Flagship Release #1 / Annual Survey of Industries (ASI 1974–2024) / September 2026

The Subcontracted Republic

Fifty Years of Capital Deepening, Contract Labour, and the Shrinking Factory Wage Share

Fifty years of factory microdata reveal how Indian manufacturing substituted direct jobs with contractor intermediaries, expanded capital intensity, and compressed the labour share of Net Value Added to historical lows.

Contract Worker Share (2024)
41.6%
Up from 37.6% in 2018-19
Contract Share of Job Growth
60.3%
1.64M of 2.72M net additions
Within-Plant Wage Penalty
-24.5%
Across 16,896 paired factories
Labor Share of NVA
38.1%
Fell from 40.85% (-2.76 pp)
Operating Profits Share
51.0%
₹10.73 Lakh Crore in 2023-24
Recent Real Wage CAGR
-0.46%
2020–24 commodity inflation dip
Chapter 01 / Long-Run Trajectory

The Half-Century Arc: 50 Years of Factory Industrialization (1974–2024)

When the Annual Survey of Industries (ASI) recorded India’s formal manufacturing base in 1974-75, the registered factory sector employed 5.41 million persons generating a national wage bill of ₹23.0 billion. Fifty years later, in the 2023-24 survey round, the factory workforce had expanded 3.49-fold to 18.86 million persons engaged in registered manufacturing (19.59 million across all ASI sectors, including 15.00 million shop-floor production workers), supporting an annual wage and salary bill of ₹6,673 billion across 212,990 operating establishments.

Deflating nominal factory earnings by the Wholesale Price Index (WPI All-Commodities spliced and rebased to 2011-12 = 100.0) reveals an essential long-run truth: real factory compensation per person engaged expanded 5.43-fold over the 49-year span, rising from ₹41,415 in 1974-75 to ₹224,699 per person engaged in 2023-24 (in constant 2011-12 prices). This represents an annualized real growth rate of +3.51%/year, placing India’s formal manufacturing wage path soundly within historical international benchmarks for industrial catch-up (~2–4%/year). Note: Because this long-run historical series tracks all persons engaged (inclusive of managerial and technical staff earning an average of ₹14.36 lakh/year in 2023–24), the real product wage of a shop-floor production worker in 2023–24 stands lower, at ₹137,452 (₹150,246 for direct workers, and ₹119,823 for contract workers).

Fifty Years of Real Factory Wages and Employment (ASI 1974–2024)

Single-deflated product wage per worker (2011-12 ₹/yr, left axis) vs. Total factory employment (millions, right axis). Shaded bands mark the five NIC classification vintages.

Real Wage (2011-12 ₹) Employment (Millions)

Decade Growth Dynamics: In Which Decades Did Real Wages Actually Rise?

Decomposing the 50-year arc into discrete economic eras shows that real factory wages grew across all five major historical decades. The only sustained period of real wage contraction occurred in the post-pandemic 2020–2024 window, when international commodity price shocks caused wholesale inflation (+7.34%/yr) to outpace nominal pay increases (+6.84%/yr).

Decade Window Period Span Nominal Wage CAGR Real Wage CAGR WPI Inflation Employment CAGR Real Wage Bill CAGR Trajectory
1970s 1974 to 1980-81 (6y) +12.15% +5.20% 6.61% +2.80% +8.14% Positive
1980s 1980-81 to 1990-91 (10y) +10.83% +3.69% 6.88% +0.64% +4.36% Positive
1990s 1990-91 to 2000-01 (10y) +9.73% +2.83% 6.71% +1.62% +4.50% Positive
2000s 2000-01 to 2010-11 (10y) +8.68% +3.49% 5.01% +4.35% +7.99% Positive
2010s 2010-11 to 2020-21 (10y) +7.72% +4.25% 3.33% +2.39% +6.74% Positive
2020-24 2020-21 to 2023-24 (3y) +6.84% -0.46% 7.34% +6.79% +6.29% Negative
Full Span (1974–2023) 1974 to 2023-24 (49y) +9.44% +3.51% 5.73% +2.58% +6.18% Positive
Chapter 02 / Distribution Dynamics

The Great Factor Squeeze: Net Value Added and the Shrinking Factory Wage Share

Between 2018-19 and 2023-24, India’s registered factory sector enjoyed an extraordinary surge in economic output. Gross factory output expanded from ₹92.8 lakh crore to ₹153.3 lakh crore, while Net Value Added (NVA)—the true cake of net income produced by labour and capital—swelled from ₹12.76 lakh crore to ₹21.03 lakh crore (+64.8% in nominal terms).

Yet the allocation of this surplus shifted decisively away from the workers who created it. The share of Net Value Added allocated to total labor compensation (wages, salaries, bonuses, and employer contributions to provident funds and pensions) fell from 40.85% in 2018-19 to 38.09% in 2023-24, after hitting a post-pandemic trough of 35.99% in 2021-22. In parallel, the official emoluments share of NVA declined from 36.20% to 34.07%.

Meanwhile, residual operating profits pocketed by factory owners and shareholders surged to ₹10.73 lakh crore in 2023-24, absorbing 51.01% of all Net Value Added. Corporate capital captured more than half of factory economic surplus, while net interest payments to financial institutions shrank from 15.15% to 10.60% of NVA.

⚖️

The Contract Labour Absorption Engine

Where did new factory jobs come from? Between 2018-19 and 2023-24, registered manufacturing added 2,721,297 net production workers. Of these net additions, 1,639,636 were contract workers supplied by third-party intermediaries, compared to just 1,081,661 direct permanent workers. Contract labour thus accounted for 60.25% of all net factory worker creation in India over the six-year panel, driving the national contract worker share from 37.62% to 41.59%.

Factor Shares of Net Value Added (ASI 2018–19 to 2023–24)

The fourfold division of factory NVA: Operating Profits, Labor Compensation, Net Interest, and Rent.

The Within-Between Decomposition: Shop-Floor Erosion vs. Sectoral Shift

Neoliberal and neoclassical accounts often argue that a declining national labor share is merely the benign byproduct of structural change—for example, faster capital accumulation in naturally capital-intensive industries like basic metals, petrochemicals, or automobiles. To test this hypothesis rigorously, we executed a symmetric Kitagawa-Oaxaca within-between decomposition across 851 common support state × 2-digit industry cells between 2018-19 and 2023-24:

ΔShare = Σ s̄c Δθc (Within-Cell Component) + Σ θ̄c Δsc (Between-Cell Reallocation) + εentry/exit
-2.76 pp
Total Compensation Share Fall
Observed decline from 40.85% to 38.09% of NVA
-2.96 pp
Within-Cell Component (Shop Floor)
Explains 107.2% of the total fall on identical factory sites
+0.71 pp
Between-Cell Reallocation
Structural industry reallocation cushioned the fall by +0.71 pp
-0.51 pp
Entry / Exit Net Residual
Net impact of plant turnover and unmatched border transitions

The Mathematical Verdict: Reallocation across industries did not cause the factory labor share to fall. Had sectoral and state output weights remained frozen at their 2018-19 baseline, the compensation share of NVA would have fallen by -2.96 percentage points. Inter-industry structural shifts contributed +0.71 pp, and net establishment turnover contributed -0.51 pp, summing cleanly to the total -2.76 pp fall (-2.96 + 0.71 - 0.51 = -2.76 pp). The entire net shrinkage of the factory wage share was driven by shop-floor wage suppression and contractualisation within established factories.

Chapter 03 Microdata Identification

The Shop-Floor Dualism: Within-Plant Paired Wage Penalty (16,896 Mixed Factories)

When economists compare contract workers with direct workers across national aggregates, skeptics object that the observed wage discount reflects sorting: contract workers might simply be clustered in poorer states, smaller plants, or lower-technology sectors.

To sweep away all unobserved plant-level heterogeneity, firm technology, regional price differences, and managerial quality, we exploit a powerful microdata identification design: we isolate the 16,896 single-factory operating establishments in 2023-24 that employ both direct production workers and contract workers simultaneously on the exact same shop floor (representing 39,999.75 weighted factories).

In these mixed factories, direct workers and contract workers clock in through the same factory gates and operate the same machinery. Yet their compensation is radically decoupled. The within-plant geometric mean daily wage ratio is 0.7552. Contract workers suffer a 24.5% wage penalty relative to direct workers inside the exact same establishment.

Distribution of Within-Plant Wage Ratios Across 16,896 Mixed Factories

Probability density curve of the ratio: Contract Daily Wage ÷ Direct Daily Wage. The shaded zone denotes establishments where contract workers earn less than direct peers.

82.3% of Mixed Plants Pay Contract < Direct Geometric Mean Ratio: 0.755 (-24.5% Penalty) Median Ratio: 0.808 (-19.2%)

Econometric Model: Does Higher Contract Intensity Deepen the Penalty?

Regressing the log within-plant daily wage ratio on establishment contract share, establishment scale, and capital intensity across 91,698 factory-year observations clustered across 856 state × 2-digit industry cells:

ln(wijtcontract / wijtdirect) = α + β₁(Contract Shareijt) + β₂ ln(Paid Personsijt) + β₃ ln(Capital/Personijt) + γst + δind + εijt
Covariate Term Coefficient (\(\beta\)) State-Clustered SE t-statistic p-value Interpretation
Contract Worker Share -0.2981 0.0259 -11.52 < 10⁻³⁰ Every 10 pp increase in plant contract share widens the wage gap by ~3.0%
Log Paid Persons (Scale) -0.0444 0.0042 -10.64 < 10⁻²⁶ Larger factory establishments enforce wider dual-wage structures
Log Capital / Person (K/L) -0.0278 0.0039 -7.09 < 10⁻¹² Highly mechanized and capital-intensive plants exhibit steeper wage discounts
NCO-2015 & Block E Hierarchy

The Factory Wage Pyramid: Shop Floor vs. Supervisory & Managerial Pay

Beyond the -24.5% shop-floor dualism between direct and contract workers, India’s registered manufacturing establishments exhibit an extreme vertical wage divide. Across 18.86 million persons engaged in registered manufacturing (NIC 10–33), supervisory and managerial personnel earn 6.07× more than direct production workers and 7.61× more than contract workers.

Supervisory & Managerial Staff
₹14,36,021/yr
17,40,859 persons (9.2%) 7.61× of Contract Wage
Clerical & Support Staff
₹4,49,338/yr
20,57,435 persons (10.9%) 1.90× of Direct Worker Wage
Direct Production Workers
₹2,36,631/yr
87,17,720 persons (46.2%) Permanent / Direct Payroll
Contract Production Workers
₹1,88,716/yr
62,85,293 persons (33.3%) Third-Party Intermediated
Employment Category ASI Block E Line Persons Engaged Workforce Share Annual Earnings (₹) NCO-2015 Classification Equivalent Skill Benchmark
Contract Production Workers Line 5 62,85,293 33.33% ₹1,88,716 Divisions 7 & 8 (Craft Workers, Machine Operators) & Division 9 (Elementary) Level 1 & 2 (Semi-skilled & Unskilled manual)
Direct Production Workers Lines 1, 2, 3 (Male, Female, Child) 87,17,720 46.23% ₹2,36,631 Divisions 7 & 8 (Craft & Related Trades, Plant & Machine Operators) Level 2 (Skilled craft & machine operators)
Clerical & Support Staff Line 8 (Other Employees) 20,57,435 10.91% ₹4,49,338 Division 4 (Clerical Support Workers) & Division 5 (Service & Sales) Level 2 & 3 (Administrative & Technical support)
Supervisory & Managerial Staff Line 7 (Supervisory & Managerial) 17,40,859 9.23% ₹14,36,021 Division 1 (Managers) & Division 3 (Technicians & Associate Professionals) Level 3 & 4 (Professional & Executive leadership)
Working Proprietors & Family Line 9 (Unpaid Family Members) 55,886 0.30% — (Unpaid) Division 6 / Self-employed working owners Proprietary

National Classification of Occupations (NCO) Concordance across Survey Vintages

NCO-1968 (1974 to 2004)
Production Workers: Div 7-8-9 (Production & Related Workers, Transport Operators, Labourers)
Supervisory / Exec: Div 2 (Administrative, Executive & Managerial) and Div 0-1 (Professional & Technical)
Clerical / Sales: Div 3 (Clerical) & Div 4 (Sales) & Div 5 (Service)
NCO-2004 (2004 to 2015)
Production Workers: Div 7 (Craft), Div 8 (Machine Operators), Div 9 (Elementary)
Supervisory / Exec: Div 1 (Managers) & Div 3 (Associate Professionals & Technicians)
Clerical / Sales: Div 4 (Clerks) & Div 5 (Service & Sales)
NCO-2015 (2015 to 2024+)
Production Workers: Div 7 (Craft), Div 8 (Plant & Machine Operators), Div 9 (Elementary)
Supervisory / Exec: Div 1 (Managers) & Div 3 (Technicians & Associate Professionals)
Clerical / Sales: Div 4 (Clerical Support) & Div 5 (Service & Sales)
Chapter 04 Industrial Segmentation

The 24 Manufacturing Sectors: Capital Intensity vs. Contract Penetration

Contract labour is not evenly distributed across the industrial landscape. A striking bivariate pattern links an industry's capital intensity with its propensity to replace direct employees with contract intermediaries: the more capital-intensive the factory, the higher its contract share, and the deeper its shop-floor wage penalty.

In heavy capital-intensive sectors—such as Coke & Refined Petroleum (NIC 19), Motor Vehicles (NIC 29), Basic Metals (NIC 24), and Non-Metallic Minerals/Cement (NIC 23)—contract workers represent between 52% and 76% of all shop-floor labor. In these sectors, contract workers earn between 31% and 65% of the direct worker wage (wage discounts of 35% to 69%).

Conversely, in labor-intensive light manufacturing and export-oriented sectors—such as Wearing Apparel (NIC 14), Textiles (NIC 13), and Leather Products (NIC 15)—contract worker penetration remains low (12% to 21%), and direct and contract wages operate near parity (wage ratios of 0.92 to 0.996).

The 24 Manufacturing Sectors: Contract Share vs. Wage Parity

X-axis: Contract Worker Share (%). Y-axis: Contract / Direct Wage Ratio. Bubble size proportional to total production workforce; color indicates log fixed capital per person.

Top-Left: Labour-Intensive & Near-Parity (Textiles, Garments) Bottom-Right: Capital-Intensive & Subcontracted (Petroleum, Auto, Metals)
Extreme Contract Dualism

Coke & Petroleum (NIC 19)

Contract Share: 76.1%
Contract / Direct Wage: 0.311x (68.9% Discount)
Direct vs Contract Wage: ₹851k vs ₹265k

Extreme capital intensity (log K/L: 16.27). A small core of permanent operators earn elite wages, while three-quarters of the workforce are subcontracted at a 69% wage penalty.

Assembly Line Contractualisation

Motor Vehicles (NIC 29)

Contract Share: 56.9%
Contract / Direct Wage: 0.600x (40.0% Discount)
Direct vs Contract Wage: ₹341k vs ₹205k

1.11M factory workers across 10,564 factories. Automotive assemblers have systematically shifted shop-floor assembly lines to contract agencies, pocketing ₹137,000 per contract worker annually.

High Parity / Labor-Intensive

Wearing Apparel (NIC 14)

Contract Share: 12.2%
Contract / Direct Wage: 0.996x (0.4% Gap)
Direct vs Contract Wage: ₹163k vs ₹163k

1.15M factory workers, predominantly women. Low fixed capital per worker (log K/L: 12.54). Wages are compressed near statutory minimum levels, leaving virtually no room for dual-wage discounts.

Chapter 05 Interactive Explorer

The State × Sector Wage Gap Calculator & Matrix

Explore how contractualisation, wage levels, and shop-floor wage gaps vary across India's 33 industrial states and union territories, and across each of the 24 manufacturing divisions. Select a state and industry below to compute live establishment counts, workforce totals, and the aggregate wage penalty.

Operating Factories
2,12,990
Weighted establishments
Factory Workers
1,55,19,957
Direct + Contract workers
Contract Worker Share
41.6%
Subcontracted fraction
Direct Worker Wage
₹235,868
Annual pay / direct worker
Contract Worker Wage
₹189,265
Annual pay / contract worker
Wage Penalty Gap
-19.8%
₹46,603 / worker shortfall
Contract Worker Intensity Baseline: 41.6%
Wage Discount vs. Direct Labor Baseline: -19.8%

Industrial State Matrix: Workforce, Contract Intensity & Wage Gaps

State / UT Factories Total Workers Contract Share Direct Wage (₹) Contract Wage (₹) Wage Gap Annual Penalty
Tamil Nadu 31,869 24,75,675 27.5% ₹1,96,308 ₹2,02,788 +3.3% ₹0.0 Bn
Gujarat 26,427 19,78,830 37.5% ₹2,36,125 ₹1,94,137 -17.8% ₹31.1 Bn
Maharashtra 21,100 18,49,633 54.8% ₹3,14,628 ₹2,26,387 -28.0% ₹89.4 Bn
Uttar Pradesh 18,760 12,80,760 36.9% ₹1,87,916 ₹1,56,732 -16.6% ₹14.7 Bn
Karnataka 11,717 9,68,922 36.1% ₹2,68,662 ₹2,39,498 -10.9% ₹10.2 Bn
Haryana 8,179 9,46,914 51.0% ₹2,31,085 ₹1,72,663 -25.3% ₹28.2 Bn
Telangana 9,914 7,72,749 65.4% ₹3,08,322 ₹1,24,379 -59.7% ₹92.9 Bn
Andhra Pradesh 12,072 6,35,844 39.1% ₹2,61,510 ₹2,12,911 -18.6% ₹12.1 Bn
Punjab 11,141 6,27,499 26.5% ₹1,83,402 ₹1,45,530 -20.6% ₹6.3 Bn
West Bengal 8,351 6,08,746 39.9% ₹2,25,302 ₹1,82,274 -19.1% ₹10.4 Bn
Rajasthan 9,618 5,96,600 43.4% ₹2,38,777 ₹1,93,688 -18.9% ₹11.7 Bn
Madhya Pradesh 4,543 3,84,680 46.5% ₹2,26,249 ₹1,73,874 -23.1% ₹9.4 Bn
Uttarakhand 2,449 3,51,659 58.0% ₹2,43,869 ₹1,62,010 -33.6% ₹16.7 Bn
Odisha 2,746 3,14,090 59.7% ₹3,27,788 ₹2,38,219 -27.3% ₹16.8 Bn
Kerala 6,891 2,82,993 23.2% ₹2,53,776 ₹2,21,461 -12.7% ₹2.1 Bn
Chhattisgarh 4,744 2,39,408 43.1% ₹2,75,926 ₹1,84,336 -33.2% ₹9.4 Bn
Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu 1,877 2,22,878 48.2% ₹2,03,231 ₹1,83,565 -9.7% ₹2.1 Bn
Assam 4,964 2,01,498 32.9% ₹1,16,390 ₹1,09,916 -5.6% ₹0.4 Bn
Jharkhand 2,209 1,90,991 55.2% ₹4,67,297 ₹2,00,855 -57.0% ₹28.1 Bn
Himachal Pradesh 1,966 1,72,793 36.2% ₹2,48,994 ₹1,91,998 -22.9% ₹3.6 Bn
Bihar 2,651 1,17,074 69.3% ₹2,08,734 ₹1,08,429 -48.1% ₹8.1 Bn
Delhi 2,094 67,932 10.5% ₹2,36,496 ₹2,38,013 +0.6% ₹0.0 Bn
Goa 681 66,181 61.9% ₹3,64,649 ₹2,36,471 -35.2% ₹5.3 Bn
Jammu & Kashmir 891 51,826 49.0% ₹1,94,304 ₹1,33,165 -31.5% ₹1.6 Bn
Puducherry 614 42,240 40.7% ₹2,88,994 ₹1,77,634 -38.5% ₹1.9 Bn
Sikkim 87 20,825 54.9% ₹3,42,341 ₹2,58,610 -24.5% ₹1.0 Bn
Tripura 672 20,601 87.7% ₹1,18,397 ₹54,568 -53.9% ₹1.1 Bn
Meghalaya 181 10,682 59.7% ₹1,99,961 ₹1,87,400 -6.3% ₹0.1 Bn
Chandigarh 176 5,489 25.0% ₹2,84,389 ₹2,03,148 -28.6% ₹0.1 Bn
Nagaland 185 5,082 25.7% ₹68,046 ₹40,958 -39.8% ₹0.0 Bn
Manipur 235 4,219 10.5% ₹91,221 ₹59,629 -34.6% ₹0.0 Bn
Arunachal Pradesh 178 3,225 18.3% ₹1,27,397 ₹1,31,011 +2.8% ₹0.0 Bn
Mizoram 204 1,048 41.9% ₹95,153 ₹86,389 -9.2% ₹0.0 Bn
Chapter 06 Statistical Discipline

Methodological Provenance: Classification Concordance & Survey Architecture

Constructing a rigorous 50-year continuous series from the Annual Survey of Industries requires overcoming deep structural breaks in classification schemes, shifting sampling multiplier conventions, and volatile deflator dynamics. Here we document the four fundamental statistical and econometric challenges addressed in this release:

01

NIC Multi-Vintage Concordance (1974 to 2024)

The ASI spans five distinct National Industrial Classification vintages: NIC-1970 (1974–1986, Divisions 20–39), NIC-1987 (1987–1997, Divisions 20–39), NIC-1998 (1998–2003, Divisions 15–37), NIC-2004 (2004–2007, Divisions 15–37), and NIC-2008 (2008–2024, Divisions 10–33).

The Publishing Structural Break: Under NIC-1998 and NIC-2004, Division 22 aggregated "Publishing, printing and reproduction of recorded media" inside Manufacturing. In NIC-2008, "Publishing" was carved out of manufacturing and moved into Information & Communication (Services Division 58). Failing to account for this classification shift creates an artificial drop in manufacturing output across 2007-08/2008-09. Our series isolates printing (NIC 18) to preserve continuous manufacturing boundaries.

lpad(CAST(code AS VARCHAR), 5, '0') was enforced across all queries so that food manufacturing (Division 10) is never corrupted or conflated with agricultural codes (Division 1).

02

ASI Survey Design, Joint Returns & Sampling Multipliers

The ASI sampling frame bifurcates factories into two sectors: Census Sector (factories employing 100+ workers, plus all factories in 6 smaller states/UTs), surveyed with certainty (multiplier = 1.0), and Sample Sector (factories employing 10–99 workers with power, or 20–99 without power), surveyed via circular systematic sampling with variable multipliers.

The Joint Return Correction: In official ASI records, a single return may be filed jointly for multiple factories under the same management (recorded in Block A Item 11, a11). Aggregating by multiplier alone without multiplying by coalesce(a11, 1.0) induces a systematic 7.1% undercount of operating factories. All establishment totals in this release rigorously apply mult * coalesce(a11, 1.0).

Historical Unweighted Period: Between 1976 and 1993, summary microdata tables did not record individual multipliers. Our historical tables explicitly document these as reporting factory totals (weight = 1.0) and visually highlight the 1998 transition to modern probability weights.

03

Product Wage vs. Consumption Wage: The 2020–2024 Contraction

A central concept in industrial economics is the divergence between the product wage (the cost of labor to the producer, deflated by output prices via WPI) and the consumption wage (the purchasing power of workers, deflated by consumer cost of living via CPI-IW).

The Commodity Shock Paradox: Between 2020-21 and 2023-24, nominal factory pay grew by +6.84%/year, and employment expanded by +6.79%/year. Yet real product wages per worker contracted by -0.46%/year. The driver was global commodity and fuel price inflation, which elevated the Wholesale Price Index (+7.34%/yr) above nominal wage bargaining adjustments. Manufacturers enjoyed record operating profits while real purchasing power of the wage bill stagnated.
04

The Within-Plant Paired Identification Strategy

By restricting our wage penalty estimation to the 16,896 factories employing both direct and contract workers simultaneously, our design absorbs all firm-level fixed effects, local labor market conditions, factory size, product mix, and management practices.

Because both direct and contract workers operate under the same roof, the observed 24.5% geometric mean wage penalty cannot be attributed to geographical dispersion or firm-size wage differentials. It represents pure labor market segmentation facilitated by the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970.

Harmonized Time Series Protocol

24-Sector NIC Multi-Vintage Concordance & 5-Digit Classification Crosswalk

Complete mapping of registered manufacturing sectors from 1974 to 2024, linking 2-digit analytical divisions to 5-digit microdata ranges across all five historical classification systems.

NIC-08 Manufacturing Industry Title 5-Digit Range NIC-1970 / 1987 NIC-1998 / 2004 Concordance & Structural Break Protocol
10 Manufacture of food products 10101–10799 20, 21 15 (pt) Stable continuous aggregate; beverage separated into NIC 11 under NIC-2008.
11 Manufacture of beverages 11011–11049 22 (pt) 15 (pt) Severed from food products (NIC-04 Div 15) and historical tobacco-beverage grouping (Div 22).
12 Manufacture of tobacco products 12001–12009 22 (pt) 16 Split from beverage under NIC-1998; 1:1 mapping between NIC-1998/2004 and NIC-2008.
13 Manufacture of textiles 13111–13999 23, 24, 25 17 Consolidated historical cotton (23), wool/silk/synthetic (24), and jute (25) into single division.
14 Manufacture of wearing apparel 14101–14309 26 18 Consistent boundary capturing woven and knitted garments.
15 Manufacture of leather and related products 15111–15209 29 19 Continuous series covering tanning, dressing, footwear, and luggage.
16 Manufacture of wood and products of wood and cork 16101–16299 27 20 Consistent boundary; furniture excluded and placed in Division 31.
17 Manufacture of paper and paper products 17011–17099 28 21 Pure pulp, paper, and paperboard manufacturing.
18 Printing and reproduction of recorded media 18111–18200 28 (pt) 22 (pt) CRITICAL BREAK: NIC-1998/2004 Div 22 combined publishing with printing. NIC-2008 severed publishing into Services Division 58.
19 Manufacture of coke and refined petroleum products 19101–19209 31 (pt) 23 Separated from rubber/plastic (historical Div 31) into dedicated refining division.
20 Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products 20111–20309 30 (pt) 24 (pt) Basic chemicals, fertilizers, plastics in primary forms. Pharmaceuticals carved out into Div 21 in NIC-2008.
21 Manufacture of pharmaceuticals, medicinal chemical and botanical products 21001–21009 30 (pt) 2423 Promoted from 4-digit class 2423 under NIC-1998/2004 to standalone 2-digit division.
22 Manufacture of rubber and plastics products 22111–22209 31 (pt) 25 Continuous series covering rubber tyres, tubes, and plastic articles.
23 Manufacture of other non-metallic mineral products 23101–23999 32 26 Glass, ceramics, cement, lime, plaster, and concrete products.
24 Manufacture of basic metals 24101–24320 33 27 Continuous series covering basic iron & steel, precious metals, and non-ferrous metals.
25 Manufacture of fabricated metal products, except machinery 25111–25999 34 28 Structural metal products, tanks, steam generators, weapons, and forging.
26 Manufacture of computer, electronic and optical products 26101–26800 36 (pt) 30, 32, 33 Consolidated office machinery (30), radio/TV/telecom (32), and medical/optical instruments (33).
27 Manufacture of electrical equipment 27101–27900 36 (pt) 31 Electric motors, generators, batteries, wiring devices, and domestic appliances.
28 Manufacture of machinery and equipment n.e.c. 28111–28299 35, 36 (pt) 29 General-purpose and special-purpose industrial machinery, engines, turbines, pumps.
29 Manufacture of motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers 29101–29304 37 (pt) 34 Automobiles, commercial vehicles, chassis, bodies, and auto parts/accessories.
30 Manufacture of other transport equipment 30111–30999 37 (pt) 35 Ships, boats, railway locomotives, aircraft, spacecraft, motorcycles, and bicycles.
31 Manufacture of furniture 31001–31009 27 (pt) 361 Elevated from 3-digit group 361 under NIC-1998/2004 to standalone 2-digit division.
32 Other manufacturing 32111–32909 38 369 Jewellery, musical instruments, sports goods, games, toys, medical & dental instruments.
33 Repair and installation of machinery and equipment 33111–33200 39 29 (pt), 35 (pt) Specialized industrial repair and maintenance carved out into standalone division.

Data Access & Citation

Download Full Dataset (JSON) ↓

Researchers and journalists are welcome to use, cite, and reproduce this analysis. Recommended citation:

@article{kumar2026subcontracted,
  title = {The Subcontracted Republic: 50 Years of Capital Deepening, Contract Labour, and the Shrinking Factory Wage Share (ASI 1974–2024)},
  author = {Kumar, Abhinav and Pradhan, Ananya},
  journal = {India Labour Observatory Flagship Series},
  volume = {1},
  year = {2026},
  url = {https://indialabourobservatory.com/stories/subcontracted-republic/}
}