drought relief for tangible and intangible benefits: a study of government drought relief work in...

Drought Relief for Tangible and Intangible Benefits:

A Study of Government Drought Relief Work in Some of the Drought-Prone States of India

National Institute of Disaster Management Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi

2005

Suggested citation: NIDM. 2005. Drought Relief for Tangible and Intangible

Benefits: A Study of Government Drought Relief Work in Some of the Drought-

Prone States of India. National Institute for Disaster Management, New Delhi,

India.

3

Contents

Page No

LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................... 4

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................... 7

PREFACE ................................................................................................................................................... 8

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 10

METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................. 12

RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................. 16

RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 43

ANNEXURE I .......................................................................................................................................... 50

ANNEXURE II ........................................................................................................................................ 83

ANNEXURE III ....................................................................................................................................... 82

ANNEXURE IV ....................................................................................................................................... 84

ANNEXURE V ....................................................................................................................................... 100

ANNEXURE VI ..................................................................................................................................... 106

List of Tables

Table 1. Drought frequency as identified by the non-beneficiary respondents (%

response). ................................................................................................... 18

Table 2. Indicators for identification of drought frequency (non-beneficiaries) ........ 19

Table 3. Source of information on drought relief works for beneficiaries in study

location of three states ................................................................................ 20

Table 4. Source of information on drought relief works for non-beneficiaries in the

study locations of three states ...................................................................... 21

Table 5. Drought relief vs mitigation (Beneficiaries) .............................................. 21

Table 6. Drought relief vs mitigation (Non-beneficiaries) ....................................... 21

Table 7. Perception about how drought risk mitigation differs from drought relief

(beneficiaries) ............................................................................................. 22

Table 8. Perception about how drought risk mitigation differs from drought relief

(non-beneficiaries) ...................................................................................... 22

Table 9. Declaration of drought as perceived by the beneficiaries of drought relief . 23

Table 10. Number of years participated in drought relief works ............................. 24

Table 11. Willingness to participate in government led drought relief programs ...... 24

Table 12. Options available with the communities in absence of drought relief works

(beneficiaries) ............................................................................................. 25

Table 13. Duration of drought relief works implemented as reported by the

beneficiaries ................................................................................................ 28

Table 14. Number of days for which the drought relief works were offered. ........... 28

Table 15. Wages received by the beneficiaries in different states during the recent

drought relief works of 2003-04. ................................................................... 29

Table 16. Adequacy of drought relief as opined by the respondents (figures % of

responses). ................................................................................................. 29

Table 17. Additional benefits accrued through drought relief works ........................ 31

5

Table 18. Women participation in drought relief works as identified by the

beneficiaries. ............................................................................................... 31

Table 19. Ratings of women participation in drought relief works (least satisfactory to

most satisfactory) ........................................................................................ 32

Table 20. Should women be offered different kinds of works than men? ................ 32

Table 21. Food consumption during drought times (beneficiaries). ........................ 32

Table 22. Percent reduction in food consumption of high energy and high nutritional

items. ......................................................................................................... 33

Table 23. Functioning of PDS system during the drought time ............................... 34

Table 24. Role of ICDS system during the drought time ........................................ 34

Table 25. Time spent by communities in fetching water (min) ............................... 35

Table 26. Ratings for the quantity, quality and timeliness of water supply during

drought relief .............................................................................................. 35

Table 27. Access to water over the years due to drought relief works .................... 36

Table 28. Major source of fodder during drought as informed by the communities. . 37

Table 29. Source of fodder during normal times. .................................................. 37

Table 30. Distress sell and death of cattle during drought years. ........................... 38

Table 31. Regaining of sold out cattle by the communities. ................................... 38

Table 32. State wise cattle population in India with specific reference to the study

locations (figures in 000, for the year 2003-04, Source: Department of Animal

Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in). .................................... 38

Table 33. State wise milk production in India with specific reference to the study

locations (figures in 000, for the year 2003-04, Source: Department of Animal

Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in). .................................... 38

Table 34. Area under fodder and pastures in the study locations (figures in 000 ha,

for the year 1999-2000, Source: Department of Animal Husbandry, Government

of India, http://dahd.nic.in). ......................................................................... 39

Table 35. Health related problems during drought ................................................ 39

Table 36. Impact of drought relief works on children’s education ........................... 40

6

Table 37. Trend in migration. ............................................................................... 40

Table 38. Where do you migrate? ........................................................................ 40

Table 39. Impact of drought relief works on migration. ......................................... 41

List of Figures

Figure 1. Participatory tools such as household surveys and group discussions using

priority ranking and SWOT analysis were used. ............................................. 14

Figure 2. District level consultation workshops were conducted in Rajasthan and

Karnataka. .................................................................................................. 15

Figure 3. Non-existent design and implementation: Poor designing and ineffective

implementation has led to debacle of marudi mahaband yojana of Orissa. ...... 26

Figure 4. Where is sustainability? Earthworks carried out during drought relief often

live short life and tend to get damaged soon. ................................................ 27

Figure 5. Quality conscious? Check dam constructed in 2004 started showing cracks,

reducing the water harvesting efficiency of the structure. .............................. 27

Figure 6. Needs resizing: ICDS does help the children and old-aged during normal

times, what about in drought times? ............................................................. 33

Figure 7. Misplaced priorities: The Self-Help Groups (SHGs) could prove a boon to

local level monitoring of drought relief works. ............................................... 41

Preface

India has an irrigated area of more than 45 million hectares contributed from both its

surface and subsurface water resources. Though this irrigated area has brought the

country’s food production to a surplus state, large tract of India’s land mass is still

rain fed and majority of it is drought prone due to the rainfall variability in temporal

and spatial scales. Recurring droughts in these areas have made them even more

vulnerable to future droughts resulting into an unending vicious circle.

The Government of India has put in place a wide range of measures to tackle

the perennial problem of drought. These measures include long term programs such

as the Drought Prone Area Program (DPAP) and Desert Development Program (DDP)

which are aimed at improving the natural resources of the affected areas such that

the drought related risks are mitigated. In addition to these programs, the

government has also designed drought relief programs which come into operation

upon declaration of the drought.

These drought relief programs are aimed at providing immediate relief to the

affected population while helping them improve their purchasing power and access

to basic needs such as food, water and fodder for cattle. With the recurring droughts

ravaging the nation year after year, there has been a large debate on the way the

drought relief measures have been administered and the impacts they are

generating. Since large amount of public money has been spent in these programs,

the Ministry of Agriculture has rightly felt to study the impact of present drought

relief interventions in the major drought prone states of the country.

This report brings out salient findings of a short study instituted by NIDM on the

tangible and intangible benefits of drought relief management. The study was

possible with a set of indicators identified, questionnaires finalized and field surveys

conducted with the help of local volunteers.

I acknowledge the contributions of Dr SVRK Prabhakar, Program Associate,

UNDP-GoI DRM Program and Dr Santosh Kumar, Professor, NIDM in carrying out this

study in association with the state and district level collaborators. I also acknowledge

the inputs obtained from Dr Cody L. Knutson, Water Resources Scientist, National

9

Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC), Nebraska, US; Dr Donald Wilhite, Director,

NDMC; Dr PK Joshi, South Asia Coordinator, IFPRI New Delhi; for technical guidance

in designing and implementing the study. No words would be sufficient to thank all

the state, district and village level functionaries who extended great support to the

study team by providing relevant information and coordinating the field visits. A list

of persons involved in this study has been provided in the Annexure I.

P.G. Dhar Chakrabarti

Executive Director, NIDM

Introduction

India has a diverse set of geo and physiographic conditions typifying its size. Its

diversity is also reflected through various kinds of disasters that the country is

vulnerable to. For instance, it has been identified that nearly 57% of the land mass is

prone to earthquakes, 12% prone to floods, 8% is vulnerable to tropical cyclones. All

these disasters are categorized as sudden onset disasters as they seldom give

sufficient time for the administration to react in advance such that the impacts could

be minimized. This very basic characteristic, apparently, seems to bring these

disasters to focus in media and elsewhere. However, slow onset disasters such as

drought, which is expected to occur in different phases spanning meteorological

drought to socio-economic drought, gives ample time for the administration to react

to this disaster. The same characteristic of this disaster makes the communities to

adapt to it over a period of time such that at a given point of time the communities

stop looking at it as a threat to their immediate and long-term prospects.

India has faced number of drought years, ever since the meteorological data is

available. Out of these years, few of them could be termed as severe to most severe

droughts. The all-India drought of 2002 caused an agricultural income loss of Rs

39000 crores to the country. Such losses, which prove costly to the nation’s economy,

can repeat in no time as it was observed in 2004. This tantamount to say that the

drought risk of the nation is ever increasing and hence deserves concerted actions

from all quarters of the society to thwart its negative impacts on the nation’s

development.

For example, the latest all India drought of 2002 saw the country spending Rs

2013 crores from the Calamity Relief Fund (CRF), Rs 2201 crores from the National

Calamity Contingency Fund (NCCF), and 87.36 MTs of foodgrains for relief

employment under special SGRY. The country also spent huge amount of resources

11

for transporting water and fodder by rail up to 30th June 20031.

In addition, the country has been spending considerable amount of resources on

long-term drought risk mitigation programs through watershed development

programs. These watershed programs, either implemented by the government of

India through its Drought Prone Areas Program (DPAP) or by various non-

governmental organizations, either in isolation or in conjunction with the state and

below level governments, produced different results across the country, ranging from

absolute failure to superb success. However, the recurring droughts proved that the

drought proofing is far from reality and the country has a lot to achieve in this area.

Severe droughts have not spared even those areas covered under long-term drought

mitigation such as DPAP.

While drought relief aims at providing quick relief to the affected communities,

so that the life returns to normalcy, it has to be understood that often huge amount

of money has been spent in a very short span of time. The bone of contention is

whether all this expenditure has led to tangible and intangible benefits? It is

worthwhile to know the answer to this question.

The present study on drought relief for tangible and intangible benefits aims at

understanding what kind of benefits were accrued to the communities through

drought relief interventions such that a corrective course of action could be chalked

out. The study had a broad objective of understanding the elements affected by

drought, identifying the tangible and intangible benefits of drought relief and

studying the existing drought relief mechanism at few locations such that the

deficiencies are identified and rectified for a better drought relief management. For

more details on the concept of the study, please refer to Annexure II.

1 Drought 2002. A Report. 2004. Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture.

Methodology

This section describes the methodology adopted in the present study on drought

relief for tangible and intangible benefits. The basic methodology of the study

comprised of conducting interviews with various stakeholders of drought relief

(communities, implementation machinery such as governments at different levels

and NGOs) with the help of structured, open-ended questionnaires developed

focusing on the identified indicators (Annexure III).

1. Identification of study locations

The study was carried out in three states of Rajasthan, Karnataka & Orissa, the

three most drought prone ones in India. Due to the budgetary and time constraints,

which were the prime factors limiting the scope of the study, it was decided to

randomly select one of the most drought prone districts in each state and conduct

the study in a single village in each district where the household surveys were to be

carried out. The household surveys were primarily conducted with the help of the

questionnaires, which are a mixture of quantitative and qualitative questions

(Annexure IV), by the qualified field data enumerators.

The study village was selected based on the following criteria:

The village should have undergone drought in the past three years

It should have been declared as drought affected

Drought relief works were carried out in the village at least once in the past three

years.

This criterion is based on the reason that the survey heavily relies on the

memory of the respondents and it would have been difficult for the respondents to

recall events happened in the distant past. Brief background information has been

provided on the study locations in Annexure VI.

13

2. Study Partners

The study partners were identified based on their experience in the respective

states and their expertise in carrying out such impact studies. For Rajasthan, the

Institute of Development Studies (IDS), Jaipur was chosen as nodal institute which

provided advice on identification of study location and coordinated the field visits of

the study team. The study was carried out independently in the states of Orissa and

Karnataka with the support of the state and district level administration and domain

experts available there (Annexure I).

3. Indicators

Identification of appropriate indicators for assessing the efficacy of drought relief

has been an important exercise before the questionnaires were prepared and surveys

were conducted. The following aspects formed the guide-rules for identification of

indicators:

Broader objectives of drought relief interventions

Boundaries of the study, which is mostly limited to the community level.

Indicators were identified based on the direct and indirect impacts that the

drought relief interventions could create. Direct impacts are resultant of the

perceivable changes brought out by the food, fodder and water supplies and

employment generation programs, which are part of the drought relief interventions.

Other impacts were identified which are basically the spill-over effects of drought

relief interventions and are resultants of interaction of social fabric and administrative

interventions. The spill-over interactions were broadly grouped into logical groups

which were well reflected in the questionnaires as well. Efforts were also made to

include issues related to gender etc.

Study on the administrative aspects of drought relief interventions could not

have been avoided for the reasons that the administrative bottlenecks could always

modify the probable impacts of the drought relief interventions. Hence, a partial

focus has also been made on how the drought relief works were carried out and how

the services were delivered to the affected communities.

14

4. Survey Questionnaires

The questionnaires were designed based on the desk study and expert

consultation. The following experts were consulted for finalization of questionnaires:

1. Dr Cody L. Knutson, Water Resources Scientist, NDMC, Nebraska, Lincoln, US.

2. Dr PK Joshi, Regional Coordinator, IFPRI, New Delhi.

3. Dr Donald Wilhite, Director, National Drought Mitigation Center, Nebraska,

Lincoln, US.

Further, the indicators and questionnaires were also shared with the state level

collaborating partners for their comments before they were finalized in a meeting

with the JS (MoA) and Director (MoA) at the Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi.

The structured questionnaires and the data collection formats were used for

obtaining the information from the drought relief beneficiaries, non-beneficiaries, the

village level administration, the Panchayat Raj Institutions, Revenue Administration,

and community level institutions such as NGOs, SHGs etc. These questionnaires

included a mixture of qualitative and quantitative questions. Where ever possible, the

respondents were asked to rank their qualitative answers in the scale of 1 – 5.

5. Participatory Research Tools

Figure 1. Participatory tools such as household surveys and group discussions using priority ranking and SWOT analysis were used.

During the field study, in addition to the questionnaires and data collection

formats, at least three kinds of participatory rural appraisal (PRA) tools were used to

understand the nature of relief interventions and the cause for the existing problems

if any. Most important ones are Focused Group Discussion (FGD), Problem Tree

15

Analysis, and Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis.

6. Consultation Workshops

Figure 2. District level consultation workshops were conducted in Rajasthan and Karnataka.

Consultation workshops were conducted at Jaipur (Rajasthan) and Kolar

(Karnataka), with the district and below level administration to ascertain the issues in

drought relief management and to find possible solutions for the same, on 29-08-

2005 and 09-08-05 respectively. Another brainstorming workshop was conducted at

NIDM, New Delhi, where the state level functionaries such as Relief Commissioners,

representatives of district administration and Non-governmental Organizations

(NGOs) were introduced to the broad findings of the study to find possible solutions

to the issues raised.

Results

This section contains information about the salient findings of the study and a

discussion on them. The findings have been grouped in to the following heads.

1) Drought

1.1. Frequency and onset of drought

1.2. Awareness among communities

1.3. Drought relief vs drought risk mitigation

1.4. Declaration of drought

2) Drought Relief

2.1. Employment generation programs

2.2. Willingness to participate

2.3. Kind of drought relief works

2.4. Adequacy of drought relief

2.5. Benefits accrued through drought relief works

2.6. Women and drought relief works

2.7. Food & nutrition

2.8. Role of ICDS and PDS systems

3) Water

4) Fodder

5) Health

6) Education

7) Migration

8) NGOs, SHGs and drought relief

17

1. Drought

Drought has different connotations for different sections of the society. It is

important to understand how every one perceive drought as happening such that a

‘user friendly’ intervention could be designed. The survey included a set of questions

on what communities perceive drought as and how do they recognize it as

happening. The results are discussed here.

1.1. Frequency and onset of drought In general, the survey revealed a majority opinion of increasing frequency of

drought related events (Fig 1, Table 1) during recent past. On an average, 64% of

the respondents opined that the drought frequency has been increasing during

recent past (6-8 years) while the years before that were normal. The similar

response was also obtained from non-beneficiary members of the community where

76% of them said that the drought severity has been increasing while 11% of them

found it declining (Table 1).

0102030405060708090

100

Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

Increasing Decreasing No change Cannot say

Fig. 1. Drought frequency as observed by the respondents (mean values in %).

18

Table 1. Drought frequency as identified by the non-beneficiary respondents (% response).

Rajasthan2 Karnataka Orissa Mean

Increasing 50 93 83 76

Decreasing 33 0 0 11

No change 17 7 17 13

Cannot say 0 0 0 0

Communities have

a number of indicators

based on which they

identify the frequency

of occurrence of

drought. Two kinds of

indicators were

observed for identifying

the frequency of drought incidences (Box 1). While one set of them are directly

related to water (rainfall, levels of the ground water table etc), the other set of

indicators are entirely different from the first set.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


1 Declining rainfall 2 Traditional indicators3 Declining water tables 4 Reduction in production/income5 Reduction in fodder 6 All the above7 Cannot say 8 Increase in rainfall

Fig. 2. Indicators useful for identification of drought frequency (beneficiaries).

2 Though the state names have been mentioned here, they should be read with reference to the study locations only and no effort has been made to generalize the findings. Please refer to Annexure VI for details on the study locations.

Box 1. Indicators for increasing drought frequency

Declining rainfall Declining water tables Reduction in crop production Reduction in household incomes Increasing dry spells over the years

19

In addition, there is a wealth of traditional indicators available with the

communities, that the communities rely upon to identify if a particular year is going

to be drought year or not (Box 2). On an average, 53% of drought relief

beneficiaries said they rely on the water related indicators and only 4% believe on

the traditional indicators. This figure is 50% in case of non-beneficiaries. There was

more reliance on traditional indicators in Karnataka (11%) than in other states. It

appears that in Rajasthan the communities consider a combination of all these

indicators to see if the year is going to be a drought year or not.

Table 2. Indicators for identification of drought frequency (non-beneficiaries)

Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Mean 1 Declining rainfall 33 33 83 50 2 Traditional indicators 0 0 0 0 3 Declining water tables 17 7 0 8 4 Reduction in production 0 0 0 0 5 Reduction in employment 0 33 0 11 6 Increasing production 33 0 0 11 7 Change in water quality 17 0 0 6 8 Shortage of fodder 0 7 0 2 9 Scarcity of food 0 20 0 7 10 Breaks/late rainfall 0 0 17 6

The survey revealed a relatively high reliance on these indicators by the

Box 2. Traditional indicators for onset of drought and rainfall

Flowering of bamboo Mid season dry spell Heavy dew in July-August Rainfalls if wind direction is in North to South Rainfalls if kumber fruit is eaten by parrot Non ripening of black berry fruit in June If the Janki tree don’t bear fruits Seed setting in kumb fruit Depending on the way the kumbh fruit is eaten by parrot Interrupted sound by rabbit leads to breaks in monsoon Seed setting at the lower side of the fruit leads to heavy rainfall in the later

part of the season Laying of eggs by bharatiya bird in swampy areas and there would not be

rain till the kitten emerge out of the eggs. High probability of deficit rainfall is strongly correlated with the delayed onset

of rainfall. Warm winter precedes a dry rainy season

20

communities. On an average, 64% of the beneficiary respondents felt that these

indicators are sufficient to decide the drought frequency and probability of an

impending drought and only 5% of the respondents declined them as insufficient.

The figure is high in Karnataka (78%) when compared to the other states, where as

the communities in Orissa are aware of more number of indicators.

It is also relevant to discuss these findings in relation to the impact of drought

on various livelihoods of the communities. It has been observed that the

communities, whose livelihoods are more linked to the availability of water, often

kept track of their incomes which fluctuate with the changing rainfall conditions over

the year. For instance, farmers identified increasing drought frequency by looking at

his farm income and so an artisan.

1.2. Awareness among communities All the respondents were aware about the drought relief interventions in their

village, without any exception. However, there were differences in the source from

where they get the information about the drought relief. At all the locations, the

information about the imminent drought relief works reached the communities

through the local Gram Panchayat (Secretary, Surpanch or members), mass media,

neighbors, friends and contractors. Table 3 indicates that around 44% of the

beneficiaries obtained the information from the gram Panchayat, while 38% from

neighbors or friends followed by mass media (15%). However, it is interesting to

know that, in some cases (3%), the respondents obtained information from the

contractors who implement the drought relief works.

Table 3. Source of information on drought relief works for beneficiaries in study location of three states

Source of information Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Mean

1 GP 61 10 60 44 2 Radio/newspaper 6 40 0 15 3 Neighbors/friends 33 40 40 38 4 Contractor 0 10 0 3

The picture is different in the case of non-beneficiaries. 67% of the non-

beneficiaries came to know about drought relief works from the neighbors and

friends followed by GP (17%) and mass media such as radio (12) and contractors

(5%). All responses where the information source was contractors were from

Karnataka, where, allegedly, the drought relief works are being carried through the

21

mediators who are established contractors. In Orissa, friends and neighbors were

found to be the main source of information for the non-beneficiaries.

Table 4. Source of information on drought relief works for non-beneficiaries in the study locations of three states

Source of information Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Mean

1 GP 50 0 0 17

2 Radio 0 36 0 12

3 Neighbors/friends 50 50 100 67

4 Contractors 0 14 0 5

1.3. Drought relief vs drought risk mitigation Drought risk mitigation aims at reducing the impacts of low rainfall in the long

term though the help of various natural resource management practices. These

measures largely concentrate on rainwater conservation through a combination of

approaches, both in situe and ex situe such that the availability of water increases in

a given location.

Table 5. Drought relief vs mitigation (Beneficiaries)

Different or not Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Mean

Yes 7 60 36 34

No 67 40 64 57

Cannot say 27 0 0 9

The study revealed a considerable ignorance (57%) about the long term drought

risk management measures required to mitigate the ill impacts of the drought (Table

5). However, the awareness levels among the non-beneficiaries found to be much

higher than among the beneficiaries (Table 6). Awareness level in Orissa is much

lower than in any other study locations.

Table 6. Drought relief vs mitigation (Non-beneficiaries)

Relief vs Mitigation: Different or not Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

Yes 50 80 0 43

No 50 20 100 57

Cannot say 0 0 0 0

Respondents differed in their perception of how the drought mitigation differs

from the drought relief (Table 7). It was observed that majority of them couldn’t

22

differentiate between drought mitigation and relief (82%) while some of them (on an

average 4%) opined that these programs are conducted throughout the year (4%), it

results in permanent constructions (4%), and gives permanent solution to the water

related problems (4%). Only 3% of them recognized them as synonymous with the

watershed works while rest of them opined as no different. The Tables below

provides the inter-study location differences in the perceptions.

Table 7. Perception about how drought risk mitigation differs from drought relief (beneficiaries)

How is it different? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Conducted through out the year 0 11 0 4

2 Cannot say 100 67 80 82

3 Gives permanent solution 0 11 0 4

4 Permanent constructions 0 11 0 4

5 Watershed works 0 0 10 3

6 No difference 0 0 10 3

7 More structures and employment 0 0 0 0

Table 8. Perception about how drought risk mitigation differs from drought relief (non-beneficiaries)

How is it different? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Conducted through out the year 0 0 0 0

2 Cannot say 23 15 100 46

3 Permanent constructions 8 23 0 10

4 sufficient water 0 46 0 15

5 canals 0 15 0 5

1.4. Declaration of drought Declaration of drought is an important aspect and has different kinds of

significances for different players involved in drought relief. A timely declaration of

drought could prove useful to the affected communities and a delay in declaration

could mean further deterioration in the socio-economic status of the affected ones.

Hence, looking at the importance of this aspect, efforts were made to find whether

the declaration of drought has been made timely or not.

The beneficiary respondents were able to give a broad indication about when

the drought is declared. The general response was that the drought is often declared

23

late by about one month (18% respondents) to three months (28% respondents).

The delay appears to be more in Rajasthan and Orissa (after 3 months) than in

Karnataka (after one month) (Table 9). However, there seems to be more ignorance

about the declaration of drought in Karnataka as 22% of the respondents said they

didn’t know about any such declaration, when compared to the other study locations.

Table 9. Declaration of drought as perceived by the beneficiaries of drought relief

When the drought is declared Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Immediately 0 0 0 0

2 1 After 1-4 weeks 22 11 8 14

3 After 1 month 6 22 25 18

4 After 2 months 6 11 21 13

5 After 3 months 50 0 33 28

6 After > 4 months 17 0 13 10

7 Not known 0 33 0 11

8 No one declares 0 22 0 7

The girdhavary system plays a vital role in declaration of drought. It was learnt

that the preparation of the girdhavari report often takes take time, exceeding a

fortnight, and hence the delay in declaration. This calls for even a better or at least

some kind of corroboratory evidence to check the accuracy of this system in

identifying the drought affected locations and beneficiaries such that an early

drought relief works could be initiated.

2. Drought Relief

Largely, drought relief has been administered in different ways that lead to a

reduction in the impact of drought on the communities. This study focused on three

aspects of it i.e. employment generation, supply of drinking water and fodder for

cattle. These interventions were studied in dimensions of adequacy, timeliness and

quality (quality of produce supplied in case of food, quality of works carried out in

case of assets generated etc). The study also tried to assess the quality of services

the government has provided as an overall indicator of effective drought relief

management.

24

2.1. Employment generation programs Employment generation programs are generally aimed at providing additional

avenues of income such that the purchasing power of the target population remains

satisfactory to lead life during the times of stress. This very basic definition makes us

understand that there are quantity and quality parameters assigned to it.

The Table 10 provides information on the number of years the respondents have

been participating in drought relief works. It is important for us to consider this

information to validate the findings of this study based on the number of years the

respondents have been involved in drought relief.

Table 10. Number of years participated in drought relief works

Years Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 22 70 18 37

2 11 20 9 13

3 11 10 50 24

4 22 0 5 9

5 17 0 14 10

6 6 0 5 3

7 0 0 0 0

8 & above 11 0 0 4

2.2. Willingness to participate The willingness to participate can be considered as an indicator of the reliance

by the communities on the drought relief programs. Efforts were also made to assess

the secondary benefits accrued to the communities from the drought relief works,

those benefits other than the food and money called the wage.

It can be seen from Table 11 that the willingness to participate is much higher in

Orissa (92%) while it is least in Rajasthan (56%) followed by Karnataka.

Beneficiaries who don’t want to participate and look for entirely different kind of

Livelihood Avenues are also high at the study location of Rajasthan. The picture from

the non-beneficiaries

Table 11. Willingness to participate in government led drought relief programs

Willing to participate? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

25

Willing to participate? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 (least willing) 13 0 0 4

2 6 0 0 2

3 0 0 4 1

4 25 22 4 17

5 (Most willing) 56 78 92 75 Note: 1 stands for not willing to participate and 5 stands for most willing to participate.

When the respondents were asked about what would they do if the government

withdraw the drought relief operations permanently, the most immediate response

was to resort to the either borrowing money (41%) or to migrate long distances

(18%) followed by working in nearby cities (Table 12). However, at places where

forest resources are available, the communities depend more on such resources by

fetching forest produce and sell them in nearby cities, as in the case of Orissa. The

tendency to borrow seems to be much higher in Karnataka (89%) than in other

states. However, people who opt for other kinds of local employment generation

activations were also higher in Karnataka. It shows that the communities are more

willing to stay in their respective villages (as indicated through the total responses of

alternative employment, borrowing money and working in nearby cities/villages

(58% excluding the ones who utilize forest produce and 75% including the ones who

want to depend on the forests for their livelihoods). This also shows the importance

of providing the local employment opportunities.

Table 12. Options available with the communities in absence of drought relief works (beneficiaries)

What would you do? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Alternative employment 6 11 8 8

2 Borrow money 24 89 12 41

3 Migrate 35 0 20 18

4 Work in nearby cities/villages 18 0 8 9

5 Cannot say 12 0 0 4

6 No problem 6 0 0 2

7 Forest produce 0 0 52 17

26

2.3. Kind of drought relief works

Figure 3. Non-existent design and implementation: Poor designing and ineffective implementation has led to debacle of marudi mahaband yojana

of Orissa.

It is important to know what kind of drought relief works have been carried out

at the study locations as it decides the sustainability of the drought relief

interventions. With little or no exception, at all the study locations, the drought relief

works included repairing of roads, digging of canals and tanks and construction of

check dams. The responses of respondents corroborated with that of the responses

from the government administration in this regard.

27

Figure 4. Where is sustainability? Earthworks carried out during drought relief often live short life and tend to get damaged soon.

Figure 5. Quality conscious? Check dam constructed in 2004 started showing cracks, reducing the water harvesting efficiency of the structure.

2.4. Adequacy of drought relief Different drought relief interventions have different indicators to assess their

adequacy. The adequacy of drought relief has two dimensions. One being the

amount of money that the beneficiaries got in terms of wage rate (Rs/day) and the

number of days they got to work in a drought year. The same holds good (amount

and duration of supply) for the drinking water and supply of fodder for cattle.

28

Duration of drought relief works

Table 13. Duration of drought relief works implemented as reported by the beneficiaries

Months Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 0 75 8 28 2 13 0 28 14 3 13 25 56 31 4 67 0 8 25 5 7 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 0

The Table 13 indicates that majority of the beneficiaries obtained the drought

relief ranging between 2 to 4 months. It is maximum in Rajasthan (4 months as

reported by 67% of the respondents) followed by Orissa (4 months as reported by

56% of the respondents). It was least in Karnataka, with majority of them (75%)

reporting it as one month. During these days, the beneficiaries could get 7-10 days

to work in Rajasthan, thirty days in Karnataka and 10-17 days in Orissa (Table 14). It

was learnt that in Karnataka the works are often completed in a month time (with a

variation of 20-25 days), where as the works in other states are spanned over two to

four months.

Table 14. Number of days for which the drought relief works were offered.

Duration (days) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

7 6 0 0 2 8 71 0 0 24 9 6 0 0 2 10 18 0 8 9 11 0 0 17 6 12 0 0 8 3 13 0 0 17 6 14 0 0 42 14 17 0 0 8 3 30 0 100 0 33

Wages Drought relief wage refers to the amount paid to the workers for taking part in

the drought relief works. Often, the wages are in two components, the cash and the

kind components. The recent drought relief norms stipulated for 75% kind and 25%

cash and each state has been advised to pay the workers as per the minimum wages

of the respective state. The kind component should be provided in terms of food

grains, usually in terms of local staple food (rice or wheat).

29

It became difficult to ascertain the amount the beneficiaries received as a part

of the wage as the respondents were unable to recall the same during the interview

process. However, the respondents were sure that the answers do not vary much

from what they have received and there could be an error of 10 to 15%. It could be

seen that the amount received as a part of the cash wage ranged between Rs 111

per month in Rajasthan to Rs 369 per month in the state of Orissa (Table 15). The

kind wage ranged between Rs 600 in Karnataka to Rs 326 in the state of Rajasthan.

However, these values are subject to change owing to the problems related to the

memory. In addition, the wages were bound to change as per the work assessment

made by the local Junior Engineer who assesses the work done and pay according to

the norms laid down.

Table 15. Wages received by the beneficiaries in different states during the recent drought relief works of 2003-04.


Cash 111 353 369 278

Kind 326 600 394 440

Adequacy Majority of the respondents informed that the amount and duration of relief they

have received was not sufficient for them to tide over the difficult times. It was

observed that the fodder and water supplies never reached some of the beneficiaries

in the state of Orissa and the fodder in Rajathan. Overall, the respondents were

satisfied over the amount of money and water received as a part of relief in

Karnataka while the other respondents were not satisfied in all other study locations.

Table 16. Adequacy of drought relief as opined by the respondents (figures % of responses).

Cash Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

Yes 28 60 13 33 No 72 30 88 63 Not provided 0 10 0 3

Kind Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average


Fodder Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

Yes 0 0 0 0

30

Cash Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

No 33 86 0 40 Not provided 67 14 100 60

Water Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average


2.5. Benefits accrued through drought relief works One of the important aspects of the study was to ascertain whether the drought

relief works have led to any kind of benefits to the communities apart from the

wages they received. The answer to this question was a mixed one. The common

assets that were developed at all the study locations were:

Approach roads

Canals

Water tanks

Check dams

While these are the tangible benefits that the communities obtained, the

measurement of intangible benefits was a difficult task as communities were to be

explained the nature of such benefits and how they could be identified. Initially,

majority of the respondents were unable to identify any kind of secondary benefit

through drought relief works (Table 17). However, the following secondary benefits

were identified by the communities as emanating out of drought relief works

Meeting of community members during relief works which led to increased

knowledge among the communities (though the respondents were unable to

explain what kind of knowledge they gained).

Some of the respondents identified development of skill through taking part in

earth works while some others declined to identify the same.

However, at places where fish rearing has been taken up (Orissa), the

communities acknowledged the skill gains in fish rearing and maintenance of fish

ponds and found it as an alternative livelihood.

Rise in water tables has been identified as an important advantage by the

communities.

31

The communities could utilize the water tanks for providing drinking water to

their cattle and for meeting their household requirements.

Table 17. Additional benefits accrued through drought relief works

Additional benefits Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Gain in skills 0 11 5 5

2 New livelihood avenues 6 0 14 7

3 Water in tanks for animals 6 0 10 5

4 Increase in water table 6 0 0 2

5 Meeting people 0 11 0 4

7 None 81 78 71 77

2.6. Women and drought relief works Assessment of women participation in drought relief works was given importance

in the present study to assess if the women participation is satisfactory (in the views

of the respondents) or if they observe the higher participation of women in drought

relief works as a disadvantage.

It could be seen from Table 18 that the average women participation in drought

relief works ranged between 50-60%. The proportion was higher in Rajasthan (70-

80%) followed by Karnataka (60-70%) and Orissa (50-60%). No limitations were

identified by the communities that might hinder the participation of women except in

Orissa where social norms (Orissa) and fewer wages (Karnataka) were identified as

factors limiting the participation of women in drought relief works.

The respondents were unable to find any additional advantage of participation of

women in drought relief works, excepting getting additional income and food.

Instead, the respondents reported of more negative impacts such as inability to cope

with the house hold chores and taking care of children during the times of drought

relief works. Health related disorders such as body aches and sun strokes were also

reported by the respondents.

Table 18. Women participation in drought relief works as identified by the beneficiaries.

Proportion of women in DRWs Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 <30 0 0 0 0 2 30-40 0 22 0 7 3 40-50 18 11 17 15 3 50-60 0 11 83 31 4 60-70 18 33 0 17

32

Proportion of women in DRWs Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

5 70-80 59 0 0 20 6 80-90 6 22 0 9 7 >90 0 0 0 0

Table 19. Ratings of women participation in drought relief works (least satisfactory to most satisfactory)

Rate the proportion Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 6 0 0 2

2 0 0 0 0

3 0 0 4 1

4 13 56 28 32

5 81 44 68 65

When asked about whether the women are offered different kinds of works than

that of men, the response was unanimously no. There was a clear ‘yes’ on whether

the women be offered different kind of works than men (Table 20). When asked

about the options, the women preferred to participate in light works and in those

works which would provide them the flexibility of working hours such as indoors

works, hand crafts etc.

Table 20. Should women be offered different kinds of works than men?

Should it be different? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

Yes 53 89 67 69

No 47 11 33 31

2.7. Food and nutrition The study also focused on the food and nutritional aspects of the drought relief

beneficiaries. It was observed that there was a clear nutritional benefit through the

food component of the wage, even though it was available for few days in a month

and few months in a year. However, owing to inadequacies in food availability for an

extended period, reduction in food consumption seems to be a major adoption

among the communities prone to drought (97% of the respondents, Table 21).

Table 21. Food consumption during drought times (beneficiaries).

Food consumption Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Reduce 94 100 96 97

2 No change 6 0 4 3

3 Increase 0 0 0 0

High energy and nutritious food items such as milk, vegetables, ghee, oils and

33

pulses were reportedly reduced by about 20-40%. The % reduction varied across the

study locations (Table 22).

Table 22. Percent reduction in food consumption of high energy and high nutritional items.

Food consumption (%) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

0 0 0 4 1

0-20 20 33 33 29

20-40 50 11 46 36

40-60 20 33 4 19

60-80 10 22 0 11

80-100 0 0 0 0

Cannot say 0 0 13 4

We also ascertained whether this reduction in consumption has something to do

with the food availability or not. It was found that the food items were abundantly

available at all the locations while the reduction in consumption was mostly due to

higher prices and inability to purchase them due to less income.

2.8. Role of ICDS and PDS systems

Figure 6. Needs resizing: ICDS does help the children and old-aged during normal times, what about in drought times?

The Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) and Public Distribution

System (PDS) play an important role in maintaining the food and nutritional security

34

of the villages in India. The study tried to find out the issues related to these

systems as well vis-à-vis drought relief management.

Overall, the respondents rated the PDS system as average to good in its

functionality during drought years. Similar rating was also given to the ICDS system.

Among the study locations, Rajasthan fared poor to fair rating for its PDS and ICDS

systems when compared to the other study locations.

Table 23. Functioning of PDS system during the drought time

PDS Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Poor 19 0 0 6

2 Fair 19 0 4 8

3 Average 38 22 9 23

4 Good 25 56 87 56

5 Excellent 0 22 0 7

Table 24. Role of ICDS system during the drought time

ICDS Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Poor 23 0 0 8

2 Fair 8 0 5 4

3 Average 31 50 5 29

4 Good 38 50 90 59

5 Excellent 0 0 0 0

The respondents opined that these support systems are less sensitive to the

changing needs during drought times and felt that they could have better worked by

providing more and diverse food supplies such as supply of edible oils and pulses

which is not happening at present.

3. Water

Water is elixir of life. It becomes more than elixir when it is scarce and during

drought when drinking water itself becomes a rear commodity. All the communities

obtained the drinking water from the hand pumps and non-drinking water from the

tanks dug or renovated during drought relief works. This is a clear indication of

benefits accrued to the communities from drought relief works.

Often, the women members of the household fetch the water. On an average,

the households spent 60 min for fetching drinking water and 94 min for fetching non-

drinking water. This time was more in the study location of Karnataka followed by in

35

the study locations of Rajasthan and Orissa. There was clear increase in the time

spent from normal times to drought time by nearly double in case of drinking water.

Water supply by the local governments seems not influenced the time spent for

fetching the water.

Table 25. Time spent by communities in fetching water (min)


Normal times Drinking 33 54 25 37

Non-Drinking 48 66 24 46 Drought times

Drinking 56 77 49 61 Non-Drinking 123 113 45 94

The water supplied to the communities was not sufficient in many cases (Table

26). In the study location of Rajasthan, there seems to me more than quantity

issues. Communities here are being supplied with the brackish waters uploaded in

the same village and supplied to the same communities by the contractors, as

alleged by the respondents. In addition, these communities informed of spending

more than Rs 700 per month for purchasing two tankers of drinking water. However,

these allegations were refuted by the local administration when asked about it.

The effectiveness of drinking water supply was also assessed in terms of

timeliness of supply. In general, the respondents informed it as poor except in

Karnataka where the communities saw the time of supply as fairly suitable to their

requirement.

Table 26. Ratings for the quantity, quality and timeliness of water supply during drought relief

Rate the quantity Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Poor 80 11 100 64

2 Fair 7 0 0 2

3 Average 7 0 0 2

4 Good 7 33 0 13


Rate the quality Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Poor 87 0 100 62

2 Fair 0 33 0 11

3 Average 0 33 0 11

4 Good 7 22 0 10


Rate the timeliness of supply Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

36

Rate the quantity Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Poor 71 22 100 65

2 Fair 0 56 0 19

3 Average 0 11 0 4

4 Good 7 0 0 2


Potable? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

Yes 0 100 71 57

No 93 0 29 41

Cannot say 7 0 0 2

The drinking water has been supplied twice in a day at all the study locations

with the help of water tankers, once in the morning and evening. Yet times, the

water was also supplied in the noon, depending on the needs of the communities.

The other indicator studied was improvement in the access to water over the

years due to drought relief works. The access to water was improved over the years

in the study locations of Karnataka and Orissa, mostly due to digging of water tanks.

However, in the study location of Rajasthan, the access to water didn’t change and

instead deteriorated over the years.

Table 27. Access to water over the years due to drought relief works

Access to drinking water Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Improved 0 56 67 41

2 Deteriorated 53 33 22 36

3 No change 47 11 11 23

When asked about how the access can be improved, majority of the respondents

felt that the permanent measures such as linking of the village to a nearby river

through canals would only solve their problems rather than through temporary

measures such as supply of water by tankers etc. They were of the opinion that the

current number of water harvesting structures has not been sufficient as they could

hardly hold water for 2-3 months after the cessation of rainfall.

4. Fodder

Fodder for cattle becomes scarce during the times of drought. Rajasthan has

one of the largest cattle populations in India and produce more milk than the states

of Karnataka and Orissa. The state also has largest areas under pastures and fodder

37

crops (Table 28). About 2/3rd of the milk in India is produced by the states 2/3 milk

production by UP, Punjab, Rajasthan, MP, Maharashtra, Gujarat, AP and Haryana. The

study revealed that the communities never got the fodder as a part of the drought

relief interventions except for one year (during 2002-03) where fodder was supplied

to the farmers on subsidy by the local milk cooperative. Hence, the major source of

fodder during drought had been either purchasing in the local market or through

grazing in the common lands (Table 28).

Table 28. Major source of fodder during drought as informed by the communities.

Major source of fodder (Drought times) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Purchasing 92 100 0 64

2 Grazing 8 0 100 36

3 Cut & fed 0 0 0 0

4 Govt given fodder 0 0 0 0

It could be seen that the places where ever there are sufficient grazing lands

available, as in the case of Orissa, there communities relied on them for fodder and

the impact of drought was less there. However, at the study location of Karnataka

and Rajasthan, where there were poor development of grazing lands and no forests

available, the communities often resorted to purchasing of fodder.

However, communities could find sufficient places for cattle grazing during

normal times. The respondents were of the opinion that the government has least

impact in terms of supply of fodder during drought and they could not remember

about when the government has opened the fodder depots in the last five years,

though the local administration claimed to have opened the fodder depots every year

the drought had happened there.

Table 29. Source of fodder during normal times.

Major source of fodder (Normal time) Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Purchasing 0 0 0 0

2 Grazing 100 20 100 73

3 Cut & fed 0 80 0 27

It was observed that the communities resorted to distress selling of cattle during

drought years, as revealed by 57% of the respondents, with relatively more in

Karnataka followed by the study locations in Orissa and Rajasthan. The death of

cattle due to starvation was also reported in the study location of Rajasthan, though

the percent of respondents who informed of the starvation deaths were less than the

38

distress selling. It reveals that the selling cattle have become an adoption mechanism

to ward off the negative impacts of drought on the household and help keep the

purchasing power.

Table 30. Distress sell and death of cattle during drought years.

Sold cattle Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

Yes 42 80 50 57 No 58 20 50 43

Cattle died Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

Yes 42 20 33 32 No 58 80 67 68

Table 31. Regaining of sold out cattle by the communities.

Could you regain the cattle? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

Yes 0 75 25 33

No 100 25 75 67

About 67% of those households who sold out the cattle couldn’t regain them

during normal years as the drought impacts continued to influence their economic

status. This figure was higher in the study location of Rajasthan followed by Orissa

and Karnataka. The respondents observed that the government drought relief works

had least or no impact on their regaining of cattle or even to keep the cattle with

them during drought years.

Table 32. State wise cattle population in India with specific reference to the study locations (figures in 000, for the year 2003-04, Source:

Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in).

State Total cattle Total livestock* Total poultry Rajasthan 10854 38284 6192 Karnataka 9539 16082 25593 Orissa 13903 9489 17611 * total of total cattle and other livestock such as Sheep, Goats, Pigs, Horses and Ponnies, Mules, Donkeys, Camel, Yaks, and Mithun.

Table 33. State wise milk production in India with specific reference to the study locations (figures in 000, for the year 2003-04, Source: Department

of Animal Husbandry, Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in).

State Milk production (000 tonnes)

Rajasthan 8054 Karnataka 1414

Orissa 997

39

Table 34. Area under fodder and pastures in the study locations (figures in 000 ha, for the year 1999-2000, Source: Department of Animal Husbandry,

Government of India, http://dahd.nic.in).

State Area under fodder crops Area under permanent

pastures and grazing land Rajasthan 3491 1714 Karnataka 55 979 Orissa NA 534

5. Health

The current survey also assessed if drought relief interventions have led to any

kind of health impacts on the communities. During the survey, it was learnt that the

limited drought relief for a period of 2 – 3 months was not sufficient enough to lead

to a perceivable impact on the communities, as informed by the communities. The

communities were both unable to see any difference in terms of health problems

they face during normal times and drought times or reported of increased health

related problems. Communities were also of the opinion that intensive medical help

such as provision of medicines, rigorous visits by the health workers would help them

tide over the difficulties during the drought times.

Table 35. Health related problems during drought

Health problems during drought years Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average 1 Gone down 13 0 9 72 Increased 53 22 74 503 Stayed the same 33 78 17 43

6. Education

The survey didn’t reveal any perceivable impact of drought on education, from

the responses of the interviewees. However, interaction with the school teachers and

principals indicated a school drop-out rate of up to 20%. It was learnt that the drop-

out was higher in the classes of 6-10th and around 60% of the dropped out children

joined back the school during normal times.

Interviews with the individual beneficiaries indicated a majority opinion of either

no impact or fair impact on education. The respondents were of the opinion that the

additional income enabled them to maintain their purchasing power to certain extent.

However, they were of the opinion that the short duration drought relief works were

40

unable to bring back the dropped out children back to the schools.

Table 36. Impact of drought relief works on children’s education

Impact on education Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 (No impact) 62 33 63 52

2 8 67 25 33

3 23 0 13 12

4 8 0 0 3

5 (most positive impact)

0 0 0 0

7. Migration

In this study, migration has been differentiated into two different forms. An

effort was made to differentiate all those who leave the village for a relatively longer

distances and duration from those who go to a nearby city or village for works and

return on the same day.

The survey revealed an increasing trend of migration over the years and mostly

the male part of the household migrated. In few cases, the entire family migrated in

search of works and alternative livelihoods. There was no change in migration trend

in the study location of Karnataka while it increased in the study locations of

Rajasthan and Orissa (Table 37).

The major reason for migration had been absence of local employment options

during drought times. The decline in migration, at least during the drought relief

works, was evident in Rajasthan where drought relief works were carried out for

relatively longer duration than in other study locations (Table 13). Here, some of the

household members who migrated to cities have returned to the village to participate

in the drought relief works there.

Table 37. Trend in migration.

Trend in migration Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 Gone down 0 0 14 5

2 Increased 82 0 86 56

3 No change 18 100 0 39

Table 38. Where do you migrate?

Where do you migrate? Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

41

1 Nearby city 100 100 43 81

2 Nearby village 0 0 14 5

3 cities in another district 0 0 43 14

4 Village in another district 0 0 0 0

When asked about whether the government should facilitate their migration, the

communities were of the opinion that they prefer to work in the village itself rather

than working in other cities. The poor living conditions in the cities were major

deterrents to them. The respondents urged that the government should provide

more employment generation activities in the village itself such that the entire

household could stay together.

Table 39. Impact of drought relief works on migration.

Impact on migration Rajasthan Karnataka Orissa Average

1 (no impact) 40 100 0 47

2 10 0 14 8

3 0 0 71 24

4 40 0 0 13

5 (most impact) 10 0 14 8

7.1. NGOs, SHGs and drought relief

Figure 7. Misplaced priorities: The Self-Help Groups (SHGs) could prove a boon to local level monitoring of drought relief works.

The study also focused on the existing linkages between government and non-

42

government organizations in drought relief management. It was observed that

though there exist fairly a good mechanism of identification of local NGOs at the

district collectorate level, the involvement of these NGOs in actual drought relief

management had been negligible at all the study locations. The basic reason for this

appears to be lack of proper mechanism to monitor the organizations helping the

government in implementing drought relief works. This has led to working in isolation

by both the institutions. There was least or no activity of NGOs at the study

locations. Even at locations where they were present, NGOs, such as MYRADA, have

been working on the longer-term drought risk mitigation such as watershed

development programs etc. At some other locations, the communities expressed

least confidence in NGOs work.

The issues plaguing the success of NGOs seems to be their scale of operation

and the access they have to financial resources, as identified by the respondents in

the study locations.

The local self-help groups (SHGs), formed either by various government

schemes or the NGOs, seem to be not aligned with solving their major problem of

drought and water scarcity. All the SHGs in the study locations were involved in

generating small savings to meet their incidental expenditures and getting bank

loans to run their kerosene shops. The SHGs were taken by surprise when they were

asked about their involvement in drought relief, in terms of decision making or

increasing the awareness of communities about better management practices for

using limited water resources.

Recommendations

In the previous section, an effort was made to discuss the results of the present

study. This section enlists the possible solutions for improving the drought relief

management leading to sustainable and longer term impacts. These

recommendations are based on the study outputs discussed in the previous section

and the district level consultation meetings conducted with the government drought

relief management machinery to identify possible remedies for the issues plaguing

the drought relief management.

1. Declaration of Drought

Girdhavari is a vital and age-old practice based on which the decisions such as declaring drought are based. Though the local administration claimed to prepare the girdhavari reports in a fortnight of such request is made to them by the higher authorities, many times such reports have been prepared with little or no field visits. To avoid such irregularities and for efficient decision making, a suitable check / alternative would have to be found out. Remote sensing could be one such check if not an alternative.

Role of remote sensing in drought declaration: Drought could be meteorological, hydrological and agricultural drought. Hence, it is important to decide on when to declare the drought for an effective drought relief intervention. The role of remote sensing could not be overlooked in this aspect. The short paper attached at Annexure V explains the potential of remote sensing technologies in the area of drought relief management.

Phased declaration at the district and below levels: It is important to identify areas falling under different kinds of droughts and decide when they could be declared as drought affected. Such a phased declaration could save lot of revenue as well. In Karnataka, rainfall data has been heavily used for such a decision making.

The current relief norms (NCCF & CRF) apply well for the first drought in a series of drought years. However, as the drought prolongs for years, these norms tend to get ineffective due to the compounding nature of the impacts.

2. Components of the Drought Relief

CRF and NCCF & Drought relief works: There is no provision for the material component in the CRF and NCCF guidelines leading to problems such as resorting to earthen works etc. If these norms provides for material component, then there

44

is a possibility for producing permanent assets that go long way in building the rural India.

Synchronization: Many times cash and food arrive at separate times. While the cash is disbursed immediately, the communities wait for the food component to arrive. Efforts have to be made to make sure that both the components arrive at same time.

Changing socio-economic conditions and drought relief: While the state’s minimum wage act provides for Rs 62.50 (vary from state to state), many labourers are unable to find it lucrative due to the reason that they find better wage earning opportunities around. It is leading to lack of participation from the communities itself. Efforts would have to be made to diversify the kinds of drought relief works from mere construction activities to skill diversification activities such that the communities find them useful in terms of livelihood diversification for use during drought times.

We also need to look into whether we should continue to give food component or not and if so what should be the ideal proportion of it. States should have to be given appropriate flexibility to decide on this front. While poor people see food component as an important component of the wage, the relatively richer ones may not accept the poor quality food grains often supplied in such works. It may be better if the cash component is increased and food component is decreased.

NCRF and CRF guidelines do not provide for transportation of food grains up to the community level. It is important that such support is given so that the food reaches the needy ones in time.

Yellow cards provide rice at much cheaper rate (Rs 3.50) than the one supplied in the works (Rs 6.25). This is leading to non-uptake of the rice supplied in the drought relief works and many times the workers prefer to take cash rather than the kind component.

In many cases, rice supplied through the yellow cards is sufficient for the family. The additional rice provided in the works is leading to the open market as these families often sell that rice for earning extra income. Flexibility should be given to the local level administration to decide whether a household should be provided with the cash + kind, only cash or only kind. This would also save lot of valuable resources.

A grain bank maintained by the communities, through Gram Panchayat, would be helpful. During the crisis situation, every household would be able to use it. Already, lot of such systems have been worked out by the NGOs and a detailed feasibility study of such systems can be envisaged and considered for broader use across the width and breadth of the country.

3. Employment Generation Programs

Local level drought relief funds & initiation of employment generation programs: The onset of employment generation programs entirely depends on the external financial support (state and above) and often the district level administration has little resources to support such works, even after considering all other developmental funds available at a given point of time. Hence, it is prudent that the districts and states be provided with appropriate guidelines that enable them

45

to maximize the available funds with them in the form of district and taluka level drought relief funds. Such funds would not only enable the local administration in initiating the drought relief employment generation works in advance, but would also reduce the possible negative impacts of the impending drought.

The drought relief beneficiaries should be paid based on the amount of work done by the individuals. At present, these payments have been made on group basis. Such a payment system has lead to a kind of lethargy on the part of participating workers as the entire group would get the same wage irrespective of the amount of work done by the individuals.

Though it appears that the works are implemented by the district level administration through Panchayat Raj department and other implementation agencies, it was observed that these agencies often ‘outsource’ the works to informal ‘contractors’ in states such as Karnataka. Though this could well have lead to ample time for the implementing agencies to monitor the works, the reality seems to be different. In cases where contractors were involved, there was no or poor involvement of Gram Panchayats in identification of drought relief beneficiaries and profit making has become a major priority for these contractors. If such a system cannot be given away with, suitable guidelines have to be released by the respective state governments to ensure the participation of elected representatives at the village / Gram Pachnayat level such that the kind of works to be carried out and where they have to be carried out are decided by the communities and the elected representatives. This would also improve the transparency in the entire process of drought relief management.

Household as a unit: In states where the household is considered as a unit, giving work opportunity per each household seems to be illogical as joint families are at loss. In such cases, the guidelines should state alternatives for including more family members to take part in the drought relief works.

A committee can be formed at the village / Gram Panchayat level and the committee can monitor the drought relief works. Though such Village Works Committees exist in many states, the role of these committees in assessing the drought relief works is missing. Drought relief works should also be brought under the purview of these committees.

4. Nature of Works

Many times the works are identified at taskforce level (tehsil and district), in the states such as Karnataka. It is important that the works are identified at the village level and communicated to the taskforce meetings, as being done in the case of Orissa. There is a need for an unified approach in all the states replicating the success of involving the local communities in identification and implementation of drought relief works.

To give away with the earthen works, suitable guidelines should be made available to the state and district level administration on how to dovetail various developmental programs such that permanent works could be carried out.

Maintenance of the assets generated in the drought relief works should be done by the GP and Taluka with the available funds. However, it could be a good idea that these outputs are handed over to the respective nodal agency for their maintenance (e.g. works related to irrigation could be handed over to irrigation

46

department, schools to education department etc)

Indoor employment has to be enhanced for the vulnerable sessions. Labour department can do this through summer training programs etc.

The diversified drought relief works could also include plantation works, encouraging handcrafts which could be marketed through self-help groups etc.

5. Water Supply

Meeting the drinking water needs of the affected communities is an important task of the local governments and NGOs. However, looking at the magnitude of the requirement, no local government (taluka and district) would be able to supply the required quantity of water through state-owned tankers. This leads to outsourcing of this important service to contractors and hence the problems related to the ones identified in this study. To alleviate these problems, suitable monitoring mechanism should be evolved with the help of local elected leaders, SHGs and NGOs. Once involved, these institutions could make sure that the beneficiaries get the required quantity of water at the required time and quality.

Water supply has to be checked both qualitatively & quantitatively by the state public health & payments to the water suppliers have to be made based on the report obtained.

Every farmer can have his own farm pond and the harvested water can be used for use during the drought times. Polythene sheets can be given to the farmers through subsidy.

Farmer groups can be formed and water can be harvested, field levelling can be done by subsidy etc. These groups could promote the measures such as rooftop rainwater harvesting etc. These groups should be trained on aspects such as crop planning to maximize the water use during critical times.

Drilling of bore wells have to be regulated. It should be based on the regulations of the water board and based on the vulnerability.

6. Fodder Supply

Community based fodder bank systems have to be encouraged. Though such systems have been well experimented and implemented by NGOs, it is time to bring them out from the experimental stage into the mainstream planning.

Some times wheat straw was supplied as a part of drought relief in southern states where as the local cattle is not acclimatized to such fodder. Proper identification of fodder sources preferred by the local livestock should be identified prior to drought season and quick transport of such fodder could be arranged when needed.

Efforts should be made to identify local pockets where fodder could be cultivated and stored for use during drought periods. This would not only reduce the long-distance transport of fodder, but would also avoid the pilferages.

The existing village committee could establish and monitor the fodder and grain banks to be used during drought period.

One local level fund could be established through which fodder depot and water supply can be done by communities and government together.

47

7. Dovetailing of Other Developmental Programs

with the Drought Relief Programs

The present study revealed that dovetailing different developmental programs with the drought relief programs is still an exception. Until the CRF and NCCF norms are not modified, there is a need that the district and below level administration put efforts to dovetail different developmental programs to produce permanent assets at the village level. To this effect, a minimum percent of development funds could be dovetailed to produce permanent assets. Such a guideline would make it more a common practice without leaving it to the innovative capacity of the district and below level administrators.

For example, in Rajasthan, Van-Jan Shakti program created 400 biga of tree fencing through involvement of communities. Around 8 million seeds of Jatropha were sown. The trenches were dug by the communities and seeds were procured separately using the funds available with the forestry program. Similar such programs could be thought of and advised to all the state governments to implement the same.

There is a need to bring out the innovations in existing drought relief management through instituting a thorough study and publicize the deserving efforts for wider replication.

8. Improving the Nutritional Security

PDS supplies: There is a need to enhance and diversify the PDS supplies during drought time, not withstanding the claims that the food grains provided as a part of drought relief wage is more than sufficient. Though the kind wage of the drought relief work provides for sufficient cereal grains, the consumption of oils and pulses was found to be declining alarmingly. To avoid this, the PDS system should provide certain quantity of cereal quota to meet the oil and pulses requirement of the households.

Similar enhancement and diversification in the ICDS supplies is also required to meet the shortages during drought times. One such measure includes extending the mid day meal even during holidays and extending the beneficiary age group to cover more of the affected population.

9. Long-term Mitigation Programs

DPAP programs and drought relief management: The study identified that the DPAP programs are being implemented in complete isolation of the drought relief works in the same village. The DPAP program envisages that every village should form Village Water Management Committee to monitor and manage the water harvested in the water harvesting structures produced in the program. These committees have been trained on various best practices of managing precious water resources, crop planning and better crop management practices. The members of these committees could prove a valuable resource to the entire village provided the knowledge and expertise available with them is used for the broader benefit of the village, which is not happening at present.

48

Insurance: The current unit for crop insurance is tehsil. Because of this, even if half of the tehsil is severely affected, it is considered as unaffected based on the average figures of rainfall obtained at the tehsil level.

10. Improving the Transparency

‘Jamabandi’ or social auditing could be introduced to monitor the drought relief works as well. In this system, the Gram Panchayat members, in conjunction with the officials of the Panchayat Raj department, would monitor the village developmental works and expenditure statements at a stipulated interval.

Many kinds of developmental works are being carried out at the GP level and at times it would be difficult for the villagers to identify which asset was created from which funds. Hence, proper awareness generation campaign has to be conducted, regularly, as a part of the responsibility of Revenue and Panchayat Raj departments informing the communities about various developmental programs being implemented in their village and their status.

11. Monitoring

A village level committee could be formed for better monitoring of the drought relief works. A committee which is already there to monitor the local constructions could be entrusted with this responsibility.

All the field officers should be given proper communication and conveyance facilities so that they monitor the drought relief works. This would also enhance the monitoring efficiency of the officers.

Local level administration is suffering from serious human resource problem. As a result, each Junior Engineer had to monitor and implement number of drought relief works in his jurisdiction leading to insufficient monitoring. Indoor employment generation could avoid this problem. This could lead to diversification of the livelihoods of the villagers as well.

All concerted efforts have to be made to avoid the involvement of political interests in drought relief works.

12. Involvement of NGOs in Drought Relief

Management

The current level of involvement of NGOs in drought relief management in conjunction with the government is either poor or nil. This vital linkage could have been better harnessed to achieve the efficient results.

The limitations related to modality of involvement, monitoring the deliverables of these institutions have to be removed.

However, there is no restriction for the involvement of NGOs and SHGs, though it is not promoted to the extent it could have been.

49

Efforts should be made identify the modality of involving NGOs in drought relief works. For example, NGOs could be made watchdogs for effective monitoring of the drought relief works. Similar role could also be played by village level SHGs. This could lead to drastic reduction in corruption and satisfactory quality of works carried out.

50

Annexure I

List of Collaborators and Contributors

Shri PG Dhar Chakrabarti Executive Director National Institute of Disaster Management (NIDM) New Delhi-02 Ph: 011-23702432; F: 23702442 Dr Santosh Kumar Professor, Policy, Planning and Community Issues National Institute of Disaster Management (NIDM) New Delhi-02 Ph: 011-23702432; F: 23702442 Shri Naved Masood JS (MoA) Dept of Agri & Coop Ministry of Agriculture Krishi Bhavan New Delhi-01 Ph: 011-23381176; F: 23382417 Dr Cody Knutson Water Resources Scientist National Drought Mitigation Center Nebraska, Lincoln Ph: (402) 472–9954; F: (402) 472–6614 Dr Prakash V.S. Director Drought Monitoring Cell Government of Karnataka #902, 9th Floor BWSSB Building, Cauvery Bhavan, KG Road Bangalore Ph: 080-22215613, 22106443, 2235327; F: 080-22217038 Shri Rajendra Singh Chairman, Tarun Bharat Sangh Tarun Ashram Bhikampura, Kishoree Via Thangazi, District Alwar Rajasthan – 301022 Ph: 0141-2393178, 225043; F: 0141-2393178

Dr SVRK Prabhakar Program Associate (GOI-UNDP DRM Program) National Institute of Disaster Management (NIDM) New Delhi-02 Ph: 011-23702432; F: 23702442 Dr MVR Seshasai Head, Agriculture Division NRSA, Balanagar, Hyderabad-37 Ph: 040-23884212, F: 23884213 Shri Negi NCS Director Dept of Agri & Coop Ministry of Agriculture Krishi Bhavan New Delhi-01 Ph: 011-23381176, F: 23382417 Dr Pradeep Barghava Professor IDS Jaipur 8B, Jhalana Institutional Area Jaipur, Rajasthan 302 004 Ph: 0141-2705726, 2706457 Dr Ramesh K.J. Incharge, disaster Mitigation Modelling DST (National Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasting (NCMRWF) A50, Sector 62; Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh Ph: 910120-2403900-10; Ext: 276 Shri R.K. Meena Sec (DM & Relief) Secretariat Govt of Rajasthan Jaipur Ph: 0141-2227380 Dr Sanjoy K Bandyopadhyay Scientist, IARI, Pusa Campus Pusa Road New Delhi

51

Ph: 011-25841255 Dr P.K. Joshi Regional Representative IFPRI-India CG Complex, DPS Marg Pusa, New Delhi Ph: 011-23010912

Mr Umasankar Nayak Scientist (KVK, OUAT) C/O Minaketan Nayak Jagannath Nilaya, Pabitra Diha Dt Keonjhar, Orissa, 758001 06766256197 (H), +91 9437298354 (M)

100

Annexure V

Agricultural Drought Monitoring and Assessment using Satellite Images towards

Drought Relief Management3

Abstract

National Agricultural Drought Assessment and Monitoring System (NADAMS) is a

remote sensing based agricultural drought monitoring mechanism operational from

National Remote Sensing Agency (Dept. of Space, Govt. of India) and provide near

real-time information on prevalence, severity level and persistence of agricultural

drought at nation / state / district level by analyzing data from multiple satellites. The

agricultural area of each district is monitored using time series Vegetation Index

information retrieved from satellite data. Detailed assessment of agricultural situation

is done during monsoon season and the information is disseminated to the decision

makers at various levels of administration engaged in drought management.

Agricultural drought information, as provided in NADAMS has immense utility for

use in drought management; in season corrections through contingency planning

and end of season crop loss assessment for claiming relief and its management.

…..

Agricultural drought monitoring using conventional methods suffer from various

limitations such as sparse ground observations, subjective data etc. Unlike these

point observations, satellite sensors provide direct spatial information on vegetation

stress caused by drought conditions. There is a need for building up the capabilities

by using innovative technological and management measures for effective

management of agricultural droughts in the country. A system for national / regional

and sub regional assessment and monitoring of agricultural drought conditions

through the cropping season to provide periodic information on the prevalence,

severity level and persistence of agricultural drought is the utmost need of the hour.

National Agricultural Drought Assessment and Monitoring System (NADAMS) provides

more efficient and timely monitoring capability by integrating the time effectiveness

3 NRSA, Dept of Space, Govt of India, Hyderabad, India. Presented in the consultation meeting at NIDM.

101

and objectivity of space observations with the details of ground perceptions.

NADAMS is mostly dependent on satellite observations for providing objective

and real-time information on agricultural drought conditions all over the country

through the Kharif season. The project envisages primary dependence on remotely

sensed data from NOAA AVHRR, Terra Modis, IRS WiFS and AWiFS, supplemented

and supported by ground observations of rainfall, sowing progress and agricultural

conditions.

Remote sensing of agricultural drought

Stressed vegetation has a higher reflectance than healthy vegetation in the

visible (0.4-0.7 microns) region and lower reflectance in the near infrared (0.7-1.1

microns) region of the electromagnetic spectrum. Vegetation indices take the

advantage of this differential response in the visible and near infrared regions of the

spectrum. Among the various vegetation indices that are now available, Normalized

Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) is a universally acceptable index for operational

drought assessment because of its simplicity in calculation, easy to interpret and its

ability to partially compensate for the effects of atmosphere, illumination geometry

etc

Water, clouds and snow have higher reflectance in the visible region and

consequently NDVI assumes negative values for these features. Bare soil and rocks

exhibit similar reflectance in both visible and near IR regions and the index values

are near zero. The NDVI values for vegetation generally range from 0.1 to 0.6, the

higher index values being associated with greater green leaf area and biomass.

Assessment of agricultural drought situation

Since availability of completely cloudfree optical satellite data during kharif

season is a major constraint, multiple satellite datasets to generate time composited

NDVI images, from which mean NDVI is extracted over agricultural area for each

district. Seasonal NDVI profiles are generated for previous years and current

year.The assessment of agricultural drought situation in each district takes in to

consideration the following factors (1) seasonal NDVI progression – i.e.,

transformation of NDVI from the beginning of the season, (2) comparison of NDVI

profile with previous normal years (3) weekly rainfall status compared to normal (4)

weekly progression of sown area compared to normal. The relative deviation of NDVI

from that of normal and the rate of progression of NDVI from June to July and

102

August gives the indication about the agricultural situation in the district which is

then complemented by ground situation as evident from rainfall and sown area.

Drought reports

Currently drought reports are being prepared and disseminated at monthly

intervals from June to November. The NDVI images describing the spatial pattern of

vegetation development are also being supplied to the state agriculture departments

on request for their crop and seasonal conditions review meetings.

Assessment for kharif 2005 (upto first fortnight of Sep. 2005)

Analysis of satellite images from June 2005 has been undertaken. NDVI statistics

and rainfall data for all the districts of 14 states have been collected and analysed.

The AVHRR NDVI images for the entire country from June to August are shown in

Figure. During June low NDVI in many parts of the country indicate that the

agricultural activity had not yet started due to delay in the onset of monsoon. NDVI

has started raising in July due to commencement of sowings in most parts of the

state, in response to the incident rainfall and release of canal waters for irrigation.

With further rise in NDVI during August and till September first fortnight, normal

progress of agricultural season is observed in most parts of the country. Mild

agricultural drought like situations was observed in parts of Bihar, Jharkhand and

Rajasthan.

NADAMS’ information for drought management

Drought management is a multidisciplinary approach involving various aspects

like crop management, drinking water management, fodder and live stock protection,

employment creation etc. Although the causative factor is mere rainfall deficiency, its

impact is multifaceted. Among different facets of drought management, agricultural

drought is also an indirect indicator of drought impact on fodder availability and rural

employment. Therefore, NADAMS’ information that deals with agricultural drought

alone also helps to trigger the administration of other aspects of drought such as

fodder and employment generation.

Monthly information being reported under NADAMS has the potential for drought

management at different stages of drought incidence in different time domains of

kharif season. Agricultural drought management has essentially two components –

(a) early season or in season drought management through contingency crop

planning and (b) end of the season assessment and relief management. In season

103

management aims at minimizing the loss by efficiently utilizing available soil moisture

in the balance part of the season. End of the season assessment is done to assess

the crop loss due to drought and to finalize the relief amount. NADAMS’ drought

information which describes the prevalence and intensity of drought at district level

can be put to use in both the aspects of drought management. The drought

information during June to August is useful for drawing contingency crop plans and

implementation of the plans. Spatial information from satellite images suggest which

part of the district is more effected and hence implantation of contingency plans on

priority basis.

August is the transition period between sowing phase and growing phase while

September/October represent maximum vegetation phase of crops. Drought

information from 2 FN of august to October is useful for drought declaration and

relief assessment.

Table 1. NADAMS’ drought information and its use in drought management

Drought report Information Specific use of information for drought management

June Commencement of agricultural season

Triggers preparedness for short term management measures.

July Commencement of agricultural season and progression of season

Initiation of short term management like contingency planning. Identification of specific thrust areas for implementation of contingency plans

August Progression of season and crop growth relative to normal

Implementation of contingency plans.

September Progression of season and maximum growth achieved

Drought impact assessment – crop loss assessment. Identification of areas in the order of drought severity and conducting crop cutting experiments for crop loss assessment.

October Progression of season and performance of crops


November Progression of season and performance of crops


Relief assessment

Relief assessment basically depends upon extent of crop loss due to drought

along with the number of sub-district level administrative units affected by drought.

The system of assessing agricultural losses from drought varies from state to state

although basically the process is personal inspection to fields and measurement of

104

crop yields. Thus, eye estimation and drought declaration still play a major role in

drought assessment and declaration resulting in subjectivity and exaggeration in the

process. NADAMS’ spatial NDVI images and its anomalies compared to normal

provide guidelines for crop loss estimation in many respects; (1) places with in the

district which are more effected, (2) prioritization of effected areas for the basis of

sample surveys for crop loss estimation (3) identification of places to be visited by

central relief teams. Thus, satellite images enable objective sampling procedures for

unbiased assessment of crop losses.

Summary

NADAMS is a remote sensing based operational mechanism for monitoring and

assessment of agricultural drought and is providing near real-time information on

prevalence, severity level and persistence of agricultural drought situation at

country/state/district level during monsoon season. The methodology has been fully

operationalised and at present NADAMS is an operational service provider to decision

makers in Agricultural drought management. NADAMS uses the satellite data of

different resolutions 1.1 km and 56 metres in an integrated manner for assessing the

drought situation at regional, district and sub-district level. The drought information

is being provided to the user community on fortnightly/monthly basis. NADAMS’

agricultural drought information has immense potential for use in drought

management; in season correction through contingency planning and end of season

crop loss assessment for claiming relief and its management. The feedback from user

community and other research organisations is encouraging.

Conclusion

Towards more comprehensive analyses and assessment of the agricultural

drought situation and for most appropriate and apt drought relief in a more

quantitative and scientific manner, pilot study covering typical drought prone districts

could be planned integrating remote sensing component and near – real time ground

information.

Fig. 1. NOAA AVHRR NDVI of kharif 2005 being used for drought assessment.

Annexure VI

Background Information about the Study Locations4

Khudiala, Rajasthan

District: Jaipur

Taluka: Dudu

Distance from Jaipur: ~70 km

Total population: 1200

Households: 330

Major business: Agriculture

DPAP Village: Yes

Drought years: 2001, 2002, 2004

4 All the information was obtained from the tehsil and district collectorates of the respective locations.

107

Dabiri, Orissa

District: Nuapada

Block: Khariar

Distance from Nuapada: 65 km


Households: 286


DPAP Village: Yes (2001)

Drought years: 2001, 2002, 2004

108

Agnihalli, Kolar

District: Kolar

Block: Khariar

Distance from Kolar: 18 km


Households: 250


DPAP Village: Yes (since inception)

Drought years: 2001, 2002-03, 2004