Hindustan Times ST (Mumbai) - Live

In Covid-19, the rural job plan was a big safety net

A new analysis of MGNREGA shows that an increase in allocation in 2020-21 made a difference to households and acted as a safety net for the vulnerable, but the budget still fell short. To meet the scheme’s overall goals, the government must boost its allo

-

India’s Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) is one of the largest social protection programmes in the world based on the right to work. In a recently released report, we present evidence that the increased allocation for MGNREGA in the Covid-19 pandemic-hit year (Financial Year 2020-21) made a crucial difference to rural households. But even the increased budget fell far short of what was required. The report is based on a survey of 2,000 job card-holding households in eight blocks across Bihar, Karnataka, Maharashtr­a and Madhya Pradesh. The study was carried out by the Centre for Sustainabl­e Employment, Azim Premji University, along with the National Consortium of Civil Society Organisati­ons on MGNREGA and Collaborat­ive Research and Disseminat­ion .

The surveyed households are predominan­tly lower caste, marginal farmers or casual workers. The vast majority reported income loss of 10 to 50%, on an already lowincome base of around ₹30,000 to ₹100,000 per year for a family of five to six persons. With the disappeara­nce of other sources of income, including remittance­s, MGNREGA became a vital source of livelihood. In this context, the study asked three questions. To what extent did MGNREGA earnings compensate them for lost incomes? Did households get as much MGNREGA work as they wanted? And did they get their wages on time?

We found that MGNREGA compensate­d for 20 to 80% of lost income, depending on the block. These suggest that even with an annual average of 50 days of MGNREGA work for households, its earnings softened the blow of the pandemic-induced first national lockdown. This is a reminder of the extent of the catastroph­e that would have happened without an MGNREGA and the extent of the economic vulnerabil­ity of these families.

MGNREGA is a demand-driven Act, and as per law, every household demanding work must get it within 15 days. However, owing to budget and capacity constraint­s, administra­tors have to make one of two choices. First, give fewer days of work to many households, and the second is to provide many days of work to a few households. These give rise to two types of exclusions, resulting in unmet demand. First, households that need work but do not get even a single day of work, and second, households that get some work but not as much as they want.

We found that 39% of households did not get a single day of work despite wanting 77 days on average. In the second group, work received fell short of that needed by a large margin of 64 days. Sixtythree per cent of the households cited that inadequate work being sanctioned or opened was the main reason for not getting work despite wanting or needing it. At a conservati­ve estimate, we found that, to meet the full extent of work demand, the labour budget should have been three times what was allocated. Delays in wage payments have been a persistent problem, which also continued during the Covid-19 year. Only 36% of the households reported having been paid within the mandated 15-day period.

Responding to our study, a ministry of rural developmen­t press release noted that as per the MGNREGA computer-based administra­tive database (MIS), close to 100% of households that demanded work received it. However, there is a crucial difference between a household wanting MGNREGA work and a household’s work demand being registered on the MIS. Our survey asked families if they wanted work and if they had received as much work as they wanted. On the other hand, MIS only shows the work demand registered on the system by officials.

In practice, often, due to insufficie­nt funds, full demand for work is not entered on the MIS. Consequent­ly, the unmet demand on the MIS is lower than the actual unmet demand.

There is incontrove­rtible evidence that inadequate funds allocation for MGNREGA directly results in high unmet demand and delays in wage payments. The legally mandated delay compensati­on that workers are entitled to as per the Act continues to be unpaid.

Owing to the centralisa­tion of funds management, panchayats have limited power in programme implementa­tion, leading to a dilution of the 73rd constituti­onal amendment. Further, a complex technical apparatus in programme implementa­tion has meant that the programme functionin­g has become too opaque from the workers’ perspectiv­e. It is fine when things work, but workers and local officials feel powerless when the technical apparatus does not perform as envisioned. Therefore, one needs to constantly ask if technical changes are making workers’ lives easier and if there is an accountabi­lity framework for digital innovation­s. Social audits are a part of the programme vision. However, that has been stuck in vicious circles of insufficie­nt funds, leading to further dilution of accountabi­lity, thereby aiding corruption. Despite these problems, MGNREGA remains popular, as evident in the broad consensus among households surveyed across states that the programme contribute­d significan­tly to developmen­t in their villages and served as a key to avoiding migration.

This was regardless of whether households got to work in MGNREGA or not. As a most compelling referendum for expanding MGNREGA, we found that more than 80% of households recommende­d that

MGNREGA should provide 100 days of work per year per individual. At present, the work entitlemen­t is 100 days per year per household.

MGNREGA is a powerful tool for providing income security to India’s most vulnerable households while aiding overall village developmen­t and empowering communitie­s. To achieve these goals effectivel­y, there is an imminent need to increase its allocation significan­tly, strengthen local governance, increase staff strength, increase accountabi­lity, avoid technical fixes for structural matters, and ensure that rights are always honoured in letter and spirit.

 ?? ?? Rajendran Narayanan
Rajendran Narayanan
 ?? ?? Amit Basole
Amit Basole

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India