Monday 6 July 2009

Changes to NREGA -- Latest from the Budget Speech

In their manifesto, the UPA promised to expand NREGA in three key ways. First, it promised to raise daily wages to 100 rs. Second, it promised to extend the guarantee of 100 days work was to individual workers rather than entire households. And third, it promised to extend to the scheme to urban as well as rural areas.

It looks like the UPA has renegged on all but the first of these promises. While the FM reiterated the government's committment to raising the wages of the scheme to 100 rs no mention of the other two campaign promises was made. This is unfortunate. While the wage increase may make political sense, it's the least important of the three promised changes and may even have negative effects. (Researchers have shown that when Maharashtra drastically increased the wage rate under the Maharashtra employment guarantee scheme years back it effectively ended the "right to work" due to budget pressures. Admittedly, the current wage increase is much smaller than the increase that was mandated in Maharashtra and there is a key difference between the two situations in that state governments don't foot the bill for NREGA wages but nevertheless it does not bode well.)

5 comments:

Deepak Saraswat said...

Nice post doug. I agree on the part that increasing wages may have negative effects but still i have some issues which i got when interacting with people involved in ground level implementation in Andhra Pradesh. First is that, Sarpanch of few villages complained that NREGA wages are not increased and in face of increasing commodity prices, it is difficult to make ends meet. Secondly, wage labour is hired for anything between Rs. 200-300 in agricultural season, so even to achieve some threshold level, so as to compare with agri season, NREGA wages have to be increased. In some villages, people have a tradeoff in going for NREGA or doing some work like tobbacco trading, hence to increase participation even in non agricultural season, increasing wages is a smart political move.

Michael Chasnow said...

Interesting post and comments. A couples thought on Deepak's comments. NREGA pay should be increased if current wages are not enough to keep up with increasing commodity prices. But, if NREGA wages need to be increased to compete with other jobs, such as the tobacco trading option, this is not as important a reason for wage increases.

If people can get good jobs in the private sector, why should the publicly funded NREGA, which is targeting struggling workers that cannot find good jobs, even try to compete?

Michael said...

Doug,

I think the larger problem is not that UPA is reneging on campaign promises, but instead that UPA promised such grandiose and populist plans in the first place. I'd be happy to give UPA the backdoor exit in wiggling out of their commitments.

The extension of NREGA to urban workers and then extending the entitlement to individuals VASTLY expands the budget burden... I mean, we're talking about potentially doubling the size of NREGA had UPA followed through on all three campaign pledges (and that's probably a conservative estimate).

NREGA is a beast with multiple channels through which it improves people's lives. Who is to say that it'll work as effectively in the slums of Mumbai as it will work in the arid plains of Rajasthan? Do we even know what aspects of the current NREGA work best (and which might just be a drain on resources)?

When the Indian government is allocating hundreds of crore rupees... should it not make it's decisions based on sound research, rather than populist promises to garner votes?

While I'll admit to not being thoroughly versed in the literature on NREGA, don't you think it's worth learning (and improving) a bit more from what we have, before expanding on such a large scale?

-Michael

Krittika said...

I BEING STUDENT AM NOT SO MUCH INTO IT
BT I FEEL THT DEEPAK SARASWANT IS RITE AS THE WAGES MST BE SET IN SUCH A MANNER THT IT BECOMES QUITE COMFORTABLE FR PEOPLE INORDER TO MEET UP WTH EXPENSES .DUE TO INFLATION IT HAS BECOME DIFFICULT FR FOR PEOPLE TO SURVIVE AND MEET THEI EXPENSES LIKE HEALTH,FOOD CLOTHES,SHELTER ETC...

Krittika said...
This post has been removed by the author.