The population is divided into three main groups based on activity. The first group consists of active individuals, the second comprises individuals with personal incomes, and the third includes supported individuals. Active population consists of individuals working in various economic and non-economic activities, thereby earning income for their livelihood. Individuals with personal incomes include retirees, individuals under guardianship, etc. The category of supported individuals consists of the population unable to generate income for various reasons (children, elderly without pensions, sick individuals, etc.). This category is supported by active individuals and those with personal incomes.
Due to the lack of processed data from the 1981 population census, all mentioned population categories will be analyzed based on data from 1961 and 1971.
In 1961, out of the total municipality population, there were 14,156 active individuals, accounting for 42.25%. The least represented were individuals with personal incomes at 3.91%, while the highest percentage was for supported individuals at 53.84%.
In 1971, several changes occurred. The total population decreased by 1,778 individuals. All population categories, both active and supported individuals, decreased, while the number of individuals with personal incomes nearly doubled. The number of active individuals decreased by 1,293 people, representing 40.54% of the total population. The number of supported individuals decreased by 1,785 people, constituting 51.23% of the total population structure by activity. Only the number of individuals with personal incomes increased by 1,300, accounting for 8.23% of the total project.
Comparative analysis of data from 1961 and 1971 indicates that there were no significant changes in the population structure by activity during the observed decade. The absolute population decrease in 1971 did not lead to significant changes in the relative ratios between active and supported populations. The most significant changes occurred only in the category of individuals with personal incomes, as their number doubled from 1961 to 1971. Such an increase in individuals with personal incomes, compared to active individuals, can be considered unfavorable. The main causes for this unfavorable trend should be sought primarily in the insufficient overall economic activity of the municipality and the relatively slower pace of opening and developing new capacities.
The structure of the active population by activities shows that the highest percentage of the population is employed in agriculture, further emphasizing the municipality's predominantly agrarian economy.
Out of the total of 12,863 active individuals, according to the provided structure, the leading position is held by workers in agriculture and fisheries, at 53.3%. In the second place are workers in industry and mining, representing 15.2%. Following are workers in construction with 6.6%, craftsmen with 5.3%, workers in trade and hospitality with 4.6%, workers in culture and social activities with 3.9%, etc.
A special group consists of the active population temporarily working abroad. In 1971, there were 413 workers employed abroad, constituting 3.2% of the total structure of the active population.
Comparing the percentages of representation of the active population in agriculture and industry in 1971, it is still evident that agricultural workers are significantly more represented than industrial workers. This indicates that agriculture remained the dominant sector of the economy in the municipality, and industry had not yet reached a satisfactory level. However, by analyzing the achievements of the social development plan for the municipality in the periods 1971–1975 and 1976–1980, significant changes are already noticeable. The number of active workers declined during this period, while employment in industry and other sectors increased. The development plan until 1980 projected an 8.3% employment growth in industry and only 0.3% in agriculture. This planned employment growth by sector clearly indicates the municipality's intention to fully mechanize and intensify agricultural production, reducing employment in this sector while simultaneously achieving higher employment in the industry, which was expected to become the leading sector.
Comparative analysis of the total population and active population in agriculture reveals interesting indicators. According to the 1971 census data, later supplemented by field research, out of a total of 12,863 active individuals, 7,006 residents, or 54.46%, were actively engaged in agriculture. It was mentioned earlier that this ratio gradually changed, i.e., the percentage of active population in agriculture decreased while it increased in other activities. According to the data presented, out of the total municipality population (31,729 residents), 14,558 or 46% constitute the agricultural population. Analyzing this ratio within the municipality's settlements reveals significant differences. In Bočar, out of a total of 2,328 residents, 1,376 or 59% are part of the agricultural population. In Kuman, the agricultural population is represented by 49%, in Novi Bečej by 35%, and in Novo Miloševo by 61%. These differences result from the varying development of individual economic sectors and the different number of daily commuters—workers who leave these places every day to work in Zrenjanin or Kikinda and return to their place of residence.
Out of the total of 14,558 agricultural residents in the municipality, 7,006 residents are actively involved in agriculture, representing 48.12%. There are also differences among settlements within the municipality. In Bočar, out of 1,376 agricultural residents, 634 or 46% are actively engaged in agriculture. In Kuman, it is 41%, in Novi Bečej 51%, and in Novo Miloševo 49%.
The gender structure of the active agricultural population also varies among settlements. In Bočar, female active population is represented by 28.07% in relation to the total active population. In Kuman, female active population constitutes 14.52% of the total active population, in Novi Bečej 28.79%, and in Novo Miloševo 30.55%.
Supported agricultural population, in relation to the total agricultural population, also varies from settlement to settlement. Out of the total of 1,376 agricultural residents in Bočar, 742 individuals belong to the category of supported individuals, constituting 53.92%. In Kuman, supported individuals in agriculture make up 59.13% of the total agricultural population, in Novi Bečej — 49.18%, and in Novo Miloševo — 51.02%.
Supported individuals in agriculture, in relation to the total supported population in the municipality, make up 46.45%. There are differences among settlements in this group as well. Out of the total of 1,181 supported individuals, 746 are in agriculture in Bočar, or 62.82%. In Kuman, supported individuals in agriculture make up 51.45%, in Novi Bečej — only 35.13%, and in Novo Miloševo — 59.27%. Due to significant differences in economic structure, the largest deviation occurs in Novi Bečej.
Out of the total of 7,006 active agricultural residents in the municipality, 72.57% are male, and 27.43% are female. This gender structure shows that three-quarters of the active workforce in agriculture consists of men. There is a higher representation of older individuals in the overall structure, which is not favorable for intensifying agricultural production and achieving significantly higher yields and market surpluses of agricultural products. The highest representation of the active agricultural population is in the age group of 35 to 49 years (34.01%), followed by the active population aged 50 to 64 years (27.36%). This age group of the active agricultural population does not achieve maximum work effects and results in agricultural production. The age group of 65 and older consists of 905 active agricultural residents, representing 12.92% of the total structure. This group of active residents is not physically capable of engaging in modern intensive agriculture or achieving satisfactory results in agricultural production. It is characteristic that the youngest active agricultural population, aged 25 to 34, is relatively less represented, accounting for only 14.81% in the overall structure. The representation of the youngest active agricultural population, aged 15 to 24, is even smaller, at only 10.53%. These relationships between age categories of the active agricultural population are primarily a consequence of the continuous migration of young and capable individuals from rural areas and agrarian economy, coupled with the movement of the younger population to urban areas and other economic sectors.
A relatively small number of active agricultural individuals from the overall active population have gone on temporary employment abroad. However, it is noticeable that over 95% of these workers belong to the age groups of 15 to 49 years. This is simultaneously the most capable workforce for work.
In the overall structure of non-agricultural active individuals, there are 8,467 individuals, or 54.72%. The female population's share is 32.04%, which is about 5% higher than the representation of female population in agriculture. Younger age groups are significantly more represented in non-agricultural activities. In 1971, from the age of 15 to 24, there were 19.19% of the active population working in non-agricultural activities, from 25 to 34 years old — 18.06%, and from 35 to 49 years old — 27.03%. Older age groups of the population aged 50 to 64 (19.91%) and 65 and older (15.69%) are also significantly represented.
In 1971, from the group of non-agricultural active individuals, 247 were temporarily employed abroad. In relation to the total non-agricultural active population, this group of workers represented only 2.92%. Of these, 96.35% belonged to the age groups of active population from 15 to 49 years old, and only 3.65% belonged to the age groups of 50 and older.
It is noteworthy that in the overall active population, the age group of 65 and older is represented by 2,234 individuals, or 14.44%. This can be considered unfavorable because the working capacity and productivity of this population are significantly lower compared to other age groups of the active population in the municipality.
In 1971, in the territory of the Novi Bečej subregion, there were a total of 16,256 supported individuals. Out of that, 7,552, or 46.46%, were in agriculture, and 53.54% were in non-agricultural activities. It is characteristic that female supported population in agriculture consists of 5,399 individuals, or 71.49%. The highest representation in the supported population in agriculture is in age groups from 0 to 9 years old (24.22%), from 10 to 14 years old (14.95%), and from 15 to 24 years old (16.50%). These are categories of preschool children, students, and students. The age groups of residents from 35 to 49 years old (14.23%) and from 50 to 64 years old (13.28%) also have relatively high representation. The older supported population, aged 65 and older, makes up 10.36% of the total supported population in agriculture, which is a normal occurrence given the age structure of the overall municipality population.
Among non-agricultural supported individuals in 1971, women were represented by 70.69%. By age categories, the highest representation was from 0 to 9 years old, at 26.17%. This was followed by the age group from 15 to 24 years old, with 17.33%. In the third place among non-agricultural supported individuals was the age group from 10 to 14 years old, with a representation of 14.20%. Then come the age groups of residents from 35 to 49 years old (14.13%) and from 60 to 64 years old (11.24%), etc.
In 1971, out of the supported population in agriculture, only 11 individuals were temporarily employed abroad from the agricultural population group. Out of the total non-agricultural supported individuals, there were 14 individuals with families temporarily working abroad. Among the youngest age group, up to 34 years old, there were 13 residents.
According to the 1971 data, in the structure of the active population, the highest percentage was of agricultural workers, at 53.17%. Of this, workers in the social sector of agriculture make up 20.79%, independent farmers — 54.08%, assisting family members — 24.21%, while other data are negligible.