Demographic and economic profile of rural youth engaged in agriculture and allied sectors in Ghazipur district of Uttar Pradesh

Introduction

Agriculture remains the backbone of the Indian economy, sustaining a large proportion of the rural population and contributing significantly to national income and employment. In states like Uttar Pradesh, agriculture and allied sectors continue to be the primary source of livelihood, particularly in districts with predominantly rural demographics such as Ghazipur. However, the sector is increasingly confronted with challenges such as declining farm profitability, small and fragmented landholdings, climate variability, and limited access to modern technologies. These constraints have led to a gradual decline in the interest of rural youth in agriculture, resulting in migration towards urban areas in search of better opportunities (Singh et al., 2019) [11] . Rural youth, defined as individuals in the age group of 15-35 years, constitute a vital human resource with immense potential to transform agriculture into a more productive and sustainable enterprise. Their involvement in agriculture not only ensures continuity in farming but also introduces innovation, risk-taking ability, and entrepreneurial orientation. The concept of entrepreneurial behaviour in agriculture has gained importance in recent years, emphasizing the need for youth to adopt agriculture as a business rather than a subsistence activity (Kumar & Kumar, 2021) [5] . However, the extent to which rural youth engage in agricultural entrepreneurship is largely influenced by their socio-economic background. The socio-economic profile of respondents including variables such as age, education, caste, family type, landholding, income, and occupation plays a crucial role in shaping their knowledge, attitudes, and decision-making behaviour. This studies consistently highlighted that factors like education, landholding size, income level, and extension contact significantly influence the entrepreneurial behaviour and adoption of improved agricultural practices among rural youth (Yadav & Sharma, 2020) [12] . Understanding these characteristics is therefore essential for designing targeted interventions to promote youth participation in agriculture and allied sectors. www.extensionjournal.com

The Government of India has initiated several programmes aimed at enhancing youth engagement in agriculture, including skill development, entrepreneurship promotion, and capacity-building initiatives. Despite these efforts, the success of such programmes largely depends on the existing socio-economic conditions and the level of awareness among rural youth (Government of India, 2022; NABARD, 2021) [3,7] . Ghazipur district of Uttar Pradesh provides a relevant setting to examine the socio-economic profile and entrepreneurial behaviour of rural youth engaged in agriculture and allied sectors. Therefore, the present study aims to analyse the socio-economic characteristics of respondents and assess their influence on entrepreneurial behaviour, thereby contributing to the development of effective strategies for promoting Agri-entrepreneurship among rural youth.

Research Methodology

The present study was conducted in the Ghazipur district of Uttar Pradesh, India. The state was purposively selected owing to the researcher's familiarity with the local language, cultural context, and geographical conditions, which facilitated efficient data collection and enhanced the reliability of the information obtained. Ghazipur district, located in the eastern part of the Varanasi division, was selected due to its diverse socio-economic and demographic characteristics. An ex-post facto research design was adopted, as the variables under study had already occurred and were beyond the control of the researcher (Kumar & Ratnakar, 2011) [4] . A multistage sampling technique was used for the selection of respondents. In the first stage, four blocks Manihari, Jakhania, Ghazipur, and Mardah were selected randomly from the total blocks in the district. In the second stage, four villages from each selected block were chosen through simple random sampling, resulting in a total of 16 villages. From each village, 10 rural youth engaged in agriculture and allied sectors were selected, constituting a total sample size of 160 respondents. The sample size was considered adequate to obtain reliable and representative results (Yadav & Sharma, 2020) [12] . Data were collected through personal interviews using a pre-tested and structured interview schedule. The schedule was designed to obtain detailed information on socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents. Field observations were also conducted to supplement the primary data. The collected data were analysed using appropriate statistical tools such as frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, and correlation coefficient for meaningful interpretation (Garrett & Woodworth, 1969) [2] . Table 2 shows that most respondents are Hindu (51.25%), followed by Muslim (26.25%), while other religions constitute smaller proportions. Table 3 indicates that most respondents belong to the Other Backward Class (52.51%), followed by General (28.12%) and Scheduled Caste (18.12%), while Scheduled Tribe has the lowest share (1.25%). Table 5 shows that most respondents are married (57.51%), followed by unmarried (39.37%), with very few widowed (1.87%) and divorced (1.25%). Table 6 shows that most respondents belong to mediumsized families (56.87%), followed by small (30.62%) and large families (12.51%). The table 7 shows that the majority of respondents (56.25%) belong to nuclear families, while a significant proportion (43.75%) come from joint families. Table 8 shows that most respondents' families are engaged in cultivation (45.62%), followed by caste-based occupations (13.12%), business (11.87%), and independent professions (10.62%), with smaller shares in labour, government, and private services. Table 9 shows that most respondents are marginal farmers (53.12%), followed by small (25.00%), semi-medium (16.87%), and medium farmers (5.00%). www.extensionjournal.com The table shows that most respondents fall in the low-income group (63.33%), followed by medium (29.16%) and high income (7.51%). Table 11 shows that mobile phones (100%) and internet (87.5%) are the most widely used mass media sources among respondents. Television (58.75%) and posters (62.5%) also have good reach, while most other sources like radio, farm magazines, books, and desktops show very low. Table 12 shows that most respondents have medium economic motivation (67.5%), followed by low (28.75%), while very few have high motivation (3.75%). Table 14 shows that most respondents have medium risk orientation (61.25%), followed by low (23.12%) and high risk (15.62%). Table 15 shows that among formal sources, Gram-Pradhan ranks first (MPS 2.17), followed by Agriculture College/University (1.99) and Co-operative (1.95). Among informal sources, friends & relatives and neighbours rank highest (MPS 3.00 each), followed by input dealers (2.58), indicating greater reliance on informal sources (overall average 3.99).

Results and Discussion 1. Youth age

Religion

Caste

Education

Marital statuses

Family size

Family type

Occupation

Land holding

Annual income

Mass media exposure

Economic Motivation

Social participations

Extension contacts

Conclusion

The findings on the socio-economic profile of rural youth indicate that the respondents were predominantly young adults belonging to OBC categories, with moderate levels of education and a high proportion of married individuals. Agriculture emerged as the principal occupation, supported by small and marginal landholdings and low-income levels.

The study further highlights a transition toward nuclear family systems while maintaining elements of joint family structures. Information-seeking behaviour reveals a strong inclination toward digital media, particularly mobile phones and the internet, over traditional sources. Moderate levels of economic motivation, risk orientation, and organizational participation were observed, with greater reliance on informal sources than formal extension services. These patterns reflect the evolving socio-economic dynamics of rural youth and emphasize the need to strengthen extension systems and digital outreach for effective agricultural development (Singh & Sharma, 2020; Kumar et al., 2019) [10, 6] .

References

1. Garrett HE, Woodworth RS. Statistics in psychology and education. Vakils, Feffer and Simons Pvt Ltd; 1969.
2. Government of India. Annual report 2021-22. Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, New Delhi; 2022.
3. Kumar A, Ratnakar R. A study on farmers' perception towards agricultural extension services. 2011.
4. Kumar R, Kumar S. Entrepreneurial behaviour of rural youth in agriculture. Indian Journal of Extension Education. 2021;57(1):72-76.
5. Kumar R, Singh P, Yadav V. Socio-economic analysis of rural youth in agriculture. Indian Journal of Extension Education. 2019;55(2):45-50.
6. National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development. Annual report 2020-21. Mumbai: NABARD; 2021.
7. Kushwaha J. A study on improvement of economic status of rural women through mobile training centre. International Journal of Home Science. 2022;8(1):287288.
8. Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India. Census of India 2011: District Census Handbook -Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh. Government of India; 2011.
9. Singh A, Sharma K. Information behaviour and extension contact among farmers. Indian Journal of Extension Education. 2020;56(1):78-83.
10. Singh A, Singh B, Patel R. Youth involvement in agriculture: Issues and challenges. Indian Journal of Extension Education. 2019;55(3):10-15.
11. Yadav V, Sharma K. Socio-economic factors influencing entrepreneurial behaviour of rural youth. Indian Journal of Extension Education. 2020;56(4):3439.