Even decades after independence, India is replete with inequality so much so that it is often said there are the two countries, one that is Bharat and the other, India. It speaks of the two different realities that prevail in rural and urban parts of the country. But, it is essential that the residents of both rural and urban areas live in harmony with each other.
According to the National Survey Organisation, the average monthly per capita expenditure in a rural area of the country was Rs 1054, while in urban areas it was Rs 1984 in 2009-10, that means the per capita expenditure of urban dwellers was more than 88% as compared to those living in the villages. This is not the only difference in the lives of villagers and city dwellers. Here we are providing essays on village life vs. city life in a very simple and easy to understand language for students so that they can select any of them as per their needs.
Essays on City Life Vs Village Life
Essay on City Life Vs Village Life 1 (100 words)
India is said to be a land of villages. Sixty-seven percent of the country’s population still lives in villages. To people who live in villages, life in urban areas is full of difficulties. What they do not like is vehicular pollution, crowd, constant noise, and smoke rampant in cities, which make them feel uneasy.
But those raised in cities love the hectic pace of life. They love to chase their dreams of money, power and social status. Each day brings to them new problems and complications for which they struggle to adjust to survive the rat-race of life.
Definitely, there is a great difference in the lifestyle of people living in villages and cities. The need is to balance both kinds of lifestyles by incorporating good aspects from each other.
Essay on City Life Vs Village Life 2 (150 words)
Facilities and opportunities to move forward are greater in urban life than what we find in rural existence but there is an acute problem of pollution, noise, lack of adequate water supply, traffic jam, overcrowding and crime in cities. Similarly, though there is a lack of modern facilities in rural areas, but the clean air and peace are beneficial for the health of the people living there.
Villages hold a mirror to Indian culture and heritage. India’s centuries-long traditions still exist there. You can enjoy sunshine, greenery and tranquillity, and the people here are found to be very warm and friendly.
On the other hand, urban life is filled with tough challenges. Mostly, the people living in cities can avail latest amenities and cutting-edge facilities. They are always pre-occupied and busy with one thing or the other all the time. Sadly, they do not have time to even meet their neighbours, friends and relatives. Thus, there are advantages as well as drawbacks to live in both rural and urban areas.
Essay on Village Life Vs City Life 3 (200 words)
India is largely an agriculture-based country. Farmers are the backbone of rural economy. They work very hard in agricultural fields where they grow grains and vegetables. They conserve water in ponds and canals to irrigate crops. The life of farmers is close to nature, away from the hustle and bustle of cities. There is peace and tranquillity everywhere, except for conflicts over land and caste prejudices and the prevailing taboos and superstitions.
On the other hand, people in cities are always racing against time. There is always great pressure to perform leading to stress and other health problems related to the hectic lifestyle of urban life. The urban dwellers have little time for friends, neighbours, relatives, or even their own family members. As the cost of living in cities is constantly going up, the chase of money becomes an inevitable part of life in cities. Yet despite accumulating wealth, peace still eludes the urban habitants.
But life in villages has its own problems. There are frequent clashes related to ownership of land and caste. Many villages do not even have basic facilities of education, employment, healthcare, transport and electricity. Ultimately, there is need for restoring true balance and purpose in your life, whether you are living in a village or a city.
Essay on Village Life Vs City Life 4 (250 words)
Rural life is quite peaceful as people here do not lead a hectic lifestyle. They wake up early in the morning and fall asleep timely at night. Here the air is not polluted, as is the case with cities. There is also less pollution and crowd. Villagers are accustomed to easy-going life in villages as opposed to the hectic life in cities that leads to great amount of stress for them.
But villages mostly lack basic facilities such as electricity, schools, nursing homes and factories to employ people. Villagers have to walk on foot for several miles, if they do not have their own transport. Villages only provide seasonal employment and mostly people there are not gainfully employed. All these factors lead to large-scale migration of people from rural to urban areas in search of good education, employment and comforts of life.
But life in cities has its own negative side – it’s full of pressure, stress and anxiety. People here have several material comforts and amenities but no mental peace. They are always busy in executing various tasks related to their personal and professional life so much so that they sometimes they do not even know their next-door neighbour. The pressure to constantly perform takes a heavy toll on their health and they become prone to various ailments or lifestyle diseases even at a young age. Some of them even spend sleepless nights and their mental equilibrium takes a beating. So, life in rural and urban areas is poles apart but both are integral to the development of India.
Essay on Village Life Vs City Life 5 (300 words)
More than half of India’s population lives in villages. Gandhi had said “the real India lives in villages”. Rustic simplicity and natural beauty is emblematic of Indian culture and heritage.
Lives of most of the people in villages mostly depend on agriculture. Some people earn their living from animal husbandry and agro-based cottage industries. Most of the villagers are farmers. They are hardworking, unassuming and generous. When farmers plough their fields in the morning sun, the chirping of birds that accompanies the movement of the oxen seems to hum a melody of hard work. Farmers are innocent by nature unlike some of their urban counterparts who lose their inner goodness in the cut-throat world of materialism in cities.
Life in urban India is marked by wide-ranging disparity. There are residents who have unlimited means of enjoyment but some people are so poor that they have to live in slums. Economic inequality, pollution and garbage are the bane of urban existence. People also have to face lack of adequate water supply. Yet people want to live in cities because they get facilities for good education, healthcare, transport and so many modes of comforts and entertainment. There are also good opportunities for employment in cities unlike villages where very few people are gainfully employed.
City life is a boon in many ways, but on the other hand it is also a curse. Every year the population of cities is growing by leaps and bounds, increasing pressure on their infrastructure and reducing life to a dehumanised rat race.
Thus, life in villages and in cities presents two contrasting pictures. There are positive as well as negative aspects to the both and it is up to the individuals to make the most of it irrespective of the rural or urban setting that one lives in.
Essay on Village Life Vs City Life 6 (400 words)
Life in both rural and urban areas has its own plus points and problems. One is quite different from each other. Traditionally, India is a predominantly rural country as Mahatma Gandhi had said, “The real India lives in villages”.
There is a splash of festivals and fairs in villages. Here festivals are celebrated with a sense of brotherhood in a traditional way. The whole village dances to folk tunes at the time of festival whether it is Holi, Baisakhi, Pongal, Onam, Dussehra, Diwali, or Eid. All the people in the village live in bonds of fraternity. They share mutual happiness as well as sorrow with each other as per the circumstances of life. Though their lifestyle is not as advanced as what you see in the cities, rural people are warmer, and more cordial. They are more considerate and know each other in the village. They do not live in a state of isolation as is the case with metropolitan cities.
The natural beauty of the villages in India is simply eye-catching. The lush green fields capped around by flowers and spread an intoxicating fragrance. Birds chirp around merrily in fields, barns and village homes. Simplicity is the hallmark of life in villages.
Unfortunately, the search for jobs and the glare of material comforts and facilities is leading to large-scale migration of people from rural to urban areas. Though, now villages in the country are now also advancing in terms of standard of living. Urbanisation is taking place at a fast pace; electricity, piped water, concrete roads, telephone/mobile phone, computers, education and medical care are accessible facilities in many parts of rural India these days. Farmers are now using modern agricultural implements, and in place of oxen, they are ploughing the fields with tractors.
But life is not without troubles in villages too. There are frequent disputes over land and same-gotra love marriages, which all result in bloodshed and violence. The village panchayats when deliberating on disputes pronounce very harsh and uncalled-for judgements which make people’s life a tale of misery and pain.
Villagers depend on the sale of their agricultural produce on urban markets and city dwellers cannot survive without the supply of essential commodities such as grain, fruits and vegetables from rural regions. People from villages daily commute to cities to buy latest articles of modern life, watch movies, relax and enjoy themselves or do jobs in urban establishment. In fact, development of India is unthinkable without the harmonious development of villages and cities. Both of them complement each other.
Read this essay to learn about Rural Development in India. After reading this essay you will learn about:- 1. Introduction to Rural Development 2. Activities and Experiments Undertaken for Rural Development 3. The Rural Development Programmes 4. Institutions 5. Observations and Problems 6. Suggestions.
- Essay on the Introduction to Rural Development
- Essay on the Activities and Experiments Undertaken for Rural Development
- Essay on the Rural Development Programmes
- Essay on the Institutions for Rural Development in India
- Essay on the Observations and Problems of Rural Development
- Essay on the Suggestions for Rural Development in India
1. Essay on the Introduction to Rural Development:
The definition of Rural is residuary become all over the world that is defined as an urban area and whatever is not urban known as rural.
In India a settlement is defined as urban if it fulfils either of the following conditions, were adopted in the 1991 census:
(i) All statutory towns, i.e.; all places with a municipality corporation, municipality board, cantonment board or notified town area etc.
(ii) A minimum population of 5,000.
(iii) At least 75 per cent of the Male working population engaged in non-agricultural and allied activity,
(iv) A density of population of at least 400 persons per square kilometres.
Thus, the term ‘Rural’ essentially means an area, which is characterised as non-urban style of life, occupational structure and settlement pattern.
‘Development’ in general refers to the process of a general improvement in levels of living together, decreasing inequality in incomes and the capacity to sustain continuous improvements overtime. Thus the term Rural Development is viewed as an activity of a series of activities or a process, which either improves the immediate living conditions-economic, social, political, cultural and environmental or increases the potential for future living or both of the rural people.
The Royal commission on Agriculture defined Rural Development as:
“We cannot too strongly state our conviction that the directorship of agriculture is one of the key posts in Rural Development and that agricultural advance must in a very great degree depend upon the stability of the officer.”
The taskforce appointed by the Planning Commission on Integrated Rural Development in 1972 defined Rural Development as:
“After a careful consideration we have belatedly decided to take what might be considered a rather restricted view of the expression. ‘Rural Development’ we have chose to equate it with agricultural development in the widest sense so as to embrace besides crop husbandry, all the allied activities.”
According to the view of World Bank “Rural Development as a strategy design to improve the economic and social life of a specific group of people – The rural (people) poor. It involves extending the benefits of development to the poorer among those who seek a livelihood in rural areas. The group includes small-scale farmers, tenants and the landless.”
Rural Development means a strategy to improve the economic and social life of the rural poor and the rural weak in the overall spectrum of development and growth. It is not only important to raise the agricultural productivity and the rate of overall economic growth in the rural areas, but also it is to ensure that the poor and weaker sections share the benefit.
“Rural Development as a process in complex and involves the interaction of economic, social, political, technological and other situational factors. These have to be integrated with Government policies and plans with the objective of improving the quality of life of the people in the villages”.
Rural Development encompasses:
(i) Improvement in levels of living, including employment, education, health and nutrition housing and a variety of social services
(ii) Decreasing inequality in distribution of rural incomes and in rural-urban balances in incomes and economic opportunities and
(iii) The capacity of the rural sector to sustain and accelerate the pace of these improvements.
The critical element in the Rural Development is improvement living standards of the poor through opportunities for better utilisation of their physical and human resources in the absence of this utilisation of rural resources has no functional significance. Making the process of rural development self-sustaining of capital and use of technology for the benefit of the poor but their active involvement in the building up of institutions as well as functioning of these.
There are a number of definitions of rural development. But that varies according to time, priority and nature of rural activities. Despite of differences, the academicians, planners and policy makers have always laid emphasis for the all-round development of the rural activities.
However, Rural Development as a concept and as series of experiments in alternative methods of organising production, welfare and exchange in rural activities has a long history and is not the monopoly of any single system or country. Its recent popularity however is mainly symptomatic of the failure of technocratic and growth strategies pursued by most developing countries in the 1950s and 1960s.
Academics, nationals and international policy makers are carrying out the search for solution to the twin problems of rural poverty and unemployment. The noted Western economists like, Kuznets, Gerschenkron, Floud and Mccloskey provide useful insights into the history of economic development of the present day developed countries.
The growth of output and productivity in these countries during last 10 to 15 decades has been qualitatively different from that observed in earlier periods. Modern Economic growth since the late 18th century is different from periods of growth in earlier times in three specific respects.
Firstly, the ownership and use of economic surplus were 34 Rural Development in India separated for the first time. Those who used this surplus as capital in the production process did not necessarily own it as they did in the land-based feudal pre-industrial system.
Secondly, extensive use of an acceptable unit of exchange called money helped in expansion of market, which made specialization and mobility possible.
Lastly, mobility of both capital and labour in pursuit of higher gains to urban areas and distant lands occurred on an unprecedented scale. The consequent increase in output and productivity were substantial and sustained over a long period of time. These impressive increases were also accompanied by growth of population and large-scale migration from not only rural to urban areas but from nation to nation and from continent to continent.
Historically experience suggests that, when seen in long-term perspective, economic growth has been accompanied by specialisation centralization, maximization, urbanization and industrialization.
History shows that, poverty has been diminished by the growth of labour increased productivity in the agricultural sector and migration of labour to urban non-agricultural activities. The population movement occurred mainly because industry could offer the incentive of higher wages and better employment opportunities.
The role of the State has been changing significantly since the Eighteenth Century. Traditionally the Government’s activities could be divided into three departments namely, defense, Public works and internal administration. A healthy balance among the three ensured stable regimes with the advent of modern economic development; the “Public works” component has been an expanding area of State activity.
Modern development policy makers while, recognising the importance of infrastructure have been rather ambiguous about the contents of infrastructure is one of the very few illuminating contributions on the subject. Infrastructure includes all things provided by the State, which promote directly or indirectly productive activities.
Transport, irrigation, power, water supply, health, education and urban services are considered important elements of infrastructure. In a mixed economy, with a relatively important public sector, provision of infrastructure has to be carefully planned and provided by the State.
The State playing an important role in development. Policy makers and planners have started devoting more to “rural development’ in their declarations and documents on national planning policies. In various ways and for various motives they have attempted to relate to the problems of their own rural poor.
Despite, substantial and impressive increase in growth of agricultural and food outputs in some regions of a number of developing countries the plight of small and marginal farmers, agricultural and landless labourers, artisans and small retailers has not been improved significantly.
In India the term ‘Rural Development’ is not a very old phenomenon. Early in the century their exist the British rule. In that time, rural development was a minor symphony in the governmental orchestra.
The functions of the Government were limited and even the spread of each function was narrowly restricted. Thus, Development cannot but be of minor meaning and significance in the structure of the priorities of colonialism, which was also reflected in the rural areas.
The decade 1920-30 was very significant from the view of early pioneering efforts at rural development in India. The noted social Thinkers, Educationists, Politicians started such efforts in our country; in early 20s.
2. Essay on the Activities and Experiments Undertaken for Rural Development:
Programmes and Projects in Pre-Independence Periods:
The important activities and experiments undertaken for rural development in Pre-Independence periods are:
(i) Sriniketan Experiments:
This programme was pioneered by noted scholar of the country Rabindranath Tagore. The important objective of the experiment was Economic and Moral rehabilitation of the rural community.
(ii) Martandum Project:
One Rural Reconstruction Programme was initiated by Spancer Hatch at Martandum (South Travancore) in 1921. Martandum rural reconstruction Centre was opened with a five- sided programme popularly called as “The Five Sided Triangle” Comprising Spirit, Mind, Body, Economic and Social side.
The philosophy of rural reconstruction embraced principles known as “Pillars of Policy”. The principle of ‘Self Help’ was maintained. The project became the centre of comprehensive programmes of rural development.
(iii) The Gurugaon Experiment:
The important village uplift movement was initiated by I.L.Brayne the Deputy Commissioner of Gurugaon district in 1920. This village development programme called as the “Gurugaon Scheme”. The Gurugaon Scheme claimed to deal with the whole life and the activity of the peasant and his family and to present a complete remedy from the terrible conditions in with they lived.
(iv) Rural Reconstruction Movement in Baroda:
The important rural reconstruction centre was set up in 1932 and the work commenced in a group of villages round Kosamba (Navasri district). The movement aimed at improvement in all aspect of rural life, changing the outlook of the agriculturists, the attainment of higher standard of living.
(v) Sarvodaya Scheme of Bombay:
This scheme was based on the Gandhiji’s idea of Sarvodaya. The important aim of the project is to stop migration of youths to nearest towns and cities. The supply of food for all, adequate medical facilities, free education, local self-Government, self-employment through cottage industries were highlighted in the programme.
(vi) Firka Development Scheme:
The Firka Development Scheme aimed at the attainment of the Gandhian ideal of “Village Swaraj” by brining about not only the education, economic, sanitary and other improvements of village along with the revitalisation of the spirit if people and to make them self-confident and self-reliant.
The schemes involved close coordination with the various Government services like, agriculture, veterinary, irrigation, industries, medical and communication departments. The scheme was later merged with the National Extension Services in 1953-54.
Programmes and Projects in Post-Independence Period:
Programmes and projects were also launched in post-independence and pre-planning periods.
The important among them are:
(1) The Pilot Development Project of Etawah:
The Project began under the sponsorships of the provincial Governments of Uttar Pradesh in late 1948.
The important objectives of the project were to increase the degree of productivity, social improvements, promotion of self-confidence and cooperation.
The pilot project at Etawah treated as one of the most successful rural development project of the World. The project also exhibited the exemplary Cooperation and Coordination of Government, volunteers and others.
(2) The Nilokheri Experiment:
India divided in 1947. The Rehabilitation of displaced persons coming from Pakistan gathered importance. In order to provide them gainful employment a new township was developed at Nilokheri in 1948 with the efforts of Sri S.K.Dey.
Sri Dey evolved a faith were to activate and support a triple charter of rights such as:
(i) Right to live,
(ii) Right to work for living and
(iii) Right to receive what is earned.
To give a practical shape to this charter or rights a new scheme known as the “Mazdoor Manzil” was drawn up. The basic concept of the Mazdoor Manzil was to stop the one-way traffic of labour, material, skill and culture from villages to town.
The township was intended to include institutions for medical relief and sanitation, Higher Education, Technical and Vocational Training, Veterinary aid and agricultural extension embracing agriculture, horticulture, poultry, piggery, fishery, sheep breeding and other forms of animal husbandry. The project was highly appreciated by the then Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru.
The Planning for Rural Development have been received utmost attention by the planners and policy makers along with the National Plan for Economic Development. The rural development strategies were also adopted by planners as per the methods and strategies adopted for the economic development of the country. India adopted both the centralised and decentralised planning models in the process of its planned economic development.
The First Five Year Plan (1950-51 to 1955-56) adopted the Harrod-Domar model of capital accumulation and saving mobilisation as its methodological approach towards planning. Under this approach, the process of economic development must start from the villages.
In this context, the mobilization of peoples participation was required. In order to implement this ideology the Community Development Programme (CDP) was conceived. The Block administration was created as a centre of Rural Development activities.
This programme failed as blocks were quite big and left the weaker section untouched. The programme was also implemented in Orissa. The State planning machinery followed the objectives and guidelines fixed by Central Government.
The Second Five Year Plan (1955-56 to 1960-61) based on Feldman-Mahalnobis model of sectoral growth. This strategy emphasised investment in heavy industry to achieve industrialization, which was assumed to be the basic condition for rapid economic development.
A good deal of reliance was placed on cottage and small industries with the aim of reducing rural under employment, unemployment. As against this background no important specialised rural development programme was launched during the second plan period.
However, steps were taken to strengthen the ongoing community development programme. In this respect the, need for viable institutional base was felt and the Panchayati Raj System was introduced during the plan period.
Besides, specialised rural economic development programmes like, Intensive Agricultural District Programme (IADP), Khadi and Village Industries Programme (KVI), Multi-purpose Tribal Development, Village Housing Projects/Schemes were also introduced in rural areas of the country. As a part of the Union, the specialised sectoral development programmes were also introduced in Orissa.
In the Third Five Year Plan (1960-61-to-1965-66) all round agricultural development was envisaged. Increased agricultural production in the farm sector and activities allied to agriculture received topmost priority during the plan period.
The important agricultural development programmes bringing green revolution strategy like Intensive Agricultural Area Programme (IAAP) and High Yield Varieties Programme (HYVP) were implemented in the country. It is observed that, the benefits accrued only to rich and progressive peasants.
Once again, landless and agricultural labourers were left untouched. Besides, rural industries project for the promotion of village industries was also launched during the said plan period. Health and Nutrition is regarded as important inputs required for improvement in the quality of life. To ensure appropriate and adequate nutrition to the children, for their growth Applied Nutrition Programme was introduced during the Third Five Year Plan.
The Fourth Five Year Plan (1969-74) in the name of “Growth with social justice” initiated efforts towards uplifting the vulnerable sections of rural society. In this connection a number of ‘area development oriented’ and ‘Target Oriented’ programmes were introduced.
Programmes such as Small Farmers Development Agency (SFDA), Small Farmers and Agricultural Labourers Development Agency (MFAL), Drought Prone Area Programme (DPAP), Tribal Area Development Programme (TADP) were introduced as the important rural development programmes. These rural development programmes did succeed, but only in limited areas and numbers.
This plan paved the path for a number of rural development and poverty alleviation programmes in the country. These programmes were implemented through the existing administrative apparatus at block and village levels.
Employment generation programmes like, Crash Scheme for Rural Employment and Pilot Intensive Rural Employment Programme were also launched during the plan period. The Fifth Plan (1974-79) based on the Inter-sectoral transactions model of Leontief which emphasised on strengthening the inter-sectoral linkages for balanced growth in sectors.
The most important objectives of the Fifth Plan Period was:
(i) Removal of poverty and
(ii) Achievement of self-reliance.
In order to attain these objectives. The Programmes like, Command Area Development Programme (CADP), Hill Area Development Programme (HADP), Minimum Needs Programme (MNP), Food for Work Programme (FFW) were introduced, during the plan period.
Besides, in order to promote small-scale, village and cottage industries the District Industries Centres (DICs) were set up in all districts of the country. The 20-point Economic Programme was also introduced during the said plan period.
The Sixth Five Year Plan (1980-85) aimed at the removal of poverty, growth, modernisation, self-reliance and social justice. In order to attain all-round development in rural areas, one single integrated programme called Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) was conceived. IRDP is regarded as a multi-level, multi-sector and multi-section concept of rural development.
As a multi-level concept it encompasses rural development at various levels such as viable cluster of village communities, districts and blocks. As a multi- sector concept, it embraces development in various sectors and sub-sectors of the rural areas such as agriculture, industry, education, health and transportation etc.
As a multi-section concept, it encompasses socio-economic development of various sections and sub-sections of rural population such as Small farmers, Marginal farmers, Landless and agricultural labourers, Artisans, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Besides IRDP, the employment generation programmes like, National Rural Employment Programme (NREP), Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme (RLEGP), Economic Rehabilitation or Rural Poor (ERRP), Training of Rural Youth for Self-Employment (TRYSEM), Self Employment for the Educated Unemployed Youths (SEEUY). Development of Women and Children in Rural Areas (DWCRA) etc. were also introduced during the said plan period.
The important objectives of the Seventh Five Year Plan (1985-90) were; building an independent self-reliant economy, establishment of social system based on equity and justice, reduction of regional imbalance and adoption of advanced technologies. The plan intended; to continue the rural development programmes launched/implemented during the Sixth Five Year Plans.
Besides, some rural infrastructural development programmes like, Indira Awas Yojana (IAY) Integrated Rural Energy Planning Programme (IREP), Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY), Million Wells Scheme (MWS), etc. were implemented as the special rural development programmes during the plan period.
The Eighth Five Year Plan (1992-97) aimed at generation of adequate employment opportunities, Universalisation of elementary education, provision of safe drinking water and primary health care facilities, and strengthening the infrastructure. The special rural development and poverty alleviation programmes implemented in earlier plans were also intended to continue during the Eighth Five Year Plan.
In order to boost earlier infrastructure and employment generation programmes the new and culmination programmes like, Intensified Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (IJRY), Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS), Operation Black Board (OBB), and District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) were introduced.
The Ninth Five Year Plan (1997-2002) aimed at generating employment opportunities in the secondary sector, all-round development of agricultural sector, strengthening the rural economy through development of agro-based industries, small- scale village and cottage industries and elimination of poverty.
As against these objectives, the programmes for self- employment, and supplementary wage employment and other programmes intended to continue during the Ninth Plan with some modifications. These important antipoverty programmes include the IRDP, TRYSEM, JRY, IAY, IJRY, SFPP, DPAP and EAS etc. The IRDP, DWCRA, TRYSEM, MWS were in operation till the end of 1998-99.
It was felt that; this fragmented approach with a multiplicity of schemes was not able to focus on the needs of the rural poor in a coherent manner. Hence these schemes were amalgamated by Government of India and merged into a single new scheme called Swarnajayanti Gram Swarojgar Yojana (SGSY) with effect from 1.4.1999. In order to create adequate infrastructural development the Jawahar Gram Samridhi Yojana (JGSY) was also implemented on the same date.
All the plan strategies for rural development based on various approaches like, growth-based approach in first Three Five Year Plans (First Five Year Plan, Second Five Year Plan, Third Five Year Plan), which was popularly known as trickle down approach.
The Fourth Five Year Plan based on Target group approach. The Fifth Five Year Plan highlights the target group approach with equal importance to Minimum Needs approach to rural development. The Sixth, Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Five Year Plan in our country adopt the target group approach for rural development.
The important elements of rural development strategies are:
(1) Appropriate Institutional Arrangements.
(2) Labour – Intensive agriculture and Minor development works.
(3) A hierarchy of development centres to bridge the wide gap between rural and urban areas and self- reliance.
(4) An active policy for social development, and
(5) Appropriate Organisational arrangements.
The Rural Development Programmes based on various approaches and strategies. These are varies according to plan and the Nature of the programme. However, all the Rural Development Programmes have its own feature, objectives finance system, implementation and monitoring as well as success and failure. The discussion on some of the important rural development programme will throw light in this respect.
3. Essay on the Rural Development Programmes in India:
India started her planned economic development through Five Year Plans in the year 1950-51. The economy of the Country has been dominated by the rural and traditional economic sectors. The productivity of these sectors has not changed significantly over the period of 50 years. The existence of massive unemployment and poverty is the common feature of Indian economy in general and rural economy in particular.
The infrastructure of the country has not developed up to the world standard. It is proper to mention here that, we have achieved little over the period of 50 years of planned economic development. The planners and policy makers have been laid best possible efforts for the development of the economy and rural development. Due to a number of factors, desired success has not been achieved so far.
However, we would like to discuss some of the important rural development programmes implemented in our country as well as the states and Union Territories from time to time. The aims and objectives of these programmes are national in nature and the progress and achievements are based on the secondary data available. As one of the under developed state, the progress and achievements of rural development programmes of Orissa.
Some comparative analysis of the R.D. Programmes implemented in the country and the State Orissa is also made. Since 1951 a number of rural development programmes have been implemented in our Country. Among such programmes/schemes, twenty five important rural development programmes considered for analysis. These programmes covers all plan periods i.e.; First Five Year Plan (1950-51 to 1955-56) to Eighth Five Year Plan (1992-97).
(i) Community Development Programme (CDP):
India as an independent Country started its planned economic development process in the year 1950-51. The First Five Year Plan 1950-51 to 1955-56 based on methodical approach. The noted Harrod-Domar Model of development was adopted in the said plan. The model emphasised on capital accumulation and saving.
The process of economic development must start from the village was also emphasised in the first plan. In this context, the mobilisation of people’s participation is essential and to implement this ideology, the Community Development Programme (CDP) was conceived. The Community Development Programme was launched on 2nd October 1952.
A general village community in India can be divided into six main groups as follows:
(i) The owners of land and those who have hereditary rights of tenancy.
(ii) The sub-tenants or tenants at will.
(iii) Landless Agricultural labourers.
(iv) Village Artisans.
(v) Money lenders and Shopkeepers.
(vi) Persons in the professions or in personal services, e.g. doctors, lawyers, barbers, village officials.
Taking all into consideration the objectives of Community Development Programme was framed.
The important objective of Community Development Programme is to create an urge among the rural people for a better life and to show the way to satisfying this urge predominantly by means of self-help. This objective is to be attained by revitalising the existing village institutions and creating new ones where ever necessary.
The programme emphasized to give effects to an intensive and comprehensive programme covering all aspects of rural life; i.e.; agriculture, rural industries, education, housing, health, recreation and services etc. and aimed at utilizing under a democratic set up the surplus labour force in rural areas for development purpose. It also aims at the largest possible extension of the principle of cooperation and every effort to made to make rural families credit worthy.
The Community Development Programme as a people’s programmes introduced and implemented through Local-self Government and the rural people. The Local Self Government get further boost after the recommendation of Balwantrai Mehta’s formulation of Democratic decentralisation in the forms of village Panchayats, Panchayat Samities and Zilla Parishads.
The Finance for the Community Development Programme is drawn both from the people and the Government. Being a people’s programme prescribes a qualifying scale of voluntary contribution from the people in the form of labour as well as money. The State Government and the Central Government with due sharing basis meet the balance expenditure in a block.
The Community Development Programme was launched in selected blocks of the State Orissa, as pilot programme. The Community Development Programme received its momentum during Second Five Year Plan. The total expenditure of Rs. 822.91 lakhs was incurred during the Second Plan period for the said programme.
By the end of the Third Five Year Plan (1965-66) period there were 147 Stage I blocks, 139 Stage II blocks bringing the total number of blocks to 314. Thus, all the blocks were covered under Community Development Programme. The total expenditure under this programme was Rs 1767 lakhs.
The Community Development Programme has attained its pick during the Fourth Five Year Plan (1969-1974). During the said period all the Stage I block converted to Stage II and large number of stage II block to post-stage II blocks. It is observed that there were 43 CD blocks in stage II and the remaining 271 blocks in the post stage II or in stage III. Total Fund of Rs 850 lakhs were earmarked for the programme.
Besides, special development schemes on irrigation, Agriculture extension, animal husbandry, horticulture, drinking water and communication were also implemented in seven backward districts of the State. In this respect a total sum of Rs 225 lakh has been earmarked.
The contribution of Community Development Programme to the rural development are:
(1) The setting up of a network of community development blocks covering the length and breadth of the country, thus enabling the government to reach the rural population in almost any aspect of their life,
(2) The transfer of powers and functions for implementing the programme to the elected representatives at the village, block and district levels, thereby paving the way for democratic decentralisation through a three-tier Panchayati Raj System.
The National Institute of Community Development conducted a survey to assess the impact of CDP They concluded that “the process of modernisation has reached all strata, and going to do so at a faster pace in future, but this has not resulted in any violent reaction on the part of the lower classes”.
The ideology of people’s participation through Panchayati Raj System, in absence of proper education and discipline resulted in conspicuous alienation of the weaker sections of the rural communities by the privileged classes.
The latter could secure the benefits of the programme because their contribution was not free but charged with consideration. It is observed that the whole programme suffered from lack of vitality, and was tending to generate only into a number of material benefits for a limited few.
The official agencies responsibility for implementation of development activities lacked in understanding the new climate because they were manned by those officials who were trained in the particular framework. Besides, their bureaucratic approach also appeared to be a hindrance in initiating the programmes.
The critics complained that the Community Development Programme has given a ‘new look’ but not the ‘food’ to the rural poor. It is no denying a fact that the expenditure on building the institutions for social change was larger than the expenditure incurred on productive purposes. Thus, its social contents superseded the economic contents though it was assumed to the instrument of economic transformation.
(ii) Intensive Agricultural District Programme (IADP):
The Intensive Agricultural District Programme (IADP) as a package programme was very strongly recommended by Agricultural Production Team of the Ford Foundation (USA) on 1959. This programme was put into action during 1960-61.
The important objective of the programme was to improve the agricultural production in a integrated and intensified manner. This programme was introduced in selected districts of the country.
The selection of these districts was made on the basis of:
(a) The district should as far as possible have assured water supply
(b) It should have a minimum of natural hazards,
(c) It should have well developed village Institutions like Cooperatives and Panchayats
(d) It should have maximum potentialities of increasing agricultural production within a comparatively short-time. Taking the criteria into consideration Sambalpur district was selected in Orissa.
It was decided to implement for the development of Rabi Crops in 1962-63. This programme was introduced in all the 29 blocks of the district. In the second phase of the programme main thrust was given on the increase of higher yielding paddy in the Khariff extending the area under various commercial and horticulture crops and on promoting efficient soil and water management practices.
Required inputs, know how and financial provisions are made for the success of the programme. Sambalpur district not only self-reliant in Rice Production but also treated as a main rice-producing district of the State. The IADP has been a ‘Path finder’ for successful programme.
(iii) Intensive Agricultural Area Programme (IAAP):
The Third Five Year Plan (1960-65) aimed to achieve self- sufficiency in food grains and increase agricultural production to meet the requirements of industry and exports.
Besides, the mid-term appraisal of the Third Five Year Plan observed that “Much greater emphasis should be given to the development of scientific and progressive agriculture in an intensive manner in areas where a high agricultural production potentialities”.
The Government of India formulated the Intensive Agricultural Area Programme (IAAP) with a view to cover at least 20 per cent to 25 per cent of the cultivated area of the country and this area should be selected for the intensive development of import crops such as wheat, paddy, millets, cotton, sugarcane, potato, pulses etc. The programme was launched in 1964-65.
The aim of IAAP was to bring about a progressive increase in the production of main crops in selected areas by an intensive package approach i.e.; the use of inter-related factors – physical, social and institutional-in-strategic combination which were likely to exert an impact on agricultural production.
It was decided to implement such programme in the selected blocks of the country as well as the state. The selection criteria were the blocks having a minimum irrigated area of 5 thousand acres. In Orissa a total of 86 blocks were covered under the Intensive Agricultural Area Programme during the period of Fourth Five Year Plan an additional 46 blocks were brought under the programme, taking total coverage of blocks up to 132.
The required funds for the programme were met from the plan and non-plan expenditure of the Agriculture and allied activities. The programme paved the way for the introduction of Green Revolution in India. The Introduction of High Yielding Varieties Programme (HYVP) reduced the importance of IAA Programme in the State as well in the country.
(iv) High Yielding Varieties Programme (HYVP):
The High Yielding Varieties Programme (HYVP) was launched in the country from the kharif seasons of 1966-67 as a major plank of new agricultural strategy under the economic planning system.
The important objective of the programme was to attain self-sufficiency in food by the end of 1970-71. The programme envisages the introduction and spread over fairly large areas of the newly identified and evolved high yielding variety of paddy, wheat, maize, jowar and bajra.
The HYVP proposes to make a technological break-through in Indian agriculture which consists of the introduction of new and high-yielding varieties of improved seeds, increased application of the right amount of fertilizers and extension of the use of pesticides so that the crop produced is not destroyed by insects.
To enable the farmers to undertake this agricultural practice, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) agreed to relax the usual terms and conditions in respect of Central Cooperative Banks (CCBs) for the purpose of financing such cultivators.
During the Fourth Five Year Plan about 742.6 thousand hectares of land was brought under the HYV programme in Orissa. This has increased to about 1860 thousand hectares of land during Fifth Five Year Plan with an investment of about Rs. 2 Crores.
This programme mainly confined to good land and to those farmers who have the resources and the adaptability to embrace the progress of technology. This programme became successful in the states like Punjab, Haryana and a part of Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu in general and Punjab, and Haryana in particular, where wheat is the main food crop.
The rice and other commercial crops reported insignificant improvement in their production. Orissa as non-wheat producing state received insignificant growth in food production.
(v) Small Farmers Development Agency (SFDA):
The Reserve Bank of India appointed All-India Rural Credit Review Committee on 1969, under the Chairmanship of Sri B.Venkatappiah. The committee in its-interim report recommended for the establishment of Small Farmers Development Agency (SFDA) in following words:
“The special efforts proposed are to be restricted to those cultivators who can be developed into surplus farmers if they adopt improved techniques on the basis of support in terms of supplies, irrigation, services of machinery etc. Appropriate schemes have to be drawn up by technical experts with reference to local resources and requirements, so that such cultivators can undertake specific lines of investment (e.g. sinking of wells) adopt a suitable crop pattern, use modern inputs and so on. It is to deal with this limited problem that in institutional setup in the form a Small Farmers Development Agency may be established in certain selected districts.”
The important functions of the Agency was to:
(i) Investigate and identify the problems of small farmers and endeavour to see that the provision of various services and supplies to small farmers is ensured,
(ii) Help small farmer to secure loans from co-operative banks and other assistance like obtain improved seeds, fertilizers and other inputs,
(iii) The agency is to provide various services such as spraying of insecticides, hiring out of tractors and land leveling to small farmers through the agro-industries corporations or other appropriate bodies and institutions including cooperatives and local authorities such as Zilla Parishad and extension services,
(iv) To draw up plans for investment and production activities to be undertaken by the cultivators participating in the programme,
(v) To explore the possibility of adding to the income of the small farmers by assisting them in taking up animal husbandry activities such as dairy and poultry,
(vi) It should endeavour to promote the flow of short-term, medium- term and long-term co-operative credit to small cultivators for appropriate purposes from the Agricultural Credit Societies and Central Cooperative banks on the one hand and the land development banks on the other. The scheme was included in the Fourth Five Year Plan. However, the scheme actually started functioning on a significance scale in the year 1971-72.
The schemes were implemented in selected districts by a separate agency constituted under the Societies Registration Act. The scheme was financed by the State and Central Government on matching basis.
The provision of subsidy was also made by the agency at the rate of 25 per cent to non-tribal small farmers, 33.3 per cent to non-tribal marginal farmers and 50 per cent to Tribal farmers in capital investments and inputs subject to maximum of Rs 3000 and Rs 5000 respectively for any farmers.
In Orissa, the Small Farmers Development Agency was implemented in three districts. They were Bolangir, Dhenkanal and Ganjam. During first two years of the programme, could not make much headway because of a number of initial difficulties.
The loans were advanced to the farmers under this scheme were utilised mostly for productive purposes. Orissa stand second in utilisation of loans in all-India basis after Kerala. The State utilised about 83.6 per cent of the loans sanctioned under the scheme.
During the period between 1971-72 and 1980, about 272 lakh families in 115 blocks less than seven SFDA were benefitted. The total loans mobilised stood at Rs. 38.4 crores. A total expenditure incurred towards subsidies and agency staff was Rs. 14.8 crores.
The SFDA was the first rural development programme in the country where the Central Government, State Government and Financial Institutions maintained proper linkage for the success of the programme. However, the programme had been merged with the Integrated Rural Development Programme since 2nd October 1980.
(vi) Marginal Farmers and Agricultural Labourers Development Agency (MFALDA):
The Marginal Farmers and Agricultural Labourers Development Agencies were set up along with SFDA on the recommendation made by Rural Credit Review Committee (1969).
The principal objective of the programme is to assist the marginal farmers and agricultural labourers in maximum productive use of their small holding and skills by undertaking horticulture, animal husbandry and other economic activities, like rural industries etc.
The important functions of the programme were to:
(i) Identify eligible beneficiaries and their problems
(ii) To formulate economic programmes for providing gainful employment to the participants,
(iii) To promote infrastructural facilities for production, processing, storage and marketing of products
(iv) To promote rural industries.
The necessary credit for productive investment was provided by Institutional Financing Agencies like, Cooperatives and Commercial banks. Besides provision of matching subsidies were also provided to the beneficiaries.
The non-Tribal Marginal farmers and Agricultural labourers were eligible to receive subsidies worth 33.3 per cent on the capital investments and inputs, whereas this was 50 per cent for tribal beneficiaries, subject to maximum of Rs 3000/- and Rs 5000/- respectively.
The Marginal Farmers and Agricultural Labourers Development Agency was launched during the year 1971-72 in the districts of Cuttack and Keonjhar. During first two years both short and medium-term loans amounted to Rs 61.32 lakhs and Rs 45.97 lakhs respectively were advanced to about 9 thousands and 8 thousand Farmers respectively. A total sum of Rs 1.6 cores was earmarked in the year 1974-75.
This amount has increased to Rs 4.2 crores in the year 1975-76. Under the project 2.6 lakh Marginal farmers and 0.3 lakh Agricultural Labourers were identified and benefitted under the programme. Among them about 70 per cent of the beneficiaries were enrolled as members of cooperative societies.
(vii) Drought Prone Area Programme (DPAP):
A Rural works programme was initiated in 1970-71 with the objective of providing development investment in drought prone areas. During the Fourth Five Year Plan the main emphasis of the programme was on labour intensive works such as medium and minor irrigation, road construction, afforestation, soil conservation and provision of drinking water. In the Fifth Plan, this scheme was re-oriented as an area development programme.
The strategy of this programme was to improve the economy of the areas covered, through a package of infrastructural and on-farm development activities with the objective of optimum utilisation of land, water, human and livestock resources. This programme was also targeted the weaker sections of the society like, Small and Marginal farmers, Agricultural Labourers and other rural poor, who have no assured source of income. Co-operative societies were organised to act accordingly.
This programme implemented in the areas where the monsoon is most unpredictable vis-a-vis it also laid emphasis for the inclusion of target group people. Thus, this programme was the first in its category, which included both the area approach and target group approach.
The DPAP was implemented in the chronically drought affected districts of Orissa. Considering the concentration of weaker sections as well as drought prone area the programme was implemented in 11 blocks of Kalahandi and 14 blocks of Phulbani district in Orissa.
During the Fourth Plan the scheme was fully financed by the Government of India. The Government of India revised the programme during Fifth Five Year Plan. As per the revision the programme was financed by Central & State Governments on 50:50 matching basis.
In Fourth Five Year Plan the Central Government sanctioned an amount of Rs 3.4 Crores to Orissa for the programme. During the years 1974-80 expenditure on the programme was stood at Rs 14.2 Crores on different schemes. The programme has been extended to 14 more blocks of Bolangir and Sambalpur districts (8 blocks in Bolangir and 6 blocks in Sambalpur) bringing total blocks to 39 in 4 districts of the State.
The State Plan allocation for the Sixth Plan was Rs 7 Crores against the anticipated expenditure of Rs 7.1 Crores. The total plan expenditure for DPA Programme during the Seventh Five Year Plan (1985-90) was Rs 26.5 Crores. The launching of Eighth Plan was delayed by two years due to political instability in the country.
However the programme received Rs 12.7 Crores in 1990-91 and 1991-92. The Drought Prone Area Development Programme is being operated in 47 blocks (2 blocks each in Boudh, Sonepur, Dhenkanal, 12 blocks in Phulbani, 10 blocks in Kalahandi, 8 blocks in Bolangir, 6 blocks in Bargarh and 5 blocks in Nuapada districts) Spread over to 8 districts of the State during the Eighth Five Year Plan (1992-97).
The Total expenditure incurred under the plan was Rs 36.9 Crores. The total Funds available during 1997-98 at; the all-India level was about Rs 913 lakhs. The total Expenditure incurred during the year was Rs 436 lakhs. The expenditure was thus 47.8 per cent of the total funds available under the programme. The percentage share of total expenditure to total funds available was about 48.6 per cent.
(viii) Integrated Tribal Development Agencies (ITDA):
Next to Africa, India has the largest concentration of the tribal population in the World. Though all the states have tribal population in various degrees of concentration, majority of them is found in Bihar, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan and West Bengal. Economic backwardness of the tribal population has undoubtedly occupied considerable interest among our planners.
The First Five Year Plan laid down its priorities for tribal development in three broad categories namely education, economic uplift and health, housing and other schemes. Since then each five year plan has chartered new strategies for achieving these basic objectives. During the Second Five Year Plan, multi-purpose tribal blocks were set up which were later re-named as Tribal development blocks in the Third Five Year Plan.
Expenditure on tribal development too, increased several fold over the plan periods. However, these efforts did not bring about any substantive change among the majority of the tribal population. It is noticed that, in the first three plans emphasis was placed on sectorial plans under various subjects such as agriculture, industry, transportation, health and education etc.
Most of these were conceived at the National or at the State level. The Fourth Five Year Plan gave importance to planning at the district level and to experimental studies on growth centres for evolving a planning strategy at the grass-root level. In this context, the Government of India has sanctioned pilot projects for tribal development in the central agricultural sector.
Among the Six projects sanctioned in All-India level, Ganjam and Koraput districts were selected in Orissa. The outlay on each of these projects was Rs 2 Crores. Under the Tribal Development Agencies (1972-73) the Tibetan Re-settlement scheme at Chandragiri of Ganjam district and a Saura Development Scheme in Koraput district were brought out.
A new strategy has been evolved for planning the development of the tribal communities during the Fifth Plan period. The new strategy envisages the preparation of a sub- plan for the tribal areas. The first exercise in this regard is to demarcate the tribal areas based on the tribal population.
(i) Areas, where the tribal concentration of 50 per cent or above.
(ii) Areas of dispersed tribal population below 50 per cent.
(iii) Extremely backward and isolated little communities.
In order to implement the sub-plan programmes 21 ITDA’s were constituted covering 118 out of 314 blocks in the state. Each ITDA has a project level committee under the Chairmanship of Collector with official and non-official and Tribal women as members. They have to draw up the plan and programmes at ITDA level and review and monitor the developmental activities of different Department.
Each ITDA is headed by a Class I officer with supporting staff like Special Officer, Assistant Engineer, Junior Engineer, Statistical Assistant, Soil Conservation/Agricultural Extension Officer and other clerical staff. 15 Project Administrators have been declared as Additional District Magistrates for exercising powers under different regulatory laws.
There were about 47 thousand villages in Orissa; out of that 18.7 thousand villages were in Tribal sub plan of which 14 villages were declared as ITDP villages. They were spread over to about 98 blocks of the State up to 1977-78. A total financial outlay of Rs 189 crore was earmarked for the programme in 1979-80 with a view to cover about 2 thousand families. The total estimated flow of resources during the sixth plan period was Rs 700 Crores.
It is observed that 36 per cent of the total outlay of the State during Sixth Plan Period was earmarked for investment as against 23 per cent during fifth plan period. About 5.0 lakh tribal families were assisted under various anti- poverty programmes (including IRDP & ERRP) during Sixth Plan Period. During the Seventh Plan period, about 7.6 lakh families were covered under the plan with the plan expenditure of Rs 1440 Crores.
The plan allocation for the sub-plan during the year 1990-91 and 91-92 was estimated at Rs 391 crores and Rs 590 crores respectively. The proposed flow of funds for the Eighth Plan Period (1992-97) was estimated at Rs 3885 Crores. The Flow of funds during 1992-93 was of the order of Rs 459 Crores. This covered about 34 families.
The total funds for the year 1993-94 have increased to Rs 466 crores. Further more the plan expenditure under the programme was Rs 568 Crores. Under the plan 43 thousand families were benefitted in the year 1993-94. Where as this stood at 41 thousand during 1994-95. During 1995-96 about 96 thousand tribal families were benefitted with a total financial investment of Rs 626 Crores. The total plan out lay for the year 1996-97 and 1997-98 was Rs 862 Crores and Rs 749 Crores respectively.
(ix) Modified Area Development Approach (MADA):
Article 46 of the constitution enjoins up on the State to promote with special care the educational and economic interest of the weaker sections and in particular Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and to protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.
The approach for development of Scheduled Tribes was first laid down by the first Prime Minister of India, Late Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in his “Tribal Panchseel” more particularly emphasised on the preservation of tribal culture. The Tribal Sub-plan approach was operated in mid seventies.
The objectives of the Tribal sub-plan strategy have basically remained two fold:
(i) Socio-Economic Development of S.Ts. and
(ii) Protection of tribals against exploitation.
Integrated Tribal Development Programmes in the form of Integrated Tribal Development Agencies (I T D A) were implemented in the areas where the concentration of tribal population is more than 50 per cent, and they live in extremely backward areas.
For the all-round development of the Tribals outside the Sub-plan areas a new programme called Modified Area Development Approach (MADA) was launched in 1978- 79. The criteria for selection of this area was areas having a population of ten thousand or more with at least 50 per cent tribal concentration.
The identified areas called as MADA Pockets. In these pockets individual family-oriented schemes as well as community benefit oriented programmes are to be implemented. There is a MADA level Advisory Committee for each MADA Sub-Collector concerned with officials and non- officials like peoples representatives as members. This Advisory Committee is responsible for drawn up programmes and overseas the implementation.
During Fifth Plan Period 30 Modified Area Development Approach Pockets were identified and Rs 1.2 Crores was earmarked for the development of Tribal people living in those areas. The number of pocket has increased to 37 during Six Plan period. A Total sum of Rs 5.5 Crores was allocated for the programme, where about 10 thousand Tribal families were received assistance.
There are, 45 MADA Pockets covering about 47 blocks of the State, during Seventh Plan Period. The total amount of Rs 7.2 Crores was earmarked for the implementation of different schemes. Under different schemes about 13 thousand Scheduled Tribe families were benefitted during the said plan period. In two annual plans i.e.; 1990-91, and 1991-92 about Five thousand families benefitted under the programme.
The total investment of Rs 2.2 crores and Rs 2.5 crores were made for the year 1990-91 and 1991-92 respectively. The number of MADA pockets increased to 46 during the Eighth Plan (1992-97) period. A total Fund of Rs 16.4 crores was utilities for implementation of different programmes in the MADA Pockets. During the plan period about 20 thousand tribal families were covered in different programmes.
(x) Command Area Development Programme (CADP):
The Command Area Development Programme was introduced in the Country in 1974-75 with a view to realising a fast and optimum utilisation of the irrigation potential created in the major irrigation projects. In Orissa, the programme was launched in 1976-77 covering 52 blocks in the districts of Cuttack, Puri, Balasore, Sambalpur and Bolangir.
It was spread over to about 5.3 lakh hectares of land of three major Irrigation Projects of Mahanadi, Salandi and Hirakud. The basic concept of the Programme was to step up agricultural production by optimum utilisation of water by controlled irrigation and adoption of multi-cropping pattern on an extensive scale.
The components of C A D Project which are given highest priority in realising these objectives are:
(i) Construction of field channels
(ii) Warabandi i.e; regulated and assured water supply to the farmers
(iii) Consolidation and
(iv) Adoption of Multi-cropping pattern.
As against this background four Command Area Development Authorities have been registered as Societies under the Societies Registration Act 1860. Funds sanctioned for the various schemes by State and Central Government are placed at their disposal in shape of grant-in-aid.
A special loan account was also set up by the ARDC with 50% contribution from Central Government and 25% each by the State Government and ARDC to finance on-farm development works for the ineligible and unwilling beneficiaries.
During the Fifth Plan the major achievement was, conducting of a large number of multi-crop demonstrations to make the farmers aware of the needs for having three cropping patterns. Small and Marginal farmers were also involved themselves in the programme and became members of Cooperative Societies.
A modest beginning was also made in demonstration of proper water Management by Construction of field channels to serve about 3 thousand hectares of land. A total financial provision of Rs 12.5 Crores was made for the programme.
The principle components of the Command Area Development Programme during the Sixth Five Year Plan (SOBS) have been:
(i) Construction of field channels including field drains
(ii) Topographical Survey
(iii) Soil Conservation and Survey
(iv) Rotational water supply to the beneficiary farmers
(v) Multiple Crop Demonstration, including mini-kits and farmers training.
During the said plan period about 1.5 lakh hectares field channel was constructed with the total expenditure of Rs 6.9 Crores.
The Command Area Development Programme expanded to 58 blocks in the districts of Cuttack, Puri, Balasore, Sambalpur, Bolangir and Koraput. An area of 2.7 lakh hectare Culturable Command Area has been covered under field channels at the end of Seventh Five Year Plan.
The Principal Component of CAD Programme during the Eighth Five Year Plan (1992-97) was:
(i) Survey Planning and Design
(ii) Construction of field channels, drains and land leveling
(iii) Rotational water supply
(iv) Adaptive Trails
(v) Farmers participation
(vii) Conjunctive use of surface and ground water
(viii) Marketing and Communication and
(ix) Monitoring and evaluation.
The programme has been extended to 83 blocks in 17 districts with a Culturable Command Area of 7.4 lakh hectares during Eighth Plan Period. A total sum of Rs 18.4 Crores was spending under the programme during said plan period.
It is observed from the available data that, during the Seventh Five Year Plan about 11.14 million hectares field channels were constructed. About 1.93 million hectare of land leveling activities and 4.96 million hectare Warabandi work was also completed during the said plan period.
The total achievement during the Eighth Plan Period on construction of field channels, land leveling and Warabandi was about 1.75 M.ha, 0.14 M.ha, and 2.75 M.ha respectively. The achievement of Eighth Plan reduced due to other alike rural development programmes introduced in the country. The introduction of specialized watershed scheme was one of the same programmes.
4. Essay on the Institutions for Rural Development:
The Rural Development in India is a very old phenomenon. Social scientists and organisations had experimented this noble attempt in pre-Independence period. Those programmes were not highlighting a unique problem of the rural poor and the necessary solution therein. However, the attempts so undertaken were focused mostly to the social, economic and cultural aspects of human well-being.
The noble attempts made by great and intellectual sons of the soil could not spread over to all part of the country due to lack of government attitude and patronage. The British Government had never felt the importance of rural development in the country. The rulers felt that, rural development was a part of social welfare, which is perhaps contradictory to the British ideology and policies.
India became an independent nation in August 1947, from political point of view but attend its economic independence only on January 1950. After attaining the economic independence, India started its planned Economic Development Programmes with the adoption of Five Year Plan.
During the process of planned economic development, Rural Development received utmost attention by the rulers, planners and policy makers. Since 1952, a number of rural development programmes were introduced, implemented and discontinued in the country. The programmes are varied in nature and approach. Some of the programmes proved to be successful and some failures.
The success and failure of the programmes governed by a number of factors important among them are:
(i) Nature of the programme,
(ii) Approach of the programme,
(iii) Finance for the programme,
(iv) Implementation of the programme.
Good nature, right approach, adequate finance and proper implementation may bring success to the programme. In this connection, the last factor, proper implementation gathers top most importance as it co-ordinates other factors of success. This can be achieved through good and right institutions.
As against this background, we would like to discuss the structure and functions of the institutions established exclusively for Rural Development from time to time.
These institutions can be classified into two such as:
(i) Main institutions and
(ii) Ancillary institutions.
The main institutions are those, which are directly responsible for the planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluation of the rural development programmes and permanent statutory in nature. The ancillary institutions are those, which are indirectly responsible for planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation and temporary in nature.
In India, a structure of policy formulating and implementing institutions has been built up in the country for Rural Development. Some of them are at the national level, some are single purpose, some relate to a particular target groups, some relate to area, sector and commodity.
However, all these institutions aim at fulfilling the national objectives of economic development in general and rural development in particular. The administrative organs of Central and State Governments involved in the process of rural development are at the Centre of the Organisational Structure. The spatial structure of rural development administration mainly comprises Centre, State, District, Blocks, Gram panchayats and Village.
At the Centre, the Ministry of Rural Development is in charge of all rural development a programme including those relating to land reforms, village and cottage industries, town and country planning and rural roads etc. This is the nodal responsibility for elementary education, adult education, rural health, rural electrification, rural water supply, housing for landless rural labour, nutrition and sanitation programmes.
The ministry has also responsible for all aspects of rural reconstruction and development. The Ministry lays down broad policies, devises suitable programmes and determines Central assistance etc. In addition to the Ministry of Rural Development, the ministries of Agriculture, Commerce and Civil Supplies, Energy, Irrigation and Industry also perform functions related to rural development.
The Ministry of Agriculture is in charge of agricultural extension, Ministry of Commerce and Civil Supplies has within its purview the Development Commissioner of Handlooms, several Commodity Boards and the public distribution system. The Ministry of Energy and Irrigation deals with all matters pertaining to water resources development and irrigation and accordingly has important functions pertaining to rural development.
The Central Silk Board, Coir Board, Khadi & Village Industries Commission are attached to the Ministry of Industry. The Ministry of Rural Development, for rural development with proper co-operation and coordination from other ministries. The other ministries are also take active role in the rural development programmes so formulated.
Besides, the Ministries, the Reserve Bank of India in the past and NABARD at present play the catalytic role for the success of rural development. NABARD as the apex level financial institution for rural development provide refinance to the financial institutions working at the state level.
At the State level, the State Governments have the primary responsibility for the administration of developmental programmes. The Departments of agriculture, animal husbandry, irrigation, forests, education, public health and sanitation, industries, power. Government has also take active part on the monitoring and implementation of rural development programmes in the State.
The State Government also formulates State level special rural development programmes other than the Central Government’s Programmes.
However, The State Level Organisational Committee is headed by the Secretary for Rural Development, who is in the rank of Commissioner of rural development is assisted by one Deputy Commissioner three Assistant Commissioners and a number of technical officers and subject specialists.
Besides, a representative of the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India is associated as a member of the Committee. There are a number of Statutory Corporations, Boards and other agencies providing infrastructural, promotional and supporting services for rural development.
Important among them are:
(i) Rural Electrification Corporation,
(ii) The Central Ground Water Board
(iii) Minor Irrigation and tube well Corporations
(iv) Central and State Warehousing Corporations
(v) Central and State Seed Corporations
(vi) Food Corporation of India
(vii) The Jute and the Cotton Corporation of India
(viii) National Cooperative Development Corporation and Cooperative banks in the State
(ix) National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation
(x) State Trading Corporations,
(xi) The Handicraft and Handloom Corporations
(xii) The Boards for Coffee, Tea, Rubber, Cardamom, Tobacco, Cashew and Coconut etc.
(xiii) The National Dairy Development Board
(xiv) The Khadi and Village Industries Commission
(xv) State Khadi and Village Industries Board
(xvi) The Central Silk Board
(xviii) The State Finance Corporation
(xix) The Agro-Industries Corporation
(xx) The Marketing Regulation Boards etc. The statutory corporations and Boards works for the implementation of various rural development programmes to their expertise.
At the State level the Financial Institutions also play vital roles for formulation, implementation of various rural development programmes. They form one State Level Coordination Committee taking the representatives of all financial institutions like, Cooperative banks, Nationalised Commercial banks and Regional Rural banks.
Besides, the representatives of various government departments are also participate in the formulation and Implementation strategy of the rural development programmes. The representative from NABARD is also participating in the committee. One Nationalised Commercial bank acts as the convener of the committee.
The Third Stage of Institutional Structure for Rural Development is the District Administration. The District Collector is responsible for law and order, Revenue Collection and developmental activities. In the past, the developmental programmes so formulated by the central and state governments were channelised through the District Administration, known as the District Development Coordination Committee.
This committee consisting of the Project Officer, the Managing Director of the Central Cooperative Societies, one/two representatives from Cooperative Societies and a Special Rural Credit Officer. Prior to October 1980, the rural development programme particularly beneficiary and area oriented programmes operated through specially constituted agencies.
They are, Small Farmers Development Agencies, (SFDA) Marginal Farmers and Agricultural Labourers Development Agencies, Drought Prone Area Programme (DPAP) and Integrated Tribal Development Programme (ITDP), etc. In 1980 the integrated rural development programme was launched. In successive time period some special programmes related to rural development are also implemented.
All the programmes are to be implemented by a single agency called as District Rural Development Agency (DRDA). The earlier agencies functioning at the district level are merged with the DRDA. The District Collector/Deputy Commissioner heads the DRDA.
Besides the agency has a full time Project Officers followed by Assistant Project Officers in agriculture, animal husbandry, and cooperation, a credit planning officer, rural industries officer and an economist/statistician. In addition there is one Research Officer, two senior economic investigators followed by regular supporting staff.
The peoples representatives like, the Chairman Zilla Parishad, Member of Parliament, the MLA and the representatives of Weaken Sections and women are also take active part in the planning process at the district level. The representatives of the lead bank, financial institutions also take active role with the DRDA to formulate District Credit Plans.
According to the Indian Constitution Amendment (74th) Act 1992 The State Governments constituted the District Planning and Development Board to provide necessary guidelines and direction to district planning units and to approve the district plans prepared by the planning units.
The board consists of a Chairman, a Vice-chairman and other members, viz.; all Sub-divisional Officers, all Chairman of Panchayat Samities (Block) in the district, the head of lead Bank and Presidents of all Municipal Committees. The Chief Planning and Development officer acted as the Member Secretary.
The district-planning unit comprised the Chief Planning and Development Officer, an economist, a Planning Officer, a Credit Planning Officer and other supporting staff. The position of the Chairman of DPB varies from state to state. In some State a Minister of State Government chairs it and the district Collector is the Chairman in some other.
The Block is the Fourth Important Institution for planning and implementation of rural development programmes. The overall resource situation, to identify human resource situation, particularly from the point of view of employment, to review the ongoing development activities to formulate a package of schemes/programmes to optimize production and augment employment and income, to identify gaps in infrastructure and to devise measures for filling these gaps. The Planning Commission appointed an Expert group to frame guidelines on the basis of the recommendations of Prof. M.L. Dantewala working group.
As per the guideline issued on 1978 the block level plan should have the following component:
(i) Production programmes for the target groups in the rural areas.
(ii) Manpower planning and skill development in relation to production programmes.
(iii) A supplementary works programme, where necessary to clear off the backlog of unemployment.
(iv) A programme for the self-employed in the trades and services sector.
(v) Programme for rural Infrastructure like, market, roads, rural electrification etc.
(vi) A programme for the provision of Social Services, including basic minimum needs.
(vii) A programme for Institutional support to the rural poor.
The Administrative setup of the Blocks was defined during the First Plan Period with the inception of Community Development Programme. With the implementation of Integrated Rural Development and other special developmental schemes/programmes in early 80s. The Administrative setups of the blocks were revised accordingly.
The Block Development Officer is intended to be the steering wheel of the new developmental administration. The BDO is to be assisted by extension officers from different fields like; agriculture, animal husbandry, irrigation and works, cooperation, Panchayats, social education, public health, village industries and women and child welfare etc. Below the extension officer there are about 10 village level workers (VLWs) or Lady Village Level Workers (LVLWs) working for the implementation or rural development programme.
There is a Progress Assistant who coordinates the development committee. The people’s representatives like; Chairman Panchayat Samiti, MLA and representatives of Weaker Sections and women also participate in the Developmental Planning at the block level. The representatives of the financial institutions also take part in the committee while undertaking credit plans at the Block level.
Village Panchayat is the last recognised institution responsible for planning and implementation of rural development programmes. The village Panchayat as an executive body implements the policies and decisions of the Gram Sabha comprising the entire population of the village. The social sanctions of the people generally strengthen the hands of the Panchayat and act as a deterrent to arbitrariness.
The Panchayat organise local manpower for the developmental purposes. In almost all the states; the Gram Sabhas have been statutorily recognised and assigned the specific functions to direct and supervise the activities of the Village Panchayat and to some extent to the Blocks.
The important functions performed by the Panchayats are:
(i) Civic amenities
(ii) Social welfare activities and
(iii) Development works.
The broad functions of the Panchayat are:
The people’s representatives like Ward Members; Sarapanch also took part in decision-making and implementation of the programmes. The village level worker represents the block in village committee. Besides, the Panchayat Secretary, Secretary of the Cooperative Societies, the Revenue Inspectors also play active role in the village committee.
Thus village committee comprises of the:
(i) Village level worker
(ii) Panchayat Secretary
(iii) Secretary of the Cooperative Societies.
(iv) Revenue Inspector
(v) The Sarapanch
(vi) The ward members
(vii) The villagers are the General body members.
It is to conclude that, the planning and Implementation of the rural development begins from the root i.e.; village and flows upward to the national level. Experience shows that the rural development programme decisions in respect of formulation, strategy & approach are undertaken at the national level and that flowing downward to the village in a “Trickle down approach”.
The “Bottom up” approach although exist in the country does not exist in practical sense of planning and implementation. However, the institutions for rural development are closely connected with each other, whether there exists “Trickle down” or “Bottom up” approach of planning and implementation of the rural development programmes in our country as well as the state.
5. Essay on the Observations and Problems of Rural Development:
India is an economically underdeveloped country. The condition of rural economy is worse. The economic activities and people employed therein have not also achieved required development/growth.
In order to break the jinx of rural economic sector, Government through its different plans introduced a number of rural development programmes. The programmes are also varied in nature. They are of sector, area and target oriented programmes. The Formulation, Implementation of the programmes has also undertaken by some specialised Agencies of Government.
In addition the NGOs, the Panchayati Raj institutions, financial institutions involved themselves in the success of the programmes. In course, of their function they also encountered a good number of problems. The problems were also varied in nature.
As the book/based on the macro level information/data. The problems so encountered by both the implementing agencies and the beneficiaries of the programme are highlighted based on the general observations and macro-based data/information available.
The problems mainly highlights the problems encountered by the Government as the planning and implementing machinery the Associated/ancillary agencies inevitable for the fruitful implementation of such rural development programmes, they are the Rural Development agencies/institutions/Departments, Financial Institutions, Non-Governmental Organisations, working as intermediary agencies for the implementation of rural development programmes/schemes.
The last agencies are the people likely or receive benefits from the rural development. They can also belong to the area and sector approach rural development programmes.
Thus, we can classify the rural development agency into three as; Government, Intermediary/Ancillary agencies and the targeted people/beneficiaries. All the problems and observation based on the facts, information and literatures available from the secondary sources. These may not hold good in all respects.
(i) 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 programmes should be micro in nature and growth oriented based on real values.
(ii) Inadequate Coordination:
As per the Guidelines all the developmental programmes in the rural areas are to be planned/formulated by the DRDA in cooperation and coordination of other departments and financial institution, agencies of peoples representatives etc. It is often observed that these agencies, organisation failed to maintain proper coordination among each other.
All the agencies/organisations 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 is required to maintaining good coordination among them.
(iii) Based on Ruling Party Principles and Ideologies:
In India, the rural development programmes are conceived/launched as per the principles and ideologies of the ruling party. Besides, in the participation for planning, formulation and implementation through their representatives tried to maintain such principles and ideologies.
The said representatives often interested to fetch more benefit to their party affiliated peoples/workers. This does not cover the problems of all class people. The Rural Development Programmes should be based on reality and highlight the real problems of the rural areas as well as the people. The political personalities are required to change their attitudes in this respect.
(iv) 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 sections people are not improved after 50 years of planned economic development.
The upliftment of their socioeconomic 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 the States/District 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. Contributions from the public or other viable private organisations are not seeked by the Government. Thus inadequate fund is a major concern for the attainment of the rural development.
(v) Land based Economy:
India’s rural economy being primarily land-based, all major developmental programmes of rural India are linked with agricultural developments. It is also evident that most of the available resources are controlled by few, this reinforces the hegemony of the few over many and the benefits do not tickle down to those who need them most.
Besides, the precarious land and man ratio suggests that by introducing radical land redistribution in rural India very limited egalitarian goals can be achieved and if done so, that will mean only sharing of poverty and no real development.
(vi) Authority Structure:
Rural development plan implementation is required to be accepted by the local level functionaries who attend the District consultative committee meetings and that they are in a position to mobilise financial and organisational resources to fulfil accepted commitments.
It is observed that the authority structure in the administration and the banks is such that those who attend such meetings are neither in a position to accept firm commitments on behalf of their departments, banks without reference to higher authorities not to act accordingly.
Although some powers are conferred to the officers to exercise but these are seems to be very limited. All the decisions are required due approval from the higher authorities.
(vii) 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 sections like small, marginal farmers, agricultural and non-agricultural labourers, rural artisans, scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and deprived women etc. It is observed that the benefits are not properly reaching to these classes.
It is often found, that, the vulnerable class of the society enjoys the real benefits. The subsidy components of the rural development programmes tend to allow to non-target groups, specially the programme implementing bureaucratic class, rather than including expansion of production base of the beneficiaries.
Due to illiteracy and ignorance the real benefits sometimes enjoyed by the Third party commonly speaking the middlemen and the village touts including the petty personnel having a little political affiliation.
(viii) Low Sustaining Impact:
It is observed that a considerable number of rural development 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 in-case of livestock assets) failed to push the beneficiaries up on the scale of production and productivity. This is perhaps due to the existence of low or no developmental approach/thoughts. This factor again dominated by the lack of awareness about the programmes.
(ix) 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 emphasised 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 per cent in some selected schemes and class of beneficiaries. This reduces the productive motive, attitude of the beneficiaries.
(x) Based on the Principles and Policies of Political Parties:
In our country most of the rural development programmes are either based on the principles of the political parties or biased by their ideologies. Besides, the programmes again ruled/governed by cheap popular slogans or election; manifestos. Due to these, causes the programmes failed to attain the expected success.
It is also observed that after the completion of one political party’s rule the next political party, which assumes power, hesitates to carry out the same. Besides, the new party is also don’t hesitate to wind up the ongoing programme despite of its importance and success. In India, due to these problems, the rural development has not attained after five decades of the planned economic development.
6. Essay on the Suggestions for Rural Development in India:
1. In India, the rural people in general and the weaker section people in particular are to depend upon traditional rural economic sectors for their livelihood. The rate of literacy in rural areas is very low in comparison to urban areas. Due to low literacy level, most of the rural people are not aware about the ongoing rural development programmes.
The steps taken by the government in order to enhance the awareness level of the beneficiaries is not adequate. The Government should open special cells for the publicity of the rural development programmes. The Government is required to adopt the publicity method, which is conducive to the nature and requirement of the rural people.
The people are to be provided with adequate instruments for enhancement of awareness level. The existing system of publicity about the rural development is required to be re-considered and should be based on rural realities prior to the Selection of the Scheme as well as the Beneficiaries, the implementing agencies should provide details of the programme to the rural people, who are likely to be benefitted serious endeavour is, therefore, needed to make the rural people aware about the resources earmarked for rural development in various Government departments.
2. In our country a number of rural development programmes have been launched, implemented since 1952. It is often said that, the rural development programmes failed to attain its desired goal due to improper identification of the programmes, schemes and the beneficiaries therein.
The Implementing Agencies attitude to implement the programme is target oriented. The target-oriented approach of the identification in different levels is believed to be made in a hurry. This approach forced the agencies for wrong identification of programmes, schemes and beneficiaries. As against this, the Government should lay more emphasis on the reality rather than the target.
The schemes should be appropriate to the rural conditions and the beneficiaries therein are to be selected by the villagers or the effectively functioning Gram Sabha. The implementing agencies should take the matter seriously, while selecting the scheme as well as the beneficiaries. The selection of the schemes is needed to be made by the beneficiaries. Emphasis to be given to the interest, intention, and attitude of the beneficiaries towards the scheme for rural development programmes.
It is to conclude that, A realistic programme on rural development with the potentiality of the successful implementation, can only be prepared if rural poor are taken into confidence and are assisted to draw the development programme, taking the village as unit. Outsiders, as technocrats, Economists etc. should only assist them as Friends to make their own decision.
3. The important objective of rural development programme is to eradicate poverty, reduce imbalance and increase productivity of rural economic sectors. Thus, the beneficiaries of rural development programmes are rural poor living below the poverty line. The poverty line in India determined by the relative standards.
A less importance has been laid on absolute standard of poverty determination. Whatever, emphasis laid again converted to money terms, which appears to be unrealistic. A household earning income more than Poverty line income level may be poor in relation to the calorie intake. Thus, the determination of poverty line required reconsidered. Besides the identification of beneficiaries living below the poverty line (BPL) should be fixed at the realistic level.
4. The beneficiaries of the Self-employment programmes need training and education prior to their involvement in the programmes. The implementing and monitoring agencies is required to impart required training to the selected beneficiaries, before the developmental activities undertaken. Besides, rural people should be provided with the scope of expressing their own felt needs and need to be provided with an opportunity to choose economic activities for their own development.
5. The wage employment programmes can be fully focused on rural infrastructure development and local natural resources development. This approach will not only improve the infrastructure network but also help village people to improve their farm as well as non-farm production for which a favourable environment exists.
6. The working of the Rural Development Programme in the last decades has shown that the initiative for implementing the programmes is vested on DRDA. The role of DRDA is more or less confined to the planning and release of subsidies for rural development programmes.
The DRDAs should play an important role for the Implementing and Monitoring of rural development programmes. Regular monitoring and evaluation of rural development programmes in real manner could solve the ongoing problems encountered therein and can also helpful to solve the problems. This will pave the path of success to the rural development programmes and attainment of rural development.
7. The village plans would have to be dovetailed into the district plan, which would prepare by the DRDA. Proper appraisal of the rural development schemes is needed. Besides, for the success of Rural Development Programmes it should be ensured that the Project Directors of the DRDA are given tenure of not less than three years so as to inculcate in them a sense of commitment to the programme. The other staff in the key posts should not be disturbed frequently
8. The various Government departments with specialised expertise and banks should work in close co-operation with the district planning unit in order to have a coordinated and scientific plan, the availability of local resources, the potential for alternative productive works and of viable schemes, to be looked into.
9. Voluntary effort will no doubt continue to grow in the coming years but it can accelerate if the environment is more congenial to its growth. Voluntary Organisations with professional and Managerial Capabilities can act as a catalyst and can organise beneficiaries, involve people in planning and development and provide the necessary support to make development a reality. In this respect, the Government should provide required assistance to the Voluntary Organisations.