Limitations of MGNREGA

MGNREGA, said to be the worlds most ambitious anti-poor scheme, has its own anomalies
when it comes to implementation in the right way. The challenges are from both the
Government and the public.
Government challenges:
a) Poor planning and Administrative skills: The scheme has been continously reviewed
by the central and state governments and also NGO’s and what the comment emerged
was that the budget allocated could be utilized better with more effective planning.
Even the report by the CAG has highlighted the issue and has said the main reason is
the lack of administrative capacity of the village panchayats to run the scheme in a
desgined and decentralised manner.
b) Lack of focus on objectives: Though Schedule One of the MGNREG Act referred to
conservation of natural resources such as rainwater, land, forests, this was not
reflected in the works floated for the scheme. 3 under this scheme, contractors and
machineries should not be used. But in some work places, contractors were allowed
and machineries were involved. And the erring officials claim that the works were
done as if they were completed by workers and not by machines.

c) Lack of adequte man power: Deficiency of adequate adminisrative and technical man
power, especially at levels of programme officer, technical assistants, etc. this
deficiency has advervesly affected the preparartion of plans, scrutiny, approval,
monitoring and measurement of works and the other activities. This has led to an
adverse impact on transperency.
d) Difficulty in Funding the Scheme: MGNREGA was started with an initial outlay of
Rs. 11,300 crore in 2006-07 and the budget for the programme has been increasing by
leaps and bounds ever since but the TAX – GDP ratio has been falling and there are
fears that the programme may end up costing 5% of the GDP.

YEAR TOTAL OUTLAY WAGE EXPENDITURE(%

OF Total Outlay)
2006-07 $2.5 bn 66
2007-08 $2.6 bn 68
2008-09 $6.6 bn 67
2009-10 $8.68 bn 70
2010-11 $8.91 bn 71

e) Dicrimination: The scheme provides a unique oppurtunity to people from rural India
to earn their own income without any discrimination of caste or gender and it
paysboth men and women the same wage. However cases of discrimination have been
reported. In states like Kerela and Andhra Pradesh high percentage of women are
enrolled through the scheme whereas in some other states it is quite opposite. Also
the number of job cards issued are few when there are women or there is delay in
issuing job cards.
 f) Corruption and Irregularities: Statistics clearly indicate that the poverty alleviation
programmes have had a minimal effect on poverty levels in India due to corruption.
The actual funds that reach the beneficiaries are very little compared to the funds
allocated for welfare schemes. Former Prime Minister, Rajive Gandhi had once said
that out of every 100 paisa allocated for public welfare only 14 paisa reaches the
targeted people.
Further concerns, include the fact that corruption of the local governments leads to
the exclusion of specific sections of the society.

g) Maoist isurgency: Less than 9% of households in the 60 districts most affected by

Maoist militancy found the required 100 days of employment under the country’s
rural jobs programme in the year ended 31 March. The National average of
households that have completed 100 days under the job guarantee plan last fiscal was
also poor at 10.1% compared with 8.8% in the districts hit by the Maoist insurgency.
The percentage of women employed under the programme in the insurgency hit
districts in the same period was 44% compared with the national average of 48%.

h) Lack of safety measures: Around one third of thw workforce is women. Therefore,
women who carry their children to work, lay their children in cradles tied around the
tree branches due to the absence of creches.
Secondly, first-aid box must be available at the work site to provide medical
assistance in case of emergency. Also life saving medicines should be present, as
anyone could be bitten by reptillians or other harmful creatures while clearing the
bushes.
Public challenges:
a) Ineadequate awareness: MGNREGA provides the rural poor a right to demand for
work for 100 days in a financial year. But people’s efforts to get jobs under this
scheme have been stymied by the fact that Governments have done nothing to
encourage people to register demands.
The fact is that the national average for workdays generated under the scheme is less
than half of the entitlement of 100 days per household, per year. Even in 2009-2010, a
severe drought year, only 54 days of work per household were generated. In 2010-
2011, this number decreased to 46.79 days. Due to lack of awareness about the
provisions of the Act, People are unaware of their basic entitlements under
MGNREGA such as Job Cards, Minimum Wage Amount, Unemployment Allowance.

b) No purposive Spending: The scheme has obviouly increased the earning capacity of
the rural poor but there is hardly any savings. For example, payment to workers in
Tamil Nadu is made in cash instead of bank accounts or post office accounts. Raw
cash in the hand leads to uneccessary spending. Lack of awareness on the impact of
inflation and the illiteracy level among rural poor are the reasons for not saving a part
of their income from this scheme.
c) Being unorganized: In spite of large number of provisions under MGNREGA being in
favor of workers, they could not enjoy their entitlements, such as getting work for the
 stipulated 100 days, unemployment allowances and basic amenities at the work site,
on account of being unorganized. It seems to be a setback for the workers under the
Act. Facing dipping demand for works under the scheme, the Jharkand State
Government has decided to form unions of workers that will persuade people in
villages to ask for more work. This will help in streamlining the village planning
process as well. But, it is still unclear under which laws, the proposed unions will
function.
d) Wage Rate: wages offered through the scheme are lower than the market wages.
e) Work is not timely available.

Suggestions to improve the scheme

a) Political interference is often reported to be prevalent both at the time of beginning
and implementation of scheme. It is strongly suggested that such a kind of political
interference should be avoided by the politicians.
b) It is suggested that Government should constitute committees for monitoring the
service delivery and public grievance resolution. These committees are important
instruments of effective monitoring of implementation of schemes by DRDA. Further
it is suggested that these commitees hold meetings once in three months and review
the work.
c) Wages should be promptly revised every 6 months like the government employees
dearness allowance set by the union government, for better financial inclusion of the
MGNREGS.
d) It is absolutely necessary to stimulate the scheme by connecting self-help groups
which have structural linkages from the neighbourhood (villages) groups to districts
may be diplomatic involved to issue job cards, participate in choosing the worksites,
arrange project meetings,etc. Then, the scheme will eventually prove to be the most
dynamic socioeconomic force to empower rural women in the century.
e) The issue of lack of qualified staff in the gram panchayat office can be overcome by
appointing one accountant and one worksite supervisor for each 100 job card holders.
Moreover, these staff should be regularly given orientation to sensitize them on their
responsibilities and inculcate mutual understanding, trust and cooperative attitude
where it is lacking.
f) The scheme should develop a relevant instrument to provide skill generating work and
activities for literate beneficiaries instead of engaging them in completely manual
labour.
g) The success of the scheme also depends on the awareness of it among the people.
There are two ways to build awareness for generating demand for the scheme. The
first is a model using education programmes, educating the people of their rights and
informing the panchayats of their responsibilities.
h) There should be higher involment of the state governments as the District Rural
Devlopment Agency (DRDA) is manned by the state governments. They try to focus
more on the state sponsered schemes.
i) They should focus on actually providing 100 days of work under the scheme.