By A Bheemeshwar Reddy and
R Ramakumar
Vol. XXXIX No.
28, July 19, 2015
THE Socio Economic and
Caste Census (SECC) was carried out between June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2011
by the ministry of rural development, government of India. The three stated
objectives of this Census were to enable state governments to prepare below
poverty line (BPL) lists, to arrive at a caste-wise enumeration of the
population, and to ascertain the socio-economic and educational status of the
enumerated castes. Provisional results from the information collected from
households in rural India – including data on socio-economic variables such as the
castes of households, the main sources of household incomes, and land ownership
– were released on July 3, 2015. The data on different variables now released
by the government have not yet fully been disaggregated by caste and
gender.
The SECC results show
a very high share of landless households among rural households in West Bengal
and Kerala. Since Kerala and West Bengal are justly famous for the
redistributive land reform carried out by Left governments, these high figures
for landlessness need some investigation.
DEFINITION OF
LANDLESSNESS IN THE SECC
The first question is
definitional: How does the SECC define landowning by a rural household? The
SECC definition does not
consider homestead land owned by households
when assessing landownership status of a household. This in effect means that
the SECC data fails to capture those landless households who received homestead
land as part of the land redistribution programmes in these two states. This would
also include beneficiaries who received crop land, including garden land, on
which they later built homes, thus converting their plots (by definition) into
homestead land. As we show below, this partly explains why, according to the
SECC, the share of landless households is high in the states of Kerala and West
Bengal.
HOMESTEAD LAND
IN KERALA AND WEST BENGAL
The most important
element of public action in Kerala after 1956-57 was the implementation of land
reforms across all regions, initiated by the Communist Party of India-led
government. The impact of land reforms went beyond changes in land tenure; land
reforms also became the “centrepiece of the programme for social and economic
progress” for which Kerala is famous.
There is general
consensus among scholars that land reform in Kerala was most successful with
respect to tenancy abolition and the distribution of homestead lands. The
component of land reform that directly benefited landless agricultural workers
was the distribution of homestead land. A significant number of landless
agricultural workers received ownership rights over the plots of homesteads.
Official data show that between 1957 and 1996, about 5,28,000 households in the
state were issued homestead ownership certificates.
The provision to
distribute homestead land to agricultural workers was added to the land reform
legislation by the CPI(M)-led government in 1967 once it had become clear that
the extent of ceiling-surplus land available for redistribution would be
smaller than expected. Between 1959 (when the Communist ministry was dismissed)
and 1967 (when the second Communist-led ministry came to power), landlords
supported by the Congress party had transferred substantial tracts of land. The
Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1970 gave landless agricultural worker
households the option of buying, in panchayats or townships, 10 cents (0.10
acres) of land each. The payment was to be 25 percent of the market value in
normal cases and 12.5 percent of the market value if the landowner possessed
land above the ceiling. Fifty percent of the amount finally payable was
subsidised by the state, with the remaining 50 percent to be paid in 12 annual
instalments (which were never paid). Thus, most agricultural worker households
in the state received plots of homestead land free of cost.
Homestead cultivation
is a characteristic feature of Kerala’s agriculture, distinguishing it from
systems of crop cultivation in many other Indian states. While the average size
of a homestead plot is smaller, the cropping pattern in a homestead is more
diverse than a plot of garden land. Mixed cropping pattern in homesteads allows
for intensive forms of cultivation in small landholdings. The major crops grown
in homesteads are perennial and annual crops, such as coconut, arecanut,
pepper, cashew, banana, and vegetables. Research on homestead cultivation has
drawn attention to its commercial and nutritional importance to the household
and its ecological significance in promoting biodiversity. Further, crop cultivation
in homesteads is very often combined with livestock rearing – cows, buffalos,
goats, and poultry.
The share of land
under homestead farming in Kerala has grown, and the share of area under garden
land has declined, owing to the demand for land to build houses.Over the years,
many small holdings have been subdivided into smaller and smaller
homesteads.
In West Bengal, about
one million (10 lakh) households received homestead land during the period of
the Left Front government (1977 to 2011).
The SECC has completely excluded homesteads from
consideration.
LANDLESSNESS: NSS
DATA VERSUS SECC DATA
The effect of not
counting homesteads in land ownership is illustrated by a comparison of the
SECC data on landlessness (that is, the percentage of households with no land)
with the data from the National Sample Survey (NSS) Employment and Unemployment
Surveys of 2011-12 (EUS). The EUS definition of land ownership differs from
that of SECC in only one respect, that is, the former includes homestead land
in its calculation of household land holdings. It is clear from Table 1 that
once homestead land ownership is included, the ranking of states by percentage
of landless people changes substantially. According to NSS data, Kerala and
West Bengal are not among the states with the highest percentage of landless
households.
Table 1 Households with no land, NSS and Socio-Economic and Caste
Census (SECC)
NSS Employment and
Unemployment Survey, 2011-12
|
SECC-2011
|
||||
States
|
% of households with
no land
|
Rank
|
States
|
% of households with
no land
|
Rank
|
Uttaranchal
|
13.42
|
1
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
73
|
1
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
11.65
|
2
|
Tamil Nadu
|
73
|
2
|
Himachal Pradesh
|
10.01
|
3
|
Kerala
|
72
|
3
|
Tamil Nadu
|
8.7
|
4
|
West Bengal
|
70
|
4
|
Haryana
|
8.6
|
5
|
Tripura
|
68
|
5
|
Assam
|
8.31
|
6
|
Punjab
|
65
|
6
|
Maharashtra
|
8.14
|
7
|
Bihar
|
65
|
7
|
Karnataka
|
8.1
|
8
|
Telangana
|
58
|
8
|
Gujarat
|
7.16
|
9
|
Assam
|
57
|
9
|
Chhattisgarh
|
7.08
|
10
|
Haryana
|
56
|
10
|
West Bengal
|
6.81
|
11
|
Madhya Pradesh
|
55
|
11
|
Kerala
|
5.88
|
12
|
Gujarat
|
55
|
12
|
Orissa
|
5.12
|
13
|
Odisha
|
54
|
13
|
Jammu & Kashmir
|
4.8
|
14
|
Maharashtra
|
53
|
14
|
Punjab
|
4.38
|
15
|
Chhattisgarh
|
47
|
15
|
Jharkhand
|
4.14
|
16
|
Karnataka
|
47
|
16
|
Madhya Pradesh
|
3.75
|
17
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
45
|
17
|
Rajasthan
|
3.26
|
18
|
Uttarakhand
|
43
|
18
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
3.16
|
19
|
Rajasthan
|
38
|
19
|
Tripura
|
2.07
|
20
|
Jharkhand
|
38
|
20
|
Bihar
|
1.07
|
21
|
Jammu & Kashmir
|
22
|
21
|
|
|
|
Himachal Pradesh
|
22
|
22
|
DEMOGRAPHIC PRESSURE
Further, demographic
pressure on land is higher in rural West Bengal and rural Kerala than most
other states (Table 2). The average area per household is relatively low in the
states, and the subdivision of family holdings has accelerated the process of
fragmentation.
Table 2 Average extent of land owned per household in hectares
|
||
State
|
Land owned per
household (in ha.)
|
Rank
|
Rajasthan
|
1.483
|
1
|
Madhya Pradesh
|
1.122
|
2
|
Maharashtra
|
0.903
|
3
|
Karnataka
|
0.851
|
4
|
Chhattisgarh
|
0.81
|
5
|
Gujarat
|
0.804
|
6
|
Haryana
|
0.764
|
7
|
Telangana
|
0.705
|
8
|
Punjab
|
0.632
|
9
|
Assam
|
0.631
|
10
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
0.493
|
11
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
0.491
|
12
|
Jharkhand
|
0.488
|
13
|
Jammu Kashmir
|
0.432
|
14
|
Himachal Pradesh
|
0.397
|
15
|
Odisha
|
0.38
|
16
|
Tamil Nadu
|
0.348
|
17
|
Tripura
|
0.334
|
18
|
Uttarakhand
|
0.317
|
19
|
Bihar
|
0.242
|
20
|
Kerala
|
0.209
|
21
|
West Bengal
|
0.174
|
22
|
Source: Table 1.1, NSS
KI(70/18.1): “Key Indicators of Land and Livestock Holdings in India,” page A3
UNDER-REPORTING
IN WEST BENGAL
We have clear evidence
from primary survey data that the extent of household land holdings in West
Bengal villages has been substantially under-reported by respondent households
in the SECC.
In India, as is well
known, many households that should, by reasonable criteria, be classified as
poor are classified under the general category of above poverty line (APL).
This is despite their being clearly poor in respect of one or many criteria,
for instance, in terms of employment and per capita income, food consumption,
housing, or access to education and health facilities.
The division of the
population in to APL and BPL is an exclusionary policy measure. Its
objective is to create target groups for certain policies, thus excluding large
deserving sections from the benefits of those policies. Respondents to
government surveys are now reluctant to disclose actual land holdings for fear
that full disclosure will push them up to APL status and therefore out of the
purview of various government schemes. Thus, many households with small or tiny
holdings of land have reported no land at all because of a fear of unjustly
being declared to be “above the poverty line.” In West Bengal, the
classification of households into APL and BPL categories – and the exclusion of
households from the BPL category – has been marked by misclassification and
political vindictiveness.
In three villages in
West Bengal, we compared unit-level data from the SECC with household data from
surveys conducted by the Foundation for Agrarian Studies (FAS) in 2010 and
2015. These three villages are in three different agro-ecological regions of
the state. Landlessness as reported in SECC was significantly higher than in
the FAS surveys. In fact, the differences between the figures for these villages
were as high as 16, 30, and 37 percentage points. (Table 3).
Table 3 Landless households as a proportion of all households,
SECC and FAS surveys in percent
Village
|
Landless households
as a share of all households according to
|
|
SECC
|
FAS village survey
|
|
Village 1
|
68
|
39
|
Village 2
|
54
|
38
|
Village 3
|
59
|
22
|
In brief, definitional
problems with the SECC survey and people’s legitimate anxiety to avoid being
excluded from the benefits of target-oriented schemes, and consequent
under-reporting of landholdings, has led to misleading conclusions from the
SECC data about landlessness in Kerala and West Bengal.
1 comment:
Thanks for it.
Literacy Programme in India
Post a Comment