Printer Friendly

Socio-Economic Impact of MGNREGS: Study in Six States.

Several wage employment programmes have been implemented in the past with a view to addressing the poverty issue in the rural areas. But Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) is having its prime place in view of its avowed objective of providing guaranteed employment of 100 days in a financial year to every household in the rural areas whose adult members are willing to participate in unskilled manual work. MGNREGS also stands unique because of its specific features including demand driven, self selecting and rights based entitlements. The objective of the scheme is to generate employment by way of creating new infrastructure or strengthening the existing rural infrastructure.

Introduced in 200 select (backward) blocks in the country in February 2006, the scheme was subsequently extended to cover the entire (rural areas) country. Since then, the scheme has made rapid strides in terms of coverage of households, expenditure incurred and employment days generated. As per the statistics available with the Ministry of Rural Development, during the period 2006-07 to 2013-14 four crore man days were generated by spending Rs. 2,48,479 crore in the same period (for creating infrastructure also) benefiting 35.45 crore households (this is a cumulative figure where there is a overlap of households who got employment in different years during 2006-07 to 2013-14.

In view of its large scale of operation both in terms of physical and financial parameters and also its special features, many scholars (both internal and foreign) and private and Govt. institutions evinced keen interest in studying the scheme from different angles and came out with important findings. The researchers have begun to assess the impacts of MGNREGA works, focusing on environmental services, land and water resources availability. Studies also offered suggestions for improving the quality of implementation of the scheme. The common thread that passes through all the findings has been that the implementation of the scheme helped improve the rural infrastructure but many shortcomings have been reported as regards employment generation. Further, these studies either snap-shot studies or cross-sectional in character. Thus, with the help of these studies it is possible only to understand how a group of households as a whole fared in so far as employment generation is concerned at a particular time point but not how a given group of households fared over a given time period. Further, though these studies did throw some light on wages, incomes and migration issues, no attempt seems to have been made to examine the inter - relationships among these aspects. Secondly, studies covering the same group of workers (forming a panel) over time are hard to come by. The present study is a modest attempt to bridge this gap.

The following section outlines the approaches and methods used in this study, and it is followed by sections on participation in MGNREGS, Impact of MGNREGS. The last section summarise the findings.

Objective

* To examine the participation of people and wage benefits gained from MGNREGS.

* To assess the impact of MGNREGS on food security, health, nutrition and education of families exposed to employment guarantee scheme.

Methodology

The study is conducted in six states across the country, the criterion for their selection being the state has registered the highest person-days of employment under MGNREGS during the year 2014-15 in each zone. Following this criterion, the states identified for the study include Madhya Pradesh in Central Zone, West Bengal in Eastern Zone, Uttar Pradesh in Northern Zone, Tamil Nadu in Southern Zone, Rajasthan in Western Zone and Tripura in North Eastern Zone.

One district from each selected state and one block from each selected district following the same criterion of highest person-days of employment was selected. However, as regards selection of Gram Panchayats (GPs) from each selected block, two GPs are selected and they are the ones which registered the extremes in respect of person-days during the reference period.

Selection of Households

In each selected village, sampling frame comprising all the households that participated in MGNREGS during 2014-15 is developed from which a sample of 40 households was drawn randomly for studying the objectives set for the study

Survey method was adopted for capturing information both on quantitative and qualitative parameters and for this purpose, interview schedules were developed with provision for direct data entry.

Socio-economic Profile of the Sample Households

This section presents the analysis and results of the data on socio-economic parameters of the respondent households and also of the household members.

The respondents are mostly middle aged with the average ranging between 37 (Rajasthan) and 45 (Tripura and West Bengal). For the overall group, the average age is 41 years. In the sample of 480 households for the study, OBCs is the major group with 44.4 per cent, distantly followed by SCs with 28.8 per cent. Further OCs constitute 13 per cent, minorities 8.5 per cent and STs 5.4 per cent only. But across states different trends emerge. In Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh, OBCs emerge as the dominant participating group with 75 per cent share in the number of sample households while 60 per cent of the sample households in Uttar Pradesh are from SC community. Other important observation concerning Madhya Pradesh is that the ST group is the next highest with 20 per cent, in Tripura OC group with 28.8 per cent occupies the second position. In West Bengal, SC is the largest group among the sample households, though magnitude wise it is slightly lower when compared to Uttar Pradesh and OC group is the second largest in this state (West Bengal) accounting for 34 per cent.

Principal Occupation of the Respondents

Cultivation, agricultural labour and non-agricultural labour are the three occupations which have more or less equal presence of about 25 per cent each in the entire sample of 480 respondent households. About 25 per cent reported business or services or artisan work as their primary occupation and this shows that respondents with non-labour occupations also participate in MGNREGS.

Economic Dependency Ratio

The dependency ratio (defined as the number of workers divided by the total number of members in the sample households) in the entire group works out to 47 per cent and across the study states, it moves in a range of (53.4 per cent in Tamil Nadu to 41.3 per cent in Uttar Pradesh). The state of West Bengal is slightly closer to Tamil Nadu with a dependency ratio of 50.4 per cent. (1)

Type of Household

Households classified as 'Above Poverty Line' (APL) also participated in MGNREGS and they form not less than two fifths in the entire sample. Variations in this figure do occur across states. In Rajasthan, the participation of APL group in MGNREGS is the highest at 71 per cent and as against this the participation of BPL households of Madhya Pradesh is the highest at 87 per cent. This shows that slightly better off sections (known as APL), also participate in the wage employment programme and out of every five sample households two households belong to APL group.

Participation in MGNREGS

The focus of this section is on studying the extent of employment generated from both MGNREGS and non-MGNREGS sources from 2010-11 to 2014-15 and also on assessing the contribution of MGNREGS in the total wage employment generated.

Participation in MGNREGS

During this year, more number of sample households (75 out of 80) in Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh participated in MGNREGS and the average number of workers who participated ranged between 1.02 in Madhya Pradesh and 1.45 in Rajasthan. Among all the six states Tripura gets the first position in larger extent of employment the participating households. In this state, on an average, each participating household got about 86 days of employment while Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal registered lowest levels of employment of about 20 days and in line with this magnitude of employment, Tripura's wages earnings are also highest at Rs. 8621 per household.

The number of days of employment the sample households got from MGNREGS during the period 2010-11 to 2014-15 is recorded and in Madhya Pradesh, the employment started with an average of 17 days and it has gone up to 21 days in the following year 2011-12 and kept increasing to 33 days in 2014-15 and this results in a percentage increase of 94 during the period 2010-11 to 2014-15 (this much of increase is possible due to the slender base of 17 days in 2010-11). But other states like Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu started with a moderately high level of about 67 days in 2010-11 and these two sates either could maintain the same level or increase it till 2013-14 but in 2014-15, there was a fall in either state and as a result the percentage increase registered a decline to the extent of 33 percentage in Rajasthan and 24 percentage in Tamil Nadu.

The state of Tripura presents a different picture. It started with a per-household - employment figure of 86 days in 2010-11, shot up to 88 days in 2011-12, further shot up to 91 days 2012-13 and to 93 days in 2013-14 but when it comes to 2014-15, the average figure fell by 20 per cent with reference to the base figure of 86 days in 2010-11.

Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal form a group where they started with a moderate base of 46 and 20 days respectively, kept an moderate increasing pace and ended up with 50 and 23 days of employment generation in 2014-15. In percentage terms, the increases are nine and 15 respectively.

Average wage per households under MGNREGS in 2010-11 to 2013-14

The average wage earned by each household, which depends up on the corresponding days of employment and also the wage rate offered under MGNREGS varied considerably in each year. During 2010-11, the wage ranged between Rs. 1682 (Madhya Pradesh) to Rs. 8621 (Tripura). After Tripura, Rajasthan registered the next highest average wage with Rs. 5287. In 2011-12 too, Tripura registered the highest wage of Rs. 10341 and lowest is recorded by Madhya Pradesh again, but this time this has gone up by Rs. 881 than 2010-11's wage of Rs. 1682. The average wage has further gone up in all states and Tripura stands first with an average wage of Rs. 12603 and Madhya Pradesh continues to record the lowest (Rs. 3613). The data on wages for 2013-14 also show that the past trend continues where Tripura leads the other states and Madhya Pradesh trails behind all states (the average figures being Tripura Rs. 14,665 and Madhya Pradesh 4483).

However, the percentage increase is seen to be the highest in Madhya Pradesh at 1.66 per cent as it started with a very low base of Rs. 1682 and touched the mark of Rs. 4483) while Rajasthan registered the lowest percentage increase of 0.15 point.

Percentage share of MGNREGS in the total wage employment:

Now the attempt is to examine the share of MGNREGS employment in the total wage employment and data shows the percentage figures. (2) In 2010-11,Tamil Nadu accounts for larger share of 30 per cent and even in the succeeding years, this figure more or less continues. Close to Tamil Nadu in 2010-11 is Tripura with a corresponding figure of 29 per cent and in this case too, shares of similar magnitude are witnessed in the succeeding years. But Rajasthan presents a slightly different picture the MGNREGS share of 22 per cent in 2010-11 shot up to 33 per cent in 2011-12 but declined to 22 per cent in 2012-13 and further declined to 19 per cent in 2013-14. This is due to the fact that the decrease in wage employment days under non MGNREGS from 2012-13 to 2013-14 is much smaller as compared to the corresponding decrease in wage employment from MGNREGS sources.
Figure 1
Percentage share of MGNREGS in total wage employment

Percentage share of MGNREGS in total wage employment

           2010-11  2013-14

Madhya
Pradesh      18        13
Rajasthan    19        22
Tamil
Nadu         29        30
Tripura      27        29
Uttar
Pradesh      26        23
West
Bengal       16        12

Note: Table made from line graph.


Reasons for Lesser Participation in MGNREGS in 2014-15

As discussed above, the average employment generation under MGNREGS ranged between 23 days (West Bengal) and 69 days (Tripura) during 2014-15 and when compared to the position in 2010-11, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal are the states which registered positive growth while the other states of Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Tripura slid back in employment generation and in quantitative terms, the dip is to the extent of 33 per cent (Rajasthan) to 20 per cent (Tripura) with reference to 2010-11. When asked what could be the reason(s) for lesser employment level in 2014-15, the households have given varying replies- first, they put the blame on implementing authorities that they could not provide employment despite request and the intensity of such response is as high as 90 per cent in Madhya Pradesh, 89 per cent in West Bengal and 25 per cent in Rajasthan. In Madhya Pradesh, another reason cited for lesser employment level is 'worksite being far off'. The other major reason given for lesser participation across states is employment outside MGNREGS preferred (26 per cent in Rajasthan, and 20 per cent in Tamil Nadu, 33 per cent each in Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal). In Tripura, the major reason for lesser participation is sickness of the worker (77 per cent).

Impact of MGNREGS

The impact of MGNREGS on participating households can be expected in terms of improvement in the household incomes and thereby reducing the dependence on various coping mechanisms which they hitherto (would have) followed and lastly improvement in various components including food intake, nutrition status etc. This section analyses the impact in respect of these aspects.

Household Income from MGNREGS

Wage employment is the main source for the workers under MGNREGS and during 2014-15, each participating household in the entire sample got an average wage of Rs. 8007 and this source forms 15.0 per cent in the total income in this year. Of all the six study states, Tripura is the state which registered the highest average of Rs. 14,604 and Madhya Pradesh with an average income of Rs. 5074 and West Bengal emerge as laggards. (It may be noted that the wage received under MGNREGS is a function of both the number of days of employment and also the wage rate paid).

Household Income from Works Taken up under MGNREGS

Across four states of Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Tripura and Uttar Pradesh, development of wet land was taken up in 25 households and in another 20 households dry land was developed under MGNREGS in all the four states except Tripura. Further, in these states, not more than four households took up horticulture development under MGNREGS either in the wet land or dry land. Besides, minor irrigation schemes were implemented under MGNREGS in three cases two in Tripura and one in Tamil Nadu.

Besides participating as wage labour in the works taken up under MGNREGS, some workers who are part of the sample covered, also took up activities under MGNREGS by way of land development, raising horticulture crops and using micro irrigation facilities. But such farmer - workers are not more than 34 or hardly seven per cent in the entire sample. These farmers reported an average income attributable to MGNREGS is to the extent of Rs. 5147. These 34 farmers come from Madhya Pradesh (six), Tripura (17) and Uttar Pradesh (11). But across these three states, as per the analysis, the farmers of Uttar Pradesh have benefited more (an average income Rs. 5686) while Tripura is very close to Uttar Pradesh with an average figure of Rs. 5470.

Coping Mechanisms

The mechanisms usually adopted by poor households to cope up with distress situations include migration, child labour, indebtedness, disposal or mortgage of land, cattle, and gold. Another aspect included along with these coping mechanism is decline in the food insecurity. As the respondent households of the study are exposed to MGNREGS for some time, it is of interest to find out the extent to which their dependence on these mechanisms has come down due to the additional earnings they got from MGNREGS. (3)

Migration

Going by the state-wise percentages computed, it is seen that the dependence on migration is not high. In the overall sample, nearly 50 per cent mentioned that they did not experience migration even earlier. Across five states leaving out those households which did not 'experience' migration, a majority of households of the states of Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal mentioned that the position remained as it is implying that there is no decline in the migration incidence. But in Rajasthan found that the incidence of migration has declined to a moderate extent (62 per cent). Of all the five states, Uttar Pradesh appears to have benefited more from MGNREGS where 43 per cent of sample households reported that the incidence of migration has come down to a significant extent.

Food Insecurity

This is another aspect which is expected to be addressed due to participation in MGNREGS. According to a large percentage of households (85 per cent of Rajasthan and 64 per cent of Tripura, about 35 per cent of West Bengal sample respondents), MGNREGS helped them in reducing food insecurity to a moderate extent. But as the analysis suggests, the scheme could not make much dent on reducing food insecurity in Madhya Pradesh (42 per cent) and in Uttar Pradesh (53 per cent) where the response was the 'incidence remained as it is'.

Incidence of Child Labour

Poor households resort to this mechanism whenever they face distress. But in the study sample, Uttar Pradesh appears to be an exception where about 93 per cent have reported the status quo in this regard. In other study states child labour does not appear to be an issue at all.

Indebtedness

In so far as this mechanism is concerned, no uniform pattern obtains across states. In Madhya Pradesh, indebtedness is not an important issue at all either prior to MGNREGS or now, while Tripura found the utility of MGNREGS where the scheme is responsible for decline of indebtedness to a moderate extent. But according to 96 per cent of sample households of Uttar Pradesh, MGNREGS could not impact this phenomenon and as a result the same position continues even now.

Mortgage of Cattle or Land

This is a common phenomenon among the poor households where the poor households resort to mortgage the fixed assets including land and house besides gold. But, except in the case of Rajasthan where about 40 per cent have experienced moderate decline due to exposure to MGNREGS, in other states either the problem did/does not persist or it did not show any decline.

Disposal of Cattle or Land

When faced severe distress, the poor households resort to dispose of cattle/gold/land. Only in Rajasthan, did MGNREGS come to the rescue of the sample households where the scheme helped reduce the incidence to a moderate extent while in the case of other states either the issue did not apply or the things remained as they are (implying that MGNREGS did not have any impact).

Improvements in Various Components

The sample households are exposed to MGNREGS for the last six to seven years in the study states and in this background it would be of some interest to ascertain the impact of the scheme in terms of bringing about improvement in various components that reflect their general wellbeing. (4) The impact of MGNREGS on each component is expressed in percentage form. The discussion that follows is both component and state-wise improvements.

Food Intake

At the aggregate level, this component gets a percentage score of 70 and across the six states, MGNREGS appears to have made larger impact on the sample households of Tamil Nadu. Here, this component received a percentage score of 89 and the state slightly closer to Tamil Nadu is Rajasthan with a corresponding score of 81.

It is further evident from the analysis that Madhya Pradesh,Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal fall short of the aggregate score of 70 per cent and the lowest percentage score is registered by Madhya Pradesh. It suggests the impact of MGNREGS in ensuring food security is relatively low.
Figure 2
Improvement in Food Intake

Improvement (% score) in food intake with reference to 2010-11)

Madhya
Pradesh    39
Rajasthan  81
Tamil
Nadu       89
Tripura    77
Uttar
Pradesh    67
West
Bengal     54

Note: Table made from line graph.


Housing Condition

By virtue of being exposed to MGNREGS, it is expected that the households' housing condition would improve. But, the impact is not discernible among more than 59 per cent and across the study states, Rajasthan stands apart with 79 per cent and there exists a tie between Tamil Nadu and Tripura with 68 per cent.

Again, the same states viz., Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal get the lower positions in housing condition too and of all the six states, Madhya Pradesh gets the lowest position on housing condition.

Health Status of Old Members

Not much impact of MGNREGS is seen in this regard. While the aggregate percentage score is 53, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Tripura form one group where the percentage score is higher than the aggregate score.

And, among these, MGNREGS' impact is seen most in Tripura where the percentage score is 70 and Rajasthan is placed second with 65 per cent. As in the case of first two components, in this case too, Madhya Pradesh lags well behind other states with a percentage score of 38.

Health Status of Pregnant and Lactating Women

This component received a percentage score of just 46 at the aggregate level and only two states obtain higher percentage score than this and they are Rajasthan and Tripura (with a score of 63 per cent each) and among the rest, the percentage score varies between 33 (West Bengal) and 44 (Uttar Pradesh).
Figure 3 Improvement in Health Status of Women

Improvement (% score) in health status of women

Madhya
Pradesh        37
Rajasthan      63
Tamil Nadu     38
Tripura        63
Uttar Pradesh  44
West Bengal    33

Note: Table made from line graph.


Health Status of Children below Five Years

On this component, the position is slightly better as compared to the position on the previous component (health status of pregnant and lactating women, if any). Going by the trends emerging from the analysis, it can be inferred that the beneficiary households attached more (relatively) importance to children's health especially in Tripura state. This state yields a percentage score of 69 and the state closer to this state is that of Rajasthan with 64 per cent. Besides these two states, Tamil Nadu also scored a higher percentage than the aggregate score and Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal constitute the other extreme. And, among these three states, while Uttar Pradesh is closer to the aggregate score, with a percentage score of 49, West Bengal occupies the lowest position with 33 per cent.

Nutrition Status of Pregnant and Lactating Women

On this component also, the scheme did not seem to have made much impact. For the study area, the impact in percentage terms is just 46 only. However, across the states, Rajasthan and Tripura on a different footing with about 65 per cent and the remaining four states fall short of the aggregate value and the lowest is recorded against West Bengal.

Nutrition Status of Children below Five Years

Even in this regard, the impact of MGNREGS is not so good. The total impact is slightly above the mid-value of 50 per cent. But among the states, Tripura yields the highest score of 70 per cent and Tamil Nadu and Rajasthan's scores are in the range of 62-65 per cent. The ranking among the states which occupy the bottom three positions is Uttar Pradesh (46 per cent), Madhya Pradesh (36 per cent) and West Bengal (35 per cent).

Children's Education

This is one of the critical components, which is expected to receive much attention in the beneficiary households. As the analysis reflects, this component gets percentage score of 61 and Rajasthan's sample households appear to have attached more importance to children's education. As compared to the aggregate value of 61 per cent, Rajasthan's score is higher by 21 per cent and Tripura is slightly a way behind Rajasthan by five per cent. Even in Tamil Nadu also the impact of the scheme is seen on children's education. As in the case of other components that have been discussed so far, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal are the laggards with percentage scores lower than 53.

Clothing

This component also is expected to receive some attention in the context of larger earnings due to MGNREGS. The aggregate score on this component is 62 per cent and Rajasthan tops the list with 79 per cent, 17 per cent higher than the aggregate value. After this state, a tie occurs between Tamil Nadu and Tripura with 74 per cent. Among the remaining three states, the position of Uttar Pradesh is only a shade better than the other two. Of all the states, West Bengal benefited the lowest (33 per cent only).

Land Condition

Improvement is expected to take place in the land condition because of two possibilities: (i) if the land is taken up for development under MGNREGS and (ii) if the households spend some part of the wage earnings they got from MGNREGS on land improvement. But as we have seen earlier very few households (34 out of 480) reported to have got the benefit of the first kind. The analysis shows that the impact of the scheme is 49 per cent only. However, Rajasthan and Tripura samples reported slightly larger impact of MGNREGS in this regard (62 and 63 per cent respectively).

Household Assets

Impact of MGNREGS is also expected among the sample households in improving the household assets.5 But the evidence we get through analysis does not support the proposition much. The aggregate score does not touch the half-way mark of 50 per cent (exact score is 46 per cent only) and the highest is seen against Tripura (60 per cent), closely followed by Rajasthan with 58 per cent. But in this case, Uttar Pradesh occupies the lowest position (33 per cent).
Figure 4 Improvements due to MGNREGS

Improvement score due to MGNREGS (%)-for all six states

Food
intake      54
Housing     48
HS of old
members     45
HS of preg
women       33
HS of
children    33
NS of preg
women       33
NS of
children    35
Children's
education   38
Clothing    40
Land
condition   33
HH assets   36

Note: Table made from line graph.


Of all the 11 components, food security witnesses largest improvement (with a per cent score of 70 per cent), followed by clothing (with 62 per cent) and children's education (61 per cent). Housing condition and health status of old members, children, nutrition status of children below five years get moderate per cent scores. The components that received lowest priority include health and nutrition status of pregnant and lactating women and household assets.

Conclusion

Among the six study states, Tamil Nadu, Rajasthan and Tripura got the first position in regard to the 11 components on which the impact of MGNREGS is examined. While Tamil Nadu tops the list on food security front (in fact this state got a percentage score of 89, highest among all states on all components), MGNREGS made relatively larger impact in respect of more than one component. As per the analysis of the data in this regard, the sample respondents expressed happiness on housing and health status of pregnant and lactating women. The component on children's education and land condition received greater attention due to MGNREGS.

In contrast to this, Tripura emerges as the state where health aspects are given more importance than others and the components are health status of old members, pregnant and lactating women and children as well besides nutrition requirements of pregnant and lactating women and children also improved (relatively in larger measure than other states). The households assets also witnessed larger improvement in this state on account of MGNREGS.

Thus, of the six states, Impact of MGNREGS is seen to be the highest in Rajasthan followed by Tripura and Tamil Nadu. Among the remaining three states, fourth position on the impact of MGNREGS is seen in West Bengal while Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh share the lowest position. But this rank order is not consistent with that based on wage incomes from MGNREGS except in Madhya Pradesh.

End Notes

(1.) The dependency ratio is defined as the number of workers divided by the total number of members in the sample households.

(2.) Total wage employment includes wage employment from MGNREGs and other sources like agriculture and non-agriculture wage employment.

(3.) The distress situation is compare from 2010-11 to 2014-15.

(4.) Improvements in various components were studied with comparison from 2010-11 to 2014-15.

(5.) Household asset includes moveable and immovable assets.

Balu I. (*)

(*) Department of Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Rajiv Gandhi National Institute of Youth Development, Sriperubudur, Kanchipuram District (TN). E-mail: balusociologist@gmail.com
Table 1 Study Area

S.  Zone      State      District         Block
No

1   Central   Madhya     Balaghat         Lalbarra
              Pradesh
    Eastern   West       Burdwan          Mongolkote
2             Bengal
3   Northern  Uttar      Sitapur          Phahala
              Pradesh
              Tamil      Thiruvannamalai  Thiruvannamalai
4   Southern  Nadu
5   Western   Rajasthan  Barmer           Bhadmer
    North     Tripura    South            Satchand
6   Eastern              Tripura

       Gram Panchayat
S.  Highest       Lowest
No  Person Days   Person Days

1   Bandri        Kanki

    Bhalugram     Paligram
2
3   Bilauli       Balsinghpur
    Bazaar
    Pavithram     Devanandal
4
5   Chaadi        Mahabar
    Indiran Agar  Sukanta
6                 Palli

Table 2 Households Participated in MGNREGS 2010-11 to 2014-15

State           2010-11  2011-12  2012-13  2013-14  2014-15

Madhya Pradesh  61       60       59       61       79
Rajasthan       75       72       69       69       80
Tamil Nadu      49       49       75       78       75
Tripura         66       66       77       79       80
Uttar Pradesh   76       71       69       69       80
West Bengal     56       68       76       79       76

Note: The figures shown in the table are out of a sample of 80
households in each state.

Table 3 Employment Received under MGNREGS Per Households 2010-11 to
2014-15

State
                2010-11  2011-12  2012-13  2013-14  2014-15

Madhya Pradesh  17       21       28       33       33
Rajasthan       69       64       70       57       46
Tamil Nadu      67       73       81       67       51
Tripura         86       88       91       93       69
Uttar Pradesh   46       52       58       59       50
West Bengal     20       25       28       31       23

State           % increase from
                2010-11 to 2014-15

Madhya Pradesh   94
Rajasthan       -33
Tamil Nadu      -24
Tripura         -20
Uttar Pradesh     9
West Bengal      15

Table 4 Average Wage per Households under MGNREGS 2010-14

State           2010-11  2011-12  2012-13  2013-14


Madhya Pradesh   1682      2563     3613     4483
Rajasthan        5287      5163     6493     6088
Tamil Nadu       4476      5193     6755     6077
Tripura          8621     10341    12603    14665
Uttar Pradesh    4630      6507     8145     9105
West Bengal      2141      3271     4276     4672

State           No. of Times Increase from
                2010-11 to 2013-14

Madhya Pradesh    1.66
Rajasthan         0.15
Tamil Nadu        0.36
Tripura           0.70
Uttar Pradesh     0.97
West Bengal       1.18
COPYRIGHT 2017 Madhya Pradesh Institute of Social Science Research
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme
Author:I., Balu
Publication:Madhya Pradesh Journal of Social Sciences
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:9INDI
Date:Dec 1, 2017
Words:5172
Previous Article:Decentralised Governance and Women's Empowerment through Panchayati Raj Institutions in India.
Next Article:Integrated Action Plan (IAP) in Left Wing Extremism (LWE) Affected Areas: The Ways of a Better Tribal Livelihood.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters