Report No. 195

Evaluation Report on

Decentralised Experience of Kerala

Programme Evaluation Organisation Planning Commission Government of India

New Delhi January 2006

1

Table of Contents

1 Preface

II Summary-Evaluation Issues, Findings & Suggestions III Chapters

2 Objectives of the Study and its Design

3 Change in the Methodology of Plan Formulation

4 Change in the Methodology of Plan Implementation

5 Grama Sabha Participation

6 Expenditure Planning under Decentralization

7 Project Level Impact

IV Annexures

V Bibliography

VI Project Team

Preface

In Kerala, there have been many attempts at decentralization during the post-Independence period. Recent attempts to decentralize the planning process followed the 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments and enabling enactment in the State in 1994. The important landmarks in decentralization, inter alia, include the transfer of powers, functions, institutions and staff to local self-governments (LSGIs), adoption of separate budget document for LSGIs, decision to devolve 35 to 40% of the plan funds to LSGIs, launching of People's Campaign in August 1996, institution-building at different tiers and levels, restructuring of the relevant State level Acts and Rules and submission of State Finance Commission Reports,

Decentralized planning in Kerala, aimed at rejuvenating the State's stagnant productive sector, had the specific objectives of: improving the quality of investment by allocating resources to local priorities, facilitating local solutions to development problems, exploiting local production possibilities, enabling people's participation and contribution in planned development and bringing about convergence of services.

At the instance of the Government of Kerala, Programme Evaluation Organisation took up the evaluation of the functioning of Kerala Model of decentralized planning to reflect on the following issues: -

• Efficacy of the processes followed (vis-a-vis Guidelines) for demand articulation, plan formulation, implementation and monitoring;

• Constraints and catalysts in effective decentralization;

• Success stories of decentralization and factors behind success; and

• Lessons from the Kerala model of decentralized planning.

The database required for the study, limited to rural PRIs and Grama Panchayats (GPs) in particular, was gathered from 4 districts, 9 Block Panchayats and 9 Grama Panchayats, 63 GP level projects and 616 project beneficiaries, 15 departmental 'comparison' projects and 140 project beneficiaries, an independent sample of 460 heads of households to analyze their Grama Sabha participation, 126 Working Group members, 75 Expert Committee members at block and district levels and 51 knowledgeable persons.

The major findings of the Study are the following;

• The productive sector projects of local self-governments (LSGs) did not develop into a comprehensive plan, due mainly to the inadequate capacity of LSGIs to formulate

0

productive sector project scientifically, weaknesses in the constitution and functioning of the expert bodies, pre-occupation of the Grama Sabha with the flow of benefits to individual members and absence of horizontal and vertical integration of plans because of near compartmentalised functioning of the various tiers of PRIs.

• Consequently, in the productive sector (mostly agriculture and allied sectors), neither departmental projects nor GP projects showed much household level impact, whereas the stand-alone GP level projects (which did not call for integration) in the service sector laid considerable impact.

• Despite the stated objective of rejuvenating the stagnant productive sector of the State, it was verified that the share of productive sector in the total plan expenditure declined from 8th to 9th Five Year Plan and further drastically in the 10"1 Five Year Plan.

• About 65% of the selected beneficiaries felt that the response of both GP and departmental officials towards people's needs improved after decentralization.

• Thoroughly inadequate provision for maintenance of assets, lack of stakeholder participation and inadequate follow-up of project execution resulted in sub-optimal utilization of created assets.

• Grama Sabhas had become pivotal in demand articulation and beneficiary selection during the Ninth Five Year Plan. About 96% of the respondent heads of households were aware of the conduct of Grama Sabhas (GSs) in their villages; awareness level went up with level of education, whereas attendance in Grama Sabhas did not exhibit any such trends,

• Though the majority of the people attended GSs exclusively with an eye on individual benefits, a lesser, but visible proportion of GS attendance was based on its developmental agenda.

• The degree of articulation of the disadvantaged sections (women and BPL) in Grama Sabhas was in no way less than that of the better-off sections.

There are some important transferable lessons from the operation of the Kerala model of decentralized planning. First, effective planning requires coordination among individuals and institutions. To be effective, it is important to put in place a mechanism that ensures coordination among members/groups within each tier of PRIs and functional linkage between different tires. This coordination is required to ensure that a district plan is not a simple linear aggregation of village plans, but there are inter linkages between the plans of villages and blocks to yield an integrated district plan. Secondly, planning and implementation of development programmes require expertise. It is important to build capacity of the PRIs members and other stakeholders in this area through advocacy and formal training. Thirdly, it is necessary to devise appropriate guidelines for use of

1

allocated funds by each tier of the PRIs, particularly keeping in view the need to bring out a consistent and effective district plan.

The study received constant support and encouragement from Hon'ble Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission, Member (Evaluation), and Member Secretary, Planning Commission, Government of India and Shri.S.M.Vijayanand, Member Secretary, State Planning Board, Government of Kerala.

The study was co-directed by Shri P.K. Abdul Kareem and Shri Antony Cyriac, Senior Research Officers of PEO under my overall guidance and supervision. Shri M. Mathisekaran (former Director) and Shri S. Chandrasekhar, Director, Regional Evaluation Office, Chennai carried out the task of coordination between the field units and headquarters of PEO on the one hand and that between PEO and the State Government of Kerala and NORMA on the other.

NORMA Social and Market Research, Thiruvananthapuram performed the tasks of (pan of) fieldwork, qualitative surveys, data processing and preliminary tabulation. Discussions held with Dr.R.V.G.Menon, Dr. Thomas Issac, Shri. C.P. John, Dr.M.A.Oommen, Dr.K-Ramachandran Nair, Dr.P.P.Pillai, Dr.K.N.Harilal, Shri.Sreekumar Chathopadhyaya, Dr, Mahesh Chand, Shri.V.Thyagarajan, Shri.T.KJose, Dr. Jos Chathukulam, Dr.S.Venkiteswaran, Shri P.S.Sasi, Shri.K.Sukumaran, Shri.Sridharan, Prof.K.N.Sudhakaran, Dr.P.V.Mohanan, Dr.P.N.Premachandran, Shri.Siraj Kunju, Shri.Jamal, Shri.Jagjivan and Shri. S.R.Sanal kumar have helped to greatly improve the conclusions of the report. The findings of the evaluation study were discussed in two seminars-one at Yojana Bhavan, Planning Commission, Government of India and the other at the State Planning Board, Kerala. The feedback received from experts and senior government officers who participated in the seminars was used to revise the draft report.

(S.P. Pal) Adviser (Evaluation)

New Delhi Dated: January, 2006

Summary Evaluation Issues, Findings & Suggestions

Background In Kerala, decentralized planning that followed the 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments and enabling enactments in the State in 1994 started off as the People’s Plan Campaign and progressed with institutionalization at different levels. The important landmarks during the 9th Five Year Plan (since 1995) include:

• Transfer of powers, functions, institutions and staff to local governments (Annexure- 1) initiated in October 1995 and completed by July 2000; the transferred officials were given a dual responsibility and accountability to both the PRIs and the line Departments for execution of their respective plan programs;

• Adoption of a separate budget document exclusively for Local Self Governments (LSGs) (since February 1996) and the introduction of a formula for allocation of Plan funds(Grants in aid) among LSGs (Chapter I );

• Decision to devolve 35 to 40% of the plan funds to local governments announced in July 1996; around 90% of this was devolved with the condition that at least 30% should be spent on Productive sectors, not more than 30% should be invested on Infrastructure and at least 10% should be earmarked for Development programs for Women;

• Launching of the People’s plan Campaign in August 1996 with multi-pronged socio-political mobilization and sensitization of people with effective participation of organizations like Kerala Sasthra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP); this was being associated with institution-building at different tiers and levels;

• Restructuring of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and the Kerala Municipality Act in 1999,based on the recommendations of the Committee on Decentralization of Powers (known as Sen Committee) (Annexure-II);

• Submission of First and Second State Finance Commission Reports in February 1996 and January 2001 respectively, reviewing the financial position of Local Self Governments and making recommendations therein (major recommendations in Annexure -III).

Note: Chapter and Annexure numbers given in parentheses refer to those in the text.

Institutional Mechanism Decentralized planning in the State operated mainly through the following institutions and instruments;

Grama Sabha (GS): People’s participation in decentralization was sought to be ensured

mainly through meetings of the GP ward level Grama Sabha, chaired by the ward member. Ten per cent of the voters of the ward constitute the quorum; The officials of GP and implementing departments are required to attend the GS meetings. The Block level Grama Sabha consisting of GP Presidents and Block Samiti members and the District level Grama Sabha consisting of GP presidents, BP Presidents and DP members were meant to vertically integrate plans.

Neighbourhood Groups (NHGs): Envisaged as a sub-system of GS, an NHG (Ayalkoottam) would be formed as an association of 20-25 women members to identify women from among themselves to form Self Help Groups (SHGs) for carrying out the Women Component Plan (WCP).

Resource Persons: About 600 Key Resource Persons (KRPs) at the State level, about 10000 district Resource persons (DRPs) at the district level and about one lakh Local Resource Persons (LRPs) at the GP level were recruited both from the Government and outside, representing various disciplines. Resource Persons were to take lead in training programmes and to spearhead the Plan campaign. Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA) co-ordinates the training activities of Local governments.

Development Seminar (DS); Based on GS recommendations, a one day DS would be held every year at the PRI level to which experts, elected members, representatives nominated by the GSs, to discuss the draft annual plan document of the PRIs, suggest the broad priorities of development projects and select members of Task Forces (Working Groups).

Task Force; Presently known as ‘Working Groups’ (at GP, BP and DP levels) were to translate the demands and recommendations of GSs and DSs into viable, technically acceptable projects. For each local body, there were about 8 –12 Task Forces/working groups dealing with different sectors. Each WG would be headed by an elected Member and convened by specified government official.

Committee System; All GPs, BPs and ZPs would have Standing Committees (SCs); each assigned with certain subjects. The SCs were to be co-ordinated with a Steering

Committee consisting of the President, Vice President of the Panchayat and the chairpersons of the SCs. Panchayats were free to constitute sub-committees to assist the aforesaid committees. There was also provision for Joint Committees between neighbouring Local Governments.

Expert Committees (ECs); There would be ECs (evolved from Voluntary Technical Corps) at block and district levels drawing expertise from and outside the Government. ECs would have a three-fold role; providing technical advice to PRIs, technically vetting projects of PRIs and giving technical sanction for works, wherever required.

District Planning Committee; All PRI plans in the district would be submitted to DPC, which would give formal approval to them. Neither DPC nor ECs would have the power to alter the priorities fixed by PRIs, but could only ensure that the Guidelines were followed.

State Level Coordinators; At the apex level, the SPB, co-ordinates with the Department of Local Self Government and takes the lead in decentralized planning at different tiers by issuing Guidelines and observing compliance and progress. There was a State Level Expert Committee too, to vet the District Panchayat plans.

State Election Commission: Apart from the conduct of Local body elections, the State Election Commission has been empowered to delimit the wards of PRIs for elections and to disqualify the defectors.

State Finance Commissions: The 1st SFC was constituted in 1994 and the 2nd in 1999.

The 1st State Finance Commission (SFC) submitted its report in February 1996. However, the formula used for inter-se distribution of plan fund was not the one given by the SFC, but was evolved by the Working Group of State Planning Board in 1997.

Ombudsman: Ombudsman is a high-powered institution consisting of judicial dignitaries formed to check malfeasance in local governments in the discharge of developmental functions.

Objectives of the Evaluation Study PEO took up the Evaluation Study on Decentralization Experience of Kerala during the Ninth Plan at the instance of the Government of Kerala with the objectives of:

• assessing the efficacy of the processes followed (vis-à-vis the guidelines) for demand articulation, plan formulation, implementation and monitoring;

• identifying the constraints and catalysts in effective decentralization of powers and smooth functioning of rural local bodies;

• analyzing the success stories of decentralization and identifying the factors contributing to success; and

• learning lessons from the Kerala model of decentralized planning.

Study Design Both primary and secondary data were required to test the hypotheses implicit in the above mentioned objectives. A multi-stage, multi-site, stratified random sampling design was adopted to generate the required data for the study. The sampling process is briefly indicated below (details in Chapter II).

• The study was limited to rural PRIs. Further, detailed study eliciting household level responses and other primary information was limited to the GP level.

• Four districts-Kollam, Ernakulam, Malappuram and Wynad- and nine BPs and nine GPs therein were selected for detailed sample survey.

• To generate the required primary information 63 projects implemented by the selected GPs during the 9th Five Year Plan and 616 project beneficiaries therein, and, 15 departmental ‘comparison’ projects and 140 project beneficiaries were selected. An independent sample of 460 heads of households belonging to the various socio-economic groups was selected to assess the details of their Grama Sabha participation.

• To understand the different processes involved in planning, a sample of 126 Working Group (Task Force) members, 75 Expert Committee members and 51 knowledgeable persons were selected from the selected PRIs.

• The reference period for the Study was the Ninth Five Year Plan, 1997-98 to 2001-02. However information was selectively gathered on pre and post- 9th Five Year Plan period to prepare the base for comparative analysis of the data collected for the reference period.

Findings of the Study On Plan Formulation The methodology for participatory plan formulation at the GP level envisaged that the needs articulated at the Grama Sabhas be recorded, processed, prioritized, projectized and harmonized into an integrated plan for the village.

That Grama Sabhas (GSs) had emerged as a prominent body of need articulation in the villages during the 9th Five Year Plan was evident from the facts that;

• About 66% of the project beneficiaries who had demanded the project benefit did so through GSs;

• About 82% of the project beneficiaries felt that their projects were taken up based on GS demands;

• About 92% of the Knowledgeable Persons opined that GSs could articulate key sectoral problems ‘effectively’ (63%) or ‘somewhat effectively’ (29%).

• Scrutiny of records by PEO revealed that most of the approved projects emanated from the needs articulated at GSs.

Discussions and diagnostic analysis reveal that while the institution of Gram Sabha ensured people’s participation in need articulation, prioritization of projects/schemes and accommodating the needs of the vulnerable sections, yet the following weaknesses were noted:

(a) Productive sector projects did not at all develop into a comprehensive plan and agricultural project planning was not focused, not outcome-oriented, and not information-based. The major constraints that inhibited effective productive sector plan formulation included;

• GS could not fully assimilate its envisaged role in plan formulation mainly because of;

- Overwhelming pursuit of individual benefits by GS participants confirmed by 88.3% of the selected knowledgeable persons.

- Presence of alternative, effective avenues of demand articulation; 34% of the selected individual project beneficiaries placed their demand for project assistance outside the GS, through GP members/leaders and officials.

- About 36% of the selected heads of households never attended any GS since 1997-98, this ratio ranged between 74% and 16% among the sample GPs.

• Inadequate capacity of the GP in agricultural plan formation. Generally, available

resources were thinly spread across projects and individuals to satisfy the need of a large number of villages/villagers.

• Only 25% of the Knowledgeable Persons felt that GPs used their available developmental database effectively in planning.

• The functioning of Sectoral Working Groups (WGs) entrusted with the task of projectizing GS demands and block level and district level Expert Committees (BLECs/DLECs) entrusted with plan vetting was constrained by;

- Pre-occupations of both official and non-official members and consequent depletion in effective membership; 33.3% of the departmental officials, who were to convene WG meetings, did not regularly attend such meetings.

- Inadequate incentives or recognition to members; 88% of the selected BLEC members and cent percent DLEC members felt that the sitting fees (the only incentive) were thoroughly inadequate.

- Lack of capacity to formulate innovative projects, analyzing specific local problems and matching GP resources; only 8% of the selected WG members felt

that they could fully take into account local resources in projectization, while 26% felt that they did not at all do this.

- Lack of Co-ordination and Integration of the works of different sectoral Working Groups.

- Removal of the full-time coordinator for BLECs and DLECs. - Frequent transfers of convening officials and partisan considerations preempted

continuity of experience and expertise in WGs and ECs. Only about 20% of the convening officials thought that their WGs functioned very well. During the field visits (June-August 2004), it was made out that Working Groups per se had become highly inactive in many places and many willing collaborators (administrative and clerical staff) were made use of in the preparation of projects in 2004-05. Projectization had turned into a totally mechanical exercise by then.

(b) Analysis of expenditure planning (done at the State level) revealed that;

- LSGI accounts were not at all integrated to the rest of the Plan accounts, with the result that arriving at the sectoral shares in plan expenditure was beset with many problems.

- The plan share (LSGI plus General) of productive sector declined from 8th Five Year Plan (37.61%) to the 9th Plan ((31.65%; (23.36% from General Plan & 34.78% from Local Government Plans)) and further during the initial years of the 10th Five Year Plan.

(c) Absence of effective vertical integration was a weak link in decentralized planning. Infrastructure and productive sector projects did not recognize their inter-linkages. The apparent signs of insufficient vertical integration in plans include;

- None of the selected GPs felt that their higher tiers created the necessary backward or forward linkages to their projects;

- Attendance in Block level GSs ranged from 40% to 94%, indicating that many GPs went unrepresented in this important instrument of block level integration of GP plans.

- The degree of compliance to the service sector projects mandated to Block panchayats (BPs ) (by the Guidelines) varies from 56% to 80% among the sample BPs;

- Majority of Block level projects had very small project allocation, so no effective linkages could have been created by them. The proportion of productive and service sector projects with less than Rs. 1 lakh project allocation varied in the range of 78% to 50% among the sample BPs.

- The proportion of projects on individual housing in the service sector plan of the selected BPs varied from 50% to 44%.

- The District Plan did not set out a clear-cut, sectorally differentiated and vertically integrated development strategy; nor did it clarify the roles of different tiers in seeking developmental goals.

(d) Another problem observed was inadequate spatial balancing within GPs in their infrastructural planning. Analysis of the plan projects for roads and bridges revealed that;

Coefficient of variation of the ward-wise expenditure in the roads and bridges sector was large (41% to 179%); The correlation between backwardness (in connectivity) of GP wards and the allocation of expenditure under roads and bridges sector was weak and in many cases higher allocation was given to better connected wards. On Plan Implementation The participatory planning processes brought about considerable changes in plan implementation in terms of people’s participation in beneficiary selection and project execution. Yet, the quantum and impact of such changes remained much less than the envisaged.

• Beneficiary selection: Grama Sabhas performed a significant role in the selection of beneficiaries of plan projects during the 9th Five Year Plan. However, their meaningful and effective involvement was constrained by;

- Low and fast-dwindling representative base of Grama Sabhas; - Conflicts within Grama Sabhas regarding prioritization of beneficiaries; 4 out

9 selected GPs highlighted this issue. - GP members and officials sometimes showed favoritism in beneficiary

selection; loss of representative character of Grama Sabhas reinforced this. Of an independent sample of households selected to verify GS participation, only 52% were satisfied with beneficiary selection (varied from 38% to 87% in sample GPs); 72% of the dissatisfied reasoned that undue preference was given to close circles of members.

Due to all the above, about 29% of the selected beneficiaries could receive individual benefits under GP projects without ever attending a GS. The incidence of this was higher among the APL beneficiaries (34.7%) than among the BPL beneficiaries (25.1%) and, among the General category beneficiaries (35.2%) than among the Scheduled Caste beneficiaries (20%).

• Co-ordination between GPs and deployed departmental officials: - About 85% of the implementing officials felt that they could co-ordinate well

with the GP. However, about 21% of them felt that GP officials/members tried to impose their terms upon them. Also, about 24.5% felt that members tried to meddle with plan implementation, especially in terms of preferential allotment of benefits to their cronies.

- Grama Sabha attendance by some implementing officials was less regular than others. About 38% of the selected implementing officials themselves declared that they did not regularly attend Grama Sabhas during the 9th five Year Plan; 82% of them giving official pre-occupations as the reason.

- About 65% of the selected beneficiaries felt that the response of both GP and departmental officials towards people’s needs improved after decentralization, while only about 10% felt that officials became less receptive.

• Beneficiary participation in project execution; was below the envisaged levels in Anganwadi projects and collective irrigation projects. Only about 24% of the beneficiaries of Anganwadi feeding got involved in local mobilization of resources, while only about 2% of the selected beneficiaries of collective irrigation projects contributed in some way to project implementation.

Though, a considerable proportion of the Knowledgeable Persons felt that speed (56.9%) and cost-effectiveness (53%) of project execution improved with beneficiary committees (BCs), the following deficiencies were noted:

- Inability to secure forward and backward linkages to BCs; - Lackadaisical, sometimes hostile, attitude of concerned officials towards them; - Lack of technical guidance to BCs in cost estimation and governmental

procedures; - Creeping in of contractors or their benamis into BCs who exploited BCs’

inexperience to their multiple advantages.

• Inadequate follow-up and maintenance have led to deterioration of the productivity of the assets/infrastructure created.

- Collective assets created under the Plan were most often neglected after plan implementation. 67.3% of the beneficiaries of collective irrigation projects felt that no mechanism for maintenance of the assets has been put in place.

- Many beneficiaries of agricultural projects felt that the post project follow up was inadequate resulting in deterioration in asset quality and their output.

On Project level Impact The analysis of the impact of sector-wise projects led to the following conclusions.

Sector Set of Projects Impact - GP Projects Brief Explanation

Felling root-wilt affected coconut trees

Negligible Only 11.5% respondents reported some impact.

Agricultural input support

Negligible

About 84% respondent beneficiaries of input support (other than vegetable) reported negligible impact.

Irrigation Negligible/Nil 69.4% respondents could not at all irrigate from the facility - None irrigated sufficiently.

Subsidized provision of animals

Negligible/seldom

Only 6.5% had considerable & sustained income effect- 2.2% acquired assets from income generated.

Prod

uctiv

e se

ctor

Self-Employment Negligible

Only 7.6% could effectively support their families from the income generated.

Subsidized provision of latrines

Considerable 80% respondents fully satisfied- 93% latrines being used - 77%

Subsidized provision of houses/repair

Considerable

85% satisfied - 81% houses are resided at- 62% Knowledgeable

Persons felt considerable improvements; 33% indicated marginal improvements

Feeding programme

Considerable

68.2% (aware of GP role) beneficiaries felt considerable improvements in feeding upon decentralization.

Serv

ice

Sect

or

Drinking water Considerable

67.2% respondents reported regular receipt of water-72.7% felt improved drinking water situation in the GP.

For the stand-alone projects (which did not call for any horizontal or vertical integration) implemented by the GP in the service sector, considerable impact was felt by beneficiaries.

So far as the productive sectors are concerned, neither departmental projects nor GP projects showed much household level impact. In general, decentralized planning during the 9th Five Year Plan failed to stir the productive sector in the sample villages. Isolated successes were on account of the selection of the right crop for project support and the co-ordination between farmers and the Krishi Bhavan. In the agricultural sector, the basic problems that dampened the project impact include;

• Inadequate capacity of the PRIs to draw up production plans on a scientific basis. Attention was not paid to the forward and backward linkages, environmental impact, the market signals and State policies in the agriculture sector.

• Many agricultural projects received only nominal allocation in an attempt to maximize the number of projects and the number of beneficiaries. The propensity to equalize the flow of resources across wards of the GP was also observed.

• Inadequate stakeholder participation resulted in poor maintenance of the agricultural assets.

Awareness & Participation • Awareness about conduct of GSs varied from 86% to 100% among the respondent

heads of households in the selected GPs. Correspondingly, the proportion of those who attended at least one GS ever since 1997-98 varied from 36% to 84% in the sample GPs. About 36% of the selected heads of households never attended Grama Sabha since 1997-98.

• Vellamunda GP (Wynad district), which showed one of the highest participation rates and Thanur GP (Malappuram district) which showed the lowest participation rate were both among the most backward GPs selected.

• Awareness level about the conduct of GSs was noted to be high both among illiterates and literates (91.1% among illiterates vs. 100% among graduates). While the relation between level of education and GS attendance was not conclusive, the GS attendance of the BPL and the socially backward was clearly greater than that of their better-off counterparts.

• Majority of the people attended GSs exclusively with an eye on individual benefits. 57.1% of the improved GS attendance and 45.3% of reduced attendance among the selected heads of households was attributed to the receipt/non-receipt of individual benefits. Nonetheless, a lesser, but visible proportion of GS attendance was based on the developmental agenda of the GSs;

• The degree of articulation of the disadvantaged sections (women and BPL) in GSs was in no way less than that of the better-off sections. 69.7% of women, 63.4% of BPL and 61.3% of the SC& ST respondents declared that they could articulate their needs in the GSs ‘to a great extent’.

• Among the non/irregular GS attendees, 34.3% of Scheduled Caste respondents and 46.2% of the fishermen declared that regular information would ensure their regular GS attendance. 17.1% of non/irregular GS attendees asked for more convenient meeting timings.

• The reduction in GS attendance by the socially and economically better-off sections seems to be faster than that of their worse-off counterparts. While 34% of the heads of selected SC households attended GSs held during June-July 2004, the corresponding figure for the general category was only 14.7%. The figures were 17.6% and 29.7% respectively for APL and BPL.

• Enhanced awareness and participation has indeed brought about an improvement in the delivery and impact of the individual beneficiaries oriented service sector schemes. However, this failed to bring about a corresponding improvement in the agriculture sector projects because of inadequate capacity of PRI members to draw up production plans on a scientific basis.

Lessons learnt & suggestions therein I. General: 1. Accounting and data retrievability at the PRI level are very weak. To rectify this, a)

LSGI accounts must be integrated with general plan accounts in their format, content and timeliness and b) maintenance and flow of information (forward & backward) including reporting of financial and physical progress needs to be computerized forthwith.

2. Ensuring involvement of higher level local academia in database building (with surveys), planning and training of planners by linking their curriculum to reports on decentralization experience of their villages would provide an essential supplement to existing capacity for decentralized planning.

II. On Plan Formulation and Integration 1. The piecemeal approach to productive sector planning must give way to plans and

projects fully integrated to a well-defined watershed based development strategy. The primary condition for this would be that GPs are capacitated with data-based, scientific inputs for planning giving the quantitative dimensions of;

a) Watersheds within the boundaries of the GP;

b) Sectoral problems with their quantitative dimensions (for example, cost of cultivation of specific crops and their profitability, making clear required intervention and support therein); and

c) Sectoral potentials and their prioritization, all integrated into watershed based development strategy and District Plan.

2. Under watershed-based planning, Grama Panchayat can be the unit of planning; but often, a group of GPs or Block Panchayat as a whole must be seen as an integral whole. Hence, joint projects of different GPs must be attempted in productive sector. BPs must integrate plans at their level by bringing in harmony between GP level priorities with appropriate collective projects.

3. Graduation of priorities and plans between tiers would require constant vertical communication of planning processes (through officials, academia and other willing collaborators) from GP to district level. Non-official expertise, essential for local planning, must be encouraged with reasonable sitting fees and adequate, non-partisan recognition. Continuity of experience and expertise further requires that official expertise, fine-tuned to local developmental problems, is not disturbed with frequent transfers.

4. Fieldwork reveals that watershed based planning has many limitations in coastal and urban areas. Hence, a different, well-defined strategy may be chalked out for such areas. Weightage given to fishermen in the formula for allocation of grantsin-aids may be re-examined considering their poor socio-economic position.

5. District Plan is the appropriate point for integration of lower level plans. An integrated district plan requires the following;

a. Constitutionally, there is hardly any scope for specific expertise in DPC as only one member is nominated by Government as expert and more than 4/5th of its members are elected LSG members. Hence, sectorally distinguished, professional, official and non-official, support mechanisms for DPC should be developed and empowered, with duties of district heads of departments clearly specified therein. They should analyze GP-wise problems and potentials, especially in the productive sector.

b. Approval of District Plan should precede projectization at lower levels and be discussed threadbare and ratified at a forum represented by all LSGs in the district.

c. District Plan must contain; a) GP-wise data on problems and potentials integrated to watershed based strategy, b) action plan for addressing each prioritized problem and potential and c) unambiguously defined roles of each tier in each action plan.

d. Plans of LSGs may be sectorally examined and those inconsistent with strategies agreed under District Plan should be revised before approval. e. Time schedule for approving the plan of various tiers for achieving integration (providing sufficient time for each tier) should be clearly specified and strictly enforced. Decentralized plan cycle needs to be advanced (like in case of annual budgeting) so that plan formulation is complete by the beginning of every financial year and one full year is ensured for plan implementation and follow up.

6. Effective merger of DRDA with District Panchayat is a pre-condition for integration of developmental efforts under CSS, SSS and PRI schemes. Like-wise, at the block level, the dichotomy between the functioning of Block Development Officer and that of Block Panchayat Secretary must be removed; his designation should only be ‘Secretary to Block Panchayat’ and his developmental functions should flow necessarily from this capacity.

7. Any effective integration of plans calls for drastic and systematic functional re-allocation between different tiers. One guiding principle should be that the projects meant for individual beneficiaries must be taken up only at GP level (among the rural PRIs). The scheme guidelines- both central and State- that preclude this need to be got amended. Collective projects on water management, drinking water, etc, must be in tune with the watershed based development strategy and be conceived/discussed thoroughly at the Block level.

8. Strategies must be urgently devised and implemented to reverse the declining share of productive sector plan expenditure shown in the Study.

III. On Plan Implementation 1. One primary requirement for operationalizing an effective productive sector plan is to

distinguish between the procedures for selection of beneficiaries for welfare schemes and productive sector schemes. Peasants, Animal Husbandry farmers, etc should be broadly defined for this purpose. Secondly, the tendency towards equal division of beneficiaries across GP wards must be arrested forthwith. 2. Concentration of flow of funds to LSGs (channelized through higher tiers) by the fag end of the financial year and not allowing enough time to spend those funds have together resulted in cumulative delays and manipulative accounting to show expenditure. To remedy this, funds may be directly transferred to the accounts of the concerned LSGIs once their plan is approved.

3. The administrative control of local officials should be fully vested with the LSGs, which must have an integrated staff set-up not divided by artificial departmental barriers (Ref: Sen Committee). This would require the following; a) Transferring salaries and other administrative responsibilities related to deployed departmental officials to local bodies at appropriate LSG levels. b) Technical officials be relieved from administrative responsibilities and thereby freed fully for technical work and to provide scientific inputs required for local body level planning. c) A specialized administrative/engineering cadre may be created for LSGs that can effectively handle hierarchies among different sets of officials.

4. The study found that need-driven creation of assets and stakeholder participation are prerequisites to ensuring maintenance and utilization of assets. Creation of every collective asset should ensure that the project report itself contains a beneficiary-supported and commonly agreed mechanism for the maintenance of assets and an adequate financial provision for the same.

IV. On Grama Sabha participation 1. Decentralized planning will become effective only if it regains its mass movement

character. Considering the size of GP wards in Kerala, sub-systems of Grama Sabhas of some form (like Neighbourhood Groups) consistent with watershed based development strategy must be developed and sustained. 2. In addition, channelizing beneficiary selection fully through Grama Sabhas or their sub-systems, and pre-

empting alternative, stand-alone, channels for this would boost GS participation. This would not only help the growth of GSs but would prevent development of client-patron relationships also.

3. Efforts should also be made to improve the participation of educated youth (who felt that only politicians have a role in GSs) in the GSs.

4. The problems of information failure (aired mostly by scheduled tribes and fishermen) and clash of work timings with GS meetings (scheduled castes) must be urgently corrected. Grama Sabha meetings should be conducted on common work holidays in the village.

5. Micro-watershed strategy, wherever appropriate, may be employed as tool to change the growing perception that the richer section does not have anything to gain from GS attendance, by assigning appropriate roles for each.

2

Chapter 1

Decentralization is prominent on the reform agenda of many developing countries. The degree of decentralization varies vastly across countries, with South Asia, typically represented by India, topping the list and sub-Saharan Africa coming last in the order. Followed by the South Asian countries are the OECD countries, Europe and Central Asian countries, Latin American and Caribbean countries and East Asian and the Pacific countries in declining order of sub-national shares of expenditure (World Development Report 2004).

In India, the 73rd and 74lh Amendments to its Constitution in 1993, with mandatory provisions for devolution of powers to the local self governments, were crucial milestones in its history of decentralization. With 232332 village panchayats (2775858 representatives therein), 6000 intermediate panchayats (144491 representatives therein) and 534 Zilla Panchayats (15067 representatives therein), India indisputably has the broadest representative base among the world nations. The Constitution envisages the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) as institutions of self -government with functional and financial autonomy, along with accountable personnel at their disposal. Articles 243(G) and 243(H) provide for such autonomy, but the scope and extent of the same are left mostly to the discretion of the States. Based on the constitutional provisions, the States were required to attempt enabling Enactments.

1.2 Historical Evolution of Local Governments in Kerala

The State of Kerala was formed in 1956 integrating Malabar district of erstwhile Madras Presidency, State of Cochin and State of Travancore. In the northern region, which constituted part of Malabar district of erstwhile Madras Presidency, the local bodies were evolved by the legislative process of Madras Presidency. Central and southern Kerala, which constituted two princely states i.e. State of Cochin and State of Travancore followed a different approach as these regions were not directly under the British control. Uniform system of local body administration came into being in the three regions in 1960, following the enactment of Kerala Panchayati Raj Act and Kerala Municipality Act (Charvak, 2000). An overview of the historical evolution of local bodies in the State is given below.

In Malabar region, the early Acts of 1865 and 1884 of Madras province under, the British India rule concentrated mainly on the development of urban local bodies. It was only after the World War I, the Act on rural local bodies came into effect. In 1920, the Madras Village Panchayat Act and the Madras Local Boards Act were passed. Subsequently, Malabar district board's- transformation into an elected body led to the

Introduction

3

abolition of taluk boards. Although Village panchayat Act was enacted, there was not much activity at grassroots level as effective measures weie not taken to implement the provisions of the Act. It took considerable time to enhance the power of local bodies in Madras presidency. The Madras Village Panchayat Act of 1950 considerably enhanced the power of local bodies. The panchayats were supposed to discharge a variety of functions such as construction and maintenance of public roads, public lighting, drainage, sanitation, drinking water and preventive health measures. The panchayats were also provided with limited judicial powers. The main source of revenue for the panchayats was taxes on buildings, profession, vehicles and entertainment. They were also entitled to certain amount of grants from the Government. The Act provided for direct election of the Panchayat president.

In Travancore State, urban local bodies existed since 1894. However, rural local bodies were introduced only in the 1930s and even then they were not fully operational. The Travancore Village Panchayat Act, 1935 empowered the Government to declare any revenue village or group of villages to be a panchayat with elected or nominated committee to perform a variety of civic duties. The civic functions included works on sanitation, maintenance of public roads and provision of drinking water, which were considered obligatory duties.

In the state of Cochin, urban local bodies emerged in the 1890s. However, the legislation for rural local bodies was attempted in 1914 through Village Panchayat Regulation Act. Accordingly, members were nominated to the Panchayats. In 1922, the principle of direct election was introduced for rural local bodies.

In 1949, at the time of integration of Travancore and Cochin princely states, there were 197 village unions and 7 panchayats in the former and 100 panchayats in the latter. At the time of formation of Kerala state, there were 495 panchayats in the Travancore-Cochin region and 399 panchayats in the Malabar area. For sometime after the formation of Kerala, the local bodies in two regions continued to function under different laws; two tiers in Malabar and single tier in Travancore-Cochin.

In 1957, the first elected Government in Kerala assumed power. The Government initiated a set of basic reforms in agriculture, education, industrial relations, police and development administration. An Administrative Reforms Committee (ARC) was formed under the chairmanship of the Chief minister with wide terms of reference, which referred to, among other things, the measures for decentralization of powers and methods for democratization of the organs of the government at various levels with a view to ensure effective participation of local self governing institutions in administration.

The Panchayat Raj system recommended by the ARC was essentially a 2-tier system with village panchayats at grassroots level and district councils at district level, both directly elected. The emphasis was to integrate revenue and development functions at Panchayat level. Local bodies were made to act as self-governing units. Village

4

panchayats would be empowered to collect land revenue to be remitted to the Government. The revenue and development blocks were to be made co-terminous. On the other hand, the district council was to have wide functions for administering the district. The District Council was to be transformed into district government in a phased manner. In the first phase, district council would act as the agents of Government, with a coordinating role. In the second phase, they would assume ful] responsibility over social sector projects. In the third phase, they would assume full powers over the development work in the district except very important schemes specifically retained by the State Government. The recommendation of the ARC formed the basis of Kerala Panchayat Bill and District Council Bill of 1958. However, the bills could not be enacted, as the Legislative Assembly was dissolved.

The new Government passed the Kerala Panchayati Raj Act of 1960, ignoring most of the recommendations of the ARC. However, the functions and resources of local bodies were enhanced. All the Government staff working at Panchayat level i.e. agriculture, animal husbandry, education, public health and cottage industries were to work under the control and supervision of Panchayat. The list of duties of Village Panchayats ranged from revenue functions to development functions. However in actual practice, the local bodies could control only traditional civic functions, which was the compulsory function of local bodies. Another drawback of the Act was that there was no provision for intermediate tier between State government and Village Panchayats/ Municipal Bodies. This became a major hindrance to integrate development activities with the Panchayat system.

In 1964, the Government attempted legislation in line with the recommendations of the Balwantrai Mehta Committee with directly elected Panchayat unions with planning and development functions at the Block level and Zilla Parishads as an advisory body at the district level. However, the bill could not be enacted as the Ministry fell. The new Government assumed power in 1967, introduced a new Panchayati Raj Bill on the lines of ARC recommendations; yet again, the bill could not be passed due to the fall of the Ministry. In 1978, the Bill on Kerala District Administration was re-introduced after removing the reference to police functions and restricting the district administration only to revenue functions. The Bill was passed in the year 1979. But before the Government could bring necessary rules for implementation of the Act, the Government fell. The next Government which came into power did effect changes in decentralized administrative set-up.

In 1987, the Government appointed a special advisor to suggest measures to effect democratic decentralization at district and lower levels. The report submitted by the Advisor in 1989 called for the review of provisions of the 1979 Act and suggested measures to remove anomalies in the Act and to effect administrative changes at the lower levels. The recommendations formed the basis for the constitution of district councils through direct elections. Under this set up, the powers and functions of district councils came to 152 items under 19 different heads. The Act did not consider

5

decentralization of boards such Kerala water Authority and Khadi and Village Industries Board. Also, the scope of the district council was restricted by preserving Government's right to intervene and lay down conditions.

In January 1991, the first ever elections to district councils were held. However, the next Government, which came into power shortly after the district council election tried to restrict the powers of the district councils under the given rule. An amendment was passed in the State legislature to empower the Government to amend the list of powers through notifications and consequently the powers of the district council became redundant. Most of the officers/ institutions, given to district councils were taken back by the Government. With the passing of 73ld and 74th constitutional amendments in 1994, the district councils were disbanded formally.

The most important milestones that facilitated large-scale decentralization in Kerala during the post-Constitutional amendment period till the end of the 9lh Five Year Plan are boxed in the following.

Important Milestones in Decentralization in the Post 73rd Amendment Period.

1994 Enabling Enactments in line with Constitutional Amendment September 1995 Initiated the transfer of powers, functions, institutions and staff to local

governments 2nd October,1995 The three tier local governments assume charge, after the elections February 1996 Adoption of a separate Budget document exclusively for local

governments February 1996 Submission of first State Finance Commission Report July 1996

Announcement of the decision to allot 35 to 40% of the Plan to Local Governments

August 1996 Launching of the People's Campaign July 1997 Setting up of the Committee on Decentralization of Powers. March 1999

Restructuring of the Kerala Panchayati Raj Act and the Kerala Municipality Act

March 2000

Amendment to Panchayat Raj and allied Acts in the context of decentralization

July 2000

Transfer of district level officers to District Panchayats and decision to redeploy staff to local governments

January 2001 Submission of the Second SFC Report

Decentralization in Kerala during the post-Amendment period was recognized as an instrument to rejuvenate the stagnant productive sector of the State and to mitigate excessive dependence on foreign remittances. Its specific objectives include; (Vijayanand 2000).

6

To improve the quality of investment by allocating resources for priorities fixed by local people.

To facilitate emergence of local solutions to development problems through improved planning, better implementation, use of traditional knowledge and technology.

To exploit local production possibilities.

To enable people's participation leading to better vigil in execution of programmes followed up with better upkeep of assets.

To provide the enabling environment for people to make contributions in kind and cash for development programme identified by them for priority action.

To bring about a convergence of resources and services to tackle development problems with greater vigour.

To unleash public action resulting in a demand-led improvement in the delivery of developmental and welfare services.

1.2.1 Transfer of Responsibilities and Personnel

The lists of responsibilities and staff of the line departments transferred to the local bodies are annexed as Annexure-I. The transferred officials have a dual accountability in the decentralized programme implementation; for the execution of plan programmes of the local bodies, they are accountable to the local bodies and for the execution of departmental programmes, they are responsible to their parent departments.

1.2.2 Transfer of Financial Resources

One-third of the Plan funds was earmarked for local governments and around 90% (the remaining 10% are Centrally and State Sponsored schemes) of this was given in a practically untied form to the local governments to prepare their own schemes and implement them within certain broad policy framework, which stipulated that at least 30% of the funds should be invested in productive sectors, not more than 30% should be invested on infrastructure, at least 10% should be earmarked for gender sensitive schemes and 5% for the care of the disabled, children and the aged. All the Plan grants due to local governments were separately budgeted in a document given as Annexure IV of the State Budget. It is non-divertible for other purposes. In addition, traditional non-plan grants continued to be given as before. The plan grants flowed in four installments to the local

7

bodies. A local government had to spend at least 75% of its allocation during a year failing which the shortfall would be reduced from the next year's allotment.

The criteria followed for intra-tier distribution of Plan grants-in aid during the 9th Five Year Plan were the following.

% Weightage Indicators Grama

PanchayaBlock.

PanchayatZila

PanchayatPopulation (excluding SC/ST) 65 65 55 Geographical area excluding area under 5 10 15 Area under paddy 5 - - Own income of GP 10 - - Composite index of Agri. Labourers, persons engaged in livestock,, fisheries, etc 15 25 20 Composite index of backwardness, houses without latrine and houses without - - 10 Total 100 100 100

During the 9thPlan, untied plan grants allocated to the local governments are as follows:

(In crore) Year Grama

Panchayat Block

Panchayat District

Panchayat Municipalities Corporations Total

1997-98 420.49 108.70 123.94 62.34 33.53 749.001998-99 549.54 135.02 142.67 81.90 40.87 950.001999-00 595.01 144.41 148.39 88.13 44.06 1020.002000-01 608.92 148.79 153.06 89.53 44.70 1045,002001-02 483.43 115.32 115.32 74.41 61.52 850.00Grand Total 2657,39 652.24 683.38 396.31 224.68 4614.00Rural-Urban % Shares 86.54 13.46% Shares of Different 66.55 16,33 17.11 63.82 36.18

100.00

Source: Economic Review, Govt. of Kerala

The table above introduces the composition of inter-tier devolution of untied plan funds to LSGs, which is further detailed in Chapter VI. During the 9'h Five Year Plan, the dominant share of the untied plan devolution to local bodies went to the Grama Panchayats, as the table above shows.

1.3 Decentralized Planning-Institutions and Methodology

1.3.1 Institutions for Local Body Level

There are three tiers to the rural local bodies in Kerala- Grama Panchayat at the village level, Block Panchayat at the block level and Zila Panchayat at the district level. Apart from these institutions, massive micro institution-building was envisaged under decentralization. They include;

8

Grama Sabha (GS): People's participation was sought to be ensured through Grama Sabha, at the level of a ward of the Grama Panchayat. Ten per cent of the voters of the ward constitute the quorum. In case of adjournment of the meeting of a Grama Sabha for the want of quorum, the meeting can be reconvened with a minimum quorum of 50 members. The officials of village panchayat shall attend the GS meetings. GS may appoint, elect or constitute general or special committees on specific issues. The specific powers and functions of Grama Sabhas are mentioned elsewhere (Chapters on Plan Formulation, Plan Implementation and Grama Sabha Participation).

Neighbourhood Groups: It is envisaged as a sub-system of the Grama Sabha. A neighbourhood Group (Ayalkoottams) is formed as an association of women members of 20-25 families with high risks, ie, usually those belonging to poverty line identified according to nine point non-economic criteria. These criteria include; possession of a kutcha house, no access to safe drinking water and sanitary latrine, presence of illiterate adults in the family with not more than one earning member, family getting barely two meals a day or less, presence of children below the age of five, presence of alcoholic or drug addict in the family and family belonging to the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The ayalkoottam identifies women from among themselves and form Self Help Groups (SHGs) for carrying out group activities; mainly for utilizing the 10% plan grants -in-aid set apart as Women Component Plan (WCP).

Training and Resource Persons. In the first year of the People's Plan, massive training programmes were introduced, About 600 Key Resorce Persons (KRPs) were identified at the State level, both from the Government and outside, representing various disciplines. At the district level, about 10000 district Resource persons (DRPs) and the local Government level about 1 lakh Local Resource Persons (LRPs) were selected. All the DRPs and LRPs and a good number of KRPs were selected by the local governments from government officials, professionals and activists. The massive training programme was intended to ensure that at the GP level, there would be nearly 100 persons sensitized on the objectives and methodology of decentralized planning, who were to take active part in spearheading the campaign. Handbooks on various development sectors were prepared by expert panels and circulated widely among local governments and resource persons,

There is an exclusive training institution for local governments called the Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA) which co-ordinates the training activities of local governments.

Committee System; All GPs, BPs and ZPs would have Standing Committees (SCs); each assigned with certain subjects. The SCs are co-ordinated with a Steering Committee consisting of the President, Vice President of the Panchayat and the chairpersons of the SCs. In addition, there are functional committees for different subjects, which may include experts and practitioners. Panchayats are free to constitute sub-committees to

9

assist the aforesaid committees. There is also provision for Joint Committees with the neighbouring local Governments.

Expert Committees: There are block and district level Expert Committees (ECs) drawing expertise from and outside the Government. (In their original incarnation, they were Voluntary Technical Corps which consisted of experts in different fields who voluntarily offered to render professional services to the local governments.) ECs have a three -fold role; providing technical advice to the PRIs, technically vetting the projects of PRIs (without changing the priorities laid down by PRIs) before they are sent to the District Planning Committee for approval and giving technical sanction for works, wherever required.

District Planning Committee (DPC): All PRI plans in the district would be submitted to DPC, which would give formal approval to them. Neither DPC nor ECs would have the power to alter the priorities fixed by PRIs, but could only ensure that the Guidelines were followed.

State Planning Board (SPB): At the apex level, the SPB, co-ordinates with the Department of Local Self Governments and takes the lead in decentralized planning at different tiers by issuing Guidelines, allocating plan funds and observing compliance and progress

State Election Commission: Apart from the conduct of local body elections, the Election Commission has been empowered to delimit the wards of PRIs for elections and to disqualify the defectors.

State Finance Commission: The I51 SFC was constituted in 1994 and the 2nd in 1999. The 1st State Finance Commission (SFC) submitted its report in February 1996. However, the formula used for inter-se distribution of plan fund was not the one given by the SFC, but was evolved by the Working Group of State Planning Board in 1997 (referred to above).

Ombudsman: Ombudsman is a high-powered institution consisting of judicial dignitaries formed to check malfeasance in local governments in the discharge of developmental functions.

1.3.2 Planning Methodology

The salient features of this methodology adopted for participatory planning for local level development are described below, stage by stage.

Needs Identification: Through a meeting of Grama Sabha/Ward Sabha, i.e., the ward or the electoral constituency of a Village Panchayat or Municipality, the felt needs of the community are identified. The meetings are held in a semi-structured manner with plenary sessions and sub-group sessions dealing with specific developmental issues. The

10

decisions are minuted and forwarded to the concerned Local Government. Each meeting is chaired by the elected member and has an official as its Co-ordinator

Situation Analysis. Compiling the demands raised in the first special Grama Sabha/Ward Sabha and the developmental information available with the PRI and the line departments, exhaustive Development Reports (DRs) were prepared for every PRI in the State. The DRs contain sector-specific chapters delineating development hitherto achieved, constraints therein and directions and strategies for further development. This was a one-time exercise for the 9lh Plan period.

Strategy Setting. Based on the recommendations of all Grama Sabha meetings, a one day Development Seminar is held every year at the PRI level in which participation of experts, elected members, representatives nominated by the GSs, practitioners from among the public is invited. The development seminars suggest the broad priorities and general strategies of developmental projects to be taken up in a particular year.

Projectisation: The Task Forces, presently known as 'Working Groups' are to translate the demands and recommendations into viable projects. For each local body, there were about 8-12 Task Forces dealing with different sectors; each consisting of 10-12 members. Each Task Force or Working Group is headed by an elected Member and is convened by the concerned government official in that sector. The Vice Chairman of the Task force /Working Group is normally a non-government expert in the sector. Projects must be prepared in the suggested format outlining the objectives, benefits, funding, mode of execution, phasing of the project and monitoring mechanism. Projects which could not be considered in the annual plan would become part of shelf of projects for the later years.

Plan Finalisation: Subject to the budget constraint of the local body, projects for the current annual plan are chosen from the whole set and the plan gets finalized. This plan is submitted to the District Planning Committee (DPC) through the Expert Committees. The Panchayat is free to take up any project, irrespective of its cost, subject to the resources actually available and within the sectoral limits.

Plan Vetting. The Technical Advisory Committees & Technical Committees at the Block or the District level consisting of official and non-official experts vet the projects with regard to their technical viability and conformity with the mandatory government guidelines on projectization and forward them to the DPC. The Expert Committees cannot change priorities or projects; they can only ask for rectification.

Plan Approval: The DPC gives the formal approval to the plans after which the Local Government can start implementation. It is to be noted that the DPC also cannot change the priority of a Local Government. It can only ensure that government guidelines are followed. Administrative approval for implementation is given project-wise by the Local Government. Every Local Government has unlimited powers of Administrative sanctions subject only to the limits of its financial resources.

11

Integration of Plans : Modalities were worked out to ensure horizontal integration (between plan projects of line departments and the PRI at the same tier) and vertical integration (between plans of different tiers of PRIs) of plans in such a way that duplicity is avoided and forward and backward linkages are secured. While organic linking of the functioning of PRIs and line departmental officials was to achieve horizontal integration, higher level (block and district level) Grama Sabhas involving the elected representatives of the lower levels and instructions outlining the spheres of activity for different tiers were to secure the advantages of vertical integration.

1.4 Evaluability of the Decentralization Experience of Kerala

Since the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution of India in 1993, the States have started devolving finances, functions and powers to the self-governing Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs). By the end of the 9th Five Year Plan, the Government of Kerala claimed to have had gone far ahead with decentralization by devolving around one-third of its plan funds to the PRIs, transferring considerable planning and executive powers and functions to them, creating enabling institutions at different tiers of local self-governments and sensitizing stakeholders at different levels. It is against this background that the Planning Board, Government of Kerala proposed that the Kerala experience on Decentralization be evaluated by Planning Commission. Time is apposite to put on record a multi-dimensional ex-post assessment of such an experience.

12

Chapter 2

Objectives of the Study and its Design

The Evaluation Study on the Decentralization Experience of Kerala during the 9th Five Year Plan was taken up by Programme Evaluation Organization, Planning Commission at the instance of the State Planning Board, Government of Kerala.

2.2 Objectives of the Study

The Evaluation Study was conducted with the objectives of;

1. Examining the extent to which the processes laid down for demand articulation, plan formulation, implementation and monitoring were adhered to at the different tiers of rural local bodies, especially by the Grama Panchayats.

2. Analyzing the efficacy of the processes actually followed for demand articulation, plan formulation, implementation and monitoring at the different tiers of rural local bodies, especially by the Grama Panchayats.

3. Understanding the constraints and catalysts in effective decentralization of powers and smooth functioning of rural local bodies.

4. Identifying the success stories of decentralization and factors behind success.

5. Learning lessons from the Kerala model of decentralized planning and suggesting reform initiatives thereon.

2.3 Study Design

1. The study followed a multi-stage, stratified random sampling design for the selection of district panchayats (DPs), block panchayats (BPs), grama panchayats (GPs), projects and households. Considering the constraints of time and cost, it was decided that the Study would be limited to the rural Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) - DPs, BPs and GPs. It was further decided that detailed study eliciting household level responses and other primary information would be limited to the GP level and that the study at BP and DP levels would mostly be confined to developing an understanding of the degree of vertical integration attained in decentralized planning.

13

2. From the districts covered under the erstwhile princely states of Travancore, Cochin and Malabar, one each was randomly selected, for, each of these three sets of districts represents distinct cultural identity, historical traditions and socio political behaviour. The predominantly hilly districts of Idukki and Wynad were separated from Travancore and Malabar region respectively and one among them was selected randomly to reflect on their characteristic issues. Thus four districts - Kollam from Travancore region, Emakulam from Kochin region, Malappuram from Malabar region and Wynad from among the hilly districts - were selected for the study by following the method of stratified random sampling.

3. Any district of Kerala may consist of three physiographic regions-coastal region, midland and hilly areas. This forms the basis for stratification of block panchayats of the selected districts, because block-specific problems are observed to be different across the three physiographic regions. The selected districts of Malappuram and Kollam are observed to consist of all the three physiographic regions. Hence from each of these districts, three blocks were selected randomly after arranging them according to their prominent physiographic characteristics. Wynad is prominently hilly and hence only one block panchayat was randomly selected from the district. Ernakulam is marked physiographically by coastal and midland region, barring a narrow stretch of high elevation. Hence after arranging its blocks under coastal region and midland, one was randomly selected from each. This procedure thus resulted in a sample of 9 blocks selected from four selected districts; 3 from Malappuram, 3 from Kollam, 2 from Ernakulam and 1 from Wynad.

4. Since there was no apriori reason to assume that the physiographic characteristics of Grama Panchayats within the selected block are vastly different, one GP was randomly selected from each selected block. Thus the sample size of Grama Panchayats was nine (List of selected GPs in Annexure IV).

5. The projects implemented by any GP under the Panchayat Plan funds were broadly classified under three sectors - Productive, Service and Infrastructure. It was decided that three projects (implemented during the 9th Five Year Plan) each from productive and service sectors would be selected for the study; the selected projects being those with the highest expenditure shares in the respective sectors. (For the evaluation of the Infrastructure sector, sample projects were not selected; a different methodology was followed.) This resulted in a sample of 54 GP projects spread across 4 districts, 9 blocks and 9 Grama Panchayats (GPs). To ensure representation to the issues of backward social classes, that project with the highest expenditure from the combined list of projects implemented under TSP and SCP during the 9th Plan was selected from each GP. This constituted an additional sample of 9 GP projects. In every selected GP, conforming to (any) one of the three Panchayat projects selected from productive/service sector of the GP,

14

one similar- if not identical-departmental project was selected to serve as comparison group. The sample of comparison projects included 15 projects (18 minus a shortfall of 3; one each in Kumbalangi, Marakkara and Edavanna GPs).

6. From each selected project, 10 beneficiaries (if available) were selected following simple random sampling from the list of beneficiaries/beneficiary group/beneficiary area of the project maintained by the GP. The total sample size of GP project beneficiaries was 616 (477 beneficiaries of 50 selected individual beneficiary oriented projects + 139 beneficiaries of 13 collective projects) and that of comparison projects was 140 (132 beneficiaries of 14 selected individual beneficiary oriented projects + 8 beneficiaries of 1 collective project). The remaining was shortfall.

7. A separate methodology was followed for assessing the participation of people in Grama Sabhas. In each selected GP, 5 socio-economic groups -SCs, STs, people below poverty line (BPL), people above poverty line(APL) and women -were defined and listed (from the voters list) from the ward with the highest concentration of SC families. From each of the 5 lists, 10 heads of households were selected randomly constituting a sample of 50 heads of households from each selected GP. The total sample over 9 GPs was 460 (an addition of 10 specially selected from Vengoor GP)

8. The next stage was the selection of members of sectoral Working Groups (WGs) at the three tiers of rural PRIs. It was decided that six WG members-two each from three major sectors- would be selected from each selected PRI by following simple random sampling. This resulted in a sample of 24 WG members from 4 selected DPs, 52 WG members from 9 selected BPs (shortfall of 2) and 50 WG members from 9 selected GPs {shortfall of 4).

9. Samples were also drawn from the members of District level Expert Committees (DLECs) and Block level Expert "Committees (BLECs) of selected DPs and BPs randomly at the rate of 6 from each selected DP and BP. The total sample size of DLEC members was 22 (shortfall of 2) and that of BLEC members was 53 {shortfall ofl).

10. From each selected GP, 6 Knowledgeable Persons (those who were knowledgeable about the different processes of decentralization, by virtue of their involvement therein, especially on non-official capacity) @ 2 from each broad sector {productive, service and infrastructure sectors) were selected. Thus the total sample size of knowledgeable persons was 51 (a shortfall of 3).

15

Sample Size at Different Levels

Sample Districts Kollam Ernakulam Malappuram Waynad Total

Number of BPs Selected 3 2 3 1 9 Number of GPs Selected 3 2 3 1 9 Total number of Selected GP Projects

7*3=21 7*2=14 7'3=21 7*1=7 63

Total Number of Selected Comparison Projects

2*'3=6 (2*2) - 1=3 (2'3)-2=4 2*1=2 15

Number of Beneficiaries of GP Projects

(10*21)-5=205

(10*14)-1-139

(10-21)-4=206

(10*7)-4=66 616

Number of Beneficiaries of Comparison Projects

(10*6)-5=55 (10*3) -3=27

(10*4)-2=38 10*2=20 140

No. of Households Selected to Assess GS Participation

50*3= 150

(50*2) +10=110

50*3= 150

50*1=50 460

Number of Knowledgeable Persons Selected

(6*3)-l= 17

6*2=12 (6*3)-2= 16

6*1=6 51

Number of Expert Committee Members Selected (DLEC+BLEC)

(6*1) + (6*3-l)=23

(6*1) 4 (6'2)=18

(6-1-1) + (6'3)=23

(6*1-1) + (6*1 HI

75

Number of TF/WG Members Selected (DP+BP+GP)

(6*1) + (6*3)+ (6*3-

1 ) =41

(6*1 )+ (6*2)+

(6*2)=30

(6*1) 4 (6*3-2)+

(6*3-3}=37

(6-1) + (6*1)4

(6'1)=18

126

2.4 Instruments of Observation

To elicit primary and secondary information required for meeting the objectives of the Study, structured questionnaires were prepared at different levels. They include the following.

State level Schedule: A questionnaire was prepared and circulated among the State Departments to understand the changes-financial and physical- occurred in their size and composition on account of decentralization.

PRI Schedule: Different questionnaires were structured for the three tiers of rural Panchayati Raj Institutions {DP schedule, BP schedule and GP schedule) to understand the specificities of plan formulation and implementation at different units of decentralized planning and the degree of integration of their plans.

Schedule for members of Expert committee (DLEC/BLEC): This questionnaire was administered to the selected members of the District level and Block level Expert Committees in order to understand the procedures and difficulties in vetting of plan projects of GPs (captured at BLEC level) and BPs (captured at DLEC level).

Working Group schedule: This was canvassed with the selected Working Group members of DPs, BPs and GPs in order to understand the correspondence between the prescribed method and the actual method followed for projectization (the process of converting rough requirements raised at Grama Sabhas into concrete projects).

16

Knowledgeable Person Schedule: This questionnaire was administered to the selected individuals known to be knowledgeable about the processes of decentralization at the GP level, with the intent to cross-check, validate and supplement views raised at different levels.

Household level beneficiary schedule: This schedule was prepared differently for different projects, again differentiated with respect to GP project and comparison project beneficiaries. This questionnaire captured information on demand articulation, stages in obtaining project assistance and household level impact of the project.

Household level schedule for assessing Grama Sabha participation: This questionnaire was canvassed with the set of people selected to assess their physical attendance in Grama Sabhas, their perceptions on the transactions carried out in Grama Sabhas, degree of articulation of different socio-economic groups in Grama Sabhas and constraints therein and reasons for non-attendance in Grama Sabhas.

Apart from the structured questionnaires discussed above, different qualitative instruments were employed to improve the explanatory power of the gathered quantitative information. They include;

Qualitative notes at GP level: Qualitative notes were written at GP level gathering information from Development Reports, Plan documents and other survey documents.

Project level notes: Notes were written about each selected project, examining the conformity of project reports with prescribed guidelines and factors that catalyzed and dampened the project level impact. Notes were also written at the GP level reflecting on the factors affecting GS participation of its population.

Besides, sources of secondary information including government publications and research works were abundantly referred to.

2.5 Reference Period

The reference period for the study was the Ninth Five Year Plan, 1997-98 to 2001-02. However information was selectively gathered on pre and post- 9th Five Year Plan period to prepare the base for comparative analysis of the data collected for the reference period.

2.6 Outsourcing of Fieldwork and Data Processing

Considering the quantum of work involved and the limited capacity of Programme Evaluation Organization (PEO) at the field level, it was decided that PEG would collaborate with a competent agency in the conduct of the Evaluation Study. (Major portion of) Fieldwork, project level reporting, data processing {entry and

17

preliminary tabulation) and software support were entrusted with NORMA Social and Market Research, Kochulloor, Thiruvananthapuram, which completed the tasks systematically and in time. However, the responsibilities of drawing samples at different levels, discussions with field level officials and canvassing of the schedules for Knowledgeable Persons, Working Group members and Expert Committee members were reserved with the field teams of Programme Evaluation Organization.

2.7 Field Orientation and Survey

The field teams of REO Chennai, PEO Thiruvananthapuram and NORMA Social and Market Research were oriented at the office of NORMA during 15th to 16th July 2004. The fieldwork in the selected districts spanned from July 2004 to November 2004. Before launching the study in the field, the instruments of observation were widely pre-tested by the field team of PEO Thiruvananthapuram.

18

Chapter 3

Change in the Methodology of Plan Formulation

Introduction

Decentralization of planning in Kerala during the post-constitutional amendment (73rd and 74th) period envisaged to institute a thoroughly revised, bottom-up methodology for plan formulation, drastically different from the departmental methods, by empowering different tiers of PRIs with commensurate powers, functions and finances and by creating appropriate institutions at each tier. The ensuing analysis examines the conformity to the main stages and processes prescribed for plan formulation by PRIs and the efficacy of the actual processes followed, especially by Grama Panchayats. Each of the following sections lists down the prescribed stages first (in italics) and then analyzes the actual stages and methods followed.

Section-II examines the processes involved in the identification of felt needs at the grassroots level while Section-Ill dwells on the methodology adopted for prioritizing the needs raised in different forums and for translating such rough requirements into concrete, technically acceptable projects. Section IV deals with the methods adopted by expert bodies for checking plans and projects of different tiers of local bodies for their technical acceptability and methods of rectification therein. Section-V makes crop-specific analysis of their cost of cultivation as case studies to further examine the scientificity of the productive sector planning of local bodies. Section-VI makes a preliminary assessment of the degree of vertical integration of plans achieved at different tiers during the Ninth Five Year Plan. Section-VII encapsulates the discussions in the chapter.

3.2 Needs Identification in the Grama Sabha

In Kerala, each Grama Sabha (GS) conforms Co one ward of a GP. As per the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act 1994, Grama sabha meetings were to be convened twice a year; later (in 1999) revised to 4 times a year. Dates for the GS meetings would be decided by the Panchayat Samithi and intimated accordingly. The quorum of GS should not be less than 10 percent of the voters of the ward. In case of adjournment ofGS, the required quorum would be fifty, when reconvened.

The first GS in each year would attempt to prepare an action plan for the ensuing financial year, based on the available resources. After a brief common gathering in GS meeting, the participants would divide into small groups, each dealing with a particular development sector and discussing at length the problems and the likely solutions related to the sector. Eight to twelve discussion groups could be formed to list down sectoral

19

priorities. These priorities would, be forwarded to the GP. (The final decision on the priority rests with the Panchayat Samithi, consisting of elected representatives).

Based on the demands of the first special Grama Sabha/Ward Sabha, exhaustive Development Reports would be prepared for every local body in the State. Analysis of secondary data and discussions held with line department officials and knowledgeable persons in the GP would form the basis of Panchayat level Development report (PDR). Attention would also be given to list out short and medium term projects to be implemented.

Based on the recommendations of all special GS meetings, a one day Development Seminar (DS) would be held at GP level consisting of experts, elected members, representatives of GSs and practitioners from the public. The DS would suggest the broad priorities and general strategies of developmental projects to be taken up for the year. During the seminar, the PDR would be presented and group discussions would be made. The recommendations made by the groups would be recorded as amendments to the PDR. DS would also select the members of Task Forces (Working Groups) to translate the seminar proposals into projects.

However from the second year of 9h Five Year Plan onwards, the first special grama sabhas were to deliberate on the draft proposals of various task forces on annual plan (since need identification by GSs had been done and documented in the development report) and all the suggestions emanating from GSs were to be minuted and forwarded to GP Samithi. Based on the suggestions of all GS meetings, along with the task force reports, the local body would finalize the drafi document for discussion. Thereafter a one day Development seminar would be held at the PRIlevel.

The following analysis of the stages involved in the decentralized plan formulation (with special reference to GPs) may be read against the background set out above.

Table 3.1 Intensity of Movements/Uprisings in the Selected GP during the Pre-Decentralization Period-Scaling of Opinions of Knowledgeable Persons

GPs

/Dis

trict

s

Land

Ref

orm

s

Wag

e In

crea

se

Proh

ibiti

on

SC

/ST

Fish

erm

en

Bet

ter

Envi

ronm

ent

Safe

Drin

king

W

ater

Bet

ter

Sani

tatio

n

Bet

ter P

H

Faci

litie

s

Lite

racy

Bet

ter

Phys

ical

In

fras

truct

ure

Oth

er

Mov

emen

ts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Vilakudi 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.6 2.B 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 3.0 4.0 Sooranad (N) 1.0 2.7 3.3 3.0 4.0 3.7 3.7 4.0 2.8 1.7 3.5 4.0 Neendakara 3.0 33 3.5 3.8 3.0 3.8 3.5 3.7 2.5 2.7 3.3 4.0 Vengur 2.7 2.5 3.2 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.8 2,8 2.8 2.8 2.8 33 Kumblangi 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.7 2.8 2.3 3.2 IK 3.0 2.8 3.3 Edavanna 3.3 3.7 3.7 4.0 4.0 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.7 1.0 3.3 4.0 Marakkara 2.3 3.0 3.0 3.2 4.0 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 2.3 3.3 3.7 Thanur 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 52 2.7 3.2 3.7 Vellamunda 2.7 2.5 3.0 2.8 3.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2* 3.0 3.7

20

The table attempts to capture the tradition {over the 20-25 years that preceded Peoples' Plan) of the selected GPs in taking part in mass movements, uprisings, etc, and the intensity of such participation, which can, to a certain extent, define the ease with which a mass movement like People's Plan and decentralization could have been initiated in these GPs. Each cell in the table above presents the arithmetic average of the scores given by the selected Knowledgeable Persons to the corresponding activity. The scores ranged between 1 to 4; 1 for 'most active', 2 for 'active', 3 for 'less active' and 4 for the 'total absence of any such participation'. It can be read from the table that, barring the struggle for land reforms in the erstwhile feudal Sooranadu (said to be Koonthalikkarude Naadu) and active involvement in literacy campaigns in Edavanna and Soornadu North, the selected GPs were not active participants in any socio-cultural uprisings in the State. If this represented the general character of the blocks/districts in question, then, grounding decentralization, with effective participation of different sets of people in plan formulation and implementation would have been a huge task in the selected GPs.

Table 3.2: Availability of Resource Persons in the Sample GPs

Name of the GP No. of Key Resource Persons

No. of District Resource Persons

No. of Local Resource Persons

: Total

Sooranadu(N) 3 3 9 15 Neendakara 3 6 15 24 Vengur 1 1 7 9 Edavanna 3 3 6 12 Marakkara 2 2 15 19 Thanur 3 3 3 9 Vellamunda 0 5 32 37 Total 15 23 87 125

It may be seen that the number of resource persons, who were recruited from within and outside the government and were to take lead in training programmes and to spearhead the People's Plan campaign, differed widely across sample GPs. This would have created different levels of enabling environment for people's planning in different local governments.

An ex-post evaluation of the degree of participation in plan formulation is beset with many difficulties; yet the same is attempted here in a limited way.

21

Table 3.3 Demand Articulation by Selected Beneficiaries

% Declaring to have Made their Demand Through:

Name of GP

% of Beneficiaries Declaring to have Demanded the Project Before Placing

Application Grama Sabha GP Members/

Other Leaders GP Officials Departmental Officials

1 2 3 4 5 6 Vilakudi 68 79.4 17.6 2.9 0 Sooranadu(N) 76 39.5 32.6 14 0 Neendakara 45.5 80 4 8 0 Vengur ™ 62.5 17.5 15 0 Kumbalangi 58 72.4 27.6 0 0 Edavanna 80 72.5 27.5 0 0 Marakiara 28 56.3 6.3 38 0 Thanur 55-4 71 19.4 3.2 3.2 Vellamunda 56.5 69.2 26.9 3.8 0

No. 275 188 61 23 1 Total % 60.2 66.2 21.5 8.1 0.4

The table above summarizes the role played by the respondents of the selected individual beneficiary oriented projects in the origin of those projects. Column 2 suggests that around 40% of the respondents received the benefits without demanding for the project in the Grama Sabhas or by any other means. The presence of such beneficiaries is very high in Marakkara from Malappuram district (72%) and Neendakara GP from Kollam district (54.5%). Among those who had placed their demand for the project assistance before the project was approved, the major platform was Grama Sabhas, especially in Neendakara GP and Vilakudi GP (both from Kollam district). Contrastingly, in Sooranadu North GP (Kollam district), GP level leaders played a major part in this, while in Marakkara GP (Malappuram district), GP officials supplemented the Grama Sabhas.

In the case of collective projects, the participation matrices formed from a sample survey in Thiruvananthapuram district has shown that beneficiary participation in conceiving, selecting and formulating projects was low (Gopinathan Nair and Krishnakumar, KRRLLD, 2002). Another sample survey conducted in two GPs and two Municipalities of Thiruvananthapuram district with a view to assess decision-making under People's Planning revealed that a) almost all GS participants were untrained as to how to participate in GSs, b) only about 16% had adequate knowledge about the purpose of GSs, c) about 49% rated the quality of GS discussions as poor, d) about 39% of the participants were fully unaware about the decisions made in the GSs and e) only 25% of the participants knew about the budget of the GP (Padma Ramachandran KRRLLD, 2004). These together with the exhaustive survey results of the present Study furnished in Chapter on GS Participation would suggest that a beginning and rapid advancement had, of course, been made in participatory decision-making during the 9th Plan; however, there were serious constraints that affected the quality and representativeness of demand articulation in Grama Sabhas. In short, the Grama Sabhas had grown as crucial forum for need articulation during the 9th Five Year Plan; however they were yet to acquire their envisaged role in this, at least in certain parts of the State.

22

Table 3,4: Articulation of Sectoral Issues in Grama Sabhas- Views of Knowledgeable Persons (KPs)

Districts % of Selected KPs Saying that GS Articulated the Key Sectoral Issues in the GS Meetings;

Effectively Less Effectively Not at All Kollam 47.1 35.3 17.7 Emakulam 83.3 8.3 8.3 Malapguram 56.3 43.8 0 Wynad 83.3 16.7 0 TOTAL 62.8 29.4 7.8

The majority of the selected Knowledgeable Persons (KPs) acknowledged that the GSs articulated the key sectoral issues effectively; yet a considerable proportion of them, especially in Kollam and Malappuram districts, doubted the effectiveness of Grama Sabhas and a very few of them fully disapproved of it. The reasons for this can be located in the tables that follow this.

Table 3.5: Motives behind attending Grama Sabhas- Views of KPs

% of Selected Knowledgeable Persons Declaring that People attended Grama Sabhas During the 9th Plan with the Following Motives: To Get Individual Benefits To Respond to

Demands of Party Cadres

To Get Benefit to

NHGs

To Get Benefit for their Socio-

Economic Groups

To Seek Explanation

from Officials /Leaders

Participated with Objective of Developing

Ward/GP

Alm

ost a

ll Pe

ople

Mor

e th

an

Hal

f of t

he

Peop

le

Less

than

H

alf o

f the

Pe

ople

Mor

e th

an

Hal

f Le

ss th

an

Hal

f N

eglig

ible

/N

il

Less

than

H

alf

Neg

ligib

le

/Nil

Less

than

H

alf

Neg

ligib

le

/Nil

Less

than

H

alf

Neg

ligib

le

/Nil

Mor

e th

an

Hal

f Le

ss th

an

Hal

f

Neg

ligib

le

/Nil

5.9 82.4 11.8 2.0 58.8 39.2 37.3 62.7 47.1 52.9 9.8 90.2 2.0 9.8 88.2

Given that majority of the Grama Sabha attendees participated in the Grama Sabhas mainly with an eye on individual benefits and only a small minority participated in GSs with the envisaged objective of taking pan in the developmental process of their village, GSs could not have been fully effective in articulating the most-felt requirements of the village. Majority of the selected KPs also felt that a visible percentage of the GS participants attended the Grama Sabhas to see that the political equations in the GSs are balanced; naturally the demands raised by this section could not be fully impartial and balanced. This coupled with inadequacies in the transmission of information about the conduct of GSs to the disadvantaged sections, unsuitable timings and influx of party politics (Chapter V) must have reduced the representative character of the Grama Sabhas.

Table 3.6: Trends in GS attendance %of Selected Knowledgeable Persons Saying that Attendance in GS Meetings Over the Years has: Increased Declined Not Changed 3.9

86.3 9.8

There has been a general agreement among the selected KPs that the attendance in Grama Sabha meetings has been going down over the years, after the initial enthusiasm.

23

That the attendance in Gram Sabhas has been going down is a conclusion consistent with the tables presented in the Chapter on Grama Sabha participation. That the salient reason for the dwindling representative base of the Grama Sabhas was the non-receipt of individual benefits (chapter 5) confirms the 'motive problem' suggested by the KPs above. A considerable number of the selected KPs opined that it was acceptable to enthuse people with the lure of individual benefits to initiate the process; but the actual failure occurred in sensitizing the majority about the envisaged purpose of Grama Sabhas (its community development substance) in the subsequent years of decentralization.

Table 3.7: GS Demands vs. Initiation of Projects

% of Beneficiaries of GP Projects Feeling that their Project was taken up Based on Demands made by GS

Name of the Project

Fully Partly Not at All Don't Know NR

Total No. of

Respondents

Housing 69.9 13.3 3.6 12.0 1.2 83 Drinking Water 77.8 4.4 2.2 13.3 2.2 45 Agriculture 58.5 22.0 8.5 11.0 0.0 82 AH 71.1 15.8 0.0 10.5 2.6 38 Irrigation 55.6 11.1 0.0 33.3 00 27 Fisheries 56.3 25.0 0.0 18.8 0.0 16 Sanitation 82.0 8.0 4.0 6.0 0.0 50 Ramp 71.4 0.0 0.0 28.6 0.0 7 Total 68.4 13.8 3.7 13.2 0.9 348

Despite all the above, it is important to note that most of the beneficiaries felt that the projects from which they benefited had been taken up by the GPs based on the demands of the Grama Sabhas; there was no systematic undermining of the people's wishes at the stage of plan formulation. Had the Grams Sabhas graduated into a body united with the objective of securing community development (rather than individual and limited-group aggrandizements), the aforesaid character of decentralized plan formulation would have resulted in fully development-oriented, integrated projects. However, as the forgoing analysis (coupled with the Chapter V) shows, this is yet to take place. Secondly, the table above also suggests that around 13% of the beneficiaries were not aware of the origin of the project, suggesting their detachment with participatory stages involved in plan formulation.

Table 3.8: Data Sources for Planning and the Degree of Their Use- Views of KPs

% Giving the Principal Source of Such Data base during the 9* Plan as;

% of KP Respondents Opining that GP used Available

Districts No. (%)of KP

Respondents Opining that

G.S had Required

Database for Planning

Departmental Data

Primary Data Collected and Maintained by

GP Over Time

Primary Data Collected at the

Start of the People's Plan

Campaign

Other Sources

To a Great Extent

To Some Extern

Kollam 15 (100) 40.0 6.3 33.3 20.0 13.3 86.7 Ernakulam 11 (100) 27.3 9.1 63.6 0 36.4 63.6 Malappuram 16(100) 31.3 31.3 37.5 0 25.0 75.0 Wynad 6(100) 16.7 0 83.3 0 33.3 66.7 TOTAL 48(100) 31.3 14.6 47.9 6.3 25.0 75.0

24

All KP respondents who knew about the GP data base (three respondents did not know about such database) unanimously declared that GP gathered enough database for planning from different sources during the 9th Five Year Plan. The degree of dependence on different data sources seems to differ across districts and GPs within districts (not shown in the table); yet it is to the credit of the groundwork done for decentralization that in majority of the selected GPs, the reliance on the primary data generated at the start of the People's Plan campaign was quite considerable. However, the enthusiasm shown in the generation of information and its compilation in the form of Development Reports does not seem to have been fully sustained in the use of the information for formulation and execution of plans. The consistency between the developmental information presented in the Development Reports and the projects formulated and executed thereon is systematically seen in Appendix V.

Other aspects such as the degree of articulation of different socio-economic sections

in Grama Sabhas and household respondents' views on the contents of GSs are detailed in Chapter V (on Grama Sabha Participation).

3.3 Prioritization & Projectization

Task Forces, presently known as 'Working Groups' (WG) would identify priorities and translate the recommendations of die Development Seminar into viable projects. After projectization, the elected representatives (Samiti) would make the final selection of projects to be implemented during the annual plan, based on the plan budget of the GP, Projects which could not be considered in the annual plan would become pan of shelf of projects from which projects could be drawn in subsequent years.

For each local body, there would be about 8 -12 Task Forces, each for 3 sector. Each task force would consist of 10-12 members. Each Task Force would be headed by an elected Member and convened by the concerned government official. The Vice Chairman of the Task force /Working Group would normally be a non-government expert in the sector. Projects must be prepared in the suggested format outlining the objectives, describing the benefits, explaining the funding and detailing the mode of execution, phasing of the project and monitoring mechanism.

The selection of the envisaged sample of WG members for the Study was beset with many problems in the field. Though it was decided that WG members would be selected randomly from the most important sectors (in terms of expenditure) of the GP, assigning representation to official and non-official members, the original sample had to be continuously substituted, mainly on account of two reasons; a) many of the non-official members of the WG selected for the study had already dissociated with the Working Group and were not available, and, b) majority of the selected official members had been transferred and were not available. These changes seriously affected the continuity of expertise from 9[h Plan to the 10th Plan and the sample presented here, to a great extent,

25

represent the group that worked during the 9th Five Year and continued with their work during the 10th Five Year Plan. Table 3.9: Attendance in WG Meetings

GP/BP/DP % of WG Members Declaring that Meetings were Called only

as and When Required

% of WG Members Declaring that their Participation was Regular in the WG

Meetings During 9 th plan All GPs 81.6 93.9 AU BPs 92 88.2 All DPs 95,7 95.5

The table shows that there were no fixed frequencies for convening the meetings of the Working Groups. The WGs were convened normally during the stage of plan formulation. That the selected WG members were regular in their attendance in the WG meetings is clear from the forgoing explanation; however, it is certain that on a fully randomized sample, the regularity of attendance of WG members would not be as bright.

Table 3.10: Extent of Identification and Prioritization of Problems

% of Selected WG Members Opining that WG Identified Sectoral Problems

% of Selected WG Members Opining that WG Identified Problems from;

% of Selected WG Members Opining that the Priorities were Fixed by;

District GP/BP/DP

Com

preh

ensi

vely

To a Limited Extent

From Minute Records of GSs

From Development Data with PRI and DRs and

Seminars

From Discussions Among WG

Members

Panchayat Samiti

WG Itself

GPs 68.8 25 18.8 37.5 37.5 93.3 6.7BPs 58.8 41.2 29.4 35.3 23.5 93.3 6.7

Kollam

DP' 100 0 0 66.7 33.3 33.3 33.3 GPs 50 50 41.7 33.3 167 41.7 58.3 BPs 41.7 50 45.5 18.2 27.3 100 0

Emakulam

DP* 50 50 0 66.7 16.7 100 0GPs 64.3 28.6 46.2 23.1 7.7 23.1 76.9 BPs 62.5 37.5 31.3 12.5 50 84.6 15.4

Malapuram

DP* 66.7 33.3 16.7 83.3 0 83.3 16.7 GP 83.3 16.7 100 0 0 50 50BP 66.7 33.3 66.7 16.7 16.7 66.7 33.3

Wynad

DP- 83.3 16.7 0 66.7 16.7 100 0 * (The sample size of each DP is only 6)

Only a negligible percentage of the selected WG members felt that they failed totally to identify the problems of the sectors that they dealt with; however a substantial percentage of them selected from GPs, BPs and DPs acknowledged that they could not identify those problems comprehensively. Part of it can be traced back to the forgoing

26

section, which spelt out the difficulties in identifying the problems through Grama Sabhas. Also, in a considerable number of cases, selected WG members revealed that they identified the sectoral problems from discussions among themselves. This was not fully in the spirit of decentralization and might not have helped them to fully identify the problems of their sectors. It may also be seen that the prioritization of the identified problems was also significantly left to the WGs in the GPs of Ernakulam, Malappuram and Wynad districts. It is verified that more than 95% of the selected WG members declared that the major identified problems were prioritized and that they agreed with the priorities fixed by the local bodies.

Table 3.11: Projectization- Views of Selected WG Members (1)

% Opining that the Projects were Made According to the Prescribed Guidelines

% Who Evaluated the Performance of WG as;

District

GP/BP/ DP

%ofWG Members Opining that

Demands of GS were Communicated to

WGs

% Opining that Projects were Prepared only

from GS Demands

Fully To a Great Extent

Very Effective

Somewhat Effective

GPs 75 43.8 35.3 58.8 29.4 70.6

BPs 81.3 76.5 52.9 47.1 47.1 52.9 Kollam

DP 16.7 0 50 33.3 66.7 33.3

GPs 91.7 50 50 41.7 25 66.7 BPs 100 75 8.33 91.7 41.7 58.3 Ernakulam DP 66.7 66.7 16.7 50 33.3 50 GPs 100 78.6 57.1 42.90 13.33 86.7BPs 75 60 75 25 56.3 37.5Malappuram DP 83.3 16.7 66.7 16.7 16.7 83.3 GPs 100 100 0 100 16.7 83.6 BPs 50 16.7 25 75 16.7 83.3 Wynad

DP 33.3 16.7 83.3 16.7 0 83.3

* (The sample size of each DP is only 6)

Those WGs to which GS demands were not communicated must have been deprived of the principal inputs for the formulation of projects. As regards the conformity with Guidelines in the preparation of project reports, the sample of the project reports taken for the Study revealed that a sizeable percentage of them did not work out the financial viability of the projects systematically and did not elucidate the criterion for the selection of beneficiaries. Many project titles were highly ambitious and the project components were thoroughly incapable of achieving the objectives of the projects as the project title and other sections revealed.

On self-evaluation, majority of the WG members suggested that their WGs were only 'somewhat effective'. Among those who declared the functioning of WG as Very effective', more than 90% of them thought that the major factor that contributed to the same was the interest shown by its members. It is verified that out of the 9 selected GPs, five felt that the constitution of WGs brought in the required expertise for projectization, while the GPs of Vengoor, Kumbalangi, Edavanna and Thanur declared that such expertise came in only 'to a limited extent'.

27

Table 3.12: Projectization- Views of Selected WG Members (II)

District GP/BP/DP % Opining that WG took into Account the Local Resources

Fully To a Great Extent

To a Limited Extent

Not at All

% Opining that due care Given to Include Locally Available Technologies in

Projects Kollam GPs 5.9 23.5 23.5 47.1 25 BPs 0 5.9 29.4 64.7 25 DP 0 66.7 33.3 0 50 Emakulam GPs 16.7 41.7 25 16.7 41.7 BPs 0 25 25 50 45.5 DP 16.7 16.7 0 50(*) 33.3 Malappuram GPs 6.7 33.3 40 20 50 BPs 15.4 0 30.8 53.8 30.8 DP 0 33.3 33.3 16.7 O 83.3 Wynad GPs 0 83.3 16.7 0 100 BPs 0 16.7 0 83.3 0 DP 0 0 0 100 0

(The sample size of each DP is only 6); (*) = There is one "no response" each.

One major shortcoming of the projects, as confessed by the WG members themselves, was inadequate consideration for the local resources while framing projects. This was partly due to inadequate understanding of local problems and the inability to distinguish the superficial problems (symptoms) from the substantial. (For example, making a project for giving negligible production bonus to paddy growers when the real agrarian question is the desertion of agriculture by the new generations due to a general perception that paddy cultivation is un-remunerative). That a large chunk of the projects were repetitive of departmental projects during the 8th Five Year Plan can be seen from the Impact Chapter. Among those WG members who cited some difficulties in accommodating local technologies in projects, 73.3% selected from GPs and 43.3% from BPs declared that their major constraint was inadequate knowledge about such technologies. .

Table 3.13: Training to WG Members during 9th Five Year Plan

% of WG Members who Rated the Training as; Districts

Sample GP/BP/DP

%. of WG Members who Got Trained

during [he 9th Plan

%of WG Members who said Training was Necessary

Very Effective Effective Somewhat Effective

All GPs 82.4 100.0 46.2 38.5 15.4 All BPs 94.1 100.0 68.8 18.8 12.5

Kollam DP 66.7 100.0 50 0 50

All GPs 83.3 90.0 100 60.0 10.0 All BPs 83.3 70.0 11.1 55.6 22.2

Ernakulam DP 100 83.3 33.3 0 66.7

All GPs 66.7 80.0 40.0 40.0 10.0 All BPs 93.8 88.2 40.0 60.0 0.0

Malappuram DP 100 83.3 16.7 0 66.7

AH GPs 100 1000 0.0 33.3 66.7 AUBPs 100 100.0 167 83.3 00

Wyiwd DP-Wynad 100 100.0 0 0 100.0

* (The sample size of each DP is only 6)

28

Majority of the WG members were trained in their work at the beginning of the Ninth Plan itself; majority of the remaining got trained during the Plan. Large majority of the selected WG members felt that the training given to them was necessary to them and majority of them, in general, approved of the effectiveness of the training programmes.

The following tables present the working of the WGs from a different angle. While the aforesaid discussion presented the views of the selected WG members, the following table presents the views of the selected implementing {line department) officials on the working of WGs, which clarifies their role in plan formulation too.

Table 3.14: Participation of Selected Implementing Officials in WGs

No. (%) Declaring to have Attended the WG Meetings during the 9th Plan;

Number (%) Declaring that Project Reports were Prepared According to the Guidelines;

Name of the Implementing Office/Official

Sam

ple

Size

Regularly

Occasionally Never

Among those Usually did not Attend, Number (%) who used to Send Other Officials to WG Meetings Regularly;

All of them Most of them

Krishi Bhavan 9 7 1 0(1) 1 7 2 Vet. Surgeon 9 4 5 0 2 5 3

PHC doctor 8 4 3 1 3 5 3 1CDS Supervisor 9 * * * * 6 3 Anganawadi worker 8 6 0 2 3 1 Overseer 7 * * * * 7 0 Fisheries Officer 3 3 0 0 2 1

Total 53 24(66.7) 9(25.0) 3

(8.3) 6

(50.0) 35 (72.9) 13

(27.1)

(*)=Question not addressed. ($) One official did not respond.

The attendance of the selected implementing officials in WGs may be viewed against the fact that all but 4 Anganwadi workers and one PWD overseer were part of the sectoral WGs and most of them (86.4%) were convenors of the respective WGs. Irregular attendance was most pronounced among the doctors at the village level- veterinary and PHC. Though some of them used to send their assistants (like health workers and veterinary assistants) to the WGs, the inputs of qualified doctors would be crucial to tackle local health problems in a scientific way. All (but one) officials who were members of the WG {47 out of 48) acknowledged to have received the Guidelines for project preparation. As the convenors of the WGs, majority of the selected implementing officials (a greater proportion than the selected WG members) felt 'that projects were prepared according to the prescribed guidelines. It is further verified, that there was no clear district-specific pattern to the regularity of attendance of the implementing officials in WGs.

Table 3.15: Appraisal of WGs by Officials

% of Selected Implementing Officials Rating the Functioning of the WG for their Sector during the 9th Plan as;

% of Selected Implementing Officials Giving the MajorDifficulties that Prevented Effective Functioning of the WG as;

Functioned Very Well Satisfactorily

Z Not Satisfactorily Pre-Occupation of , Non-Official

Members

Pre-Occupation of Official Members

Lack of Adequate Incentives

19.6 66.7 13.7 46.2 20.5 17.9

29

The evaluation of the selected implementing officials of the functioning of the respective sectoral WGs went more or less in tandem with that of the selected WG members (presented above), suggesting ample room for improvement. 34 out of 47 WG members/convenors among the selected implementing officials reported major difficulties that prevented effective functioning of their WGs. Pre-occupation of the non-official members, reflected by majority of the selected WG members too, stresses the need for a more careful selection of the non-official members of the WGs along with building up a reasonably acceptable incentive mechanism, which would induce shedding pre-occupations and ensure regular attendance in WGs. Attending to the needs of WGs should ideally be conceived as one of the most important pre-occupations of the implementing officials. During the field visits (June-August 2004), it was made out that Working Groups per se had become highly inactive in many places and many willing collaborators (clerical, administrative staff and others) were made use in the preparation of projects in 2004-05. Projectization had turned into a totally mechanical exercise by then.

The following table summarizes the opinions of the selected Knowledgeable Persons about the improvements/otherwise secured by decentralization on some important aspects of plan formulation.

Table 3.16: Scaling of Opinions of Knowledgeable Persons on GP Level Plan Formulation

GPs/Districts Conformity of

Project with Local Needs

People's Participation in Project Selection

Addressing Problems of

Women in Plans

Addressing Problems of SC/ST in Plans

Vilakudi 1.2 2.0 1.4 1.4 Sooranad (N) 1.66 1.0 1.00 1.33 Neendakara 1.8 1.83 1.50 1.25 KOLLAM 1.46 1.58 1.28 1.33 Vengur 1.00 1.16 1.16 1.00

Kumblangi 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ERNAKULAM 1.00 1.08 1.08 1.00

Edavanna 1.50 1.50 1.25 1.75 Marakkara 1.33 1.33 1.50 1.50

Thanur 1.00 1.00 1.16 1.00 MALAPURAM 1.25 1.25 1.31 1.37

Vellamunda 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 WYNAD 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 TOTAL 1.22 1.29 1.20 1.22

Considering that the score '1' represents considerable improvements over the pre-decentralized scenario, '2' for marginal improvements, '3' for absence of any change, '4' and '5' for deterioration) most of the selected knowledgeable persons seem to agree that decentralization of planning brought about welcome changes in the aspects defined in the table. However, the forgoing analysis shows that the achievements were far below the envisaged. These results are consistent with the opinions aired by them elsewhere.

30

Unqualified improvements are reported from the fishing 'villages of Kumbalangi and Thanur and the hilly northern village of Vellamunda.

3.4 Plan Vetting

The projects prepared by GPs and other tiers for the annual plan would have to be approved by the District Planning Committee (DPC) which^ would lead to releasing the funds from the State government. There may be technical deficiencies in the projects prepared by WGs; hence they needed to be vetted by an expert body. Therefore, an expert body known as 'Voluntary Technical Corps' (VTC), drawing only from voluntary non-official expertise, was constituted as an advisory body to DPC, to vet the plan projects of GPs (to be done by VTCs at the block level) and the projects ofBPs (to be done by VTCs at the district level) with respect to their conformity with prescribed guidelines for project preparation. Later, VTCs at block and district levels were modified into Block level and District level Expert Committees (BLECs & DLECs respectively), combining both official and non-official expertise.

Expert Commitees (ECs), presently known as Technical Advisory Committees were to a) provide technical advice to the concerned heal bodies; b) technically vet the projects of local bodies before they were sent to the District Planning Committee for approval (GP projects are vetted by BLECs and BP'projects by DLECs); and, c) provide technical sanction for works, which required such sanction. While vetting projects, ECs are not empowered to change the priority of a PRI; they can only insist on following technical standards, proper costing and phasing of various programmes. For technical sanction, sub groups consisting of at least three Experts would be formed of which, if possible, a Government professional would be the convenor and a non-government professional the Chairperson.

The following table gives the availability of BLEC members in the selected BPs during the Ninth Five Year Plan.

Table 3.17: Composition of BLEC Across the Selected BPs

Name of the BP No of BLEC Members during 9th Five Tear Plan

No of Sub Committees Formed out of BLEC during 9th Five Year Plan

Pathanapuram 57 12 Sasthamkotta 82 8 Chavara 66 7 Koovappady NA* 4 Palhtruthy 60 14 Wandoor 42 8 Kuttippuram 39 11

* NA=Not available

31

All the BPs could not respond to the queries regarding the composition of BLECs during the 9th Five Year Plan. (Data retrievability in Thanur BP was very poor). The table suggests that the number of BLEC members was vastly different across BPs; the number in Sasthamkotta BP was more than double than that of Kuttippuram BP and the number of sub-committees constituted under BLEC in Koovappadi was less than a third of that of Pailuruthy, both from Emakulam district. The requirements of number of members and sectoral sub divisions of BLECs may be different across BPs; but the differences may not have to be this vast.

The original sampling design for the selection of Expert Committee (EC) members had proposed that 3 non-official EC members and 3 official EC members would be selected randomly to make a sample of 6 members from every selected BP and DP. However, it was rendered impossible in the field due to transfer of official members en masse and the non-availability of many of the originally selected non-official members, because of their getting dissociated with ECs subsequently. Thus, the sample presented here lost its randomness to an extent and the present sample prominently represents the group that continues to work as EC members from the 9'h Five Year Plan.

Table 3.18 Response of EC Members about their Attendance in EC Meetings

No. (%) of Respondents who No. (%) of Respondents who Declared their

Sample Size

Regular Irregular Improving Declining No Change BLEC 53 48(90.6) 5(9.4) 3(6.2) 7(14.6) 38(79.2) DLEC 22 22(100) 0(0) 0(0) 1(5.6) 21(95.5)

The sample of ECs members, for the reasons suggested above, consisted mainly of those who still continue to render their services for ECs. Their attendance in the Committee meetings was generally regular.

Table 3.19: Constraints in the Functioning of BLEC

% of EC Members Responding in the following Way as to whether Constraints were Faced in the Functioning of EC; Level of EC Sample Size

lu a Limited Extern Not at All BLEC 53 24.5 75.5

DLEC 22 22.72 77.27

None of the selected EC members reported major constraints in the functioning of the Expert Committee during the 9th Five Year Plan; vast majority of them reported no constraint at all.

32

Table 3.20: Training of EC Members and Degree of Effectiveness

BP/District No. (%) of EC Members who Received Training;

No. (%) of EC Respondents rating the Training as;

Beginning of 9th Plan

During 9th Plan

No. (%) Who felt Training

was Necessary

Very Effective

Effective/ Some what Effective

Not all Effective

Kollam BLEC 9 8 15 9 5 1 DLEC 2 4 6 2 4 0Emakulam BLEC 3 8 9 0 10 0 DLEC 5 0 4 0 2 3 Malapuram BLEC 11 7 17 6 11 1

DLEC 3 2 5 4 1 0Wynadu BLEC 6 0 5 4 1 1 DLEC 5 0 5 2 3 0 Total BLEC 29 (54.7) 23 (43.4) 46(86.8) 19(36.5) 27(51.9) 3(5.8) DLEC 15 (68.18) 6 (27.27) 20(95.2) 8(38.09) 10(45.45) 3(13.63)

Almost all EC members received training during the 9th Five Year Plan, either in its beginning or in course, and, most of those who got trained felt that the training was necessary. From the sample, any major voice of dissent on the effectiveness of training is heard only from Emakulam district.

Table 3.21: Adequacy of Sitting Fees for EC Members

No. (%) Responding in the following way Regarding Adequacy of Sitting Fees during 9th

Plan

No. (%) Responding in the following way Regarding Adequacy of Sitting fees during 10th Plan

BP/District Not all Enough

Somewhat Enough

Not all Enough

Somewhat Enough Not Aware

BLEC 11 3 5 6 3 Kollam DLEC 6 0 2 4 0 BLEC 12 0 5 2 5 Emakulam DLEC 6 0 5 1 0 BLEC 9 2 5 5 1 Malapuram DI.EC 4 0 3 1 0 BLEC 5 0 2 1 2 Wynad DLEC 3 0 3 0 0 BLEC 37(88.1) 4(11.9) 17 (40.5) 14 (33.3) 11 (26.2) Total DLEC 19(100.0) 0 (0.0) 13 (68.42) 6 (31.58) 0 (0.0)

Serving officials were not entitled to sitting fees and hence the sample is reduced here. During the 9th Five Year Plan, majority of the EC members felt that the sitting fee (Rs.40/- per sitting) was fully inadequate. The amount was raised to Rs.80/- per sitting during the 10th Five Year Plan; but is still felt to be fully/partly inadequate by a majority of

33

the respondents. Interestingly, around 26% of the selected BLEC members do not know the current amount of sitting fees signifying that they were never paid the sitting fees or that the payment is belated. As for the official position on payment of sitting fees, 6 out of 9 selected blocks (barring Sasthamkotta, Koovapadi and Wandoor) suggested that the sitting fee was not paid in time.

Seven out of nine selected blocks (barring Koovapadi and Palluruthi) suggested that the incentives given to BLEC members were not sufficient to ensure their smooth functioning. Inadequacy of the financial incentives or its delayed payment was not viewed as a serious constraint in the functioning of the Expert Committee by any of the sample EC respondents; 69.6% of them felt that giving adequate financial incentives would greatly improve the functioning of these expert bodies.

Table 3.22: Main Problems Faced in Vetting of Projects and Methods Adopted for Rectification

No. (%) Suggesting the main Lacunae Found in Projects Sent in for Vetting as;

No. (%) Declaring Mechanism Adopted for Rectifying Problems in Project Proposals as;

Level of EC

Non-Conformity with Guidelines

Financial Non Viability of

Project Discussions with GP President /Officials

Spot Corrections with Officials

BLEC 44 (86.27) 4(7.8) 37(72.5) 13(25.5) DLEC 17 (77.27) 2(9.09) 18(81.81) 1(4.54)

Expectedly, the major problem located by EC members in the project reports prepared by the GPs and BPs was the non-conformity with the Guidelines given in the Handbooks for the preparation of such reports. The sample of project reports examined for the Study also found that a considerable proportion of them lacked in spelling out the following;

• The justification for taking up the particular project among the available alternatives to address the developmental problem at hand;

• Criteria for the selection of project beneficiaries; and

• Quantification of the viability (financial or otherwise) of the project.

It is already seen that in many places, projectization has turned into a highly mechanical exercise. The set of projects so prepared at the GP/BP level are brought to the BLEC/DLEC ceremoniously and the GP/BP presidents/members sit with the Expert Committee members to get the projects vetted and to get the technical sanction for projects, wherever necessary.

34

Table 3.23: Friction between PRIs and ECs on Vetting Projects

BP/District Sample Size

No. (%) Declaring that Friction between ECs & GP/ BPs Occurred;

No. (%} Suggesting the Reasons for Friction as;

Never Rarely GPs/BPs Unwilling to

Make Suggested Modifications

BLEC not in Position to Accord

Sanction due to Piling of Projects

BLEC 17 10 7 4 3 Kollam DLEC 6 1 5 1 4

BLEC 11 7 4 2 2 Ernakulam DLEC 6 4 2 0 2

BLEC 18 10 8 3 3 Malapuram DLEC 5 3 2 1 1

BLEC 6 5 1 1 0 Wynadu DLEC 5 4 1 1 0

Total BLEC 52 32(61.53) 20 (38.46) 10 (50.0) 8 (40.0)

None of the selected EC member suggested that there were frequent frictions between the Expert Committee and the GPs/BPs in question in the vetting of projects or in the accordance of technical sanction. During the fieldwork, it was verified that the plans of almost all GPs were heaped on to the BLECs only days before the final date on which the plans were to be submitted to DPC for approval (or after extension of the prescribed time limit) with the result that quality suffers in all stages. Again, during the initial years, there was a full-time co-coordinator for the BLEC, whose role, as reported by almost all selected BLEC members, was pivotal to integrating the activities at the block level with other levels. Scrapping of the post of full-time coordinator is widely reported to have crucially affected the smooth functioning of Expert Committees.

3.5 Case Studies: Planning for Paddy, Coconut and Banana- (Reflections from Sample Results)

A sample exercise was conducted in the selected GPs to understand; a) the variables significantly affecting the profitability of paddy cultivation in the selected areas, and, b) the attempt made by GP plans to make impact on these variables.

Table 3.24: Estimates of Per Hectare Yield, Cost and Profit on Paddy Cultivation in Sample GPs

Sample Size Per Hectare Profit (in Rs.)

% Profit Per Hectare Cost (in Rs.)

Yield per Hectare(in

Qtls) Vellanmunda 4 -1027 -3.98 25779 35 Kumbalangy 2 -2523 -10.42 24198 23 Vengoor 3 1623 5.96 27219 32 Edavanna 5 2855 11.06 25813 35 Thanur 5 1941 6.43 30171 39 Marakkara 3 -1669 -5.53 30179 36 Sooranad N 4 -3623 -13.33 27170 29 Vilakudi 4 1746 6.45 27055 40 Average 30 -231 -0.8 27236 34

35

The small sample above was collected from a representative list of farmers, combining both small and larger farmers. The cost estimates drawn from the sample go along with the cost estimates drawn from the larger sample surveys on cost of cultivation. The table gives a couple of strong indications.

• The sample on the whole lends support to the general perception of the farmers that paddy cultivation is an un-remunerative activity in Kerala. The question is: why should a rational farmer undertake an unprofitable agricultural operation? The selected farmers tried to explain this in terms of the preference to have own production of rice for self-consumption and emotional attachment to this activity followed for generations together. The younger generation, by and large, has already deserted the activity. Also farmers do not impute any value to their labour in their explicit cost calculations.

• There are, however, many areas which make a positive return on the recurring cost. However, as the recurring cost is low, percentage profit gets magnified; but such returns will not guarantee the commercial cultivation of paddy even in those areas.

• The absolute production and area under cultivation of paddy have shown a secular declining trend in Kerala.

Table 3.25 Components of the Cost of Cultivation of Paddy in Sample GPs

% Share of Different Cost Items in the Cost of Cultivation of Paddy; (Per Hectare ) Human Labour

nimal Lab Machine Lab Seed/ Seedlings

Manures & Fertilizers

Plant Protection

Interest OTX Working Capital

Irrigation Marketing

Vellamunda 58.5 0.0 21.0 3.3 9.4 1.2 4.7 0.0 1.8 Kumbalangy 71.6 0.0 0.0 8.2 11.4 0.0 4.8 2.6 1.4 Vengoor 60.9 0.0 8.9 4.3 16.8 1.1 4.8 0.0 3.2 Edavanna 54.3 0.0 12.5 7.9 16.4 1.5 5.4 0.0 2.0 Thanur 52.1 8.4 8.4 7.1 13.4 1.4 5.1 1.2 3.0 Marakkara 57.8 0.0 10.9 5.2 16.5 2.6 4.9 0.0 2.1 Sooranad N 60.3 0.0 11.8 4,6 15-2 2.1 4.8 0.0 1.1 Vilakudi 59.0 5.8 9.1 5.3 149 0.7 48 0.0 0.5 Average 58.34 1.63 12.2 5.49 13.7 1.47 4.9 0.4 1.9

In all cases, human labour cost- imputed plus actual- is more than half the total cost of production (and marketing). The other major cost items, adjusting which can make an impact on profit, are those on manures and fertilizers and machine labour; the latter has a high dispersion across GPs. The table, on the whole, suggests that different GPs shall have to follow different support strategies to improve the profitability of paddy cultivation. The following simulation exercises, each done with specific intent, specify the quantitative effect of important variables on the profitability of paddy cultivation.

36

Table 3.26: Results of Simulation Exercises on Profit from Paddy Cultivation

Output SL No. Situation Profit as % of Recurring Cost

Per Hectare Recurring Cost (In Rs)

Original situation -0.8% -231 1 Average price per qtl of paddy from Rs.608/- to Rs.780/-

(28% increase) 20.5% 5574

2 Average price per qtl of paddy from Rs.608/- to Rs.730/-(20% increase)

14.6% 3986

3 Average price per qtl of paddy from Rs.608/- to Rs.730/- + marketing cost dispensed with

16.8% 4492

4 20% reduction in human labour cost tl.9% 2872 5 10% reduction in human labour cost 5-1% 1321 6 Total subsidy on machine labour 12.6% 3025 7 Total subsidy on manures and fertilizers 14.4% 3400 8 Incentive of Rs.5000/- per hectare cultivated 17.5% 4769

• . Simulation (1) assumes an increase in the market price of paddy by 28%. This does not imply a subsidy of Rs. 1727- per quintal or procuring paddy @ Rs. 780/- per quintal. The conversion between paddy and rice is 0.6 and the market price of rice is around Rs. 1300/- per Qtl, If the intermediate processes can be managed by the GP by organizing farmers and facilitating and bearing the cost of conversion, storage and creating or establishing links with the direct marketing initiatives flourishing in many GPs of the State, the farmer would realize the full market price of rice which is equivalent to Rs.780/- per Qtl of paddy. This would require an extraordinary initiative and willingness to channelize considerable part of productive sector resources to paddy. This may also require strong, mutually facilitating inter-GP and inter-tier linkages. However, the results would be overwhelmingly positive.

• Simulation (2) is tantamount to passing a portion (Rs.50/- per quintel of paddy) of the cost of the intermediary processes (between harvesting of paddy and its direct marketing as rice) to the farmer. (This is reflected in the change from Rs.780/- in Simulation (1) to Rs.730/-- in simulation (2)).

• Simulation (3) realistically assumes that once rice is directly marketed, the marketing cost incurred by each individual farmer can be dispensed with.

• Simulations (4) to (8) attempt to derive the effect of support to cost production on profit. Simulations (4) and (5) indicate that the elasticity of profit with respect to adjustment in human labour cost, the prominent cost item, is visibly less than its price elasticity.

• Simulations (6) & (7) show that giving full subsidy on the cost of machine labour and manures and fertilizers bring about considerable increase in profits. However, considering the variations across GPs in machine labour cost, the effect of this subsidy would vary considerably. Yet, wherever farming activities are least mechanized, giving

37

mechanized support for preparatory work would considerably reduce the human labour cost therein. This also points towards the need for locally appropriate support systems.

• Simulation (8) is carried out in the light of the recent GoK proposal to give an incentive of Rs. 5000/-per hectare of fallow land being brought into cultivation. The effect of this is considerable; but it should be judged based on whether it is a one-time support and its coverage and cost-effectiveness relative to other support mechanisms.

• Setting GP paddy projects during the 9th Five Year Plan against background given above leads to the following conclusions.

• None of the selected GPs had any initiatives to give market support to paddy or rice during the 9th Five Year Plan.

• None of the selected GPs had any integrated package of input support to paddy cultivators, based on an estimate of the total support required by them. Their paddy projects fiddled with some input support, some production bonus, and in some cases, part mechanization of some on-field activities. At the implementation level, such support was not provided in time and was spread over a very large number of beneficiaries, making the support per farmer very low. Untimely provision of input support cannot be treated as a pure implementation failure, because most of this had spilled over from belated planning and beneficiary selection. Numerous micro- irrigation projects were also planned and implemented, which did not yield the desired results. Such multiple, small projects for supporting paddy, thinly spread over a large number of beneficiaries, would hardly make clear the quantum of support per fanner vis-a-vis the required support. This unconnected, often belated, small-project-based assistance for paddy did not develop into comprehensive support in any sample GP.

The case of paddy may be compared with those of coconut and banana. The results give interesting policy inputs for local level planning for agriculture.

Table 3.27: Components of the Cost of Cultivation of Coconut

% Share of Different Cost items in the Cost of Cultivation of Coconut; Name of the GP Cost Per Hectare (inRs) Labour

Cost Fertilizers

and Manures

PP Materials Fixed Irrigation

Coat

Marketing Cost

Lease Charges

Interest onWC&

Other

Total Cost

Vengoor 15273 57.7 32.1 0.2 2.5 2.2 0.0 5.4 100 1 hanui 39480 23.8 29.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 25.8 6.8 100 Marakkara 40690 50.5 43.7 0.0 0.5 1.8 0.0 3.i 100 Kumblangi 18995 62.7 323 0.5 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 100 Edavanna 24571 53.9 39.2 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.8 100 Vellsmunda 19855 46.6 50.4 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 SooranadN 13045 70.8 23.8 1.3 04 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 Vilakudi 15396 59.4 31.5 4.1 0.4 2.2 0.0 2.3 100 Neendakara 26685 44.4 49.0 2.1 1.6 1.6 0.0 0.8 100 Average 23087 48.8 38.3 1.0 0.8 3.8 3.9 3.0 100

38

It may be seen that the generally applicable cost items for selected coconut growers are those on labour and manures; others being incurred only by a very few sample farmers. First, the composition of cost between labour and manures varies widely across sample GPs (further within GPs), suggesting that the methods of coconut cultivation employed by farmers even within a locality vary considerably. Secondly, dispersion of the cost per hectare too is very high across GPs and within GPs. This must be read with the following.

Table 3.28: Annual Profit (on Recurring Cost) on Coconut Cultivation

Name of the GP

Trees per Hectare

Cost Per Tree (in

Rs)

Cost per Hectare (in Rs)

Receipt Per

Hectare (in Rs)

Profit Per Hectare (in Rs)

Profit as % of Recurring

Cost

%of Currently Yielding

Trees Vengoor 204 75 15273 27706 12433 81.4 69.0 Thanur 180 219 39480 56463 16983 43.0 90.6 Marakkara 200 203 40690 53026 12336 30.3 75.1 Kumblangi 169 112 18995 59263 40268 212.0 79.4 Edavanna 215 114 24571 49753 25182 102.5 90.5 Vellamunda 250 79 19855 48450 28595 144.0 69.0 Sooranad N 232 56 13045 28528 15483 118.7 52.3 Vilakudi 183 84 15396 30447 15051 97.8 59.8 Neendakara 230 116 26685 43875 17190 64.4 59.7 Average 209 110 23087 41147 18061 78.2 68.9

Definitionally, the profits on coconut cultivation may not be comparable with those on paddy cultivation because the calculation of the former omits the initial cost involved in planting trees; however, considering the long life of a coconut tree, the annualized value of the aforesaid cost component may not be analytically significant. The recurring cost on maintaining old trees and nurturing the newly planted ones is included in the total recurring cost.

In Kumblangi GP, from where the highest per hectare is reported, the size and oil content of coconuts is high; the sample farmers reported that they undertake organic method of farming with minimal use of chemical fertilizers. The land area of the GP, being an island, bound by water on three sides, is fertile and is quite conducive to coconut forming. A sizable number of coconut farmers indicated that even without application of fertilizers, the yield is high. In Neendakara, Marakara and Thanur coconut trees are affected by Mandari and root-wilt diseases. Productivity has been declining over the years, though they apply fertilizers on regular basis. Other reasons for low productivity are lack of proper plant protection measures and lack of irrigation facilities. In Edavanna, and Soorandu, the sample respondents reported that they adopt scientific method of farming such as basin opening, applying of fertilizers, and plant protection and use irrigation facilities wherever available.

39

Table 3.29: Annual Cost (of) and Profit from Cultivation of Banana (Cost, Receipt & Profit (In Rs.)

Receipt Per Hectare

Cost per Hectare

Profit Per Hectare

Cost Per Vazha

Receipt Per

Vazha

Profit Per

Vazha

No. of Plantains Per

Hectare

% Profit

Vengoor 312171 159596 152575 66 129 63 2429 95.6 Vellamunda 169083 84137 84947 40 80 40 2125 101.0 Edavanna 161798 96481 65317 43 72 29 2232 67.7 Marakkara 141737 100261 41476 56 79 23 1798 41.4 Sooranad N 19762 13831 5931 48 69 21 285 42.9 Vilakudi 70969 40774 30195 49 85 36 837 74.1 Average 136937 77851 59086 50' 89 38 1543 75.9 Vazha = Plantain Tree.

In Vengoor, the selected farmers reported that they resorted to scientific methods of farming, application of fertilizers and plant protection measures. In Vellamunda GP, farmers switched over from rice to banana crop due to comparably higher profits in the latter; the use of excess chemical fertilizers for getting better yield is reported from the region. In Vilakudi, good price for farmers was assured through farmer self-help-groups and marketing through the Vegetables and Fruit Promotion Council (VFPC). In Edavanna, application of chemical fertilizers, plant protection measures and marketing through farmers' cooperatives by VFPC were reported. However, in Soorandu and Marakkara, not much emphasis was placed on banana cultivation as farmers concentrated on paddy and coconut and no specific marketing method was adopted on a collective basis.

The comparison of the results on profits from the cultivation of paddy, coconut and banana based on the limited sample gives the following indications.

• Unsupported cultivation of paddy gives only negligibly low (or no) profits, while coconut cultivation gives indisputably higher profits. Profit on the cultivation of banana is clearly higher and seemingly attractive; however, excessive application of fertilizers in observed pursuit of greater yield of banana can be detrimental to soil quality and raises the problems of health hazards and damages to the environment.

• By implication, if there are environmental and other considerations behind conserving paddy cultivation, the quantitative support that needs to be given to the crop should be very high.

• The whole point behind the forgoing crop-specific analysis is to suggest that such data analysis of a larger scale must go into plan formulation to decide on the exact quantity and nature of support required to be given to each crop.

3.6 Vertical Integration of PRI Plans

In Kerala, Grama Panchayats and municipalities are the basic units of planning. The Block Plan would be built up by integrating plans of GPs within their jurisdiction. The

40

role of BP would be to concentrate on such activities which cannot not be taken up at the GP level and to assist GPs by integrating their programmes through forward and backward linkages. Points emerging from GS discussions and various studies could provide the basis for preparing block level planning.

There would be a Grama Sabha at the Block level (and at the district level) too, which should consist of its elected members and Presidents of all GPs under its area. The BP should also conduct Development Seminar. Ideas emerging from the seminar would be translated into viable projects by Block level Task Forces (Working Groups). The BP plan would be prepared based on the sectoral situation analysis done with the information base of GP level Development Reports and the required complementary activities therein and by analyzing the recommendations made by GPs to their higher levels.

Inter-tier integration is only one among the several aspects of integration of plans (Sudhakaran; 2004, the other aspects being spatial, sectoral, financial, temporal and rural-urban integration); yet, this section is limited to the degree of integration achieved between GP, BP and DP plans.

Table 3.30: Degree of Co-ordination between Various tiers-Views of Selected GPs

Jf yes, what was the Mechanism Did Higher Tiers Try to bring about Backward and Forward Linkages to GP the Projects?

Name of the Grama Panchayat

Was there any Mechanism to

Ensure Go-ordination

between the GP, BP and DP?

(Yes=l;No=0)

Block/District Level GSs (Yes- 1;

No=0)

Higher Level Plans is Approved after

Approval of Lower Levels

(Yes=3;No=0)

To a Limited Extent (Yes=l;

No=0)

Not at All (Yes=l; No=0)

Vilakudi 1 0 1 1 0 Sooranadu(N) 1 0 1 I • 0 Neendakara 1 1 0 1 0 Vengur 1 1 0 1 0 Kumbalangi 1 1 0 1 0 Eddvantu 0 NR NR 0 1 Marakkara 0 NR NR 0 1 Thanur I I 0 1 0 Vellamunda 1 0 1 0 1 Total (of Yes} 7 4 3 6 3

None of the selected GPs felt that the higher tiers succeeded to bring about considerable backward and forward linkages to their projects; three of them felt that the BPs and DPs could not at all provide any to their projects. This must be viewed against the fact that many projects, especially those under self-employment, did not yield the desired impact on account of absence of forward and backward linkages (Impact Chapter)..

41

Table 3.31: Mechanism Adopted to Ensure Co-ordination between the GPs and BPs-Views of BPs

Was there any Mechanism to

Ensure Co- ordination

between GPs & BP?

Normative Frequency of Block Level

Grama Sabhas

Was the Co-ordination Mechanism Effective in Avoiding Duplication of

Projects of GP and BP?

Was the BP Plan Finalized after Taking Stock of all

the GP Plans

Average (or Range) of

Attendance in Block GS

during 9th Plan(%)

Name of the Block

Panehayat

Yes No Half Yearly

Yearly Very Effective

Some what

Effective

Not Effective

Yes No

Pathanapuram 1 1 1 60 Sasthamltotta 1 1 1 i NA Chavara 1 1 1 1 40-52 Koovappady 1 1 1 68-78 Palluruthy 1 50 Wandoor 1 1 1 85-94 KulLippur^m 1 1 1 1 NA Thanur 1 1 80 Mananthwadi 1 1 1 1 90 Total 4 3 2 7 2 4 1 3 2

It may be seen that considering the sample size of BPs was 9, the response of BPs on the questions of vertical integration of plans during the 9lh Five Year Plan was poor. The selected BPs were less optimistic than the corresponding GPs (each of the 9 GPs above corresponds to a BP in order) about the availability of the co-ordination mechanism between GPs and BPs. Though 2 BPs declared that their BP level GS is half yearly, observation of the number of GSs organized by the selected BPs during 1997-98, 2001-02 and 2003-04 reveals that all of them organized only one GS a year. Any effective integration of the GP level plans with the BP level plans would not be possible with such formalized meetings held annually among elected BP members and Presidents of GPs under its jurisdiction. It may also be seen that the average attendance of block level GSs, as reported by the BPs, was very poor in the BPs of Kollam and Ernakulam, indicating that almost 40-60% of the GPs went totally unrepresented in the block GSs. The following table examines the size of the projects (in terms of expenditure) implemented during the 9th Five Year Plan by a sub-set of selected BPs.

Table 3.32: BP projects according to their expenditure classes during the 9"h Five Year Plan

% Distribution of BP Projects According to their Expenditure Classes During the 9* Five Year Plan >Rs .l5OOO Rs.15001

-30000 Rs.

30001-50000

Rs. 50001-

Hs.100001-200000

<Rs.200000

Total Number

of Projects

Name of BP Productive Sector Projects Koovapadi 16.7 23.3 20.0 23.3 6.7 10.0 60 Manathavadi 0.0 0.0 13.0 21.7 34.8 30.4' 23 Sastamkota 3.3 11.3 11.3 29.2 19.1 - 25.8 S8 Service Sector ProjectsKoovapadi 15.6 28.1 9.4 20S 7.3 18.8 96 Manathawadi 14.3 6,5 16.9 16.9 15.6 29.9 77 Sastamkota ni 8.4 10.2 20.5 17.8 30.0 107

42

There cannot be any fixed threshold level of expenditure for projects that would enable BPs to generate linkage effects; yet it is highly suspect that very small projects-covering a very limited area or a small set of individuals would have generated any forward or backward linkages. In Koovappadi block around 78%, in Sasthamkotta around 53% and in Mananthawadi about 50% of their 9th Plan projects (productive plus service sectors) had expenditure below Rs. 100000/-. The following table throws more light into the nature of service sector projects implemented by these BPs during the 9th five Year Plan.

Table 3.33: % Share of Sub Sectors in the Service Sector Plans of Selected BPs during the 9* Plan

% Share of Sub Sectors in the Service Sector Plans of Selected BPs during the 16

Anganwadi

s and Balwadjs

Drinking Water

Education Health & Sanitation

Electrification

Housing Self Employmen

t

Others Total

Expenditure in the Service Sector (in Rs,)

Koovapadi 12.15 6.20 15.01 3.29 0.32 50.33 2.71 9.98 15422316 Manathavad 0.82 15.59 5,58 6.07 0.00 4B.18 15.53 8.22 36463852 Sastamkota 5.89 14,46 6.07 6.10 7.16 43.79 8.54 8.00 27911946

The picture emerging from the expenditure composition of the service sector shows that majority of these projects would not be able to generate any forward and backward linkages directly. (The same simple analysis cannot make clear the picture of the productive sector and hence is not attempted here). Projects on housing and self-employment that constituted well over 50% of the service sector expenditure of the BPs could very well have been handled by the corresponding GPs. Most of the projects on drinking water projects (and health and sanitation) were small too, without any inter-GP implications.

Table 3.34: Service sector plans of selected BPs during the 9* Plan

Service Sector during 9th Plan BPs

% of BP Mandated Projects Implemented by BPs Koovapadi 56.73

Manathavadi 79.91 Sastamkota 76.78

The table above attempts to divide the service sector projects implemented by BPs during the 9th Five Year Plan into two categories; those which fell under the categories mandated to them and those which fell under the categories mandated to GPs. (Here, provision of housing benefits under the Centrally sponsored Indira Awas Yojana is treated as an area mandated to Block Panchayat.) Projects implemented by all BPs spilled over to the areas earmarked for GPs; however the degree of such spill over varied widely. However the selected GP (Table 3.22-Vellamunda GP) felt (also the chapter on Impact revealed to a limited extent) that their BP failed to bring about any substantial linkage effects. Sticking to the mandated areas is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for integration of plans of different tiers of PRIs. Hence, the ongoing process of Activity Mapping in the State must ensure room for continuous correspondence between different tiers in the different stages

43

of plan formulation and for built-in measures for making plans of the higher tiers an organic continuum of those of the lower tiers.

Sudhakaran (2004) attempted modeling of consistency between GP and BP projects in the standard input-output framework. This must evolve over time; but consistency between GP and BP Plans, in the short-run, requires a) uninterrupted flow and convergence of information at the block level, b) building up sustainable expertise at the block level that can process this information into outcome-oriented integrated projects with rigorous analysis and consultations and c) treating planning as a continuous exercise extending over the whole year.

3.4.1 Assessment of the District Plan of Kollam District

Three important requirements for an integrated plan for a district include; a) integration of projects in various sectors, b) integration of projects of a set of local bodies with similar development problem or with different tiers of local bodies and c) integration of schemes of Central and State government with local projects. As a case study, a brief assessment of the District Plan of Kollam district, finalized in 2000, has been made which led to the following conclusions.

• Issues such as increase in the cost of cultivation, high cost of engaging agricultural labourers, shortage of good quality labourers are all interlinked. The plan does not critically assess the existing profit margins across various crops and linkage of problems and prospects in the areas with similar physiographic characteristics and hence fails to suggest specific supportive measures applicable to specific agro-climatic zones.

• Although District Plan emphasizes that farmers need to be trained in latest crop-cutting practices and dissemination of information, it does not provide any specific measures at lower tiers to attain such objectives.

• Lack of marketing facilities is raised as an important problem in agriculture; yet the role to be played by the different tiers of local bodies herein is not specified.

• Traditional industries in Kollam, especially coir, cashew, handlooms and tiles are plagued by several institutional problems; yet guidelines for preparation of local plans do not give any specific suggestion, except to provide support schemes for labourers in traditional coir and handloom sectors.

• The District Plan approached the problem of sectoral integration of projects mainly from the departmental point of view. It has listed out general suggestions for next few years, without clearly mentioning the methodology of integrated schemes and the role of various tiers in facilitating smooth implementation of such activities. The Plan was

44

prepared within a short period of time, which prevented meaningful vertical and horizontal inter-sectoral discussions.

* The existing district level statistics used in the Plan is heavily drawn from 1991 census figures and is not amenable to quantitative analysis of development problems. Though tables are given to explain ongoing central/state/local body transferred schemes, not much attempt has been made to discuss the contents of each scheme, to point out the general impact of these scheme on the beneficiaries and to suggest measures to strengthen the contents of the schemes, so as to tie them up with integrated plan in the context of decentralized planning.

• The Plan has not made any spatial planning, wherein regional parameters could be considered. For instance, Gramapachayats with similar physiography pooled together may carry out specific activities appropriate to the region.

It transpires from the above that such hasty and name-sake exercise for formulation of District Plan cannot serve any meaningful purpose in integration of projects, programmes, sectors and plans. However, a beginning has of course been made in constructing a District Plan, which needs to be built up in the coming years.

3.7 Conclusions

That Grama Sabhas (GSs) had emerged into the prominent body of need articulation in the villages during the 9th Five Year Plan was confirmed by majority of the selected project beneficiaries and knowledgeable persons. However, GS could not fully assimilate its envisaged role in plan formulation mainly because of overwhelming pursuit of individual benefits by GS participants, presence of alternative, effective avenues of demand articulation, insufficient understanding of the purpose of GSs by its participants and the low and fast-eroding representative base of Grama Sabhas.

The productive sector projects did not at all develop into a comprehensive plan and remained a group of unconnected projects. There was no clearly-defined, medium-term policy for support and sustenance of important crops like paddy and coconut. None of the selected GPs based their agricultural projects on scientific, area-specific studies of cost of cultivation, its components, yield, price and other significant policy variables derived from such analysis. Nor did any selected GPs seem to have been capacitated to do so.

The Sectoral Working Groups (WGs) and district and block level Expert Committees (BLECs/DLECs) undertook an appreciable task during the 9Ib Plan. However, the working of WGs and ECs was constrained by pre-occupations of both official and non-official members, inadequate sitting fees and recognition, failure to take into account local resources in projectization, lack of co-ordination and integration of the works of

45

different sectoral WGs, removal of the full-time coordinator for BLECs and DLECs and frequent transfers of convening officials and penetration of partisan considerations. During the field visits (June-August 2004), Working Groups per se had become highly inactive in many places and projectization had turned into a highly mechanical exercise.

That absence of effective vertical integration in planning was a weak link in decentralized planning was evidenced by the generally low attendance in Block level Grama Sabhas, less than acceptable degree of compliance among the sample Block Panchayats (BPs) to the projects mandated to BPs and visible concentration of BP level projects to small and individual oriented projects. Examination of the District Plans suggested that they were incapable of serving as an integrated plan for the district. Infrastructural and productive sector projects did not recognize their inter-linkages.

46

Chapter 4

Change in the Methodology of Plan Implementation

Introduction

As in the case of plan formulation, drastic changes were contemplated in plan implementation too, under the decentralized planning framework. Those changes are outlined in the sections to follow. Each section, dealing with one or more important aspects of decentralized plan implementation, is arranged in two parts; the first part, given in italics, delineates the normative procedures to be followed as given in the different rules, government orders and handbooks and the second part describes the actual procedures followed.

Section II examines the degree of conformity achieved during the 9th Five Year Plan to the changes envisioned under decentralization in the selection of beneficiaries for GP and departmental plan projects. Section III analyses the degree of adaptation by GP and departmental officials to their changed role in the implementation of plans. Section IV briefly evaluates the degree of success achieved by beneficiary committees in plan implementation while section V deals with the extent of follow-up of plan projects after their execution and the post installation mechanism for maintenance of public assets created under the Plan. Section VI summarizes the main findings of the chapter.

4,2 Methodology for Beneficiary Selection

Under the pre-decentralized system, as per the targets assigned to each village level office by the higher offices of the concerned line department, project beneficiaries were selected from among the applicants, on the basis of field inspection conducted by the concerned officials and according to fixed criteria. This system lacked transparency because people were not kept informed about the processes involved in beneficiary selection, project selection and implementation.

Under the decentralized system, for each project, there were to be dearly observable and quantifiable eligibility criteria (criteria for exclusion plus criteria for inclusion) and prioritization criteria for the selection of beneficiaries- The criteria should be clearly stated in the project. The draft priority list of beneficiaries prepared by GP after receiving applications and conducting enquiries on the applications received, would be scrutinized in a meeting of the Grama Sabha to which the applicants would also be invited. Final list of deserving beneficiaries, in the order of priority, would be prepared by the GS and sent for the approval of the GP. Prioritization by GS should be adhered to by

47

the GP but for any factual error. For each prioritization criterion, weightage could be attached by giving marks. For the GP as a whole, the selection list should be prepared based on the marks given. There should not be any ward-wise targets (later revised allowing ward-wise targets to certain individual benefits) and eligibility would be considered only on the basis of marks received. Once the GP finalized the list, it would be published as a draft and objections on it would be considered. Thereafter the final list would be printed and displayed in all public places.

An ex-post evaluation of the methods followed for selection of project beneficiaries is extremely difficult; but is attempted in a limited way in this section.

Table 4.1: Information about Conduct of GS-Views of Selected 9 GPs

Number of GPs Declaring that People were informed of Beneficiary Selection for Individual Oriented Projects Through;

Advertising in Local News

Papers/' Others

Through Ward

Member

Through Neighbourhood

Groups

Through Grarna Sabhas

Public Announcements/ Ward Members

Ward Members/ Notice

Number of GPs Declaring that Applications Collected

through GSs were only

Entertained 1 1 1 1 3 2 3

While some of the GPs declared to have resorted to a single means of communicating beneficiary selection to the people, some others combined a couple of means; at least in 6 out of 9 GPs, the GP members played a crucial role in passage of information. Grama Sabhas played only a limited role in this; yet all the selected GPs declared that the projects available with the GP were communicated to the Grama Sabhas.

Table 4.2: Applying for Individual Project Benefits-Views of Selected Beneficiaries

% of Beneficiaries of Selected Projects Declaring that they Applied for the Project Benefit Because;

Nature of Project Name of GP Known

Leaders/Officials asked to Apply for the Benefit

GS Identified and asked to Apply

Knew from GP Advertisement

Concerned Departmental

Officials Informed

Vilakudi 66.7 3311 0 0 Soonmadu(N) 51.1 31.9 14.8 0 Neendakara 58.6 24.1 17.2 0 Vengur 57.1 32.7 10. 2 0 Kumbalangi 52.5 40.0 2.5 0 Edavanna 22.5 75.0 2.5 0 Marakkara 59.2 22.4 18.4 0 Thanur 44.4 51.9 1.9 1.9 Vellamunda 45.0 52.5 0 0

GP Projects

Total 51.0 40.4 7.3 0.3 Control Projects Total 40.6 16.5 2.3 37.6

48

The table above summarizes the views of the respondents of the selected beneficiary oriented projects on how they happened to apply for the project benefits. Only around 40% of the beneficiaries conclusively felt that they were identified by their Grama Sabhas as project beneficiaries. The proportion of those who were directly asked by their Grama Sabhas to apply for the project benefits is very low in all the selected GPs of Kollam district and Marakkara GP of Malappuram district. Even in the case of selected control projects implemented by the line departments, village leaders played a big role in prompting beneficiaries to apply for the benefit, while the role of GSs was marginal and understandably the role of departmental officials was quite significant, especially in certain GPs.

This is not to criticize the role played by GP members in the identification of project beneficiaries. However, given that GP members were integral parts of Grama Sabhas, channeling the initial identification of beneficiaries through Gramasabhas would not only have secured their involvement in the process but also have helped to improve GS participation and to reduce the chances of developing a patron-client relationship between GP members and project beneficiaries. The table above may be read along with the following table to make greater sense.

Table 4.3: Awareness and Attendance of Selected Project Beneficiaries in Grama Sabhas

Type of Project

Name of GP Sample Size % of Beneficiaries Aware of the Conduct of the GS Meetings in their Village

Of chose Aware, % who Attended GS from 1997-98 Till date

Comparison Projects

GP Projects

GP Projects

Comparison Projects

GP Projects Comparison Projects

Vilakudi 15 56 96.4 100.0 66.7 80.0 Sooranadu(N) 20 55 100.0 100.0 60.0 70.0 Neendakara 20 55 100.0 95.0 80.0 65.0 Vengur 20 50 84.0 65.0 81.0 64.3 Kumbalangi 7 4 96.3 100.0 94.2 85.7 Edavanna 0 50 98.0 87.8 Marakkara 10 50 98.0 100.0 65.3 90.0 Thanur 20 66 S7.9 100.0 61.0 60.0 Vellajnunda 20 46 100.0 100.0 76.1 100.0 In

divi

dual

Ben

efic

iary

O

rient

ed

Total 132 477 95.4 93.9 74.3 75.4 Vilatudi 0 14 100.0 78.6 Sooranadu(N) 0 30 100.0 55.0 Neendakara 0 10 100.0 90.0 Venpur 0 20 100.0 65.0 KiimbdlJn 0 15 80.0 41.7 Edavanna 8 20 95.0 100.0 84.2 100.0 Marakkara 0 20 90.0 88.9 Vellamunda 0 20 100.0 85.0

Collective Total 8 139 95.7 100.0 73.7 100.0

The table above is presented against the requirement that the selection of beneficiaries for the departmental plan schemes too was to be done by the Grama Sabhas under decentralized planning. It may also be gathered from Chapter III that the biggest motive attributed by the selected knowledgeable persons for the attendance of the people in Grama Sabhas was the pursuit of individual project benefits.

49

Barring Vengoor and Thanur GPs, there were not significant awareness hazards, pre-empting the project beneficiaries to attend the Grama Sabhas. The awareness problem in Vengoor was rampant (considering both the GP and control projects). That almost 30-40% of the beneficiaries of the GP projects who were aware of the conduct of GS did not attend any GS since 1997-98 (in Vilakudi, Soomadu North, Marakkara and Thanur) reflects badly on the representative character of the Grama Sabhas on the one hand and on the role of GS in beneficiary selection on the other. This is so because it was normatively fixed that priority list of beneficiaries prepared by the GP would be scrutinized in a meeting of the Grama Sabha to which the applicants would also be invited and a final list of the deserving beneficiaries, in the order of priority, would be sent to the GP. In the case of control projects, the picture {on GS attendance of project beneficiaries) reverses in Vilakudi, Soornadu North, Neendakara and Marakkara, while Thanur confirms its problems in control projects too.

Table 4.4: Views of Sample Respondents (for GS Participation) about Beneficiary Selection

% Distribution of Respondents who Attended GS Meetings, Suggesting

% Distribution of Respondents Dissatisfied with Beneficiary Selection Suggesting the (Main] Reasons for Dissatisfaction as:

District

GP

Beneficiary selection was done by GS during 9th

plan

Satisfied with

beneficiary selection

Selection Done by Officials

without Consultation

Preference given to close circles of

GP members

As GS attendance was very low,

Selection by GS not representative

Vilakkudi 520 48.0 23.1 69.2 0.0 N.Sooranad 83.3 54.8 10.5 84.2 5.3 Kollam Neendakara 96.8 87.1 0.0 100.0 0.0 Vengur 81.6 44.7 14.3 81.0 4.8 Ernakaulam Kumbalangi 80.6 41.7 23.8 66.7 0.0 Edavanna 82.9 57.1 13.3 66.7 13.3 Marakkara 75.8 48.5 0.0 88.2 0.0

Malappuram

Thanur 50.0 50.0 11.1 22.2 11.1 Wynad Vellamunda 43.2 37.8 21.7 65.2 0.0

Total 73.6 51.9 14.8 71.8 3.5

The table summarizes the views of the respondents selected specifically (and randomly) for verifying the details of their GS participation on the selection of beneficiaries for individual oriented schemes. The role of Grama Sabahs in beneficiary selection seems to differ widely among the selected Grama Panchayats within and across selected districts; no strong district level pattern unfolding therein. It turns out that Neendakara, the coastal GP from Kollam stands out in the involvement of Grama Sabha in beneficiary selection in terms of the level of satisfaction of the respondents while Vellamunda, which had one of the highest GS participation rates, lagged very much behind in this. The main reason suggested for the dissatisfaction with beneficiary selection across selected GPs (except Thanur) is the nepotism of GP members in the selection of beneficiaries.

The forgoing tables raise the question as to whether there were major difficulties in routing beneficiary selection fully through Grama Sabhas. The following table summarizes the views of the selected GPs on this.

50

Tsble 4.5: Constraints in Routing Beneficiary Selection through Grama Sabhas-Views of GPs

Number of GPs Stating the Constraints in Routing Beneficiary Selection through Grama Sabhas as; Conflicting Opinions Regarding Priorities

Accorded

Low Representation in the Grama Sabha

Enormity of Applications Politicization of Beneficiary Selection.

4 1 1 1

7 out of the 9 selected GPs suggested difficulties in routing beneficiary selection through Grama Sabhas. Prioritization criterion of different GPs consisted of household level indices of deprivation like presence of widows, divorced, separated from the spouse, physically or mentally handicapped and physically indisposed for long time in their households and other economic indicators like income and land possession. The beneficiary profile shows that the presence of divorced, separated and physically or mentally handicapped in the household (and even widows) is not common. Many villagers in the sample GPs felt that the estimation of income is manipulable and hence the prioritization of applications for benefits under projects is seriously questionable. Low representation in the Grama Sabha is indeed a crucial problem in Thanur (which referred to this problem) along with many other GPs and there should primarily be a GP level initiative to correct this. Low GS participation can have a cumulative effect in facilitating manipulations and nepotism in the provision of benefits (Chapter V-table 5.17).

The selected GPs declared that scoring/marking was followed in the selection of beneficiaries. Out of these, 7 of them further declared that the scores given to the applicants were validated and got justified in the Grama Sabhas.

Table 4.6: Distribution of Beneficiaries of Beneficiary Oriented Projects under Different Economic Category

% of Beneficiaries Falling Under; (as Per BPL Survey)

% of Beneficiaries falling under the following categories in land possession Nature

of project

Name of the Project

APL BPL Nil (Landless)

Less than 10

cents

Between 10 S 20 cents

Between 20&50

cents

Between 50 & 100

cents

Between 1&2 Acres

Above? Acres

Housing 20.2 79.8 1.0 68.7 16.2 9.1 2.0 2.0 1.0 Drinking Water 91.7 0.0 48.3 16.7 16.7 8.3 0.0 0.0

Agriculture 75.0 25.0 1.0 13.5 12.5 28.8 22.1 9.6 12.5 A H 40.0 60.0 1.7 40.0 15.0 21.7 15.0 5.0 1.7

Self Employ 25.0 75.0 0.0 78.1 6.3 9.4 3.1 0.0 3.1 Fisheries 25.0 75.0 0.0 85.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 Sanitation 25.0 75.0 1.7 80.0 16.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0

ICDS 43.3 56.7 5.6 51.1 14.4 17.8 6.7 1.1 3.3

GP P

r ojec

ts

Total 39.8 60.2 1.9 52.2 13.8 15.7 9.0 3.4 4.0 Housing 25.0 75.0 5.05 75.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Agriculture 75.6 24.4 1.1 5.6 7.8 23.3 24.4 16.7 21.1 AH 33.3 66.7 0.0 26.7 13.3 13.3 6.7 26.7 13.3

Sanitation 28.6 71.4 0.0 85.7 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Com

paris

on Pr

ojects

Total 60.6 39.4 1.5 22.7 9.1 18.9 17.4 14.4 15. 9

51

It is difficult to derive a coefficient of inclusion error (error of selection of ineligible beneficiaries) based on the data presented in the table, especially in the light of (a) widespread complaints about the BPL Surveys in general and (b) the fact that considerable portion of agricultural land was not being put to use for commercial agriculture in the selected GPs. Yet, a couple of interesting points emerge from the table.

• The table hints at the fact that a few of those project beneficiaries who had a land possession of less than 10 cents in the rural areas are classified as APL (self- employment, fisheries, sanitation, etc, in the case of GP projects) as per the BPL survey,

• Secondly, given that the benefits under the agricultural projects implemented for the provision of input support (which constituted more than 70-80% of the GP and control projects selected for the study) were very thinly distributed across a large set of beneficiaries, making the assistance per beneficiary almost insignificant, it appears that these projects (especially the comparison projects) could have had a greater concentration on marginal cultivators. The argument often raised by the implementing officials that rejuvenating agriculture would entail giving support to full-time, large-enough farmers, would have held good only if the quantum of support had been big enough to make an impact in their farms.

• Thirdly, among the GP projects, it prima facie appears that the benefits mostly reached the target group (the poor) under self-employment, housing and sanitation (barring exceptions), indicating minimal inclusion error in terms of the prescribed eligibility criteria.

• The benefits under selected AH projects mainly included subsidized provision of milch animals. Given this, benefits under projects on animal husbandry (especially under the departmental projects), it appears, could have been more pro-poor.

4.3 Local Bodies and Departmental Officials in Plan Implementation

Transfer of powers, functions, institutions and staff to local governments was initiated in October 1995 and was continued subsequently. The list of responsibilities and staff of the line departments transferred to the local bodies are annexed as Annexure I. The transferred officials acted as the implementing officials for the GP's plan in their respective sectors. The transferred officials have a dual accountability in the decentralized programme implementation; for the execution of plan programmes of the local bodies, they are accountable to the local bodies and for the execution of departmental programme, they are responsible to their parent departments.

52

Table 4.7: Regularity of GS Attendance by Implementing Officials

No. (%) Whose Attendance in Grama Sabhas During the 9th Plan Was;

No. (%) Giving the Reason for their Irregular/Non-Attendance in GS as ; (*)

Name of the Implementing Office/Official

Sa

mpl

e Si

ze

Regular Occasional Never Official Pre-Occupations

Was not Required by Guidelines to Attend the GS

Was not Regularfy

Informed of the Conduct of GS

Krishi Bhavan 9 6 2 1 3 0 0 rgeon q 4 5 0 4 0 0

8 3 4 1 4 0 0 1CDS Supervisor 9 8 1 0 0 0 0 AW worker 8 8 0 0 PWD Overseer 7 2 3 2 3 2 0 Fisheries Officer 3 2 3 0 0 0 1

Total % 53 (62.3) (30.2) (7.5) (82.4) (11.8) (5.9)

(*)= 3 non-responses

From the limited sample, it seems that some departmental officials like ICDS and Krishi Bhavan officials are more regular in their attendance in Grama Sabhas than the village level medical officers and PWD overseers. Attending to Grama Sabhas and hearing to the requirements of the people could be one criterion to judge the degree to which the line departmental officials got sensitized and adapted to their roles in decentralized planning; yet the reasoning of the irregular attendees that compelling official preoccupations pre-empted them from attending GSs needs to be looked into. It is verified, while arranging the selected implementing officials GP-wise, that there is no clear district level pattern to the regularity of attendance of the implementing officials in the Grama Sabhas; from the limited sample, the officials of Vilakudi (Kollam), Edavanna (Malappuram) and Vellamunda (Wynad) seemed less regular in GS attendance, while all from Neendakara GP (Kollam) declared to have regularly attended the GS.

Table 4.8: Degree of Cu-ordination between GPs and Implementing Officials Number (%)

Saying that this was Done through

Name of the Grama Panchayat

Sample Size of

Implementing Officials

Number of (%)Selected Implementing Officials Acknowledging Systematic Co-ordination Between them & GP during Projectisation

Number (%) Saying that GO Officials/Members tried to Impose their Terms on Them

Number (%) Saying this led to Unhealthy Relations

Number (%) Saying GP Members tried to Procedures for Project Formulation and Implementation

Und

ue In

terf

eren

ce in

Im

plem

enta

tion

of

Proj

ects

Pref

eren

tial A

llotm

ent

of B

enef

its to

Pre

ferr

ed

Peop

le

Vilakudi 4 4 1 1 1 0 1 Sooranadu (N) 6 6 1 1 1 0 1 Neendakara 5 4 1 1 1 0 1 Vengur 6 6 2 0 3 0 3 Kumbalangi 7 5 1 1 2 0 1 Edavanna 6 3 0 0 0 0 Marakkara 6 5 1 0 1 0 1 Thanur 7 6 3 1 2 2 0 Vellamunda 6 6 1 0 2 1 0

Total (%) 53 (84.9) (20.8) (50.0) (24.5) (25.0) (66.7)

53

On the positive side, almost 85% of the selected departmental officials felt that there was systematic co-ordination between them & GP in projectisation during the 9th Plan; none of the GPs, (except perhaps Edavanna) was particularly disadvantaged in this respect. But it may be significant that almost 21% of them felt that GP officials/ members tried to impose their terms on them and almost a quarter of the selected officials felt that GP members tried to meddle with procedures for project formulation and implementation. Yet, there was no district-specific pattern to either of these. 11 out of 13 officials declaring that GP members tried to meddle with procedures for project formulation and implementation (84.6%) felt that such meddling affected project execution 'to a certain extent'.

The following table summarizes people's perceptions about the change in the receptivity of the GP and departmental officials towards the people's requirements, which would be an important criterion to judge the degree to which the officials responded to their envisaged roles during decentralization.

Table 4.9: Beneficiaries' Perceptions about Change in the Attitude Officials % of Beneficiaries Saying that Response of the Panchayat Officials Towards People Needs after Decentralisation

% Suggesting that, after Decentralization, Response of the Departmental Officials towards People's Needs;

Name of GP

Sam

ple

Size

Bec

ame

mor

e R

ecep

tive

Not

cha

nged

Bec

ame

Less

R

ecep

tive

No

Res

pons

e

Num

ber w

ho A

ppro

ache

d D

epar

tmen

tal O

ffic

ials

afte

r D

ecen

tralis

atio

n

Bec

ame

Mor

e R

ecep

tive

Not

Cha

nged

Bec

ame

Less

R

ecep

tive

No

Res

pons

e Vilakudi 84 77.4 4.8 14.3 3,6 62 74.2 16.1 4.8 4.8 Sooranadu(N) 89 48.3 30.3 11.2 10.1 61 52.5 32.8 14.8 0.0 Neendakara 86 79.1 15.1 2.3 3.5 63 73.0 20.6 1.6 4.8 Vengur 90 72.2 25.6 1.1 1.1 57 70.2 29.8 0.0 0.0 Kumbalangi 66 56.1 24.2 7.6 12.1 30 75.0 10.0 15.0 0.0 Edavanna 78 89.7 1.3 6.4 2.6 70 85.7 5.7 7.1 1.4 Marakkara 80 47.5 37.5 15.0 0.,0 17 11.8 52.9 35.3 0.0 Thanur 76 56.6 17.1 11.8 14.5 27 29.6 25.9 25.9 18.5 Vellamunda 86 57.0 27.9 12.8 2.3 54 61.1 11.I 20.4 7.4 Total 735 65.0 20.5 9.1 53.3 431 65.4 20.4 10.4 3.7

Over all, the results are encouraging as about 65% of the beneficiaries felt that GP and departmental officials became more receptive to the needs of the people and only around (or less than) 10% of them felt that the officials became hostile to the public needs. (It is not fully appropriate to comment on the results from Marakkara and Thanur as the sample beneficiaries who had contacted departmental officials in the post-decentralization period is low in number). However, there is ample room for improvement as visible proportion of the beneficiaries in many GPs did not feel that the officials became more receptive despite massive training programmes held at different levels. This may be seen against the background that the officials at different levels

54

generally appreciated the effectiveness of training programmes on their changed roles and argued for further training.

Table 4.10: Improvements in Plan Implementation during 9th Plan-Scaling of Perceptions of Knowledgeable Persons

GPs/Districts Transparency in Project

Execution

Appropriateness of Beneficiary

Selection

Timeliness in Project Execution

Reduction in Corruption

Cost Effectiveness in Project Execution

Use of loci Resources

Vilakudi 2.0 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.4 1.8 Sooranad (N) 1.5 1.16 1.65 1.66 2.33 1.83 Neendakara 1.83 1.66 1.75 2.25 2.33 1.75 KOLLAM 1.76 1.52 1.86 2.13 2.36 1.80 Vengur 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.00 1,16 1.33 Kumblangi 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.33 ERNAKULAM 1.00 1.00 1.16 1.00 1.08 1.33 Edavanna 1.25 1.75 2.75 3.25 2.00 2.75 Marakkara 1.83 1.16 2.50 2.16 2,00 2.00 Thanur 1.16 1.00 1.16 1.50 1.33 1.33 MALAPURAM 1.43 1.25 2.06 . 2.18 1.75 1.93 Vellamunda 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 WYNAD 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total 1.39 1.66 1.65 1.75 1.62 1.63

The selected Knowledgeable Persons (KPs) had been asked to capture the changes occurred in the post-decentralized plan implementation in the variables defined in the table above in a scale of 1 to 5; the base scale of '3' represents absence of any change from the decentralized scenario in the variable while '2' and T represented marginal and considerable improvements respectively. Likewise, '4' and '5' represented marginal and substantial deterioration. The table, giving the arithmetic average of the scores given by the KPs in each aspect, suggests that there have been considerable/marginal improvements in the different aspects of plan implementation during the 9th Five Year Plan, especially in Wynad district. Increased transparency, more appropriate beneficiary selection and increased use of local resources in projects are the expected results of introduction of people's participation in planning and plan implementation; yet certain GPs point towards need for improvements in these aspects. Reduced corruption should be an outcome of increased transparency; nonetheless some GPs (Edavanna, Vilakudi, Marakkara and Neendakara) require drastic improvements in this. The results on timeliness and cost effectiveness in project execution may be seen along with the results on beneficiary committees.

4.4 Role of Beneficiaries & Beneficiary Committees (BCs) in Plan Implementation

Beneficiary participation in plan implementation was sought to be achieved through direct participation of project: beneficiaries and through beneficiary committees. In order to eliminate contractors and middlemen and to ensure participation by the beneficiaries, the local bodies were empowered by the Government to entrust

55

implementation though beneficiary committees which came forward to execute works / projects. If the beneficiaries of the project express their willingness to undertake the work themselves, a committee for project implementation consisting of 7 to 15 members was to be selected, together with a chairman and a con vener for the committee. One third of the committee members should be women. If the project was for Scheduled caste /scheduled tribe, there should be sufficient representation for them and [he Chairman/convener should be from that community.

Against the background of the methods envisaged under the above, beneficiary participation in execution of plan projects during the 9th five Year Plan is analyzed in the following.

Table 4.11: Involvement of Beneficiaries in Anganwadi Feeding Programme

Name of GP No. (%) Suggesting that Resources are Locally Mobilized for Feeding Programmes in AW;

Considerably Negligibly Not At All No Idea

No. (%) of Beneficiaries Involved in Mobilizing

Local Resources Vilakudi 3 3 3 1 3 Sooranadu(N) 0 0 10 0 0 Neendakara 10 0 0 0 10 Vengur 0 1 9 0 2 Kumbalangi 0 0 9 1 0 Edavanna o 9 0 0 1 Marakkara 0 1 6 3 1 Thanur 0 2 7 0 0 Vellaraunda 2 3 5 0 4 Total (%) 15 (17.0) 19(21.6) 49(55.7) 5(5.,7) 21 (23.9)

One important advantage envisaged on account of decentralization (as made out in the Handbook on ICDS) was that under the leadership of the GP, local resources would be mobilized to improve the running of the feeding programme. The table suggests that, though a beginning has been made (barring Ernakulam district), this aspect demands considerable improvement. Neendakara GP appears to be way ahead of other GPs in this respect. Another independent study (T.N.Seema, 2001) used data collected through a survey of Anganwadi centres in 15 selected panchayats (two from Thiruvananthapuram and one each from other districts) found out community participation in Anganwadis was only formal in activities like food preparation, vaccination camps and building maintenance.

Table 4.12: Involvement of Beneficiaries of Collective Irrigation Projects in Project Execution

No (%) Responding in the Following way About their Involvement in Executing the Project;

Name of GP No. of Beneficiaries Not at All/Not Significantly

Contributed Labour No Response

Sooranadu(N) 10 6 0 4 VenRur 10 I 0 9 Kumbalangi 9 2 0 7 Edavanna 10 10 0 0 Vellatnunda 10 9 1 0 Total (%) 49 28 (57.1) 1 (2.0) 20 (40.8)

56

The table above confirms that the involvement of beneficiaries of collective irrigation projects in the execution of those projects was minimal. This may suggest that beneficiary involvement in project execution was largely confined to their being the members of beneficiary committees; and only a small fraction of the project beneficiaries were members of BCs. The table below gives the scams of implementation of works through BCs in the selected GPs during the 9th Plan.

Table 4.13: Project Execution through BCs in the Selected GPs during 9th Plan

Name of the Grama

Panchayat

No of Collective Projects

Implemented Under GP Plan During 9th Five

Year Plan

% of Collective Projects for which

Beneficiary Committees were

Formed for Implementation

Of Column 3, % that

Undertook Work of Project

Implementation

Of Column 4, the % that left Projects Incomplete

Sooranadu(N) 44 (*) 97.73 100.00 0.00 Neendakara 51 82.35 88.10 5.41 Vengur 341 32.84 96.43 12.96 Edavanna 94 100.00 86.17 18.52 Marakkara 398 14.57 79.31 26.09 Vellamunda 200 100.00 90.00 11.11 Total 1128 4S.67 90.16 12.73

(*)= Figure only for 1999-00

First of all, the proportion of collective works implemented with BCs varied vastly across GPs. Marakkara had the least of its collective works done by BCs. It may also be noted that Marakkara had the highest proportion of works left incomplete by the BCs. The singular hurdle that the GP has declared to have constrained project execution through BCs was that the BC works were finally reduced to works by single contractor. Apart from Marakkara, 6 selected GPs (i.e. a total of 7 GPs from the selected 9 GPs) echoed this problem. The other problems suggested by selected GPs in project execution through BCs included lack of required co-ordination among BC members (Thanur, Vengur and Vilakudi) and lack of managerial and technical expertise to BCs (Kumbalangi and Neendakara).

The table below presents the views of the knowledgeable persons on the achievements of the beneficiary committees, in general, in reducing the cost of projects and in ensuring timeliness of project completion.

57

Table 4.14: Views of Knowledgeable Persons about Speed and Cost of Project Execution by BCs

Number (%) Declaring that, with Beneficiary Committees, the Speed of Project Execution has;

Number (%) Declaring that, with Beneficiary Committees, Project Cost has been;

GPs/Districts

Incr

ease

d co

nsid

erab

ly

Incr

ease

d m

argi

nally

Red

uced

M

argi

nally

Red

uced

co

nsid

erab

ly

Red

uced

co

nsid

erab

ly

Red

uced

m

argi

nally

Incr

ease

d m

argi

nally

Incr

ease

d co

nsid

erab

ly

Vilakudi 3 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 1 0 Sooranad (N) 2 3 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 Neendakara 0 6 0 0 0 1 4 1 0 0 KOLLAM 5 9 3 0 0 3 5 6 1 0 Vengur 2 0 1 2 1 4 0 2 0 0 Kumblangi 2 0 3 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 ERNAKULAM 4 0 4 2 1 6 2 4 0 0 Edavanna 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 Marakkara 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 4 0 0 Thanur 4 1 0 1 0 1 3 2 0 0 MALAPURAM 4 4 3 5 0 3 6 6 0 1 Vellamunda 2 1 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 2 WYNAD 2 1 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 2

TOTAL 15

(29.4) 14

(27.5) 10

(19.6) 9

(17.7) 2

(3.9) 14

(27.5) 13

(25.5) IS

(35.3) 1

(2) 3

(5.9)

On the whole, the selected Knowledgeable Persons were not unanimous about their views on the achievements of beneficiary committees (BCs) in increasing the speed of project execution and in reducing the cost of project execution.

• There is a certain district level pattern to their opinions on the speed of project execution achieved by BCs; in Kollam district none held the opinion that the BCs reduced the speed of project execution, while in the other districts some KPs suggested reduced speed in project execution by BCs.

• The main reason suggested by the selected KPs for speedy project execution by BCs was the advantages that had flown from collective action by an interested group. The fact that the profit was not part of the costing of the BCs and that unaccounted voluntary contributions came in as a response to collective action reduced the accounted costs of project execution, some KPs argued.

• However, some KPs felt that since BCs did not have their accumulated working capital, they had to wait for release of funds for starting the works and hence this reduced the speed of project execution. The other factors that affected the speed and cost of project execution by BCs, according to the selected Knowledgeable Persons, included;

• Absence of the linkages that the contractors used to enjoy in purchasing raw materials and arranging funds;

58

• Lacklusture-sometimes hostile- approach of some officials towards BCs; many KPs opined that the officials felt it more convenient to deal with contractors than with BCs;

• Incompatibility of the PWD scheduled rates of inputs, including wage rate, with local rates and the inability of BCs to make any adjustments here (unlike the contractors);

• Increased accountability of BCs towards the beneficiary groups and the resultant requirement for maintaining acceptable quality.

4.5 Follow-up on Plan Implementation and Maintenance of Assets

It was prescribed that the plan implementation should be meticulously followed up and that the assets created under the plan be maintained well by ensuring stake-holders' participation in terms of creation and effective functioning of beneficiary committees.

Table 4.15: Follow-up by Officials upon Project Execution in Agriculture

Of the Selected Beneficiaries of Agricultural Projects; GP Projects Comparison Projects

GP

% Responding that Officials

Made Follow-up Visits

% Saying that Officials Gave Advices for Better

use of the Assistance

% Responding that Officials

made Follow-up Visits

% Saying that Officials gave Advices for Better use of the Assistance

Sooranadu(N) 63.64 63.64 47.06 47.06 Neendakara 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vengur 77.78 66.67 40.00 30.00 Kumbalangi 30.00 10.00 Edavatina 100.00 100.00 83.33 50.00 Maraldura 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Thanur 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 Vellamunda 90.00 50.00 90.00 60.00 Total 49-43 40.23 38.75 30.00

First of all, on the whole, the follow-up visit status for GP projects seems to be better than that of comparison projects. Secondly, there is a strong GP-specific pattern to follow-up, but no district specific pattern. It may be seen that the follow-up was absent in the GPs of Neendakara, Marakkara and Thanur and very low in Kumbalangi.

The lone project that reaped the desired returns among the GP agricultural projects is reported from Edavanna where, in 1998-99, the supply of seeds and fertilizers for vegetables through Haritha Samkhams (farmers' societies) is said to have resulted in extensive farming of vegetables and increase in productivity. Continuous monitoring and follow-up by Krishi Bhavan officials and the convenors of Haritha Samkhams were

59

reported. Lack of effective follow-up upon plan implementation emerging from the sample of projects is exemplified from the inability to act on/follow up the following;

• Root wilt infection continued unabated despite many projects on felling diseased trees.

• Many beneficiaries of the projects for supply of seeds used the same for consumption purposes, mainly because agricultural season had got over by the time inputs were supplied.

• Many drinking water, irrigation and self-employment projects yielded far less-than optimal results, partly because they were inadequately serviced/ supported.

• Majority of beneficiaries (65.2%) who received milch animals sold them off without reaping any substantial benefits.

• About 19% of the new houses built for the sample beneficiaries under the housing projects are not currently resided at, mainly because of their being incomplete.

The following provides a brief analysis of the functioning of beneficiary committees for maintenance of assets.

Table 4.16: Status of BC's for Maintenance of Collective Assets

Name of GP No of Collective Projects Implemented under GP Plan during 9th Give Year Plan

No of BCs Formed for Maintenance of Assets

Created

No of BCs that are Currently Active in Maintaining Assets

Created Vilakudi NA NA NA

Sooranadu(N) 44 (only 1999-00) NA NA Neendakara 51 42 0

NA 0 NR kumbalangi Vengur 341 1 0

Edavanna 94 NA NA Marakkara 398 0 NR

Thanur NA NA NA Vellamunda 200 200 200

Total 1128 243 200

NA=Not available; NR=Not Relevant

In the selected GPs, retrievability of the data regarding the formation and current functionality of the beneficiary committees formed for maintenance of the collective assets created was very poor, indicating that maintenance of assets was a low priority item in the development plans of these PRIs. From the available data, it turns out that the formation of beneficiary committees for asset maintenance was not widely practiced among the selected GPs, except Neendakara and Vellamunda. Their level of functionality

60

seems to be very poor barring Vellamunda However, the Vellamunda GP's declaration that all BCs are functional does not get validated by the project level analysts done in Chapter VII,

The case of the collective irrigation projects selected for the study may be taken to understand the mechanisms adopted for maintenance of assets.

Table 4.17: Maintenance of Collective Assets under Irrigation Projects

Number Suggesting that the Mechanism for Maintenance of Asset was; Name of the

Gram Pane hay at

Sample Size of Beneficiaries for

Collective Irrigation Projects

Beneficiary Committee

GP's Official Mechanism

No Mechanism

No Response

Sooranadu(N) 10 0 0 10 0 Vengur 10 0 2 8 0 Kumbalangi 9 0 0 8 1

Edavanna 10 10 0 0 0 Vellamunda 10 1 0 7 2 Total 49 11 (22.4%) 2(4.1%) 33 (67.3%) 3 (6.1%)

Only one (Edavanna) out of the 5 projects had some mechanism for the upkeep the asset created. Chapter VII (Project Level Impact) reveals that out of the selected collective irrigation projects, none made any visible impact on land productivity of the selected beneficiaries. The so-called irrigation project of Edavanna (in Pothiladu SC colony) functions very well as a drinking water project; with an effective beneficiary committee that meets once a month and collects Rs.30/- from each beneficiary SC household, which is used for payment of electricity and other charges.

The selected drinking water projects also exemplified the contrast in the utility levels of projects that are maintained well and those are not. In Marakkara GP of Malappuram district, the water from the drinking water project was seldom used for drinking (but was used for other purposes) on account of rusting of manual hand pumps due mainly to bad maintenance. The unattended damage of the pipeline in certain places reduced the utility of the drinking water project in Soorandu North too. In Vellamunda, there is a beneficiary committee for maintaining the drinking water facility (lifting water from lowland, storing it in tank and connecting each household with a tap) to which every tribal and non-tribal household pays a monthly sum of Rs.30/- and Rs.50/-respectively towards running expenses. The system works fairly well, but for undeterred source contamination of water and minor ego clash between different groups of beneficiaries.

61

The general picture that emerges from this section is that;

• Collective assets created under the Plan were most often neglected after the plan implementation. Follow-up and unfailing maintenance of assets with active stakeholders' participation are still to be built into the developmental process as its integral components.

• Wherever required follow-up after project implementation and maintenance of collective assets were ensured, the project level impact was higher.

4.6 Conclusions

Introduction of participatory processes brought about substantial changes in plan implementation during the Ninth Five Year Plan in terms of people's participation in beneficiary selection, project execution and maintenance. The selected Knowledgeable Persons generally acknowledged improvements in many dimensions. However the quantum and impact of such changes remained much less than the envisaged.

Beneficiary Selection: Grama Sabhas had performed a significant role in the selection of beneficiaries of plan projects during the 9th Five Year Plan. Yet, full involvement of Grama Sabhas in beneficiary selection was constrained by;

• Low and fast-dwindling representative base of Grama Sabhas;

• Conflicts within Grama Sabhas regarding prioritization of beneficiaries;

• Propensity among GP members and sometimes among officials to provide benefits to their cronies; loss of representative character of Grama Sabhas reinforced this.

Due to the above, a considerable proportion of respondents were not satisfied with beneficiary selection. But the economic profile of beneficiaries suggested that most of them were poor; yet, given the nature of agricultural and AH projects implemented, it was felt that that the beneficiary selection therein could have been more pro-poor.

Co-ordination between GPs and deployed departmental officials: Generally, such co-ordination was effective during the Ninth Five Year Plan. Grama Sabha attendance by certain sets of implementing officials was not regular. About 65% of the selected beneficiaries felt that the response of both GP and departmental officials towards people's needs improved after decentralization.

Beneficiary participation in project execution; Beneficiary participation was far below the envisaged levels in Anganwadi projects and collective irrigation projects. Many avoidable dampeners pre-empted beneficiary committees from reaching at least part of their

62

potential efficacy in project execution; yet a considerable proportion of the Knowledgeable Persons felt that speed and cost-effectiveness of project execution improved with BCs.

Follow-up and maintenance: These aspects require serious amendments. Collective assets

created under the Plan were most often neglected after plan implementation. Follow-up

and unfailing maintenance of assets with active stakeholders' participation are still to

become integral components of plan implementation. Instances that ensured these two

measures laid the desired injpact on the target group.

63

Chapter 5

Grama Sabha Participation

Introduction

Regular conduct of Grama Sabhas (GSs) and ensuring the participation of different socio -economic groups in the Grama Sabhas is the most powerful instrument of decentralized planning. In a society with multifarious socio-cultural ramifications, ensuring vocal participation of different groups, especially the underprivileged, is a pre-condition for ensuring balance in the ensuing developmental process. It is against this background that a stratified random sample-APL, BPL, SC, ST and Women being the strata- was drawn for the current study from the selected ward of each selected Grama Panchayat (GP), exclusively to assess the different aspects of their participation in the Grama Sabhas.

Section II of the chapter gives a brief profile of the selected respondents. Section III evaluates the participation of defined socio-economic groups in the Grama Sabhas in terms of their attendance and the factors determining it. However, the primary objective of this chapter is not to throw disaggregated estimates of Grama Sabha participation, but to discuss the issues involved in improving participatory planning. The sample was drawn with this objective in mind. Section-IV dwells on the opinions of the respondents on the contents of the Grama Sabhas. Section-V assesses the degree of their articulation in the Grama Sabhas and the factors affecting it. Section-VI concludes the discussions of the chapter.

5.2 Profile of Sample Respondents

The following table describes the composition of the defined sample categories of respondents selected exclusively for verifying GS participation.

Table 5.1: Distribution of Sample Categories

% Distribution of Respondents According to Sample Categories District GP Sample Size APL BPL SC ST Women Fishermen

Vilakudi 50 20.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 Sooranadu 50 20.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 20.0 0.0

Kollam

Neendakara 50 20.0 20.0 38.0 2.0 20.0 0.0 Vengur 60 16.7 16.7 16.7 33.3 16.7 0.0 Ernakulam Kumbalangi 50 20.0 20.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 Edavanna 50 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 0.0 Marakkara 50 20,0 20.0 40.0 0.0 20.0 0.0

Malappuram

Thanur 50 20.0 20.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 Wynad Vellamirada 50 20.0 20.0 16.0 24.0 20.0 0.0 Total 460 19.6 19.6 27.6 9.3 19.6 4.3

64

Though the sampling design stipulated that 10 each from APL, BPL, SC, ST and women, aggregating 50, would be selected from each GP, the final sample looks disturbed in the composition between Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). This is because, wherever the sample frame for either SCs or STs did not have 10 households in the selected ward (of the GP), the shortage was made up from the other group; except in Kumbalangi and Thanur where the shortage in ST was made up by the households from fishermen community; the villages basically being fishing villages. The sample for Scheduled Tribes could only be drawn from the GPs representing hilly areas (except Vilakudi). An additional ST sample of 10 was selected from Vengoor from a non -selected ward which was prominently tribal and remained insulated from the mainland. It should, first of all, be noted that the respondents for this chapter are the heads (if he/she was available during canvassing) of the households selected to assess Grama Sabha participation; hence any estimate given in this chapter is valid only for them, not to the population as a whole. The heads of households were selected because a) generally, it was a priori leamt that the they often used to represent households in GS meetings and by selecting them the quantum of non-responses could be minimized and b) the objective of this diagnostic study was not to draw statistically tenable estimates of GS participation, but to understand the casual and other factors behind this.

Table 5.2: Distribution of Respondents According to Socio-Economic Categories

% Distribution of Respondents According to: Social Category Economic

CategoryAccording to Sex District GP

SC ST OBC General APL BPL Male Female Vilakudi 46.0 0.0 30.0 24.0 38.0 62.0 62.5 37.5 Sooranadu 60.0 0.0 16.0 24.0 36.0 64.0 50.0 50.0

Kollam

Neendakara 44.0 2.0 52.0 2.0 28.0 72.0 55.3 44.7 Vengur 23.3 30.0 25.0 21.7 26.7 73.3 75.0 25.0 Emakulam Kumbalangi 34,0 2.0 38.0 26.0 44.0 56.0 61.2 38.8 Edavanna 22,0 24.0 36.0 18.0 32.0 68.0 62.8 37.2 Marakkara 38.0 0.0 36.0 26.0 34.0 66.0 72.0 28,0

Malappuram

Thanw 22.0 4.0 74.0 0.0 54.0 46.0 55.8 44.2 Wynad Vellamunda 16.0 32.0 36.0 16.0 28.0 72.0 70.0 30.0 Total 33.7 10.9 37.8 17.6 35.4 64.6 63.2 36.8

The total sample size of SCs and STs, APL and BPL and Women as seen from this table is higher than what Table 5.1 shows, because the sample frame was not mutually exclusive and only repetitive selection was sought to be avoided. For example, the sample of women in excess of 90 (162-90=72) is constituted by the female heads of the selected households from the APL, BPL, SC and ST sample. The sample of male respondents is invariably higher than that of female respondents, because, except in case of defined women category (table 5.1), the heads of the selected households were canvassed. Again, the sample of BPL is generally higher than that of APL, because most of those who were selected from SCs and STs fell under the BPL category.

65

Table 5.3: Distribution of Respondents According to Age and Educational Groups

% Distribution of Respondents According to: Age Groups Educational Groups

District

GP

20-3

0

30-4

0

40-5

0

20-6

0

60-7

0

Abo

ve 7

0

Illite

rate

s

L P

5th -

9 h

Bel

ow

Deg

ree

Gra

duat

es

Vikkudi 2.1 14.6 31.3 33.3 14.6 4.2 8.3 33.3 37.5 20.8 0.0 Sooranadu 0.0 8.0 22.0 42.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 28.0 38.0 14.0 0.0

Kollara Neendakara 0.0 8.5 31.9 31.9 17.0 10.6 4.3 31.9 57.4 43 2.1

Vengur 1.7 23.3 30.0 26.7 15.0 3.3 40.0 18.3 16.7 16.7 8.3Emakulam Kumbalangi 2.1 16.7 31.3 22.9 20.8 6.:i 8.2 38.8 40.8 10.2 2.0

Edavanna 7.0 14.0 34.9 25.6 14.0 4.7 37.2 37.2 20.9 2.3 2.3Marakkara 4.0 HO 18.0 28.0 26.0 16.0 38.0 34.0 26.0 2.0 0.0

Malappuram Thanur 2.3 256 27.9 18.6 16.3 9.3 51.2 39.5 4.7 2.3 2.3Wynad Vellamunda 16.0 26.0 28.0 10.0 18.0 2.0 240 24.0 44.0 4.0 4.0 Total 3.9 16.2 28.2 26.7 18.0 7.1 25.7 31.1 31.8 8.9 2.5

The age-group composition of the sample is conditioned to a limited degree in the sense that very aged citizens were omitted from the sample frame for their being unable to attend the GS meetings due to physical ailment, etc. This may make the estimate of the attendance of the people in the GS a slight overestimate. Greater concentration of the sample is seen in the age groups 30-40 through 60-70; the groups of 40-50 and 50-60 constitute more than 50% of the sample. The educational status given in the table would, to a certain degree, represent the educational status of the selected wards; however it may not reflect the total GP level situation, as the wards selected were those with the highest SC concentration in the selected GPs. The educational status of GS wards selected from the GPs of Malappuram district (and Vengoor from Ernakulam district) is the poorest.

5.3 Trends in Grama Sabha (GS) Attendance

This section has two sub-sections; the first throws up the available quantitative information on GS attendance of different social groups, while, the second dwells on the factors determining GS attendance. Two qualifications need to be given here.

• The estimates are applicable to the heads of the selected households.

• Very aged citizens were omitted from the sample.

5.5.7 Estimates of Attendance

The following table gives the attendance of the selected heads of households in Grama Sabhas, aggregated for all the sample categories.

66

Table 5.4: Awareness about and Attendance in Grama Sabhas

%of Respondents Who: % of Respondents Who did not Attend the Last GS Giving the Reason as:

District GP Sample

Wer

e A

war

e of

C

ondu

ct o

f GS

in th

eir V

illag

e

Ever

Atte

nded

G

S Si

nce

1997

-98

Atte

nded

Las

t G

.S (J

une-

July

20

04)

Not

Info

rmed

Pers

onal

Pr

eocc

upat

ions

Divisive Parry Politics Within

GS

Mee

tings

are

Les

s M

eani

ngfu

l

Oth

er F

amily

M

embe

rs

Atte

nded

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 Vilakudi (H) 50 96.0 50.0 20.0 27.5 47.5 0.0 17.5 7.5 N.Sooranadu(M) 50 100.0 84.0 NRS NR NR NR NR NR

Kollam

Neendakara (C ) 50 94.0 62.0 NR NR NR NR NR NR Vengur (M) 60 100.0 63.3 16.7 10.7 78.6 3.6 7.1 0.0Ernakulam Kumbalangi (C ) 50 98.0 72.0 30.0 30.0 40.0 0.0 30.0 0.0Edavanna (H) 50 86.0 70.0 24.0 36.8 55.3 0.0 7.9 0.0Marakkara (M) 50 100.0 66.0 16-0 17.1 51.2 0.0 31.7 0.0

Malappuram

Thanur (C ) 50 86.0 36.0 18.0 26.8 56.1 2.4 12.2 0.0Wynad Vellamunaa (H) 50 100.0 74.0 50.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total 460 95.7 64. 1 24.7 23.7 57.1 0.9 16.4 1.4

*(H) =GP from Hilly region; (M) =GP from mainland- (C) = GP from coastal region. $= Data were not collected for these two GPs.

The table above gives a highly mixed picture which is analyzed in the following.

• The selected wards of 4 GPs- one each from each sample district- did not have any awareness hazard that would pre-empt the attendance of the different sections of their population in the Grama Sabhas (Column 4). However, in Edavanna and Thanur GPs selected from Malappuram district, 14% of the respondents did not at all know about the conduct of Grama Sabhas in their wards (Column 4).

• Almost 36% of the respondent heads of households never attended any Grama Sabha since they were instituted in 1997-98, indicating that this section of the population remained completely cut off from the decision-making processes of the Panchayaii Raj Institutions (Column 5). Such alienation was acutely felt in the selected ward of Thanur GP (64%), followed by Vilakudi GP (50%). The incidence of this was the lowest in Sooranadu North (16%), followed by Vellamunda GP (26%).

• About 75% of the selected heads of households did not attend the Grama Sabhas which were being conducted across the State during PEO fieldwork (June-July 2004). It should not be mistaken that 25% of the population is estimated to have attended the June -July 2004 Grama Sabhas. First, in many places, of late, the practice of more than one family member attending the Grama Sabhas is noticed to be rare and mostly the heads of households used to represent the household in the Grama Sabha. Secondly, the sample, by its design, is dominated by the poorer sections of the society and given their proven greater propensity to attend Grama Sabhas (Table 5.9&10), the figure gets inflated,

67

especially when the sample was drawn from potentially the poorest wards (with the maximum concentration of SCs and STs) of the selected GPs. Thirdly, aged citizens who could not have attended GSs were omitted from the sample. The incidence of this was very low. The point driven home is that the proportion of eligible population that attended the June-July 2004 Grama Sabha was way below the figure given for the selected heads of households. This is further explained in tables 5.10 & 5.11).

• Comparatively, Vellamunda, the selected GP from the hilly Wynad district, stood out in this respect with half of its respondent heads of households attending the last GS. It is, however, reported from Vellamunda that, of late, there has been a spurt in women participation in GSs, mainly due to active involvement of Kudumbasree units. There are about 276 Kudumbhasree units in the GP. Knowledgeable Persons point out that the CDS meetings in some wards are being converted into GS meetings. As CDS meetings attract large women folk, often GP members take interest to convene GS meetings on such dates, so as to fulfill the condition of minimum quorum. Since the GS meeting is convened mainly as part of Kudumbhasree work, no active GS business is transacted in such meetings. The attendance in such meetings is highly prompted.

• The single most important reason suggested for non-attendance was personal pre occupations of the respondents, signifying that participating in GSs was not reckoned by them as one of their important civic duties. Absence of such sensitization may be seen along with the absence of any information about the conduct of GS to a considerable portion of respondents (Columns 7 & 8).

Table 5.5: GS Attendance of Respondents during 2001-02 & 2003-04

% Distribution of Respondents According lo tee Number of GSs Attended in 2001-02

% Distribution of Respondents According to the Number of GSs Attended in 2003-04 District GP

1GS 2 GSs 3 GSs 4 (or

above) GSs

Total 1GS 2 GSs 3 GSs

4 (or above)

GSs Total

Vilakudi (H) 6.0 12.0 28.0 0.0 46.0 6.0 14.0 14.0 0.0 34.0 N.Sooranadu(M) 8.0 22.0 30.0 14.0 74.0 16.0 28.0 24.0 0.0 68.0

Kollam

Neendakara (C) 4.0 16.0 18.0 24.0 62.0 6.0 16.0 14.0 4.0 40.0 Vengur (M) 16.7 333 5.0 1.7 56.7 18.3 20.0 6.7 3.3 48.3 Ernakulam Kumbalangi (C ) 2.0 32.0 22.0 6.0 62.0 10.0 20.0 18.0 2.0 50.0 Edavanna (H) 10.0 16.0 6.0 200 52.1 10.0 16.0 12.0 12.0 50.0 Marakkara (M) 0.0 20.0 6.0 12.0 38.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 2.0 26.0

Malappuram

Thanur (C ) 4.0 10.0 6.0 0.0 20.0 10.0 8.0 2.0 00 20.0 Wvnad Vellamunda (H) 10.0 32.0 26.0 0.0 68.0 14.0 34.0 18.0 0.0 66.0

Total 7.0 21.7 16.1 8.5 53.3 10.9 18.3 13.0 2.6 44.8

• In all selected Grama Panchayats, except Thanur, (where the attendance in Grama Sabha was very low in 2001-02 itself), there was a decline in the attendance in Grama Sabhas from 2001-02 to 2003-04. This period was chosen for analysis to minimize the

incidence of recall error. In all, 16% of the selected heads of households who attended at least one GS in 2001-02 did not attend any GS in 2003-04.

68

• Again, the proportion of respondents who attended all the 4 Grama Sabhas conducted during a year was very limited in 2001 -02 and negligible in 2003-04. In three GPs, none of the respondents attended all the four GSs in 2001 -02. Even the sum of those who attended 3 GSs and 4 GSs (presented to account for chancy non-attendance) is a paltry 15.6% in 2003-04.

Combining the tables above, it turns out that after the initial euphoria, the Grama Sabhas across the State had gradually been losing their representative base. However, the pattern and intensity of this loss is not uniform across districts and in GPs within districts. It seems that the erosion of people's participation was the lowest in Soornadu North of Kollam district and Vellamunda of Wynad district. (Their initial and sustained participation levels too were comparatively higher), while such erosion was drastic in Marakkara and Thanur GPs of Malappuram district, Vengur GP of Ernakulam district and Vilakudi GP of Kollam district. The forgoing analysis fails to bring out any conclusive physiographic or district-specific pattern in GS attendance. Hence this dataset requires a more disaggregated examination.

Table 5.6; Awareness about Conduct of GSs among Sample Categories

GP APL BPL SC ST Women Fisherman Total

Vilakudi (H) 100.0 100.0 90.0 100.0 96.0

N. Sooranadu (M) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Kollam

Neendakara (C) 100.0 90.0 94.7 100.0 90.0 94.0 Vengur (M) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Ernakulam Kumbalangi (C) 100.0 90.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 98.0 Edavanna (H) 90.0 80.0 90.0 80.0 90.0 86.0 Marakkara (M) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Malappuram

Thanur (C) 100.0 90.0 90.0 60.0 90.0 86.0 Wynad Vellamunda (H) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Four out of ten women respondents (sample category) were unaware about the conduct of Grama Sabhas in Thanur GP (Malappuram district) under decentralized planning is a poor reflection on the mechanism for passage of information. The BPL and scheduled tribe respondents of Edavanna GP (Malappuram district) were also disadvantaged in this respect.

69

Table 5,7: Awareness about Conduct of GSs among Age Groups and Educational Categories

% of Age Groups and Educational Categories who were Aware of Conduct of GS in their Wards

Age Groups Educational Categories

GP

20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70

Illite

rate

LP 5th-9th Below Degree

Gra

duat

es

Vilakudi (H) 100.0 100.0 93.8 100.0 100.0 66.7 .000 100.0 100.0 N.Sooranadu(M) 100.0 1000 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1000 100,0 Neendakara (C ) 80.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 66.7 93.8 96.4 100.0 100.0 Vengur (M) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1000 100.0 100.0 Kumbalangi (C ) 100.0 100.0 93.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 95.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Edavaima (H) 100.0 75.0 93.8 84.6 75.0 80.0 84.2 100.0 100.0 100.0 Matakkara (M) 100.0 100 0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1000 100.0 100.0 Thanur (C ) 100.0 84.6 85.7 100.0 70.0 84.6 85.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Vellarnunda (H) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1000 100.0 100.0 100.0

Among different age-groups, discomforting trends are seen from Edavanna and Thanur GPs, both selected from Malappuram district. Among the educational categories, awareness about the conduct of GS increased generally with increase in the educational status of the respondents. A considerable percentage of the illiterates selected from two of three GPs of Kollam district remained unaware about the conduct of GS; so did the illiterates and less educated of Edavanna and Thanur (both from Malappuram district).

Table 5.8: Attendance in GSs by Age Groups and Educational Categories %of Age Groups and Educational Categories who Ever Attended Grama Sabha Since 1997-98

Age Groups Educational Categories

GP

20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 above 70

Illite

rate

LP 5th-9th Below Degree

Gra

duat

es

Vilakudi (H) 42.9 53.3 56.3 S7.1 25.0 62.5 44.4 60.0 N.Sooranadu(M) 75.0 90.9 85.7 80.0 75.0 100.0 92.9 73.7 71.4 Neendakara (C ) 75.0 66.7 66.7 87.5 20.0 46.7 70.4 Vengur (M) 42.9 72.2 75.0 66.7 37.5 90.9 80.0 90.0 40.0 Kumbalangi fC ) 75.0 66.7 63.6 80.0 75.0 63.2 85.0 60.0 Edavanna (H) 83.3 86.7 81.8 83.3 62.5 100.0 88.9 Marakkara (M) 50.0 77.8 85.7 518 50.0 84.2 58.8 46.2 Thanur (C ) 54.5 50.0 50.0 14.3 25.0 40.9 35.3 Vellamnnda (H) 62.5 69.2 71.4 100 88.9 75.0 91.7 63.6

Grand Total 55.6 65.5 67.4 76.9 54.5

• Cells that are kept blank imply that the sample size relevant to the cell was too small to attempt any meaningful percentage analysis.

70

In 6 out of 9 GPs, the middle aged (40-60) showed greater interest than the youth in GS attendance; yet the trends among the different age categories with regard to their GS attendance are not fully conclusive. The progressive movement of GS attendance with better educational status is far less conclusive than the general positive relation observed between the awareness about the conduct of GS and the educational status of the respondents, indicating that the educated did not fully translate their better information base into greater physical presence in the Grama Sabha.

Table 5.9: Attendance in GSs by Gender and Socio-Economic Categories

% of Different Categories of Respondents who Ever Attended Grama Sabha Since 1997-98; Sex Economic Social

District GP

Male Female API BPL SC ST OBC General Vilakudi (H) 53.3 50.0 63.2 44-8 61.9 60.0 25.0 N.Sooranadu(M) 80.0 88.0 61.1 96.9 93.3 75.0 66.7

Kollam

Neendakara (C ) 61.5 71.4 57.1 69.7 84.2 50.0 Vengur (M) 66.7 53.3 68.8 61.4 57.1 44.4 86.7 69.2 Emakulam Kumbalangi (C) 73.3 73.7 77.3 70.4 100.0 63.2 50.0 Edavanna (H) 85.2 75.0 93.3 75.0 88.9 50.0 100.0 75.0 Marakkara (M) 80.6 28.6 23.5 87.9 1000 33.3 61.5

Malappuram

Thanur (C ) 45.8 36.8 30.4 55.0 100 41.9 Wynad Vellamunda (H) 82.9 53.3 64.3 77.8 87.5 87.5 61.1 62.5

Grand Total 68.5 56.9 S7 1 68.0 77.4 600 56.9 56.8

The table, on the whole, shows that the introduction of GS could not stir all sections of the society alike, reflecting that the utility of GS was conceived differently by different sections across different physiographic regions. In many cases, the participation of the underprivileged sections- for instance women in all selected GPs of Malappuram district, the BPL in Vilakudi and Edavanna and the OBCs in Marakkara- is pronouncedly less than that of their better-off counterparts. Contrariwise, the participation of the better-off sections-male respondents from Neendakara, APL from five out of nine GPs and general category from Vilakudi and Kumbalangi- is less pronounced than that of their worse-off counterparts. However, the results in general are conclusive to a great extent.

• The female participation in GSs is visibly less then male participation; however most of this difference is contributed by Malappuram district and it shrinks considerably once we exclude Malappuram (64.4% for women Vs. 68.9% for men). (Stronger evidence for greater female participation in GSs has been obtained in Thiruvananthapuram district by another sample survey- Padrna Ramachandran; 2004).

• Participation, in general, tends to go down with improvement in economic status. Field notes suggest that this is due to the general perception among the non-poor that benefits of attending Grama Sabhas accrued only to the BPL.

71

• The results flowing from different social categories go in tandem with those from the economic categories. The response of the socially forward classes to the call for participatory planning was considerably less active than that of the scheduled castes.

Table 5.30: Attendance in June-July 2004 GSs by different categories

% of Different Categories of Sample Respondents who Attended the GS held in June-July 2004 Gender Economic Social

Male Female API BPL SC ST OBC General 25.6 23.8 17.6 29.7 34.0 28.6 22.1 14.7

The table above provides the percentage distribution of the different categories of respondent heads of households according to their attendance in the Grama Sabha held during June-July 2004. The qualification stated while explaining Table 5.4 hold here too. A comparison of the tables 5.9 & 5.10 make some trends clear.

• Female participation may also be on the decline, but it has now caught up with male participation.

• Participation by the upper strata of the society in GSs is fast-eroding, and, GSs are propelled mainly by the backward economic and social classes. This point is echoed in the field level observations too. The upper classes generally have a feeling that GSs are mainly meant for selection of project beneficiaries and that, given the criteria for beneficiary selection, they do not gain anything by participating in GSs. A considerable number of medium and large farmers felt that they did not have any stake in the Grama Sabhas and hence they did not participate. Such alienation has not only reduced the representative character of GSs but has disrupted the flow of valuable information on sectoral problems and their potential solutions also.

The following table gives attendance in June-July 2004 GSs as culled out from the official records of the selected GPs.

Table 5.11: % Attendance in June-July 2004 GSs-official Records

Name of GP % Attendance

% of Wards without Quorum (10% of Voters)

Maximum % Declared by Wards

Minimum % Declared by Wards

Vilakudi (H) 8.2 66.7 10.4 4.1 N.Sooranadu(M) 8.7 64.3 18.9 4.7 Neendakara (C ) 9.3 30.0 12.5 0 Vengur (M) 6.5 72.7 12.4 3.5 Kumbalangi (C ) 9.7 23.1 10 9 Edavanna (H) 24.9 0.0 31.8 11.0

Marakkara (M) 6.4 86.7 14.8 3.1 Thanur {C ) 10.0 15.0 15.6 2.7 Vellamunda (H) 10.1 31.3 10.7 8.7

72

The sample information presented in tables 5.4 &5.10 are not comparable with that in table 5.11 and hence the sample information cannot be used to verify the veracity of the official records. However, a preliminary scrutiny of the official data is quite revealing. 43% of the GP wards within the selected GPs reported GS attendance more than 9% and less than 11%. It is highly unlikely that it is mere happenstance. In Kumbalangi and Vellamunda, almost all wards reported attendance figures hovering around 10%. In Thanur, majority of the wards had attendance figures around 10% and the GP level figure was exactly 10%. This would suggest that there was, at least to a limited degree, an attempt to report the GS attendance figures around 10% of the voters, the quorum fixed for convening GSs. However, only a negligible % of GP wards (3 out of 130 wards within the selected GPs) reported an absolute attendance figure below 50, the mandatory number required to re-convene a GS in case of failure to meet the quorum.

Il.b) Factors Determining GS Attendance

The following table summarizes the intents of the people, as perceived by the selected knowledgeable persons, in attending Grama Sabhas.

Table 5.12: Motives of GS Attendance- Views of Selected Knowledgeable Persons

% of Selected Knowledge Person Declaring that People Attended in GS with the Following Motives: To Get Individual Benefits To Respond to

Demands of Party Cadres

To Get Benefit to

NHG

To Get Benefit for their Socio-

Economic Groups

To Seek Explanation

from Officials /Leaders

Participated with Objective of Developing

Ward/GP

Almost All People

More than Half of the People

Less than Half of the People

More than Half

Less than Half

Neg

ligib

le/N

il

Less than Half

Neg

ligib

le/N

il

Less than Half

Neg

ligib

le/N

il

Less than Half

Neg

ligib

le/N

il More than Half

Less than Half

5.9 82,4 11.8 2.0 58.8 39.2 37.3 62.7 47.1 52.9 9.8 90.2 2.0 9.8 88.2

An overwhelmingly high percentage of the selected knowledgeable persons thought that more than half of the people attended the Grama Sabhas with an eye on individual benefits and that only a negligible proportion of them attended the Grama Sabhas with the sublime objective of participating in the development of their Grama Panchayat. The second important motive seems to be the desire to respond to the calls by party cadres. These have been substantiated by other surveys/research works too (N.D. Gopinathan Nair 2000; Chathukulam & John 2002). The extent to which this is true defines the limits of expanding the representative character of Grama Sabhas, as the first two years of decentralized planning in Kerala had conclusively proved that development did not lie in doling out, but in integrated efforts. This reiterates the need for further sensitization on a higher plain of civic sense and about the mutually beneficial effects of participatory development.

73

Here, the determinants of GS attendance are proposed to be captured from three groups of respondents- those whose attendance status has been improving/ declining over time, those who never attended the Grama Sabhas and those whose attendance was irregular. The factors governing these trends would to a great extent explain group -wise pattern of GS attendance.

Table 5.13: Reasons for increased Attendance in GS

% of the Sample Respondents (whose Attendance in GS is Declared to have been Increased) Giving the Reason for their Increased Attendance in GS as;

Received Individual Benefits

Decline in Party

Politics in the GS

Meetings later Became

more Meaningful

Organizers Listened to the Voice Raised by

You

Regularly Informed of Conduct of Meetings

Expect to Receive

Individual Benefits

Interest in Party Politics

Received Collective Benefits

57.1 0.8 11.3 9.0 14.3 1.5 0.8 2.3

The table above shall be explained along with the table below.

Table 5.14: Reasons for decreased attendance in GS

% of the Sample Respondents (whose Attendance in GS is Declared to have been Decreased) Giving the Reason for their Decreased Attendance in GS as;

Did not Receive any Individual Benefits

Spurt of Divisive

Party Politics

in the GS

Meetings Later

Became Less

Meaningful

Organizers did not

Listen to the Voice

Raised by You

Not Regularly

Informed of Conduct

of Meetings

Clash with Working

Hours

Health Problems

Personal Pre Occupations

45.3 6.6 14.2 1 8.5 7.5 3.8 4.7 4.7

The tables given above, presenting the most important reasons given by the sample respondents for their increased/reduced attendance in Grama Sabhas, agree to an extent with the opinions of the Knowledgeable Persons.

• While majority of those who declared that their GS participation increased in the subsequent years of decentralization (during the 9th Plan) attributed their increased GS attendance to the receipt of individual project benefits, the most conspicuous reason for reduced GS attendance was that the concerned did not receive any individual benefits.

• The tables also make clear that change in the (developmental) substance of Grama Sabhas defined by changes in variables like presence of divisive party politics, meaningful discussions in GS and interest shown by organizers to listen to the participants also affected the attendance in Grama Sabhas.

74

On the policy point of view, further sensitization efforts singularly directed at promoting GS attendance based on its developmental substance (rather than personalized factors like individual benefits) should be set in motion and efforts at correcting information asymmetry (captured in detail elsewhere in the Section) and unsuitable GS timings should be initiated. The first is only a question of extending substance-based attendance because, as the tables show, there already is a considerable proportion of such GS attendance.

However, following tables show that those who never/irregularly attended in the Grama Sabhas do not fully agree with the knowledgeable persons.

Table 5.15: Reasons for Non-Attendance in GSs

% Distribution of Non-attendee Respondents of Different Sections According co Reasons Suggested for Non- Attendance

Category

Nev

er In

form

ed

Onl

y Po

litic

ians

ha

ve a

Rot

e in

G

S N

o m

eani

ngfu

l A

spec

ts D

isc-

asse

t V

oice

s of

Wea

ker S

ectio

n no

t Hea

rs

Dom

inat

ed b

y C

erta

in C

lass

es

Tim

ing

clas

h w

ith W

orki

ng

Hou

se

Hea

lth

Prob

lem

s

Oth

er F

amily

M

embe

rs A

ttend

Oth

er P

re-

occu

patio

ns

Not

Inte

rest

ed

Total 19.3 103 5.5 0.7 4.1 28.3 11.7 9.7 4.1 3.4SC 14.8 3.7 7.4 0.0 0.0 51.9 14.8 7.4 0.0 0.0ST 33.3 11.1 5.6 0.0 0.0 22.2 11.1 0.0 11.1 00OBC 16.4 11.9 6.0 0.0 6.0 25.4 13.4 11.9 3.0 4.5

Social Category

General 21.2 12.1 3.0 3.0 6.1 18.2 6.1 12.1 6.1 6.1Illiterate 29.5 9.1 4.5 0.0 2.3 29.5 15.9 2.3 4.5 0.0LP 16.7 4.8 9.5 00 7.1 26.2 16.7 14.3 4.8 01)5th- 9th 17.8 133 4.4 00 0.0 31.1 6.7 13.3 4.4 6.7Below Degree 0.0 11.1 0.0 0.0 22.2 22.2 0.0 11.1 0.0 22.2

Educational Category

Graduates 0.0 40.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 APL 13 S 12.3 6.2 0.0 6.2 27.7 92 12.3 3.1 6.2Economic

Category BPL 23.8 8.8 5.0 1.3 2.5 28.8 13.8 7.5 5.0 1.320-30 16.7 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 50.0 16.7 0.030-40 179 7.1 7.1 0.0 3.6 32.1 7.1 7.1 3.6 7.140-50 8.1 10.8 8.1 0.0 5.4 405 B.I 2.7 5.4 8.150-60 258 129 0.0 0.0 6.5 419 3.2 3.2 3.2 0.0 60-70 24.0 16.0 12.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 20.0 0.0 0.0

Age Groups

Above 70 278 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 44.4 11.1 5.6 0.0Fishermen 40.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

The table above provides valuable policy inputs to improving the attendance of different socio-economic groups in Grama Sabhas.

It is to the credit of the conduct of Grama Sabhas in Kerala that only a negligible percentage of the non-attendee respondents from socially and economically disadvantaged sections suggested that the voices of weaker sections are not heard in the GS or that GS is dominated by certain classes of society.

The fact that a comparatively higher percentage of the respondents of STs, illiterates, BPL and fishermen declared that they were never informed about the conduct of

75

Grama Sabhas indicates that there is considerable information asymmetry which needs to be urgently corrected. This may be contrasted with the official position received from most of the selected GPs that the method of passage of information about the conduct of GSs is very effective, reflecting the trade-off between the official impressions about the efficacy of their efforts and grassroots level realities. Most of the selected GPs also declared that they took special efforts to ensure the participation of the disadvantaged sections like SCs and STs, poor families and women.

The table also evidences that a substantial percentage of the non-attendees of the most educated class shied away from the GSs reasoning that only politicians have a role to play in GS.

Another avoidable factor that seriously affected attendance is unsuitable timings, the incidence of which is very high among the SC non-attendees. Health problems are mostly reported by the elderly.

Half of the non-attendees from the 20-30 age group did not attend GSs thinking that participation by their elder household members would suffice, strongly suggesting the need for greater sensitization.

Table 5.16: % Distribution of Non/Irregular-Attendees in GS, Giving Factors that would Make them regularly Attend GS

Category Regular

Information on Conduct

of GS

Individual Benefits

Confidence Building Efforts

by the Responsible

People

Meeting Timings/ days

Should not Clash with the Work Timings

Others

Total-all Respondents 25.9 27.9 5.6 17.1 7.6 SC 34.3 28.4 0.0 17.9 4.5 ST 21.7 26.1 4.3 13.0 0.0 OBC 22.9 27.6 4.8 18.1 9.5

Social Category

General 23.2 28.6 14.3 16.1 10.7

Male 26.9 22.8 5.4 19.2 7.8 Sex Female 23.8 38.1 6 13.1 7.1

APL 20.4 27.2 9.7 17.5 8.7 Economic Category BPL 29.7 284 2.7 16.9 6.8

20-30 10 40 10 0 20 30-40 18.6 32.6 4.7 25.6 4.7 40-50 27.7 23.1 9.2 23.1 3.1 50-60 32.3 25.8 3.2 17.7 4.8 60-70 31.1 31.1 6.7 8.9 13.3

Age Groups Above 70 15.4 26.9 0 7.7 15.4

Illiterate 32.4 19.7 4.2 12.7 11.3 LP 29.7 33.S 2.7 10.8 6.8 5th-9th 19.5 29.9 6.5 29.9 6.5 Below Degree 18.2 36.4 13.6 9.1 4.5

Educational Category

Graduates 14.3 0 14.3 14.3 0

Fishermen 46.2 15.4 0.0 7.7 7.7

76

This table elicited information from those who never attended the Grama Sabhas and those who attended Grama Sabhas irregularly; hence is not directly comparable with the forgoing table. It may be verified that, among those who never attended the Grama Sabhas, a considerable percentage was ready to attend the Grama Sabhas if individual benefits were on offer. Interestingly, this demand was more pronounced among the youth (20-30 age-group) and ladies. However, to the SCs, illiterates/less educated and the fishermen regular information about the conduct of Grama Sabhas seem to matter a lot. Adjusting the timing of meetings to not to clash with the work timings is an important change called for by all social categories of respondents who never attended the Grama Sabhas (netting those who were not regular).

5.4 Respondents' Views on the Contents of Grama Sabhas

This section segregates the respondents into two categories-those who ever attended a Grama Sabha since 1997-98 and those who never attended; the tables in this section present the views of only the former.

Table 5.17: Duration of Grama Sabhas

Average of the Range of Duration of GS Meetings Declared by the Respondents

District GP

Maximum (Minutes) Minimum (Minutes) Vilakudi (H) 184 133 N.Sooranadu (M) 185 113

Kollam

Neendakara (C ) 238 153 Vengur (M) 162 89 Ernakaulam Kumbalangi (C ) 162 87 Edavanna (H) 175 121 Marakkara (M) 127 85

Malappuram

Thanur (C ) 157 109 Wynad Vellamunda (H) 176 120 Total 174 111

The duration of Grama Sabhas differs widely across GPs. There is no solid district-specific pattern emanating from this, barring that Grama Sabhas of Kollam district are comparatively longer in duration than those of other districts. The following table sums up the extent to which Grama Sabhas transacted the business that was expected of them.

77

Table 5.18: Issues Dealt with in the Grama Sabhas- Initial Years and Later Years of 9th Plan

% Distribution of Respondent GS Attendees Saying that the GSs Dealt with the Issues in Column I:

Issues

Perio

d (Y

ears

)

Vila

kkud

i

Soor

anad

Nee

ndra

kada

Ven

gara

Kum

bala

ngi

Edav

anna

Maa

kkar

a

Than

ur

Vel

lam

unda

Tota

l

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Initial 84 86 61 87 53 100 85 56 86 79 Assisting GPs in Collecting

Details Required for GP Plans Later 72 79 29 82 56 91 55 83 92 71 Initial 72 67 35 71 31 91 88 44 81 66 Proposals and Fixing Priority of

Schemes Later 64 62 16 71 28 80 52 72 78 59 Initial 56 38 29 61 22 91 85 33 68 !i? Giving Beneficiaries' Final list

Based on Fixed Criteria Later 48 38 10 66 53 77 36 67 73 52 Initial 64 40 100 34 58 97 94 56 49 65 Finding out Deficiencies of

Water Supply, etc Later 68 57 61 47 6. 86 61 67 46 61 Initial 32 29 97 47 31 94 58 19 30 51 Imparting Awareness on Matters of

Public Interest Later 36 50 61 53 42 83 39 56 30 50 Initiai 8 10 29 39 3 17 0 28 19 17 Organizing Arts and Sports

Festivals Later 16 10 6 24 47 29 0 44 24 21 Initial GO 38 32 61 14 83 21 22 41 42 Monitoring and Assisting

Beneficiary Committees Later 60 40 6 71 31 71 15 44 38 42 Initial 8 5 10 16 3 3 9 28 24 11 Assisting Parent-Teacher

Associations in the Schools Later 12 2 0 13 14 3 12 61 27 14 Initial 68 33 97 45 33 a 3 28 43 49 Assisting Literacy and Public

Health Activities Later 56 60 58 53 56 86 3 50 16 52

Column I of the table describes the activities expected of Grama Sabhas (Vijayanand, 2000). Column II distinguishes between two time periods- the initial years of decentralization and the later years, with a view to test the position maintained by many scholars that there have been many qualitative changes in the conduct of Grama Sabhas in Kerala over time (R. Krishnakumar; 2005). Two points stand out here.

* The performance of Grama Sabhas of different GPs differed vastly in the importance attached to particular functions; the Grama Sabhas of none of the selected GPs stand out in having attached the required importance to all activities expected to be performed by them.

• There is no conclusive evidence from the opinions of the Grama Sabha participants on any change in the quality of Grama Sabhas during the later half of the 9th Five Year Pkn in terms of the performance of their functions outlined in the table. Malappuram district provides an interesting case study, because Thanur GP, which showed the lowest representative base of GS among all selected GPs, reported considerable improvements in the agenda items of its Grama Sabhas in the later years of 9th Five Year Plan, while the same trend is not visible in the other two GPs of the district.

However, field visits have shown that, of late, GSs have been very much less substantial; it is essential for GSs to regain their mass movement character. Efforts to club

78

Grama Sabha meetings with Kudumbasree (CDS) meetings in an attempt to magnify the GS attendance (Vetlamunda) have already been referred to. The main business transacted in such meetings would be that of Kudumbasree, not of Grama Sabha.

5.5 Degree of Articulation of Different Groups in GSs

This section takes a disaggregated look at the degree of articulation by the different sections of the society in Grama Sabhas.

Table 5.19: Degree of Articulation in GSs by Gender and Socio-Econoroic Categories

% Distribution of Respondents who Attended the GS Meetings Declaring that they Articulated their Demands in the GS:

Sex Economic Category

Social Category

District GP

Total

Male Female APL BPL SC& ST

Others

To a Great Extent 52.0 56.3 44,4 58.3 46.2 38.5 66.7 Vilakudi Not at All 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 To a Great Extent 52.4 45.0 59.1 45.5 54.8 57,1 42.9 Sooranadu(N) Not at All 21.4 30.0 13.6 18.2 22.6 21.4 21.4 To a Great Extent 93.5 87.5 100.0 75.0 100.0 94.1 92.9

Kollam

Neendakara Not at All 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 To a Qreat Extent 55.3 43.3 100-0 27.3 66.7 87.5 31.8 Vengur Not at All 5.3 6.7 0.0 0.0 7.4 6.3 4.5 To a Great Extent 83.3 81.8 85.7 82.4 84.2 77.8 88.9

Emakuiam

Kumbalangi Not at All 5.6 4.5 7.1 0.0 10.5 11.1 0.0 To a Great Extent 22.9 21.7 25.0 0.0 38.1 46.2 9.1 Edavanna Not at All 37.1 34.8 41.7 57.1 23.8 23.1 45.5 To a Great Extent 39.4 37.9 50.0 100.0 31.0 10.5 78.6 Marakltara Not at All 45.5 48.3 25,0 0.0 51.7 73.7 7.1 To a Great Extent 66.7 63.6 71.4 57.1 72.7 20.0 84.6

Malappuram.

Thanur Not at All 22.2 27.3 14.3 14.3 27.3 40.0 15.4 To a Great Extent 70.3 65.5 87.5 33.3 82.1 85.7 50.0 Wynad Vellamunda Not at All 2.7 3.4 0.0 11.1 0.0 0.0 6.3

On the positive side, a greater proportion of female respondents who attended the Grama Sabhas than their male counterparts (in all GPs except Vilakudi) declared that they could articulate their demands in the Grama Sabhas "to a great extent". Again, the proportion of female respondents who suggested that they could not at all articulate their demands in the Grama Sabhas was generally lower than the male respondents.

Likewise, in 7 out of 9 GPs, the BPL respondents declared better articulation than the APL (Marakkara was a huge exception). Nonetheless, substantial proportion of the respondents from Edavanna and Marakkara GP (both from Malappuram district) and 'a lower, but visible proportion from Thanur (Malappruam district) and Soorandu North

79

(Kollam district) declared that they could not at all articulate their demands in the Grama Sabhas. Neendakara GP (a backward fishing village) of Kollam district stands out in the degree of articulation of women, BPL respondents and scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in Grama Sabhas.

• The comparison between SC&ST respondents and others with regard to their level of articulation is not conclusive. The SC&ST respondents of the selected GPs of Malappuram, especially of Marakkara GP, seem to be seriously constrained in articulating their demands in the Grama Sabhas; so are the "others" category of Edavanna (Malappuram).

On the whole, out of those who declared that they did not articulate their demands in the Grama Sabhas or articulated only to a limited extent, 53.4% attributed the same to their feeling that Grama Sabha would not consider their demands, 21.6% felt that Grama Sabhas did not use to discuss substantial issues and the remaining 25% declared to have lacked the confidence to raise their issues.

Table 5.20: Paying Attention to the Demands raised in GS by different Categories

% Distribution of Respondents who Suggested that the GS Paid Attention to the Demands they Articulated

Sex Social Category Economic Category

Male Female Total SC& ST Others Total APL BPL Total

84.6 79.7 82.7 93.5 70.4 82.7 78.3 84.3 82.7

Due to limited number within each GP, the % distribution is shown for all the GPs together. There is no significant evidence to suggest that GPs differentiated against the disadvantaged sections in paying attention to the demands raised in the Grama Sabhas; rather the table suggests that GP paid greater attention to the demands of the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe respondents than those of the other social categories. In the GPs of the Malappuram district, the previous table suggested that the SCs and STs had problems in articulation; but it is verified here that those who articulated felt that their demands were paid heed to.

5. Conclusions

The chapter does not attempt to give any representative estimate on the Grama Sabha participation of different sections of population during the 9th five Year Plan. However, the analysis suggests that;

− There is no strong district-specific pattern in the participation of different socio-economic sections in the Grama Sabhas;

80

− Though the general level of GS participation was higher in some GPs than the others, none of the selected GPs from any district was absolutely advantaged than the others in terms of awareness about and participation of their population in Grama Sabhas;

− Representative base of the Grama Sabhas has been gradually eroding hi all the selected GPs and this loss was more drastic in some of them than the others. Interestingly, Vellamunda GP, which showed one of the highest participation rates and Thanur GP which showed the lowest participation rate were both two of the most.backward GPs selected.

− The reduction in GS representation by the socially and economically better-off

− sections seems to be faster than that of their worse -off counterparts. − The reduction in GS representation by the socially and economically

better-off sections seems to be faster than that of their worse-off counterparts.

− Awareness level about Grama Sabhas went up with the level of education of the respondents; but GS attendance and level of education did not show any meaningful correlation.

− In the selected GPs of Malappuram and Wynad districts, the GS attendance of the male respondents was higher than that of their female counterparts, while in the other two districts, there was no unidirectional pattern to this. The comparison between the APL and the BPL (as per the BPL survey) and between the social categories with regard to their GS participation was not conclusive.

− Vast majority of the selected knowledgeable persons thought that more than half of the people attended Grama Sabhas with an eye on individual benefits. This observation has been reinforced by household level responses.

− Notwithstanding this, household level responses also suggested that a lesser, but visible proportion of GS attendance was based on the developmental substance of the GSs. This should form the core of Grama Sabhas in future, and, hence further sensitization efforts should be geared to stir and magnify this proportion.

− Correction of information asymmetry would ensure substantially improved attendance of SCs, illiterates/less educated and fishermen in the Grama Sabhas. Adjusting timing of GS meetings to not to clash with the work timings was demanded by disadvantaged social categories.

81

The relative importance attached to different (recommended) agenda items in GSs was different across GPs. There was no conclusive evidence to suggest that the quality of GSs changed during the later half of the 9th five Year Plan. However, field visits have shown that, of late, GSs have been very much less substantial; it is absolutely essential for GSs to regain their mass movement character. This would primarily require acknowledging and furthering the successful efforts made by independent organizations in mass mobilization {K.P. Kannan; 2000).

It is commendable that the degree of articulation of the disadvantaged sections (women and BPL) was no way less than that of the better-off (barring exceptions); in many cases the former seemed more articulate. Nonetheless, there were serious problems in articulation, cutting across sections, in the selected GPs of Malappuram district.

82

Chapter 6

Expenditure Planning Under Decentralization

Introduction

One of the most binding problems in analyzing the financial planning under decentralization has been the lack of any reliable statistics at the local body level. Local body level functionaries, busy with the responsibilities of administration and project execution, attach minimum importance to the maintenance of financial statistics. Their sole priority here is to arrange for the data required for progress reporting, and, hence there is a strong case for preparing analytically amenable formats, uniformly applicable to all local bodies, for progress reporting. Secondly, on account of the total lack of correspondence between general plan accounts and LSGI plan accounts, a consolidated sectoral analysis becomes highly difficult. Hence it is also extremely important to integrate the LSGI plan accounts to the general plan accounts in such a way that there would be no conceptual problem in combining the two sets of data.

This chapter has five sections. Section II attempts to integrate the general plan accounts for the 9th Five Year Plan with the corresponding LSGI accounts to arrive at the total picture and to unveil trends. Section III makes reflections on the financial planning of the selected Grama Panchayats within the data limitations. Section IV makes a limited analysis of the spatial balancing of the infrastructural planning of the selected Grama Panchayats, mostly left out from other chapters. Section V concludes the discussions.

6.2 Expenditure Planning- A Macro Analysis

For the Annual Plan, 1996-97, the year before the start of the 9th Five Year Plan, out of the total devolved funds, the State Planning Board allocated 55.80% to Village Panchayats, 14.33% to Block Panchayats, 14.93% to District Panchayats, 5.64% to Municipalities and 2.17% to Corporations. The 1st State Finance Commission (submitted its report in 1996) held that the devolution of plan funds among them might continue in the aforementioned proportions (provisionally) and the inter-se distribution among the various units in the same group of Local Bodies might follow the criteria given below.

Table 6.1: Criteria Suggested by 1"SFC for Inter-se Distribution of Devolved Funds [Weightage in %)

Indicator Urban Local Bodies Rural Local Bodies Population in 1991 Census 75 70 Population of SC/ST in 1991 Census 10 10 Total Workers Excluding Workers in Manufacturing, Processing, Servicing and Repairs Outside Household Industry

15 10

Population of Agriculture Workers Among Workers NIL 10 Total 100 100

83

The Cabinet Sub-Committee, set up to examine the devolution of funds, felt that instead of the formula recommended by 1st SFC, plan funds may be distributed according to the simple formula giving 90% weightage to population and 10% to the area. The distribution of plan funds in 1997-98, the year in which plan grant-in-aid was greatly enhanced, was based entirely on the criterion of population alone. In 1997, the Working Group of State Planning Board evolved a fresh formula for inter-se distribution of plan fund. This formula was followed for the whole 9th Five Year Plan.

Table 6.2: Criterion Followed for Inter-se Distribution of Plan Fund during the 9'h Five Year Plan (Weightage in %)

Indicators GPs BPs DPs Municipalities/ Corporations Population (Excluding SCs/STs) 65 65 55 75 Geographical Area (Excluding Area under Forests) 5 10 15 5 Area Under Paddy 5 - - - Own Income (Grama Panchayac) 10 - - - Composite Index of Agri Labourers, Persons Engaged in Livestock, Fisheries, etc. and Marginal Workers

15 25 20 -

Composite Index of Backwardness, Houses without Latrines and Houses Without Electricity - - 10 20

Total 1110 100 100 100

While population, geographical area, area under paddy and both the composite indices were directly related to the entitlement to grants-in-aid by a PRI, own income of the GP was inversely related to their grants-in-aid.

During the 9th Plan, untied plan grants (excluding grants for Centrally and State Sponsored Schemes) allocated within and between different tiers of PRIs and urban local bodies (ULBs) were as follows:

Table 6.3: Division of Plan GiA among LSGs during 9'h and Initial Years of 10th Plan (in %)

% Share of Three Tiers in the Toul Plan Grants-in-Aid to Rural LSGs

% Shares in the Total Plan Grants-in-Aid to Urban LSGs

Plan Period

Grama Panchayat

Block Panchayat

District Panchayat Municipalities Corporations

Ninth Five Year Plan 66.55 16.33 17.11 63.82 36.18 2002-03 & 2003-04 68.00 17.06 14.94 57.38 42.62

It is verified that the share of rural PRIs in the plan grants-in-aid was 86.54% during the 9th Five Year Plan whereas the same slightly declined to 85.52% during the first two years of the 10th Plan. The table above reiterates the pre-eminent position attached to Grama Panchayats (GPs) in the devolution of untied plan funds. On an average, each of the 991 GPs of Kerala was allocated an untied plan assistance of 53.6 lakh per annum during the Ninth Five Year Plan, each of the 152 block panchayats (BPs) was allocated 85.8 lakh per annum and each district panchayat (14 DPs), 9.76 crores per annum. The pattern of allocating the pre-eminent share in the allocation to the GPs in Kerala may be contradicted with the drastically declining share of GPs in the total

84

transfers to PRIs in Madhya Pradesh (during 1991-92 to 1997-98: Shakun Palihirya EPW March 15, 2003) and the prominent position attached to DPs in plan transfers in Karnataka (World Bank, November, 2003).

The Accounts of the 8th Five Year Plan furnish the following figures on the devolution of untied funds to LSGIs.

Table 6.4: Devolution of Plan Funds to LSGs during 8lh Plan (Rs. in lakhs)

Year 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 8* Plan Plan Assistance to LSGIs 2107 2500 3307 3559 14218 25690

Gross Plan Outlay 107024 136704.6 173112 213830 254175 884846 % LSGI Share 1.97 1.83 1.91 1.66 5.59 2.90

Source: 8th Plan Accounts

It was in 1996-97 that the beginning in the trajectory shift in the devolution of untied funds for formulation of local level plan schemes was heralded. However, as the table below shows, such devolution got quadrupled in one year from 1996-97 to 1997-98. This was suggestive of the big-bang approach followed by Government of Kerala towards devolution of powers.

Table 6.5: Devolution of Plan Funds to LSGs during 9"nand Initial Years of Iff11 Plan (Rs. in lakhs)

Year 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00

2000- 01 2001-02 9"1 Plan 2002-03

Plan Assistance to LSGIs for Local Plan 74187 93887 85089 75948 62014 391126 1004.59 Gross Plan Outlay (Including CSS) 323344 359252 347615 330256 285498 1645964 442485 Gross Plan Outlay (Excluding CSS) 289036 317883 310596 296550 253325 1467390 39S&65 % LSGI Share (Including CSS in Plan Outlay) 22.94 26.13 24.48 23.00 21.72 23.76 22.70 % LSGI share (Excluding CSS in Plan Outlay) 25.67 29.54 27.40 25.61 24.48 26.65 25.38

Source: 9th Plan accounts / budget documents 2004-05; CSS=Centrally Sponsored Schemes

The Approach Paper to the People's Campaign had declared that 35 to 40% of the outlay of the 9th Five Year Plan would be earmarked for the local bodies. However, it may be seen that the State Government did not reach up to this during any year of the 9lh Five Year Plan. Also, the % devolution to the LSGIs varied considerably over the years.

The State Planning Board (PB) had collected the financial statistics for local bodies for the first three years of 9th Five Year Plan at a certain degree of desegregation. The following table is derived by attributing the average outlay shares of LSGIs from their receipt of grants-in-aid, obtained from the Planning Board data for the years 1997-98 to 1999-00, to the last two years of the 9th Plan (2000-01 8c 2001-02).

Table 6.6: Sectoral Shares in Plan Expenditure of LSGIs (Oui of Grants-in-Aid) and General Plan during the 9th Five Year Plan

Sector Plan Expenditure Made by LSGIs (Rs. in lakhs)

% Shares

General Plan Expenditure

Excluding LSGI Share

% Shares

Plan Expenditure

Including LSGI Share

% Shares

85

(Rs. in lakhs) (Rs. in lakhs) Agriculture & Allied 75229 19.25 143352 11.42 21S581 13.28 Rural Development 8212 2.10 44512 3.55 52724 3.20 Co-operation 4379 1.12 21627 1-72 26006 1.58 irrigation & Flood Control 32328 8.27 111482 8.88 143810 8.74 Power 10487 2.68 289935 23.11 300422 18.26 Industry and Minerals 23537 6.02 107864 8.60 131401 7.98 Transport & Communications 71833 18.38 128217 10.22 200050 12.16 Scientific Service and Research 1500 0.38 8618 0.69 10118 0.61 Social & Community Services 160776 41.13 358353 28-56 519129 31.54 Economic Services 1148 0.29 18702 1.49 19850 1-21 General Services 1425 0.36 22177 1.77 23602 1.43 Total 390854 (*) 100.00 1254838 100.00 1645692 100.00

(*) - The Plan Accounts show that the plan assistance to LGIs was 391126 lakh; the difference is on account of adjusting the decimal points of proportions in calculations,

Column (2&3) above are projected of out of the sectoral outlay shares of LSGIs from their receipt of grants-in-aid. However, it may be seen from table 6.13 that grants-in-aid and Centrally and State sponsored schemes together accounted for about 77% of the plan receipts of the LSGIs. Expenditure under grants-in-aid to LSGIs and Centrally and State sponsored schemes are both considered in the table above (CSS and SSS under the general plan expenditure). This means that only 23% of the plan financing of LSGIs is outside the analysis here (ref: table 6.13) and it would be reasonable to assume that this would not distort the LSGI sectoral expenditure shares presented above (and below) drastically.

This aggregated table reveals the picture only partially; yet it may be seen that sectoral importance attached by the LSGI plan and the general plan (excluding LSGIs) differed drastically for sectors like social and community services, power, transport and communications and agriculture. It is not technologically and financially feasible for LSGIs to make big investments in the power sector; most of their expenditure shown in the sector related to street lighting (under distribution). The trends seen in the other sectors can be analyzed with the tables below.

Table 6.7 Highest Shares in Plan Expenditure of LSGIs during the 9"1 Five Year Plan

Sub-Sector LSGI Plan Share (%) General Plan Share (Excluding LSGIs) (%] Agriculture 9.08 3.45 Animal Husbandry 6.02 0.92 Minor Irrigation 7.60 1.25 Small Scale Industries 4.51 2.65 Drinking Water 6.64 4.39 (•) Housing 17.40 1.12 Sanitation 3.95 4.86 (*•} Roads & Bridges 18.14 5.57 Total 73.34 19.35

(*)= combined share of Sewerage and water supply; (") = combined share of medicine, pubic health and sanitation.

86

The table makes clear the ways in which sectors like agriculture and allied activities, social and community services and transport and communications received a boost under the LSGI plans. Expectedly, LSGIs invested greater plan shares than the general plan in agriculture, animal husbandry and minor irrigation. The boost in social and community services was primarily on account of huge funds earmarked for housing and followed by small drinking water projects and provision of sanitary latrines under the LSGI plans. The higher LSGI share in transport and communications was almost fully on account of the widespread construction of rural roads and bridges under their plans.

LSGI accounts distinguish between three main sectors- productive, service and infrastructure sectors and hence the following analysis treats them separately. One of the main objectives given for decentralization was to stir the stagnant productive sector of the Kerala economy. The other chapters have dwelt on the degree of success achieved in this; the following section helps examine whether the groundwork for this was done in the financial planning of the decentralized plan.

Table 6.8: % Shares of Productive Sector in the Plan Expenditure during 8*. 9"b and (Initial Years of) 10* Five Year Plans

Productive Sector-Sub Sectors %Shares-8th Plan

% Shares-9"1 Plan (Excluding LSGI

Shares)-

9 t h P l a n LSGI Shares

(%)

% Share-9th Plan (Inclusive

of LSGI Shares)

% Shares 2002-03 (Exclusive

of LSGI Shares)'

% Shares 2003-04 (Excluding LSGI Shares)'

Agriculture 7.20 3.45 9.11 5.62 2.63 2.13Soil and Water Conservation 0.39 0.34 3.04 1.06 0.37 0.49 AH 1.07 0.92 6.04 2.36 0.54 0.61 Diary Development Q.21 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.03 0.05 Fisheries 2.47 1.60 1.09 185 1.73 0.76 Forests 1.71 1.84 0.02 1.84 1.27 1.43 Invest in AF Institutions 0.17 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.11 0.12 Market, Storage and Warehouse 0.98 0.30 0.00 0.30 0.75 0.11 Co-operation 1.51 1.32 1.14 1.59 1.20 0.79 Irrigation and Flood Control 1.53 0.78 0.67 0.94 0.31 0.25 Major and Medium Irrigation 6.68 430 0.00 4.30 2.36 2.87 Minor Irrigation 1.81 1.25 7.63 3.07 0.63 0.88 Command area Development 1.02 0.48 0.00 0.48 0.39 037 Village and Small Industries 4.99 2.65 6.04 4.09 2.12 1.94 Medium and Large Industries 5.82 3.87 0.00 3.87 2.22 4.29 Mining 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 . 0.01 Productive Sector-Total 37.61 23.36 34.78 31.65 16.66 17.10

(*)= Here, the numerator is the general plan expenditure (excluding LSGIs, but including centrally sponsored schemes) in the sub-sector, while the denominator is the total plan expenditure (including both LSGIs and CSS) under the 9th Five Year Plan. Keeping the denominator constant for Columns (3) & (5) helps to directly derive the LSGI's sub-secroral share in the total 9th Five Year Plan, by taking the difference between the two.

The table makes evident a host of interesting trends in productive sector planning.

The share of agriculture declined from 8th Plan to 9th Plan and further drastically from 9th Plan to 10th Plan. Though the LSGIs spent a visible proportion of their 9th Plan funds on agriculture, this could not compensate the substantial reduction seen in the general 9th Plan. Even while assuming that the LSGI sectoral shares were maintained,

87

the reduction in the agriculture sector experienced during the first two years of the 10Ih Five Year Plan would be considerable.

Minor irrigation received a boost in the 9th Five Year Plan, mainly on account of LSGI allocations thereon. Naturally, LSGIs did not invest in larger irrigation projects and hence the plan share of such projects came down.

Animal husbandry and dairying may be seen together. The increase in their combined share during the 9th Five Year Plan was mainly due to large scale doling out of milch animals by the LSGIs during the period. The trends seen in the fisheries sector would need to be reversed, especially in the aftermath of the Tsunami.

The plan share of industries (small and large together) came down during the 9th plan. The share decline experienced by the small scale industries was less than that of the medium and large industries, mainly on account of the LSGI efforts in the former.

On the whole, the share of productive sector has been declining since the 8th Five Year Plan; the pace of decline accelerated during the initial years of the 10* Five Year Plan. It needs to be further probed as to whether such trends are in line with the envisaged strategy to stir the productive sector.

Table 6.9 % Shares of Service Sector in the Plan Expenditure during 8th, 9th and (Initial Years of) 10"1 Five Year Plans

Service Sector-Sub Sectors %Shares-8aPlan

% Shares-9"' Plan

(Excluding LSGI Shares)

9">Plan LSGI shares

(%)

%Share-9th Plan

(Including LSGI Shares)

% Shares 2002-03

(Exclusive of LSGI Shares)

% Shares 2003-04 (Exclusive of LSGI Shares)

Rural Development 4.97 1.52 0.00 1.52 1.30 1.14

Community Development and Panchayat 3.05

(0.15 *) 0.77 0.00 0.77 2.19 4.20 General Education 2.84 2.73 3.24 3.51 2.58 1.47 Art and Culture 0.20 0.33 1.20 0,62 0.21 0.24 Technical Education 1.38 1.21 0.27 1.28 0.67 0.60 Sports and Youth Services 0.18 0.20 0.42 0.30 0.17 0.29 Medicine, PH and Sanitation 5.19 4.86 6.09 6.31 4.1J 4.52 Sewerage and Water Supply 5.51 4.39 6.70 5.98 4.28 4.33 Housing 1.47 1.12 17.52 5.29 1.29 1.14 Urban Development 1.55 0.95 0.74 1.13 1.32 1.29 Information and Publicity 0.11 0.09 0.00 0.0° 0.09 0.11 Labour and Labour Welfare 0.25 0.21 1.32 0.52 0.14 0.22 Welfare of SC. ST. OBCs 3.30 3.84 0.00 3.84 5.85 4.19 Social Welfare and Nutrition 1.22 1.70 3.75 2.59 3.50 3.45 Secretariat Economic Services 0.11 0.48 0.00 0.48 1.32 1.86 Economic Advice and Statistics 0.21 0.22 0.00 0.22 0.18 0.21 Other General Economic Services 0.05 0.43 0.00 0.43 1.37 0.01 Stationery and Printing 0.04 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.04 0.03 Civil Supplies 0.11 0.06 0.37 0.14 0.08 0.05 Total-Service Sector 31.73

(28.83-) 25.17 41.60 35.09 30.68 29.34 (*) It may be verified from the Accounts for die 9* Five Year Plan Fhat the untied assistance given to the LSGIs for locaJ plan programmes was subsumed tinder the field "Cotnmujiity Development and Pinchayzt'. This fanned 2.9O% of the torsi plan expenditure (Hef: table 6.4). Once this amount is taken out from iheshBreof~Comnjuni£y Development and PaocJiavat", its expendimre Share gets reduced tif 0 15°^ and the shaze of service secfor to 28 83%

88

It may be seen that in those sectors where the LSGI share was substantial, the 9Ih

Plan expenditure share surpassed the corresponding 8th Plan share (general education, sanitation, water supply, housing and social welfare). It could be verified from the "Impact" chapter that the. Grama Panchayats could create visible impact on sectors like housing, provision of sanitary latrines and the drinking water situation in the villages; the table above testifies that the LSGIs had attached very high importance to these activities, especially housing, during the 9ih Five Year Plan.

The reduction in the expenditure on rural development from 8th to 9th plan was partly on account of substantial reduction in the share of Centrally Sponsored schemes in the sector. During the 8th Five Year Plan, most part of the expenditure head 'community development and Panchayat' consisted of the untied funds transferred to LSGIs for local level plan schemes, while this expenditure head did not contain the same during the 9th

Five Year Plan. The sectoral disaggregation of the aforesaid transfer of funds during the giti Five Year Plan is not available and hence is kept undisturbed under the same head.

Table 6.10 % shares of Infrastructure Sector in the Plan Expenditure during 8th, 9th and (Initial Years of) 10'h Five Year Plans

Infrastructure Sector-Sub Sectors % Shares-8'h Plan

% Shares-9"-Plan

(Excluding LSGI shares)

9th Plan LSGI

Shares (%}

% Shares'" Plan

(inclusive of LSGI Shares)

% Shares 2002-03

(Exclusive of LSGI Shares)

% Shares 2003-04

(Excluding LSGI Shares)

Special Programs for Area Development 0.54 0.22 0.00 0.22 0.28 0.31

Power 21.39 17.65 2.69 18.29 16.79 8.27 Information Technology 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.72 0.29 Ports and Lighthouses 0.25 0.12 0.00 0.12 0.08 0.12 Road and Bridge 5.59 5.57 18.21 9.91 8.40 9.30 Road Transport 0-38 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.13 0.12 Water Transport 0-18 0.22 0.05 0.24 0.35 0.19 Other Transport 0.07 0.35 0.05 0.36 0.61 0.00 Tourism 0.67 1.01 . 0.13 1.04 1.44 1.50 Scientific Services and Research 0.51 0.53 0.38 0.62 0.54 0.74 Public Works 0.97 1.24 2.11 i.74 0.66 0.72 Total- Infrastructure Sector 30.54 27.47 23.62 33.10 29.81 23.55

The resources for the general power sector plan are generated from the sector itself and hence oscillations under the head cannot be attributed to policies underlying the general plan allocations; however, it may be noted that the plan funds under the power sector declined visibly from the 8th Plan to the 9th plan and further steeply from the 9th Plan to the initial years of the 10lh Plan. The lone sector that received a boost during the decentralized planning under infrastructure was roads and bridges; correspondingly the rural knowledgeable persons opined that there were substantial improvements in rural connectivity on account of decentralized planning. The 10th Five Year Plan has further stepped up the plan shares for the sector.

89

Table 6.11 Major Expenditure Shares at Constant Prices during the 8th and 9th Five Year Plans (1993-94=100)

Sub-Sectors Expenditure during tie 8th

Plan (Rs. In lakhs)

Expenditure during the 9* Plan (Rs. In

lakhs)

% Change from the 8* to 9th Plan

%ShareofLSGIain the Total 9* Plan

Expenditure

Agriculture 37699 50085 32.9 48.05 Soil and Water Conservation 2234 11427 411.6 70.10 Animal Husbandry & Dairy Development 8537 26776 273.2 59.80 Fisheries 10002 13390 33.9 21.40 Forest 12268 16717 36.0 0.36 Major & Medium Irrigation 52013 47529 -8.6 0.00 Minor Irrigation 13905 33903 143.8 59.26 Flood Control & Anti-sea Erosion 12039 10361 -13.9 16.91 Power 162480 200766 23.6 3.54 Village and Small Industries 31818 39276 23.4 40.39 Medium and Large Industries 43232 42455 -1.8 0.00 Roads and Bridges 43178 108942 152.3 44.01 Tourism 4773 11348 137.8 2.93 Scientific Services and Research 3727 6660 78.7 14.83 General Education 16067 32753 103.9 26.20 Technical Education 10160 13301 30.9 5.35 Medical Public Health & Family Welfare 13983 26559 89.9 21.13 Water Supply & Sanitation 42959 71893 67.4 39.12 Housing 9769 58134 495.1 78.77 Urban Development 10913 10343 -5.2 18.67 Welfare of SC, ST and OBC 18484 40209 117.5 0.00 Social Security and Welfare 1227 10580 762.5 60.80 Public Works 6816 18568 172.4 29.69 Total 644169 987036 53.2 26.66 Centrally Sponsored Schemes 131245 120387 -8.3 - Grand Total 775413 1107423 42.8 23.76

Every real percentage change given in the table above may be compared with the aggregate change of 42.8% in the plan expenditure from 8lh Plan to the 9[h Plan (though some such percentages where the base level values were very small can be misleading).

It is notable that agriculture, fisheries, village and small industries, power and technical education received less than proportionate increase in plan expenditure whereas the real value the expenditure on important sectors like major and medium irrigation and medium and large industries declined. Prominent sectors like animal husbandry, minor irrigation, roads and bridges, general education, medical health, drinking water and sanitation, housing, welfare of backward sections and public works received considerable boost during the 9th Five Year Plan. It needs to be further probed and analyzed threadbare whether the changes in allocation implicit in these trends were in tune with the envisaged strategy that emphasized revival of the productive sector. The table below throws more light into this.

90

The second important finding that requires much introspection is the LSGI shares in the sectoral plan expenditure. In sectors like agriculture, animal husbandry, minor irrigation, small industries, roads and bridges, water supply and sanitation, housing and social security and welfare, substantial part of the State plan was contributed by the LSGIs. Considering the capacities for planning by LSGIs, these and other sectoral shares maintained by them seemed to be on expected lines. Given this, it needs to be further debated whether the evident sectoral re-allocation underplaying the importance of some sectors like major and medium irrigation, power, medium and large industries, and even fisheries and technical education was part of a deliberate plan strategy or the unintended bi-product of decentralization and devolution of funds to LSGIs.

Table 6.12: Sub-Sectoral Expenditure Shares during 8th and 9"1 Plan

Sectors Expenditure during the 9th Plan (Rs. In

lakhs)

% Share of LSGIs in the Total 9th

Plan Expenditure

Expenditure during the 8* Plan (Rs. In

lakhs)

% Change from the 8lh to

9th Plan Agriculture Including Irrigation 145871 35.76 110221 32.34 Industries 81958 19.35 75616 8.40 Education 46034 20.18 26226 75.60 Backward Classes and Social Welfare 54254 18.01 21267 155.10

The table above aggregates some important sub-sectors to make the sectoral perspective clearer. The point that stands out from the table above is that the main sub-sectors of the productive sectors like agriculture and industry did not receive an increase in plan expenditure proportionate to the increase in the aggregate plan expenditure during the 9th Five Year Plan. However, many service sector areas and welfare activities received tremendous expenditure boost during the same period.

6.3 Financial Planning at the Sample GP Level

It would be appropriate to see the financing of plans in the sample GPs against background of the State-wide picture during the 9th Five Year Plan. The table below gives the macro picture.

Table 6.13: % Share of Sources of Financing the Plans of Different LSGIs during the 9'b Five Year Plan

Items GPs BPs DPs Municipalities Corporations Total Grant-in-Aid 58.06 41.67 58.57 64.73 57.99 55.48 Own Fund 13.69 0.1 > 0.01 12.77 22.08 9.60 State Sponsored Schemes 9.81 7.27 22 .18 7.55 4.37 10.58 Centrally Sponsored Schemes 4.68 35.19 3.74 7.35 4.54 10.60 Cooperative Finance 0.18 1.42 10.53 0.47 0.00 1.86 Institutional Finance 0.89 12.15 0.14 1.67 4.10 3.19 Voluntary Contribution 2.03 0.45 0.40 1.33 0.37 1.35 Beneficiary Contribution 8.47 0.93 0.57 3.34 5.04 5.35 Others 2.20 0.80 3.67 0.80 1.51 1.99 Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total Amount (Rs. crore) 3340.74 1195.9 863.38 468.24 359.09 6227.35

Source: Economic Review, Govt. of Kerala

91

The table not only brings out the insignificant role of Bank finance in the plans of PRIs of Kerala, but the dismal state of BPs and DPs in mobilizing own funds and the failure of Grama Panchayat to bring in beneficiary and voluntary contributions to the desired levels.

The analysis of the receipts and expenditure of the selected GPs was constrained by huge difficulties in terms of non-maintenance of consolidated accounts, inconsistency between different data sources and binding problems in data retrievability. There was indeed a problem in instituting an accounting system, the format and dimensions of which were vastly different from the past, from nowhere. Hence, presenting mutually consistent financial information for the selected GPs is a huge ask; GPs with inconsistent information base had to be dropped from many tables. The following tables briefly examine the ways of mobilizing plan resources by selected GPs {for which information is available).

Table 6.14% Share of Different Components in the Total Plan Resources for 9th Plan in the Selected GPs

GPs Grants in Aid

Own Income

Voluntary Contribution

Beneficiary Contribution

Bank Finance

State Sponsored

Scheme

Centrally Sponsored Scheme

Soorandu 82.92 8.81 0.00 0.97 0.00 5.32 1.98 Neendakara 88.64 o oo 0.00 1.41 0.00 0.00 6.36 Vengoor 87.13 10.23 0.08 0.15 0.00 0.09 2.33 Edavanna 60.58 4.71 12.27 8.23 2.27 2.96 8.99 Thanur 67.85 6.57 0.26 20.44 0.48 1.75 2.65

Majority of the GPs were hugely dependent on the plan grants-in-aid by the State Government for their plan resource mobilization. Considering the differences in the share of own income in the total resources (from 0% to 10%), the 10% weightage given to the own income of GPs the formula for inter-se distribution of grants-in-aid seems reasonable. An independent sample Study (R.P Nair; 2004) on the potentials and feasibilities of own resource mobilization in GPs concluded that that the realization of revenue potential was low from all sources including building tax {between 26% to 51%), profession tax (between 29% and 47%), entertainment tax (between 11% and 50%) and non-tax revenue (between 25% and 70%), mainly on account of inadequate database on the tax base, insufficient personnel to collect revenue and the propensity to levy the lowest rate prescribed.

Mobilizing voluntary contributions was one of biggest advantages expected from decentralization; but the GPs generally failed in this. Ability to mobilize beneficiary contribution is dependent, inter alia, on the nature of the projects and capabilities of the beneficiaries; however, total failure to mobilize beneficiary contributions observed in certain GPs, given the nature of their projects (mostly individual beneficiary oriented) would suggest that development has not been participatory. One of the biggest failures

92

arose in the form of the poor bankability /involvement of financial institutions in projects. The following table also suggests that some GPs did not target any bank financing of their projects, some have totally underachieved their targets.

Table 6.15 % Realization of Targets in the Mobilization of Resources

Grants in Aid

Own Income

Voluntary Contribution

Beneficiary Contribution

Bank Finance

State Sponsored Scheme

Centrally Sponsored

Scheme Total

Sooranadu N 94.64 73.97 NR 100.00 NR 40.iS 36-39 83.24 Vengoor 76.49 9.95 0.75 1.07 NR 1.32 39-86 39.50 Thanur 83.40 47.67 25-16 56.53 4-04 38.19 65.22 66.44 Edavanna 63.17 29.97 44-17 53.01 51.47 45.64 54-68 54.87

The table suggests that the target that realized most was that of the grants-in-aid from the State Government. There were very low targets of voluntary and beneficiary contributions, many of which did not realize. Targets on own income showed different levels of realization across GPs.

Under decentralization, one-third of the plan funds has been earmarked for local governments and around 90% of it (the remaining 10% would be sponsored schemes) has been given in an untied form to a great extent within the broad policy framework which stipulated that at least 30% of it should be invested in productive sector, not more than 30% should be invested in infrastructure sector, at least 10% be earmarked for gender sensitive schemes and 5% for the care of the disabled, children and the aged. The following table examines the conformity of the selected GPs with these norms.

. Table 6.16: Sectoral Expenditure Shares of the Selected GPs during 9th Plan

Sectoral Expenditure Shares of the Selected GPs during 9th Plan (*) Name of GP Productive Sector Service Sector Infrastructure Sector Vilakudi 21.29 50.42 28.29 Sooranad (N) 25.87 56.10 18.03 Vengoor 25.47 38.56 35.97 Kumbalangi 28.85 45.04 26.11 Edavanna 44.97 32-58 22.45 Marakkara 36.07 31.31 32.62 Thanur 39.19 33.54 27.27 Vellamunda 23.23 25,11 51.67

(*) Expenditure out of spill-over projects is not considered here.

First of all, the sectoral expenditure shares varied widely across the selected GPs. Secondly, most of the selected GPs found it difficult to adhere to the prescribed minimum requirement of 30% expenditure on productive sector. Evident example of manipulative accounting to boost productive sector expenditure shares was seen from Edavanna where the sample irrigation project was conceived and executed as a drinking water project, but was accounted under irrigation to inflate the share of the productive sector. (Selected Knowledgeable Persons opined that many of the so-called irrigation water projects

93

actually became drinking water projects}. The selected GPs referred to late release of funds and uncertainties about cuts in allocation leaving inadequate time to plan and implement the projects under the productive sector and difficulties in conceiving viable projects in the productive sector as the prominent factors constraining them from spending greater proportion of their plan funds in the productive sector.

Table 6,17: Re-Classification of Productive Sector Projects

% of Project Funds put Under Productive Sector that can be Re-classified Under;

% of Productive Sector Projects that can be Classified as;

Selected GPs Productive Sector Other Sectors Collective Projects Individual Projects

Marakkara 95.87 4.13 53.96 46.04 Edavanna 72.20 27.80 59.01 40.99 Vellamunda 90.57 9.43 62.54 37.46 Thanur 97.02 2.98 16.10 83.90 Vengoor 93.91 6.09 69.03 30.97 Neendakara 86.40 13.60 30.99 69.01 Sooianad 99.60 0.40 30.47 69.53 Vilakudi 69.26 30.74 58.82 41.18

The re-classification of the productive sector projects in the table is done on the basis of the field findings. The explanation for re-classifying a considerable proportion of productive sector project funds under non-productive sector is given above. In Vilakudi GP, many projects were implemented to construct ramps to the paddy fields; however, it was observed that most of these ramps are actually pathways, with no implications for paddy cultivation. While funds reclassified as non-productive ("other sectors") were used for construction of pathways, culverts, small bridges and compound walls for krishibhawan and veterinary hospital in the name of improvement of agriculture and allied sectors in Vellamunda GP, in Neendakara GP the same was used for purchase of land, furniture, etc for krishibhawan and veterinary hospital. In Edavanna GP, drinking water projects were created in the name of irrigation projects to adjust sectoral shares.

Table 6.18: % Expenditure Shares of Sub-Sectors of the Productive Sector in the Selected GPs during the 9th Five Year Plan

Name of GP Agriculture Irrigation Animal Husbandry

Fisheries Others

Vilakudi 69.71 7.35 20.05 0.00 2.89 Sooranad (N) 76.65 12.32 8.48 0.00 2-55 Vengoor 10.85 63.06 14.84 0.00 11.25 Kumbalangi 44.62 19.33 21.61 9.62 4.82 Edavanna 13.34 53.79 32.26 0.00 0.61 Marakkara 34.57 39.80 23.63 0.00 2.00 Thanur 31.13 5.86 10.21 42.67 10.14 Vellamimda 41.62 43.54 11.85 0.00 3.00

The composition of the productive sector expenditures in the given GPs is revealing. First, the productive sector investments of the selected GPs (except Thanur,

94

which is a fishing village) confined mostly to agriculture (including irrigation) and animal husbandry. The negligible share of other productive activities has been aggregated under the head "others" in the table. Many of the projects under self-employment could have been subsumed under the productive sector; however they were fully kept under the service sector. Secondly, the composition between the expenditure shares of agriculture and irrigation varied widely across GPs.

Table 6. 19:% Expenditure Shares of Sub-Sectors of Service Sector in Selected GPs during 9* Plan

Name of GP Education Anganwadi Health Sanitation Drinking Water Housing

Self Employment

Am& Sports Others

Vilakudi 4.22 18.79 2.01 14.67 7.55 29.36 0.40 0.56 22.42 SooranadN 5.59 9.49 0.82 0.00 4.52 68.20 2.71 1.75 6.93 Vengoor 5.76 11.39 3.41 12.21 13.75 34.22 4.02 6.47 8.78 Kumbalangi 2.19 5.98 1.80 11.55 6.29 46.31 15.86 0,09 9.94 Edavanna 7.56 17.20 4.46 16.58 2.96 37.62 9.86 1,70 2.06 Marakkara 3.47 24.04 2.21 20.76 6.26 38.54 1.56 1.63 1.53 Thanut 12.60 9.78 8.36 7.82 8.91 44.68 1.43 ^ . 7 9 2.64 Vellamunda 12.39 13.95 0.17 0.00 7.46 48.58 13.50 2.29 1.65

The table above suggests vastly differing priorities in the service sector for the selected GPs. Every GP allocated a visible share its service sector expenditure on Anganwadis, mostly for nutrition programmes. Generally, very low priority was accorded to education and health sectors by the selected GPs. Sanitation (almost fully with projects on construction of latrines), self-employment and drinking water received different degrees of priority across GPs. The dominating sector was housing; in the extreme, Sooranadu North allocated around 68% of its service sector expenditure on housing. Analysing whether these allocations represented the priorities of the GPs in the productive and service sectors is not possible with the available data.

6.4 Spatial Balance in Decentralized Infrastructure Expenditure Planning-A Brief Assessment

The methodology applied for the evaluation of projects in the productive and service sectors cannot effectively be applied to the infrastructure sector as the impact of road and bridge projects cannot be evaluated on a comparative plain from the responses of the beneficiaries of such projects. Hence a preliminary analysis of the justifiability of the distribution of expenditure on infrastructure- across wards within the selected GPs and across selected GPs- is made here assuming that greater impact of infrastructure projects is felt in GP wards and GPs with greater infrastructure constraints at the base level.

a) Geographical Spread of Infrastructural Expenditure within GPs

It may be noted that while disaggregating the total expenditure in infrastructure during the 9lh Five Year Plan into ward-wise expenditure, discrepancies arose in almost

95

all GPs. The data presented here are those with less than 20% discrepancies; Neendakara and Edavanna got omitted due to thoroughly incompatible discrepancies.

Table 6.20: % Share of Sub-Sectors in the Total Expenditure of the Selected GPs on Infrastructure Sector during 9th Plan

Name of the GP Roads & Bridges Drainage Electricity Public Buildings Others Vilakudi 95.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.94 Sooranad 90.14 0.00 7.23 0.00 2.63 Neendakara NA NA NA NA NA Vengoor 72.39 0.66 5.04 20.72 1.19 Kumblangi 69.49 5.33 15.28 2.41 7.48 Edavanna NA NA NA NA NA Marakkara 98.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.16 Thanur 76.84 0.00 11.49 11,68 0.00 Vellamunda 65.95 0.00 3.30 0.00 30.75

It may be seen that the priorities accorded to different sub-sectors (of infrastructure sector) varied during the 9th Five Year Plan; however, the roads & bridges sub-sector emerged as the dominant sub-sector in all selected GPs. This justifies limiting the following analysis on the expenditure in infrastructure sector to the analysis of the expenditure on roads and bridges.

Table 6.21: Ward-wise share in the expenditure on roads & bridges sector during the 9& Plan in the selected GPs (")

GP Wards Vilakudi Sooranadu N Neendakara Vengoor Kumblangi Marakkara Thanur Vellamunda wl 13.19 10.98 15.12 10.58 16.01 7.38 2.46 9.83 w2 5.45 3.45 0.00 10.55 3.40 14.36 0.00 14.86 w3 7.75 3.30 2.61 6.12 7.17 4.81 0.00 13.39 w4 1.30 13.39 62.20 20.37 9.26 9.97 1.06 6.09 w5 9.45 15.69 1.82 9.89 12.81 13.18 0.00 11.1 w6 6.0S 12.97 0.00 6.48 8.29 9.46 4.04 14.82 w7 7.69 7.11 0.00 5.16 6.53 9.49 6.46 8.62 w8 8.24 8.10 7.93 12.22 14.52 14.72 16.44 4.09 w9 14.91 6.92 10.31 8.33 9.99 7.04 4.22 1.19

w10 10.S5 9.81 10.28 6.01 4.07 8.13 4.31 w11 7.95 8.27 6.01 5.53 22.38 9.74 w12 7.18 7.25 1.97 w13 11.25 w14 4.97 w15 10.30

Coefficient of Variation 42.76 43.55 179.04 43.06 43.22 41.24 97.32 57.6

In the following analysis, the wards within the selected GPs are first ranked according to their connectivity during the beginning of the 9th Five Year Plan by consolidating the ranks given by the selected Knowledgeable Persons to the GP wards. In the second stage, ward-wise infrastructure plan expenditure are computed and correlated with their ranks in connectivity. The hypothesis is that the higher the rank of the ward in

96

connectivity, the lower was the share in the infrastructure expenditure of the GP to the ward.

(*) Based on ward delimitation in 1995

The number of wards varies across different GPs; hence some rows remain blank for many GPs. This table was derived by identifying and listing the location of the road works undertaken during the 9th Plan ward-wise and then allocating the expenditure on each road to the respective ward. In the case of roads which cut across wards, the expenditure was divided in proportion to the new/repaired road length shared between the wards.

The final row of the table above giving the coefficient of variation (CV) of the ward-wise expenditure in the sub-sector summarizes huge variations in the expenditure on roads and bridges within the different wards of the selected GPs. In all GPs, the average ward-wise dispersion in expenditure is more than 40% of the mean expenditure; in the extreme the dispersion is 179% of the mean expenditure in Neendakara. In Neendakara, three wards received no expenditure in the sub-sector, while in another ward, the expenditure share was as high as 62.2%.

The table above nullifies a common belief that GP members would have divided the funds for the roads and bridges sector equally among their wards. It is not verifiable whether such tendency on equalization of expenditures across wards was done for all sectors taken together. (In contrast, it may be seen that such tendencies were visible in the provision of input support in agriculture and in the projects on felling root-wilt affected coconut trees). Now the question is to understand whether the ward-wise expenditures were distributed according to the levels of their backwardness. This is checked in the following.

Table 6.22: Relation between Backwardness of Wards and their Infrastructural Expenditure Share-1

Vilakudi Sooranad Neendakara Vengoor Kumhlangi Mdukkarj Thanur Vellamunda (*) %

Exp (**) Rc %Exp Rc %Exp Rc %Exp Rc %Exp Rc %

Exp Rc %Exp Rc %Exp Rc

Wl 13.2 i 11.0 11 I5J 5 10.6 1 16.0 3 7.4 2 2.5 14 9.83 2W2 S5 2 3.5 6 0.0 4 10.6 2 3.4 2 14.4 5 0.0 15 14.86 9W3 7.8 5 3.3 9 2.6 7 6.1 6 7.2 4 4.8 7 0.0 13 13.39 3W4 1.3 10 13.4 10 62.2 6 20.4 8 93 7 10.0 3 1.1 8 6.09 1 W5 9.5 3 15.7 8 1.8 8 9.9 3 \L8 8 13.2 4 0.0 10 11.1 4W6 6.1 9 13.0 7 0.0 3 6.5 10 8.3 9 9.5 9 4.0 11 14.82 5 W7 7.7 12 7.1 1 0.0 2 5.2 2 6.5 10 9.5 6 6.5 9 8.62 12 W8 8.2 4 8.1 5 7.9 9 12.2 5 145 5 14.7 8 16.4 3 4.09 8 W9 14.9 8 6.9 3 10.3 1 8.3 4 10.0 11 7.0 1 4.2 6 1.19 6 W10 50.9 7 9.8 2 103 9 6.0 1 4.1 11 8.1 7 4.31 11 W11 8.0 6 8.3 4 6,0 6 5.5 10 22.4 1 9.74 7W12 7.2 11 7.3 4 1.97 10W13 11.3 5 W14 5.0 12 W15 10.3 2

(*)=% Exp=% share of the ward in the total expenditure of the GP on roads and bridges. (**)=Rc=Rank of the ward in connectivity among the wards in the GP.

97

Ranks (rank 1 for the most connected ward and so on) of wards within a GP in their connectivity in the beginning of the 9lh Five Year Plan are arrived at by consolidating the respective ranks given to the wards by the selected Knowledgeable Persons. Owing to frequent delimitation of wards changing their geographic boundaries and size of population, any quantitative estimate of the normalized values (facilitating inter-ward comparison) of their connectivity status in the beginning of the 9lh Five Year Plan could not be attempted. This is why the aforesaid ranking of wards, based on the personal perceptions of the knowledgeable Persons had to be resorted to. The subjectivity of these ranks could be a limitation to the quantitative rigour of this analysis; hut the results would be strongly indicative. The table, on whole, indicates that there was no systematic relation between the backwardness of wards in connectivity and their share in the plan expenditure on roads and bridges. The following table clarifies this further.

Table 6.23: Relation between Backwardness of Wards and their Infrastructural Expenditure Share- II

Name of the GP Correlation Coefficient between % Expenditure & Re Vilakudi -0.313 Sooranad 0.324 Neendakara 0.145 Vengoor 0.189 K i i n i b i , nt;i 0.117 Marakkara -0.242 Thanur -0.813 Vellamunda -0.280

The table above suggests that significant positive correlation between backwardness of a ward and the % expenditure allotted to the ward can be found only in Sooranadu North. In the other extreme, in Thanur, backwardness of ward was highly negatively correlated with the % expenditure share of the ward; Vellamunda and Vilakudi too exhibited negative correlation. Thus, it turns out that GPs did not allocate expenditures in roads and bridges sector in their wards according to their levels of backwardness. Continuing this would perpetuate/widen the developmental imbalance in the availability of infrastructure in the different areas within the selected GPs.

Explanations could be gathered from a couple of GPs regarding huge dispersion in the ward-wise spread of expenditure on roads and bridges. From Neendakara GP, it was gathered that the lion's share of the said expenditure had flown to that GP ward represented by the most articulate GP member. From Thanur GP, it was learnt that some fishermen areas, which were both most infrastructurally backward and thickly populated, could not be penetrated by additional connectivity, because this would have required large-scale rehabilitation of the villagers.

b) Spread of Infrastructural Expenditure across GPs

98

This part compares the plan expenditure made by the selected GPs in their roads and bridges sector to their relative position in connectivity status. Their position in connectivity status has been gathered from the NATPAC data.

Table 6.24: Connectivity Status of Selected GPs and their Plan Expenditure Therein

9th Plan Expenditure (from GiA) on Roads and Bridges

GP

Total Rural Road

Length

Per 1000 Road

Length Rank

therein

Per sq km Road Length

Rank therein

Pet Thousand Population

Rank therein

Per sq Km Area

Rank therein

Vilakudi 303.76 9.9B 1 14.17 2 151717 5 215455 2 Sooranadu N 476 18.69 I 21.00 1 152837 4 171714 5 Neendakara 34.15 Z21 5 3.35 4 56448 8 85442 7 Kumbalangi 11.7 0.48 8 0.74 8 111205 7 173478 4 Marakara 55,689 2.00 6 2.01 6 173749 3 174281 3 Edavarma 90.78 2.83 4 1.85 7 125775 6 82144 8 Tanur 63.015 1.16 7 3.23 5 206809 2 575573 1 Vellanmnda 225.il 7.38 3 3.49 3 299056 1 141317 6

Source for connectivity status: NATPAC

Decentralized planning in Kerala, as initiated under People's Plan Campaign, bestowed GPs with untied planning powers within some macro stipulations. However, there was no mechanism to ensure that the ensuing development would be regionally balanced. The table above attempts a preliminary examination of this with respect to the infrastructure sector.

One would expect a negative correlation between ranks in connectivity and ranks in infrastructural expenditure. However, the table does not suggest any such strong negative correlation between the two. Edavanna, Kumbalangi and Neendakara which were comparatively poor in their internal connectivity had comparatively lower expenditure too. This preliminary analysis is highly limited in scope, but is strongly indicative; it suggests that decentralized planning should find ways of securing spatial balance in the growth of infrastructure (represented by roads and bridges here) without compromising on the power of self-governance of local governments.

6.5 Conclusions

The forgoing discussions lead to the following conclusions.

• LSGI accounts were not at all integrated to the rest of the plan accounts, with the result that disentangling the total sectoral shares in plan expenditure was beset with many problems.

• The derived data suggested that important sectors like housing, sanitation, water supply, education and roads and bridges received considerable increase in plan expenditure (at constant prices), significantly on account of the emphasis given LSGIs

99

on those sectors. Yet, important sub-sectors of the productive sectors received only a less than proportionate increase in plan expenditure compared to the increase in the aggregate plan expenditure. Correspondingly, the share of productive sector in the total plan expenditure declined from 8th to 9th Five Year Plan and further drastically in the 10th Five Year Plan. This would not have helped the envisaged strategy to stir the stagnant productive sector.

Available data suggested inadequate spatial balancing within GPs in their infrastructural planning. However, the common belief that GP members would have divided the funds for the roads and bridges sector equally among their wards did not hold true in the sample GPs. The relation between backwardness (in connectivity) of GP wards and the allocation of expenditure under roads and bridges sector was weak.

100

Chapter 7

Project Level Impact

Introduction

t was originally proposed that the effect of decentralization in achieving the objectives of development projects would be studied by comparing the impact of

selected projects implemented by PRIs during the 9th Five Year Plan with that of closely comparable projects planned and implemented by related line departments during the same period. However, this could be done only to a limited extent because in many sectors, line departments had withdrawn themselves-as they ideally should have- from those areas which were extensively taken up by PRIs. Comparing the projects planned and implemented by the PRIs during the 9th Five Year Plan with those implemented by the line departments during the 8'h Five Year Plan could not be attempted due to probable error of recall. Despite this, the chapter presents the household level impact of an abundant set of varied projects, which gives an interesting cross section of case studies of successes and failures of decentralized planning during the 9th Five Year Plan in the most important sectors of the Kerala economy.

This chapter has four sections. Section II examines the household/group level impact of selected projects and the factors determining such impact. Section III attempts to capture the broad sectoral impact of decentralization in a limited way by drawing from the opinions of the selected Knowledgeable Persons and validating/crosschecking their opinions with the project level findings. Section IV sums up the discussions made in the chapter.

7.2 Project Level Impact Assessment

The project level impact assessment is carried out by analyzing the impact information generated from selected beneficiary households and supplementing it with project level notes and the details contained in the project beneficiary lists. It may be borne in mind that the selected projects were mostly those with the highest allocation in the productive sector and service sector of the selected Grama Panchayats during the 9th

Five Year Plan. An additional consideration (apart from allocation) that went into the selection of projects was the availability of comparison (departmental) projects.

7.2.1 Impact-Agricultural (Including Irrigation) Projects

As seen from the following table, the fact that at least one agricultural project got selected from each selected GP based on the expenditure criterion is indicative of the degree of importance attached to agricultural sector in the selected GPs.

I

101

Table 7.1: Sample Size of Beneficiaries in Selected Agricultural Projects

Name of the Project Assistance Gram Panchayat

Prov

isio

n of

Fe

rtiliz

ers/

Pest

ic

ides

/See

ds

Prov

isio

n of

Pum

p-

sets

Prov

isio

n of

Ir

rigat

ion

Wel

ls

Cut

ting

dow

n of

D

isea

sed

Coc

onut

Tr

ees

Prov

isio

n of

Pr

oduc

tion

Bon

us

Prov

isio

n of

the

Serv

ice

of G

P Tr

acto

r

Non

Ben

efic

iarie

s

Total

Vikkudi 0 0 0 0 9 0 1 10 Sooranadu (N) 10 0 0 7 0 0 3 20 Neendakara 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 10 Venpir 0 0 10 9 0 0 I 20 Kumbalanni 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 10 Edavanna 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 Marakkara 10 0 0 0 0 10 0 20 Thanur 8 0 0 0 0 0 2 10 Vellamunda 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

GP Projects

Total (%) 52 (43.3)

6 (5.0)

10 (8.3)

26 (21.7) 9 (7.5) 10

(8.3) 7 (5-8) I20f) (100)

Vilakudi 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 10 Sooranadu (N) 10 0 0 9 0 0 1 20 Neendakara 0 0 0 S 0 0 2 10 Vengur 0 0 10 10 0 0 0 20 Edavanna 0 6 0 0 0 0 2 8 Marakkara 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 Thanur 9 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 Vellamunda 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

Comparison Projects

Total (%) 39 (39.8)

6 (6.1)

10 (10.2)

27 (27.6)

10 (10.2)

0 (0.0)

6 (6,1)

98 (100)

(*)= Apart from 120 beneficiaries of GP level agricultural projects given above, there were 49 beneficiaries of 5 collective irrigation project! in the sample (ref: table 7,5), for which there were no comparison projects.

As the sample projects drawn were those with the highest allocation in the selected GPs during the 9lh Five Year Plan (subject to the condition that comparison projects are available to the selected GP project), the selected projects would represent the priorities fixed by them in agriculture. This set would also represent those areas in agriculture where GP projects and departmental projects co-existed during the 9th Plan. The column "non beneficiaries" is for those project beneficiaries who, after thorough efforts, could not be confirmed to be the beneficiaries of the projects in question. This was a general problem in fieldwork, as the beneficiaries, selected from the beneficiary lists provided by the GPs and Krishi Bhavan, could not remember whether they benefited at all from the project and the exact quantity of input support they received, as the support was negligible. They always had a problem in distinguishing between the support extended by departmental and GP projects.

A: Felling of Coconut Trees

This was a project generally included in the plans (during 9lh Five Year Plan) of GPs with considerable number of coconut growers. These projects envisaged cutting

102

down the root-wilt affected coconut trees and planting new ones in order to reduce the incidence of root-wilt infection and to thereby increase coconut production in the villages.

Table 7.2: Felling of Root-Wilt Affected Coconut Trees (1)

No. of Beneficiaries Giving Purpose of Project as;

No. Saying cha! Project Reduced Root wilt Infection;

No. Giving the Factors that Prevented Greater Impact as;

Nat

ure

of th

e Pr

ojec

ts

Name of GP

One-time help to Farmer

To R

educ

e R

oot -

wilt

No.

Say

ing

that

Tre

es w

ere

Rep

lant

ed u

nder

Pro

ject

Con

side

rabl

y

Mar

gina

lity Only a

Few Affected

Trees were Cut

Officials did not Ensure that Affected Trees were Only Cut

Infe

cted

Fre

es

not C

ut

Exte

nsiv

ely

Sooranadu(N) 3 2 0 2 5 3 0 1 Neendakara 1 8 6 1 5 I 2 2 Vengur 2 7 7 0 7 6 0 2

GP Projects

Total (%) 6 (23.1) 17

(65.4)13

(50.0)3

(11-5) 17

(65.4) 10

(52.6) 2 (10.5) 5 (26.3)Sooranadu(N) 6 3 4 3 5 5 0 1 Neendakara 0 8 4 2 4 1 0 3 Vengur I 8 6 0 9 8 0 1

Comparison Projects

Total <%) 7 (25.9) 19

(70.4) 14

(51.9) 5 (1S-5) 18

(66.7) 14

(70) 0 (0) 5 (25)

The table above may be read along with the following, which provides figures averaged across sample beneficiaries.

Table 7.3: Felling of Root-wilt Affected Coconut Trees (Per Beneficiary)-(2)

Nature of Project Average No. of Average No. of Average No. of Average No. % Currently Coconut Trees Affected Trees cut Down Trees of Coconut Affected by Root by Root wilt Before the under the Project Replanted Trees wilt Project under the Currently Project Owned GP Projects 9.9 3.5 1.4 19.5 14.4% Comparison Projects 6.6 2.6 I.I 16.7 19.8%

On the bright side, all selected beneficiaries deckred that only root-wilt affected trees were cut down under the project and about 96% (both GP and comparison projects-not seen in the table) of them were informed about the purpose of cutting down their coconut trees. However, the projects are collectively an example of the propensity to thinly spread the scarce resources over a vast area and to share the resources of the GP equally among all the GP wards. It may be seen that for the current beneficiaries, only a fraction of their diseased trees were cut under the project (Table 7.3), while experts suggest that an extensive operation of felling diseased trees over an area only would create any meaningful impact on root wilt. Though all the project reports stated that new trees would be planted in place of trees felled under the project, only in half the cases this was done; particularly, none in Sooranadu North GP project (Table 7.2). The project beneficiaries contained only a small fraction of the coconut growers in the selected GPs; field notes confirmed that the root wilt infection was very much prevalent in the selected

103

GPs during the survey period. Only a small fraction of the selected beneficiaries felt that the project helped in considerably reducing their root wilt infection. Read altogether, the results obtained from the GP projects and those from the comparison projects do not suggest significant differences in the focus of projects in addressing the problem in question.

B: Ramp (Vilakudi) & Tractor (Marakara)-Novel Projects

A novel project; two tractors were purchased at Marakara GP (Malapuram district) at the cost of Rs.8.95 lakh in 2000-01. While most of the paddy growers had used to hire tractors from private parties for Rs.300/- per day prior to the project, the GP-owned tractors, now transferred to the farmers' societies called "padasekara samithis", help them avail of the same facility for Rs.200/- per day. Hence, the gain to the farmer was a pure financial gain of Rs.100/- per ploughing day; the sample data confirmed that there was no change in cropping pattern/intensity on account of the project. Almost all bigger farmers still receive the benefits of the project; clearly the benefits are oriented more towards bigger farmers who can afford to use tractor.

Vilakudi GP (Kollam district) attempted a project for the construction of a ramp that could facilitate the use of tractors in the paddy fields. However, the fact that the project was hardly discussed among the people became evident from the field level observations. Many farmers opined that due to fragmentation of land, traditional methods of ploughing were more convenient to them. The intended beneficiaries felt that digging well for irrigation would have been a better project than ramp construction and that the location of the ramp was inappropriate. Several ramps constructed do not reflect any genuine demand from the farmers; rather they acted as pathways for individuals residing in the vicinity.

Table?. 4: Provision of Agricultural Inputs

No. of Beneficiaries Saying that Quality of Input Given was; (")

No. of Beneficiaries Saying that with Application of the Input, Yield of Land;

Nat

ure

of P

roje

ct Name of GP

Sam

ple

Size

Very good

Good Average

Sub-standard /Nol Usable C

onsi

dera

bl

y In

crea

sed Negli

gibily Increa

sed

No Change

Delcained

Sooranadu N 10 6 1 3 0 3 6 1 0 Kumbalangi 10 3 7 0 0 0 4 0 0 Edavanna 10 1 8 1 0 10 0 0 0 Marakkara 10 0 2 7 1 1 8 0 0 Tbanur 8 2 4 0 1 1 6 0 1 VeMiim iinda 10 7 0 1 1 7 1 0 0

GP

Proj

ects

Total (%) 58 (100)

19 (32.8)

22 (37.9)

12 (20.7)

3 (5.2)

22 (44.0)

25 (50-0)

1 (2-0)

1 (2.0)

Sooranadu N 10 7 1 2 0 2 7 1 0 Edavanna 6 2 4 0 0 Marakkara 10 0 2 8 0 1 8 1 0

Com

paris

on

Proj

ects

Thanur 9 1 1 3 4 1 4 2 2

104

Vetlamunda 10 2 1 1 3 4 3 1 0

Total (%) 45 (100)

12 (26.7) 9 (20.0) 14

(31.1) 7 (15.6) (21.6) 22 (59.5) 5 (13.5) 2 (5.4)

(*)=Two non-responses regarding quality of inputs in GP projects, and 3 for comparison projects.

Among the GP projects, in Sooranadu North GP, though the project cost was Rs. 7.31 lakh, many of the individual beneficiaries said that the quantity of paddy seeds supplied under the project was insufficient and hence different varieties of seeds had to be planted in the same field. The fertilizer subsidy too was reportedly insignificant. The complaint about the provision of insignificant quantities of seeds and other inputs was echoed by the beneficiaries of Kumbalangi (seeds, pesticides, fertilizers and motor pumps), Marakkara (fertilizers for coconut trees) and Vellamunda (inputs and subsidy for vegetable cultivation; despite this the beneficiaries of this GP declared that the seeds supplied helped them reap greater yield once.) All these interventions lacked the features of an integrated and focused package and the emphasis was to achieve the maximum coverage of farmers in the provision of inputs. Often, several beneficiaries cutting across GPs mentioned that the less-than desired impact of agricultural projects for provision of inputs was also due to delayed supply of inputs; after the completion of agricultural seasons. The project for the provision of production bonus for paddy cultivators in Vilakudi (not covered in the table), had the ambitious objective of raising the paddy production by 10% in one year, but totally failed to achieve the same as the bonus per farmer was too insignificant to be remembered and as it was provided even after several months of the completion of farming activity.

The lone project that reaped the desired returns among these GP projects is reported from Edavanna where, in 1998-99, the supply of seeds and fertilizers for vegetables through Haritha Sanghams (farmers' societies) is said to have resulted in extensive farming of vegetables and increase in productivity. Continuous monitoring and follow-up by Krishi Bhavan officials and the convenors of Haritha Sanghams were reported. The selection of activity too was crucial, as vegetable cultivation was a flourishing agricultural operation in the area. Yet, there were minor complaints about beneficiary selection and excessive concentration on vegetable cultivation.

It may be further verified that if the provision of inputs for vegetable cultivation is set aside, about 84% of the remaining beneficiaries of the GP projects suggested negligible/nil impact of the projects on the yield of the land. The overall impact of the GP projects on the provision of inputs seemed to be better than that of the comparison projects.

C: Projects on Irrigation

Most of the selected projects on irrigation were collective projects; facilitating the existing irrigation channel by concreting it in Sooranadu North, Lift irrigation in Vengoor

105

and Edavanna, bund in Kurnbalangi and erecting check dam, lifting water to uphill tanks and distributing it among farmers in Vellamunda.

Tible 7.5: Collective Projects on Irrigation

Name of the GP No. of No. of No. of No, of No. of Beneficiaries Saying the Project;

Sam

ple

of

Ben

efic

iarie

s Beneficiaries whose Lafld was Irrigated Prior to

the Project (Fully* Partially}

Beneficiaries Saying,

Provision of Irrigation

Facility was a

Beneficiaries Saying, People

were Consulted Before Project

Beneficiaries Opining, ihe Project

Conceived Appropriate Method of

Did not help Irrigate their

Land

Helped Irrigate Land Marginally

• Most-felt Need Preparation Irrigation Sooranadu N 10 0+10 10 0 9 0 10 Vengur 10 0+1 9 6 7 10 0 Kumbalangi 9 1+fl 0 0 0 9 0 Edavanna 10 Q-tO 0 3 0 10 0 Vellamunda 10 4+2 9 1 10 5 5 Total 5+13 28 to 26 34 15( )=% 49 (36.7) (57.1) (20.4) (53,1) (69.4) (30.6)

• In Sooranadu North, the project report had not specified any mechanism for maintenance of the irrigation channel in the post-construction stage, and, the absence of such mechanism reduces project benefits because there is nobody to operate the shutter according to needs.

• In Vengoor, the Lift irrigation project implemented with a cost of 7.59 lakh remained largely unused and most of the intended beneficiaries were unaware about the project. Not even a single selected beneficiary commented as having received any benefit from the project, and, the field team observed that the project is currently non-functional.

• Kurnbalangi project was more of a project to prevent soil erosion than for irrigation.

• The so-called irrigation project of Edavanna (in Pothiladu SC colony) is a typical case of the sectoral shares of expenditure being manipulated to show that the instructions regarding sectoral expenditure shares are stuck to. Currently, the project functions very well as a drinking water project; but as per records, the project was shown primarily as an irrigation project in an attempt to inflate the share of productive sector in its total plan expenditure. There is an effective beneficiary committee that meets once a month and collects Rs.30/- from each beneficiary SC household, which is used for payment of electricity and other charges.

• In the multi-stage irrigation project of Vellamunda (check dam + construction of pump house + lifting water to uphill tanks+ distributing water), only the first stage of constructing the check dam was taken up and completed with the result that the primary objectives of the project were totally defeated and only some secondary benefits from temporary rise in the water level near the reservoir were accrued. The check dam collapsed during the last rains. The project was not sufficiently discussed in

106

the Grama Sabha and most of the intended beneficiaries were unaware of its original project components.

The forgoing discussion explains why 69.4% of the sample beneficiaries, selected necessarily from the defined catchment area of the projects, suggested that the projects did not at all help them irrigate their land; none of the selected beneficiaries acknowledged that the project fully satisfied their irrigation needs. The marginal/insignificant impact of the projects can be traced to defective planning reflected in poor need assessment, inadequate consultation with the potential project beneficiaries and the inappropriateness of the project itself as provision of an irrigation facility; all reflected in the table above.

Table 6: Provision of Pump Sets and Wells to Individuals

No. (%} of Beneficiaries Suggesting that Project helped Irrigating their Land

Nature of the Project

Name of GP Sample Size

Not at All

Marginally Sufficiently

No. (%) of Beneficiaries

Declaring Current use of

Asset Vengur 10 9 1 0 2 KumbaJanai 6 I 0 4 3

GP Projects

Total (%) 16 11

(68.8) 1

(6-3) 4 (25.0) . 5 (31.3)

Vengur 10 5 1 4 4 Ec'avanna 6 1 5 0 5

Comparison Projects

Total (%) 16 6

(37.5) 6

(37.5) 4 (25.0) 9 (56.3)

Whereas table 7.5 dealt with collective irrigation projects, table 7.6 deals with a small sample of individual benefits under irrigation projects. Majority of the pump sets given under GP projects did not help irrigate the land; however, individual irrigation projects, with their limited sample size, seem to suggest greater impact on irrigating the agricultural land than the collective projects. Yet, differences in the size of the sample do not permit any conclusive observations.

7.2.2 Impact-Animal Husbandry Projects

Projects on fostering dairying and poultry units found place in the plans of a large number of GPs during the 9th Five Year Plan. The projects mostly took the forms of subsidized provision of animals and subsidy for constructing/repairing cattle sheds; projects for improved provision of fodder/concentrates or for organized marketing/ processing were seldom seen in the GP plans.

107

Table 7.7: Animal Husbandry Projects (1)

No. of Beneficiaries Citing the Reason for Sale of Animals as; GP Sample Size

No. of Beneficiaries who Sold off Animals

Received

Lack of Green Fodder

/Concentrates

Financial Constraint

Widespread Diseases

Nobody to Reduced Take Care Milk Yield

GP Projects Vilakudi 8 5 0 2 0 3 0 Neendakara 10 6 0 0 0 2 4 Edavanna 10 5 0 0 0 3 2 Tbanur 8 6 0 2 1 1 2 Vellamuniia 10 8 0 3 2 2 I Total ()=% 46

30 (65-2)

0(0) 7 (23.3)

3(10.0) 11 (36.7)

9(30.0)

Comparison Projects Vilakudi 4 2 1 0 0 1 0 Vellamunda 10 5 1 1 2 1 0 Total ( ) = % 14 7 (50.0) 2 (28.6) 1 (14.3) 2 (28.6) 2 (28.6) 0 (0)

Majority of the beneficiaries of the projects on subsidized provision of milch animals sold them off without acquiring further assets that would have generated an income stream. The finding that there was 'nobody to take care of the animal' emerged as one important reason for the sale of animals indicates the lack of seriousness with which the stakeholders approached the project. Widespread diversion of the subsidy was reported from Vilakudi, Thanur and Edavanna. The project of Edavanna, implemented as late as 2000-01, was meant to benefit widows and the handicapped; however, the fact that officials could not find enough beneficiaries from the target group and hence benefits were given to (originally) ineligible households shows that the project was not demand-driven.

Table 7.8: Animal Husbandry Projects (2)

No. of Beneficiaries Saying the Income Effect of Provision of Animals as: No. of Beneficiaries who diis the Following from added

Income/Milk

GP

Considerably for Sometime

Considerably till Now

Negligibly for Some Time

Negligibly till Now

Not at All

Bought Assets

Met Consumption Requirements

GP Projects Vilakudi 3 0 3 0 2 0 3 Neendakara 5 1 4 0 0 0 9 Edavanna 3 1 2 2 2 1 7 Thanur 0 0 6 1 1 0 6 Vellamunda 1 1 5 1 2 0 4 Total ()•%

12 (26.1)

3 (6.5) 20 (43.5)

4 (8.7)

7 (15.2) 1 (2 2)

29 (63.0]

Comparison Projects Vilakudi 3 0 0 0 0 1 Vellamunda 3 2 4 1 0 7 Total ( ) =% 6

(42.9) 2 (14.3) 4 (28.6) 1 (7.1) 0 (0) 0

(0) 8

(57.1)

108

The table makes it clear that the GP projects of fostering mini dairy units at the household level by providing milch animals have failed to bring in the desired income effect. The majority of the beneficiary households could achieve only negligible/nil income effect and almost all of them failed to buy income generating/other assets from the income mobilized out of dairying. Though the income effect of the departmental comparison projects is seemingly better, comparison cannot be attempted on account of a) their limited sample size and b) overlapping responsibilities between GPs and departments.

7.2.3 Impact-Projects for Generation of Self-Employment

Considering the incidence of educated unemployment in the rural areas of the State, many GPs included projects for creation of self-employment by combining subsidized provision of assets with micro-credit to individuals or groups-Table?. 9: Self-Employment (1)

Of them, [he Number of .Respondents making the following Statement Regarding Increase in Productivity;

Number who Made the Following Statement Regarding Increase in Income Due to the Asset;

GP

No.

of B

enef

icia

ries

alre

ady

Invo

lved

in th

e A

ctiv

ity, w

hen

Rec

eive

d

Con

side

rabl

y fo

r so

me

time

Con

side

rabl

y til

l da

te

Mar

gina

lly fo

r so

me

time

Mar

gina

lly ti

ll D

ate

Noc

at a

ll

No.

Who

Sta

ned

the

Act

ivity

Afr

esh

Con

side

rabl

y fo

r So

me

Tim

e

Con

side

rabl

y til

l D

ate

Mar

gina

lly fo

r So

me

Tim

e

Mar

gina

lly ti

ll D

ate

Not

at A

ll

Neendakara 18 1 0 12 4 1 8 1 1 5 0 1 Kumbalangi 0 10 0 1 8 0 I Edavanna 10 0 1 1 7 1 0

Vellamunda 0 6 0 0 2 2 2

Total (%) 28 (53.8) 1 (3.6) 1 (3.6) 13

(46.4) 11 (39.3) 2 (7) 24 (46.2) 1 (4.2) 2 (8.3) 15

(62.5) 2 (8.3) 4 (17)

The sample of projects for self-employment was limited to 4 GPs and did not have any comparison project to compare with. Out of the total sample of 52 beneficiaries, 28 were already involved in the activity when the project benefit was conferred on them and the remaining 24 started the activity afresh with the project. The table above needs to be read along with the following.

109

Table 7.10: Self-Employment (2)

No. of Beneficiaries who Made Following Statement Regarding Supporting the Family from the Income Generated from the Asset;

No. of Beneficiaries Ranking the following as the Most Important Factor that Prevented Greater Impact

GP

Sam

ple

Size

Effe

ctiv

ely

Som

e tim

e

Effe

ctiv

ely

Dat

e

Mar

gina

lly

Som

erim

Mar

gina

lly D

ate

Not

at a

ll

Lack

of M

arke

t for

Pc

oduc

ts

Inab

lity

to b

uy

the

Ass

et

Bec

ause

of

Inad

equa

te

Subs

iry

Con

stra

ints

to

Arr

ange

A

ncill

iary

Fa

cilit

ies

Non

-ava

ilabi

lity

of R

aw M

ater

ials

Neendakara 26 1 1 17 6 1 11 0 4 6 Kumbalangi 10 0 0 9 0 1 0 2 8 0 Edavanna 10 1 1 0 5 3 8 0 1 0 Vellamunda 6 0 0 2 2 2 0 3 3 0

Total 52 2 (3.8) 2 (3.8)

28 (53.8)

13 (25)

7 (14)

19 (36.5) 5 (9.6)

16 (30.8)

6 (11.5)

• The Neendakara sample, drawn from two net weaving units and a coir production unit, benefited the respondents only for a very short duration, after which many left the group and the activity. This was due to reduced marketability on account of irresistible competition from mechanized units and failure to arrange for ancillary facilities and raw materials. Field notes observed that many units were started to merely obtain the subsidy from GP. While the group members continued with their individual activities, the groups they had formed struggled with non-availability of workers.

• The book-binding unit, started in Kumbalangi, gave training to SC ladies; but the trainees could mobilize only a marginal income for a short time.

• On similar lines, Vellamunda GP trained people in a Co-operative Printing Press; the press remained closed for a long time for obsolete technology, insufficient working capital, too high rent, large employee turnover resulting in trained employees leaving the firms and lack of co-ordination among the group members.

• In Edavanna, the project for the distribution of autorikshaws (Rs.20000/- subsidy + Rs. 50000/- bank loan per auto), meant for the unemployed SC youth, has not yielded the desired results, reportedly because the bank raised the rate of interest to 13% and the beneficiaries found it difficult to manage recurring expenses and loan repayment.

Low quality/non-functionality of the assets (1.9%), non-co-operation among the group members (1.9%) and labour shortage (3.8%) were suggested by only a negligible fraction of beneficiaries of self-employment projects as factors that prevented greater project impact. The general picture that unfolds from the projects on self-employment (sample and non-sample) is that they generated marginal incomes for a short period for the beneficiaries; but they gradually perished or started functioning nominally without any significant impact.

110

7.2.4 Impact: Projects on Sanitation

While in most cases, the project for sanitation was named. "Total Sanitation Project", the project mostly ended with the construction of latrine for the beneficiary households.

Table?. 11: Project for Construction of Latrine

Reasons for non-completion

Level of Satisfaction with Assistance Given

Reasons for Dissatisfaction GP

Sam

ple

Size

No.

with

Con

stru

ctio

n C

ompl

ete

Inab

ility

to

Arr

ange

R

emai

ning

A

mou

nt

Am

ount

Rec

eive

d fo

t Div

erte

d

No.

Cur

rent

ly U

sing

the

Latri

ne

Fully

Partl

y Not

at A

ll

Long

Pro

cess

ing

Perio

d

Del

ay in

Dis

burs

al

of In

stal

latio

n

Inad

eqia

te

Subs

idy

GP Projects Vilakudi 10 7 2 1 8 7 1 2 1 0 2 Vengm: 10 9 1 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0

Kmnbalangi 10 7 3 0 9 5 5 0 1 0 4 Edavanna 10 9 0 1 9 7 3 0 1 0 2 Marakkara 10 10 0 0 10 9 t 0 0 1 0 Thanur 10 8 2 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0

60 50 8 2 56 48 10 2 3 1 8 Total ()=% (83.3) (80) (20) (93.3) (80) (16.7) (3.3) (25) (8.3) (66.7) Comparison Projects Kumbalangi 7 6 1 0 6 4 3 0 o 0 3

Due to limited size of the sample in the comparison group, comparison of the impact of the projects under the Department and Grama Panchayat cannot be made. In the case of GP projects, construction could be completed by 83% of the beneficiaries, while around 93% of the total number latrines built are currently being put to use. Inability to arrange the amount required in addition to subsidy was the main reason for non-completion of construction and naturally insufficient subsidy is the major reason for dissatisfaction of those who were not fully satisfied with the assistance.

Table 7.12: Sanitary Condition of Beneficiary Households (Projects for Constructing Latrine) Thanur 3 7 0 3 5 2 4 4 2 2 2 6 Total 5

(8.3) 45

(75.0) 10

(16.7) 5 (8.3)

46 (76.7)

9 (15-0) 13 (21.7)

39 (65.0)

8 (13.3)

3 (5.0)

45 (75.0)

12 (20.0)

Comparison Project Kumbalangi 0 5 2 0 5 2 0 5 2 0 6 1

App

reci

aW

Sat

isaf

acto

ry

Uns

atis

fact

ory

App

teci

ab

Satis

fact

or'

Uns

atis

fact

App

reci

ab

Satis

fact

or

Uns

atis

fact

ory

App

reci

ab

Satis

fact

or

Uns

atis

fact

ory

GP Projects Vilakudi 0 8 2 0 8 2 1 7 2 1 7 2 Vengur 1 9 0 1 9 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 KumbaLingi 0 4 6 0 5 5 0 7 3 0 6 4 Edavanna 0 10 0 0 10 0 6 4 0 0 10 0 Marakkara 1 7 2 1 9 0 2 7 1 0 10 0

111

Providing latrine to the poor is indeed a required intervention; the table, however, suggests that the projects on sanitation, should not merely end with giving subsidy for the construction of latrines, but be integrated with the total sanitary conditions of poor households and the village as a whole. The table above and field level observations suggest that this is especially true of sanitation projects meant for poor households of fishermen villages like Kumbalangi (Ernakulam), Thanur (Malappuram) and Neendakara (Kollam-not in the table) which are prone to intermittent water logging, spread of mosquitoes and sudden contagion of epidemics.

7.2.5 Impact: Projects for Drinking Water

The Development Reports of almost all GPs commented on the drinking water situation in their GPs. On identifying the drinking water deficient areas in the villages, many GPs conceived drinking water projects and included them in their plans. The projects selected for the Study included provision of individual wells for 60 households @ a subsidy of Rs.2500/- per household (Vilakudi-Rs.1.5 lakh, total project cost), tube well, 50000 liter water tank and pipeline connections (Sooranadu North-Rs.9.3 lakh/- total project cost), extension of pipelines and installation of water taps (Vengoor - Rs. 6.44 lakh, total project cost), 10 tube wells (Marakkara - Rs.3.1 lakh, total project cost), 10 wells for SC families @ Rs.7500/- per household (Thanur -Rs. 75000A, total project cost) and well, pump house, water tank and pipeline (Vellamunda-Rs.2 lakh, total project cost).

Table 7.13: Projects for Drinking Water (1)

Number (%) Suggesting the Reasons for Non- Receipt of Water as: (*)

Number (%) Currently Gelling Water:

GP

Sam

ple

Size

No.

(%) o

f Ben

efic

aire

s w

ho N

ever

Rec

eive

d W

ater

ftom

the

Proj

ect

No

Wat

er F

low

Dis

tanc

e fr

om

Res

iden

ce

Wat

er fl

ow

Hig

hly

Irre

gula

r

Saf

e w

ater

fr

om O

wn

Wel

l

REg

ular

ly fo

r 24

Hou

rs

Reg

ular

y D

urin

g Fi

xex

Tim

e

Irre

gula

rly

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Vilakudi 9 1 1 0 0 0 8 0 0 Sooranadu 10 7 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 Vengui 10 3 1 1 1 0 0 3 4 Marakkara 10 0 6 4 0 Thanur 6 0 6 0 0 Vellamunda 10 0 10 0 0 Total 11 2 4 1 3 30 7 6 ( ) =% 55 (20.0) (18.2) (36.4) i9 1) (27.3} (54.5) (12.7) (11) (*}= One non-response from Sooranadu North.

In Vilakudi, beneficiaries complained that the subsidy of Rs.2500/- per well was highly inadequate. The beneficiaries of the provision of the same type of drinking water facility in Thanur received Rs.7500/- per household. Both the projects were reported to be highly beneficial. The selection of beneficiaries for the remaining collective projects was done from the catchment area of the project as defined by the approved project

112

report (wherever project reports were available). One instance in which the impact of the project may look depressed is where the project report inflated the beneficiary population; however the actual coverage is limited to a small fraction of what the project report envisaged. The selected project of Sooranadu North (and of Vengoor) is a typical example of this. The damage of the pipeline and distance of the intended beneficiaries from the pipeline further reduced the coverage of beneficiaries from the projects. The effective users of the projects were only 67% of the total sample size of all GPs ((30+7/55)* 100). All the selected drinking water projects were fully or partially functional.

Table 7.14: Projects for Drinking Water (2)

No. of Beneficiaries who Felt [hat. Compared to

Earlier Source, the Water From the Project is:

No. of Beneficiaries who Felt that the Project

Reduced Frequency of Fetching Water from

Remote Areas

No. of Beneficiaries who Felt that Involvement of GP Improved the

Provision of Drinking Water in the GP

GP

Safe

r

No

Diff

eren

ce

Wor

se

Con

side

rabl

y Mar

gina

lly

Not

at a

ll

Impr

oved

No

Cha

nge

Wor

sene

d

Don

't kn

ow

Vilakudi 7 1 0 7 0 1 8 0 0 1 Sooranadu(N) 1 1 0 0 0 3 2 5 1 2 Vengur 5 2 0 0 6 1 7 1 0 2 Marakkara 0 8 2 3 4 3 10 0 0 0 Thanur 6 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 3 Vellamunda 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 0

12 2 24 12 8 40 6 1 8 Total ( )=% 29 (65.9) (27.3) (4.5) (54.5) (27.3) (18.2) (72.7) (10.9) (1.8) (14.5)

In Marakkara, beneficiaries were drawn from one of the 10 tube wells erected during decentralization. On account of rusting of manual hand pumps due mainly to bad maintenance (in contrast to maintenance by a committee of beneficiaries in Vellamunda), water was seldom used for drinking, but was used for other purposes. In Vellamunda, there is a beneficiary committee for maintaining the drinking water facility (lifting water from lowland, storing it in tank and connecting each household with a tap) to which every tribal and non-tribal household- pays a monthly sum of Rs.30/- and Rs.50/-respectively towards running expenses. The system works fairly well, but for undeterred source contamination of water and minor ego clash between different groups of beneficiaries. It is significant to note that 73% of the project beneficiaries opined that the intervention of GPs improved the provision of drinking water in the GP.

7.2.6 Impact-Housing Projects

Housing received a very high share of allocation of most GP plans for the service sector. The sample of GP projects on housing selected for the Study consisted of one project on repair of existing houses {Marakkara GP) and the others for construction of

113

houses. The following table shows that the subsidy provision involved in the projects of different GPs was vastly different.

Table 7.15: Project Details of Selected Housing Projects

GP Project Subsidy Component Per Beneficiary (In Rs.) Vilakudi Construction of house 8500/- Neendakara Buying land + Constructing house 15000 + 30750=45750 Edavanna Construction of house 15500 Marakkara Repair for existing houses 7000 Thanur Construction of house 30000 Vellanmnda Construction of house 22000

Some of the variations in the provision of subsidies may be expkined in terms the differences in terrains. But such considerable differences as those given in the table above would signify differential treatment of the houseless households living in different villages of the State, especially when there were widespread complaints from the selected beneficiaries of those GPs which offered lower subsidy per beneficiary. It may also be of interest to know how some GPs could mobilize resources to offer higher subsidy, given the pressure on their resources from different sectors. In Neendakara GP, problems of fishermen households not having legally enforceable rights on the land claimed by them constrained the GP to a great extent in offering the benefits under housing projects to such households.

Table 7.16: Projects for Housing (2)

No. (%) Giving Reasons for Non- Completion as;

Nature of Projects

GP Sample Size

No. (%) of Beneficiaries

not Completed Construction/

Repair

Could not Arrange

Remaining Amount

Amount was

Diverted

No. (%) of Beneficiaries who do not

Reside at New House

No. (%) Not Satisfied with

Assistance

Vilakudi 8 5 5 0 2 0 Sooranadu 20 15 14 1 3 2 Neendakara 9 4 4 0 3 2 Vengur 9 6 6 0 1 1 Kumbalangi 10 9 9 0 4 3 Edavanna 6 2 2 0 1 1 Marakkara 10 2 2 0 1 2 Thanur 10 0 0 0 0 0 Vellamunda 10 4 4 0 2 3

GP Projects

Total () = %

92 47 (51)

46 (97)

1 (2)

17 (19)

14 (15)

Neendakara 10 4 4 0 1 3 Tnanur 10 0 0 0 0 0

Com

paris

on

Proj

ects

Total ()=%

20 4 (20) 4 (100)

0 (0) 1 (5) 3 (15)

114

Though 51% of the houses are not completely constructed, majority of them are being resided at. However, the money spent on 19% of the houses, which are not yet occupied due to their incomplete status, must be treated as wastage of public resources. This requires urgent follow-up. With a grossly unequal sample, it may not be justified to compare the GP projects with the comparison projects. The incidence of sale of houses after their having constructed is negligible, and, hence generally there was no problem with the motive of the beneficiaries behind applying for houses. The major reason for dissatisfaction about the assistance was inadequacy of the subsidy (73.3%).

7.2.7 Impact- Feeding Programmes in Anganwadis

A comparison group approach towards analyzing the results is impossible in this respect as the responsibility of managing the feeding programme had fully been transferred to PRIs upon decentralization.

Table 7.17: Anganwadi Feeding Programme (1)

GP Sample Size (^Children*

Mothers)

No. of Children Taking 2

Meals from AW

No. of Mothers Taking 1

Meal from AW

No. Fully Satisfied with AW Food in-

Take (Children + Mothers)

No. (Children & Mothers) Fully Satisfied with

Quality of AW Food

No. (Children & Mothers)

Satisfied with Timeliness of

Feeding

Vilakudi 10 (6+4) 5 4 7(5+2) 8 10 Sooranadu N 10 (6+4) 6 4 7 (5+2) 7 10 Neendakara 10 (6+4) 5 2 10(6+4) 10 10 Vengur 10(6+4) 4 4 8(4+4) 6 10 Kumbalangi 10(6+4) 6 4 9 (6+3) 4 10 Edavanna 9 (5+4) 5 4 9(5+4) 5 9 Marakkara 10 (6+4) 6 3 10 (6+4) 10 10 Tbanur 9(6+3) 5 3 4(3+1) 4 9 Vellamunda 10(6+4) 5 4 10 (6+4) 10 10 Total 88 (53+35) 47 32 72 (46+26) 64 88 % 100

(60.2+39.8) 88.7 91.4 81.8

(S6.8&74.3) 72.7 100.0

While most of the children, irrespective of whether attending to pre-school or not, are taking two meals from Anganwadi every day, most of the pregnant and lactating mothers take only one meal. It may be seen that in three GPs- Neendakara from Kollam district, Marakkara from Malappuram district and Vellamunda from Wynad district all the beneficiaries were fully satisfied with the quantity, quality and timeliness of the food being offered through Anganwadi (the sincerity and special efforts of the Anganwadi officials are specially commented in the field notes from Neendakara and Vellamunda}, while the level of satisfaction needs to improve in Thanur GP (Malappuram) and Kumbalangi GP (Ernakulam). Appreciably, there is no complaint about the timeliness of feeding in any selected GP.

115

Table 7.18: Anganwadi Feeding Programme (2)

No. of Respondents Suggesting the Role of GP in Running Anganwadi as;

Of Column (2). No. of Respondents Suggesting that GP Manages the AW;C)

Of Columns (2) and (3), Number of Respondent Suggesting that Involvement of GP Improved the AW Feeding; (")

Of Columns (8) i (9), Number Suggesting Improvement Occurred in; ($)

GP C

ruci

al

Insi

gnifi

cant

Don

't K

now

Ver

y w

ell

Satis

fact

orily

Uns

atis

fact

orily

Ver

y m

uch

Neg

ligib

ly

Not

at

all/d

eter

iora

ted

Acc

ount

abili

ty to

Pe

ople

Mor

e nu

tritio

nal

Food

Vilalnidi 3 2 5 1 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 Sooranadu N 5 0 5 2 2 0 2 1 0 3 0 Neendakara 10 0 0 3 7 0 9 0 0 8 1 Vengur 0 1 9 0 1 0 . 0 0 Kumbalangi 0 2 8 1 1 0 0 2 Edavanna 5 1 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 4 1 Marakkara 5 0 5 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 Thanur 1 0 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Vellamunda 8 1 1 5 2 1 8 0 1 4 3 Total 37 7 44 19 16 1 30 6 2 27 7 % 42.0 8.0 50.0 51.4 43.2 2.7 68.2 13.6 4.5 73.0 18.9

(*)= One non-response from Sooranadu North. (* *)= 6 non-responses here. ($)= 2 non-responses here.

That 50% of the beneficiaries of the feeding programme in Anganwadi were unaware about the role of Grama Panchayat in its running reflects badly on the efforts on increasing the awareness and involvement of people in the functioning of village level public institutions. However, 42% of the beneficiaries believed that the involvement of GP in the running of Anganwadi was crucial and more than half of them suggested that GP managed the feeding programme very well. It is again to the credit of GPs that 68.2% of those who knew about the role of GP in running the Anganwadis felt that the involvement of GP improved the feeding programme in Anganwadis very much.

The most important suggestions reflected by the field notes of the present survey included adequate provision of better toiletry facilities, own buildings and smoke-free kitchens. Another independent study (T.N.Seema, 2001} used the data collected through a survey of Anganwadi centres in 15 selected panchayats in different districts and found out that only 27.8% of the Anganwadis has own buildings; 25% does not have a single spacious airy room; only 11% has electricity connection and 28% has open space for children's recreation; only 30% has latrine facilities; only around 3 % has tap water facility and around one-third has protected vessels for storing drinking water. Thus there are huge mfrastructural deficiencies to be addressed. The study also reflected on the poor financial conditions of Anganwadi teachers and helpers. It was further observed that

116

adequate capability to plan for mother and childcare services, other than feeding programmes, was yet to be created at the grassroots level. The PEO survey confirmed that these aspects remained largely unaddressed.

7.2.8 Projects under Special Component Plan and Tribal Sub-Plan

This is a sub-set of the projects already discussed. Selected projects under Special Component Plan and Tribal Sub-Plan included three housing projects (all from Kollam district), one project for provision of latrines (Vengoor), two self-employment projects (book binding unit of Kumbalangi and autorikshaw distribution in Edavanna) and three water supply projects (tube wells in Marakkara, wells in Thanur and piped water supply in Vellamunda). All but the water supply project in Vellamunda (which was under TSP) was under SCP. In the case of housing projects, the limited sample suggested that the incidence of incompletion (59.3% of the sample SC beneficiaries) and non-occupancy of the new houses (22.2% of the sample) were slightly higher in the case of SCP projects than the others. The provision of latrines in Vengoor was beneficial and none had any specific complaint. The two self-employment projects represented the average scenario of only providing marginal incomes in the short run, reflecting the fact that providing the benefit under the project is only an incomplete part of enabling the disadvantaged and that their activities need to be continuously followed up, guided and supported. The project benefits under the tube well water supply in Marakkara was found wanting for lack of follow-up and repair while the piped water supply project under TSP in Vellamunda is an undiluted success effected through totally need-based project implementation and effective stakeholder participation (active beneficiary committee for maintenance of the project).

7.3 Sectoral Impact-Perceptions of Knowledgeable Persons

What is attempted in this section is to codify the perceptions aired by the 'Knowledgeable Persons' selected from each selected GP and to arrive at an approximation of the impact of decentralized planning on the important sectors of the State. Knowledgeable Persons are a set of informed individuals identified to have been aware of the processes of decentralization in their capacity as Working Group members. Expert Committee members, independent observers, resource persons, etc. They were identified sectorally in order to enable them to make sector-specific comments. Utmost care has been taken to avoid, to the extent possible, political and other biases in their selection and in their opinions.

117

Table 7.19: Service Sector- Views of KP Respondents

GPs

/Dis

irict

s

Ava

ilabi

lity

of P

H

Faci

litie

s

Qua

lity

of P

H

Faci

litie

s

Qua

lity

of S

ervi

ce o

f A

ngan

wad

is

Qua

lity

of P

rimar

y Ed

ucat

ion

Ava

ilabi

lity

of S

afe

Drin

king

Wat

er

Faci

litie

s for

Per

sona

l Sa

nita

tion

of th

e Po

or

Envi

ronm

enta

l Pr

otec

tion

Hou

sing

fbt t

he P

oor

Man

agem

ent o

f W

elfa

re S

chem

es fo

r Po

or

Self

Empl

oym

ent f

or

Educ

ated

Une

mpl

oyed

Vilakudi 3.5 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 Sooranad (N] 1.7 1.3 1.0 2.0 2,3 1.7 3.3 1.0 2.0 2.3 Neendakara 1.7 1.7 1.7 2.0 2.0 1.7 2.7 1.7 2.0 3.0 KOLLAM 2.1 1.9 1.3 1.7 1.9 1.5 3.0 1.4 1.7 2.1 Vengur 1.3 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.7 1.7 1.0 2.0 Kumblangi 1.3 2.0 1.3 2.0 1.7 1.3 2.3 1.3 2.0 1.3 ERNAKIILAM 1.3 1.7 1.2 1.5 1.3 1.2 2.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 Edavanna 2.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.0 3.5 1.5 3.0 3.0 Marakkara 2.5 3.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.0 2.5 1.5 1.0 2.0 Thanur 1.5 1-5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 MALAPURAM 2.2 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.0 2.5 1.3 1.5 2.0 Vellamunda 1.5 2.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 WYNAD 1.5 2.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 TOTAL 1.9 1.9 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.2 2.6 1.4 1.5 1.9

The Knowledgeable Persons (KPs) selected for the service sector had been asked to capture the changes occurred in the sub-sectors defined in the table above in a scale of 1 to 5. The base scale of'3' represents absence of any change in the sector between the pre-decentralized and decentralized scenario while '2' and T represent marginal and considerable improvements in the sector respectively. Likewise, '4' and '5' stand for marginal and substantial deterioration in the sector respectively. The values presented in the table are the scales reported by KPs and averaged for the sample (within GPs/districts and total).

• Unquestionable improvements uniformly spread across the selected GPs have been suggested by the KPs in the personal sanitation and housing of the poor, quality of services of Anganwadis and management of the welfare schemes for the poor.

• As the previous section has shown, there were many schemes for self-employment under decentralized planning; however, their impact in many cases remained marginal for reasons discussed above.

• Drinking water schemes too were many and were fruitful, but in some cases the assets are not maintained well and hence the impact got dampened.

• Other areas that call for substantial improvements in many GPs are primary health; its availability and quality, and, environmental protection.

118

Table 7.20: Infrastructure Sector-views of KP Respondents

GPs/Districts

Qua

lity of

Roa

ds

Con

nect

ivity

of

Vill

age

Stre

et li

ghte

ning

Mar

ket p

lace

s

Oth

er p

ublic

B

uild

ings

Infr

astru

ctur

e Fo

r sch

ools

Infr

astru

ctur

e Fo

r hea

lth

Infr

astru

ctur

e fo

r A

ngan

wad

is

Publ

ic P

arks

Play

Gro

unds

Vilakudi 1.0 1.0 1.0 I 0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 Sooranad (N) 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 Neendakara 2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 KOLLAM 1.5 1.5 1.8 2.3 2.0 1.5 2.0 1.8 3.0 3.0

Vengur 2.0 1.3 1.3 2.0 1.0 1.7 1.7 1.0 3.0 2.0 Kumblangi 1.5 1.5 1.0 2.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.5 2.5 ERNAKULAM 1.8 1.4 1.2 2.2 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.0 2.8 2.2

Edavanna 1.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.5 3.0 3.0 Marakkara 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 Thanur 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.7 2.3 MALAPURAM 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.2 2.3 2.7

Vellamunda 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 WYNAD 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.0

TOTAL 1.3 1.2 1.4 2.1 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.2 2.7 2.4

This table is presented in the same manner as the previous table.

• In nutshell, the selected KPs opined that most of the important areas of rural infrastructure including quality and length of rural roads, street lighting, and infrastructure for schools, health institutions and Anganwadis have improved to a great extent (barring isolated failures) under decentralized planning during the 9th

Five Year Plan.

• However, public amenities like market places, public parks and play grounds remained without much change in almost all GPs.

119

Table 7.21: Productive Sector-vies of KP Respondents

GPs/Districts

Prod

uctio

n of

Pad

dy

Prod

uctiv

ity o

f Pad

dy

Prod

uctio

n of

Coc

onut

Prod

uctiv

ity o

f Coc

onut

Prod

uctio

n of

Oth

er

Impo

rtant

Cro

ps

Prod

uctiv

ity o

f Oth

er

Impo

rtant

Cro

ps

Agr

icul

tura

l Mar

ketin

g

Agr

icul

tura

l Pric

es

Loca

lly S

usta

inab

le

Irrig

atio

n &

Flo

od

Con

trol

Loca

lly S

usta

inab

le A

H

Act

iviti

es

Inco

me

of S

C/S

T

Inco

mes

of P

oor W

omen

Fish

ing

and

Fish

erm

an's

Inco

me

Loca

lly S

usta

inab

le

Smal

l Ind

ustri

es

Vilakudi - 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 4.5 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Sooranad N 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.0 2.5 2.5 3.0Neendakara 4.5 5.0 1.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.5 2.0 1.5 3.0 2.0KOLLAM 3.0 3.0 3.8 4.0 1.3 1.7 3.0 3.5 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.0 3.0 2.3Vengur 3.3 2.7 3.0 3.7 1.3 2.0 2.3 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.7 2.0Kumblangi 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0ERNAKULAM 3.8 3.2 3.4 3.8 1.2 1.6 2.6 2.4 1.8 1.5 1.4 1.6 2.11 2.0Edavanna 4.5 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.5 2.5 2.5Marakfcara 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 1.5 1 5 3.0 3.0 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.0 1.0Thanui 3-0 3.0 2.3 2.3 1.3 1.3 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.0MALAPURAM 3-6 3.4 2.9 2.9 1.6 1.7 3.1 3.1 2.3 2.4 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.6Vellamunda 1-0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.5 2.5 3.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0WYNAD 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.5 2.5 3.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0TOTAL 3.2 3.0 3.2 3.4 1.4 1.7 2.9 3.1 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.7 2.0 1.9

Productive Sector presents a sharply contrasting picture to the other two sectors. This must be viewed against the fact that one of the fundamental objectives of decentralization has been to stir the near-stagnant productive sector of the Kerala economy. The project level analysis done in the previous sections offers explanation to most of the results here.

• In paddy and coconut, the most important areas in agriculture, the problems faced by decentralized planning were deep-rooted and highly demanding; yet most of the GPs, as the forgoing sections reveal, concentrated on easy and populist measures like giving attractive project headings, repeating the departmental projects and thinly spreading the scarce resources while the fundamental agrarian questions remained largely unaddressed. Novel projects failed to make the desired impact due to defective planning and lack of follow-up.

• Appreciably, however, crops like vegetables have been given a fillip through decentralized efforts. This is reflected in the scaling of changes in the "production of other important crops".

• That most of the animal husbandry projects, which merely concentrated on doling out, and irrigation projects did not make the desired impact is seen from the forgoing project level analysis.

• The failure to ensure the linkage effect (forward linkages, for example, improving agricultural marketing and agricultural prices and backward linkages, for example,

120

making raw materials available at affordable pieces to self-employment units) by integrating planning at different tiers is seen from elsewhere.

• Organizing women and backward classes through formal and informal associations (Neighbourhood Groups deserve special mention) yielded rich dividends selectively during the 9th Five Year Plan.

To summarize, the sectors wherein each individual project could make a difference, especially infrastructure sector and to an extent service sector, the Grama Panchayat level plans did reasonably well, while in productive sector, especially in agriculture, where co-coordinated, focused and determined plan formulation and execution would only have mattered, the GP plans mostly made an insignificant impact during the 9th Five Year Plan (barring isolated successes). Therefore planning for the productive sector under the decentralized framework requires huge amendments in future.

7.4 Summing Up

This section summarizes discussions made in the Chapter. The analysis of the impact of sector-wise projects taken together leads to the following conclusions.

Sector Set of projects Impact-GP projects Impact-control projects Felling root-will affected coconut trees Negligible Negligible Agricultural input support Negligible/consi derable Megl igible/seldom

considerable Irrigation Negligible/Nil NR Animal Husbandry-subsidized provision of animals and cowsheds

Negligible/seldom considerable Negligible/considerable

Productive sector

Self employment Negligible NR Subsidized provision of latrines Considerable NR Sanitary conditions of the village Nil/negligible NR Subsidised provision of houses/repair Considerable NR Feeding programme in Anganwadis (AW) Considerable NR Local mobilization for AW feeding Negligible NR

Service Sector

Drinking water Considerable/negligible NR

1. The duplicity of the components of projects implemented by the Grama Panchayats and the line departments has got reduced drastically during the 9'h Five Year Pkn. This posed an analytical problem in forming a comparative framework between the two sets of projects; yet, given the limited sample of the departmental projects, either GP's or comparison projects, in general, did not show an edge over the other in laying greater household level impact of their projects. Even if there had been any significant difference, it would have been difficult to comment on their relative efficiency as their functioning is organically linked in the decentralized scenario; the envisaged role of departmental officials is crucial to GP level planning and project execution while Grama Sabha plays an important role in the execution of departmental proj ects by selecting their beneficiaries.

121

2. One of the fundamental objectives of decentralization has been to stir the near- stagnant productive sector of the Kerala economy. The forgoing analysis suggests only very limited impact of the selected projects in meeting the aforesaid objective. In the agricultural sector, the basic problems that dampened the project impact (as made out from the scrutiny of the ward-wise distribution of beneficiary lists, sectoral project sets and field level discussions about the processes followed in planning and execution) include;

• Failure of the selected GPs to address the generally-perceived trade-off between rising cost of cultivation and the inability of farm returns to keep pace with the rising cost with vertically and horizontally integrated collective efforts.

• Many agricultural projects received only nominal allocation in an attempt to maximize the number of projects. Thin spread of project allocation over a very large number of individual beneficiaries and the propensity to equalize the flow of resources to different wards of the GP (especially in felling of coconut trees, provision of agricultural inputs and production bonus) was widely observed.

• Absence of any integrated planning for the development of particular crops and the resultant attempt to develop different crops at a time;

• Provision of delayed input support, sometimes months after the agricultural season;

• Absence of post-project follow-up and mechanism for effective monitoring.

• Inadequate stakeholder participation and poor maintenance of the agricultural assets created therein.

Isolated successes were on account of the selection of the right crop for project support and the co-ordination between farmers and the Krishi Bhavan (Provision of farm inputs in Edavanna GP).

3. On the other hand, it may be seen that the stand-alone projects (That which did not call for any horizontal or vertical integration) in the service sector laid considerable impact on the intended beneficiaries. Similar comparative conclusions on the impact of decentralized planning on service and productive sectors have been reached by other survey research works too (Harilal 2004).

122

Annexure I

Staff transferred to Local Self Governments with Decentralisation

Departments Grama Panchayats Block Panchayats

District Panchayats Municipal Councils/ municipal Corporations

-Two Deputy Director and -Krishi Bhavans auxiliary posts. -District soil Conservation Officer and auxiliary posts. -One Assistant Executive

-One post of Deputy Director of Agriculture, (this post should be under the Municipality of District

Engineer and connect posts. -Soil Testing Laboratory . -Mobile Soil Testing Laboratory

headquarters but his services should be extended to all Municipalities of the District).

-District Sales Counter -District Agriculture Farm/Coconut nursery ( should serve other districts also wheie such institutions do not

Agriculture

Kiishi Bhavans One post of Assistant Director and Auxiliary posts

exist) Veterinary Polydinic, ICDP area The Veterinary Polyclinic, Sub- office. Mobile Veterinary Centre, Dispensary of the Dispensary. Mobile Farm Unit, respective places Clinical Laboratories not attached to District Veterinary Centres. (the services of mobile units and clinical laboratories should be

Animal husbandry (Dispensary / Hospitals of respective Places)

-Veterinary sub-centre -Veterinary dispensaries/ hospitals

extended to urban areas also) One Dairy Extension Officer and Auxiliary posts (this unit should be transferred to one of the Grama Panchayats in the Block and this should cover all the Grama Panchayats in

Dairy development

the block)

One Fisheries Sub Inspector (in the

The fisheries Schools of respective places

One post of Fisheries Sub Inspector. One post of Fisheries

Grama Panchayat Sub Inspector. (to the wherever necessary Municipalities wherever

Fisheries

necessary Two Village Extension The post of Block Officer posts (including Development Officers lady V.E.O) (if it is not and posts. possible to deploy two posts for a Grama Panchayat from a Rural Development Block one post can be deployed for the present and additional post can be deployed as and when necessary

Rural Development

subject to availability)

123

Social Welfare Day care centres and Anganwadis of the respective places.

Care Homes, Oldage Homes and similar respective places

SC Development

Balawadies, Ha la wad i cum feeding centre, seasonal day care centre and dormitories of the respective places

Pre-matric Hostels of the respective places. The post of Block Extension Officer (his services should be made available to all Grama Panchayats in the Block

Tribal Development Balawadies, Medical unit. Nursery schools. Midwifery centres & Ayurvedic dispensaries of the respective place?

Tribal Extension Officer (his services should be made available to all Grama Panchayats in the Block)

Health Services (Allopathy)

Primary Health Centres and Government Dispensaries.

Block level Primary Health Centre/Community Health Centre, Taluk H ospitals/Govemment 1 lo.pii.ik

Community Health Centres, Government Hospitals, Taluk Hospitals of the respective places

Health(ISM) Government Ayurvedic Dispensaries and Hospitals of the respective places

Taluk hospitals of the respective places

Taluk hospitals of the respective places.

Health (Homeo) Government Homoeo Dispensaries and Hospitals of the respective Places

Taluk hospitals of the respective places

Taluk hospitals of the respective places.

General Education Government Lower Primary Schools of the respective places

The Upper Primary Schools and Higb Schools of the respective places. One Section from the Deputy Director's Office.

Government Primary Schools and High Schools or the respective places.

Cooperative One post of Assistant Registrar and one post of Clerk

One post of Senior Co-operative Inspector (this post should be under the Municipal Council of District Head Quarters and the concerned officer will attend to the works in all the Municipalities of the District)

Public works One Public Works Overseer post (this post should be given to a Grama Panchayat in which there are no engineering posts and the incumbent should work in three similar Grama Panchayats)

One division consisting of Executive Engineer and auxiliary staff, (from among Local Works Division, Special Division, Building Division)

124

Responsibilities Transferred to PRI Institutions with the Decentralisation

Sector Responsibilities transferred to Grama Panchayats

Responsibilities transferred to Block

Panchayats

Responsibilities transferred to District Panchayats

Agriculture

Bring into cultivation waste lands and marginal lands Bring about an optimum utilization of land Soil conservation Production of organic manure. Establishment of nurseries. Promotion of co-operative and group farming. Organising self-help groups among cultivators Promotion of horticulture and vegetable cultivation. Fodder development Plant protection. Seed production Farm mechanization.

Management of Krishi Bhavans

Fanners' training for theprogrammes implementedat the village level. Arrangements of agricultural inputs required for schemes at the village level. Conduct of agricultural exhibitions.

Integrated watershed

management in watersheds falling within Block Panchayat area. Mobilize agricultural credit. Sericulture

Running of agricultural farms other than regional farms and research centers and establishment of new farms. Integrated watershed management in watersheds covering more than one Block Panchayat area. Provision of agricultural inputs. Soil testing. Pest control. Marketing of agricultural produce. Cultivation of ornamental plants. Promotion of agricultural cooperatives.

Promotion of commercial crops. Biotechnology applications. Field trials and pilot projects to popularize innovation, Locally appropriate research and development.

Animal Husbandry

Cattle improvement programmes. Dairy farming. Poultry farming, bee keeping, piggery development, goat rearing, rabbit rearing. Running or veterinary dispensaries. Running of ICDP sub-centres. Preventive health programmes for animals Prevention of cruelty to animals. Fertility improvement programmes. Control of diseases of animal origin.

Running of Veterinary Poly clinics and Regional Artificial Insemination Centres. Provide speciality services in Animal Husbandry. Conduct cattle and poultry shows.

Management of district level veterinary hospitals and laboratories. Management of dairy extension service units. Promotion of milk co-operatives. Management of farms other than regional farms, breeding farms and research centres. District level training. Implementation of disease prevention programmes. Field trials and pilot projects on innovative practices. Locally relevant research and development.

Minor Irrigation

All minor irrigation schemes within the area of a Village Panchayat. All micro irrigation schemes. Water conservation.

All lift irrigation schemes and minor irrigation schemes covering more than one village Panchayat.

Development of ground water resources- Construction and maintenance ofminor irrigation schemes covering more than one Block Panchayat. Command area development.

125

Fisheries Development of fisheries in ponds and fresh water and brackish water fish culture, Mari culture. Fish seed production and distribution. Distribution of fishing implements. Fish marketing assistance. Provision of basic minimum services for the families of fishermen. Welfare schemes for fishermen.

Development of traditional landing centres.

Arrangements for marketing of fish. Management of Fish Farm Development Agency.

Management of district level hatcheries, net making units, fish markets, feed mills, ice plants and cold storages. Management of fisheries schools. Introduction of new technologies. Provide inputs required for fishermen. Promotion of fishermen's co- operatives.

Social Forestry

Raising of fodder, fuel and fruit trees Organising campaigns for tree planting and environmental awareness. Afforestation of waste lands.

Small Scale Industries Promotion of cottage and village industries Promotion of handicrafts Promotion of traditional and mini industries

1

Setting up of mini industrial estates. Promotion of industries with investment limit of one-third of SSI. Self employment schemes in industrial sector.

Management of District Industries Centre. Promotion of small scale industries. Setting up of industrial estates. Arranging exhibitions for sale of products. Entrepreneur development programmes. Marketing of products. Training. Input service and common facility centres. Industrial development credit planning.

Housing Identification of homeless people and poramboke dwellers and provide house sites and houses. Implementation of rural housing programmes. Implementation of shelter upgradation programmes.

Popularization of low cost housing. Promotion of housing co- operative societies.

Housing Complex and infrastructure development. Mobilizing housing finance.

Water Supply

Running of water supply schemes covering one village panchayat. Setting up of water supply schemes covering one village panchayat.

Running of water supply schemes covering more than one Village Panchayat.. Taking up of water supply schemes covering more than one Village Panchayat.

Electricity & Energy

Street lighting Promotion of bio-gas.

Promotion of non- conventional energy sources.

Taking up of micro-hydel projects. Determining priority areas for extension of electricity.

Education Management of Government pre-primary schools and Government primary schools.

Management of Industrial Training Institutes.

Management pf Government high schools (including LP section and

Literacy programmes. UP section attached to high schools) Management of Government higher secondary schools.

126

Management of Government technical schools. Management of vocational training centres and polytechnics. Management of vocational Higher Secondary schools. Management of District Institute for Education and Training. Co-ordinate centrally and State sponsored programmes related to education

Public Works Construction and maintenance of village roads within the village panchayat. Construction of buildings for institutions transferred.

Construction and maintenance of Village roads covering more than one village panchayat. Construction of buildings for institutions transferred.

Construction and maintenance of all district roads other than State Highways. National Highways arid Major District Roads. Construction of buildings for institutions transferred.

Public Health and Sanitation

Management of dispensaries and primary health centres and sub-centres (in all systems of medicine). Management of child welfare centres and maternity homes. Immunization and other preventive measures. Family Welfare Sanitation.

Management of community health centres and taluk hospitals within the Block Panchayat area in all systems of medicine.

Management of district hospital in all systems of medicine. Setting up of centres for care of special categories of disabled and mentally ill people. Co-ordination of centrally and State Sponsored programme at the district level.

Social Welfare

Running of anganwadies. Sanctioning and distribution of pensions to destitute, widows, handicapped and agricultural labourers.

Sanctioning and distribution of unemployment assistance. Sanctioning of assistance for marriage of the daughters of widows. Management of group insurance scheme for the poor.

Management of ICDS. Payment of grants to orphanages. Starring of welfare institutions for the disabled, destitutes etc.

Poverty Alleviation

Identification of the poor. Self employment and group employment schemes for the poor especially women. Providing community assets of continuing benefit to the poor.

Planning and implementation of Employment Assurance Schemes in co-ordination with Village Panchayats. Skill upgradation of the poor of the employment and wage employment for people below poverty line

Providing infrastructure for self-employment programmes.

SC/ST Development

Beneficiary oriented schemes under SCP and TSP. Management of nursery school for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, Provision of basic amenities in Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes habitats. Assistant to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes students. Discretionary assistance to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in need.

Management of Pre-metric hostels. Promoting Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Co-operatives.

Management of post matric hostels. Management of vocational training centres for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

Sports and Cultural affairs

Construction of Play grounds Construction of Stadiums

127

Public Distribution System

Examination of complaints against the public distribution system and taking of remedial measures. Organisation of campaigns against weights and measures offences. General supervision and guidance of ration shops and maveli stores and other public distribution centres and if necessary starting new public distribution centres._

Natural Calamities Relief

Management of relief centres Organisation of relief works (Repair works to assets will be divided and carried out by the Panchayat in charge of the assets)

Cooperatives

Organisation of co-operatives within the jurisdiction of the Panchayat. Payment of Government grants and subsidies within the jurisdiction."

Organisation of Co-operatives within the jurisdiction of Block Panchayats. Payment of Government grants and subsidies within the jurisdiction."

Organisation of Co-operative within the jurisdiction of Distric Panchayats. Payment of Government grants and subsidies to co-operatives within the jurisdiction."

128

Annexure II

Restructuring of Kerala Panchayatiraj Act, 1994

Certain provisions of the Kerala Panchayatiraj Act, 1994 were modified in 1999 based on the recommendations of the Committee on Decentralization of Powers (Sen Committee}. The main features of the Act included the following.

1. Strengthening the role of Grama Sabhas, by clearly defining the functions and responsibilities of Gramasabha, as a forum for people's participation in decision making., modifying the norms for convening GSs/ required quorum in GSs for improving its effectiveness. (Convening of GS four times in a year, compared to the earlier position of two times in a year, quorum to be 10% of GS population instead of 50 members).

2. Provision for disqualification of Members against defection.

3. Constitution of Standing committees ( 3 in GP ,3 in BP, 5 in DP) and defining the role of these standing committees. {As per 1994 act, there was only 1 standing committee in GP, 2 in BP and four in DP).

4. Strengthening the role and functions of three tiers of PRIs, by framing three schedules to give clear-cut role differentiation, to achieve complementarity. The schedules clearly define their mandatory functions, general functions and sectoral functions.

5. Vesting of roads under the jurisdiction of different tiers of panchayats , other than those classified as Highways .1994 PR act provided that all roads other than those classified as highways are vested with Village Panchayat. Under the Amended act, Responsibility has been assigned to various tiers of PRIs to maintain the roads as per the prescribed standards under their jurisdiction.

6. Clear cut rules on Selection of beneficiary for the various developmental schemes, implemented through PRIs. Clear eligibility criteria, expressed in terms of criteria for exclusion and inclusion and among eligible applicants, there should be well-defined prioritization criteria.

7. Citizen charter for information of Delivery of services.

129

8. Well defined roles of President, Secretary and officials of PRIs.

9. Right to Information

10. Constitution of Appellate Tribunal

11. Constitution of Ombudsman

12. Amendments in provision of PR Act on solid waste management, market and slaughter houses, licensing of trades and industries, building rules.

130

Annexure III

State Finance Commissions & Financial Devolution

a) Plan Transfers

The 1st State Finance Commission (SFC) submitted its report in February 1996. While deliberating on the question of evolving a principle for devolution of funds among the three groups of Local Bodies (Corporations, Municipalities and Panchayats), an important factor considered by the 1s1 SFC was the functional canvass of each local body. Kerala Panchayati Raj Act 1994 and Kerala Municipality Act 1994 enumerate the responsibilities transferred to the respective local bodies.

1st SFC held the view that it would be possible to suggest a criterion for the sharing of funds among the Local Bodies, only after transfer of responsibilities is complete in all respects. Till such time, it was recommended that, the inter-se allocation among the groups of Local Bodies as indicated by the State Government or the State Planning Board might be continued. For the Annual Plan, 1996-97, out of the total devolved funds, the State Planning Board allocated 55.80% to Village Panchayats, 14.33% to Block Panchayats, 14.93% to District Panchayats, 5.64% to Municipalities and 2.17% to Corporations. The 1st SFC held that the devolution of plan funds among them may continue in the aforementioned proportions (provisionally) and the inter-se distribution among the various units in the same group of Local Bodies may follow the criteria given below.

Indicator Urban Local Bodies

Rural Local Bodies

Population in 1991 Census 75 70 Population of SC/ST in 1991 Census 10 10

Total workers excluding workers in manufacturing, processing, servicing and repairs outside household industry

15 10

Population of agriculture workers among workers NIL 10 Total 100 100

The Cabinet Sub-Committee set up to examine the devolution of funds felt that instead of the formula recommended by 1st SFC, plan funds may be distributed according to the simple formula giving 90% weightage to population and 10% to the area. The distribution of plan funds in 1997-98, the year in which plan grant-in-aid was greatly

131

enhanced, was based entirely on the criterion of population alone. In 1997, the Working Group of State Planning Board evolved a fresh formula for inter-se distribution of plan fund. This formula, followed during 9th plan, is given below.

Weightage (in Percentage)

Indicators GPs BPs DPs Municipalities/ Corporations

Population (Excluding SCs/STs) 65 65 55 75 Geographical Area (Excluding Area Under Forests)

5 10 15 5

Area Under Paddy 5 - - - Own income (Grama Panchayat) - 10 - - - Composite Index of Agri Labourers, persons engaged in livestock, fisheries, etc. and marginal workers

15 25 20 -

Composite Index of Backwardness, Houses without latrines and houses without electricity

- - 10 20

Total 100 100 100 100

The 2nd SFC observed that the plan grant-in-aid to LSGIs as proportion of State plan outlay was 31.4% and that should funds devolved on account of State-sponsored schemes also be considered, then the ratio went up to 35.5% and recommended that a minimum of one-third of the state's plan outlay in any year should be statutorily transferred to LSGIs and that in computing this ratio, the transfers on account of state-sponsored schemes should be excluded from the numerator. The recommendation sought to remove the lacuna that the decision to devolve 35% of plan outlay remained an administrative decision, reversible at any time.

The total plan transfers to local bodies is distributed between General Sector (75%), SCP (21%) and TSP (4%). The General Sector funds get divided between PRIs and ULBs in the ratio of 85:15. Within PRIs the distribution is in the ratio of 70, 15 and 15 between GPs, BPs and DPs. SCP and TSP are shared between PRIs and ULBs in proportion to their SC/ST population. The ratio of distribution between GPs , BPs and DPs is 60, 20 and 20 for SCP and 40, 20 and 40 for TSP. The inter-se distribution within each tier is on the basis of the formula framed by the Working Group of State Planning Board mentioned above.

The 2nd SFC introduced an incentive criterion for collection of "own collected revenue" of GPs and ULBs (they only have considerable potential for own revenue generation), by setting apart an amount from their plan allocation for the same. The amount so set apart in the following year shall be a maximum of 10% of the plan allocation for GPs (ULBs); the exact percentage to be set apart is worked out as 10*n/N (%} of the GP (ULB)

132

plan allocation, where "n" represents the number of GPs (ULBs) showing an increase of 30% or above in their 'own collected revenue' and "N" is the total number of GPs in the State.

b) Non-Plan transfers

Non-plan transfers consist of statutory and non-statutory grants. Statutory grants refer to transfers on account of assigned taxes {surcharge on stamp duty and basic tax) and shared taxes (motor vehicle tax). Non-statutory transfers refer to a host of grants, a possible 18 in the case of Panchayats and a possible 10 in the case of Municipalities.

The non-statutory non-plan grants given to local bodies constituted 0.33% of the state revenue during 1993-94 and 94-95. The first SFC recommended that non-statutory non-plan grants given for traditional functions may be fixed at 1% of the state revenue and may be distributed between two separate pools- urban and rural pools- in proportion to the urban and rural population. While computing the state revenue, the items including a) land tax or basic tax, b) surcharge on duty on transfer of property, c) Motor Vehicle tax given to local bodies, d) One time tax on buildings, and, e) 50% of net allocation of sale of court fee stamp may be deducted from the tax and non-tax revenue of the state government. The following table illustrates the non-plan grants (Statutory and Non-statutory) recommended by l!t SFC for distribution among local bodies.

Rural Pool* Urban Pool ** 1) 25% of basic tax collected from Panchayat areas

100% basic tax collected from urban areas

2) 25% of surcharge on stamp duty collected from Panchayat areas

25% of surcharge on stamp duty collected from Municipal councils

3) Consolidated general grant at 1% of State revenue (Panchayat share)

Consolidated general grant at 1% of State revenue (Municipality share)

* DPs and BPs are excluded from rural Pool ** 3 Corporations are kept out of Urban Pool

The 1st SFC recommended the following criterion for distribution of rural and urban pools among village panchayats and among municipal councils.

Indicator Village Panchayats Municipal Councils Population in 1991 census 75 80 Population of SC/ST in 1991 census 5 5 Financial need of LBs 15 10 Tax effort of LBs 5 5 Total 100 100

133

While the Government accepted all other recommendations except setting apart 1% of the tax revenue on this count. The 2nd SFC non-plan transfers split into a) non-plan grants for maintenance of assets owned by the LSGIs and b) non-plan, non-maintenance grants. On the devolution non-plan grants for maintenance of assets, the 2nd SFC sequentially made the following suggestions.

1. Set aside in each State budget an amount equivalent to 5.5% of the own tax revenue of the latest year for which audited accounts are available (usually year t-2).

2. Of this amount, set aside, Rs, 1407- crores valued at 2000-01 prices. One -seventh of this must be distributed in the ratio of 19:1 between DPs and BPs. BPs would have their share equally divided among them while DPs would share half of their share among them in proportion to the distribution of the 3437 Km road length. And the other half on the basis of 'norms' applied to estimated non-road asset values.

3. The remaining six-seventh of the sum (Rs. 140/- crores valued at 2000-01 prices) was to be distributed among GPs, municipalities and corporations. Seven-eighth of this would be distributed on the basis of the Babu Paul Committee recommendations and the remaining one-eighth on the basis of 'norms' applied to estimated asset values.

4. The remnant (5.5% of the state's own tax revenue minus Rs. 1407- crores valued at 2000- 01 prices) must be distributed exactly in the same ratio as plan assistance.

5. The committee strongly opposed using the maintenance grants for current operational expenses; yet as a transitional arrangement allowed LSGIs to spend upto 10% of it for current expenses

6. The 2nd SFC did not very convincingly explain the ways by which the State government could find out the resources to be transferred to LSGIs for maintenance grant; but only mooted that the same may be raised from the countervailing saving on departmental expenditure for maintenance of assets, savings made on account of non-payment of VTC and taxing services.

134

Annexure IV

District Panchayat Block Panchayat GramaPanchayat Physiography

Pathanapuram Vilakudy Highland

Sasthamcotta Sooranad North Midland

Kollam

Chavara Neendakara Coastal

Koovapadi Vengoor Midland Ernakulam

Palluruthi Kumblangi Coastal

Wandoor Edavanna Highland

Kuttipuram Marakkara Midland

Malapuram

Thamir Thanur Coastal

Wynad Mananthavadi Vellamunda Highland

135

Annexure V

Consistency between the Needs/Demands Raised in GP Level Development Reports and the Projects Implemented during the

9th Five Year Plan in their Productive & Service Sectors

I. Edavanna GP (Wandoor Block, Malappuram District)

Edavanna occupies a place in history in the field of business and commerce. The GP lies 45 to 200 meters above sea level, comprising highlands, mountains, valley and paddy fields. The well known Chaliyar river flows through the GP. Chaliyar was one of the major waterways in the 19th century. The nearest commercial town was Kozhikode. The Goods and commodities which originate from Kozhikode town were brought to Edavanna through Chaliyar and from Edavanna, it was taken to distant destinations such as Mysore and other southern Indian cities through road network. Edavanna enjoyed a significant position during the early period. However, the improvement in road network between Kozhikode and Mysore reduced gradually the commercial significance of Edavanna.

Productive Sector

Demands in Development Report (DR) - Agriculture Projects Implemented in the 9th Plan 1 Comprehensive soil-testing in the GP by Agri. Dept and

application of appropriate crops suited to the soil Project implemented with dept funds on a limited scale

2 awareness programmes on environment friendly approach to agriculture.

Project implemented

3 Construction of lift irrigation across Chaliyar river. Not implemented

4- Construction of check dam/ VCB s in rivulets Project implemented 5 Old ponds and wells could be renovated. Project implemented

6 provision of wells and pump sets for irrigation Project implemented 7 Farms roads may be constructed Not implemented 8 Farmer's co-op for encouraging group farming activities through

supply of modem implements such as tractor, etc. Project implemented

9 Timely availability of seeds and fertilizers through KB Project implemented 10 Promote inter-crop facilities in coconut gardens, such as banana,

pineapple, vegetables, etc Project implemented on a limited scale

11 Provision of household vegetable cultivation Project implemented 12 Support for Paddy project Productivity linked bonus of Rs.350/-

per hectare for paddy cultivation in the form of seeds, lime and pesticides

136

Demands -AH Sector Projects Implemented in the 9th

Plan1 Milk cooperatives, involving all farmers should be formed and milk

procurement centre should be started in all wardsNot implemented

2 A fodder production unit could he established with the financial and technical assistance of GP

Not implemented

3 Promotion of grass cultivation Project implemented through SS of seeds

4 Assistance to fanners for poultry , Project implemented 5 Assistance for promotion of chick production units Not implemented 6 Assistance to farmers for cow rearing Project implemented 7 Facilities in the vet. hospital such as Clinical lab,, operation theatre and

medicines should be provided. Project implemented by (improvement of physical infrastructure)

8 Vaccination should he given to the stray dogs Project implemented 9 Setting up of slaughter house in the GP. Not implemented 10 vaccination measures for hen Project implemented

Service sector

Demands- Education Projects Implemented in the 9th

Plan 1 Provision of basic infrastractural facilities in schools Project implemented 2 Awareness campaign among parents and students Project implemented 3 Make available text books at the beginning of the academic year

itself. Not as specific project,but through support of PTAs

4 Teacher student ratio should be proportionately decreased. . No specific project 5 Appointment of teachers on contract basis in place of those who are

going on long leave/ transfer. No specific project

6 PTAs in schools should be strengthened No specific project 7 Assistance for Nutritional program in Anganwadies Project implemented

Demands- Health .Sanitation and Drinking Water Projects Implemented in the 9th

Plan 1 Awareness campaign on immunization, maintenance of hygiene

surroundings, etc. Project implemented

2 Screening camp for Diabetes, Hypertension and Cancer once in six months. Project implemented through Medical Camps

3 Provision of latrines to BPL households. Project Implemented 3 Provision for local purchase of essential medicines in Ayurveda and Homeo

dispensary. Project Implemented

4 Posting of doctors hi the PHCs permanently and compulsory visit to sub-centers once in a week.

No Specific Project

5 Provision of proper drainage facility, public comfort stations, community toilets, etc.

Not Implemented

6 Provision of a water treatment plant in the GP. Not Implemented 7 Chlorination of Water reservoirs and wells periodically. Public wells

should be covered with proper nets etc. Project Implemented

8 Extension of pipeline facility for drinking water Project implemented 9 Digging of wells for water supply Project implemented

137

2. Marakkara GP (Kuttippuram Block & Malappuram District)

Marakkara lies in the midland region of Malapuram district. The Gramapanchayat is traditionally considered as an agrarian village. The GP is surrounded by hills, slopes and plains. The main cultivation of the GP is Paddy and Coconut. Areacanut, mixed crops such as banana, tapioca, banana, betel leaves, pepper are also cultivated in the GP. As per 1991 census, the total population was 30669 of which 15409 were males and 15260 were females. Agriculture continues to be the main source of livelihood for the population of the GP. Small and marginal fanners constitute majority of the GP's farmer population.

Productive Sector

Demands in DR-Agriculture Projects Implemented in the 9th Plan

1 Ensure adequate price for Agricultural Commodities Not Implemented 2 Supply of seeds, manure, pesticides for paddy and coconut

through Krishibhawan at concessional rate Project Implemented

3 Ensure availability of effective pesticides. Project Implemented 4 Regular soil testing by Agricultural dept and Soil health card

should be introduced wherein information on all types of crops applicable to various soil conditions are available to farmers.

Implemented by dept on a limited scale

5 Encourage group farming activities -paddy -distribution of seeds and fertilizers through samithis

Project Implemented

6 Provision for purchasing modern agricultural implements including tractors

Project Implemented two tractors purchased for samithis

7 Construction of public ponds for irrigation purpose Project Implemented in a wider scale

8 Provision of crop insurance facility not Implemented

9 Construction of new check dams and repair of all damaged check dams in rivulets.

Project Implemented

10 Vegetable cultivation in house premises to be popularised Project Implemented 11 Agricultural Nurseries should be started in the GP Not implemented 12 Set up agro -processing centers such as cashew- processing

center, coir processing unit, copra processing Implemented only for copra-drier units in a limited scale

13 Construction of tractor roads Project implemented 14 Setting up of coop, fertilizer depot in GP Not implemented 15 Marketing facilities for major crops Not implemented 16 Pop. of vegetable cultivation among school children Project implemented 17 Awareness programme on new cultivation: mushroom etc Project implemented in a

limited scale

138

Demands in DR- Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Projects Implemented in the 9th

plan 1 New Veterinary hospital to be established in GP Not implemented, however,

Vet building shifted to GP building for the time -being

2 Awareness programmes to be conducted by Veterinary Hospital on usefulness and method of rearing modem breed cattle

Implemented in a limited scale

3 provision for supplying quality breed cattle in the GP. Not implemented 4 Milk societies to be started in two main wards ,the milt marketing

societies in the GP should be made effective Not implemented

5 Financial assistance to be provided for poultry /chick production units Project implemented for poultry during first two years

6 Financial assistance to be provided for cattle rearing Project implemented 7 Fodder production unit to be set up at reasonable prices , Promotion of

grass cultivation for fodder Not implemented

8 Vaccination for dogs 9 promotion of pissiculture in available ponds Implemented in a limited scale

10 Insurance facility for cattle Project implemented

Service Sector

Demands in DR- Education & Social welfare Projects implemented in the 9th

plan1 Provision of basic infrastructural facilities to schools such as add.class

rooms, toilets, wells, electrification, kitchen shed etc Project Implemented with assistance of GP and BP

2 Opening of pre-primary units in LP schools of GP Not Implemented 3 Conduct of Workshop, awareness camps on education Project Implemented 4 Strengthening of PTAs in schools Strengthened but no specific

Project 5 Text books be made available at the start of the acad. Year Imp. through societies 6 Academic facilities such as library, lab facilities situation of schools

should be strengthened Project implemented, focused on providing support for school libraries

7 Small Libraries should be established in all wards of the GP Not implemented 8 Provision for nutritional food in all Anganwadies Project implemented 9 Provision of adequate toys and equipments in Anganwadies. Project implemented 10 Provision of own buildings for Anganwadies, Project implemented 11 Training for youth on wiring .plumping .tailoring Not implemented 12 Public Library in Kadampuzha Not implemented 13 Cultural activities for youth Project implemented 14 Establishment of pub. Auditorium Not implemented 15 Mini stadium in the GP Not implemented 16 Strengthening of literacy programmes Project implemented by

providing physical infrastructure and computers

139

Health .Sanitation and Drinking Water Projects Implemented in the 9th Plan

1 Improvement in infrastructural facilities in PHC .ensure availability of doctors and supporting staff in PHC throughout the day

Project implemented by providing funds for well, repair of building

2 Awareness programme on health, sanitation, etc. Project implemented 3 Ensure availability of medicines and vaccines in PHC Project implemented 4 Vehicle facility should be made available to PHC Not implemented 5 Improvement in basic facilities in sub-Centres ScProvision of more sub-

Centres inwards Project implemented for basic facilities in sub-centers, but could not set up new sub-centers

6 Provision of more public tube wells with hand pump for drinking water purpose.

Project implemented

7 Unused wells/deepening of ponds / unused ponds to be cleaned and used for drinking water purposes.

Project implemented

8 Extension of drinking water pipeline in certain areas of GP Project implemented 9 Assistance to BPL famines for digging wells for drinking water Project implemented 10 Provision of latrine to BPL households. Project implemented for all

those who applied for the facility

ll Medical camps /immunization camps Project implemented 12 construction of slaughter house in GP Not implemented 13 Mechanism for disposal of waste and garbage Project implemented by

setting up waste bins, however,disposal still a problem area.

14 Mechanism for tackling mosquito menace No effective project

3. Thanur GP (Thanur Block & Malappuram District)

Thanur enjoys a prominent place in Indian history. During thelSth century,the French people established one of their colonies in this area. Thanur was considered as one of the commercial hubs of the region during French rule in India. Historical records indicate that there was large scale export of coconut products from this small town. Thanur had a very extensive road network with other towns which helped for its commercial development. Traditionally, Fisheries occupies an important position in the Thanur. The GP covers an extensive coastal line covering 7.32 kilometers. Agriculture is the main occupation for a sizable population of the panchayat. As per 1991 census, the population of the GP was 56803, of which 28205 were males and 28205 were females. Essentially, the GP can be divided into two regions. 1. Fisheries area consisting of 7 wards and 2. Non-fisheries area consisting of 8 wards (comprising Agriculture and business).

140

Productive Sector

Demands-Fisheries Projects implemented in the 9th

Plan 1 Financial assistance to fishermen to purchase new boats and repair boats Project implemented for

purchase of small boats 2 Awareness camps on benefits distributed through people's planning Project implemented in the

first two years 3 Effective market mechanism for fish products Not implemented

4 Setting up of fish processing units such as storage units, ice plants, Repair ofGovt. Ice plants etc.

Assistance given by GP for construction of building to house fish processing units funded by Women Development Corporation

5 Establishment of Fishing Harbour with the assistance of Fisheries and Harbour engineering Dept and GP.

Not implemented

6 Improvements in facilities such as Education, health sanitation and drinking water in fisheries area.

Project implemented

7 Construction of seawall for about 3 kms for protection of fishermen families residing in coastal areas

Already implemented under Dept funds

8 Fish societies strengthened through GP assistance Project implemented for setting up Society office

9 Planting of Kandatkadu to counter problem of sea erosion Not implemented 10 Supply of equipments to those fishermen who lost instruments in

accidents Not implemented

Demands- Agriculture Projects Implemented in the 9th Plan

1 Construction of regulators in rivulets and repair of damaged vertical cross bars in rivulets

Project implemented

2 Repair of public ponds and wells should he undertaken in the GP Project implemented 3 Modernization of Agri. Implements including tractor and tiller Not implemented 4 Establishment of strong market mechanism for all commodities Not implemented 5 Scientific testing of soil and technical advice to farmers on modern crop-

cutting practices implemented with dept funds

6 Assistance to the farmers for supply of pumpsets .fertilizers pesticides and seedlings at reasonable prices for coconut

Project implemented

7 Assistance to the Paddy samithis for supply of fertilizers .pesticides and seedlings at reasonable prices for Paddy

Project implemented

8 Assistance to the farmers for supply of fertilizers .pesticides and seedlings at reasonable prices for Arecanut, betel

Project implemented

9 Support for vegetable cultivation Project implemented 10 Construction of farm roads Project implemented 11 Introduction of new crops such as mushooom, orchid ,anthorium Not implemented 12 Establishment of school level agriculture promotion Clubs Project implemented

141

Demands- Animal Husbandly & Self Employment Schemes

Projects Implemented in the 9th

Plan1 Awareness camps to be conducted for opportunities in AH sector Project implemented 2 Setting up of dairy units involving to 5to lOcattle Not implemented

3 Assistance for Grass cultivation Project implementation

4 Assistance for goat rearing for milk as well as for meat purpose Project implemented

5 Assistance for cow rearing for milk Project implemented 6 Assistance to farmers for promotion of poultry Project implemented 7 Modernization of vetenary hospital with new equipments Project implemented (imprv. of

infra,)8 Construction of a scientific slaughter house Not implemented 9 Vaccination for stray dogs Project implemented10 promotion of inland fisheries and prawn rearing Project implemented 11 Establishment of Milk societies Not implemented 12 Conduct of AH exhibitions Not implemented

Not mentioned in DR Self-employment schemes in readymade garments

Not mentioned in DR Self-employment schemes in readymade garments in coir production

Not mentioned in DR Self-employment schemes in fish processing

Not mentioned in DR Self-employment training in computer

Service Sector

Education, Social welfare and Housing Projects implemented in the 9th Plan

1. Provision of basic infrastmctural facilities in the schools in the form of additional class rooms, kitchen sheds, urinal facilities, electrification and provision of drinking water

Project implemented

2. Improvement in academic standards through support prog. Such as library facilities, lab facilities and teaching aids

Project implemented

3. Support for mid-day meal scheme through supply of necessary vessels and Project implemented 4. Awareness campaign among parents and students, especially in fisheries

area to contain dropout rate in schools. Project implemented during first Z years

5. Increase in the amount of scholarship for students in fisheries area Not implemented

6. Text books to be supplied at the beginning of the academic year. No specific project, but supported by PTA

7. Students from economically backward families should be given Text books, uniform and special tuition at free of cost

Not implemented

8- Teacher student ratio should be proportionately decreased. No specific project

9. Appoint teachers on contract basis in place of those who are going on long leave/transfer.

Problems sorted out with the involvement of PTA

10. PTAs in schools should be strengthened Voluntary support 11. More financial assistance for 'Ilianur Library for improving Project implemented 12. Assistance for setting up small libraries in all wards Project implemented 13. Provision for nutritional food in all Anganwadies Project implemented 14. Establish aits and science college in GP Not implemented 15. Housing facilities for fisherman Project implemented 16. Housing facilities for weaker sections Project implemented

142

Demands-Health .Sanitation and drinking water Projects implemented in the 9th Plan

1. Awareness campaign on health issues and sanitation, need for immunization etc., especially in fisheries area.

Project implemented

2. Provision of latrines to BPL households and toilets in all public places, especially in fisheries area in the GP.

Project implemented

3. Adequate number of Doctors and paramedical staff should be posted permanently in the PHC and their services should be made available throughout the day.

No specific project

4, Improvement in basic facilities in PHCs and sub-centres Project implemented

5, Improvement in in-patient facility of CHC Project implemented through BP

6, Casualty unit needs to be established in PHC Not implemented

7. Provision for local purchase of some essential medicines. Dept project 8. Development of Ayurvedic dispensary building Project implemented for

own building 9. Provision of small drinking water project and more public

taps especially in fisheries and highland area of the GP. Project implemented

10 Repair work should be undertaken to clean unused public ponds and wells in the GPVnew wells

Project implemented

11 proper drainage system should be implemented to drain off water

Project implemented

12 Establishment of a waste disposal unit in GP Project implemented, but not operational due to public protest

13 Provision of a slaughter house in centralized area to reduce dumping of animal/bird wastes in open places

Not implemented

4. Kumbalangi GP (Palluruthi Block & Ernakulam District)

Kumblangi is a small island Grama Panchayat, surrounded by backwaters and rivers on its three sides near the city of Cochin. The GP consists of 11 wards (9th plan) and spreads over an area of 15.21 Sq. Kilometers. Fishing is the main activity of the GP. Agriculture is another imponant occupation in the GP. Paddy cultivation is one of the major cultivation in the GP. The GP has been named as model fisheries village in 10th plan.

The following were the list of demands originated in special GS meetings held prior to the publication of Development report of the GP in 1996-97.

143

Productive Sector

Demands -Fisheries Projects Implemented in 9th Plan

1. Awareness campaigns against exploitation of fish resources in the backwaters

Not implemented

2. Single window system of all institutions under fisheries through Matsya bhawan

Not implemented

3. Coop, fisheries societies to be formed Not implemented 4. Fish processing units/ ice factories to be set up. Not implemented 5. Sluices /Bunds should be constructed to prevent salination of

water in Pokkali fields Implemented

6. Training for scientific rearing of prawn/fishes Not implemented 7. Unused public ponds to be cleaned. Implemented

8. Streamlining of fishing nets in backwaters for transport

Not implemented due to court cases (but implemented during 10th

plan)

Not mentioned in DR Distribution of boats and nets for fishermen (3 projects )

Not mentioned in DR Distribution of nets for fishermen (3 projects )

Demands -Agriculture Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1. Distribution of seeds, fertilizers, pump sets and construction of bore wells at subsidized rates for facilitating cultivation

Projects implemented for paddy, coconut and vegetable

2. Activation of Paddy Samithis through various support prog, such as Methiyathram and tiller

Projects implemented partial mechanization of paddy

3. Scientific testing of soil by Agri.Dept and impart technical advice to farmers

Project implemented , results not utilized by farmers

4. Agri. Marketing Mechanism Not implemented 5. Construction of pathways to paddy fields Not implemented. 6. Cleaning of small rivulets and ponds Projected implemented 7. Supply riverine alluvial soil in cultivable areas Not implemented 8. Fin. assistance to coconut farmers to cut down diseased trees and

replant new trees. Project implemented

9. To drain off excess water in paddy fields Project implemented

144

Demands -Animal husbandry sector Projects implemented in 9th plan

1 Opening up of a new Vet. Hospital Not implemented 2 Two more ICDP centres to be opened . Not implemented 3 Assistance to farmers for poultry and duck-rearing project implemented 4 Assistance to farmers for goat /cattle -rearing project implemented 5 Assistance for fodder production through supply of seeds project implemented 6 Milk Societies to be formed for every three wards project implemented 7 Vaccination for animals project implemented 8 Need for establish slaughter house in the GP Not implemented 9 Awareness programmes and training on new opportunities

in Animal husbandry sector Not implemented

Service Sector

Demands- Education, Social welfare Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1 Institutions such as Vocational HS, ITC to be opened Not implemented 2 More Nurseries, Balawadies to be opened in fisheries area Project implemented 2 Strengthening of Infrastructure/facilities in schools. Project implemented 3 PTA in schools should be activated for this purpose. Project implemented 4 Toys/ teaching aids to be supplied in Anganwadies. Project implemented 5 Assistance to Anganwadies for nutritional food Project implemented 6 Monitoring mechanism to oversee implementation of

activities in schools. Project implemented

7 Establishment of public play ground. Not implemented 8 Establishment of libraries in all wards. Not implemented

Demands-Health, Sanitation & Drinking Water Projects implemented in 9th Plan 1. Awareness prog, on optimum use of drinking water Project implemented 2. Priority should be given to open more taps in these wards,

where there exists drinking water problem. Project implemented

3. Establishment of 30 bed inpatient facility at CHC plan Implemented, but partly operational due to poor staff strength

4. Postmortem unit, X- ray, Lab facilities in CHC, Specialist doctors to be posted as per CHC pattern

Not implemented

5. The activities of Sub-Centre should be streamlined and service of JPHN for every two wards.

Not implemented

6. Latrine should be provided for households Project implemented 7. Setting up of compost units within households. Not implemented 8. Public wells and ponds to be cleaned and make it available

for drinking water. Implemented but not effective

145

5. Vengoor GP (Koovappadi Block & Ernakulam District)

Vengoor GP covers a geographical area of 248 Sq Kms, one of the largest GPs in the State. The Grama Panchayat is blessed with Nature's Grace with hills,. River Periyar flows through the GP, surrounded by lush green forest in the east and slopes and valleys on the other sides. The only Scheduled Tribe colony in Ernakulam district Known as 'Ponginchuvadu Colony' is situated in this GP. Vengoor is basically an agrarian village, with majority of its population earning its livelihood from agriculture and allied sectors. Out of the total 248 Sqw. Kms, only 39.9 Sq. Kms of land are useful for human inhabitation and the rest of the land are covered by forest and water resources.

Productive Sector

Demands -Agriculture Projects implemented during 9th

Plan1. Scientific testing of soil by Agri. Department and impart

technical advice to farmers Implemented in a limited scale

2. Construction of side protection walls in rivulets for facilitating irrigation activities.

Project implemented extensively

3. Construction of check dams and Lift Irrigation Project implemented but not effective

4. Agri. Marketing Mechanism Not implemented 5. Renovation of ponds and Installation of pump sets for

Irrigation Project implemented

6. Construction of ramps/farm roads. Project implemented 7. Supply of seedlings and manures at a concessional rate. Project implemented 8. Fin. assistance to coconut farmers to cut down diseased trees

and replant new trees. Project implemented for one year for all wards

9. Promote group forming practices Not implemented

Demands -Animal Husbandry Sector Projects implemented during 9th Plan

1. Construct own building for Vetenary Hospital Project implemented 2. Basic facilities such as electricity and drinking water

and modern equipments to be providedProject implemented in a limited scale, but completed in 10th plan

3. Awareness camps for farmers on cattle rearing Project implemented 4. Assistance to farmers for poultry Project implemented 5. Assistance to farmers for goat -rearing Not implemented 6. Assistance to farmers for cattle -rearing Project implemented for SC

groups 7. Vaccination for animals Project implemented 8. Mini dairy units to be established Not implemented

146

Service Sector

Demands- Education, Social welfare Projects implemented during 9th

Plan 1. Basic infrastructure/facilities in many schools should be

strengthened. Project implemented

2. facilities to be provided for pre-primary education Project implemented in one school only

3. Talented students to be identified and adequate support facilities to nurture their talents

Not implemented

4. Higher educational institutions and Co-ed. Colleges should be established in GP

High school upgraded to Plus two level

5. PTA in schools should be activated. FT As activated through voluntary support

6. Toys/ teaching aids to be supplied in Anganwadies. Project implemented 7. Provision for nutritional food in all Anganwadies Project implemented 8. Own buildings for Anganwadies Project implemented for some

Anganwadies.

Demands -Health .Sanitation and Drinking Water Projects implemented during 9th

Plan 1. Existing PHC to be upgraded with inpatient facilty with

operation theatre and mortuary unit. Project implemented with BP assistance However, OT and MU not implemented

2. Availability of essential medicines should be ensured at the PHC itself.

Assistance through Health Department

3. Availability of generator in PHC Not implemented 4. Service of Doctors should be made available throughout the

day Not implemented

5. Renovation of the Ayurvedic hospital at Nedungpara Project implemented (own building )

6. Health awareness campaign/medical camps Project implemented 7. Medical check up in schools Not implemented 8. Churumudi irrigation / Vakkuvalli water supply scheme to

be commissioned for solving water SS Churumudi project implemented

9. Public wells and ponds to be cleaned and make it available for drinking water.

Implemented in a limited scale

10. Sanitary Latrines to be provided to households Project implemented Not specified in DR Project implemented for supply of

medicines in Ayurvedic dispensary

147

Neendakara GP (Chavara block & Kollam District)

Neendakara Panchayat is situated along the Alappuzha- Kollam National Highway, about 9 Km from Kollam. In 1953, Indo-Norwegian Fisheries Community Project started in Neendakara igniting the development of the Panchayat. However, the momentum did not last for long and Neendakara continues to be a backward Panchayat in many respects. It is a mineral rich land which is not utilized fully at the same time the presence of minerals in large quantity is pausing a threat in the form of various diseases such as cancer to the humans. Considering the land usage pattern of the Panchayat, around 46.7% is coconut cultivation which has turned into non-profitable because of the diseases, presence of salt water and high priced human labour. The development report of Neendakara Panchayat identifies the potential areas for generating income, problems in the respective areas and ways to overcome these limitations.

.

The following were the list of demands originated in special GS meetings held prior to the publication of Development report of the GP in 1996-97.

Productive Sector

Demands -Fisheries Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1 Distribution of fishing boat for fishermen Not implemented 2 Distribution of nets for fishermen Implemented as self

employment programme

3 Construct bunds in backwaters so as to make prawn farming possible

Not implemented

4 For processing fish, cold storage to be provided Not implemented 5 Financial help through fish co-operative societies Not implemented 6 Ensure smooth functioning of the existing fishermen training

centre. Not implemented

7 Ensure adequate facilities for marketing the fresh catch at reasonable price

Not implemented

8 Unused public ponds to be cleaned Not implemented

148

Demands -Agriculture Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1 Scientific testing of soil by Agri.Dept and imparting technical advice to farmers

Implemented on a limited scale by conducting awareness camps

2 Seeds and saplings in time to farmers for paddy and coconut Implemented 3 Supply of pesticides / sprayers to farmers-coconut Implemented 4 Awareness programes on agricultural activities Implemented 5 Irrigation facilities to summer crops in all wards Not implemented 6 Encourage farmers to venture into profitable fields like floriculture,

fish farming, mushroom and medicinal plants cultivationImplemented (limited scale )

7 Construct bunds to prevent salination of water. Not implemented 8 Encourage implementation of group farming system esp. plantain

cultivation Not implemented

9. Fin. assistance to coconut farmers to cut down diseased trees and replant new trees.

Implemented in all wards

Demands -Animal husbandry sector &SSI Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1 Improvement in infrastructural facilities in Vet. Hospital Implemented 2 Encourage Mini dairy units for milk production Implemented 3 Assistance to farmers for poultry and duck-rearing Implemented 4 Goat rearing units for meat production Implemented 5 Provision of training on modernisation of coir units Not implemented 6 Strengthen coir co-operative societies Not implemented 7 Establish coir factories Not implemented 8 Insurance for cattle project implemented 9 vaccination for animals project implemented

Not specified in DR Self employment project for coir production

Not specified in DR Self employment project for readymade units, sweet units, lime units and others.

149

Service Sector

Demands-Health, Sanitation and Drinking Water Projects implemented in 9th Plan 1. Specialized doctors to be posted in the Govt. hosp. Not implemented 2. Extend the working hours of the hospital. Reinstate

the working of children's ward and maternity wardNot implemented

3. Improvement in infrastructural facilities of two sub-centres

Project implemented

4. prepare master plan for the removal of biological waste from the hospital

Not implemented

5. Reinstate the working of a unit of Baba Atomic Research Centre as the area is prone for skin disease and cancer in the mineral rich area

Project implemented by setting up by a medical unit BP, matching contribution by GP.

6. Housing facilities for fishermen / weaker sections Project implemented 7. Latrine facilities to be provided for households Implemented through department

funds 8. Permit the transport of waste from fish industry only

during nights through the national highwayImplemented in a limited scale

9. Organize a massive drive for the revival of wells and ponds

Implemented in a limited scale

10. Repair the bore wells which are lying unusable Implemented by BP. 11. Repair of the leakage of pipes Implemented in a limited scale 12. Not specified in DR Supply of medicines to ayurveda

dispensary

Demands- Education, Social welfare Projects implemented in 9th Plan 1 Improvement in infrastructure facilities such as

buildings for schools , teaching aids implemented in a limited scale

2 one boys' high school and one fisheries technical school may be started.

Not implemented

3 Distr. of text books/other materials for students from weaker sections

Not implemented

4 Involvement of parents in educational matters by strengthening of PTAs in schools

Implemented through PTAs

5 Own buildings for Anganwadies Not implemented 6 Improvement in infra facilities of Anganwadies. project implemented 7 Provision for nutritional food in all Anganwadies project implemented 8 Welfare programmes for old age centres , balawadies &

women centres Not implemented

150

Sooranadu North GP (Sasthamkotta Block & Kollam District)

Sooranadu Panchayat has a well drawn development report which identifies the thrust areas for development, problems faced by these areas and the most viable solutions for these problems. The areas which call for immediate attention are identified as Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Industry, Education, Health & Sanitation and Infrastructure.

The following were the list of demands originated in special GS meetings and other public suggestions held prior to the publication of Development report of the GP in 1996-97.

Productive Sector

Demands -Agriculture Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1. Construction of channels and side walls for the canals Project implemented

2. Repair of shutters/ lift irrigation pumps Project implemented in two areas

3. Construction of bunds for irrigation Project implemented 4. Kallada irrigation project: Extn of pipeline Not implemented 5. Trenching the paddy fields and conversion of paddy fields into

construction sites should be stopped immediately. Voluntary support : awareness camps through groups

6. For the irrigation of coconut farms, drip irrigation is to be implemented effectively and steps are to

Not implemented

7. Cutting down of disease affected coconut trees. Project implemented in almost all wards

8. Implement group fanning for paddy and make provision for production and distribution of high quality seeds.

Project implemented, a.

9. Provision of tractors, tiller, methiyathram to Paddy Samithis Project implemented through samithis

10. Construction of pathways to paddy fields Project implemented widely in paddy fields

11. Supply of pump sets to farmers Project implemented 12. Availability of good quality saplings and provision of green

manures and pump- sets for agriculture Project implemented

13. Promotion of irrigation through GP ponds Project implemented 14. Promotion of Rubber, cashew and pepper cultivation Not implemented 15. Effective marketing mechanism for agricultural commodities Not implemented 16. Not included in DR Implemented productivity

linked bonus to paddy farmers

151

Demands -Animal Husbandry Sector

Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1. Set up a Fodder production factory by Govt. or co-operative basis which can distribute fodder the farmers at reasonable price

Not implemented

2. Support for grass cultivation Project implemented 3. Awareness camps of opportunities in AH sector Project implemented 4. Opening up of 5 sub-centres of veterinary hospital Project implemented 2-3

sub-centres opened 5. Improvement in Infrastructural facib'ties of Vetenary hospital

including refrigerator ,lab, and own vehicle Project implemented Infrastructural facilities provided ie. Fridge, instruments

6. Assistance to farmers for poultry Project implemented, not successful

7. Assistance to fanners for goat /cow rearing Project implemented to some extent

8. Provide vaccination for the domestic animals Project implemented 9. Utilize the available water bodies for fresh water fish and

prawn farming

Project implemented

10. Establish cold storages and markets for fisheries. Not implemented 11. Need for establish slaughter house in the GP Project implemented 12. Implement welfare schemes for fishermen. Not implemented not 13. milk processing unit may be started in the GP Not implemented. 14. Milk societies to be established for each ward Project implemented

in almost all wards

Demands -Industry Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1. Encourage people who are interested in investing in SSI units. Project implemented 2. A co-operative society to be formed for the collection, processing

and marketing of coconut products. Not implemented

3. Establishment of Ready-made garment unit by Women as part of self employment units

Project implemented through women groups

4. Start new Khadi board units in the panchayat. Not implemented

152

Service Sector

Demands- Education, Social welfare Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1. Upgradation of HS Institutions into Vocational HS, and new courses like para-medical .dairy DD to be opened

No specific project (HS upgraded to +2)

2. PTA in schools should be activated for this purpose No specific project

3. The infrastructure/facilities in many schools should be strengthened, (add. buildings, toilets, kichen shed)

Project implemented

4. Promotion of school health clubs, first-aid kits to schools Project implemented

5. Fill up the vacancies of teachers in all schools before the beginning of the academic year.

Project implemented

6. Opening of more Anganwadies in GP/ construction of compound walls for existing Anganwadies

Project implemented

7. Toys/ teaching aids to be supplied in Anganwadies. Project implemented 8. Provision for nutritional food in all Anganwadies Project implemented. 9. Assistance to libraries Project implemented, 2 libraries

started functioning 10. Programmes to strengthen literacy activities Project implemented on a

wider scale 11. Not mentioned in DR Remedial tuition for students

from weaker section through the support of PT As

12. Not mentioned in DR Promotion of cultural activities for students

Demands -Health, Sanitation and Drinking Water Projects implemented in 9th

Plan 1 The primary health centre may be raised to level of CHC. Not implemented 2 Establishment of sub-centres in GP Project implemented, in

addition, mobile medical camp were conducted

3 Improvement in infra .facilties of PHC Project implemented 4 New building for the Homeo Dispensary Project implemented 5 Building for Ayurveda hospital Project implemented

6 Build toilet facilities for all the eligible families under the "rural Sanitation" programme

Project implemented through Dept scheme

7 Necessary steps may be taken to solve malnutrition among children, pregnant women this issue

Project implemented

8 Cleaning of all wells in the GP and digging of new wells, repair of tube wells Project implemented

9 Extend pipe connection through Water SS schemes Project implemented 10 Crematorium in GP Not implemented 11 Establishment of Public market Project implemented 12 Not mentioned in DR Establishment of old age

homes 13 Not mentioned in DR Supply of medicines to

homoeo dispensary

153

Vilakudi GP (Pathanapuram Block & Kollam District)

Vilakudi Grama panchayat is traditionally known as an Agrarian village. The GP lies in the high land region of Kollam district. The land is blessed with rich flora and fauna, comprising lush green hills, slopes and valleys. As per 1991 census, the population of GP is 30433. Out of the total population, 24.7% is engaged in various economic activities. About 54% of the working population is engaged in agriculture sector. While 20% constitute farmers at various levels, 31% is engaged as agricultural labourers. 13% are involved in small industries located in GP.

Productive Sector

Demands-Agriculture Projects implemented in 9th

Plan

1. Comprehensive soil testing by Krishibhawan in the GP. Not implemented

2. Awareness programs to be conducted on modern crop practices.

Not implemented

3. Modern machines for sowing, harvesting to be introduced in GP

Implemented (tractor cum tiller for GP )

4. Construction of Bunds/shutters in rivulets. Implemented on limited scale

5. 24 km long rivulet bed to be built with quarry stones to save standing crops during rains.

Implemented on limited scale

6. Construct VCBs and check dams in the rivulets flowing through the GP. Canals should be made activated.

Implemented on limited scale

7. Renovation of public ponds for irrigation Project implemented 8. Provision of pump set to farmers for irrigation Project implemented 9. Productivity Bonus to be given as incentive to farmers to

undertake paddy cultivation. Project implemented

10. Construction of ramps /farm roads Project implemented, but mainly used as farm roads

11. timely availability of seeds and seedlings, fertilizers for crops Project implemented 12. Assistance to coconut farmers for remove disease affected

trees and spraying of pesticides for tackling mandari disease Project implemented

13. Establish Agriculture marketing mechanism in the GP Marketing society established but not operational

14. Implementation of watershed development programe Project started but thereafter no follow up activities

15. Promotion of vegetable cultivation Project for one year 16, Group insurance for standing crops Not implemented

154

Demands- Animal Husbandry Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1. A fodder production unit could be established with the financial and technical assistance of GP /promotion of grass cultivation

Not implemented

2. Opening of sub-centres of vet.hospital in some wards. Project implemented 3. Assistance should be given to start chicken production units

in the GP, thereby enhancing production of eggs and meat. Not implemented

4. set up mini dairy units , Cattle rearing of quality breeds Project implemented 5. Assistance to farmers for goat rearing Project implemented 6. Assist, to farmers for cattle sheds Project implemented 7. Vaccination should be given to hen / dogs Project implemented 8. Fund support to milk societies to strengthen infrastructure

facilities such as storage ,milk tester etc. Not implemented

9. Establishment of Market place for sale of animals not implemented 10. Insurance facility for cattle project implemented

Demands- Industry Projects implemented in 9th

Plan 1 Ensure availability of raw cashew on regular basis for cashew

units in the GP. Not implemented

2 At present, the waste products from cashew are dumped in to the nearby rivulets. This should be stopped

Not implemented

3 Necessary infrastructural facilities should be made available to workers, serving in these units. For eg., toilets, canteen, etc.

Not implemented

4 Need for introduce agro processing centers in the GP for creating more employment opportunities - for instance rubber processing, bamboo products

Not implemented

155

Service Sector

Demands- Education Projects implemented in 9th

Plan I. Provision of repair of buildings, partiti on screens in class rooms, drinking water ,

toilets compound walls, bumps etc. should be provided to all schools. Project implemented

2. Pre-primary classes should be started for every LPS in the GP. Not implemented 3. The books and teaching aids should be made available at the beginning of the

academic year. Not implemented

4. Free text books and scholarship to students from weaker sections. Measures to counter drop-out rates

Not implemented

5. PTA should be strengthened in schools Not implemented 6. improvement in literacy activities Project implemented

7. Construction of new building for 22 Anganwadis Project implemented, (50% of Angs have own buildings)

8. Provision of necessary infrastructure facilities including toys to Anganwadis Project implemented 9. Provision for nutritional food in all Anganwadies Project implemented 10. Setting up of libraries in 5 wards, assist, for own building Not implemented, (assistance

provided to libraries for purchase of new books.)

11. Supply of TV sets to libraries Project implemented 12. Improvement in Play ground facilities in schools Not implemented

Demands- Health, Sanitation and Drinking Water Projects implemented in 9th Plan

1 Provision for more facilities including beds in PHC. Implemented 2 Availability of doctors to be ensured throughout the day Project implemented 3 infrastructure facilities for PHC Project implemented

4 Own buildings for sub-centres Project implemented

5 Slaughter house Project implemented

6 Separate market place for fish business, etc. Not implemented 7 Proper waste removal method for cashew processing units Not implemented 8 Financial assistance for construction of latrines to households. Project implemented 9 Awareness programs and financial assistance should be given to households

to convert household waste into compost fertilizers. Not implemented

10 GP assistance for purchase of land, motor, pipelines for common drinking water projects and its maintenance.

Project implemented

11 Repair and deepening of all public ponds, taps and Chlorinisation of all wells

Project implemented

156

Bibliography

1. Anand, Jaya S, 2002, KRPLLD, Centre for Development Studies; Self-Help Groups in Empowering Women: Case Study of Selected SHGs and NHGs.

2. Baiocchi, Gianpaolcr. Participation, Activism and Politics: The Porto Alegre Experiment in Participatory Governance.

3. Bandyopadhyay D, Saila K.Ghosh, Buddhadeb Ghosh, Economic and Political Weekly September 20, 2003: Dependency VS Autonomy- Identity Crisis of India's Panchayat

4. Bardhan, Pranab and Mukherjee, Dileep, Economic and Political Weekly February 28, 2004: Poverty Alleviation efforts of Panchayats in West Bengal.

5. Charvak, 2000, KRPLLD, CDS: From Decentralization of Planning to People's planning: Experiences of the Indian States of West Bengal and Kerala.

6. Chathukulam Jos, John M S, Economic and Political Weekly, December 7, 2002: Five Years of Participatory Planning in Kerala; Rhetoric and Reality.

7. Development Reports; All selected GPs.

8. Estelitta. S, Elsy C.R, Jayasree Sankar.S, Sushama P.K, and Pathiyoor Gopinath, State Planning Board, 2000: GALASA for Sustenance of Rice Culture in Kerala.

9. Gopinathan Nair N.D, KRPLLD, CDS, 2000; People's Planning in Kerala; A Case Study of Two Village Panchayats.

10. Gopinathan Nair N.D, and Krishnakumar P: Public Participation and Sustainability of Community Assets Created under People's Planning Programme in Kerala: Selected Case Studies.

11. Government of India: CAG Report on Local Bodies.

12. Government of India, Planning Commission, 2001: Report of the Task Force on Panchyati Raj Institutions (PRIs).

13. Government of Kerala, State Planning Board: Aasoothrana Sahayi; different editions.

14. Government of Kerala, State Planning Board, 2003 & 2004; Economic Review.

15. Government of Kerala, 1997: Committee on Decentralization of Powers-Final Report.

157

16. Government of Kerala, Eighth Five Year Plan, 1992-1997, Accounts.

17. Government of Kerala, Ninth Five Year Plan, 1997-2002, Accounts.

18. Government of Kerala, Department of Economics and Statistics, 2004: Report on Cost of Cultivation 2002-03.

19. Government of Kerala, Department of Fisheries, 2004: Inland Fisheries Statistics of Kerala, 2004.

20. Government of Kerala, Department of Fisheries, 2005: Marine Fisheries Statistics of Kerala, 2005.

21. Government of Kerala, Western Ghat Cell, 2002: Watershed Management Practices in India.

22. Government of Kerala, 1999: Report of the Expert Committee on Paddy Cultivation.

23. Government of Kerala, 1996: Report of the 1st Finance Commission.

24. Government of Kerala, 2001: Report of the 2nd Finance Commission.

25. Government of Kerala, 1999: Kerala Panchayati Raj Amendment Act.

26. Government of Kerala, 1994: Kerala Municipality Act.

27. Government of Karnataka, 2002: Report of the 2nd Finance Commission.

28. Government of Karnataka, 2002: Report of the Working Group on Decentralisation - Department of Rural Development and Panchyati Raj.

29. Gulati, I.S and Issac, Thomas T.M, 1998: People's Campaign for Decentralized Planning-An Experiment in Participatory Development.

30. Harilal K.N, 2004: Reforming Local Governance Structures in India- Lessons from the Kerala Experiment.

31. Heller, Patrick, 2000: The Politics of Decentralization in Kerala, South Africa and Porto Alegre.

32. Issac, Thomas and Franke, Richard, 2000: Local Democracy and Local Developments- The peoples campaign for decentralized planning in Kerala.

158

33. Jeromi P.D, April 2003, Economic and Political Weekly: What Ails Kerala Economy: A Sectoral Exploration.

34. Jinraj P V, 1999, KRPLLD, CDS: Performance Evaluation of Krishi Bhavan Set-up in Kerala.

35. Jose, R.V, KRPLLD, CDS, 1999: Inland Fishermen and Inland Fishing- A Study at Neelamperoor Village (Alapuzha district).

36. Joseph C.J, 2001, KRPLLD, CDS; Beneficiary Participation in Irrigation Water

Management: The Kerala Experience.

37. Kannan, K.P: People's Planning, Kerala's Dilemma.

38. Kerala Sasthra Sahitya Parishad, August 2005 & September 2005; Sasthragathi.

39. Mathew Roy, Menon P Madhu, 1999, KRPLLD, CDS; Participatory rural marketing activities of KHDP-An analysis.

40. Mohanakumar S, Economic and Political Weekly, April 20, 2002: From People's Plan to Plan sans People.

41. Muralidharan, |Sarada, 2005: Negotiating Framework for Local Development: The Role of District Planning Committees- An Analysis.

42. Nair R.P, 2004, KRPLLD, CDS; Mobilization of Resources by Panchayats:

Potentials and Feasibilities (A Case Study of Six Selected Panchayats in Kerala).

43. NATPAC (Mimeograph): Study of Village and Panchayat roads -Road status of Kerala, report No.2 .

44. NATPAC(Mimeograph): Study of Village and Panchayat roads of Kerala Research report.

45. NIRD, K. Siva Subramanyam. & R.C. Choudhary, 2001: Devolution of Functions and Finances on Panchayats in India.

46. NIRD 2003: Rural Development Statistics 2001.

47. NIRD, 2002: India Panchayati Raj Report 2001: Volume II.

48. Patnaik, Prabhat, 2004: A Theoretical Note on Kerala-Sryle Decentralized Planning

159

49. Plan Documents; All selected LSGIs.

50. Pradeep Narayanan, Economic and Political Weekly 2003 June 21; Empowerment through participation- How effective is this approach?

51. Prema A, KRPLLD, CDS; Evaluation of Agricultural Projects under People's Plan Campaign in Malappuram District.

52. Ramachandran Padma, 2004, KRPLLD, CDS; Study of Decision-making Process in Selected Panchayats and Municipalities under the People's Planning Programme.

53. Seema T N, 2001, KRPLLD, Centre for Development Studies: Performance of Anganwadi Centres in Kerala: An evaluation and experiment to develop a model centre with community participation.

54. Shakun Palihirya "Madhya Pradesh decentralized governance hampered by financial constraints" Economic and political weekly March 15, 2003.

55. Shubham Choudhury, K.N. Harilal and Patrick Heller, 2004, CDS: Does Decentralization Make a Difference? A Study of the Peoples' Campaign for Decentralized Planning in the Indian State of Kerala.

56- Sudhakaran M N, 2004, KRPLLD, CDS: Plan Integration in the Context of Multi-level Planning-A Study based on Thrissur District.

57. Thomas E.M, January-December 2004, Administrative Change: Decentralized Planning and Transfer of Development Functions; A Case Study of Four Village Panchayats in Kerala.

58. Vaidyanathan A: Watershed Development: Reflections on Recent Developments.

59- Vijayanand, S.M: Poverty Reduction through Decentralization-Lessons from the Experience of Kerala State in India.

60. World Bank, 2004: Fiscal Decentralization to Rural Governments in India.

61- World Development Report 2004.

160

Project Team

Project Coordinators

1 Shri. M Mathisekaran Ex-Director, REO, Chennai

2 Shri. S Chandersekhar Director, REO, Chennai

Project Directors

1 Shri. P K Abdul Kareem Senior Research Officer

2 Shri. Antony Cyriac Senior Research Officer

Headquarters New Delhi

1 Shri. D S Sajwan Tab. Clerk

Charts & Maps Units, Planning Commission

1 Shri. S K Sharma Technical Officer

2 Shri. Praveen Kumar Artist

Regional Evaluation Office, Chennai

1 Shri G Subramany Economic Officer, REO, Chennai

2 Shri. P S Raghavan Economic Officer, REO, Chennai

3 Shri. Radhakrishnan Economic Officer, REO, Chennai

4 Shri. M Parthasarathy Economic Investigator

5 Mrs. Portia Louis Economic Investigator

Project Evaluation Office, Thiruvananthapuram

1 Shri. V Nagarajan Economic Officer

2 Mrs. Sreedevi Narayanan Economic Investigator

3 Mrs. Mercy Economic Investigator

4 Mr. Lakshmi LDC

161

Varahan

Project Evaluation Office, Bangalore

1 Mrs. P T Subha Research Officer

2 Shri. Rajkumar Economic Officer

3 Shri. K V Suresh Economic Officer

4 Shri. T C Sunderamani Economic Investigator

-----------

162