Does EGS Require Restructuring

for Poverty Alleviation and Gender Equality?

II – Gender Concerns and Issues for Restructuring
The Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS) initiated in Maharashtra in the early 1970s is the
oldest and the largest public works programme in the developing world. It has been the
subject of numerous studies that have highlighted the positive effects of EGS on the
rural economy of Maharashtra. Yet none of these has furnished concrete evidence for most of
these inferred effects. Moreover, there have been no investigations since the 1990s, when
both the rural economy of Maharashtra and the EGS have undergone significant changes in
size, character and direction. This article reviews the EGS to assess whether it requires
restructuring for poverty alleviation and gender equality.
Part I of the article (which appeared in the issue of April 17, 2004) examined the concept,
design and delivery system of the EGS, so as to assess its effectiveness against poverty and
pinpoint its limitations. Part II highlights the issues including gender concerns that need to be
addressed before restructuring the scheme.
MAITHREYI KRISHNARAJ, DIVYA PANDEY, ARUNA KANCHI

E
conomic development of Maharashtra is today dominated
by the secondary and tertiary sectors. The primary sector
is the laggard: of the State Domestic Product (SDP) at current
prices of Rs 21,22,160 million in 1999-2000, the primary sector
contributed only 17.18 per cent primarily due to the poor perfor-
mance of agriculture. Between 1960-2000 agriculture grew at 2.92
per cent per annum, only barely exceeding the population growth
rate of 2.24 per cent [GoM 2002b]. Inadequate precipitation and
its uneven distribution have meant recurrent droughts: in 1965-
66, 1970-73, 1984-87, 1992 and 2001-2003. It has also been
estimated that at any given time, 35 per cent of the geographical
area and 38 per cent of the population of the state is permanently
experiencing a drought [GoM 1987]. Combined with climatic
factors, the slow growth of irrigation (in spite of massive invest-
ments, only 14.5 per cent of the net sown area was irrigated in
1999-2000), unviable farm size, unequal distribution of opera-
tional landholdings and lack of diversification have been the
major stumbling blocks for agricultural growth. Yet, more than
60 per cent of the state’s workforce depends on this sector. The
low elasticity of employment with respect to value added in
agriculture [Bhalla and Hazel 2003] limits the scope of rural
labour absorption and productive employment. The result: preva-
lence of high unemployment rates1 and widespread rural poverty
characterised by high degree of instability of incomes. Estimates
of the incidence of rural poverty in the state range from 24 per
cent [GoM 2002a] to 38 per cent [Sundaram and Tendulkar
2003].2 Despite the laurels earned and not withstanding official
claims of falling demand for EGS in the 1990s, it is obvious that
the scheme is as much needed today as it was in the early 1970s.
The opening up of the economy, particularly agriculture to
international trade in the 1990s has impacted farmers in many
ways. Changes such as liberalised export of agricultural products,
commercialisation/corporatisation of agriculture and the entry of
new technologies will favour resource rich farmers. In contrast,
other changes such as expensive inputs like seeds, fertiliser,
credit, privatisation of natural resources, particularly water,
intellectual property right restrictions, lack of access to new
markets and technologies, volatility of international tastes and
prices, depressed farm gate prices of food articles due to cheap
imports will all impoverish the small (and marginal) farmers and
agricultural workers by dampening on-farm employment and real
wages, at least in the short run.3 Globalisation has also seen the
dismantling of policies that defended rural livelihoods (input
subsidies, support prices for output, priority credit to agriculture,
to name a few) and the slashing of investment on agriculture
and rural development.4 Effects on the environment of market
driven consumption of fertilisers and pesticides, over exploitation
of land and water may be expected to adversely impact overall
productivity of agriculture in the near future unless preventive
measures are undertaken [Shiva 2002]. Under such conditions,
it is clear that social security nets are indispensable for the
protection of the rural poor against market fluctuations: a strong
case exists not only for the continuation but also the expansion
of the EGS. The scheme, in fact has the potential to change the
face of rural Maharashtra if used imaginatively.
The EGS will have to be restructured before it can function
effectively as a poverty alleviation scheme. Restructuring implies
more than merely filling in the lacunae that have emerged in the
30 years of its operation. Restructuring involves changes that
will transform the scheme into a true poverty alleviation tool
rather than merely a fire fighting or relief operation (a hastily
reformulated scheme would be self-defeating). Below we raise
some issues/questions that need to be debated in this context.
EGS for ‘Relief’ or Poverty Alleviation
Should EGS continue to be used, as it is today, as a relief
operation or be extended to fight poverty? Using the scheme as
a tool against poverty implies looking beyond the effects of
poverty to the reasons that underlie it. Within the framework of

Economic and Political Weekly April 24, 2004 1741

a wage employment programme this means going beyond merely
providing a few days/weeks of employment during drought years
or the lean agricultural season, to expanding mainstream employ-
ment opportunities through asset creation.5 It also means rede-
fining the expected impact of the scheme in terms of reduction
in the population below the poverty line rather than merely
person-days generated.
The transformation will need to begin with the explicit articu-
lation of poverty reduction as the objective of the EGS. Failure
to do this has led, as our discussions with all levels of EGS
hierarchy revealed, to the pervasive perception of the scheme
– by policy-makers, line agencies and by the participants – as
an employment programme of the last resort, reflected in the
deliberations of review committees and even in the official data
systems. While the review committees are preoccupied with
employment generation during crisis years and implementation
lacunae, official data is confined to expenditure incurred and
employment generated under the scheme at district and state
levels. With respect to assets, data is thin with little beyond the
expenditure incurred and numerical counts of the various assets
created. Even the impact of the scheme is measured officially
in terms of person-day figures rather than in terms of the reduction
in poverty. Discussion of EGS data base is taken up later.
Admission of poverty alleviation as the objective also implies
attribution of explicit weights to employment provision vis-à-
vis asset creation since a trade-off is often involved between the
short-term and long-term components of poverty alleviation.6
This, it must be pointed out at the outset is a policy or political
decision rather than a technical one. Appropriate project selection
criteria will also need to be formulated and communicated to
line agencies in unambiguous terms, since their choice of projects
ultimately determines the type and pattern of assets created. Line
agencies will need to be suitably sensitised to the ‘true mission’
of the scheme through open dialogues between various levels
of the hierarchy. We have already seen how because of the present
system of top-down administration and the lack of criteria, the
line agencies, which are far removed from the policy centre are
likely to make unsystematic choice of assets depending primarily
on their employment potential. It is due to this bias, for example,
that more roads continue to be built in water-starved Jawhar in
preference to water and soil conservation works. An advantage
of giving explicit weights is that they can be varied depending
on whether the given year is a bad agricultural year requiring
relief in the form of employment or a good year when assets
could be built without too much regard for labour absorption.
In practice this may mean that EGS allocation is not cut back
during good years and during the peak agricultural season. This
will undoubtedly involve considerable increase in annual expen-
diture. Although the EGS Fund has a massive balance its utilisation
is a matter of political decision.7 The changes considered above
are at the core of the transformation. Nevertheless there are other
issues that warrant a rethink.
Who Benefits from EGS
If EGS is to be used as a tool against poverty then it is necessary
to decide who has priority of access to the benefits – the poor
(small and marginal farmers) or the poorest (the landless chroni-
cally unemployed). This is both a political decision and technical
decision (which strategy is more efficient, raising the standard
of living of the poorest or pulling the not-so-poor above the
1742
poverty line?). Two kinds of benefits accrue from the scheme:
(a) employment and income benefits and (b) benefits from the
assets created. We shall consider each in turn.
In the delivery of employment benefits, as discussed earlier,
EGS suffers from exclusion errors. A part of the very poor –
the landless and chronically unemployed – are not covered under
the scheme. To take an illustration from our field experience,
the very poor of Dahanu – the landless labour – migrate to work
in brick kilns and other industries in neighbouring Kanwel and
Boisar attracted by better wages and immediate payment. They
return to Dahanu at Holi (mid-March) and having exhausted their
earnings, stay back working on EGS projects during April, May
and June. As EGS earnings begin to get exhausted during the
rainy season, recruiters from industries outside offer advances
to tide over the rainy season. At the end of the rainy season
(October) these recruiters come back to the villages to pick up
those who owe them money. They are then made to work in the
brick kilns/ factories, being provided with just enough money
to survive, in near bonded labour conditions. They are allowed
to go back to their villages just before Holi with a pittance as
payment. This vicious circle then continues. When EGS work
begins in earnest after the rainy season, in December-January,
many of the poorest have already migrated. This illustration also
underlines the importance of providing income during the
monsoons, which are periods of peak starvation [Ramachandran
2003]. Since practically no EGS projects are underway during
the monsoons, officials we met during our field visit suggested
paying the participants partly in grains during the period just
preceding the rains thereby discouraging the acceptance of loan
from recruiters and thus breaking the cycle. Payment in kind has
always been beset with problems primarily due to the inferior
quality of grains as well as the attendant costs of time and money
involved in collecting it from the public distribution centres [see
Dev 1996, for a discussion of linking PDS to EGS]. This aspect
needs to be looked into carefully.
The problem of exclusion can be ultimately resolved within
the present (self-targeting) framework of the EGS only through
better location and timing of projects based on the identification
of this section of the poor through careful panchayat samiti based
manpower planning. The very poor can be brought within
EGS ambit immediately by extending EGS activity throughout
the year.
Although the asset building activity benefits all classes of the
poor, the benefits of the assets themselves accrue to the land-
owning section of the rural populace – the large farmers (non-
poor) but also the small and marginal farmers (poor). Soil and
moisture conservation, minor irrigation and forest development
benefit the land owners by increasing the productivity of land;
roads by facilitating the movement of inputs and output. The
landless poor do not benefit directly from these assets – at least
in the short run. The possibilities of also creating other kinds
of assets under EGS that will directly benefit the landless need
to be explored. New avenues such as collective ownership of
assets, creation of assets that generate non-farm employment –
agro processing, processing and value addition to locally
available material such as bamboo and coir, production of herbal
medicines, recycling enterprises and services for example,
wasteland development and tree pattas should be examined.
NGOs may have an important role to play in identifying such
opportunities, designing training programmes and even running
them.
Economic and Political Weekly April 24, 2004
 What kind of jobs should EGS provide? As already discussed
EGS continues to provide back breaking unskilled manual labour.
What kind of skill/training needs to be imparted if participants
are to be weaned away from EGS and prepared for mainstream
employment and how to organise this within the framework of
the scheme are questions that warrant careful consideration.
Apart from skill upgrading, it should be possible to identify
avenues of using non-manual labour that goes to improve village
life (The Times of India, July 2003). It might be also possible
to undertake under EGS, the maintenance of EGS assets.
NGOs and officials could use EGS sites to disseminate infor-
mation about diverse occupations not usually considered locally
like bamboo or coir products, value addition to herbal medicine,
poultry or livestock rearing, organic farming especially of
vegetables, etc. They could also provide information on local
training centres, where they exist.
What Kind of Assets
What kind of assets should EGS create? The EGS Act mandates
the creation of only ‘productive’ assets under the scheme and
gives a definition of productivity. This definition, however, raises
more questions than it answers. Productivity is a very difficult
concept to assess and requires the articulation of the priorities
between alternative aims (drought relief or asset creation), and
alternative needs (roads or water), between different classes of
the beneficiaries (small and marginal farmers or landless labourers
or women), the weight given to the gestation period of projects
(long-term or short-term projects) and finally, the cost of pro-
ductive assets. It is imperative to define productivity in such a
way that it results in the creation of the right kinds of assets –
assets that fulfil the perceived needs of the community and those
that expand mainstream opportunities for employment are both
required – and to devise a way to operationalise this new defi-
nition in the selection of EGS works, if the scheme is to function
effectively against poverty. Without a proper definition of pro-
ductivity it is also impossible to assess the worth of assets created
under EGS.
Although the EGS is planned and implemented by the bureau-
cracy, people participation was built into the scheme by requiring
the whetting of the local blue print by the EGS Panchayat Samiti
Committee, which was to contain representatives of backward
classes, minorities, participants of the scheme as well as women.
However, the decisions regarding what assets to build have
largely remained in the hands of the officials of the line agencies,
who may or may not take into account the perceived needs of
the participants. More recent (centrally sponsored) poverty al-
leviation programmes in the mould of the EGS such as the
Jawahar Rojgar Yojana (JRY) and the Employment Assurance
Scheme attempted to involve the poor in the decision-making
process by charging the panchayats with implementation, with
mixed results. A review of these two schemes in Maharashtra
by the Planning Commission [Policy Development Initiatives
2000] revealed that though fund utilisation was much higher in
areas with active panchayats, participation remained by and large
poor due to poor attendance at meetings, lack of awareness of
the issues involved (though awareness of the programmes was
itself high), passivity of the participants, the insensitivity of the
panchayat leaders to the needs of the poorest and lack of
organisational skills and staff. Research elsewhere [Corbridge
et al 2003] reveals that the poorest continue to be left out of
Economic and Political Weekly April 24, 2004
the coverage where the patron-client relationships are entrenched
in local politics and where time, education and health constraints
keep the poor from participation.
As for the EGS, implementation (if not asset selection) has
been much better in areas with active voluntary organisations
or social activists. Awareness creation, conscientisation and
education of the finer points of the scheme are basic ingredients
for generating people participation in the decision-making pro-
cess. NGOs and social activists should also aim to provide an
alternative channel of information. Besides this panchayat leaders
as well as the poor require to be trained in participation and
decision-making. The creation of a separate organisation for the
administration of EGS has sometimes been suggested. This does
not appear to offer any special advantages and is bound to increase
administrative costs and decrease the benefit flow to the parti-
cipants. Bureaucracy-facilitated people participation may be the
answer: bureaucracy can be pressurised to take steps to involve
the people especially in planning/project identification and
monitoring. Besides sensitising the bureaucracy to the needs of
the poor, a sense of ownership of the projects in their area will
also have to be transmitted. Officials will also require training
in people and information management. The deliberate develop-
ment of a ‘success story’ in each tahsil could help motivate people
to see the concrete benefits of collective action. Ultimately
effective participation of the poor can be made possible only
through better education and health care provision.
Who Owns the Assets
With whom should the ownership of EGS assets be vested?
This question has several dimensions. At one level is the debate
of public versus private assets. The EGS was envisaged as a
‘public works programme’ mandated to create assets in the public
domain. This principle was assiduously followed in the early
years of the scheme. However, in the 1990s, EGS diversified
into projects that resulted in the development of private assets.
The horticulture sub-scheme is a useful illustration in view of
the emerging government plans to considerably expand horti-
culture activity in the state under the EGS. The expansion of
horticulture is doubtless a laudable strategy for the diversification
of agriculture in Maharashtra. However implementing this
strategy through the EGS raises several concerns. Horticulture
by being applicable only to land owners automatically excludes
the poorest. Equity dictates the use of EGS funds for the poorest
first, especially since other sources of funds, such as the bank
finance may be available for the development of horticulture.
It also entails use of other community resources, especially water
without any quid pro quo. The employment potential of horti-
culture appears, prima facie limited. Its viability in dry areas of
the watershed and in the absence of storing, marketing and
processing facilities also needs to be examined before substan-
tially expanding this sub-scheme under EGS. Finally, the use of
EGS funds to create private assets is likely to increase inclusion
errors in the scheme.
The issue of maintenance of EGS assets is closely linked to
ownership. EGS assets are at present handed over to the local
authorities for maintenance. The result has been the uniformly
poor condition of assets – roads that are washed away in the very
first rains, percolation tanks that run dry shortly after construc-
tion, for example. A variety of reasons may be listed for this
– considerable delays in handing over the assets to the zilla
1743
parishad, failure to allocate resources by the local bodies for the
maintenance of these assets, the unwillingness of local bodies
to take over the assets due to paucity of resources, political
interference, rivalry between revenue and technical departments,
lack of proper blueprints, lack of coordination and delays in
implementation. An additional reason is that there is no clear
sense of ownership – neither amongst the implementing agencies
nor amongst the villagers who see their role only in its building.
Collective ownership of EGS assets together with the sanction
of EGS funds for maintenance may be explored, since such
strategies have been successful in community forest management
elsewhere [Patnaik 2002].
The questions raised above have no easy answers. While the
answers to some are in the political domain others require careful
investigation and the application of multi-disciplinary expertise
and imagination. All questions are, however important as the
answers will determine the future direction and ultimately the
success of the EGS as a tool in the poverty alleviation arsenal.
EGS and Gender Concerns?
The EGS, as observed earlier, is a mainstream programme: that
is, it is not specially designed as a women specific/pro-women
programme. However due to the large-scale participation of
women from the outset, the EGS has acquired the reputation of
a women-friendly programme – 38 per cent of EGS participants
were women in 1995-96; by 1998-99 the proportion had increased
to 73 per cent, though it fell to 58 per cent the following year
[GoM 2002c]. Women’s partiality to EGS arises in large part
due to the circumstances in which women in rural Maharashtra
find themselves and in some part to EGS features favourable
to women.
Of the12.7 million women working in rural areas of Maharashtra,
89 per cent are in agriculture – 41 per cent as cultivators and
48 per cent as agricultural labour. Amongst wage workers, there
are 1,311 women for every 1,000 men. On the other hand, among
cultivators there are only 689 women for every 1,000 men.
Compared to men, the proportion of marginal/subsidiary workers
amongst women is much higher. Given lack of education and
skills, they have recourse only to unskilled work. Thus, more
than half the employed women work as casual labour. Hardly
1.5 per cent works on a regular basis [GoM 2000b]. There is
in fact a greater shift to casual labour by women in the state than
in the country as a whole. Because of this, employment of women
fluctuates more (compared to men), between peak and lean
agricultural seasons. Their daily rate of unemployment is higher
than their usual status rate – in 1999-2000, unemployment rate
daily status for women was 6.90 per cent (the corresponding rate
for men was 6.30 per cent) while the corresponding usual status
rate was 0.8 per cent, underlining the significance of under-
employment amongst women. Thus, whichever way we look at
it, women, clearly, depend on impermanent, insecure employ-
ment. In effect then, women in rural Maharashtra have a greater
stake in agriculture than men but fewer rewards.
Alternative opportunities (other than agricultural work) within
rural sector or outside it are denied to women because they are
relatively immobile due to their reproductive functions and
household responsibilities, their limited access to resources –
private or public – such as property, skills or credit and last but
not least, due to the role ascribed by society to women: studies
show that in terms of family strategies, options for migration
1744
or alternative employment as a means of improvement of the
family’s economic status is available first to men while women
hold the responsibility for basic survival strategies. This is specially
so in the case of households predominantly economically sup-
ported by women.8 Under such conditions it is not surprising that
short-term unskilled employment offered by EGS is attractive
to women.
The following design features must help draw women to EGS:
– Provision of work close to the village and the advantages of
working alongside the family
– Provision of work not requiring special skills
– Lack of discrimination in recruitment
– Parity of wages offered to men and women
– Provision of shelter, drinking water and especially of crèches
for children
The act also mandates the following monetary entitlements to
women [GoM 2002d].
– Maternity benefit to a woman worker if she works continuously
for 75 days before her delivery: she is given 15 days leave with
wages at the rate prevailing in that particular zone. If she had been
working for more than 15 days, payment is given as one day’s wages
every five days and this benefit is given for maximum 150 days
– If a woman undergoes tubectomy, she is entitled for 14 days
leave with wages; a male worker is given seven days leave with
wages if he undergoes vasectomy
– If a woman works continuously for five days in the preceding
two weeks, she is entitled for two days leave with wages for
copper-T surgery for the purpose of family planning
– If a child brought to the work site suffers from accident or
injury, the child is also given same ex-gratia payment as is given
to adult labourers [GoM 1978]
The EGS Act has also provided for the representation of women
in the district and panchayat level committees so that their voice
might be included in the planning and implementation of the
scheme.
Due to the large participation of women in EGS and the features
in EGS design enumerated above, a number of benefits were
anticipated from the scheme for women. Besides the obvious
advantages conferred by employment and income [Datar 1990]
especially to women from low asset/assetless and female headed
households, the EGS was expected to gradually eliminate taste
and statistical discrimination from the agricultural labour market
[Foster and Roseweig 1992], break down social taboos concerning
gender and caste, increase social awareness and instil confidence
in women [Datar 1987]. However, the EGS, as it is implemented
today, cannot really be considered sensitive to gender concerns
as it fails to address some important gender issues.
Benefit Delivery to Women
At the most basic level, EGS has not delivered on the many
commitments that the act has made to women. Many of its
provisions built-in for women’s protection, such as those per-
taining to maternity and family planning have never reached
women, remaining merely on paper. We could not find a single
case of these benefits being awarded. One reason is that the
prescribed number of days a woman has to work to become
eligible for the benefit is unrealistic: in the case of maternity
benefits, for example, the minimum stipulation is 75 days
(100 days earlier). With discontinuity in the provision of EGS
employment, it is difficult for a person to work continuously for
Economic and Political Weekly April 24, 2004
as long as 75 days. Second, under conditions of shifting work
sites and non-availability of records a woman has no way of
showing the stipulated days of work. Had she been given an ID
card, she would have proof of days worked. As this system has
been discontinued, it has resulted in a serious loss to the woman
worker. The days of work in reality will exceed the required
condition if we count not just EGS work but also her work in
agriculture in general. Finally lack of awareness regarding their
rights and entitlements has also prevented women from claiming
the mandated benefits. It must be noted here that awareness
amongst women is confined to awareness of their right to demand
work under EGS. Awareness regarding their rights or entitle-
ments under the scheme or awareness/knowledge regarding
measurement of work and calculation of wages is practically non-
existent. Women on EGS sites declared that they depend upon
their men folk to take care of these aspects.
Shelters and crèches – theoretically facilities provided particu-
larly for women – remain primitive and apologies for the real
thing. Moreover, given the inferior status of women in society,
men claim priority to the use of shelters [Chari 2003]. No toilets
can be detected on/near EGS sites. Officials say they cannot
provide these, as work sites are temporary. There is total lack
of privacy for women for breast feeding.
Though mandated by the act, it is not certain whether, in
practice, women get equal wages for equal work under EGS.
Methods of measuring work and payment do not ensure equity
because the method of recording employment and wages under
EGS does not allow precise determination of the quantity or
duration of women’s work. Work on EGS sites, as already
explained, is done by a group of both men and women called
a ‘gat’. Work completed by each gat is measured according to
procedures laid down for this purpose and is recorded correspond-
ing to the gat. This figure is then multiplied by the piece rate
applicable and thus the wage due to each gat is calculated. At
the time of payment the wage due to each gat is then presumably
divided in the ratio of the person-days contributed by each
member of the gat. The aggregate payment due to the gat is usually
handed over to the leader of the gat, usually a male, who then
distributes it amongst its members. Thus it is not possible to
calculate wages earned by men or women with precision. A
woman member of a gat is, in practice, likely to get less in her
hands than a male member for the same quantity of work, given
the gender bias in society. Official EGS records do not reflect
this reality – they simply assume that men and women get equal
wages. Lack of wage parity on the ground, is perhaps, one of
the reasons why the anticipated spillover effects in terms of
general equalisation of wages for men and women in agriculture
have not materialised. Agriculture in Maharashtra as elsewhere
continues to pay differential wages to men and women: a woman
engaged in casual work earns Rs 25.28 per day compared to the
corresponding male wage of Rs 38.06. Though the law stipulates
equal pay for equal work, it is always possible to claim women’s
work is different and less valuable.
No doubt, employment and income opportunities under the
EGS represent important economic gains for women. However,
research has established that employment and income does not
automatically lead to increased access to money or other resources
for women. Even if we assume that women do get equitable
wages, these may have to be handed over to men as most women
on EGS sites confirmed. Moreover, a large part of their earnings
must necessarily go towards food for the family.
Economic and Political Weekly April 24, 2004
Finally the bulk of women in rural Maharashtra continue
to remain unskilled and therefore mainly dependent on casual
labour, including that offered by EGS. Women continue to be
burdened by arduous and health threatening tasks under
EGS as in agriculture. Traditional sexual division of labour
continues to be perpetuated on EGS sites, with women being
given ‘unskilled’ work. Women say there are many tasks at
present given to men like using machinery, which can be done
by women. In this connection, the one feature that could have
bestowed significant benefits to women is the training and skill
upgradation that the act hints at. However, no effort has been
made in the 30 years that the scheme has been in existence to
devise ways to impart skill training to EGS participants- men
or women.
Several reasons may be postulated for the lack of gender
sensitivity
– Gender discrimination entrenched in society can be expected
to inform EGS administrators – both policy-makers and
implementers – and prevent participants in general and women
in particular from using opportunities embedded in EGS to restore
gender equity.
– Absence of attempts by the administration to take stock of the
reasons behind the large participation of women in the scheme
or to measure the impact of the scheme on women if not on gender
relations. Except in terms of number of person-days9 contributed
by them, women do not figure in official EGS data and even
these figures do not appear credible. The many gaps in data,
particularly gender data, ultimately thwart attempts by research-
ers to assess the impact of the scheme on women.
– Absence of any organised attempt by the state to use the
convergence of women on EGS sites to deliver information and
services such as literacy and health.
– Finally, absence of mobilisation and conscientisation of women
on site. Though there was some local mobilisation of EGS
participants – but not particularly of women except in small
pockets – in the 1970s and some attempt at consolidating the
action at state level under the Maharashtra Rajya Shetmajoor and
Employment Guarantee Scheme Workers Samanvya Samiti in
the early 1980s, mobilisation efforts petered out in the late 1980s
for various reasons.
Making EGS Women Friendly
Making the EGS more relevant to women within the existing
framework may require action on many fronts
(i) To begin with women should be made aware of how EGS
works and informed of their rights and entitlements. Women
already have representation in panchayat. With some training,
this should give opportunities to women members and women
sarpanches to take an active part in articulating their needs of
work at village level, participate in the (EGS) budget process
at the local level as well as monitor work execution. They could
also be trained to be part of vigilance committees. Such practices
have been successful for instance in monitoring PDS.
(ii) Reasons why the administration has been unable to award
any of the mandated entitlements to women have to be examined
and appropriate modifications made.
(iii) Enriching their private capabilities by according skills/train-
ing to women in agriculture and related activities. Exploration
and research in identifying marketable and location-specific
skills for women is required.
1745
(iv) Creating community asset under EGS that answer women’s female person-days to total person-days generated is provided
needs and devising ways to award the ownership of community – but is hardly credible: given the huge inter-district differences
assets created under EGS to women’s groups. There are many of the condition of women it is difficult to accept the uniformity
existing models available where wasteland development is re- demonstrated by the data. (Table 5) Wage data as already dis-
warded by women’s collective ownership of land reclaimed or cussed is based on notional equality of men and women.
ownership of trees if they develop nurseries. There is great scope On assets, data is available on expenditure, number of projects
for this in social forestry and watershed development. In cases sanctioned, number of projects completed since the commence-
of joint private land ownership, mentioned in some sections of ment of the scheme, the annual categorywise expenditure since
EGS work, it is possible to build in women’s collective ownership 1991. Data on the status of assets (many assets are temporary
(v) Other existing government programmes such as health, lit- structures) or the different types of assets created are absent. Even
eracy, education, child care, etc, could take advantage of the the limited data available on assets is of little use due to the
presence of large number of women on EGS sites to focus these practice of clubbing dissimilar categories; data on horticulture,
services on women. What is needed is to create a synergy of Jawahar wells and Shram Shaktidware Gram Vikas is aggregated,
services where EGS sites provide an ideal site for health, literacy for example in spite of the fact that the last no longer exists.
and awareness programmes. EGS sites also offer opportunities Decentralised planning, monitoring and assessment are impos-
for Social Action. sible without proper comprehensive information management.
(vi) Migrant women EGS workers face special problems that need Essential information regarding participants, particularly women
special attention. not available:
(vii) At present EGS perpetuates existing social and gender (1) Background data on participating households
inequalities. The costs and benefits of such practices to different – Size of the household
sections must be highlighted through research and investigation. – Its composition in terms of gender and age
(viii) There has to be a clearer perception among officials at lower – The marital status, number of children of the female
levels on what is meant by gender sensitivity – understanding members of the household
how programmes affect women; what their disadvantages are; Table 5: Districtwise Female Person-days Generated under
traditional conceptions on gender roles and how they generate EGS in Maharashtra, 1995-96 to 1999-2000
unequal burdens between men and women, unequal entitlements Sl District/Division/State Percentage of Female Person-days
and lower participation in public sphere and how EGS should No to Total Person-days
guard against perpetuating these. 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-
2000
(ix) Social Action Groups can play a valuable role in mobilisation (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
and of women. This used to be so in the past and could be revived.
Women’s collective strength could be encouraged to bring about 1 Thane 57.37 58.95 49.01 72.96 60.01
2 Raigad 0.00 59.06 48.97 73.01 59.99
changes in gender relations. EGS has been instrumental in bringing 3 Ratnagiri 42.44 59.02 49.00 73.00 60.00
together large numbers of women at work sites – an experience 4 Sindhudurg 38.78 58.96 48.98 73.00 60.03
that has been positive for women. In areas where social action Konkan division 41.10 58.99 49.00 73.00 60.00
5 Nashik 29.49 58.99 49.00 73.00 60.01
groups have played a dominant role as in Jawhar, illiterate tribal 6 Dhule 12.47 58.97 49.01 73.01 60.05
women are very assertive and demand work. 7 Nandurbar - - – - 59.99
(x) Finally, EGS would contribute much to the cause of women 8 Jalgaon 7.24 58.99 49.00 73.00 59.99
9 Ahmadnagar 29.00 59.01 48.99 73.01 59.99
by simply fulfilling its original agenda: soil and water conser- Nasik division 26.85 59.00 49.00 73.00 60.00
vation, conservation of forests and other natural resources which 10 Pune 53.35 59.00 48.99 72.97 59.98
11 Satara 47.13 59.02 49.01 72.98 60.00
feed into women’s special requirement of water, fodder, fuel 12 Sangli 38.03 59.01 49.01 73.02 60.00
besides enhancing productivity in agriculture. 13 Solapur 26.04 59.00 48.99 73.01 60.02
In conclusion, a few observations on the state of official EGS 14 Kolhapur 51.84 58.98 49.02 72.95 59.98
Pune division 35.80 59.00 49.00 72.99 64.12
data system: the data collection has a narrow focus: to enable 15 Aurangabad 52.88 58.99 49.01 72.99 59.99
assessment of the wage bill and the cost of the scheme to the 16 Jalna 59.75 59.00 48.99 73.00 60.00
government and to present employment generation under the 17 Parbhani 53.66 59.02 48.99 73.02 60.03
18 Hingoli - - - - 59.91
scheme to the assembly. The Planning Department collects and 19 Bid 56.59 59.00 49.01 73.00 30.30
presents data on employment generated and assets created. Data 20 Nanded 40.40 58.99 48.99 73.00 60.01
on employment is measured in terms of male and female person- 21 Osmanabad 48.78 58.99 49.00 72.99 60.00
22 Latur 36.85 59.05 49.00 72.99 60.00
days generated on EGS sites at the district, division and state Aurangabad division 49.74 59.00 49.00 73.00 52.10
level, the attendance on the last day of the month, and the annual 23 Buldana 28.29 59.00 49.02 73.00 59.99
maximum, minimum and average attendance on site for the state. 24 Akola 18.20 59.03 48.97 73.03 59.97
25 Washim - - - - 60.08
While person-days generated gives a good idea of EGS activity 26 Amravati 28.30 58.99 49.00 73.00 60.01
over the years and across districts, it does not allow comparison 27 Yavatmal 6.57 58.99 48.99 72.99 60.00
with labour data available either from the Census or the National Amravati division 20.52 59.00 49.00 73.00 60.00
28 Wardha 13.43 59.09 49.00 72.99 60.02
Sample Survey in the absence of statistics on average number 29 Nagpur 27.19 59.00 48.99 73.01 59.98
of days for which employment is available on the scheme. Also 30 Bhandara 40.28 59.01 48.99 73.00 60.00
assessment of impact is not possible using this data because the 31 Gondia - - - - 59.99
32 Chandrapur 29.17 58.97 49.00 73.00 59.99
intra district variations are lost in aggregation. This is a serious 33 Gadchiroli 31.19 59.01 49.02 72.99 60.00
limitation considering that under EGS the focus is or ought to Nagpur Division 33.17 59.00 49.00 73.00 60.00
State Total 37.94 53.54 49.00 73.00 57.89
be on localised employment provision. Data on gender is not
only grossly inadequate – only the districtwise percentage of Source: Planning Department (EGS), Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai

1746 Economic and Political Weekly April 24, 2004

 – The economic status of the household, income, for example
– Number of earners – male and female, their employment
status (employed or unemployed/main or marginal workers/
cultivator or labourer, for example), occupation (agriculture,
allied activity or other)
– Land ownership in terms of size (small farmer/marginal
or landless) as well as gender
– History of migration in the household
(2) Details of employment on EGS
– Data on male and female workers
– The duration of employment on EGS sites (data is available
only in terms of person-days)
– Division of labour between men and women
– The capacity to absorb women of various projects under-
taken, horticulture for example, and finally,
– Gender disaggregated wage data
Development of data records needs to focus on the tahsil/block
level. Even collection and dissemination of village level data
should not pose difficulties with computerisation. This is essen-
tial not only for integrated local planning and feed back but also
in the interest of transparency. EPW
Address for correspondence:
kraj@vsnl.com
arunakanchi@hotmail.com
Notes
1 The daily status unemployment rates have always been much higher than
the corresponding usual status rates indicating the pervasiveness of
underemployment rather than chronic unemployment. See National Sample
Survey, Reports of the 43rd, 50th and 55th Rounds. In 1999-2000 the
daily status male and female unemployment rates were respectively, 6.3
and 6.9. The corresponding usual status rates were 0.8 and 0.2.
2 The Census of Rural BPL Households 1997-98 (GoM not dated), estimates
it at 35 per cent of the population.
3 A vast spread of literature on the desirable and undesirable effects of
globalisation/trade liberalisation on agriculture particularly on small
farmers is available. For a discussion of the Indian context see for
example, Srinivasan P K and Shika Jha (not dated), Shiva (1998), Gulati
and Sharma (1997), Nayyar and Sen (1994).
4 The state’s revenue expenditure on agriculture, which was 18.5 per cent
of the total revenue expenditure in 1970-71 stands today at 4 per cent.
Rural development has suffered a similar fate.
5 The importance of the creation of rural infrastructure for agricultural
growth finds a sure place in the recommendations of all commissions
and research papers.
6 Implicit in EGS, as it is now implemented, is the greater weight given
to short-term employment provision.
7 For a lengthy discussion of the issue of the utilisation of EGS Fund,
see the Report of the Eighth EGS State Committee [GoM 2002f].
8 Official data records headship of households in terms of who is declared
so by the household. On this basis, out of 10,778,100 households
9,28,200 households are estimated to be female-headed. However,
if the number of households that are predominantly economically
supported by women are counted then the proportion comes nearer
30 per cent. These households face greater vulnerability to economic
shocks [UNDP 2002].
9 Even these estimates are not precise because they are measured in person-
days, which are most likely approximated from last day of the month
figures.
References
Bhalla and Hazel (2003): ‘Rural Employment and Poverty Strategies to
Eliminate Rural Poverty within a Generation’, Economic and Political
Weekly, Vol 38, No 33, August 16.
Economic and Political Weekly April 24, 2004
Chari Anurekha (2003) (unpublished): ‘Is EGS Gender Sensitive?’, Paper
presented at a Workshop on Employment Guarantee Scheme, University
of Pune, April 3 and 4.
Corbridge, Stuart, Glyn Williams, Manoj Srivatsava and Rene Veron (2003):
‘Making Social Science Matter Part I: How the Local State Works in
Rural Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal', and Part II: 'How the Rural
Poor See the State in Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal’, Economic
and Political Weekly, July 14.
Datar, Chaya (1987): Revaluation of Employment Guarantee Scheme,
Maharashtra, Institute of Social Studies Trust, New Delhi.
– (1990): Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Scheme, Tata Institute of
Social Sciences, Mumbai.
Dev, Mahendra (1996): ‘Food Security: PDS and EGS – A Tale of Two
Cities’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol 31, No 27, July 6.
Foster, A D and M R Roseweig (1992): ‘Information Flows and Discrimination
in Labour Market of Rural Areas in Developing Countries’, Proceedings
of the World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics,
World Bank, Washington, DC.
GoM (1978): EGS Act (1977), Maharashtra Act No XX of 1978, Mumbai.
– (1987): Avarshanpravankshetra Punervilokan Samiticha Ahwal, Mumbai.
– (2002a): Economic Survey of Maharashtra, 2001-2002, Directorate of
Economics and Statistics, Planning Department, Mumbai.
– (2002b): Human Development Report, Maharashtra, Government of
Maharashtra, Mumbai.
– (2002c): ‘Internal Paper, EGS-9’, Planning Department, Maharashtra, June.
– (2002d): ‘Internal Paper, EGS-9’, Planning Department, Maharashtra,
November.
– (not dated): Census of Rural BPL Households, 1997-98, Department of
Rural Development and Water Conservation, Maharashtra.
Gulati, A and A Sharma (1997): ‘Freeing Trade in Agriculture: Implications
for Resource Use Efficiency and Cropping Pattern Changes’, Economic
and Political Weekly, December 27.
Nayyar, D and A Sen (1994): ‘International Trade and the Agricultural Sector
in India’, Economic and Political Weekly, May 14.
Patnaik, Manoj (2002): ‘Community Forest Management’ in Mohan Hiralal
Hirabai (ed), Orissa in Village Forest – Gateway to Sustainable and
Participatory Community Forest Management, Vrikshamitra,
Chandrapur/Gadchiroli.
Policy Development Initiatives (2000): ‘Study on Poverty Alleviation Schemes
in Maharashtra’ (Submitted to Planning Commission, Government of
India) web pages.
Ramachandran, Nira (2003): ‘Food for Work’, The Times of India, July 6.
Scandizzo, Pascale, Raghav Gaiha and Katsushi Imai (2003): ‘Option Values,
Switches and Wages – An Analysis of the Employment Guarantee
Scheme in India’, Discussion Paper Series No 164, Department of
Economics, University of Oxford, June.
Shiva, Vandana and T Crompton (1998): ‘Monopoly and Monoculture:
Trends in Indian Seed Industry’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol 26.
Shiva, Vandana (2002): ‘Real Reasons for Hunger’, The Guardian, June 23.
Srinivasan, P K and Shika Jha (not dated): ‘Globalisation and Public
Agricultural Research in India’, web pages.
Sundaram and Tendulkar (2003): ‘Poverty in India in the 1990s: An analysis
of Changes in Fifteen Major States’, Economic and Political Weekly,
Vol XXXVIII, No 14, April 5.
EPW Index
A comprehensive subject and author index to
EPW for January-June 2003 and January-June
and July-December 2002 is now available. Each
half-yearly edition of the index is priced Rs 25
and may be ordered from Circulation Manager,
Economic and Political Weekly, Hitkari House,
284 Shahid Bhagat Singh Road, Mumbai-400001.
1747