Paradoxically, Kerala which has one of the highest literacy rates in the country & has exceptionally good social indicators fares very poorly when it comes to employment. This has had tremendous social & political consequences. One such upshot was visible in the registration process which attracted many an educated youth of Kerala. So, does it point towards a disturbing social phenomenon of education being a cause for ones’ impediment rather than growth? Is kerala a failed state? Many such questions linger on the back of our mind which remains unanswered. The Article has concentrated only on the Palakkad District and has not tried to explore the interplay of relationships between Palakkad & other bigger states of Kerala. However the authors do shower their lavish praises on the administrative structures viz. the various local bodies & the decentralized model of governance. The authors have tried to use comparison as a mode to convey their findings very subtly. For example the authors have cited the high number of women registrations & attributed the same to the high literacy rate and at the same time highlighted the concept of differential wage payments that existed prior to the scheme’s launch. Similarly, they have tried to distinguish between the roles played by the local bodies of Palakkad & Jharkhand .They have scathingly pointed to the dysfunctional Governance structures in Jharkhand as one of the major reasons for limited success of the NREGA Scheme there. Another aspect of this article has been the existence of the social dimension in the analysis & findings. This is illustrated by the importance attributed to literacy, gender equity in wage payment & the fallout of such measures like limited participation of men in the scheme. The authors have also tried to bring in a perspective on corruption & how, here it has been effectively checked through a simple measure like zero -balance bank account.
Nationwide, NREGA has been plagued by implementation issues and one of its proponent, noted economist Jean Drèze has also criticized it on the same grounds. In Palakkad, NREGA’s success was primarily based on three point’s viz. Quality Local Governance institutions, Women Participation & Minimal Corruption. However the plurality in the social model of Kerala & some inherent flaws in the NREGA Scheme were deterrents in its path. The authors have carefully documented their findings in this regard. Amongst other things they have outlined the need for an institutionalised grievance redressal mechanism, Clarity on nature of work & Payments & seasonal variations. They articulate their arguments by citing the example of heavy manual work allotted to women, importance of Harvest season in a village calendar, Cost Allocation for material & wages etc. These roadblocks probably emphasize the need to revisit the “One Size Fits All” approach of the Government for central schemes.
In the article, the authors have clearly distinguished between education & awareness and how the former doesn’t translate into the latter. However, undoubtedly Mass education especially that of women should be the pre-cursor to launch of a social scheme & women should play an important role in that process of de-intermediation or re-intermediation. The existence of excellent administrative structures in Kerala is an ode to the democratic form of Governance and the success of NREGA Implementation in Palakkad belies the fact that social schemes can’t succeed within a democratic framework.
