This document analyzes gender inclusiveness in MGNREGA (Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act), India's job guarantee scheme. It finds that while women's participation is high, women sometimes face higher rationing (not getting work despite seeking it) than men. The study examines differences between states and finds vulnerable groups like female-headed households generally face lower rationing. It concludes MGNREGA has been reasonably gender inclusive but states vary and vulnerable populations need more support through differentiated policies, sensitizing staff, and awareness campaigns.

1. How gender inclusive is
MGNREGA in practice?
Upasak Das
August 29, 2016

2. Work Participation and Rationing in the
Employment Guarantee Scheme
Sudha Narayanan and Upasak Das

3. MGNREGA
• Prescribes at least one third of the workers to be women.
• Entitlement at household level leaves space for women participation.
• Stipulation of work within 5 kms.
• Individual bank accounts.
• Preference on worksites closest to their dwelling.
• Women representation in staff selection/ work supervisors.
• Equal wages.
• High for women in terms of person-days in most of the states

4. NSS Employment-Unemployment
68th round (2011-12)
• Data on whether registered in job card (individual wise)
• Three categories: Did not seek, sought but did not get
work, got work (individual wise).
• Rationing rate: proportion of those who sought work but
did not get it

5. Our work
• Whether women face more rationing than men.
• Whether some groups (widows, young mothers,
woman headed households and households without
an adult male member are likely to fare worse
• Interstate variations

6. Males Females
Job card Sought work Rationing rate Job card Sought work Rationing rate
India 0.29 0.21 0.28 0.2 0.14 0.25
States where males have a higher rationing rate than females
Andhra Pradesh 0.43 0.3 0.19 0.43 0.33 0.16
Rajasthan 0.55 0.32 0.4 0.53 0.36 0.26
Tamil Nadu 0.18 0.13 0.14 0.4 0.35 0.07
Himachal Pradesh 0.37 0.24 0.22 0.34 0.22 0.15
States where males and males have comparable rationing rates
Karnataka 0.16 0.12 0.41 0.1 0.07 0.41
Chattisgarh 0.58 0.48 0.1 0.47 0.38 0.1
Maharashtra 0.14 0.1 0.65 0.12 0.09 0.65
States where females have a higher rationing rate than males
Madhya Pradesh 0.61 0.26 0.39 0.53 0.18 0.42
West Bengal 0.49 0.42 0.26 0.21 0.16 0.35
Gujarat 0.2 0.12 0.46 0.16 0.1 0.48
Uttar Pradesh 0.2 0.17 0.16 0.04 0.03 0.21
Bihar 0.17 0.14 0.43 0.03 0.02 0.58

7. Job Card Sought work Participation Rationing Rate
Female headed households 0.31 0.24 0.19 0.19
Female headed households
with no adult males
0.26 0.19 0.16 0.19
Widows 0.28 0.21 0.17 0.20
Females 0.20 0.14 0.10 0.25
Females from households
belonging to the SC/ST
0.31 0.22 0.17 0.26
Females from households with
children (0-5 years)
0.18 0.12 0.09 0.26
Males from households
belonging to SC/ST
0.41 0.31 0.23 0.27
Males from households with
children (0-5 years)
0.30 0.22 0.16 0.28
Males 0.29 0.21 0.15 0.28
Households 0.38 0.30 0.23 0.23
Persons 0.25 0.17 0.13 0.27

8. State Level Findings
• Rationing rate for vulnerable groups is lower in most of
the states.
• Demand rates among Female Headed Households (FHH)
FHH (SC/ST) FHH with kids (0-
5 years)
FHH with no
adult members
Female widows
Assam
0.033 0.031 0.123 0.068
Bihar
0.051 0.021 0.08 0.039
Jharkhand
0.027 0.027 0.052 0.033
Gujarat
0.218 0.127 0.007 0.055
Kerala
0.112 0.063 0.027 0.08
Rajasthan
0.094 0.039 0.005 0.034

9. Concluding Remarks
• MGNREGA has performed reasonably well and has been
gender inclusive.
• Variations across states and lower demand for
vulnerable population.
• Need for differentiated policy emphasis.
• Act as a support in progressive states
• Sensitizing staffs, generating awareness for weaker
states.