Critical evaluation of rural development policies and programmes.pptx

This presentation provides a critical evaluation of rural development policies and programmes implemented in various parts of the world. It explores the challenges and limitations of these policies, and examines their effectiveness in addressing the needs and priorities of rural communities.

The presentation begins by defining rural development and highlighting its significance in promoting economic growth and reducing poverty in rural areas. It then discusses various rural development policies and programmes, including those aimed at improving infrastructure, promoting agricultural development, and providing social services to rural communities.

The presentation also critically evaluates these policies and programmes, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. It discusses the limitations of top-down approaches to rural development, the importance of community participation, and the need for policies that address the root causes of poverty in rural areas.

In addition, the presentation examines the role of international organizations, NGOs, and local governments in promoting rural development. It discusses the challenges of coordinating and implementing development efforts, and the need for partnerships and collaboration among stakeholders.

Overall, this presentation provides a comprehensive and critical evaluation of rural development policies and programmes, and offers insights and recommendations for improving their effectiveness in promoting sustainable rural development.

1. ANNAMALAI UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF PLANT PATHOLOGY PGS-501 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, RESEARCH ETHICS AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES CRITICAL EVALUATION OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES BY R.LOKESH I -M. sc .,Agriculture Plant pathology Annamalai university TOPIC:

2. Over the years the functioning of rural development policies and programmes and their impacton the poor has attracted a great deal of attention. Numerous studies – several under the suspices of the government, and many more based on independent surveys, micro studies and analyses of available macro data – have highlighted their achievements as well as weaknesses. A healthy and wholesome feature is the extraordinarily free and open discussion of deficienciesof particular schemes, the relative merits of different interventions and suggestions for restructuring and reorientation. However, they have received strong critiques as well. Officialclaims of the number of beneficiaries, works carried out, additions to productive assets and employment generated are unreliable and exaggerated. Poor targeting is reflected in the high proportion of non-poor and other non-eligible persons among the beneficiaries. INTRODUCTION

3. What is rural development programmes? Rural development means  an action plan for the economic and social upliftment of rural areas . It aims at improving the quality of life of people living in rural areas. It focuses on the action for the development of areas that are lagging behind in the overall development of the rural economy.

4. Leakages due to inappropriate works, inefficient implementation and corruption are high. Quality of assets provided/created under these programmes is poor and their impact on income level of beneficiaries dubious. Assets and schemes are frequently not appropriate to the needs and potentials of particular regions or groups. There is little consultation with, not to speak of involvement of local communities generally and target groups in particular, in deciding and implementing schemes.

5. Lack of accountability remains a major problem. The structure, content, and funding of these programmes remain mostly in the hands of the central government. There is considerable overlap among these schemes as well as between them and development schemes included under the normal state plans. Typically each programme is administered by a separate agency each with its own line hierarchy and operating independently.

6. These features, taken together with the rigidity of central guidelines, make for fragmentation and duplication of schemes. Coordination is difficult; so is monitoring of accomplishments in terms of efficacy of targeting, quality of works actually completed and impact on the beneficiaries. The programmes tend to emphasize loans and subsidies and provision of current wage employment rather than ensuring that they are used to augment productive capacity for achieving a higher level of employment and income on a sustained basis. The selection of beneficiaries, the distribution of loans and subsidies, and the recovery of loans offer much scope for patronage and corruption at the political and bureaucratic levels. The public distribution system (PDS) does not accomplish its ostensible aim of ensuring essential consumer goods to the poor at reasonable prices.

7. Problems / Constraints in Implementation of Rural Development Programmes Inadequate Coordination Inadequate funds Leakage of benefits Low Sustaining Impact Dominance of welfare over productivity More Generalized Programme

8. Inadequate Coordination As per the Guidelines all the developmental programmes in the rural areas are to be planned / formulated by DRDA in corporation and coordination of other departments and financial institution, agencies of peoples representatives etc. It is often observed that these agencies, organization failed to maintain proper coordination among each other. All the agencies / organizations are trying their best to stick to their own principles and ideologies. In the process cooperation and coordination are not maintained. The Agencies responsible for the formulation, implementation and evaluation of the Rural Development Programme are required to maintain good coordination among them.

9. Inadequate funds The rural development programmes require more capital investment. The Economic Sectors of rural areas remain more or less traditional. These sectors also adopt traditional methods of production. In order to attain rural development the transformation of technologies is required. The conditions of weaker section people are not improved even after 50 years of planned economic development. The upliftment of their socio-economic condition also require high dose of investment. In our country, a fixed amount of funds are allocated for a particular rural development programme. These are distributed among States/Districts as per the importance, such as geography, concentration of weaker section population etc. The share of the Fund to cope with the local problems seems to be inadequate.

10. Leakage of benefits It is observed that, there is considerable leakage of benefits to non-target sectors and groups. Most of the rural development programmes are conceived to improve the Socio-economic condition of the weaker section like small, marginal farmers, agricultural and nonagricultural labourers, rural artisans, scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and deprived women etc. It is observed that benefits are not properly reaching to these classes.

11. Low Sustaining Impact It is observed that a considerable number of rural developments programmes/schemes having no or little sustaining impact for changing the socio-economic status of the beneficiaries. The assets created from the credit assistance of financial institutions and subsidies of the development / administrative agencies are short lived (Particularly incase of livestock assets) failed to push the 95 beneficiaries up on the scale of production and productivity. This is perhaps due to the existence of low or no development approach / thoughts. This factor again dominated by the lack of awareness about the programmes.

12. Dominance of welfare over productivity In India, most of the rural development programmes are based on the basic welfare principles. These schemes are backed by both credit and subsidy components. Besides, development of infrastructure facilities is also emphasized under these programmes. It is also evident that provision of long term credit and based on the principle of write off by political parties also have adverse effect on the productivity of economic sectors. It is observed that the subsidy component is often extending up to 100 percent in some selected schemes and class of beneficiaries. This reduces the productivity motive and attitude of the beneficiaries.

13. More Generalized Programme Rural Development Programmes have been conceived for the all-round development of the rural areas. However, the rural development Programmes are launched in the context of general problems of the rural areas. It fails to give importance to some particular and area issues. The rural development programmers should be micro in nature and growth oriented based on real values.