The Shifting Urban Occupational Landscape in Post-Liberalization India

When India opened its economy in 1991 through a sweeping set of liberalization reforms, the effects were felt far beyond trade and industry. They reached into every corner of urban life – reshaping who worked, in what capacity, and under what conditions. The cities that emerged from this transformation were more dynamic, more unequal, and more complex than before. Understanding how urban employment patterns shifted in post-liberalization India means grappling with a story that is not simply one of growth, but also one of deepening precarity, persistent social hierarchies, and starkly uneven outcomes across gender, caste, religion, and geography.

The economic backdrop: what 1991 changed 🔗

The 1991 reforms – commonly referred to as the LPG (Liberalization, Privatization, and Globalization) package – were introduced in response to a severe balance-of-payments crisis. Under Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao and Finance Minister Manmohan Singh, India dismantled many of the controls that had defined its post-independence economic model. Tariffs fell sharply, industries were deregulated, and the doors to foreign investment swung open. Per capita output has increased significantly since then, and the overall unemployment rate has remained relatively low – but these headline figures mask a far more complicated reality on the ground, especially in cities.

Decline in work participation rates for key groups 🔗

One of the more counterintuitive outcomes of India’s high-growth post-liberalization era has been a decline in the Work Participation Rate (WPR) – the share of the population actively engaged in economic activity – for certain groups. The WPR is not simply a measure of unemployment; it also captures those who have withdrawn from the labor force entirely.

Labor force participation rates fell sharply, especially for women, even as per capita output rose significantly. Youth unemployment too remained persistently high in urban areas. Urban youth unemployment reached as high as 18.8% for women aged 20-24 and 12.8% for men aged 15-19 in 2011-12, well above rural equivalents. This points to a structural mismatch between urban economic growth and actual job creation for the young population entering the labor market.

The reasons behind declining WPR are layered. Rising household incomes led to the withdrawal of women from the labor force to take on domestic duties, while increased participation in education pulled younger workers away from the job market. Yet the paradox is sharp: more education did not automatically translate into greater workforce participation. Even after a decade of structural transformation, urban women’s labor force participation rate remained almost stagnant.

The rise of skilled manual and service sector jobs 🔗

Liberalization did create new employment categories in cities. The IT sector, business process outsourcing (BPO), finance, retail, and telecommunications all expanded rapidly. Cities like Bangalore, Hyderabad, and Pune emerged as global technology hubs, and deregulation of telecommunications sparked dramatic expansion with mobile usage growing from a luxury to widespread adoption, creating jobs in retail, customer service, and network maintenance.

Within manufacturing and trade, there was also a measurable rise in skilled manual occupations. After trade liberalization in 1991, demand for unskilled labor increased in India, with these occupations largely comprising tailors and dressmakers in textile manufacturing and salespersons in wholesale and retail trade in urban areas. Over the following decade, however, the employment structure began shifting further toward non-routine, cognitive, and skilled manual work – reflecting a gradual upgrading of the urban occupational hierarchy.

Still, the benefits of this upgrading were not broadly distributed. Service sector growth was concentrated in select segments. The services sector contributed 63% of GDP growth over the last decade but a significantly smaller share in employment at about 33%, and over 55% of service-sector employment was still made up of petty trade, domestic services, and other small-scale informal employment.

Gender and urban employment 🔗

Gender remains one of the most decisive fault lines in urban India’s labor market. The workforce participation rate of India’s women is significantly lower than that of men, and among women, the employment levels of urban women are lower than those of their rural counterparts. Women who do find urban employment are disproportionately concentrated in low-wage, informal, and often precarious work – domestic labor, home-based piece-rate tasks, and assembly work.

Even in sectors like IT and BPO that are seen as relatively gender-progressive, the picture is mixed. Women enter these industries in significant numbers but often occupy lower-level positions with limited upward mobility. A phenomenon termed the “feminisation of labour” has emerged – a rise in female participation alongside a pattern where jobs with lower wages tend to increase with greater female entry.

Supply-side factors compound the problem. Between 1993-94 and 2011-12, the share of women with secondary and higher education increased substantially, yet possessing secondary or higher secondary education was not found to be an incentive for women to participate in the labor market in India. Structural and social barriers – including safety concerns, limited flexible work options, and household expectations – continue to suppress participation regardless of educational attainment.

Caste and religion: persistent hierarchies in a liberalized economy 🔗

Economic liberalization was expected by many to erode the significance of caste and religion in determining employment outcomes. The market, the argument went, would reward skill over social identity. The evidence, however, tells a different story.

Caste has been treated as a historical disadvantage in post-liberalization policy debates, yet it continues to function as a structure of advantage and discrimination in the modern urban economy. Dalits and Adivasis, who were historically landless, have not found urban expansion to be a path of equal entry. Roughly 45% of Dalit households possess no land at all, reflecting deep institutional barriers rather than market outcomes, and dominant castes have profited from rising urban land prices while landless groups have lost access to common lands and livelihoods.

In hiring, caste-based discrimination has adapted rather than disappeared. Audit studies in the technologically advanced corporate sectors of India have found that caste and religion continue to play a key role in hiring decisions for Scheduled Castes and Muslims. While some research on software jobs found no direct discrimination based on caste surnames, call-center hiring studies did find significant callback disparities between upper-caste and OBC applicants.

Religion adds another layer of exclusion. Muslims face a paradox: relatively low recorded unemployment but declining job quality, low wages, lower labor force participation, and high poverty – highlighting that the real issue is not just whether people are employed, but the quality and security of that employment. Religious minorities more broadly tend to be pushed toward informal, low-paying work, which reinforces economic inequality along community lines.

Uneven geography: metros versus smaller cities 🔗

The post-liberalization employment boom was not spatially even. Large metropolitan centers captured the lion’s share of formal sector growth. Mumbai, Delhi, and Bangalore attracted skilled workforces, corporate investment, and high-wage service jobs. But urban areas benefited far more than rural areas, and states with more flexible labor regulations attracted greater industrial investment compared to those with more worker-protective laws, creating significant regional disparities.

Smaller cities and towns experienced far more limited formal sector expansion. In places like Kanpur, Meerut, or Coimbatore, older industries such as textiles and leather continued to dominate, but without offering meaningful upward mobility. Workers in these cities found fewer pathways into skilled employment and were more likely to remain in informal, low-wage work. This geographic concentration of opportunity has also fueled large-scale migration toward metros, which in turn intensifies competition for housing and informal jobs in urban peripheries.

The growth of casual and informal employment 🔗

Perhaps the most defining characteristic of post-liberalization urban employment is the dramatic expansion of informal and casual work. Liberalization was supposed to formalize the economy – but the reverse largely occurred. The number of informal sector workers increased from 341 million in 1999-2000 to 386 million in 2011-12, and by 2011-12, 51% of all jobs in the organized sector were informal.

The Periodic Labour Force Survey (2017-18) reports that 92% of the 61 million jobs created since 1991 have been informal. This casualization has also infiltrated the organized sector itself. Between 2000 and 2015, the share of contract labor in manufacturing increased from 15% to 28%, while the share of directly hired workers fell from 61% to 50%. Employers increasingly prefer short-term contract workers to reduce costs and limit workers’ collective bargaining power.

Informal workers – whether street vendors, construction laborers, domestic workers, or home-based piece-rate workers – face a common set of vulnerabilities. They are excluded from labor law protections such as minimum wage guarantees, paid leave, and provident fund contributions. Urban casual labor is associated with a 7 percentage point higher likelihood of being poor and nearly 17% lower earnings compared to other forms of urban employment.

Urban centres across India have witnessed a rapid proliferation of informal employment since the post-1991 era, with the proportion of workers in casual wage work and self-employment escalating as the economy opened up to globalization – despite the persistent perils of job insecurity, low wages, and lack of social security.

The informal economy in cities is not a temporary or transitional phenomenon. It has become structural – a permanent feature of how urban labor markets function in India. Informal sector employment plays a dual role: it contributes to employment generation and economic growth, but its pervasive nature – encompassing 85-90% of the labor force – highlights complex challenges that perpetuate economic vulnerability.

What the shifts add up to 🔗

Post-liberalization urban India presents a striking paradox. The economy grew substantially, new industries emerged, and some sections of the urban population gained access to better-paying, more skilled work. Yet for a large majority of urban workers – particularly women, Dalits, religious minorities, migrants, and residents of smaller cities – the dominant experience has been one of informality, precarity, and constrained mobility. The WPR decline for women and youth, the persistence of caste and religion in shaping job access, the concentration of formal gains in select metros, and the relentless expansion of casual employment together form the real texture of India’s urban occupational transformation. Growth happened – but it did not reach everyone equally, or securely.

What do you think? If economic growth has not reduced informality or labor market inequality in urban India over three decades, what structural changes – in policy, education, or social norms – would actually move the needle? And does the persistence of caste and religion in urban hiring suggest that India’s labor market requires anti-discrimination frameworks as much as it does skill-development programs?

References

1. https://wol.iza.org/articles/the-labor-market-in-india-since-the-1990s/long
2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2452292923000565
3. https://socialwork.institute/social-development/liberalization-in-india-economy-jobs/
4. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-76228-4_9
5. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09500170221083511
6. https://www.orfonline.org/research/promoting-female-participation-in-urban-indias-labour-force-63693
7. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/559511491319990632/pdf/WPS8024.pdf
8. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X18301943
9. https://ephr.in/2025/10/27/caste-power-land-politics-and-urban-inequality-in-post-liberalised-india/
10. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956247818812330
11. https://www.majorcitiesofworld.com/unemployment-in-india-caste-religion-community-disparities/
12. https://www.indiaspend.com/90-of-jobs-created-over-two-decades-post-liberalisation-were-informal
13. https://www.iasgyan.in/daily-current-affairs/indias-cities-expanding-hubs-of-precarious-employment
14. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9207434/
15. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41775-022-00131-2
16. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391772199_Migration_Social_Network_and_Informal_Employment_in_Households_of_Women_Domestic_Workers_A_Study_of_Urban_Livelihoods_in_Kolkata_City
17. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44282-025-00239-9