EVALUATION


Evaluation of watersheds under Rajiv Gandhi Mission for Watershed Management in Madhya Pradesh

Agency: TARU Leading Edge, New Delhi

Duration: February, 2001

Area:  Madhya Pradesh

Sample: Shivpuri, Ratlaam, Jhabua, Khandwa, Chattarpur, Sagar, Narshingpur, Chindwada, Jabalpur, Satna, Sarguja, Bilaspur, Bastar

Results and major findings

              i.            Environmental impacts have been assessed with respect to reported changes in land -use, especially cropped and non-crop biomass area, and water availability. One of the key environmental impacts identified is the increase reported in cropped area in 46 of the 58 project villages (about 80 percent) compared to only 8 of the 13 control villages (about 60 percent). Similarly, there is reported increase in non-crop biomass area in 8 of the 58 project villages (about 14 percent), a phenomenon not evidenced in any of the 13 control villages. There has been improvement in ground water situation in many of the project villages as evidenced by reduction in dry-period of wells, especially during March and April.

            ii.            An increase in irrigated area has also been reported in 38 of the 58 project villages (about 66 percent of villages). The benefits that land-use changes and improved water availability are likely to translate into are undeniable. However, in some of the project villages there seems to be no appreciable change reported in cropped area, non-crop biomass area, ground water situation or irrigated area. This can be traced to funding delays and adequacy of allocations; priorities and attitudes of communities; planning and efficacy of water harvesting structures; and the scale and protection of afforestation and fodder development interventions. 

          iii.            The allocation of land for afforestation and fodder development interventions has often been constrained by use of land for agriculture and encroachments.  

           iv.            In terms of livelihood related impacts are significant when compared to the control villages, especially in relation to increases in kharif and rabi cropped area and crop-mix change. Increases in direct wage employment from project interventions are also reported. However, the increase in wage employment from agricultural sector does not seem to be significant enough to neutralise the accompanying growth in work force.

             v.            Landless households have benefited significantly from direct wage employment opportunities. The impacts on long-term wage employment are less clear.

           vi.            In addition to these, there is evidence to suggest increased crop yield, land values and livestock and other asset ownership in the project villages.  In some cases, the changes are not directly traceable to the RGMWM interventions and have also been reported in the control villages.

         vii.            Increases in cropped area and crop-mix changes have differentially benefited the medium and large farmers.   Marginal farmers also report increases in cropped area (about 3 percent) and crop-mix change (about a fourth compared to over a third among large farmers) but may be expected to benefit to a lesser degree due to their land holding sizes and capacities to invest in water extraction technologies.

       viii.            Socio-Political Impacts reveals an increased appreciation of the agenda for sustainable natural resource management in select quarters, especially the VWC Presidents and Secretaries.   It is also clear that ‘water’ has started emerging as a subject of mainstream public discourse, both within and outside the project villages studied. Further, the RGMWM has been effective in creating space for government official-people interaction and negotiation and mainstreaming womens’ concerns. This is evidenced in gradual changes in traditional mind-sets.

           ix.            One of the major achievements of RGMWM has been the emergence of leadership and pool of management skill at the village level, which can potentially challenge established power structures and complement the Panchayati Raj agenda of the Government of Madhya Pradesh. These may lead to gradual yet far-reaching changes in terms of local empowerment and the emergence of local institutions, which capitalise on spaces and opportunities available in a people-friendly dispensation.

             x.            SHGs are not reported to be functional in 33 of the 58 project villages studied.  In the 25 project villages where they are reported to be functioning, SHGs in 9 villages are reported to be awaiting assistance.

           xi.            Among SHGs, which report receiving assistance, the amount is considered insufficient for any business venture of reasonable scale. (It is understood that the amount available for assistance has since been revised.) In most cases, the assistance is either rotated among members or divided equally to be used in any manner deemed fit by individuals.

         xii.            WTCGs are not reported to be functional in 29 of the 58 project villages studied. In the 29 project villages where they are operational, most WTCGs appear to be motivated by the possibility of accessing assistance and distributing the same equally among members. In instances where WTCGs have been found to be saving regularly, advancing small loans and repaying the same, they are observed to be largely dependent on the PIA Member.  The arrangements relating to procurement, marketing linkages and profit-sharing arrangements seems to be inadequate in the few cases where WTCGs have undertaken income generation activities.

       xiii.            The RGMWM has led to investment in areas that have witnessed limited public investment in the past, thus creating an opportunity for correcting historical regional imbalances and focusing on areas where the most vulnerable population groups in the state reside.

       xiv.            The direct wage employment opportunities provided through RGMWM have provided immense relief to the landless, small and marginal farmers. These opportunities have made a significant contribution to household income, addressed immediate and pressing concerns at the household level and checked daily movement to urban centres in search of work. Benefits from drinking water improvements, afforestation and fodder development activities accrue to the landless, small and marginal farmers but depend upon the scale and protection arrangements.

         xv.            One of the major direct impacts on women has been in terms of equal wages for labour provided under RGMWM. At the same time, reservation of women representation in VWCs can have far reaching impacts on gender equity. Currently their participation in VWC activities is limited. However this needs to be viewed against historic biases and legacies, which will dissipate over a period longer than the project cycle. The space for mainstreaming women's’ aspirations and concerns into the RGMWM and the larger development agenda has been created.

       xvi.            There has been a significant change in sensitivities of government officials towards women and there are cases where women have started asserting their position. Capitalising upon these opportunities requires more intensive mobilisation.

     xvii.            Other impacts on women are largely indirect and emerge either because of their ‘membership’ of the household or are incidental to the gender division of labour. The drudgery of fetching water, fuel and fodder from distant sources is reported to have reduced in instances.

   xviii.            Commitment to the vision and goals of RGMWM at the state level has percolated to the district level.  It is gradually being realised among district officials, POs and PIA Members that the RGMWM presents a unique opportunity for meaningful action and professional enrichment.

       xix.            Issues associated with Financial Resources relate to both delays in funding and the adequacy of allocations. While the reasons for delayed funding are varied and provide cause for speculation, it is clear that such delays have been a major contributory factor to the muted impacts reported in some of the project villages studied. This has led to sub-critical investment and loss of goodwill and morale at the village level. There are indications that bottlenecks in funding exist at the district level, given that a large part of the funds are routed directly to the districts.

         xx.            The emphasis on training and capacity building marks another significant achievement of the RGMWM. Much effort has been expended in training programmes, exposure visits and literature but returns have not always been commensurate

       xxi.            The analysis of monitoring, review and feedback mechanisms suggests that RGMWM has institutionalised mechanisms that permit greater opportunity for tracking progress, identifying shortcomings and making mid-course corrections.   A culture of introspection where field data is considered to have utility beyond mere reporting has been a positive development.

     xxii.            The data collection process and monthly meetings are reported to be regular and there is evidence of prompt action based on malpractices reported. However, there are concerns relating to the pressures created for reporting progress, which are reported to lead to compromises in quality of works and community mobilisation.  Further, the indicators currently monitored tend to emphasise physical and financial progress but lay inadequate emphasis on capturing process-related shortcomings like planning inadequacies, community mobilisation and preparedness of various groups to assume future responsibilities.

   xxiii.            The RGMWM has correctly anticipated the need for maintenance and benefit-sharing arrangements to minimise dissonance at the village level and the fate of past efforts, which suffered on account of lack of upkeep. These arrangements were recommended to be formulated and agreed in the initial stages at the village level. The evidence on ground suggests that the formulation of such arrangements received limited attention. A positive development has been the attention that these issues have received from VWC and PIA Members in the recent past.

  xxiv.      The RGMWM has succeeded in bringing sustainability issues into sharp focus and has introduced some introspection and debate both at the PIA Member and village level as to the most appropriate course for the future.  This along with the emergence of VWCs as strong institutions, provision for DF, sense of ‘difference’ detected at the village level and benefits that have accrued provide hope for the sustainability of interventions.