CSE study questions NREGP's works

NREGP THE YEAR AFTER

In Ravalia Kala village, in Gogunda block of Udaipur, Sohan Singh, 20, who studied till class X, digs along with his fellow villagers a gravel road which they all know would be washed away in the next rain. He is conscious that the work may not lead to any worthwhile assets for the village.

One year after the National Rural Employment Guarantees Programme (NREGP) was launched, Udaipur in Rajasthan has been celebrated as a success story because of high participation of the people, especially of women.

The flip side to the story, however, is that Udaipur also is an instance of trivialisation of the scheme to provide 100 days of employment to rural people by pushing them into unproductive manual work, often on harsh terrain.

In the 40 gram panchayats of Gogunda block, visited by Business Standard, work site after work site is buzzing with activity. But each of them is a gravel road. This example is reinforced by a recent report of the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) which says that the NREGP has slipped miserably in abiding by the work priorities set forth in the law.

Section 5.1 of the NREGP says that water conservation should get top priority in work sites, It says clearly that water conservation and harvesting, afforestation and tree plantation, construction of irrigation canals, desilting of tanks, renovation of traditional waterbodies and rural connectivity should be the focus areas.

The CSE study of the EGA (employment guarantee Act) work sites in the 200 districts under NREGP shows that water conservation and harvesting comprise just four per cent of work in progress. Rural connectivity works "" mainly construction of gravel roads "" comprise 18 per cent while flood control and drought-proofing comprise 27 per cent and 32 per cent respectively.

The study takes the specific example of Hardoi district in Uttar Pradesh where it finds 85 per cent of work being related to "rural connectivity"!

While water conservation works were most in number their popularity have been fast declining, with progress in these projects falling to 18 per cent in the end of 2006 compared to 67 per cent progress in flood control structures.

Of the 410,742 odd works being implemented under the NREGP in 200 districts of 27 states, 188,035 are in water conservation, 105,558 in rural connectivity, 30,631 in drought-proofing and plantation and 8,248 in flood control sectors.

NREGP promised to provide livelihoods in villages by providing a minimum of 100 days of employment to every household. It was envisaged that this would be done by initiating projects that would ensure long-term security by creating productive assets.

Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) in its study says that the Act has been used in a self defeating way in places like Hardoi where 39 per cent of land is rainfed. It was brought under NREGP to regenerate the agriculture there through water conservation.

However most of the money got spent on gravel roads. According to Union ministry of rural development data, in Hardoi district, 85 per cent of works undertaken under NREGP related to rural connectivity, while only 12 per cent related to water conservation.

Official data also indicates that across Uttar Pradesh more than 55 per cent of works were linked to construction of roads while only about 16 per cent related to water conservation.

But on this irregularity in the working of the law, one official explanation is from the Assistant Engineer in Gogunda Mohammad Hussain Bohra and it however celebrates the newly won right to work of the rural poor.