Kerala's Paddy Land Conservation Policy (2008) And The Pressure Of Urbanization

Policy Update
Ayana N K

Background

Kerala’s paddy fields are wetland ecosystems that help manage flooding, recharge groundwater, and support rural biodiversity. They are also the state’s main source of rice. Between 1957-58 and 2022-23, the area used for paddy cultivation in Kerala decreased from about 7.66 lakh hectares to roughly 1.91 lakh hectares. This decline was due to land being converted for non-agricultural purposes, rising labor costs, and a move towards more profitable crops like rubber and coconut. By 2023-24, rice made up only 7.1 percent of the state’s total cropped area, down from almost one-third in the mid-1970s.

In this context, the Kerala Legislative Assembly passed the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, which took effect on 12 August 2008. The Act aims to protect paddy land and wetlands and restrict their conversion or reclamation. This is intended to support growth in agriculture, ensure food security, and maintain the state’s ecological system. It replaced an earlier, narrower law, the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967, which was not enough to stop conversions.

The Act applies to all of Kerala and covers both notified paddy land, formally recorded in a local database, and, after a 2018 amendment, unnotified land that had been under paddy cultivation at any time. It was amended in 2011 to change committee composition and again through the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland (Amendment) Ordinance/Act of 2018, which added Section 27A. This provision allows for the regularization of certain unauthorized conversions for a fee, along with specific building exemptions for small residential and commercial structures.

Functioning

The Act establishes a three-tier institutional structure for implementation:

Local Level Monitoring Committees (LLMCs), constituted in every Panchayat and Municipality, chaired by an Agricultural Officer as Convenor. LLMCs maintain the local data bank of paddy land and wetland, inspect land for compliance, recommend cases for reclamation, and report violations to the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO).
District Level Authorized Committees, which scrutinize LLMC recommendations for reclamation.
A State Level Committee, chaired by the Agricultural Production Commissioner, which reviews applications forwarded by district authorities and by the government for conversion in the public interest.

Landowners who want to build a residence on paddy land can apply through the LLMC. This committee may recommend filling up to ten cents of land in a Panchayat or five cents in a Municipality or Corporation, but this is subject to State or District Committee approval. The 2018 amendment introduced a simpler option. Now, owners of un-notified land do not need Committee permission to build a residential building up to 120 square meters on up to 4.04 acres, or a commercial building up to 40 square meters on up to 2.02 acres, as long as this exemption is used only once per owner.

Violations lead to penalties. Local authorities cannot issue building permits or licenses for structures built on land converted against the Act. The Revenue Department can impose conversion fees and, in some cases, order the land to be restored to its original condition. The Government also has the power under Section 10 to grant exemptions for conversion when no alternative land is available and when nearby paddy cultivation and local ecology are not harmed.

Performance

Figure 1. Decline in Kerala’s Paddy Cultivation Area, 1955–56 to 2022–23

Source: Department of Economics and Statistics (DES), Government of Kerala — Kerala Agricultural Statistics / Ecostat.

Government data presented to the Kerala Assembly shows that from 2018-19 to 2024-25, over 10,950 hectares of paddy land were officially converted for residential and other non-agricultural uses under the Act’s provisions. This conversion generated more than ₹1,606 crore in fees for the state treasury. Thrissur district recorded the highest conversion, with around 2,150 hectares across seven taluks, followed by Ernakulam with nearly 1,650 hectares. Revenue from conversion fees peaked at ₹385.79 crore in 2022-23. By April 2024, the department had already collected ₹217.25 crore for that fiscal year. The state government has also allocated resources to process these applications. This includes funds for temporary staff and equipment to address pending files.

Figure 2. Paddy Land Converted for Non-Agricultural Use in Kerala, 2018–19 to 2024–25

Source: Government of Kerala, Revenue Department data presented before the Kerala Legislative Assembly (reported by Onmanorama, February 2025). Compiled by author.

District-level trend data shows a longer-term decline that the Act has only somewhat slowed. In Ernakulam, the share of paddy in net sown area dropped from 57.53 percent in 1980-81 to just 5.39 percent by 2011-12. In Palakkad, traditionally known as Kerala’s rice bowl, the share fell from 85.91 percent to 42.41 percent during the same period. In Alappuzha, it declined from 56.88 percent to 42.57 percent. Researchers studying area, production, and productivity trends up to 2023-24 note that while productivity per hectare has more than doubled since the 1950s, these improvements have not compensated for the shrinking area. As a result, total production has continued to decline in recent years.

Recent Implementations and Enforcements

₹1,678.66 crore in conversion charges: The government has faced scrutiny over the use of conversion/regularization fees collected under the Paddy Land and Wetland Act, raising questions about whether these funds are being channeled effectively toward agricultural conservation.
Section 13 restoration proceedings: Recent Kerala High Court cases show that authorities continue to initiate proceedings to restore illegally converted paddy land, indicating that the Act’s enforcement provisions remain active.
Administrative delays: Court cases also highlight delays and disputes involving Revenue Department authorities in processing land-reclassification and restoration matters, pointing to weaknesses in implementation.
Continued legal scrutiny of Section 27A: Recent court proceedings concerning Section 27A demonstrate that the provision allowing certain land conversions/regularization remains an important and contested part of the policy framework.

Impacts

Food-security pressure: Loss of paddy fields reduces Kerala’s potential for domestic rice production and increases dependence on rice supplied from other states.

Increased flood vulnerability: Paddy fields and associated wetlands act as natural water-storage areas. Their conversion can reduce the landscape’s ability to absorb and temporarily retain excess rainwater.

Loss of ecological functions: Conversion can disrupt wetland ecosystems, affecting local biodiversity, soil functions, groundwater recharge, and natural drainage.

Urbanization and land-use pressure: Conversion makes agricultural land available for residential and commercial development, contributing to the expansion of built-up areas.

Declining agricultural livelihoods: Continued conversion can reduce the availability of cultivable land and weaken the economic viability of paddy farming, particularly for small farmers.

Climate-resilience concerns: The loss of paddy-wetland systems can make local landscapes less capable of dealing with intense rainfall, flooding, and other climate-related stresses.

Policy contradiction: Regularization mechanisms such as Section 27A can create tension between allowing legitimate land-use changes and the Act’s broader objective of conserving paddy land and wetlands.

Emerging Issues

The capacity of local bodies to enforce regulations is highly diverse among them. The LLMCs are dependent upon the Agricultural Officers and various local administrative employees, the monitoring capacity of which is not uniform among the Panchayats. Hence, a systematic inspection for violations is not possible for the approx. 940 Gram Panchayats and 87 Municipalities of Kerala.
Exemption provisions operate as an alternative channel of legal conversion. The owner-occupier residential and commercial building exemptions under section 27A are not adequately differentiated from incremental land market conversion.
Low economic incentives for further paddy cultivation. Provision in the Act at Section 4 gave incentives towards paddy cultivation but it failed to compensate for the difference in the value between the agricultural land and converted land.
Delays in addressing illegal conversions. Bureaucratic processing delays and resource constraints slow enforcement action against unauthorized conversions once detected.
Fragmented data banks. The accuracy and regular updating of local-level paddy land registers, which form the legal basis for what can and cannot be converted, is not uniform across all local bodies.

Way Forward

Enhancing price support and market linkages for paddy, alongside crop insurance, to decrease the return gap that drives owners toward conversion.
To disseminate integrated models (eg. Paddy+fish/duck raising) that can enhance per-hectare return on investment, without disturbing the pattern of Land holding.
Strengthening LLMCs by providing dedicated staff and maintaining updated digital databases can make the monitoring process more effective and make conversion approvals more transparent.
Regularly reviewing the exemption limits under Section 27A can help ensure they are used for genuine housing needs rather than becoming a common way to convert paddy land for other purposes.
Integrating paddy land conservation into urban and regional planning can help guide new development toward already-converted or non-agricultural land, instead of treating paddy fields as an easy option for local development.

Conclusion

Kerala’s Paddy Land Conservation Policy has helped slow the loss of paddy fields, but it has not stopped it. The 2008 Act created a legal framework for protecting paddy land and monitoring its conversion. However, exemptions for housing and small-scale construction continue to make conversion possible, often with fees attached. As urbanization continues to spread across Kerala’s densely settled countryside, protecting paddy land will require more than restrictions. It also means making paddy cultivation economically worthwhile for the farmers who own and depend on these lands.

References

Government of Kerala. (2008). The Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. Department of Environment and Climate Change. https://envt.kerala.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/The-Kerala-Conservation-of-Paddy-Land-and-Wetland-Act-2008.pdf
Government of Kerala. (2011). The Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland (Amendment) Act, 2011. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/ind118198.pdf
Onmanorama. (2025, February 12). 10,950 hectares of paddy land converted in 6 yrs in Kerala, Revenue dept collects Rs 1606 cr fee. https://www.onmanorama.com/news/kerala/2025/02/12/kerala-paddy-land-conversion-impact.html
Ageconsearch/Agricultural Economics Research Review. Trends in area, production, and productivity of paddy in Kerala, 1957-58 to 2022-23. https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/368135
Keralaeconomy.com. Paddy Cultivation in Kerala: A Trend Analysis of Area, Production and Productivity across Districts. https://keralaeconomy.com/admin/pdfs/Paddy%20cultivation%20in%20Kerala.pdf
International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research. (2025). Trends in area, production and productivity of paddy in Kerala, 1970-2024. https://ijsser.org/2025files/ijsser_10__91.pdf
Arya, V., & Rejuna, C. A. (2024). Unveiling Kerala’s Distinct Urbanisation: A Comparative Analysis within India. Journal of Social and Economic Development. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00194662241278066
Indian Kanoon. Section 27A, Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/170425638/
Centre for Development Studies. Paddy Land Conversion in Kerala (KRPCDS Report). http://www.cds.ac.in/krpcds/report/parameswarakurup.pdf
Agricultural Economics Research Review (via AgEcon Search). Trends in area, production, and productivity of paddy in Kerala, 1957-58 to 2022-23 https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/368135

About the Contributor

Ayana N K is a Political Science graduate from the University of Calicut. With a keen interest in public policy, international relations, and development studies, she enjoys researching contemporary social and political issues and exploring how policies shape society.