This presentation provides a critical evaluation of rural development policies and programmes implemented in various parts of the world. It explores the challenges and limitations of these policies, and examines their effectiveness in addressing the needs and priorities of rural communities. The presentation begins by defining rural development and highlighting its significance in promoting economic growth and reducing poverty in rural areas. It then discusses various rural development policies and programmes, including those aimed at improving infrastructure, promoting agricultural development, and providing social services to rural communities. The presentation also critically evaluates these policies and programmes, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. It discusses the limitations of top-down approaches to rural development, the importance of community participation, and the need for policies that address the root causes of poverty in rural areas. In addition, the presentation examines the role of international organizations, NGOs, and local governments in promoting rural development. It discusses the challenges of coordinating and implementing development efforts, and the need for partnerships and collaboration among stakeholders. Overall, this presentation provides a comprehensive and critical evaluation of rural development policies and programmes, and offers insights and recommendations for improving their effectiveness in promoting sustainable rural development.

1. ANNAMALAI UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT OF PLANT PATHOLOGY
PGS-501 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, RESEARCH ETHICS AND
RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES
CRITICAL EVALUATION OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES BY
R.LOKESH
I -M.sc.,Agriculture
Plant pathology
Annamalai university
TOPIC:

2. • Over the years the functioning of rural development policies and
programmes and their impacton the poor has attracted a great deal
of attention.
• Numerous studies – several under the suspices of the government,
and many more based on independent surveys, micro studies and
analyses of available macro data – have highlighted their
achievements as well as weaknesses.
• A healthy and wholesome feature is the extraordinarily free and open
discussion of deficienciesof particular schemes, the relative merits of
different interventions and suggestions for restructuring and
reorientation.
• However, they have received strong critiques as well.
• Officialclaims of the number of beneficiaries, works carried out,
additions to productive assets and employment generated are
unreliable and exaggerated.
• Poor targeting is reflected in the high proportion of non-poor and
other non-eligible persons among the beneficiaries.
INTRODUCTION

3. What is rural development programmes?
1. Rural development means an action plan for the
economic and social upliftment of rural areas.
2. It aims at improving the quality of life of people living in
rural areas.
3. It focuses on the action for the development of areas that
are lagging behind in the overall development of the rural
economy.

4.  Leakages due to inappropriate works, inefficient implementation and
corruption are high.
 Quality of assets provided/created under these programmes is poor and
their impact on income level of beneficiaries dubious.
 Assets and schemes are frequently not appropriate to the needs and
potentials of particular regions or groups.
 There is little consultation with, not to speak of involvement of local
communities generally and target groups in particular, in deciding and
implementing schemes.

5.  Lack of accountability remains
a major problem.
 The structure, content, and
funding of these programmes
remain mostly in the hands of
the central government.
 There is considerable overlap
among these schemes as well
as between them and
development schemes
included under the normal
state plans.
 Typically each programme is
administered by a separate
agency each with its own line
hierarchy and operating
independently.

7.  These features, taken together with the rigidity of central
guidelines, make for fragmentation and duplication of
schemes.
 Coordination is difficult; so is monitoring of
accomplishments in terms of efficacy of targeting, quality of
works actually completed and impact on the beneficiaries.
 The programmes tend to emphasize loans and subsidies
and provision of current wage employment rather than
ensuring that they are used to augment productive capacity
for achieving a higher level of employment and income on
a sustained basis.
 The selection of beneficiaries, the distribution of loans and
subsidies, and the recovery of loans offer much scope for
patronage and corruption at the political and bureaucratic
levels.
 The public distribution system (PDS) does not accomplish
its ostensible aim of ensuring essential consumer goods to
the poor at reasonable prices.

8. Problems / Constraints in Implementation of
Rural Development Programmes
• Inadequate Coordination
• Inadequate funds
• Leakage of benefits
• Low Sustaining Impact
• Dominance of welfare over productivity
• More Generalized Programme

9. Inadequate Coordination
 As per the Guidelines all the developmental programmes in the rural areas
are to be planned / formulated by DRDA in corporation and coordination of
other departments and financial institution, agencies of peoples
representatives etc.
 It is often observed that these agencies, organization failed to maintain
proper coordination among each other.
 All the agencies / organizations are trying their best to stick to their own
principles and ideologies.
 In the process cooperation and coordination are not maintained.
 The Agencies responsible for the formulation, implementation and evaluation
of the Rural Development Programme are required to maintain good
coordination among them.

10. Inadequate funds
 The rural development programmes require more capital investment. The
Economic Sectors of rural areas remain more or less traditional.
 These sectors also adopt traditional methods of production.
 In order to attain rural development the transformation of technologies is
required.
 The conditions of weaker section people are not improved even after 50 years of
planned economic development.
 The upliftment of their socio-economic condition also require high dose of
investment.
 In our country, a fixed amount of funds are allocated for a particular rural
development programme.
 These are distributed among States/Districts as per the importance, such as
geography, concentration of weaker section population etc.
 The share of the Fund to cope with the local problems seems to be inadequate.

11. Leakage of benefits
 It is observed that, there is considerable leakage of benefits to non-target
sectors and groups.
 Most of the rural development programmes are conceived to improve the
Socio-economic condition of the weaker section like small, marginal farmers,
agricultural and nonagricultural labourers, rural artisans, scheduled castes,
scheduled tribes and deprived women etc.
 It is observed that benefits are not properly reaching to these classes.

12. Low Sustaining Impact
 It is observed that a considerable number of rural developments
programmes/schemes having no or little sustaining impact for changing the
socio-economic status of the beneficiaries.
 The assets created from the credit assistance of financial institutions and
subsidies of the development / administrative agencies are short lived
(Particularly incase of livestock assets) failed to push the 95 beneficiaries up
on the scale of production and productivity.
 This is perhaps due to the existence of low or no development approach /
thoughts.
 This factor again dominated by the lack of awareness about the programmes.

13. Dominance of welfare over productivity
 In India, most of the rural development programmes are based on the basic
welfare principles.
 These schemes are backed by both credit and subsidy components.
 Besides, development of infrastructure facilities is also emphasized under
these programmes.
 It is also evident that provision of long term credit and based on the principle
of write off by political parties also have adverse effect on the productivity of
economic sectors.
 It is observed that the subsidy component is often extending up to 100
percent in some selected schemes and class of beneficiaries.
 This reduces the productivity motive and attitude of the beneficiaries.

14. More Generalized Programme
 Rural Development Programmes have been conceived for the all-round
development of the rural areas.
 However, the rural development Programmes are launched in the context of
general problems of the rural areas.
 It fails to give importance to some particular and area issues.
 The rural development programmers should be micro in nature and growth
oriented based on real values.