How is the hinterland unlocking? Findings from 2 nd round of survey - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

How is the hinterland unlocking? Findings from 2nd round of survey

A collaborative study by:

The Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (India), Action for Social Advancement, Grameen Sahara, i-Saksham, PRADAN, SAATHI-UP, SeSTA, Seva Mandir and Transform Rural India Foundation With research support of:

VikasAnvesh Foundation and Sambodhi

Sincere gratitude

• To all the villagers we approached for the study, who in these

extraordinary times gave their valuable time and input to complete the study.

• To all the coordinators of data collection from our partner organizations,

and field staff of the partner organizations for their extraordinary efforts to ensure data collection within an extremely tight timeline.

• Special thanks, to Sridhar Anantha, for his support in logistics of the

study.

• Households have depended on Kharif stock more than Rabi – but that

stock is now dwindling.

• Households are coping with the shock by eating less food and lesser

number of times and with large dependence on PDS.

• Need for food support through PDS and promotion for food crop

cultivation in Kharif.

• Preparedness for Kharif 2020 is low - need for public support in terms of

seed provision and credit for Kharif 2020.

• Large chunk of migrants yet to return – but already the increased workload

enhances the drudgery faced by the women.

Reconnecting with round-1 (1/2)

Reconnecting with round-1 (2/2)

• Lockdown and rumors have indeed adversely affected income – dairy and

poultry.

• Coping mechanisms mostly clustered around change in food habits and

reduction in expenditures.

• Borrowing is taking place – indebtedness might increase if the effect of

shock prevails.

• Asset sales still low - but already reported by a small fraction of

respondents.

• Gives a snapshot – to understand how the hinterland is getting affected

progressively – more rounds will be needed.

Objectives of the study (round 2)

• An assessment of the effect of the COVID-19 induced lockdown on the

rural households

• Compared to 1st round in April 20 (lockdown), how the situation has

changed in a month of unlock

• Assessment in 2nd round is focused on:
• Reverse migration
• Food security
• Kharif season practices
• Drudgery faced by the women in the household
• Borrowing and asset sales etc.

Geographical spread

• 4835 Households, 11 States, 48 Districts
• Data collection took place between 24th June and 8th July

States Districts Assam 3 Bihar 4 Chhattisgarh 4 Gujarat 2 Jharkhand 10 Madhya Pradesh 10 Odisha 6 Rajasthan 3 Tripura 2 Uttar Pradesh 1 West Bengal 3

181 363 538 84 1132 1053 644 375 101 79 285 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

• No. of households

74

Returned Migrants as % of outmigrants

Migrants who have returned Outmigrants (n=1196)

25

Households with outmigrants as % of total households (n=4835)

Outmigrant

29

% of returned migrants moved back to the town/city (n=882)

Returned migrants moved back to town/city

Reverse migration

• Returned migrants are engaged

mainly in labor work - more than 80% of them

• Reflects absence of skilled

employment in villages

• More than 1/4th of them are still

searching for work

• 45% of those still in village think

they will move back to city

• It varies according to their current

engagement

20 30 19 14 28 3 7 MGNREGA Kharif work Agricultural labor Labor in nearby area Searching for a job Still under quarantine

• ther

% of staying of working migrants Activities of returned migrant members in village (n=641)

What returned migrants who are still in villages doing?

47 47 49 50 42 42 52 56 10 20 30 40 50 60 More trips in fetching water More time in fetching water More demand for fuelwood More time to collect fuelwood % of Households Round 1 Round 2

• Marginal changes in drudgery
• More or less similar situation as

round 1.

• Changes likely to be induced by

season.

Workload of female members of the household

• Drudgery and Migration status

55 53 72 71 43 43 57 62 39 39 47 52 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 More trips in fetching water More time in fetching water More demand for fuelwood More time to collect fuelwood % of Households Migrant Returned Migrant not returned No Migrant

• Same pattern has been observed

during 1st round as well

• More members in the households

where migrant has returned – median household size is 6 vis-à-vis 5 in those households where there are no migrants

Female members of households with returned migrants are worst-off

• In round 1, 14% households reported

no Kharif surplus and 20% reported to last it till May 20.

• If this would have been true

assessment, 34% of households should have been without Kharif surplus.

• But reported % in round 2 is 22%,

considerably lower, indicates that household were conservative in their assessment or their perspective was influenced by food scarcity.

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 No surplus

• r

surplus ends May 20 Jun-20 Jul-20 Aug-20 Sep-20 Oct-20 Nov-20 Dec-20 % of Households Round 1 (Kharif) (n=4385) Round 2 (Kharif) (n=4230)

Status of Kharif 2019 food stock

36 58 8 8 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Carried from last year Purchased from market Got free seeds Borrowed Other % of Households

Seed procurement Sources (n=4030)

28 13 16 17 32 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Bank MFI Extended family Moneylenders SHG and Other % of Households

Crop Loan in last month - Sources (n=628)

Kharif 2020 situation: Less uncertain than what was thought

• Considerable reduction in

households reporting fall in sales for dairy and poultry

• Possible explanation is increase in

urban economic activities during Unlock phase

50 42 15 21 11 18 10 20 30 40 50 Dairy (n=1370) Poultry (n=1561) Fish (n=970) Pig (n=754) % of Households

Fall in Sales of Dairy, Poultry, Fish and Pigs

Round 1 Round 2

Key livelihood activities

• Considerable improvement
• PDS access remains high and

similar

• Lower incidence of buying in

the market can be attributed to sufficient grains from PDS

50 68 24 12 84 78 43 55 14 4 85 56 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Reduction in meals (n=4811) Reduction in meal items (n=4811) Borrwed grains in the village (n=4811) Borrowed cooked food* (n=4811) PDS (n=4402) Bought grains in the market* (n=4811) % of Households

Food Consumption

Round 1 Round 2

Coping: Immediate adjustments in Food consumption

• Postponing the plans

32 23 28 35 13 17 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Postponed a ceremony (n=1875) Reduced the guest list without postponement (n=1205) Postponed purchase of Agricultural tool (n=2548) % of Households Round 1 Round 2

• Possibility of children dropping
• ut from school

29 24 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Round 1 Round 2 (n=3795) % of Households

Coping: Changing the plans in near terms and long term

• Improvement in perceptions

14 22 16 22 6 10 7 15 5 10 15 20 25 Mortgaged household items Borrowed from extended family Borrowed from money lender Sold livestock (n=3100) % of Households (n=4835) Round 2

• Fall in the incidence of borrowing

as well as sell of livestock

• But it is difficult to ascertain

whether it reflects improvement or further worsening across the rural households.

• Seen together with improvement in

food consumption and fewer households reporting fall in sales

• f dairy and poultry, there is scope

for optimistic interpretation.

Coping: Mortgaging, borrowing and selling livestock

6 3 5 3 2 2 2 1 Sold dry cattle (n=2917) Sold in milk- cattle (n=2826) Mortgaged land (n=3662) Sold land (n=3858) % of Households Round 1 Round 2

• Scope for cautious optimistic

interpretation.

• More details, like seasonal patterns,

will be required to interpret this evidence.

Coping: Sale of productive assets

Uptake of key government schemes

• 71% of households have LPG and 85% of those have it

through Ujjwala Yojana.

• 80% of Ujjwala beneficiaries have received free refill in last
• month. (June 2020)
• 90% households are eligible for PM-KISAN and 38% of those

have received the transfer of Rs. 2000.

To summarize (1/2)

• Transient phenomenon of Reverse migration?
• Absence of skilled employment in the villages – reflected in the fact that nearly 2/3rd of returned

migrants have either migrated again or wish to do so.

• Female in household where migrant members have returned experiences

more workload compared to other households.

• Improved perceptions of how long the food stocks from past Kharif season

will last.

• Seed availability hints that Kharif situation has turned out to be better than

what has been anticipated.

• Sales of dairy and poultry seems to have steadied or improved – reflects the

nascent buoyancy in economy.

To summarize (2/2)

• Marked improvement in food intake – it is likely that grain availability

through PDS has helped households to improve the consumption as well as reduced the need to buy from market.

• Yet distress incidence still high – sobriety check – 1 in 4 household thinks

that they have take the child out of the school.

• Lower incidences of borrowing and asset sale – scope for optimistic

interpretation though more needs to be known.

• Ujjwala Yojana seems to have reached to considerable section of

beneficiaries, moderate outcome for frontloaded PM-KISAN transfer

To conclude…

• In a nutshell, unlocking of economy eases some of the distress in rural

India.

• though distress is still considerable, structural changes are not yet visible and health risk of

Covid-19 in rural India is rising.

• Longitudinal analysis for households shall provide deeper understanding.
• Detailed micro studies of villages.
• End of the Kharif season study.
• Current Kharif cultivation is likely to be lower cost production process than usual practice.

THANK YOU