RURL POVERTY-AGRICULTURE LABOUR

SOCIOLOGY

Submitted by

KRISHNA KOUSIKI

2014065

SEMESTER I

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM NOVEMBER 2014

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

1

-VISAKHAPATNAM

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Miss.krishna kousiki with Reg. No. 2014065 of Ist Semester prepared the

project on “Rural poverty-Agriculture Labour” in partial fulfillment of his semester course in

the subject Sociology during the academic year 2014-2015 under my supervision and guidance.

Date: October; 2014

Signature of the Faculty

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

2. INTRODUCTION

3. CAUSES FOR BACKWARDNESS IN VILLAGES

4. PROBLEMS FACING IN RURAL AREAS BY LAND LESS LABOUR

5. POLICIES FOR REDUCING RURAL POVERTY

6. RURAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS

7. MGNREGA ACT 2005

8. EMPRICIAL STUDY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

3

I have made my project titled “Sociology” under the supervision of Mr. M. Lakshmipati Raju,

Faculty Lecturer, Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law University. I find no words to express

my sense of gratitude for Lakshmipati Raju sir for providing the necessary guidance at every

step during the completion of this project.

I am also grateful to the office, librarian and library staff of DSNLU, Visakhapatnam for

allowing me to use their library whenever I needed to. Further I am grateful to my learned

teachers for their academic patronage and persistent encouragement extended to me.  I am once

again highly indebted to the office and Library Staff of DSNLU for the support and cooperation

extended by them from time to time. I cannot conclude with recording my thanks to my friends

for the assistance received from them in the preparation of this project.

-Krishna Kousiki

Roll no.- 2014065

Sec. - A

Semester 1

Introduction

4

Rural poverty refers to poverty found in rural areas,including factors of rural society,rural economy and rural political systems that give rise to the rural poverty

Land less labour refers to the people with owning any property land and are working for their needs.

About 75% of the Indian population lives in rural areas and about 80% of this population is dependent on agriculture for its livelihood. Agriculture accounts for about 37% of the national income. The development of the rural areas and of agriculture and its allied activities thus becomes vital for the rapid development of the economy as a whole.

Causes for Backwardness in Villages

1. Zamindari System, the legacy of the British Rule

India was under British rule for 200 years. British policies were aimed in revenue collection and not rural development. They introduced the zamindari system. The zamindars were deemed the owners of all land and they collected as much revenue as they could from the peasants. The system left the peasants very poor and the zamindars did very little to improve the conditions of the villages. After the country attained independence this system was abolished, but the conditions of the peasants is yet to transform completely.

2. The Bonded Labour System

It is equivalent to near slavery. Bonded labour is an indebted agricultural worker, who had borrowed from the money lender at usurious rate of interest and had to work in his farm for low wages. The system was used to permanently enslave the worker, as the worker was only able to repay a part of interest and the loan with compounded residual interest went on swelling. The agricultural labour can free himself eventually only by giving his son in bondage as a substitute. Under the 20-point economic programme, the Government India under Prime Minister Mrs.Indira Gandhi abolished bonded labour system and brought legislation to this effect in 1975. Despite the legislation the system is known to persist here and there in select areas.

3. Other contributory reasons are the total lack of agricultural development under foreign rule, poor communication, roads and other infrastructure development in villages, lack of education and health facilities, and the destruction of the thriving Indian cottage industries on account of competition from the cheap machine made goods imported under British rule

PROBLEMS FACING IN RURAL AREAS BY LAND LESS LABOUR

5

As we know the 60-70% of rural population in India lives in primitive conditions. This sorry state exists even after 60 years of independence. So that Rural Development programmes have urgency in the present condition also. There are many obstacles in the rural development programmes which are as under

1. In 21st Century, there is no electricity supply in many villages.

2. Now also many rural peoples using primitive methods of cooking, living and farming and they have trust on these methods.

3. By using primitive cook stoves, around 300,000 death / year takes plan due to pollution.

4. 54% of India’s population is below 25 years and most of them live in rural areas with very little employment opportunities.

5. Literacy is the major problem in rural development programme.

6. The poor extension linkage causes slow growth of rural development.

7. Untrained, unskilled, inexperienced staff in extension linkage cannot provide satisfactory help to rural peoples.

8. Every one want to go to the cities, so that rural people’s remains as ignores part by the policy makers also.

9. Privatization concept is useful for rural development but, government not praying much attention to this aspect.

10. Policy makes prepared policies, programmes for betterment of rural people but, if these programmes are not implemented very well then have no used.

6

POLICIES FOR REDUCING RURAL POVERTY

To design policies that have a chance of effectively helping the rural poor, the focus of policy should be on four major groups:

small landowners who cultivate their land;  landless tenants who cultivate other people's land;  landless laborers who depend on casual or long-term employment in the farm or nonfarm

sectors; and  women, who could also be part of any of the three preceding groups.

All of these groups will benefit from good macroeconomic management—which helps keep inflation in check and maintains unsubsidized prices—because it facilitates sustained economic growth through private investment and competitive markets. Needless to say, unfair laws or poor enforcement of existing laws, exclusion of the poor from decision making, and pervasive corruption in the public sector are no less detrimental to the well-being of the poor than they are to the country's overall economic growth.

Achieving agricultural growth by applying new technologies is one of the most important ways to reduce rural poverty. The impact of such efforts on the rural poor, however, depends on initial conditions, the structure of relevant institutions, and incentives. Research shows that agricultural stagnation has harmed the rural poor in sub-Saharan Africa by creating food shortages and higher prices that have reduced their ability to buy food and find work. Conversely, experience with the Green Revolution showed that rapid agricultural progress made a big difference in reducing rural poverty in parts of South Asia. Researchers have found that higher crop yields reduce both the number of rural poor and the severity of rural poverty. But these effects are strong only if certain conditions are met:

land and capital markets are not distorted by a high concentration of ownership of natural resources (agricultural land), including unfair tenancy contracts, and repression in the capital markets (with restricted access to finance); 

public policy on pricing, taxes, and the exchange rate does not penalize agriculture and encourage or subsidize labor displacement; 

public investment in basic education and health care is high and used effectively; farmer literacy and good health have great influence on farm productivity; 

public sector support for agricultural research is strong and resulting improvements are made available to small farmers is effective; 

physical capital, like irrigation systems, access roads, is adequately maintained;  safety nets and social assistance are available for the very poor, particularly the landless

(casual) workers and rural women, in the form of public works programs, microfinance, and food subsidies; and 

7

the rural poor are directly involved in the identification, design, and implementation of programs to ensure effective use of resources and equitable distribution of benefits.

Since the rural poor are a varied group, we need to understand how macroeconomic changes and policies can affect them. The three major ways in which policies affect the rural poor are through markets,infrastructure (including public services), and transfers.

The markets in which the rural poor participate are those for products, inputs (labor and nonlabor), and finance (from formal and informal sources). Several important features of these markets can affect conditions in rural areas.

The infrastructure that directly affects the rural sector's productivity and the rural poor's quality of life includes the economic (transport, communications, extension services, and irrigation) and the social (education, health care, water, and sanitation). Given that most elements of a country's infrastructure are provided through public funding, the level of spending, cost effectiveness, quality of service, and access of the rural poor to infrastructure and public services have important effects on human capital and productivity in rural areas.

Transfers, which are both private and public, provide some insurance against anticipated and unanticipated economic shocks. Most of the rural poor depend on private transfers among households, extended families, and other kinship groups. Public transfers can take the form of redistribution of such assets as land, employment on public works projects, and targeted subsidies for inputs and some consumer products. These transfers supplement or displace private transfers, depending on the policy instrument and how it is used. But these channels—markets, infrastructure, and transfers—do not work in the same way for all of the rural poor because each group has quite different links to the economy.

RURAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS

RLEGP-Rural land less labour employment guarantee program

RLEGP was introduced on August 15, 1983, with the objective of (a) improving and expanding employment opportunities for the rural landless with a view to providing guarantee of employment to at least one member of every landless household up to 100 days in a year and (b) creating durable assets for strengthening the infrastructure so as to meet the growing requirements of the rural economy.

An outlay of Rs. 500 crores to be fully financed by the Central Government was provided under this programme in the sixth Plan. The implementation of the programme was entrusted to the states and union territories, but they were required to prepare specific projects for approval by a central committee.

During 1983-85, the central committee approved 320 projects with an estimated cost of Rs. 906.59 crores. The target for employment generation in 1983-84 and 1984-85 was fixed at

8

360 million many days against which 260.18 million many days of employment was actually generated.

Mid-way through the sixth Plan, the RLEGP was revamped. It started with the dual objective of expanding employment opportunities in the rural areas and providing sharper focus on the landless labour households which constitute the hardcore of the people below the poverty line.

Efforts are being made to implement a limited guarantee for providing 80 to 100 days employment to the landless labour households through this programme. In the seventh Plan an outlay of Rs. 1,250.81 crores has been provided for NREP in the Central Sector which will be matched equally by the states. An outlay of Rs. 1,743.78 crores has been provided in the seventh Plan for RLEGP which will be borne entirely by the Centre. Based on the average wage of Rs. 8.61 per day as in 1984-85 and a wage material cost ratio of 50:50, a total employment of 1,445 million many days under NREP and 1,013 million many days under RLEGP is likely to be generated during the seventh Plan period at an average rate of around 290 million many days and 200 million man days per annum respectively.

MGNREGA ACT 2005

The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005 (No 42), also known as the "Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act", and abbreviated to MGNREGA, is an Indian labour law and social security measure that aims to guarantee the 'right to work' and ensure livelihood security in rural areas by providing at least 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in a financial year to every household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work. The UPA Government had planned to increase the number of working days from 100 to 150 before the 2014 Lok Sabha Elections in the country but failed. The statute is hailed by the government as "the largest and most ambitious social security and public works programme in the world". The more comprehensive survey of Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, a ‘Supreme Audit Institution’ defined in Article 148 of the Constitution of India, reports serious lapses in implementation of the act.

Targeting poverty through employment generation using rural works has had a long history in India that began in the 1960s. After the first three decades of experimentation, the government launched major schemes like Jawahar Rozgar Yojana, Employment Assurance Scheme, Food for Work Programme, Jawahar Gram Samridhi Yojana and Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana that were forerunners to Mahatma Gandhi NREGA. The theme of government approach had been to merge old schemes to introduce new ones while retaining the basic objective of providing additional wage employment involving unskilled manual work and also to create durable assets.

9

The major responsibility of implementation was also gradually transferred to the Panchayati Raj Institutions. Unlike its precursors, the Mahatma Gandhi NREGA guaranteed employment as a legal right. However, the problem areas are still the same as they were in the 1960s. The most significant ones are: lack of public awareness, mismanagement and above all mass corruption.

The statement of the law provides adequate safeguards to promote its effective management and implementation. The act explicitly mentions the principles and agencies for implementation, list of allowed works, financing pattern, monitoring and evaluation, and most importantly the detailed measures to ensure transparency and accountability. Further the provisions of the law adhere to the principles enunciated in the Constitution of India.

The comprehensive assessment of the performance of the law by the constitutional auditor revealed serious lapses arising mainly due to lack of public awareness, mismanagement and institutional incapacity. The CAG also suggests a list of recommendations to the government for corrective measures. The government, however, had also released a collection of reportedly independent researches evaluating the functioning of the act whose results significantly differed from the CAG report. Meanwhile, the social audits in two Indian states highlight the potential of the law if implemented effectively.

EMPRICIAL STUDY

NAME VILLAGE

AGE

GENDER

CASTE

EDUCATION

FAMILY

RELIGION

BPL CHILDREN

DAILY WAGES

WORKING DAYS

CHILD LABOR

MGNERG

10

S.ANJINAYLLU

YLAMANCHILI

55

MALE

OC

PRIMARY

6 EXTENDED

HINDHU

6000/-PER MONTH

MALE-2

400/-

230 DAYS

NO

NO

M.VENTARAO

UTADA

65

MALE

OC

ILLETEATE

2 HINDHU

7000/-PERMONTH

MALE-2

300/-

200 DAYS

NO

YES

K.SAHADEVUDU

PENUMADAM

61

MALE

SC PRIMARY

6 CHIRSTIAN

5000/- PER MNTH

MALE-1FEMALE-1

200/-

200 DAYS

NO

NO

T.SREENU

YELAMANCHILI

40

MALE

OC

PRIMARY

7 HINDHU

10000/-PER MONTH

NO 500/-

365 DAYS

NO

NO

J.R.VSATYANARYANA

YELAMANCHILI

38

MALE

OC

PRIMARY

3 HINDHU

6000/-PER MONTH

FEMALE-1

200/-

240DAYS

NO

NO

K.SIVANARYANA

YELAMANCHILI

30

MALE

OC

HIGH SCHOOL

4 HINDHU

8000/-PER MONTH

FEMALE-2

200/-

250 DAYS

NO

YES

S.PEDIRAJU

YELAMANCHILI

45

MALE

OC

PRIMARY

4 HINDHU

9000/-ER MONTH

MALE-1FEMALE-1

300/-

230DAYS

NO

NO

M.RATNAM

YELAMANCHILI

60

FEMALE

SC ILLETERATE

1 HINDHU

1000/-PERMONTH

MALE-2

125/-

10DAYS

NO

NO

G.SUBBA RAO

YELAMAN

60

MAL

SC HIGH

6 HINDH

6000/-

MALE-

250/-

250DA

NO

NO

11

CHILI E SCHOL

U PERMONTH

3FEMALE-1

YS

G.VARAPRASAD

YELAMANCHILI

40

MALE

SC HIGH SCHOOL

4 HINDHU

5000/-PERMONTH

MALE-2

300/-

260DAYS

NO

NO

B.VEERA SWAMI

YELAMANCHILI

76

MALE

BC

ILLETARATE

7 HINDHU

2000/-PERMONTH

MALE-3FEMALE-2

125/-

10 DAYS

NO

NO

T.SESHAMA

YELAMANCHILI

65

FEMALE

BC

ILLETERATE

2 HNDHU

200/-PERMONTH

MALE-2FEMALE-1

150/-

150DAYS

NO

NO

C.SIRINIVAS RAO

YELAMANCHILI

37

MALE

OC

PRIMARY

5 HINDHU

8000/-PERMONTH

MALE-1FEMALE-1

600/-

365/-DAYS

NO

NO

R.RAMU CHINCHINADU

40

MALE

OC

ILLETERATE

4 HINDHU

7000/-PERMONTH

MALE-2

600/-

250DAYS

NO

NO

CONCLUSION

12

Agriculture is the back bone of India economy .so,the rural poverty leads to the deacline in economy of nation.enactment of new laws regarding the health of the people, giving subsidy to the farmer,providing free electricity,giving good selling prices,abolishment of tax while transporting the agricultural goods,protecting the agricultural lands leads to increase in economy of nation.devolping and creating the awerance regarding MGNREG Act,minimum daily wages Act,RLEGP Abolishment of bonded labour gives the remarkable result.

It also underlines the main cause of a deceleration in agriculture in the post-reform period and makes policy suggestions for the regeneration of Indian agriculture. The differential growth of various sectors in India in the post independence period has resulted in major changes in the composition of gross domestic product (GDP) of India. The level of land productivity in any country is determined by a combination of demographic, geographic, structural and institutional and policy factors. The number of workers engaged in agriculture is, in turn, determined by the level of demand for food and other agricultural products, the demographic pressure on land, the extent of diversification of the economy and capital intensity of agricultural production process. A rapid growth in agriculture that leads to increased productivity and income of a large number cultivators and agricultural labourers therefore becomes an important vehicle for accelerating growth in the secondary and tertiary sectors of the economy through forward, backward and consumption linkages. In India for nearly four decades from 1950-51 to 1990-91, agricultural policy has constituted a part and parcel of overall planning of the economy. With the initiation of economic reforms in 1991, both the overall macro-economic policy framework as well as agricultural policy has undergone a significant change. These changes have had a significant impact on the growth of agriculture in the post-reform period.

http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/20083156469.html

13

14