Arjun Surendra SaciWATERs Vulnerability Vulnerability is the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Arjun Surendra

SaciWATERs

Vulnerability

• Vulnerability is the propensity to suffer a

significant shock that brings welfare below a socially accepted level (Kühl, 2003)

• Vulnerability increases when there is

uncertainty with respect to livelihood and life – such as climate variability.

Vulnerability (contd.)

• Lacking sufficient assets, insurance or capital the

poor are the worst hit by fluctuations in levels of income, consumption and well-being

• Such shocks and seasonalities may lead to

losses, distress sale of assets, reduced food intake, interruption of schooling,

• Vulnerability is strongly rural, and severe in

regions of physical remoteness. It also varies with agro-climatic factors, seeing higher incidence in areas prone to floods, drought and areas difficult to irrigate.

Vulnerability (contd.)

• Variability of rainfall and temperatures

contribute to variability in agricultural production and food insecurity –affecting current and future vulnerability

• Governments world over have launched

programmes to attempt to reduce vulnerability.

• Some major programmes in India are as

follows

Public Distribution System

• Individual food security -Distribution of

essential commodities at subsidized rates –mainly foodgrains, oil, sugar, kerosene

• Food distribution in Modern India, since

1930s (Bombay)

• Foodgrains Prices Committee (1964) –

formation of FCI

• 1997- Targeted PDS –concentrating on the

poor

• Different states have different entitlements
• Andhra Pradesh – apart from rice @ Rs 1/ kg

Public Distribution System

Table 6 : Overview of the benefits of the Amma Hastham Scheme (source: Government figures available online at : http://cm.ap.gov.in/15jan13press.asp) S.No Commodities Quantity per Card Consumer Price(Rs.) Open Market Price (Rs.) Cardholder benefit (Rs.) 1 Red Gram Dal 1 kg 50/- 73/- 23/- 2 PalmOil 1 ltr 40/- 58/- 18/- 3 Whole meal atta 1 kg 16.50 25/- 8.50 4 Wheat 1 kg 7/- 18/- 11/- 5 Sugar ½ kg 6.75 17/- 10.25 6 Salt (Iodized) 1 kg 5/- 14/- 9/- 7 Chilli powder ¼ kg 20/- 35/- 15/- 8 Tamarind ½ kg 30/- 40/- 10/- 9 Turmeric powder 100 gms 10/- 12/- 2/- Total 185/- 292/- 107/- NB: Rice is also provided as per existing schemes mentioned earlier

Some issues of the PDS in India Issues Source Illegal diversion of foodgrains from PDS to open market Khera 2011 57% of subsidized grains does not reach the target group, of this -36% is siphoned off the supply chain. POE 2005 No survey for identification of BPL families under TPDS undertaken in 18 out of 31 States and Union Territories. Mane 2006 18 per cent of BPL households did not have ration cards The performance of TPDS was poor in states with larger BPL population Ghost Cards : Cards exist on fake names etc. POE 2005 Irregular delivery of stock to FPS POE 2005 FPS Viability: Only 23% of FPSs sampled by POE were found to be viable. POE 2005

Self-Help Groups

• A Self Help Group (SHG) is a small group of

persons who come together to work towards a common purpose for issues that could range from medical issues to livelihood generation

• r watershed management
• Often financial lending – main function

• Loans at low interest rates –as low as 7% pa

(under National Rural Livelihoods Mission)

• Use money for livelihood generation,

investments etc

• Useful for tiding over tough times, and debt

swapping

• In interviews – not much complaints.

Self-Help Groups

MGNREGA

• Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment

Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) notified

• n

September 7th 2005 & launched in February 2006 (Gazette of India 2005)

• Act mandates minimum 100 days of guaranteed

wage employment in a financial year (FY) to every rural household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work

Objectives of MGNREGA

• To ensure social protection for the most vulnerable people

living in rural India through providing employment opportunities

• To create durable assets, improved water security, soil

conservation and higher land productivity, to ensure livelihood security for the poor

• To carry out work that help mitigate the effects of drought and

natural disasters, such as floods, in rural India

• To aid the empowerment of the marginalised communities,

including women, Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), through the processes of a rights-based legislation

Objectives of MGNREGA contd…

• To strengthen decentralised, participatory

planning through convergence of various anti- poverty and livelihoods initiatives

• To strengthening local grass root governance

such as the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs)

• To effect greater transparency and

accountability in governance

MGNREGA in Andhra Pradesh

• AP receives a large percentage of central funds

for NREGA

FY -2010-11

Andhra Pradesh (Rs. Lakh) India (Rs. Lakh) AP as a % of Total Central Release 741807 3576895 21 Total Available Funds 910710 5417214 17 Total Expenditure 543939 3937727 14 Unspent Amount 366771 1479487 25

Source http://nrega.nic.in/Netnrega/WriteReaddata/Circulars/Briefing_booklet13.pdf

MGNREGA in Andhra Pradesh

Average Days worked per household under NREGA

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Andhra Pradesh 31 42 48 66 54 58 National Average 43 42 48 54 47 43

MGNREGA in Andhra Pradesh

Clearing of P. juliflora in Aurepalle

Work done under MGNREGA

• Most work involved is clearing P. juliflora.
• Same fields being cleared again and again

every year.

• Some amount of
• desilting of tanks + land application of silt
• field bunds and channels –
• Water scarcity not addressed!

Contrasting stories

Shortcomings

• -Bad quality work done –eg. Checkdams that don’t

hold water- wither “durable assets”

• Not implemented equally across states, or even from

village to village

• Work done for land improvement – eg juliflora, not

planned.

• Work not regularly given, often suspended
• Financial irregularities –delayed payments
• Most vulnerable are most affected by these

shortcomings – not all are able to take the benefits.

Conclusions

• Many deficiencies in the official social protection

programs

• Thus only partially successful in reaching their

intended beneficiaries.

• Problems include :

a)leakage of resources towards the non-targeted groups. b)the targeted poor not getting the benefits c) the most vulnerable among the poor not benefiting.

• Thus alternatives to traditional institutional

approaches are needed to best reduce the vulnerability to climate variability

Conclusions