This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
5%) received the full 100 days¶ employment and wages . The average employment per house hold was 43 days in 2006-07 and 35 days in 2007-08 respectively. 2. Shekhawat (2002) in his study ,on ³Impact of employment generation programmes (Egps) in Jaipur district of Rajasthan´, reported that disbursal of assistance to beneficiaries was delayed and assistance given under Egps was insufficient, these were the major problems faced by the respondents in taking advantages f Egps. 3. Datt (2008)reported that main constraints under MGNREGA were lack of professional staff, lack of proper project planning ,bureaucratic resistance to MGNREGA, Inappropriate rates of payment ,lack of worksite facilities and lack of transparency and social audit 4. Mazdoor Kisan Samiti and Nari Shakti Sangathan (2006) studied status of implementations of NREGP scheme in Jharkhand district. A sample of 36 respondents (men and women) from 8 Panchayats were taken. The finding of the study revealed that in village Jilimatanr, out of nine respondents only one reported that Gram Sabha was organized in which four women and 12 male participated. 5. Sood (2006) studied NREGP challenges in implementation and reported that in Jashpur block, Chattisgarh, lack of staff is having a negative impact on the working of the NREGA. Also sub-engineer were being burdened with the task of maintaining job cords implying that their primary tasks suffered. Such additional appointments are a rare opportunity to provide employment to the youth in villages and should not be allowed to be squandered due to administrative hurdles. 6. Central Guarantee Council (2007) reviewed the implementation of MGNREGA in Burdibeda village Jharkhand district of and revealed that. Job cards were handed over to the workers only two days prior the visit of the social audit team in the same village. Two community development works have been sanctioned on the some land owned by the Pradhan of the Village. Construction of well and a farm pond are both being carried out on the Pradhan¶s land
A substantial part of their work is unpaid because they work in their farms. Women headed household and joint families are the main disadvantages in accessing the benefits of the scheme as it is applicable only to the head of the household. like Warangal in Andhra Pradesh and Ahmednagar in Maharashtra. for women (48%) in Uttar Pradesh. 11. MGNREGA has changed this. . Now parts of women¶s non-paid jobs. Maharashtra SC (25%). Richard Mahapatra (2010) in his study found that increasing women¶s participation in MGNREGA can be used for effective delivery of its core objective: local ecological revival. OBCS (50%). No case was reported here an individual has actually received the work. Richard Mahapatra (2010) in his study revealed that the unique features of the MGREGA seem to have made it a woman friendly initiative. It allows members belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities to take up work in their own fields and get paid for that. community members say this has attracted women to the programme. 10. like land levelling and digging a pond in their farms.7. In Madhya Pradesh SC (1%). Richard Mahapatra (2010) in his study further revealed that more than 90 per cent of woman workers are farm labourers or cultivators. 8. ST (85%). it will be a win-win situation for the programme as well as villages. OBC (3%) and women (39%) found. In the current fiscal till October. ST (15%). So if the supervisory roles in panchayats and the dominant presence as workers converge. OBC (8%) also for women jobs generated NREGA (53%). OBC (42%). are paid for. In drought-prone districts. Kumar (2006) revealed the comparative analysis of performance of NREGA based on 107 sample and found jobs generated for SC (28%). 9. ST (33%) for women 58 percent study found in Chittisgarh SC (37%). The Act also helps women take up this opportunity as economic freedom. including preparing the village development plan. It is now mandatory to have 50 per cent woman panchayat representatives who have nodal roles in the programme¶s implementation. ST (20%). women availed of more than 50 per cent of employment created under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). with more women than men enrolling in the scheme. National Tribunal (2006) studied 100 days programme of NREGP in district of Madhya Pradesh and reported that tremendous hurdles faced at the first stage of registration and acquiring of the job cards.
or they are paid directly to the individual workers. readymade garments. (2006) found that in Andhra Pradesh minimum wages were not received by the workers even for a full days¶ work. Also proactive administration in Rajasthan..payment increased when wages were paid to group leaders (Mistry. 16. chances of corruption and non. According to Hardikar (1998) the average additional employment generated for IRDP beneficiaries was 77. (2006) stated that Public vigilance can be helpful to minimize corruption in rural employment guarantee scheme in Rajasthan and Haryana. There was massive participation of rural folk.30 . Iqubal et al. Ramalakshmi (1998) pointed out that inadequate working capital is the most serious problem restricting the performance of many DWCRA groups and also the group members needed training for skill enhancement. One of the labour informed the team that he worked only for 6 days on a particular work but the entries on the job cards indicated that he had worked for 48 days. 18.7 person days while that for DWCRA beneficiaries was 60. Tribal women looked forward to seeing their men back home. as result workers have stopped going for work. especially for items like pottery..12. lack of awareness . Measurement of work was not made in front of the workers. Engineers do not visit the worksite regularly and women often received lower wages as compare to men for similar work. 14. 13. The mode of payment can have different effects on the workers on the whole payment of wages to the group leader. social and community pressure. 15. Study found corruption being minimized in Rajasthan due to public vigilance leading to more than one and a half lakh people gaining employment in Dungarpur district. In Kanta toil village the team found that payments have no made for work that began a month before the team visit. and suggestion are training and adequate supply of information and resources. Dreze et al. etc. 2007). 17. unemployment allowance was observed as low as Rs. In a study on NREGA Ensure Security Against Hunger in Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh found that the wages are paid either to the entire group and divided among the group by the leader. Corruption and neglect hindering implementation of the programme in Haryana. 6 to 13 per day for a full day¶s digging work. Mangasi (1999) reported that the problem faced by DWCRA women were. foot-wear.
bamboo and plastic items etc.Even through the employment at the village level is seasonal they migrated during such period. animal husbandry hosiery. handicraft.persons days. A research done by Rao (2000) reported in his study that awareness about the programme like IRDP.88 percent of the gross income from all sources. Rathore (2000) revealed that the economic contribution from dairy and livestock enterprise perceived by the beneficiaries of SGSY programme was 84. workers and wages under JRY and planning and execution of work JRY was 70. Annonymous (2009) The first phase of the audit in Bhilwara district has revealed irregularities and corruption relating to the use of sub-standard materials. candle.66. Awareness on DWCRA was poor among agriculture labour families. but they were ignorant of the programme under which the construction work was made except for telling that it was a government work executed by the gram panchayat . Attitude and Impact of DWCRA Programme on Tribal and Non-Tribal Beneficiaries of Udaipur District´ Upadhyay . 880/. needed to ensure that the right people are being paid. funds JRY. He further pointed out that average additional income generated by IRDP was Rs. 79. carpet weaving . JRY EAS TRYSEM . 25. 22.per beneficiaries.spice grinding. Out of 32 families only three families (10 %) worked few years back for school building construction taken up under JRY. buffalo rearing. 72. Ameta (2000) observed in his study that the extent of knowledge of beneficiaries about general aspects of JRY. 20.46. 72. In a study on ³Comparative Study of Knowledge.07. 21. DWCRA etc. Dwaraknath (2001) in a study on ³Self Employment Generation under DWCRA´ reported that women had gained knowledge through DWCRA programme in various income generation activities such as weaving industry.16 percent respectively. Bishnoi (2007) in his study on ³Awareness of DWCRA programme among rural women´ reported that several entrepreneurial activities were promoted through DWCRA programme after conducting training like fruit preservation. 23. 24. 2046/.while DWCRA scheme had generated additional income of Rs. making and mat weaving. 19. the use of machinery instead of manual labour and the non-issuance of job cards.
33%) of them who were only partially aware of the scheme and less than one.33%) of the beneficiaries were highly aware about the existence and function of the SGSY followed by one ±third (33. It has also worth while to note that majority of the beneficiaries 12-67 percent were not aware about selection of beneficiaries under the scheme. 27. document required to attached with the application and areas prescribed for well construction.33%) possessed average knowledge and one third respondents (33. .33 percent of the women beneficiaries were aware of the existence of SGSY for the upliftment of rural women followed by 43. 26.33%) had poor knowledge about DWCRA progarmme.33%) of them who were reasonably aware about the scheme. sharing of expenditure and concession available for construction of new and repair to old wells.tribal (7. procedure prescribed for getting installment.33 percent of them who were aware of the implementing agency of SGSY.73 percent beneficiaries had medium level of awareness whereas 33.77% had very poor knowledge.third (28. It was observed that 65. Antwal and Wangikar (2002) in their study on ³Awareness and Participation of Beneficiaries in Urban Basis Services Programme for poor´ found that 48. None of them had good and very good knowledge about various aspects of DWCRA programme among non-tribal respondents more than half of the women (53. Whereas a few non. According to Phulikken and Wankhade (2005) in their study revealed that majority of beneficiaries of Jawahar Well Scheme (JWS) advance sanctioned amount of loan sanctioned and its disbursement.66%) were in the category of average knowledge.18 percent beneficiaries. However the majority of beneficiaries farmers know little about eligibility requirements for becoming beneficiaries .(2000) mentioned that majority of the tribal respondents (83. 28.09 percent beneficiaries had low level of awareness.33%) possessed poor knowledge and 10 percent women had very poor knowledge while a few (6. Chethan (2004) in her study revealed that the overall awareness of the women beneficiaries about SGSY show that more than one third (38. High level of awareness was observed in 18.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.