Chapter I

INTRODUCTION
In the context of global economic crisis and economic slowdown, providing livelihood security to the people is the major challenging task for the Government of India. At the beginning of the 21st century, 260 million people in the country did not have income to meet their both ends. India is home to 25 per cent of the worlds poor, of which 75 per cent were in the rural areas (http://planningcommission.nic.in). Agriculture wage earners, small and marginal farmers and casual workers engaged in non-agriculture activities constitute the bulk of the rural poor. Small land holdings and their low productivity are the causes of poverty among the households dependent on land-based activities. Poor educational base and lack of other vocational skills also perpetuate poverty. Due to the poor physical and social capital base, a large proportion of people are forced to seek employment in vocations with extremely low levels of productivity and wages. Migration of labour, discrimination in wages paid to men and women, distressed child labourer etc., are the common features of rural labour market. There arises a need to take care of the wage employment needs of the rural poor. The creation of employment opportunities for unskilled workforce has been a major challenge for development planners and administrators. The Government of India had launched a number of wage employment programmes over the years to provide employment opportunity and to eradicate the poverty among the poor people; prominent among them are Food for Work (FFW) (1977), National Rural Employment Programme (NREP) (1980) Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme (RLEGP) (1983), etc., The NREP and RLEGP were merged under Jawahar Rojgar Yojana (JRY) in 1989 to generate meaningful employment opportunities for the unemployed and underemployed in rural areas through the creation of economic infrastructure besides community and social assets. JRY was revamped as the Jawahar Gram Samridhi Yojana (JGSY- 1999) for creation of rural economic infrastructure with employment generation as a secondary objective. Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS) -1993 was designed to provide employment in the form of manual work in the lean agriculture season. In spite of their many shortcomings, wage employment schemes were proved beneficial and created much needed rural infrastructure. The Government further launched National Food for Work Programme (NFWP) in 2004 to provide food-linked employment opportunity to the

poor in 150 most backward districts of the country. Even though the above programmes yielded significant outcomes, still a large chunk of rural population are not absorbed for engaging in various rural developmental activities. In this scenario, the Government has proposed an innovative Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act on 7th September 2005, which is altogether different from the earlier employment schemes in the context of demand driven approach rather than supply driven approach. Based on the Act, the scheme of National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme was ceremoniously launched by the Honble Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh on February 2nd 2006. It is implemented by the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and is the worlds biggest employment guarantee programme. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act was renamed as Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) on 2nd October 2009 as a befitting tribute to the Father of the Nation, Mahatma Gandhi. This MGNREG Act is historic and unique legislation reiterating governments commitment towards promoting livelihood security in rural areas with a promise of providing at least 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in a financial year. So far, significant progress has been achieved under MGNREG Act, as revealed by the facts that, nearly half a million worth of assets were created and nearly three percent of Indias population were provided with a guaranteed employment by the end of 2010-11 with a Cumulative number of household issued job cards was 119824438, number of households who have demanded employment 55763244, number of households provided employment was 54954225, person days were 25715.25 with SCs were 7875.65 lakhs, STs 5361.8 lakhs and others were 12477.8 lakhs, funds available 5264889.48, central release (sanctioned) were were 5082587 (www.nrega.nic.in). Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme in Andhra Pradesh It is essential to note that, MGNREGA is a law and not just a scheme. It is implemented with an intention to protect rural households from poverty and hunger. MGNREGA can also serve other objectives: creating productive assets, protecting the environment, empowering women, reducing rural-urban migration, and fostering social equity, among others. Thus, MGNREGA is not just an employment scheme, it is a tool of economic and social change in rural areas with legal right for work. 1038287.82, expenditure was 3937727.03, works ongoing 2496763, works completed 2585824, and total works

In Andhra Pradesh, this Scheme was first launched in Anantapur district on February 2nd, 2006 with the objective of providing every rural household a guarantee of at least 100 days of employment during a financial year by providing unskilled manual work in rural areas to those members of the rural household, who volunteer to do such work. The Act also promises for the creation of durable assets and livelihood resources for the poor through the works undertaken in this programme. Another meritorious aspect of this programme is to provide timely payments and also to ensure that the right beneficiary receives the wage payments. This programme is aimed at the development of degraded cultivable land belonging to SC, ST families, small and marginal farmers. Land levelling, silt application, clearance of bushes, deep ploughing etc. are some of the land development works being taken up in the villages. Afforestation is one of the important interventions under APREGS; and was found to be the most useful in terms of creation of wage employment and regenerate resources forest area in the long run. Construction of roads (i.e., rural connectivity program) for uncovered SC/ST habitations under APREGS is also given due priority. The Government of Andhra Pradesh has promoted dry land horticulture and growing of trees (i.e., fodder, fuel, timber and fruit trees) on bunds and periphery of agriculture fields in order to generate additional income. The year wise progress is also heartening since its inception. In 2010-11 total number of Job cards issued were 1,25,97,952 lakhs, total expenditure was

5,47,312.92, total number of person days generated was 33,95,76,671, average wage rate per day per person was 97.22, total number of households completed 100 days of wage employment 9,68,532 (www.nrega.ap.nic.in). Despite several achievements, several weaknesses remain. The most important have to do with the quality of assets created. The Government has not paid adequate attention to strengthen the process of peoples planning and implementation of works. The immense potential of MGNREGS for transforming rural livelihoods thus remains completely unrealized. It is known that, under the MGNREGS, the Union Government provides 90 per cent funds for the works and remaining 10 per cent is the State's matching share. However, various State Governments are finding it difficult or rather impossible to take optimum benefit of the MGNREGS because of its limitations in meeting the State's share from the meager district plans.

The problem statement

In view of the constraints identified in the execution of the Act, there lies immense need to have an in depth analysis regarding the causes for these constraints. The literature reviewed regarding the performance of MGNREGA in the selected districts of Andhra Pradesh indicated that, they are facing several constraints and thus, hampering the success of this programme on the lines of promises made at the beginning of its execution. Further, to draw the relevant policy suggestions, an in depth analysis comes to the help of administrators. Though the programme is still in its formative stages of implementation, but it can be expected that significant impact has taken place on different stakeholders as well as in different aspects of rural India. Wage earners are the main focus of this programme. Without any doubt, it can be said that this programme has enormous potential to uplift the socio-economic conditions of the rural poor, which are mainly constituted by the landless agricultural labourers and the marginal and small farmers. Especially in the state like Andhra Pradesh, where economy is largely depending upon agriculture, 72% of the population lives in rural areas, out of which 28.6% lies below poverty line. This rights based platform of the programme can make a difference to rural livelihood security by guaranteeing 100 days of wage employment to every household. Substantial increase in income will obviously lead to a better standard of living. In this context it is important to know what actual impact this programme has made on wage earners with respect to their socio-economic conditions. It is also being expected that the MGNREGA has brought changes in the employment pattern of the rural labourers. The number of days of employment may have increased along with the changes in the distribution of workforce in different jobs, including the agriculture. The prevailing wage rates in the rural areas are trending upward. On the other hand, there is a strong argument of shifting of labour forces from the agricultural jobs to MGNREGA works which is adversely affecting the agricultural operations. High involvement of women in MGNREGA is a common feature of this programme in every corner of the country. So it can also be expected that it will lead to a greater empowerment of them.

When it comes to providing 100 days of wage employment to every household, the programme is far behind from achieving the target as the national average is 54.73 person days employment per household in 2010-11 which is the highest ever since inception of the programme. Though without any doubt the MGNREGA has potential to change the socioeconomic constraints of rural India in the long term but as with any other legislation, it is practically impossible to make it foolproof. So taking all these into account, the present study attempted to accomplish the following objectives: Objectives of the study 1. To study the impact of Andhra Pradesh Rural Employment Guarantee scheme on livelihood security of people in rural areas 2. To study the impact of Andhra Pradesh Rural Employment Guarantee scheme on eco-restoration and regeneration of natural resource base for sustainable rural livelihood. 3. To study the impact of Andhra Pradesh Rural Employment Guarantee scheme on creation of durable community, social and economic assets and infrastructure development in rural areas of Andhra Pradesh. 4. To study the constraints in implementation of the scheme by different stakeholders. Scope of the study The results of the study are expected to throw light on the impact of MGNREGA on livelihood security, economic security and regeneration of resources of the beneficiaries, to impose the implementation aspects and review the constraints of the MGNREGA. The results of the study will be useful to draw and suggest suitable policy implications for improving the working of the programme. Limitations of the study The study is confined to three districts of Andhra Pradesh and selected mandals and villages. Hence the implications and suggestions drawn from the study should be interpreted cautiously keeping in view the geographical, socio economic, political and

administrative backgrounds of the selected districts, mandals and villages. It is also possible that some of the responses might not have correctly or fully reflected the beneficiaries inner thoughts and opinions about MGNREGA. In spite of this sufficient care has been taken to design proper tools to get the data for the study as objectively as possible. The schedule prepared for the study have dealt only with those items that are in use and those works that are under taken under MGNREGA in selected districts of

Andhra Pradesh. The area of investigation was restricted to three districts from three regions, three mandals from each district and two villages from each mandal, therefore the implementation of the study should not be generalized for larger areas. However, careful and rigorous procedures have been adopted in carrying out the research as objectively as possible. In spite of the individual bias made by the respondent farmers in eliciting the necessary information, it is believed that the findings and conclusions drawn in the present study would form the basis for future research study.
Hypothesis The following hypotheses are formulated for testing the impact of MGNREGA. 1. The employment days per year increase after the implementation of MGNREGA. The labour demand for agriculture decreases and non agriculture labour demand increases after implementation of MGNREGA. Money wages and real wages have increased Income of the beneficiary households increases due to MGNREGA Consumption expenditure of beneficiary households will increase due to implementation of MGNREGA. Food security of beneficiary households will increase It was hypothesized economic security increases Eco restoration and natural resource base for sustainable livelihood will not change.

2.

3. 4. 5.

6. 7. 8.

Organisation of the Thesis

The thesis has been organized under the following headings:

1) Chapter I: IntroductionGeneral introduction about the status of the MGNREGA in India and Andhra Pradesh, its achievements, weakness and the problem statement along with the objectives and scope of the study are presented. 2) Chapter II: Review of Literature-In this chapter, an attempt was made to review the concepts and past studies which hold relevance to the current problem. 3) Chapter III: Material and Methods-In this chapter, sampling procedure, tools and techniques employed for the collection and analysis of data, the terms and concepts used in the study were given. 4) Chapter IV: Results and Discussion-The presentation of results, discussion of the results for their relevance and significance with past literature and policy implications are presented. 5) Chapter V: Summary and Conclusions-The results were summarized and conclusions were drawn to make necessary policy suggestions.