Insights from the Field - Home page | UNICEF · Insights from the Field ... The assessment was carried out by Winrock International India, New Delhi in ... CEOs Zilla Panchayats and

Insights from the Field
Evaluation of UNICEF’s Drought Mitigation Project

in Madhya Pradesh, 2001-2003

In association with

CENTRE FOR ADVANCED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

May 2005

EEvvaalluuaattiioonn ooff DDrroouugghhtt AAssssiissttaannccee ooff UUNNIICCEEFF iinn MMPP

Insights from the Field:

Evaluation of UNICEF’s Drought Mitigation Project in Madhya Pradesh, 2001 –2003

The assessment was carried out by Winrock International India, New Delhi in association with the Centre for Advanced Research and Development, Bhopal, which conducted the field surveys. Various agencies and officers from the Government of Madhya Pradesh provided useful information and insights for conducting this evaluation. These include the Rajiv Gandhi Watershed Mission, Rural Engineering Services, Revenue Department, Department of Water Resources Management, Department of Public Works, Public Health and Engineering Department, District Collectors, CEOs Zilla Panchayats and Block Development Officers. Financial and technical project related information was provided by UNICEF, Bhopal. Drought Relief Officers provided insights into the implementation and monitoring arrangements. Representatives from Gram Panchayats, Pani Roko Samitis and villagers from the sample villages provided insights into planning, implementation and monitoring aspects of the project, and the impacts of the drought mitigation efforts. UNICEF, Bhopal funded this evaluation.

WW ii nn rr oo cc kk II nn tt ee rr nn aa tt ii oo nn aa ll II nn dd ii aa ,, NN ee ww DD ee ll hh ii

I


Acronyms APL Above Poverty Line

BPL Below Poverty Line

CARD Centre for Advanced Research and Development

CEO Chief Executive Officer

DFID Department of International Development

DMP Drought Mitigation Program

FGD Focus Group Discussion

FTL Full Tank Level

GoI Government of India

GoMP Government of Madhya Pradesh

MP Madhya Pradesh

OBC Other Backward Class

PRI Panchayati Raj Institutions

PRM Participatory Resource Mapping

RES Rural Engineering Services

RGWM Rajiv Gandhi Watershed Mission

SC Scheduled Caste

SGRY Sampoorna Gramin Rojgar Yojana

ST Scheduled Tribe

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

WFP World Food Programme

WII Winrock International India


II


Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................1

2 KEY ISSUES...........................................................................................................................1

3 THE CONTEXT OF DROUGHT RELIEF INTERVENTIONS ......................................3

4 TRACING DROUGHTS IN MADHYA PRADESH ..........................................................6

5 LEARNING FROM TWO DECADES OF INTEGRATED WATERSHEDS DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS...................................................................................................10

6 UNICEF’S SUPPORT .........................................................................................................11

7 METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................................12 7.1 SAMPLING STRATEGY ...................................................................................................12

District Selection ....................................................................................................................12 Block Selection .......................................................................................................................12 Village Selection.....................................................................................................................14 Household Selection ...............................................................................................................15

7.2 SURVEY TOOLS .............................................................................................................15 8 THE FIELD SURVEY: SALIENT FEATURES...............................................................17

8.1 PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS............................................................................................17 8.2 SHORT-TERM MITIGATION OF DROUGHT IMPACTS ........................................................20

Livelihood & Food Security ...................................................................................................21 Migration................................................................................................................................24 Social Inclusion ......................................................................................................................28

8.3 LONG-TERM DROUGHT PROOFING................................................................................31 Bio-Physical Environment: Physical and Natural assets.......................................................31 Institutional Environment.......................................................................................................38

8.4 KEY FINDINGS...............................................................................................................43 i) Short-term mitigation of drought impacts...........................................................................43 ii) Long-term drought proofing ..............................................................................................45

8.5 RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................................................................................47 References

Annexure- Terms of Reference

Annexure- Study Design and Survey Tools report

Annexure – Technical Remarks on the Works

Annexure – Details of 142 Works studied


III


List of Maps

Map 1: Ground Water Development in selected Districts…………………………………...5

Map 2: Twelve Moderately affected districts of MP with Drought…………………………7

Map 3: Twenty Severely Affected Districts with Drought…………………………………...8

Map 4: Drought Resilience Index of selected districts………………………………………13

Map 5: Selection of districts based on indicators……………………………………………13

WW ii nn rr oo cc kk II nn tt ee rr nn aa tt ii oo nn aa ll II nn dd ii aa ,, NN ee ww DD ee ll hh ii iv


List of Figures

Figure 1: Districtwise share of respondents………………………………………………….18

Figure 2: Districtwise proportion of SC & ST household respondents……………………19

Figure 3: Districtwise share of Landless and Marginal Farmer respondents……………..20

Figure 4: Districtwise share of respondents from various income groups………………..20

Figure 5: Frequency and Mode of Wage Payment……………………………………….….23

Figure 6: Proportion of Machinery Used for Various Activities…………………………...23

Figure 7: Castewise Migration in Sample Households……………………………………..26

Figure 8: Income Groupwise Migration in Sample Households…………………………..26

Figure 9: Occupation Groupwise Migration in Sample Households……………………..27

Figure 10: Groupwise Number of Migrants across Household Sizes…………………….27

Figure 11: Districtwise distribution of SC and ST wage beneficiaries……………………28

Figure 12: Districtwise distribution of wage beneficiaries of Landless and Marginal farmers……………………………………………………………………………………..29

Figure 13: Castewise Percent Share of Women Beneficiaries in Wage Employment……29

Figure 14: Implementing Agencywise Quality of Works in Sample Villages………….…34

Figure 15: Proponents of Project Idea in the Villages……………………………………….39

Figure 16: Proportion of Innovative and Inspired Action Reported by Beneficiaries…...43

WW ii nn rr oo cc kk II nn tt ee rr nn aa tt ii oo nn aa ll II nn dd ii aa ,, NN ee ww DD ee ll hh ii v


List of Tables

Table 1: Madhya Pradesh- Intra-State Poverty Analysis .........................................................3 Table 2: Major droughts in MP and their impacts ....................................................................8 Table 3 : Shortlisted districts based on vulnerability .............................................................14 Table 4 : Survey tools used for various hypotheses and issues ............................................15 Table 5: Sample Specifics............................................................................................................17 Table 6 : Degree of UNICEF Assistance and the Drought Resilience Index .......................18 Table 7 : Workwise Percent composition of expenditure in Cash, Kind and Material.....21 Table 8 : Workwise distribution of person-days in sample villages ....................................22 Table 9: Drought induced migration in various socio-physical settings .............................25 Table 10 : Incomewise distribution of beneficiaries................................................................30 Table 11: Percentage of villages where outside villagers benefited .....................................31 Table 12 : Actual Average Cost of Sample Water Harvesting Structures............................32 Table 13 : Works by Cost and Type categories........................................................................32 Table 14 : Implementing Agencywise and Districtwise Quality of Works .........................34 Table 15 : Community’s perceptions about appropriateness and quality of works ..........36 Table 16 : Status of Water Security During Lean Season in Sample Villages .....................37 Table 17 : Role of PRIs in Decision Making in Sample Villages...........................................38 Table 18 : Break up of Community Contribution ...................................................................41 Table 19 : Extent of Community Contribution in various works .........................................42


VI


1 Introduction

Large tracts of India are prone to droughts. Sixty-eight percent of India’s land mass is drought-prone to varying degrees, of which about 50 percent is chronically drought-prone (Swami 2001). “The 20th century is marked by a high frequency of droughts. There were as many as 18 large-scale droughts1 with some of these extending to over 3-6 years – 1903-05, 1957-60, 1966-71, 1984-87, and 1997-99” (Narain et al, 2000). As per Government of India’s estimate (GoI, 2000), there are one or two years of droughts every five years in semi-arid and arid regions of India. Even the first two years of the 21st century were recurring drought years in many drought prone states such as Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Gujarat, with most parts of these states facing third to fourth consecutive years of drought. Every year, GoI spends millions on relief for creating employment, provisioning water supply, foodgrains and fodder to mitigate the impacts of droughts. With a view to enhance drought proofing, GoI has accorded high priority to its watershed development program. This is evident from the fact that GoI has developed a perspective plan of 20 years (2002-03 to 2021-22) for treating around 88.5 Mha of land with a total investment of Rs. 727.5 billion. Between 2001 and 2003 UNICEF assisted the Government of Madhya Pradesh (GoMP) for mitigating the impacts of drought in 34 of 45 districts of the state. This evaluation was commissioned by UNICEF (see Annexure - Terms of Reference) to draw lessons to from this experience to feed into better design, planning and implementation of such interventions. It is worth noting that this evaluation looks at UNICEF’s support within the larger framework of GoMP’s approach to and efforts towards mitigating droughts and drought relief work in the state. The specific objective of this evaluation was to assess, primarily from the perspective of various socio-economic sections of drought-affected communities, to what extent the project objectives of long-term drought proofing and short-term livelihood sustenance through wage employment were achieved. 2 Key Issues

For achieving the objectives of the assignment, two hypotheses were proposed:

I. The drought assistance has helped in the mitigation of short-term drought impacts through the creation of employment opportunities within the village itself, especially for the landless and small and marginal farmers whose livelihoods are most fragile and whose dependence on wage labour is high. The key issues under this included:


1

1 During 1905, 1911, 1915, 1918, 1920, 1941, 1951, 1965, 1966, 1972, 1974, 1979, 1982, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1999, and 2000.


a) Livelihood security: Livelihood security comprises of water (domestic and irrigation), food and income security. The extent to which livelihood security of the poor among the affected communities has been addressed during the drought. Was the mode of payment (mix of cash and food grain) appropriate to adequately address livelihood concerns? How did households use the income they earned?

b) Migration: Migration of two types—regular and distress. The former refers to the mode through which communities meet their aspirations and needs, while the latter helps sustain their livelihoods. The evaluation will examine whether the project helped curb distress migration?

c) Social inclusion: The degree to which gender and equity concerns were addressed in planning, implementation and monitoring, along with the distribution of benefits from the assets created among various social categories within these communities. Emphasis will be on whether vulnerable groups (SC/ST/OBC and BPL) were “involved” in all the stages of the project and, to what extent they benefited.

II. The drought assistance contributed incrementally to drought preparedness from

the village to State level by enhancing the water harvesting capacity at the village level.

Drought preparedness is a function of two parameters—bio-physical and the institutional environment from the village to State level. There exists a high degree of inter-dependence between these two parameters. While the institutional environment at the State, district and block levels is governed by policies and procedures of the project, the institutional environment at the village level is shaped by the extent of community participation and ownership, especially of vulnerable populations to which the assistance is targeted. With this understanding of drought preparedness, the set of issues covered included:

a) Bio-physical environment: The degree to which this intervention has affected

water availability for domestic use, irrigation and other livelihood related activities. In order to fulfill this, an associated question is whether the structures constructed were technically sound and cost effective.

b) Institutional environment: The overall institutional environment, both formal and informal, at all levels--from village to State level. Specifically, it entails: • The policies and procedures followed by formal institutions from state to

block levels for implementing the intervention. • Institutional development through awareness and capacity building

programs for institutions at all levels. • The extent of community participation in project planning,

implementation and monitoring. The level of community contribution towards the costs of structures, the rationale for variations in these levels across districts, its impacts and implications.

• The extent of involvement of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRls) in the project.

• The effectiveness of local institutions in managing the assets created to enhance their long-term sustainability.


2


• The degree of change in mindset i.e, attitude and practice, among the affected communities, if any, towards the management of fresh water resources.

• The degree to which this experience has triggered adoption and upscaling of similar interventions through community initiatives.

3 The Context of Drought Relief Interventions

Madhya Pradesh (MP) is the second largest state in India with a total geographical area of 30.75 million hectares divided into 45 districts with a population of nearly 60 million people (Census 2001). It is primarily an agricultural state with nearly 73 per cent of the population being rural, depending directly or indirectly on agriculture. Of the total agricultural area nearly 72 per cent is rain fed. As a result there is a large proportion of cultivable waste and fallow land. MP also has the largest tribal population in the country accounting for nearly 23 per cent of the state’s population (Census 1991). In addition, it is characterized by a large percentage of small and marginal farmers accounting for nearly 61 per cent of landholdings. The latter have a low investment capacity to make their lands productive, as a result of which large numbers of them depend on wage labour. MP has long been recognized as a Bimaru (sick) state, amongst other states like Bihar, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, for its limited achievements on the human development front and its high incidence of poverty (MP Human Development Report 2002). Across various regions of MP there is a gradation in poverty and deprivation (see Table 1) which provides data on six comparative parameters for six regions of Madhya Pradesh). The districts in the South Western region of the state (e.g. Jhabua, Dhar, Khargone) are the poorest districts of Madhya Pradesh. Table 1: Madhya Pradesh- Intra-State Poverty Analysis

State and Regions

Head Count Poverty Ratio

Land Productivity

Labor Productivity

Per Capita Food Grain Production

Real Wages

South Western MP (Jhabua, Dhar, Khargine etc.)

68.2 Rs. 7559 Rs. 4822 297 Kg. Rs. 22.47

Central MP (Sehore, Vidisha, Raesen etc) 50.13 Rs. 7038 Rs. 9524 248 Kg. Rs. 21.79

South MP (Betul, Chhindwara, Mandla, Dindori etc.)

46.36 Rs. 7393 Rs. 5159 274 Kg. Rs. 18.54

*Vindhya Region (Chhtarpur, Sidhi, Tikamgarh etc.)

36.71 Rs. 5998 Rs. 5122 246 Kg. Rs. 24.02

Malwa (Chambal etc.) 27.39 Rs. 7605 Rs. 5492 237 Kg. Rs. 26.20 North MP (Sheopur, Shivpuri, Guna) 17.42 Rs. 9968 Rs. 11250 357 Kg. Rs. 32.21

Source: NIRD, 2000

3

It is noteworthy that according to the National Sample Survey nearly 80 per cent of households dependent on agricultural labour (those who earn more than 50 per cent of their income from labour) in India are landed. However, the land that they own has such low productivity that it does not yield enough to support a subsistence livelihood. In MP it is estimated that there are 39 lakh small and marginal farmers who are mostly WW ii nn rr oo cc kk II nn tt ee rr nn aa tt ii oo nn aa ll II nn dd ii aa ,, NN ee ww DD ee ll hh ii


underemployed. The size of landholdings of these farmers, on an average, is 0.91 hectares, which is uneconomical and therefore the majority work as agricultural or casual labourers in order to eke out a livelihood. Equally grim is the water resources scenario in MP. Unlike the canal irrigated southern, eastern and northern plains of India, MP is largely upland and receives irrigation for only 28 percent for its arable land. Neither does MP receive winter monsoons like southern India and the states of Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh. MP receives only summer or Kharif rains. Hence, the monsoons in June are very critical to the farmers of Madhya Pradesh. By every 10th to 15th of June, MP starts getting monsoon showers. Over a period of 120 days, between the 15th of June and 15th September, MP receives, on an average 90 percent of its annual 1000 mm of rainfall. However, it is critical for all farmers of this state that at least 35-40 mm of rains occur within the first three weeks of June, every year. Delayed rains bring diseases to crops and cause stunted growth of plants. Black-cotton-soil that is the dominant soil-type in the state (80 percent the area) also demands larger amounts of water for saturating its top layer. The status of groundwater development across various districts of the State is shown in in Map 1. It shows that western part of the state has high development of groundwater. But a cursory look at the status at the block level shows that parts of many districts are overdeveloped. As per third Human Development Report of MP (2002), the groundwater draft has already exceeded the annual replenishable recharge in 22 blocks (57%) out of a total of 38 blocks in Barwani, Dhar, Indore, Mandsaur, Rajgarh, Ratlam, Shajapur and Ujjain districts. Over-exploitation in these blocks has resulted in continuous decline of water levels in these blocks. The groundwater scenario in other 27 blocks where groundwater development falls in grey category (>85% development) is rapidly pacing towards the over-exploitation category. This level of groundwater development has resulted in both the decline in water levels and deterioration of groundwater quality in many blocks of MP. For instance, the result of statewide monitoring of fluctuations of groundwater water levels in 554 wells over the past decade (1990-1999), shows a declining trend in 206 wells (37%), out of which 29 observation wells recorded a decline in water level from 2-4 m and 8 observation wells recorded a decline of more than 4 m. On quality implications of groundwater overdevelopment, high values of fluoride from 1.5 mg/l to 10 mg/l have been observed in aquifers generally below the depth of 30 m in Mandla and Hoshangabad districts. The increasing rate of groundwater development will have adverse implications on the already stressed water supplies for drinking and irrigation uses in the State.


4


Map 1

The revenue department in each tehsil and district closely monitors the changing state of cumulative rainfall on a daily basis. Specifically, every tehsil office keeps a close watch on the progress of the monsoon during the first three weeks of June. It is this Jayesth-Aashad-rain, which endows the rural masses of MP with their staple food, viz. Kodo-kutki, sama, bajra, jowar, maize and other cereals grown in the Kharif season. Monsoons also herald the sowing season for soyabeans, arhar and urad, the major cash and supporting crops of marginal and small farmers of MP. Moreover, the Aashad-rains allow speedy growth of grass on the field-margins and beeds of the farmers. The livestock of the villagers thrive on this Kharif grass. In years of normal rainfall, enough fodder grows till December, which is later harvested, dried and fed to cattle through the ensuing eight months. Besides these characteristics, another serious implication of droughts that seems to affect the rural inhabitants of MP, is the long-term impact of one drought that gets prolonged into a recurrent one. Unlike the scenario in Rajasthan, the inhabitants of MP are not yet aware of the consequences of long-term drought situations, as only few have experienced them first hand. However, three consecutive years of drought, incessant degradation of soil-water-biomass resources, progressive denudation of uplands and over-exploitation of ground water resources, indicate that the scourge of droughts is going to be visiting MP again and again. Historically, another factor that does not support the people of MP is its very small share of animal husbandry. Rajasthan has evolved its drought resilience through drought proofing and building a strong animal husbandry based economy, which contributes


5


from 18 to 26 percent during drought years to the State Domestic Product. In MP however, animal husbandry barely accounts of 4 percent.1 The office of the World Food Programme (WFP) in India is the lead agency that has been preparing periodic status papers vis-à-vis food security in India. WFP, along with MS Swaminathan Foundation has recently published the Food Insecurity Atlas of Rural India (2001). This study indicated that six tehsils from Jhabua, Dhar, Rajgarh, Chhatarpur and Mandla are food deficient. Coming to the current issue of drought, the aforesaid monsoon failed miserably for three consecutive years of 2000-2001-2002. Most of the small and marginal farmers engaged in rainfed-agriculture were only kharif crop growers. Loss of kharif crops meant, they would at best grow worth four annas or 25 percent of crops, with, in few cases, some grams and non-irrigated variety of desi wheat during the rabi season. Technically, if on an average in a tehsil, crops yields fall below 36 percent of the normal annual productivity, it is declared as a drought-affected tehsil. Between 2000 and 2002 32 of MP’s districts and more than 120 of its tehsils recorded crop yields to the tune of 20 to 35 percent of a normal year’s cropping. Hence, officially a drought situation prevailed in these districts. By drought one implies its five major indicators and manifestations. These are: (a) food and water scarcity (depletion of natural resources); (b) drastic fall in primary sector based production and income; (c) lack of work and insufficient wages due to fall in the opportunities available to unskilled labor; (d) loss of cattle and other livestock; and, (5) distress migration. Drought mitigation programmes are designed to intervene and address these five major indicators and wield a positive impact on establishing long-term, deliberate win-win relationships of man and soil-water-biomass-livestock cycles, thus promoting drought proofing. 4 Tracing Droughts in Madhya Pradesh

This section is based on drought timeline exercises carried out across the sample villages. It traces the major droughts to have affected MP, their impacts and the responses of the community and the government in terms of coping strategies / relief (as per the communities). The first recorded major drought in MP was known as Chhappania Akaal or Akalhawa Saal (called so in Baghelkhand region) was the most severe drought that has occurred in recent five centuries of India. Legends of this great drought have transcended the generations through folklore. Probably the second biggest drought to affect MP after the Chhappaniya akaal was the two-year drought period between 1930-35. However, incidents attached to this drought are not well remembered, because its intensity was moderate. After this came that of the1970s and 80s. All the villages visited in the Bundelkhand region of MP reported moderate to severe drought in 1979-80. However, as for as Malwa and Mahakaushal regions are concerned the second most difficult drought phase was experienced in six districts of Malwa, including Khargone, Ratlam, as well other four


6

1 Situation analysis of Animal Husbandry in Rajasthan, with special reference to Drought, 2003-04, ARAVALI, Jaipur.


districts adjoining Gujarat and Rajasthan too reported a major drought year during the year 1987-88. In between 1979 and 1988 there were many mild and moderate droughts. For example, villagers from Mandla district reported mild to moderate droughts for 1981-82 and 1984-85 also.

This was followed by three consecutive years of droughts between 2001 and 2003. The villagers in ten districts that were visited by the study team felt that the drought of 2001-2003 was the first time ever when the state government took up drought mitigation activities so extensively.

In 2001 twenty severely drought affected and twelve moderately drought affected districts (see Map 2 and Map 3) were identified. Although the drought status of many of the previously affected districts owing to poor monsoons in 2002, persisted, as well. The severely affected districts remained largely the same the following year as well. The drought situation in MP got prolonged further, as it persisted for the third straight year into 2003. Again, there were some minor status changes in the drought situations of the districts of MP. The moderately and severely affected districts are illustrated below. Map 2

Twenty severely drought affected districts were identified between the years 2001 and 2003. Recurrent deficit rainfall in all the 45 districts of Madhya Pradesh was experienced for five successive monsoon years of 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003. This created a drought situation in the state of Madhya Pradesh. However, 44 of 45 districts in MP were relatively hard-hit, as they received less than 60 percent of normal rainfall. In 32 districts the recorded rainfall was as low as 20 to 25 percent of the normal rainfall. These districts were hence declared severely affected by drought. Another twelve districts registered rainfall between 25 percent and 60 percent in the aforesaid phase. Hence, these districts were considered as moderately affected by drought.


7


Map 3 Table 2 lof the com Table 2: Drought Period

1902-1904 AD

WW ii nn rr oo cc kk

ists the major droughts that have affected MP, their impacts and the responses munity and the government in terms of coping strategies / relief.

Major droughts in MP and their impacts Areas/ Regions Affected?

What were the Manifestations of this Drought?

What Measures Adopted by the Drought Affected Community Locally?

What Measures Adopted by the Government for Addressing the Drought

Entire State of Modern Madhya Pradesh

No Kharif Crop in 1902-03, no Fodder, many cattle died by mid 1903. Next year, in 1903-1904 AD a large number of people died because of over-eating of maize and millets, after the debilitating, severely emaciating drought of the previous year.

Barks of Forest trees peeled, dried, ground, baked and eaten as rotis by the villagers.

Probably none. Villagers do not remember having heard of any systemic measure taken by the authorities (from, their ancestors).. However, Dr. MS Randhawa in his three- volume- treatise on the History of Indian Agriculture writes about some drought redress measures undertaken by the then British Government in Bundelkhand Region of UP and MP, such as a

II nn tt ee rr nn aa tt ii oo nn aa ll II nn dd ii aa ,, NN ee ww DD ee ll hh ii

8


9

big dam built between Jhansi and Newari block and in Tikamgarh district.

1979-80

The Bundelkhand Drought

Failed to grow any crops, the whole year. No Fodder, many cattle died by mid 1980. Large scale migration to cities started. Next year, too, it was a scanty rain. But some crops were grown.

Sold the half of livestock, At least one family member had to migrate for earning livelihood in Gwalior, Delhi or western UP.

None

1987-88

The Malwa and Mahakaushal Drought

Many trees in the forest died. Not enough fodder available for cattle. Very little Kharif crop was harvested. Wells dried up. Very little water was left in hand pumps

Some people migrated out of the villages and went to remote places, many also had to borrow heavily from usurers.

None

2001 to 2003

32 districts of MP belonging to all the five regions of the state.

1) Loss of Crops 2) Loss of wage labor opportunity, 3) Problem in getting enough drinking water in many villages 4) Lack of drinking water for livestock 5) Irrigation sources based on ground water and surface water were reduced.

. Migration was enhanced, people had to borrow from their well off relatives and from money lenders., The Pani Roko Campaign helped the community to tide over the drought period without much of human loss. However, there was a significant loss of cattle and domesticated animals

The government of MP undertook the Pani Roko Abhiyan and sought food for work support from Govt. of India, also requested UNICEF to assist in drought relief work



5 Learning from Two Decades of Integrated Watersheds Development Projects

People of rural MP, initially with the work of a few voluntary agencies in particular and then with the advent of RGWM in the entire state of MP, picked up water harvesting agenda in full flourish by 1996. This was the largest participatory watershed development program implemented by any state at the time and covered all the districts in the state. Some prominent regional watershed development projects, like: DFID supported GVT’s watersheds projects in Dhar, Jhabua and Ratlam districts and DANIDA supported Watersheds Projects in Ujjain, Ratlam and Jhabua districts also contributed a lot in building hands on experience of the rural communities towards in situ water harvesting. This decade old, varied and rich water harvesting experience of MP yielded some valuable lessons for all the inhabitants of the state. By the year 2001, when the three-year drought hit the state, MP Government and the state’s civil society had a bevy of watershed experts, gurus and practioners. The prominent lessons that they spread during the water harvesting campaign or Pani Roko Abhiyan were:

• Water conservation and water harvesting should be everybody’s business in the state. Government, NGOs and International Organizations can facilitate and orchestrate community mobilization towards this end.

• Decades of negligence towards building a dynamic, productive and sustainable relationship between human beings (Jan), water (Jal), soil (Zameen), biomass (Jungle) and livestock (Janvar) caused the reigning degradation of primary resources in the state. Hence the relevance of these five Js should be made known to everyone in the state.

• In situ water harvesting through ridge to valley treatment and adoption of proper agricultural practices, field bunding, contour trenching, water percolation and storage structures are not technically very complex practices and common villagers can learn these through exposure and hands on experience.

• Any water harvesting structure that costs below rupees two lakhs does not require high quality engineering and technical support base. Basic and commonsensical understanding of the over-all area from which the run off is collected, rainfall and calculation of highest expected hectare feet of water that will be accumulated in 24 hours of a most rainy monsoon day, concentration rate, proportion of run-off that could be harvested in the given ponding area, characteristics of water (like water always finds and maintains its level, wave effect of water, pressure of water is equal to its height and so on) can be picked up by villagers if they develop participatory earthen structure construction and learn through deliberately designed exchange program with the technical experts, when these structures get built in their villages. Similarly basic knowledge about the characteristics of building compacted earthen high density (with soil density 0.85 to 0.9) structures, thumb rules for height, width and slopes for such structures and keeping free board of 1.5 metres, etc., could also be learnt by the villagers in due course of implementation. Developing local survey techniques and tools for studying the impending inundation area with clubs and indigenous equipment might also be one of the major objectives for undertaking such projects. These techniques then could be passed on to the village level community leaders and animators.


10


• Pani Roko campaign was based on aforesaid thumb rules and conclusions. The idea was for (a) making the community aware and prepared for undertaking water harvesting structures, (b) Actually building water harvesting structures in hundreds of hamlets and villages and (c) training some villagers as water harvesting animators who could carry on making such structures after the campaign, as well. They could also ensure aftercare of earthen structures.

6 UNICEF’s support

As a response to this crisis the GoMP converged funds from various programmes at the state level for drought relief work. UNICEF with DFID funding contributed to this pool of funds for drought mitigation to the tune of US$ 7.5 million in the first phase and another US$ 3.5 million in the second phase, amounting to 8 per cent of the total outlay. This assistance to the state’s drought relief efforts during the period February 2001 to December 2003 resulted in 3,578 groundwater recharge structures in as many villages in 34 of the worst drought affected districts of the state, generating wage employment estimated at US$ 5.38 million, mostly for landless and marginal farmers. In addition, physical works including rehabilitation / construction of canals, check dams, ponds, percolation tanks, hand dug wells, contour trenching and tree planting were undertaken. The drought mitigation efforts were undertaken in the form of a public movement for water harvesting and conservation called the Pani Roko Abhiyan. It was catalyzed through a mass awareness campaign through the state’s Gram Sampark Abhiyan seeking to convert the drought into an opportunity to take the message of water harvesting to every village in MP. The movement was marked by a thrust on people’s participation in the programme through the promotion of ‘do-it-yourself’ technologies and partial contribution to the cost through shramdaan (voluntary labour), cash or kind. There was a thrust on small, earthen structures for water harvesting, which could be sustainably managed by the people. Emphasis was on labour intensive techniques to maximise employment generation for sustaining livelihoods in the short term. Great importance was accorded to institutional strengthening to ensure sustainability. Pani Roko Samitis were created in the non-watershed villages (villages where watershed work under the Rajiv Gandhi Watershed Mission had not been undertaken previously) to sustain the momentum created by the Pani Roko Abhiyan. Against the background of a large population of landless and small and marginal farmers, dependent on rainfed agriculture and wage labour to augment their subsistence livelihoods, UNICEF’s assistance to the drought mitigation efforts holds tremendous importance as it aimed to not only provide short term employment opportunities but also long-term drought proofing in order to sustain and make resilient the livelihoods of these vulnerable communities. While in the first phase an equal amount of money was allocated to all the selected districts, in the second phase, funds were allocated according to the extent of drought, indicated by the degree of drinking water scarcity and the proportion of vulnerable groups amongst the 15 worst affected districts.


11


7 Methodology

The methodology adopted was suited to test the stated hypotheses. It was developed by Winrock International India (WII) in association with Centre for Advanced Research and Development (CARD) and Dr. M.S. Rathore (Independent Statistical Analysis consultant). After following a two month long rigorous process of shared problem appreciation, objective-articulation and examination of various instruments of enquiry; this team in close consultation with UNICEF deployed its resources, as per the assigned sub-roles and responsibilities, sub-team-wise. Field teams, pre-test teams, teams of mentors, investigators, observers, schedule designers and trainers, as well as of analysts and integrators were prepared and their assignment schedules were prepared. The following section presents in brief the sampling strategy and the various tools that were used for the survey (refer Annexure- Study Design and Survey Tools report, for more details).

7.1 Sampling Strategy By design the survey was undertaken in 10 districts. Within these districts the field survey was administered in 132 villages. The rationale for selection of districts and villages was as follows:

DD ii ss tt rr ii cc tt SS ee ll ee cc tt ii oo nn The districts were selected using two levels of stratification. Firstly, based on data from the MP State Human Development Report 2002, the drought resilience index2 of various districts was computed (Map 4). Subsequently, the vulnerability index of various districts was calculated by aggregating drought resilience index, proportion of SC/ST population and percentage of land degradation. Based on the vulnerability index of various districts to droughts, 11 districts were shortlisted from the 34 intervention districts (Table 3). Secondly, based on this shortlist, 10 districts were finally selected through meetings with UNICEF and the Government of MP, which provided information on project performance in the shortlisted districts. Based on suggestions received, six of the ten districts were selected from Phase II of the UNICEF Drought Relief project and four from the Phase I. The districts, thus selected for assessment are shown in Map 5.

BB ll oo cc kk SS ee ll ee cc tt ii oo nn Within each of these districts, Blocks where UNICEF work had been implemented were identified based on information provided by UNICEF. Tables for each district were prepared which listed the Blocks and the total number of villages in each Block to which UNICEF assistance was provided. Two Blocks in each district, which had the highest number of intervention villages, were selected.


12

2 The drought resilience index was computed from Education Index, Health Index, Income Index, Gender Development Index, irrigation development index taken from MP Human Development Report.


Map 4

Map 5


13


Table 3 : Shortlisted districts based on vulnerability S.No. Region Wise Districts S.C

(%) S.T (%)

Drought Resilience index

Land degradation (% area)

West M.P, Nimad Plains 1. Jhabua 3.1 85.7 246 79.5 Nimad 2. Khargone 11.7 33.3 341 85.3 3. Khandwa 11.4 26.8 357 84.2 4. Barwani 6.9 64.8 290 - Malwa Plateau 5. Dhar 6.9 53.5 363 76.7 6. Indore 16.7 5.5 431 84.7 7. Dewas 18.2 15.0 392 84.5 8. Ujjain 24.6 2.1 407 81.9 9. Shahjapur 22.3 2.4 398 64.9 10. Sehore 20.3 10.2 369 75.9 11. Rajgarh 18.0 3.3 337 70.4 North West M.P 12. Neemuch 12.8 7.9 388 - 13. Mandsaur 17.8 2.8 400 71.2 14. Ratlam 13.7 23.3 404 67.5 Bagelkhand 15. Tikamgarh 22.8 4.1 353 58.3 16. Chatarpur 23.7 3.8 306 82.0 17. Panna 20.4 14.9 287 82.0 18. Damoh 20.1 12.4 358 74.4 Bundelkhand 19. Satna 17.8 13.8 302 74.4 20. Siddhi 11.4 30.4 332 87.0 Mahakoshal 21. Jabalpur 13.3 14.9 351 82.5 22. Katni 11.9 23.9 338 - 23. Umaria 8.2 46.3 293 - 24. Shahdol 7.5 46.3 301 92.7 25. Mandla 5.4 54.8 330 83.0 26. Dindori 5.1 66.7 322 - Narsimhapur 16.6 12.9 401 80.9 Southern M.P 27. Betul 10.8 37.5 334 87.8 28. Chindwara 12.2 34.5 361 84.5 29. Seoni 10.8 37.0 333 81.5 30. Balaghat 8.3 21.9 393 93.4 Northern M.P 31. Sheopur 16.6 20.1 382 - 32. Morena 21.0 0.7 355 77.2 33. Bhind 21.3 0.3 366 70.7 Average 14.4 24.5 350.6 65.2

VV ii ll ll aa gg ee SS ee ll ee cc tt ii oo nn The number of villages to be covered in each district was in proportion of the number of villages covered under the project in that particular district to the total number of villages to be covered in the selected 10 districts (i.e. 132 villages). The number of WW ii nn rr oo cc kk II nn tt ee rr nn aa tt ii oo nn aa ll II nn dd ii aa ,, NN ee ww DD ee ll hh ii

14


villages to be sampled per district was spread equally across the two identified Blocks. A tentative list of double (264) the number of villages proposed to be covered was prepared which captured a diversity of implementing agencies and structures constructed based on the records furnished by UNICEF. The list of double the number of villages for each Block was prepared and shared with the concerned district and block level officials. Then half the number of villages from this list were randomly selected as the field survey villages for a given Block. This exercise helped minimize the chances of priming.

HH oo uu ss ee hh oo ll dd SS ee ll ee cc tt ii oo nn Basic 5% representation of households was ensured at the village level with a minimum of 10 households and a maximum of 20 households to be covered under the household questionnaire in each village. The list of households was developed through a review of project records available at the village level, such as muster-rolls and, Participatory Resource Mapping (PRM) exercises. While muster-rolls helped identify the direct beneficiaries3, the PRM helped: identify indirect beneficiaries4 and, prepare stratified (socio-economically) lists of direct and indirect beneficiaries. The proportion of indirect to direct beneficiaries selected was 1:4, to help give more weightage to direct beneficiaries while collecting data through the household questionnaire, which focused more on short-term benefits than long-term impacts of the project. The proportion of 1:4 was indicative and varied across study villages depending on the prevailing situation.

7.2 Survey Tools

The survey tools used for the evaluation helped capture both the qualitative and quantitative dimensions of data. These included Semi-structured interviews, Participatory Resource Mapping, Village Schedules, Observation of structure, Focus Group Discussion (FGD), Drought Timeline and Household Questionnaires. Separate FGDs were organised with various sections of the community—landless and SC/ST, Small and Marginal farmers, Women groups and Panchayat members. For each key issue, a set of primary tools and secondary tools were selected from the above list. While Primary Tools were the main source of information and reflected the emphasis on data analysis and presentation, Secondary Tools were seen as complementing/ substantiating/ triangulating information obtained through Primary Tools. The following Table 4 shows tools used for various hypotheses and issues. Table 4 : Survey tools used for various hypotheses and issues

Hypothesis/Issue Tools (Primary Tools: PT

Secondary Tools: ST)*

Type of data

Hypothesis 1 The drought assistance has helped mitigation of short-term drought impacts through the creation of employment opportunities within the village itself, especially for the landless and small and marginal farmers whose livelihoods are most fragile and dependence on wage labour is high. Issue a): Livelihood security PT:HHQ and VS

Quantitative

3 Benefited by wage employment and food grain provision through the project


15

4 Beneficiaries of improved water regime and induced secondary benefits such as enhanced agriculture productivity and income.


16

ST:FGDs and PRM Qualitative PT: HHQ, VS and DT

Quantitative

Issue b): Migration

ST: FGDs and PRM Qualitative PT: FGDs

Qualitative

Issue c): Social inclusion

ST: HHQ, PRM and VS Quantitative Hypothesis 2 The drought assistance contributed incrementally to drought preparedness from village to State level by creating water harvesting capacity in every village

PT: PRM, FGDs, OS Qualitative Issue a): Bio-physical environment

ST: HHQ and VS Quantitative

Issue b): Institutional environment PT: SSI

Qualitative (and, quantitative from literature collected during SSIs)

i. Policies and procedures

ST: FGDs Qualitative

ii. Institutional Development PT: SSI and FGDs Qualitative PT: FGDs Qualitative iii. Community Participation

ST: HHQ and SSI, PRM Quantitative and Qualitative

PT: FGDs Qualitative iv. Involvement of PRIs ST: VS Quantitative PT: FGDs Qualitative v. Effectiveness of local institutions for

management of assets ST: HHQ, OS and VS, ST Quantitative PT: FGDs and DT Qualitative vi. Change in mindset towards

management of freshwater resources ST: HHQ Quantitative

PT: FGDs Qualitative vii. Adoption and upscaling of similar interventions by community ST: VS Quantitative

PT - Primary Tool; ST: Secondary Tool; HHQ – Household Questionnaire; VS – Village Schedule; FGD – Focus Group Discussion; SSI – Semi-structured Interview; DT – Drought Timeline; PRM – Participatory Resource Mapping; OS – Observation of Structures For the purpose of analysis and presentation of the key issues across the 10 districts a Combined FGD scoring response sheet was prepared which was filled for each village based on information collected through FGDs. There are couple of points to be kept in mind while reviewing this evaluation. First, UNICEF provided financial assistance to the district administration from where the financial allocation among blocks/ villages was decided solely by the district administration based on a bottom-up planning approach. Second, it was learnt that the district administration used UNICEF assistance as a gap filling strategy i.e. provided funds to villages that did not receive any relief support under the SGRY-II programme of the government.



The evaluation faced some hurdles as well. First, most of the district level officials from relevant agencies involved in the implementation had got transferred and therefore were not available for semi-structured interviews. Another constraint was the non-availability of villagers in some cases due to migration or agricultural activities. 8 The Field Survey: Salient Features

As mentioned, UNICEF assisted GoMP for mitigating drought impacts in 34 of 45 districts of the state. DFID provided financial assistance to UNICEF for undertaking labor intensive activities that resulted in the construction and repair of water harvesting structures and provided wage employment to the rural communities in 3,578 villages. This section highlights the key findings of an elaborate field-based study of 128 structures, in 132 villages in ten districts of Madhya Pradesh. This section strives to coalesce the findings gleaned from the semi-structured interviews (with District Collectors/ CEO, Zilla Panchayat) and structured interviews with 1659 respondent-households who actively participated in the Drought Mitigation Programme (DMP) of UNICEF in Madhya Pradesh during 2001-2003.

8.1 Profile of Respondents

As given in the Table 5 this study was conducted in 132 villages from 20 tehsils spread over 10 districts. The total number of works in these villages was 142. However, owing to some incomplete works and non-availability of some records, in-depth study of only 131 works could be taken up; additionally, for some queries data for another set of 9 works was not available, with the result that 128 works could be studied thoroughly. Table 5: Sample Specifics

District

Blocks

No. of Villages

No. of Works

No. of Respondents

Chhatarpur Bakswaha, Bangarh 20 22 260 Dhar Badnawar, Umaryan 7 7 86 Jhabua Jhabua, Meghnagar 5 6 70 Khargone Badwaha, Bhagwanpura 21 22 285 Mandla Ghugri and Narayan Ganj 10 10 109 Rajgarh Khilchipur and Rajgarh 13 13 147 Ratlam Bajna and Ratlam 30 32 352 Sehore Aashtha and Sehore 4 4 44 Seoni Barghat & Lakhnadaun 19 21 246 Sidhi Chitrangi and Waidhan 5 5 60

10 Districts 20 Blocks 132 Villages 142 Works 1659 The number of villages surveyed in each district is an indicator of the degree of UNICEF assistance in these districts. The number of villages surveyed is highest in Ratlam, followed by Khargone, Chhatarpur and Seoni. At the lower end are the districts of Sehore, Sidhi, Jhabua and Dhar. Therefore, as shown in Figure 1, Ratlam, Khargone, Chhatarpur and Seoni had a large sample size and together accounted for 68.8 percent of WW ii nn rr oo cc kk II nn tt ee rr nn aa tt ii oo nn aa ll II nn dd ii aa ,, NN ee ww DD ee ll hh ii

17


the total sample of 1659. On the other hand, Sehore, Sidhi, Jhabua and Dhar had small a sample size. These samples from four districts together add up to 260 or 15.67 percent of the total sample size. Figure 1

Districtwise share of respondents

15.67%

5.18% 4.22%

17.18%

6.56%8.85%

21.22%

2.70%

14.82%

3.60%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

Chhattarp

urDhar

Jhab

ua

Khargone

Mandla

Rajgarh

Ratlam

Sehore

Seoni

Sidhi

Blocks

Perc

enta

ge o

f re

spon

dent

s

Comparing the above information to the Drought Resilience Index that was computed for each of these districts5 provides an insight into how appropriately UNICEF assistance was targeted (Table 6). The Drought Resilience scores of districts were arrived at by adding relative values (calculated as percentage of maximum value) of five parameters– four on status of socio-economic systems and one on the status of the bio-physical system. Land degradation being an important bio-physical parameter was considered separately. The socio-economic indices were Education Index, Health Index, Income Index, Gender Development Index while the index on proportion of gross irrigated area to gross cropped area (for 1998-99) describe the status of the bio-physical system. These were taken from MP State Human Development Report 2002. Lower the value of the drought resilience index, higher the rank of vulnerability to droughts. TABLE 6 : Degree of UNICEF Assistance and the Drought Resilience Index

District

Degree of UNICEF Assistance (Nos. of Villages surveyed)

Drought Resilience Index

Ratlam 30 404 Khargone 21 341 Chhatarpur 20 306 Seoni 19 333 Rajgarh 13 337 Mandla 10 330 Dhar 7 363 Jhabua 5 246

Sidhi 5 332

Sehore 4 369

185 Study Design and Survey Tools Report



The average drought resilience computed for the state is 350.6 (see Annexure-Study Design and Survey Tools report). Using this figure as a benchmark, the drought resilience indices of Ratlam, Dhar and Sehore are found to be above average. Ratlam is one of five districts, out of 33, to have a drought resilience index of 400 or above. Considering then that the degree of UNICEF assistance is the highest in Ratlam even though it is among the five districts with the lowest vulnerability to drought is an indication that sufficient care was not always taken to ensure that UNICEF funds were allocated to the districts that needed it the most. Figure 2 shows the district-wise proportion of SC respondents was higher in Chattarpur (38%) and Sehore (41%), while Jhabua (90%), Mandla (90%) and Ratlam (72%) had high percentages of ST respondents.

Figure 2

Districtwise proportion of SC & ST household respondents

38%

19%

1%

22%

1%

33%

18%

41%

13% 8%

21%

9%

66%

99%

58%

90%

5%

72%

9%

53% 55% 51%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Cha

ttarp

ur

Dha

r

Jhab

ua

Kha

rgon

e

Man

dla

Raj

garh

Rat

lam

Seh

ore

Seo

ni

Sid

hi

Ove

rall

Districts

Perc

enta

ge o

f SC

/ST

Res

pond

ents

SCST

Source: -Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Household Schedule)

As can been seen from Figure 3, the percentage of landless respondents varied from 11% (Sehore) to 32% (in Khargone), and marginal farmers6 constituted 7% of the respondents in Sidhi and as high as 37% in Jhabua and Rajgarh.

6 It is to be noted that some of the SC and ST households also appear in marginal farmer’s categories.

19



Figure 3

Districtwise share of Landless & Marginal Farmer respondents

14%

29%

13%

32%

23%

15% 16%

11%

22%

15%

20%

30%

23%

37%

14%10%

37%

30% 30%28%

7%

25%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Cha

ttarp

ur

Dha

r

Jhab

ua

Kha

rgon

e

Man

dla

Raj

garh

Rat

lam

Seh

ore

Seo

ni

Sid

hi

Ove

rall

Districts

Perc

enta

geLandless

Marginal Farmers

Source: -Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Household Schedule)

The economic status of respondents is shown in Figure 4. It shows that, across the 10 districts, a majority of the respondent households had an annual income of less than Rs. 50,000.

Figure 4

Districtwise share of respondents from various income groups

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Cha

ttarp

ur

Dha

r

Jhab

ua

Kha

rgon

e

Man

dla

Raj

garh

Rat

lam

Seh

ore

Seo

ni

Sid

hi

Districts

Ann

ual I

ncom

e in

'000

of R

s

Respondents (12001-25000)

Respondents (25001-50000)

Respondents (>50000)

Respondents Total

Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Household Schedule)

8.2 Short-term mitigation of drought impacts

In this section, we present the extent to which employment opportunities are created within the village itself, especially for vulnerable groups—SC/ ST, landless and small and marginal farmers, whose livelihoods are most fragile and whose dependence on wage labour is high. It covers issues of livelihood security (food and income security), migration and social inclusion.


20


LL ii vv ee ll ii hh oo oo dd && FF oo oo dd SS ee cc uu rr ii tt yy a) Extent of relief provided through various works As can be seen in Table 7, there were three distinct components of cost of works, i.e. wages in the form of cash, cost of cereals and material cost which also includes machinery cost. The average proportion of expenditure of 128 works in terms of cash, cereals and material was found to be 67%, 23% and 10% respectively. Table 7 : Workwise Percent composition of expenditure in Cash, Kind and Material

Expenditure (%age) Work Cash Cereals Material

Construction of pond 70 19 11 Construction of tank 59 34 7 Construction of well 38 29 33 Renovation of pond 69 30 1 Renovation of tank 63 37 0 Water conservation work 100 0 0 Average 67 23 10

Based on Table 7, it is found that for construction activities the cash to cereal component ratio is highest in the case of ponds, at 3.68, and lowest in the case of wells (1.31). On an average, for construction activities the cash to cereal ratio is 2.24. Similarly, in the case of renovation activities, this ratio is the highest for ponds, at 2.3, followed by tanks at 1.7. For renovation activities, the average cash to cereal ratio works out to 2, which does not vary significantly from that of construction activities (2.24). Therefore, it would be appropriate to say that, on an average, across sites that received UNICEF drought relief assistance in MP a ‘cash to cereal ratio’ of 2 existed, i.e. the cash component was approximately double the cereal component.

Further, considering that construction activities would require more ‘material’ inputs than renovation activities, the ratio of combined ‘cash and cereal’ to material components was computed for construction activities. This ratio was found to be the lowest in the case of ‘construction of wells’ (2.03) and highest in the case of ‘construction of tanks’ (13.28). This means that the expenditure towards ‘material costs’, in relation to expenditure towards cash and cereals, was the highest in the case of wells and the lowest for tanks. For the construction of ponds this ratio was 8.06. In other words, in terms of support to livelihoods, the ‘construction of tanks’ provided the maximum relief (cash and cereal), followed by the ‘construction of ponds’, and finally the ‘construction of wells’.

There were no ‘cereal’ and ‘material’ components in the case of ‘water conservation works’ and wages were paid in cash only. This activity consisted of staggered contour trenches, continuous contour trenches, field bunding, terracing, gully plugging, small percolation structures in the form of dug outs and dabries.


21


b) Work- wise employment generation Figures of expenditure on works vis-à-vis caste-wise and gender-wise wage employment benefits in person-days from sample villages were collected from project records available at village/block level. Table 8 shows that the construction of ponds and tanks, and renovation of ponds provided significant wage employment benefits especially to SC/ST and OBC communities. Table 8 : Workwise distribution of person-days in sample villages

Person days Distribution in Sample Works (person-days)

Work No of Works

Total Expenditure

Incurred SC ST OBC Others

Total Male Female

Construction of pond 38 11,987,437 24,026 98,201 26,615 3,292 152,134 75,116 77,018Construction of tank 43 3,654,053 5,156 47,577 4,658 120 57,511 31,901 25,610Construction of well 17 957,966 1,319 5,987 3,239 24 10,569 7,867 2,702 Renovation of pond 36 2,664,184 10,950 14,478 13,331 98 38,857 26,395 12,462Renovation of tank 5 672,252 5,559 2,007 7566 4,016 3,550 Water conservationwork 3 699,768 3,003 6,366 5,689 1,166 16,224 10,221 6,003 Grand Total 142 20,635,660 44454 178,168 55,539 4,700 282,861 155,516 127,345Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Village Schedule) Examining the distribution of wage employment across gender we find that overall women received 1,900 person days of wage employment more than men only in the case of ‘construction of ponds’. In the case of all the other works, men received a larger share of the total wage employment that was generated. The disparity was not so great in the cases of ‘construction of tanks’ (i.e. for every woman employed there were around 2 men employed) and in the ‘renovation of tanks’ for every woman employed there were 1.12 men who also received employment. The disparity was highest in the case the ‘construction of wells’ (67% less than men) followed by ‘renovation of ponds’ (53% less than men). c) Appropriateness of Mode of Payment

Information collected through FGDs indicates that villagers from 108 sample villages (out of 132 villages) were satisfied with the payment composition of cash and kind. Villagers from 90% of these villages were satisfied with the type of food grains, whereas in 43% of these villages the quantity and quality was reported as satisfactory. The wage rate was satisfactory for over 87 percent of the beneficiaries and payments were made in time. Equal wages were paid to both men and women. Figure 5 shows that in most of the cases the implementation and payment agency was Panchayats, and that the payment of wages on a weekly basis was the general norm.


22


Figure 5

Daily 4%

Weekly 57%

Other 5%

Duration

d) Extent of use of mac Overall it was found tha119 villages, which is wproportion of machineryuse of machines for cotechnically justified, itconstruction of smaller from distant villages. Achighest. The reason forwere involved in the cowas provided to bring th Figure 6

Pr

20.45

12.12 12.1

15.91

5.30

2.27

0

5

10

15

20

25

Construction ofpond

C

Perc

enta

ge o

f mat

eria

l cos

t

Source: Winrock-CARD Field Surve

WW ii nn rr oo cc kk II nn tt ee rr nn aa tt ii oo nn aa

Frequency & Mode of Wage Payment

Monthly10%

Fortnightly24%

of Wage

Panchayat66%

Govt. Officials

31%

Contractor 2%

Others 1%

Pani Roko Samiti

0%

Wage Payment

hinery

t only 10 percent material cost was incurred for 132 structures in ithin reasonable limits. Figure 6 provides a break up of the

used for various activities across the works undertaken. While mpaction, transport of material and dressing of bunds can be was surprising to find that machines were used even in earthen dams/ bunds and for regular commuting of laborers ross all works the use of machinery to transport labour was the

this is that generally most villages falling within a Panchayat nstruction / renovation activities and therefore transportation ese labourers, from outside the intervention village, to the site.

oportion of Machinery Used for Various Activities

6.06

1.520.76

1.520.76

4.55

0.76

2 12.12

0.76 0.76

7.58

2.271.52

onstruction oftank

Construction ofwell

Renovation ofpond

Renovation of tank Waterconservation work

Works undertaken

Compaction Work

Labour Transport

Material Transport

Digging & Construction

Other machinery used

y, 2005 (COMBINED FGD RESPONSE Schedule)

ll II nn dd ii aa ,, NN ee ww DD ee ll hh ii

23


e) Food security Technically, for attaining food security a beneficiary requires 2200 calories of food per day. This diet should moreover contain prescribed rates and ratios of various components of nutrition, viz. proteins, carbohydrates, fats, minerals and vitamins. Inabilities of a household to provide for the aforesaid balanced diet for all members on a daily basis qualifies it as a ‘food insecure’ household. However, for practical purposes in this study it was assumed that those households that did not have secured food for more than three months at a stretch and those who did not possess the wherewithal to obtain secured food supply for more a minimum period of three months were considered as Food Insecure households. The investigators from the study team requested the beneficiaries to recall this status of food insecurity in the actual drought periods, when the project was executed. The aforesaid definition was applied to the universe of respondents. Based on this it emerged that during the drought months about 83 percent of households could be identified as food insecure households. Of 1377 (83%) food insecure households, 654 or 47.5 percent households felt that the wages and food grains received from the project helped them to successfully tide over the phase of food insecurity.

MM ii gg rr aa tt ii oo nn Migration is a complex subject that requires an indepth understanding of a number of themes and issues such as livelihoods, skills and resources of the migrating communities. Moreover, this understanding becomes clearer by probing into migrating communities’ socio-economic and historical situation, socio-ethnic proclivities and preferences, and political economy. Broadly, there are two types of migration—regular migration and distress migration. The former refers to the mode through which communities meet their aspirations and needs, while the latter helps sustain their livelihoods in situations of stress. Though all the above aspects are important in order to understand the push factors leading to migration, the study was restricted to the evaluation of drought induced migration, or distress migration. More specifically, the study sought to examine what proportion of the community had been migrating - chronically and what was the incremental migration induced due to the droughts of 2001, 2002 and 2003. Chronically poorer and high migration prone (regular migration) six districts, viz. Seoni, Jhabua, Rajgarh, Ratlam, Chhatarpur and Sidhi reported between nil to under 16 percent of additional migration due to drought conditions. On the other hand, two districts, which are not considered to be migration prone, Mandla and Sehore showed an extra ordinary rise in the migration rate (distress migration). In the case of districts that are moderately prone to regular migration such as Khargone and Dhar there was a moderate increase in migration (20 % to 24 %) due to the drought. Further, it was found that the total days of drought-induced migration for districts like Jhabua, Seoni and Chhatarpur was lower than the total days of regular migration. However, in the case of less migration-prone districts like Mandla and Sehore the total days of drought-induced migration was either almost equal to or greater than the days of regular migration.


24


Table 9: Drought induced migration in various socio-physical settings Category Migration Pattern Background Group –1

Regular Migration > Drought induced Migration = Sidhi by 28 Days, in Dhar by 37 Days, in Chhatarpur by 88 Days, in Seoni by 95 Days, Rajgarh by 104 days and in Jhabua by 185 Days

Jhabua, Seoni and Sidhi – each have structural poverty, meaning poverty beyond the domain of poor people’s control. Owing to poverty, migration started in early 1980 and it has been going on incessantly since then. The social groups who are predominantly known to migrate belong to ST, SC and OBC communities from Sidhi, SCs and STs in Seoni, Basors-Ahirwars and OBCs in Chhatarpur, Bhils and Bhilalas of Jhabua. The drought affected emigrants generally come back home within 3 months.

Group-2 Drought induced Migration > Regular Migration= Sehore by 90 Days, Ratlam by 22 Days, Khargone by 8 Days

Poverty related migration is a recent phenomenon here. It started in mid 1990s, about 15 years later than those from the first group of districts. The drought related migration period is extra ordinarily high and lasts for 4 to 5 months

Group-3 Low Regular and Drought induced Migrations = In Mandla, Both below 65 Days

Mandla district is quite resource endowed and has an average rainfall of >1300 mm per annum. Mandla began experiencing drought conditions in the 1990s.. However the rate of migration was very low and people migrated traditionally for just 30-40 days in a year.

The most striking finding is that in the case of communities (in Group 1 of the Table 9) that practiced ‘regular migration’, a distinction between distress and regular migration cannot be made. If there is any distress migration due to drought conditions in these districts, it is ‘absorbed’ into the pattern of regular migration. However, in the case of communities that did not practice regular migration (i.e. Group 2 of the Table 9), distress migration emerged as an important coping strategy to the drought conditions. Therefore, based on existing migration patterns of communities, their response to drought conditions, in terms of migration, can be anticipated.

The status of the migrants among the sample households was assessed further and it was noted that in larger households (more than 8 members), on an average, the proportion of migrants (37.5%) was lower than in the case of smaller 4-member households (50%). Overall, the number of migrants in 5-6 member households was found to be the highest for all the three Groups (Error! Reference source not found.). Jhabua reported the highest number of migrants per household (3-4 per household), while Mandla and Sidhi stand at the lower end with an average of 1 migrant per household.


25


Caste wise analysis of respondents (Figure 7) shows that scheduled tribes were the predominant migrants across the three groups of districts (refer Table 9). Figure 7

0

50

100

150

200

250

SC ST OBC Others

Caste

No.

of M

igra

nts

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Castewise Migration in Sample Households


Further, Figure 8 indicates that migration is highest in the vulnerable, medium income households (Rs.12,001 – 25,000 / annum), while the very poor or ‘destitute households’ (<12,000 / annum) do not have the ability to adopt migration as a coping strategy during droughts. Therefore, drought mitigation efforts need to specifically target this group of ‘destitute’ households. Figure 8

0

50

100

150

200

250

Rs (<12000) Rs (12000 to25000)

Rs (25000 to50000)

Rs (>50000)

Income Categories

No.

of m

igra

nts

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Income Groupwise Migration in Sample Households

Figure-4.2

Source:: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Household Schedule)


26


Figure 9 shows that landed households in districts that are moderately prone to regular migration (Group 2) were forced to migrate under drought conditions along with those dependent on wage labour (agri and non-agri based). Figure 9

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Cultivator Agri. Labour Non-Agri Labour Other Occupation

Occupation

No.

of M

igra

nts

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Occupation Groupwise Migration in Sample Households


Cursory look at migration scenario across various migrant groups (Chronic, Drought based and general migrant) shows higher number of migrants per household among the chronic migrants (group 1), while households with more than 7/8 members among the drought based migrants (group 2) had higher average of migrants per households (2.3 for 7 to 8 members and 2.8 for more than 8 members households) (Figure 10). Figure 10

0

50

100

150

200

250

1-4 member 5-6 members 7-8 members > 8 members

Household Size

No.

of M

igra

nts

Group 1Group 2Group 3

Groupwise Number of Migrants across Household Sizes

Source: Winrock -CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Household Schedule)


27


SS oo cc ii aa ll II nn cc ll uu ss ii oo nn Based on the field survey it was found that many of the beneficiaries of wage employment were from the vulnerable sections of SC, ST, BPL and women. Figure 11 depicts the number of SC/ST households that benefited from wage employment out of the total number of households in each of the 10 districts. Combining the data in Figure 5 to Table 1, which shows that the degree of UNICEF assistance has been the highest in Ratlam, Khargone, Chattarpur and Seoni. It was found that 91% of the households that benefited from wage employment in Ratlam belonged to the SC/ST category, followed by Khargone (83%), Seoni (70%) and Chhatarpur (54%). A point to note here is that the number of SC/ST households benefiting from the intervention would be influenced by their populations in each of these districts. However, nonetheless, one can conclude that in terms of provision of wage employment UNICEF’s drought mitigation programme has been quite successful at targeting SC/ST households. Figure 11

Districtwise distribution of SC and ST wage beneficiaries

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Cha

ttarp

ur

Dha

r

Jhab

ua

Khar

gone

Man

dla

Raj

garh

Rat

lam

Seho

re

Seon

i

Sid

hi

District Name

No

of B

enef

icia

ries

SC BeneficiariesST BeneficiariesDirect Beneficiaries

Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Household Schedule) If one were to identify the top four districts with largest proportion of landless and marginal farmers as beneficiaries of the project, they would be Dhar, Rajgarh, Seoni and Jhabua, in descending order. On the other hand, Sidhi, Sehore, Chhatarpur and Mandla were the four districts with the lowest proportion of landless and marginal farmers, in ascending order (See Figure 12). Figure 12 indicates that across the 10 sample districts, on an average, 63% of the beneficiaries were landless and marginal farmers. This is expected, since the state is characterized by a large percentage of small and marginal farmers accounting for nearly 61 per cent of landholdings.


28


Figure 12

6142

153

195

18

151

199

76 64

224

86

126

284

24

199

5825

137

93

50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Chh

atar

pur

Dha

r

Jhab

ua

Kha

rgon

e

Man

dla

Raj

garh

Rat

lam

Seh

ore

Seo

ni

Sid

hi

No

of D

irect

Ben

efic

iarie

s

Share of Landless & Marginal Farmers Direct Beneficiaries

Districtwise distribution of wage beneficiaries of Landless and Marginal farme

Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Household Schedule) Around 80% (1340 HHs) of the beneficiaries surveyed through the household questionnaire received wage employment. This figure is expected, as in the study design for this evaluation a proportion of 1 ‘indirect beneficiary’ for every 4 ‘direct beneficiaries’ was taken for administering the questionnaire. It is interesting to note that 46.32% of women received wage employment generated. This is a high degree of women’s participation when compared to the ‘33% participation of women’ that the Government of India stipulates in its programmes. Further, while 46.32% of the women beneficiaries received 41.17% of the person days of work generated, 53.68% of the men received 58.83%. Effectively this means that, on an average, while one man received 69 person days of wage employment, one woman beneficiary received 56 person days of employment. This difference is not so great when compared to the inequalities that usually exist in the benefit distribution between men and women folk. Figure 13

Castwise Percent Share of Women Beneficiaries in Wage Employment

0102030405060708090

100

Perc

enta

ge

SC STOBC Others

Source: CARD-Winrock Field Survey, 2005 (Household Schedule)


29


Interestingly, as can be noted from Figure 13, women from SC, ST and OBC castes received greater and significant share of wage employment as compared to other castes in all the districts. However, there were many beneficiaries who belonged to APL households. Ratlam, Khargone, Chhatarpur and Seoni stand out as the districts with high APL beneficiaries. These four districts had 367 or 32.11 percent of APL beneficiaries of their total beneficiaries. Of these 77 beneficiaries were from households that had annual incomes above Rs. 50,000 per annum each (see Table 10). There could be different views for the higher participation of APL families. One is that even the economically better-off were reduced to wage earnings as a result of recurrent droughts. The higher proportion of APL families among the migrants in these districts proves the point. In case of tribal districts it is obvious as the proportion of APL households among the population is very low. Table 10 : Incomewise distribution of beneficiaries

Income Range of Beneficiary Households (Rs.) District

Number of Respondents (District wise Sample-size)

Up to 12.000 12001- 25000 25001- 50000 >50000

Chattarpur 260 22 105 99 34 Dhar 86 13 46 19 8 Jhabua 70 12 33 22 3 Khargone 285 25 132 86 42 Mandla 109 85 24 0 0 Rajgarh 147 56 54 26 11 Ratlam 352 40 148 112 52 Sehore 44 11 11 15 7 Seoni 246 26 129 85 6 Sidhi 60 16 32 11 1 Total 1659 306 =18.44 % 714=43.04 % 475 = 28.63 % 164 = 9.89 % BPL Medium Income APL=38.52%

A significant proportion (43%) of the beneficiaries fall within the ‘medium income’ bracket, which according to the government classification falls within the APL category. Of the total beneficiaries only 18.44% belong to the BPL category. This is well below the percentage of beneficiaries belonging to Rs. 25,001-50,000 per annum income bracket (around 29%). This is a point of concern, especially since a significant proportion of the MP’s rural population falls in the BPL category, and considering that the intervention was targeted at the vulnerable sections of affected communities. Therefore, there is much scope for improving the strategies for targeting the most vulnerable sections of drought-affected communities. Based on FGDs, it was found that villagers from outside the intervention village benefited more from wage employment in 10% of villages, whereas in 21% villages, outside and local villagers benefited equally (see Table 11). It is striking to note that in 33% of villages in Jhabua, villagers from outside benefited more from wage employment.


30


Table 11: Percentage of villages where outside villagers benefited District Outside

villagers benefited more

Outside villagers benefited equally

Outside villagers benefited less than local villagers

Outside villagers benefited marginally

Outside villagers not at all benefited

Chhatarpur 0 15 20 65 0 Dhar 14 0 57 29 14 Jhabua 33 17 33 17 33 Khargone 0 32 37 32 0 Mandla 0 30 10 60 0 Rajgarh 0 15 54 31 0 Ratlam 30 14 38 14 34 Sehore 50 25 0 0 75 Seoni 5 42 5 47 5 Sidhi 0 0 0 100 0 Overall for 10 districts 10 21 28 38 13

Source:: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (COMBINED FGD RESPONSE Sheet)

8.3 Long-term Drought Proofing

In this section, we look at extent to which the objective of long-term drought proofing was achieved. Drought proofing is dependent on two interdependent parameters-- status of the bio-physical and the institutional environments, from the village to the State level. While the institutional environment at the State, district and block levels is governed by policies and procedures of the project, the institutional environment at the village level is shaped by the extent of community participation and ownership, especially of vulnerable populations to which the assistance is targeted

BB ii oo -- PP hh yy ss ii cc aa ll EE nn vv ii rr oo nn mm ee nn tt :: PP hh yy ss ii cc aa ll aa nn dd NN aa tt uu rr aa ll aa ss ss ee tt ss a) Cost of Works Three types of structures (ponds, tanks and wells) were either constructed or renovated. It was found that all the structures were constructed within the estimated /sanction cost—there was no cost overrun. The average overall sanctioned cost per (new) structure worked out to Rs.1,85,873 against an average expenditure of Rs.1,51,138. The difference in sanctioned amount and actual expenditure is partly due to non-availability of expenditure related information for all the structures (see Table 12). In addition, it could be attributed to design and estimates of structures being prepared on the higher side.


31


Table 12 : Actual Average Cost of Sample Water Harvesting Structures Sanction Cost Details Expenditure Details Work No of

sample Works

No of works where

Sanction cost was available

Total Sanction Cost of sample

structures (Rs)

Average Sanction Cost per Structure

(Rs)

No of works where

expenditure

details were

available

Total Expenditure incurred in sample structures

(Rs)

Average Expenditure incurred

per Structure

Construction of pond 38 35 13,813,382 394,668 33 11,229,271 340,281

Construction of tank 43 39 4,520,520 115,911 39 3,739,416 95,882Construction of well 17 15 1,114,400 74,293 16 958,381 59,899Renovation of pond 36 34 3,329,594 97,929 34 2,434,511 71,603Renovation of tank 5 5 771,500 154,300 3 334,252 111,417Water conservation work 3 3 800,000 266,667 3 649,791 216,597

Grand Total 142 131 24,349,396 185,873 128 19,345,623 151,138 Table 13 provides number and percentage of works falling in various cost categories. Of 128 works studied, 80 (62%) were in the lowest cost range of below one lakh, 19 (15%) were in more than 1 lakh but less than Rs. 2 lakhs, 20 (15%) were in the cost bracket between Rs. 2 lakhs and Rs. 5 lakhs, while 9 works (7 %) were in the uppermost cost bracket of above Rs. 5 lakhs. Table 13 : Works by Cost and Type categories

Work & District Name <1.00 Lakh 1.00 to 2.00 Lakh

2.00 to 5.00 Lakh >5.00 Lakh Total

Work Type Wise Construction of tank 4 5 16 8 33 Construction of pond 28 8 2 1 39 Construction of well 16 16 Renovation of tank 30 3 1 34 Renovation of pond 2 1 3 Water conservationwork 2 1 3

Total 80 19 20 9 128 District Wise

Chattarpur 18 1 3 22 Dhar 2 5 7 Jhabua 3 1 4 Khargone 12 6 4 22 Mandla 6 3 1 10 Rajgarh 3 2 1 6 Ratlam 24 1 1 3 29 Sehore 1 1 2 Seoni 16 4 1 21 Sidhi 1 4 5

Total 80 19 20 9 128


32Source: CARD-Winrock Field Survey, 2005 (Village Schedule)


A closer look at the number of works falling below the 1 Lakh cost bracket shows that the majority of works fall in the Rs. 10,001 to Rs. 50,000 and Rs. 50,001 to Rs. 1,00,000 categories. These two categories alone contain 73 structures out of the total of 80 structures within the 1 lakh cost bracket. There is only one structure costing less than Rs. 10,000. 62 percent of all the structures surveyed falling below the Rs. 1 lakh cost bracket, indicates that almost two-thirds of UNICEF assistance either went towards the renovation of existing structures or for the construction of rather small water harvesting structures. Evaluating renovation activities is not easy as there is little or no information regarding the status of the structure prior to UNICEF assistance. Further, though the construction of small water harvesting structures does help in water harvesting to a certain degree, however, their impacts, in terms of drought proofing, are limited by their small capacities. Therefore, in similar interventions in the future, the kind of structures (in terms of capacity) to be promoted will need to be reassessed and monitored, so as to maximise long-term drought-proofing benefits. b) Quality of Works: Participatory Assessment Evaluating the quality of works implemented under this project was a complex exercise that included the opinions and judgments from four groups of people, viz. the respondent beneficiaries, the PRI leaders, water resources engineers and the field investigators of this study. Based on total scores with equal weightages given to ratings of all the four groups, it was found that in 50 percent of the works the quality reported was ‘fair’ or merely satisfactory. Only 5 percent works were rated as ‘very good’, 17 percent of the works were given a ‘good’ rating and 20 percent works were considered to be of poor quality. On exploring further, the key reasons for overall ‘not-so-good-quality-rating’ of works was attributed to two main reasons: a very fast rate of implementation of works; and, lack of any authority given to the local communities. These two reasons point towards two key weaknesses in similar developmental projects, which have been identified but not remedied suitably, namely, following a target-driven approach and poor community participation. With the above assessment on quality of works for the studied sample, further analysis was carried out to see if there is any correlation between quality of works and the implementing agency (See Figure 14 and Table 14). This analysis does not decisively give any indication as to which implementing agency was the best and which ranked next. It however shows that some works of Janpad Panchayats were never completed and if completed its records were not available. Similarly, in some districts the Panchayats failed to come up with high quality rated works and in some others it was the Water Resources Department. Finally, by comparative analysis we can say that the works of Rajgarh, Ratlam and Mandla were not very laudable.


33


Figure 14 Implementing Agencywise Quality of Works in Sample Villages

2 31

16

8

1 14

47

21

7

1

15

8 7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Rural EngineeringServices

Panchayat Water ResourcesDepartment

Non-GovernmentOrganizat ion

Others (JanpadPanchayats and Forest

Department)

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

Source: -Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Village Schedule)

Table 14 : Implementing Agencywise and Districtwise Quality of Works Implementing

Agency District Name Very Good Good Fair Poor Grand Total

Dhar 1 2 3 Rajgarh 2 2

Rural Engineering Services Ratlam 1 1 2 Sub-Total 2 4 1 7

Chattarpur 1 9 2 12 Khargone 1 4 12 3 20 Mandla 2 2 6 10 Rajgarh 1 1 Ratlam 4 4 8 Sehore 1 3 4 Seoni 2 2 15 2 21

Panchayat

Sidhi 2 2 1 5 Sub-Total 3 16 47 15 81

Chattarpur 1 7 2 10 Dhar 2 2 4 Jhabua 4 2 6 Rajgarh 1 1

Water ResourcesDepartment

Ratlam 2 9 6 17 Sub-Total 1 8 21 8 38

Non-Government Organization

Ratlam 1 1

Sub-Total 1 1 Khargone 2 2 Rajgarh 4 5 9

Others (JanpadPanchayats andForest Department Ratlam 1 1 2 4

Sub-Total 1 7 7 15 Grand Total 6 26 79 31 142

Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Village Schedule)


34


c) Quality of Works: Technical Assessment The field team leaders along with Village Jankars, women members and, those involved in key aspects of implementation/ operation/ management of the UNICEF structure were trained to assess quality of works from the technical perspective. Based on actual observations of works on pre-determined indicators (as described in Annexure- Study Design and Survey Tools report), assessment of 60 out of 132 works was carried out. The key finding from this assessment is presented below:

• There were only 34 structures that did not report any significant seepage loss of water. Most of these were the renovated structures. Twelve new water harvesting structures made in Ratlam, Seoni, Sehore and Sidhi districts also showed no seepage.

• It was reported that some water harvesting structures lost their stored water due

to seepage. Eleven of these water harvesting structures were virtually water gushing sieves. Such loss of impounded water due to seepage was because of inadequate depth and width of puddle, inadequate or no use of clayey impervious soil in puddle, and poor compaction of bunds.

• Few works were over-designed, while some were under-designed. Under-

designing was majorly related to keeping more than the required free board as per technical considerations. It was found that more than two meters of free board was maintained in some works against the established norm of 1.25 meters for small water harvesting structures. On the other hand, works were over-designed by keeping greater height of embankment than desired. As a thumb rule, the height of embankment for small water harvesting structures is kept less than six meters, and where height greater than 6 metres is required, a rock toe is provided to take care of seepage. On the contrary, it was observed that height of embankments in 10 works was greater than 6 metres. Perhaps this was done for providing adequate wage employment.

• In areas where groundwater development is not significant due to quality

problems or lack of capacity of communities to dig wells, a pond or a tank, which has good impounding capacity, is more effective as compared to a recharge structure. It was noted that in some works the impervious tank bed-strata was removed as part of renovation/deepening activity, which led to drastic reduction of the structures impounding capacity.

• Deepening of existing tanks tanks/ponds was noted to have been carried out in

areas above the FTL (full tank level), which does not help increase the storage capacity of the structure. This was found in few cases.

For details of technical remarks on each structure please refer Annexure-Technical Remarks on the Works. d) Appropriateness of site Appropriateness of a site for constructing a well, a tank or a pond is very crucial, as it determines the extent of benefits and the beneficiaries. An indirect indicator used for


35


assessing the appropriateness of site selection is the satisfaction of villagers about the usefulness of the structure. Using this indicator, it was found that in 80 percent of cases the villagers were satisfied with the selection of the site. The Combined FGD scoring data sheets substantiates the above finding, which indicate that in 83 percent of works the site selection was appropriate, and 73 percent of works had satisfactory command and coverage (see Table 15).

Box: Poor Site Selection A new well was constructed by the panchayat in Village-Surai, Panchayat- Bharga, block-Lakhnadon of Seoni district. About Rs 92,000 was spent for construction of this well. Whenthe field team inspected it in December 2004, there was no water in the well. The mainreason for this was ‘improper site selection’, a fact pointed out by the villagers. On furtherenquiry the team confirmed that the well was built on a rocky surface. The villagers alsomentioned that originally they had demanded a construction of a pond, but the sarparch ofthe village actually sanctioned a pond. The dry well had diameter of 24 feet and it wastwenty feet deep. About 50 unskilled people got employment for a fortnight. The materialcomponent and wages of skilled laborers together came to above 50 % of the total cost. Thevillagers were not involved in the implementation of the work.

Table 15 : Community’s perceptions about appropriateness and quality of works

Villagers Participation in Design & Physical Aspect of Structure (%) Work Location &

site was appropriate

Command & coverage of Structure

was Satisfactory

Type of structure

Satisfactory

Design of structure

was appropriate

Construction Quality

was satisfactor

y Structure Wise Construction of pond 84 62 41 32 51 Construction of tank 79 69 44 44 31 Construction of well 94 75 75 69 75 Renovation of pond 88 84 38 25 59 Renovation of tank 40 80 60 60 80 Water conservation work 100 100 100 100 100

Total 83 73 47 41 52 District Wise

Chattarpur 100 95 40 15 50 Dhar 86 43 29 14 57 Jhabua 100 50 50 50 50 Khargone 84 89 89 89 89 Mandla 80 60 40 20 20 Rajgarh 62 54 8 8 38 Ratlam 76 66 38 34 28 Sehore 100 50 50 75 25 Seoni 84 84 74 74 74 Sidhi 80 80 0 0 100 Total 83 73 47 41 52 Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (COMBINED FGD RESPONSE Sheet)


36


e) Improvement in Water Security The findings of Combined FGD response sheet indicate that water security improved during the lean season in 45% villages, which resulted in the construction of new sources of water in 8 villages and improvement in yield of handpumps/wells (existing) in 31 villages. Water for livestock and domestic needs were met in 52 and 21 villages, respectively (See Table 16). Table 16 : Status of Water Security During Lean Season in Sample Villages

If Increase Water Securities (no of villages) Have increased water security during lean season

District

No of Village

%

New source of water

constructed

Distance to source of water reduce

Yield of HP/ well increased

Water availability

for cattle improved

Water to meet the domestic

needs

No change in time spent in

collecting water

Chattarpur 8 40% 1 2 1 8 Dhar 4 57% 2 4 3 4 2 Jhabua 5 83% 3 3 1 1 Khargone 7 37% 3 4 5 5 4 4 Mandla 5 50% 4 4 4 4 3 Rajgarh 5 38% 1 1 4 5 1 Ratlam 9 31% 3 3 9 1 2 Sehore 2 50% 1 1 2 1 1 Seoni 11 58% 3 4 3 10 4 2 Sidhi 4 80% 2 3 3 2 3

Overall 60 45% 8 23 31 52 21 19 Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (COMBINED FGD RESPONSE Sheet) The above findings get reinforced through the household interviews, wherein atleast 50% of respondents from each district reported an increase in groundwater recharge and water availability for livestock. Increase in irrigation was reported in 23 percent of villages, which enhanced the yield of the Rabi (winter) crop in half of these villages. Shift in cropping pattern was reported only in one village in Dhar, but new crops were introduced in some cases.

• About 30 percent of margina

seeds that led to improved agr• About 13 percent of small and

about 188 acres of land with th• A rise in 12 percent in wage ea• About 10 percent of marginal

land on lease or as share cropp

WW ii nn rr oo cc kk II nn tt ee rr nn aa tt ii oo nn aa ll II nn dd ii aa ,, NN

Additional benefits

l farmers were able to buy water and use better certifiedicultural production marginal farmers reported that they were able to irrigatee impounded water in the tanks and ponds. rnings during the project implementation phase. and small farmers were able to either get some additionalers leases.

ee ww DD ee ll hh ii

37


II nn ss tt ii tt uu tt ii oo nn aa ll EE nn vv ii rr oo nn mm ee nn tt a) Role of Pani Roko Samitees and Gram Sabhas In contrast to popular belief, it was found that Pani Roko Samitees were either not constituted (in 39% of cases) or had no role in the decision-making (noted in 73 % of the constituted Samitees) at any stage of the construction process. The Samitees in Sehore district were very active in two of the four sample villages where the Pani Roko Samitees discussed the matter and approved the proposals. The Gram Sabhas played a better role as they were the approving authorities in case of 31 percent of the sample villages. In Mandla district the Gram Sabha was the sole decision maker in all the sample villages (Table 17). Table 17 : Role of PRIs in Decision Making in Sample Villages

Pani Roko Samiti (% village) Gram Sabha (% villages)

District Not constituted

No role played

Approved by samitti

Contribution received by samiti

No role played

Approval by Gram Sabha

Chattarpur 25 80 5 0 80 5 Dhar 57 57 0 0 86 0 Jhabua 100 0 0 0 100 0 Khargone 21 95 5 0 47 47 Mandla 0 100 0 0 10 100 Rajgarh 62 69 0 0 77 15 Ratlam 31 76 3 0 62 34 Sehore 50 50 25 0 75 50 Seoni 47 63 0 11 53 37 Sidhi 100 60 0 0 100 0 Overall 39 73 3 2 64 31

Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (COMBINED FGD RESPONSE Sheet) b) Proponents of the project idea in the villages As given in figure 9, when the question regarding who the prime movers of the drought mitigation programme were was discussed in FGDs it emerged that, overall, it was the villagers, themselves and through their respective Pani Roko Samitees. In about 32 percent of the cases, the idea originated directly from the villagers themselves, and in about 55 percent it originated from the Pani Roko Samitees. In other words, in 87 percent cases the villagers proposed the idea for a drought mitigation programme. In only 7 percent of the cases, the proposal came from the Panchayats, through their Sarpanches. This shows that there clearly was a demand for drought mitigation work from the general populations rather than from a few influential people at the village level or from external agencies.


38


Figure 15

6.82%3.04%

55.30%

34.85%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

Villagers Pani Roko Samiti Panchayats Sarpanch

Prime Movers

% o

f sam

ple

villa

ges

Proponents of Project Idea in the Villages

Source: -Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Village Schedule) c) Community Participation in Activity Selection and Implementation In 23 percent of the cases, for pond and tank construction works, the communities participated in the selection of works. However, the level of community participation and the ownership building process got further diluted during the implementation phase. It came down to 18 percent in the case of tank construction works and to 11 percent in the case of pond construction works. These figures show that community participation in the planning phase (excluding activity selection) of this programme has been rather low. The level of community participation should have been significantly higher in the activity selection and execution phases.

Box: Poor Community Participation In village Satmata in Petlawad panchayat of Manavar block, a new pond worth about Rs. 6. 38lakhs was constructed under the programme. The RES was the main implementing agency.This village already had one large pond of about two hectares. The villagers were notinvolved in any stage of implementation. One important benefit that the villagers got was thata large number of them were able to get wages. It was because of the timing for starting theconstruction work was right. It was when the villagers were ready to migrate in the year 2001that the work started. e. The villagers told the field team members that 350 villagers wereengaged for in the construction of the pond and they got work for about 25 days. In all, 9744person days of labor were generated. Villagers also said that if tractors had not been used,they could have got wages for at least 20 more days . As far as any benefits to agriculture isconcerned this structure failed to provide any direct or indirect benefit. It stored water only tillthe month of November every year. The pond was useful for providing water to cattle forabout four months and people used it for washing and cleaning purposes.


39


d) Community Participation in Site selection It is very critical to ensure participation in site selection. Encouragingly, in 41 percent of the cases villagers played a key role in site selection. Next were Panchayats and Line Department officials, who were involved in site selection in 30 percent and 12 percent of the cases, respectively. In some villages Sarpanches took up the sole leadership and did not share the implementation related responsibilities even with up-panches and panches. In most cases, where Sarpanches were the sole leaders, secretaries of Panchayats acted as their scribes and assistants. Whereas, in villages where Panchayats collectively selected the site, various sites were discussed and the final site selected in the Panchayat meeting through a majority vote. e) Participation of Vulnerable Groups (SC/ST and Women) At the village level there was no formalized system of community participation for the processes of planning, implementation and monitoring. This was done in an informal manner with small groups of influential villagers getting together and discussing these aspects of the intervention. It was found that in some cases women and SC/ST communities were part of these groups. In this context, the participation and influence in decision-making and women and SC/ST communities is discussed below. Women Participation Women participated in the informal planning groups in 41 out of 132 villages (31%). But their influence in the planning related decision-making was insignificant, reflected by the fact that they influenced planning related decisions only in 19 out of 132 villages. Women participation in maintenance groups was noted only in 3 villages. However, as per the Combined FGD Response schedule it was found that though they were not members of maintenance groups in most of the villages, they influenced maintenance related decision-making in 42% of villages.

SC/ST Participation SC/STs communities were part of the informal planning groups in 34 villages. Given that the majority of the respondents belonged to these two categories, this figure also indicates that they did not play a significant role in the planning process. For example, it was found that SC/ST communities influenced planning related decisions significantly in only 14 of the 132 villages. Similarly, SC/ST communities participated in maintenance groups only in 3 villages (out of 132 villages studied). However, as per the Combined FGD Response Sheets it was found that overall they influenced maintenance related decisions in a total of 10 villages. People’s Participation in Village Meetings on planning, implementation and monitoring stages Information on people’s participation in planning, implementation and monitoring, collected through FGDs with different groups, was compiled and recorded in the


40


Combined FGD response sheet for each village for quantitative analysis. Of the 132 villages, no participation was recorded in 102 cases in planning, 94 cases in implementation and 103 in the monitoring stage. At the planning level only in one work of pond construction all households were reported to have participated, and over 50 percent participation was reported again in another work of tank construction. Further the participation was limited to men folk and that too at the group level. BPL and SC/ST communities had a minor role in the planning process. The participation levels declined further in the implementation and monitoring phases. In these phases, only men folk and group members participated. f) Community Contribution Table 18 shows the percentage contribution by communities for various types of works undertaken in the project. Shramdaan and cash contribution were the two major modes of contributions. Cash contribution was not an up-front payment, but rather a pre-determined portion of the wages were deducted from the wage bill of the beneficiaries.

Table 18 : Break up of Community Contribution

Community Contribution (in %) Work Cash Labour Kind

Construction of pond 2.27 11.73 2.27 Construction of tank 0 16.24 0 Construction of well 0 2.48 0 Renovation of pond 0 4.24 0 Renovation of tank 0 2.00 0 Water conservation work 0.76 0.24 0 Total 3.03 36.93 2.27 Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (COMBINED FGD RESPONSE Schedule) At the aggregate project level, the total community contribution amounted to Rs.10.46 lakhs and constituted 5 percent of the total cost of the completed 128 structures. Of this contribution, ‘voluntary labour’ formed a significant proportion (36.93%). However, it must be noted that this contribution was not made on a voluntary basis but was rather a part of the project design and often the communities were not aware of this contribution that they were making towards the project. For details of contribution across works, please see Annexure- Details of 142 works studied. Community contribution, which was majorly in two forms– Shramdaan and cash contribution, was noted in only one-third (42) of the total 128 works studied. The contribution, as a percentage of the total cost of works, was high in the case of construction of ponds and wells. In Jhabua and Ratlam the contribution was found to be the highest (see Table 19).


41


Table 19 : Extent of Community Contribution in various works Construction of

tank Construction

of pond Construction

of well Renovation of

tank Renovation

of pond Water

conservation work

Total District

Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Chattarpur 4905

(1.7%) 4905

(1.7 %) 18755

(23%)1502

(23 %) 18755

(23 %) 1502

(23 %)Dhar 88062

(12.7%) 42900 (15%)

88062 (12.7%)

42900 (15%)

Jhabua 144000 (32%)

28000 (5.3%)

144000 (32%)

28000 (5.3%)

Khargone 30000 (11%)

19974 (10.4%)

8873 (10%)

2757 (10%)

9000 (11%)

3527 (4.5%)

5096 (10%)

5000 (11.4%)

29977 (11%)

20000 (10%)

30000 (11%)

2757 (10%)

Mandla Rajgarh Ratlam 9318

(33%) 9318 (33%)

16000 (22%)

8463 (44%)

20952 (34%)

20952 (34%)

20952 (34%)

8463 (44%)

Sehore Seoni 10660

(4.8%) 10660 (4.8%)

5500 (5.8%)

5500 (5.8%)

10660 (4.8%)

5500 (5.8%)

Sidhi Grand Total 144000

(32%) 4905

(1.7 %) 16000 (22%)

2757 (10%)

20952 (34%)

3527 (4.5%)

18755(23%)

1502 (23 %)

29977 (11%)

20000 (10%)

144000 (32%)

1502 (23 %)

Source: Winrock-CARD Field Survey, 2005 (Village Schedule)

Box: Examples of Some Successful cases Water conservation works were taken up in Panchayat & Village Chhapra, Block- Badwah indistrict Khargone. As part of the second phase of the UNICEF drought assistance programme,3 Gully Plugs, 2644 Trenches and 1000 Dug Outs were constructed amounting to Rs. TwoLakhs. Though Panchayat was the main implementing agency, it received technical supportfrom the executive engineer. The entire work was assigned by the Panchayat to the women ofthe village, who put in 3500 person days worth work into it. The Pani Roko Samiti of thevillage was also very active. In Chitrangi block of Sidhi district and in village Berdha a new pond was constructed underthe UNICEF programme. The cost of pond was approximately Rs. 2.44 lakh. The localpanchayat was the implementing agency. This village was badly affected due to the failure ofmonsoon. By the month of January 2001 most of the villagers had exhausted their food orcereals stocks. Almost all the villagers deserted their domesticated animals, which roamedaround in the nearby jungle. UNICEF assistance provided major relief to these villagers. Thevillagers felt that the construction of the pond has not only provided wages to the farmers, buthas also helped in augment the water availability for cattle and irrigation. For building thepond 65 laborers worked for about 40 days and 2586 person days of labor were generated. Atractor was used for only three days for transporting tank soil and stones for pitching. Wagerate received was Rs. 30 plus four kgs of rice per day per person. The field team found that thepond had full water even in December 2004. Although the pond has been built on the privateland of Bundu Singh, as no common land was available in the village, it has helped raise thewater level of three down stream wells

42

f) Community initiatives triggered by the project The extent to which the project triggered the adoption of similar water conservation techniques by village communities, even if observed in the field, cannot be solely



attributed to the project. There would be other exposures and experiences of beneficiaries that would have also helped them to initiate a thinking process, and the project could have helped precipitate such innovations. Community members were specifically asked multiple-choice questions in this regard. Extra care was taken by the field team to probe the answers further and have a brief one-to-one session with the beneficiaries. Notwithstanding other influences it could be safely said that the project was one of the programs that triggered the adoption of community initiatives like: field bunding, vegetable cultivation, and fisheries. The proportion of respondents who adopted these initiatives is as shown in Figure 16. Figure 16

Proportion of Innovative and Inspired Action Reported by Beneficiaries

8 8

5

11

2

17

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Field Bunding Deepening ofwells/ kundis

Others smallwater

harvestingstructures

Fishery inWater Pond

and Tank

VegetableProduction

Reduced inDistress saleof Livestock

Perc

ent o

f Vill

ages

Source: CARD-Winrock Field Survey, 2005 (COMBINED FGD RESPONSE Schedule)

8.4 Key Findings

Based on the analysis provided above, this section summarises the key findings of this evaluation. Overall, it was found that UNICEF’s Drought Mitigation Program had a beneficial impact both on short-term drought mitigation as well as long-term drought proofing. The key findings are listed below.

ii )) SS hh oo rr tt -- tt ee rr mm mm ii tt ii gg aa tt ii oo nn oo ff dd rr oo uu gg hh tt ii mm pp aa cc tt ss Livelihood & Food Security • Across 142 structures that were constructed under the UNICEF Drought Mitigation

Program a total of 282,861 person days of wage employment was generated. • The construction of ponds and tanks, and renovation of ponds provided significant

wage employment benefits especially to SC/ST and OBC communities. • Women received 1,900 person days of wage employment more than men only in the

case of ‘construction of ponds’. In the case of all the other works, men received a larger share of the total wage employment that was generated. Highest disparity was


43


noted in the case of ‘construction of wells’ (67% less than men) followed by ‘renovation of ponds’ (53% less than men).

• In terms of support to livelihoods, the ‘construction of tanks’ provided the maximum relief (cash and cereal), followed by the ‘construction of ponds’, and finally the ‘construction of wells’.

• UNICEF assistance was effective in targeting SC and ST communities. The district-wise proportion of SC beneficiaries was higher in Chattarpur (38%) and Sehore (41%), while Jhabua (90%), Mandla (90%) and Ratlam (72%) had high percentages of ST respondents.

• In UNICEF drought relief assistance a ‘cash to cereal ratio’ of ~ 2 was found.

• Over 90 percent of the beneficiaries were satisfied with the type of food grains provided, whereas with regards to quantity and quality 43 percent found them to be satisfactory. Similarly, the wage rate was satisfactory for over 87 percent of the beneficiaries and payments were made in time. Equal wages were paid to both men and women. The payment in 57 percent of cases was made on a weekly basis and in 66 percent cases made by Panchayats.

• Average of 10 percent of cost was incurred on machinery/material with highest being for well construction (33%) and practically no cost incurred on machinery/material in renovation activities (ponds and tanks).

• Of 1377 food insecure households 47.5 percent households reported that the wages and food grains received from project helped them to successfully tide over the phase of food insecurity.

Migration • In larger households (more than 8 members), on an average, the proportion of

migrants (37.5%) was lower than in the case of smaller four-member households (50%)

• Overall, the number of migrants in 5-6 member households was found to be the highest. Jhabua reported the highest number of migrants per household (3-4 per household), while Mandla and Sidhi stand at the lower end with an average of 1 migrant per household.

• Migration was observed to be the highest in the vulnerable, medium income households (Rs.12,001 – 25,000 / annum), while the very poor or ‘destitute households’ (<12,000 / annum) did not have the ability to adopt migration as a coping strategy during droughts. Therefore, drought mitigation efforts need to specifically target this group of ‘destitute’ households.

• Landed households in districts that are moderately prone to regular migration were forced to migrate under drought conditions along with those dependent on wage labour (agri and non-agri based).

• Highest migration was seen among Schedule Tribes. • Chronically poorer and high migration prone six districts, (Seoni, Jhabua, Rajgarh,

Ratlam, Chhatarpur and Sidhi) reported upto 16 percent of additional migration • Districts moderately prone to migration (Khargone and Dhar) had a moderate

increase in migration (20 % to 24 %). Two districts, (Mandla & Sehore) not considered as migration prone, showed an extra ordinary rise in the migration rate.

• For communities that practiced ‘regular or traditional migration’, a distinction


44


between distress and regular migration cannot be made as the former tends to get absorbed in the latter. However, in the case of communities that did not practice regular migration distress migration emerged as an important coping strategy

Social inclusion • The degree of UNICEF assistance was the highest in Ratlam, Khargone, Chattarpur

and Seoni. It was found that 91% of the households that benefited from wage employment in Ratlam belonged to the SC/ST category, followed by Khargone (83%), Seoni (70%) and Chhatarpur (54%).

• Across the 10 sample districts, on an average, 63% of the beneficiaries were landless and marginal farmers.

• A high degree of women’s participation was found (46.32%), in terms of receiving wage employment, under the UNICEF program.

• Effectively, on an average, while one man received 69 person days of wage employment, one woman beneficiary received 56 person days of employment

• 43 percent of the beneficiaries were from the ‘medium income’ bracket (Rs. 12001 – 25,000/ annum) while 18.44 percent belonged to the BPL category (below Rs 12,000/annum). The percentage of BPL households was found to well below the percentage of beneficiaries belonging to the APL category (around 29%) - Rs. 25,001-50,000/ annum income bracket.

• The program coverage, as a percentage of the population covered to the total population of the project village, ranged from 10 percent in Chattarpur to 100 percent in Jhabua with overall program average of 31 percent. Further, a minimum of 33 percent of total labourers were sourced from outside the project villages. These ‘outside’ labourers were mainly from the same Panchayat as that of the project village.

• UNICEF’s drought mitigation program has been quite successful at targeting SC/ST and BPL households. More than 80 percent of SC/ST and BPL populations of project villages were covered by program in Chhatarpur, Khargone, Mandla, Ratlam and Seoni. The average coverage of SC/ST and BPL households at the program level was 73 percent.

ii ii )) LL oo nn gg -- tt ee rr mm dd rr oo uu gg hh tt pp rr oo oo ff ii nn gg Bio-physical environment • Three types of structures (ponds, tanks and wells) were either constructed or

renovated. It was found that all the structures were constructed within the estimated /sanction cost—there was no cost overrun. The average overall sanctioned cost per (new) structure worked out to Rs.1,85,873 against an average expenditure of Rs.1,51,138.

• Of 128 works studied, 80 (62%) were in the lowest cost range of below one lakh, 19 (15%) were in the 1 - 2 lakhs bracket, 20 (15%) were in the cost bracket between Rs. 2 lakhs and Rs. 5 lakhs, while 9 works (7 %) were in the uppermost cost bracket of above Rs. 5 lakhs.

• Almost two-thirds of UNICEF assistance either went towards the renovation of existing structures or for the construction of small water harvesting structures, costing less than Rs. 1 Lakh.


45


• It was found that in 50 percent of cases the quality of work was reported as ‘fair’ or merely satisfactory. Only 5 percent of the works were rated as ‘very good’, 17 percent were given a ‘good’ rating and 20 percent were considered to be of poor quality.

• In the case of 60 structures for which an indepth technical assessment was carried out: It was found that 43% reported a loss of the impounded water through seepage. In 18% of the cases water loss due to seepage was a result of poor

implementation (inadequate depth and width of puddle, inadequate or no use of clayey impervious soil in puddle, and poor compaction of bunds)

Technical specifications were not always adhered to. Some structures were under-designed and more than the required free board was kept. Others were over-designed and a greater height of embankment, than desired, was observed (in 17% of the cases the height of the embankment was greater than the stipulated 6 m)

• 80 percent of the respondents were satisfied with appropriateness of sites of structures, 73 percent were satisfied with command and coverage of structures.

• Water security improved during the lean season in 45% of the villages, which resulted in the construction of new sources of water in 13% of the villages and improvement in yield of handpumps/Wells (existing) in 52% villages. Water for livestock and domestic needs were met in 87% and 35% of the villages, respectively.

• Increase in irrigation was reported in 23 percent of villages, which enhanced the yield of the Rabi (winter) crop in half of these villages. In three-fourth of these villages the increase was upto 10 percent while in the rest the increase was upto 30 percent.

Institutional environment • Pani Roko Samitis were not constituted in 39 percent of villages and in 73 percent of

cases where they were constituted they did not play any role in program implementation. Strikingly, Pani Roko Samitis were constituted in 100 percent of villages in Mandla, while in Jhabua and Sidhi they were not constituted in any village.

• In 32 percent of villages Gram Sabhas were approving authorities. In Mandla, the Gram Sabha was the sole decision maker in all the villages.

• In 41 percent of cases villagers played key role in site selection while Panchayats and line department officials were involved in site selection in 30 percent and 12 percent cases, respectively.

• Villagers’ influence in the decision making process in construction of structures was limited only to the initial planning stage - in deciding on the location of the site, where 50 percent of respondents participated. The level of participation in next stages of planning was low, viz. command and coverage (16%), type of structure (3%), cost estimates (5%) and design (0.7%). This can perhaps be attributed to the fact that these stages were considered too technical for villagers to participate. Strikingly, participation of villagers in site selection for well construction was high (68%).

• Total community contribution amounted to Rs.10.46 lakhs - 5 percent of the total cost of 128 structures. Shramdaan (36.93%) and cash (3.03%) contribution were the two major modes of contributions. Cash contribution was not an up-front payment, but rather a pre-determined portion of the wages was deducted from the wage bill of the beneficiaries. Deductions at source (wages) varied from Rs. 5 per day to Rs. 10 per day. In effect, those not involved in wage labour did not contribute at all.


46


• Community contribution was noted in only one-third (42) of the total 128 works studied. The contribution, as a percentage of the total cost of works, was high in the case of construction of ponds and wells

• At the village level there was no formalized system of community participation for the processes of planning, implementation and monitoring. This was done in an informal manner with small groups of influential villagers getting together and discussing these aspects of the intervention.

• It was found that only in 102, 94 and 103 villages, local communities participated in planning, implementation and monitoring respectively. Further the participation was limited to men folk and that too at the group level. BPL and SC/ST communities had a minor role in the planning process. The participation levels declined further in the implementation and monitoring phases.

• Women participated in the informal planning groups in 41 out of 132 villages (31%). But their influence in the planning related decision-making was insignificant, reflected by the fact that they influenced planning related decisions only in 19 out of 132 villages.

• SC/STs communities were part of the informal planning groups in 34 villages. Given that the majority of the respondents belonged to these two categories.

8.5 Recommendations

Targeting • Allocation of funds to districts to be made based on drought assessment reports:

Need to develop strategies and procedures for targeting BPL households • For curbing migration, districts that have low traditional / regular migration to be

targeted. • Supporting follow up programs necessary for translating natural assets created into

potential livelihood options. Technical • Construction of tanks and ponds (costing more than Rs.300,000) to be promoted as

the gross returns in the short-term (wage employment, community participation) and long-term (water security) are higher.

• There is a need to manage groundwater resources by first, undertaking scientific district-wise studies of scenario, and secondly, assessing additional scale of rainwater harvesting by taking into consideration hydrogeological profiles.

• Scientific assessments of local geo-hydrological conditions from point of view of aquifer’s transmissivity and porosity need to be undertaken in various geological formations–Vindhyan, Gondwana, Deccan Basalts and Quaternary Alluvium, to assess the recharge potential at the local level. For this, few structures that were constructed with DFID-UNICEF’s assistance in each of the geological zones should be selected. Based on this, a map showing potential recharge and discharge zones for various geological formations in the state should be developed.

• Detail water balance studies involving the assessments of ‘local’ supplies and demands need to undertaken, again in various geological formations, in order to decide the type and scale of water harvesting interventions that will be required in


47


the area for long-term drought proofing. For assessing supplies, a system of monitoring on meteorological, hydrological and groundwater levels should be setup in few select structures. On the other hand, for demand assessment, detail land and water use studies should be taken up.

• Groundwater movement studies using Isotype tracer techniques need to be undertaken in different geological formations of the state for better site planning of water harvesting structures.

• Good network of monitoring wells need to be established for monitoring groundwater quality in pockets, especially where excessive fluoride concentration is observed.

Institutional • Long term drought proofing strategies has to help create strong institutions and

separate funds/programmes should be allocated for capacity development of CBOs in order to engender greater community participation

• Short term drought proofing strategies should however not focus on creating institutions but build upon the existing institution base

• Panchayats should be the preferred implementing agency • Effective monitoring systems for renovation works need to be developed


48


References

1. Government of India (2000). National Report on Implementation of United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, April 2000, Ministry of Environment and Forests.

2. Narain P, Sharma K, Rao A, Singh D, Mathur B and Ahuja U (2000): India’s Arid

Region and the Current Drought, Drought Network News, Volume 12, No. 2.

3. Swami S (2001): Managing Drought in India, paper presented at the UNDP Sub-Regional Seminar on Drought Mitigation, August 29-29, 2001, Tehran.

4. Third Human Development Report, Madhya Pradesh, 2002


49

Documents

Insights from the Field - Home page | UNICEF · Insights from the Field ... The assessment was carried out by Winrock International India, New Delhi in ... CEOs Zilla Panchayats and