Livelihood Enhancement Strategy: Effectiveness of Wage
Employment Programme on Tribes
Dr. Vinod. S
Post Doctorate Fellow (PDF),
Department of
Sociology,
University of Kerala.
Email: vinodkottukal@gmail.com
Dr. Biju S K
Assistant Professor
Government Arts
College,
Thiruvananthapuram
Email: bijubodheswar@gmail.com
Abstract
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) is a
flagship poverty alleviation programme of Central Government, intending to
generate demand for productive labour force in villages. The perceived benefits
of the scheme include guaranteed employment, improved income and better generation
of assets.
The article attempts to examine the impact of the programme in improving tribal
livelihoods. In the light of a case study in Wayanad tribal settlements, the
study submits that MGNREGS is liketly to positively affect the tribal communities
for a sustainable livelihood. Though there are controversy exist about the
continuity of the scheme, due to the changes in the central government
leadership, the sustainability depends on the quality of improvement. Hope the learning’s of
Wayanad positively impact of the sustainability of the Act.
1.
Introduction
India,
the land of cultural diversities and the emerging power house in the financial
map of world seems to face a lot of challenges, particularly in terms of its
rural development. Most of the villages are suffering from penury and inequalities.
The fundamental inequalities in livelihood security - the basic necessities
like food, shelter and cloth, etc. - pave way for impoverishment among rural
population. (Pankaj and Tankha, 2010). Furthermore,
the environmental effects of deforestation and declining land productivity have
adverse effects on providing rural livelihood security. Researchers have described the distribution of
income among households in rural areas as the most unequal in the country. (Datta and Vipin, 2012).
It is desirable to
concentrate on small farming livelihood systems by increasing resource use
intensity and reap the synergy from diversity and complexity of the small scale
economy.
Most
of the rural households depend on agriculture and livestock management for their
livelihood. The profitability of rural small agriculture is in dilemma. In this
juncture, the governments at different level should play a strategic role by
hand in hand to improve the livelihood security of rural poor.
Livelihood
security is dependent upon a number of activities and strategies undertaken by
rural people to generate income. Some of the livelihood strategies are wage,
labour, social pension, remittances from household members working in urban
area, unpaid domestic and farm labour (Chambers and Conway, 1992). The livelihood shall be
sustainable both environmentally and socially. A livelihood is environmentally
sustainable when it maintains or enhances the local and global assets on which
livelihoods depend, and has net beneficial effects on other livelihoods. A
livelihood is socially sustainable which can cope with and recover from stress
and shocks, and provide for future generations. For policy and practice, new
concepts and analysis are needed. Future generations will vastly outnumber us
but are not represented in our decision-making. Current and conventional
analysis both undervalues future livelihoods and is pessimistic. For policy,
implications include personal environmental balance sheets for the better off,
and for the poorer, policies and actions to enhance capabilities, improve
equity, and increase social sustainability. (///////)
2.
Livelihood
Enhancement Strategies
Rural
people in India in general and especially those from the backward region and
section are most vulnerable to livelihood security (Ellis, 2000). The incidence of poverty in
rural India is directly related to prevalence of unemployment and under
employment on a large scale. Majority of the rural population is landless and
sustains entirely on wage employment. While the self employment programme are
intended to remove poverty on a sustainable basis, there is need to take care
of the wage employment needs of the rural poor (Hirway, 1986). An effort to provide wage
employment, as a short-run strategy for alleviation of rural poverty has been a
major component of development planning in India. The major programmes under
implementation in this direction are the Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) and
Employment Assurance Schemes (EAS). The Million Wells Scheme (MWS) is also one such
programme of employment on land based activities (Centre for Science and
Environment, 2008).
3. Tribes
and Livelihood
Tribal
communities of Kerala constitute a significant portion of the population in the
Wayanad districts who were primarily dependent on forest and land resources for
their livelihood. However environmental degradation, natural calamities,
external non-tribal interventions occurred in the tribal region in terms of
massive forest exploitation over the year made them vulnerable and severely affected
their livelihood. Thus, these tribal communities are forced to depend upon the
other means of livelihood. In this situation the programmes and policies shall
concentrate on the enhancement of livelihood of tribal population. Here arises
the importance of effective implementation of programmes and public
accountability of Local Self Governments.
After independence so many programmes and policies are introduced for the
improvement of rural especially in tribal livelihood, by the State and Central
Governments, but most of them are failing to attain its target. The persistent
poverty and inequality prevailing in India and the government’s policy for more
inclusive and sustainable growth, induced the policy makers to evolve a job
guarantee programme named MGNREGS.
MGNREGS
has attracted wide attentions both at national and international level. It has
been considered as a model anti-poverty programme to the world. Providing
descent wages to job seekers, bringing the poorest marginalised Scheduled Caste
and Scheduled Tribes households who have been side lined from the mainstream
development process to its purview by offering them a secure source of income,
empowering rural women and Panchayat Raj Institutions among others are the most
noteworthy features of the Scheme.
4.
Focus of MGNREGS
Mahatma
Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee
Act 2005 envisaged as a rural poverty scheme is enacted on 2nd February 2006. It
mandates up to 100 days of employment per year for adult members of rural
households at the minimum wage rate. The manual work as per this scheme will
have to be provided within 15 days of application (Government of India, 2005a).
The programme was launched through the Local self Governments and in case the
agencies fail to provide work to those who are registered, will be given
unemployment allowance. The unemployment allowance is a right and not
privilege.
Schedule I of the Act lists eight categories of
works that are supposed to be ‘the focus of the Scheme’ (Government of India,
2005b). They include the following
Ø Water conservation and water harvesting
Ø Drought proofing (including afforestation)
Ø Irrigation canals including micro and minor
irrigation works
Ø Provision of irrigation facility to land owned by
households belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes,
beneficiaries of land reforms, or beneficiaries of Indira Awas Yojana
Ø Renovation of traditional water bodies including
tanks
Ø Land development
Ø Flood control and protection works including
drainage in water-logged areas; and
Ø
Rural connectivity to provide all-weather access.
In addition, there is a residual ninth category
which states any other work which may be notified by the Central Government in
consultation with the State Government.
5. MGNREG in Kerala
Initially, the programme
was piloted in two districts in Kerala. As the most backwards districts,
Wayanad and Palakkad, was selected for piloting. In 2007-08, it was extended to another two
districts, Kasargod and Idukki. It was implemented in all the 14 districts from
April 2008 onwards.
The present study intends to discuss
both the implementation and the impact of the scheme in the tribal dominated
villages of Wayanad district in Kerala. The study focused on the following
questions: To what extent MGNREGS has helped in sustaining the tribal
livelihood?, Is MGNREGS successful in in improving the living condition of the
rural poor? Is it really a livelihood generating programme than wage- earning
scheme? Hence, the study focussed on 1) understanding the impact of MGNREGS on tribal
livelihoods, 2) identifying the changes of household level expenditure before
and after the enactment of MGNREGS. The study was conducted among 150 MGNREGS
beneficiary tribal households in Wayanad district of Kerala. Both qualitative
and quantitative data were collected.
6.
Findings
In order to identify the changes of household level
expenditure and impact of MGNREGS, works performed under the scheme, occupation
status, expenditure pattern and comparison of performance of Kerala state and
waynad district were analysed, and listed here under.
6.1.Variety of Works
undertaken
Table 1:
Performances of MGNREGS in Wayanad (Financial Year
2013-14)
|
No
|
Work under MGNREGS
|
No. of work
|
|
|
Completed
|
Ongoing
|
||
|
1
|
Rural
Connectivity
|
33
|
104
|
|
2
|
Flood
control and Protection works
|
156
|
1198
|
|
3
|
Drought
proofing
|
12
|
586
|
|
4
|
a. Irrigation
facilities- Provision to land owned by farmers
|
114
|
2752
|
|
b. Land
Development Works
|
14
|
350
|
|
|
5
|
Water
Conservation and Water Harvesting
|
175
|
1512
|
Source: htt//nrega.nic.in (data received on 28th
Dec. 2014)
In Works like Water conservation and Water harvesting 175 works are
completed in Wayanad and 1512 works are ongoing. In Flood Control and
Protection works are done (156 works were completed in 2013-14 financial year),
as a part of land development activities 14 works were completed and 350 works
are ongoing in 2013-14 financial year). The data revealed that assets creation
and ecological regeneration are more as compared to other programmes. Now a day
most of the rural tribal farmers and agricultural labourers are turning to
agricultural activities. So the objectives of Food Security and Sustainability
are being ensured through MGNREGS.
6.2.Comparison of Performance
Table 2:
MGNREGS Statistics in Kerala and Wayanad Districts (FY 2013-14)
|
|
Kerala
(Person
days in Lakh)
|
Wayanad Districts
(Person days in Lakh)
|
||
|
Employment provided to households:
|
13.7326
|
0.77706
|
||
|
|
Person days
|
Per cent
|
Person days
|
Per cent
|
|
SC
|
87.34
|
15.78
|
1.27
|
3.76
|
|
ST
|
15.99
|
2.89
|
6.46
|
19.1
|
|
Others
|
450.28
|
81.33
|
26.09
|
13
|
|
Women
|
517
|
93.45
|
29.41
|
86.96
|
|
Total
|
553.62
|
100
|
33.82
|
100
|
Source: htt//nrega.nic.in (data received on 28th
Dec. 2014)
One of the first phase implementation districts,
Wayanad, has been leading in the implementation of the MGNREGS programme. In
Wayanad total 0.77706 households got NREGS work, 33.82 lakhs person days are
generated in 2013-2014 financial year. In the case of work participation of
marginalised sections, SCs are 3.76 per cent and STs are 19.1 per cent in Wayanad. But in the case of
gender participation Kerala holds a high position. More than 93 per cent
workers are women. In Wayanad hold 86.96 per cent.
6.3.Occupation Status of
Households
Table 3:
Occupation status of sample households
|
#
|
Categories
|
Occupation of Respondents
|
|
|
Main
|
Subsidiary
|
||
|
1
|
Farming
|
27 (18.0)
|
0
|
|
2
|
Agri-Labour
|
53 (35.3)
|
6 (4.0)
|
|
3
|
Non agri-labour
|
14 (9.3)
|
10 (6.7)
|
|
4
|
Merchant
|
2 (1.3)
|
7
(4.7)
|
|
5
|
Services
|
1 (0.7)
|
0
|
|
6
|
MGNREGS
|
48 (32.0)
|
115 (76.6)
|
|
7
|
Traditional artisans
|
1 (0.7)
|
10 (6.7)
|
|
8
|
Others
|
4 (2.7)
|
2
(1.3)
|
|
|
Total
|
150 (100)
|
150 (100)
|
Source:
Primary data
*figures within parentheses show percentages.
The distribution of the population based on their
main occupation reveals that 35.3 per cent of the working population are
agriculture labourers. Farmers constitute 18 per cent of the working
population. Non-agriculture labourers constitute 9.3 per cent; while 0.7 per
cent is government servants and 3 per cent have chosen other skilled and
unskilled works. An interesting observation is that MGNREGS has emerged as the main
occupation to a sizeable section of the working population (32 per cent). Most
of the women respondents responded MGNREGS as the main occupation, because
MGNREGS wage rate is higher as compare to other local wages and women also
received equal wages to men. Among the total sample households, 76.7 per cent
have shown MGNREGS as subsidiary occupation. Most of the rural people engaged
in seasonal agricultural activities, so off season they were depending MGNREGS.
Some of the other subsidiary occupations of the population include traditional
artisan (6.7 percent), merchant (4.7 percent), agricultural labour (4 percent)
and non-agricultural labour (6.7 percent). An important inference that can be
drawn from the analysis is that MGNREGS has emerged as an important basis of
livelihood for the tribal households.
6.4.Changes in Level of Expenditure.
Table 4:
Household level expenditure before and after the
implementation of MGNREGS
|
#
|
Source of expenditure
|
Before MGNREGA
(Percent)
|
After MGNREGA
(Percent)
|
|
1
|
Food
|
73.11
|
60.39
|
|
2
|
Clothing
|
5.08
|
7.04
|
|
3
|
Health
|
3.5
|
3.72
|
|
4
|
Cooking
fuel
|
0.67
|
1.57
|
|
5
|
Education
|
0.5
|
1.95
|
|
6
|
Transport
|
2.14
|
2.63
|
|
7
|
Social/religious
function
|
1.25
|
1.68
|
|
8
|
Alcohol
|
2.85
|
1.91
|
|
9
|
Electricity
bill
|
0.95
|
2.83
|
|
10
|
Phone/mobile
bill
|
0.54
|
2.85
|
|
11
|
Agri.Equipments
and seeds
|
2.36
|
2.31
|
|
12
|
Household
assets
|
2.68
|
3.93
|
|
13
|
Recreation
|
0.42
|
1.07
|
|
14
|
Maintenance
of House
|
3.95
|
6.12
|
|
|
Total
|
100
|
100
|
Source: Primary
Data
The
data from the table 4 reflected that there is positive impact of MGNREGA on
tribal livelihoods. The percentage of decrease in expenditure towards food
items is not because of reduction in food but because of increase in income. A pre and post comparison of the annual income
of beneficiaries, it is found that there is increase near 50% in income of the
beneficiaries. Major share of this impact can be attributable to MGNREGS.
Increased income may leads to increase in expenditure. The major chunk of
income of villagers may be attributed towards food items because of the culture
of villages and the availability of facilities. It is apparent from the table
that 73.1 percent of their expenditure is apportioned for food, and there is 13
percent reduction after the involvement in labour guarantee scheme. But after
the implementation of this scheme, the increased income capacitated to spend
more money towards non-food items which include both luxury and necessity
items. This depict that the scheme has made a considerable improvement on
tribal livelihood.
The study finds that after the
implementation of MGNREGS rural households get better opportunities to educate
their children. This is because women are largely involved in MGNREGS work;
they get more income as compared to local wage rate. Before the implementation
of MGNREGS public awareness was not obtained, but with the advent of MGNREGS in
local areas, the marginalised rural poor were largely mobilised. The workers
started to mutually discuss public matters, household needs and individual
observations.
7.
A
Sanguinity Note
The flagship programme
of United Progressive Alliance (UPA), MGNREG is probably facing its toughest
test during the BJP led Government.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi launched an indirect scathing attack on the
scheme. He added that the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee
Act (MGNREGA) was a “living monument” of the Congress-led UPA government’s failures (Sarika Malhotra, 2015). Even then
the Finance Minister Arun Jaitley gave a marginal hike to the scheme’s
allocation from Rs 34,000 crore to Rs 34,699 crore, while promising to enhance
the allocation by another Rs 5,000 crore (Ruhi Tewari, 2015) if there is tax buoyancy.
In spite of the
consequential reduced fiscal space for the Centre, the government has decided
to continue supporting important national priorities such as agriculture,
education, health, MGNREGA, and rural infrastructure, including roads, shows
that the government is committed to supporting employment through MGNREGA. The government
will focus on improving the quality of effectiveness of activities under the Act (Jayati Ghosh, 2015). As the analysis of Wyanad gives a rosy
picture of the scheme and hope, such a type of performing may force the
administrators and policy makers to recommend for continuous support of the Act.
8. Conclusion
MGNREGS
provides source of livelihood with magnified effect. The scheme crated an
alternative solution that the people can work for their livelihood in their own
village, having tremendous impact on reducing migration. Providing sufficient
sources of income, in a way it curb child labour and alleviating poverty. Thus
leads to a self sufficiency among the rural poor. Along with such a social aim,
the scheme paved way for creation of productive assets and infrastructure.
Construction of roads, cleaning of sources of water, soil and water
conservation works are some among them. Though several changes made in the Act,
the image of the scheme faded due to the poor implementation. As the structure
of scheme gives no way to manipulate the wages of poor people, the quality of
created assets is still standing as a big question mark. Even then the coverage
and innovativeness, it proved as one of the largest programme for reducing
poverty and also gained worldwide attention. The assessment of the impact of MGNREGS on tribal livelihood scenario
explored the positive outcomes for the tribal households. If the scheme is
executed and targeted efficiently, it can have substantial effects on the Tribal
communities. The MGNREGS can not only provide short term relief to the poor but
also contribute to the rural development in the long run. If livelihood
enhancement is one side of the coin of MGNREGS, transforming rural society by
diluting the bias of gender discrimination, reducing poverty and improving
income in labour intensive work in rural community will be the other side. Many
of the people argue that the MGNREGS is one of the most important pieces of
socio-economic legislation passed recently to change the face of the rural
structure. It also helps to strengthen the social mobilisation of rural poor
especially the tribals through the creation of social capital. The level of
enhancement of social participation ensures better responsiveness of local
governance to community needs and priorities, and most of all enhances the
outcomes of governance. With a confusing stance from the central government on
MNREGA, it remains to be seen what the future of the programme will be and
whether it will create real assets as promised and stand for the enhancement of
livelihood.
Reference
- Pankaj, A& Tankha, R, (2010), Empowerment
effects of the NREGS on Women Workers: A study in four States, Economic
and Political Weekly, Vol. 45, No.30, 24-30 July, pp. 45-55.
- Datta Sankar and Sharma
Vipin (ed.), (2012), State of India’s livelihoods Report 2011, New
Delhi, Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd.
- Chambers R and Conway G, (1992), 'Sustainable Rural Livelihoods:
Practical Concepts for the 21st century', IDS Discussion Paper No
296.
- Ellis
Frank, (2000), Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries,
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
- Hirway
I, (1986), Wage Employment Programmes in Rural Development, New Delhi,
Oxford Publishing House.
- Centre for Science and Environment
(CSE), (2008), National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA):
opportunities and Challenges, Natural Resource Management and Livelihood
Unit, New Delhi. (http:// www.cseindia.org/programe/nrml/
pdf/NREGA_ policy Paper_2008 pdf) accessed December, 2009.
- Government of India, (2005a), National Rural
Employment Guarerntee Act (NREGA), The gazette of Indian Extraordinary.
Part II, No 48, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India.
- Government of India, (2005b), National Rural
Employment Guarerntee Act – 2005 (NREGA), Operational Guidelines, Ministry
of Rural Development, Government of India.
- Website : htt//nrega.nic.in
- Sarika Malhotra (2015), Union Budget 2015-16:
Lip service to MNREGA, Business Today February 28, http://businesstoday.intoday.in/,
accessed on/////
- Ruhi
Tewari, (2015), Despite Modi criticism, Jaitley gives NREGA a
slight nudge, The Indian Express, March 1, http://indianexpress.com/business/,
accessed on /////
- Jayati Ghosh, (2015),
Lost between intent and belief, Hindustan Times, March 2, http://www.livemint.com/, accessed on,
Comments
Post a Comment