Impact of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Program on Employment and Income Status of Tribal families in Mahasamund District
Gaytri Prasad Patel
Guest Lecturer, Lt. Raja Virendra Bahadur Singh Govt. College,
Saraipali, Dist.–Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, India.
*Corresponding Author E-mail:
ABSTRACT:
The research paper was conducted through employment program to sample tribal families in Mahasamund district. The employment and income received in 2015-16 has been studied and along with this, the employment planning commission received from agricultural workers, agricultural labor etc. from other sectors has been analyzed so that it can be known what the share of employment and maternal income is received from MNREGA program in the total annual employment and income of fearless workers and other work workers of families. Employment is an important determining factor in the socio-economic development of any country and is also a major requirement for living a respectable life. The available resources of employment reflect the development of any country, while employment is also a medium for the socio-economic upliftment of an individual. While the people engaged in employment get income from it, along with this, the person does not spend his time in unnecessary tasks but in productive work, which leads to the development of the country along with the personal development of that person. Unemployment gives rise to an inferiority complex in the mind of a person, which motivates that person to do work against the policy. In such a situation, it is necessary that proper and respectable employment should be provided to every person in the country. Keeping this in mind, in this chapter of the presented research study, an attempt has been made to analyze the impact of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Program (MGNREGA) on the socio-economic development of model tribal families of Mahasamund district. Hence, in the present study the impact of MNREGA programmed on employment, income and standard of living of the sample tribal families during the survey year has been analyzed.
KEYWORDS: Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Program, Tribal Population.
INTRODUCTION:
Chhattisgarh state is a tribal dominated state of India. 7.50 percent of the total tribal population of India lives here. Chhattisgarh state is the seventh largest state of the country on the basis of tribal population. The tribals of the state mainly live in hilly and forested areas. About 41.14 percent of the state's land area is surrounded by forests and about one-third of the population of Chhattisgarh state is of tribals. The social, economic and cultural level of the tribal communities living in Chhattisgarh state is different from each other. Mainly the tribal communities in the state are classified under three language families 1. Munda language family: Korku, Kharia, Mavaasi, Nihal, Birhor, Korba, Nagesia, Turi, Saunta, Majhi and Majhwar are included under it, 2. Dravidian language family: Various classes of Paraja, Oraon and Gond tribals are included under it, 3. Aryan language family: The remaining other tribal communities are included under it. Chhattisgarh state has the highest number of tribal communities speaking languages of the Aryan family. Most of the tribals of the state belong to the Proto-Australoid species. In Chhattisgarh state, under Article 342 of the Constitution, a total of 42 tribal groups have been identified which are classified into 161 sub-groups. The state's 6 tribal groups Abujhmariya, Baiga, Bharia, Birhor, Kamar and Korba have been identified as special backward tribals by the Government of India.
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY:
1. Study of members registered for employment under MNREGA programme.
2. Study of working hours of sample families in MNREGA programme.
3. Study of total annual employment from various sources in families.
Table No. 1.1 Details of members registered for employment under MNREGA program in sample families
|
S. No. |
Block |
Total sample family |
Total number of members registered |
Average registered members per household |
|
1 |
Bagbahara |
81 |
196 |
2.4 |
|
2 |
Pithora |
94 |
223 |
2.4 |
|
3 |
Mahasamund |
123 |
259 |
2.1 |
|
Total |
298 |
678 |
2.3 |
|
Registered for employment under MNREGA:
Analysis of Table No. 1.1 shows that out of total 298 sample tribal families, 678 members of the family are registered for employment under MNREGA program and the average number of registered members per family is 2.3. Block wise study shows that 81, 94 and 123 sample families have been selected from Bagbahara, Pithora and Mahasamund block respectively, and the number of members registered under MNREGA program in these families is 196, 223 and 259 respectively. The average number of registered members per family in Bagbahara and Pithora block is 2.4 and in Mahasamund block it is 2.1. It is clear from the entire analysis that about 2 members of tribal families are registered under MNREGA program in Mahasamund district.
According to MNREGA Act 2005, at least 8 hours of work will be taken from the workers under the program in a day. An attempt has been made in the study to know how many hours of work are required in a day from the workers under the MNREGA program. The work is taken. Under Table No. 1.2 and Figure No. 6.1, the duration of work (in working hours) of sample workers in MNREGA program is presented.
Table No. 1.2 Working hours of sample families in MNREGA programme.
|
S. No. |
Working hours |
Block |
|||
|
Bagbahara |
Pithora |
Mahasamund |
Total |
||
|
1 |
4 hours |
17 (21.0) |
25 (26.6) |
33 (26.8) |
75 (25.2) |
|
2 |
6 hours |
35 (43.2) |
40 (42.5) |
50 (40.6) |
125 (41.9) |
|
3 |
8 hours |
18 (22.2) |
20 (21.3) |
20 (16.3) |
58 (19.5) |
|
4 |
Uncertain |
11 (13.6) |
9 (9.6) |
20 (16.3) |
40 (13.4) |
|
|
Total |
81 (100) |
94 (100) |
123 (100) |
298 (100) |
Analysis of Table No. 1.2 reveals that among total sample workers 25.2 percent work for 4 hours, 41.9 percent work for 6 hours, 19.5 percent work for 8 hours and the working hours of remaining 13.4 percent sample tribal workers are uncertain under MNREGA programme. In comparison to Pithora and Mahasamund development blocks, the highest number of sample workers of Bagbahara development block, i.e. 43.2 percent and 22.2 percent respectively, work for 6 hours and 8 hours under the programme. In comparison to 21 percent of Bagbahara and 26.6 percent of Pithora, the highest number of sample workers of Mahasamund development block, i.e. 26.8 percent, work for 4 hours under the programme. The working hours of 13.6%, 9.6% and 16.3% sample tribal workers of Bagbahara, Pithora and Mahasamund development blocks respectively under MNREGA program is uncertain. It is clear from the entire analysis that most of the tribal workers working under MNREGA program in Mahasamund district work for 6 hours.
Table No. 1.3: Total annual employment from various sources in families
|
Description |
Block |
|||
|
Bagbahara |
Pithora |
Mahasamund |
Total |
|
|
Total employment generated from own agriculture |
56.16 (13.0) |
63.21 (12.1) |
87.60 (13.80) |
20697 (13.0) |
|
Total employment generated by agriculture |
19668 (45.3) |
25284 (48.3) |
27233 (42.9) |
72185 (45.4) |
|
Total employment generated by non-agricultural labour |
15886 (36.6) |
18190 (34.8) |
24099 (38.0) |
58175 (36.5) |
|
Total employment generated from MNREGA |
2211 (5.1) |
2528 (4.8) |
3333 (5.3) |
8072 (5.1) |
|
Total employment from all sources |
43381 (100) |
52323 (100) |
63425 (100) |
159129 (100) |
Analysis of Table No. 1.3 shows that in Mahasamund district, the total sample families got employment for a total of 159129 days from various sources in the survey year (financial year 2015-16). Out of which 45.4 percent was from agricultural labour, 36.5 percent from non-agricultural labour, 13 percent from own agriculture and the remaining 5.1 percent employment was obtained from MNREGA programme. Block-wise study shows that the percentage of employment obtained from agricultural labour is the highest in the total employment obtained by the sample families of the three blocks of the district from all sources. The percentage of employment obtained from non-agricultural labour and own agriculture in total employment was the highest in Mahasamund block as compared to Pithora and Bagbahara blocks. Which is 38 percent and 13.8 percent respectively. The percentage of employment obtained from MNREGA programme in total employment is 5.3 percent in Mahasamund and 175 percent in Pithora and Bagbahara blocks.
Compared to Bagbahara (5.1 percent) development block, Pithora development block had the lowest employment of 4.8 percent. It is clear from the entire analysis that in the survey year, the percentage of employment obtained by the sample families of the district from agricultural labour and non-agricultural labour is the highest in the total employment obtained from all sources and the percentage of employment obtained from MNREGA programme is very low at about 5 percent.
CONCLUSION:
According to 52.7 percent of the total sample workers of Mahasamund district, regular social audit of the works done under MNREGA program is not done by the Gram Panchayat in the Gram Sabha and 36.6 percent of the sample workers do not know whether social audit is done in the Gram Sabha or not. 89.3 percent of the total sample workers do not participate in the social audit of MNREGA program done in the Gram Sabha and only 10.7 percent of the workers participate. It is known from the survey of Mahasamund district that women of any sample family do not participate in the social audit of the works done under MNREGA program. By studying the reasons for non-participation of sample workers in social audit, it was known that 69.9 percent of the total sample workers are not aware of the social audit process under the program, 19.2 percent are not informed by the Gram Panchayat and 10.9 percent do not participate in social audit due to other reasons.Out of the total sample workers of the district, 8 percent are not satisfied with the social audit conducted in their Gram Panchayat, 2.7 percent sample workers are partially satisfied and no sample worker is completely satisfied. The main reason for this, as revealed by the study, is that only some of the works done under the MNREGA program are audited by the Gram Panchayat and regular audit is not done at the right time. Out of the remaining total sample workers, 89.3 percent workers could not express their level of satisfaction on the social audit, and they remained neutral.
REFERENCES:
1. Arokiasamy, P (1997), “poverty, Nutrition and Fertility A micro study “B. R. Publising Corporation, Delhi.
2. Chhattisgarh Act. (2006), “Chhattisgarh state rural employment Act. -2006” Chhattisgarh Govt. Pub. NAREGA Act. – 2006.
3. Dheeraja, C. and H. rao (2010) “changing gender relations: A study of MGNREGS across different states” Hyderabad: National Institute of rural development.
4. Dre’ze J, N. Dey and R. khera (2008) “Employment guarantee Act: A primer” National book trust, New Delhi.
5. Dutta, Puja and other (2012) “Does India’s employment guarantee scheme guarantee employment?” economic & political weekly, april 21, 2012, vol. XLVII No. 16, PP. 55-63.
6. Gaiha, R. (2007), “Employment guarantee Scheme” The Oxford Companion to economic in india, (Ed.) by K Basu, Oxford University press, New Delhi, PP. 129 -31.
7. Parthasarthy, G (1985) “Reorientation of rural Development Programme: A Note on some Basic lssues” economic and political weekly, vol. VI (2), P. 21
8. Ravi chopra et. al (2012) “Greening rural development in India” volume-1 UNDP publications, India.
9. Singh B.D. (1992), “PlaningFor Rural Devlopment and Poverty Alleviation” Mittal Publication, New Delhi, PP 32.
10. Siwach, Raj kumar and sunilkumar (2009) “Implementing NREGS in Haryana: A study of social audit” kurukshetra, April 2009, PP. 41-44.
|
Received on 26.02.2025 Revised on 08.03.2025 Accepted on 20.03.2025 Published on 19.03.2025 Available online from March 28, 2025 Res. J. of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2025;16(1):41-44. DOI: 10.52711/2321-5828.2025.00008 ©AandV Publications All right reserved
|
|
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License. |
|