Impact of the Right to Work Programme_grp 10

8/13/2019 Impact of the Right to Work Programme_grp 10

1/38

IMPACT OF THE RIGHT TOWORK PROGRAMME


2/38

Right to Work is an unenforceable right

Staggering financial implications

A brief timeline :

1970, Employment Guarantee Act,Govt. of Maharashtra

1978, IRDP

2001, SGRY

2005,MGNREGA

1

2

3

4

INTRODUCTION


3/38


4/38

Providing wage employment opportunities andboost rural incomeCreating sustainable rural livelihoods through

regeneration of the natural resource base i.e.augmenting productivity and supporting creation ofdurable assets Strengthening rural governance through

decentralisation and processes of transparency andaccountabilityReduce population pressure in urban areas throughmigration


5/38

Ministryof Rural

Development nodal

ministry

Implementingagencies line dept. & state

agencies

Intermediate & district panchayats

Main agency: Gram Panchayat


6/38

GoI : 100% wage cost for unskilled labour75% of material cost

State Govt. : 25% of material cost100% of unemployment allowance

Programme officer & DistrictProgramme coordinator

Fundsreleasedto bank

& PO A/C


7/38


8/38


9/38

This Spiral and the demand stimulating process iscalled the Multiplier effect. The value of the Multiplierdepends on the marginal propensity to consume of

benefitting from this scheme. The mpc is our extraspending out of the additional rupee we earn.

Higher the mpc, greater will be the stimulus todemand. One advantage of the NREGA scheme is thatit is handing out money to the rural workers who havethe highest mpc. People who are on the margins ofexistence are more likely to spend than save most ofwhat they earn.


10/38

Rising incomes also improve capacity utilization and happier expectations act as incentives for moreinvestment.This positive impact of growing economy on private fixed investment is known as the Accelerator

Principle in macro economic theory.

Thus along with public investment it would also lead to a surge in private investment and gives a chance tothese workers to return to fulltime farmingThere are examples of such behavior by the farmers in the Tribal

belt of Central India. Te construction of dams on the common land helped recharge the wells of the poorfarmers who worked as laborers. The additional income and public investment incentivized them to make

private fixed investment.

Millions of small and marginal farmers are in fact owners of small pieces of agricultural land who are forced towork under NREGA because the productivity of their land is not enough to make their ends meet.Theadditional income which these worker get under NREGA scheme, can be used by them to increase the

productivity of their land by increasing their investment in goods such as better farming technology, seeds,pesticides, storage.


11/38


12/38

Benefits andsuccess

55-62%

employmentfor SC/ST

households

Opening bank

and postoffice

accounts

Creation ofsustainable

assets

Income &livelihoodsecurity

Agriculturalproductivity

Womenempowerment


13/38

Household income - 1,064 ruralhouseholds across Medak district ofAndhra Pradesh, around 12 percent ofthe households indicated that theirhousehold income had increased asmore members of the same householdwere being able to work

Monthly per capita

expenditure(MPCE) 2500 householdssurveyed in Andhra Pradesh.Participation in MGNREGA had asignificant and positive impact onconsumption expenditure, intake ofenergy and protein and asset

accumulation

Net benefits from the Scheme also takeinto account, availability of alternateemployment opportunities(AEO) andopportunity cost of time as important

parameters

1. Income and Livelihood Security

Fact : Rs 1,10,700 crore (66 % of the totalexpenditure of around Rs 1,66,000 crore)as worker wages from FY 2006 up to FY

201112


14/38

Wages of female casual workers increased by 8%Wages of male casual workers increased by 1%


15/38


16/38

National participation rate of 47 per cent, evidence suggests that women areparticipating in the Scheme more actively than in other works, surpassing

the minimum requirement of 33%

Has reduced traditional gender wage discrimination, particularly in thepublic works sector- Rs90.9 per day for men, and for women it was Rs 87 perday. The wage difference was larger for labour in other public works; Rs 98.3

per day for men and Rs 86.1 per day for women

Economic Independence

2. Gender and SocialEmpowerment


17/38

Green line represents the 33% women participation mandated by the Act


18/38

Return on Investment for MGNREGA assets more than 100% Has faced criticism on the quality and sustainability of the assets created

under it

To assess quality, durability and utility

RoI/cost recovery :Assessed 143 bestperforming MGNREGA

water related assets andfound that RoI estimatesare positive in the case of amajority of assets. Out of143 assets,117 assets had aRoI of over 100 per cent in

the first year

Beneficiary perception-based surveys : Out of allthe MGNREGA assetsbeing used, 83 per cent inRajasthan, 80 per cent inMadhya Pradesh and 67per cent in AndhraPradesh, wereconsidered to be of good

or very good quality

Quality and soundnessof technical design: InMadhya Pradesh, in an

evaluation of 100 dugwells, across fivedistricts, irrigationstructures were foundto have a low failurerate of 5 per cent


19/38


20/38


21/38


22/38


23/38

Misconception : Agriculture labour shortage causedentirely by MGNREGA.Fact : 70 per cent of the works in the Scheme havebeen generated during the agriculture lean season

Also, impact on labor market varies from place toplaceFour distinct situations of MGNREGAs (demand,supply and market wages) interaction with the labourmarket

Insignificant ImpactMisfitSignificantPotentially significant


24/38

Led to an increase in bargaining powers ofthe laborers.

Seasonal scheduling of MNREGA Activities non agricultural peak seasons

Reduce distress migration as compared tomigration taken up for economic growth andother reasons


25/38


26/38


27/38

Income records for villages Gambhirpur,Abhapur & BandhanaRegression analysis run to test the impact of

yearly NREGA income and yearly secondaryincome to total yearly income (dependentvariable)

Results of regression analysisy = 4339.889 + 1.415 1 + 0.686 2

R Square Adjusted R Square

0.88 0.86


28/38

NREGA wage income increases the totalyearly income by Rs. 1.415

Secondary wage income increases the totalyearly income by Rs. 0.686R square value of 0.88 means that NREGAand secondary jobs alone contribute 88% ofyearly income earned by sample population


29/38


30/38

Low awareness about


31/38

Awareness

Low awareness about Unemployment allowance Work on demand Grievance redressal mechanism

Planning

Infrequent GSsLow participation in GSs for selection and prioritization of workWork selection not done according to set priorities or demand of the GSWork proportion undertaken by GP less than 50% of total cost of scheme in the district

DemandFor Work

AndUnemploy

ment

TheReasons for higher rationing:Larger proportion of existing demandLow institutional capacity to administer schemeLow awareness and empowerment levelsWeak PRIs

xtTimely AndFull

PaymentOf Wages

Wage payments often less than notified wageDelay in payments past 15 day limit huge disincentive

Continued cash payments due to poor bank and post office coverage (mandatory touse the same for wage transfer apart from cash)

LeakagesAnd

Misappropriations

Muster rolls filling and maintenance discrepanciesLarge leakages in Odisha, Jharkhand, ChhattisgarhNo irregularities in AP, HP, less in RajasthanUse of contractors and machinery which is prohibitedPayments to fictitious/ghost workers

Transparency And

Accountability

Proactive disclosure and social audits performed irregularly Karnataka, MP, RajasthanAP innovative steps for institutionalizing accountability tools into the governance systemIneffective grievance redressal

Accuracy Of

MIS

Concerns regarding accuracy of Management Information System (MIS) and Monthly

Progress Report Data


32/38


33/38

Systems workingin the field

Delivery ofentitlements

Good officers incharge

High politicalcommitment

Andhra Pradesh Good quality lower level field staff

Use of mandalsInstitutionalized social audit processthrough autonomous state unit

Good Management InformationSystem (MIS) designed by TCS

Rajasthan Considerable experience of draughtrelief programmes

Pioneered concept and use of RTI andsocial audit through Mazdoor KisanShakti Sangathan (MKSS)

Leading state of work provided;womens employment; number offamilies completing 100 days

2nd generation problems -maintaining pipeline of suitable works;

work quality by enhancingconvergence with other departments

Best managed NREGA programmes


34/38

Low politicalcommitment to theprogramme

Weaker systemsSignificant leakages upto

one-third to half of thestipulated wages

Orissa Leakages Attributedto state Government.No dedicated POs butgive additional chargeto BDOs

Ahead of most statesin conducting monthly

reporting MIS

Jharkand Poor no system ofelected panchayats

Beneficiary committeesthat tend to get hijackedby contractors

Regular staff reluctant to

hand over responsibilitiesto newly hired workers

SOR yet to be finalized

UP Employment picking upafter introducingminimum Rs.100 wage

Women participationremains low- 14%


35/38


36/38

Improvethe

ecological

balance

Strengthen the positivesynergy between

MGNREGA and agriculture and alliedrural livelihoods

Respond to the demands of the States for greaterlocation-specific lexibilityin permissible works


37/38

Recommendations

Effectiveplanning - StrictTime schedule

Ensuring theDemand-based

Character Greater role forcivil societyorganizations

Better social audits Transparency andaccountability

Limitations onadministrative

expensesEqual

Opportunity forvulnerable groups

StrengtheningMIS

Reducingdelays in wage

payments

Deployment ofHuman

resources


38/38

Documents

Impact of the Right to Work Programme_grp 10