Saturday, April 09, 2005
Food for Work
Promise and Challenges
(This article is available at The Hindu)
The launch of the National Food-for-Work Programme (NFFWP) this week in Andhra Pradesh is a bold symbol of the pro-poor policy orientation of the United Progressive Alliance Government. The initiative marks a clear divergence from the `India Shining' sloganeering of the former National Democratic Alliance Government, and there is much promise in this orientation of governance for marginalised classes, predominantly in rural areas. However, the potentially serious pitfalls of elite capture of the administering institutions implies the need for frequent monitoring and review of performance, as well as a nuanced understanding of local political conditions in the 150 districts where the implementation of the scheme has been planned.
The NFFWP is premised on a Keynesian understanding of employment that emphasises the role of the state in proactively generating employment opportunities. The policy design is simple yet remarkably efficient in adopting a multi-pronged strategy to tackle the essentially multi-dimensional problem of poverty. On the one hand, it provides employment to otherwise seasonally unemployed wage labourers who often migrate from district to district, and sometimes across state borders, to obtain a subsistence wage. On the other, the policy facilitates rural infrastructural development in the form of repair and construction of village-level irrigation works, road connectivity and basic socio-economic infrastructure. Essentially the hope is that income levels in the rural economy will gradually rise, both as a consequence of the wage goods provided as `payment' for work undertaken, as well as through externalities derived from boosting the quality and quantity of rural infrastructure. Broader developmental goals, including food security and employment guarantee are also likely to receive a shot in the arm from this programme.
This partly brings to fruition the efforts of the Right to Food Campaign spearheaded by Jean Dreze and others, and a number of other organisations that have actively campaigned to get the Employment Guarantee Act tabled in and passed by Parliament in December this year, pressing towards establishing the constitutional right to work. These organisations include the National Alliance for the Fundamental Right to Education, All India Agricultural Workers Alliance, All India Agricultural Workers Union, All India Democratic Women's Association, Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti, National Alliance of People's Movements, National Federation of Indian Women, New Trade Union Initiative, among others. There is little doubt that the adoption and passing of this pro-poor, redistributive scheme is a notable achievement in itself and clearly marks a divergence from the principal dependence on `trickle-down' growth manifested in the NDA regime's governance.
However, the empirical record of redistribution failures in India occurring in the second, implementation phase should serve as a note of caution to those who are inclined to believe that agenda setting is the main stumbling block for policymakers. The dismal implementation record of land redistribution, rural credit policies such as the Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP), and a host of other foundering initiatives, points to the need for frequent monitoring and review of the performance of the administering institutions. This includes the bureaucracy, as well as partner institutions such as non-governmental organisations.
The fact that the NFFWP is funded primarily by the Central Government itself implies that the resources coming from New Delhi will encounter State-level patronage networks that may seek to alter resource allocation, in this case food distribution patterns, in favour of dominant elites at the sub-district levels. Targeting issues are also potentially under threat from this sort of political capture, as many critics have pointed out about the IRDP that ultimately pandered to the not-so-poor in credit terms.
It might be argued that in a country with such a decentralised political structure as India, this sort of elite capture is inevitable to some extent, but it can certainly be minimised through the creation of multi-institutional monitoring bodies, comprising, for example, independent watchdogs, political leaders of the ruling and opposition parties, civil servants and NGO members.
However, above and beyond this basic issue is the need for policymakers in New Delhi and in the respective States to incorporate an understanding of local political conditions into their plans for policy implementation. Caste discrimination, neo-feudal interdependencies between poorer tenants and their rich landlords, and even criminal elements that dominate specific parts of the rural economy are factors that need to be carefully examined before committing resources to any district, even the poorest ones. Otherwise, there is a looming threat of misappropriation and wastage of scarce food resources in an already predominantly food-insecure context.
(This article is available at The Hindu)
The launch of the National Food-for-Work Programme (NFFWP) this week in Andhra Pradesh is a bold symbol of the pro-poor policy orientation of the United Progressive Alliance Government. The initiative marks a clear divergence from the `India Shining' sloganeering of the former National Democratic Alliance Government, and there is much promise in this orientation of governance for marginalised classes, predominantly in rural areas. However, the potentially serious pitfalls of elite capture of the administering institutions implies the need for frequent monitoring and review of performance, as well as a nuanced understanding of local political conditions in the 150 districts where the implementation of the scheme has been planned.
The NFFWP is premised on a Keynesian understanding of employment that emphasises the role of the state in proactively generating employment opportunities. The policy design is simple yet remarkably efficient in adopting a multi-pronged strategy to tackle the essentially multi-dimensional problem of poverty. On the one hand, it provides employment to otherwise seasonally unemployed wage labourers who often migrate from district to district, and sometimes across state borders, to obtain a subsistence wage. On the other, the policy facilitates rural infrastructural development in the form of repair and construction of village-level irrigation works, road connectivity and basic socio-economic infrastructure. Essentially the hope is that income levels in the rural economy will gradually rise, both as a consequence of the wage goods provided as `payment' for work undertaken, as well as through externalities derived from boosting the quality and quantity of rural infrastructure. Broader developmental goals, including food security and employment guarantee are also likely to receive a shot in the arm from this programme.
This partly brings to fruition the efforts of the Right to Food Campaign spearheaded by Jean Dreze and others, and a number of other organisations that have actively campaigned to get the Employment Guarantee Act tabled in and passed by Parliament in December this year, pressing towards establishing the constitutional right to work. These organisations include the National Alliance for the Fundamental Right to Education, All India Agricultural Workers Alliance, All India Agricultural Workers Union, All India Democratic Women's Association, Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti, National Alliance of People's Movements, National Federation of Indian Women, New Trade Union Initiative, among others. There is little doubt that the adoption and passing of this pro-poor, redistributive scheme is a notable achievement in itself and clearly marks a divergence from the principal dependence on `trickle-down' growth manifested in the NDA regime's governance.
However, the empirical record of redistribution failures in India occurring in the second, implementation phase should serve as a note of caution to those who are inclined to believe that agenda setting is the main stumbling block for policymakers. The dismal implementation record of land redistribution, rural credit policies such as the Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP), and a host of other foundering initiatives, points to the need for frequent monitoring and review of the performance of the administering institutions. This includes the bureaucracy, as well as partner institutions such as non-governmental organisations.
The fact that the NFFWP is funded primarily by the Central Government itself implies that the resources coming from New Delhi will encounter State-level patronage networks that may seek to alter resource allocation, in this case food distribution patterns, in favour of dominant elites at the sub-district levels. Targeting issues are also potentially under threat from this sort of political capture, as many critics have pointed out about the IRDP that ultimately pandered to the not-so-poor in credit terms.
It might be argued that in a country with such a decentralised political structure as India, this sort of elite capture is inevitable to some extent, but it can certainly be minimised through the creation of multi-institutional monitoring bodies, comprising, for example, independent watchdogs, political leaders of the ruling and opposition parties, civil servants and NGO members.
However, above and beyond this basic issue is the need for policymakers in New Delhi and in the respective States to incorporate an understanding of local political conditions into their plans for policy implementation. Caste discrimination, neo-feudal interdependencies between poorer tenants and their rich landlords, and even criminal elements that dominate specific parts of the rural economy are factors that need to be carefully examined before committing resources to any district, even the poorest ones. Otherwise, there is a looming threat of misappropriation and wastage of scarce food resources in an already predominantly food-insecure context.
# posted by Narayan Lakshman @ 5:54 AM 
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
