1 a n d f u r t h e r i m p r o v e d t o 3 9 . 2 p e r
1991 t o 11.6 p e r cent i n 2 0 0 1 , a n increase b y m e r e l y
in 2 0 0 1 .
1.9 p e r c e n t . ( R e f e r t a b l e 6 ) .

T A B L E 1 1 : M a i n a n d M a r g i n a l W o r k e r s i n I n d i a (2001)

In Million Percentage

Total Main Marginal Main Marginal

Persons 402.5 313.2 89.3 77.8 22.2

Males 275.4 240.5 34.9 87.3 12.7

Females 127.0 72.6 54.4 57.2 42.8

Persons 310.6 229.7 80.9 74.0 26.0

Males 199.2 169.3 29.9 85.0 15.0

Females 111.4 60.3 51.1 54.1 45.9

Persons 91.8 83.5 8.3 91.0 9.0

Males 76.2 71.2 5.0 93.4 6.6

Females 15.6 12.3 3.3 78.8 21.2

Registrar G e n e r a l of I n d i a
92 OCCUPATIONAL S T R U C T U R E A N D E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T

5 . O u t o f a t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n o f 1,025 m i l l i o n , h o m e and l o o k after o n l y domestic w o r k .


402.5 m i l l i o n persons w e r e workers, o f these 275.5 9 . T h e C e n s u s h a s d e f i n e d t h e ' m a i n w o r k e r s ' as
m i l l i o n are males a n d 127.0 m i l l i o n are females. I n those w h o h a v e w o r k e d f o r 183 d a y s o r m o r e i n a y e a r and
relative terms, the share o f males i n total w o r k force was m a r g i n a l w o r k e r s w h o w o r k less t h a n 183 days i n a year.
68.4 per cent and that o f females w a s 31.6 per cent. Out o f a total workforce o f 402.5 million, 313.2 million
are m a i n w o r k e r s accounting f o r 77.8 per cent a n d 89.3
6. O u t o f a total rural population o f 740.2 m i l l i o n ,
workers accounted for 310.6 m i l l i o n w i t h 199.2 million m i l l i o n are marginal v/orkers accounting for 22.2 per
being males and 111.5 m i l l i o n being females. A m o n g the cent. A m o n g m a l e w o r k e r s , t h e proportion o f m a i n
rural w o r k e r s , the share o f males was o f the order o f 64.1 w o r k e r s w a s 8 7 . 3 per cent a n d a m o n g f e m a l e w o r k e r s , it
per cent and that o f females w a s o f the order o f 35.9 per w a s 5 7 . 2 per cent. T h i s i m p l i e s that females account for
cent. a m u c h larger p r o p o r t i o n as m a r g i n a l w o r k e r s n e a r l y
4 3 p e r cent. I n r u r a l areas, p r o p o r t i o n o f m a i n a n d
7. I n the urban population, out o f a total o f 285.0 m a r g i n a l w o r k e r s a m o n g female w o r k f o r c e w a s 5 4 % and
m i l l i o n , 91.9 m i l l i o n persons constituted t h e urban 4 6 % respectively, but i n urban areas, this p r o p o r t i o n was
workforce. A m o n g them, 76.3 m i l l i o n were males and 7 9 per cent and 2 1 per cent respectively.
15.6 m i l l i o n w e r e females. T h i s implies that the share o f
males i n rural w o r k f o r c e was 8 3 per cent and that o f 10. O u t o f a t o t a l o f 8 0 . 9 m i l l i o n m a r g i n a l w o r k e r s
females w a s 17 per cent. i n r u r a l areas, 2 9 . 9 m i l l i o n ( 3 7 % ) w e r e males a n d 5 1 . 1
m i l l i o n ( 6 3 % ) w e r e females. I n other words, gender
8. F r o m t h e c e n s u s d a t a , t h e c o n c l u s i o n e m e r g e s
that rural w o m e n are m o r e burdened; n o t o n l y they d i s t r i b u t i o n o f m a r g i n a l w o r k e r s i n r u r a l areas was m o r e
participate i n larger numbers i n e c o n o m i c activity, they titled towards females. A s against t h e m , out o f a total o f
have t o return h o m e f r o m that activity t o undertake 8.3 m i l l i o n m a r g i n a l w o r k e r s i n u r b a n a r e a s , 5 . 0 m i l l i o n
d o m e s t i c w o r k l i k e c o o k i n g , cleaning, t e n d i n g o f cattle, ( 6 0 . 2 % ) w e r e m a l e s and 3.3 m i l l i o n ( 3 9 . 8 % ) w e r e fe-
not to mention child bearing and child rearing. males. T h e share o f females i n urban gender distribution
o f w o r k e r s w a s r e l a t i v e l y h i g h e r as c o m p a r e d w i t h t h a t o f
A s against t h e m , vast m a j o r i t y o f the urban w o m e n
r u r a l areas.
have w i t h d r a w n f r o m economic activity outside t h e

SELECT REFERENCES
A j i t S i n g h ( 2 0 0 5 ) , 'Manufacturing Services, Jobless G o v e r n m e n t o f I n d i a ( 2 0 0 5 ) , Economic Survey]
Growth and Informal Economy: W i l l s e r v i c e s b e (2004-05).
the n e w Engine o f G r o w t h i n India?', Presentation I A M R , Manpower Profile India (2004).
in a Seminar at LLO, N e w Delhi, 1 6 * Papola T . S . (2005), E m e r g i n g Structure o f the Indian
February. E c o n o m y - Implications o f G r o w i n g Inter-Sectoral
Baumol, W . J . (1967), Macroeconomics o f Unbalanced Imbalances, Presidential address, 8 8 * A n n u a l Con-1
G r o w t h : T h e A n a t o m y o f U r b a n C r i s i s , Americal ference o f the Indian E c o n o m i c Association, D e -
Enonomic Review, V o l . 5 7 . cember 27-29.
( 2 0 0 1 ) "Paradox of the Services: E x p l o d i n g C o s t s , Rangrajan C (2006), Employment a n d Growth, V . V . j
Persistent D e m a n d i n T e n R a a and R . Schetkatt Giri M e m o r i a l Lecture, N e w Delhi
( e d s . ) . T h e G r o w t h o f S e r v i c e I n d u s t r i e s : The Para- R e s e r v e B a n k o f I n d i a ( 2 0 0 5 ) , Handbook of Statistics oA
dox of Exploding Costs and Persistent Demand, The Indian Economy, (2004-05).
Cheltenham, E d w a r d Elgar. W o r l d B a n k ( 2 0 0 4 ) a n d ( 2 0 0 5 ) , World Development
F i s h e r A . G . B . ( 1 9 3 9 , 'Production: Primary, Secondary Indicators.
and Tertiary', The Economic Journal, V o l . X V R u d d a r D a t t ( 2 0 0 8 ) , Growth, Poverty and Equity