Problem:
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, better known as MNREGA, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi_National_Rural_Employment_Guarantee_Act), though very much needed, in it’s current form is a big burden. It include mostly the labor intensive tasks, has no asset creation, no skill development, and nearly zero accountability. Majority of the tasks undertaken under the scheme have very short lived results and within a few year we will need to do the same task again. For example if we undertake a task to dig up a pond in a village, given that the creation of banks is not under MNREGA the pond will be filled up with mud and dirt in a couple of years and we will again need to do the similar task.
Along with this MNREGA had huge impact on other parts of Indian economy. Some regions in Andhra where under some self-employment scheme people were given loans for animal husbandry. As soon as MNRGA came to that region most of the people sold the animals and wanted to work under MNREGA. MNREGA is also reducing availability of labor for agriculture purpose increasing the input costs of it and making it less and less viable.
What can be done:
Even with all the drawback indicated above MNREGA should not be abandoned as it is providing, in many cases the only, source of income to the hundreds of families. But a revamp should be considered at the earliest to make this scheme efficient and asset-creating. Here are some suggestions.
1. It should not be a “flagship” scheme. MNREGA should not remain a flagship scheme and must be made a supplementary scheme to various other schemes that need unskilled or semi-skilled labor. Schemes for constructing toilets in villages, wells, small stone and brick structures for water retention, ponds. MNREGA should be made the only way to supply labor for such activities in rural areas. and the contract should be amended for this. This will also make sure that the ponds created under it will have permanent banks, the well will have walls etc. to as to increase the life and utility of the created structures.
2. Timing of the “work”: In India agriculture forms the backbone of rural economy. We must time this 100 days of guaranteed work in such a way that the agriculture activities are not disturbed. There is a very brief period of time of the whole agriculture cycle when the activities go sharply labor intensive; basically at the time of sowing and harvesting. If MNREGA activities are planned in such a way that they do not collide with these timings for the region we will have ample labor for both the activities. labor availability will reduce the input cost for agriculture back to normal and more days of activity in villages will reduce the exodus of people to towns and cities.
3. Different areas with different targets: As far as possible the areas of the “self-employment” schemes and MNREGA should not collide. The areas should be defined in such a way that near to the cities there should be more focus on self-employment schemes and thus on micro and small industries, while in remote areas the focus should be on MNREGA like activities. So that the infrastructure at those places will start to improve.
4. Skills: At least some of the activities under MNREGA, like construction activities of various types, need semi-skilled labor along with the unskilled ones. In such cases a percentage of the budget should be allotted to train some unskilled labor to make them semi-skilled and then employ them in the activities.
These are just some of my suggestions that, i believe, will make MNREGA much more feasible, co-existent, and long reaching.
Please voice your opinion.