India’s Progress on Gender Equality in Sustainable Agriculture

India’s journey toward achieving gender equality in agriculture involves navigating complex challenges across policy, data, and implementation. While the country has made strides in some areas, significant gaps remain in ensuring women farmers receive equal access to land, resources, and decision-making power in the agricultural sector.

India’s performance on gender and sustainable agriculture indicators 🔗

The SDG India Index 2023-24, developed by NITI Aayog with technical support from the United Nations, provides a comprehensive view of India’s progress. The country scored 71 out of 100, an improvement from 66 in the previous edition. However, this overall progress masks persistent challenges in two critical areas: SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) and SDG 5 (Gender Equality).

Gender equality received the lowest score among all goals, with only marginal improvement. The index uses 113 indicators across 16 SDGs, and despite notable progress in areas like poverty elimination and climate action, gender-specific challenges in agriculture remain deeply entrenched. Women constitute 73% of the rural agricultural workforce and perform nearly 70% of all agricultural activities, yet they own just 14% of operational landholdings and control only 11% of total land in the country.

This disconnect between labor contribution and resource ownership highlights a fundamental challenge. While India has seen steady economic growth and research shows improvements in SDG 1, 8, and 13 targets, challenges persist in SDG 2 and SDG 5 due to governance issues and regional disparities. The interplay between these goals is particularly important for agriculture, where gender inequality directly impacts food security and sustainable farming practices.

The data gap: why we cannot see women farmers 🔗

One of the most significant barriers to addressing gender inequality in agriculture is the lack of accurate, gender-disaggregated data. Women farmers are often “invisibilized” in data systems because land operations serve as the primary criteria for identifying farmers in census enumeration systems.

Inconsistent data collection methods 🔗

Multiple data sources exist, but they use different methodologies and definitions. The National Family Health Survey data shows that women land owners (either single or joint ownership) increased from 28.3% in 2015-16 to just 31.7% in 2019-21 among women aged 15-49 years. The Agriculture Census reports growth from 11% in 2005-06 to 13.9% in 2015-16. However, these patterns are not comparable due to differences in their methodologies.

The Socio-Economic Caste Census 2011 lacks sex-disaggregated figures entirely. The NFHS data is restricted to the age group of 15-49 years and does not disaggregate between single and joint ownership. The Agriculture Census only considers the sex of the head of household, which systematically undercounts women’s actual involvement in farming.

Missing information on land ownership 🔗

The most critical gap lies in land ownership data. According to research on gender data gaps, neither the Agricultural Census nor the National Sample Surveys currently gather land ownership data by gender. State-level land revenue surveys consider operational holdings at the household level as the primary unit, meaning there is no sex-disaggregated data for titleholders within a household.

Women work as cultivators or agricultural laborers, most as unpaid family labor. This informal, home-based work impacts official statistics and leads to severe underreporting. As one policy analyst noted, women are estimated to carry out 60-75% of all farming-related work across most regions, yet they are not counted as farmers. Instead, they are often denied access to land, livestock, assets, technologies, credit, irrigation, and markets.

Regional variations and data limitations 🔗

When examining women’s land ownership patterns, research reveals that only 60% of surveyed plots had formal title deeds or documents, while 25% lacked any documentation. Women’s names appeared in less than 10% of formal land documents, whereas their husbands’ names were present in over 90%. This gender disparity was even more pronounced among Muslim families, especially in Bihar, where none of the formal land documents included women’s names.

Barriers beyond data: social and structural challenges 🔗

The data gap reflects deeper social realities. Women face multiple barriers to claiming and managing agricultural land, even when legal rights exist.

Lack of awareness about legal rights 🔗

Approximately 40% of surveyed women were unaware that the law grants them the right to own land. This lack of awareness was even higher among female-headed households. About half of Hindu and Muslim women believed that their religious leaders did not recognize their right to inherit land from their parents. Furthermore, both groups reported that local leaders failed to acknowledge their inheritance rights.

Limited engagement with government systems 🔗

Due to entrenched gender norms and male-dominated land administration, 61% of surveyed women had never interacted with revenue officials. This lack of engagement not only affects their ability to secure land rights but also limits their access to essential information, credit, and government schemes designed to support farmers.

Social pressure and family dynamics 🔗

In northern and eastern India, women typically relinquish claims to parental land in favor of their brothers to maintain good relations. After parents pass away, a woman’s access to her natal home depends on her bond with her brother, who provides emotional and financial support. This social dynamic makes it nearly impossible for women to assert legal inheritance rights without risking family relationships.

Policy frameworks and implementation gaps 🔗

India has developed several policy initiatives aimed at supporting women in agriculture, including the Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana, which provides training on modern agricultural methods. The Sub-Mission on Agriculture Extension offers skill training courses through various institutes. The Namo Drone Didi scheme provides women-led Self-Help Groups with drone technology for agricultural tasks.

The training paradox 🔗

While these programs emphasize training and capacity building, they assume women farmers already hold decision-making power in agriculture. This overlooks a crucial first step: securing land ownership. Despite increased training, the Agriculture Census shows that female-operated landholdings increased by just 1% from 12.78% in 2010-11 to 13.78% in 2015-16. Data shows that only 2 out of 1,000 women aged 15 and older have participated in formal agricultural training, indicating low outreach and effectiveness.

What works: joint titling initiatives 🔗

Some states have shown innovative approaches. Karnataka created a sex-disaggregated database on farmers, decoupled from land ownership, giving the government a more complete picture and providing farmers easier access to entitlements. Maharashtra enabled joint registration for couples for house and agricultural land. West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, and other states have distributed land titles jointly to women and men in public ceremonies, ensuring that women’s rights are acknowledged both legally and socially.

Toward gender-responsive agricultural policy 🔗

Achieving gender equality in food security and sustainable development requires addressing multiple dimensions simultaneously. The potential lies in recognizing that gender equality intersects with SDGs on poverty, hunger, and climate change, but also that silence on gender in resource conservation goals could prove detrimental to both food security and conservation objectives.

Essential policy reforms 🔗

First, India needs nationwide awareness campaigns to educate rural women, religious leaders, and local communities about women’s legal land rights. Second, laws should be amended to require women’s names on land documents, with incentives for updating titles to reflect joint ownership. Third, gender-sensitivity training for land officials and Panchayat members is essential to combat institutional bias.

The role of gender-disaggregated data 🔗

Building robust data systems is fundamental. This means introducing gender disaggregation in the Agricultural Census and National Sample Surveys, creating state-level databases that track women farmers independently of land ownership, and developing monitoring systems for SDG indicator 5.a.1 on the proportion of agricultural population with ownership or secure rights over agricultural land.

Linking land rights to broader empowerment 🔗

Research consistently shows that women with land titles participate more actively in decisions about farming, livelihood, and household activities. They demonstrate higher participation in family planning and resource allocation. Land ownership enhances women’s bargaining strength, allows them to challenge discriminatory social norms, and provides security that extends beyond the labor market’s fluctuations.

According to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, if women had equal access to productive resources as men, they could increase farm yields by 20-30%. This could lead to a 4% rise in total agricultural output in developing countries, potentially reducing global hunger by 12-17%, which translates to 100-150 million people.

What do you think? Can training programs truly empower women farmers without first securing their land ownership rights? How can communities balance traditional social structures with the need for gender equality in agriculture?

References

1. https://india.un.org/en/274382-india-making-progress-towards-sdgs-report-shows
2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590291125003651
3. https://www.devex.com/news/can-better-data-change-the-fate-of-india-s-invisible-female-farmers-96664
4. https://repository.nls.ac.in/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1236&context=slr
5. https://sprf.in/workers-or-owners-the-case-of-women-farmers-in-india/
6. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X23001567
7. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1877343517302415