Examining the nature and pattern of agricultural land leasing system in eastern plain zone of Uttar Pradesh

Introduction

Agricultural land leasing constitutes a significant component of India's agrarian structure, functioning as an important mechanism for livelihood security, land access, and resource allocation. Evidence from national databases shows that tenancy continues to exist widely despite restrictive tenancy regulations. The National Sample Survey (NSS) 70th Round, 2013 reported that nearly 10-11% of operational holdings in India are under some form of lease, with a higher concentration observed in states such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Odisha, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and West Bengal. Further, the survey indicated that small and marginal farmers account for more than 75% of leased-in holdings, highlighting the crucial role of tenancy in supporting vulnerable agrarian households. Similarly, studies by NITI Aayog (2016) [8] noted that a large share of tenancy remains informal and undocumented, making the actual extent of leasing significantly higher than officially recorded figures. Empirical research has consistently emphasized that agricultural land leasing in India is dominated by oral agreements, socially negotiated arrangements, and noninstitutional contracts. Deininger et al. (2007) [3] and Bhalla (1993) [1] reported that more than 80% of tenancy contracts in many parts of rural India are oral in nature, often based on trust, kinship ties, caste relationships, and localized power structures rather than legal documentation. The Planning Commission (2012) [9] also highlighted that fear of losing ownership rights and rigid tenancy laws forced landowners to avoid written agreements, thereby pushing tenancy underground. To address these structural issues, policy initiatives such as the Model Agricultural Land Leasing Act, 2016 were introduced to promote secure, transparent, and legal leasing systems; however, informal tenancy continues to remain dominant across many regions. In Uttar Pradesh, tenancy has historically played a vital socio-economic role. Various agricultural policy assessments and regional studies have indicated that a considerable proportion of land in Eastern Uttar Pradesh is cultivated under leasing arrangements, primarily due to small and fragmented holdings, high rural population density, limited non-farm opportunities, labour migration, aging landowners, and the need for income security among landholders. Studies such as Prasad et al. (2012) [10] , Bansal and Grover (2012) [2] , and Kiranmayi & Vijayabhinandana (2015) [7] observed that tenancy in North India frequently involves a combination of fixed cash leasing, crop-sharing arrangements, and long-standing informal lease relations, with a growing shift toward monetized rental systems. Given these realities, examining the socio-economic nature and patterns of agricultural land leasing in Eastern Uttar Pradesh is crucial for understanding its role in rural livelihoods, equity in land access, agricultural productivity, and social relations. A systematic assessment helps in www.extensionjournal.com explaining how tenancy shapes economic opportunities, how social and institutional structures influence leasing behaviour, and how evolving rental arrangements reflect transformations within the agrarian system. Such an examination is vital not only for academic understanding but also for supporting evidence-based policy formulation aimed at promoting secure, equitable, and efficient land leasing frameworks conducive to inclusive agricultural growth.

Methodology

Sampling framework

A multistage stratified random sampling technique was used. Districts formed the first stage, blocks the second stage, villages the third stage, and households were the ultimate sampling units. From each selected district, two blocks were chosen: Varanasi: Baragaon, Sewapuri Barabanki: Haidergarh, Trivediganj, Ambedkar Nagar: Akbarpur, Jalalpur. From each selected block, three villages were purposively selected, making a total of 18 villages. A total of 240 farm households were selected: 150 lessees and 90 lessors.

Nature of data and method of collection

The study is based primarily on primary data, collected through a well-structured and pre-tested interview schedule. Necessary modifications were made after pre-testing. Data were collected by personal interview method from heads of households during the agricultural year 2024-25.

Analytical framework

The primary and secondary data so collected were tabulated in Excel Worksheets. The data was tabulated and analyzed by employing suitable statistical tools. In order to achieve the objectives of the study, the tabulated data were further analysed by using tabular and statistical methods described below:

Tabular method

The primary data collected on survey schedules were tabulated to determine averages, indices, ratios, and percentages.

Results and Discussion

Pattern of agricultural land leasing-in and lease-out

An attempt was made to study the pattern of tenancy existing in the study area based on agreement, duration, size of lease-in land, inheritance, sharing of cost of cultivation, mode of lease rent payment and decision making in crop selection as given below. In this section the pattern of land leasing-in and leasing-out, along with the prevailing conditions of land rent, land value, etc. have been discussed.

Tenancy type based on agreement

Table 1 presents the distribution of respondents according to the type of tenancy agreement across three districts of eastern plain zone of Uttar Pradesh. Tenancy agreements are classified into oral and written (Documented) contracts, and respondents are further categorized as lessees (Tenant farmers) and lessors (Landowners). The results clearly indicate that tenancy arrangements in all three districts are entirely oral in nature. In each district, 50 lessees and 30 lessors reported operating under oral agreements. No respondent in any of the districts reported having a written or documented tenancy agreement. The complete absence of written agreements highlights the informal and undocumented nature of land leasing in the study area. The results are in conformity with that reported by Damodaran (2011), Bansal and Grover This situation can be attributed to the fact that the nature of tenancy arrangements is largely determined by landowners rather than by those who lease in land. In the case of documented tenancy, legal benefits and entitlements would accrue to the tenant, which landowners are generally reluctant to allow. Consequently, landowners often avoid entering into written agreements. In addition, landowners prefer to lease out their land to known and trusted individuals rather than to unfamiliar persons. Owing to these close and informal relationships between landowners and tenants, oral tenancy arrangements are predominantly preferred. And owners often avoid entering into written agreements. In addition, landowners prefer to lease out their land to known and trusted individuals rather than to unfamiliar persons. Owing to these close and informal relationships between landowners and tenants, oral tenancy arrangements are predominantly preferred.

Tenancy type based on duration

Table 2 shows the distribution of respondents by duration of tenancy among lessees and lessors, along with their percentages. Among lessees (150), annual tenancy is the most common, accounting for 63 respondents (42.0%). This is followed by very long-term tenancy, reported by 53 lessees (35.3%), indicating sustained leasing relationships over time. Short-term tenancy (3 years) is reported by 19 lessees (12.66%), while biennial tenancy is relatively limited, with 15 lessees (10%). No lessees reported seasonal, medium-term, or long-term tenancy arrangements. Among lessors (90), very long-term tenancy dominates, with 39 respondents (43.3%), followed by annual tenancy reported by 27 lessors (30.0%). Biennial tenancy accounts for 16 lessors (17.8%), while short-term tenancy is reported by only 8 lessors (8.9%). Similar to lessees, no lessors reported seasonal, medium-term, or long-term tenancy.

Overall, the pattern highlights the dominance of annual and informally extended long-term tenancy arrangements in the study area. Very long-term duration of tenancy may be accounted for by inherited type of tenancy. The results are in conformity with that reported by Kiranmayi and Vijayabhinandana (2015) [7] . www.extensionjournal.com

Tenancy type based on inheritance

The results indicate that non-inherited leasing is the dominant form of tenancy in the study area. Overall, 61.3% of the respondents reported non-inherited leasing, while 38.7% were engaged in inherited leasing arrangements. This suggests that most tenancy relationships are formed based on present economic needs rather than being carried forward through generations.

At the district level, non-inherited leasing is more prevalent in all three districts -Varanasi (66%), Barabanki (62%), and Ambedkar Nagar (56%) highlighting a consistent pattern across the region. The relatively higher share of inherited leasing in Ambedkar Nagar (44%) compared to the other districts indicates the continued role of traditional and family-based tenancy relationships in some areas.

Distribution of the respondents according to lease agreements

The table reveals that fixed cash payment is the most prevalent form of lease agreement in the study area, accounting for 70 per cent of the total respondents. This dominance is observed across all three districts, with the highest incidence in Ambedkar Nagar (74%), followed by Varanasi (70%) and Barabanki (66%), reflecting landowners' preference for assured and risk-free income. Crop-sharing arrangements constitute the second most common form, reported by 26% of respondents. The practice is relatively more common in Barabanki (32%), suggesting a greater willingness to share production risk in this district, while its prevalence is lower in Ambedkar Nagar (20%). Fixed crop-sharing agreements are least preferred, accounting for only 4% of respondents, indicating limited acceptance of this form due to possible complexities in valuation and enforcement under informal tenancy conditions. Overall, the results suggest a clear shift towards cash-based leasing arrangements, alongside the continued but declining presence of traditional crop-sharing systems. (2012) [10] , Kiranmayi and Vijayabhinandana (2015) [7] and Jhansi (2018) [6] .

Conclusion

The study shows that agricultural land leasing in Eastern Uttar Pradesh is predominantly informal and socially driven, with all tenancy arrangements based on oral agreements. Annual and very long-term leases coexist, reflecting both short-term economic needs and long-standing trust-based relationships. Non-inherited leasing is more common, indicating economically motivated tenancy decisions. Fixed cash leasing dominates, supported by flexible rent payment practices, demonstrating increasing monetization of tenancy alongside tenants' reliance on crop income. Overall, land leasing remains a crucial livelihood mechanism, despite operating largely outside formal legal frameworks.

References

1. Bhalla GS. Land reforms and agricultural growth in India. Econ Polit Wkly. 1993;28(52): A145-A155.
2. Bansal A, Grover DK. An economic analysis of tenancy in agriculture: A case study of Punjab. Agric Econ Res Rev. 2012;25(2):255-262.
3. Deininger K, Jin S, Nagarajan H. Efficiency and equity impacts of rural land market restrictions: Evidence from India. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4324. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 2007.
4. Government of India. Key indicators of land and livestock holdings in India (NSS 70th Round, 2012-13). National Sample Survey Office, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. New Delhi: Government of India; 2013.
5. Jha B, Acharya S. Agrarian structure and land lease markets in India: An analysis of NSSO data. Mumbai: Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research; 2011.
6. Jhansi R. Agricultural land leasing and tenancy structures in developing economies. Int J Soc Sci Econ Res. 2018;3(4):1238-1252.
7. Kiranmayi P, Vijayabhinandana B. Pattern of tenancy and agricultural performance in rural India. J Rural Dev. 2015;34(3):321-336.
8. NITI Aayog. Report of the Expert Committee on Model Agricultural Land Leasing Act, 2016. New Delhi: Government of India; 2016.
9. Planning Commission. Report of the Working Group on Land Relations for the 12th Five Year Plan. New Delhi: Government of India; 2012.
10. Prasad CS, Singh R, Kumar P. Trends and patterns of agricultural land leasing in India. Agric Situ India. 2012;69(1):5-14.