Q1. Critically examine the phenomenon of feminisation of Indian agriculture. How far have policy frameworks succeeded in recognising women as independent farmers?
Analytical Focus for Answer (AFfA):
- Define feminisation of agriculture with PLFS and Economic Survey data trends
- Explain unpaid labour, low land ownership, and lack of recognition
- Examine policy intent under National Policy for Farmers (2007) and MKSP
- Analyse ground-level gaps and patriarchal barriers
- Suggest reforms for gender-equitable access, identity, and asset ownership
Model Answer
Introduction:
Feminisation of agriculture describes the rising participation of women in agricultural work as male workers move to non-farm sectors. According to the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) 2023–24, nearly 77% of rural women workers are engaged in agriculture, while the share of men has fallen below 50%. This trend highlights women’s expanding role in food production but also exposes the persistent denial of their identity as farmers.
Body:
Women contribute across the agricultural cycle—sowing, transplanting, harvesting, and livestock management. Yet, they remain structurally disadvantaged.
Land and ownership inequality: The Agriculture Census (2015–16) shows women operate 13.9% of total agricultural holdings, while NFHS-5 (2019–21) indicates around 43% of women report owning a house or land (alone or jointly), not necessarily farmland. Limited control over assets restricts access to credit, insurance, and government benefits.
Policy intent: The National Policy for Farmers (2007) defined “farmer” inclusively, delinking it from land ownership. However, implementation remains weak, as most programs still address men as primary beneficiaries.
Institutional gaps: Gender-blind designs in cooperatives and Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs) limit women’s leadership and decision-making roles.
Labour invisibility: Women’s unpaid and unrecorded work sustains farm households but receives little policy recognition.
Conclusion:
India’s agriculture increasingly depends on women’s labour, but policy frameworks have not matched this shift. Formal recognition through joint land titles, gender-sensitive registries, and equal access to resources is essential to translate feminisation into empowerment.
Q2. “Recognition of women as farmers can transform both agricultural productivity and rural equity.” Discuss with reference to recent data and policy developments in India.
Analytical Focus for Answer (AFfA):
- Show link between recognition, productivity, and empowerment
- Use NFHS and PLFS data to highlight women’s contribution
- Examine impact of schemes like MKSP, SHGs, and Drone Didi
- Explain how agency leads to income stability and resource sustainability
- Conclude with inclusive growth and equity outcomes
Model Answer
Introduction:
Women constitute the backbone of Indian agriculture, contributing to cultivation, livestock rearing, and natural resource management. Their recognition as farmers can catalyse inclusive growth by linking empowerment with productivity and social equity.
Body:
Recognition creates multiplier effects: It enhances livelihoods and food security.
Economic impact: Studies by FAO suggest that closing the gender gap in access to resources could raise agricultural output by up to 30% in developing countries. In India, improved recognition enables access to credit, extension services, and insurance.
Recent initiatives: Schemes like Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP), National Food Security Mission (NFSM) (30% allocation for women), and Namo Drone Didi (2024–26) aim to strengthen women’s skills, technology use, and collective participation.
Community empowerment: Self-Help Groups (SHGs) and microfinance collectives improve financial inclusion and market access.
Persistent barriers: Women’s lack of land titles, mobility constraints, and limited representation in decision-making continue to weaken policy outcomes.
Conclusion:
Recognition of women as farmers is not symbolic—it is transformative. By securing land rights, improving credit access, and ensuring leadership in agri-institutions, India can achieve both higher productivity and gender-equitable rural development.
Q3. Critically analyse the persistent gender gaps in agricultural land ownership and institutional participation in India. How can gender-disaggregated data and inclusive registries address these inequalities?
Analytical Focus for Answer (AFfA):
- Present data on land ownership and operational holdings (NFHS-5, Agri Census)
- Explain exclusion from credit, insurance, and FPOs
- Critique gender-blind institutions and IFR title bias
- Highlight role of FRUITS registry and need for gender-disaggregated data
- Recommend joint titles, DBT targeting, and gendered policy lens
Model Answer
Introduction:
Land ownership in rural India determines not only economic power but also access to state benefits and institutional voice. Despite their large presence in agriculture, women own and operate a small fraction of farmland, limiting their empowerment.
Body:
Gender disparities remain entrenched: Women continue to face deep structural inequalities in both ownership and institutional participation.
Ownership data: The Agriculture Census (2015–16) records women as holders of 13.9% of operational landholdings and 11.7% of total operated area.
Legal framework: While inheritance laws under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 ensure equal rights, social norms continue to prevent women from claiming or retaining property.
Institutional exclusion: In many states, Forest Rights Act (2006) titles are issued primarily in men’s names. Women also remain underrepresented in FPOs and cooperatives.
Data gaps: Agricultural statistics often fail to distinguish male and female farmers, obscuring gendered realities in credit, insurance, and market participation.
Digital inclusion: Karnataka’s FRUITS registry (Farmer Registration and Unified Beneficiary Information System) provides a replicable model of gender-tagged farmer identification. However, the national AgriStack must include landless and tenant women cultivators to avoid exclusion.
Conclusion:
Bridging gender gaps in land and institutional access requires legal reform, reliable gender-disaggregated data, and inclusive digital systems. Recognising women as rightful agricultural stakeholders is key to equitable and data-driven policy design.
Q4. Critically evaluate the effectiveness of existing government schemes for women farmers in India. Why have policy intentions not translated into real empowerment on the ground?
Analytical Focus for Answer (AFfA):
- List key schemes: MKSP, NFSM, Lakhpati Didi, Drone Didi, Mahila Kisan Yojana
- Explain implementation gaps, weak monitoring, and low awareness
- Discuss exclusion of landless and unpaid women workers
- Highlight lack of gender lens in FPOs and registries
- Conclude with need for data-driven, rights-based, and asset-linked empowerment
Model Answer
Introduction:
India has launched several targeted initiatives over the last decade to empower women in agriculture. Programmes such as Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP), Sub-Mission on Agricultural Mechanisation (SMAM), National Food Security Mission (NFSM), and new schemes like Lakhpati Didi and Namo Drone Didi reflect strong policy intent. Yet, real empowerment remains limited due to persistent institutional and social barriers.
Body:
Women-specific schemes and their objectives:
- MKSP: Builds capacity of women farmers for sustainable livelihoods and resource-based farming.
- NFSM: Allocates 30% of its funds to women farmers to boost productivity and food security.
- SMAM: Provides subsidies and assistance for women to access farm machinery and custom-hiring centres.
- Lakhpati Didi Scheme: Enhances income generation and entrepreneurship through Self-Help Groups (SHGs) under DAY-NRLM.
- Namo Drone Didi (2024–26): Equips 15,000 SHGs with drones for agri-spraying and data collection, integrating women into agri-tech value chains.
- Mahila Kisan Yojana: Offers concessional loans for Scheduled Caste women to promote self-employment in agriculture and allied sectors.
Implementation gaps and structural challenges:
- Low awareness and training: Limited outreach among small and marginal cultivators reduces participation.
- Exclusion of landless women: Eligibility linked to land records excludes unpaid and tenant women workers.
- Weak monitoring: Fragmented databases and lack of gender-disaggregated data weaken impact evaluation.
- Institutional barriers: Cooperatives and Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs) are largely male-dominated, limiting women’s leadership.
- Symbolic policy design: Schemes continue to treat women as beneficiaries rather than decision-makers, perpetuating inequality.
Emerging digital models and lessons:
- FRUITS Registry (Karnataka): Demonstrates transparent, gender-tagged farmer tracking with improved accountability.
- AgriStack integration: National rollout must ensure inclusion of landless and tenant women cultivators to avoid digital exclusion.
Conclusion:
India’s women-centric agricultural programmes show commendable policy intent but limited on-ground transformation. Real empowerment requires joint land titles, gender-responsive budgeting, and women’s institutional representation in agriculture. Integrating gender-disaggregated data and inclusive digital registries can convert symbolic inclusion into a genuine transformation of women’s status in India’s agrarian economy.