Performance of MGNREGA and Poverty Reduction – A Micro level study
*S.KRISHNAN
Introduction
India suffers from acute economic and social disparities. There is empirical evidence to indicate that during the last two decades all these disparities have been increasing. Rural and urban divide also widened in the wake of reforms. While large and medium cities experience unprecedented economic prosperity, the rural areas experience economic stagnation. As a result, there is a widespread agrarian distress which results in formers suicide and rural unrest.
Socially backward sections, especially Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes have faired little from the new prosperity which rewards disproportionately those with assets, skills and higher education. The gender gap in social and economic status, traditionally more in India as compared to other societies, has further been widened by the economic reforms and globalization.
Poverty Scenario in India
India's official poverty measure has long been based on solely upon the ability to purchase a minimum recommended daily diet of 2400 kcl. in rural areas where about 70 percent of people live and 2100 kcl. in urban areas.
The planning commission, which is responsible for the estimate, currently estimates that a monthly income about Rs.356/- per person is needed to provide the required diet in rural areas and Rs.539/- in urban areas. The Dendulkar Committee has (2009) raised the monetary cutoffs to Rs.447/- in rural areas and Rs.579/- for urban areas per month. The commission setup by the Ministry of Rural Development raised the cutoffs to Rs.700/- per month in rural areas and Rs.1000/- per month per person in urban areas.
In the last 12 years, India's economy has grown at an average annual rate of about seven percent, reducing poverty by 10 percent. However, 40 percent of the world's poor still live in India, and 28 percent of the country's population continues to live below the poverty line. More than one-third live on less than a dollar a day and 80 percent live on less than two dollars a day India's recent economic growth has been attributed to the service industry, but 60 percent of the workforce remains in agriculture. A country with such an unequal distribution of opportunities and wealth can never promise long term security and stability. Haves and have-nots would always exist and coexist. Out of the 456 million poor people in the country, 75.0 percent are living in the rural areas. About 25.0 percent rural households have no income generation assets and 80.0 percent of farmers are being small and marginal. The problem of perpetual poverty is seen more particularly in rural areas. Besides, seasonality of poverty is a peculiar feature of India poverty scenario. In other words, in one season people in the rural areas are in extreme poverty situation and in other season, they may be slightly relived from poverty because there is an opportunities to earn better as compared to the previous season.
MGNREGA
Provision of adequate remunerative employment has been a long cherished goal of India's strategy of development planning. However, for a long time the country experimented with adhoc wage and self-employment programmes without any emphasis on the guaranteed work provision. With the economic reforms introduced since 1991, this problem has been exacerbated largely because of the growth of joblessness. High economic growth was accompanied by very little growth in employment along with a growing tendency for formal employment to became informal employment.
The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) was designed to provide for enhanced livelihood security for households in rural areas by providing at least 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in every financial year to every household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work. As a legal right to work, MGNREGS contrast with previous employment- generation schemes in several aspects. First and foremost, it bestows entitlement to work, in the form of providing work, for those who demand it, within 15 days of applying at a guaranteed wage. Second, the universal nature of the programme eliminates targeting errors. Self-selection is intended to ensure that only the most needy come forth and claim employment.
Third, the creation of employment through specified works is expected to improve agricultural productivity. For Instance, the initial estimates by Patnaik (2005) suggested that Rs.1- spent on MGNREGS may generate Rs.1.33 as wage bill in the economy.
The MGNREGA, which came into existence on Feb 2, 2006 was initially implemented in 200 districts of the country in the first phase. In the second phase, it was further extended to 130 districts in 2007-08, it was extended across the country in April 2008.
Table 1.1. Performance of MGNREGA (National Overview)
Items | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 | Total |
Total Jobcards issued (in crores) | 3.18 | 6.48 | 9.44 | 10.72 | 10.24 | 40.66 |
Employment provided to households | 2.10 | 3.39 | 4.50 | 4.07 | 4.36 | 18.42 |
Person days in crores Total | 90.5 | 143.59 | 214.56 | 165.72 | 158.58 | 772.95 |
SC's | 22.95 | 39.36 | 62.88 | 33.54 | 35.54 | 194.27 |
ST's | 32.98 | 42.07 | 54.51 | 27.92 | 27.06 | 184.54 |
Women | 36.79 | 61.15 | 102.73 | 77.50 | 78.10 | 356.27 |
Others | 34.56 | 62.16 | 97.17 | 104.26 | 95.99 | 394.14 |
Source : www.nregs.com
The table 1.1 reveals that the MGNREGS has provided employment to 18.42 crores household from its inspection. It has generated 772.95 crores mandays of employment from 2006 onwards 46 percent mandays of employment was provided exclusively to the women those who are identified as socially and economically backward in the rural India. Around 49 percent (378.81 crores) mandays of employment was provided to the downtrodden people i.e SC/ST. There by it has increased the purchasing power of the economically affected.
Review of Related Literature
As the scheme is ongoing from 2006 onwards, various attempt have been made to analysis the performance of MGNREGA. Ramesh ( 2009) observed that the income levels of the workers have increased substantially and all the workers daily wage income was increased to two fold in turn it helped in catering the minimum needs of the MGNREGA workers. The study also reveals that the expenditure level before implementation of this scheme was met by the workers by indulging depts to meet their minimum needs, and it also helped in easing out the dept burden to some extend offer the implementation of the scheme. Pursty et.al (2009) reports that 80 percent of informants agreeing to the fact that the standard of living of the people who have worked in NREGA was improved during the last three years, reconfirms strongly the hypotheses that NREGA has supplemented the income of worker households and 86 percent of the worker feel that they are comfortable in having sufficient food after working in MGNREGA establishes the positive correlation between food security and MGNREGA. Indira Harway et.al (2008) NREGA can reduce poverty at the bottom and empower the poor. If planned well, it can have highly positive output, income and employment multiplier effects on the local economy in the medium and long run. These works can also raise the multiplier co-efficient and accelerate the process of development subsequently. ISWSD (2008) reports that in Utther Pradesh most houses reported increase in expenditure on food items like milk and milk products, pulses, vegetables and fruits, in general there is an improvement in nutrition in terms of frequency, quantity and quality of food. Anandharaja kumar (2010) observes that the income level of the scheme's beneficiaries women has increased after the implementation on MGNREA and the participation of women has increased in the decision making of the family in regard to expenditure and saving Kareemulla.K et.al (2009) reports that the earnings from NREGA wages accounted for 32 percent of the household income for those families who worked in the scheme as labourers, purchase of food followed by expenses related to education of the dependents and health care were the major modes of utilization of the earnings from NREGA. There seems to be a significant contribution towards household assets like fan, television and bicycle mainly attributable to the savings of NREGA wages. Pattanaik (2009) reports that the income earned from MGNREGA has enabled them to purchase additional amount of Pulses, Vegetables and other items for their households.
Study Area
The Madurai District of Tamilnadu has taken for the purpose of this study. The District has 25,62,279 (2001) population of which 44 percent (11,29,028) lives in rural areas and the remaining lives in urban area. The Geographical area of the District is 3741.73 Sq.km. The District has 13 Development blocks and 670 Revenue Villages with 431 village panchayats. This village panchayat is held responsible for the implementation of the MGNREGS. The three tier systems of panchayatraj institution are in existence for planning, implementation and monitoring the MGNREGS. The District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) is the nodal agency for the implementation of the scheme in the district level.
Methodology.
The present study follows descriptive and diagnostic method which are sought to examine the current status, interior prospects and performance of MGNREGA scheme. The study is mainly based on secondary data available in the DRDA, Madurai were analyzed using simple percentage. The objective of the study is (1) to analyze the quantum of employment generated and the increased income of the beneficiaries in the study area. (ii) to find out the existence of gross root democracy in deciding the nature of works to be taken under MGNREGA (iii) to analyze the durable assets created by the scheme and its contribution to the village economy.
1.2 Performance of MGNREGA in Madurai District.
Sl. No | Name of the Block | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 | |||
No. of Bene- ficiers | Expen-diture (Rs. in lakhs) | No. of Bene-ficiers | Expen-diture (Rs. in lakhs) | No. of Bene-ficiers | Expen-diture (Rs. in lakhs) | ||
1. | Madurai East | 113658 | 69.189 | 418967 | 277.828 | 658734 | 477.688 |
2. | Madurai West | 90323 | 51.869 | 484039 | 302.958 | 607052 | 389.629 |
3. | Thirupparankundram | 366786 | 242.599 | 810552 | 565.480 | 884169 | 649.992 |
4. | Melur | 134752 | 69.637 | 622267 | 339.221 | 711242 | 488.345 |
5. | Kottampatti | 313340 | 187.484 | 623742 | 363.359 | 793303 | 525.052 |
6. | Vadipatti | 236152 | 142.347 | 468688 | 281.479 | 485800 | 320.702 |
7. | Alanganallur | 182824 | 127.363 | 625821 | 401.521 | 738549 | 468.499 |
8. | Usilampatti | 460672 | 285.217 | 605829 | 355.556 | 884848 | 633.411 |
9. | Chellampatti | 386608 | 248.636 | 978033 | 591.781 | 1354991 | 916.855 |
10. | Sedapatti | 406634 | 224.279 | 887789 | 542.408 | 1025873 | 713.834 |
11. | Thirumangalam | 502283 | 319.676 | 1022280 | 697.577 | 1101495 | 829.218 |
12. | T.Kallupatti | 762925 | 448.248 | 1078342 | 668.524 | 1024046 | 701.047 |
13. | Kalligudi | 303182 | 193.430 | 819064 | 522.090 | 831781 | 631.033 |
Total | 4260139 | 2609.974 | 9445413 | 5909.782 | 11101883 | 7745.305 | |
Source : DRDA, Madurai.
The table 1.2 reveals that the generation of employment was doubled during the year 2009-10 when compare to previous year. So for the schemes has generated 2,48,07,435 mandays of employment from its inspection. It has spent Rs.16265.062 lakhs for the implementation of the scheme. The average expenditure per person comes to Rs.66 per day.
Table 1.3 MGNREGA at a Glance – Madurai District (as on Feb- 2011)
i) Employment provided to 2.32543 lakhs Households ii) Person days of Employment generated in lakhs Total : 103.28 SC : 23.37 (22.63%) ST : 0.18 (0.17%) Women : 82.57 (79.9%) Others : 79.73 (77.2%) Total Funds : 114.74 crore Expenditure : 72.01 crore Total Works take-up : 2469 Works completed : 1 Households completed 100 days employment : 10894 |
The scheme has generated 103.28 lakhs man days during the current financial year, out of which 79.9 percent were provided to the women folk, 24 percent were provided to the SC/ST community. The District stands first in providing more employment to women workforce; it has provided 30 percent more than the National Average (49.25) and 3 percent more then the State Average (76.83%). It has provided 22.73 percent of Employment to SC which is equal to the National average of (22.41%). The participation of ST in this scheme is very meager (0.17%) because of the meager availability of ST population in the District.
1.3 Nature of Assets created under MGNREGA in Madurai District 2009-10; 2010-11
(Rs. in Lakhs)
Sl. No | Name of the Work | No. of Works | LabourComponent | Matrial Component | |||
2009-10 | 2010-11 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 | ||
1. | Rural Connectivity | 148 | 251 | 462.0744 | 415.5217 | - | - |
2. | Water Conservation and Water Harvesting | 87 | 182 | 443.39996 | 834.47174 | - | - |
3. | Renovation of traditional water bodies | 1001 | 1590 | 4828.61328 | 5729.10889 | - | - |
4. | Irrigation Canals | 52 | 79 | 158.0072 | 205.01601 | - | - |
Total | 1288 | 2102 | 5892.09531 | 7184.11792 | - | - | |
Source : www.nrega.nic.in
The table 1.3 reveals that Madurai Districts has taken major works related to water conservation, only 11 percent of works were taken related to road connectivity that to without any material component. The NREGA guidelines instructs to take 40 percent material component work to create more employment, but this district has taken all works related to labour component.
The Elected panchayat and The Grama Sabha are giving more importance for renovating traditional water bodies. Around 78 percent of works are taken up in this category and 81 percent of amount were earmarked for this Category during the year 2009-10. During 2009-10, 1288 works were taken but it has increased to 2102 during 2010-11. The financial allotment to execute this work has increased from 5892 lakhs to 7184 lakhs.
GROSS ROOT LEVEL REALITIES
To achive the full potential of the MGNREGA the structure for its implementation is more adequately strengthened. The scheme has both positive and negative. Some say it a source of corruption, while others say it is the best thing that ahs happened in rural development. There are villages, where it has provided employment to as large number of people leading to creation of public assets, whereas in some parts funds have been siphoned off. The recent social audit of the MGNREGA indicates that the programme can have a positive impact of the socio-economic well being of rural labourers and their families. In particular, it holds the powerful prospect of bringing major changes in the lives of women. This is especially true in the study area where women constitute an overwhelming proportion (80 percent) of the NREGA workers.
It is observed that very few worksites have child care facilities of any sort, even when children are present the site. It is observed that in some places women are discouraged from bringing children to the worksites. It is therefore necessary that NREGA should be children friendly. In some places there is no worksite facilities like water and provision of shadow during lunch hours. This is to be taken care. This may increase the women participation and naturally lead to woman's empowerment. The scheme has not clearly indicates about the upper age limit for participation. So very aged women (65 years) are also participating in the scheme, Aged person will not contribute much in NREGA which needs more physical turnover. So the scheme have to be very clear about the age limitations.
Conclusion.
The scheme will continue to supplement the income of the beneficiaries create durable assets and bring long term tangible benefits in rural India. A committed administrative machine with political support is a precondition for the adoption and building of appropriate institutional structure for socially fruitful implementation of the NREGA. It may seem repetitive, but it is worth concluding that although NREGA enshrines a demand-driven, legally binding right to work of there is not the proactive political and administrative commitment to provide a continuous and adequate supply of productive works, implementation of the scheme may not bring the desired results.
References
1) Mamidipally Rajanna, Gundeti Ramesh "NREGP-Facet of inclusive Growth a study of Karinagar Dist, Andhra Pradesh" Kurukshetra Feb '09 P.33-35.
2) Panda.B, Dutta.A.K and Purusty S. "Appraisal of NREGA in the State of Meghalaya and Sikkim" A project report submitted by Indian Institute of Management, Shillang 2009.
3) Indira Harway, Saluja M.R, Bhupesh Yadav " The Impact of Public Employment Guarantee Strategies on Gender Equality and Pre-poor Economic Development-India" UNDP Research Project No.34, Jan '2008.
4) ISWSD NREGA second draft report "Impact of National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme on the living and working conditions of women in Rural India" 2008.
5) Well Haorei and Anandha rajakumar.P "Impact of MGNREGE on Rural women empowerment" Journal of Extension and Research. GRI Volume XII, No.2, January 2010, P.124-130.
6) Kareemulla.K, Srinivas Reddy.K, Ramarao C.A., Sualander kumar and Venkateswarlu.B., "Soil and Water Conservation Works through National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) in Andhra Pradesh. An analysisof livelihood Impact" Agricultural Economics Research Review Vol.22 (Conference Number) 2009, P.P.443-450.
7) Pattanaik "National and Employment Guarantee Scheme: Some Preliminary Findings from Hoshiarpur District" Kurukshetra, April 2009.
8) Pattanaik P.2005, "A Universal Programme is Possible" Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.41, No.2, PP.203-207.
9) Naganagoud S.P., Uliveppa.H.H., "Rural poverty alleviation in India, Contribution of MGREGS" Mainstream July 30-August 5,2010.
10) IDS Publications 2011 "Institution and Innovations in the implementation process of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme in India" Narasima Reddy.D; Upendranath.C; Rukmini Tankha; Alakh N.Sharma. Institute of Development Studies publications, New Delhi. PP 1-25.
(The copy of the paper presented in the National seminar on Innovative Research for Development held at APPLIED RESEARCH DEPARTMENT,GANDHIGRAM in MARCH 3-4, 2011.
S.Krishnan Research scholar, Dept of Applied Research,GRI.Gandhigram.Tamilnadu.
maduraisuki@gmail.com
maduraisuki@gmail.com
