If NRLM has to succeed in raising the livelihood of poor rural people, where previous programmes have failed, it is necessary to involve low-income producers in the design and implementation of various programmes, as only then can the structural causes of poverty be substantively tackled

Launched in June 2011, the $ 5.1 billion National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM)ⁱ  is one of the flagship programmes of the Ministry of Rural Development. It is also one of the world's largest initiatives to improve the livelihood of poor, rural people and boost the rural economy. The World Bank is supporting the programme with "credit of about $1 billion, in continuation of its long-term engagement in the sector."ⁱⁱ

While the NRLM promises a lot with regard to creation and strengthening of rural livelihood, it does suffer some shortcomings, which if not addressed are likely to see it move in the same path as the erstwhile Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP), Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) and/or other programmes.

So, what then are the critical issues that raise the risk of failure with regard to implementation of the NRLM? I present my views with all humility!

Let us understand what the National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) stands for?

"The core belief of National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) is that the poor have innate capabilities and a strong desire to come out of poverty. They are entrepreneurial, an essential coping mechanism to survive under conditions of poverty. The challenge is to unleash their capabilities to generate meaningful livelihoods and enable them to come out of poverty. The first step in this process is motivating them to form their own institutions. They and their institutions are provided sufficient capacities to manage the external environment, enabled to access finance, and to expand their skills and assets and convert them into meaningful livelihoods. This requires continuous handholding support. An external dedicated, sensitive support structure, from the national level to the sub-district level, is required to induce such social mobilization, institution building and livelihoods promotion. …Strong institutional platforms of the poor, enable them to build up their own human, social, financial and other resources. … NRLM also believes that the programme can be up scaled in a time-bound manner, only if it is driven by the poor."ⁱⁱⁱ 

First, the vision of NRLM is great, but its design seems inappropriate as it talks of rural livelihoods primarily through self-help groups (SHGs). In other words, the thrust of NRLM is on building and maintaining institutions of the poor-defined as SHGs in this context and then enabling members in SHGs to access various services for better livelihoods. Several aspects deserve mention here:

•  This whole issue of creating and maintaining grass-roots structures like SHGs is something that has been attempted regularly (with varied success) by many stakeholders over the last two decades and it is continuing. Therefore, I am not sure that we need a national flagship programme (like NRLM) of the Ministry of Rural Development, funded by a World Bank loan, exclusively just for this task.

• Also, when the NRLM argues that to access its services, SHGs must come under the programme fold, pluralism and choice are lost, as by default all SHGs (irrespective of who nurtured them in the first place) have to become loyal to the state. This idea is fraught with danger and the chances of political abuse of SHGs cannot be ruled out.
   
•  Also, while the Andhra Pradesh (Indira Kranti Patham) and Kerala (Kudumbashree) experiments of mass SHG programmes have shown positive results in many ways, the same perhaps cannot be said about other states. Both the programmes were led and supported by brilliant and committed officers who had a long tenure in their organisations/ positions and this cannot be guaranteed in other contexts, especially today.

Second, on a substantive note, SHGs have had differing degrees of success with regard to livelihoods initiatives. While they may work reasonably well for small livelihoods and consumption-related matters, I am not sure that serious livelihood interventions (in fisheries, agriculture and similar areas) can happen ONLY through these SHGs. There are several reasons for this:

• While I very much appreciate the contribution of SHGs in financial services and development in India, relying only on them (as an institution of the poor) is fraught with danger, as not everyone in the rural areas is a member of a SHG, and not everyone may desire to become a member of a SHG. Furthermore, rural folk may perhaps like to access various services through other aggregation mechanisms (like cooperatives) and/or even individually.
   
• Also, in today's fast-paced rural economy, the number of people who are likely to be actively involved in the kind of social intermediation^iv  that so-called good SHGs^v  have to practise, appears rather far-fetched. Given the (fast) changing nature of our society, the choices available and information explosion that is going on, the long-winding meetings of SHGs would be very difficult to sustain in the medium- and long- term. And without such preparation, the quality of SHGs^vi will surely become low, and the moment we forcefully push for targets with regard to quick establishment of (such) SHGs , then, the process will start getting corrupted as numerous available examples (including one given below) are evidence. Therefore, using SHGs as the only mechanism in NRLM may become counter-productive.
  
  Page
Share this article:




 

Submit your comments

Name * :
Email Id * :
Author Url:
Comment*:
	alert me when new comment is posted on this article
Security Code:	Not readable? Change text.


5 Comments


Aloysius P Fernandez 8 months ago

Any grouping to grow into an institution requires investment in institutional capacity building(ICB). Takes time but once properly done, it sustains itself without direct support from the NGO.Myrada formed over 10,000 SAGs which today have federated into Community managed resource Centres -they are self sustaining -no Myrada support.

http://www.moneylife » Reply » Link » Report abuse

In reply to: Aloysius P Fernandez                                                               Close Name* :           Email Id* :        Author Url :      Comment* :             alert me when new comment is posted on this article Security Code : Not readable? Change text.

ErMCAggarwal 8 months ago

It is also added that sincere,expreinced and honest NGOs/SHGs be involved

http://www.moneylife » Reply » Link » Report abuse

In reply to: ErMCAggarwal                                                               Close Name* :           Email Id* :        Author Url :      Comment* :             alert me when new comment is posted on this article Security Code : Not readable? Change text.

ErMCAggarwal 8 months ago

The Livelihood scheme is restructured from SGSY.The IWMP is also in operation since 2008 implementation is not known. But sources say it howering arround preparation of PPR /DPRs.the work is entrusted to big houses sitting in ACs.The IWMP very much cover the Livelihood &Entry Point Works. Unless the agency persons thoroughly intract the 40 to 50 %and poorest the poor of the village late in evening,early in morning preferably night stay,the exercise is futile.Changing name of scheme camoflaging the previous poor progress is no solution.

http://www.moneylife » Reply » Link » Report abuse

In reply to: ErMCAggarwal                                                               Close Name* :           Email Id* :        Author Url :      Comment* :             alert me when new comment is posted on this article Security Code : Not readable? Change text.

Aloysius P fernandez 9 months ago

Fully agree. All CBOs at the base (membership instiutions) should be included:SAGs,JLGs, user groups (water , forest produce) etc. More importantly second level institutions managed by CBOs like Producer Companies should also be incolved to aggregate add value and scale. This has now been incorporated in the final draft.

http://www.moneylife » Reply » Link » Report abuse

In reply to: Aloysius P fernandez                                                               Close Name* :           Email Id* :        Author Url :      Comment* :             alert me when new comment is posted on this article Security Code : Not readable? Change text.

ErMCAggarwal 9 months ago

The NGOs and SHGs are mostly one or two men shows.People are earning lacs and crores of rupees under these banners.Most of these are family based.Instead of this corruped system the small societies ofhonest,volunteers seniorand experienced persons for the capacity building,implementation and monitoring of at least cluster of ten villages may be formed.

http://www.moneylife » Reply » Link » Report abuse

In reply to: ErMCAggarwal                                                               Close Name* :           Email Id* :        Author Url :      Comment* :             alert me when new comment is posted on this article Security Code : Not readable? Change text.


What's Hot
From this section


• JP Morgan Loss: Were any laws broken?
  When banks are in trouble, they often mislead the world about their financials. Maybe JPMorgan disclosed everything properly about its $2 billion loss, but that's what we need to determine.
• Ayurvedic doctor penalised for giving allopathic medicine that led to
  The National Consumer Commission, while upholding State Consumer Forum’s decision, questioned why an Ayurvedic practitioner administered allopathic medicines without any knowledge of the same
• 4 doctors of Max Hospital held guilty of negligence; anxious father
  Following the death of his daughter due to medical negligence in Delhi’s posh Max Hospital, the aggrieved father invoked 50 RTI applications in various departments to seek justice. Last week’s order by CIC Shailesh Gandhi provides some hope
• ‘Lucrative’ assignments: A Messy Saga
  Top bureaucrats and chairmen of banks and public sector entities (barring a few honourable exceptions) are guilty of corruption and looting of public assets. However, their political godfathers ensure that they escape strict action
• Harshad Mehta Scam: A Distorted Picture of 1992
  Even after a 20-year effort, the special court is discussing the possibility of pushing the hearings. The only major beneficiaries have been India's lawyers, whose incomes rose by a factor of 10 or more