Implementation of MGNREGA in Bihar
A Research Paper presented by:
Subhendra Nath Sanyal
(India)
in partial fulfilment of the requirements for obtaining the degree of
MASTERS OF ARTS IN DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Specialization:
Poverty Studies and Policy Analysis
(POV)
Members of the examining committee:
Supervisor’s name (Dr Andrew Fischer)
Reader’s name ( Prof. Dr Ashwani Saith)
The Hague, The Netherlands
November, 2011.
Disclaimer:
This document represents part of the author’s study programme while at the
Institute of Social Studies. The views stated therein are those of the author and
not necessarily those of the Institute.
Inquiries:
Postal address:
Institute of Social Studies
P.O. Box 29776
2502 LT The Hague,
The Netherlands
Location: Kortenaerkade 12
2518 AX The Hague
The Netherlands
Telephone:
+31 70 426 0460
Fax:
+31 70 426 0799
ii
Contents
List of Tables
List of Acronyms
Abstract
iv
v
vi
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Research Question
1.3 Methodology Used
1.3.1 Semi structured interview:
1.3.2 Focus group discussion (FGD):
1.3.3 Using the secondary data:
1
1
1
2
2
4
4
Chapter 2: The Concept and Rational
2.1 EGP and NREGA
2.2 NREGA and India
6
6
8
Chapter 3: The Location
3.1 Bihar and NREGA
11
11
Chapter-4: Analysis of Field work
4.1 Socio- Economic situation
4.2. Socio-political situation
4.3. Design of the program
17
17
22
28
Chapter 5: Findings and Conclusion
References
34
37
iii
List of Tables
Table 1: Performance of NREGA in the country on a yearly basis.
Table 2: State wise performance of NREGA in 16 major states of India.
Table 3: Status of women’s participation of women in 16 major states of
India in 2010-11.
Table 4: Performance of NREGA in Bihar and India on a yearly basis
Table 5: Performance of NREGA in Bihar as compared other similar
poor states.
Table 5: Status of women’s participation in NREGA in Bihar compared to
other similar states in the financial year 2010-11.
Table 6: Status of participation of job card holders in the schemes.
iv
8
9
10
14
15
15
15
List of Acronyms
DLR- Department of Labour Resources
EGP- Employment Guarantee Program.
ELR - Employer of last Resort.
FGD - Focus group discussion.
GDP- Gross Domestic Product.
IFPRI- The International Food Policy Research Institute
IHD- Institute for Human Development.
IIPA- Indian Institute of Public Administration.
MGNREGA – Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act
MORD- Ministry of Rural Development
NREGA– National Rural Employment Guarantee Act.
NREGS- National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme.
PACS- Poorest Area Civil Society
PO- Program Officer.
PRI- Panchayti Raj Institution
SC- Scheduled Caste
ST- Scheduled Tribe.
UNDP- United Nations Development Program
v
Abstract
The world’s biggest Employment Guarantee Program, India’s National
Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGs) has been in operation from
the year 2005 following the Mahatma Gandhi National Employment Guarantee Act( NREGA, hereafter) being passed by the parliament of India. The
program is self-targeted in nature and is designed to provide 100 days of employment to rural households and to serve as safety net. The enactment of the
act can be seen as a significant step towards the initiative to operationalize the
right to work as per the directive principles of Indian constitution. More
broadly its aim is to reduce rural poverty by creating productive rural infrastructure to foster economic growth. The current study looks at the performance of NREGA in the state of Bihar where despite of need, the uptake of
the program is low. The study is an analysis of the performance of NREGA in
Bihar from three perspective, the overall man days of employment generated
to the beneficiaries, the participation of women and the ratio of job cards issued vis a vis actual participation of beneficiaries in the program. The study is
based on the primary data through in depth interviews and focus group discussion in six Gram Panchayats of Muzaffarpur and Gaya Districts of the state.
The study reveals on the basis of primary data that in Bihar the performance of NREGA is much influenced by the prevailing social structures
formed due to, socio-economic situations and socio-political situation that
exists since past and which influence the proximate reasons as mentioned in
the literature. It also reveals the inherent gaps in the design of the program.
The paper points out that the structures that exist in the society influence the
implementation processes of NREGs in the state and explains how it hinders
the functioning of PRIs (the prime implementation body of NREGS) which
results in low performance of the act. This paper also tries to analyse the importance of designing the program keeping into account the complex the existing social structure to meet its objective to provide economic safety net for the
rural poor and eventually reduce poverty.
Keywords
NREGA, NREGs, Performance, Participation, Uptake, India, Bihar, Muzafferpur, Gaya.
vi
Chapter 1:
Introduction
1.1 Introduction
Employment Guarantee or government as an employer of last resort (ELR)
has been used by many countries as central theme for poverty reduction and
viewed as the most important area of intervention for welfare (Kaboub 2007:23). In India since 2005 after enactment of National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA), the program became the main strategy in addressing the
poverty persisting in the rural areas. After six years of its initiation, the program is working well in the states of Tripura, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh
whereas in some states as that of Assam, Haryana and Punjab the program is
not working well. Ironically it appears that in states where the need of such
kind of program is more, the program is not working well. The most extreme
case is of Bihar in which the program is not performing as expected in spite of
the fact that it aptly responds to the need of the people. Bihar has the largest
percentage of rural population in the country, with rising number of the population joining the work force and pressure on land increasing rapidly. On the
other side, agriculture, which is the back bone of rural economy has no longer
remained enough remunerative and is facing the challenge of low productivity
(Shah, 2009). This is affecting everyone in the area .The plot size is getting
smaller and smaller. Resources are getting scarce. Data reflects that the percentage of farmers having small land holding has risen to 80% in the state
(Chandrasekhar and Ghosh 2004: 53). This implies that wage requirement particularly in rural area is required not only for landless but also for the small
landholders to supplement their income.
1.2 Research Question
This paper examines, ‘Why’ NREGA appears to be not performing well in
Bihar? Why people are not joining in the program where Government is committed to provide employment on one hand and huge portion of population
require employment on the other? In order to examine, why the state has only
generated 34 days of employment to the beneficiary in the financial year 201011 which is far below than the other states like Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh
(where majority of population lives in rural areas).Why participation of women
in the program is as low as (28%) in the state and why only 17% of job card
holders participated in the schemes undertaken in the program in last financial
year1.
In order to analyse the performance of the program in Bihar this paper
focuses on the social structural causes influencing in implementation of the
program. These factors are important because in the state despite of need of
the people the uptake is low. Whereas other states with similar socio-economic
1
All the figures are taken from http://nrega.nic.in accessed on 1st of October 2011
1
and cultural situation as that of Bihar, the program is performing much better.
More over in the recent time the state is among the better governed state
among India as compared to other states even then performance of the program is not picking up and people are less keen in participating in the schemes
under NREGA. This paper majorly focuses on the socio economic situation,
socio political situation and design of the program which effects in participation of people in the program. This paper also compares the performance of
NREGA in Bihar with other states and tries to analyse that how these situations exists in the states.
1.3 Methodology Used
To carry out the study the researcher used mainly three research tools for
data collection to analyse the reason for low uptake of the scheme in the state.
The primary data was collected from the following location.
Sl No.
District
Panchayat1
Panchayat2 Panchayat3
1
Muzaffarpur Pilkhi-Gajpati Mirpur
Chaksen
2
Gaya
Jikatia,
Bela
Kachori
The research tools used were:
1.3.1 Semi structured interview:
Semi structured interviews was used as main tool for the research. In total
of 36 interviews were conducted in six different Panchayats2 of the two districts in the state. 21 interviews were conducted with directs beneficiaries and
non-beneficiaries of the program who participates in the schemes. The respondents were selected during the village level meetings conducted before the
interview process where the objective of the research was briefed to the community. Among the beneficiaries those respondents were considered who had
worked in the program till last year. Non- beneficiaries are those who had
worked in the scheme before the last year and backed out thereafter. Apart
from beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries interviewed, four more respondents
were interviewed who had large land holdings and were big farmers in the area
and they engage labourers for their own agriculture. Though they do not participate in NREGs but has significant influence in the area. Five Elected Panchayat Representatives known as Mukhia were also interviewed. Two Program
Officers (PO)3, three eminent academicians and one senior civil servant were
also interviewed. The selections of the respondents were done to make the
data collection more representative.
Panchayat comprises of 3-5 villages and Panchayati Raj is a system of governance in
which gram panchayats are the basic units of administration
3 Program officers are government official responsible for supervision of NREGA in
district.
2
2
Respondent selection chart:
Districts
Muzaffarpur
Categories of
Respondents
PilkhiGajpati
Mirpur
Beneficiary
participating
in NREGs
Beneficiary
not participating in
NREGs
Panchayat
leaders(Mukhia)
Big land
holders
PO
Academicians
Senior civil
servant
2
2
2
Gaya
Chaksen
Total
Jikatia
Bela
Kachori
2
2
2
2
12
1
1
1
2
2
9
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
4
2
3
1
Different sets of questions were prepared for the interview for the different types of respondents. For participants of the NREGs the question asked
were, how many days of employment did they get in the program, processes
involved in getting the job card, processes for demanding jobs, how they received payments, how the jobs were being allocated, role of Panchayat for job
allocation, how caste dynamics influence in job allocations, power relation with
in the village, landowner-labour relation , effect of land distribution pattern in
the program, participation of people belonging to socially advanced section
(upper caste) in the scheme, role of the upper castes in finalization of sites in
the schemes, why people migrate and do not participate in the program, who
participate in the program, women’s participation in the scheme, as per their
perception what work should be taken up under the schemes and so on. For
Panchayt Leaders(Mukhias), POs and to other respondents the questions
asked were how Gram Sabhas (Village council meeting) are conducted, how
are jobs demanded by the beneficiaries and how are they registered, what is the
process of finalization of the schemes, challenges in implementing the
schemes, the limiting factors for taking up new schemes and closing of old
schemes, processes of releasing payments to the beneficiaries, how people influence in the schemes, what are the possible reason for low performance of
3
the program, what measures are needed to be taken that can increase the participation in the program and what is the impact of the recent political change
that is happening at the top level.
1.3.2 Focus group discussion (FGD):
Selected members from the village level meeting participated in Focus
Group Discussion (FGD). In all four FGDs were conducted in different villages of the selected districts. . Among the four focus groups two were of male
beneficiaries, one of women beneficiaries and one of women non beneficiaries.
Duration of the Focus group discussions was on an average for one hour.
The major questions for discussion were how far the schemes are useful for
the villagers, what are the possible reasons for the low performance are and
what are the possible solutions which can help to carry out more schemes and
include more beneficiaries. In the FGD with male beneficiaries the discussion
were around the hindering factors for the scheme, why people are not participating and why people are migrating to other places for wage earning.
In the group the purpose of the research was explained in the beginning
and it was promised that no name of the participant will be revealed. The
whole process was recorded and some photographs were also taken. The researcher’s role was only to facilitate the process and build a suitable environment to participate in the FGD.
As per the plan the researcher wanted to understand the usefulness of asset created in the scheme by work site visits of some schemes. Researcher
started the process to study the individual schemes and tried to find out its
usefulness to the community, who has participated in the particular scheme
and how the scheme has been selected. In the process it was observed that the
people are reluctant in answering and hesitant to participate. Hence the process
had to be stopped in between.
1.3.3 Using the secondary data:
In the research process secondary data sources has been extensively used.
The data accessed through internet, data available in official web site and the
related literature available on NREGA were used to compare the performance
of the schemes.
Apart from the literature available on the net researcher visited A.N. Sinha
Institute, Indian Institute of Technology, Asian Development Research Institute, Institute of Participatory Practices, Ministry of Rural Development and
UNDP in Patna, the capital of the state to collect various reports and used
them as secondary data.
In order to meet the objective of the paper the primary data has been collected from two districts of the state, Muzaffarpur and Gaya. These districts
were selected as they are situated in different geographical region of the state
4
and the program had started in both the districts in 1st phase. This was done
primarily to capture data from the different socio economic conditions attributed due to difference in geographical locations to make the paper more
representatives in terms of the whole state. The other reason for selecting these
two districts is to compare and contrast the situation prevailing in the two
broad divisions of the state north and south. Muzaffarpur has been selected as
it is situated in the northern Gangetic plain which encounters flood and water
logging and has high density of population whereas Gaya is situated in the
south of Bihar and is drought prone. Both the districts have very contrasting
features geographically. Muzaffarpur is situated in very fertile alluvial Gangetic
plain, were as Gaya the rain fed farming is predominantly practiced.
To make the study more comprehensive the paper follows the debates on
the theories which are crucial in formulating the act in the country, its rationales and the specific socio-economic and political condition of the research
location. The performance of the program in the research location (Bihar) has
been compared with other parts of the country and analysed how existing social and political structure contributes in implementation of the program.
5
Chapter 2:
The Concept and Rational
2.1 EGP and NREGA
Employment Guarantee Program at the moment is operating in many parts of
the world. In EGP, government provides the job opportunity with assurance
of minimum wage but participant themselves decided whether to participate in
the program or not. That is why EGP is self-targeting program but this option
of self-targeting is universal. In the program the wage rate and nature of work
are such designed that non poor will find disincentive in this kind of arrangement and hence would exclude themselves from participating in the program
(Sjoblom and Farrington 2008: 3)
Like all other poverty alleviation programs, EGP has also focused towards
reduction of poverty (Hirway 2006: 3). In India specifically the Employment
Guarantee Act has been enacted in 2005, to enhance the livelihood security of
the households in rural areas by providing at least one hundred days of guaranteed wage employment in every financial year. Members from every household
whose adult members can volunteer to participate in unskilled manual work in
the schemes under the act in their own locality which will further provide
strong social safety net to rural poor by providing employment.
In the present context of India when Indian economy is growing rapidly it has
become even more important. It is almost a decade now, in India economy is
growing fast but poverty is also increasing in absolute number4. The gap between urban and rural is increasing very fast, as much of the growth are urban
centric whereas rural areas are facing negative growth rate. Agriculture, which
is the back bone of rural area is no longer enough remunerative and is facing
the challenge of low productivity (Shah 2009).The act was enacted to speed up
the growth of rural economy as the schemes under taken in the act has been
designed to generate employment through creation of productive assets which
is required for poor to reduce vulnerability because vulnerability is often directly related to poverty which is closely related to ability of poor to cope up with
shocks (Hulme and Shepherd 2003: 409). In this regard, EGS aims to strengthen the asset base by creating community assets like all-weather road, drainage
and sanitation for improving the quality of life and also helps in to providing
the opportunity which will be helpful for creating environment for economic
growth in rural area.
The program also aims at regenerating the ecology by promoting plantation in
common and waste lands and taking up land and soil conservation programs
under watershed development program, constructing water harvesting structures etc. As livelihoods of the people in rural area are very closely associated
with natural resources, these measures will have a highly positive impact on
employment and productivity in the area. On the other side it will also help in
Highest number of poor in the world is living in India. Data from
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator
4
6
generating the basic necessities of life like water supply, fuel wood and fodder
for animals etc.
The act provides the opportunity to demand for works, which will empower
the rural poor through rights-based Law. It is also expected that the act will
provide the opportunity to unskilled wage worker to earn the minimum legal
wage which will reduce distress migration. Guaranteed works will not only help
them to reduce distress migration but also provide them the opportunity to
have the stable life along with improving their access to human development
opportunity. (Hirway, 2006: 6).
In Indian context, “National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA)’’ is
a significant step towards the initiative to operationalize the right to work as
per the directive principles of Indian constitution. It provides the opportunity
to all those who are willing to participate and get minimum wage fixed by the
state in the schemes undertaken known as ‘National Rural Employment Guarantee Schemes (NREGs)’. In the act the finance mobilization is the responsibility of the central Government but creating the opportunity of work lie with
state government. In the scenario, right to work is not complete on its own as
it involves the states to create the provision of work within its limited economic capacity (Papola, 2005: 594). The motive behind this act is to provide employment to those who are willing and demand for it. Unlike the other pervious schemes, NREGs is demand driven not supply driven. By enacting the act,
government for the first time stepped into providing decent work to all its citizens particularly in the rural area for the unskilled workers.
NREGA has been enacted in July 2005 but it came into force with effect from
February, 2006 in 200 districts initially and later on from financial year 2008-09
extended to all the rural districts of India. It is being implemented through
Panchyat, the local government at the grass root level. The planning and implementation is done by Panchayat, while the block and district level has the
role of consolidation, approval, monitoring and supervision. There are few
activities that are allocated at district and intermediate level too.
NREGA like other Employment Guarantee programs includes:
i. Centrally funded jobs to anyone who is ready and willing to work.
ii. These jobs claim to provide a minimum wage decided by local Government
with decent working conditions and living.
Salient feature of the act are:
1) Adult members of a rural household, willing to do unskilled manual work,
may apply for registration in writing or orally to the local Gram Panchayat.
2. Employment will be given within 15 days of application for work, if it is not
then daily unemployment allowance as per the Act, has to be paid. Liability of
payment of unemployment allowance is of the States.
7
3. Work should be provided within 5 km radius of the village. In case work is
provided beyond 5 km, extra wages of 10% are payable to meet additional
transportation and living expenses.
4. Wages are to be paid according to piece rate or daily rate. Disbursement of
wages has to be done on weekly basis and not beyond a fortnight in any case.
5. At least one-third beneficiaries shall be women who have registered and
requested work under the scheme.
6. Work site facilities such as crèche, drinking water, shade have to be provided.
7. Permissible works predominantly include water and soil conservation, afforestation and land development works.
2.2 NREGA and India
Six years since the act has been enacted by the parliament of India, NREGA
has been able to provide employment to the beneficiaries at around 50 days in
each year to each beneficiary with little ups and down in each year as against
government’s commitment of 100 days. The average itself indicates the gap
between uptake and need of the program across the country. Though performance and participation data does not reveal any straight co-relationship between uptake and need between states.
Table 1: Performance of NREGA in the country on a yearly basis.
Year
Employment
days provided
to each beneficiaries
2008-09
48
2009-10
54
Source: www nrega.nic.in
8
2010-11
47
Table 2: State wise performance of NREGA in 16 major states of India.
States
Tripura
Tamil Nadu
Andhra Pradesh
Rajasthan
Uttar Pradesh
Karnataka
Orissa
Madhya Pradesh
Gujarat
Maharashtra
Jharkhand
Kerala
Haryana
Bihar
West Bengal
Assam
2008-09 (days)
64
36
50
76
35
32
36
57
25
46
48
22
42
26
26
40
2009-10 (days)
80
55
66
69
65
57
40
56
37
51
49
36
38
28
45
34
2010-11 (days)
67
54
54
52
52
49
49
45
45
44
42
41
36
34
31
26
Source: www nrega.nic.in
Varying performance can be observed in different states. The data reflects that
Bihar is among the few states which are ranked at the bottom of the table in
terms performance of the scheme. Comparing with other poorer states like
Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan etc. all are performing at par with
the national average. Whereas among the affluent states like Gujarat, Maharashtra and Karnataka after the initial hiccups the program has picked up and
performing close to the national average.
So far as the debate on performance of the program is concerned many study
were conducted which explains different reasons which has affected performance. The studies conducted by IFPRI (2010: 10-20), Oxfam (2010: 10-17),
Sharma (2007: 13), Mohan (2008: 1-5) and Bela Bhatia and Jean Dreze (2006:
3198-3111) suggests that lack of awareness of people of the program, lack of
job cards to the beneficiaries, lack of proper planning at the implementation
level, too much paper work in finalization and completion of the scheme, lack
of skilled personnel at implementation level, lack of technical capability of implementing agencies, governance issues like absence of vigilance or monitoring
committee for effective implementation, administrative laps like not registering
demands of the beneficiaries, not paying the unemployment allowance, administrative capabilities and delay in payment of wage to the participants in the
program, lack of basic work site facilities, rigid frame-work of program which
allow only earthen work and follow 60:40 ratio of wage and material in the
schemes, quality of employment, lack of innovation as per the requirement of
the local needs, corruption and financial irregularities at all levels like state,
9
district and in Panchayat level, socio culture dimension and commitment of
political leadership and lack of women representation are the main reasons for
poor performance of the program.
Table 3: Status of women’s participation of women in 16 major states of
India in 2010-11.
States
Kerala
Tamil Nadu
Rajasthan
Andhra Pradesh
Karnataka
Maharashtra
Gujarat
Madhya Pradesh
Tripura
Orissa
Haryana
West Bengal
Jharkhand
Bihar
Assam
Uttar Pradesh
National average
Percentage participation of women
90
83
68
57
46
46
44
44
39
39
36
34
33
28
27
21
51
Source: www nrega.nic.in
The table depicts that participation of women in sixteen major states in 201011. The data says that participation of women in southern states are high even
though the program overall is not performing among the best in the country.
On the contrary in the states like Tripura, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar
Pradesh the overall performance of the program is better than the participation
of women in the program in these states.
All the literature explaining about the performance of NREGA in India appears to explain the proximate reason which affects the schemes undertaken in
the act. But there are underling factors as well which are due to the social
structures and various relationships that exist in the society from ages which
has also significant influence on the above mentioned reasons which affects
the performance of NREGA.
10
Chapter 3:
The Location
3.1 Bihar and NREGA
Bihar is among the big states in India. Population wise it is third populated
state in India. In the state more than 85% of population stays in rural area and
the state is the least urbanized state of the country (Sharma 2005: 960). The
state is primarily a rural economy and 75% of main workers depend on agriculture for their livelihoods (Banerjee 2009: 1) which contributes 24% of total
GDP. Despite of huge proportion of population engaged in agriculture,
productivity wise it is almost half of that of national average and one fifth that
of Punjab (Sharma 2005: 960). The state has high migration and 30.64 per cent
of the rural households reporting migration were at 44.1 per cent of the total
households being indebted (Sharma 2007: 38). The state has 41.4 per cent BPL
population5 . Almost 43 per cent of the total households are landless and another 39 per cent has less than 2.5 acre of land. Land distribution is highly
skewed with almost 66 per cent of house hold owning only 20% of the total
cultivable land (Sharma, 2005: 961). This percentage is gradually increasing as
land is getting divided among the households. A survey conducted in 2005
reveals that while landless or those owning less than an acre of land increased
from 67 per cent to 73 per cent, were as those owning more than 5 acres has
also declined from 13 to 5.5 per cent (Sharma 2005: 960). On the whole it can
be concluded that in Bihar quite a huge population depend on wage labour for
sustenance and the percentage is increasing rapidly.
In the state 23.5 per cent of land belongs to big landlords who comprise less
than 9 per cent of the total land owned population (Banerjee 2009: 4). Majority
of these landlords do not practice agriculture on their own and are absentee
land owners. Their lands are either tilled by share croppers or leased or rented
to small and marginal farmers for agriculture purpose. Reports say that nearly
25 per cent of cultivable area in Bihar is under tenancy which belongs to mostly big and medium level of landholders (Sharma 2007: 43). Since land is fixed
and population is growing, all the categories of peasants, big, small and marginal, are losing land (Chakrabarty 2001: 1452). The number of households
leasing in land has declined but the area of land leased has remained more or
less the same. This is because tiny landlords particularly those belonging to
advance section of the society, migrate after leasing out their land. Due to the
initial prevalence of caste-class nexus, these sections in the society even today
dominate among the big peasants and landlords and others among the poor
and middle peasants.
Bihar land distribution show very high degree of disparity compared to other
part of country. According to the data released by Ministry of Agriculture in
2003-04, in Bihar 80.14% of land holders have less than 2.5 acre of land which
5
http://planningcommission.gov.in accessed on 20th March 2011.
11
is far higher than the national figure which is 61.58% and which is not enough
to generate livelihoods for the majority of the land holders. Furthermore the
average size of the land holding is also less as compared to national average
which is 0.72 and 1 acre respectively (Banerjee 2009: 2-3). Adding to complexity 43% of the total households are either landless or only owns their house
stead land out of which 76.6% do not have land at all (Sharma 2005: 967). On
the other side productivity in agriculture is also low despite of the fact that half
the state lies in the fertile Gangetic plain. These data has straight co-relation
with the income earned by the people which reflects in the per capita earning
in Bihar which is less than half of the national average. The study suggests that
the income distribution is also fairly unequal. The bottom 40 per cent of the
households in rural Bihar the per capita income scale get about 16 per cent of
total income, while about 25 per cent of the income accrues to the top 10 per
cent of the households( Thakur et al 2001: 4661).
As mentioned earlier, large amount of land belongs to big land lords and 25
per cent of land falls under the tenancy in the state. The data says that 36 present of rural households lease land for the agriculture purpose (Sharma 2005:
965). Hence tenancy becomes the dominant form of labour relationship in the
state. The nature of agreement of tenancy in the state between tenants and
land owners informal and short term. As argued by Omotunde E.G. Johnson
(1972: 260) in his paper on landlord- tenant system that though system is prevailing in many parts of the world and has contributed in increase in wealth by
increasing the productivity. In Bihar also this existing form of labour relationship has contributed in changes in terms of productivity but changes are slow
and over all agriculture has failed to keep up with the pace with growth of
population (Sharma 2005: 965). In the state the nature of agreement of tenancy
actually violates the provision of ‘Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885’ (Banerjee 2009:
16). No landowner wants to have such agreement written out on paper in form
of formal contract. As a consequence, the tenants are unable to safeguard their
legal rights. Further landowners make sure that tenants do not get to cultivate
any plot of land continuously over a long time, to prevent the possibilities of
legal transfer of land ownership in the name of tenants. Absence of legal and
long term contract prevents to facilitate long term investments on land. In Bihar due to the existing systems despite majority of population depend on agriculture, investment on the activity in terms of mechanization and on the land
in terms of reclamation has been minimal so far and gap productivity has widened and as a result everyone engaged in agriculture has suffered.
Decline of land availability and existing tenure system has made poor in the
rural area more difficult to survive. Moreover low productivity has forced a
significant proportion of poor, not only landless labourers but also the small
and marginal farmers, to migrate and to look for the alternative livelihood
source to elsewhere (Sharma 2005: 966). This in fact is not a new phenomenon
in the state. So far as the nature of the migration is concerned, in Bihar both
seasonal as well as circular migration trends are prevalent. Migration is age old
practice in Bihar and the labour market in the neighbouring industrial city like
Kolkata, depends on migrant labour from Bihar and where nature of migration
is circular ( Haan 2002: 115). Due to regularity of employment it is still considered as attractive proposition among the migrant workers. Though there are
studies which claim that in recent year due to several government programs
12
which includes NREGA also, has helped in reducing migration (MORD 2006:
X ) where as other report say that number of migrants have actually increased
in absolute terms but rate has reduced in recent years ( DLR 2009-10: 84 ).
Bihar is among the states which has highest migration. Lack of opportunity is
the fundamental reason for the migration in Bihar. Migration in Bihar cannot
be understood by the prevailing factors like periodic floods and drought, law
and order or caste operation. Migration in Bihar is considered as structural. In
spite of having higher economic growth rate in recent years due to continued
increase in population and the backlog of unemployed among people in the
state migration has increased however the rate of migration has slowed down
(DLR 2009-10: 85-89). Lack of diversified livelihood options coupled with lack
of industrialization, poor infrastructure, lack of capital and raw material all has
contributed significantly in migration. Various policies also promoted migration like Freight Equalisation Policy, 1948 for coal and iron ores which has
denied the state any advantage of proximity to the mineral resources, bifurcation of state in 2000 which further contributed in slipping down industries in
the state and the credit policy which denied entrepreneur to grow in the state
(DLR 2009-10: 5-6). All these factors make the state a place of low opportunity
and supplier of labour for other states.
Further more like many other states in India, politically Bihar is always dominated by the strong caste dynamics in the society. This phenomenon plays a
crucial role in all the activities that are carried out in the state. This always has
been the reason for the struggle of the people belonging to different sections
in the society (Chakrabarty 2001: 1453). In the history of Bihar several incidence of caste struggle can be noted. The caste system which is much enrooted
in the society is often the fundamental reason for the social inequalities in the
society. Time to time Bihar politics has seen the dominance of different castes
at the centre of power. This caste factor till recently played the crucial role in
deciding the people to be in the government. In the last assembly election held
in the November 2010, first time people all across the state kept all the prevailing caste dynamics aside and voted for development6. The result show that
people accepted and appreciated the effort made by the present government
for good governance and re-elected them.
It is not that the state politics is always dominated by socially advanced section
of the society known as upper castes. It is mainly because in the history of Bihar there are several incidents where one particular caste fought against the
other. Unlike the other states such as Uttar Pradesh or Madhya Pradesh, which
has the similar social structure like Bihar, in Bihar the peasants were not passive and not tolerant of the acts of Zamindars that existed in the formal structure introduced in colonial era (Das 1992: 36). The incidence of formation of
‘Kisan sabha’ in 1929, which actually formed to oppose these existing Zamindars in the state and their dominance in terms of controlling the resources
In Bihar till recently the most important factor for choosing the candidate was the
caste. Candidates who contest election generally enjoys the support of the people
belong to same caste of their constituency which has changed in recent election and
people voted those candidates who performed well in terms of representation. This
shift of thinking on the part of people is considered as mark of the beginning of another political transformation in the state.
6
13
(Singh 1992: 21). Another significant movement was carried out by ‘Trivany
Sangha’ formed in late 30’s which was formed by the sections of peasants who
were relatively small in terms of resources and landholdings. More recently the
Naxal movement started in 70’s and still going on, spearheaded by the oppressed and marginalized sections of the society. All these movements have
challenged the existing socio-political structures and resulted in bringing certain
section of people at the central power from time to time.
This periodic changeover of power by particular sections with in the society
has made the Bihar politically very vibrant state. Till recently the state has observed the political rivalry due to the caste factor. Moreover, who so ever has
come to the centre of power has taken the political decisions which inclined
and favours with biasness for particular sections. All these have resulted in
higher accessibility of resources for particular section and the other as subordinate to them. All these have brought a significant change in attitude of the
people which persists with all those who are in power in the society. One of
the examples to understand the attitude is to observe the policeman’s attitude
that how mercilessly he behaves and removes the rickshaw-puller from the lane
to allow the car to pass through and salutes at passing cars. This attitude to
dominate over the powerless and poor and saluting to the powerful and resourceful has become the characteristic of the behaviour of the people within
the society and reflects all across the state. All these character make Bihar very
different from the other states of the country and prevalence of strong structures pose challenge in implementation of different poverty alleviation program which has very little success in the past.
So far as NREGs is concerned, in the state the program was started since 2006.
During the pilot phase, out of 200 districts all across the country, 20 districts
were selected from the state. Later in 2008 all the districts in the state were
included in the program. In both the districts selected for the purpose of research, the program was started in the first phase. As per the data issued in the
official web site the performance of the scheme in the state:
Table 4: Performance of NREGA in Bihar and India on a yearly basis
Financial year
Average Labour-days
generated in the country
Average Labour-days
generated in the State
2006-07
43
2007-08
42
2008-09
47
2009-10
54
2010-11
47
35
22
26
28
34
Source: www nrega.nic.in
The table reflects the performance of the scheme in the state compared to the
country in terms of Labour-days which shows that the state is performing constantly below the national average and state lies among last few states in the
country.
14
Table 5: Performance of NREGA in Bihar as compared other similar poor states.
States
Rajasthan
Madhya Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh
Bihar
Average Labour days generated
2008-09
2009-10
76
69
57
56
35
65
26
28
2010-11
52
45
52
34
Source: www nrega.nic.in
The table depicts the performance of NREGA in comparison to the similar
characteristic of states with Bihar like less urbanized, highly populated and
major portion of population depending on agriculture for livelihoods. The data
shows that the performance of the scheme is worst in Bihar in all the last three
financial years.
Table 5: Status of women’s participation in NREGA in Bihar compared to other similar
states in the financial year 2010-11.
States
Rajasthan
Madhya Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh
Bihar
Percentage of women participating in NREGA
68
44
21
28
Source: www nrega.nic.in
The table depict that percentage of women participated in the scheme undertaken in the act compared with the states having similar socio-economic and
cultural situation as Bihar. The data says that the state is lagging behind all the
states except Uttar Pradesh in the last financial year.
Table 6: Status of participation of job card holders in the schemes.
States
Rajasthan
Madhya Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh
Bihar
Percentage of job card holders in the schemes
54
35
59
17
Source: www nrega.nic.in
15
The table depicts the percentage participation of the job card holders in the
scheme in which in Bihar lies at the bottom and more than 3/4th of the job
card holders actually did not participate in the NREGs in year 2010-11 which
is high in comparison to other states.
The study conducted by Oxfam (2010: 10-17), Sharma (2007: 13), SamarthanPACS (2008: 25-31) and DLR (2010: 44) regarding the performance of the
program in the state reveals the same proximate reasons as mentioned above
but it appears that there are underlying factors responsible which are due to
socio-economic and political situation prevailing in the state since long time
which is influencing the performance of the program in the state.
Primary data for research has been collected from two districts of the state,
Muzaffarpur and Gaya as mentioned earlier situated in different geographical
location. Moreover both the districts has high percentage of landless, small
and marginal farming population as well as these districts are also home to big
land lords in Bihar who engage number of labourers in their field for agriculture.
Three Panchayats from each district for study were selected. The selections of
Panchayats were done on the basis of land holdings by different section of the
people in the area. In Muzaffarpur the Panchayat taken for the study are PilkhiGajpati, Mirpur and Chaksen. All the Panchayat has significant percentage of
scheduled-caste (SC) people. Though in all the Panchayats the percentage of
SC population is almost similar but the land holding pattern is very different.
In ‘Pilkhi-Gajpati’ more than 80 percentage of land belongs to big land lords
who belongs to particular section of the society. Rest of the land is distributed
among others. In the Panchayat the SC population hold very little land and
majorly depend on wage labour. In ‘Mirpur’ Panchayat about 56 per cent of
land belongs to big land holders and they are of different caste within the society. People belonging to SC community in the Panchayat also are engaged in
agriculture by taking land on lease from big land holders and also involved in
wage labour. In ‘Chaksen’ Panchayat the land is relatively well distributed
among the various section of the society. In the Panchayat 30-35 percentage of
land comes under the big land holdings and rest are distributed among Muslims, SCs and others.
In Gaya three Panchayats selected for research were Jikatia, Bela and Kachori.
In the district the size of Panchayats are relatively bigger in terms of land than
from Muzaffarpur. On an average three to four villages fall in each Panchayats
which is unlike in Muzaffarpur where Panchayat comprises of one or two villages. In Gaya the ‘Jikatia’ Panchayat is being taken for study as it has significant presence of big land holders and more than 50 per cent of land belongs to
them. ‘Bela’ Panchayat is where people from all sections of the society live and
numbers of big land holdings are less. In this Panchayat in sixties a significant
amount of land were distributed under ‘Bhudan scheme’ to the land less people
belonging to marginal communities. The third Panchayat selected is ‘Kachori’
where there are some big plots and rest are almost equally distributed among
all sections of society in the Panchayat. All the land distribution data are taken
from the Circle Officer’s office in the respective blocks in the districts.
16
Chapter-4:
Analysis of Field work
The field work was conducted to find out the socio-political structural reasons
contributing to the performance of NREGA in the state. The literature also
suggests that Bihar is characterized as highly divided society in terms of resource allocation and is politically very vibrant unlike other states. These characteristics are often the reasons for several structures existing in the society
from past days. Apart from implementation lapses, this societal structure which
persists in Bihar, unlike other states has significant role in implementation processes and is affecting the program in the state. Taking these characters in to
consideration the field work data has been analysed under three broad heads.
4.1 Socio- Economic situation
Labour Relation and Changing Trend in Tenure Pattern
In the present situation of Bihar, where more than three quarter of land holders are small and marginal and hold land which is not enough to fulfil basic
needs, little less than two quarter of total population are landless and mainly
survive on agriculture labour and a huge proportion of land belonging to them
who do not practice agriculture makes the state an ideal platform for NREGA.
Big proportions of land which belong to big landholders do not practice agriculture on their own and their land is rented out to small, marginal and landless
farmers. The prevalent form of labour relation which exists in the state is that
of tenancy (Sharma 2005: 965) in which small, marginal and landless farmers
take land from big landholders on lease and practice agriculture. In the earlier
days in this form of labour relation, landowners supplied all the inputs and the
tenants supplied the labour. In return they got the share from the agriculture
output. But in recent years the trend has changed .Now a days renting is the
most popular form of tenancy. This change is mainly due to the fact that majority of the big landholders have migrated to other places and diversified their
livelihoods. Priority has shifted from agriculture to elsewhere. One of the respondents a big landholder in the area said that, ‘Now Zamindars has become
Servicedars (government employee)’. Gradually they are trying to pull themselves out of the whole agricultural activities as agriculture no longer is enough
remunerative.
The other factor which is responsible for change in the land tenure pattern is
the rise in wages of the labour in rural labour market. Twenty four respondents
who are beneficiaries of NREGA and also big land holders said that in recent
years the labour wage rate in the area has gone up significantly. They all agree
that growth of infrastructure industry and due to government schemes like
NREGA, labour wage rate has risen by many folds. Studies say that the increase has occurred not just in terms of cash amounts but also in reduced expected outcomes from labourers (Jha et al 2009:459). The study also finds that
NREGA has provided the small and landless labourer opportunity for employment which has increased their bargaining power. All the respondents in17
terviewed agreed that general labour wage rate has risen by two and half folds
in last three years and goes up to four times during peak agriculture season.
One of the respondents, a big land holder in the area very angrily reacted to
the matter that ‘now it is becoming difficult to do agriculture by employing
labour, it is better to rent the land and sit at home’. The impact of rise in labour wages has affected big landholders very adversely which has resulted in
the change in tenure pattern.
In the field work it was found that the nature of tenancy is informal and tenants get changed every year as narrated by the person who takes land on rent
from land holders. In case of NREGA this informal tenancy has been the
major hindering factor for the schemes to be undertaken on private lands
which act permits. As per the act there is provisions to take up work for employment generation and create asset base in the private lands which belongs
to Scheduled caste/Scheduled tribe (notified strata of the society) or small
farmers(Amendment made in the act on 24th July 2009). But in the field visit
not a single incident was found in six Panchayats surveyed in two districts. For
demanding work in the private land, it has to be approved by Gram Sabha and
either ownership or long term lease agreement has to be proved in the Panchayat. As the nature of the contracts with the tenants is informal, the tenants are
denied to take up the stated provision in the act. Thus the nature of tenancy
prevailing in Bihar is reducing opportunity for employment generation and
hindering in increasing the asset base in rural area which is one of the objectives of the act. In all this restricts the opportunity of work and contributes in
low performance in terms of man days generated per beneficiaries in the state.
Influence of land distribution on selection of NREGs
Regarding the type of work undertaken in NREGA, all the five Mukhias who
were interviewed unanimously agreed that majorities of the work under taken
in the act are restricted to construction of approach roads, connecting bridges
and road side plantations which reports also suggests. They including POs interviewed also agreed that particularly in North Bihar finding suitable site for
scheme to generate opportunity for employment is a challenging task. In the
northern part of the state due to high density of population which is even
higher than the average state density which 881 person per square kilometre as
per 2001 census, common lands are less available. Adding to it there are lands
lying in possession of the people who actually do not own the same. Many
common lands are been encroached by the prosperous and powerful sections
of society (Banerjee 2009: 16). In the field work it has been found that many
plots are controlled by particular section of the society in the name of religion
and social purposes. In six Panchayats of research area three instances of encroachment on religious ground were found. Moreover incidences were also
found where the common lands were used and controlled as private property
by particular section of the community. These incidences are more frequent in
those Panchayats where proportion of land belonging to particular section of
the society is high. Probing into the matter the respondents said that these
encroachments had happened years ago. In all such incidences people having
large land holdings, very powerful and influential in the society were found
18
involved. In general these lands are ideal to take up scheme under the act for
employment generation but are not considered for annual work plan for the
Panchayat for NREGs. As said by the respondents that people know about
these encroachments of common land. When the question was raised to the
Mukhias one of the Mukhia at first, pretended that he does not know about
such case but when specific case was given, he responded that doing anything
about these lands might disturb the peace of the region. All these means that
the society is highly divided in terms of power and all want to maintain their
status quo which is prevailing from long.
Land Holding Pattern and its Legal Follies
Talking to one respondent who is a prominent researcher in the state and conducted a study for ‘Institute for Participatory Practices’ a research organization
working in land issues, reveals that this illegal possessions of land by socially
advanced caste has actually widened the gap of land holdings between socially
advanced caste and others. More so there are incidences in many parts of the
state where beneficiaries have failed to provide proof of ownership of the land
gifted to them by ‘Bhoodan Yojna Committee’ donated by Landlords (Zamindars) in mid-fifties in recent years because land donated by Zamindars are actually not owned by them. This recent incidence supports the fact that the illegal encroachments are widespread in the state and is continuing since years.
During the field visit particularly in South Bihar it has been observed that these
incidences has raised fear among the small landholders holding Bhoodan land
about the legal status of their so called own land. In Gaya district in the field
work all the respondents having ‘Bhoodan land’ expressed that in spite being
under the notified section (scheduled caste) with in the act, they prefer to work
in the scheme but are not willing to take up the activity in their own land for
asset creation. All respondents agreed that they know about the provision in
the act that the scheme can be used for creating private assets but are not very
sure about the legalities of their own lands. They generally avoid taking up the
provisions under NREGA in their own land. This whole issue of land ownership reduces the option for the scheme to take up in the private land and the
schemes are restricted to only common land available in the area which is one
of the main reasons for low performance of NREGA in the state in terms of
employment generation.
As mentioned earlier that in the state the features like land distribution pattern,
huge gaps among the various classes and prevalence of large portion of landless population in the rural area are characteristics of ‘semi feudalism’ that exists in the society (Sharma 2005:963). Further the state is characterized by the
relationship between a deeply fragmented social structure and weak political
capabilities of government institutions (Rouyer 1994: 63). In spite of having
some richest farming areas and till recently (till 2000) the Chotanagpur plateau
(now Jharkhand) which accounts huge mineral resources of the country was
part of the state, the state is ranked at the bottom in all social indicators. The
agrarian reforms failed miserably and government’s efforts to implement programs of poverty alleviation had very little success. Till recent years political
killings to prove supremacy over others were wide spread.
19
“Semi Feudal” Attitude
In recent years in the changing political scenario all these features have reduced
significantly but the semi feudal nature in the society still exists. This nature is
very much related to highly unequal distribution of asset in the society and it
also has correlation between the big land holders and particular section of the
society. This phenomenon persists in Bihar since ages as in earlier days these
feudal lords (Zamindars) during the time of British Raj (before independence
in 1947) were given rights to collect rent from settlers (small land holders
called a Raiyat) (Sharma 2005:961). The system was the part of the land revenue collection system administered by the British. This continued till Bihar had
passed the law of ‘Abolition of Zamindari Act, 1947’ which came into effect in
1948. Further Bihar legislation passed the act of “Bihar Agriculture land Act,
1955” and “Bihar Land Reform Act, 1961” in which the provisions were made
for ceiling of land ownership, land allocation and surplus land distribution (Jha
1997). These laws were further modified from time to time to make land reforms more effective. Even after several efforts by the government, small and
marginal farmers and agricultural labourers did not get much relief and land
distribution structure has not changed much because of stiff resistance from
land lords who are politically very powerful also (Das 1992: 33-37). There are
two major reasons for this. Firstly the pace of implementation of the laws are
slow which gave ample opportunity to the big land owners to save their property and secondly many big land holders divided their land into smaller parts
and complied the ceiling and registered in the name of their family members
and loyal servants(Banerjee 2009: 2-4). On the whole the feudal attitude of the
Zamindars in past days, turned as big landholders in recent days remain the
same. These particular sections of society are still very influential, powerful and
strong in terms of resources at the village levels. They often hinder in the
work of NREGA. There are evidences in the field that these people either use
their influence not to carry out work in particular site which might generate
several days of employment to many beneficiaries or put some restriction on
the site. In BelaPanchayat in Gaya, a road construction work has not started
because the land holder beside the site has not agreed to dump the soil in his
land and finally Panchayat had to stop the scheme. The story does not end
here. There are instances found in the field visit in which several complaints
were lodged to the higher authorities to stop the work in many sites. During
the field visit one case occurred just after two days of start of work in Muzaffarpur district where the site was dug by machine by a very influential and
powerful person in the region and who also own majority of the land in the
Panchayat. Further the complaint has been lodged to higher officials against
the functionaries of the Panchayat to stop the work. As in the act the use of
machines to dig the soil is not permitted the administrative officials finally ordered to stop the work and ordered for an inquiry. In this regard Mukhia of
that respective Panchayat has been called to District office for several times.
PO of the area in her interview said very clearly that these type of incidences
are common and they became helpless when complains are lodged. She also
expressed that these incidence mainly occurs due to the power relations that
exists in the social structure. According to one of the Mukhia interviewed say
20
that ‘big people does not want to see the progress of the people of the area as
they fear that they might loose respect if other progresses’. The Panchayat officials are often targeted to tighten control over Panchayat by so called big people (landlords) to remain at the centre of power. One of the Mukhia of the
Panchayat in Gaya district clearly expressed that this has increased in recent
time as Government is giving more power and space to Panchayat to implement the schemes. These recent form of power struggle not only create disturbance in the area but also reduces the scope in identifying the site to carry
on the program which contributes in the low performance of the program in
the state compared to other states.
Rise in Labour Wage Rate and its implication
There are other reasons also because of which NREGs is been targeted by
particular section of the society. After enactment of the act in 2005, minimum
wage rate has been fixed by the state and this resulted in rise of agriculture
wage rate in the rural area significantly. This has affected adversely to all the
farmers who engages labour for agriculture, particularly big land holders who
are dependent on labour and are finding difficult to carry on their traditional
agriculture activity. One of the big farmers in the area expressed in his interview that ‘now stomach of labour has become big and they demand more
money for work’. Secondly it is becoming difficult to find people for domestic
work who are also considered as their loyalists and which also contributes to
their status and power in the society. The opportunity which has been provided by the act has increased the bargaining power and labourers started denying
the orders of land owners locally termed as ‘Malik’. Fear of losing respect, influence and power in the society by this section of society often facilitate to act
unlawfully. During the field work one of the big land holders of the area openly expressed that ‘if the situation continues in the same manner for next few
years Bihar will see serious consequence’.
Analysing the incidence where big land holders hinder in the NREGs, a pattern can be observed. These incidences are more common in the place were
land holding is spread out among the different sections of the society. One of
the Mukhia of Gaya district among the Panchayats where land is distributed
among all the sections of the societies, said that big people of early days are
gradually loosing clout in the region because others are now becoming more
aware of their rights and they do not listen to landlords anymore and they do
not want the scheme to operate in the area. In contrast the places where the
concentration of land is more with the land lords (a particular section of the
society) the Mukhias said that these powerful people does not influence in the
NREGs because they know that schemes are going to help them as well. This
pattern shows that impact of the program has affected the medium range landholder more adversely as compared to big landholders and resistance for the
scheme is more from this category of the land holders.
In the interviews and in the FGDs, conducted during field work with the beneficiaries almost all the respondents and the participants expressed that migrating to other place for work is preferred option than working in the NREGs.
They all said that timely payment, regularity of work and less payment are the
21
reason for it. These are also the reasons for which NREGs has failed to attract
labour. Added to it in the field work many respondents expressed that they
prefer to migrate to resist the feudalist attitude which is wide spread in the
society. All most all the beneficiaries interviewed said that making regular request for work to Panchayat, for payments, running around post offices and
banks and owner-subordinate behaviour in the work field, are some of the
main factors of not choosing the scheme to work and prefer to migrate. In the
field one respondent who is migrant labourer clearly expressed that ‘in outside
we earn with respect whereas here we get humiliation for our own claims’.
More over talking to one of the senior academician of Bihar who claims that
choosing migration is often resisting of feudalism and will continue till the
caste dynamics exists in the society.
Limited Scope for Women Participants
All these factors mentioned makes situation even more difficult for women to
participate in the scheme. As per existing structure of the society women are
responsible for house hold activities and looking after the children. It becomes
difficult for them to strike a balance on both taking care of house hold activities as well as participating in the scheme along with running for their claims
(payments). Moreover in Bihar migration is predominantly a male phenomenon ( Chakrabarty 2001: 1454) and being male counterpart away from home
made it more difficult for them to do everything singlehandedly. In the FGD
of women beneficiaries all the participants agreed that they generally participate
in the work when their husband is around as they also help in some domestic
work. Otherwise they prefer to stay away from the schemes.
On the whole the field study findings clearly show that strong structures which
are there in the society since years due to high degree of disparity in land distribution and various dynamics relating to it like tenure system, encroachment
of land and feudalistic behaviour of those having power in the society,
NREGA has not been attractive for poor labourers in the state. All these compels poor wage worker to choose other options over NREGs. These are some
of the reasons why women, poor, vulnerable and power-less labourers prefer
to stay away from the scheme. All these cumulatively have resulted in low performance of NREGA in the state.
4.2. Socio-political situation
As mentioned earlier politically Bihar is a very vibrant state. The state has observed several changeover of power of certain sections within the society. In
recent time also the state is passing through a political transformation. This
time the transformation is more radical as people in the state have decided to
elect the top leadership on the basis which has never been considered before.
Though the changes are happening at the state level, but in lower level like in
village and panchayat level or in lower bureaucracy or at elected panchayat
functionaries’ levels, still the semi feudal behaviour is very much dominant.
The political change happening in the apex level in the state has yet to reach at
22
the lower level institutions which actually delivers the services to the people
living in rural area and posing hindrance to the lower level institutions not to
function in its full capacity which has happened several times before in the past
(Rouyer 1994: 63).The program like NREGA is also caught up in the same trap
and as a result it is performing with less success in the state as compared to
other states.
Panchayati Raj Institution (PRI) which came into existence after 73rd amendment 1992 of constitution of India, which has the primary responsibility to
implement of NREGs in the rural areas. Panchayats are political bodies and
representatives are elected in every five years by adult (above 18 years of age)
franchise within the Panchayat boundary. The primary objectives of forming
the PRIs are to encourage and ensure the bottom level planning and implementation. After the formation of PRIs many government schemes are designed and implemented through the PRI and NREGs is also one among
them. To be more effective the operational guideline is prepared which explains the processes to be followed and also clearly distinguish the role of the
different stake holders like community, government officials and Panchayat
itself for the schemes.
Status of PRI and its governance
As per the guidelines of NREGs, the scheme has to be finalized by GramSabha. In the field work conducted in the six Panchayats comprising of 19
villages, in none of the Pachayats it was found that the schemes were finalized
in Gram-Sabha. All the 21 respondents interviewed complained that GramSabhas are not held properly and they are only conducted to fulfil the process.
Probing the matter into deep it was found that the Elected Panchayat representatives, who are primarily responsible for calling the meetings, do not inform the people well in advance and put the blame on the people that they do
not attend Gram-Sabha meetings. The process for calling the Gram-Sabha is to
pass a resolution in ‘Panchayat Committee Meeting’ which has to be attended
by at least ¾th of the elected members of the Panchayat. Further a notification
is issued and the latter has to be displayed in the main places of every village
and hamlet and an announcement has to be made. In the data collection process it was found that in three Panchayats out of six, the information for
Gram-Sabha meetings were made at very last hour. Beneficiaries in the interviews and in FGDs expressed clearly that this is done intentionally by the Panchayat members, so that people do not participate and this gives the freedom
to the elected members of Panchayat to finalize the scheme as per their wish.
While in the interviews with the Mukhiyas, all expressed that it is the people’s
responsibility to know about the meeting not theirs to inform. This practice
clearly shows how the processes are bypassed and the schemes are used by the
elected members of the Panchayat as per as their own choice. As reported by
Sharma (2007:43), “the selection of schemes has not been always the most
appropriate one. One reason for this is often the clash of interests among the
PRI representatives. It has been observed that major consideration in selection
of schemes has been the immediate political interests of the PRI representatives. They push for those schemes first which would benefit their electorate
23
first. Sometimes immediate and the most urgent requirement of the locality
and area are ignored to benefit certain interest.” In the field work more than
half of the beneficiaries interviewed came out with the options about the possible sites where the schemes could be executed but these have not been included as part of the annual plan which reduces the opportunity for the worker
to participate in the schemes and results in low performance in terms of employment generation.
Pseudo Democracy in PRIs
Lack of opportunity for site selection is heard as common explanation for low
performance of the NREGA in the area as said by all the five Mukhias interviewed. Whereas the annual plans are prepared often without taking peoples’
views which is non-adherence of institutional processes suggested in the guidelines of NREGs. All this indicates the attitude and motives of the elected Panchayat representatives to use the scheme to exercise their assigned power over
the community to differentiate them from rest of the population. In the FGD
conducted with the beneficiaries one beneficiary expressed that, ‘after being
elected as Mukhia, Mukhiaji has become a big man and he no longer listens to
us’. This exercising of power by Panchayat leaders for their own vested motive, similar to the political scenario that exists in the state since years, has resulted in loss of the possible opportunities present in the area which can generate several more man days of employment and can contribute more in terms
of performance of the program in the state.
Further to control the work and the beneficiaries, Panchayat functionaries
promote small contractors who supervise the work although the act does not
permit for employing contractors7 . While designing the act this provision was
seriously considered and finally the ‘contractor system’ has been not agreed in
the act. This is mainly to break the nexus between politicians and administrative officials to save beneficiaries from exploitation. It has been also thought
that this provision will give greater freedom to the Panchayat bodies to take up
the activities for the benefit of the people in the area at large and would help
the newly formed Panchayat to emerge as strong institution. But in practice, in
Bihar it is working very differently. In the field work it has been found that in
all the Panchayats the work under the act are being undertaken by contractors.
The Panchayat functionaries and administrative staffs in the name of ‘Nrega
Mate’ (explain in footnote) allocate the schemes to the small contractors who
are generally loyal to Mukhias to have greater control over the schemes and
provide benefits to those who support them in the elections. The implication
of this existing practice are, first not all wilful beneficiaries get employment as
selection of the beneficiaries are at the discretion of the contractors and secondly the beneficiaries are denied the minimum wage fixed by the state and
some portions of the wage of the participants, goes in the pockets of the Panchayat functionaries and the administrative officials. Moreover this existing
As per the NREGA guideline 15th point which says that the scheme undertaken will
follow 60:40 wages and material ratio and no contractors and machinery is allowed in
the scheme.
7
24
practice followed in the state in NREGs, violates the basic principles of the
act, formulated by Government of India in 2005. On one hand it has proved
wrong to the commitment of government to enhance livelihood security to the
households in rural areas by providing at least one hundred days of guaranteed
wage employment in every financial year to provide strong social safety net for
the vulnerable groups by providing employment. On the other hand it has denied people the opportunity to demand for works which would have been
thought of to empower the rural poor through rights-based law. It also denies
the unskilled wage worker to earn the minimum legal wage fixed by the Government and by and large is responsible in not helping in reducing distress migration which reports also suggests. On the whole the prevailing practice in
NREGs in the field has failed to replace the exploitative contractor system
which was responsible for the failure of the poverty alleviation schemes in the
past; the same has been repeated in NREGs as well. All the 21 beneficiaries
interviewed in the field consider NREGs same as other scheme and the
scheme has also failed to attract labourers to participate in it.
Reports on NREGA functioning suggest that the selection of schemes at the
Gram Panchayat is more or less smooth. It also says that it is because of the
motivated interests of the Panchayat functionaries. Reports on NREGA suggests that in majority of the cases, schemes at the Panchayat level are been selected by the Mukhia himself without the meeting of Gram-Sabha and forwarded to the PanchayatSamiti as scheme selected by the Gram Sabha. Moreover they push for those schemes first which would benefit their electorate.
Sometimes immediate and the most urgent requirement of the locality and area
are ignored to benefit certain interests. (Sharma 2007: 44). During primary data
collection it was evident from the interviews that the program is being used as
a political machine by the elected Panchayat representatives. Fifteen beneficiaries interviewed in the field work had agreed to it. More over among the six
Panchayats surveyed, in four Panchayats it was found that only those schemes
get finalised which affects the people who has supported the Mukhia in the
election or belongs to same caste as said by the participants interviewed. One
of the Muslim women in ChaksenPanchayat of Muzaffarpur district clearly
expressed in the FGD that, ‘in her hamlet Mukhia do not open the NREGA
scheme as they all are Muslim and the Mukhia is non-Muslim’. There were also
incidences found in the field where the schemes are not even considered after
several requests because the beneficiaries belong to other social group. While
field work in BelaPanchayat in Gaya district it was found that approach road of
one hamlet resided by particular community (same that of Mukhia) was built
twice under the scheme but in-spite of several request made for the approach
road of adjoining hamlet resided by other community has not yet been started.
The person who has been interviewed in the same village very dejectedly said
that ‘there is no one to look after them in the Panchayat’. There are other examples too of same nature in other Panchayat as well. All these mean the failure in the existing institution to deliver the objective of the act for which it has
been formulated. Moreover the leaders of the institution are making the institution discriminatory on the basis of age old social structure which reiterates
the fact that the process of political transformation in the state happening at
the state level has yet to show its impact in the lower level. This existing practice is not only hindering in reducing exploitation of the wage labourers but
25
also hindering in taking up all the possible opportunity to generate employment to the wilful beneficiaries and provide safety net for the poor people living in rural area.
Elite capture in the scheme
In the state all the job card holders in the area actually do not participate in the
schemes. Particularly people belonging to socially advanced community keep
themselves away from the schemes in terms of participation despite having job
card. This is one of the reasons for high ratio among the job card holder and
actual participant in the schemes all across the state said by the Mukhias and
POs interviewed in the area. But those hamlets or villages where they stay are
always preferred for the scheme8 . Probing into the matter with the Panchyat
functionaries in one of the Panchayat in South Bihar, Mukhia clearly came out
that these people are influential and they need to be kept happy so that they do
not disturb. Another reason that came out is the work needs to be taken up in
those hamlets because only in their hamlet, places of common interests like
Temples, Mosques, schools, cremation place etc. are situated. Further, Mukhias
are also inclined to take up those works because they have huge visibility effect
as they are used by everybody. One of the Mukhias of a Panchayat in Gaya
district, who do not belong to socially advanced section of the society, said that
it was his good work that he did in his last tenure that he got re-elected. He is
very proud to say that all the religious and important places in his Panchayat,
are well connected by road which are built under NREGs. Although all the
socially important places are mostly confined in two hamlets in the Panchayat
and in both people from socially advanced section stay. During the field visit
the researcher tried to map the places of social importance in the Panchayat to
triangulate the claim of the Mukhia and found that only one place of social
importance which is left out of approach road is the burning place of ‘Musahar’ community considered one of the most oppressed section of society.
Mukhia explains that this is mainly due to land problem and people are not
willing to give land for construction of road. On the whole the age old sociopolitical structure, in which favours are made to particular sections and denied
to other, are still persisting as same which is indicative of failure of the existing
institutions. All these factors hinders in taking up the activities which can be
helpful for the larger mass and also has the potential to generate several more
days of employment to beneficiaries of the schemes and contributes in the
performance of NREGA in the state.
All these factors restate the claim of difference in politics at the state level and
the Panchayat level. At the ground level the power relations and its effect on
the decision making is very different than in the state level where people are
keeping these factor aside while choosing the leadership in the state. In India
due to constitutional provisions in many Panchayats, the people from marginIn Bihar in the villages the caste wise settlement is very distinct. Generally the settlements are divided in terms of hamlets resided by particular caste. In the big villages
the villages are divided in different parts locally termed as ‘Tola’ and each tola is resided by different caste of people.
8
26
alized groups and women are getting elected in the leadership positions but
due to prevalence of strong structures in the society, they are compelled to act
according to the people who actually hold power and resources in the village
level which has been discriminatory in nature and has divided the society.
These power relations in the village level often pose hindrance in the functions
of the institution and ultimately the quality of service delivery suffers. The
same is happening in NREGA which results in lower uptake of the scheme
due to poor delivery by these institutions in the state.
Among five Mukhias interviewed in the field work two of them were women.
But in the field work no difference has been observed in terms of functioning
of the Panchayat. In the interviews like their male counterpart they also expressed same so far as women participation in the scheme is concerned. No
special efforts are made to encourage women to participate in the program.
Though one of them expressed that in the plantation work which is common
in the northern part of the state, women are preferred over men as the work is
less strenuous. But on the whole all the Mukhias agreed that participation of
women has increased marginally over the years as awareness among the women about the program has increased.
Politics in the selection of the schemes
NREGA is not only used to consolidate votes by the Panchayat functionaries
but it is also being used to expand the followers. In one of the Panchayat in
Muzaffarpur district, Mukhia used NREGs to expand her followers. In recent
Panchayat election held in March 2011 she has been re-elected with the highest
margin in the district. She says in her interview that in the previous election a
particular section has not supported her but the same section in this election
has supported her after seeing her work. In the particular hamlets where this
particular section of people resides, in last tenure she as Mukhia has taken up
the task of constructing the approach road, road side plantation and allotted
the supervision of the plants to the beneficiaries of the same section. She
claims that her attitude towards ‘development’ has not only benefited to get
her re-elected but also it was easy to find new opportunity for the schemes.
Though she expresses the concern for shrinking opportunity of work as in her
Panchayat as more than 70 percent of land belongs to few rich families.
Here,the situation is very similar to the changing political scenario of the state
politics which reflected in November 2010 assembly election where people
selected the leader of state government in totally new basis of ‘Governance’
keeping the prevailing caste dynamics aside . But this process of political transformation at the top level is not reflected in the lower level during the process
of data collection. Though in one panchayat out of six surveyed has shown the
changing trend but in all other areas the data says that NREGA is used to help
particular section. This reflects the dynamic political change which the state is
passing through. The changes happening at top and bottom level is contradictory in the state. All the Mukhias interviewed express that things are changing
but changing slowly all throughout the state. They all say that now electorates
are choosing Mukhias on the basis of their ability and performance in delivering but local level caste dynamics and power relations also plays crucial role.
27
Moreover in the recent years number of schemes has increased which benefitted all the sections of the area though in varied degree. Some eminent academicians in the state also do not agree that the change happening at the state
level is the true reflection of total political transformation but says the process
is on and gradually percolating down. Still delivery of the benefits through
government institution is highly questionable. Though they acknowledge that
reason for the present change in the socio-political situation is actually a result
of higher utilization of the central funds and increased number of schemes in
which NREGs is also one. This has forced people to look beyond the existing
social structure for their own betterment.
4.3. Design of the program
After the act was enacted by the Parliament of India in 2005 the operational
guideline was prepared for the purpose of effective implementation. Though
different state governments have been given some freedom to adjust the
schemes depending upon the local situation but by and large the provisions
under the schemes are made fixed for all the states. Some states had also adjusted the provision on the basis of their local requirements from time to time.
Like in Kerala more emphasis is given in NREGs to employ more labour and
those schemes are preferred which are more labour consuming whereas in
Bihar under NREGA, creating the rural infrastructure following 60:40 ratio of
labour and material are taken as priority.
Huge gap in Job card holders and the ratio of their participation in the
program
Despite low level of literacy rate in the rural areas in Bihar, in the field work it
has been observed that people are aware about NREGA. However, the level of
awareness was not uniform all across as reports also suggests. People are aware
about the wage rate, about the distance of the work and the role of PRI in the
scheme. But very few are aware about the work site facility (Sharma 2009: 3132).
Having job card is common except in one hamlet where respondents raised
concerns about the issuing of the job card. In fact government officials raised
concern about the fact that number of job card issued are three to four times
more than that of the people actually participating in the program. The official
web site of the program also suggests the same. In the rural Bihar even the
people belonging to socially advanced section and resourceful also have job
cards though they do not participate in the schemes undertaken in the act.
They mostly registered themselves under the impression that they would be
entitled to get unemployment allowance once they have the job card. During
the field work both the POs interviewed asserted the fact that it prevails across
the state for which the state has been often criticized for offering employment
28
to only 17 per cent of total job card in the scheme and this has been viewed as
low performance of the scheme in the state.
In the field work it has been found that getting job card is not difficult process.
Many times it is prepared on the spot. It is very non-discriminatory process.
Both the POs interviewed in the field work has categorically said that all the
RojgarSawak9 have been instructed to issue job card on the spot if any beneficiary does not have job card and wants to participate in the scheme. This
practice is followed all across as per as government direction to include as
many beneficiaries possible under the act. This has resulted in issuing duplicate
job cards to many beneficiaries. More over as mentioned earlier that despite
having job-card; people belonging to socially advanced sections do not participate in the program. All these factors together contributed in issuing of job
card to large number of participant who actually does not participate in the
program. Recently government has launched a massive drive to rectify the matter and the process of scrutiny is going on across the state for finding the double issued job-cards and those who in spite of having job card do not participate in the program.
Further in the field work many people in hamlet level meeting expressed that
despite having job card they do not want to participate in the program as program offers very limited scope of work, delays in payment and is very strict in
nature. Moreover in FGD that due to existing social structure it is considered
as inferior for the people belonging to socially advanced section to work as
manual labourer in other places in the village along with the other section of
people. It affects their status and respect within the society. One participant in
the FGD said that ‘if they work in the scheme with them they will lose their
respect’. Hence non-participation in the scheme by majority of people can be
attributed to both the program design and also to the social structure that exists in the society.
Non labour friendly payment norms in the scheme
In Bihar, during the field work it was found that no one demands for work
which is the core principle of the act. Among six Panchayat surveyed only in
two places the Mukhia and the government official acknowledged that there
are incidence of demands by the beneficiaries but they are very few in number.
In fact one of the POs of the surveyed block said that the people who a demand for work has always come with a hidden motive to claim unemployment
allowance which is the provision in the act. She further stressed that these are
the people who always disturb the program. An interesting reason came out in
the field work is that the rules in the act are hindering the process of demand
in the scheme. All the Mukhias and the officials interviewed in the field work
agreed that for the schemes undertaken in the program, lot depends upon the
motivation of the respective Mukhias. As the act does not permit daily payment to the labourers participating in the schemes, this is also an important
reason for poor labourers not choosing the scheme. In the field work, in all the
Panchayats, it has been found that the payments of the labourers are delayed.
9
Deputed from Government to all the Panchayat to assist Mukhia in NREGs
29
Not in any case the payment was made earlier than fifteen days. In some cases
the payments were delayed for over a year. Due to the nature of payment in
the program, the program has become less attractive for the labourers. More
over the labourers prefer to work in the fields nearby or to go to nearby town
or cities as casual labourer in spite of low wage because they get the wages
there on daily basis. This reason has made NREGs very difficult for the
Mukhias and the administrative officials to arrange labour for the scheme. Four
out of six Mukhias agreed that they arrange some advances to start the work
and also arrange the payment if not daily then once in two or three days. The
advance given to the labourers are then claimed by the Mukhias or others who
supervise, at the time of scheduled payment for the scheme. One Mukhia in his
interview very angrily reacted to the matter that ‘the nature of the scheme is
such that to carry on the scheme we need to do lot of massaging to the labourers’. This practice is very common in all across the state as stated by the
Mukhias.
This existing practice has many implications which can be clearly observed in
the field. Firstly it restricts the willing beneficiaries not to demand the work
which violates one of the core principal of the act. Generally Mukhias refuse to
pay advances or the periodic payments to the participant, if the participant
demands for work. The demand made by participant is considered to be an
acceptance from the participant to agree to the terms and condition of payment of the program which is in practice and no extra favour hence can be
demanded. This has been pointed out by one of the Mukhias and a PO and
was also expressed by some of the beneficiaries. Secondly it promotes the contractor system in NREGs which is exploitative and not permitted in the act. In
the field work it has been found that Mukhia always does not initiate the works
but often the works are delegated to the petty contractors in the name of
‘Nrega Mate’ as explained earlier. Thirdly and most importantly it denies the
minimum wage to the participants that are fixed by the state government. The
workers at the end do not realize the same amounts that government has fixed
for the state. Final payment is done to the participants after keeping some
shares by the contractors or Mates. These are some of the serious design and
implementation lapses which have compelled to follow the age old form which
is exploitative which contributes to the non-participation in the program and
hence results in poor implementation of the program.
Interference of the government officials in the program
Delay in payment is one of the major reasons for NREGA not to be performing as expected. It has been mentioned earlier that during the field work no
scheme was found where the payment was done on time. The implication of
delayed payment is affecting the overall goal of the act. There are several reasons for delay in payment. One of the major reasons is irregular fund flow
from the district to Panchayat. All the Mukhias interviewed, categorically says
that flow of fund is very irregular. Moreover the huge paper work also delays
the process. Corruption in the administrative system is wide spread. Ultimately
all these at the end adversely affect the participants who work in the scheme.
Recently the state government has started disbursing funds electronically in
30
some Panchayats but result is yet to be seen. On the issue all the Mukhias explain that in the recent changing political scenario the bureaucrats has become
more dominant in the system and corruption in the government system has
actually increased. In addition to this the periodic instruction issued from the
district administration about the priority of work to be taken also hinders the
pace of the work. Recently a District Level Panchayat meeting of all the concerning Mukhias of the all the Panchayat was conducted by Deputy Development Commissioner (DDC) in Muzaffarpur . In the meeting all the Mukhias
were instructed to take up only earthen work with very little material component. This measure was taken to provide job to more beneficiaries as in the
region the initial monsoon was erratic. This instruction made all the Mukhiyas
to either stop or slow down the on-going work on roads and small bridges and
diverted focus on searching more labour intensive work sites. On the whole
the pace of the schemes slowed down in the area and by the time heavy monsoon arrived which forced to stop most of the work. These instructions from
the administration from time to time are often responsible for the disruption in
the on-going schemes. These unfinished schemes are also the reason for delayed payment as the measurement can only be done after the report from the
vigilance committee of the concerned village is submitted and they are reluctant to give reports on unfinished schemes.
NREGA is an act and hence government officials also keep very close eye on
it. In many cases the government officials take action soon after the complaint
has been lodged. As per as the officials interviewed during the field work they
accept that these complain are often baseless and politically motivated but
once they are lodged official is left with no option other than stopping the
work and is followed by order of investigation. All these interferences in implementation have increased in recent years as per the Mukhias who were interviewed. These acts are actually the reflection of the on-going tussle of power
between the elected representatives and the bureaucracy. It is not only
NREGA which is getting affected but other schemes are also affected by this.
One of the Mukhia during the field work showed a letter issued by one Block
Development Officer (Lowest executive in administrative structure) instructing
all the Mukhia to work as his helping hand in developmental works. This is one
of the extreme examples of exerting power by bureaucracy over elected representatives in democratic system. These struggles are some of the reasons of the
slow progress of the government schemes and NREGA is also one among
them.
The strict norms and repeated interference by the government officials, makes
difficult to explore the new opportunities for the schemes. NREGs is now
being implemented for last six years and it is becoming harder to generate the
opportunities in available common lands. Further the strict and inflexible rules
in the act are adding to the complexity which is leading to low performance of
the program in the state. During the field visit it has been found that the activity like plantation in common land which generates employment for many labour days and also suits to the basic principle of the act, is not taken in the
districts of South Bihar this year. The reason for this is, in the previous year
lots of complaints were lodged for this activity. Last year in the region which is
highly drought prone, the mortality rate of the saplings planted was high. As
the act does not permit for refilling of saplings in the gaps, many complains
31
were lodged all across the districts in South Bihar and many of the officials
were charged. This year POs of all the districts of Bihar as stated by both the
POs interviewed are reluctant to take up the activity in their region. This reflects the limitation in the design of the program which even hinders in taking
up of the activity permitted in the law and has the potential to generate several
labour man days also get affected.. More over the activities like plantation are
less labour strenuous and suits to women, old and disabled people. In the state
it has been seen that participation of these section of people is high as compared to others as seen in the past years. Not taking up these activities restricts
them specially women in participating in the scheme. In the fieldwork it has
been observed that women participate more in the plantation work in comparison to other work. All the three Mukhias interviewed in Muzaffarpur acknowledges that women’s participation rate is more than 50 percent in plantation
work. On the whole design of the program, the rule and the way these rules are
administered, itself is imposing challenges to include more beneficiaries in the
program specially women which is reflecting on the performance of the program in the state.
In NREGA, to prevent labour from exploitations and to ensure minimum
wage, several measure are taken in the act. As per the act payment of the
worker is done through the personal account either in post offices or banks.
No direct payment is allowed in the schemes. But in reality it is working oppositely. The institutional payment system not only delays the payment but also
increases the corruption. In the field work it has been found that these post
offices in the rural areas are small and often do not have enough cash for payments. In practice they collect the signed withdrawal slip from the beneficiaries
in advance and then these post offices collect cash from the bigger branches
and pay to the respected beneficiaries. All these processes take three to four
days and contribute in further delay in payment to the beneficiaries. This practice not only delays the payment but also violates the banking norm. During
data collection more than half of the beneficiaries complained that post masters also demand money from them. In the field work when it was raised to
Mukhias and administrative officials, it was found that this is a very common
practice and almost all are aware of this but show their helplessness as practice
is recommended in the operational guideline. Four out of six Mukhias suggested that hand to hand cash payment to the laboures will make the program
more attractive and will help in including more participation but law does not
permit to do so.
Limited Shelf of work
It has been also found that that the self of work prescribed in the frame work
of NREGA, is itself limiting and posing challenges for implementation. The
act permits only earthen work and the payments are done as per the prescribed
amount of work (one Labour Day is equivalent of digging 100 cubic feet of
soil). This is quite a strenuous job. The nature of job makes the scheme less
attractive especially for weak, disabled and women to participate in the scheme.
All the respondents interviewed during the field work acknowledge that meeting the fulfilment of the scheme is very difficult particularly in the lean season
32
because of adverse weather condition and soil is also dry and hard. Many beneficiaries said that the nature of work compels them to think for other options.
In the focused group discussion conducted with the women beneficiaries, they
clearly expressed that the nature of work is very hard and the program needs to
provide other option for them. Out of six participants in FGD three said that
they have fell sick after participating in the schemes in summer and hence
stopped going to participate in NREGs. More over the job site facilities are
also not followed properly as prescribed in the act. All these factors in addition
to irregular availability of work make NREGA less attractive to both women
and men.
So far as the infrastructure creation is concerned the ratio of 60:40 in terms of
labour verses material is also posing as limiting factor. This ratio can be maintained for creating new infrastructure but not sufficient for renovating the old
one. Often in the rural areas these old infrastructures are very important but
cannot be taken up under the scheme due to restriction in the act as said by the
Mukhias.
Other factor which contributes in lack of performance of the program is the
lack of technical support from the administration and also the capacity of the
Panchayat functionaries. As observed in the field the Panchayat representative’s lacks capacities in planning, site selection, and measurement of work and
technical knowhow. There is very little effort in government’s part to build the
capacities of the Panchayat functionaries as it has happened in other earlier
poverty alleviation programs. Particularly for technical matters they are dependent on the government official which further delays the process. More
over the government officials generally gives less priority to the program as it
has very strict rules and regulation. They are much keen in supporting other
programs run parallel in the area. All this delay the process for closing the
schemes under NREGA and delays the payments to the workers participating
in the scheme. These design issues make the program less attractive and labours are reluctant to participate in the program which is contributing in low
up take of the program in the state.
33
Chapter 5:
Findings and Conclusion
In spite being an ideal condition in the State of Bihar, NREGA appears to
have been not performing well in the state. The performance of NREGA in
the state is a classic example of low uptake of the schemes vis-à-vis high need
of employment for the people in the area. Government of India enacted the
act in 2005 to boost the rural economy by providing employment in order to
create productive asset base in the rural areas. The program is designed to provide economic safety net to the rural poor. Bihar being one of the least urbanized, having huge portion of population dependent on agriculture, high rate of
migration particularly from rural area, huge BPL population and high percentage of population with very less resource base who mostly depend on wage
labour, the scheme under the act should have performed in much better way
than what it is doing presently in terms of employment generation, women’s
participation and ratio of job card holder participating in the program.
Comparing with the other states, Bihar has generated low employment opportunities to the beneficiaries of the program. Nationwide the data says that the
state has performed poorly as compared to the affluent states as well as the
poor states. As compared to the states having similar socio cultural and economic situations as Bihar, the program has performed far behind in all respects.
As in many other states, caste plays a crucial role in decision making. But in
Bihar this factor not only play the dominant role but also is reflected in the
attitude of the people of the state. On the other side being politically very vibrant the state has observed several changeovers by particular sections from
time to time at the power centre and who so ever has been at the centre of
power has exerted effort to provide benefits only to the section he/she represents. Due to this the state time to time has seen particular sections as dominant and others as subordinate in the state politics. This has become a prototype of power structure unlike the other states and resulted in attitudinal
change amongst the people of all sections. Power struggle no longer is restricted to different sections but it has become the game of the individuals. This
individual character has followed the same pattern of supporting his/ her kin
and oppressing other for execution of the government programs. This pattern
was followed even when the so called oppressed section or women were given
leadership role and power. This rigid compartmentalised structure that exists
in the society is playing a crucial role in non-performance of NREGA which is
meant to provide economic safety net to rural poor.
Clash for power is a common phenomenon in the society. It is not only restricted to different sections within the society but it also reflected in the bureaucracy of the state and also amongst the elected representative. Though the
state in recent years is passing through a dynamic political transformation and
the synergy and coordination can be seen at the top level by which Bihar in
34
recent years is doing quite well among all the other states in India, but still the
process has yet to impact at the lower level. In the field work the tussle for
power among the district and block level government officials and elected representative was apparent. It has been found that lack of coordination and synergy between the two in execution of the program is causing gaps in implementation which is resulting in low participation of the people in the program
in the state.
Furthermore the power relation at the village level which has straight correlation with resourceful people in the area has significant influence in decision
making and functioning of the institutions responsible for implementation of
programs. In the field work the effort of balancing of power relations by the
elected representatives at the lower level to maintain peace as well as functioning of the program is clearly evident. This divided effort by the primary implementers seemed to have affected in the implementation of the program.
More over this village level power relation is structural in nature and can be
termed as part of old historical legacy and weak political will of earlier leadership. In spite the state being among the first few to adopt abolition of Zamindary system, the state has miserably failed in doing so. The strong will of holding of resources and power by the people has resulted in the state to fail to
enforce the laws many times in the past for distribution of its resources. It has
affected the state in two ways. Firstly the state unlike the other states remains
highly divided in terms of access to the resources which resulted in large proportion of the population having very little access to resources and are dependent on the resources owned by others. Secondly it has divided state
among two distinct classes in which one always dominates over other. These
two factors not only restricts opportunities of employment generation but also
employment are to be generated as per as the wish of dominant class. Further
significant impact of NREGA on rural labour market so far, the program is
facing stiff resistance for resource owner class particularly the medium term
land holders as it has affected them very adversely who are in large number in
the state. This has made the program very unpopular among the landholders
and the program is being often targeted for failure.
In recent years the state is passing through political transformation and political thinking and political priorities has changed at the top. But in the field work
it has been found that the change is yet to reach at the lower level. The institutions working at the lower level are still in trap of old thinking process. They
are grappled with vested motives and local level power structures. One of the
examples in this regard is in spite of having job card majority of people do not
participate in the program because job cards were made either to get compassion allowance without participating in the scheme as favour from the leadership or too much hassle to claim for their own entitlements. Both reasons of
non-participation figure out the capacity of the institution to deliver services in
non-discriminatory manner which has been facilitated by the political environment in the past which still exists. In case of NREGA implementation gap
in functioning of the Panchayat has come out as major hindering factor. Capacity building of the village level leadership and empowering people for their
rights presently are the major role to be carried out by the government. Once
these primary institutions become capable to operate in full capacity and people start to demand from the bottom for their own entitlements, then only the
35
changes happening at the top level can be justified as the true reflection of the
state.
Finally design of the program in the act itself has the inherent tendency to exclude people from the program rather than including them. The inflexible design and strict rules and norms which often do not suit to local situations tend
to exclude participants from the program particularly women. India being highly diverse country, one frame cannot be adapted for all across the country and
produce results. The shelf of work need to be more diversified to make more
attractive and conducive for the weaker sections of the society including women. To improve the situation serious thinking is required in design which will
facilitate innovation and creativity and also suit the local condition so that the
program include more people and help in boosting the rural economy by
providing employment by increasing asset base in rural area and provide safety
net to the poor rural population.
On the whole despite of noble motive of EGP, implementation of NREGA
cannot be explained by only analysing the match between objectives of the
program and need of the people. Bihar has been a classic example where in
spite of match between objective and need the uptake is low. In the divided
societies like in Bihar the challenge of designing suitable program is even more.
Greater consideration of social hierarchies, attitude of the people, the power
relations existing in the society and the effect of political environment need to
be taken care off. These facets are very much evident in case of NREGA
which is one of the world’s biggest and very ambitious programs, still struggling to function in full capacity after six years of inception and it is challenged
from all corners by the rigid socio-political structures exists in the society. It is
high time to evaluate the program in broad horizon so that the program fulfils
its objectives and the poor people get benefit out of it.
……………………………………………………..
36
References
Banerjee. A (2009) Landlessness and Social Justice Patna, India: Ekta Parishad and
Praxis.
Bhatia.B and J.Dreze (2006) ‘Employment Guarantee in Jharkhand’, Economic and
Political Weekly: 3198-3202.
Chakrabarty.A (2001) ‘Caste and Agrarian Class: A View from Bihar’, Economic and
Political Weekly Vol. 36, No. 17: 1449-1462.
Chandrasekhar.C.P and J.Ghosh (2004) ‘How feasible is a Rural Employment Guarantee?’ Social Scientist Vol. 32, No. 7/8: 52-57.
Committee for International Cooperation in National Research in Demography (2007)
‘Urban Population, Development and Environment Dynamics’, CICRED Policy
Paper(3 ) Paris.
Comptroller and Auditor General.(2008), ‘Performance audit of implementation of
National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (NREGA)’. Performance Audit Report No. 42. New Delhi, India.
Das A.N (1992) Republic of Bihar India: Penguin Books India (P) Ltd.
Department of Labour Resources, Government of Bihar (2009-10) ‘A study on Bihari
Migrant labourers: Incidence, Causes and Remedies’, Indian Institute of Public
Administration, New Delhi.
Haan.A.de (2002) Migration and livelihoods in historical perspective: A case study of
Bihar, India, Journal of Development Studies, Volume 38 Issue 5: 115-116.
Hirway.I. (2006), ‘Concurrent Monitoring of National Rural Employment Guarantee
Act, Feedback from field’ Centre for Development Alternatives Ahmedabad: 5-8.
Hulme.D and A.Shepherd (2003), ‘Conceptualizing Chronic Poverty’, World Development Vol.31:403-411.
Johnson O E. G. (1972), ‘Economic Analysis, the Legal Framework and Land Tenure
Systems’, Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 15, No. 1: 259-276.
Jha. P (1997) ‘Land Reform in Bihar Needs for far reaching Approach’. Accessed on
10th September 2011
<http://www.cpiml.org/liberation/year_1997/july/article3.htm>
37
Jha. R, S. Bhattacharyya, R. Gaiha and S. Shankar (2009) ‘Centre of anti-policy program: An analysis of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Program in India’ Journal of Asian Economics 20: 456-464
Kaboub. F. (2007) ‘Employment Guarantee Programs: A Survey of Theories and
Policy Experiences’, Unpublished Working Paper No. 498. The Levy Economics
Institute of Bard College.
Lipton, M (1996) ‘Success in Anti-Poverty; Issues in Development’, Discussion Paper
8, ILO, Geneva.
Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India (2006) ‘Evaluation and Impact
Assessment of National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme in Bihar’, Institute of Human development, New Delhi.
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005, Ministry Of
Rural Development, Government of India, Accessed 1st October 2011
<http://nrega.nic.in>
Mohan. S (2008), ‘NREGA: How effective’, Press Trust of India.
Pankaj A.K (2008) ‘Process, Institution and mechanism of Implementation of
NREGA: Impact Assessment of Bihar and Jharkhand’, Institute of Human Development , New Delhi.
Papola. T.C, 2005, ‘A Universal Program is Feasible’, Economic and Political Weekly,
Vol. 40, No. 7: 594-599
Planning Commission, Government of India ‘Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007-12’ Accessed 20 March 2011 <http://planningcommission.gov.in>
Raaba.K, R. Birner, M. Sekhar, K.G. Gayartidevi, A. Shilpi and E. Schiffer, 2010 ‘How
to overcome the Governance Challenges of Implementation of NREGA’, Discussion Paper 00963, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington
DC, USA.
Reddy D.N and C. Upendranadh (2010) ‘Natioal Rural Employment Guarantee: Issues, Concern and Prospects’, Working Paper V, Oxfam India
Rouyer. A.R (1994), ‘Explaining Economic backwardness and weak Governing capacity in Bihar State of India’, South Asia Vol XVII, No -2: 63-89
Saith, A. (1992) The Rural Non- Farm Economy: Processes and Policies (illustrated
ed. Vol. World Employment Program): International Labour Organization.
Samarthan-PACS (2008) ‘Status of NREGA Implementation: Grassroots Learning
and Ways Forward’, Bhopal, India: Samarthan-PACS.
38
Shah. M (2009) ‘Multiplier Accelerator synergy in NREGA’, The Hindu April 30,
2009
Sharma A.N. (2005), ‘Agrarian Relations and Socio-Economic Change in Bihar’ Economic and Political Weekly Vol. 40, No. 10: 960-972
Sharma A.N (2007), ‘Political Economy of Poverty in Bihar, Nature, Dimension and
Linkage’, Institute of Human Development, New Delhi.
Sharma.K. (2009). ‘Scoping Study for Design and Development of Alternative Implementation Model(s) on NREGS’, The World Bank, New Delhi.
Sjoblom D and J.Farrington (2008) ‘The Indian National Rural Employment Guarantee Act: Will it reduce poverty and boost the economy?’ Project Briefing no-7,
Overseas Development Institute, UK.
Singh L (1992) ‘The Bihar Kisan Sabha Movement: 1933-1939’, Social Scientist, Vol.
20, No. 5/6: 21-33,
Subbarao, K (1997): Public Works as an anti-Poverty Programme: An Overview of
Cross-Country Experience American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 79,
No. 2: 678-683.
Tcherneva, P. R.(2007) ‘What are the Relative Macroeconomic Merits and Environmental Impacts of Direct Job Creation and Basic Income Guarantees?’ Working
Paper No. 517. The Levy Economics Institute of Bard College
Tcherneva, P.R. (2003) ‘Job or Income Guarantee?’ Working Paper No. 29. University of Missouri Kansas City.
Thakur J, M.L. Bose, M. Hossain, A. Janaiah (2001) ‘Rural Income Distribution and
Poverty in Bihar: Insights from Village Studies’, Economic and Political Weekly,
Vol. 35, No. 52/53: 4657-4663
39