Participation of rural youth in agriculture and allied activities

Introduction

Materials and Methods

An Ex-post-facto research design was used in the present study. The study was conducted in southern Rajasthan, which consists of seven districts namely Udaipur, Rajsamand, Banswara, Dungarpur, Chittorgarh Pratapgarh. Out of these, two districts viz., Udaipur and Bhilwara were purposely selected on the basis of maximum tribal and nontribal population. Two tehsils from each identified district were selected for study based on maximum tribal and nontribal population. Therefore, a total of four tehsils were selected for the study. From each selected tehsil three villages were randomly selected from each of the tehsils, resulting in a total sample of 12 villages (6 tribal and 6 nontribal). From each selected village 20 rural youth who are living in the village, engaged in agriculture and members of a joint family of age group 16-30 years were selected by simple random sampling method by using random number table generator and they were considered as respondents in the study. Rural youth in this research study are considered as a youth having an age group of 16-30 years as per National Youth Policy of India, 2012 (NYP, 2011). Total 60 rural youth will be selected from each selected tehsils. Total 120 rural youth will be selected from Udaipur and 120 rural youth from Bhilwara district. Thus, a total of 240 rural youth will be selected for the present investigation. A comprehensive structured interview schedule was developed keeping the study objectives in mind. Data was collected using personal interview techniques with developed schedules and various statistical measures were used for analysis, including Percentage and Frequency distribution, Mean, SD, MPS and Rank.

Results and Discussion

Participation of rural youth in crop production activities Participation of rural youth in crop production is a crucial www.extensionjournal.com indicator of their engagement in the agricultural sector. Youth involvement in key field operations i.e. input management and post-harvest activities determines the future sustainability, productivity and technological growth of farming systems. Assessment the extent of youth participation in crop production activities was measured by calculating Mean Per cent Score (MPS) for different activities and the results are presented in Table 8. The overall results of [1] , Dhakad and Meena (2022) [2,14] and Kavitha et al. (2023) [3] , who reported that rural youth tend to participate more in activities linked to economic returns, technical knowledge and input management, while showing limited involvement in monotonous, labour-intensive field operations.

Participation of rural youth in vegetable production activities

Participation of rural youth in vegetable production activities was assessed using Mean Per Cent Score (MPS), and results are presented in Table 2. The activity-wise analysis shows considerable variation in youth involvement across different activities of vegetable cultivation. [4] , Jat et al. (2022) [5] and Wankhade & Thorat (2023) [6] , who observed that rural youth show higher participation in skill-based, economically rewarding and technically important agricultural operations, while their involvement remains low in repetitive, labour-intensive tasks. These studies also highlight the influence of resource availability, market exposure and technological access on youth participation patterns in vegetable cultivation.

Participation of rural youth in orchard management activities

Participation of rural youth in orchard management activities was measured using Mean Per cent Score (MPS) and the results are presented in Table 3 Considerable variation was found in the involvement of youth across preplanting, planting, plant protection and post-harvest operations. Non-tribal youth demonstrated substantially higher involvement across most orchard operations, reflecting greater access to farm inputs, improved exposure to commercial horticulture and higher decision-making autonomy. Tribal youth were more inclined toward routine, low-investment practices, indicating their dependence on traditional systems and limited market integration. These observations align with the of Sharma et al. (2021) [7] ,

Poonia & Meena (2022) [8,14] and Rathod et al. (2024) [9] , who reported higher youth engagement in orchard tasks requiring skill, precision and income gain, and lower participation in core labour-intensive and post-harvest grading operations.

Participation of rural youth in animal husbandry and dairy activities

Participation of rural youth in animal husbandry and dairyrelated activities was measured using Mean Per cent Score (MPS) and the results are presented in Table 4. The data indicate that youth play a substantial role in livestock management, though their level of involvement varies across different operations. ). This suggests that tribal youth remain more focused on labour-based livestock management rather than commercial aspects of dairy farming.

In contrast, non-tribal youth exhibited considerably higher participation across most activities. The highest involvement was recorded in milking (MPS 49.17, Rank 1), followed by animal grazing (MPS 48.33, Rank 2), arrangement of fodder (MPS 47.92, Rank 3) and selling of milk/products (MPS 47.92, Rank 3). Non-tribal youth also showed substantial engagement in preparation of feed (47.50) and repair of animal shed (47.08). These trends reflect greater involvement in activities linked to income generation, market interaction and dairy enterprise management, likely due to better resource access, improved advisory linkages and greater integration with formal dairy systems.

A comparison between tribal and non-tribal youth revealed considerable variation. Non-tribal youth recorded consistently higher MPS in most activities, particularly in milking (49.17), animal grazing (48.33), fodder arrangement (47.92), selling of milk/products (47.92) and preparation of feed (47.50). This pattern suggests that non-tribal youth are more oriented toward dairy-based income generation and commercial livestock operations, likely due to greater exposure to organized dairy farming systems, better awareness of market channels and higher resource accessibility.

In contrast, tribal youth showed relatively higher initial participation in cleaning of animal shed (MPS 40.83), caring of animals (37.92) and repair of shed (37.08). This trend indicates that tribal youth are engaged more in routine and labour-based animal care activities rather than activities involving commercialization and financial decisions. The analysis concludes that rural youth significantly participate in animal husbandry and dairy activities, with particularly high involvement in animal hygiene, feeding management and grazing-based operations. However, youth showed relatively lower interest in income-generating and marketing activities of dairy farming. Non-tribal youth demonstrated substantially greater participation than tribal youth, reflecting the benefits of better resource access, institutional linkages, veterinary services and dairy commercialization in non-tribal regions.

Tribal youth mainly support labour-oriented livestock tasks rather than enterprise-oriented activities.

These results are consistent with the observations of Verma et al. (2020) [10] , Bhati & Meena (2022) [11,14] and Koli et al.

(2023) [12] , who reported that youth involvement is highest in physical livestock management tasks, while marketing and commercial responsibilities are generally handled by senior family members.

Participation of rural youth in farm management

Participation of rural youth in farm management activities was assessed using Mean Per cent Score (MPS) and the results are presented in Table 5. The analysis demonstrated that youth contribute not only in routine agricultural operations but also in selected management-related decisions and supervision responsibilities. Non-tribal youth demonstrated significantly higher www.extensionjournal.com participation across almost all farm management activities. Their highest involvement was noted in cleaning of pathways and unwanted plants (MPS 55.42, Rank 1), followed by supervision (49.17, Rank 2), hiring of labour (47.92, Rank 3) and keeping records (47.50, Rank 4). Moderate to high participation was also observed in purchase of seeds and payment of wages (MPS 46.25 each). These findings suggest that non-tribal youth possess greater managerial responsibility, enhanced decision-making power and more frequent involvement in administrative and financial aspects of farming. A clear difference was observed between tribal and nontribal groups. Non-tribal youth recorded higher participation across all farm management dimensions, particularly in cleaning of pathways and unwanted plants (55.42), supervision (49.17), record keeping (47.50), hiring of labour (47.92) and purchasing seeds (46.25). This highlights their enhanced control over resource allocation, financial decision-making and labour administration. On the contrary, tribal youth showed comparatively lower participation, although their highest involvement was found in cleaning of pathways and unwanted plants (41.25), keeping record of field work (40.83), hiring of labour (40.00) and paying wages (37.50). This pattern indicates that tribal youth are involved primarily in supportive management practices, while major financial decisions continue to be handled by elders. These outcomes align with the of Kumar & Singh (2021) [13] , Meena et al. (2022) [14] and Vashistha et al. (2023) [15] , who reported that youth involvement in farm management is increasing, but complete autonomy in financial and operational decisions is yet to be institutionalized, especially among tribal households. The results conclude that rural youth show meaningful participation in farm management activities, particularly in record keeping, supervising labour, maintaining cleanliness of farm premises and coordinating hired labour. This reflects an emerging managerial role of youth in agriculture, moving beyond traditional labour-based responsibilities. However, the level of participation varies significantly across groups non-tribal youth exhibit higher involvement and decision-making power compared to tribal youth, largely due to better exposure to modern farming systems, market networks, financial literacy and institutional linkages. Tribal youth continue to assist in management activities but remain less involved in major decisions requiring financial accountability.

Conclusion

The present study provides a comprehensive understanding of the extent and pattern of participation of rural youth in agriculture and allied activities, encompassing crop production, vegetable cultivation, orchard management, animal husbandry and farm management. The findings clearly establish that rural youth play a significant and active role in agriculture, though their participation varies considerably across activities and social groups. Overall, rural youth exhibited moderate to high participation in skill-based, technical and decision-oriented activities, such as input management, irrigation, plant protection, nursery and bed preparation, intercultural operations, record keeping and supervision. These activities are closely linked with productivity enhancement and economic returns, indicating a gradual shift of rural youth towards commercial, knowledge-intensive and market-oriented agriculture. Conversely, participation was relatively lower in labour-intensive, repetitive and drudgery-prone operations such as ploughing, clod crushing, thinning, transplanting, threshing and certain post-harvest operations, reflecting changing aspirations and work preferences among rural youth. A marked difference was observed between tribal and nontribal youth. Non-tribal youth consistently demonstrated higher levels of participation across most agricultural and management activities, particularly in input purchase, fertilizer management, marketing, dairy enterprise operations and farm management decisions. This higher involvement can be attributed to better access to resources, market exposure, institutional support, mechanization and decision-making autonomy. In contrast, tribal youth were more involved in routine, low-investment and labour-based activities, with limited participation in market-oriented and financially driven operations, highlighting persistent socioeconomic and infrastructural constraints. Participation in animal husbandry and dairy activities revealed that youth were highly engaged in routine animal care, hygiene, grazing and feeding practices, while involvement in marketing and income-generating activities remained comparatively low, especially among tribal households. Similarly, farm management participation indicated an emerging managerial role of youth, though full autonomy in financial decision-making is yet to be achieved. The findings of the study are in consonance with earlier research, which underscores that rural youth tend to participate more actively in activities that offer economic incentives, technical learning and skill development, while showing limited interest in monotonous and physically demanding tasks. In conclusion, the study highlights the untapped potential of rural youth as agents of agricultural transformation. Strengthening their participation requires focused policy interventions aimed at skill enhancement, access to credit and inputs, promotion of agripreneurship, market integration, mechanization and inclusive extension services, with special emphasis on tribal youth. Creating an enabling environment for youth-led agriculture will not only improve their livelihood opportunities but also contribute significantly to the sustainability, productivity and modernization of the agricultural sector.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementThe authors sincerely acknowledge the guidance, encouragement and valuable suggestions provided by subject experts and colleagues during the course of this research. We are grateful to the farmers/ respondents for their cooperation and for sharing their time and experiences, which formed the foundation of this study. We also express our thanks to the Department of Extension Education, MPUAT, Udaipur, for providing necessary facilities and support for successful completion of the research work.

References

1. Patel AR, Sharma V, Desai KL. Participation of rural www.extensionjournal.com youth in agricultural and allied activities: an empirical analysis. Indian J Ext Educ. 2020;56(3):45-50.
2. Dhakad RS, Meena ML. Extent of involvement of rural youth in farm operations and decision-making process. J Community Mobil Sustain Dev. 2022;17(2):312-317.
3. Kavitha N, Ramasubramanian M, Balasubramaniam R. Engagement of rural youth in agriculture: trends, constraints and opportunities. J Ext Educ. 2023;35(1):8612-8618.
4. Sachan R, Singh P, Verma AK. Participation of rural youth in vegetable cultivation and factors influencing their involvement. Indian J Ext Educ. 2020;56(4):9297.
5. Jat ML, Meena HR, Sharma RK. Role of rural youth in vegetable production and adoption of improved cultivation practices. J Community Mobil Sustain Dev. 2022;17(1):148-153.
6. Wankhade RN, Thorat VA. Extent of participation of rural youth in vegetable cultivation and associated socio-economic factors. J Ext Educ. 2023;35(2):87358741.
7. Sharma R, Singh D, Yadav RK. Participation of rural youth in orchard management practices and associated factors. J Ext Educ. 2021;33(4):6721-6726.
8. Poonia MK, Meena HR. Involvement of rural youth in horticultural crop production and constraints faced by them. Indian J Ext Educ. 2022;58(2):134-139.
9. Rathod PK, Patil SR, Deshmukh MS. Engagement of rural youth in orchard-based farming systems: a socioeconomic analysis. J Community Mobil Sustain Dev. 2024;19(1):45-51.
10. Verma AP, Singh R, Kumar S. Participation of rural youth in livestock farming and decision-making behaviour. Indian J Ext Educ. 2020;56(1):58-63.
11. Bhati DS, Meena ML. Role of rural youth in livestock enterprise management and associated constraints. J Community Mobil Sustain Dev. 2022;17(3):604-610.
12. Koli RT, Patel NR, Chauhan SK. Extent of involvement of rural youth in dairy farming activities and factors influencing participation. J Ext Educ. 2023;35(2):87548760.
13. Kumar A, Singh R. Participation of rural youth in farm management decisions and associated socio-economic factors. Indian J Ext Educ. 2021;57(3):21-26.
14. Meena ML, Patel DK, Sharma P. Decision-making behaviour of rural youth in agriculture with special reference to tribal areas. J Community Mobil Sustain Dev. 2022;17(2):289-295.
15. Vashistha R, Rathore RS, Meena HR. Extent of managerial and financial autonomy of rural youth in farming households. J Ext Educ. 2023;35(1):86288634.