POST INDEPENDENCE OVERALL PROGRESS

55 years of Independence. 55 years of freedom. 55 years of democracy. 55 years of planned development. What is the overall balance sheet ? There is an impressive credit side. Attaining of food security is our greatest achievement. From food shortage to food surplus is a remarkable progress. As a child, around and after independence, I used to stand in a queue at a ration shop for food grain. Around that period even cloth was in short supply and there was control on cloth and commoner’s cloth was available in ration shop. To get two pairs of clothing was not easy for middle class families due to control and rationing on cloths. Khaki short - half pant - was almost a luxury to us. There was a marriage in my family and my father wanted to get me two pairs of shirt. He could manage a cloth only for one shirt due to rationing. Readymade garments were unknown in those days, excepting baby wears in some shops. Now, we produce more than we need not only in quantity but even in quality. We produce world class cloths. Advancement in industrial sector is another area, we can be proud of. We produce virtually everything that we need. We are presently among the topmost countries in science and technology. We are second to none in computer software. Our technocrats and professionals in various fields are at par with the best of their counter parts anywhere in the world. Our young boys and girls are topping at the American Universities and academic institutions. Our scientists, planners, bureaucrats, business executives, entrepreneurs are among the best in the world. The list of our achievements is really impressive and does not end with the above description.

URBAN - RURAL DIVIDE

There however, is another side of our balance sheet of 55 years development, which does not make us any proud. There are clearly two India. One urban another rural. In other words, there is rich India and there is poor India. The entire nation can be divided distinctly in urban and rural India. Though our villages and farmers in particular, have given food security to our country and fed the entire country, we have kept half of our rural population poor, half- fed or ill-fed and half clothed. Almost half of our rural people are living in poverty. Everything that is associated with villages is in poor shape. Poor roads or no roads ; poor drinking water facilities ; poor sanitation or no sanitation ; lack of medical facilities ; poor educational facilities. Their one time good rivers are polluted by urban industries and urban people; their forests have been de-forested and degraded by urban mafias, allegedly in collaboration with the forest staff. Their water sources are mostly cornered by urban centres, depriving locals of their own water sources. If there is water shortage in Ahmedabad or in Rajkot, water would be brought by pipes from hundreds of kilometers, but the same water would not be given to the nearby villages. A voice of village is not listened to half of that of towns and city.

POST INDEPENDENCE EFFORTS IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT

What have we done for the rural people ? No one can say that there have been no attempts to improve rural conditions. No one can say there have been inadequate attempts in this direction. Truth is that massive and relentless efforts have been put in by the Government over the years through various rural development programmes to improve the conditions of rural areas and rural people. History of rural development programmes during post independence period is very interesting. It’s a story of hopes and despair. It’s a story like that of India’s rainfed farmer, who begins his sowing operations on the onset of monsoon with great hopes, but, often ends up in despair at the time of harvesting. To summarise the story, many important programmes were launched with great enthusiasm and funfair. To mention few of them ; ‘Rural Community Development Programme’, ‘National Rural Employment Programme (NREP),’ ‘Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP)’, ‘Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY)’ in various versions, special area development programmes like Drought Prone Area Development Programme (DPAP), Desert Development Programme (DDP), etc. This is not an exhaustive list of all the rural development programmes that we have seen during the last 55 years. Excepting DPAP and DDP, the other Rural Development programmes have had relatively short life as none lasted as permanent programme. Most of them had experimental run for few years and then suddenly wound up, replaced by new programmes. Often such new programmes were like “old wine in a new bottle”, with change in label, but, components or ingredients remaining almost the same. Hardly, anything was wrong with the planning of all these programmes, and yet, almost all of them have had partial impact and none of them were considered as highly successful programme. Those who have studied these programmes in depth state that it was at the implementation level that these programmes did not deliver the desired results. Not that they were all total failures, but, the benefits and impact were not commensurating with the massive investment and efforts. During all these Rural Development programmes, baring some regions and pockets, everywhere the villages crumbled under poverty while the urban centres flourished. Each posh and multi-storeyed building in a city / town destroyed the rural households equal to the numbers of new rooms coming up in such city buildings. Only those rural areas which got irrigation facilities during this period saw some progress and stability in rural lives. The impact of green revolution witnessed during this phase was largely confined to the irrigated regions. In other regions, particularly, rainfed regions, the poverty remained unchanged, rather increased and as a result, rural flocks resorted to distressed seasonal migration lock, stock and barrel (with all the members of family migrating). Whatever may be the claims of the Government on poverty reduction or whatever may be the statistics of the Government on rural poverty, the open fact is that in any non-irrigated region / sub-region / village or group of villages, with no industrial or other development, the poverty is going to increase and not going to decrease.

PRESENT WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

The unsatisfactory and poor performance of most of our rural development programmes resulting in perpetuating rural poverty and degradation of natural resources was well comprehended by Dr. C. H. Hanumantha Rao Committee in its report. Based on the recommendations of this committee, the Government of India, Ministry of Rural Development, formulated Participatory Watershed Development programme and implemented the same from the year 1995. The ultimate objective of this new programme was to promote and achieve sustainable economic development of the village community within the micro watershed through various appropriate interventions around land and water resources and to achieve restoration of ecological balance, keeping in mind the sustainable use of such natural resources. Infact, watershed development as a concept, encompasses various activities around land, water, human beings and cattles. It is a concept, which on proper implementation can transform the lives and ecology of village on sustainable basis. It’s a concept which should have been considered in our national planning much earlier. It’s a concept which should have governed all our rural development programmes from the very beginning.

The latest and ongoing watershed development programme has been well conceived and truly appropriate for our rural development. It has immense potential to transform the lives of rural poors and to restore the rural ecology and eco-system.

Though the watershed programme is an excellent programme with tremendous potential, given our track record of implementation of development programme and present political scenario and general character in every sphere deteriorating everyday, one is not sure whether this programme will be successful or this programme will be more successful than previous programmes. Once again, it may turn out to be the same story of a good programme implemented badly and as a result not much impact. Already there are signs, infact reports, which are not encouraging about the implementation of such a prestigious programme. Several short comings and deficiencies have been observed in the implementation of this programme. To mention few of such serious deficiencies ;

i. In large number of cases the Project Implementation Agencies are not selected on merit.
ii. Unscrupulous elements both in the NGO sector and Government sector have entered as implementing agencies making mockery of the programme.
iii. The programme with massive financial allocation and big money coming to each village has generated vested interest among many sections of the society and such elements are out to defeat the objectives of this programme.
iv. Alike other programmes, this programme is also becoming target oriented, in which the achievement of physical and financial targets has become more important than the quality outcome.
v. In many cases, the programme and interventions are not technically sound.
vi. In most of the cases, the prescribed qualified Watershed Development Team (WDT) is conspicuously absent.
vii. In most of the cases, the WDT team members are not appropriately trained as prescribed in the programme guidelines.
viii. In large number of cases, even the District Rural Development Agency officials are neither well trained nor well motivated to guide and monitor this important programme.
ix. In several States where this programme is predominantly implemented through Panchayati Raj Institutions, the performance is no better as PRI Institutions and people associated in the implementation are neither well equipped nor well motivated to make this programme a success. Infact, PRIs are much less equipped then the Government Departments and NGOs.
x. The institutional aspect of the programme is seriously missing at most of the places putting serious question mark on the sustainability of the programme.

ROLE OF CORPORATE SECTOR

In view of the deficiencies observed in the programme, it is imperative that the implementation of the programme improves. In order to improve the programme and to achieve the desired results, it is important that good people and good agencies are involved in this programme. It is ultimately an economic development programme for the rural people, and therefore, it has to be managed by people who understand what is economic development programme. Skill and efficiency combine with accountability have to be core qualities for the implementation. It is here that good NGOs and earnest corporate sector companies have a role to play. Many corporate sector companies in our country are known for their social responsibility and such corporate companies have done excellent work in rural development. However, as corporate sector as a whole, their contribution is not significant and tangible, particularly, in the field of Rural Development and rural poverty reduction programme, the corporate sector has not contributed significantly. It is time that such corporate companies intensify their efforts and more and more corporate companies enter into this field of rural development and get themselves involved in the implementation of watershed development programme. The Government policy should welcome such role by NGOs and corporate sector companies. The latest guidelines of Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India, Watershed Development programme, is not encouraging for the role of NGOs and corporate companies in watershed development. The corporate companies and their association like CII and others have to lobby for the policy change, not in the interest of corporate sector companies, but, in the interest of the Government as well as the rural people as failure of such an all important programme will have fatal blow on the prospects for the revival of our rural economy and regeneration of ecology.

It is also essential that the corporate companies develop well designed strategy to implement such programme. It has to be well directed, concerted efforts at tangible scale. I feel, instead of attempts in isolation, few companies should join hands as consortium and design their plan and programmes. Since such companies will also have their own limitations, they need to identify most needy and deserving regions or sub-regions. I would suggest to select few tribal districts as by all parameters and considerations, tribal regions and tribal people are the poorest in this country. In programme priority also, the exclusive focus should be given to watershed programme, further focusing on the development of water resources. The water is going to be a crucial factor in our development as well as for our very existence and survival, and therefore, water sector need to be given number one priority by all who have stake in our development and survival.

Ideally, the corporate sector should ultimately select about 100 deserving districts for their intensive Rural Development and Poverty Alleviation programme with an aim to transform these districts in about 10 years period with consorted efforts.

To begin with, about hundred companies may join hands for concerted efforts for the reduction in rural poverty. Selecting the poorest districts in the tribal regions, these companies may select proven NGOs to implement the programmes. The companies with long term commitment in Rural Development may implement the programme directly, if they desire.

It is time that everyone, particularly, the Government and more particularly our politicians, realize that public money is properly used for people and not for their own vested interests in supporting their political supporters. If our ruling elite do not realize this, we cannot hope for the success of any programme for the rural development.

All citizens, particularly, businessmen and relatively better placed people have to repay debt to rural people / villages. Our villages have given much to our towns and cities. The reverse needs to happen.

If half of our body is impaired by defects or illness, we just cannot function as normal beings. Similarly, if more than half of our country is poverty stricken and ridden with various serious problems as a nation, we cannot expect to grow. From developing country to the status of developed country we need to have frontal attack on our rural poverty. Without this, we can never achieve the status of a developed country.

The competent and proven NGOs and corporate companies with trusteeship concept can improve the situation drastically and dramatically.

I end up with a quote of J.D. Livingston Booth

“If Government provides the head of society
and business the hands,
then independent voluntary action provides its heart.

But hearts cannot be taken for granted.
Strengthening the big heart of societies
means making one’s own contribution
of time, talent, and money and proclaiming aloud
the underlying values of philanthropy.”

And final lines from a book “Ignited Minds” written by our President, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam;

“O God Bless my people to work and transform the country into a prosperous nation soon.”

29.08.2002