The document discusses several key constraints in the implementation of rural policy and development programs in India. It notes that policies are often designed using a "one size fits all" approach without considering geographic, socioeconomic, and physical differences across rural areas. This can result in policies not achieving their intended impact. Other common constraints include inadequate coordination between implementing agencies, lack of adequate funding, leakage of benefits away from intended groups, shortage of technical staff, lack of sustainability, insufficient infrastructure, and limited monitoring and evaluation of programs. The document concludes by proposing some mechanisms to help overcome these implementation challenges, such as improved coordination, planning, participation, and evaluation.

1. PONDICHERRY UNIVERSITY
PANDIT JAWAHARLALNEHRU COLLEGE OFAGRICULTUREAND RESEARCH INSTITUTE,
KARAIKAL- 609 603
DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE
COURSE TEACHER: Dr. V. RAMESH
PGS 505AGRICULTURALRESEARCH, RESEARCH ETHICSAND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES (1+ 0)
II SEMESTER
PRESENTED BY,
NIVEDHA.S
I M.Sc., (Hort.) Vegetable Science
2022-2023(Batch)
TERM PAPER ON - Constraint in implementation of rural policy and
programmes

2. • The policies or programs are structured and planned by the legislators placed at
the central or the Union level.
• They follow the one size fit all approach or the top-down approach and frame a
policy without keeping in mind the view that there lies a huge diversity in terms of
• Therefore, a single policy design cannot produce the same effective results in all
the places
GEOGRAPHY SOCIO-ECONOMIC PHYSICAL STRUCTURE

3. Inadequate Coordination
 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.

4. Inadequate funds
 Rural areas often have limited financial resources, making it difficult to allocate
adequate funds for policy implementation and monitoring.
 In most central schemes funds are devolve to district through corresponding
states, many time funds stuck at state level due to various political and administrative
reasons.
 Even in schemes in which funds are directly transferred to district administration
from central gets delayed and schemes lost its significance and developmental work get
delayed.

5. 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 laborer's, rural artisans, scheduled castes,
scheduled tribes and deprived women etc.
• It is observed that benefits are not properly reaching to these classes.

6. Lack of technical and professional staff
• It is not just difficult but impossible for a single man to carry all the administrative
responsibility.
• Any leader requires a body of people whom he/she can direct and lead to achieve the
desired goals of the organization.
• Therefore, it is important to have adequate staff for the successful implementation of any
policy or program.
• Lack of technical and professional staff have negative impact on the proper functioning of
policies.

7. Example
• Every state government, however, directed block Development officers to take additional
charge to implement NREGA.
CAG REPORT
• 19 states had not appointed these officers in 70% of the blocks surveyed.
• Besides, one employment Guarantee Assistant is be appointed in each Gram Panchayat.
But 52% of 513 Gram panchayats had not appointed these assistants.

8. 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.
• 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

9. Lack of proper project planning
• In case of policies initiated by Indian government, the most of the policies lack of proper
planning due to which they are unable to produce desired outcomes.
Example
NREG specifically mentions the creation of durable productive assets, in the form of
roads, improving rural infrastructure, drought proofing, watershed development and water
conseveration.
The survey by CAG found that though it promises for various assests but its main focus is
on rural connectivity and wells.
Other meaningful projects for rural transformation were conspicuous by their absence.

10. 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.

11. • Infrastructure Challenges: Inadequate infrastructure, including transportation,
networks, electricity and communication systems can make it difficult to deliver program
benefits and services to remote rural areas.
• Lack of Accountability- There are provision accountability and transparency in every
policy but they are not followed because of loopholes. Lack of accountability which
distorts the management of funds.
• Vulnerability to External Shocks: Rural areas, especially those dependent on
agriculture, can be highly vulnerable to climate change, natural disasters and economic
fluctuations, which may disrupt policy implementation.

12. • Lack of Technical Expertise: Implementing certain programs such as technology or
agricultural initiatives may require specialized technical knowledge that is not readily
available in rural. Lack of manpower has adversely affected the preparation of plans,
approval, monitoring, measurement of work and maintenance of the records at the block
level and Grama Panchayat level.
• Limited Access to Information: Inadequate access to information and technology can
hinder awareness and participation in rural programs, reducing their overall impact.
• Monitoring and Evaluation Challenges: Limited capacity for monitoring and evaluating
program outcomes can make it difficult to assess the effectiveness and impact of rural
programs.

13. Effectiveness evaluation and feedback mechanism
District administration most of the time is process oriented rather than focusing on
effectiveness of the schemes.
These make the whole process complex while implementation.
Even most of the schemes don’t have any effective evaluation mechanism or feedback
mechanism from the target group so scope of improvements gets closed.
Schemes become supply rather than demand driven thus do not satisfy aspirations of
target group.

14. Mechanisms for overcoming problems and
constraints
• Adequate time and sufficient resources are made available to the programme.
• A national planning and policy making group to provide policy guidance and technical
and financial support to the project programmes at the micro-level.
• A planning unit at the national level which would be responsible for preparing national
level rural plans based on data and feedback from the micro-level plans and for providing
allocations for different programmes on the basis of these plans.

15. Cont…
• Coordination mechanisms at the national, state and district levels to ensure the
provision of various inputs and technical support to the programmes at the micro-
level by the R&D, academic, scientific, technological, and industrial infrastructure at
the country and the provincial/district levels.
• Coordination mechanisms at the grassroots level which would ensure the active
participation of non-governmental institutions and individuals, catalizing people's
participation of the intended beneficiaries and their elected and non-elected
representatives, so as to make the rural programme truly a people's programme.