Governing the Rural Employment Rights and Hegemony in

  • Slides: 39
Download presentation
Governing the Rural Employment, Rights and Hegemony in Neoliberal India Dayabati Roy

Governing the Rural Employment, Rights and Hegemony in Neoliberal India Dayabati Roy

Introduction In 2005, the United Progressive Alliance government led by the Congress passed the

Introduction In 2005, the United Progressive Alliance government led by the Congress passed the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA), ‘employer of last resort’, which guarantees wage employment to every rural household for one hundred days in a financial year whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work. The objective of the Act is to ensure livelihood security for the ‘most vulnerable people’ living in rural India through creation of durable assets and subsequently providing employment opportunities.

The ministry of Rural Development (GOI) justifies this enactment in the following words in

The ministry of Rural Development (GOI) justifies this enactment in the following words in its official website. ‘While market oriented reforms are necessary to generate faster growth and larger public resources, they do not, on their own, guarantee participatory and equitable growth. Active social policies (such as the MGNREGA), far from detracting from economic reforms, complement these in an essential way. ’

The question arises : In the neo-liberal conditions, when the scholar argues, 'institutional reforms

The question arises : In the neo-liberal conditions, when the scholar argues, 'institutional reforms are pro-market and pro - privatization' (Bhaduri 2008), why the governments intervene into poverty alleviation programmes. Is the extent of state interventions into welfare of the people declining in the contemporary period? Or are there indications of a new form of state-centred (or non-state or non-government) welfare policy interventions, operating at the grass roots, seeking to govern the people in a different fashion?

Just after the enactment of the MGNREGA, Rajeev Bhargava (2006) had raised the similar

Just after the enactment of the MGNREGA, Rajeev Bhargava (2006) had raised the similar kind of questions. He states, “the real puzzle is how something like NREGA was even passed in the current climate of hyperantistatism. Do we not know that in this new world order the public provision of public goods is meant to become scarce? How could a new regime of social policy. . be installed in conditions where state intervention in the economy is routinely scoffed at – where the welfare state is widely subjected to moral and economic critique and the market reigns supreme, expected to address even the basic subsistence needs of the people? ”

In this connection I would draw upon three representative views including Bhargava (Ibid) on

In this connection I would draw upon three representative views including Bhargava (Ibid) on why the governments intervene into poverty alleviation programmes in the current climate of ‘hyper antistatism’. The essence of the three representative views seems to be somewhat similar when all of them emphasize on electoral compulsion of different political parties or the question of democracy. Bhargava opines that “the NREGA would never have seen the light of the day without pressure from below. And this pressure would not be forthcoming without political freedoms, if people did not possess the right to vote. No form of accountability is more direct from elections. ”

Jenkins (2012: 29), like Dreze, subscribes to the widely held view that, had the

Jenkins (2012: 29), like Dreze, subscribes to the widely held view that, had the Congress thought it possessed even a remote chance of winning the 2004 general election, it never would have committed, in its election manifesto, no less - to passing employment guarantee legislation of such far-reaching political (and fiscal) significance. But Jenkins also believes that leadership variables played a role as well to ensure that NREGA’s enactment. People associated with National campaign for People’s right to Information and the right to Food campaign were drawn into the National Advisory Committee (NAC). The formation of NAC was a key factor in NREGA’s enactment.

Chatterjee (2008: 53)) states, “the state, with its mechanisms of electoral democracy, becomes the

Chatterjee (2008: 53)) states, “the state, with its mechanisms of electoral democracy, becomes the field for the political negotiation of demands for the transfer of resources, through fiscal and other means, from the accumulation economy to programmes aimed at providing the livelihood needs of the poor. ” Electoral democracy makes it unacceptable for the government to leave the marginalized groups without the means of labour. The question seems to be worthy of consideration when ‘the major characteristic of the contemporary regime of power’ was explained by the scholar as ‘governmentalization of the state’ whereby the ‘regime secures legitimacy not by the participation of citizens in matters of state but by claiming to provide for the well-being of the population’ (Chatterjee 2004: 34).

My argument is that the MGNREGA’s enactment in the main originated as part of

My argument is that the MGNREGA’s enactment in the main originated as part of neoliberal reforms and ‘transnational governmentality’ which introduced new practices of government (Ferguson and Gupta 2002) and also embodied very different kind of ideologies and goals from the earlier ones, though the electoral democracy acts as an important factor to push forward this enactment.

While the earlier policy interventions were welfare programmes that provided ‘tangible services and assets’,

While the earlier policy interventions were welfare programmes that provided ‘tangible services and assets’, as Gupta and Sharma (2006) envisage, the contemporary policy regime (like MGNREGA) being an empowerment programme aimed at helping the rural to become autonomous rather than dependent clients of the state waiting for the redistribution of resources.

This research reveals by examining the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act in

This research reveals by examining the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act in the rural hinterland of West Bengal that both in its conceptualization and everyday practices, the employment guarantee programme being far from a ‘right to work’ and also far from concerned with empowerment and self-help characteristics of neoliberal governmentality. It is still rendering the individuals ‘dependent clients of the state’ and hence, it is not the end of welfare and its replacement with workfare, but the simultaneous expansion of both kinds of programmes.

The research also reveals that though the government tries to negotiate the issues of

The research also reveals that though the government tries to negotiate the issues of poverty by framing and implementing some poverty alleviation programmes like MGNREGA, it could impact very little on the lives and livelihoods particularly of the rural poor. And the issues of inequity take new shape and recreate new issues of contestation as a result of the socio-political processes emerged at the grass roots due to implementation of different welfare policies of the governments.

Two important features or political rationalities of Neoliberal Governmentality 1. Foucault’s discussion of neoliberal

Two important features or political rationalities of Neoliberal Governmentality 1. Foucault’s discussion of neoliberal governmentality shows, as Lemke argues, that “the so-called “retreat of the state” is in fact prolongation of government. Neoliberalism is not but the transformation of politics that restructures the power relations of the society. What we observe today is not a diminishment or a reduction of state sovereignty and planning capacities but a displacement from formal to informal techniques of governments and the appearance of new actors on the scene of government (e. g. NGOs) that indicate fundamental transformations in statehood and a new relation between state and civil society actors. ” ( 2000: 11 and Rose and Miller 1992)

2. Neoliberal forms of government also feature not only direct intervention by means of

2. Neoliberal forms of government also feature not only direct intervention by means of empowered and specialized state apparatuses, but also characteristically develop indirect techniques for leading and controlling individuals. The strategy of rendering individual subjects “responsible” entails shifting the responsibility for social risks such as illness, unemployment, poverty etc and for life in society into the domain for which the individual is responsible and transforming it into a problem of “self-care”. One key feature of the neoliberal rationality is the congruence it endeavours to achieve between a responsible and moral individual and an economic-rational individual. ” (Ibid: 12 an also Rose and Miller 1992: 34)

In the Mandate and Objectives section of MGNREGA, it has been written that ‘MGNREGA

In the Mandate and Objectives section of MGNREGA, it has been written that ‘MGNREGA marks a paradigm shift from the previous one because its design is bottom-up, people-centred, demand-driven (where provision of work triggered by the demand for work by wage seekers), self-selecting and right-based. And also, it has an integrated natural resource management and livelihood generation perspective. ’ These words clearly reveal that this Act as a governmental technology encourage entrepreneurship which means, in normative sense, any adult individual in rural India ‘make their decisions, pursue their preferences and seek to maximize the quality of their lives by demanding employment’.

But, while on the other hand, the MGNREGA encourages entrepreneurship, on the other, it

But, while on the other hand, the MGNREGA encourages entrepreneurship, on the other, it limits the sphere of entrepreneurship. The contradiction, in fact, lies in the conceptualization of the Act. Firstly, on the one hand, while it provides the legal guarantee of wage employment on demand recognize it, to some extent, as a ‘right to work’, on the other, it restricts the employment guarantee to only a limited time - 100 days.

The people of Lalgarh responded interestingly in 2008 to the Act which guarantees 100

The people of Lalgarh responded interestingly in 2008 to the Act which guarantees 100 days employment per year for every rural household. I quote a portion from one pamphlet, ‘Why it is only 100 days for us? While you, the government elites, are leading your luxurious lives throughout the year, would we have our meal only for 100 days? If you are really concerned about us, please think about how we, our families, can live throughout the year with self- dignity. ’

Secondly, in the neoliberal regime , ‘when the language of the entrepreneurial individual, endowed

Secondly, in the neoliberal regime , ‘when the language of the entrepreneurial individual, endowed with freedom and autonomy, has come to predominate over almost any other in evaluations of the ethical claims. . . of programmes of government’, the Act provides 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in a financial year not to every individual but only to every rural household. This provision bars not only an individual to make efforts ‘in the energetic pursuit of personal fulfilment. . . ’, but also bars this very Act to turn into a ‘right to work’.

One respondent from the district of Purulia said, “The Government is propagating that this

One respondent from the district of Purulia said, “The Government is propagating that this is a huge project providing hundred days’ work for everyone. But one job card has been issued for my family having 5 -7 members. Hence a few days work for each member of the family is fulfilling the hundred days’ quota. When we are approaching the Panchayat President we are told not to work in the project. We will not be paid anymore. ”

Thirdly and most importantly, the Act provides 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in

Thirdly and most importantly, the Act provides 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in a financial year to every rural household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual work. Manual work means the digging the earth such as renovating or digging a pond or canal, constructing the village muddy road which requires very hard labour. So the rural households or the individuals find very limited choice to make ‘their decisions, pursue their performance and seek to maximize their quality of life’. One woman in Purulia said, “Due to the hard soil, women folk are failing to fulfil the job so as to earn Rs. 100 a day. They would require working 2 -3 days to earn only Rs. 100. Where the soil is soft enough, they can earn Rs. 100 a day. ”

Hence the MGNREGA is, in actual sense, not to be recognized as citizens’ ‘right

Hence the MGNREGA is, in actual sense, not to be recognized as citizens’ ‘right to work’ as very often the government functionaries, the activist intellectuals and NGO personalities do propagate. Instead, MGNREGA is clearly a household or familial right to unskilled manual work for one hundred days.

But the question is whether the state government could provide 100 days employment for

But the question is whether the state government could provide 100 days employment for the jobseeker families in West Bengal? The Joint Secretary in the department of Panchayat and Rural Development stated in 2010, ‘the government could generate so far only less than 50%, i. e. on an average 42%, person days in West Bengal. There a number of hindrances operational before the implementation process of the Act. We have a very limited amount of land to work on in West Bengal. Besides this, it seems to be the most important factor that the rural poor people are not enough aware about the Act. They are not straight forward to demand for work. ’

The Team leader of Pradan, a national level NGO which is a collaborator with

The Team leader of Pradan, a national level NGO which is a collaborator with district administration, Purulia, in the MGNREGA programme, stated, ‘we could not generate options for the landless poor who are the most vulnerable section in the state. We have been working since 2006 but achieved a little in terms of poverty alleviation. The marginal or small peasants who own some amount of land are getting benefitted by means of our work and implementation of MGNREGA. Because they could utilize the effects of the durable assets produced in course of implementation of the Act. ’

After the land was acquired in Singur in 2007, the dispossessed peasants of the

After the land was acquired in Singur in 2007, the dispossessed peasants of the affected villages have got employment in the ‘ 100 days project’ only 715 days on an average in a year from 2007 -2008 to 2008 -2009 (The Citizens Initiative, 2009). The explanation of both CPI (M) and TMC led panchayat is that ‘no infrastructural opening available for employment generation’.

Pratima, the day labourer in Singur region, stated that “The sowing season has passed

Pratima, the day labourer in Singur region, stated that “The sowing season has passed since long and we remained unemployed for the last two three months. How can we arrange food during this period? Now we can get just 10 days work in agriculture. All our work that we used to get in this field has vanished since it was acquired for the Tatas. Hence we have no more work. After acquisition of the land fencing it off, even if we enter the field for grazing our cows and goats, we are accused of pilferage. When we cannot arrange food, how would we be able to continue our children’s study. ” (21. 02 2011)

What is the impact of implementation of NREGA on the economy of the village?

What is the impact of implementation of NREGA on the economy of the village? Mishra, a villager residing near Bankura town, replied, ‘Initially, the villagers were very enthusiastic about the project. But they are no more interested about the project due to the delay of wage payment. It takes 25 days at least to pay the wages. The villagers cannot wait such a long period as they all are day labourers. So, at this moment, there is no demand of jobs and also no impact on the economy of the village. ’

Basanti, the landless peasant woman from the district of 24 Parganas said, Though 100

Basanti, the landless peasant woman from the district of 24 Parganas said, Though 100 days work should be given, we don’t hope to get it ever. Last time we worked in this project in October. Now after three months lapse, we get this work order for 6 days. We have no power and cannot even guess when we will get work next time. We will wait after making applications to get work, may be for another 3 months. Rest of the time we depend on raring our livestock. We have no other option. We are suffering from late-payment. We are poor people, so our subsistence depends on this earning.

This is the paradox. On the one hand, the state witnessed a better representation

This is the paradox. On the one hand, the state witnessed a better representation of marginal people, i. e. the participation of the landless and sharecropper peasants, who mainly belong to the SC and ST communities, in the local self- governments; on the other, the worse performance of MGNREGA in terms of employment generation in comparison of other states.

In fact, the scholarly researches amply show that in rural West Bengal the political

In fact, the scholarly researches amply show that in rural West Bengal the political parties are in real powers which control the panchayats and everyday politics at the grassroots. And these political parties are actually led and dominated by the landed upper caste gentries (Bhattacharya 1998, Bhattacharya 2002, Ruud 1999 and Roy 2008). They are rarely be interested to implement the MGNREGA in their respective regions as it can increase the wage rate of labourers.

This might be one of the main reasons why the Left parties, including the

This might be one of the main reasons why the Left parties, including the CPI (M), who had been very active to raise the demand of an Act like MGNREGA at the Parliament, was not much concerned to implement the Act in West Bengal where they were in power. . Since the very inception, as told by Talwar, a NGO activist, “We found that the State government was quite reluctant to implement the Act. In the first year (2006) the government wanted to suspend its implementation on the excuse of impending elections. ”

Despite the constraints like non-availability of land to create employment and bureaucratic hurdles in

Despite the constraints like non-availability of land to create employment and bureaucratic hurdles in every step, the implementation of MGNREGA yields some positive results in the places where party in power or the existing NGOs do collaborate with the government to implement this programme. In fact, the operational guidelines and the rules of the Act are devised in such a fashion that the rural households whose adult members volunteer to do manual work are unable to demand employment. And, in many cases, the village gram sansad being incapable to make planning to create work.

In the regions where MGNREGA being implemented considerably, we would witness its impact on

In the regions where MGNREGA being implemented considerably, we would witness its impact on the labour market. It has led to an increase of agricultural wage rates. And in some cases, the wage effect is equal for both men and women. The agricultural wage labourers also exercise greater bargaining power due to the availability of work. On the other hand, the land owner farmers are affected due to the increase of wage rate and the crisis of labourers. In some cases, these farmers become reluctant to continue farming as a profession. But in many cases, the big land owners try to introduce more mechanization in agriculture.

As a result, there seems to be a probability of greater class conflict or

As a result, there seems to be a probability of greater class conflict or caste conflict in the rural hinterland. And the issues of inequity take new shape and recreate new problems of governance as a result of the socio-political processes emerged at the grassroots due to implementation of different poverty alleviation policies of the governments.

Hence it is not only the structural constraints inherent in the society, but also

Hence it is not only the structural constraints inherent in the society, but also there are other constraints for which anti-poverty programmes are not being implemented successfully. But where it is implemented, it is still rendering the individuals ‘dependent clients of the state’. And the small producers (principally the peasantry) who have been continually dispossessed of their lands and/or other means of labour in the neo-liberal regime are not simultaneously being provided with some other means of livelihood as part of ‘governmentality’ as argued by the scholars.

In fact, the dominant discourse predominantly does not take into account the highly unequal

In fact, the dominant discourse predominantly does not take into account the highly unequal social context in which poverty is produced and reproduced. Until and unless we are careful to take into account this unequal context and the way we approach the poverty issues, we will land up time and again with an unfinished agenda of poverty alleviation. Perhaps it is time to reflect now, as Chandhoke (2012) proposes, on the right of the people ‘not to be poor’.

The question at the end arises when there has always been a kind of

The question at the end arises when there has always been a kind of deficiencies in ‘providing the well-being of the population’, how the ‘regime secures its legitimacy’ by mediating with or managing the issues of governance.

In fact, due to these deficiencies of governance or lack of ‘development’, the ‘concerned

In fact, due to these deficiencies of governance or lack of ‘development’, the ‘concerned citizens’ always make some protests or criticisms against the government in order to fulfil the lack on the part of the government. These criticisms or protests of the citizens might become a force which can make a change in policies of the government and ‘in attitude and actions’ of the administration to some extent, and subsequently ‘that extending the limits of some practices’ and obviously ‘allows the invention of others. ’

All these steps or policy reforms may further strengthen and extend the hegemony of

All these steps or policy reforms may further strengthen and extend the hegemony of capitalist regime or the art of contemporary government by governing the ‘difference’ in a new fashion.

Thank you

Thank you