Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A hard look at MGNREGS

A hard look at MGNREGS

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Jul 15, 2012   modified Modified on Jul 15, 2012
-Live Mint

After years of denial about problems in its flagship social welfare programme, the MGNREGS, the government has awoken to the need for an honest debate on the subject

After years of denial about problems in its flagship social welfare programme, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Scheme (MGNREGS), the government has awoken to the need for an honest debate on the subject. On Saturday, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh made some comments on the subject that, obliquely, hinted at problems in MGNREGS. Earlier in the month, the National Advisory Council (NAC)—the intellectual and political begetter of the scheme —called for measuring its impact. These are welcome changes in what has otherwise been an environment of denial.

While releasing NREGA Sameeksha—an anthology of studies on the scheme—Singh said: “The combined effect of expanded agricultural production, demand for labour from the construction sector and the effect of Mahatma Gandhi NREGA has led to a tightening of the market for agricultural labour and a steady rise in real wages… But rising demand for labour is the only way to help the landless improve their standard of living. The income support provided under Mahatma Gandhi NREGA has increased the bargaining power of agricultural labour to some extent and it has helped to put a floor under rural poverty as well.”
The Prime Minister’s remarks, implicitly, provide a critique of the programme.

It is no one’s case that rural labour should be exploited. The issue is different. The question is if MGNREGS is the “only” way to help the rural poor. As the Prime Minister said, the programme has provided a wage floor for rural workers. The problem lies in the sustainability of that floor. On the one hand, as the Prime Minister has asserted, raising demand for rural labour is the only way to help the landless improve their standard of living. On the other hand, MGNREGS has a strong localizing effect that keeps rural labour away from high productivity regions where labour shortage is acute.

In a country where economic growth is slowing, a wage-cum-work guarantee programme that is de-linked from the wider economy is bound to become unsustainable sooner than later. By 2010-11, MGNREGS provided over 250 crore workdays of employment to nearly 5.5 crore families or nearly one in four rural households. These are very large numbers and sustaining them only on the basis of government’s budgetary allocations was a tall order even in the years of high growth. Today, sustainability is a far more serious challenge.

The deeper issue, one that has not been debated is this: would spending on rural infrastructure—roads, schools, better market yards, transportation networks in areas where there are no roads—have helped the poor on a more sustainable basis instead of MGNREGS?

Live Mint, 15 July, 2012, http://videos.livemint.com/2012/07/15210618/Ourview--A-hard-look-at-MGNRE.html?h=B


Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close