Schemes for the Betterment of Agricultural Labour in India

India’s agricultural sector employs a massive share of the country’s workforce, yet agricultural labourers remain among the most economically vulnerable groups. Seasonal unemployment, low wages, lack of food security, and poor rural infrastructure have historically kept millions of farm workers trapped in poverty. To address these challenges, the Indian government has launched a series of schemes and programmes over the decades – each designed to provide employment, create rural assets, and improve the quality of life for agricultural labour. Let’s take a detailed look at these major initiatives, how they work, and where they fall short.

Why agricultural labourers need government intervention 🔗

Agricultural labourers in India are largely landless or marginal workers who depend on seasonal farm work for their livelihood. During the lean agricultural season – the period between sowing and harvesting – there is little or no work available, pushing families into hunger and debt. According to government data, rural poverty in India declined from 27.1% in 2011-12 to 5.3% in 2022-23, but a significant portion of the rural population still depends on wage employment programmes for basic survival. Low bargaining power, caste-based discrimination, and lack of education further compound the problem. Government schemes, therefore, act as a safety net – providing work when private employment is unavailable and ensuring a minimum level of food security and income.

National Food for Work Programme (NFWP) 🔗

The National Food for Work Programme was launched on 14 November 2004 by the Ministry of Rural Development. It targeted 150 of the most backward districts in India, identified by the Planning Commission based on indicators like agricultural productivity per worker, farm wage rates, and the proportion of SC/ST population.

How it worked 🔗

The programme was open to all rural poor willing to do manual unskilled work. Workers received wages partly in cash and partly in foodgrains – at least 5 kg of foodgrains per person per day of work. The central government bore the entire cost, supplying foodgrains free of cost to state governments, though transportation and handling charges were the states’ responsibility. The District Collector served as the nodal officer for planning and implementation at the district level.

Types of work and outcomes 🔗

Projects under the NFWP focused on creating durable rural assets – water conservation structures, irrigation facilities, rural roads, and flood control measures. For the year 2004-05, approximately ₹2,020 crore along with 18 million tonnes of foodgrains were allocated for the programme. Meals were provided at worksites and wages were paid daily. The programme was eventually absorbed into the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) in 2006, which expanded coverage to 200 districts including all 150 NFWP districts.

Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana (SGRY) 🔗

The Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana – which translates to “Universal Rural Employment Programme” – was launched on 25 September 2001 by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government. It merged two earlier schemes: the Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS) and the Jawahar Gram Samridhi Yojana (JGSY).

Objectives and features 🔗

SGRY had two primary goals: first, to provide supplementary wage employment and food security to rural labourers, and second, to create durable community and social infrastructure in rural areas. It was a centrally sponsored scheme with costs shared between the Centre and states in a 75:25 ratio for the cash component, while foodgrains were provided entirely by the central government.

Workers received wages partly in foodgrains (minimum 5 kg per labourer per day) and partly in cash, with at least 25% of wages paid in cash. The programme gave preference to agricultural labourers, marginal farmers, women, SC/ST communities, and parents of children withdrawn from hazardous work. At least 30% of employment opportunities were reserved for women.

Implementation and limitations 🔗

SGRY was implemented through the three-tier Panchayati Raj system – Zila Parishads, Intermediate Panchayats, and Gram Panchayats. The annual outlay was approximately ₹10,000 crore, including 50 lakh tonnes of foodgrains. While the scheme generated millions of person-days of employment and contributed to rural road construction and water harvesting, it faced persistent challenges – delays in wage payments, leakage of funds, inconsistent reporting, and weak monitoring mechanisms across states. SGRY was eventually merged with NREGA in 2006.

Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) 🔗

Unlike the wage-employment programmes above, the Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana focused on self-employment for the rural poor. Launched on 1 April 1999, it replaced six earlier schemes including IRDP, TRYSEM, DWCRA, SITRA, Ganga Kalyan Yojana, and the Million Wells Scheme.

Core approach 🔗

SGSY aimed to lift poor rural families above the poverty line within three years by providing them with income-generating assets through a combination of bank credit and government subsidies. The programme organised the rural poor into Self-Help Groups (SHGs), provided training and skill development, and linked them to banks and markets. It covered all aspects of self-employment – from group formation and capacity building to technology transfer, credit, and marketing support.

The scheme was funded by the Centre and states in a 75:25 ratio and implemented through District Rural Development Agencies (DRDAs) in coordination with banks, Panchayati Raj institutions, and NGOs. Beneficiaries, called Swarozgaris, were selected from BPL families by a three-member team of the Block Development Officer, a banker, and the Sarpanch. At least 50% of assistance was reserved for SC/ST families, 40% for women, and 3% for persons with disabilities.

Subsidies and group insurance 🔗

A uniform subsidy of 30% of the project cost (up to ₹7,500) was provided, increasing to 50% (up to ₹10,000) for SC/ST and disabled beneficiaries. For SHGs, the subsidy was 50% of the project cost, subject to ₹1.25 lakh per group or ₹10,000 per capita, whichever was less. Beneficiaries were also covered under a group insurance scheme, and assets purchased with loan funds were insured. SGSY was later restructured and relaunched as the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) – now known as Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana – NRLM – in 2011, with a stronger institutional framework.

MGNREGA: the landmark rights-based scheme 🔗

The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, passed on 23 August 2005 and implemented from February 2006, was a transformative piece of legislation. For the first time, employment became a legal right for rural households. Any adult member of a rural household willing to do unskilled manual work could demand employment, and the state was legally obligated to provide at least 100 days of wage employment per household per year – or pay an unemployment allowance.

Key features 🔗

MGNREGA was implemented across the country through Panchayati Raj Institutions. Nearly 65% of the works under the scheme were agriculture-related – water conservation, irrigation, land development, and drought-proofing. One-third of employment was reserved for women. The central government bore the full cost of unskilled labour and 75% of material costs. Wages were linked to the Consumer Price Index for Agricultural Labourers (CPI-AL) and varied by state.

Over its lifespan, MGNREGA issued over 14.88 crore job cards and provided employment to more than 28 crore workers. The scheme significantly reduced gender wage gaps and gave women economic independence, especially in states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala where female participation was particularly high. It also reduced rural-to-urban distress migration in areas where it was implemented well.

Challenges faced 🔗

Despite its achievements, MGNREGA was plagued by implementation problems. Delayed wage payments were a chronic issue, with workers sometimes waiting weeks or months for their dues. Corruption – including ghost accounts, wage skimming by administrators, and inflated material costs – eroded the scheme’s effectiveness in several states. A critique published in Down to Earth noted that most MGNREGA workers were marginal farmers or landless labourers who turned to public works precisely when agricultural incomes were low or uncertain. The scheme also drew criticism from large farmers who argued that guaranteed public wages were making private agricultural labour scarce and more expensive.

Viksit Bharat – G RAM G Act, 2025: the new framework 🔗

In December 2025, the Indian Parliament repealed MGNREGA and replaced it with the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Act, 2025. This new legislation represents the most significant overhaul of rural employment policy in two decades.

What has changed 🔗

The new Act guarantees 125 days of wage employment per rural household per year – up from the 100 days under MGNREGA. However, it also introduces a 60-day no-work period during peak agricultural seasons (sowing and harvesting) to ensure labour availability for farming. Wages must be disbursed on a weekly basis or within a fortnight of work completion.

The scheme integrates employment with infrastructure development through four verticals: water security works, core rural infrastructure, livelihood-related infrastructure, and special works to address extreme weather events. All assets created are aggregated into a Viksit Bharat National Rural Infrastructure Stack, and planning is decentralised through village-level Gram Panchayat Plans linked to national spatial frameworks like PM Gati Shakti.

Funding structure 🔗

The cost-sharing model has shifted from MGNREGA’s central-sector format to a centrally sponsored scheme, with a 60:40 Centre-to-state funding ratio (90:10 for North Eastern and Himalayan states, 100% central funding for Union Territories without legislatures). The estimated annual fund requirement is ₹1,51,282 crore, with the Centre’s share being approximately ₹95,692 crore. The administrative expenditure ceiling has been raised from 6% to 9% to strengthen staffing, training, and technical capacity at the field level.

Other notable programmes for agricultural labour 🔗

Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) 🔗

Launched in 1989 by merging the National Rural Employment Programme and the Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme, JRY was at one point India’s largest wage employment programme. It aimed to provide 90-100 days of employment, particularly in backward districts. Later restructured as the Jawahar Gram Samridhi Yojana, it was eventually absorbed into SGRY in 2001.

Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS) 🔗

Introduced in October 1993, EAS initially covered 1,778 backward blocks and was designed to provide assured employment during lean agricultural months. It targeted areas that were drought-prone, calamity-affected, or faced heavy labour migration. EAS was also eventually merged into SGRY and then into MGNREGA.

Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme (RLEGP) 🔗

Launched in 1983, this was one of India’s earliest attempts at guaranteeing employment specifically to landless labourers. Fully funded by the central government, it promised 100 days of guaranteed employment with earmarked allocations for social forestry, housing, and works benefiting SC/ST communities.

Common challenges across all schemes 🔗

While each of these programmes was well-intentioned, they have collectively faced a recurring set of problems that weaken their impact on agricultural labour.

Corruption and fund leakage remain the most persistent issues. Ghost workers on muster rolls, inflated material costs, and collusion between contractors and local officials have diverted funds away from genuine beneficiaries in many states. Delayed wage payments discourage participation – when workers don’t get paid on time, they lose faith in the system and revert to private employment, even at lower wages. Poor monitoring at the ground level, despite digital initiatives like geo-tagging and Aadhaar-based payments, continues to allow irregularities. Finally, bureaucratic complexity – with multiple agencies, layers of approval, and overlapping schemes – often slows down implementation and creates confusion for the very people these programmes are meant to serve.

The road ahead 🔗

India’s approach to protecting agricultural labourers has clearly evolved – from basic food-for-work programmes in the 1970s and 1980s to rights-based employment guarantees and now to infrastructure-linked livelihood missions. The new Viksit Bharat – G RAM G Act attempts to fix several structural weaknesses of MGNREGA by increasing guaranteed workdays, improving administrative capacity, and linking employment to productive rural asset creation. At the same time, self-employment initiatives that grew out of SGSY continue through the Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana – NRLM, emphasising SHG-based livelihood models.

However, the success of any scheme ultimately depends on how well it is implemented at the village level. Technology, transparency, and strong local governance remain the keys to ensuring that benefits actually reach agricultural labourers rather than being lost to corruption or bureaucratic inefficiency.

What do you think? Can technology-driven reforms and increased workday guarantees truly transform the lives of India’s agricultural labourers, or do structural issues like landlessness and caste-based discrimination require a fundamentally different approach? How important is the role of Panchayati Raj institutions in making these schemes work on the ground?

References

1. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2207351&reg=3&lang=1
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Food_For_Work_Programme
3. https://www.gktoday.in/national-food-for-work-programme/
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampoorna_Grameen_Rozgar_Yojana
5. https://www.indiafilings.com/learn/sampoorna-grameen-rozgar-yojana
6. https://www.indiafilings.com/learn/swarnajayanti-gram-swarozgar-yojana/
7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi_National_Rural_Employment_Guarantee_Act,_2005
8. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12220
9. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/governance/two-decades-of-the-right-to-work-under-mgnrega-and-the-turn-we-are-taking-now