Some Important Programmes in Livelihoods: Searching for Focus?
45
improving livelihoods. The programme
has to rethink about its focus and strategy.
The NRLM should focus more clearly on
differentiated livelihood strategies that are
relevant in different local areas. The less
developed states and those with a large
population of poor should be prioritised.
Monitoring should not restrict itself to
outputs but outcomes also in terms of
vocations, livelihoods and incomes. With
several other schemes underway on finan-
cial inclusion, NRLM with its high costs is
perhaps not needed to create groups which
default to banks. NRLM is badly needed to
create, strengthen and sustain livelihoods
and not for creating groups that would
borrow without adequate ideas on how to
apply the money for productive purposes.
The central government which had been
the prime mover so far has passed on the
implementation responsibility to the states.
During the restructuring of centre–state
finances, the central government thought it
fit to reduce the Centre’s support for NRLM
and confined this only to capital expendi-
ture with revenue expenditure to be borne
by the states out of their share of increased
devolution of taxes. A number of states in
the past moved very slowly on implementa-
tion, even when full funding was assured.
With funding now having been restricted,
whether states will move full steam on a
programme where Centre is seemingly
losing interest remains to be seen. There is
a serious risk of investments made so far,
becoming infructuous unless the states own
the mission and take the necessary steps.
The changes in funding pattern are likely
to adversely impact the states’ willingness
to invest more amounts in creating the HR
capacities and infrastructure necessary for
implementation of NRLM in more blocks.
Greater focus is now on skill building
in people with a view to provide them jobs
and enterprise opportunities not just in
local areas but also in other urban loca-
tions. The increasing urbanisation and the
low-income opportunities in agriculture
necessitates shifting of labour force from
low paid unskilled jobs to viable, skilled jobs
and self-employment opportunities. NRLM
looks to move towards this direction. Two
new programmes have been announced,
one aimed at village entrepreneurship in
the non-farming sector (Start-up Village
Entrepreneurship Programme, SVEP) and
second at skill development for youths
resulting in skilled jobs (Deen Dayal
Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushalya Yojana,
DDU-GKY) under NRLM. DDU-GKY will
fit in with the thematic content of Skill
India Initiative of the government. This
programme (DDU-GKY) trained 86,000
candidates and placed 52,000 in jobs dur-
ing 2014–15. Details are discussed in a later
chapter on skill development. With such
sub-projects and programmes, NRLM is
facing a distinct shift in its orientation.
However, the
introduction of subsidised
loans for NRLM women SHGs, prioritised
credit access over developing and stabilising
livelihood ideas that needed funding and
thus distorted the focus on basic objectives
of NRLM
. Skill development leading to
enterprises or jobs is a valid and relevant
way of dealing with issues of livelihoods
for vulnerable people. Often this results in
migration. For those who do not want to
migrate, other parts of NRLM should be
strengthened so that they can continue in the
rural areas with viable livelihoods. For this
to happen, the NRLM should develop com-
prehensive and differentiated approaches
for livelihood development that respond to
the demand arising frommicrocredit plans.
Cluster-based value chains that convert
demand into effective livelihoods, provision
of backward and forward linkages, technical
know-how, training and making people’s
organisation develop competencies in serv-
ing members’ livelihood resource needs are
aspects that NRLM should work on. The
SHG formation and federation creation
should no longer occupy the centre stage of
NRLM work; the mobilisation of people is
just a means to achieve the ultimate objec-
tive for improving livelihoods. The focus
should shift from ‘means’ to ‘end’.
