Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
IMPACT OF MGNREGA: ANIMPACT OF MGNREGA: AN
OVERVIEWOVERVIEW
S.Mahendra DevS.Mahendra Dev
IGIDR, MumbaiIGIDR, Mumbai
Context and BackgroundContext and Background
Public works programs are an important component ofPublic works programs are ...
Public works programmes in IndiaPublic works programmes in India
At the national level, there were JRYAt the national leve...
Potential Ten Direct and IndirectPotential Ten Direct and Indirect
Benefits of MGNREGABenefits of MGNREGA
1.1. Creation of...
Ten BenefitsTen Benefits
7.7. Reduction in Distress MigrationReduction in Distress Migration
8. Seasonal benefits and insu...
Field Surveys: IMPACT OF MGNREGAField Surveys: IMPACT OF MGNREGA
There have been thousands of studies using secondaryThere...
(1)Impact on Income, livelihoods:Macro(1)Impact on Income, livelihoods:Macro
Macro Level: Employment peaked in 2009-10 wit...
(1) Income and Livelihood Security: Field Studies(1) Income and Livelihood Security: Field Studies
A study on three states...
A lifeline for the rural
poor (Dreze and Khera, 2009)
Proportion(%) of sample workers who:
NREGA is very important
to them...
Proportion of HHs Reported NREGA asProportion of HHs Reported NREGA as
(Chhabra et al 2009)(Chhabra et al 2009)A.P. M.P. G...
2. Impact on Women and Social Groups2. Impact on Women and Social Groups
One of the successes of the NREGS is that theOne ...
A job of One’s Own
:Women (Dreze and Khera
2009)
Population 1% of female sample workers who:
Collect their own wages 79
Ke...
Women’s Contribution to HH income: RajasthanWomen’s Contribution to HH income: Rajasthan
(Pankaj and Tanka 2010)(Pankaj an...
Impact on Women and social groupsImpact on Women and social groups
Self help groups and Civil society organizationsSelf he...
NREGA labourers: Rural India’s
“working class” (Dreze and Khera, 2009)
Proportion(%) of sample workers who:
Live in Kaccha...
Impact on Social Groups: 6 states field surveyImpact on Social Groups: 6 states field survey
(Chhabra, 2009)(Chhabra, 2009...
3. NREGA and Child Well Being3. NREGA and Child Well Being
The NREGA seems to have some positiveThe NREGA seems to have so...
Impact on children with Young Lives dataImpact on children with Young Lives data
The Young Lives project is in four countr...
Impact on children with Young LivesImpact on children with Young Lives
Although these results are not robustAlthough these...
Impact of NREGA on ChildrenImpact of NREGA on Children
They used three rounds of Young Lives data.They used three rounds o...
Impact on children contd.Impact on children contd.
Cost-effectiveness analysis based solely onCost-effectiveness analysis ...
(4) Impact on Assets(4) Impact on Assets
MGNREGA ‘s impact is mixed. In some placesMGNREGA ‘s impact is mixed. In some pla...
Playing with mud?
(Dreze and Khera 2009)
Proportion(%) of sample worksite where the
survey team felt that:
NREGA had led t...
Projects at IGIDRProjects at IGIDR
3ie funded collaborative study with IFPRI, Cornell3ie funded collaborative study with I...
IGIDR study on MaharashtraIGIDR study on Maharashtra
IGIDR study (led by Sudha Narayanan): Study ofIGIDR study (led by Sud...
IGIDR study on AssetsIGIDR study on Assets
An overwhelming 90% of respondents consideredAn overwhelming 90% of respondents...
Other Studies: Impact on AssetsOther Studies: Impact on Assets
Indian Institute of Science study of over 2000 hhsIndian In...
(5) Impact on Migration(5) Impact on Migration
MGNREGA has had a more direct and positiveMGNREGA has had a more direct and...
Concluding ObservationsConcluding Observations
Letter to PM by some economists says the followingLetter to PM by some econ...
Concluding ObservationsConcluding Observations
EPW editorial says: Why this Attack onEPW editorial says: Why this Attack o...
Concluding ObservationsConcluding Observations
The evidence on MGNREGA shows wide variationsThe evidence on MGNREGA shows ...
Concluding ObservationsConcluding Observations
We need to think of ways of improving theWe need to think of ways of improv...
THANK YOUTHANK YOU
IFPRI-IGIDR Workshop on Implementation of MGNREGA in India  A Review of Impacts for Future Learning - Impact of MGNREGA: A...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

IFPRI-IGIDR Workshop on Implementation of MGNREGA in India A Review of Impacts for Future Learning - Impact of MGNREGA: An Overview - S Mahendra Dev

Presented at a one day workshop jointly organized by Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR), International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Cornell University, with funding from International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) titled 'Implementation of MGNREGA in India: A Review of Impacts for Future Learning'.

The main objective of the workshop was take stock of the current scenario of MGNREGA, assess the impacts it has made over the past decade and emerge with knowledge as to the areas under MGNREGA that still need to be studied and can be opened up with more research.

  • Login to see the comments

IFPRI-IGIDR Workshop on Implementation of MGNREGA in India A Review of Impacts for Future Learning - Impact of MGNREGA: An Overview - S Mahendra Dev

  1. 1. IMPACT OF MGNREGA: ANIMPACT OF MGNREGA: AN OVERVIEWOVERVIEW S.Mahendra DevS.Mahendra Dev IGIDR, MumbaiIGIDR, Mumbai
  2. 2. Context and BackgroundContext and Background Public works programs are an important component ofPublic works programs are an important component of labor market interventions and social assistancelabor market interventions and social assistance Rural labor market problem: Acute poverty, disguisedRural labor market problem: Acute poverty, disguised unemployment, low skills, low occupationalunemployment, low skills, low occupational diversification.diversification. Therefore, governments increasingly relied on directTherefore, governments increasingly relied on direct intervention in the form of public works.intervention in the form of public works. In the broader context of development: Using surplusIn the broader context of development: Using surplus labor for capital formation (Ragnar Nurkse, 1957)labor for capital formation (Ragnar Nurkse, 1957) At global level, many countries have this programme.At global level, many countries have this programme. India has a long experience in experimenting withIndia has a long experience in experimenting with labour intensive public works starting from 1960labour intensive public works starting from 1960 The Employment Guarantee Scheme of Maharashtra (EGS)The Employment Guarantee Scheme of Maharashtra (EGS) 1972/731972/73
  3. 3. Public works programmes in IndiaPublic works programmes in India At the national level, there were JRYAt the national level, there were JRY (Jawahar Rojgar Yojana) and EAS(Jawahar Rojgar Yojana) and EAS (Employment Assurance Scheme), SGRY(Employment Assurance Scheme), SGRY (Swarnajayanti Grameen Rozgar Yojana).(Swarnajayanti Grameen Rozgar Yojana). But, the most important programme now isBut, the most important programme now is Mahatma Gandhi National Rural EmploymentMahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). MGNREGA was introduced in 2006-07MGNREGA was introduced in 2006-07 We have 8 to 9 years experience of the Act.We have 8 to 9 years experience of the Act. MGNREGA is different from earlierMGNREGA is different from earlier employment schemes including Maharashtraemployment schemes including Maharashtra EGSEGS
  4. 4. Potential Ten Direct and IndirectPotential Ten Direct and Indirect Benefits of MGNREGABenefits of MGNREGA 1.1. Creation of Employment: Livelihood securityCreation of Employment: Livelihood security:: increase in consumption, food security andincrease in consumption, food security and nutrition, reduction in poverty, positive impact onnutrition, reduction in poverty, positive impact on health and educationhealth and education 2. The most important benefit according to2. The most important benefit according to workers isworkers is self respectself respect 3.Asset creation: benefit agri. And rural3.Asset creation: benefit agri. And rural development and environment protectiondevelopment and environment protection 4. Positive impact on agricultural wages4. Positive impact on agricultural wages 5.5. Impact on women empowermentImpact on women empowerment 6. Help marginalized sections SCs and STs6. Help marginalized sections SCs and STs
  5. 5. Ten BenefitsTen Benefits 7.7. Reduction in Distress MigrationReduction in Distress Migration 8. Seasonal benefits and insurance function8. Seasonal benefits and insurance function 9.9. Financial InclusionFinancial Inclusion 10.10. Strengthening grass root processesStrengthening grass root processes ofof democracy infusing transparency and accountabilitydemocracy infusing transparency and accountability in governance. Particularly involvement ofin governance. Particularly involvement of panchayats.panchayats. Social audit can improve governance.Social audit can improve governance. In fact, There is a need to use MGNREGA exp.In fact, There is a need to use MGNREGA exp. Increase in general and drought years in 2014-15Increase in general and drought years in 2014-15 and 2015-16 in particular.and 2015-16 in particular. There are extreme views on MGNREGA. It is betterThere are extreme views on MGNREGA. It is better to examine the evidence based on field studiesto examine the evidence based on field studies
  6. 6. Field Surveys: IMPACT OF MGNREGAField Surveys: IMPACT OF MGNREGA There have been thousands of studies using secondaryThere have been thousands of studies using secondary data and field data on the impact of MGNREGAdata and field data on the impact of MGNREGA Almost every research institute/university in India andAlmost every research institute/university in India and many research institutes abroad did studies on thismany research institutes abroad did studies on this scheme.scheme. We cover here only few of the studies ( NREGAWe cover here only few of the studies ( NREGA Sammeksha, Dreze and Khera, Young Lives, IGIDRSammeksha, Dreze and Khera, Young Lives, IGIDR study, Dilip Mookherji) to give a flavour on the impactstudy, Dilip Mookherji) to give a flavour on the impact and concentrate on the following.and concentrate on the following. (1) Income, livehood Security and well being of hhs.(1) Income, livehood Security and well being of hhs. (2) Impact on gender and disadvantaged(2) Impact on gender and disadvantaged (3)(3) NREGA and Child well beingNREGA and Child well being (4)(4) Creation of AssetsCreation of Assets (5) Impact on migration(5) Impact on migration Basically putting together some old and new studiesBasically putting together some old and new studies
  7. 7. (1)Impact on Income, livelihoods:Macro(1)Impact on Income, livelihoods:Macro Macro Level: Employment peaked in 2009-10 withMacro Level: Employment peaked in 2009-10 with more thanmore than 2.8 billion person days2.8 billion person days (2.2 billion in 2013-14(2.2 billion in 2013-14 and 1.7 billion in 2014-15)and 1.7 billion in 2014-15) Households provided employment increased from 21Households provided employment increased from 21 million hhs. In 2006-07 tomillion hhs. In 2006-07 to 55 million days in55 million days in 2010-112010-11 and then declined (48 million in 2013-14.)and then declined (48 million in 2013-14.) Average person days created inAverage person days created in 2014-15: 402014-15: 40 ExpenditureExpenditure Rs.35868 crores in 2014-15;Rs.35868 crores in 2014-15; 0.29% of GDP.0.29% of GDP. Expenditure spent since 2006-07 on wages: More thanExpenditure spent since 2006-07 on wages: More than 2 ,00,000 crores till 2014-15.2 ,00,000 crores till 2014-15. Inspite of some leakages,Inspite of some leakages, studies show a positivestudies show a positive impact of this transfer on household income, foodimpact of this transfer on household income, food security and health of the hhs.security and health of the hhs.
  8. 8. (1) Income and Livelihood Security: Field Studies(1) Income and Livelihood Security: Field Studies A study on three states show that the share ofA study on three states show that the share of NREGA income of the poor was highest in A.P.NREGA income of the poor was highest in A.P. (17%), Rajasthan (10%), Maharashtra (7%).(17%), Rajasthan (10%), Maharashtra (7%). Several other studies have different shares inSeveral other studies have different shares in various states.various states. Modest contribution increase in wages.Modest contribution increase in wages. RecentRecent studies (using difference-in-difference method)studies (using difference-in-difference method) show a rise of daily wages 5% to 9% in differentshow a rise of daily wages 5% to 9% in different states (Dilip Mookherji)states (Dilip Mookherji) Different studies have also shown positiveDifferent studies have also shown positive effects on food and non-food consumption,effects on food and non-food consumption, calories and protein intakes, health, savingscalories and protein intakes, health, savings (Dilip Mookherji)(Dilip Mookherji)
  9. 9. A lifeline for the rural poor (Dreze and Khera, 2009) Proportion(%) of sample workers who: NREGA is very important to them 71 NREGA helped them to avoid hunger 69 NREGA helped them to avoid migration 57 NREGA helped their family to cope up with illness 47 NREGA helped them to avoids demeaning or hazardous occupations 35
  10. 10. Proportion of HHs Reported NREGA asProportion of HHs Reported NREGA as (Chhabra et al 2009)(Chhabra et al 2009)A.P. M.P. Gujarat Haryan a Orissa U.P. Total Very importan t for family 30.8 55.6 98.1 57.5 34.5 27.8 50.8 To avoid going hungry 19.3 45.6 2.2 85.0 84.7 41.9 46.4 Send children to school 13.5 40.3 3.4 90.0 40.3 30.6 36.4 Cope with illiness 26.3 29.4 17.2 100.0 50.0 -- 37.1 Helped to raise market wage 94.0 42.8 65.3 100.0 52.4 33.1 64.6
  11. 11. 2. Impact on Women and Social Groups2. Impact on Women and Social Groups One of the successes of the NREGS is that theOne of the successes of the NREGS is that the participation of women in the scheme.participation of women in the scheme. Share of women in NREGA has been increasingShare of women in NREGA has been increasing . It was 53% in 2013-14.. It was 53% in 2013-14. Empowerment of women certainly improved dueEmpowerment of women certainly improved due to the scheme.to the scheme. Field surveys reveal that the share of NREGSField surveys reveal that the share of NREGS income in the total income of women in fourincome in the total income of women in four states (Rajasthan, Bihar, Jharkhand and H.P)states (Rajasthan, Bihar, Jharkhand and H.P) was 18%.was 18%. Access to paid work has had a positive impactAccess to paid work has had a positive impact on women’s socio economic status and wellon women’s socio economic status and well beingbeing
  12. 12. A job of One’s Own :Women (Dreze and Khera 2009) Population 1% of female sample workers who: Collect their own wages 79 Keep their own wages 68 Earned and cash income (other than NREGA wages) during the last three months 30
  13. 13. Women’s Contribution to HH income: RajasthanWomen’s Contribution to HH income: Rajasthan (Pankaj and Tanka 2010)(Pankaj and Tanka 2010) Districts Women’s income from NREGA as % of total NREGA income of HHs Share of Women’s NREGA in the total annual income of hhs (%) Dungarpur 78.8 21.2 Gaya 61.5 7.9 Kangra 82.1 14.7 Ranchi 67.4 10.9 Total 76.6 14.1
  14. 14. Impact on Women and social groupsImpact on Women and social groups Self help groups and Civil society organizationsSelf help groups and Civil society organizations encouraged women’s participation in states likeencouraged women’s participation in states like Rajasthan, Kerala and U.P.Rajasthan, Kerala and U.P. Impact on disadvantaged social groupsImpact on disadvantaged social groups Evidence suggests that MGNREGA isEvidence suggests that MGNREGA is succeeding as a self targeting programme withsucceeding as a self targeting programme with high participation from marginalized groupshigh participation from marginalized groups including SCs and STsincluding SCs and STs Share of SC (22.6%) and ST (17.6) together inShare of SC (22.6%) and ST (17.6) together in NREGA participation was 40% of total.NREGA participation was 40% of total. Works on private lands of the marginalised alsoWorks on private lands of the marginalised also helped SCs and STs to some extenthelped SCs and STs to some extent
  15. 15. NREGA labourers: Rural India’s “working class” (Dreze and Khera, 2009) Proportion(%) of sample workers who: Live in Kaccha House 81 Belongs to S.C./S.T. families 73 Are illiterate 61 Have no electricity at home 72
  16. 16. Impact on Social Groups: 6 states field surveyImpact on Social Groups: 6 states field survey (Chhabra, 2009)(Chhabra, 2009) Proportion of Hhs reported NREGA as SC ST OBC OC Brought significant change in life 57.4 55.6 56.7 30.0 To avoid hungry 48.4 46.1 49.5 30.1 Send children to school 37.8 34.1 36.1 21.5 Helped to cope illness 38.0 34.9 38.5 23.1 Raise market wages 67.1 56.9 66.4 56.2 Helped repay our debts 40.5 46.1 41.7 24.5
  17. 17. 3. NREGA and Child Well Being3. NREGA and Child Well Being The NREGA seems to have some positiveThe NREGA seems to have some positive impact on child well beingimpact on child well being Long term benefits for children in terms ofLong term benefits for children in terms of reducing, malnutrition, ill-health and improvereducing, malnutrition, ill-health and improve education.education. We have already seen above NREGS hadWe have already seen above NREGS had positive impact on women’s well being.positive impact on women’s well being. Women’s well being and empowerment areWomen’s well being and empowerment are crucial for the well being of children.crucial for the well being of children. One of the gaps is lack of care facilities at workOne of the gaps is lack of care facilities at work sites in many cases.sites in many cases. Due to lack of crecheDue to lack of creche facilities, women with small children hesitate tofacilities, women with small children hesitate to participate.participate.
  18. 18. Impact on children with Young Lives dataImpact on children with Young Lives data The Young Lives project is in four countriesThe Young Lives project is in four countries Ethiopia, Vietnam, Peru and India (only combinedEthiopia, Vietnam, Peru and India (only combined State of Andhra Pradesh in India).State of Andhra Pradesh in India). In this project 1In this project 1stst Round survey was done in 2002.Round survey was done in 2002. 2000 households with a 1 year child and 10002000 households with a 1 year child and 1000 households with an 8 year old child were randomelyhouseholds with an 8 year old child were randomely selected.selected. They are tracked 15 years. ResurveysThey are tracked 15 years. Resurveys were done during the 2007 (round 2) and 2009-10were done during the 2007 (round 2) and 2009-10 (round 3).(round 3). (1) One study on A.P. using Young Lives data(1) One study on A.P. using Young Lives data shows that there is a positive relationship betweenshows that there is a positive relationship between NREGA participation and anthropometric scoresNREGA participation and anthropometric scores (health outcomes)(health outcomes)
  19. 19. Impact on children with Young LivesImpact on children with Young Lives Although these results are not robustAlthough these results are not robust On the other hand, the study finds robust resultsOn the other hand, the study finds robust results on child labour. It reduces child labour for boyson child labour. It reduces child labour for boys by 13.4% and for girls by 8.9%.by 13.4% and for girls by 8.9%. (2) A recent study using young lives data (Mani,(2) A recent study using young lives data (Mani, Behrman, Galab and Reddy, 2014)Behrman, Galab and Reddy, 2014) examinedexamined the impact of the NREGA on Schooling andthe impact of the NREGA on Schooling and Intellectual Human Capital.Intellectual Human Capital. This paper uses a quasi-experimental frameworkThis paper uses a quasi-experimental framework to analyze the impact of NREGA on schoolingto analyze the impact of NREGA on schooling enrollment, grade progression,enrollment, grade progression, readingreading comprehension test scores, math test scorescomprehension test scores, math test scores and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT)and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) scoresscores
  20. 20. Impact of NREGA on ChildrenImpact of NREGA on Children They used three rounds of Young Lives data.They used three rounds of Young Lives data. They find that the program has no effect onThey find that the program has no effect on enrollmentenrollment but has strong positive effects on gradebut has strong positive effects on grade progression, reading comprehension test scoresprogression, reading comprehension test scores and PPTV scores.and PPTV scores. This effect in A.P. is similar to the effects ofThis effect in A.P. is similar to the effects of conditional cash transfer programs implementedconditional cash transfer programs implemented in Latin America.in Latin America. The findings have important policy implicationsThe findings have important policy implications Public works programs can be extremelyPublic works programs can be extremely beneficial in improving children’s human capital.beneficial in improving children’s human capital.
  21. 21. Impact on children contd.Impact on children contd. Cost-effectiveness analysis based solely onCost-effectiveness analysis based solely on labour force participation and incomelabour force participation and income underestimate the total gains.underestimate the total gains. Effects on intellectual human capital are likely toEffects on intellectual human capital are likely to have substantial spillover effects andhave substantial spillover effects and intergenerational effects which are not easilyintergenerational effects which are not easily measurablemeasurable The gains from receiving the program early onThe gains from receiving the program early on remain significant for primary school.remain significant for primary school. The timing of these interventions is criticalThe timing of these interventions is critical particularly for femalesparticularly for females
  22. 22. (4) Impact on Assets(4) Impact on Assets MGNREGA ‘s impact is mixed. In some placesMGNREGA ‘s impact is mixed. In some places they created quality assets and in some othersthey created quality assets and in some others asset quality is poor.asset quality is poor. NSSO survey shows that around 99% of hhsinNSSO survey shows that around 99% of hhsin Rajasthan, 82% in M.P. and 64% in A.P. wereRajasthan, 82% in M.P. and 64% in A.P. were using the assets createdusing the assets created Research indicates that wherever villageResearch indicates that wherever village communities have taken enthusiasticallycommunities have taken enthusiastically supported by an able, capable local governancesupported by an able, capable local governance institutions, the results were positiveinstitutions, the results were positive In other instances, lags in process andIn other instances, lags in process and procedure have reduced the efficiency of assetsprocedure have reduced the efficiency of assets (NREGA Sameeksha)(NREGA Sameeksha)
  23. 23. Playing with mud? (Dreze and Khera 2009) Proportion(%) of sample worksite where the survey team felt that: NREGA had led to the creation of useful assets in their village 83 The work they were doing on NREGA was useful 92 Proportion(%) of sample worksite where the survey team felt that:* The assets being created or repaired was useful (very useful) 87(32) The work done was useful (very useful) 81(29)
  24. 24. Projects at IGIDRProjects at IGIDR 3ie funded collaborative study with IFPRI, Cornell3ie funded collaborative study with IFPRI, Cornell University and IGIDR, 2013-15University and IGIDR, 2013-15 Government of Maharashtra supported study toGovernment of Maharashtra supported study to assess usefulness of MGNREGA assets, 2014assess usefulness of MGNREGA assets, 2014 ICRISAT-funded study Village Dynamics in SouthICRISAT-funded study Village Dynamics in South Asia (Andhra Pradesh, Telengana andAsia (Andhra Pradesh, Telengana and Maharashtra), 2014-15Maharashtra), 2014-15 EU-funded FoodSecure Project on PublicEU-funded FoodSecure Project on Public Distribution System and MGNREGA, 2014-15.Distribution System and MGNREGA, 2014-15. Collaborative study with Stanford University onCollaborative study with Stanford University on using mobile phones to improve implementation,using mobile phones to improve implementation, Surguja, Chhattisgarh, 2014-17.Surguja, Chhattisgarh, 2014-17.
  25. 25. IGIDR study on MaharashtraIGIDR study on Maharashtra IGIDR study (led by Sudha Narayanan): Study ofIGIDR study (led by Sudha Narayanan): Study of over 4100 MGNREGA assets across 100over 4100 MGNREGA assets across 100 villages in 20 districts in Maharashtravillages in 20 districts in Maharashtra indicate that 87% of the works exist andindicate that 87% of the works exist and function and over 75% of them are directly orfunction and over 75% of them are directly or indirectly to agriculture.indirectly to agriculture. The bulk of the rest constitutes rural roads thatThe bulk of the rest constitutes rural roads that connect habitations to farms and access to agri.connect habitations to farms and access to agri. marketsmarkets The study also finds that 92% of the randomlyThe study also finds that 92% of the randomly selected users report that their main occupationselected users report that their main occupation is farming;is farming; half of them are small and marginalhalf of them are small and marginal farmers owning less than 1.6 hect. of land.farmers owning less than 1.6 hect. of land.
  26. 26. IGIDR study on AssetsIGIDR study on Assets An overwhelming 90% of respondents consideredAn overwhelming 90% of respondents considered the works very useful or somewhat useful: only 8%the works very useful or somewhat useful: only 8% felt the works were useless.felt the works were useless. Sudha Narayanan says that inspite of problemsSudha Narayanan says that inspite of problems MGNREGA is theMGNREGA is the best institutional mechanismbest institutional mechanism available to cope with two profound challengesavailable to cope with two profound challenges India will face in the coming years.India will face in the coming years. The first is increasing cultivation on marginal lands.The first is increasing cultivation on marginal lands. need to increase the productivity of the marginalneed to increase the productivity of the marginal lands.lands. The second challenge relates to building theThe second challenge relates to building the resilience of Indian agriculture. Climate changeresilience of Indian agriculture. Climate change cancan reduce yields.reduce yields.
  27. 27. Other Studies: Impact on AssetsOther Studies: Impact on Assets Indian Institute of Science study of over 2000 hhsIndian Institute of Science study of over 2000 hhs in 40 villages in A.P., Rajasthan and M.P. andin 40 villages in A.P., Rajasthan and M.P. and Karnataka (quoted in Sudha Narayanan)Karnataka (quoted in Sudha Narayanan) documents clear benefits in terms of reduced soildocuments clear benefits in terms of reduced soil erosion, increased water availability, groundwatererosion, increased water availability, groundwater recharge and biomass.recharge and biomass. Tata-International water management studies ofTata-International water management studies of best examples of 140 MRNREGA assets in 75best examples of 140 MRNREGA assets in 75 villages in Bihar, Gujarat, Kerala and Rajasthanvillages in Bihar, Gujarat, Kerala and Rajasthan suggest that for a majority of assets the recoverysuggest that for a majority of assets the recovery of investment happens within just one year of theof investment happens within just one year of the completion of works (Quoted in Sudhacompletion of works (Quoted in Sudha Narayanan)Narayanan) They found too that additional water led to savingsThey found too that additional water led to savings
  28. 28. (5) Impact on Migration(5) Impact on Migration MGNREGA has had a more direct and positiveMGNREGA has had a more direct and positive impact on reducing distress migration as comparedimpact on reducing distress migration as compared to migration taken up for other reasonsto migration taken up for other reasons Some studies indicate that MGNREGA has reducedSome studies indicate that MGNREGA has reduced migration by providing work closer to home andmigration by providing work closer to home and decent working conditions.decent working conditions. A study on Anantapur, A.P. observed that theA study on Anantapur, A.P. observed that the scheme brought down the migration levels fromscheme brought down the migration levels from about 27% to 7% in the sample. (NREGAabout 27% to 7% in the sample. (NREGA Sammeksha)Sammeksha) Another case study on one block in Bastar:Another case study on one block in Bastar: migration declined from 4500 to 500.migration declined from 4500 to 500. Some reports indicate that in certain places theSome reports indicate that in certain places the reduction in distress migration has beenreduction in distress migration has been reversedreversed
  29. 29. Concluding ObservationsConcluding Observations Letter to PM by some economists says the followingLetter to PM by some economists says the following Despite many problems, MGNREGA has achievedDespite many problems, MGNREGA has achieved significant results.significant results. At a relatively modest cost (0.3% of GDP) about 50At a relatively modest cost (0.3% of GDP) about 50 million households are getting some employment.million households are getting some employment. A majority of NREGA workers are women, and closeA majority of NREGA workers are women, and close to half are Dalits or Adivasis.to half are Dalits or Adivasis. A large body of research shows that the NREGAA large body of research shows that the NREGA has several benefits , including the creation ofhas several benefits , including the creation of productive assetsproductive assets Recent research also shows that corruption levelsRecent research also shows that corruption levels have steadily declined over time.have steadily declined over time.
  30. 30. Concluding ObservationsConcluding Observations EPW editorial says: Why this Attack onEPW editorial says: Why this Attack on MGNREGA?MGNREGA? According to editorial, four positive outcomesAccording to editorial, four positive outcomes stand outstand out (a) provide some income security to rural poor(a) provide some income security to rural poor (b) productive assets in and outside agriculture(b) productive assets in and outside agriculture (c) High female participation and empowerment(c) High female participation and empowerment (d) Modest tightening of rural labour market(d) Modest tightening of rural labour market However,However, there are many problems in the designthere are many problems in the design and implementationand implementation; corruption; wages are paid; corruption; wages are paid late; gram sabhas do not always have technicallate; gram sabhas do not always have technical power; not always paid attention to quality assetspower; not always paid attention to quality assets
  31. 31. Concluding ObservationsConcluding Observations The evidence on MGNREGA shows wide variationsThe evidence on MGNREGA shows wide variations across states with regards to implementationacross states with regards to implementation Lower income states such as Bihar, Odisha andLower income states such as Bihar, Odisha and Jharkhand with limited administrative capacities lagJharkhand with limited administrative capacities lag behind ‘five star’ states (Kerala, Tamil Nadu,behind ‘five star’ states (Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, A.P.) (DilipRajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, A.P.) (Dilip Mookherji)Mookherji) It has many benefitsand many problems.It has many benefitsand many problems. NREGA has significant positive impact on social sector There are many problems with MGNREGA but little evidence that removal or dilution of the program is the solution.
  32. 32. Concluding ObservationsConcluding Observations We need to think of ways of improving theWe need to think of ways of improving the performance.performance. If properly implemented, the potential benefits as theIf properly implemented, the potential benefits as the ten benefits listed by me are large.ten benefits listed by me are large. It can be usedIt can be used not only as social protection program but also asnot only as social protection program but also as rural transformation program.rural transformation program. But one has to be pragmatic. We can not doBut one has to be pragmatic. We can not do miracles with 0.3% of GDP.miracles with 0.3% of GDP. Policy makers must continue to follow the two-foldPolicy makers must continue to follow the two-fold strategy of letting the economy grow faststrategy of letting the economy grow fast andand attacking poverty directly through poverty alleviationattacking poverty directly through poverty alleviation programmes to reduce poverty and inequality andprogrammes to reduce poverty and inequality and improve employment and social sectorimprove employment and social sector MGNREGS is part of these effortsMGNREGS is part of these efforts
  33. 33. THANK YOUTHANK YOU

×