10 CHAPTER VIII - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/9907/12/12...279 CHAPTER VIII OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE 8.1 INTRODUCTION Occupation implies trade or profession

279

CCHHAAPPTTEERR VVIIIIII

OOCCCCUUPPAATTIIOONNAALL SSTTRRUUCCTTUURREE

8.1 INTRODUCTION

Occupation implies trade or profession. It reveals the nature of economic

progress of a country. It is related to agriculture, industry and services.

Occupations depend up on the degree of economic development and

sophistication of country. Occupational structure influences many aspects of

population in a region. The occupational characteristics of population are

reflected in the working force, dependency load, employment and

unemployment.

In spite of that, occupational structure is a key component and

manifestation of population composition. It gives a proper illustration of ratio

of the working and non-working population in an area or a country.

Occupational structure also influences the socio-economic development of an

area. The spatial distribution of working and non-working population has been

studied on the basis of data provided by the Census of India. This relevant data

have its own utility and role in policy-decisions. The proportion of workers

engaged in various occupations highlights economic and cultural surfaces of

the society. In India, especially the cultural moorings have strong bearing on

man’s livelihood. Further, economic power of a country depends, largely, on

the proportion in which the productive workers are prudently engaged in

various economic activities.

From times, immemorial man has been pursuing economic activities

in one form or the other, because ‘certain requirements of human life are

so universal and so uniform that they must be fully met and admit no

incomplete or intermittent satisfaction’ (Brunhes, 1952). Initially, occupational

development very much correlated with economic development. There is a

close relationship between the development of an economy and the

occupational structure. Economic progress is generally associated with

certain distinct, necessary and predictable changes in occupational structure

(Clark, 1940). Any change, therefore, in the occupational structure may be an

280

indication of economic growth. In other words, the growth and prosperity of a

region are largely dependent on the size of working population.

Besides economic development, occupational structure and composition

also throws enough light on the social inequality of the country or an area. In

the social respect, prestige or status attached to an individual due to his

occupation in the society has changed from one period to another with varying

degrees. Even in the modern society the process of allocating high prestige

value to certain occupations, which of course may be of little social utility,

reflects the influence of the traditional force of the past (Maurya, 1989).

Whereas, the occupation itself forms an important constituent of the social

history, and its present shape must have emerged out of more or less a definite

but ill-defined evolutionary process.

Up till now, one can know that the occupational structure of a society is

the product of a number of intimately related factors, such as agricultural

development, industrialisation and civilisation. When the primary resources are

utilised on a commercial scale, it generates diversification of occupational

structure, according to that, if the agriculture remained at subsistence level,

there is not much diversification of occupations. The diversification process

gets further inputs from industrialisation because industrialisation generates a

variety of jobs. Advancement in science and technology introduces an element

of specialisation in the occupational composition by creating highly specialised

type of jobs. All these developments together breed a new urban culture, which

is more service oriented. It modifies the occupational structure considerably

(Chandna, 1986).

The significance of occupational distribution of population of a region

lies in the fact that, it clearly reveals the socio-economic characteristics of the

people living that particular region. It is, hence, one of the important measures

of socio-economic development of the country.

In this chapter, the further study will be dealing with the dimensions of

occupational structure relating to the population composition of the study

region, eventual regional disparities are also analysed.

281

8.2 THE CONCEPT OF WORK AND CLASSIFICATION OF WORKERS

The term ‘occupation’ itself is indefinite as to both meaning and scope.

It has a varying intellectual content and emotional association. In all modern

languages, it has a number of synonyms and the range of their meanings

indicates as to how much the specific content of this term has shifted through

historical epochs (Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences, 1965). Thus, the meaning

of ‘occupation’ has undergone continuous changes from the times immemorial.

So, its contents can be fixed definitely only for a short period of time.

Generally, an ‘occupation’ of an individual refers to his trade, profession, type

of work.

In the census, the term ‘work’ is used in a special sense and therefore

stress should be applied to understand it correctly. ‘Work may be defined as

participation in any economically productive activity’. Such participation may

be physical or mental in nature. ‘Work’ involves not only actual work but also

effective supervision and direction of work. It also includes unpaid work on

farm or in family enterprise (Census of India, 1991).

The concept of ‘worker’ was introduced for the first time in India in

1961. According to that, any person whose main activity is participation in any

economically productive work either by his physical or by his mental activity

was classified as worker (Census of India, 1971). Thus, work involved not only

actual work but also effective supervision and direction. The definition of

worker in India has been changing from census to census. In 1961, any person

who had worked at least one hour a day on an average during the reference

period was classified as worker. In 1971, if a person worked on any one of the

days during the reference period of one week prior to the date of enumeration,

he was considered as a worker. In 1981, it was considered desirable to obtain a

detailed profile of the working characteristics of population as possible,

without loosing the possibility of comparison with 1961 and 1971 census

results. There has been no conceptual change in defining the workers between

1981 and 1991 census. At the 1981 Census, there has been mainly a three-fold

classification of population namely main workers, marginal workers and

282

non-workers, which was adopted for 1991 also. In addition to this, the main

workers of 1991 were distributed in nine industrial categories of economic

activities, but in the earlier census of 1981, this presentation was up to four

industrial categories only (Fig. 8.1). In 2001, there has been no further

classification made in the main and marginal workers. It means, the 2001,

Census of India, divided the population into as aforesaid three-fold

classification.

As per the occupation of the total population, census authorities has

been adopted three-fold classification of population, viz. main workers,

marginal workers and non-workers. According to the Census of India, all those

who had worked for the major part of the preceding year (at least 6 months or

183 days) were recorded as main workers, while those who worked for some

time during the preceding year but not for the major part, have been treated as

marginal workers. All those who had not worked at all during the last year,

where recorded as non-workers. Persons engaged in household duties, students,

dependents, retired persons, rentiers, beggars are some of the categories

grouped into non-workers.

In 1971, Census authorities have classified the working population into

the nine categories considering the Indian economy (Fig. 8.1). The rationale of

classification of workers followed by 1971 census was entirely changed by

Census authorities in 1981 census and it classified only into four industrial

categories viz. (i) cultivators, (ii) agricultural labourers, (iii) Household

industry (manufacturing, processing, service and repairs) and (iv) other

workers.

In 1991, Census authorities have classified workers again into nine

categories as 1971 census. After that, the occupational classification of 2001

census has made drastic change in the classification system and classification

has stoped on main, marginal and non-workers. There has been no further

classification was made by Census authorities in 2001, it has become very

difficult to make comparative analysis of occupational characteristics in the

study region either temporal or spatial.

283

Source : Census of India

• Economic Activities

1. Cultivators

2. Agricultural Labourers

3. Livestock, forestry. fishing, hunting, plantations, orchards and allied activities

4. Mining and quarrying

5. Manufacturing, processing, servicing and repairs

a) Household industry

b) Other than household industry

6. Construction

7. Trade and commerce

8. Transport, storage and communication

9. Other services

Total Population

Dependent Population

(Non-Workers)

Working Population

(Workers)

Main Workers Marginal Workers

Fig. 8.1

Classification of Workers

284

Due to this considerable changes made by Census authorities in the

classification of workers, the study of occupational structure and its analysis

has been dealt only as per three fold classification i.e. main, marginal and

non-workers. It may be helpful to understand the economic base of the tahsils

in the study area.

8.3 DISTRICT WISE OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE (1901-2001)

The study of occupational structure dealing with working (main and

marginal) and non-working population has been carried out in the present

chapter. The size of working force, its division into different economic

activities are fair indicators of the social status of regional population are

compared to general population. Similarly, the trend in working force and

occupational structure of regional population are associated with the overall

physio-socio-economic set up of the state (Karve, 1979).

As regarding to study region, except some situations, overall working

population during 1971 to 2001 showed increasing trend, while the percentage

of non-workers dropped down along with the progress of time. It is very

noteworthy that, during the entire span of the study, percentage of the

non-workers always remained above 50 per cent mark; this situation was

applicable for all the districts in Pune Division. It means, up to 2001 the

working population has not been crossed 50 per cent mark, but eventually it

went upwards and it gave some kind of satisfaction. Some ups and downs were

seen in the marginal population during the study.

Figure 8.2 and table 8.1 show the changes in the working and

non-working population in the study region during 1971-2001. In respect of

that, total working population of Pune Division was only 32.82 per cent in

1971. In those 32.82 per cent total working population, 29.70 per cent was

classified as main working, whereas only 3.12 per cent fallen into the category

of marginal workers. It means that there have been 67.18 per cent non-workers.

285

Table 8.1

District-Wise Occupational Structure (Figures in percentage)

1971 1981 1991 2001

Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non

Pune District 29.91 2.70 32.61 67.39 34.95 3.57 38.52 61.48 37.08 3.24 40.32 59.68 36.58 4.27 40.85 59.15

Satara District 25.27 6.07 31.34 68.66 33.56 7.88 41.44 58.56 36.57 7.95 44.52 55.48 37.20 9.21 46.41 53.59

Sangli District 28.32 2.77 31.09 68.91 34.16 4.74 38.90 61.10 36.87 7.25 44.12 55.88 36.86 10.31 47.17 52.83

Kolhapur District 28.67 2.22 30.89 69.11 35.30 4.51 39.80 60.20 39.13 7.01 46.14 53.86 39.59 7.33 46.92 53.08

Solapur District 35.43 2.49 37.93 62.07 40.01 4.16 44.17 55.83 38.64 4.43 43.07 56.93 38.60 6.68 45.28 54.72

Pune Division 29.70 3.12 32.82 67.18 35.64 4.70 40.34 59.66 37.66 5.98 43.63 56.37 37.62 6.75 44.37 55.63

Source : Based on figures from District Census Handbooks of concern years and concern districts

286

Table 8.2

District-Wise Decadal Variation in the Occupational Structure (Figures in percentage)

1971-81 1981-91 1991-2001

Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non

Pune District 5.04 0.87 5.91 -5.91 2.13 -0.33 1.8 -1.8 -0.5 1.03 0.53 -0.53

Satara District 8.29 1.81 10.1 -10.1 3.01 0.07 3.08 -3.08 0.63 1.26 1.89 -1.89

Sangli District 5.84 1.97 7.81 -7.81 2.71 2.51 5.22 -5.22 -0.01 3.06 3.05 -3.05

Kolhapur District 6.63 2.29 8.91 -8.91 3.83 2.5 6.34 -6.34 0.46 0.32 0.78 -0.78

Solapur District 4.58 1.67 6.24 -6.24 -1.37 0.27 -1.1 1.1 -0.04 2.25 2.21 -2.21

Pune Division 5.94 1.58 7.52 -7.52 2.02 1.28 3.29 -3.29 -0.04 0.77 0.74 -0.74


287

In the 1981, it is observed that, there has been just above seven and half

percent of population shifted into the working population from non-working in

Pune Division and reached at 40.34 per cent. As compared to that of the last

decade, 5.94 per cent population was added to main workers, while 1.58 per

cent population as marginal workers, which respectively rested at 35.64 per

cent and 4.70 per cent during this particular decade.

Due to increase by three percent, total working population in 1991

reached at 43.63 per cent. Among them 37.66 per cent were main workers and

5.98 per cent were marginal workers. Remaining 56.37 per cent population was

not engaged in any economic activity.

As compared to those in the last two decades, it has been observed that,

0.04 per cent population was shifted to the marginal workers category from

main workers. It means that some main workers from preceding years have not

worked for major part in the 2001. In this decade, the ratio of shifting

population from non-worker to total working population was very low, during

the period under study, only 0.74 per cent was added to the total workers to

increase up to 44.37 per cent.

Fig. 8.2 Pune Division

Occupational Structure (1971-2001)

288

Above discussion, reveals the whole story about overall trends in the

occupational classification in Pune Division. All the districts in the division

also followed Pune Division regarding occupational classification, for

understanding, their situation further study was made.

8.3.1 DISTRICT-WISE OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE (1971)

During 1971, Solapur district recorded the highest working population

i.e. 37.93 per cent. Among them 35.43 per cent population was classified as

main workers, while only 2.49 per cent population was marginal workers,

followed by, Pune district, which recorded 32.61 per cent of population as total

working population (29.91 % main workers + 2.70 per cent marginal workers).

Satara (31.34 %) and Sangli (31.09 %) districts stood at third and fourth

position with marginal difference regarding the total working population.

Kolhapur district has 28.67 per cent population in the main workers’ category,

but due to the very less proportion of marginal workers (2.22 %), it recorded

the lowest working population (30.89 %) in the region. On the other hand,

Satara district recorded the lowest population in the main workers (25.27 %)

category, even though because of the highest number of marginal workers

(6.07 %) it improved its rank in the study region considering total working

population.

During this particular decade, all the districts in Pune Division recorded

above 60 per cent non-working population, mostly because of sluggish

industrial development and traditional agricultural practices (Fig. 8.3).


According to census 1981, Solapur district remained at the first position

with 44.17 per cent of working population. As compared to the last decade,

6.24 per cent population shifted from non-workers to the working population.

After that, Satara district with the highest number of population shifting

from non-workers to working population (10.1 %) went up by one-step

ahead as compared to the earlier decade. Kolhapur district was at number

third position with 39.80 per cent working population, as compared to that of

289

290

previous decade, 8.91 per cent population shifted to the working population

from non-working category. Sangli district was just behind Kolhapur district

with 38.90 per cent working population, and it also increased its working

population by just above seven and half percent. Surprisingly at the end of this

particular decade, Pune district was at the bottom position among all the

districts. It has 38.52 per cent total population with 5.91 per cent increase than

the earlier decade.

As compared to the previous decade, more changes in the percentage of

main workers were found in Satara district (8.29 %), followed by Kolhapur

district showing some changes in the working population (6.63 %). Pune

district (5.04 %) followed by, Sangli district (5.84 %) in the number of

population shifting from non-workers to main workers (Fig. 8.4).

Changes in the marginal workers have not showed the same trends as

main workers during 1981. Kolhapur district recorded maximum number of

change in the marginal workers i.e. 2.29 per cent, and Sangli district followed it

with 1.97 per cent. Whereas, Satara district, which recorded the highest

percentage of change in the main workers, had only 1.81 per cent change in

marginal workers, subsequently Solapur district had 1.67 per cent marginal

workers. In Pune district, considerable change was not observed in the

percentage of marginal workers, which was only 0.87 per cent.

On the whole, in the study region, only two districts viz. Solapur and

Satara recorded non-working population less than 60 per cent, while

non-working population in the other districts such as Pune, Sangli and

Kolhapur remained above 60 per cent.


In Kolhapur district owing to the industrial and agricultural

development, working population increased with 6.34 per cent as compared to

that of the past decade, and it reached up to 46.14 per cent, in 1991. Satara

district remained at the second position, with 3.08 per cent increase in the

total working population. Whereas, Sangli district improved its position by one

291

292

number and stayed at third position regarding total working population.

Surprisingly, Solapur district dropped down from the first rank to the fourth

position. During this particular decade, working population of Solapur district

showed some decreasing trends. Solapur district showed a decrease in the main

workers by 1.37 per cent and increase in marginal workers by 0.27 per cent, it

means overall, 1.1 per cent decrease in the total working population was

observed in the Solapur district in this decade. It further means that, 1.1 per

cent working population from last decade totally lost their jobs, while 0.27 per

cent population reduced duration of their jobs. Pune district did not improve its

rank and remained at the bottom position with 40.32 per cent total working

population.

As mentioned above, Solapur district showed some negative change in

the main workers during 1991. Except Solapur, all the remaining districts

showed positive change in the numbers of main workers, among them

Kolhapur (3.83 b%) and Satara (3.01 %) districts recorded highest increase in

the number of main workers as compared to the last one. On the other hand,

Sangli and Pune districts increased their population in the main worker

category with 2.71 per cent and 2.13 per cent respectively.

There was 0.33 per cent decrease from marginal workers category in

Pune district. Except that, all other districts in the study region recorded

positive change in the number of marginal workers. Sangli (2.51 %) and

Kolhapur (2.50 %) districts improved their percentage of the marginal workers

category with almost same percentage.

For first time during last two or three decades, population in the

non-workers category dropped down below 60 per cent in all the districts in the

study region (Fig. 8.5).


The last decade of investigation, i.e. 1991-2001, not so many changes in

occupational classification has been observed. Only some ups and downs

in the positions of districts regarding working population were observed. Sangli

293

district (47.17 %) recorded highest working population in this decade; it was

more than 3.05 per cent as that in the previous decade. Kolhapur district

(46.92 %) dropped down from first to second position as compared to the last

decade, but still 0.78 per cent increase in working population. Satara (46.41 %)

and Solapur (45.28 %) districts just followed Kolhapur district, while Pune

district was at the bottom during the entire study span (Fig. 8.6).

It is interesting to note that, increase in the marginal workers was

observed in more or less proportion in the districts in the study region during

2001. Although, quite low increase in the number of main workers was

observed in the entire study region during this particular decade. Not only that

but there were also few districts, such as Pune (-0.50 %), Sangli (-0.01 %) and

Solapur (-0.04 %) which recorded decrease in the percentage of main workers.

It means that this population has been shifted from main worker category to

marginal worker. On the other hand, Satara (0.63 %) and Kolhapur (0.46 %)

showed some positive change in the category of main workers but in very

meagre proportion.

On the contrary, changes in the marginal workers were observed quite

usually in all the districts included in the Pune Division. The highest increase in

the marginal worker (3.06 %) as compared to the earlier decade, was found in

Sangli district, and the proportion of marginal workers reached up to 10.31 per

cent. Satara district recorded 9.21 per cent population in the marginal worker

category during 2001 with 1.26 per cent increase as compared to the last

decade. Kolhapur (7.33 %) and Solapur (6.68 %) districts maintained their rank

with increase of 0.78 per cent and 2.21 per cent respectively. Pune district

ranked last in the number of marginal workers and had 4.27 per cent marginal

workers with an increase by 0.53 per cent. Except Pune district (59.15 %), all

the remaining districts recorded less than 55.0 per cent population in the

non-workers category.

8.4 SPATIO-TEMPORAL CHANGES IN OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

The spatial and temporal changes in the occupational classification in

the study region from 1971 to 2001 are illustrated in the tables 8.3 and 8.4.

294

Table 8.3

Tahsil-Wise Occupational Structure (1971-2001) (Figures in percentage)

Sr.

No. Decades –> 1971 1981 1991 2001

Working Group –> Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Pune District

1 Junnar 27.03 6.19 33.22 66.78 36.55 8.00 44.54 55.46 43.16 4.89 48.05 51.95 42.93 7.19 50.13 49.87

2 Ambegaon 28.80 6.42 35.23 64.77 38.25 8.24 46.49 53.51 42.36 8.83 51.19 48.81 45.51 7.30 52.80 47.20

3 Shirur 31.85 4.66 36.51 63.49 40.90 6.02 46.93 53.07 47.71 5.06 52.77 47.23 45.79 5.15 50.93 49.07

4 Khed 34.23 3.08 37.30 62.70 41.28 5.83 47.11 52.89 45.33 4.56 49.89 50.11 43.51 7.16 50.68 49.32

5 Maval 31.32 3.26 34.58 65.42 35.49 3.89 39.38 60.62 37.15 3.97 41.12 58.88 35.31 6.31 41.62 58.38

6 Mulsi 26.48 7.16 33.63 66.37 37.81 7.74 45.56 54.44 43.51 9.07 52.58 47.42 42.97 8.98 51.94 48.06

7 Haveli 30.10 2.87 32.97 67.03 34.43 2.26 36.69 63.31 33.94 1.51 35.45 64.55 33.69 2.89 36.58 63.42

8 Pune City 28.94 0.50 29.43 70.57 30.13 0.82 30.95 69.05 31.09 0.79 31.88 68.12 32.11 2.09 34.20 65.80

9 Daund 30.14 1.33 31.47 68.53 36.60 3.50 40.10 59.90 40.23 4.65 44.88 55.12 42.28 5.14 47.42 52.58

10 Purandar 29.11 2.69 31.79 68.21 38.78 5.64 44.42 55.58 43.57 6.93 50.5 49.5 43.38 6.33 49.71 50.29

11 Velhe 22.87 11.08 33.95 66.05 35.06 12.95 48.01 51.99 44.46 8.48 52.94 47.06 41.77 11.39 53.17 46.83

12 Bhor 21.21 7.68 28.89 71.11 32.19 9.47 41.66 58.34 40.74 9.98 50.72 49.28 37.65 11.06 48.71 51.29

13 Baramati 34.98 0.73 35.71 64.29 38.13 1.99 40.13 59.87 42.06 3.72 45.78 54.22 42.40 4.60 47.00 53.00

14 Indapur 33.29 1.43 34.73 65.27 39.38 4.41 43.79 56.21 40.24 4.73 44.97 55.03 35.83 7.42 43.25 56.75

Satara District

15 Mahabaleshwar 32.27 0.94 33.21 66.79 34.88 1.10 35.98 64.02 35.7 1.56 37.26 62.74 30.30 6.94 37.24 62.76

16 Wai 28.72 3.44 32.16 67.84 35.80 6.94 42.75 57.25 36.95 8.81 45.76 54.24 36.89 10.16 47.05 52.95

17 Khandala 33.81 2.87 36.68 63.32 34.14 8.00 42.14 57.86 40.2 5.21 45.41 54.59 39.25 8.91 48.16 51.84

18 Phaltan 30.98 3.11 34.09 65.91 37.55 4.64 42.19 57.81 38.15 5.62 43.77 56.23 39.33 6.76 46.09 53.91

19 Man 28.78 4.29 33.07 66.93 36.51 6.97 43.48 56.52 39.68 6.76 46.44 53.56 39.47 7.16 46.63 53.37

20 Khatav 25.73 4.13 29.86 70.14 33.72 8.90 42.62 57.38 37.68 10.55 48.23 51.77 38.84 9.34 48.19 51.81

21 Koregaon 14.64 12.72 27.36 72.64 28.98 10.76 39.75 60.25 35.45 8.01 43.46 56.54 37.09 7.74 44.82 55.18

22 Satara City 21.62 7.41 29.03 70.97 31.46 7.46 38.92 61.08 33.96 5.28 39.24 60.76 33.28 6.34 39.61 60.39

23 Jaoli 31.51 7.46 38.97 61.03 38.47 9.69 48.16 51.84 40.39 9.77 50.16 49.84 36.08 11.29 47.37 52.63

24 Patan 19.97 12.05 32.02 67.98 30.89 13.44 44.34 55.66 33.58 14.35 47.93 52.07 37.21 12.21 49.43 50.57

25 Karad 26.30 2.98 29.28 70.72 33.08 5.52 38.60 61.40 36.39 7.22 43.61 56.39 38.27 12.22 50.49 49.51

Sangli District

26 Shirala 22.41 6.51 28.92 71.08 30.74 10.41 41.14 58.86 34.91 11.47 46.38 53.62 35.69 13.59 49.28 50.72

27 Walwa 25.98 3.47 29.45 70.55 34.99 3.77 38.77 61.23 38.14 7.61 45.75 54.25 37.21 9.40 46.61 53.39

295

Table 8.3 continued…

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 �

28 Palus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 38.89 13.37 52.25 47.75

29 Khanapur 31.96 3.58 35.55 64.45 38.01 5.78 43.79 56.21 40.33 8.15 48.48 51.52 44.00 15.21 59.22 40.78

30 Atpadi 26.91 2.04 28.96 71.04 32.16 6.64 38.80 61.20 36.46 9.98 46.44 53.56 36.18 12.86 49.04 50.96

31 Tasgaon 27.33 3.33 30.66 69.34 34.92 5.28 40.19 59.81 38.49 7.52 46.01 53.99 40.46 12.76 53.22 46.78

32 Miraj 28.33 1.12 29.46 70.54 31.92 1.74 33.67 66.33 33.5 3.37 36.87 63.13 31.72 5.74 37.47 62.53

33 Kavatemahankal 29.17 1.84 31.01 68.99 33.37 8.19 41.56 58.44 36.59 11.42 48.01 51.99 38.72 12.15 50.87 49.13

34 Jat 33.04 2.44 35.48 64.52 36.76 5.69 42.45 57.55 39.46 9.68 49.14 50.86 39.26 11.33 50.59 49.41

35 Kadegaon 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Kolhapur District

36 Shahuwadi 32.78 4.07 36.84 63.16 36.08 8.67 44.74 55.26 40.44 13.59 54.03 45.97 40.05 11.80 51.85 48.15

37 Panhala 32.52 2.12 34.64 65.36 37.04 7.25 44.29 55.71 41.97 9.14 51.11 48.89 43.16 10.29 53.45 46.55

38 Hatkanangale 29.28 1.42 30.70 69.30 33.04 2.37 35.40 64.60 34.61 5.38 39.99 60.01 35.35 4.60 39.94 60.06

39 Shirol 28.92 1.14 30.06 69.94 35.08 3.23 38.31 61.69 37 5.46 42.46 57.54 39.84 8.97 48.81 51.19

40 Karveer 28.30 1.18 29.48 70.52 32.08 2.83 34.90 65.10 34.68 4.84 39.52 60.48 35.27 4.71 39.98 60.02

41 Bavada 34.04 7.05 41.09 58.91 42.13 6.18 48.30 51.70 50.97 6.35 57.32 42.68 48.44 7.12 55.56 44.44

42 Radhanagari 39.24 2.60 41.84 58.16 44.68 5.84 50.52 49.48 45.59 7.87 53.46 46.54 46.05 10.14 56.19 43.81

43 Kagal 33.60 3.54 37.15 62.85 39.11 7.29 46.40 53.60 44.31 9.1 53.41 46.59 46.29 7.64 53.93 46.07

44 Bhudargad 34.72 1.57 36.28 63.72 44.22 5.88 50.10 49.90 45.64 5.62 51.26 48.74 44.28 10.92 55.21 44.79

45 Ajara 34.46 3.53 37.99 62.01 43.17 6.01 49.17 50.83 44.74 6.38 51.12 48.88 43.37 7.95 51.32 48.68

46 Gadhinglaj 26.97 5.73 32.70 67.30 38.01 6.48 44.49 55.51 41.22 9.5 50.72 49.28 44.07 9.32 53.40 46.60

47 Chandgad 39.39 2.74 42.14 57.86 46.05 5.99 52.04 47.96 47.8 11.4 59.2 40.8 43.08 10.59 53.68 46.32

Solapur District

48 Karmala 32.48 2.24 34.73 65.27 39.96 5.33 45.28 54.72 43.59 6.73 50.32 49.68 45.02 8.67 53.69 46.31

49 Madha 33.83 1.99 35.82 64.18 39.37 5.27 44.64 55.36 42.46 5.68 48.14 51.86 44.83 7.78 52.61 47.39

50 Barshi 33.62 2.39 36.01 63.99 38.09 5.38 43.47 56.53 39.44 3.8 43.24 56.76 37.70 6.22 43.92 56.08

51 Solapur N. 29.00 0.59 29.58 70.42 32.20 1.20 33.41 66.59 32.2 0.64 32.84 67.16 33.24 2.74 35.99 64.01

52 Mohol 35.47 1.86 37.33 62.67 43.13 3.48 46.61 53.39 44.07 5.49 49.56 50.44 43.24 6.14 49.38 50.62

53 Pandharpur 29.13 2.84 31.97 68.03 40.46 3.54 44.00 56.00 39.45 3.27 42.72 57.28 37.93 6.14 44.07 55.93

54 Malshiras 30.39 3.41 33.80 66.20 43.44 3.88 47.33 52.67 39.6 5.92 45.52 54.48 40.67 9.39 50.06 49.94

55 Sangola 30.41 3.12 33.52 66.48 36.52 6.46 42.98 57.02 40.31 7.28 47.59 52.41 38.46 8.97 47.43 52.57

56 Mangalwedha 32.11 3.83 35.94 64.06 39.78 5.32 45.10 54.90 39.71 9.38 49.09 50.91 41.75 9.56 51.31 48.69

57 Solapur S. 32.03 2.64 34.68 65.32 39.13 5.39 44.52 55.48 41.86 4.25 46.11 53.89 42.34 9.33 51.67 48.33

58 Akkalkot 31.88 2.53 34.41 65.59 38.03 4.14 42.17 57.83 38.74 7.00 45.74 54.26 35.40 9.02 44.42 55.58


296

Table 8.4

Tahsil-Wise Occupational Differentials in the Pune Division (Figures in percentage)

Sr.

No.

Decades –> 1971-81 1981-91 1991-01

Working

Group –> Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non Main Marginal Total Non

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Pune District

1 Junnar 9.52 1.81 11.32 -11.32 6.61 -3.11 3.51 -3.51 -0.23 2.3 2.08 -2.08

2 Ambegaon 9.45 1.82 11.26 -11.26 4.11 0.59 4.7 -4.7 3.15 -1.53 1.61 -1.61

3 Shirur 9.05 1.36 10.42 -10.42 6.81 -0.96 5.84 -5.84 -1.92 0.09 -1.84 1.84

4 Khed 7.05 2.75 9.81 -9.81 4.05 -1.27 2.78 -2.78 -1.82 2.6 0.79 -0.79

5 Maval 4.17 0.63 4.8 -4.8 1.66 0.08 1.74 -1.74 -1.84 2.34 0.5 -0.5

6 Mulsi 11.33 0.58 11.93 -11.93 5.7 1.33 7.02 -7.02 -0.54 -0.09 -0.64 0.64

7 Haveli 4.33 -0.61 3.72 -3.72 -0.49 -0.75 -1.24 1.24 -0.25 1.38 1.13 -1.13

8 Pune City 1.19 0.32 1.52 -1.52 0.96 -0.03 0.93 -0.93 1.02 1.3 2.32 -2.32

9 Daund 6.46 2.17 8.63 -8.63 3.63 1.15 4.78 -4.78 2.05 0.49 2.54 -2.54

10 Purandar 9.67 2.95 12.63 -12.63 4.79 1.29 6.08 -6.08 -0.19 -0.6 -0.79 0.79

11 Velhe 12.19 1.87 14.06 -14.06 9.4 -4.47 4.93 -4.93 -2.69 2.91 0.23 -0.23

12 Bhor 10.98 1.79 12.77 -12.77 8.55 0.51 9.06 -9.06 -3.09 1.08 -2.01 2.01

13 Baramati 3.15 1.26 4.42 -4.42 3.93 1.73 5.65 -5.65 0.34 0.88 1.22 -1.22

14 Indapur 6.09 2.98 9.06 -9.06 0.86 0.32 1.18 -1.18 -4.41 2.69 -1.72 1.72

Satara District

15 Mahabaleshwar 2.61 0.16 2.77 -2.77 0.82 0.46 1.28 -1.28 -5.4 5.38 -0.02 0.02

16 Wai 7.08 3.5 10.59 -10.59 1.15 1.87 3.01 -3.01 -0.06 1.35 1.29 -1.29

17 Khandala 0.33 5.13 5.46 -5.46 6.06 -2.79 3.27 -3.27 -0.95 3.7 2.75 -2.75

297


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

18 Phaltan 6.57 1.53 8.1 -8.1 0.6 0.98 1.58 -1.58 1.18 1.14 2.32 -2.32

19 Man 7.73 2.68 10.41 -10.41 3.17 -0.21 2.96 -2.96 -0.21 0.4 0.19 -0.19

20 Khatav 7.99 4.77 12.76 -12.76 3.96 1.65 5.61 -5.61 1.16 -1.21 -0.04 0.04

21 Koregaon 14.34 -1.96 12.39 -12.39 6.47 -2.75 3.71 -3.71 1.64 -0.27 1.36 -1.36

22 Satara City 9.84 0.05 9.89 -9.89 2.5 -2.18 0.32 -0.32 -0.68 1.06 0.37 -0.37

23 Jaoli 6.96 2.23 9.19 -9.19 1.92 0.08 2 -2 -4.31 1.52 -2.79 2.79

24 Patan 10.92 1.39 12.32 -12.32 2.69 0.91 3.59 -3.59 3.63 -2.14 1.5 -1.5

25 Karad 6.78 2.54 9.32 -9.32 3.31 1.7 5.01 -5.01 1.88 5 6.88 -6.88

Sangli District

26 Shirala 8.33 3.9 12.22 -12.22 4.17 1.06 5.24 -5.24 0.78 2.12 2.9 -2.9

27 Walwa 9.01 0.3 9.32 -9.32 3.15 3.84 6.98 -6.98 -0.93 1.79 0.86 -0.86

28 Palus N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 38.89 13.37 52.25 47.75

29 Khanapur 6.05 2.2 8.24 -8.24 2.32 2.37 4.69 -4.69 3.67 7.06 10.74 -10.74

30 Atpadi 5.25 4.6 9.84 -9.84 4.3 3.34 7.64 -7.64 -0.28 2.88 2.6 -2.6

31 Tasgaon 7.59 1.95 9.53 -9.53 3.57 2.24 5.82 -5.82 1.97 5.24 7.21 -7.21

32 Miraj 3.59 0.62 4.21 -4.21 1.58 1.63 3.2 -3.2 -1.78 2.37 0.6 -0.6

33 Kavatemahankal 4.2 6.35 10.55 -10.55 3.22 3.23 6.45 -6.45 2.13 0.73 2.86 -2.86

34 Jat 3.72 3.25 6.97 -6.97 2.7 3.99 6.69 -6.69 -0.2 1.65 1.45 -1.45

35 Kadegaon N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

Kolhapur District

36 Shahuwadi 3.3 4.6 7.9 -7.9 4.36 4.92 9.29 -9.29 -0.39 -1.79 -2.18 2.18

37 Panhala 4.52 5.13 9.65 -9.65 4.93 1.89 6.82 -6.82 1.19 1.15 2.34 -2.34

38 Hatkanangale 3.76 0.95 4.7 -4.7 1.57 3.01 4.59 -4.59 0.74 -0.78 -0.05 0.05

298


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

39 Shirol 6.16 2.09 8.25 -8.25 1.92 2.23 4.15 -4.15 2.84 3.51 6.35 -6.35

40 Karveer 3.78 1.65 5.42 -5.42 2.6 2.01 4.62 -4.62 0.59 -0.13 0.46 -0.46

41 Bavada 8.09 -0.87 7.21 -7.21 8.84 0.17 9.02 -9.02 -2.53 0.77 -1.76 1.76

42 Radhanagari 5.44 3.24 8.68 -8.68 0.91 2.03 2.94 -2.94 0.46 2.27 2.73 -2.73

43 Kagal 5.51 3.75 9.25 -9.25 5.2 1.81 7.01 -7.01 1.98 -1.46 0.52 -0.52

44 Bhudargad 9.5 4.31 13.82 -13.82 1.42 -0.26 1.16 -1.16 -1.36 5.3 3.95 -3.95

45 Ajara 8.71 2.48 11.18 -11.18 1.57 0.37 1.95 -1.95 -1.37 1.57 0.2 -0.2

46 Gadhinglaj 11.04 0.75 11.79 -11.79 3.21 3.02 6.23 -6.23 2.85 -0.18 2.68 -2.68

47 Chandgad 6.66 3.25 9.9 -9.9 1.75 5.41 7.16 -7.16 -4.72 -0.81 -5.52 5.52

Solapur District

48 Karmala 7.48 3.09 10.55 -10.55 3.63 1.4 5.04 -5.04 1.43 1.94 3.37 -3.37

49 Madha 5.54 3.28 8.82 -8.82 3.09 0.41 3.5 -3.5 2.37 2.1 4.47 -4.47

50 Barshi 4.47 2.99 7.46 -7.46 1.35 -1.58 -0.23 0.23 -1.74 2.42 0.68 -0.68

51 Solapur N. 3.2 0.61 3.83 -3.83 0 -0.56 -0.57 0.57 1.04 2.1 3.15 -3.15

52 Mohol 7.66 1.62 9.28 -9.28 0.94 2.01 2.95 -2.95 -0.83 0.65 -0.18 0.18

53 Pandharpur 11.33 0.7 12.03 -12.03 -1.01 -0.27 -1.28 1.28 -1.52 2.87 1.35 -1.35

54 Malshiras 13.05 0.47 13.53 -13.53 -3.84 2.04 -1.81 1.81 1.07 3.47 4.54 -4.54

55 Sangola 6.11 3.34 9.46 -9.46 3.79 0.82 4.61 -4.61 -1.85 1.69 -0.16 0.16

56 Mangalwedha 7.67 1.49 9.16 -9.16 -0.07 4.06 3.99 -3.99 2.04 0.18 2.22 -2.22

57 Solapur S. 7.1 2.75 9.84 -9.84 2.73 -1.14 1.59 -1.59 0.48 5.08 5.56 -5.56

58 Akkalkot 6.15 1.61 7.76 -7.76 0.71 2.86 3.57 -3.57 -3.34 2.02 -1.32 1.32


299

300

Generally, it was found that average working population fluctuated over

four decades. It differed from tahsil to tahsil within the study region. It has

been observed from Table 8.3 that during the investigation period (1971-2001)

majority of the tahsils in the study region recorded less than 60 per cent

participation rate of working population. Thus, high percentage of non-workers

was observed.

8.4.1 CHANGES IN OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE IN 1971

In 1971, there was not a single tahsil in the division, which has the

working population above 50 per cent. That means, there has been more than

50 per cent population not participated in any economic activity from any tahsil

in the study region during 1971. The tahsils located in the hilly zone, such as

Chandgad (42.14 %), Radhanagari (41.84 %) and Bavada (41.09 %) recorded

the highest percentages of working population, interestingly to note that all the

afore mentioned tahsils are in Kolhapur district. Majority of the tahsils i.e. 41

tahsils from the study region were having 30 to 40 per cent working population

during 1971. Among them, 12 tahsils were from Pune district, 10 from Solapur

district, 8 from Kolhapur, 7 from Satara and only 4 tahsils from Sangli district

were placed in this particular category. It means that overall 30 to 40 per cent

population participated in the various economic activities during 1971.

During the same decade, there were 12 tahsils, which recorded the

lowest work participation rate i.e. below 30 per cent. Out of them, four tahsils

were from Sangli district viz. Shirala (28.92 %), Walwa (29.45 %), Miraj

(29.46 %) and Khatav (29.86 %). Koregaon (27.36 %), Satara (29.03 %) and

Karad (29.28 %) tahsils from Satara district also had less than 30 per cent

working population during 1971. Two tahsils each from Pune (Bhor and Pune)

and Solapur (Atpadi and Solapur N.) districts were in this category, while only

Karveer (29.48%) tahsil from Kolhapur district had less than 30 per cent

working population in 1971 (Fig. 8.5 A).

301

302


During 1981, Chandgad (52.04%) and Radhanagari (50.52%) tahsils

from Kolhapur district showed increase in the working population and gained

one category, while Bhudargad (50.10%) tahsil again from Kolhapur district

improved its position by two categories and showed more than 50 per cent

population engaged in various economic activities. Only these three tahsils, all

from Kolhapur district were having high participation in various economic

activities as compared to other tahsils.

In the second category, there were 39 total tahsils from the study region,

which had working population between 40 to 50 per cent. Among them the

highest number of tahsils i.e. 11 tahsils were from Pune districts viz. Velhe,

Khed, Shirur, Ambegaon, Mulshi, Junnar, Purandar, Indapur, Bhor, Baramati

and Daund. Thereafter, Solapur district took a lead in this category with 10

tahsils, such as Malshiras, Mohol, Karmala, Mangalwedha, Madha, Solapur S.,

Pandharpur, Barshi, Sangola and Akkalkot. Satara, Sangli and Kolhapur

districts had six tahsils each in this category. Particularly, Khandala, Phaltan,

Wai, Man, Patan and Jaoli from Satara district, Tasgaon, Shirala,

Kavatemahankal, Jat, Khatav and Khanapur tahsils from Sangli district and

Panhala, Gadhinglaj, Shahuwadi, Kagal, Bavada and Ajara tahsils from

Kolhapur district. Except Bavada tahsil from Kolhapur district all the tahsils

improved their category as compared to that in the past decade, while Bavada

tahsils showed very little increase in the working population (Fig. 8.5 B).

During this particular decade, there were 14 tahsils, which recorded 30

to 40 per cent population as working population. Four tahsils viz. Koregaon

(39.75%), Satara (38.92%), Karad (38.60%) and Mahabaleshwar (35.98%)

form Satara district were in this category. Followed by, three tahsils each from

Pune and Kolhapur districts were included in this category, particularly, Maval

(39.38%), Haveli (36.69%) and Pune (30.95%) tahsils from Pune district and

Shirol (38.31%), Hatkanangale (35.98%) and Karveer (34.90%) tahsils from

Kolhapur district. Walwa (38.77%) and Miraj (33.67%) tahsils from Sangli

303

district and Atpadi (38.80%) and Solapur N. (33.41%) tahsils from Solapur

district recorded working population in between 30 to 40 per cent.

There was not a single tahsil, which recorded less than 30 per cent

working population during 1981.


In this decade, Chandgad (59.20%), Radhanagari (53.46%) and

Bhudargad (51.26%) tahsils from Kolhapur district remained in the category

of above 50 per cent working population. In spite of that, there were 14

another tahsils from the study region, were included in this category. Except

above-mentioned tahsils another six tahsils from Kolhapur district were newly

entered in this category, these were Bavada (57.32%), Shahuwadi (54.03%),

Kagal (53.41%), Ajara (51.12%), Panhala (51.11%) and Gadhinglaj (50.72%).

Pune district had five tahsils in it, namely Velhe (52.94%), Shirur (52.77%),

Mulshi (52.58%), Bhor (50.72%) and Purandar (50.50%). Satara and Solapur

districts have one tahsil each in this category during 1991; those were Jaoli

(Satara district) and Karmala (Solapur district) tahsils, which recoded 50.16 per

cent and 50.32 per cent working population respectively (Fig. 8.5 C).

There were 31 tahsils from the study region included in the category of

40 to 50 per cent working population. Out of them, 10 tahsils were from

Solapur district viz. Mohol, Mangalwedha, Madha, Sangola, Atpadi, Solapur

S., Akkalkot, Malshiras, Barshi and Pandharpur. Followed by, Satara district

having eight tahsils namely Khatav, Patan, Man, Wai, Khandala, Phaltan,

Karad and Koregaon in the category. Khed, Junnar, Baramati, Indapur, Daund

and Maval from Pune district and Jat, Khanapur, Kavatemahankal, Shirala,

Tasgaon and Walwa from Sangli district were also included in this category.

On the other hand, Kolhapur district had only one tahsil that recorded working

population between 40 to 50 per cent.

Hatkanangale (39.99%) and Karveer (39.52%) tahsils from Kolhapur

district, Satara (39.24%) and Mahabaleshwar (37.26%) tahsils from Satara

district, Haveli (35.45%) and Pune (31.88%) tahsils from Pune district, Miraj

304

(36.87%) from Sangli district and Solapur N. (32.84%) from Solapur district,

all these tahsils remained in the third category (30 to 40 per cent of working

population) if compared with the previous decade. It is more interesting to note

that all the tahsils having districts headquarters constantly stayed in this

category.

As like past decade in this decade also, there was not any tahsil in the

last category i.e. below 30 per cent of working population.


In the last decade of the investigation period i.e. 1991-2001, Kolhapur

district showed improvement in the occupational classification and about 75

per cent tahsils recorded above 50 per cent of working population. These

tahsils were Radhanagari (56.19%), Bavada (55.56%), Bhudargad (55.21%),

Kagal (53.93%), Chandgad (53.68%), Panhala (53.45%), Gadhinglaj (53.40%),

Shahuwadi (51.85%) and Ajara (51.32%). After that, Velhe (5317%),

Ambegaon (52.80%), Mulshi (51.94%), Shirur (50.93%), Khed (50.68%) and

Junnar (50.13%) tahsils from Pune district were in the highest category of

working population. Khanapur (59.22%), Tasgaon (53.22%), Palus (552.25%)

and Kavatemahankal (50.87%) tahsils from Sangli district and Karmala

(553.69%), Madha (52.61%), Solapur S. (51.67%), Mangalwedha (51.31%)

and Malshiras (50.06%) tahsils from Solapur district were also having more

than 50 per cent of working population. Satara district still had not a single

tahsils in this category (Fig. 8.5 D).

Satara and Pune districts dominated the second category (40 to 50 per

cent of working population). Satara district had eight tahsils in this category

namely, Patan, Khatav, Khandala, Jaoli, Wai, Man, Phaltan and Koregaon.

Followed by, Pune and Solapur districts, which had six tahsils each in this

category. These tahsils are Purandar, Bhor, Daund, Baramati, Indapur and

Maval from Pune district and Mohol, Atpadi, Sangola, Akkalkot, Pandharpur

and Barshi from Solapur district. Shirala and Walwa tahsils form Sangli district

also recorded the number of working population in between 40 to 50 per cent

305

while, Shirol was the only tahsil from Kolhapur district fallen into this category

with the 48.81 per cent of working population.

As in the previous two decades all the tahsils, which were having district

headquarters in them, squeezed into the category of 30 to 40 per cent. Along

with these tahsils Haveli (Pune district), Mahabaleshwar (Satara district) and

Hatkanangale (Kolhapur district) tahsils also remained in the category of 30 to

40 per cent of working population.

8.5 ZONES OF WORKING POPULATION

The spatio-temporal analysis of working population 2001 helps to

demark the Zones of Working Population (Fig. 8.7). These are,

I. Zone of high percentage of working population having more than

55 per cent working population.

II. Zone of moderate percentage of working population having

working population between 45.01 and 55.0 per cent.

III. Zone of low working population having working population less

than 45.0 per cent.

8.5.1 ZONE OF HIGH WORKING POPULATION

In this zone of highest percentage of working population there were only

four tahsils, viz. Bavada, Radhanagari and Bhudargad from Kolhapur district

and Khanapur tahsil from Sangli district. Not a single tahsil from any other

district in Pune Division was included in this zone. These tahsils are located in

the western hilly part of the study region, which has almost unfavourable

physical conditions. Only primary activities mainly subsistence agriculture

prevailed in the tahsils. Hence, the percentage engaged in the activities for

livelihood was maximum as compared to the other tahsils in the division.

8.5.2 ZONE OF MODERATE WORKING POPULATION

There were 39 tahsils from the study region, which were included in the

zone of moderate percentage of working population. It means that, 67.24 per

306

cent tahsils of the study region recorded the working population between 45.0

per cent and 55.0 per cent.

The highest number of tahsils i.e. 10 tahsils from Pune district were

placed in this particular zone. These tahsils are Velhe, Ambegaon, Mulshi,

Shirur, Khed, Junnar, Purandar, Bhor, Daund and Baramati. After Pune, there

were eight tahsils included in this zone form Satara and Solapur districts each.

Specifically, these tahsils are Karad, Patan, Khatav, Khandala, Jaoli, Wai,

Man and Phaltan from Satara district and Karmala, Madha, Solapur S.,

Mangalwedha, Malshiras, Mohol, Atpadi and Sangola from Solapur district.

Kolhapur and Sangli district respectively having seven and six tahsils in this

zone. Kagal, Chandgad, Panhala, Gadhinglaj, Shahuwadi, Ajara and Shirol

tahsils from Kolhapur district and Tasgaon, Palus, Kavatemahankal, Jat,

Shirala and Walwa tahsils from Sangli district attend the category of moderate

percentage of working population.

Most of the tahsils included in this zone were also dominated by primary

activities. Secondary and tertiary occupations were developed in few tahsils

only, but they could not affect the occupation change. Moreover, some of these

tahsils showed balance in the all kind of economic activities, thus they were

sited in this zone of moderate percentage of working population.

8.5.3 ZONE OF LOW WORKING POPULATION

As per the census figure of 2001 and also according to above stated

criteria of the zones of working population, 14 tahsils were included in the zone

of low percentage of working population. Among them Pune and Solapur

districts had four tahsils each, these are Indapur, Maval, Haveli and Pune

tahsils from Pune district and Akkalkot, Pandharpur, Barshi and Solapur N.

tahsils from Solapur district. Further investigation showed that, after Pune and

Solapur district there were three tahsils from Satara district namely Koregaon,

Satara and Mahabaleshwar also included in this zone of working population.

Karveer and Hatkanangale tahsils from Kolhapur district and only Miraj tahsil

from Sangli district had below 45 per cent of working population, hence, these

tahsils were included in this zone.

307

308

Basically, it is found that, in developing country like India most of the

population is engaged in the primary kind of economic activities, hence the

participation rate in the secondary and tertiary activities remained low. Due to

this reason, the tahsils having district headquarters in their domain, recorded

low percentage of working population.

8.6 CONCLUSION

It is observed that, all the districts in the study region showed increasing

trends in the total working population and all the districts almost followed the

average working population of the study region with some exceptions.

Generally, India on a large scale has agrarian economy and in this kind of

economy majority of the people are engaged in the primary activities. In

accordance to that, numerous tahsils in Pune Division has the same trend.

Therefore, these tahsils recorded high percentage of working population. The

tahsils located in the western part of the study region, having undulating

topography due to influence of Western Ghat recorded high participation rate

of the working population. These tahsils were also dominated by the primary

kind of economic activities. Most of the members of the family in working age

group are engaged in agriculture, as it does not require special training or skills.

On the other hand, those tahsils, which have shortly started the

urbanisation and industrialisation process mostly subjugated by secondary and

tertiary sector, and much population is not engaged in these sectors, as these

activities require skilled labour force on the large scale. Consequently, these

tahsils recorded low per cent of working population. Another reason is that,

people migrated towards these tahsils in search of employment in the

secondary and tertiary sector with their families, and due to that, there is

increase in the dependency ratio. All these things influenced on the structure of

working population.

According to available census data the tahsils classified as in the zone of

low working population included Haveli, Pune city, Pandharpur, Solapur N.,

Karveer, Hatkanangale and Miraj depict a false picture. Pune city is highly

309

urbanised and industrially developed tahsil. So is the case with Haveli also.

Pandharpur is a religious and tourists centre, Solapur N. is a centre of textile

industry, Karveer tahsil including Kolhapur city is also urbanised and

industrialised tahsil. Hatkanangale is also agriculturally and industrially

developed tahsil. All these tahsils have been offering opportunities of

employment. Even then, according to census data they have low working

population, which is hard to believe if we consider the ground reality.

However, this is only a generalised picture, due to generalised

classification of workers. Separate in-depth study is, therefore recommended to

bring about the true picture of the occupational structure.

REFERENCES

1. Brunhes, J. (1952) : Human Geography. P. 30

2. Census of India (1971) : Indian Census in Perspective, Office of

Registrar General, Government of India, New Delhi, p. 169

3. Census of India (1991) : Census Atlas, Maharashtra, Series – 14,

Maharashtra, Director of Census Operations, Maharashtra

4. Census of India (1991) : District Census Handbook (Kolhapur), Series –

14, Maharashtra, Director of Census Operations, Maharashtra,

p.36

5. Chandna, R. C. (1986) : Geography of Population – Concepts,

Determinants and Patterns, Kalyani Publications, New Delhi,

Pp. 245-46

6. Clarke, Colin (1940) : The Conditions of Economic Progress, p.182

7. Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences (1965) : Vol. XI-XII, p. 424

8. Karve, I. G. (1979) : Maharashtra, Land and Its People, in Maharashtra

Gazetteers, Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai, Pp. 98-99

9. Maurya, S. D. (1989) : Population and Housing Problems in India,

Chugh Publication, Allahabad, Vol. I, P. 110

Documents

10 CHAPTER VIII - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/9907/12/12...279 CHAPTER VIII OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE 8.1 INTRODUCTION Occupation implies trade or profession