Community Development Programme

Unit-C (Social Changes in India)
(ii) Rural and Agrarian Transformation in India:
(a) Programmes of Rural Development, Community

Development Programme, Cooperatives, Poverty Alleviation
Schemes:
Community Development Programme

First major step towards rural transformation after independence was taken up in first five
year plan and that was through Community Development Programme. CDP initiated a
process of transformation of socio-economic conditions of villages.
It was designed to promote better living for whole community with active participation of
entire community. It aimed at inculcating in the villagers new desires, new incentives,
now technologies and new confidence so that the vast resources of human resource may
be used for the growing economic development of the country.
As the name suggested, it conceived of village as a community cutting across caste,

religious and economic differences. According to A.R. Desai, in the context of agrarian
society in India, the philosophy underlying this movement was based on the following
sociological assumptions.
(1) Individuals and groups forming the village community have a large number of
common interests and sufficiently strong to bind them together, that the interests
of different sections of community are not irreconcilably conflicting, rather they
are sufficiently alike to create a general enthusiasm as well as a feeling of
development for all.
(2) State is a supra class and an impartial association and that the major policies of
the government are of such a nature that they wouldn’t sharpen the existing
inequalities further.
(3) Government conceived of Community Development Programme, to bring about
rural industrialization by developing community as a whole. It is possible because
members of village community interests have shared interest if interests are
promoted, it would benefit and if differences exist they can be reconciled. And
there was a belief that State was impartial. That is why there was reliance on state
as a basic instrument of transformation.
Community Development Programme was designed on the basis of certain earlier

experiments in rural India like that intensive rural development activities carried out at
Sevagram and Sarvodaya centers in Bombay State, Firca development schemes in
21
Call: 09540865705, Email: info@sociologyias.com, Visit: www.sociologyias.com
Madras presidency, experiments to build community centers to refuges in Nilokheri and
on the times of some pilot projects initiated by Elbert Mayors at Etowah and Gorakhpur
in U.P
Along with this, there was another realization that developed. Provincial autonomy was
granted after GOI Act 1935. So, Indians gained experience in administration. The main
problem was that, activities of various departments were not carried out in a coordinated
manner. All these experiments didn’t prove to be effective.
In a single program they wanted to have multiplicity of programs, simultaneously

introduced to bring development. As far as the content of program is concerned, there
were various dimensions to it:
(a) Constructional programs: These involved building of schools, laying roads,
dispensing buildings, community centre buildings, houses for poor, drinking
water resources etc.
(b) There were also irrigation which consisted of constructing wells, canals, tank etc.
Along with this there were agricultural programs which introduced soil
conservation techniques, reclamation of waste lands. Encouraging farmers to
adopt improved seeds, manures and pesticides. It also aimed to familiarizing
farmers with better agriculture implements, consolidation of land holding etc.
(c) Institutional programs were also launched. Youth clubs, women organization,
Vikas Mandal, cooperative societies, veterinary dispensaries, primary schools,
maternity centers, midwives training centers etc. were started.
This is how a multipurpose program was envisaged.
Programme implementation
Administrative structures which consisted of four tiers consisting of Centre/State/District
and Block were created.
The program was highly centralized, centrally controlled and executed. There was an
administrator at Centre, Divisional commissioner at state level and a District level and
Block development officer at block level. At the bottom of hierarchy there was a village
level worker or Gram Sevak etc.
Program was launched on 2nd October 1952 more than 50 projects were launched to begin
with. Each project comprised of 300 villages with a population of 2 lakhs each, three
divisional blocks of 100 villages, Block of 20 units of 5 villages each and for every unit
there was a Gram Sevak.
22
1 Project
A B C Blocks
100 villages 100 villages 100 villages
20 units
5 Villages
The whole program was divided into three phases. The first phase was the National
extension phase, second phase was intensive community development phase, and third
phase was post intensive development phase
In first phase, areas selected were subjected to provision of services on the ordinary rural
development pattern. In the second phase, the blocks that were selected were subjected to
a more composite and increasing government expenditure. In the post intensive phase, it
was presumed that the basis for self perpetuation of the development process has been
created and the need for special government intervention reduced. And gradually these
areas were handed over to concerned department. And in this way the multipurpose
program of rural development was initiated.
This program aroused enormous curiosity among social scientists including sociologists.
It was in 1950’s and 1960’s, that they thronged Indian villages. Oscar Lewis, S.C. Dube,
David Mandelbaum, Daniel Thorner etc conducted numerous studies.
S.C. Dube identifies some of the salient features of this program. They are as follows:
1. This program recognized need for a unified and coordinated direction of
development activities.
2. It also recognized need of associating non-officials and civil society with both
planning and execution.
3. They also streamlined administrative hierarchy into four tires to reduce delays
and red tapes.
4. They tried to use various local agencies to mobilize popular participation.
However, very soon it was realized that program was not very successful. Balwant Rai
Mehta committee laid a general consensus that the project was not successful in
achieving the targeted objectives. The failures were:
(a) The basic assumption that village as a community of shared interests went wrong.
It was found that village had over riding interests.
(b) That state will act as a neutral, impartial and supra manner proved to be wrong.
(c) Most of programs tended to benefit land owners. Gram Sewak and members of
his caste received most of its benefits.
23
(d) High reliance on bureaucratic machinery alone for programmed implementation
rendered the program ineffective.
(e) There was hardly any people’s participation. Also bureaucracy was not able to
enthuse people.
(f) There was no consultation, discussion, participation and suggestions of people.
Decisions were taken at the top and they were ordered to ground level
functionaries.
(g) Most of the people and even bureaucrats had no social service ethos and skills.
There still remained a confusion regarding powers and duties of functionaries.
(h) Most importantly there was a general apathy of public because there was no form
or agency which represented people through which participation could be
mobilized and held accountable for implementations of programmes.
(i) It was also realized that villagers normally showed distrust at officials with whom
they hardly had any communication and who were outsiders.
Thus, at the end of the program it was found that existing inequalities stood sharpened.
So, there was serious rethinking about efficiency of an area development approach.
In a society characterized by gross inequalities, many programs tended to benefit the

privileged. By end of 2nd FYP, we started moving away from Community Development
Programme. From Community Development Programme, we moved to rural
development programmes. While approach was changed to target group approach as
needs and interests of different groups are different. That is why by 3rd FYP we had
IADP (Intensive Agricultural District Programme) for rich, SFDP (Small Farmers'
Development Programme) for landless, MFDP (Marginal Field Development
Programme) for better peasants. Also separate agencies for each were created to
implement these.
24
Cooperatives
India recently celebrated the centenary of the establishment of cooperatives in the
country. The first of these societies were started on the initiative of colonial officials
essentially as the best way of enabling farmers to get out of the clutches of usurious
money lenders seen as the major cause of widespread rural poverty. Gradually, the scope
got extended beyond agricultural credit to cover numerous other activities including
production, finance, marketing and processing in a wide range of sectors, as well as
trading of several important farm products, consumer stores and housing.
During British Rule:

It was an altruistic measure. The cooperative movement owes its origins to the initiative
of a few visionary officials of the colonial government in the early 20th century. The idea
of establishing cooperatives of the type that were proving to be successful in Germany
was mooted in the late 19th century. Concerned with the acute poverty of the peasantry,
aggravated by recurrent droughts, these cooperatives were seen essentially as a means
that would enable farmers to get out of the clutches of usurious moneylenders.
The pioneering officials persuaded the colonial government to adopt an active policy of
encouragement and to provide support to nurture these institutions. Weaknesses in the
functioning of societies, their failure to promote thrift, excessive dependence on state
support, and poor financial management became manifest early on. Their persistence and
the need for corrective action too was recognised. But the remedy was seen to lie in
tightening the laws and stricter government supervision to ensure greater discipline in
their management, rather than by addressing structural defects of the institutions.
The Royal Commission on Agriculture (1927) endorsed this approach and made strong
recommendations for the continuance of state patronage for cooperatives on the ground
that the “failure of cooperatives would mean failure of best hope for rural India”. This
strategy has been pursued ever since. In the 1930s, the newly established Reserve Bank
of India (RBI) was mandated to play a central role in expanding and strengthening credit
cooperatives by providing finances to enable them to increase their lending capacity.
Gradually, the scope was expanded beyond agricultural credit to cover other activities.
The pace of expansion and diversification was slow and fitful in the pre- Independence
period but gathered increasing momentum after 1947.
Post Independence India:

After Independence, the state policy under planning attached a great deal of importance
to cooperatives as a desirable form of organisation to enable small farmers, households
and cottage industries to acquire greater bargaining strength in the economy, vis-à-vis the
big players, through access to credit, input and produce markets. More generally, the
concept of organising economic activity in a spirit of mutual help and managing them
democratically for the benefit of members rather than for profit had a wider moral and
ideological appeal to the leaders of that time.
25
This is reflected in the prominence given to cooperation in the early five-year plans and
the vigorous efforts to encourage, promote and support cooperatives. As a result, there
has been a phenomenal expansion in the number of societies and the range of activities
covered.
Institutional lending to agriculture and allied activities has recorded a quantum growth
during the last two decades as a result of the government’s aggressive policy of
expanding credit to agriculture. Total disbursement in 1990-91 (Rs 128 billion) amounted
to about 7% of the country’s agricultural gross domestic product (GDP). This increased
to about a third of agricultural GDP by the turn of the century. By the end of the last
decade it has grown further, though at a slower rate, and amounts to nearly half the
agricultural GDP.
The rationale for aggressive expansion of institutional lending to agriculture and other
priority sectors is that, being poor and socially disadvantaged, they cannot get credit from
traditional informal sources or for that matter from commercial banks on a scale and at
rates that would enable them to increase the productivity of their own resources or avail
of other opportunities for raising their incomes in a growing economy.
Inadequacy and high cost of credit are indeed severe constraints facing most rural
households and small enterprises. But, effectiveness of policy depends on a realistic
assessment of their overall credit needs and also on ensuring that credit of the magnitude
required by different segments and for different activities actually reaches them. By this
criterion the policy has been far less successful than the above figures suggest.
Weakness
(i) In an effort to provide cheap credit to rural areas, the rates at which cooperatives are
provided funds, as well as rates charged to borrowers, are kept much below rates
applicable to other borrowers. The differential is so large that it is highly profitable to
divert funds borrowed from cooperatives to other uses.
(ii) Central agencies, earlier RBI and latterly the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural
Development (NABARD), have neither the authority nor the means to check the
exploitation of this potential for misuse of funds.
(iii) The legal framework in which cooperatives are to operate is framed by state
governments. Responsibility for ensuring compliance with that framework also vests with
them. But enforcement is notoriously lax. Violations of the letter and spirit of cooperative
law regarding election of boards, maintenance of proper records and their audit,
transparent and objective processes in granting loans, ensuring their proper use and
recovery of dues, have been endemic features of cooperatives all over the country.
(iv) Enforcing discipline through supervision of a huge number of dispersed societies is

impractical. More active interventions – such as appointing government officials to
26
manage societies or superseding elected boards – have also proved ineffective. Though
most of the resources of cooperatives come from public funds, there is no mechanism to
ensure prudent and efficient management of funds.
(v) The opportunities for acquiring power and patronage for personal and party gain by
managing these funds led to locally well-to-do and influential individuals and groups to
gain control of societies. Elections became irregular, contentious and were often rigged
(or countermanded) to help supporters of parties in power. The result has been a
progressive deterioration in the financial health of the cooperative credit system marked
by a high proportion of societies running losses, with low recoveries and huge overdues.
Way Forward (Solutions)

The strategy, therefore, has to be to find ways by creating sanctions and incentives for
implementing some key elements and open up spaces for exploring healthier forms and
practices. In conclusion we can outline some of the ways in which this could be done.
First, programmes for training personnel for computerisation, internal management and
record-keeping, as well as improving the quality of audit of PACS, proposed as part of
the revival package must be pursued vigorously.
Second, efficient and well-managed societies should be motivated and facilitated to

introduce structural and managerial reforms. The aim should be to transform them into
models of true cooperatives that promote thrift, manage loans and repayments efficiently,
and use surpluses for the collective benefit of their members.
Third, successful and promising innovators need to be identified and brought forward to
demonstrate to the wider co-operative community, including politicians and bureaucracy,
the possibilities and impact of institutional reform. The aim should be to mobilise opinion
to persuade and pressurise governments to enact model cooperative laws and enable old
model societies to migrate to them.
Fourth, civil society organisations could play a useful role in mobilising opinion in
support of enabling and encouraging the spread of societies under the model cooperative
act. This is one way to blunt the hold of the political class to implement the much needed
institutional reform.
[Andhra Pradesh has such a legislation that has made it possible to establish and operate
cooperatives as truly democratic, self-reliant, efficient and dynamic institutions. Their
strong and proactive civil society lobby has been able to thwart attempts to bring them
under the control of the registrar of cooperatives, impede registration of such societies
and allow the old-model ones to opt for the new model. This will be useful to create
pressures on the government and the political class from within the cooperative
movement for implementing institutional reform of wider scope and scale.]
27
Fifth point, NABARD needs to play a more proactive role in inducing states to fulfil their
commitments to undertake radical legal and institutional reforms and eliminate
governmental interference in their functioning. NABARD can and should play an
important role by (a) conducting a forensic audit of the loan portfolios of a representative
sample of PACs (Primary Agriculture Credit Society) in each state to check the veracity
of their records, of the characteristics of their borrowers and purposes for which loans
have been given, (b) impose penalties, including withholding of funds, for gross
inaccuracies and misfeasance, and (c) make continued access to NABARD funds
conditional on the implementation of grass-root level reforms specified in the MOUs
signed by the state government.
Sixth, the MOUs signed by states are in the nature of contracts under which they have
undertaken commitments to implement a series of specific reform measures in exchange
for substantial central financial assistance. The possibility of invoking judicial sanctions
to enforce these contractual commitments should be seriously considered.
28
Poverty Alleviation Programmes
At the time of independence because of the colonial legacy we inherited a society with
widespread poverty. We had more than 50% population BPL who were not able to afford
two square meals a day. And, poverty was overwhelmingly rural in character. 80% of the
population in 1947 lived in rural areas. Right from the days of independence we were
confronted with problems of wide spread poverty.
As the 1st Five Year Plan (FYP) clearly demonstrated that, the elimination of poverty
can’t obviously be achieved merely by redistributing existing wealth. Nor can a
programme aimed only at increasing production remove existing inequalities. The two
need to be considered together.
The fundamental urges of Indian people namely right to work, right to education, right to
adequate income and a measure of insulation against sickness, old age, and disability
have to be accommodated.
We tried to address the problem at two levels

(1) By initiating a process of sustained growth
(2) As process of growth by itself doesn’t lead to development, we thought to
redistribute wealth through land reforms, CDP, DPAP etc.
Even in DPSP’s we had enjoined that state has to function in a manner which
progressively reduces inequality and concentration of power has to be prevented.
We needed both growth and redistribution. As far as diagnosing the problem is

concerned, the 1st FYP didn’t do much about it except that of Community Development
Programme. Besides CDP there was no other strategy to alleviate poverty.
At the end of 1st FYP, as we had become quiet up-beat after its success in achieving
targeted objectives, we embarked as a Mahalanobision strategy of growth. In the course
of this strategy, we in a way moved away from the view that growth alone can’t solve the
problem. In Mahalanobision strategy we tended to rely primarily on growth.
We moved to target based approach. New programs like SFDP, MFDP, IADP, and DPAP
were launched.
Both 2nd and 3rd FYP didn’t address to eliminate poverty through employment. But still,
some kind of tokenism was resorted to, when there was a criticism that plan was
neglecting employment. A special rural work programme to provide 100 days of work for
2.5 million people. Also programmes for water supply and local developmental
programmes for rural areas were launched.
29
But on the whole, as far as issue of poverty and unemployment was concerned, the view
point of planners as articulated in the paper didn’t go well and even didn’t achieve the
said objectives. So, a plan holiday followed.
Incidence of poverty shot up during the plan holiday. There was a social ferment in India.
INC for the first time lost power in many states in the 1967 general elections. Opposition
parties got power at this time. The loss of power by INC is due to conspicuous neglect of
agriculture plan holidays also made no investment on agriculture.
In the 4th FYP, we thought of making a direct assault on poverty. While we wanted to
continue with process of growth, we wanted to immediately attend to the problem of
poverty. Minimum needs programme was launched. It tried to ensure food, education,
housing etc. But to spend for the program there were no resources left. So, the program
didn’t address to the local felt needs. At this point of time 32 million, i.e. nearly 54% of
our populations were BPL.
Except for implementation of land reforms, the redistributive remained a failure. It only
marginally reduced economic power by conferring ownership rights in serving tenants by
abolishing intermediaries.
The 2nd FYP addressed the problem of poverty primarily as a growth problem. The idea
was that, poverty in India was attributed to the colonial legacy and thus they said that
Indian society is characterized by structured mass poverty which is widespread.
Structured mass poverty means that poverty is built-in the economic relations that exist in
society. So, they thought that, this structured mass poverty could be reduced through
growth. Pitambar Pant presented a paper to the planning commission where he outlined
the approach to address problem of poverty. According to him, if a sustained growth of
7% for a decade can be maintained then we can effectively address structured mass
poverty through trickle down process by 2 nd FYP, we adopted ‘growth’ as the strategy for
solving poverty.’
Although we witnessed growth in heavy industries, growth rate of economy didn’t reach
the targeted levels. The average of the growth of initial three ‘five year plans’ was only
3%. Along with this we had droughts due to neglect of agriculture in 2nd and 3rd FYP. For
all these reasons inflationary spiral started developing by mid 1960’s, poverty tended to
increase while agriculture production tended to decrease. Also, we learnt from
Community Development Programme that area development programmes only
accentuate inequality.
We realized through CDP that members of a community didn’t have common interest.
Caste divisions did create a divide in members of rural community, Abandoning area
development approach.
30
Along with there a number of other programs like RLEGP which is a target group
orientated programme for landless laborers, TRYSEM for rural youth was launched. At
the state level, Tamil Nadu launched mid day meal scheme, Andhra Pradesh launched 2
Rs a kg rice etc.
Also in Maharashtra, Maharashtra employment guarantee scheme (MHEGS) was

launched and was also given a statutory form in 1979. The programme was to give
employment to unskilled laborers who would take up manual labor. The payment was to
be consistent with minimum wages Act. Regionally all these programs created durable
assets.
MHEGS was seen as an alternative to constitutional provision of right to work. BY 1988-

89, Maharashtra government spent nearly 3180 million annually on this scheme.
All this also reduced fertility levels in South India. Because due to employment
opportunities and due to subsidized, infant mortality rate declined. Also children were
born with enough nutrition. These reasons along with awareness on family planning
reduced fertility level and helped in controlling population explosion.
By early 1990’s, poverty obstinately lingered around 38-40%. Benefits of these programs
were far below from what was expected. Though many programs were launched, many
programs had leakage of funds. 85% of money was eaten up. Also benefits of these
programs reached only the better off sections. Politics also intervened, due to which
identification of beneficiaries were biased.
The real poor and deprived still lacked. There was no adequate information about
government programs, and government relied heavily on intermediaries. Also there was
no access to mass media. So, they are uninformed and unorganized. There was also lack
of coordination between various departments entrusted with these programs. In this
context government thought of revitalizing Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRI’s).
In the meanwhile there were attempts for one window addressing - all programs were
merged under new name JRY, where implementing agency would be PRI’s. Later
JGSRY, EAS, IAY, were stated. In 2001, SGRY started which was later modified as
SJGSY. NFWP was launched in 2004.
Poverty eradication became a political compulsion. Congress adopted a leftist orientation

in approach- ‘Garibi Hatao’ phase of Indian politics started. In the budget, there was
greater allocation for minimum needs program. A food for work programme also started.
In 1973-74 there was hyper inflation. That was the reasons why food for work program
was launched. It was to pay the poor in kind.
In 1975, all the existing programs were rechristened as twenty point program. The
incidence of poverty hovered around 52-53%. Congress lost power in 1977. Janata Party
came to power. They launched Antyudaya program. ‘Ant’ referred to the rock button of
31
society where poorest of poor lived. ‘Yudaya’ referred to their upliftment. So Janata
Party started to give unsecured loans and create employment opportunities etc.
In 1980, INC came back to power. Now, the focus of government was to have twin
objectives at same time. The twin objectives were high growth and poverty eradication.
As growth didn’t eradicate poverty, they wanted to have a different approach.
The 6th FYP, document admitted that half of population in 1980 remained BPL. This also
implied that 70% of India’s populations are poor, because people who were just above
BPL were no better to counter this structured mass poverty. Anti-poverty measures were
initiated with renewed vigour.
Antyodaya, Food for work and minimum needs programme were clubbed together and
integrated rural development programme was introduced. Also a national rural
employment programme which was a rehashed version of food for work programme was
introduced.
We wanted to solve two problems in one stroke. We accumulated lots of food grains in
FCI godowns. It was done to help farmers to give incentive. Government introduced
procurement price, to avoid a glut in the market. The government ensured that market
prices are high enough for remunerative prices of farmer.
NREGA (MGNREGA)
It is the most important program of rural poverty alleviation. It is based on an act passed
by parliament in 2005 called NREGA. It came into force on 2nd Feb 2006. It was initiated
initially in 200 most backward districts of the country. By April 2007, it extended to 330
Districts. Today, the entire country barring 4 districts are under this programmes.
It is also known as the "Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act",
and abbreviated to MGNREGA, is an Indian labour law and social security measure 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. This step is
expected to provide wage employment to the rural poor and would act as a safety net
below which no household would be allowed to fall.
The NREG Programme was designed based on the lessons learnt from the
implementation of earlier wage employment programmes such as NREP, RLEGP, JRY,
(SGRY – Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana) and (JGSY - Jawahar Gram Samridhi
Yojana). Earlier policies were formulated and implemented by bureaucracy alone.
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 the Panchayati Raj
32
Institutions. Under this a minimum of 50% of the funds are transferred to the village
panchayats which are responsible and accountable for generating wage employment.
Various type of activities such as rural connectivity, water harvesting structures, drought
proofing, minor irrigation, micro irrigation works, works for benefiting SCs/ STs are
being implemented.
To make MGNREGA implementation effective, recently Electronic fund management

system (eFMS) has been introduced to reduce delay in payment of wages. Aadhaar card
made compulsory to prevent leakage and ghost accounts. For drought-affected talukas/
blocks, additional employment over and above 100 days per household is introduced.
The lacunas of earlier poverty alleviation programmes were as follows:

(1) Absence of social monitoring.
(2) Hardly any involvement of local communities.
(3) Rampart corruption.
(4) Supply driven schemes rather than demand drive schemes.
Livelihood by employment generated didn’t match with felt needs. There was delays and
corruption in wage payments. The programmes failed to provide livelihood security.
Employment opportunities were not flexible enough. They also had gender bias. Also, no
adequate employment for women and also no parity in the wages between men and
women.
Uniqueness of NREGA:
(1) Unlike other schemes, NREGS is rooted in an act of parliament and it doesn’t depend
on whom and fancies of politicians.
(2) It aims at generating minimum livelihood security to alleviate poverty.
(3) It relies primarily on PRI’s it is also an experiment with decentralized delivery
mechanism it is not bureaucratically engineered.
(4) The main objective is to provide for enhancement of livelihood security of
households in rural areas by providing at least 100 days of guaranteed wage
employment in every financial year to every household whose adult members
volunteer to do unskilled manual work.
(5) It also provides for unemployment allowance when there is no work. Thought it is a
centrally sponsored scheme, unemployment allowance will be paid by State
governments. Along with this 1/4th share of semi skilled and unskilled wages will be
paid by state government.
(6) 60% of fund will be spent on wages of unskilled labors and 40% of fund will be spent
on wages of skilled labor.
(7) PRI’s are made prime agencies for planning and implementation to ensure
transparency, accountability. Along with this, there is a provision of social audit also.
33
The important schemes to be taken up under this scheme on priority basis are:
(a) Water conservation
(b) Irrigation
(c) Land development
(d) Drought proofing
It also aims at providing shelter, first aid and safe drinking water at workplaces.
The two by-products of this programme area (a) empowerment of rural women (b)
enlivening of PRI’s. By around August 2013, this scheme is operational is 27 out of 29
states barring Delhi and Goa. This scheme provides security to 46% of total labour force
in the country. This scheme also provides livelihood security for 100% workforce in
Bihar and Jharkhand. In Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra it provides livelihood security for
about 50% of people where in one state population in large and in other state slum
dwellers are maximum.
2/3rd of Gram Panchayats are already involved in the scheme. Firstly people have to
register for employment. After 15 days they are given Job cards and they get recruited.
This is how it is a driven demand scheme. If any registered worker fails to get a job, he
would be given unemployment allowance.
By around August 2007, more than 62 million people were given job cards. There are
variations in terms of efficiency and terms of demand, because it is now contingent upon
PRI’s to act accordingly. So far 21.2mn households demanded employment.
Problem Areas:
(1) People who have close ties with heads of PRI’s get job cards.
(2) Inability of PRI’s to workout scheme to give jobs.
(3) There are cases where people are not allowed to register. So, supply constraints
are popping up.
(4) Inadequate fund utilization. Only 73% of funds have been actually utilized.
(5) Inadequate information on various schemes and dependence on village headmen.
(6) General lack of quality awareness regarding procedure and entitlements scheme.
(7) Wages payment is not timely
(8) Both goals of 100 days work and minimum wages of Rs. 60 still remains on
illusive goal.
(9) Problems with payment of unemployment allowance.
(10) As most of work done is Kachchah works, during monsoons work is not
able to done.
(11) Still centralized
(12) Various objectives of scheme are mutually incompatible. For example:
durable assets creation and 100 days work is incompatible.
34
(13) Also the act didn’t take into account unequal delivery capacity of PRI’s
the PRI’s delivery capacity has to be strengthened.
Impact of the Scheme:

(1) Indeed the impact is remarkable because most of the advantages belong to
deprived class. 90% of beneficiaries were landless laborers. Out of there 34%
belonged to SC, 28% to Muslims and 26% to OBC.
(2) Rajasthan was the state where it was most effective. Dungarpur district of
Rajasthan generated 100 days of work.
(3) Also lot of irrigation and water conservation works are being carried out. Along
with this rural connectivity programme are being taken up. So, lot of durable
assets is being created due to NREGS.
(4) In a state like Bihar, where lawlessness is name of game, wages were more than
Rs. 60 target. So, NREGS worked effectively in a state which really requires it.
Improvement/Suggestions:
Now to improve benefits NREGA, social audit needs to be strengthen where Andhra can
be taken as role model. Also use of ICT increases transparency and accountability. Civil
society should be used by PRI’s to mobilize the needy.
35
Green Revolution
Initially, the new technology was tried in 1960-61 as a pilot project in seven districts and
was called Intensive Agricultural District Programme (IADP). Later the High Yielding
Varieties Programme (HYVP) was added to the IADP and the strategy was extended to
cover the entire country. This has been called the Green Revolution.
Green Revolution is one of the programmes which aim at transformation of rural

economy and thereby the social setting of the people to be in tune with the encouraging
trends of society.
Since the mid 1960s the traditional agricultural practices are gradually being replaced by
modern technology and farm practices in India and a veritable (real) revolution is taking
place in India. The major achievements of the green revolution is the boost in the
production of major cereals viz, wheat and rice. The production of rice increased from 35
million tons in 1960-61 to 92.8 m tons in 2006-07. The yield per hectare has also
recorded an improvement from 1010 kg in 1960-61 to nearly 2000 kgs in 2004-05.
The production of wheat which at 11 million tons in 1960-61 rose to 75.53 million tons in
2006-07. The yield per hectare rose from 850 kg to 2600 kg, signifying an increase of
nearly 200 percent in last 46 years.
While maize has made impressive progress, other coarse-cereals and pulses have not
recorded any growth, they have registered considerable decline during this period.
The green revolution did not cover pulses. The output of pulses fluctuated violently from
year to year till it declined to an all time low 8 million tons in 1979-80. Even now the
production of pulses is stable around 13.7 million tons (15.15 mt in 2006-7). Neither did
the green revolution cover barley, ragi and minor millets which accounted for around 5
million tons in 2006 as in 1961.
Thus the green revolution was confined only to HYV cereals mainly wheat, maize and
jowar, while the rice output increased relatively at slower rate.
Social Complications of Green Revolution
As the green revolution went apace in wheat growing areas, some sociological
implications have come to the forefront. First, the necessary inputs are beyond the reach
of small farmers. Only farmers with ten acres or more of land are able to exploit the
situation. This is clearly revealed by the fact that some regions with relatively land
holdings such as Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh have done better than
others – such as Bihar where small farmers preponderate. It has come as a revelation that
rural poverty has become deeper and has more wider ramification than though earlier.
36
Even in Punjab it is estimated that only 10 to 12 per cent of the farmers have become
beneficiaries of the programme. The gulf between big and medium farmers on the one
hand, and the small farmers on the other has widened, leading to a new kind of social
stratification.
Secondly, owing to more intensive farming, the demand for labour has not fallen, but the
nature of demand, however, has changed. Labourers with better experience and superior
skills are preferred. This has snapped the old ties between land owners and their
labourers. Transient or seasonal labour has become more important than ever before in
the economic life of the affected villages. Besides, there is resentment and unrest among
local workers against both land-owners and seasonal workers. This has escalated tensions
between owner and local labourers, and also threat to imported labourer.
Technological changes in agriculture have had adverse effects on the distribution of

income in rural areas. From his study of technological changes and distribution of gains
in Indian agriculture, C.H. Hanumantha Rao concluded: Technological changes have
contributed to widening the disparities in income between different regions, between
small and large farmers and between land owners on the one hand, landless labourer and
tenants on the other. In absolute terms, however, the gains from technological changes
have been shared by the rise in the real wages and employment and in incomes of small
farmers in regions experiencing technological changes.
The rich farmers in Punjab, Haryana and in some pockets of western Uttar Pradesh have
been spending portion of their gains due to green revolution on conspicuous
consumption.
Analyzing the green revolution, we find that it has been stunted by the variety of forces.
Technological change without institutional reform has been found to worsen the socio-
economic inequalities and foster, tensions. It has been found that the traditional ethos and
skills of agricultural communities such as Jats of north India, are an important input for
realizing the potential of new agriculture, while other farming groups cannot easily drawn
into radical developments.
The spread of Green Revolution has not failed, but it has not really begun in fullest sense.
The task is to broaden the technological breakthrough wherever possible and to translate
it into socio-economic revolution.
37
Changing Modes of Production in Indian Agriculture
(Capitalist Agriculture and Rural Classes in India)
The debate over the 'mode of production in Indian agriculture' grew out of a milieu where
scholars plunged in classic Marxist notions of feudalism, capitalism and imperialism
confronted a changing empirical reality.
By the 1960s, important economic changes in agriculture had been initiated, and the
process of destroying pre independence forms of landlordism and laying the foundations
of an industrial and infrastructural development that could supply inputs to agriculture
was beginning to produce real changes.
Gail Omvedt highlights the structure and characteristics of the main rural classes viz.
capitalist farmers, middle peasants and semi-marginalized poor peasants and labourers.
But this is a capitalism that is developing within a post-colonial economy totally bound
up with imperialism affected in specific ways by the separation between small-scale
capitalism and large-scale industry characteristic of such economies and by the still
potent retrogressive impact of certain semi-feudal features of Indian social organisation,
including caste and oppression of women.
In 1969, two years after Naxalbari, Ashok Rudra and two colleagues published results of
a survey on capitalist farming in Punjab. Their rather negative conclusions were
responded to first by Daniel Thorner, a long-time observer of India's agriculture, who had
concluded from his own rural tours that a new era of capitalist agriculture was beginning:
In 1971 Utsa Patnaik supported Thorner, from her own study of 1969, that a new
capitalist farmer class was indeed beginning to emerge.
Clearly the 'mode of production' debate was provoked by real changes occurring in
Indian agriculture, expressed politically in the Naxalbari revolt, new organising of
agricultural labourers and the repression of this organising by the rural elite as
symbolised in the 1968 Kilvenmani massacre (Tanjore, Tamil Nadu), first of a long series
of 'atrocities on Harijans'.
Most of the important economic changes in agriculture can be said to date from the
1960s, when the process of destroying the pre-independence forms of landlordism and
laying the foundations of an industrial and infrastructural development that could supply
inputs to agriculture was beginning to produce real changes.
In fact, much of the 'mode of production' debate centred more on the colonial period, than
on analysing whether a qualitatively different process was at work in the post-colonial
phase.
Ten years later, many things seemed much clearer. To begin with, not only have the
patterns that could be seen in outline in 1968-69 developed much further, but there is
more data available to confirm them. These include not only many more village and
38
regional studies, but also massive all-India government material — the Census and
Agricultural Census of 1971, the National Sample Survey and All-India Debt and
Investment Survey whose jointly conducted 1971 survey of 12,452 villages is perhaps the
most quoted source of information, the Rural Labour Enquiry of 8,512 villages in 1974-
75, to mention only the most important.
1971 was sufficient to reflect the basic pattern of the changes in Indian agriculture.
Further, data on production itself — productivity, crop patterns, irrigation, investment
and credit, use of tractors, fertilisers and improved seeds etc. — is available for much
more recent years. There is, in other words, a basis now that did not exist in 1969-70 to
draw more solid empirical conclusions about the agrarian economy and class structure,
though there are still important gaps in our knowledge and the state of theory; Politically
also the classes that observers were barely discerning in 1970 — a Kulak or capitalist
farmer class, and a rural semi-proletariat of agricultural labourers and poor peasants —
are now coining forward as clearly powerful rural actors, though not in forms predicted in
1970.
Capitalist farmers were the main force behind the 'farmers' agitations' during 1980s , who
were dominating the rural political scene: it is no accident that these agitations were
centering in the more capitalistically developed regions, that their main demand for
higher crop prices itself indicates the commercialisation of the rural economy, and that in
contrast to pre-independence peasant movements they are not directed against any rural
exploiter but rather seek to 'unite all peasants' with any ideology that claims the 'city' is
exploiting the 'countryside'.
Thus they show the kulaks on the offensive against the industrial bourgeoisie and seeking
to bring other sections of the rural population under their hegemony — with some
success in the case of the middle peasants and even among the poor peasants especially
where the left parties were there to help them. On the other hand, the increasing
incidences of 'atrocities against Harijans' and caste riots, especially those in early 80s
Marathwada and Gujarat which raged in both rural and urban areas, show the capitalist
farmers on the offensive against the rural poor (it is again no accident that the most mass
explosions and campaigns, including that centering on Kanjhawala, have been in more
capitalistic areas) and using a weapon whose potency had also been hardly expected in
early days of independence — the weapon of caste divisions.
It is symptomatic of the 1980s dilemma that the question, "will the green revolution turn
into a red one" is being replaced by, "will the caste war turn into a class war"? As for the
rural poor themselves, agricultural labourers, poor peasants, contract labourers and
migrants, whether dalits, adivaais, Muslims or caste Hindus, have also been constantly
struggling and asserting their rights, sometimes as workers, sometimes for wages or land,
sometimes also as oppressed castes, nationalities or women struggling for rights as
human beings.
39
Though their movements so far have been comparatively weak and divided — and most
weak and divided precisely in the more capitalistic areas — they provide a hint of what
might come once they really begin to organises.
Process of Transformation of Indian Agriculture

After Independence, government not only focused on the building up of a heavy industry,
a public sector and infrastructure that included dams, roads and other forms of
transportation, but also a series of land reforms and various village development
programmes.
2 Stages of transformation:
In first stage, the Zamindari Abolition Acts and Tenancy Acts were passed in various
states in the 1950s. This did not give land to the landless or land-poor; they were not
intended to. They allowed landlords to retain huge amounts of land (usually the best land)
and paid generously for what was taken away; and they resulted as often in poor tenants
being expelled from the land as in richer tenants getting control of the land. But they did
achieve by and large the main effective slogan of the Kisan Sabha movement —that of
giving land to the tenants.
They deprived big landlords to a large degree of their village power, pushed them to turn
to farming through hired labour and investing in the land (here compensation money also
helped), and laid a basis for the bigger tenants and rich peasant cultivators to come to
power in the villages and develop as capitalist farmers.
Land concentration as such was little affected by the Acts (it should be remembered there
is both feudal land concentration and capitalist land concentration, and these acts struck
only at the first type). But a basis was laid for the emergence of a new class in the
countryside, bigger and more broad-based than the old landlords, composed in part of
some old landlords but numerically more of ex-tenants and rich peasants. This class was
'new' in its relation to the land; its members were no longer living off peasant surpluses
but were hirers and exploiters of labour power.
While land concentration remained as high as before, tenancy declined and effective
landlessness and proletarianisation increased.
The second phase started with the Land Ceiling Acts that began to be passed from 1961
onwards, were very different from these Zamindari Abolition and Tenancy Acts. They
were designed to give 'land to the landless' and were not simple anti-feudal reforms but
rather challenged land property as such, whether 'capitalist' or 'feudal'.
Along with anti-feudal land reforms, came programmes to increase production. From the
very beginning the Indian ruling class had seen its task of building capitalism as
including both the development of heavy industry and of fostering and transforming the
small-scale sector which centred on agriculture [Shirokov, 1973|. Developments often
40
seemed low and halting, but the government did invest, from the 1950s onwards, in
irrigation, dam-building, promoting new seeds and improved breeds, long before the Ford
Foundation and international agencies came along with their package programmes,
selected IAVP districts, and the 'green revolution'.
The spread of education, cooperative credit societies, land development banks, sugar
cooperatives, agricultural universities all played a role. One of the most significant steps
was the bank nationalisation of 1969, which had the effect of channelling an increased
share of credit to the countryside. Perhaps more important than any specific programme
or the whole 'green revolution' package was the increasing ability of the new kulak class
to claim an increasing share of government resources for itself, especially after 1965
[Shetty, 1978; Mody, 1981]. Government programmes and funds played an essential role
in helping the new class to increase its productive base.
Finally, on the political side, the new institutions of the Panchayat raj, credit cooperatives
and educational institutions, mahila mandals and similar 'village development' institutions
all helped the new class maintain its hegemony in a new way over the increasingly
proletarianised and restless rural majority.
All these developments took place very unevenly, for India is a vast and highly varied
land, a sub-continent that has become a nation. In areas of ryotwari settlement, where
strong peasant or anti-caste movements occurred, it proved easier to move against
landlordism and consolidate the gains of the new kulak class. Thus south and western
India and the northwest show on the whole a clearer prevalence of capitalist relations of
production. (This does not necessarily mean a greater development of the productive
forces: the south remains poorer even today, while Punjab and Haryana, where
investment in agriculture has been high even from British times, maintain their lead in
production.)
In contrast, the east, northeast and central regions remain backward, with a significant
amount of semi-fedual relations of production. Within these broader regions, within
states, and even within districts tremendous differences remain. But on the whole a
growth in agricultural production and the transformation of the agrarian relations of
production, in short the development of capitalist agriculture — even though it remains a
backward capitalist agriculture with tremendous hangovers of feudal relations and
remnants — has characterised the Indian, countryside since independence.
Extra:
DEVELOPMENT OF THE FORCES OF PRODUCTION
To begin with, let us look at the evidence of the degree of development of the productive
forces in agriculture. On the commercialisation of the rural economy, Reserve Bank
studies showed that by the early 1960's wages provided either the main or supplementary
income for over half of rural families [cited by Rastyannikov, 1975]. Similarly in the
early 1960s the Ministry of Food and Agriculture estimated that 45-47 per cent of total
41
crop production was marketed; it seems that about three-fourths of this was marketed by
producers while the rest represented crops turned over to landlords or moneylenders who
in turn sold them on the market [Rastyannikov, 1975].
Indradeep Sinha [1990] has claimed that during the last 40 years virtually the entire rural
economy has been drawn into the vortex of money-commodity relationships and almost
100 per cent of commercial crops and 40 to 60 per cent of the food crops are brought to
the market and sold as commodities. This is probably correct, as is his point that village
traders and wholesalers are thoroughly integrated into the overall Indian industrial-
commercial structure and that this itself is linked to the imperialist chain, so that the life
of India's rural population is truly dominated by the crisis-ridden economy of world
capitalism.
There is clear evidence for a substantial growth in the use of capital inputs in agriculture,
such as fertilisers, tractors, oil engines, irrigation pump-sets etc.
This use of capital inputs has been often provided through the state and co-operative
sectors and has been inevitably accompanied by greater dependence on the world market.
India's previous food dependence has now substantially ended, but according to one
economist, "instead of importing food we are importing fertilisers for producing food"
(The Economic Times, Dec. 19, 2013).
Finally, terms of trade, which were more or less constant until the mid-sixties, turned
steadily in favour of the agricultural sector between the mid-sixties and mid-seventies;
though there has again been a reversal in recent years the net result has still been to
increase the resource flow into agriculture [Ashoka Mody, Shetty].
The results of all of this can be measured in three ways: in terms of growth of
production, mass welfare, and the changing nature of the rural elite.
Growth of production: Since independence the growth in production of all crops has
been 2.9 per cent a year or 0.7 per cent per capita per year. The overall rates of food
imports have steadily declined. The growth rate in the earlier period, up to 1964-65, was
higher than in the later period, but this early growth was primarily due to expansion of
cultivated area.
Productivity growth rates were more or less constant with some improvement in
foodgrains in the later period; there is no marked difference in productivity seen from the
time of the 'Green Revolution' because in fact state-sponsored efforts at technological
growth preceded this period.
Though Indian agriculture is still miserably backward, but clear capitalist agricultural
development can be observed.
42
Mass welfare: This development, however, is not leading to any increased overall
welfare of the rural (or urban) masses. (Indeed the idea that capitalist development by
itself leads to improved welfare, or that pauperisation, growing landlessness etc., are
themselves sign of 'semi-feudalism' or the lack of capitalist development betrays some
strange illusions about the nature of capitalism.)
India's agricultural development is development that is accompanied by continuing

insecurity in which bad weather leads to famines and by increasing dangers of
widespread plant disease, water logging, etc. resulting from lack of irrigation projects.
It seems that most of the increasing gains in production are being directed towards
export, including not only traditional exports like tea or coffee but also the best of India's
rice, fruit, vegetables, onions, meat and fish products.
Agricultural labour remains the main source of income of the rural poor, and almost all
studies show that both real wage rates and the days of work available have been
declining. While there is a somewhat growing reliance on other sources of income, from
low-paid labour in the unorganised sector (organised sector employment continues to
show declining rates of growth), from various forms of very petty commodity production
(ranging from lace-making to selling grass in the market), or from ownership of tiny plots
of land or a cow or milch buffalo, there is no evidence to show that this is increasing
sufficiently to compensate for the decline in income from agricultural labour.
Rural elite: A third result of the capitalist growth of productive forces in agriculture has
been a significant change in the nature of the rural elite.
Inequality is not the main point here but the relation of the changing forces of production
to class. Rastyannikov points out that in the middle 1960s, "the distinguishing
characteristic of commodity production in India's agriculture prior to the 'green
revolution' was the markedly uneven erosion of natural-type relations in both spheres of
the reproduction process; the reproduction of labour power was freed from the fetters of
the natural economy to a far greater extent than the reproduction of the means of
production ....
This situation has now substantially altered. The large increments in credit going to
agriculture, in fertilisers, improved seeds, pumpsets, tractors, etc. and the importance of
irrigation in determining the value of land itself means that now the means of production
for the rich farmers who control most of the land are being significantly and increasingly
provided through the market and by modern industry and the state.
Another indication is that over half of the debt owed by richer farmers comes from
modern external sources such as co-operatives and banks in contrast to traditional money-
lenders and other agriculturalists [Mody]. This also reflects the transition of the dominant
class in agriculture from being primarily landlords to being primarily capitalist farmers.
43
In conclusion, there seems to be no basis on which we can argue that India's agriculture
is not dominantly capitalist: over half the rural population depend on wages for their
survival; all cultivators, including middle and poor peasants, are forced to sell to some
extent in the market and their production is governed by the laws of the market; and
monopolised by those who depend on the exploitation of labour power.
44
Problems of Rural Labour
Rural labour refers to the workers in villages whose only source of income is
their labour. They sell their labour to earn money. They have no control over
land or capital. Rural labour includes tenants, agricultural labourers, other
landless labourers, and artisans. Level of specialization being low in villages,
many individuals are seen to be engaged in multiple activities for subsistence.
Hence, many workers work in varied sectors.
Problems of those landless labour are multi-faceted. At the core of all this is the
problem of low wage level and unemployment. It is estimated that on an
average, they are totally unemployed for a period of about 100 days and self-
employed for about 50 days in a year. Various problems of rural labour can be
studies as under:
1. Security of tenure: One of the major objectives of government's land
reform movement was to ensure security of tenure of tenancy and provide
minimum wages. However, the implementation has been unsatisfactory.
Implementation has been uneven and landlords have made use of certain
loopholes to escape the rules (G.R. Madan, 1990). For example, land
owners have started declaring tenants as mere agricultural labourers.
Implementation work has been successful wherever tenants have
belonged to the numerically dominant caste. Otherwise tenants still face
exploitation and uncertainty of tenure.
2. Wages: A major problem faced by rural labour is that supply of labour in

labour market is more than demand. As a result, wages are abysmally
low. Government has instituted a minimum wages regulation law.
However, it is not followed by landlords. Indeed, the National
Commission on Labour has termed it as a 'dead letter'.
A view in many scholarly circles was that increase in productivity will

lead to increased labour wages, by the 'trickle-down effect'. However, this
view has been found to be incorrect. There has not been any perceptible
rise in wages owing to green revolution, and resultant rise in productivity.
Hence, agricultural labour till date are mired by extremely low wages, in
spite of huge surplus value earned by land owners.
A positive trend seen off late is the introduction of National Rural

Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA now MGNREGA). Rural labourers
get a minimum wage for 100 days of the year through NREGA. Hence,
wherever NREGA is properly implemented, landlords are also forced to
give at least as much wage as labourers get through NREGA.
3. Capitalist mode of farming: Prior to green revolution, Jajmani System

was in operation in villages. By the jajmani system, the land owner had a
45
social obligation to pay for the worker's welfare. The landlord-worker
relation was regularized, and there was stability in the relation.
Green revolution introduced farm mechanization. Due to farm

mechanization, the 'sponge effect' of agriculture was lost. Sponge effect
refers to the ability of a farm to accommodate more labour. Secondly,
green revolution exposed farmers to market economy. Landlords
favourably adopted capitalist mode of production. In capitalist farming,
profit is primary motive. To maximize profits, landlords cut down on
labour. Also, jajmani system broke; landlords were no longer ready to
provide for their traditional workers in lean season. When jajmani system
broke, landlords hired and fired workers at will.
According to Surinder Jodhka, all of the above factors have led to high
rates of unemployment and underemployment. Green revolution and
capitalist farming have led to polarization of classes (high inequality in
incomes) and pauperization of rural labour.
4. Bonded Labour: The problem of bonded labour has substantially

decreased in recent years, but still remains. Landlords do not let their
bonded labourers free and force them to declare themselves as casual
labourers.
5. Problems of non-farm landless labour: Other than agricultural

labourers, there are other labourers engaged in activities such as building
of houses, digging of canals, construction of roads, and other public
works. They mostly work under contractors and are paid low wages. As
they work in groups - unlike agricultural labourers who work on
individual basis - they can organize themselves to form unions and
cooperatives for mutual help. However, for this they need extension
support from local government.
6. Problems of artisans: The socio-economic situation of artisans had

deteriorated a lot during British rule due to competition from British
manufactured goods. With independence, tariff barriers were imposed on
manufactured goods, and condition of artisans improved. Government has
also reserved certain businesses for Village and Small Scale Industries
(VSI); Khadi, handicrafts, handloom and powerloom to name a few.
In spite of this, artisans face numerous problems. They face problems in

procuring raw materials; they cannot afford new technology, and do not
have institutional support to market their products. As a result, they are
exploited by numerous middlemen. Their efficiency is low due to low
levels of technology. Further, they are getting stiff competition from
machine-made goods. Due to unavailability of credit facilities, they cannot
46
go for modernization.
Due to pauperization, many skilled artisans migrate to urban areas in hope

of better opportunities. This trend has, in fact, harmed them and doomed
them to underemployment, slum life and exploitation in hands of informal
sector industries in cities.
47
Migration in India
Migration has been defined as crossing of the boundary of a political or
administrative unit for a certain minimum period of time. It includes the
movement of refugees, displaced persons, uprooted people as well as economic
migrants. Internal migration refers to a move from one area (a province, district
or municipality) to another within one country. It can be studied in terms of
permanent as well as seasonal or cyclic migration.
Migration can either depopulate or overpopulate an area depending upon the

level of economic activities and is an important process of urbanization and
social change. Historically, it has been a force to the democratization of society.
For example, great developed nations like US and Australia are the products of
the streams of migration. In the Indian context, it paved the way for the lower
caste groups to free themselves from the oppression and subjugation of
traditional caste system if they moved to the urban areas. Other to it, more
people migrate due to lack of opportunities in their native place rather than a
spirit of exploration, thus creating social problems in the region they move to.
Causes of Migration in India

Several push and pull factors exist in the country which are responsible for the
large-scale migration. The most important reason for migration in India is
marriage, accounting for more than half of the migrants. This type of migration
does not lead to serious social consequences, but social evils like female feticide
have given rise to a large number of inter-regional marriages posing serious
problems of adjustment and cultural changes as well.
Employment can be considered to another major cause of migration in the

country. The root of the problem is 'jobless growth' in Indian economy, that is,
despite an acceleration in the growth rate in India; the pace of creation of work
opportunities has not kept pace with the growing requirement in all the regions of
the country. Studies have found that the interstate movement is not very high and
most people remain within the same state after migration. However literate
people constitute a vast majority of the migrants. Though considered by many as
a natural and, at times, a beneficial process, it has led to several problems in the
Indian scenario.
India has high levels of regional disparity in terms of population distribution and
development indicators. Most of the north Indian states are poor in infrastructure
facilities and are also highly populated. Hence a large number of people from
states like Uttar Pradesh, Orissa and Bihar migrate to other states in search of
jobs. Low and variable agricultural production coupled with lack of local
employment opportunities are the biggest cause of movement of people outside
the state. According to F.G. Bailey, in states like Orissa, landlessness and
48
marginalization of the poor people turns out to be the main cause of them moving
to other more developed regions of the country in the hope of a better livelihood.
Maharashtra, Gujarat, the south Indian states and other states in northern parts of
the. country like Haryana, Punjab and Delhi have become attractive destinations
for the migrant population.
Though factors like internal conflicts and political unrest have not become a
significant cause for migration as yet, government must guard against them in the
long run, particularly in the Naxalite belt. Terrorism is also a major reason of
migration in border areas as is evident from large number of Kashmiri migrants.
Negative Consequences of Migration in India

Though the freedom to reside in any part of the country has been enshrined in
the Indian constitution as a fundamental right, experience has shown that it has
only created friction points within the society. The process of migration creates
problems both in areas of inmigration (place to where people go) and out-
migration (place from where people leave).
First let us discuss problems of areas of in-migration which mostly happen to big
urban centres. Rapid urbanization and industrialization of cities like Mumbai,
Delhi, Punjab, Haryana etc. have generated more employment opportunities and
also created better infrastructure. People migrate to these regions perceiving
them as greener pastures. However several factors make them vulnerable as they
enter new territories. They create pressure on the job market and start competing
with the local populate. Since migrant people are usually more willing to work
on lower wages, they dent the prospects of locals in the area getting jobs. This
creates a situation of social and ethnic unrest and has even lead to violence in
many states in India. Migrant population from Bihar being attacked by
MNS(Maharashtra Navnirman Sena),migrant wage labourers from outside
Assam attacked by ULFA - these are few incidents clearly demonstrating the
social consequences of migration in India.
Apart from this the increasing trend of migration to urban areas creates various
problems due to unplanned nature of urbanization of these urban centres. First,
masses of the poor, landless, illiterate and unskilled agricultural laborers and
petty farmers from backward states of such countries make quantum jumps
towards big metropolises like Kolkata, Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai, and so forth,
bypassing local small towns and small cities - which fail to give them even
minimum employment. Such massive rural to metropolitan migration of
distressed people is a typical characteristic of migration in India, which is
leading to acute urban involution, congestion and decay. Proliferation of filthy
urban slums and pavement dwelling, extreme dirtiness and very poor level of
living characterize such metros. This is because such metropolises have failed to
provide to migrants and residents with minimum shelter and minimum
49
subsistence employment. Overflow of urban poverty, unemployment, extreme
housing shortages, and frequent breakdowns of essential urban services.
Secondly, such phenomena are occurring because-metropolises have very

limited employment-generating capacity under capital-intensive
industrialization, and consequently, the incoming illiterate and unskilled
migrants are absorbed only in very poorly paid urban informal sectors; that are
characterized by low productivity, cut-throat competition, insecurity and
exploitation. Although such migration helps to avoid starvation (hence
desirable), it does not improve their economic condition adequately, nor permits
their social mobility. Rather, it leads to a colossal waste of human resources and
of national potential. So the migrants are in fact moving from rural poverty to
urban poverty.
Thirdly, such metropolises are very fast becoming the scenes of extreme social
and economic inequalities wherein abundant affluence among a handful few
stand hanging and over-looking abject poverty among the masses down below.
These kinds of situations may create a dangerously eruptive situation - which is
conducive to unleash in the near future extreme social disorder, severe class
conflict, crimes, widespread violence and urban civil war. These situations
urgently warrant immediate plans of action.
Apart from aforesaid problems, the areas of out-migration also face many
problems mostly on account of loss of vital human resource potential which
keeps these areas perpetually underdeveloped. Rural areas face shortage of
skilled people because most of skilled and semiskilled people migrate to urban
areas.
The demography of these areas is also altered to a large extent leaving back the
women and old population at their own. It results in imbalances in Sex
composition due to selective male or female migration. Large cities have
unfavourable sex ratio as compared to rural areas due to high male immigration.
Migration affects the women more. In the rural areas, male selective out
migration leaving their wives behind puts extra physical as well mental pressure
on the women which increases their vulnerability.
Remedies
There is an urgent need to formulate a planned, long-term strategy to counter the
problem. Balanced regional development is the key to tackle this problem.
Agriculture must be given top priority as it employs a large number of people

and it is only when there is a slump in this sector that people in rural areas
migrate to the cities. Dryland farming using the techniques of watershed
management can cure the problem of underdevelopment in a vast portion of
country.
50
Government must take steps to encourage private enterprise in rural and semi-
urban areas so that educated people do not move to bigger cities in search of
jobs and suitable small and medium scale industries could be set up in the rural
areas. This will also reduce pressure from the already burdened agriculture.
Though the government has launched several anti-poverty and infrastructure

generating schemes, most of the villages in India still do not have even the bare
minimum amenities. The crux to solving this problem is to generate full-time
employment opportunities in the rural areas. Further, proper implementation of
Schemes like Bharat Nirman, MGNREGA, SJGSY etc. can lead to creation of
vibrant village economy supported with good infrastructure to support the
development of villages. Initiatives like PURA (Provision of Urban amenities in
Rural Areas) must be promoted on a large scale to bridge the rural-urban divide
in terms of infrastructure. Private sector too must be involved in rural
infrastructure development projects by providing them incentives like tax-
holidays and rebates.
Further, preventive measures like planned growth and expansion of cities

should be taken so that the incoming rural population can be absorbed in the
cities in more efficient manner without creating any adverse effects. Schemes
like JNURM, Swasthya suraksha Yojana etc. can usher in the era of cities
without slums.
However, it must be noted that a decade from now, the problem that the nation
will face is educational unemployment. In fact, with the expansion of rural
education, 11 million children have been taken off the fields in the last decade
to join the rural schooling system. The aspirations of these first-generation
literates require the construction of creative strategies for mass semi-skilled
employment in the near future. So, the process of "jobless growth" has to be
stopped and steps has to be taken to undertake creation of employment
opportunities through expansion of manufacturing and service sectors.
Though it will perhaps never be possible to stop migration completely, the

approach should be of managing it in such a way that no ethnic or social
frictions are created across the country.
Rural areas across the country must have all the amenities to ensure that people
of younger generation choose to remain in there instead of moving to the bigger
cities. If they still decide to migrate to bigger cities, the choice should be
dictated more by a spirit of exploration rather than compulsion to move out due
to lack of opportunities.
51

Community Development Programme

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Community Development Programme

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Unit-C (Social Changes in India)

(ii) Rural and Agrarian Transformation in India:

(a) Programmes of Rural Development, Community

Community Development Programme

As the name suggested, it conceived of village as a community cutting across caste,

Community Development Programme was designed on the basis of certain earlier

In a single program they wanted to have multiplicity of programs, simultaneously

This is how a multipurpose program was envisaged.

In a society characterized by gross inequalities, many programs tended to benefit the

During British Rule:

Post Independence India:

(iv) Enforcing discipline through supervision of a huge number of dispersed societies is

Way Forward (Solutions)

Second, efficient and well-managed societies should be motivated and facilitated to

We tried to address the problem at two levels

We needed both growth and redistribution. As far as diagnosing the problem is

Also in Maharashtra, Maharashtra employment guarantee scheme (MHEGS) was

MHEGS was seen as an alternative to constitutional provision of right to work. BY 1988-

Poverty eradication became a political compulsion. Congress adopted a leftist orientation

To make MGNREGA implementation effective, recently Electronic fund management

The lacunas of earlier poverty alleviation programmes were as follows:

Impact of the Scheme:

Green Revolution is one of the programmes which aim at transformation of rural

Social Complications of Green Revolution

Technological changes in agriculture have had adverse effects on the distribution of

Process of Transformation of Indian Agriculture

India's agricultural development is development that is accompanied by continuing

2. Wages: A major problem faced by rural labour is that supply of labour in

A view in many scholarly circles was that increase in productivity will

A positive trend seen off late is the introduction of National Rural

3. Capitalist mode of farming: Prior to green revolution, Jajmani System

Green revolution introduced farm mechanization. Due to farm

4. Bonded Labour: The problem of bonded labour has substantially

5. Problems of non-farm landless labour: Other than agricultural

6. Problems of artisans: The socio-economic situation of artisans had

In spite of this, artisans face numerous problems. They face problems in

Due to pauperization, many skilled artisans migrate to urban areas in hope

Migration can either depopulate or overpopulate an area depending upon the

Causes of Migration in India

Employment can be considered to another major cause of migration in the

Negative Consequences of Migration in India

Secondly, such phenomena are occurring because-metropolises have very

Agriculture must be given top priority as it employs a large number of people

Though the government has launched several anti-poverty and infrastructure

Further, preventive measures like planned growth and expansion of cities

Though it will perhaps never be possible to stop migration completely, the

You might also like