Is MGNREG Scheme Complementary to Fishing Activities?

Abstract

Freshwater fish output is taken as a proxy variable for empirical assessment of indirect benefits in terms of enhanced quantity of freshwater fish (output) cultivation. It is not unlikely to assess empirically the productivity of subsidized public scheme when rural development or rural asset generations are underlined in the said scheme, MGNREG Act, 2005. Rainwater harvesting is a major component part of the scheme since about 49.5 per cent of the total fund is already utilized on water conservation and obviously it has an impact on the cultivation of freshwater fish output. Time series data on annual expenditure on MGNREG and corresponding freshwater fish output at the state level are taken during the period 2006-07 to 2013-14 for 16 major Indian states. Fixed effect model and random effect models are being applied and the Hausman specification test suggests that fixed effect model is more appropriate than random effect model. Significant differences among the intercepts of the selected states are revealed as per F test. The results of fixed effect panel regression establish that fish output is enhanced by 0.000257 thousand tones or 0.26 tones if MGNREG expenditure rises by one crore or 10 million rupees. 

Keywords: {'name': 'MGNREG'}, {'name': 'Water Conservation'}, {'name': 'Fish Output'}, {'name': 'Public Scheme'}

Authors & affiliations

Chiranjib Neogi
Affiliation not supplied

Kamal Ray
Affiliation not supplied

Ramesh Chandra Das
Affiliation not supplied

Deposited references

Supplied references, not a list of publications citing this article.

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1941959

Bhaskar, A., Shah, A. & Gupta, S. (2015). Crore Green Jobs? Assessing the Greenness of MGNREGA Work, 57 thAnnual conference, Summaries of the Conference papers, The Indian Societ of Labour Economics

Devereux, S. & Solomon, C. (2006). Issues in Employment and Poverty, Employment creation programmes: The international experience, Discussion Paper 24, Economic and Labour Market Analysis Department, International Labour Office, Geneva

Dreze, J. (2011). ‘The Perils of Gandhigiri’, in the Battle for Employment Guarantee, (ed.) R. Khera, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 257–61.

DOI: 10.1596/1813-9450-6003

Ghorude, K. N. & Muldiyer, V. V. (2015). Performance Evaluation of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act: A Case Study of Tribal dominated Talukas of the State Goa, 57th Annual conference, Summeries of the Conference Papers, The Indian Societ of Labour Economics.

Kelkar, G. (2009). ‘Gender and Productive Assets: Implications for the National Rural Employment Guarantee for Women’s Agency and Productivity’, UNIFEM,

Kheri, R. (2008). Empowerment Guarantee Act, Economic and Political Weekly, August

Mahapatra, R., Suchitra, M., & Moyna. (2011). A Million Opportunities Lost.Down to Earth, 3-12.

Mehrotra, S. (2008). NREG two years on: Where do we go from here?.Economic and Political Weekly, 27-35.

Ministry of Rural Development, MGNREG Division, Government of India

National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005, Government of India, 5 Sept 2005

Pani, N., & Iyer, C. G. (2011). Evaluation of the impact of processes in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme in Karnataka: A study conducted for the Planning, Programme Monitoring and Statistics Department, Government of Karnataka (NIAS Report No. R1-11).

Shah, M. (2015). Should India do away with the MGNREGA? 57 th Annual conference, Summaries of the Conference papers, The Indian Societ of Labour Economics