Presentation

advertisement
Y.Gangi Reddy
Associate Professor (CRI)
STUDY TEAM
Dr.Y. Gangi Reddy, Project Director
Dr. S. Venkatadri, Professor & Head
Dr. P. SivaRam, Associate Professor
gangi@nird.gov.in
gangi1957@gmail.com
NIRD, Rajendranagar,
Hyderabad-500 030
040-24008416/20025011
+919848387111
+919848780266
Centre for Rural Infrastructure (CRI),
National Institute of Rural Development,
HYDERABAD.
Rural Housing
• Housing is a basic human need after Food & Clothing (Roti,
Kapada & Makaan)
– Constitution of India: Article 21 (1951)
– Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)1948
– Istanbul Declaration 1996
• Owning a house provides significant economic security
and Social status in village community
Indira Awas Yojana (1996 – 75:25)
• All BPL or income less than Rs. 32,000 (Annual)
• GP and Gram sabha - Waiting list on GP wall
• Selection is based on Priority, SC/ST-60% (Permanent
Waitlist)
• Unit Cost Plain Rs. 45,000 - (48,500) minimum plinth
200 sq.fts.
• Support for Up gradation Rs. 15,000
• Payment by GP through bank account (female)
• Monitoring & Evaluation (midterm- GP with a
committee- gram sabha)
Shortage of Housing in India
• 2001Census
– Total shortage 35 Million
– People in Kutcha: 32 Million
– Houseless : 3 Million
• Working Group 11th FY Plan
– 43 Million (2007-12)
• Working Group 12thFY Plan
– 48.81 Million (2012-17)
– BPL (90%) 43.93
• Decadal GR of RHH 24.31%
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Indira Awas Yojana (1996 – 75:25)
All BPL or income less than Rs. 32,000 (Annual)
GP and Gram sabha- Writing list on GP wall
Priority, SC/ST-(Permanent Waitlist) Proportionate
Unit Cost Plain Rs. 70,000 - (75,000) minimum plinth 20 sm
Support for Up gradation Rs. 20,000
Credit cum subsidy Rs. 62,500 (50,000 +12,500)
Payment through bank account (female)
Monitoring &Evaluation (Gram sabha,Local Area Officers, Awaassoft & NLM of MoRD)
New Initiatives
•
Administrative Expenses – 4% of fund released
• House site support for Landless- 20,000 (Homestead)-20,000
• Empowered Committee (ASRD)
• 5 % of total budget for special projects)
• Habitat for PTG/FRA & Individual for Scattered
• Access to Land, Finance, Infrastructure, Technology,
Delivery mechanism, Capacity building & Information
Land Use Classification in India (2009-10)
10%
Land under
Cultivation
17%
Land under
Forests
73%
Not available
for
Cultivation
Literacy Rate in India - 2011
Census
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rual
Urba Total Male Fema Total
n
le
Series1 68.91 84.98 74.04 82.14 65.46 74.04
Poverty Ratio in India
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rural
Urban
Total
1973-74
56.4
49
54.9
19992000
41.8
25.7
37.2
2009-10
33.8
20.9
29.8
Households used Predominent Material
for the Roof
Thatch
Housing Condition in India
Dilapidated
6%
Tiles
Good
46%
18%
21%
Burnt Bricks
Stone
16%
9%
Livable
48%
Households by No. of Dwelling
Rooms
No Exclusive
3%
3%
4%
Room
One Room
7%
37%
14%
Two Rooms
Three
Rooms
Four Rooms
Five Rooms
32%
Six Rooms
and above
29%
7%
GI / Asbestos
Sheet
Concrete
Households by Main Source of Drinking
4%
Water
Tap Water
8%
31%
Well
Hand Pump
44%
13%
Tube /
Borewell
Other
sources
Households by Latrine Facility
70.00%
Axis Title
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Series1
Latrine
facility
within the
premises
30.73%
No Latrine
within the
premises
69.27%
NEED FOR THE STUDY
• Given the background of Shelter for all the poor
and the programme of IAY, several states initiated
their own state specific programmes such as
INDIRAMMA,
Ashraya,
SPAY,
AAY
&
Samathvapuram during the recent past.
• Several Good Practices are adopted by different
states in fulfilling the Housing Needs of the Poor.
• MoRD was interested to take up a study on IAY in
different states to document the same so as to
strengthen the programme of IAY.
• With this background the study was undertaken
on IAY
Objectives of the study
• To review the guidelines of IAY and their relevance to
the socio-economic profile of beneficiaries and trace
out the various problems of housing of rural poor
• To understand the constraints, analyze provisions and
the process of implementation of IAY programme
• To identify different best practices adopted in the
implementation of IAY
• To suggest interventions for refinement of national
rural housing policy for effective implementation of IAY
Study Area & Sample
Name of the Districts
S.No. Name of the State
visited
Mayurbhunj
1
Orissa
Sambalpur
Dhamtari
2
Chattisgarh
Raipur
Dhanbad
3
Jharkhand
Ranchi
Simogha
4
Karnataka
Bidar
West Godavari
5
Andhra Pradesh
Anantapur
Coimbatore
6
Tamil Nadu
Erode
Thane
7
Maharashtra
Solapur
Bikaner
8
Rajasthan
Nagaur
Thiruvanantapuram
9
Kerala
Kollam
Cachar
10
Assam
Nagaon
Vadodara
11
Gujarat
Anand
Solan
12
Himachal Pradesh Kangra
No. of
Name of the Blocks Visited
GPs
Joshipur, Bisai
04
Hirakud, Sason
04
Dhamtari, Nagri
04
Bhansoj, Arang
04
Dhanbad, Kusunda
04
Namkon, Rampur
04
Hosanahalli, Hiriyur
04
Bidar, Andur
04
Achanta, Pedavegi
04
Kuderu, Tadimarri
04
Anamalai, Polachi
04
Bhavani, Gobichettipalayam
04
Jawar, Mokhada
04
Mohol, Pandarpur
04
Shri Kolayat, Mundsar
04
Pharrod, Asawari
04
Athayanoor, Nemon
04
Kottarakara, Vattakavala
04
Narsingpur Dev, Sonai Dev
04
Kathiatal, Rupahilat
04
Sankheda, Naswadi
04
Kambat, Sojitra
04
04
Solan, Dharampur
Annexure
04
Nagrota Bagwan
No. of
Samples
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
Methodology & Data Collection
– Selection of the district
and
blocks was done in
consultation with the concerned officials and progress of the
work done
– In-depth study is based on data collection from the primary
stakeholders (IAY households) Total Sample: 960
– Focus Group Discussions:
1. IAY Beneficiaries
2. GP Members
3. Concerned Officials
- Consulted with:
1. RBCs / Nirmiti Kendras
2. Brick Making Units
Aspects of Best Practices Identified
•
Selection Process of the beneficiaries
•
Cost of Construction:
Unit Assistance
Credit Sources
No. of Installments
•
Own contribution (labour, materials, finance)
•
Appropriateness to Household Needs: Space etc.
•
Cost Effective Technology
Locally available Raw materials
Design used for the House
Disaster Proof Technology
•
Convergence Practices:
Household Needs – Electricity, IHHL, Drinking Water etc.
Livelihoods etc.
•
Access and Service availability
•
Institutional Mechanism
- Institutional Structure
- Institutional Support
Transparency and Accountability
•
MAJOR FINDINGS
OF THE STUDY
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
Rural Housing and Development Corporation
State Housing Boards/ Corporations
National Mission for Rural Housing
Habitat Development
National Housing Bank (NHB)
National Rural Building Centers (RTP-NIRD)
Research and Development (CBRI-CSIR-IITs)
Griha Nirmith Kendras
Policy perspectives
– National Rural Housing and Habitat Policy (2008)
– Joint Secretary (Rural Housing), MoRD, GOI
1. Participatory Selection Procedure:
- Transect Walk :
A.P., Kerala, Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Gujarath, Maharashtra etc.
- Selection through Grama Sabha:
In almost of all the states, but in some states Grama Sabha
resolutions were not there.
2. Tamilnadu:
Selection Process is based on BPL and IAY waitlist but
considering who could able to construct the house
3. IAY boards were displayed with all the details at GP - Maharastra, Gujarat,
Tamilnadu etc.
4. Due weightage is given to Houselessness for selection of Blocks and Villages
- Maharashtra
5. Priority was given to SCs first and then to STs, OBCs and OCs respectively at
beneficiary level – Maharashtra and Rajastan
6. Yearly Selection and Display of Beneficiary List in at GP and Ward (Vaartha
Boards ) – Kerala
• GPs were providing the temporary shelter for the
beneficiaries while construction was going on - Tamilnadu.
• State specific schemes are more attractive than IAY –
Kerala ESN
• Uniform Assistance to both state specific and IAY –
Tamilnadu & A.P.
• 100% coverage of SC, ST under IAY – A.P. (Maharastra &
Rajastan – 2002 BPL)
• Saturation Approach – A.P. (Maharastra – limited to SCs,
STs)
• The beneficiaries constructed their houses under IAY in
the least plinth area (about 201 sq.ft.). This type of
practice was seen especially in Tamilnadu state.
• Priority to the coverage of beneficiaries rather than the
enhanced unit of assistance – Rajastan
Policy Suggestions:
BPL Survey should be done both the methods of Participatory and
Secondary data base: Income and Expenditure method, per capita
consumption of food / Calaries intake method etc. It should be done
once in five years.
Grama Sabha can delete the names of the
beneficiaries but it should not include new beneficiaries.
In IAY boards on GP walls should provide the following information:
•
S.No.
• Name & Father/ Husband name of the beneficiary
• BPL Rank
• IAY wait List Number
• Year of Allotment
• Year of completion of IAY
Status of Land for the Construction of
IAY House
1. Kerala: Government is providing Rs. 35,000/for General with 50% subsidy, Rs.70,000/- for
SCs with full subsidy for house site.
2. The highest percentages of (about 78.75%) of
the beneficiaries were provided the land from
the Govt. in Tamilnadu followed by 58.75% in
Maharashtra, 50% in A.P.
Own Land
69%
Govt.
Provided
Land
31%
3.
In Tamilnadu, most of the Panchayats were
providing the temporary shelter while
construction is going on.
Status of Land in the study area
100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Govt. Provided Land
Own Land
Problems in facilitating the Landless PoP
- Land cost is very high in many states like Kerala, Tamilnadu,
A.P., Karnataka
- In many states like Kerala etc CPR land is not available, if
land is available, it is very far away from the main
panchayat.
- Forest officials were not giving permission to get the
possession certificate on land and sometimes it takes one
to two years time to allot the land for the poor especially in
tribal areas.
- It is very difficult to provide the land for the newly married
couples, who are separated from their parents after getting
married.
- The provision of Rs.10,000/- (homestead) is not at all
sufficient to purchase at least one cent of land.
Design of the House
• Only few states like Tamilnadu,
Rajastan, Mahararastra, A.P., Assam
had taken initiation towards designs
made available for the benefit of
beneficiaries.
• But only one or two types of designs
are made available for the benefit of
beneficiaries.
Category
Total
No.
Installments
A.P.
Tamilnadu Maharashtra Kerala Karnataka Rajasthan Gujarat
Assa
m
H.P.
3
3
-
0
Orissa Chattisgarh Jharkhand
of
6
5
3
4
4
2
3
3
3
3
0
-
20000
-
Beneficiary
Contribution
1.Advance
-
-
1500
-
5000
1500
-
-
30.00%
20000
21000
-
20%
2. Basement / Plinth
8300
12364
25000
-
0
20000
0
20000
3. Lintel Level
-
13351
25000
-
14000 20000
0
-
4. Lintel Laid
6000
23894
-
-
-
5. Roof
10400
-
-
-
6. Roof Laid
13800
17891
-
20.00%
7. Completion
Total Amount
5000
7500
18500
10.00%
12500
-
45000
75000
70000
100.00%
50000
50000
-
30000
25000
Table
5000
-
Additional Amount
from State Govt.
40.00% 12500
12500
12500
25000
-
0
-
0
-
0
-
30%
-
0
-
0%
10000 8500
20000
20000
20000
-
5000
8500
8500
45000 48500 48500 45000
48500
48500
0
-
0
-
20%
20000
0
Unit Cost provided by the State Government of
Kerala
Additional Amount provided by the State
IAY
Govt.
Social
Assistanc
S.No.
GP
Category
DP
Share
BP
Share
e
Share
(25%)
(50%)
(25%)
48,500/1.
General
6,625/13,250/6,625/(65%)
48,500/2.
SCs
(48.5%)
STs
(38.8%)
26,500/(35%)
75,000/-
12,875/-
25,750/-
12,875/-
51,500/1,00,000/(51.5%)
19,125/-
38,250/-
19,125/-
76,500/1,25,000/(61.2%)
48,500/3.
Total
Grand
Total
Amount
• Good Practices:
- Beneficiary contribution is compulsory - Maharastra, Rajastan
- Adavance Payment is being done - A.P., Kerala, Rajastan, Gujarat,
Assam, H.P., Orissa, Chattisgarh
- Absence of final installment - Rajastan - Affects the completion of the
house.
Different Practices:
• No additional amount - Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh.
• No. of Installments varies from state to state.
• Unit Cost and Installment Amount varies from state to state.
• Only few states are adopting the system of Beneficiary contribution in
terms of finance - Maharastra, Rajastan.
Average Cost per one Sq.ft. of Plinth Area
Average Construction Cost per one Sq.ft. of Plinth Area
800.0
600.0
400.0
200.0 379.3
0.0
318.9
271.3
212.4
294.9
227.7
239.3
227.8
338.8
518.4
277.6
428.2
311.9
Average Construction Cost per one Sq.ft. of Plinth Area
•
The average cost for the construction of IAY house was observed Rs.311.9
per one sq.ft. of plinth area in India as a whole.
•
It is very high in the states like Kerala Rs. 518.4 followed by H.P.
(Rs.379.3)
•
It is very low in the states like Jharkhand (Rs.212.4) followed by
Chattisgarh (Rs.227.9), Maharashtra (227.8) etc.
Proportion of IAY Assistance to Total
Construction Cost of the House
Proportion of IAY assistance to the Total Construction
Cost of the House
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
•
The proportion of IAY assistance
to the total construction cost of
the house was observed 56.38%
in India as a whole.
•
The same was observed very low
in states like H.P (28.38%)
followed by Kerala (33.8%), Orissa
(37.7%) etc. where construction
is very high
Name of the State
IAY assistance
6.00%
5.00%
4.00%
3.00%
2.00%
1.00%
Name of the State
Self help groups
INDIA
Tamilnadu
Kerala
Karnataka
A.P.
Maharastra
Gujarath
Chattisgarh
Orissa
Jharkhand
Assam
Rajastan
0.00%
H.P.
More credit was also availed
from
the
Housing
Credit
societies - Kerala, Tamilnadu
etc.
Proportion of Credit from Self help groups to the Total
Construction Cost of the House
Percentage of Credit from SHGs to the total
Construction Cost of the House
Nominal credit is availed from
SHGs
--A.P.,
Karnataka,
Tamilnadu.
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Himachal Pradesh
Rajastan
Assam
Jharkhand
Different Credit Sources
Proportion of Sources to the Total Construction Cost of
the House under IAY in India
Friends &
Relatives
19%
56%
Money
lenders / land
lords
Money lenders /
land lords
Maharastra
Andhra Pradesh
Karnataka
Kerala
-
Labour Cost is very high in Kerala,
Himachal Pradesh due to scattered
houses
-
Average construction cost is very low in
Tribal Areas due to accessibility of locally
available construction material with a free
of cost.
Bank Finance
Self help
groups
Gujarath
The Proportion between Labour Cost and
Material Cost is Rs.1:4 in the states like
Kerala, H.P. due to high labour cost
whereas in all other states it is Rs.1:6.3
only.
Own funding
10%
Chattisgarh
-
IAY assistance
1%
5%
9%
Self help groups
Bank Finance
Own funding
Friends & Relatives
Orissa
IAY assistance
Proportion of Credit Sources
Proportion of different sources to the Total Construction Cost of the House in sampled States
Credit Sources:
Proportion of Bank Finance to the Total Construction
Cost of the House
Proportion of Bank Finance to the Total Construction
Cost of the House
14.00%
12.00%
10.00%
8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
0.00%
Name of the State
• The average share of Bank
finance is just 5.46 % in all
India.
• The contribution of DRI
loans is negligible in all the
states except Gujarat, where
50% of beneficiaries were
getting DRI Loans.
Bank Finance
•
Banks are not willing to pay loans as the credit amount seems to be very low
in almost of all the states
•
In states like; Tamilnadu, Kerala, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Himachal Pradesh,
Rajastan and A.P., Banks are not giving loans without getting proper security
documents or getting proper secured Assets
•
In states like; Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat Banks are not giving loans when
one’s close relative is a defaulter in the respective banks.
•
DRI Loans are getting very easily where GP Presidents and members are
Proportion of Credit from Money Lenders to the
Total Construction Cost of the House
Proportion of Credit from Money lenders / land
lords to the Total Construction Cost of the House
20.00%
18.00%
16.00%
14.00%
• Role
of
Money
Lender
continues in Karnataka (18%),
Kerala (15%), H.P. and A.P.
(11%) and Jharkhand (10%)
12.00%
10.00%
8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
0.00%
Name of the State
Money lenders / land lords
•
The share of SHGs contribution is about 2.21 per cent in all India
•
It is very high in the states like A.P. (5.72%) followed by Karnataka
(5.21%)
•
The contribution of NREGA wages is significant in all the states during
construction
•
Wages are used for the purpose of household consumption
•
Having a NREGA Bank account helped in getting loans from Banks Tamilnadu, Gujarat, Kerala, A.P
Proportion to the Total Construction Cost of the House
Proportion of Own Contribution to the Total Construction
Cost of the House
40.00%
35.00%
-
Own Labour Contribution is seen in
all the states.
-
House construction was being done
in the presence / fully involvement
of Beneficiary households.
-
Community Help was seen in almost
of all the states except where the
housing construction was handed
over to the local Masonry as a
contract.
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
Name of the State
Own funding
•
The practice of Collective Purchase of materials - Maharashtra, Karnataka, A.P.,
Rajasthan thereby getting economies of scale.
•
In Maharashtra (especially in Thane district) bricks were made by the beneficiaries
themselves (collective action with 4 to 5 members) with locally available mud.
•
District authorities are supplying the construction material like cement, steel /
iron, windows, doors etc. with subsidized rates – A.P. and Tamil Nadu
•
IAY beneficiaries turning into a brick producer – Orissa (Mayurbunj).
Share of Self Contribution to the total Construction Cost of the House
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Self Labour
Community Help
Hired Labour
1400.0
1200.0
1043.3
1000.0
800.0
570.7
429.7
245.5
439.7
455.9
600.0
428.2
551.2
187.6
400.0
427.2
123.8
380.1
251.4
322.6
317.2
200.0
241.4
230.3
243.0
0.0
Backyard Area
129.5
72.0
222.1
362.3
Average Plinth Area (in Sq.ft.)
363.2
317.7
272.5
211.8
•
Minimum of three room construction - H.P., Kerala, Karnataka.
•
Washing Platforms are constructed in Backyard - Tamilnadu.
•
Seating Platforms are constructed in frontyard - Tamilnadu, Karnataka
•
Traditional Chulhas linked to the Bathroom tub – Tamilnadu
•
Additional room for occupational activity – Tamilnadu, Maharastra and
tribal areas
•
Plantation of Trees in all houses - Maharastra, Kerala, H.P
•
Both Plinth area and Backyard area was highest in Rajastan,H.P.Kerala
•
Houses were being constructed in Agricultural fields especially in
Rajastan, Himachal Pradesh
•
Houses were being constructed along with their old houses –
Rajastan, Chattisgarh
-
In Rajastan, locally available Stone Patties were used for Roof
-
In Rajasthan, for flooring and filling the gap between the bricks for the
construction of wall - Lime mud mortar with locally available material
-
In Tamilnadu, IAY beneficiaries were fixing the tiles on the roofing
-
Most of the IAY beneficiaries still using the Asbestos Sheets / steel
sheets for the Roof - Maharashtra, Gujarath
-
Most of the IAY houses were being built with bullies (local name is
wooden patties) for the support of Roof in the states like Maharashtra,
Gujarath
-
The State Govt. (In A.P. and Tamilnadu) is supplying the material like
steel, windows, doors and cement.
-
In Himachal Pradesh, people are using 3 types of sand viz., a) Coarse
Sand for RCC roofing b) Fine Sand is used for Plastering of walls,
flooring purpose and c) Sand mixed with mud is used for filling the
gap between bricks etc.
-
Due to high cost of Sand, Stone Dust (M Sand) is used - Kerala
-
Cement Bricks are made with M Sand - Kerala
-
M sand is also used for Plastering - Kerala
-
Concrete based Window Frames - Tamilnadu, Kerala
Usage of bricks in RCC of second layer Arc roof – saves cement, sand and mortar
– Rajastan
Honey Comb Technique is used for pit construction of IHHL – Gujarat
V shaped RCC roofs - Kerala - easy draining of rain water
• Pillar foundation is seen - Kerala, Himachal Pradesh
considering soil condition
• About 95 % of the beneficiaries don’t have knowledge about
Disaster proof technology.
• The cost of construction of Disaster Proof housing is high.
• Housing Insurance for IAY – Kerala
• Inter Locking Brick construction method is limited to few
areas due to non availability of skilled masons - Kerala
In Kerala, Nirmithi Kendras are not useful for IAY beneficiaries
In the states like Gujarat, the beneficiary households are getting the
construction material from Gulf of Combat which is 200 KMs far away from
these places
In the absence of facilitation centers adoption of new technology and
technique of construction is limited
• In Himachal Pradesh, Latrine Pits 10”x10”x6” costing Rs.30,000/• Technical ly 4”x4”x6” is enough costing Rs.8,000/- to Rs.12,000/- per Latrine
• About 70% using Grade- II Bricks (I Grade: Fine; II Grade: Medium; III Grade:
Lowest)
• 20 % using the Grade-I bricks and 10% using the Lowest quality of bricks.
• Cracks on the walls due to poor plastering & curing (TN, A.P & Maharashtra )
• In Gujarath state, the beneficiaries from Vadodara and Anand districts were
getting the bricks from Gulf of Combat, which is 300 KMs far by paying extra
Rs. 1/- to Rs.1.50 per each brick in the absence of alternative technology &
locally available material.
• Very few houses constructed with inner locking brick Technology in Kerala
• It is very difficult to motivate the people to construct their houses with the
alternative & cost effective technology.
• Honey Comb Masonry Technique for the construction of IHHL in some parts of
Gujarat
Convergence with Household Needs
Electricity with RGGVY:
In
India – 39.52% - Highest in
Kerala (78.75%), Tamil Nadu
(58.8%)
IHHLs Convergence with TSC: Convergence
of IAY with TSC is about 62..8% in India as
a whole – Tamil Nadu, Jharkahand, Kerala
are highest in the position
Rajasthan & Kerala:
If all the facilities did not complete
amount will be deducted from the unit
cost.
Usage is about 42.7 % in India as a
whole.
Convergence with NRDWP
57% IAY HHs were converged with NRDWAP
in India as a whole.
- Tribal Areas – 100%
Only 14.3% HHs were connected with Tap
Connection to their house Premises – Gujarat
is high (78%)
Encouragement
for
Water
Harvesting
Structures:
- Kerala – Rs.10,000/- for digging wells
- Rajasthan – Rs.20,000/- for Tanks
- Tamil Nadu – Rs.6,000/- for laying tiles on
the Roof
Convergence with Livelihoods
Convergence with NREGS – 75.7% in
India as a whole - But highest in A.P
(88.3%) followed by Rajastan (78%),
Maharastra (75%, Tamil Nadu (73%),
Jharkhand (67.5%)
Amount is being utilized for household
consumption during construction
This is the major contribution than
financial assistance.
Convergence with NREGA during Construction
• Land Development – Himachal Pradesh, Kerala
• Upto Plinth level Construction – Engagement of
two labours under NREGA – Kerala
• Latrine Pit Digging and Construction – Maharastra
• Convergence with NREGA for getting Bank Loans
under DRI – Tamil Nadu, Gujarat
Drinking Water Source for the IAY Households
120.00%
100.00%
80.00%
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
Public Hand Pump
Piped Water
Public Tap
Status of IHHL in the IAY House
100.00%
80.00%
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
Yes
No
Open Well
Utility of IHHLs in the study area
100.00%
80.00%
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
Regularly
Occasionally
During Rainy Season
Not Using at all
IAY beneficiaries with NREGA
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Yes
No
IAY beneficiaries with NSAP support
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Yes
No
Accessibility of Bus Stop facility from the respective IAY House
100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
<50
51 - 100
100 - 150
151 - 200
200 -250
> 250
Accessibility of Primary School from the IAY House
100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
<50
51 - 100
100 - 150
151 - 200
200 -250
> 250
Involvement of Local NGO: Jharkhand
Payment:
Except in Tamilnadu and Kerala, rest of the states following the
payment system with joint account of both Grama Sevik / Junior
Engineer and Beneficiaries.
Material Support:
In Andhra Pradesh: 18.3 % of the HHs were getting the
material from RBCs.
Tamil Nadu Govt. is providing material support – Cement,
Cement based Windows, Iron, Doors etc. on subsidized
price.
Transparency
- Beneficiary details on GP walls – Rajastan,
Maharastra, Chattisgarh
- Amount Deposited into Beneficiary Account
directly
- Using GPS system - Rajastan
- Using AwaasSoft – Uploading Beneficiary Photos
– Chattisgarh using Android system
- Complaint redressal system
- Tamilnadu – Social Audit
INITIATION BY GP – BOMMANACIKANPALAYAM (Tamilnadu)
 In this village, about 420 HHs are living and in this 211 HHs were
belong to the BPL Category
 Private ½ (half) acre of Land was purchased by spending Rs. 53.85
Lakh – Same was distributed to 139 poor landless HHs with 3 Cents
each
 Beneficiary contribution (from Rs. 4,000/- to Rs.10,000/- according to
their level of poverty) Total Amount Rs. 5.5 Lakh
from the
beneficiaries.
 Support received under Homestead Policy – 16.70 Lakhs
 Support received from Department of Backward Classes - 30.65 lakhs.
 Donations from Textile Mill Owners - Rs. 1.0 Lakh
 Initially, the GP selected 15 beneficiaries sanctioned under IAY.
 bank linkage of Rs.10,000/- per each household under DRI by linking
with NREGS scheme for better Repayment
Areas of concern
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Land – Access & Management ( Homestead)
Access to Finance (DRI)
Infrastructure & Habitat Development
Sustainability Concerns
Technology Support and Transfer
Capacity Building of Manpower (Mason)
Delivery Mechanisms & Capacity Building
Monitoring & access to Information
Convergence Model for Housing programme
State Action
Plan
TSC
MNRE
(Solar)
NRDWP
IAY
House
Housing
Habitat
NREGS
Labour
Jan Shree &
AAB (Insurance)
BRGF
Gap filling
SSA/DPEP
School
NAP
Plantation
SGSY
Livelihoods
& C Hall
RGGVY
Electricity
PMGSY
Roads
Finance
Commission
Internal Road
Policy Suggestions- A:Selection Process
• BPL Survey based composite index
• BPL Survey strictly be once in Five years
• Gram Sabha can delete but no additions
• Selection strictly be based on seniority
• Gram Sabha’s resolution in public to
ensure transparency & genuine selection
• Income limit of Rs. 32,000 need to be
enhanced
Policy Suggestions- B:Access to Land
• Govt. & Panchayat land reserved for IAY
• Agriculture land of beneficiary be allowed
• Land allotments addressed by PRIs with
Revenue Department support
• Tribal housing colonies in Revenue lands
adjacent to Forest- Security, Satisfaction,
Occupancy & access to Livelihoods
• Temporary shelter during construction
• Display with all details at GP wall
Policy Suggestions- C:Convergence
• TSC amount should be increased and
kept with IAY agency
• IAY and TSC (NBA) by single agency
• MG-NREGS with IAY- cost reduction, household
income & enhance value to habitat development
• All works of habitat development be
included in MG-NREGS list of works
• All IAY houses should have RSBY
• BPL card should be proof for insurance
• Linked with SGSY-NRLM- Kitchen Garden
Policy Suggestions- C:Convergence
• Converging with Bharat Nirman components'
• Encouraged to Solar/Bio-gas/roof water harvesting
• Bankers should be encouraged to extend DRI
by Deposits and recovery of loans
• RBI ensure active involvement of RRBs & Coop
Banks in extending DRI loans to IAY
• Training in Artisan/ Horticulture (NHM)
• State specific Convergence model for adoption
at village level
• All IAY households extended with other RDPs
Policy Suggestions- D:Instalment System
•
•
•
•
•
Four Instalments- 20 – 25 – 35 – 20 %
Minimum support Rs. 75,000 and vary
Bank credit is must < 50,00 – MG-NREGS
SHGs and Federation involvement (AP)
Cost reduction techniques, use of local
materials, collective action in construction
should be encouraged by awards/ rewards
• Innovations of individual beneficiaries
need to be recognised and encouraged
Policy Suggestions- E:Type Design
• Minimum plinth area – 300 sq ft (3 rooms)
• Design option should be left to beneficiary
• Shelf of designs- local condition, space,
availability of materials, practices
• Type design should have scope for
livelihoods
• Concept of Green Building (RWH- Solar)
• Land scarce locations G+1 be encouraged
Policy Suggestions- F:CET
• Revival of RBCs with focus on CET
• Competent NGOs be encouraged as RBC
• State level workshops on Eco-friendly
construction
technologies for sustainable
habitat management under IAY
• Model buildings of CETs in different geoclimatic zones
• Awarding of ISO code to CET
• Structural and stability certificates
• Mix of proper & proven practices be
encouraged
Policy Suggestions- G:Disaster Resistant Housing
• State specific technologies so as to adopt
by field functionaries in selected locations
• Training of Engineers & masons on
required techniques and technologies of
different disasters
• RBCs should also be oriented on region
specific disasters and technologies
• Model houses for demonstration in
disaster prone areas so as to convince
• Additional support to disaster prone areas
Policy Suggestions- H:Institutional Networking
• Dedicated institution to achieve Shelter for all by 2017
•
•
•
•
•
Manpower support to implement & monitor
Monitoring system with support of MIS
State political will could make difference
Administrative cost to be compensated
Incentive mechanism for good performing
villages on the lines of NGP
• National Housing Board- State Housing Corporations
•
Policy Suggestions- I: MIS Applications
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Integration of state level software with AWAASSoft
Uploading of BPL & IAY-PWL to be mandatory
Video Films on Best Practices- website
IAY bank account to be linked with all others
GPS based monitoring system through Mobile
Uploading of Social audit proceedings on website
Software to generate DRI application form
Provision of contingent expenditure- AWAASSoft
Dedicated staff with technical knowhow AWAASSoft
Exclusive administrative charges upto 5% for MIS
Flexibility to district authorities deciding bank code
Conclusions
• IAY could not help to realise the Dream of having
one’s own house to lead safe, secure, comfortable
and healthy life as desired
• The limited success of IAY was determined by a few
committed officials, PRIs, Women, NGOs and
Beneficiaries
• Separate administrative structure, online system,
cluster type of housing, convergence with SHGs,
NREGS has made IAY more effective
• Immediate adoption of NRH&HP in totality could
ensure safe, secure , comfortable and sustainable
habitat (CET) for well being of rural people.
Related documents
Download