2019
DOI: 10.1177/0258042x19871406
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act: Design Failure, Implementation Failure or Both?

Abstract: The Government of India implemented MGNREGA in 2005–06 to provide social security cum wage employment on demand, initially in 200 districts and was later extended to all of India. The programme expenditure has now ballooned to over 60,000 crore per year in 2018–19, for creating about 267.95 crore man-days of employment. The programme has been beset with a host of issues since its inception, raising serious doubts about its impact in achieving designed objectives. The programme was designed with host of objecti… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
5
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This reflects that although the MGNREGS is intended to provide employment guarantee to marginal sections like SC/STs in rural areas, it is not efficient in terms of targeting them and is often being undermined by snatching of the scheme’s benefits by other claimants, due to rationing (Narayanan & Das, 2014; Narayanan et al, 2017), delays in wage payments (Narayanan et al, 2018), and some other problems. As a result, the scheme could not fully address the problem of distress migration from rural areas (Agarwal, 2019; Reddy et al, 2014). This is also clearly evident regarding the COVID-19 predicaments (Kesar et al, 2021; Srivastava, 2020).…”
Section: Participation Of Women and Social Groupsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This reflects that although the MGNREGS is intended to provide employment guarantee to marginal sections like SC/STs in rural areas, it is not efficient in terms of targeting them and is often being undermined by snatching of the scheme’s benefits by other claimants, due to rationing (Narayanan & Das, 2014; Narayanan et al, 2017), delays in wage payments (Narayanan et al, 2018), and some other problems. As a result, the scheme could not fully address the problem of distress migration from rural areas (Agarwal, 2019; Reddy et al, 2014). This is also clearly evident regarding the COVID-19 predicaments (Kesar et al, 2021; Srivastava, 2020).…”
Section: Participation Of Women and Social Groupsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The act was originally intended at poverty alleviation and reducing inequality, i.e., achieving social protection goals (Khera and Nayak, 2009;Sharma, 2011;Mahato and Roy, 2015). However, the scope of the program got expanded later on to reducing migration and creation of rural assets and infrastructure thereby strengthening democracy (Agrawal, 2019).…”
Section: The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Schemementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS, hence forth) is one of the largest functional labor guarantee schemes ever recorded in the world (ESID, 2014;Bahal, 2022), which offers 100 days of paid labor in a financial year to every rural household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work (Ministry of Rural Development, 2012;Bhalla, 2014;Gupta and Mukhopadhyay, 2014;Ehmke, 2015;Godfrey-Wood and Flower, 2017;Agrawal, 2019). Later, a directive was issued by Ministry of Rural Development that members of Scheduled Tribe who have received land rights under the Forest Rights Act ( 2006) should be given extra 50 days of work under the scheme (Business Standard, 2014).…”
Section: The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Schemementioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations