Drought Relief for Tangible and Intangible Benefits:  A Study of Government Drought Relief Work in Some of the Drought-Prone States of India
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Drought Relief for Tangible and Intangible Benefits: A Study of Government Drought Relief Work in Some of the Drought-Prone States of India

on

  • 1,624 views

India is one of the most drought prone countries in the world with elaborate institutional mechanisms to respond to droughts. However, drought relief has always been a public discourse due to various ...

India is one of the most drought prone countries in the world with elaborate institutional mechanisms to respond to droughts. However, drought relief has always been a public discourse due to various issues plaguing the system. This report evaluates the drought relief interventions in some of the most drought prone parts in India i.e. Rajasthan, Karnataka, Orissa using direct interviews with various stakeholders involved in drought relief.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,624
Views on SlideShare
1,624
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
29
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Drought Relief for Tangible and Intangible Benefits: A Study of Government Drought Relief Work in Some of the Drought-Prone States of India Document Transcript

  • 1. Drought Relief for Tangible andIntangible Benefits:A Study of Government DroughtRelief Work in Some of theDrought-Prone States of IndiaNational Institute of Disaster Management Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi 2005
  • 2. Suggested citation: NIDM. 2005. Drought Relief for Tangible and Intangible Benefits: A Study of Government Drought Relief Work in Some of the Drought- Prone States of India. National Institute for Disaster Management, New Delhi, India.
  • 3. 3 Contents Page NoLIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................... 4LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................... 7PREFACE ................................................................................................................................................... 8INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 10METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................. 12RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................. 16RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 43ANNEXURE I .......................................................................................................................................... 50ANNEXURE II ........................................................................................................................................ 83ANNEXURE III ....................................................................................................................................... 82ANNEXURE IV ....................................................................................................................................... 84ANNEXURE V ....................................................................................................................................... 100ANNEXURE VI ..................................................................................................................................... 106
  • 4. List of TablesTable 1. Drought frequency as identified by the non-beneficiary respondents (% response). ................................................................................................... 18Table 2. Indicators for identification of drought frequency (non-beneficiaries) ........ 19Table 3. Source of information on drought relief works for beneficiaries in study location of three states ................................................................................ 20Table 4. Source of information on drought relief works for non-beneficiaries in the study locations of three states ...................................................................... 21Table 5. Drought relief vs mitigation (Beneficiaries) .............................................. 21Table 6. Drought relief vs mitigation (Non-beneficiaries) ....................................... 21Table 7. Perception about how drought risk mitigation differs from drought relief (beneficiaries) ............................................................................................. 22Table 8. Perception about how drought risk mitigation differs from drought relief (non-beneficiaries) ...................................................................................... 22Table 9. Declaration of drought as perceived by the beneficiaries of drought relief . 23Table 10. Number of years participated in drought relief works ............................. 24Table 11. Willingness to participate in government led drought relief programs ...... 24Table 12. Options available with the communities in absence of drought relief works (beneficiaries) ............................................................................................. 25Table 13. Duration of drought relief works implemented as reported by the beneficiaries ................................................................................................ 28Table 14. Number of days for which the drought relief works were offered. ........... 28Table 15. Wages received by the beneficiaries in different states during the recent drought relief works of 2003-04.................................................................... 29Table 16. Adequacy of drought relief as opined by the respondents (figures % of responses). ................................................................................................. 29Table 17. Additional benefits accrued through drought relief works........................ 31
  • 5. 5Table 18. Women participation in drought relief works as identified by the beneficiaries................................................................................................ 31Table 19. Ratings of women participation in drought relief works (least satisfactory to most satisfactory) ........................................................................................ 32Table 20. Should women be offered different kinds of works than men? ................ 32Table 21. Food consumption during drought times (beneficiaries). ........................ 32Table 22. Percent reduction in food consumption of high energy and high nutritional items. ......................................................................................................... 33Table 23. Functioning of PDS system during the drought time ............................... 34Table 24. Role of ICDS system during the drought time ........................................ 34Table 25. Time spent by communities in fetching water (min) ............................... 35Table 26. Ratings for the quantity, quality and timeliness of water supply during drought relief .............................................................................................. 35Table 27. Access to water over the years due to drought relief works .................... 36Table 28. Major source of fodder during drought as informed by the communities. . 37Table 29. Source of fodder during normal times. .................................................. 37Table 30. Distress sell and death of cattle during drought years. ........................... 38Table 31. Regaining of sold out cattle by the communities. ................................... 38Table 32. State wise cattle population in India with specific reference to the study locations (figures in 000, for the year 2003-04, Source: Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in). .................................... 38Table 33. State wise milk production in India with specific reference to the study locations (figures in 000, for the year 2003-04, Source: Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in). .................................... 38Table 34. Area under fodder and pastures in the study locations (figures in 000 ha, for the year 1999-2000, Source: Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in). ......................................................................... 39Table 35. Health related problems during drought ................................................ 39Table 36. Impact of drought relief works on children’s education ........................... 40
  • 6. 6Table 37. Trend in migration. ............................................................................... 40Table 38. Where do you migrate? ........................................................................ 40Table 39. Impact of drought relief works on migration. ......................................... 41
  • 7. List of FiguresFigure 1. Participatory tools such as household surveys and group discussions using priority ranking and SWOT analysis were used. ............................................. 14Figure 2. District level consultation workshops were conducted in Rajasthan and Karnataka. .................................................................................................. 15Figure 3. Non-existent design and implementation: Poor designing and ineffective implementation has led to debacle of marudi mahaband yojana of Orissa. ...... 26Figure 4. Where is sustainability? Earthworks carried out during drought relief often live short life and tend to get damaged soon. ................................................ 27Figure 5. Quality conscious? Check dam constructed in 2004 started showing cracks, reducing the water harvesting efficiency of the structure. .............................. 27Figure 6. Needs resizing: ICDS does help the children and old-aged during normal times, what about in drought times? ............................................................. 33Figure 7. Misplaced priorities: The Self-Help Groups (SHGs) could prove a boon to local level monitoring of drought relief works. ............................................... 41
  • 8. PrefaceIndia has an irrigated area of more than 45 million hectares contributed from both itssurface and subsurface water resources. Though this irrigated area has brought thecountry’s food production to a surplus state, large tract of India’s land mass is stillrain fed and majority of it is drought prone due to the rainfall variability in temporaland spatial scales. Recurring droughts in these areas have made them even morevulnerable to future droughts resulting into an unending vicious circle. The Government of India has put in place a wide range of measures to tacklethe perennial problem of drought. These measures include long term programs suchas the Drought Prone Area Program (DPAP) and Desert Development Program (DDP)which are aimed at improving the natural resources of the affected areas such thatthe drought related risks are mitigated. In addition to these programs, thegovernment has also designed drought relief programs which come into operationupon declaration of the drought. These drought relief programs are aimed at providing immediate relief to theaffected population while helping them improve their purchasing power and accessto basic needs such as food, water and fodder for cattle. With the recurring droughtsravaging the nation year after year, there has been a large debate on the way thedrought relief measures have been administered and the impacts they aregenerating. Since large amount of public money has been spent in these programs,the Ministry of Agriculture has rightly felt to study the impact of present droughtrelief interventions in the major drought prone states of the country. This report brings out salient findings of a short study instituted by NIDM on thetangible and intangible benefits of drought relief management. The study waspossible with a set of indicators identified, questionnaires finalized and field surveysconducted with the help of local volunteers. I acknowledge the contributions of Dr SVRK Prabhakar, Program Associate,UNDP-GoI DRM Program and Dr Santosh Kumar, Professor, NIDM in carrying out thisstudy in association with the state and district level collaborators. I also acknowledgethe inputs obtained from Dr Cody L. Knutson, Water Resources Scientist, National
  • 9. 9Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC), Nebraska, US; Dr Donald Wilhite, Director,NDMC; Dr PK Joshi, South Asia Coordinator, IFPRI New Delhi; for technical guidancein designing and implementing the study. No words would be sufficient to thank allthe state, district and village level functionaries who extended great support to thestudy team by providing relevant information and coordinating the field visits. A listof persons involved in this study has been provided in the Annexure I. P.G. Dhar Chakrabarti Executive Director, NIDM
  • 10. IntroductionIndia has a diverse set of geo and physiographic conditions typifying its size. Itsdiversity is also reflected through various kinds of disasters that the country isvulnerable to. For instance, it has been identified that nearly 57% of the land mass isprone to earthquakes, 12% prone to floods, 8% is vulnerable to tropical cyclones. Allthese disasters are categorized as sudden onset disasters as they seldom givesufficient time for the administration to react in advance such that the impacts couldbe minimized. This very basic characteristic, apparently, seems to bring thesedisasters to focus in media and elsewhere. However, slow onset disasters such asdrought, which is expected to occur in different phases spanning meteorologicaldrought to socio-economic drought, gives ample time for the administration to reactto this disaster. The same characteristic of this disaster makes the communities toadapt to it over a period of time such that at a given point of time the communitiesstop looking at it as a threat to their immediate and long-term prospects. India has faced number of drought years, ever since the meteorological data isavailable. Out of these years, few of them could be termed as severe to most severedroughts. The all-India drought of 2002 caused an agricultural income loss of Rs39000 crores to the country. Such losses, which prove costly to the nation’s economy,can repeat in no time as it was observed in 2004. This tantamount to say that thedrought risk of the nation is ever increasing and hence deserves concerted actionsfrom all quarters of the society to thwart its negative impacts on the nation’sdevelopment. For example, the latest all India drought of 2002 saw the country spending Rs2013 crores from the Calamity Relief Fund (CRF), Rs 2201 crores from the NationalCalamity Contingency Fund (NCCF), and 87.36 MTs of foodgrains for reliefemployment under special SGRY. The country also spent huge amount of resources
  • 11. 11for transporting water and fodder by rail up to 30th June 20031. In addition, the country has been spending considerable amount of resources onlong-term drought risk mitigation programs through watershed developmentprograms. These watershed programs, either implemented by the government ofIndia through its Drought Prone Areas Program (DPAP) or by various non-governmental organizations, either in isolation or in conjunction with the state andbelow level governments, produced different results across the country, ranging fromabsolute failure to superb success. However, the recurring droughts proved that thedrought proofing is far from reality and the country has a lot to achieve in this area.Severe droughts have not spared even those areas covered under long-term droughtmitigation such as DPAP. While drought relief aims at providing quick relief to the affected communities,so that the life returns to normalcy, it has to be understood that often huge amountof money has been spent in a very short span of time. The bone of contention iswhether all this expenditure has led to tangible and intangible benefits? It isworthwhile to know the answer to this question. The present study on drought relief for tangible and intangible benefits aims atunderstanding what kind of benefits were accrued to the communities throughdrought relief interventions such that a corrective course of action could be chalkedout. The study had a broad objective of understanding the elements affected bydrought, identifying the tangible and intangible benefits of drought relief andstudying the existing drought relief mechanism at few locations such that thedeficiencies are identified and rectified for a better drought relief management. Formore details on the concept of the study, please refer to Annexure II.1 Drought 2002. A Report. 2004. Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry ofAgriculture.
  • 12. MethodologyThis section describes the methodology adopted in the present study on droughtrelief for tangible and intangible benefits. The basic methodology of the studycomprised of conducting interviews with various stakeholders of drought relief(communities, implementation machinery such as governments at different levelsand NGOs) with the help of structured, open-ended questionnaires developedfocusing on the identified indicators (Annexure III).1. Identification of study locations The study was carried out in three states of Rajasthan, Karnataka & Orissa, thethree most drought prone ones in India. Due to the budgetary and time constraints,which were the prime factors limiting the scope of the study, it was decided torandomly select one of the most drought prone districts in each state and conductthe study in a single village in each district where the household surveys were to becarried out. The household surveys were primarily conducted with the help of thequestionnaires, which are a mixture of quantitative and qualitative questions(Annexure IV), by the qualified field data enumerators. The study village was selected based on the following criteria: The village should have undergone drought in the past three years It should have been declared as drought affected Drought relief works were carried out in the village at least once in the past three years. This criterion is based on the reason that the survey heavily relies on thememory of the respondents and it would have been difficult for the respondents torecall events happened in the distant past. Brief background information has beenprovided on the study locations in Annexure VI.
  • 13. 132. Study Partners The study partners were identified based on their experience in the respectivestates and their expertise in carrying out such impact studies. For Rajasthan, theInstitute of Development Studies (IDS), Jaipur was chosen as nodal institute whichprovided advice on identification of study location and coordinated the field visits ofthe study team. The study was carried out independently in the states of Orissa andKarnataka with the support of the state and district level administration and domainexperts available there (Annexure I).3. Indicators Identification of appropriate indicators for assessing the efficacy of drought reliefhas been an important exercise before the questionnaires were prepared and surveyswere conducted. The following aspects formed the guide-rules for identification ofindicators:  Broader objectives of drought relief interventions  Boundaries of the study, which is mostly limited to the community level. Indicators were identified based on the direct and indirect impacts that thedrought relief interventions could create. Direct impacts are resultant of theperceivable changes brought out by the food, fodder and water supplies andemployment generation programs, which are part of the drought relief interventions.Other impacts were identified which are basically the spill-over effects of droughtrelief interventions and are resultants of interaction of social fabric and administrativeinterventions. The spill-over interactions were broadly grouped into logical groupswhich were well reflected in the questionnaires as well. Efforts were also made toinclude issues related to gender etc. Study on the administrative aspects of drought relief interventions could nothave been avoided for the reasons that the administrative bottlenecks could alwaysmodify the probable impacts of the drought relief interventions. Hence, a partialfocus has also been made on how the drought relief works were carried out and howthe services were delivered to the affected communities.
  • 14. 144. Survey Questionnaires The questionnaires were designed based on the desk study and expertconsultation. The following experts were consulted for finalization of questionnaires: 1. Dr Cody L. Knutson, Water Resources Scientist, NDMC, Nebraska, Lincoln, US. 2. Dr PK Joshi, Regional Coordinator, IFPRI, New Delhi. 3. Dr Donald Wilhite, Director, National Drought Mitigation Center, Nebraska, Lincoln, US.Further, the indicators and questionnaires were also shared with the state levelcollaborating partners for their comments before they were finalized in a meetingwith the JS (MoA) and Director (MoA) at the Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi. The structured questionnaires and the data collection formats were used forobtaining the information from the drought relief beneficiaries, non-beneficiaries, thevillage level administration, the Panchayat Raj Institutions, Revenue Administration,and community level institutions such as NGOs, SHGs etc. These questionnairesincluded a mixture of qualitative and quantitative questions. Where ever possible, therespondents were asked to rank their qualitative answers in the scale of 1 – 5.5. Participatory Research Tools Figure 1. Participatory tools such as household surveys and group discussions using priority ranking and SWOT analysis were used. During the field study, in addition to the questionnaires and data collectionformats, at least three kinds of participatory rural appraisal (PRA) tools were used tounderstand the nature of relief interventions and the cause for the existing problemsif any. Most important ones are Focused Group Discussion (FGD), Problem Tree
  • 15. 15Analysis, and Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis.6. Consultation Workshops Figure 2. District level consultation workshops were conducted in Rajasthan and Karnataka. Consultation workshops were conducted at Jaipur (Rajasthan) and Kolar(Karnataka), with the district and below level administration to ascertain the issues indrought relief management and to find possible solutions for the same, on 29-08-2005 and 09-08-05 respectively. Another brainstorming workshop was conducted atNIDM, New Delhi, where the state level functionaries such as Relief Commissioners,representatives of district administration and Non-governmental Organizations(NGOs) were introduced to the broad findings of the study to find possible solutionsto the issues raised.
  • 16. ResultsThis section contains information about the salient findings of the study and adiscussion on them. The findings have been grouped in to the following heads.1) Drought 1.1. Frequency and onset of drought 1.2. Awareness among communities 1.3. Drought relief vs drought risk mitigation 1.4. Declaration of drought2) Drought Relief 2.1. Employment generation programs 2.2. Willingness to participate 2.3. Kind of drought relief works 2.4. Adequacy of drought relief 2.5. Benefits accrued through drought relief works 2.6. Women and drought relief works 2.7. Food & nutrition 2.8. Role of ICDS and PDS systems3) Water4) Fodder5) Health6) Education7) Migration8) NGOs, SHGs and drought relief
  • 17. 171. Drought Drought has different connotations for different sections of the society. It isimportant to understand how every one perceive drought as happening such that a‘user friendly’ intervention could be designed. The survey included a set of questionson what communities perceive drought as and how do they recognize it ashappening. The results are discussed here.1.1. Frequency and onset of drought In general, the survey revealed a majority opinion of increasing frequency ofdrought related events (Fig 1, Table 1) during recent past. On an average, 64% ofthe respondents opined that the drought frequency has been increasing duringrecent past (6-8 years) while the years before that were normal. The similarresponse was also obtained from non-beneficiary members of the community where76% of them said that the drought severity has been increasing while 11% of themfound it declining (Table 1). Increasing Decreasing No change Cannot say 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa AverageFig. 1. Drought frequency as observed by the respondents (mean values in %).
  • 18. 18 Table 1. Drought frequency as identified by the non-beneficiary respondents (% response). Rajasthan2 Karnataka Orissa Mean Increasing 50 93 83 76 Decreasing 33 0 0 11 No change 17 7 17 13 Cannot say 0 0 0 0 Communities have Box 1. Indicators for increasing drought a number of indicators frequency based on which they  Declining rainfall identify the frequency  Declining water tables of occurrence of  Reduction in crop production  Reduction in household incomes drought. Two kinds of  Increasing dry spells over the years indicators were observed for identifyingthe frequency of drought incidences (Box 1). While one set of them are directlyrelated to water (rainfall, levels of the ground water table etc), the other set ofindicators are entirely different from the first set. 1 Declining rainfall 2 Traditional indicators 3 Declining water tables 4 Reduction in production/income 5 Reduction in fodder 6 All the above 70 7 Cannot say 8 Increase in rainfall 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average Fig. 2. Indicators useful for identification of drought frequency (beneficiaries).2 Though the state names have been mentioned here, they should be read with reference tothe study locations only and no effort has been made to generalize the findings. Please referto Annexure VI for details on the study locations.
  • 19. 19 In addition, there is a wealth of traditional indicators available with thecommunities, that the communities rely upon to identify if a particular year is goingto be drought year or not (Box 2). On an average, 53% of drought reliefbeneficiaries said they rely on the water related indicators and only 4% believe onthe traditional indicators. This figure is 50% in case of non-beneficiaries. There was Box 2. Traditional indicators for onset of drought and rainfall Flowering of bamboo Mid season dry spell Heavy dew in July-August Rainfalls if wind direction is in North to South Rainfalls if kumber fruit is eaten by parrot Non ripening of black berry fruit in June If the Janki tree don’t bear fruits Seed setting in kumb fruit Depending on the way the kumbh fruit is eaten by parrot Interrupted sound by rabbit leads to breaks in monsoon Seed setting at the lower side of the fruit leads to heavy rainfall in the later part of the season Laying of eggs by bharatiya bird in swampy areas and there would not be rain till the kitten emerge out of the eggs. High probability of deficit rainfall is strongly correlated with the delayed onset of rainfall. Warm winter precedes a dry rainy seasonmore reliance on traditional indicators in Karnataka (11%) than in other states. Itappears that in Rajasthan the communities consider a combination of all theseindicators to see if the year is going to be a drought year or not. Table 2. Indicators for identification of drought frequency (non- beneficiaries) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Mean 1 Declining rainfall 33 33 83 50 2 Traditional indicators 0 0 0 0 3 Declining water tables 17 7 0 8 4 Reduction in production 0 0 0 0 5 Reduction in employment 0 33 0 11 6 Increasing production 33 0 0 11 7 Change in water quality 17 0 0 6 8 Shortage of fodder 0 7 0 2 9 Scarcity of food 0 20 0 7 10 Breaks/late rainfall 0 0 17 6 The survey revealed a relatively high reliance on these indicators by the
  • 20. 20communities. On an average, 64% of the beneficiary respondents felt that theseindicators are sufficient to decide the drought frequency and probability of animpending drought and only 5% of the respondents declined them as insufficient.The figure is high in Karnataka (78%) when compared to the other states, where asthe communities in Orissa are aware of more number of indicators. It is also relevant to discuss these findings in relation to the impact of droughton various livelihoods of the communities. It has been observed that thecommunities, whose livelihoods are more linked to the availability of water, oftenkept track of their incomes which fluctuate with the changing rainfall conditions overthe year. For instance, farmers identified increasing drought frequency by looking athis farm income and so an artisan.1.2. Awareness among communities All the respondents were aware about the drought relief interventions in theirvillage, without any exception. However, there were differences in the source fromwhere they get the information about the drought relief. At all the locations, theinformation about the imminent drought relief works reached the communitiesthrough the local Gram Panchayat (Secretary, Surpanch or members), mass media,neighbors, friends and contractors. Table 3 indicates that around 44% of thebeneficiaries obtained the information from the gram Panchayat, while 38% fromneighbors or friends followed by mass media (15%). However, it is interesting toknow that, in some cases (3%), the respondents obtained information from thecontractors who implement the drought relief works.Table 3. Source of information on drought relief works for beneficiaries in study location of three states Source of information Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Mean 1 GP 61 10 60 44 2 Radio/newspaper 6 40 0 15 3 Neighbors/friends 33 40 40 38 4 Contractor 0 10 0 3 The picture is different in the case of non-beneficiaries. 67% of the non-beneficiaries came to know about drought relief works from the neighbors andfriends followed by GP (17%) and mass media such as radio (12) and contractors(5%). All responses where the information source was contractors were fromKarnataka, where, allegedly, the drought relief works are being carried through the
  • 21. 21mediators who are established contractors. In Orissa, friends and neighbors werefound to be the main source of information for the non-beneficiaries. Table 4. Source of information on drought relief works for non- beneficiaries in the study locations of three states Source of information Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Mean 1 GP 50 0 0 17 2 Radio 0 36 0 12 3 Neighbors/friends 50 50 100 67 4 Contractors 0 14 0 51.3. Drought relief vs drought risk mitigation Drought risk mitigation aims at reducing the impacts of low rainfall in the longterm though the help of various natural resource management practices. Thesemeasures largely concentrate on rainwater conservation through a combination ofapproaches, both in situe and ex situe such that the availability of water increases ina given location. Table 5. Drought relief vs mitigation (Beneficiaries) Different or not Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Mean Yes 7 60 36 34 No 67 40 64 57 Cannot say 27 0 0 9 The study revealed a considerable ignorance (57%) about the long term droughtrisk management measures required to mitigate the ill impacts of the drought (Table5). However, the awareness levels among the non-beneficiaries found to be muchhigher than among the beneficiaries (Table 6). Awareness level in Orissa is muchlower than in any other study locations. Table 6. Drought relief vs mitigation (Non-beneficiaries) Relief vs Mitigation: Different or not Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average Yes 50 80 0 43 No 50 20 100 57 Cannot say 0 0 0 0 Respondents differed in their perception of how the drought mitigation differsfrom the drought relief (Table 7). It was observed that majority of them couldn’t
  • 22. 22differentiate between drought mitigation and relief (82%) while some of them (on anaverage 4%) opined that these programs are conducted throughout the year (4%), itresults in permanent constructions (4%), and gives permanent solution to the waterrelated problems (4%). Only 3% of them recognized them as synonymous with thewatershed works while rest of them opined as no different. The Tables belowprovides the inter-study location differences in the perceptions. Table 7. Perception about how drought risk mitigation differs from drought relief (beneficiaries) How is it different? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 Conducted through out the year 0 11 0 4 2 Cannot say 100 67 80 82 3 Gives permanent solution 0 11 0 4 4 Permanent constructions 0 11 0 4 5 Watershed works 0 0 10 3 6 No difference 0 0 10 3 7 More structures and employment 0 0 0 0Table 8. Perception about how drought risk mitigation differs from drought relief (non-beneficiaries) How is it different? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 Conducted through out the year 0 0 0 0 2 Cannot say 23 15 100 46 3 Permanent constructions 8 23 0 10 4 sufficient water 0 46 0 15 5 canals 0 15 0 51.4. Declaration of drought Declaration of drought is an important aspect and has different kinds ofsignificances for different players involved in drought relief. A timely declaration ofdrought could prove useful to the affected communities and a delay in declarationcould mean further deterioration in the socio-economic status of the affected ones.Hence, looking at the importance of this aspect, efforts were made to find whetherthe declaration of drought has been made timely or not. The beneficiary respondents were able to give a broad indication about whenthe drought is declared. The general response was that the drought is often declared
  • 23. 23late by about one month (18% respondents) to three months (28% respondents).The delay appears to be more in Rajasthan and Orissa (after 3 months) than inKarnataka (after one month) (Table 9). However, there seems to be more ignoranceabout the declaration of drought in Karnataka as 22% of the respondents said theydidn’t know about any such declaration, when compared to the other study locations. Table 9. Declaration of drought as perceived by the beneficiaries of drought relief When the drought is declared Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 Immediately 0 0 0 0 2 1 After 1-4 weeks 22 11 8 14 3 After 1 month 6 22 25 18 4 After 2 months 6 11 21 13 5 After 3 months 50 0 33 28 6 After > 4 months 17 0 13 10 7 Not known 0 33 0 11 8 No one declares 0 22 0 7 The girdhavary system plays a vital role in declaration of drought. It was learntthat the preparation of the girdhavari report often takes take time, exceeding afortnight, and hence the delay in declaration. This calls for even a better or at leastsome kind of corroboratory evidence to check the accuracy of this system inidentifying the drought affected locations and beneficiaries such that an earlydrought relief works could be initiated.2. Drought Relief Largely, drought relief has been administered in different ways that lead to areduction in the impact of drought on the communities. This study focused on threeaspects of it i.e. employment generation, supply of drinking water and fodder forcattle. These interventions were studied in dimensions of adequacy, timeliness andquality (quality of produce supplied in case of food, quality of works carried out incase of assets generated etc). The study also tried to assess the quality of servicesthe government has provided as an overall indicator of effective drought reliefmanagement.
  • 24. 242.1. Employment generation programs Employment generation programs are generally aimed at providing additionalavenues of income such that the purchasing power of the target population remainssatisfactory to lead life during the times of stress. This very basic definition makes usunderstand that there are quantity and quality parameters assigned to it. The Table 10 provides information on the number of years the respondents havebeen participating in drought relief works. It is important for us to consider thisinformation to validate the findings of this study based on the number of years therespondents have been involved in drought relief. Table 10. Number of years participated in drought relief works Years Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 22 70 18 37 2 11 20 9 13 3 11 10 50 24 4 22 0 5 9 5 17 0 14 10 6 6 0 5 3 7 0 0 0 0 8 & above 11 0 0 42.2. Willingness to participate The willingness to participate can be considered as an indicator of the relianceby the communities on the drought relief programs. Efforts were also made to assessthe secondary benefits accrued to the communities from the drought relief works,those benefits other than the food and money called the wage. It can be seen from Table 11 that the willingness to participate is much higher inOrissa (92%) while it is least in Rajasthan (56%) followed by Karnataka.Beneficiaries who don’t want to participate and look for entirely different kind ofLivelihood Avenues are also high at the study location of Rajasthan. The picture fromthe non-beneficiaries Table 11. Willingness to participate in government led drought relief programs Willing to participate? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average
  • 25. 25 Willing to participate? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 (least willing) 13 0 0 4 2 6 0 0 2 3 0 0 4 1 4 25 22 4 17 5 (Most willing) 56 78 92 75Note: 1 stands for not willing to participate and 5 stands for most willing to participate. When the respondents were asked about what would they do if the governmentwithdraw the drought relief operations permanently, the most immediate responsewas to resort to the either borrowing money (41%) or to migrate long distances(18%) followed by working in nearby cities (Table 12). However, at places whereforest resources are available, the communities depend more on such resources byfetching forest produce and sell them in nearby cities, as in the case of Orissa. Thetendency to borrow seems to be much higher in Karnataka (89%) than in otherstates. However, people who opt for other kinds of local employment generationactivations were also higher in Karnataka. It shows that the communities are morewilling to stay in their respective villages (as indicated through the total responses ofalternative employment, borrowing money and working in nearby cities/villages(58% excluding the ones who utilize forest produce and 75% including the ones whowant to depend on the forests for their livelihoods). This also shows the importanceof providing the local employment opportunities. Table 12. Options available with the communities in absence of drought relief works (beneficiaries)What would you do? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Alternative employment 6 11 8 82 Borrow money 24 89 12 413 Migrate 35 0 20 184 Work in nearby cities/villages 18 0 8 95 Cannot say 12 0 0 46 No problem 6 0 0 27 Forest produce 0 0 52 17
  • 26. 262.3. Kind of drought relief works Figure 3. Non-existent design and implementation: Poor designing andineffective implementation has led to debacle of marudi mahaband yojana of Orissa. It is important to know what kind of drought relief works have been carried outat the study locations as it decides the sustainability of the drought reliefinterventions. With little or no exception, at all the study locations, the drought reliefworks included repairing of roads, digging of canals and tanks and construction ofcheck dams. The responses of respondents corroborated with that of the responsesfrom the government administration in this regard.
  • 27. 27 Figure 4. Where is sustainability? Earthworks carried out during drought relief often live short life and tend to get damaged soon. Figure 5. Quality conscious? Check dam constructed in 2004 startedshowing cracks, reducing the water harvesting efficiency of the structure.2.4. Adequacy of drought relief Different drought relief interventions have different indicators to assess theiradequacy. The adequacy of drought relief has two dimensions. One being theamount of money that the beneficiaries got in terms of wage rate (Rs/day) and thenumber of days they got to work in a drought year. The same holds good (amountand duration of supply) for the drinking water and supply of fodder for cattle.
  • 28. 28Duration of drought relief worksTable 13. Duration of drought relief works implemented as reported by the beneficiaries Months Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 0 75 8 28 2 13 0 28 14 3 13 25 56 31 4 67 0 8 25 5 7 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 The Table 13 indicates that majority of the beneficiaries obtained the droughtrelief ranging between 2 to 4 months. It is maximum in Rajasthan (4 months asreported by 67% of the respondents) followed by Orissa (4 months as reported by56% of the respondents). It was least in Karnataka, with majority of them (75%)reporting it as one month. During these days, the beneficiaries could get 7-10 daysto work in Rajasthan, thirty days in Karnataka and 10-17 days in Orissa (Table 14). Itwas learnt that in Karnataka the works are often completed in a month time (with avariation of 20-25 days), where as the works in other states are spanned over two tofour months.Table 14. Number of days for which the drought relief works were offered. Duration (days) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 7 6 0 0 2 8 71 0 0 24 9 6 0 0 2 10 18 0 8 9 11 0 0 17 6 12 0 0 8 3 13 0 0 17 6 14 0 0 42 14 17 0 0 8 3 30 0 100 0 33Wages Drought relief wage refers to the amount paid to the workers for taking part inthe drought relief works. Often, the wages are in two components, the cash and thekind components. The recent drought relief norms stipulated for 75% kind and 25%cash and each state has been advised to pay the workers as per the minimum wagesof the respective state. The kind component should be provided in terms of foodgrains, usually in terms of local staple food (rice or wheat).
  • 29. 29 It became difficult to ascertain the amount the beneficiaries received as a partof the wage as the respondents were unable to recall the same during the interviewprocess. However, the respondents were sure that the answers do not vary muchfrom what they have received and there could be an error of 10 to 15%. It could beseen that the amount received as a part of the cash wage ranged between Rs 111per month in Rajasthan to Rs 369 per month in the state of Orissa (Table 15). Thekind wage ranged between Rs 600 in Karnataka to Rs 326 in the state of Rajasthan.However, these values are subject to change owing to the problems related to thememory. In addition, the wages were bound to change as per the work assessmentmade by the local Junior Engineer who assesses the work done and pay according tothe norms laid down.Table 15. Wages received by the beneficiaries in different states during the recent drought relief works of 2003-04. Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average Cash 111 353 369 278 Kind 326 600 394 440Adequacy Majority of the respondents informed that the amount and duration of relief theyhave received was not sufficient for them to tide over the difficult times. It wasobserved that the fodder and water supplies never reached some of the beneficiariesin the state of Orissa and the fodder in Rajathan. Overall, the respondents weresatisfied over the amount of money and water received as a part of relief inKarnataka while the other respondents were not satisfied in all other study locations.Table 16. Adequacy of drought relief as opined by the respondents (figures % of responses). Cash Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average Yes 28 60 13 33 No 72 30 88 63 Not provided 0 10 0 3 Kind Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average Yes 11 30 21 21 No 89 50 79 73 Not provided 0 20 0 7 Fodder Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average Yes 0 0 0 0
  • 30. 30 Cash Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average No 33 86 0 40 Not provided 67 14 100 60 Water Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average Yes 6 67 0 24 No 89 33 0 41 Not provided 6 0 100 352.5. Benefits accrued through drought relief works One of the important aspects of the study was to ascertain whether the droughtrelief works have led to any kind of benefits to the communities apart from thewages they received. The answer to this question was a mixed one. The commonassets that were developed at all the study locations were:  Approach roads  Canals  Water tanks  Check dams While these are the tangible benefits that the communities obtained, themeasurement of intangible benefits was a difficult task as communities were to beexplained the nature of such benefits and how they could be identified. Initially,majority of the respondents were unable to identify any kind of secondary benefitthrough drought relief works (Table 17). However, the following secondary benefitswere identified by the communities as emanating out of drought relief works Meeting of community members during relief works which led to increased knowledge among the communities (though the respondents were unable to explain what kind of knowledge they gained). Some of the respondents identified development of skill through taking part in earth works while some others declined to identify the same. However, at places where fish rearing has been taken up (Orissa), the communities acknowledged the skill gains in fish rearing and maintenance of fish ponds and found it as an alternative livelihood. Rise in water tables has been identified as an important advantage by the communities.
  • 31. 31 The communities could utilize the water tanks for providing drinking water to their cattle and for meeting their household requirements. Table 17. Additional benefits accrued through drought relief works Additional benefits Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 Gain in skills 0 11 5 5 2 New livelihood avenues 6 0 14 7 3 Water in tanks for animals 6 0 10 5 4 Increase in water table 6 0 0 2 5 Meeting people 0 11 0 4 7 None 81 78 71 772.6. Women and drought relief works Assessment of women participation in drought relief works was given importancein the present study to assess if the women participation is satisfactory (in the viewsof the respondents) or if they observe the higher participation of women in droughtrelief works as a disadvantage. It could be seen from Table 18 that the average women participation in droughtrelief works ranged between 50-60%. The proportion was higher in Rajasthan (70-80%) followed by Karnataka (60-70%) and Orissa (50-60%). No limitations wereidentified by the communities that might hinder the participation of women except inOrissa where social norms (Orissa) and fewer wages (Karnataka) were identified asfactors limiting the participation of women in drought relief works. The respondents were unable to find any additional advantage of participation ofwomen in drought relief works, excepting getting additional income and food.Instead, the respondents reported of more negative impacts such as inability to copewith the house hold chores and taking care of children during the times of droughtrelief works. Health related disorders such as body aches and sun strokes were alsoreported by the respondents.Table 18. Women participation in drought relief works as identified by the beneficiaries. Proportion of women in DRWs Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 <30 0 0 0 0 2 30-40 0 22 0 7 3 40-50 18 11 17 15 3 50-60 0 11 83 31 4 60-70 18 33 0 17
  • 32. 32 Proportion of women in DRWs Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 5 70-80 59 0 0 20 6 80-90 6 22 0 9 7 >90 0 0 0 0 Table 19. Ratings of women participation in drought relief works (least satisfactory to most satisfactory) Rate the proportion Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 6 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 1 4 13 56 28 32 5 81 44 68 65 When asked about whether the women are offered different kinds of works thanthat of men, the response was unanimously no. There was a clear ‘yes’ on whetherthe women be offered different kind of works than men (Table 20). When askedabout the options, the women preferred to participate in light works and in thoseworks which would provide them the flexibility of working hours such as indoorsworks, hand crafts etc. Table 20. Should women be offered different kinds of works than men? Should it be different? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average Yes 53 89 67 69 No 47 11 33 312.7. Food and nutrition The study also focused on the food and nutritional aspects of the drought reliefbeneficiaries. It was observed that there was a clear nutritional benefit through thefood component of the wage, even though it was available for few days in a monthand few months in a year. However, owing to inadequacies in food availability for anextended period, reduction in food consumption seems to be a major adoptionamong the communities prone to drought (97% of the respondents, Table 21). Table 21. Food consumption during drought times (beneficiaries).Food consumption Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Reduce 94 100 96 972 No change 6 0 4 33 Increase 0 0 0 0 High energy and nutritious food items such as milk, vegetables, ghee, oils and
  • 33. 33pulses were reportedly reduced by about 20-40%. The % reduction varied across thestudy locations (Table 22). Table 22. Percent reduction in food consumption of high energy and high nutritional items. Food consumption (%) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 0 0 0 4 1 0-20 20 33 33 29 20-40 50 11 46 36 40-60 20 33 4 19 60-80 10 22 0 11 80-100 0 0 0 0 Cannot say 0 0 13 4 We also ascertained whether this reduction in consumption has something to dowith the food availability or not. It was found that the food items were abundantlyavailable at all the locations while the reduction in consumption was mostly due tohigher prices and inability to purchase them due to less income.2.8. Role of ICDS and PDS systemsFigure 6. Needs resizing: ICDS does help the children and old-aged during normal times, what about in drought times? The Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) and Public DistributionSystem (PDS) play an important role in maintaining the food and nutritional security
  • 34. 34of the villages in India. The study tried to find out the issues related to thesesystems as well vis-à-vis drought relief management. Overall, the respondents rated the PDS system as average to good in itsfunctionality during drought years. Similar rating was also given to the ICDS system.Among the study locations, Rajasthan fared poor to fair rating for its PDS and ICDSsystems when compared to the other study locations. Table 23. Functioning of PDS system during the drought timePDS Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Poor 19 0 0 62 Fair 19 0 4 83 Average 38 22 9 234 Good 25 56 87 565 Excellent 0 22 0 7 Table 24. Role of ICDS system during the drought timeICDS Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Poor 23 0 0 82 Fair 8 0 5 43 Average 31 50 5 294 Good 38 50 90 595 Excellent 0 0 0 0 The respondents opined that these support systems are less sensitive to thechanging needs during drought times and felt that they could have better worked byproviding more and diverse food supplies such as supply of edible oils and pulseswhich is not happening at present.3. Water Water is elixir of life. It becomes more than elixir when it is scarce and duringdrought when drinking water itself becomes a rear commodity. All the communitiesobtained the drinking water from the hand pumps and non-drinking water from thetanks dug or renovated during drought relief works. This is a clear indication ofbenefits accrued to the communities from drought relief works. Often, the women members of the household fetch the water. On an average,the households spent 60 min for fetching drinking water and 94 min for fetching non-drinking water. This time was more in the study location of Karnataka followed by in
  • 35. 35the study locations of Rajasthan and Orissa. There was clear increase in the timespent from normal times to drought time by nearly double in case of drinking water.Water supply by the local governments seems not influenced the time spent forfetching the water. Table 25. Time spent by communities in fetching water (min) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average Normal times Drinking 33 54 25 37 Non-Drinking 48 66 24 46 Drought times Drinking 56 77 49 61 Non-Drinking 123 113 45 94 The water supplied to the communities was not sufficient in many cases (Table26). In the study location of Rajasthan, there seems to me more than quantityissues. Communities here are being supplied with the brackish waters uploaded inthe same village and supplied to the same communities by the contractors, asalleged by the respondents. In addition, these communities informed of spendingmore than Rs 700 per month for purchasing two tankers of drinking water. However,these allegations were refuted by the local administration when asked about it. The effectiveness of drinking water supply was also assessed in terms oftimeliness of supply. In general, the respondents informed it as poor except inKarnataka where the communities saw the time of supply as fairly suitable to theirrequirement. Table 26. Ratings for the quantity, quality and timeliness of water supply during drought reliefRate the quantity Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Poor 80 11 100 642 Fair 7 0 0 23 Average 7 0 0 24 Good 7 33 0 135 Excellent 0 56 0 19Rate the quality Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Poor 87 0 100 622 Fair 0 33 0 113 Average 0 33 0 114 Good 7 22 0 105 Excellent 7 11 0 6Rate the timeliness of supply Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average
  • 36. 36Rate the quantity Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Poor 71 22 100 652 Fair 0 56 0 193 Average 0 11 0 44 Good 7 0 0 25 Excellent 21 11 0 11Potable? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa AverageYes 0 100 71 57No 93 0 29 41Cannot say 7 0 0 2 The drinking water has been supplied twice in a day at all the study locationswith the help of water tankers, once in the morning and evening. Yet times, thewater was also supplied in the noon, depending on the needs of the communities. The other indicator studied was improvement in the access to water over theyears due to drought relief works. The access to water was improved over the yearsin the study locations of Karnataka and Orissa, mostly due to digging of water tanks.However, in the study location of Rajasthan, the access to water didn’t change andinstead deteriorated over the years. Table 27. Access to water over the years due to drought relief worksAccess to drinking water Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Improved 0 56 67 412 Deteriorated 53 33 22 363 No change 47 11 11 23 When asked about how the access can be improved, majority of the respondentsfelt that the permanent measures such as linking of the village to a nearby riverthrough canals would only solve their problems rather than through temporarymeasures such as supply of water by tankers etc. They were of the opinion that thecurrent number of water harvesting structures has not been sufficient as they couldhardly hold water for 2-3 months after the cessation of rainfall.4. Fodder Fodder for cattle becomes scarce during the times of drought. Rajasthan hasone of the largest cattle populations in India and produce more milk than the statesof Karnataka and Orissa. The state also has largest areas under pastures and fodder
  • 37. 37crops (Table 28). About 2/3rd of the milk in India is produced by the states 2/3 milkproduction by UP, Punjab, Rajasthan, MP, Maharashtra, Gujarat, AP and Haryana. Thestudy revealed that the communities never got the fodder as a part of the droughtrelief interventions except for one year (during 2002-03) where fodder was suppliedto the farmers on subsidy by the local milk cooperative. Hence, the major source offodder during drought had been either purchasing in the local market or throughgrazing in the common lands (Table 28). Table 28. Major source of fodder during drought as informed by the communities.Major source of fodder (Drought times) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Purchasing 92 100 0 642 Grazing 8 0 100 363 Cut & fed 0 0 0 04 Govt given fodder 0 0 0 0 It could be seen that the places where ever there are sufficient grazing landsavailable, as in the case of Orissa, there communities relied on them for fodder andthe impact of drought was less there. However, at the study location of Karnatakaand Rajasthan, where there were poor development of grazing lands and no forestsavailable, the communities often resorted to purchasing of fodder. However, communities could find sufficient places for cattle grazing duringnormal times. The respondents were of the opinion that the government has leastimpact in terms of supply of fodder during drought and they could not rememberabout when the government has opened the fodder depots in the last five years,though the local administration claimed to have opened the fodder depots every yearthe drought had happened there. Table 29. Source of fodder during normal times.Major source of fodder (Normal time) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Purchasing 0 0 0 02 Grazing 100 20 100 733 Cut & fed 0 80 0 27 It was observed that the communities resorted to distress selling of cattle duringdrought years, as revealed by 57% of the respondents, with relatively more inKarnataka followed by the study locations in Orissa and Rajasthan. The death ofcattle due to starvation was also reported in the study location of Rajasthan, thoughthe percent of respondents who informed of the starvation deaths were less than the
  • 38. 38distress selling. It reveals that the selling cattle have become an adoption mechanismto ward off the negative impacts of drought on the household and help keep thepurchasing power. Table 30. Distress sell and death of cattle during drought years.Sold cattle Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa AverageYes 42 80 50 57No 58 20 50 43Cattle died Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa AverageYes 42 20 33 32No 58 80 67 68 Table 31. Regaining of sold out cattle by the communities.Could you regain the cattle? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa AverageYes 0 75 25 33No 100 25 75 67 About 67% of those households who sold out the cattle couldn’t regain themduring normal years as the drought impacts continued to influence their economicstatus. This figure was higher in the study location of Rajasthan followed by Orissaand Karnataka. The respondents observed that the government drought relief workshad least or no impact on their regaining of cattle or even to keep the cattle withthem during drought years. Table 32. State wise cattle population in India with specific reference to the study locations (figures in 000, for the year 2003-04, Source: Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in).State Total cattle Total livestock* Total poultryRajasthan 10854 38284 6192Karnataka 9539 16082 25593Orissa 13903 9489 17611* total of total cattle and other livestock such as Sheep, Goats, Pigs, Horses and Ponnies, Mules, Donkeys, Camel,Yaks, and Mithun.Table 33. State wise milk production in India with specific reference to thestudy locations (figures in 000, for the year 2003-04, Source: Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in).State Milk production (000 tonnes)Rajasthan 8054Karnataka 1414Orissa 997
  • 39. 39Table 34. Area under fodder and pastures in the study locations (figures in000 ha, for the year 1999-2000, Source: Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in). Area under permanentState Area under fodder crops pastures and grazing landRajasthan 3491 1714Karnataka 55 979Orissa NA 5345. Health The current survey also assessed if drought relief interventions have led to anykind of health impacts on the communities. During the survey, it was learnt that thelimited drought relief for a period of 2 – 3 months was not sufficient enough to leadto a perceivable impact on the communities, as informed by the communities. Thecommunities were both unable to see any difference in terms of health problemsthey face during normal times and drought times or reported of increased healthrelated problems. Communities were also of the opinion that intensive medical helpsuch as provision of medicines, rigorous visits by the health workers would help themtide over the difficulties during the drought times. Table 35. Health related problems during droughtHealth problems during drought years Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Gone down 13 0 9 72 Increased 53 22 74 503 Stayed the same 33 78 17 436. Education The survey didn’t reveal any perceivable impact of drought on education, fromthe responses of the interviewees. However, interaction with the school teachers andprincipals indicated a school drop-out rate of up to 20%. It was learnt that the drop-out was higher in the classes of 6-10th and around 60% of the dropped out childrenjoined back the school during normal times. Interviews with the individual beneficiaries indicated a majority opinion of eitherno impact or fair impact on education. The respondents were of the opinion that theadditional income enabled them to maintain their purchasing power to certain extent.However, they were of the opinion that the short duration drought relief works were
  • 40. 40unable to bring back the dropped out children back to the schools. Table 36. Impact of drought relief works on children’s education Impact on education Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 (No impact) 62 33 63 52 2 8 67 25 33 3 23 0 13 12 4 8 0 0 3 5 (most positive 0 0 0 0 impact)7. Migration In this study, migration has been differentiated into two different forms. Aneffort was made to differentiate all those who leave the village for a relatively longerdistances and duration from those who go to a nearby city or village for works andreturn on the same day. The survey revealed an increasing trend of migration over the years and mostlythe male part of the household migrated. In few cases, the entire family migrated insearch of works and alternative livelihoods. There was no change in migration trendin the study location of Karnataka while it increased in the study locations ofRajasthan and Orissa (Table 37). The major reason for migration had been absence of local employment optionsduring drought times. The decline in migration, at least during the drought reliefworks, was evident in Rajasthan where drought relief works were carried out forrelatively longer duration than in other study locations (Table 13). Here, some of thehousehold members who migrated to cities have returned to the village to participatein the drought relief works there. Table 37. Trend in migration.Trend in migration Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average1 Gone down 0 0 14 52 Increased 82 0 86 563 No change 18 100 0 39 Table 38. Where do you migrate?Where do you migrate? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average
  • 41. 411 Nearby city 100 100 43 812 Nearby village 0 0 14 53 cities in another district 0 0 43 144 Village in another district 0 0 0 0 When asked about whether the government should facilitate their migration, thecommunities were of the opinion that they prefer to work in the village itself ratherthan working in other cities. The poor living conditions in the cities were majordeterrents to them. The respondents urged that the government should providemore employment generation activities in the village itself such that the entirehousehold could stay together. Table 39. Impact of drought relief works on migration. Impact on migration Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 (no impact) 40 100 0 47 2 10 0 14 8 3 0 0 71 24 4 40 0 0 13 5 (most impact) 10 0 14 87.1. NGOs, SHGs and drought relief Figure 7. Misplaced priorities: The Self-Help Groups (SHGs) could prove a boon to local level monitoring of drought relief works. The study also focused on the existing linkages between government and non-
  • 42. 42government organizations in drought relief management. It was observed thatthough there exist fairly a good mechanism of identification of local NGOs at thedistrict collectorate level, the involvement of these NGOs in actual drought reliefmanagement had been negligible at all the study locations. The basic reason for thisappears to be lack of proper mechanism to monitor the organizations helping thegovernment in implementing drought relief works. This has led to working in isolationby both the institutions. There was least or no activity of NGOs at the studylocations. Even at locations where they were present, NGOs, such as MYRADA, havebeen working on the longer-term drought risk mitigation such as watersheddevelopment programs etc. At some other locations, the communities expressedleast confidence in NGOs work. The issues plaguing the success of NGOs seems to be their scale of operationand the access they have to financial resources, as identified by the respondents inthe study locations. The local self-help groups (SHGs), formed either by various governmentschemes or the NGOs, seem to be not aligned with solving their major problem ofdrought and water scarcity. All the SHGs in the study locations were involved ingenerating small savings to meet their incidental expenditures and getting bankloans to run their kerosene shops. The SHGs were taken by surprise when they wereasked about their involvement in drought relief, in terms of decision making orincreasing the awareness of communities about better management practices forusing limited water resources.
  • 43. RecommendationsIn the previous section, an effort was made to discuss the results of the presentstudy. This section enlists the possible solutions for improving the drought reliefmanagement leading to sustainable and longer term impacts. Theserecommendations are based on the study outputs discussed in the previous sectionand the district level consultation meetings conducted with the government droughtrelief management machinery to identify possible remedies for the issues plaguingthe drought relief management.1. Declaration of Drought Girdhavari is a vital and age-old practice based on which the decisions such as declaring drought are based. Though the local administration claimed to prepare the girdhavari reports in a fortnight of such request is made to them by the higher authorities, many times such reports have been prepared with little or no field visits. To avoid such irregularities and for efficient decision making, a suitable check / alternative would have to be found out. Remote sensing could be one such check if not an alternative. Role of remote sensing in drought declaration: Drought could be meteorological, hydrological and agricultural drought. Hence, it is important to decide on when to declare the drought for an effective drought relief intervention. The role of remote sensing could not be overlooked in this aspect. The short paper attached at Annexure V explains the potential of remote sensing technologies in the area of drought relief management. Phased declaration at the district and below levels: It is important to identify areas falling under different kinds of droughts and decide when they could be declared as drought affected. Such a phased declaration could save lot of revenue as well. In Karnataka, rainfall data has been heavily used for such a decision making. The current relief norms (NCCF & CRF) apply well for the first drought in a series of drought years. However, as the drought prolongs for years, these norms tend to get ineffective due to the compounding nature of the impacts.2. Components of the Drought Relief CRF and NCCF & Drought relief works: There is no provision for the material component in the CRF and NCCF guidelines leading to problems such as resorting to earthen works etc. If these norms provides for material component, then there
  • 44. 44 is a possibility for producing permanent assets that go long way in building the rural India. Synchronization: Many times cash and food arrive at separate times. While the cash is disbursed immediately, the communities wait for the food component to arrive. Efforts have to be made to make sure that both the components arrive at same time. Changing socio-economic conditions and drought relief: While the state’s minimum wage act provides for Rs 62.50 (vary from state to state), many labourers are unable to find it lucrative due to the reason that they find better wage earning opportunities around. It is leading to lack of participation from the communities itself. Efforts would have to be made to diversify the kinds of drought relief works from mere construction activities to skill diversification activities such that the communities find them useful in terms of livelihood diversification for use during drought times. We also need to look into whether we should continue to give food component or not and if so what should be the ideal proportion of it. States should have to be given appropriate flexibility to decide on this front. While poor people see food component as an important component of the wage, the relatively richer ones may not accept the poor quality food grains often supplied in such works. It may be better if the cash component is increased and food component is decreased. NCRF and CRF guidelines do not provide for transportation of food grains up to the community level. It is important that such support is given so that the food reaches the needy ones in time. Yellow cards provide rice at much cheaper rate (Rs 3.50) than the one supplied in the works (Rs 6.25). This is leading to non-uptake of the rice supplied in the drought relief works and many times the workers prefer to take cash rather than the kind component. In many cases, rice supplied through the yellow cards is sufficient for the family. The additional rice provided in the works is leading to the open market as these families often sell that rice for earning extra income. Flexibility should be given to the local level administration to decide whether a household should be provided with the cash + kind, only cash or only kind. This would also save lot of valuable resources. A grain bank maintained by the communities, through Gram Panchayat, would be helpful. During the crisis situation, every household would be able to use it. Already, lot of such systems have been worked out by the NGOs and a detailed feasibility study of such systems can be envisaged and considered for broader use across the width and breadth of the country.3. Employment Generation Programs Local level drought relief funds & initiation of employment generation programs: The onset of employment generation programs entirely depends on the external financial support (state and above) and often the district level administration has little resources to support such works, even after considering all other developmental funds available at a given point of time. Hence, it is prudent that the districts and states be provided with appropriate guidelines that enable them
  • 45. 45 to maximize the available funds with them in the form of district and taluka level drought relief funds. Such funds would not only enable the local administration in initiating the drought relief employment generation works in advance, but would also reduce the possible negative impacts of the impending drought. The drought relief beneficiaries should be paid based on the amount of work done by the individuals. At present, these payments have been made on group basis. Such a payment system has lead to a kind of lethargy on the part of participating workers as the entire group would get the same wage irrespective of the amount of work done by the individuals. Though it appears that the works are implemented by the district level administration through Panchayat Raj department and other implementation agencies, it was observed that these agencies often ‘outsource’ the works to informal ‘contractors’ in states such as Karnataka. Though this could well have lead to ample time for the implementing agencies to monitor the works, the reality seems to be different. In cases where contractors were involved, there was no or poor involvement of Gram Panchayats in identification of drought relief beneficiaries and profit making has become a major priority for these contractors. If such a system cannot be given away with, suitable guidelines have to be released by the respective state governments to ensure the participation of elected representatives at the village / Gram Pachnayat level such that the kind of works to be carried out and where they have to be carried out are decided by the communities and the elected representatives. This would also improve the transparency in the entire process of drought relief management. Household as a unit: In states where the household is considered as a unit, giving work opportunity per each household seems to be illogical as joint families are at loss. In such cases, the guidelines should state alternatives for including more family members to take part in the drought relief works. A committee can be formed at the village / Gram Panchayat level and the committee can monitor the drought relief works. Though such Village Works Committees exist in many states, the role of these committees in assessing the drought relief works is missing. Drought relief works should also be brought under the purview of these committees.4. Nature of Works Many times the works are identified at taskforce level (tehsil and district), in the states such as Karnataka. It is important that the works are identified at the village level and communicated to the taskforce meetings, as being done in the case of Orissa. There is a need for an unified approach in all the states replicating the success of involving the local communities in identification and implementation of drought relief works. To give away with the earthen works, suitable guidelines should be made available to the state and district level administration on how to dovetail various developmental programs such that permanent works could be carried out. Maintenance of the assets generated in the drought relief works should be done by the GP and Taluka with the available funds. However, it could be a good idea that these outputs are handed over to the respective nodal agency for their maintenance (e.g. works related to irrigation could be handed over to irrigation
  • 46. 46 department, schools to education department etc) Indoor employment has to be enhanced for the vulnerable sessions. Labour department can do this through summer training programs etc. The diversified drought relief works could also include plantation works, encouraging handcrafts which could be marketed through self-help groups etc.5. Water Supply Meeting the drinking water needs of the affected communities is an important task of the local governments and NGOs. However, looking at the magnitude of the requirement, no local government (taluka and district) would be able to supply the required quantity of water through state-owned tankers. This leads to outsourcing of this important service to contractors and hence the problems related to the ones identified in this study. To alleviate these problems, suitable monitoring mechanism should be evolved with the help of local elected leaders, SHGs and NGOs. Once involved, these institutions could make sure that the beneficiaries get the required quantity of water at the required time and quality. Water supply has to be checked both qualitatively & quantitatively by the state public health & payments to the water suppliers have to be made based on the report obtained. Every farmer can have his own farm pond and the harvested water can be used for use during the drought times. Polythene sheets can be given to the farmers through subsidy. Farmer groups can be formed and water can be harvested, field levelling can be done by subsidy etc. These groups could promote the measures such as rooftop rainwater harvesting etc. These groups should be trained on aspects such as crop planning to maximize the water use during critical times. Drilling of bore wells have to be regulated. It should be based on the regulations of the water board and based on the vulnerability.6. Fodder Supply Community based fodder bank systems have to be encouraged. Though such systems have been well experimented and implemented by NGOs, it is time to bring them out from the experimental stage into the mainstream planning. Some times wheat straw was supplied as a part of drought relief in southern states where as the local cattle is not acclimatized to such fodder. Proper identification of fodder sources preferred by the local livestock should be identified prior to drought season and quick transport of such fodder could be arranged when needed. Efforts should be made to identify local pockets where fodder could be cultivated and stored for use during drought periods. This would not only reduce the long- distance transport of fodder, but would also avoid the pilferages. The existing village committee could establish and monitor the fodder and grain banks to be used during drought period. One local level fund could be established through which fodder depot and water supply can be done by communities and government together.
  • 47. 477. Dovetailing of Other Developmental Programs with the Drought Relief Programs The present study revealed that dovetailing different developmental programs with the drought relief programs is still an exception. Until the CRF and NCCF norms are not modified, there is a need that the district and below level administration put efforts to dovetail different developmental programs to produce permanent assets at the village level. To this effect, a minimum percent of development funds could be dovetailed to produce permanent assets. Such a guideline would make it more a common practice without leaving it to the innovative capacity of the district and below level administrators. For example, in Rajasthan, Van-Jan Shakti program created 400 biga of tree fencing through involvement of communities. Around 8 million seeds of Jatropha were sown. The trenches were dug by the communities and seeds were procured separately using the funds available with the forestry program. Similar such programs could be thought of and advised to all the state governments to implement the same. There is a need to bring out the innovations in existing drought relief management through instituting a thorough study and publicize the deserving efforts for wider replication.8. Improving the Nutritional Security PDS supplies: There is a need to enhance and diversify the PDS supplies during drought time, not withstanding the claims that the food grains provided as a part of drought relief wage is more than sufficient. Though the kind wage of the drought relief work provides for sufficient cereal grains, the consumption of oils and pulses was found to be declining alarmingly. To avoid this, the PDS system should provide certain quantity of cereal quota to meet the oil and pulses requirement of the households. Similar enhancement and diversification in the ICDS supplies is also required to meet the shortages during drought times. One such measure includes extending the mid day meal even during holidays and extending the beneficiary age group to cover more of the affected population.9. Long-term Mitigation Programs DPAP programs and drought relief management: The study identified that the DPAP programs are being implemented in complete isolation of the drought relief works in the same village. The DPAP program envisages that every village should form Village Water Management Committee to monitor and manage the water harvested in the water harvesting structures produced in the program. These committees have been trained on various best practices of managing precious water resources, crop planning and better crop management practices. The members of these committees could prove a valuable resource to the entire village provided the knowledge and expertise available with them is used for the broader benefit of the village, which is not happening at present.
  • 48. 48 Insurance: The current unit for crop insurance is tehsil. Because of this, even if half of the tehsil is severely affected, it is considered as unaffected based on the average figures of rainfall obtained at the tehsil level.10. Improving the Transparency ‘Jamabandi’ or social auditing could be introduced to monitor the drought relief works as well. In this system, the Gram Panchayat members, in conjunction with the officials of the Panchayat Raj department, would monitor the village developmental works and expenditure statements at a stipulated interval. Many kinds of developmental works are being carried out at the GP level and at times it would be difficult for the villagers to identify which asset was created from which funds. Hence, proper awareness generation campaign has to be conducted, regularly, as a part of the responsibility of Revenue and Panchayat Raj departments informing the communities about various developmental programs being implemented in their village and their status.11. Monitoring A village level committee could be formed for better monitoring of the drought relief works. A committee which is already there to monitor the local constructions could be entrusted with this responsibility. All the field officers should be given proper communication and conveyance facilities so that they monitor the drought relief works. This would also enhance the monitoring efficiency of the officers. Local level administration is suffering from serious human resource problem. As a result, each Junior Engineer had to monitor and implement number of drought relief works in his jurisdiction leading to insufficient monitoring. Indoor employment generation could avoid this problem. This could lead to diversification of the livelihoods of the villagers as well. All concerted efforts have to be made to avoid the involvement of political interests in drought relief works.12. Involvement of NGOs in Drought Relief Management The current level of involvement of NGOs in drought relief management in conjunction with the government is either poor or nil. This vital linkage could have been better harnessed to achieve the efficient results. The limitations related to modality of involvement, monitoring the deliverables of these institutions have to be removed. However, there is no restriction for the involvement of NGOs and SHGs, though it is not promoted to the extent it could have been.
  • 49. 49 Efforts should be made identify the modality of involving NGOs in drought relief works. For example, NGOs could be made watchdogs for effective monitoring of the drought relief works. Similar role could also be played by village level SHGs. This could lead to drastic reduction in corruption and satisfactory quality of works carried out.
  • 50. 50 Annexure I List of Collaborators and ContributorsShri PG Dhar ChakrabartiExecutive Director Dr SVRK PrabhakarNational Institute of Disaster Program Associate (GOI-UNDP DRMManagement (NIDM) Program)New Delhi-02 National Institute of DisasterPh: 011-23702432; F: 23702442 Management (NIDM) New Delhi-02Dr Santosh Kumar Ph: 011-23702432; F: 23702442Professor, Policy, Planning andCommunity Issues Dr MVR SeshasaiNational Institute of Disaster Head, Agriculture DivisionManagement (NIDM) NRSA, Balanagar, Hyderabad-37New Delhi-02 Ph: 040-23884212, F: 23884213Ph: 011-23702432; F: 23702442 Shri Negi NCS DirectorShri Naved Masood JS Dept of Agri & Coop(MoA) Ministry of AgricultureDept of Agri & Coop Krishi BhavanMinistry of Agriculture New Delhi-01 Ph: 011-23381176, F:Krishi Bhavan 23382417New Delhi-01 Ph: 011-23381176; F:23382417 Dr Pradeep Barghava ProfessorDr Cody Knutson IDS JaipurWater Resources Scientist 8B, Jhalana Institutional AreaNational Drought Mitigation Center Jaipur, Rajasthan 302 004 Ph:Nebraska, Lincoln 0141-2705726, 2706457Ph: (402) 472–9954; F: (402) 472–6614 Dr Ramesh K.J. Incharge, disaster Mitigation ModellingDr Prakash V.S. Director DST (National Center for MediumDrought Monitoring Cell Range Weather ForecastingGovernment of Karnataka (NCMRWF)#902, 9th Floor A50, Sector 62; GhaziabadBWSSB Building, Cauvery Bhavan, KG Uttar PradeshRoad Ph: 910120-2403900-10; Ext: 276Bangalore Ph: 080-22215613,22106443, 2235327; F: 080-22217038 Shri R.K. Meena Sec (DM & Relief)Shri Rajendra Singh SecretariatChairman, Tarun Bharat Sangh Govt of RajasthanTarun Ashram Jaipur Ph: 0141-2227380Bhikampura, KishoreeVia Thangazi, District Alwar Dr Sanjoy K BandyopadhyayRajasthan – 301022 Scientist, IARI, Pusa CampusPh: 0141-2393178, 225043; F: 0141- Pusa Road2393178 New Delhi
  • 51. 51Ph: 011-25841255 Mr Umasankar NayakDr P.K. Joshi Scientist (KVK, OUAT)Regional Representative C/O Minaketan NayakIFPRI-India Jagannath Nilaya, Pabitra DihaCG Complex, DPS Marg Dt Keonjhar, Orissa, 758001Pusa, New Delhi 06766256197 (H), +91 9437298354Ph: 011-23010912 (M)
  • 52. 100 Annexure V Agricultural Drought Monitoring and Assessment using Satellite Images towards Drought Relief Management 3 Abstract National Agricultural Drought Assessment and Monitoring System (NADAMS) is aremote sensing based agricultural drought monitoring mechanism operational fromNational Remote Sensing Agency (Dept. of Space, Govt. of India) and provide nearreal-time information on prevalence, severity level and persistence of agriculturaldrought at nation / state / district level by analyzing data from multiple satellites. Theagricultural area of each district is monitored using time series Vegetation Indexinformation retrieved from satellite data. Detailed assessment of agricultural situationis done during monsoon season and the information is disseminated to the decisionmakers at various levels of administration engaged in drought management. Agricultural drought information, as provided in NADAMS has immense utility foruse in drought management; in season corrections through contingency planningand end of season crop loss assessment for claiming relief and its management. ….. Agricultural drought monitoring using conventional methods suffer from variouslimitations such as sparse ground observations, subjective data etc. Unlike thesepoint observations, satellite sensors provide direct spatial information on vegetationstress caused by drought conditions. There is a need for building up the capabilitiesby using innovative technological and management measures for effectivemanagement of agricultural droughts in the country. A system for national / regionaland sub regional assessment and monitoring of agricultural drought conditionsthrough the cropping season to provide periodic information on the prevalence,severity level and persistence of agricultural drought is the utmost need of the hour.National Agricultural Drought Assessment and Monitoring System (NADAMS) providesmore efficient and timely monitoring capability by integrating the time effectiveness3 NRSA, Dept of Space, Govt of India, Hyderabad, India. Presented in the consultationmeeting at NIDM.
  • 53. 101and objectivity of space observations with the details of ground perceptions. NADAMS is mostly dependent on satellite observations for providing objectiveand real-time information on agricultural drought conditions all over the countrythrough the Kharif season. The project envisages primary dependence on remotelysensed data from NOAA AVHRR, Terra Modis, IRS WiFS and AWiFS, supplementedand supported by ground observations of rainfall, sowing progress and agriculturalconditions. Remote sensing of agricultural drought Stressed vegetation has a higher reflectance than healthy vegetation in thevisible (0.4-0.7 microns) region and lower reflectance in the near infrared (0.7-1.1microns) region of the electromagnetic spectrum. Vegetation indices take theadvantage of this differential response in the visible and near infrared regions of thespectrum. Among the various vegetation indices that are now available, NormalizedDifference Vegetation Index (NDVI) is a universally acceptable index for operationaldrought assessment because of its simplicity in calculation, easy to interpret and itsability to partially compensate for the effects of atmosphere, illumination geometryetc Water, clouds and snow have higher reflectance in the visible region andconsequently NDVI assumes negative values for these features. Bare soil and rocksexhibit similar reflectance in both visible and near IR regions and the index valuesare near zero. The NDVI values for vegetation generally range from 0.1 to 0.6, thehigher index values being associated with greater green leaf area and biomass. Assessment of agricultural drought situation Since availability of completely cloudfree optical satellite data during kharifseason is a major constraint, multiple satellite datasets to generate time compositedNDVI images, from which mean NDVI is extracted over agricultural area for eachdistrict. Seasonal NDVI profiles are generated for previous years and currentyear.The assessment of agricultural drought situation in each district takes in toconsideration the following factors (1) seasonal NDVI progression – i.e.,transformation of NDVI from the beginning of the season, (2) comparison of NDVIprofile with previous normal years (3) weekly rainfall status compared to normal (4)weekly progression of sown area compared to normal. The relative deviation of NDVIfrom that of normal and the rate of progression of NDVI from June to July and
  • 54. 102August gives the indication about the agricultural situation in the district which isthen complemented by ground situation as evident from rainfall and sown area. Drought reports Currently drought reports are being prepared and disseminated at monthlyintervals from June to November. The NDVI images describing the spatial pattern ofvegetation development are also being supplied to the state agriculture departmentson request for their crop and seasonal conditions review meetings. Assessment for kharif 2005 (upto first fortnight of Sep. 2005) Analysis of satellite images from June 2005 has been undertaken. NDVI statisticsand rainfall data for all the districts of 14 states have been collected and analysed.The AVHRR NDVI images for the entire country from June to August are shown inFigure. During June low NDVI in many parts of the country indicate that theagricultural activity had not yet started due to delay in the onset of monsoon. NDVIhas started raising in July due to commencement of sowings in most parts of thestate, in response to the incident rainfall and release of canal waters for irrigation.With further rise in NDVI during August and till September first fortnight, normalprogress of agricultural season is observed in most parts of the country. Mildagricultural drought like situations was observed in parts of Bihar, Jharkhand andRajasthan. NADAMS’ information for drought management Drought management is a multidisciplinary approach involving various aspectslike crop management, drinking water management, fodder and live stock protection,employment creation etc. Although the causative factor is mere rainfall deficiency, itsimpact is multifaceted. Among different facets of drought management, agriculturaldrought is also an indirect indicator of drought impact on fodder availability and ruralemployment. Therefore, NADAMS’ information that deals with agricultural droughtalone also helps to trigger the administration of other aspects of drought such asfodder and employment generation. Monthly information being reported under NADAMS has the potential for droughtmanagement at different stages of drought incidence in different time domains ofkharif season. Agricultural drought management has essentially two components –(a) early season or in season drought management through contingency cropplanning and (b) end of the season assessment and relief management. In season
  • 55. 103management aims at minimizing the loss by efficiently utilizing available soil moisturein the balance part of the season. End of the season assessment is done to assessthe crop loss due to drought and to finalize the relief amount. NADAMS’ droughtinformation which describes the prevalence and intensity of drought at district levelcan be put to use in both the aspects of drought management. The droughtinformation during June to August is useful for drawing contingency crop plans andimplementation of the plans. Spatial information from satellite images suggest whichpart of the district is more effected and hence implantation of contingency plans onpriority basis. August is the transition period between sowing phase and growing phase whileSeptember/October represent maximum vegetation phase of crops. Droughtinformation from 2 FN of august to October is useful for drought declaration andrelief assessment. Table 1. NADAMS’ drought information and its use in drought managementDrought report Information Specific use of information for drought managementJune Commencement of Triggers preparedness for short term management agricultural season measures.July Commencement of Initiation of short term management like agricultural season contingency planning. Identification of specific and progression of thrust areas for implementation of contingency season plansAugust Progression of Implementation of contingency plans. season and crop growth relative to normalSeptember Progression of Drought impact assessment – crop loss season and assessment. Identification of areas in the order of maximum growth drought severity and conducting crop cutting achieved experiments for crop loss assessment.October Progression of Drought impact assessment – crop loss season and assessment. Identification of areas in the order of performance of crops drought severity and conducting crop cutting experiments for crop loss assessment.November Progression of Drought impact assessment – crop loss season and assessment. Identification of areas in the order of performance of crops drought severity and conducting crop cutting experiments for crop loss assessment. Relief assessment Relief assessment basically depends upon extent of crop loss due to droughtalong with the number of sub-district level administrative units affected by drought.The system of assessing agricultural losses from drought varies from state to statealthough basically the process is personal inspection to fields and measurement of
  • 56. 104crop yields. Thus, eye estimation and drought declaration still play a major role indrought assessment and declaration resulting in subjectivity and exaggeration in theprocess. NADAMS’ spatial NDVI images and its anomalies compared to normalprovide guidelines for crop loss estimation in many respects; (1) places with in thedistrict which are more effected, (2) prioritization of effected areas for the basis ofsample surveys for crop loss estimation (3) identification of places to be visited bycentral relief teams. Thus, satellite images enable objective sampling procedures forunbiased assessment of crop losses. Summary NADAMS is a remote sensing based operational mechanism for monitoring andassessment of agricultural drought and is providing near real-time information onprevalence, severity level and persistence of agricultural drought situation atcountry/state/district level during monsoon season. The methodology has been fullyoperationalised and at present NADAMS is an operational service provider to decisionmakers in Agricultural drought management. NADAMS uses the satellite data ofdifferent resolutions 1.1 km and 56 metres in an integrated manner for assessing thedrought situation at regional, district and sub-district level. The drought informationis being provided to the user community on fortnightly/monthly basis. NADAMS’agricultural drought information has immense potential for use in droughtmanagement; in season correction through contingency planning and end of seasoncrop loss assessment for claiming relief and its management. The feedback from usercommunity and other research organisations is encouraging. Conclusion Towards more comprehensive analyses and assessment of the agriculturaldrought situation and for most appropriate and apt drought relief in a morequantitative and scientific manner, pilot study covering typical drought prone districtscould be planned integrating remote sensing component and near – real time groundinformation.
  • 57. Fig. 1. NOAA AVHRR NDVI of kharif 2005 being used for drought assessment.
  • 58. Annexure VI Background Information about the Study Locations 4 Khudiala, Rajasthan District: Jaipur Taluka: Dudu Distance from Jaipur: ~70 km Total population: 1200 Households: 330 Major business: Agriculture DPAP Village: Yes Drought years: 2001, 2002, 20044 All the information was obtained from the tehsil and district collectorates of the respectivelocations.
  • 59. 107Dabiri, OrissaDistrict: NuapadaBlock: KhariarDistance from Nuapada: 65 kmTotal population: 1225Households: 286Major business: AgricultureDPAP Village: Yes (2001)Drought years: 2001, 2002, 2004
  • 60. 108Agnihalli, KolarDistrict: KolarBlock: KhariarDistance from Kolar: 18 kmTotal population: 700Households: 250Major business: AgricultureDPAP Village: Yes (since inception)Drought years: 2001, 2002-03, 2004