MGNREGA

1
MGNREGA
2
National Rural Employment Guarantee 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
securitymeasure 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.
[1]
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.
[2]
The statute is hailed by
the government as "the largest and most ambitious social security and public
works programme in the world".
[3]
The more comprehensive survey
ofComptroller 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.
[4]
MGNREGA
3
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. The major
responsibility of implementation was also gradually transferred to
thePanchayati 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
MGNREGA
4
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.
MGNREGA
5
MGNREGA
6
OVERVIEW
According to the Eleventh Five Year Plan (200712), the number of Indians
living on less than $1 a day, called Below Poverty Line (BPL), was 300 million
that barely declined over the last three decades ranging from 1973 to 2004,
although their proportion in the total population decreased from 36 per cent
(199394) to 28 percent (200405),
[19]
and the rural working class dependent
on agriculture was unemployed for nearly 3 months per year
[20]
which was
rising due to a downward trend of the agricultural productivity and in turn also
aggravating poverty.
[21]
In large states like Bihar, Madhya
Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, the number of poor
even increased. The plan targeted poverty through MGNREGA which
promised employment as an entitlement.
The law is based on Gandhian principles.
[22]
Previous employment guarantee schemes (EGS) like Sampoorna Grameen
Rozgar Yojana (SGRY) or Universal Rural Employment Programme
and National Food For Work Programme (NFFWP) - both SGRY and NFFWP
MGNREGA
7
were merged with MGNREGA - also provided short-term unskilled
employment to poor, assured food and job security and created durable
assets.
[23]
In contrast to the earlier wage employment programmes,
MGNREGA, as per its definition, is a right-based, demand-driven public
employment programme that is principally based on decentralized,
participatory planning at the gram panchayat level with adequate
transparency and accountability safeguards for effective implementation.
[24]
The MGNREGA is notified on 7 September 2005 with the objective of
"enhancing 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".
[25]
In addition to this
the aim of MGNREGA is to create durable assets that would augment the
basic resources available to the poor. At minimum wage rate and within 5 km
radius of the village, the employment under MGNREGA is an entitlement that
creates an obligation on the government failing which an unemployment
allowance is to be paid within 15 days. Along with community participation,
MGNREGA
8
the MGNREGA is to be implemented mainly by the gram panchayats (GPs).
The involvement of contractors is banned. Labour-intensive tasks like creating
infrastructure for water harvesting, drought relief and flood control are
preferred. Starting from 200 districts in 2 February 2006, the MGNREGA
covered all the districts of India from 1 April 2008.
[26]
INTRODUCTION TO THE AREA OF RESEARCH
The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act
(MGNREGA) is an Indian job guarantee scheme, enacted by legislation on
August 25, 2005. The scheme provides a legal guarantee for one hundred
MGNREGA
9
days of employment in every financial year to adult members of any rural
household willing to do public work-related unskilled manual work at the
statutory minimum wage of Rs. 100 per day. The Central government outlay
for scheme is Rs. 39,100 crores ($8 billion) in FY 2009-10.
This act was introduced with an aim of improving the purchasing power of the
rural people, primarily semi or un-skilled work to people living in rural India,
whether or not they are below the poverty line. Around one-third of the
stipulated work force is women. The government is planning to open a call
center, which upon becoming operational can be approached on the toll-free
number, 1800-345-22-44. It was initially called the National Rural Employment
Guarantee Act (NREGA) but was renamed on 2nd October, 2009.
MGNREGA
10
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
To do an in-depth analysis of NREGA and its relevance in present context..
The study will aim to study:
To study the genesis and need for NREGA in India.
To enlist the distribution model adopted by NREGA
To evaluate the financial performance of NREGA for the last three years
across all major states.
To evaluate the effectiveness of NREGA in selected location in NCR
region (Suburbs).
To reveal using real time case studies on the usefulness on NREGA.
MGNREGA
11
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The study may reveal some aspects of usefulness of NREGA in Indian
Context.
MGNREGA
12
ESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research work will be done from two sources: -
(1) Primary data
(2) Secondary data
Primary data will be collected by onsite interview of the Officials of NREGA.
The interview will be structured and open-ended questions based on literature
survey, will be asked.
Secondary data will be collected by reviewing different literatures, from
published books, management journals, articles published by the other
researchers. Other sources will include Ministry of Rural Development and
Website of NREGA.The information gathered would be tabulated and
presented in the final report.
MGNREGA
13
JUSTIFICATION FOR CHOOSING THE RESEARCH PROPOSAL
The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) has been a subject
of lively debate during the last two years or so. Unfortunately, the factual
basis of this debate has been, so far, rather thin. This has made it possible
for extremist positions to flourish, without being put to the test of careful
evidence. Thus I have taken up this study on NREGA.
DETAILS OF THE EXTERNAL GUIDE
Name: Ravi Ranjan
Qualification: MBA
Designation: Relationship Manager
MGNREGA
14
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXISTING CONTENTS IN THIS FILE
Preface
Contents
Background
The Study Area- Socio Economic Profiles
of Nuapada and Sidhi
Methodology
Survey Findings- Nuapada
Survey Findings- Sidhi
Comparative Analysis
Conclusion
MGNREGA
15
Chapter-1
Introduction
It has been over two years since the National Employment Guarantee Act
(NREGA) was implemented in 200 of the most backward districts of India and
over one year since it began in another 130 districts. Further, it has been
more than three years since the National Food for Work Programme
(NFFWP), the pilot scheme launched by the government as a precursor to the
NREGA, was implemented in 200 districts. The debate began then and
continues till date about the feasibility and utility of the NREGA. The topic
spurs an interest in everybody from all walks of life largely because of the
enormity of scale. The scheme is the largest of its kind anywhere in the world
and thus involves a proportionate amount of resources. However, what is truly
large about the scheme that more or less dwarfs the quantum of resources
being put into the scheme is the number of lives that it intends to touch and
the way in which it intends to touch them. .
MGNREGA
16
The NREGAs coverage has been expanded from 330 districts to all 604
districts of India beginning April, 2008. As the scheme is implemented
throughout the country and as works begin everywhere, the magnitude of
lives that will be touched by it will inevitably be massive. However, what is
uncertain is the actual impact of the Act on the lives and livelihoods of people.
Whether the Act actually makes a lasting impact on these millions of people it
proposes to touch will depend on the extent to which the nation is able to
extract the developmental potential of the Act. In this regard, as we move on
the path towards nationwide implementation of NREGA it becomes imperative
that we take stock of the experience so far in order to learn from the
successes as well as failures.
This paper attempts to do just that. There have been a number of studies that
look at the implementation of the act in terms of employment created as well
as issues of wages, processes of implementation, feedback mechanisms, etc.
However, with the NREGA just emerging out of its infancy, few studies have
actually focused on an assessment of the impact of the NREGA in terms of
MGNREGA
17
the realization of its development potential. With the overwhelming
considerations of ideology and corruption at the forefront, rarely any of the
studies have attempted to look into the actual assets being created and their
contribution towards long term development and sustained employment
generation in the villages. This paper tries to bridge this lacuna by attempting
to study the effectiveness of the assets created under the act.
At a time when the world is facing one of the worst food crises ever
witnessed, it becomes extremely pertinent to look at the effectiveness of the
NREGA in providing both short and long term food security through work on
improvement of agriculture and provision of water. Even the origins of the
NREGA lie in the drought relief programmes of the 19
th
century which helped
provide purchasing power to agricultural workers in drought stricken areas.
Such a scheme would help curb starvation and hunger since the problem was
localized and a shortage in a drought stricken area simply needed to be met
by surpluses from elsewhere. A Food-for-Work scheme would then solve both
problems of selection and transfer of purchasing power to the needy. The
MGNREGA
18
problem today is much different. The shortage is no longer localized and
therefore a mere transfer of purchasing power would not lead to a solution.
Moreover, with an ever increasing strain on our meager resources, we need
to take measures that will empower people to take care of their own needs
rather than depend on external agencies. NREGA has the potential to do just
that by providing people what they most need/desire at the village level. In
such a situation, it becomes extremely crucial to assess the impact of the
NREGA, both in providing short and long term relief.
There have been numerous success stories of economic and environmental
regeneration where year-round productive employment has been generated
as a result of community or NGO efforts. Such success has not been found in
the government employment guarantee schemes of the past. Yet, the
potential of NREGA in reaching the rural poor is unsurpassed as it is now
being implemented in all the districts of India. There is thus an urgent need to
study how such success stories can be made part of the employment
MGNREGA
19
guarantee schemes, what are the lacunae and drawbacks and how they can
be addressed.
Using primary data collected from two districts, Nuapada district in Orissa and
Sidhi district in Madhya Pradesh, we shall assess the potential of the NREGA
in providing food and livelihood security.
MGNREGA
20
MGNREGA
21
BACKGROUND
NREGA is going through a crucial phase. It is a bit early to quantify its impacts
definitively given that people are still grappling with implementation hitches.
The institutional mechanism required for implementation of such a massive
scheme have still not been completely set up. In order to make sure the
NREGA does not become redundant at the hands of the existing structure, a
new design has been evolved which demands a shift of power and
responsibility downwards to village level institutions. Thus, new roles assigned
to each instrument in this setup need to be clearly understood and
internalised by all. What is most difficult and which will take time, is, the
delegation of power by those higher up on the beauracratic ladder.
This transition of power and the friction generated as a result thereof, have
generated incessant negative media coverage on the performance of the
NREGA. This had triggered some uncertainty among the ranks of the
government as well as those skeptical about the programme regarding the
implementation of the Act. From the current financial year the Act covers the
MGNREGA
22
entire country, giving the guarantee of 100 days employment to around 45
million rural households. As other public wage programmes like the SGRY
has been subsumed within NREGA, this will be the only operational wage
employment programme in the country. Being focused on regeneration of
village economy in the long term, the Acts success or failure potentially
affects the entire rural development scenario in India. From the advocates of
the Act, the excessive focus on just employment creation has also narrowed
its larger objectives and potential. Without discounting the civil societys
consistent monitoring of the implementation, programmes like NREGA cannot
be just examined on the basis of its short-term benefits.
Performance according to official sources
Going by the national level government data, the NREGA has started to make
an impact, both in its short-term and long-term objectives. To recap, it has
performed far better than other employment programmes: a NREGA district
has created 45 lakh person days of employment a year in comparison to other
districts creating 14 lakhs a year using other programmes. That is the short-
MGNREGA
23
term objective of NREGA: to create daily wage employment. On the long-term
objective of productive assets creation, each district under NREGA is creating
around 2000-4000 village assets a year. This is double of what has been
created under EAS and the SGRY earlier. Around a million assets have been
created in the last two years, a large number of them being water
conservation works.
However, the impact of some of these assets, such as check dams and ponds
can only be assessed after the rainy season. The monsoons should be the
period when these structures would be working to their potential, making an
impact on the rural economies. The survey, thus, would not be able to assess
the performance impact of these structures. However, as we shall see, there
are other structures which have an immediate visible impact, for instance,
wells and roads. These works in fact constitute the majority of the works being
undertaken in the study and their impact has been apparent during the
survey. We therefore, look mainly at the perceptions of the people about the
MGNREGA
24
long term impacts of the act on their livelihood. This gives us a fair idea as to
the potential long term development impacts of the programme.
Performance of the selected districts
Nuapada
The district in all has spent 21.77 crores on the implementation of the NREGA
in the last two years. It has provided 98% of the employment demanded so
far, generating a total of 18.62 person days. However, in the year 2007-08 the
district undertook water conservation works out of which only 4 were
completed and has rural connectivity works reported completion of 14 works.
Rural connectivity works clearly got a priority over water conservation works in
contrast to the year 2006-07 when the district undertook 44.68% work on
water conservation.
Sidhi
Sidhi spent 213.06 crores on the programme, providing almost 100%
employment against demand. It generated 264.2 lakh person days in the
process. Government data shows that in the year 2006-07, out of the total
MGNREGA
25
works undertaken in the district, 59% were on water conservation. This figure
reduced slightly to 55.9% in the year 2007-08.
The Study Area: Socio Economic Profiles of Nuapada and Sidhi
We chose two districts from two states representing two distinct agro-
ecological zones.
District Agro-ecological Zone State
Nuapada Eastern Highlands Orissa
Siddhi Central Highlands Madhya Pradesh
The selection of the districts was based on the following overarching
parameters:
1. Must be implementing NREGA since March 2006. This is to allow at
least one year of NREGA implementation for an objective assessment.
2. Must have agriculture as the primary source of livelihood.
3. Must have dominance of agricultural workers in the workforce.
MGNREGA
26
4. Must have been a district featuring in the Planning Commissions 100
poorest districts ranking.
Socio-Economic Profiles
Nuapada: Nuapada was part of the Kalahandi District till early March, 1993,
but for administrative convenience, Kalahandi was divided into two parts i.e.
Kalahandi and Nuapada. Nuapada district now comprises one sub-division
(Nuapada), two tehsils (Nuapada and Khariar) and five Community
Development Blocks (Khariar, Sinapalli, Boden, Nuapada and Komna).
Nuapada is a drought prone district with a large number of marginal farmers
and agricultural labourers. The district is one of the poorest in Orissa with a
large tribal population. According to the district statistical handbook, 83% of
families live below the Government of India poverty line of Rs.15,000
(US$300) per annum. Of the families living below the poverty line over 50%
are very poor with an income of only Rs.6000 (US$120) per annum. It
experiences high distress migration due to failure in agriculture.
MGNREGA
27
In a population of 5,00,652 persons, 72% of the households fall into the
category of small and marginal farmers. The male literacy rate in Nuapada is
58% and among women it is 24%. Among children, only 25% of Scheduled
Caste and 19% of Scheduled Tribes are enrolled in schools.
MGNREGA
28
Statistical Profile of Nuapada: -
Geographical area (sq km) 3,852
Number of panchayats 109
Is it a DPAP
1
district Y
Is it a DDP
2
district .
Rural population 500,652
Rural population density per sq km 150
Average population per panchayat 4,593
Average area per panchayat (sq km) 35
Total rural workers 234,000
Agricultural labourers vs total rural workers 48%
Fifth schedule district .
Sixth schedule district .
MGNREGA
29
Rural ST
3
population (%) 36%
Source: Second Administrative Reforms Commission- Unlocking Human
Capital: Entitlements and Governance- a case study, 2005
1. Drought Prone Areas Programme
2. Desert Development Programme
3. Schedule Tribe
Agriculture in the district is mainly rain-fed. Because of a host of factors,
including variable and unpredictable rainfall, agricultural productivity in
Nuapada can be best characterized as low and uncertain. As a result, an
average non-irrigated farm produces about seven months worth of food
grains for the food and nutritional needs of an entire family of average family
size. For the remaining months, male members of the family mainly seek work
on the fields of bigger land owners or migrate in search of employment. In
some instances, especially among the tribal communities, entire families
forage for food in the forests. This adds to their existing problems of not being
able to access minimum benefits in relation to education, nutrition, health
MGNREGA
30
security. Instances of malnutrition, sometimes severe, are fairly common
among these groups. (source: Western Orissa Rural Livelihoods Project)
Despite the fact that average annual rainfall is as high as 1378 mm, Nuapada
is a highly drought prone area. It has suffered repeated droughts in the
eighties every alternate year and for 3 years consecutively from 1987 to 1989.
The nineties and the new millennium have fared better with reduced intensity
of droughts, only the year 2002 registering a severe drought. With an agrarian
economy and high incidence of poverty, poor rains disrupt the entire yearly
cycle in agriculture. A majority of the population in the district is landless
earning their livelihood as agricultural labourers. Accumulatively, including the
tillers who are unable to till land, droughts spell a decline in the employment
opportunities for nearly 85% of the population.
Further, the district is highly dependant on natural resources. 48% of the total
land area in the district comes under forest area and the local economy
thrives on major and minor forest products as agriculture cannot provide
employment for the major part of the year. Reducing forest cover, absence of
MGNREGA
31
pro-poor NTFP policies, and substitution of traditional craft items by cheaper
factory goods have resulted in a dramatic fall in non-agricultural employment
opportunities. All this has forced several families in Nuapada, especially in
rural areas, to migrate to urban areas in search of employment opportunities.
In such a situation, an act like the NREGA has the potential to transform the
face of the rural economy. The availability of such a large amount of
resources presents a massive opportunity for the creation of productive
assets such as water conservation structures. As the problem in Nuapada is
not one of less rainfall but irregular rainfall, creation of proper water
conservation structures through the NREGA would have immense potential to
boost agriculture and rural livelihoods.
Siddhi: The district of Sidhi forms the eastern border of Madhya Pradesh and
is known for six thermal power stations and has the second largest series of
eleven active coal mine groups in Asia (Zila Panchayat, Sidhi). It consists of 8
administrative blocks - Sidhi, Rampur, Majhauli, Kusmi, Sihawal, Devsor,
Chitrangi, Waidhan. Adjoining Chattisgarh, Sidhi hosts similar conditions of
MGNREGA
32
scarcity as Nuapada. It is a drought prone district with its economy largely
based on agriculture. Sharing 3% of Madhya Pradeshs population, the district
comprises 1831152 persons. Out of its total population 11.9% are Scheduled
Caste and 29.9% Scheduled Tribe.
Siddhi district is dominantly hilly and has a significant forest cover at about
40% of the total area of the district. Out of this, 24 percent of the total area or
about 2400 Sq. Km. has dense canopied forest and about 16 percent or about
1600 Sq. Km. is open forest. Of the eight blocks of district, three: namely,
Kusmi, Devsar and Chitrangi have significant forest cover (mixed tropical
deciduous forests). The forests serve as a source for variety of N.T.F.Ps. like
mahua, chironji, tendu etc., which are an important source of livelihood for
people.A large number of villages are unreachable by road during the rains.
Additionally, a large number of villages in the hilly areas are sparsely
populated. Any project on ecological regeneration would thus have to take
these geographical features of the region into account in order to fully realize
its developmental potential.
MGNREGA
33
The district with an average annual rainfall of 1248 mm is well endowed with
natures bounty. The local economy is agriculture based and heavily
dependant on natural resources. There is large scale fragmentation of land
with majority of farmers tilling land less than two hectares. Only 29% of the
total area under cultivation is irrigated within which 9.4% area is under
irrigation through perennial sources like streams, 2.7% is canal irrigated, 5.5%
through wells and 11.34% through other means. A large proportion of the land
area is under forest cover with the district hosting 38% of Madhya Pradeshs
forests at 4013 sq. km.
Statistical Profile of Sidhi
Geographical area (sq km) 10526
MGNREGA
34
Percentage of cultivable area 63.53
Development Blocks 8
Number of panchayats 717
Is it a DPAP district Y
Is it a DDP district .
Rural population 1,570,121
Rural population density per sq km 149
Average population per panchayat 2,190
Average area per panchayat (sq km) 15
Total rural workers 681,769
Agricultutal labourers vs total rural
workers
34%
Fifth schedule district Y
Sixth schedule district .
MGNREGA
35
Rural ST population (%) 33%
Source: Second Administrative Reforms Commission- Unlocking Human
Capital: Entitlements and Governance- a case study, 2005
. = missing
The Female literacy rate at 13.6% stands very low in Sidhi and so does the
level of rural poverty, at 64.6%. The district, like Nuapada, is also covered by
the Drought Prone Area Programme. Sidhi has a total ST population of 33%.
In terms of occupation 34% of the rural population in the district consists of
agricultural labourers. Given the extent and scale of rural population and
dependence on agriculture and natural resources, the development potential
of the NREGA has a good scope for realization in the area.
It is a water scarce district that has done impressive works in water
conservation. It has large number of marginal farmers and going by
preliminary reports has taken up extensive water conservation works on
SC/ST lands as well as village common lands. A large part of this investment
has been in wells on private land. This is due to the fact that the status of
MGNREGA
36
ground water is relatively comfortable as compared to other parts of the
country. The depth of ground water varies from 60 to 150 feet in Rampur and
Sidhi blocks and about 30 to 50 feet in Kusmi, Devsar and Chitrangi blocks. It
is a problem of managing water resources properly that forms the basis of the
scarcity of water in the area. This is coupled with the lack of opportunity for
the poor to access under ground water sources. It is here that the NREGA
can and has really helped people.
There are three perennial rivers that flow through the district, the Son, the
Gopad and the Banas but irrigation facilities are poorly developed across the
district. There are very few ponds and tanks in the area but the NREGA is set
to change all that.
MGNREGA
37
Chapte-2
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE AND METHODOLOGY
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The assessment has been carried out using primary data collected through a
survey instrument as well as collection of secondary data through various
sources like government records, panchayat records, life histories of people
and observation on field. The collection of data commenced in January 2008
with the finalization of the survey instruments. The survey instruments were
field tested in three districts and developed to look at specific target areas
such as
1. Monitor the creation of productive assets such as water harvesting
structures, the process of work selection under NREGA and whether
the assets created reflect the local needs.
2. To gauge the development potential of the productive assets created.
MGNREGA
38
3. Assess creation of employment potential for the rural poor and
marginalized, particularly for women, tribals, fisherfolk;
4. Assess the creation of institutional systems created that can ensure
long-term sustainability and peoples participation.
The collection of related secondary data has been an ongoing process
starting in January and lasting till the closure of the field survey.
The Survey Team
Secondary data was collected by CSE staff along with our partners in the
field. For the purpose of the same as well as to carry out the primary data
collection we formed two field research teams in the respective districts. The
team in Orissa was headed by Prof. Simanchal Mishra, teaching at Kesinga
Mahavidhyala; and in Sidhi by Shri J.N. Pandey, head of a non-profit
organisation called Gurukul. Under the able leadership of both, 12 students
and young NGO professionals were recruited to conduct the survey in the
villages. The team at CSE trained the local survey teams in conducting the
survey and brushed up the nuances of the NREGA act. Local examples were
MGNREGA
39
taken up in the survey and people already engaged with the NREGA were
called at the district training to impart a better understanding of the act and its
implementation. Possible scenarios in the field came up during the training
and a lot of confusion on wage rates, documentation aspects, kind of assets
created etc. were cleared in the process. The survey instrument itself was
translated in parts to suit the locales and to forge a better understanding
about what was being asked in the particular question. The survey instrument
for Sidhi was translated into Hindi to facilitate the process.
The survey instrument
The survey instrument that we developed contains detailed village and
household level questionnaires called the Productive Asset Creation and
Assessment Survey Tool (PACAST) to collect information on various aspects
related to the implementation of NREGA. The survey has been fine tuned
further with help from peer group reviews. It gathers information along the
following set of broad parameters- An assessment of the impact of NREGA
MGNREGA
40
1. On the increment of local natural resources like water, forests and land
improvements;
2. On the local rural economy;
3. On the creation of sustainable and diversified rural employment
opportunities;
4. On improvements in lifestyle such as changes in pattern of economy,
purchasing power, housing, gender roles and responsibilities, school
attendance;
5. On the nature of institutional structures created;
6. On the manner of implementation including patterns of decision-
making;
7. On the impact on marginalized and the landless poor.
Sampling:
The sample frame was developed using random sampling. Two blocks were
chosen per district. Within these two blocks a random sample of four villages
MGNREGA
41
was chosen per block. A random sample of 30 households per village was
chosen from these villages for the household survey.
District Block Villages
Nuapada Khariar Badamulla, Chanabeda, Khasbahal and Thakpali
Sinapalli Boto Pali, Hatibandha, Kokpadar and Mahagaon
Sidhi Sidhi Bagohar, Barhai, Barmani and Mata
Kusmi Dadri, Khaira, Kanchanpur and Umriha
Analysis of Data:
The data has been entered once at the district level by the students who
conducted the survey. It was reentered in Delhi to check for data entry errors
and check for inconsistencies.
Data analysis was carried out centrally at CSE. The software used for
analysis of data was STATA. Analysis involved establishment of causal
MGNREGA
42
networks i.e. building a logical chain of events/evidence in order to chart out
the important indicators that explain the process of asset creation and
distribution of benefits. The general strategy has been to build descriptive
display formats designed to answer the research questions- charts and tables.
We have used statistical analysis along with qualitative data collected from
field visits and reports from the field to derive trends and cross check data.
This has been repeated for both the district cases to draw cross-case
conclusions.
We strive to monitor and assess the potential impact of NREGA on the
creation of natural resource asset base and the resultant impact of rural
livelihood, food security, lifestyle changes, economic regeneration and impact
on rural-urban migration. Institutional aspects such as the process of decision-
making, capacity building, building long-term institutional structures have also
been assessed as also its impact on women and marginalized groups. The
final objective has been to draw comparisons between the performances of
NREGA in the two districts. This will help us learn what steps need to be
MGNREGA
43
taken in order to move towards the final objective of ensuring short term and
long term food and livelihood security of the rural poor.
MGNREGA
44
Chapter-
CONCLUSION
The paper attempts to gauge the prospective impacts of the act in providing
sustained relief to communities by looking at the kind of works being
undertaken at the village level under the act along with its associated realms
like wages. Just to reassert our strategy and the lens through which we look
at NREGA, we strive to answer the question Why monitor the impacts of
NREGA on rural assets?
From an environmental standpoint, rural employment programmes can play a
key role in improving the rural natural resource base and increasing overall
rural production. Environmental regeneration demands heavy labour inputs --
whether it is reforestation, construction of water harvesting structures or soil
conservation. But since the economic returns are not immediately apparent,
impoverished people are likely to neglect these tasks. Rural employment
programmes can help villagers solve this problem, because they have the
MGNREGA
45
capacity to mobilise impoverished labour in order to regenerate the
environment.
In this scenario, employment schemes such as the NREGA can play a key
role since the bulk of unemployment (nearly 80%) is in rural India. In
economic terms, this would be an investment in building up rural natural
capital, which will result in creation of water harvesting structures to irrigate
farmlands and increase crop production and well-stocked forests and
grasslands to support dairy development and a variety of artisanal crafts.
Rural environment's sustainable, employment-supporting capacity can thus go
up substantially.
Looking within the environmental systems in rural India, we see an increasing
problem of land degradation and depletion of natural resources like
grasslands and forests, etc. Though the entire system in itself is important
when it come to focusing on re-generation, time and again it has been shown
that wasteland development begins with water and not trees. Once a water-
harvesting system is built and equitable sharing of the water evolved, the local
MGNREGA
46
community becomes involved in protecting and re-greening the catchment of
its water system. But this is possible only if the villagers are empowered to
plan and decide their future.
We began from talking about the development potential of act in terms of
employment generation through the creation of productive assets. This has
been proved to a large extent through the findings of the survey specially in
Sidhi district. If the structures created under the act work to their full potential
they will create additional employment for people in the village and benefit the
people on a sustained basis. Nuapada has treated the NREGA more like any
other employment scheme. Sidhi, on the other hand realized the potential of
the NREGA and used it as an opportunity to reinvigorate its traditional
ecological balance through the creation of productive assets. Thus, while the
programme has had a nominal impact on the lives and livelihoods of people in
Nuapada, it has had a huge impact on the rural economic structure of Sidhi. In
Sidhi, the NREGA can actually be seen moving towards its short term and
MGNREGA
47
long term objective of food and livelihood security and long term sustainable
development through ecological regeneration.
Keeping in mind the immense potential of the act and the findings from our
study, below are mentioned some suggestions that could help improve the
functioning of the NREGP
Need to reframe evaluation parameters: NREGA must aim at creation of
productive employment. To make this happen it has to focus more on the
creation of productive assets at the village level.
From the point of view of gauging the development effectiveness of the act
the first area that comes to the fore is the evaluation and monitoring of the act.
Instead of the simple calculations on jobs demanded and provided, the
NREGA needs to be evaluated and monitored on its impact on livelihood
security. Currently, the act is monitored by the majority on the number of jobs
created and number of assets created under preferred works category. The
real effectiveness of the scheme though may be measured using three
parameters:
MGNREGA
48
1. Increase in average annual income of households
2. Increase in the productivity of small and marginal land holdings
3. Quality and contribution of productive assets like water tanks
By changing the evaluation parameters, the scheme will assume the
character of a rural development scheme in the true sense, instead of a run-
of-the-mill wage-earning programme. This will also help the government to
ensure that most of the works taken up remain within the preferred works
category, that is, productive assets.
Works taken up should improve total village ecology
Under the NREGA, as our experience shows, water conservation works are
being taken up as stand-alone activities. Village ecology is a fragile
combination of soil, water and forests. A water harvesting structure, for
instance, is rendered useless if its catchments areas are left unprotected.
Works under the scheme need to be planned in totality to succeed, water
conservation needs to take into account plantation works and drought
proofing. Even the Second Administrative Reforms Commission has
MGNREGA
49
recommended that all works under the Act must be undertaken keeping in
mind the overall improvement in total ecology. This needs to be implemented
thoroughly.
Use of a perspective plan prepared by village panchayats
Village-level resource planning and designing ought to be strengthened
further. As our data shows, there is a strong co-relation between people
planning their works and the success of these works. With two years behind
the act planning is yet to reach a large number of villages and gram sabhas.
Without a village plan, developed by the villagers themselves the
development impact of the NREGA will be poor.
To make local planning integrated, NREGA works must be allowed in all lands
i.e. private, forest and revenue based on Gram Sabha approval. This requires
administrative order from the forest department. This is crucial as catchments
of water structures are invariably in forest areas.
Setting up institutional mechanism for maintenance of assets
MGNREGA
50
Setting up of strong institutional mechanisms to manage and distribute the
resources generated must follow the creation of assets. Poor maintenance
and weak institutions are already rendering productive assets useless. Under
the current implementation regime, maintenance is not covered. While assets
are created in large number, the Panchayats are being told o maintain it. The
problem is that Panchayats dont have the money to undertake such large-
scale maintenance works. Our studies pointed out that due to this most of the
assets are going to be put into disuse.
Also, there should be a binding work completion plan for each asset created.
This must also include the maintenance plan. Further, given the unequal
priority given to productive assets amongst states, NREGA should make
provision to fix percentage of works in sector like water conservation. This
should be done changing the NREGA.
Capacity Building of the elected Panchayat Members
Right capacity building of the elected Panchayat members must follow
devolution. Training of government officials on the NREGA should be
MGNREGA
51
accorded priority. At the same time, Panchayat members must be included in
the process so that they know the scheme well and can exercise rights
effectively. Local experiences point at government officials dictating
Panchayat members on the nature of works, citing vague government orders.
This takes away the Panchayats powers under the Act, and has to be
rectified immediately.
Devolution of functions, funds and functionaries to Panchayats must be a
condition for states to implement the NREGA. Though it is difficult given that
the programme is demand driven, but Union government can offer fiscal
incentive to states with such devolutions. As in other rural development
programmes like BRGF preparation of district plan has been made
compulsory, the NREGA must also be made conditional.
The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) 2005 is landmark
legislation in Indian history of social security legislation after independence.
Enacted after a successful struggle for an employment guarantee legislation,
MGNREGA
52
this legislation is a partial victory towards a full-fledged right to employment in
any developing country context. The essential feature of this legislation which
separates it from any other public service provisioning scheme is its
enactment through the parliament of India. Read with the Right to Information
Act, this legislation has been bringing about a silent revolution in rural areas of
the country.
In brief, this Act provides for 100 days of employment for all households in
rural areas in manual work, if demanded. Read with various transparency and
accountability measures and provisions for social audits, this Act for the first
time brings the role of the state as provider of livelihood within the reach of the
participants/beneficiaries themselves. By design it is different from any
employment generation scheme that has been previously implemented. It
requires a different approach towards employment generation schemes and
towards overall involvement of the State in providing the right to employment
to its masses (even though it is still far from being a full right).
MGNREGA
53
The real challenge as well as the strength of the Act comes from it being
given the legitimacy as well as authority from the Indian Parliament, which
puts the onus of its implementation in the hand of the recipient as well as that
of the implementing authorities. The recipients have a greater role, at least by
design, not only in demanding the employment but also in deciding on how
the Act will be implemented. Such a situation is unique in terms of posing
challenges of implementation where the existing system has one of being a
dole to be handed to the recipients at the mercy of the babus of the state. It
also drastically alters the power equations which the agents of the state and
the powerful groups within the local society have become used to enjoying.
Moreover, for the first time, it provides for mechanisms for penalising the
government if it fails to provide employment on time.
Precisely because of these, despite the well-intentioned nature of the Act, it
poses necessarily new challenges and enables new ways of exploitation as
well as new ways of fighting such exploitation.
MGNREGA
54
Needless to mention, a legislation of this nature is bound to have
repercussions at different levels, right from altering the socio-economic
conditions of the affected districts, more particularly for the disadvantaged and
the poor, to altering the social dynamics which are currently very heavily
weighted against the disadvantaged and the poor in these backward districts.
To a certain extent, the extent and nature of impact of NREGA on overall
economic and social conditions is influenced by the overall political economy
and nature of change in the social and political structures of power in these
districts. Although well intentioned in spirit, this Act has found limited support
from the states as well as central government in implementation of the Act.
Arguments and excuses have been manufactured to make it as toothless as
possible. However, despite these, the Act has become a rallying point for
smaller struggles on field as well as in larger public policy arenas to highlight
the success of a democratic state in ensuring right to well being for its
members. These experiences vary from state to state with relatively large
MGNREGA
55
successes in states like Rajasthan to almost negligible success in states like
Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
At the same time, a programme of such a large scale has drawn both
criticisms and accolades. The critics, mainly from the minimalist state
perspective have argued against the efficacy of such a programme in
providing either income support or employment support to rural poor. This has
also taken the form of questioning the logistics of transferring such large sums
of money to poor in a state where the track record of public service delivery
has been acknowledged to be dismal. On the other hand, the success of the
programme has emboldened the government to introduce the Act to all the
districts of the states in 2008 itself. Nevertheless, the debate is far from
settled on this controversial issue.
It is in this context that an urgent need is felt to do a stock-taking of the
implementation of the NREGA in the last three years. Although a programme
of this magnitude will take time to settle down and be of any relevance in
changing the landscape of rural India in such a short span of time, initial
MGNREGA
56
reports of the evaluation studies of NREGA by various institutions and
individuals has documented the processes of revival and resurgence largely
driven by the NREGA as an axis of struggle by the rural poor. It has neither
been claimed nor was envisaged that NREGA is the key to successful
rejuvenation of rural areas of the country that have remained marginalised in
the growth process of the country. This requires many such efforts particularly
towards ensuring the broken linkages of the growth process to include the
rural areas as engines of growth. Nonetheless, it does offer an opportunity for
the rural poor to stake claim to the fruits of the growth. Moreover, success
stories of NREGA provide opportunities for mainstreaming and legitimising the
struggle for other social security legislations. Above all, they re-enforce the
faith in the state in being able to do something for the poor and marginalised
of the country in being included in the growth process.
Therefore, the success of NREGA is as much a hope for those civil society
activists fighting for the rights for the poor as it is a critique of the
developmentalist state in case it fails to deliver.
MGNREGA
57
MGNREGA
58
CASE STUDY - IMPLEMENTATION OF NREGA - EXPERIENCE
OF KERALA
Kerala has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country. But most of
the unemployed are educated. Thus NREGA has only limited application in
tackling the problem of unemployment among the poor of Kerala. Yet it has a
niche ideal for about 4 to 5 lakh people who are willing to do physical labour
and for whom an addtitional annual income of Rs.12,500/- obtained from the
Employment Guarantee Scheme would be a substantial boost in income and
purchasing power. Therefore right at the beginning a political decision was
taken to target the eligible families, visualising NREGS as the nucleus of a
concerted and convergent anti-poverty initiative.
Innovative features.
The following are the innovative features in the organization of the
Employment Guarantee Programme.
MGNREGA
59
1) The agriculture workers of Kerala are fairly well organized into trade
unions. Therefore primacy is given for the organization of meetings of
registered workers. This enables proper assessment of demand and in
inculcating the workers perspective in the design of the programme - in
choice of the works in preference of locations and in deciding the
schedule.
2) Kerala uses trained facilitators in the workers meetings as well as in
subsequent Grama Sabhas. This ensures that these fora are used
effectively to convey the principles and features of NREGA to the lay
citizen. These facilitators help in the conduct of these meetings in a
semi-structured and orderly manner.
3) Panchayati Raj Institutions are in the central place in the planning and
implementation of NREGA. They are the sole agencies responsible for
this. Since Kerala has a very strong decentralization experience,
Panchayati Raj Institutions have considerable capacity in the planning
and implementation of local development works. They have used this
MGNREGA
60
capacity to full advantage in the implementation of NREGA. It is
significant to note that as of now the entire implementation is in the
hands of Village Panchayats.
4) A strong engineering support system has been put in place. In addition
to one diploma/degree holder working on contract at the level of the
Village Panchayat, there is a system of accredited engineers. Such
engineers are drawn from amongst retired engineers, staff working in
Engineering Colleges, Polytechnics/ ITIs, engineers working in NGOs
etc. These engineers are paid for their work, at rates fixed by
Government. Further, if any engineer from a government department
or agency is willing to help the Village Panchayat over and above his
normal work, he is also allowed to do so and is paid at 50% of the rate
applicable to others.
5) Technical Sanction is given not by individual engineers, but by a
Technical Committee of engineers. The Committee normally includes
a government engineer, a retired engineer and an engineer working in
MGNREGA
61
an academic institution. This has introduced transparency in the issue
of Technical Sanction.
6) Since disputes are common regarding measurements, an appellate
system has been put in place at the district level. This has facilitated
speedy sorting out of disputes.
7) In order to mobilize the workers and the public and to assist the
panchayat in carrying out its duties, Village Panchayats have been
given the freedom to identify one public servant of their choice having
the time and inclination to do social work from any government
department and such persons are posted on working arrangement as
NREGA co-ordinators.
8) The most radical feature of implementation of NREGA in Kerala is the
central place given to Kudumbasree in the implementation of the
programme. Under Kudumbasree every family below poverty line is
organzied into a Neighbourhood Group (NHG) at the local level
consisting of 15 to 40 families with each family being represented only
MGNREGA
62
by a woman. The NHGs are federated into an Area Development
Society (ADS) at the level of the Ward of the Village Panchayat (a
Village Panchayat Ward in Kerala has a population of around 1500 to
2000). The ADSs in a Village Panchayat are federated into a
registered body called the Community Development Society (CDS).
Each NHG, ADS and CDS has five volunteers carrying out different
functional roles.
The ADS has been entrusted with the task of organizing public works
under NREGS. Muster Rolls and other records are maintained by the
ADS, implements are provided to labourers by them and the
transparency and monitoring requirements are also carried out by
them. Welfare amenities to the workers are also provided by the ADS.
Since ADS is an organization of the poor and is basically a woman's
group, there has been greater sensitivity and community participation
in the implementation process.
MGNREGA
63
9) In order to promote transparency, it is mandatory that the estimates are
summarized in the local idiom as understood by ordinary people. At
the beginning of every work, the nature of work, expected out turn and
the likely wages are explained to the workers' groups.
10)Since Kerala has limited public land, it has been decided to take up
eco-restoration works in degraded forest lands. It is significant to note
that Village Panchayats would implement the programme in forest
areas with the technical supervision being done by field level officials of
the Forest Department representing a new kind of relationship between
a Panchayat Raj Institution and a government department.
11)A conscious decision has been taken by Government in keeping with
the spirit of NREG Act to limit road works to 10% of the total
expenditure and to give special priority to integrated watershed
development works.
12)Another unique feature of implementation of NREGS in Kerala is that
there is total financial inclusion of each and every worker; that is, the
MGNREGA
64
wages are paid only into the individual bank accounts of workers, and
no exception has been made till date.
Achievements
Compared to the earlier wage employment programmes there have been
significant achievements under NREGS. They are:
1. So far through a combination of transparent processes and procedures,
local action and constant vigilance it can be proudly be claimed that
implementation of NREGA has been totally corruption free. The factors
contributing to this situation include: -
a) A clear political decision was conveyed to the Panchayats that the
scheme has to be implemented strictly according to the letter and spirit
of the Act. There were several pragmatists arguing for an asset
focused programme ignoring the processes and conforming to the
procedures on paper, and it was argued that Kerala would lose out as
the demand for unskilled labour is very limited and as the wages are
much higher than the statutory minimum wages in more than 90% of
MGNREGA
65
the State, it would be better to go for public works. But this opinion was
firmly rejected.
b) The work is organized through the Kudumbashree system and the poor
have a stake in the work right at the beginning.
c) The technocratic power to accord Technical Sanction, measure works
and recommend payments has been made more spread out and
accountable through the Committee system and in case of difference of
opinion the appellate system.
d) A lot of social activists have been motivated to keep constant vigil as a
kind of continuous concurrent social audit.
e) Special emphasis have been given to the rights of workers and they
have been made fully aware of their entitlements. In a state where
workers are fairly well organized this has resulted in their jealous
guarding of their privileges.
f) All the payments are made only through the individual bank accounts
of workers. This is the ultimate preventer of corruption.
MGNREGA
66
Yet there are apprehensions that once material purchase starts, corruption
would come in, in some form or the other. The state is earnestly trying to
put in a system which deters corruption and the details are being worked
out. Till then the focus would be on labour-intensive works.
2. Implementation of NREGA has contributed to very high levels of women
empowerment, particularly in the following aspects.
i) As the work is organized by womens groups, the gender
perspective gets built in automatically.
ii) As women are comfortable working along with their neighbors,
nearly 80% of the workers have been women.
iii) For the first time equal wages are really paid and this has boosted
the earnings of women.
iv) As the wages are paid into Bank accounts the habit of thrift which
was already inculcated through the Kudumbashree experiment has
further been strengthened.
MGNREGA
67
v) As the Bank deposits are increasing, the intra-household status of
the woman has also been improving commensurately as she
controls substantial cash resources and withdrawal can be only on
her decision.
3. NREGS has given rise to a new work culture. Hitherto workers were
controlled by contractors and their middlemen who knew how to extract
work. When NREGS began the out-turn was very poor as the workers
could not be supervised properly. But soon the workers themselves
realized that they would be losing collectively and a new internal dynamics
evolved with peer pressure forcing workers to put in their maximum effort.
At the same time a kind of social responsibility also became evident as
more capable workers became more than willing to put in extra effort to
make up for those who genuinely could not do hard work beyond a point,
like the women and the elderly.
4. Public works have gained respectability. Hitherto they were seen as
highjacked either by a contractor or a local leader. Now the workers see it
MGNREGA
68
as their right. They tend to distinguish between wages provided by a
contractor and wages directly given by the Panchayat. The latter is almost
equated with a salary. This has motivated a large section of people who
were hitherto unwilling to work into join the work force. There was an
interesting instance of a penurious descendant of the erstwhile Kollengode
royal family in Palakkad taking an active part in NREGS and even
motivating her relatives to join on the logic that self-help and access to
legally entitled emoluments from a public source is better than charity from
relatives.
5. NREGS has suddenly increased purchasing power of the poor and there is
visible local economic development. This is particularly true of Wayanad
which was ridden with farmer suicides. The peasants have managed to get
substantial relief from NREGS by getting over their inhibition in working as
labourers in richer farmers lands by moving on to the now-respectable
public works.
New Initiatives
MGNREGA
69
Now that a working model for operationalization of NREGA has stabilized
certain new initiatives have been started. They are:
(1) A National Rural Employment Guarantee Mission has been approved
and a Mission Director posted.
(2) A convergent Anti-Poverty Sub-Plan is to be prepared using the
Kudumbashree network. The components of the Anti-Poverty Sub-
Plan would include:
NREGS - for wage employment
SGSY and Kudumbashree programmes for skill development
and self employment
SSA
NRHM for Human Development
ICDS
o Including nutrition for children in the age group 0 3 and
adolescent girls
MGNREGA
70
Annapoorna and Anthyodaya Anna Yojana for food security
IGNOAPS
Asraya of Kudumbashree Social Security
Health Insurance
IAY Minimum needs infrastructure
Peoples Plan
The detailed methodology has been developed and firmed up in
about 100 Village Panchayats whereby at the local level
Neighbourhood Groups of the poor prepare micro plans focusing on
individual and family needs and at the level of the ADS these are
consolidated and components relating to community assets added
and thereafter the plans are integrated by the CDS at the level of the
Village Panchayat by bringing in elements related to human
development and economic development. The plan prepared by the
poor is negotiated with the Panchayat and approved.
MGNREGA
71
(3) A strong natural resource management focus has been given to
NREGS. One of the topmost environmentalists in the country has
been recruited as a consultant and agricultural graduates are being
taken as young professionals. It has also been decided to take up a
mega scheme for Bharathapuzha River rejuvenation with action plans
emanating from the Village Panchayat as building blocks.
(4) A methodology is being developed to integrate NREGS and Peoples
Plan. Village Panchayats get more than Rs.1 crore on an average
under Peoples Plan. If intelligently dovetailed it is expected that
substantial improvement in quality of assets can be attained.
(5) In order to meet the problems due to shortage of technical staff it has
been decided to rope in voluntary services of reputed non-
government organizations. Already in one district a firm offer has
been received and in principle clearance given. The details are being
worked out.
MGNREGA
72
(6) Using the excellent network of Kudumbashree it has been decided in
the State Employment Guarantee Council to develop a cadre of bare-
foot technical volunteers from among the poor women.
(7) In order to develop the skills of the workers it has been decided to set
up Labour Banks. A pilot has been launched in one Village
Panchayat. The Labour Banks would be supported under Peoples
Plan to take up other public works and even private works.
(8) It is well-nigh impossible to identify works in the plantation areas as
well as in the coastal areas. It has been decided to seek the expert
support from Government of India to come out with a shelf of projects
which can be taken up in such geographical areas.
(9) An innovative form of training has been developed by KILA where
there is a shift from the cascading model to a ripple model,
according to which outstanding Panchayats become the master
trainers and the neighbouring Panchayats formally learn from the
experience of the best performers.
MGNREGA
73
(10) Monitoring has been strengthened with the decision of the State
Employment Guarantee Council to put in a system of State level and
District level quality Monitors by identifying persons with reputation for
integrity and competence. The State level Monitors would be of two
categories outstanding individuals whose views are widely
respected by society and senior Technical Experts capable of giving
authoritative feed back on the quality of implementation. Further the
State Employment Guarantee Council has decided to request a team
consisting of eminent experts like Smt. Aruna Roy, Prof. Jean Dreze,
Shri P. Sainath and Shri Nikil De to conduct an independent
assessment of Keralas performance and offer suggestions for
improvement.
MGNREGA
74
CONCLUSION
Though there were several teething problems it is clear that the policy focus
on natural resource management and corruption-free implementation and the
administrative measures introduced to operationalise the policy especially the
involvement of the Kudumbasree network have resulted in a strong foundation
being laid and opened up space for pro-poor innovations.
MGNREGA
75
Bibliography
Aiyar, Yamini (2009). "Transparency and Accountability in NREGA A Case
Study of Andhra Pradesh". Retrieved 29 October 2013.
BBC News (2012). "China military budget tops $100bn". BBC News.
Retrieved 29 October 2013.
BBC News (2010). "India mobile licence sale lost billions, auditors say". BBC
News. Retrieved 29 October 2013.
BBC News (2012). "Outrage over report that India lost $210bn in coal scam".
BBC News. Retrieved 29 October 2013.
Chambers, Robert (17 June 2013). Ideas for Development. Routledge. ISBN
978-1-136-56343-0.
Chandoke (2007). Engaging with Civil Society: The democratic Perspective.
Center for Civil Society, London School of Economics and Political Science.
MGNREGA
76
Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2013). "The Comptroller and Auditor
General of India". The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG).
Retrieved 29 October 2013.
Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2013). "Report of the Comptroller
and Auditor General of India on Performance Audit of Mahatma Gandhi
National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme". Comptroller and Auditor
General of India. Retrieved 5 November 2013.
Centre for Science and Environment (2007). "The National Rural Employment
Guarantee Act (NREGA) Opportunities and Challenges (DRAFT)". Centre for
Science and Environment. Retrieved 29 October 2013.
Dobhal, Harsh (2011). Writings on Human Rights, Law, and Society in India:
A Combat Law Anthology : Selections from Combat Law, 20022010. Socio
Legal Information Cent. p. 420. ISBN 978-81-89479-78-7.
Frontline (2010). "Wages of delay". The Hindu. Retrieved 29 October 2013.
MGNREGA
77
Goetz, A.M and Jenkins, J (1999). Accounts and Accountability: Theoretical
Implications of the Right to Information Movement in India. 3 20. Third World
Quarterly.
Ghildiyal, Subodh (11 Jun 2006). "More women opt for rural job scheme in
Rajasthan". The Times of India. Retrieved 25 October 2013.
Novotny, J., Kubelkova, J., Joseph, V. (2013): A multi-dimensional analysis of
the impacts of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee
Scheme: a tale from Tamil Nadu. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography,
34, 3, 322-341. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/sjtg.12037/full
The Times of India (2012). "PM directs Planning Commission to address gaps
in NREGA". The Times of India. Retrieved 22 November 2013.
The Times of India (2013). "CAG finds holes in enforcing MNREGA". The
Times of India. Retrieved 23 November 2013.
The Hindu (2001). "PR Dept. loses Central assistance". The Hindu. Retrieved
29 October 2013.
MGNREGA
78
The Hindu (2006). "CAG report reveals irregularities in Sampoorna Rozgar
Yojana". The Hindu. Retrieved 29 October 2013.
The Hindu (2012). "Manmohan directs Planning Commission to address gaps
in NREGA". The Hindu. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
Roy, Aruna; Dey, Nikhil (2012). "Much more than a survival scheme". The
Hindu. The Hindu. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
Malekar, Anosh (21 May 2006). "The big hope: Transparency marks the
NREGA in Dungarpur". InfoChange News & Features. Retrieved 25 October
2013.
Menon, Sudha (10 Jan 2008). "Right To Information Act and NREGA:
Reflections on Rajasthan". Munich Personal RePEc Archive. Retrieved 25
October 2013.
Ministry of Law and Justice (2008). "Constitution of India". "Ministry of Law
and Justice", Government of India. Retrieved 5 November 2013.
MGNREGA
79
Ministry of Rural Development (2002). "Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana
(SGRY) Guidelines". "Ministry of Rural Development", Government of India.
Retrieved 29 October 2013.
Ministry of Rural Development (2002). "Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana
(SGRY) Guidelines". "Ministry of Rural Development", Government of India.
Retrieved 29 October 2013.
Ministry of Rural Development (2005). "Mahatma Gandhi National Rural
Employment Guarantee Act (Mahatma Gandhi NREGA)". "Ministry of Rural
Development", Government of India. Retrieved 5 November 2013.
Ministry of Rural Development (2005). "The National Rural Employment
Guarantee Act 2005 (NREGA) Operational Guidelines". "Ministry of Rural
Development", Government of India. Retrieved 5 November 2013.
Ministry of Rural Development (2012). "MGNREGA Sameeksha, An
Anthology of Research Studies on the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural
Employment Guarantee Act, 2005, 20062012". "Ministry of Rural
MGNREGA
80
Development", Government of India (New Delhi: Orient BlackSwan). ISBN
978-81-250-4725-4. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
Pasha, Dr. Bino Paul GD and S M Fahimuddin. Role of ICT in Mahatma
Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). S M
Fahimuddin Pasha. p. 59. ISBN 978-81-921475-0-5.
Planning Commission (2001). "Report Of The Working Group On Rural
Poverty Alleviation Progammes For The Tenth Five Year Plan (2002-2007)".
"Planning Commission", Government of India. Retrieved 29 October 2013.
Planning Commission (2007). "Chapter 4: Rapid Poverty Reduction".
"Planning Commission", Government of India. Retrieved 29 October 2013.
Planning Commission (2007). "Chapter 4: Employment Perspective and
Labour Policy". "Planning Commission", Government of India. Retrieved 29
October 2013.
Planning Commission (2007). "Chapter 9: Environment and Climate Change".
"Planning Commission", Government of India. Retrieved 29 October 2013.
MGNREGA
81
Shira, Dezan & Associates; Devonshire-Ellis, Chris (31 May 2012). Doing
Business in India. Springer. ISBN 978-3-642-27617-0.
World Bank (2008). "Social Audits: from ignorance to awareness. The AP
experience". Retrieved 5 November 2013.
NewsYaps (2009). "NREGA: Effects and Implications". Retrieved March 12,
2014.