Idpms - NIRD Report


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Idpms - NIRD Report

  1. 1. Chapter IBackground-Even as the economy progresses at an astounding pace, India is still struggling withbasic social and economic problems like illiteracy, widening gaps between the rich andpoor, poverty and more. Plans to reduce poverty levels and bridge the gaps indistribution of wealth have been a part of the Government’s policy since India got itsindependence. Some of the initial programs concentrated on making the poor selfsufficient with respect to basic necessities like food. Immediately after independence,making food grains available to all residents at controlled prices was an important part ofpoverty reduction programs. This has completely abolished deaths due to hunger. Thisis a major accomplishment of the Government of India.Later many poverty alleviation programmes were brought which address the root causefor poverty like illiteracy, high population growth rate, high dependence of farmers onmonsoons and outdated techniques to cultivate their lands, good infrastructures andcreation of employment opportunities etc. Poverty reduction has also been an importantpart of India’s five-year plans. National Rural Employment Programs, Rural LandlessEmployment Guarantee Program, and Jawahar Rojgar Yojna are some of the programsintroduced by the Indian Government.The current plan aims at reducing the headcount ratio of consumption poverty by 10percentage points. It is also expected to reduce educated unemployment, increase workopportunities and increase the real wages for unskilled workers – thus reducing povertyamongst labor classesPoverty alleviation and employment generation programmesPoverty reduction has been an important goal of development policy since the inceptionof planning in India. Various antipoverty, employment generation and basic servicesprogrammes have been in operation for decades in India are listed below-(Ref: website: http:/ )(a) Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY)Launched in December 2000, PMGSY aims to provide all-weather connectivity to all theeligible unconnected rural habitations. Bharat Nirman, envisages connectivity by 2009 toall the habitations with a population of 1000 or more in the plains, and of 500 or more inthe hilly, desert and tribal areas. The systematic upgradation of the existing rural roadnetwork also is an integral component of the scheme, funded mainly from the accruals ofdiesel cess in the Central Road Fund, with support of the multilateral funding agenciesand the domestic financial institutions.(b) Indira Awaas Yojana (IAY)IAY aims to provide dwelling units, free of cost, to the Scheduled Castes (SCs),Scheduled Tribes (STs), and freed bonded labourers, and also the non-SC/ST BPLfamilies in rural areas. It is funded on a cost-sharing basis in the rates of 75.25 betweenthe Centre and the States. Under IAY, the ceiling on construction assistance isRs.25,000/- per unit in the plains and Rs.27,500/- for hilly/difficult areas; and Rs. 1 Idpms/nrega report/09
  2. 2. 12,500/- on upgradation of unserviceable kutcha house to pucca/semi pucca house forall areas(c ) Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY)SGSY, launched in April, 1999 after restructuring the Integrated Rural DevelopmentProgramme and allied schemes, is the only self-employment programme for the ruralpoor. The objective is to bring the self employed above the poverty line by providingthem income-generating assets through bank credit and Government subsidy..(d) Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana (SGRY)SGRY, launched on September 25, 2001 to provide additional wage employment in therural areas, has a cash and food grains component, and the Centre bears 75 per centand 100 per cent of the cost of the two with the balance borne by the States/UTs.(e) National Food for Work Programme (NFFWP)The NFFWP was launched as a CSS in November 2004 in the 150 most backwarddistricts to generate additional supplementary wage employment with food security.States receive food grains under NFFWP free of cost. The focus of the programme is onworks relating to water conservation, drought proofing (including aforestation /treeplantation), land development, flood-control/protection (including drainage inwaterlogged areas), and rural connectivity in terms of all-weather roads(f) DPAP, DDP and IWDPDrought Prone Areas Programme (DPAP) was launched in 1973-74 to tackle the specialproblems faced by those areas constantly affected by severe drought conditions. DesertDevelopment Programme (DDP) was launched in 1977-78 to mitigate the adverseeffects of desertification. Integrated Wastelands Development Programme (IWDP) hasbeen under implementation since 1989-90 for the development of wastelands/ degradedlands. The basis of implementation has been shifted from sectoral to watershed basisfrom April 1995.(g) Swarna Jayanti Shahari Rozgar Yojana (SJSRY)In December 1997, the Urban Self-Employment Programme (USEP) and the UrbanWage Employment Programme (UWEP), which are the two special components of theSJSRY, substituted for various programmes operated earlier for urban povertyalleviation. The SJSRY is funded on a 75:25 basis between the Centre and the States.(h) Valmiki Ambedkar Awas Yojana (VAMBAY)VAMBAY, launched in December 2001, facilitates the construction and up-gradation ofdwelling units for the slum dwellers, and provides a healthy and enabling urbanenvironment through community toilets under Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan, a component ofthe Scheme. The Central Government provides a subsidy of 50 per cent, with thebalance provided by the State Government. Since its inception and up-to December, 312005, Rs. 866.16 crore had been released as Central subsidy for theconstruction/upgradation of 4,11,478 dwelling units and 64,247 toilet seats under theScheme..Anti-poverty strategy has three broad components: promotion of economic growth;promotion of human development; and targeted programmes of poverty alleviation toaddress multi-dimensional nature of poverty. The various programmes targeted at the 2 Idpms/nrega report/09
  3. 3. poor have been streamlined and strengthened in recent years, including through theNREGS.Economic performance of Karnataka and India in a comparative perspective- Karnataka came into being as a state of the Union of India on November 1, 1956 as aresult of the merger of five territories viz. four districts of the erstwhile Bombay state,three districts of the erstwhile princely state of Hyderabad, two districts and one taluk ofthe former Madras state, nine districts of the former princely state of Mysore.Karnataka is the eighth largest state in India in both area and population. Karnataka liesbetween 74o and 78o East longitudes and 11o and 18o North latitudes. It is situated onthe western edge of the Deccan plateau and is surrounded by Maharashtra and Goa onthe north, Andhra Pradesh on the east, and Tamil Nadu and Kerala on the south. On thewest, it opens out on the Arabian Sea. The state of Karnataka has an area of 191,791 sq. km. and a population of 52.85million. There are 27 districts, 176 blocks and 29406 villages. The State has populationdensity of 275 per sq. km. (as against the national average of 312). The decadal growthrate of the state is 17.51% (against 21.54% for the country) and the population of thestate is growing at a slower rate than the national rate.It accounts for about 5.8% of India’s land, and about 5.3% of India’s population.Karnataka contributes to about 5.5% of India’s GDP. Karnataka has an estimated GSDPof Rs. 118,540 crore (about $25.2 billion equivalent). Karnataka is on track to meet mostof the Millenium development Goals ( MDGs, ) with trend performance better thanrequired for important MDGs such as poverty reduction, child malnutrition, schoolenrollment, infant mortality and access to safe water. Reduction in the discrepancy ofmale-to-female literacy is slightly below target, as is improvement in number of birthsattended by skilled personnel.Karnataka is one of India’s fastest growing states. Its state GDP (GSDP) growth ratepicked up from 5.3% in the eighties (below the national average) to 7.3% in the nineties(the second highest), and at 8.3% in the second half of the nineties (the highest). Growthin all three sectors of the economy is above the Indian average. During the second halfof the nineties, for example, Karnataka’s agricultural, industrial, and service sectors grewat average rates of 4.0%, 9.2%, and 10.6% respectively, compared to all-India averagesof 3.6%, 5.0% and 8.7% respectively. Agricultural output increased on the back ofdiversification and increases in productivity, industrial growth was led by rapidmanufacturing expansion. Growth in services was high across the board, led by softwareexports. During the second half of the 1990s, Karnataka became the third largestrecipient of FDI among major Indian states, and the highest on an income per capitabasis. Karnataka’s good growth record in the nineties was maintained into 2000/01 (withreal growth of 6.7%), but slowed in 2001/02 and 2002/03 on account of drought.Despite rapid growth in recent years, Karnataka is still a poor state, poorer than theaverage for India. According to the now -widely-used Deaton-Dreze adjusted povertyestimates, poverty in Karnataka in 1999/00 was 25.1% compared to the all-Indiaaverage of 22.7% (Table 1). This reflects low average land-holdings, and high relianceon rain-fed agriculture. However, poverty is falling. Rural poverty in Karnataka fell from 3 Idpms/nrega report/09
  4. 4. 37.9% in 1993/94 to 30.7% in 1999/00, compared to an all India decline from 33% to26% (see Table 1). Urban poverty fell from 21.4% in 1993/94 to 10.8% in 1999/00(compared to an all India decline from 18% to 12%). Thus, compared to the all-Indiaperformance, there was a slightly above average reduction in rural areas and a greatlyabove average reduction in urban areas.Table 1 .Headcount ratio of Karnataka and All India in the nineties (% ) RURAL URBAN TOTAL 1999/00 Reduction 1999/00 Reduction 1999/00 Reduction from from from 1993/94 1993/94 1993/94Karnataka 30.7 7.2 10.8 10.6 25.1 8.1All India 26.3 6.7 12.0 5.8 22.7 6.5Human development. Karnataka’s performance in human development indicators isimproving, though still rather average (Table 2). The nineties saw an eleven percentagepoint improvement in literacy, a slow down in population growth, and above-averageimprovement in infant mortality. Yet Karnataka has a long way to go to catch up with thecomparator states of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, and, on the issue of population growth,Andhra Pradesh. The current proportion of immunized children, at 60% is disappointingfor a middle -tier Indian state like Karnataka. Successfully increasing the rate ofimmunized children to the target of 90% will play a major role in reducing the spread ofcommunicable diseases that are responsive to immunization. HIV prevalence amongSTD clinic attendees in Karnataka is about 16% and among women attending antenatalclinics was 1.13% in 2001. These figures indicate that HIV has crossed over fromsubpopulations engaging in high risk behaviors to the general population and it signalsthat the epidemic has reached a generalized stage, and could have catastrophic effectsunless successfully and rapidly tackled.Table 2. Human Development Indicators for Karnataka and All India levels Population Growth Infant Mortality Rate ( Literacy Rate(%) (over the last decade per 1000) %) 2001 Increase 2001 Reduction 2001 Reduction since since since 1991 1991 1991Karnataka 67.0 11.0 17.2 3.9 51.5 13.9All India 65.4 13.8 21.3 2.6 67.6 10.9HDI, Karnataka ReportThe scheduled caste and scheduled tribe population are 16.2 and 6.6 per cent of thetotal population in the state respectively. The percentage of SC population in Gulbargais second highest (8.29 %) which is next Bangalore Urban (9.9 %). Raichur, anothersample district for the study has highest percentage of ST population (18%). 4 Idpms/nrega report/09
  5. 5. Table 3. Literacy rates of SC/STs by sex and region : 1991 and 2001 census Area GENERAL SC POPULATIONS ST POPULATION POPULATION Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Rural 31.42 43.21 19.23 - - 47.69 60.30 34.761991 36.0 Urban 59.18 70.05 47.64 74.20 82.04 65.74 Rural 47.25 58.71 35.56 45.3 56.9 33.3 59.33 70.45 48.012001 Urban 59.88 69.27 78.32 64.6 74.4 54.3 80.55 86.66 74.12Literacy rate is less than 50% (i.e 47.25%) in the rural Karnataka as per 2001 census.With no viable assets, low literacy rate compounds the problem of literacy.Agriculture DevelopmentLand use pattern is one of the indicators of agriculture development. A high proportion ofcultivable waste land, low irrigation and low cropping intensities may indicate agriculturebackwardness. Land Utilization details in the selected districts is given below at Table: (in hectare) District Hassan Gulbarga Raichur State Total Geographical area 662602 1610208 835843 19049836 Forest 58775 69089 18167 3070941 Land Not available for cultivation a. Non-Agricultural 78236 67827 20563 1335704 b. Barren 30365 63122 20084 787949 Total 108601 130949 40647 2123653 Cultivable waste 14318 11802 10712 419329 Permanent pasture 32943 37409 19816 947158 Trees and groves 6957 1792 13680 301102 Fallow Land 42747 171508 114339 1853696 Others 24598 20210 37789 487351Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, 2005Total geographical data is highest in Gulbarga. Even though Gulbarga has highestfallow land (171508 Ha), proportionate fallow land compared to the total holding ishigher in Raichur (13.68%) as compared to Gulbarga(10.65%) and Hassan (6.45%).Percentage land not available for cultivation is highest in Hassan (16.39%) as comparedto Gulberga (8.13%) and Raichur(4.86%) 5 Idpms/nrega report/09
  6. 6. Table 4. Percentage share of district in total production of food grainsDistrict 1995-96 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-2002 2002-03 2003-04Chitradurga 6.23 2.78 3.37 3.62 3.12 2.19Gulbarga 6.72 7.79 6.90 7.48 10.39 10.44Raichur 9.61 6.79 6.01 5.86 6.53 5.59Hassan 3.98 4.23 4.19 4.71 3.92 3.23STATE 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, 2005Gulberga is steadily increasing in its’ percentage share of food grains while share isdecreasing in Raichur. However Hassan is more or less maintaining the same standard .Table 5. Different crops and area grown-- (in Ha) District Hassan Gulbarga Raichur State Paddy 39533 65687 79002 1073899 Ragi 142538 0 0 998266 Jowar 5805 292954 160377 1698177 Bajra 0 72378 69564 318745 Maize 21919 2568 486 618173 Wheat 0 17523 2584 231994 Total 37051 655009 64353 1874328 pulse(Gram, Tur and others) Groundnut 944 60947 36534 817243 Cotton 169 17295 31965 316674Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, 2005Area under paddy is significantly high in all the three districts. While paddy is beinggrown in Hassan traditionally, its’ production picked up in the recent decades in Raichurand Gulbarga ever since the canal irrigation started. Apart from paddy, Ragi is beinggrown as a food crop in Hassan and Jowar and Bajra in other two districts.Table 6.Per capita Food Grains Production(in Kgs)District 1995-96 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-2002 2002-03 2003-04Chitradurga 219.76 181.75 244.70 207.25 137.32 94.73Gulbarga 200.16 245.82 242.18 207.61 221.18 218.88Raichur 310.92 406.35 399.47 305.20 260.91 219.62Hassan 202.31 241.93 266.83 237.53 151.77 123.06STATE 172.77 186.96 207.83 164.56 126.09 124.16Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, 2005 6 Idpms/nrega report/09
  7. 7. In both Gulbarga(218.88 kg) and Raichur (219.62 kg), per capita food production is higher as compared to state average of 124.18kg while per capita food production in Hassan is 123.06 Kg which is slightly less than state average in the year 2003-04. However, in all the three districts, per capita food production is decreasing with the passing year. Land records. About 5 million farmers a year request the government for a copy of or change in their land records. Karnataka has now computerized its 20 million rural land records. Whereas land record issuance took 3-30 days under the manual system it is now done immediately. Karnataka delivered the second highest agricultural growth rate among all states in India in the nineties: 4.4% per annum. However, the negative agricultural growth experienced in 2001/02 and 2002/03 has made apparent the state’s susceptibility to low rainfall, and the consequent vulnerability of its rural population. Karnataka in fact has the second largest arid area of any state after Rajasthan. Only 25% of Karnataka’s farmland is irrigated compared to an average of 39% for all-India. . Both the land holding and literacy play a key roles in welfare of any community. It is well known fact that these segment of the population are deprived of assets. Despite the special efforts of the government, the low literacy among the SC and STs are of grave concerns. Table 7. Distribution of operational holdings and areas for different social groups in Karnataka :2001 (per cent)Size Scheduled Scheduled Tribes Others TotalClass Castes No of Area No of Area No of Area No of Area Holdings Holdings Holdings HoldingsMarginal 52.13 19.70 40.84 12.00 45.41 11.40 45.94 12.20small 30.13 33.10 30.89 25.30 26.28 21.10 26.98 22.40Semi 13.73 27.70 19.37 29.60 18.26 27.90 17.79 28.00MediumMedium 3.65 16.00 7.85 25.30 8.65 28.30 8.03 27.00Large 0.36 3.50 1.05 7.70 1.40 11.40 1.26 10.50All sizes 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, 2005 It can be noticed from the above table that about 72.92% of the farmers are small and marginal farmers which accounts for 34.60% of the total cultivable area which means for many of these farmers can’t sustain only on land holding for their livelihood. It is further noticed that majority of the belong to lower castes like SC/STs. It is important in this context to create an alternate employment with in the villages such that they do not migrate to nearby cities in search of employment leaving behind their small piece of land , cattle and elderly people at home. 7 Idpms/nrega report/09
  8. 8. NREGA StudyNIRD (National Institute of Rural Development), Hyderabad has entrusted IDPMS toconduct the study on ‘Planning and Implementation of NREGA in Karnataka’. IDPMShas been asked to make study in three districts namely Hassan, Raichur and Gulbarga.Details of methodology, brief descriptions about the selected districts, analysis andimportant findings of the study were explained below--Methodology-The Scheme is introduced in the state during the year 2006. In the first phase, sixdistricts viz.Bidar, Gulbarga, Raichur, Davanagere and Chitradurga were included in thescheme. With effect from April 2007, Bellary, Belgaum, Chikmagalur,Hassan, Shimogaand Kodagu are included in the second phase. Then During October 2007, theremaining 18 districts were brought under the fold of NREGA. Two districts viz. Raichur,Gulbarga which belong to backward most districts in the state were selected to study theimpact of NREGA. Both these districts were part of NREGA from the first phase itself.Besides Hassan district also was selected for the study which is in the southern part ofthe state. Hassan is relatively forward district is included under NREGA during thesecond phase. From each of the three districts, two taluks ( blocks) are selected. Theselection of taluks were done in consultation with district officials of the respective ZP.Selections are mainly done considering the NREGA work progress as well as thedistance of the block from the district headquarters. From each of these six taluks, oneGram Panchayat was selected as per the choice of the programme officers of theconcerned Taluk as shown in the table below—Table 8: Sample Districts, Taluks and Gram Panchayats.District Taluk GP Village Hassan Marakuli Nagenahalli Hassan Belur Yalahanka Yalahanka, Bhovi Raichur Gunjalli Gunjalli Raichur Manvi Madlapura Madlapura Gulbarga Kinni(Sadak) Kinni(Sadak) Gulbarga Afzalpura Mashala MashalaSelection of Sample Household and nature of data collected-Different types of data are collected. Firstly, data were collected from about 30 laboureswho worked in NREGA through structured questionnaire. The information collectedincluded mainly the awareness about provisions of NREGA like wages, other basicfacilities at work site, implementation procedures and the employment generated etc.Apart from this, about 30 farmers in that village were interviewed mainly to find out aboutthe awareness and utility of the NREGA, impact of the NREGA on wages as well asassets created in the villages. Household enumeration with about 100 households wereconducted mainly to find out about the socioeconomic status of the village as well astheir awareness about NREGA.Further information was collected from the officials and elected representatives atDistrict, Taluk and Panchayat level through structured questionnaire. 8 Idpms/nrega report/09
  9. 9. Table 9: Number of sample Household in the Survey—District Taluks Numbers REGS workers 30 Hassan Farmers 30 Households 98 Hassan REGS workers 31 Belur Farmers 31 Households 82 REGS workers 11 Raichur Farmers 36 Households 103 Raichur REGS workers 36 Manvi Farmers 11 Households 100 REGS workers 27 Gulberga Farmers 27 Households 100 Gulberga REGS workers 31 Afzalpur Farmers 31 Households 59 Chapter IIInstitutional Arrangements and Profiles of the Study AreaThe National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) came to be enacted byGovernment of India in September 2005 following which the Government of Karnatakahas been implementing the scheme under the said Act in phases since February 2006.The district covered in the first phase are Bidar, Gulbarga, Raichur, Davanagere andChitradurga respectively while those covered under second phase with effect from April2007 are Bellary, Belgaum, Chikamagalur, Hassan, Shimoga and Kodagu. During April2008, the remaining 18 districts have been brought under NREGA for the purpose ofimplementing the Employment Guarantee Scheme.NREG Act envisages collaborative partnership between the Central Government, theState governments, the Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs) and the local community.Broadly, the main implementation activities are at the village and Block/Taluk levels,while coordination activities are mainly at the Block/Taluk levels. Planning, supervisionand monitoring take place at all levels (Village/Taluk/Distric and State). At each level, theconcerned authorities are accountable to the community. The Grama Sabha is thestatutorily mandated institutional mechanisms for community participation. The overallresponsibility for ensuring the implementation of the scheme as per the NREGA lies onthe State Employment Guarantee Council (SEGC) at the state level, District ProgrammeCoordinaor (DPC) at district level, the Programme Officer(PO) at the Block/Taluk leveland Grama Panchayat at the grass root level. The Gram Panchayat is responsible forplanning of works,. Registering households, issuing job cards, allocating employment,executing the works and monitoring the implementation of the scheme at the villagelevel. 9 Idpms/nrega report/09
  10. 10. The Information, Education Communication (IEC) activities for all the districts at differentphases have been organized. The Abdul Nazir Sab State Institute of Rural Development,Mysore is the main organization entrusted with the responsibility of training the officialsand non-officials of PRIs. The National Institution of Rural Development, Hyderabad isalso involved to train the personal. Besides, in some districts, local NGOs have beeninvolved for social mobilization and awareness building. Other instruments used areposters/pamphlets, display on walls.( Ref: RDPR, Karnataka) Profiles of Selected DistrictsThe study area has several basic information like demographic, spatial and other usefulindicators which helps in knowing the dissimilarities among the three selected districts asshown in the Table 10 Gulbarga has got larger geographical area as compared toRaichur and Hassan. Gulbarga also has a higher population but density is low ascompared to other two districts. Sex Ratio and literacy levels are higher in Hassanwhich is also indication of more forwardness. Table 10: Districts at a Glance Gulbarga Raichur Hassan No of Taluks 10 5 8 Hoblies 48 37 38 Villages 1378 878 2552 Grama Panchayath 336 165 259 Towns/Urban Agglomeration 17 8 12 Municipalities / Corporations 11 6 8 Per Capita Income (1998-99)(Rs) 11,078 9,866 10,859 Employment Exchanges (as on 2 1 1 31.3.2001) Police Stations (2000-2001) 50 23 27 Fire Stations (2000-2001) 5 3 4 Area (Sq. Kms) 16,224 5,559 6,814 Population - Male 1,591,379 832,352 858,623 Population - Female 1,533,479 815,860 862,696 Density 193 241 253 Sex Ratio (No. of females per 1000 964 980 1,005 males) Actual rainfall for the year 2000 (mm) 805 640 1,100 Number of Factories (as on 31-3-2001) 129 236 45 Banks 174 94 166 Post Offices 623 279 421 Telephone Exchanges 142 60 94 Literacy Rate (%) 50.65 49.54 68.75 Source: District at a Glance, GOK 10 Idpms/nrega report/09
  11. 11. The brief description of the districts-Gulbarga:Gulbarga district is one of the three districts that were transferred from Hyderabad toKarnataka state at the time of re-organization of the state in 1956. It is located in theNorthern part of the state and lies between North latitude 17° 10 and 17° 45 andbetween east longitude 76° 10 and 77° 45’ The District is a biggest district in the statecovering 8.49% of the area and 5.9 present of population of the state. Gulbarga districthas a sizable part of Scheduled Caste Population. It is 23% of the total population of thedistrict. It is ranked 3rd in the state in respect of this next to Kolar and Chamraj nagar.In recent years a High Power Committee(popularly known as Nanjundappa Committee)was constituted by the govt. of Karnataka to look into the problem of regionalimbalances in the state. The committee, on the basis of various socio-economicindicators assessed the development of 175 talukas in the state and has identified ninetaluks among the ten talukas in Gulbarga district as the most backward taluks.Afzalpur (one of the most backward taluk ) and Gulbarga taluks were selected for thestudy.The climate of the district is generally dry and healthy with temperature ranging from 5cto 45c and an annual rainfall of about 750mm. The entire district is situated in DeccanPlateau and the general elevation ranges from 300 to 750 meters above MSL . Two main river , Krishna and Bhima , flow in the district . The predominant type of soil inthe district is black soil . The district has a large number of tanks which in addition to theriver irrigate the land . The Upper Krishna Project is major irrigational venture in thedistrict . Jowar, groundnut , rice , and pulses are the main crops. Sugarcane and cottonare the two commercial crops produced in the district. Apart from these, horticulturecrops like lemon, papaya and mango are also grown.RAICHURThe District of Raichur was a part of the Hyderabad State till the re-organisation of Stateon 1st November 1956.The district is bounded on the North by the district of Gulberga, on the West by thedistricts of Bijapur and Dharwar, on the East by the district of Mababoobnagar of AndhraPradesh, and on the South are the districts of Kurnool also of Andhra Pradesh, andBellary. The two rivers, the Krishna and the Tungabhadra from the entire North andSouthern boundaries of the district.The climate of the district is characterised by dryness for the major part of the year and avery hot summer. The low and highly variable rainfall renders the district liable todrought. The data of this observatory may be taken as representative of the conditionsin the district. December is the coldest month with the mean daily maximum temperatureat 29.3 Degree C. (84.8 F) and the mean daily minimum at 17.7C (63.9F) The nights aregenerally cool in the season, but day temperatures sometimes reach 35 to 38 Degree C. 11 Idpms/nrega report/09
  12. 12. The geographical area of the district, according to the Central statistical organization ofthe Government of India, is 14,013 Sq Kilometers The population of the districtaccording the 2001 census, was 1,648,212 . In terms of area, the district occupies thethird place among the districts of the State, while in respect of population it occupies thetenth place. It accounts for 7.36 percent of the total area and 4.6 percent of the totalpopulation of the State in 1961; the density of population then worked out to 202.51 persquare mile or 77 per square kilometer and this was much below the State average,which was 319 per square mile or 123 per square kilometer, and the lowest next only toNorth Kanara district.The literacy in the district is considerably low with only 49.54% . The female literacy isstill low which is only 36.84%.HASSANLying between 12° 13´ and 13° 33´ North latitudes and 75° 33´ and 76°38´ Eastlongitude, Hassan district has a total area of 6826.15 km². It is divided into 8 taluks, 38hoblies & 2369 villages. The geography is mixed with the malnad or mountainous regionto the west and south west called Bisle Ghat and the maidan or planis regions in thenorth, south and east. There are some areas of degraded forest ranges in central portionof the district. Coffee, Black Pepper, Potato, Paddy and Sugarcane are the majoragricultural cropsThe general level of Hassan district is it slopes with the course of Hemavathi river fromthe western ghat ranges towards the bed of Cauvery river near Hampapura in the southeast. Its chief tributary is Yagachi from Belur taluq which joins it near Gorur. Hemavathipasses through Holenarsipur taluq in a southerly direction and joins with Cauvery rivernear Hampapura close to the border of Hassan district. Hassan and Belur stands around3,084 and 3,150 feet (960 m) above the sea level respectively.As per the 2001 census the population of Hassan district is 17,21,669. The percentageof rural and urban population to the total population of the district is 82.31 and 17.69respectively.People’s perceptions and Overall performanceNREGA is just not about income and employment generation. Apart from providingwages for the work done, it is intended to several other indirect benefits to the workersand community like arresting or minimizing distress migration, using the potential ofunderemployed men and women who are unskilled, asset creation in the village andabove all ecological regeneration of the villages. NREGA has also huge potential ofreviving the economy of Indian villages if it is properly implemented. By this, it isenvisaged to have land development, regenerating the water bodies, recharging theground water and finally the water available for both consumption and productivepurposes. 12 Idpms/nrega report/09
  13. 13. For this to happen, the Scheme is expected to improve the awareness level of thepeople about the NREGA and other development programmes. It is also expected toempower the people to demand services from Gram Panchayat.The overall performance of each district is measured by combining several indicators.They are broadly grouped into nine categories viz. general awareness like job cards,seeking employment, income and employment gains, duration of employment, display ofinformation, worksite facilities, peoples’ participation in Gram sabha and Social Audit andperceptions of workers.The study was conducted through structured questionnaires. Separate questionnairewas designed for village enumeration, schedule for REGS workers and for farmers. Theimportant findings of the survey is given below - A. VILLAGE ENUMERATIONIt was decided to do a household survey in each of the selected Grama Panchayath covering thesocio economic status like caste, literacy status, land holding, income etc and brief informationlike their status of job card applied and owned, and wages earned if they had worked underNREGS and their over all perceptions on the NREGS.Summary of the compilation of the village enumeration data is as follows-Table 11: Social Status-Caste Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=100) GP(N=59) GP(N=100) GP(N=100) GP(N=98) GP(N=82) No answer 1(1%) 1(1.7%) 5 2 1(1.2%) SC 13(13%) 5(8.5%) 23 29 8(8.2%) 78(95.5%) ST 32(32%) 1(1.7%) 47 45 2(2%) OBC 52(52%) 46(78%) 17 15 85(86.7%) 3(3.7%) OC 2(2%) 6(10.2%) 11 9 3(3.1%)It is seen from the above table that OBC constituted a major group in Kinnisadak (52%),Mashala (78%) and Naganahalli (86.7%) panchayaths. In remaining three districts SC/STs formed a major group Viz: Gunjalli(70%), Madlapura(74%) and Yalahanka(95.5%).Table 12: Literacy Status Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=100) GP(N=59) GP(N=103) GP(N=100) GP(N=98) GP(N=82)No 1(1.0%) 2(3.4%) 4(3.9%) 1(1.0%)answer/Blank-Illierate - 1 29(29%) 32(54.2%) 86(83.5%) 88(88%) 65(66.4%) 68(82.9%)Primary - 2 45(45%) 23(39%) 3(2.9%) 7(7.0%) 23(23.5%) 11(13.4%)High School-3 19(19%) 1(1.7%) 3(2.9%) 3(3.0%) 8(8.2%) 2(2.4%)Above high 6(6%) 1(1.7%) 7(6.8%) 1(1.0%)school 2(2.0%) 1(1.2%) 13 Idpms/nrega report/09
  14. 14. From the sample household survey in about 100 households, in both Gunjalli andMadlapura of Raichur district, proportions of SC/ST population are 70% and 74%respectively. Similarly, in Bhovi village of Yalahanka Panchayath, 97.5% of thepopulation belong to ST population of Bovi community. Also illiteracy among the household survey in these three panchayats seems to be highest to the extent of 83 to 88%.Added to social backwardness and high percentage of illiteracy, household belonging tolandless or small holding (less than 2.5 acres) constitute the bulk of the population (64 %to 86%).Table 13: Land holding status Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=100) GP(N=59) GP(N=103 GP(N=100 GP(N=98) GP(N=82) ) )Landless -1 14 23(39%) 39(37.9%) 34 3(3.1%) 8(9.8%)Less than 34 6(10.2%) 2(1.9%) 13 28(28.6%) 9(11.0%)one acre -21.01-2.5 21 12(20.3%) 25(24.3%) 36 61(62.2%) 53(64.6%)acres -32.51-5.0 25 16(27.1%) 25(24.3%) 8 5(5.1%) 10(12.2%)acres -42.51-5.0 1 1(1.7%) 5(4.9%) 4 1(1.0%) 2(2.4%)acres -45.01-10.0 5 1(1.7%) 7(6.8%) 5acres -510.1- acres 7and above -6It is observed from the above table that more than 90% of the household interviewed ishaving less than 2.5 acres of land which means they can not sustain the livelihood onlyon the land. In such cases families who are unskilled will have to depend on theirphysical work and during the critical part of the year i.e summer when they do not getany employment locally will migrate to faraway places in search of wage works.Table 14: Economic Status (Annual income) Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=100) GP(N=59) GP(N=103) GP(N=100) GP(N=98) GP(N=82)No 1 15(25.4%) 2(1.9%) 1answer/Blank-0<Rs.5000 - 1 19 13(22.0%) 21(20.4%) 22 59(60.2%) 33(40.2%)Rs.5001- 36 20(33.9%) 31(30.4%) 46 33(33.7%) 33(40.2%)10000 -2Rs.5001- 25 4(6.8%) 39(37.9%) 23 2(2.0%) 7(8.5%)15,000 -3 80 62.8 88.7 91 95.9 88.9Rs.15001- 11 5(8.5%) 5(4.9%) 4 2(2.0%) 3(3.7%)20000 -4Rs.20001- 1 2(3.4%) 1(1.0%) 2(2.4%) 14 Idpms/nrega report/09
  15. 15. 25000 -5Rs25001- 2 2(1.9%) 1 2(2.4%)40000 -6Rs.40001- 1(1.0%) 1 1(1.0%) 1(1.2%)60000 -7>Rs.60001-- 5 1(1.0%) 2 1(1.0%) 1(1.2%)8Most of them have less than 2-2.5 acres of land and depend on agriculture and also work asagriculture labourers. More than 80 % of the families are having an annual income of less thanRs. 40,000/.Table 15: Household registration for NREGS Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=100) GP(N=59) GP(N=103) GP(N=100) GP(N=98) GP(N=82) Whether the household was Registered under NREGSNo answer 2 8(13.6%) 2 2(1.9%) 1(1.0%)Yes 23 51(86.4%) 71 67(68.9%) 69(70.4%) 57(69.5%)No 75 30 31(29.1%) 28(28.6%) 25(30.5%) Position of the Job cardNo answer 16 6(10.2%) 3(2.9%) 5(5%) 27(27.6%) 1(1.2%)Yes 10 53(89.8%) 64(62.1%) 64(64%) 61(62.2%) 52(63.4%)No 74 36(35.0%) 31(31%) 10(10.2%) 29(35.4%)Except in Kinni(sadak) Panchayt of Gulberga district, in all other panchayats, 68.9 to 86.4% ofthe households have registered themselves under NREGS. Almost 62 to 69% of them appliedown the job cards in these panchayaths.B. REGS WORKERS SCHEDULESInformation was collected from workers who worked in scheme. Even though, it wasdecided to seek information from 30 REGS workers, number is less in GunjalliPanchayath.Table 16: Awareness of Entitlements under NREGA- Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=27) GP(N=31 GP(N=11 GP(N=36) GP(N=30 GP(N=31) ) ) )Maximum number of days 18(66.67% 31(100) 2(18.18) 4(11.11) 10(30.0) 7(29.17)of guaranteed employment )(100 days)Unemployment allowance 1(4.00) 9(29%) 2(18.18) 1(3.00) 3(10.00) 0(Rs.______ ) 15 Idpms/nrega report/09
  16. 16. Wages to be paid if work is 0 0 0 0 0 0given beyond 5 kmsMinimum wages 24(88.89) 26(83.87) 3(27.27) 13(36.11) 19(63.33) 8(25.80)(Rs.______ )Time limit for providing 17(62.96) 31(100.0) 1(9.00) 2(5.56) 11(36.67) 21(67.74)employment aftersubmission of application (15 days)Time limit for payment of 17(62.96) 27(87.11) 1(9.00) 3(8.33) 16(53.33) 25(80.65)wages (15 days)Except for the knowledge about 100 days guaranteed employment, awareness aboutremaining entitlements is very low across all the three districts. Awareness aboutentitlements like extra wages to be paid if the work is given beyond 5kms, is nil amongworkers. One of the reason told by some officials is that question of extra wagesbeyond 5 kms does not arise as they always worked within 5 kms, in their own grampanchayath. If we go by districts, overall awareness about the entitlement is better inGulbarga as compared to other two districts.Table 17: Awareness regarding social audit and VMC Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=27) GP(N=31) GP(N=11) GP(N=36) GP(N=30) GP(N=31) Aware of social 6(22..2%) 20(66.67%) 0 1(3.3%) 8(26.67%) 1(3.2%) audit Aware of VMC 11(40.74%) 15(48.39%) 1(9%) 0 1(3.3%) 1(3.3%) Major Sources of information i. Gram panchayat 23(85.19%) 25((80.65%) 6(54.55%) 14(38.89% 25((83.33%) 26(83.87%) ) ii. Officials 0 1(3.2%) 0 1(3.3%) 0 0 iii.Newspaper 0 0 0 0 0 0 Iv. Radio and TV 0 0 0 0 0 0 v.NGO 0 0 0 0 0 0 vi. Friends and 0 0 5(45.45%) 16(44.44% 0 1(3.3%) relatives ) vii. NREGA 0 0 0 0 1(3.3%) 2(6.6%) campaign viii. Door to door 0 0 0 0 0 0 survey ix. Not applicable 0 0 0 0 0 0As per the discussion with the people, social audit is conducted in Mashal GramPanchayath. In other places people whom we have spoken to do not have any ideaabout social audits. In Hassan district, officials admitted that neither they have clearidea about how to go about the social audits nor they have conducted social audits /facilitated to conduct. They expressed the need for the training in this regard. The abovesurvey findings also confirm the lack of knowledge about the social audits and VMCs.Highest awareness about the Social audit and VMCs is in Mashal Grampanchayat ofGulbarga districts which are 66.67% and 48.39% respectively. 16 Idpms/nrega report/09
  17. 17. More than 80% of the workers expressed that they got information on NREGA throughPanchayat secretary/sarapanch in both Gulbarga and Hassan districts. In Raichur, inboth Gunjalli and Madlapur Panchayat, about 45% of the workers said that they got theinformation from friends and relatives apart from Gram Panchayat Secretary/Sarapanch.Table 18:Awareness about complaints to be given regarding job card- Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=27) GP(N=31) GP(N=11) GP(N=36) GP(N=30) GP(N=31) 1. Awareness about the complaintsi.a. Job cards are not given: 22(81.5%) 29(93.5%) 4(36.4%) 11(30.6%) 3(10%) 2(6.5%)i.b officials to be contacted 6(22.2%) 6(19.4%) 0 0 2(6.1%) 2(6.5%)ii. Work is not given within 20(74.1%) 28(90.3%) 0 2(5.6%) 2(6.7%) 1(3.2%)15 days:ii.b officials to be contacted 3(9.7%) 0 0 0 0 1(3.2%)iii. Wages are not paid 19(70.4%) 27(87.1%) 0 1(2.8%) 2(6.7%) 2(6.5%)within 15 days:iii.c officials to be contacted 1(3.7%) 4(12.9%) 0 0 0 1(3.2%)iv. Wage slips are not given: 8(29.6%) 15(48.4%) 0 1(2.8%) 2(6.7%) 2(6.5%)v. Officials to be contacted 5(18.5%) 2(6.5%) 0 0 0 1(3.2)for complaint 2.Registration of job cardsa. Male 15(55.6%) 26(83.9%) 10(90.9%) 21(58.3%) 13(43.3%) 19(61.3%)b.Female 12(44.4%) 5(16.1%) 1(9.1%) 15(41.7%) 17(56.7%) 12(38.7%) 3. Job card lies generally withi. Sarapanch 10(37%) 6(19.4%) 2(6.5%)ii.Technical Assistant 1(9.1%) 4(11.1%) 2(6.7%)iii. Panchayat Secretay 10(37%) 23(74.2%) 7(63.6%) 24(66.7%) 5(6.7%) 6(19.4%)iv.Contractor 6(22.2%) 3(27.3%) 3(8.3%)v. Mate 1(3.2%) 3(8.3%) 2(6.7%)vi. GRS 2(6.7%)vii. Others 1(3.7%) 1(3.2%) 2(5.6%) 19(63.3%) 23(74.2%)vii. Does not know 4. Expenditure incurred while obtaining job cardi. For photo 16(59.3%) 20(64.5%) 7(63.6%) 26(72.2%) 4(13.3%) 0ii. For bank account 11(40.7%) 11(35.5%) 4(36.4%) 10(27.8%) 26(86.7%) 31(100%)5. Can you get jobs without 4(14.8%) 0 1(9,1%) 20(55.6%) 15(50%) 27(87.1%)job card?6. Can you get jobs without 5(18.5%) 1(3.2%) 2(18.2%) 12(33.3%) 17(56.7%) 25(80.6%)application?Workers from Kinnisadak and Mashal gram panchayath from Gulbarga district aremoderately aware about the provision of complaining if the job cards are not issued.However, even in that district, awareness about knowledge regarding officials to becontacted is less than 20%. From the group discussion, it was clear that no one has sofar ever given any complaint to any officials even though they have so many grievances.Here are few observations made regarding job cards during the study-1. It was observed that only one third of the people who apply for job cards actuallysought for Job under NREGA. The reasons for this poor turn out are as follows- 17 Idpms/nrega report/09
  18. 18. (i) Some of them who really wanted the job, neither know that they had to apply and gettheir job nor local officials told them. This was expressed in Madlapur grama panchyathof Raichur district.(ii) Large many people applied for job card like they apply for Ration cards /voters IDcard. By mere having the card and doing some work, they thought they would get thehigher wages from the government. Some people also told that this may be useful to getsome government benefits.(iii)There are yet another category who would go to near by city, mostly district placeswhere they get much higher wages. They work in construction / granite quarry / coffeeplantations.(iv) There is an understanding between local contractors and officials where incontractors gets the work done and works are adjusted in the job cards belonging to hispeople.This was observed in Madlapura Gram Panchayat when team visited. Most of theworkers who were on work site did not know about job cards. Another pity thing is thatabout half of them ( 8 out of 15) were young boys of 14-15 year s of age. They said thatpayments were made through cash on weekly basis by the contractor ( who claimhimself as mate) at the rate of Rs.100/day. When interacted with the mate, he said thatto get the NREGA money for the work, it will take more than two months for which noworker is willing to work. Therefore, they are somehow managing to get work done bymaking the advance payment to the workers at higher rates. Add to all these, officialswere saying that single JE( Junior Engineer) is responsible for many worksites, it ispractically impossible to settle the bill within stipulated time. All these are oralexpressions given by various people but to get the exact information, expendituretracking has to be done case by case, which was beyond the scope of this study.Another important thing observed in Madlapur panchayat is that farm ponds wereconstructed on an individual farmers field which is not on the watershed principle. Farmpond which was built is near a bore well and at best it will be used as a water storagetank to irrigate the surrounding paddy field.Majority of the workers from Gulbarga and Raichur (59.3% to 73.2%) told that theyspend Rs.30-40/- per card for taking the photo. In Hassan district, workers had to payRs. 100/- per card as a deposit for opening an account.Job cards generally lie with sarapanch/Panchayath secretary or contractors. In some ofthe Panchayats, job card was issued and made them available to the workers on theworksite when the survey team went. In some panchayaths like Belur, Panchayatsecretary justified the need for keeping the job cards in the panchayath office to avoidloosing/misplacing the job cards by workers. 18 Idpms/nrega report/09
  19. 19. Table: 19 Application for work and time taken to get employment Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=27) GP(N=31) GP(N=11) GP(N=36) GP(N=30) GP(N=31) Awareness about application for REGS work Yes 5(18.5%) 1(3.2%) 2(18.2%) 12(33.33%) 17(56.7%) 25(80.6%) No 22(81.5%) 30(96.8%) 9(81.8%) 24(66.7%) 13(43.3%) 6(19.45) Duration taken to get employment after applying 0-No answer/ Blank 1(3.7%) 1(9.1%) 2(6.6%) 4(13.3%) 1-Immediately 13(48.1%) 12(38.7%) 1(9.1%) 2(5.6%) 3(9.7%) 2-Less than a week 5(18.5%) 8(25.8%) 2(18.2%) 1(2.8%) 2(6.7%) 2(6.5%) 3.7-10 days 2(7.4%) 5(16.1%) 0 3(8.3%) 8(26.7%) 11(35.5%) 4.11-15 days 5(18.5%) 5(16.1%) 6(54.5%) 19(52.8%) 5-More than 15 days 1(3.2%) 1(9.1%) 1(2.8%) 4(13.3%) 2(6.5%) 6-Not given but got 1(3.7%) work 8(22.2%) 12(40.0%) 13(41.9%) Except in Hassan district awareness about applying for employment is low. It is mostly supply driven rather than them demanding for the work. Majority of the workers during the personal interaction said that they will work whenever work is given by panchayath. Answers in the above table mostly refer to duration between the time Panchayat secretary /other officials making villagers apply for a certain work and give the work. Whomever they approach will get the employment and the remaining who equally deserve the employment and willing to work are left behind because of want of information. This is expressed during the personal interview and group discussions. Table 20: Utilization of NREGS wages by workers Gulberga Raichur HassanGPs Kinnisadak Mashal Gunjalli Madalapura Marakuli YalahankaHousehold 24(88.9%) 22(71%) 3(25.4%) 17(47.2%) 26(86.67%) 29(93.54%)purposeSchool fees 2(6.6%) 1(3.3%)No use /Not 3(25.4%) 1(3.3%)satisfiedNot answered 3(11.1%) 9(29%) 5(45.5%) 17(47.2%) 2(6.6%) 2(6.5%) Majority of the workers (71% to 93.54%) are using the wage money for household purposes both in Gulbarga and Hassan districts. However, in both the panchayat viz Gunjalli and Madalapura, significant number of workers’ family ( 45.5 to 47.2%) did not answer and they did not know how the money was being spent. In Gunjalli Panchayat ( 25.4%), people expressed the dissatisfaction about the wages and measurement of work. When we visited the site, which was selected for the desilting, workers refused to work as the soil was very hard and silt removed had to be physically lifted on the one side of the tank bund which was very high. In this case, Gram panchayat Secretary /officials were following the older measurement rate and did not know the revised rates. 19 Idpms/nrega report/09
  20. 20. Table 21: Details on Wage payment- Gulberga Raichur HassanGPs Kinnisadak Mashal Gunjalli Madalapura Marakuli YalahankaWage slip given - Nil Nil Nil 2(6.7%) NilMode of 8(29.6%) 2(6.5%) 2(18.2%) 2(5.6%) 2(6.7%) NilPayment No answer Post 4(14.8%) Nil 2(18.2%) 5(13.9%) Nil Nil Office Cash 3(11.1%) 3(9.7%) 3(27.3%) 12(33.3%) Nil 9(29%) Bank 19(70.4%) 26(83.9%) 4(36.4%) 17(47.2%) 28(93.3%) 22(71%)Duration 0-7 days 3(11.11%) 2(6.5%) 4(36.36%) 16(44.44%) 1(3.3%) 13(41.94%)taken for 15days 20(74%) 29(93.5%) 4(36.36%) 14(38.89%) 20(66.67%) 14(45.16%)the 15-30 2(7.4%) 0 0 4(11.11%) 9(30%) 4(12.90%)payment >30days 2 0 3(27.27%) 2(5.6%) 0 0 Wage slip is not given in all gram panchayaths across three districts. In Kinnisadak and Mashal gram panchayat of Gulberga district and Marakuli gramapanchayat of Hassan district, more than 80% of the payment is done through Bank/post office. In Raichur district and Yalahanka Panchayat of Hassan district 27.3 to 33.3% of the workers said that they got wages by cash. Similarly, in all these places, 36.6 to 44.4% workers said that they got their wages within a week’s time. Currently, in our experience on an average, time taken for earliest payment by following normal procedures is 15 days. These cases pose many questions regarding the reliability of the payment. In one of the Panchayath, they said that payments were made through cash on weekly basis by the contractor ( who claim himself as mate) at the rate of Rs.100/day. When interacted with the mate, he said that to get the NREGA money for the work, it will take more than two months for which no worker is willing to work. They pay an advance money to workers on a weekly basis and claim the money from the government later. Table 22:Total number of days worked under NREGA as per the job card- Gulberga Raichur HassanNo. of Kinnisadak Mashal Gunjalli Madalapura Marakuli Yalahankadays1-10 5(22.72%) 1(3.7%) 3(100%) 2(6.5%)11-20 9(40.91%) 4(14.81%) 2(50%) 2(8%) 6(19.35%)21-30 1(4.5%) 4(14.81%) 2(50%) 5(20%) 7(22.58%)31-40 2(9%) 7(25.93%) 4(16%) 8(25.81%)41-50 1(3.7%) 2(8%) 6(19.35%) 77.13 62.95 100 52 93.5951-60 5(20%) 1(3.25%)61-70 2(7.4%) 4(16%)71-80 3(13.64%) 5(18.52%) 1(4%)81-90 4(14.81%)91-100 2(9%) 4(14.81%) 2(8%) 1(3.25%)Total 22 27 4 3 25 31 20 Idpms/nrega report/09
  21. 21. When we visited the work site / doing village households, some of them did not possess the job card with them. Many of them said they normally do not bring the job card to the work site. Also, some of them carried job card but nothing is being entered there. The figures in the above table do represent only those workers who had job cards in their hand/house as well as some entries being done on the card. For example, in Madlapura, many workers on work site did not have job cards and those who had, entries were not done. It is seen from the above table that, less than 10% of the workers have completed 100 days of employment in all the panchayaths except in Mashal. Percentage of workers family who completed less than 50 days range from 62.95% in Mashal to 93.59% in Yalahanka. Table 23: Facility provided at worksite for workers- Gulberga Raichur HassanGPs Kinnisadak Mashal Gunjalli Madalapura Marakuli YalahankaDrinking water 25(92.6%) 28(90.3%) Nil 2(5.6%) 23(76.7%) 25(80.6%)Cresche 13(48.1%) 16(16.6%) Nil Nil Nil NilFirst aid kit 17(63%) 25(80.6%) Nil Nil 11(36.7%) NilShade 17(63%) 25(80.6%) Nil Nil 11(36.7%) Nil Other than the drinking water facility , most of the facilities like Creshe, first aid kit and shade is very poor. Even among the people who said they have facility to take care of their children are the women who are working in forest nursery where they have ample shade and few buildings where they can leave their young ones. In one of the panchayath ( Gunjalli ) villagers and GP members expressed their dissatisfaction about the substandard quality materials like drinking water pot and other agriculture implements. ( As the GPs did not purchase the materials, it was centrally purchased at taluk level and supplied to all GPs ). The drinking water pot was of low quality plastics, which would be quite unfit to use for drinking water purposes given the summer temperature of the region. Table 24: Awareness about Selection of works Gulberga Raichur HassanGPs Kinnisadak Mashal Gunjalli Madalapura Marakuli YalahankaAwareness 19(70.4%) 30(96.8%) 1(9.1%) 1(35%) 11(36.7%) 6(19.4%)about type ofworksGrama Sabha 23(85.2%) 29(93.5%) 2(18.2%) 9(25%) 15(50%) 21(67.7%)for selection ofworksParticipation of 4(14.8%) 5(16.1%) 1(9.1%) Nil 3(10%) 2(6.4%)selfAwareness 16(59.3%) 30(96.8%) 2(18.2%) Nil 4(13.3%) 1(3.2%) 21 Idpms/nrega report/09
  22. 22. about socialaudit conductedParticipation of 5(18.5%) 16(51.6%) 1(9.3%) Nil 1(3.3%) Nilself in socialauditREGS GP 20(74.97%) 22(70.97%) 2(18.18%) 5(15.6%) 5(15.6%) 2(6.5%)info Work 1((3.3%) 4(13.33%) 6((54.55%) 10(31.25%) 14(46.67%) 10(33.33%)display site Don’t - - - - - know Workers in Gulbarga district have a better knowledge about the type of works and select ion of works (70.4% to 96.8%) while awareness in other districts is low ( 9.1% to 36.4%). However, their own participation in the Grama Sabha while selection of different works takes place is poor. It was observed that Social audit is being conducted in Gulbarga and significant number of workers do have knowledge about social audit. But even in this district, workers’ participation in the social audit process is very low across all Grampanchayath except in Mashal Gram Panchayat of Afzalpur taluk of Gulbarga. In all the Grama Panchayth visited, REGS information is displayed on the walls. But workers knowledge about them is poor which could be partly due to illiteracy. Also about 50% of them interviewed are women who are generally not so much mobile where they might not have come to GP and observed them. In many work sites, it was observed during the visit that there is no display of information. Table 25: Opinion about the work by REGS workers Gulberga Raichur HassanGPs Kinnisadak Mashal Gunjalli Madalapura Marakuli Yalahanka Quality Of The workVery Good 17(81%) 11(64.7%) 2(6.1%) 23(76.7%) 14(48.3%)Good 3(14.3%) 5(29.4%) 14(42.4%) 4(36.36%) 7(23.3%) 13(44.8%)Average 1(5.9%) 1(3%) 1(3.4%)Not good 13(39.4%) 5(45.45%) 1(3.4%)Don’t know 1(4.8%) 2(18.18%) 3(9.1%) DurabilityDurable 18(85.7%) 12(70.6%) 6(18.2%) 24(80.0%) 80.0Not durable 2(9.5%) 4(23.5%) 2(22.3%) 12(36.4%) 5(16.7%) 16.7Can’t say 1(4.8%) 1(5.9%) 7(77.8%) 15(45.5%) 1(3.3%) 3.3 UsefulnessUseful 18(85.7%) 14(82.4) 1(11.1%) 5(15.2%) 27(90.0%) 23(79.3%)Not useful 2(9.5%) 2(9.5%) 3(33.3%) 11(33.3%) 3(10%) 6(20.7%)Can’t say 1(4.8%) 1(5.9%) 5(55.6%) 17(51.5%) From the above table, it can be inferred that workers perception about the quality, durability and usefulness about the work in the villages are quite positive in Gulbarga and Hassan district. However, in both Gunjalli and Madlapur grama Panchayath, more 22 Idpms/nrega report/09
  23. 23. than 50% of the workers expressed dissatisfaction and unsure about the quality, durability and usefulness of the work. Table 26: Opinion of workers on Impact of REGS about migration. Gulberga Raichur HassanGPs Kinnisadak Mashal Gunjalli Madalapura Marakuli YalahankaNo 5(18.5%) 6(19.4%) 4(13.3%)answer/Blank 0 4(11.1%)Cnsiderably 17(63%) 19(61.3%) 0 5(13.9%) 2(6.7%) 3(9.7%)Moderately 3(11.1%) 4(12.9%) 6(30%) 16(51.6%) 2(18.2%) 1(2.8%)No effect 2(7.4%) 2(6.4%) 12(32.3%) 9(81.8%) 25(72.2%)Not applicable 19(63.3%) Except in Gulbarga, in other two districts, majority of workers expressed that REGS has only moderate effect or no effect on migration. In Mashal panchayath of Gulbarga, people used to migrate to the neighbouring Maharashtra for three months during summer. Workers said that as they get the employment, they could stay back in their villages. In Marakuli Panchayath, historically there was no distress migration as enough employment is available locally through out the year. Therefore the question of migration in this panchayath is not relevant. In Raichur and Gulbarga taluks, workers are getting lot of employment in factories, granite quarries etc as they are nearby to district places. Workers, especially men are depending on these works as they get higher wages in these places and it was told that women in the family are encouraged to work under REGS. In Yalahanka Panchayath of Hassan district, most of them belong to Bhovi (SC) community, who will work in coffee estate on a contract basis. As the NREGS work is just started six months ago here, it is very premature to draw any conclusion about the migration. However, people said that if they get hire wages than coffee estate, they will stay back. IMPACT of NREGS works on Agriculture productivity in the villages Agriculture wage rate has increased in last three years in these districts. But there is a very little evidence about the significant impact of NREGS on various aspects of agriculture like labour demand and supply, wage rates and cost of cultivation. In one of the village called Madlapura, there was steep demand for agriculture labours as they started getting Tungabhdra canal water for irrigation. Because of this, farmers started growing paddy in two seasons and until end of February, there is demand for harvesting of paddy. Because of this, agriculture labour rate has gone up. In places like Marakuli panchayath of Hassan, due to desilting of tank and tank repair, farmers took second crop of paddy in about 80 acres. Farmers of both Mashal and Yalahanka Panchayat, said yet another major benefits they got is enough water for their cattle. However, they felt it had no impact on wage rate or cost of cultivation. Only exception to this is Mashal gramapanchayath of Afzalpur taluk where there was significant improvement in the ground water level. Bore wells and open wells which were completely dried up got rejuvenated and farmers could irrigate tur crops at critical stages of the crop growth which also enhanced their productivity. In this village, few farmers who had their land near the tank said that yield of bengal gram and tur has increased to the extent of 3 bags/acre( 150 kg approx). This is possible as farmers could irrigate their land during the critical stage of the crop growth. Farmers who had farm pond dug near by their farm said that apart from increase in the water 23 Idpms/nrega report/09
  24. 24. table, they could use pond water for pesticide spray which in turn saved them lifting the waterfrom far away places for spraying purpose.Table 27: Impact of NREGS on Agriculture Kinnisadak Mashal Gunjalli Madhalapura Marakuli Yalahanka 02. Increased water 19 30 04. Agriculture 4 6 activities in summer 05. Drinking water 30 20 for cattle 07. Crop yield 8 increase 08. Not significant 1 10. Second crop 10 more yieldForest seedlings are planted on roadside as well as on waste land. This work is just completedsix months prior to the study and villagers have not started getting benefits like fodder for sheep,fuel for household , shade etc.Table 28: Knowledge of farmers about Various activities taken up under NREGSand impact of the in the villages Gulbarga Raichur Hassan Kinnisadak Mashala Gunjalli Madlapura Nagahalli Yalahanka GP(N=19) GP(N=29) GP(N=30) GP(N=30) GP(N=18) GP(N=20) Awareness of eight categories of workNo answer 16(84.2%) 2(6.7%) 2(11.1%)Yes 1(5.3%) 29(100%) 5(16.7%) 1(3.3%) 12(66.7%) 4(20%)No 2(10.5%) 23(76.7%) 29(96.7%) 4(22.2%) 16(80%) Impact of water harvestingNo impact 1 1(5%) 4(20.0%)Moderate 1(4.5%)ImpactSignificant 1 29(100%) 1(4.5%) 18(100%) 12(60.0%)positiveImpactCant say 17 9(40.9%) 19(65%) 4(20.0%)Not applicable 11(50%) 10(30%)to this village Impact of AfforestationNo impact 5 6 13Moderate 10ImpactSignificant 10 9positiveImpactCant say 5 15 13Not applicable 19 4 18(100%) 20(100%)to this village Impact on Land development 24 Idpms/nrega report/09
  25. 25. No impact 4 3 5Moderate 10 10ImpactSignificant 10 10positiveImpactCant say 5 5 5Not applicable 1to this village Impact on Irrigation and canalsNo impact 1 1Moderate 5 1ImpactSignificant 19 1positiveImpactCant say **19 4 9 6Not applicable 11 NA NAto this villageExcept in Mashal Panchayat of Gulbarga anf Marakuli Panchayt of Hassan district all otherplaces, people’s awareness about eight different categories are very poor. It is obvious peopleget to know about them because of the excellent works being done and an active participation ofelected panchayath representatives.Table 29:Impact of NREGS on Agriculture wages- Average wages for male before and after NREGS MIN MAX Before After Before After Mashal 34.65 70.34 58.45 110.86 Madlapura 87 87 110.67 111 Gunjalli 77.53 92.14 116.15 107.31 Marakuli 94.23 94.23 95 105 Yalahanka 77 87 57.11 98.5 Average wages for female before and after NREGS MIN MAX Before After Before After Mashal 28.5 35 32.58 54.3 Madlapura 59.33 60 84.7 84.7 Gunjalli 45.8 45 84.2 87.17 Marakuli 67.3 67.3 75 95 Yalahanka 55 59 57.1 73.24 25 Idpms/nrega report/09
  26. 26. As par as the agriculture wages is concerned, only in Mashal grama Panchayath, thereis a significant difference in the wages of both male and female workers after theintervention of the NREGS. Average range of wages for men in this grama panchayathis 34.65 to 58.45 before the NREGS and it shoot upto 70.34 to 110.86. Similarly,maximum wages for women went upto Rs. 54.3 after the NREGS. However, the womenwage rate is still low compared to state average. In one of the nearby Grama Panchayat,men said that as wages for women is higher in NREGS than what otherwise get locally,they prefer to send their women folk from their families while men can earn higher wagesin nearby town/city for construction works.Chapter IVInfo from officials and its’ analysis ( To be collected)Chapter VConclusions and Policy ImplicationsKarnataka is one of India’s fastest growing states. Its state GDP (GSDP) growth ratepicked up from 5.3% in the eighties (below the national average) to 7.3% in the nineties(the second highest), and at 8.3% in the second half of the nineties (the highest).Karnataka’s good growth record in the nineties was maintained into 2000/01 (with realgrowth of 6.7%), but slowed in 2001/02 and 2002/03 on account of drought.Despite rapid growth in recent years, Karnataka is still a poor state, poorer than theaverage for India. According to the now -widely-used Deaton-Dreze adjusted povertyestimates, poverty in Karnataka in 1999/00 was 25.1% compared to the all-Indiaaverage of 22.7% (Table 1). This reflects low average land-holdings, and high relianceon rain-fed agriculture. However, poverty is falling. Rural poverty in Karnataka fell from37.9% in 1993/94 to 30.7% in 1999/00, compared to an all India decline from 33% to26%.Urban poverty fell from 21.4% in 1993/94 to 10.8% in 1999/00 (compared to an allIndia decline from 18% to 12%). Thus, compared to the all-India performance, there wasa slightly above average reduction in rural areas and a greatly above average reductionin urban areas.NREGS in Karnataka is not only needed to give the meaning employment for the rural poor, andarrest distress migration in some of the backward districts. Most importantly, scope for the assetcreation within the villages is boon for the entire village. Important findings and recommendationsof the study are summarized as follows-AwarenessExcept for the knowledge about 100 days guaranteed employment, awareness aboutremaining entitlements is very low across all the three districts. Awareness aboutentitlements like extra wages to be paid if the work is given beyond 5kms, is nil amongworkers. Awareness about the social audit and village monitoring committee is not 26 Idpms/nrega report/09
  27. 27. sufficient. In some places officials themselves are not clear idea about how to go aboutthe social audits nor they have conducted social audits / facilitated to conduct. There is aneed for the training in this regard.In all the Grama Panchayth visited, REGS information is displayed on the walls. Butworkers knowledge about them is poor which could be partly due to illiteracy. Alsoabout 50% of them interviewed are women who are generally not so much mobilewhere they might not have come to GP. In such cases, innovative methods to reachthese target audiences are though apart from the display on the walls of panchayath.Registration and issue of Job cardsSome of them who really wanted the job, neither know that they had to apply and gettheir job nor local officials told them. Awareness about seeking employment is poor.Employment in most of the villages are supply driven rather than demand drivenThere is a need to have a separate intensive awareness campaigns with innovativemethods like street play, attractive awareness materials, film show etc may be neededsuch that message remain with the people.During the visit, in few cases it is noticed that, single members’ name appeared in twojob cards For example: If mother-in-law and husband are having separate job cards,daughter in law’s name appear in both the cards. There is a need to conduct a separatefresh survey to update new people who are not included as well as eliminateduplication. There is also a need to make a separate list of people/families who regularlygo on migration to far away places and also special focus is needed to bring them intoREGS fold.Capacity Building-Many times, workers do not have a clarity on how much wages they are entitled forcertain number of days’ work. The amount mentioned in the pass book and what theysay does not match. Clarity about measurement of piece work is needed for bothworkers and officials. This will bring mutual trust and respect among the workersand officials and people are empowered to join these works for the betterment oftheir village.Repeated training for all the elected representatives and concerned officials areneeded for them to execute the work effectively.Implementation Process:-Even though, excellent work is being done in many cases, it is more seen as assetcreation/target reaching/ etc. In the bargain, social empowerment is being slightlysidelined. In this process, involving people who are in dire need of employment isignored. 27 Idpms/nrega report/09
  28. 28. One of the discouraging factor for some of the deserving people opting out of NREGS isdelayed payment. Speedy mechanisms like use of IT in measurement may be thoughtof. Also, it should be seen that there are enough number of staff to make measurementand certify the works.Many times stringent rules will hamper the progress of the work. For example, in case offorest nursery, by the time they get trained in various aspects of the nurserymanagement, their period of 100 days would be over. To get another batch and trainthem would require time and effort. Moreover, women who are very nearby to thenursery site would be ideal. Depending on the need and appropriateness, the 100 days’duration may be relaxed.Transparency MeasuresBoth elected representatives and officials need to be thorough with the processof social audits and VMCs. Also these social audit needs to be conductedregularly involving all the stake holders. 28 Idpms/nrega report/09