MPRL annexes

Document Sample
MPRL annexes Powered By Docstoc
					                        LIST OF ANNEXES
   DFID Appraisal Annexes
          1. Technical Appraisal Annex                             2
          2. Governance appraisal                                 11
          3. Social appraisal                                     17
               Appendix 1: Summary stakeholder analysis           25
               Appendix 2: District-wise data on key indicators   31
          4. Economic Justification                               32
          5. Environmental Appraisal                              37

   Government of M.P. Annexes
          6. Project Approach                                     49
          7. Technical/Livelihood Interventions                   60
          8. Budget and Management Responsibilities               72
          9. Milestones, Monitoring and Review of Effectiveness   80




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                 1
                          DFID APPRAISAL ANNEXES

                    ANNEX 1: TECHNICAL APPRAISAL
SUMMARY OF PROJECT APPROACH

A1.1 The proposal presents an area based rural livelihoods programme, which
will operate in six predominantly tribal districts during Phase 1: Badwani, Dhar,
Jhabua, Mandla, Dindor and Shahdol, all amongst the poorest in Madhya
Pradesh. GoMP intends to scale this up to 17 districts through a second phase
from 2005. DFID support during Phase 1 will help GoMP to develop the
approaches and respond to poor people‟s livelihood choices. Key features of the
proposal include:

 The adoption of multiple strategies for responding to livelihoods choices
  based on both natural resource based interventions (particularly, watershed
  and joint forest management), enterprise development and broader
  livelihoods support including migrant labour support and access to
  information.
 A central role for the Gram Sabhas (village assemblies) in approving and
  monitoring the village development plans. This project would be pioneering in
  its support to the recent Gram Swaraj policy of GoMP and to national level
  guidelines that Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) should play an increasingly
  key role in planning and monitoring participatory natural resource
  management with the support of line departments.
 The project will strengthen the ongoing decentralisation programme within MP
  through building capacity and systems at district level so that the Zila
  Panchayat (ZP) is better able to converge resources and respond to poor
  people‟s livelihoods opportunities.
 The establishment of a Rural Livelihoods Forum at state level to evaluate
  experiences from rural development programmes in the state, commission
  analyses and make recommendations on actions that would improve the
  impact of GoMP policies and programmes targeting rural poverty.

A1.2 Full details of the project approach and intended technical interventions
are provided in Annex 6 and 7, which were prepared by GoMP. This annex
presents a technical appraisal of the proposal, providing context to the proposed
livelihoods strategies and highlighting issues that will need to be addressed
during implementation. Issues related to poor people‟s rights and improving
livelihoods outcomes from watershed and joint forest management programmes
are further discussed in the social and environment annexes. Appraisal issues
related to improving poor people‟s access to services and the effectiveness of
government institutions and programmes are discussed in the governance and
economic annexes.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                      2
RURAL LIVELIHOODS STRATEGIES

A1.3 Livelihood strategies of the poor typically reflect simultaneous dependence
on forests, agriculture and wage employment for subsistence and income. Levels
of dependence on each of these vary according to the availability of resources
(particularly land), caste and tribal heterogeneity and opportunities for
occupational diversification.

Forest Based Livelihoods

A1.4 Approximately 90% of the tribal population in MP live on forest fringes and
are highly dependent on forest resources for their livelihoods, especially in the
eastern project districts. The state is heavily forested, but 35% is classified as
degraded. The project districts have on an average 30% of land under forest
cover; with higher rates of forest depletion in the western region. Through the
Joint Forest Management (JFM) programme initiated in 1990, the MP Forest
Department has entered into memoranda of understanding with local
communities to conserve, develop and manage forests. Madhya Pradesh now
has a larger area under JFM arrangements (43,000 km 2 under 10,443
committees) than any other state.

A1.5 The project would follow current government orders on JFM (i.e. the GoMP
resolution of October, 2001) and would seek to actively inform subsequent
revisions. The project approach recognises the key role of Gram Sabhas not only
in approving the formation of JFM committees but also in approving microplans
and co-ordination with other village development plans. The holding of funds by
the Gram Sabhas will further strengthen this arrangement. This goes
considerably beyond current arrangement where JFM committees frequently
suffer from having only administrative status under the Forest Department rather
than legal status as recommended in National level guidelines (MoEF, 2000).
Project experiences therefore have the potential to inform national and state
levels debates on the roles and responsibilities of JFM committees and PRIs. The
proposal outlines how the current JFM model will evolve towards a community
forest management approach, devolving greater rights and responsibilities to
local communities. However, the project design provides little opportunity to
engage with institutional issues of the Forest Department other than through the
recommendations of the rural livelihoods forum. Specific issues that the project
will need to address include:
 Improved participation and benefit sharing by women and other vulnerable
  groups (e.g. graziers, landless, head loaders) in micro planning, particularly in
  ensuring that short term wage opportunities are not at the expense of
  traditional access to forest lands and resources;
 Addressing the broader livelihoods needs of forest dependent poor people –
  the project emphasis on planning at village and district levels will allow far
  greater co-ordination and convergence with other rural developments
  programmes than is generally available with JFM;
 Reconciling issues of alleged encroachment by tribals on forest lands –
  although GoMP maintains that cases should be dealt with recognising
  customary land rights, socially acceptable regularisation of encroachment is

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        3
      severely constrained by current legislation (Forest Conservation Act, 1980).
      This has led to considerable tensions between state Government and activist
      groups acting on behalf of tribal populations;
 Increasing the autonomy of Gram Sabhas in their ownership and
  management of forest resources, as envisaged under the Panchayat
  Extension to Scheduled Areas Act (1996);
 Enhancing benefit sharing in good forest areas to increase the range and
  quantity of products that are available from community forest management
  arrangements;
 Ensuring that NGOs play an appropriate role in developing community forest
  management and in supporting conflict resolution.

A1.6 Non timber forest products (NTFPs) are an important source of food and
income for the tribal poor, especially women, who constitute more than 70
percent of gatherers1. In Madhya Pradesh, three nationalised NTFPs (sal seeds,
harra and tendu leaves) are sold directly to the Minor Forest Produce Federation
in return for wages. Although private trade of nationalised NTFPs is illegal, delays
in payment by the Federation and lack of storage facilities forces gatherers to sell
to traders and shopkeepers at very low rates. In addition to nationalised NTFPs,
more than 40 non-nationalised products are collected and sold by tribal groups to
village-level Primary Co-operative Societies of the Federation2. Most non-
nationalised NTFP collection is in the informal sector.

A1.7 Fair prices or wages for NTFP collection and employment in value-addition
stages are key concerns for gatherers. Tribal women are mainly involved in the
collection stage and not in processing and value-addition activities, where the
real profit margins lie. The importance of strengthening the contribution of NTFPs
to the livelihoods of the tribal poor, particularly women, is increasingly recognised
by GoMP and NGOs. However, widespread forest degradation has started
impacting on the availability of NTFPs as a sustainable source of income.

A1.8 Although the project recognises the importance of NTFPs to poor people‟s
livelihoods, there are many challenges to realising this potential. The project will
need to find ways to improve poor people‟s skills, including in processing and
value addition. Improving access to markets and prices for NTFPs are critical
issues although the project will need to avoid advocating a greater Government
role in setting minimum support prices. The project also needs to be aware of
significant risks as well as opportunities for poor people to engage in enterprises
based on new or underdeveloped markets. The fact that the most valuable
NTFPs remain nationalised – despite the provisions of PESA – significantly
constrains their potential to contribute to livelihoods enhancement. The project
will need to promote debate on issues associated with collection and marketing
regulations for NTFPs (both nationalised and other minor forest produce) through
the livelihoods forum.



1
    Documentation review and discussions with the Minor Forest Produce Federation, Bhopal.
2
    Madhya Pradesh Human Development Report, 1998.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                       4
Watershed And Agricultural Development

A1.9 Given that the traditional livelihood base from forest produce is declining,
there has been an increasing shift by tribal groups towards agriculture in recent
years. Poverty in the project districts for both tribal and scheduled caste
populations manifests itself in subsistence farming of low value crops on marginal
lands, in primarily rainfed conditions. Most project districts (especially Jhabua,
Dindori, Mandla) have low irrigation rates and low agricultural productivity. In
2000, the worst drought in forty years is estimated to have affected 3.7 million
people throughout the state, and particularly the project districts of Dhar and
Jhabua.

A1.10 The situation of poor households is characterised by marginal
landownership, insecure tenancy and landlessness. Prior to bifurcation of MP,
approximately 56% of agricultural landholdings were marginal holdings of less
than two hectares, occupying only 16% of the cultivated area3. Although the
average size of landholding in project districts is 3.12 hectares (as against the
state average of 2.63 hectares), agricultural fields of tribal communities are
mostly on hill slopes. Undulating terrain, skeletal soils and absence of field bunds
result in low agricultural productivity and do not allow for mechanised agriculture.
As a result, the majority of small and marginal farmers also work as agricultural
labourers and/or sharecroppers to sustain their livelihoods.

A1.11 Unsustainable agricultural practices in areas of unreliable rainfall have
contributed to widespread soil erosion and land degradation. In addition,
agricultural intensification and rapid expansion of irrigation based on groundwater
utilisation in certain districts of western MP (e.g. Dhar) has led to major concerns
about unsustainable rates of groundwater extraction.

A1.12 Based on the micro planning activities, the project would support
watershed development interventions in target villages, building on existing social
or natural capital developed through the Rajiv Gandhi Watershed Mission and
Pani Roko Abhiyan. GoMP‟s technical approach (Annex 7) outlines how the
project will address some of the „second generation‟ issues associated with
watershed programmes - particularly concerning long-term sustainability and
ensuring that the poorest groups benefit and are sufficiently involved in identifying
needs. An early activity to be commissioned by the livelihoods forum should be a
synthesis of the many reviews and evaluations already undertaken of watersheds
programmes in Madhya Pradesh, with an intention to produce clear
recommendations on how to improve effectiveness and poverty impact. The
linking of watershed committees with Gram Sabhas is consistent with national
level guidelines issued by MoRD. An important lesson from other projects has
been that self-help and common interest groups, which are often represented by
women and landless people, need to have meaningful linkages with watershed
and joint forest management committees. Key issues related to watershed
management that the project will need to address during implementation include:



3 Land Administration and Management in Madhya Pradesh: Report of an FAO Preliminary Issue
Identification Mission, March 2001.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                               5
 Ensuring that watershed development activities are undertaken in a demand
  driven and flexible manner, with improved participation by women and
  vulnerable groups in identifying local needs and potential benefits;
 Cost contribution is proportionate to whether support actions are undertaken
  on private or community land. There needs to be an analysis of the wage
  labour payments associated with the project and government norms for
  watershed management, and the effect that subsidies have on both ownership
  and sustainability;
 Undertaking water resource audits to assess scope for groundwater and
  surface water development, the likely impact on downstream water users and
  on traditional water resource management systems;
 Promoting convergence at village level and co-ordination within government
  for supporting rural livelihoods. It is important that the project supports
  convergence of resources and does not displace funds already existing within
  a village for watershed activities;
 Taking watershed development beyond initial soil and water conservation
  activities, to improved agricultural practices and productivity. It will be
  important that attention is also paid to markets to ensure that demand exists
  and that watershed improvements will result in increased incomes;
 Best practise technologies are adopted based on local adaptation and
  people‟s experiences. The project will support participatory technology
  development involving poor people from target villages.

A1.13 Absence of infrastructure in different project districts severely limits access
to quality seeds, fertilisers, pesticides, extension services, institutional and formal
credit and commodity markets. This can be even more pronounced for resettled
tribal communities. The Gyandoot experiment in Dhar has examined the role of
improved access to information and communication with government
departments as an innovative way of addressing some of these constraints.
Training and extension services of the Agriculture Department have generally
failed to recognise the increasing feminisation of agriculture, and therefore do not
take into account women‟s needs and priorities.

A1.14 The project approach is in line with many of the recommendations of the
recent policy framework for agricultural extension (2001). This includes the
development of village paraprofessionals and facilitating technical advice and
inputs from the best available source. Valuable experiences are available from
other projects in MP, such as the DFID supported Western India Rainfed Farming
Project and the World Bank supported District Poverty Initiatives Programme. At
district level, the project can support district administrations with the pilot MoUs
being implemented for privatised extension services and with ICT initiatives. It will
also undertake work to improve market information and access.

Unorganised Employment

A1.15 Labour is the main asset for the majority of the poor. According to 1993/4
data, only around 6.2% of the labour force is employed in the organised sector in


MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                            6
MP4. The majority (around 94%) of workers are in the unorganised or informal
sector, where poor households work in agricultural labour, construction labour,
forestry, fishing, bidi rolling, and village artisanry. In the project districts, 23.2% of
households on average are reliant upon income from agricultural labour

A1.16 Recent trends highlight the gradual casualisation of labour in MP. Limited
land resources and landlessness amongst large sections of the tribal and
scheduled caste populations make it imperative to diversify livelihoods and seek
wage labour on farm, urban areas, or in other states. However, wage labour pay
rates and working conditions are frequently exploitative and insecure, with
seasonal variations in employment opportunities. The poorest who depend upon
daily wage labour generally have difficulty in obtaining sufficient days‟ work in
either their villages or areas to which they migrate. Typically, it is tribal groups,
scheduled castes, landless people and women who are most vulnerable to
exploitation and wages below the official minimum wage.

A1.17 In many of the project districts, seasonal migration for at least four months
of the year is a regular feature. Migration is a particularly important livelihood
strategy for poor households in the western project districts due to their proximity
to employment opportunities in the neighbouring states of Maharashtra and
Gujarat. Out-migration of men puts a considerable burden on women and the
elderly. An imperative remains for rural non-farm diversification, the rate of which
has been much slower in MP than in other parts of India. Government rural
development programmes have generally aimed to reduce or even stop migration
rather than tackle the poor conditions and vulnerability under which people
migrate. Acknowledgement of distress migration is therefore an important
element of the proposal. The project will be able to draw on the experiences of
other projects (e.g. WIRFP) and is well placed to develop both practical actions
within districts and to promote policy dialogue at state level. In facilitating the
development of micro-enterprises by self-help groups, the project will need to
ensure that these enterprises are both viable and are not dependent on
subsidies. The proposed use of livelihoods promoters remunerated by groups
themselves is an important part of the project approach. The project will also
encourage enterprise related initiatives at district and sub-district levels through
an innovations fund.

PROJECT APPROACH

A1.18 A major feature of the proposal is that the project will operate at village,
district and state levels promoting innovation and convergence of resources in
responding to people‟s livelihood choices. The extent to which local level
experiences are considered at state (and even National) levels and result in
improvements in policy and programme implementation will be a major factor in
deciding the extent of DFID support for a second phase.

Village Level

A1.19 The first phase will directly target 600 of the most deprived villages, many


4 Draft Madhya Pradesh Human Development Report, 2001.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                               7
of which have not yet benefited from watershed or other rural development
programmes. The project would build on village level institutions and natural
capital created through earlier or current GoMP schemes such as Pani Roko
Abhiyan, the Rajiv Gandhi Watershed mission and the JFM programme.
Linkages between these institutions and the village development committees of
Gram Sabhas would be established for the approval and co-ordination of
development plans. The holding of funds by the village Gram Kosh account
would further strengthen the role of Gram sabhas.

A1.20 Micro planning would be undertaken by the village level institutions and
associated common interest groups, focusing on the poorest groups to identify
appropriate livelihood opportunities and interventions. GoMP‟s rapidly expanding
self-help group (SHG) programme would also provide important social capital
through mobilising disadvantaged groups and women. The approach would
promote convergence at village levels, levering funds from existing schemes
wherever possible.

A1.21 The project will develop existing village level workers (particularly forestry,
agriculture, animal husbandry and SHG mobilisers) and innovative farmers as
„livelihood promoters‟ and support coalitions of these workers within and across
villages. Experience from elsewhere has shown that such village level workers
can be very effective at disseminating successful approaches to neighbouring
villages.

A1.22 Multi-disciplinary Project Facilitation Teams (PFTs) would be established
at a village cluster level to support village committee, community groups and
livelihood promoters to undertake the micro planning, source technical inputs and
identify capacity building needs. Training sources would include the programmes
currently being run by the Department of Panchayat and Rural Development for
village and PRI functionaries. The facilitation role of PFTs is significant as it
allows for more demand driven support than usually occurs from the Project
Implementing Agencies (PIAs) under watersheds programme. The orientation
and training of these teams (which will be both NGO and government) will be a
significant challenge for the project although there are valuable lessons emerging
from the District Poverty Initiatives Programme in other districts of Madhya
Pradesh.

A1.23 The project will need to monitor the quality of participatory planning
processes, the impact on poor people‟s livelihoods and to reflect on the balance
of support between the natural resource based and non-farm livelihoods
strategies. The extent to which the type of livelihoods support and source of
technical inputs is genuinely decided by people‟s local institutions rather than by
line department functionaries will need close attention.

District Level

A1.24 The proposal recognises the importance of capacity building and
institutional development in enabling district administrations and Gram Sabhas to
fulfil their evolving roles under decentralisation, including under Gram Swaraj.
New skills and capacity amongst government officials especially the frontline field

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                          8
staff are essential for rural development programmes to become more people
and outcome focused.

A1.25 At the district level, a process approach would be adopted to institutional
development. Initial support would be identified through a detailed mapping of
available skills and resources (within and outside district governments) and
systems that are necessary for the Zila Panchayat (ZP) to converge resources
and effectively respond to poor people‟s livelihoods opportunities. This has been
included as a key milestone to be undertaken in each of the project district within
the first 12 months. The project opportunities to strengthen the ongoing
decentralisation programme including the implementation of district level planning
is further discussed in the governance annex. The project is well placed to
support the development of district planning frameworks for water resource
management informed by local partners.

A1.26 Rather than creating a large project support unit at district level, the project
provides resources to contract in short or long term specialists as necessary. This
could include developing MoUs with credible NGOs functioning in a district. The
location of an untied Innovation Fund at district level will allow the district to
respond to promising initiatives in the area of enterprise development and
livelihoods promotion.

A1.27 The District Project Management Committees chaired by the Collectors will
promote co-ordinated planning and action by the main line departments (e.g.
Rural Development, Agriculture, Forestry and Animal Husbandry Departments).
As the district project co-ordinator, the CEO of the ZP will enable integration of
project support with other rural development programmes implemented by the
ZP.

A1.28 An early activity will be the development of implementation guidelines at
state and district levels. Although the design is based on principles of innovation
and learning, flexibility risks being lost if these guidelines are overly rigid and if
physical targets for different types of intervention are established at district levels.

STATE LEVEL

A1.29 The establishment of a Rural Livelihoods Forum is a critical component of
the proposal. It provides the link between action and experiences at village and
district levels with informing policy and programme development at state level.
The Livelihoods Forum will evaluate experiences from rural livelihoods
programme in MP, commission analyses and recommend actions to address
constraints in policy, institutional and regulatory framework. GoMP‟s project
approach (Annex 6) outlines the need for the Rural Livelihoods Forum and the
outputs that should be expected over the first phase of the project. Establishing
the Steering Group with appropriate individuals, subsequent agreement on ToR
and staffing for the Secretariat, and agreeing an initial work programme for the
Forum will be critical tasks, which have been identified as a milestone at 3
months and for the inception review after 6 months. The secretariat for the
Livelihoods Forum is proposed to be located in the Tribal Research Institute (TRI)
in Bhopal. The secretariat will need to be an autonomous unit within TRI,

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                             9
appropriately resourced and with the necessary operational flexibility to enable it
to effectively service the Livelihoods Forum and its Steering Group.

A1.30 Although the project does not work through any one centrally sponsored
scheme (CSS), it will support the state government to more effectively use the
resources from the various schemes aimed at wage employment, rural asset
development and self-employment. The project should actively contribute to
national level dialogue on the future of CSSs.

A1.31 Ensuring effective integration and co-ordination of the project at state level
would be sought through the Empowered Committee and the Steering Group of
the Livelihoods Forum. There are considerable opportunities for linkages with the
World Bank supported District Poverty Initiatives Project, which targets a further
14 villages and is also located within the Department for Panchayats and Rural
Development. Linkages will also need to be established with the Rajiv Gandhi
Missions (particularly the Watersheds and Food Security Missions) and the JFM
programme.

A1.32 As funds will be routed through the state finance systems (rather than
through parallel arrangements) it will be critical that the Rural Development
Department and Empowered Committee ensure sufficient contractual and
procurement flexibility for the Secretariat and Project Management Unit to handle
FA and TC funds.

Monitoring And Evaluation Arrangements

A1.32 The establishment of a participatory learning and monitoring system will be
important to ensure that the project is able to reflect on the effectiveness of
project support and its impact on poor people‟s livelihoods. The system will need
to monitor livelihood and environment outcomes at village level and the quality of
project processes and approaches at village and district levels. There is a
growing body of experience within India on developing participatory livelihood
monitoring systems, which the project should draw on during the inception period.
It will be important to establish a baseline for the project districts and directly
targeted villages.

A1.33 The Project duration is three years with reviews against agreed milestones
undertaken on a six-monthly basis. It is anticipated that informal monitoring would
also be possible, both through DFID involvement in the Livelihoods Forum
Steering Group and through periodic visits to project districts. An independent
review of project effectiveness and the intermediate level outcomes would be
undertaken by 30 months. This will inform a joint (GoMP, GoI and DFID) output to
purpose review to be held in Project month 30 and subsequent design work for a
second phase proposal. The nature and scale of DFID support for a second
phase will depend on the success of the project in influencing wider policies and
programmes of GoMP and on subsequent developments and opportunities within
rural sectors in MP.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        10
                      ANNEX 2: GOVERNANCE ANNEX
A2.1 Projects are often conceived and designed in a sterile environment, and
therefore unable to cope with real-life stresses, many caused by factors related to
institutions and governance. In this sense, it could be argued that such projects
are over-designed and too deterministic.
A2.2 The present project is constructed on a set of principles and priorities
negotiated between DFIDI and GoMP. The broad direction and some detail,
including critical project milestones, are defined. The rest is expected to evolve
as implementation proceeds, through strategies that will enable the project to
work round, adapt to, cope with, and hopefully solve some of the problems that
are sure to come. Especially in early stages of the project, it will accordingly be
important that GoMP and DFIDI engage and consult with one another intensively.
A2.3 The project seeks to support and learn from an ongoing process of change
in MP. The most significant opportunities are at village and district levels. Past
attempts by governments, bilaterals and multilaterals to improve poverty focus
and impact of schemes, projects and programmes (esp. watersheds, forest
management, micro enterprise) have met with limited success. Government (or
other external) control over resources, processes and information has often
inhibited, even suppressed, genuine autonomy for community institutions, widely
regarded as an essential prerequisite for meaningful and sustainable impact.
However, recent trends in MP provide grounds for optimism.
Decentralisation In Madhya Pradesh
A2.4 Recent decentralisation initiatives in MP provide opportunities to develop
new relationships between rural communities and their institutions on the one
hand, and government agencies in the districts, NGOs, markets and service
providers on the other. Village level participatory democracy is increasingly
backed up with financial and operational authority. Change in MP seems to be
occurring faster and in newer ways, than the rest of India. Developments in MP
could inform governance trends elsewhere. Much would depend on how the state
manages and consolidates change.
A2.5 The 73rd (Indian) Constitutional Amendment makes local government,
including Panchayat Raj mandatory. In 1999, the planning process in MP was
modified through introduction of District Planning Committees (DPCs) consisting
of elected representatives (from the state legislature and local panchayats) and
government officials to integrate bottom up plans produced by the three-tier
panchayat system. In January 2001, MP enacted a pathbreaking Panchayat Raj
and Gram Swaraj (Sanshodhan) Act, rules framed under which devolve powers
right down to the village (Gram Sabha or village assembly), thus closing what
many have long seen as a significant gap in the 73 rd Constitutional Amendment.
The basic rules for direct participative democracy at the village level (in addition
to existing indirect representative panchayat and parliamentary democracy) have
been established in MP. The second (MP) Finance Commission Award (whose
report is expected) is likely to recommend allocation of a significant share of the
state‟s revenue directly to villages. Another recent measure is an amendment to
the state Land Revenue Act, which provides for direct flow of village land
revenues to gram sabha accounts.            Institutions of governance, planning

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        11
processes and funding seem to be moving toward villages. There is potentially a
greater degree of transparency, downward accountability, community
participation, responsiveness to poor people‟s livelihood priorities and needs;
hence better effectiveness of government investment in poverty reduction.
A2.6 This livelihoods project is potentially well positioned (in time) to support
and take advantage of changes already begun, with reasonable political and
administrative support as well as popular appeal. Decentralisation is however
still in its early stages. There are considerable uncertainties and risks. As the
structures of government change, different forces and interests contend for power
and influence. There will be local officials and political interests opposed to new
ways, and others out to capture the benefits of new opportunities. On the
ground, implementation of direct democracy is running behind the legislation.
Social, political and cultural differences throughout Madhya Pradesh will bring
their own influences to bear on the realities of decentralised government. Of the
tensions in decentralisation processes in MP, (which are probably manageable,
at least during the life of the project), five are noteworthy:

   a) The (well-argued) emphasis that MP places on participatory democracy at
      village level (through gram sabhas) diminishes space for the two lowest
      tiers of panchayat (gram panchayat and janpad panchayat) established by
      the 73rd constitutional amendment. During the project, district officials and
      project facilitation teams will need to coordinate appropriately and
      manage any local tensions arising as a result. Ultimately, this may need to
      be resolved by further legislative change, probably to make gram sabha
      and gram panchayat boundaries congruent.
    The concept of district government (which is effectively, at the moment,
      the „district planning committee‟) similarly competes with the elected zila
      (district) panchayat. Again, only legislative change can ultimately resolve
      this.
       Checks (justified by the need for caution) on gram sabhas that include
        legal and administrative powers with local officials of the state
        government. Here, the project can help to develop and demonstrate good
        practices that point the way to a graduated transfer of responsibility.
       The potential for conflict between new interests created by
        decentralisation and older established interests.         In particular, line
        department officials are accustomed to the exercise of considerable
        power and control over resource allocation in government programmes.
        There is resistance to changes that place more decision-making powers
        in the hands of programme participants and panchayat bodies, and for
        some, limit rent-seeking opportunities. In this, the project can support line
        department staff to redefine and grow into their new roles.
       Ambiguity as to whether gram sabhas in „scheduled tribal areas‟ where
        „PESA‟ (Central Act 40/96) applies do (or can) actually exercise the full
        range of powers that the Act provides for. Here, the project should at
        least be able to contribute to the debate.
A2.7 Despite these tensions, opinion in government and NGOs generally
acknowledges that decentralisation does indeed create unprecedented
opportunities for better and contextually relevant responses to poverty

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                         12
challenges, with improved accountability. The project has a real opportunity to
take advantage of and test these opportunities. Decentralisation is well aligned
to recent recommendations of the Indian Planning Commission that favour much
higher levels of participation and much more flexibility in schemes/programmes.
Project Contribution To Improved Delivery Of Livelihoods Programmes
A2.8 Both GoI (over the years) and GoMP (in more recent years) have been
trying to reduce delay and attrition in fund-flow for development, to improve
timeliness and relevance of decision-making and implementation, and to provide
more autonomy and flexibility. There is growing realisation however, that change
has been slow and in small increments. The project creates opportunities for
further and faster changes. Building capacities and links across Gram Sabhas,
the three tiers of panchayats and newly constituted DPCs represent a significant
challenge for the state. The project will contribute to capacity building at the two
levels where most funds and resources are available – the village and the district.
A2.9 Over a decade ago GoI started channelling much of its funds for schemes
directly to the District Rural Development Agency (DRDA, exists in all districts
across India). A senior government district official heads the DRDA. In MP, the
DRDA has now been subordinated to the zila panchayat. There are many
criticisms of the DRDA system, within and outside government. The project
presents opportunities to gram sabhas to renegotiate relationships with DRDAs.
Sharing, allocation, control and management of funds between districts and
villages should be a priority area for project monitoring, especially in the early
stages.
A2.10 During project design, GoMP has argued persuasively in favour of
continuing natural resource based programmes (accompanied by new efforts in
microenterprise, land based and non-land based). The challenge before the
project is how to avoid a repetition of standard prescriptions, programmes and
approaches, and use opportunities provided by the project to innovate and find
better ways to plan and manage programmes.
A2.11 In this context, three specific features of the project deserve mention:
       Funds (especially for watersheds and forestry activities) are placed at the
        disposal of gram sabhas. The traditional practice is to place funds in the
        hands of line departments whose functionaries dominate and control
        processes.
       Funds have been made available for capacity building of the gram sabha,
        to develop it as a stable autonomous institution. Districts will need
        guidance and support from the project to use the funds wisely (i.e. not
        simply to deliver training, but more importantly to create and identify
        demand for contextually relevant and specific capacity building in gram
        sabhas and CIGs).
       Creation of a Livelihoods Forum, which creates a mechanism for lesson-
        learning (see further below).
A2.12 As the weight of information, capacities and funds shifts to people and
their institutions, government line departments will be challenged to seek new,
more meaningful and fulfilling roles as facilitators and catalysts of development.
The project has the potential to trigger off bottom up changes in governance, in

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                           13
ways that legislation and schemes cannot. The extent and pace of such change
would of course be an important determinant of a possible second phase of this
particular project. More importantly, the lessons learnt about how and why such
changes occur should inform design of other projects supported by DFID in India.
A2.13 During project implementation, GoMP and DFIDI will have to manage
tensions arising from an understandable tendency in some quarters to implement
„core‟ activities quickly, in traditional ways at the expense of project objectives
related to learning and change. A balance will need to be maintained. Changes
begun during the project would inform and be taken forward in a subsequent
phase.
A2.14 In addition to standard audit and accounting procedures, the project can
maximise openings to limit openings for corruption and rent-seeking behaviour.
The increased role of Gram Sabhas in relation to officials should, if working
effectively, help militate against such behaviour. The effectiveness and
transparency of the information flow from district to village will be crucial, and
implementation guidelines need to include mechanisms for challenge and
complaint. Open, transparent and competitive recruitment of Project Facilitation
Teams, the key intermediaries between district and village, should help avoid
undue reliance on pre-existing patronage relationships. As mentioned above,
close monitoring of allocation and control of funds will be required, particularly in
the initial stages. This is an area which could usefully be addressed by the
Livelihoods Forum, given its relevance for service delivery generally.
A2.15 An ongoing appraisal issue will be the continuing commitment of different
agencies, groups and individuals in GoMP, in NGOs and elsewhere to the
governance agenda of the project, and how to ensure that this agenda remains
visible and survives to the end of the project. The Project Steering Committee
and Learning Forum will have a critical role to play here.
Information, Capacity Building And CSO Engagement
A2.16 A key determinant of project effectiveness will be the quality, timeliness
and relevance of capacity building and information available to villages and
districts. The project design allows for much autonomy at the district level. This
must be complemented with an external effort that creates awareness and a
demand for inputs, and provides links to quality resources that can provide these.
The challenge will be to find mechanisms that work well with existing structures
and ways of thinking.
A2.17 The project provides space for the private sector, NGOs (and other civil
society organisations) to participate. Capacity building, market linkages and
enabling support of various kinds would be needed – particularly by gram
sabhas, SHGs and CIGs; but also at the district level. It is a fact that neither the
organised private sector nor NGOs have a significant presence in the six project
districts, especially in tribal areas. Significant costs may be involved in bridging
the gap. How to identify, attract, co-opt and support the private sector and
NGOs, to co-ordinate their inputs and get value for money are challenges that
gram sabhas and districts may not be able to face alone. Considerable support
from the project at state level and the Livelihoods Forum will be needed, and
should be feasible. To support this, each PMC will commission a detailed



MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                         14
mapping of resources, capabilities and expertise available locally, and design and
implement capacity building as appropriate.
Institutional Arrangements
A2.18 The institutional arrangements and approach are set out in Annex 6 and
accompanying Appendix (organisational chart). An Empowered Committee,
headed by the Chief Secretary, will provide strategic direction. The Empowered
Committee will include the Secretary to the Chief Minister and heads of major
departments (such as Tribal Welfare and Agriculture), as well as DFID(I). For
operational purposes, the project will be housed in the Department of Panchayat
and Rural Development (DoP&RD). DoP&RD is the largest government
department engaged in rural development work, in terms of both size and budget.
Although a multiplicity of line departments have some kind of role in this area,
DoP&RD is the most significant and the department with the greatest potential to
leverage major improvements.           A Project Management Unit within the
Department will ensure horizontal and vertical linkages and coordinate the project
at State level. This Unit will support the project in the selected districts, provide
operational direction and monitor progress.
A2.19 The district level is key to project implementation. A Project Management
committee, chaired by the Collector, will ensure participation of the key line
departments, as well as co-opted experts and local MLAs. The Chief Executive
Officer of the Zila Panchayat, (which includes the DRDA), will be the project
coordinator, and will be supported by a District Project Support Unit, which would
have a small operational staff, with funds to contract task managers and
consultants, as necessary, and develop capacity building activities. Project
Facilitation teams will report to these Units, and will facilitate implementation at
village level, supporting Gram Sabhas and village committees to develop
proposals, source capacity building and access technical expertise. Competitive
recruitment processes and good quality induction and training will be necessary if
these teams are to function effectively, and develop an organisational culture
which will support the innovative and facilitative approach required for project
success.
Livelihoods Forum
A2.20 The project provides for a Livelihoods Forum. The forums role as a think-
tank for the project should support high-level interaction between government
policymakers and a range of other actors including academics, NGOs and DFID.
As well as commissioning analysis and action research on livelihoods issues, the
Forum would be expected to look at how district government and other public
bodies need to respond to the challenge of Gram Swaraj, and how key line
departments can improve their roles and functions to better match their evolving
responsibilities.
A2.21 The Forum will be served by a secretariat, located within the Tribal
Research Institute. The Institute is administratively under the Department for
Tribal Affairs. The Principal Secretary of the department is also the head of the
Institute. The TRI is not autonomous, whereas the Forum will need a high
degree of administrative and financial autonomy, including contracting powers, to
perform its functions meaningfully. During project appraisal, it was therefore
agreed that the secretariat would function as an autonomous unit located within


MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                         15
the TRI, but independently managed. Rules and norms for the Forum will need to
be notified during the project inception phase, and will constitute one of the
milestones to be met by PM 3.
A2.22 A Steering Group will set the agenda and work-plan for the Forum, whose
membership would include GoMP policy makers, development professionals,
NGO representatives, key resource persons from outside GoMP and DFID. The
Project Coordinator will be the Steering Group Secretary. One of the most
important functions of the Steering Group will be to present regular reports to
GoMP through the Empowered Committee, and make recommendations to
government. The successful functioning of this feedback mechanism will be
essential if the project is to have leverage at senior policymaking levels, and
selection of Steering Group members should be a matter for careful
consideration.
Key Organisational Issues To Be Addressed In The Inception Phase
A2.23 The following issues will be addressed and resolved in the inception phase
of the project, as part of the two early milestones of production of implementation
guidelines and establishment of the Livelihoods Forum. Both milestones are set
for PM 3.
     Detail of organisational arrangements, especially roles, responsibilities
        and relationships connecting GoMP (Dept. of Panchayats & Rural
        Development), the Empowered Committee, Project Director, Livelihoods
        Forum (and its Steering Committee), district administration (and
        departments), zila panchayat (including DRDA which controls central
        government funds), gram sabhas, SHGs and CIGs (including watershed
        and forestry)
     Fund flow from DFID through GoI and to end users; accounting and
        accountability issues.
     Scope and content of project guidelines, issuing authority, process of
        dissemination, mechanisms for amendments and changes, and timetable
        for issue and dissemination.
     Roles, composition of Livelihoods Forum and Steering Committee, and an
        initial agenda.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                       16
                             ANNEX 3: SOCIAL APPRAISAL
INTRODUCTION

A3.1 This annex presents the Social Appraisal of the proposed support to the
Rural Livelihoods Project of the Government of Madhya Pradesh (GoMP). Six
predominantly tribal districts have been selected for the first three-year phase.
The project seeks to improve the livelihoods of tribal populations and other
disadvantaged groups below the poverty line, taking into account social and
economic inequalities that deprive the poor of access to natural resources,
productive assets, government schemes and decision-making and planning
processes.

A3.2. The annex provides an overview of the poverty context in the project
districts. It highlights the key social appraisal issues deriving from an analysis of
poor peoples livelihood options and government policies impacting on tribal
groups. This appraisal is based on consultations with key primary and secondary
stakeholders and review of documentation.


PROJECT CONTEXT: POVERTY AND INEQUALITY

Who and where are the poor?

A3.3. The publication of the first Human Development Report (HDR) for Madhya
Pradesh (MP) in 1995 brought to centre-stage concerns about the low level of
human development in the state. Madhya Pradesh has a low Human
Development Index (HDI) compared to other Indian states (MP‟s HDI was 0.5 in
1998 as compared to 0.6 for India, and the ideal of 1.0) 5. The state has a
population of approximately 60.4 million. The majority of the poor are in rural
areas, where nearly three-quarters of the population reside. At least 47% of the
rural population is estimated to live below the poverty line (BPL)6.

A3.4. Madhya Pradesh has a large population of Scheduled Tribes (20%) and
Scheduled Castes (15.5%), who are amongst the most marginalised and
vulnerable groups (constituting 80 to 90% of BPL households7). Districts with
significant tribal and scheduled caste populations therefore typically represent the
most deprived areas. The selected six districts for Phase I have high tribal
populations (more than 45% of the district population). Socio-economic indicators
(Appendix 2) reveal increasing disparities between people in tribal areas and the
rest of the state. Of the six project districts, four figure among the lowest ten in




5
  The HDI is a composite index that includes literacy, infant mortality, life expectancy and income indicators.
The five project districts include Jhabua, West Nimar, Shahdol, Betul, and Mandla. Reference: Madhya
Pradesh Human Development Report 1998.
6
  National Planning Commission, 1999-2000; Madhya Pradesh Human Development Report 2001 (Draft);
December 2001; Survey by Rural Development Department, GoMP, 1997-98 to 2000.
7                                                                      st
  The Bhopal Document: Charting a New Course for Dalits for the 21 century, GoMP, 2002.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                                 17
the state with respect to the HDI. Jhabua, Badwani and Shahdol are also among
the lowest ranking districts in terms of the Gender Development Index (GDI) 8.

A3.5. On the whole, the poor (including both men and women) in the project
districts can be broadly categorised into:
 Scheduled Tribes (STs), particularly the so-called „primitive tribal groups‟ -
mainly involved in agricultural labour, marginal farming, and non-timber forest
product collection;
 poor non-tribal households, particularly those from Scheduled Castes (SCs) -
mainly involved in agricultural labour, marginal farming, and small-scale income-
generating activities;
 women from poor households, especially women-headed households;
 poor and vulnerable groups from landless and displaced households; and
 poor households with members engaged mainly as migrant and/or casual
labourers under insecure and exploitative contractual arrangements.

A3.6. The project districts are home to a number of tribal groups that are
extremely diverse in origin, socio-cultural and political history, language,
livelihood strategies and level of development. There are about 17 different tribal
groups in the project districts, with the Gonds being the largest tribe numerically,
followed by Bhils, Kol and Kawar. Among the tribal groups in the project area,
Sahariyas, Korwas, Baigas and Bhainas are designated as „Primitive Tribal
Groups‟, who are typically the most marginalised and isolated.

A3.7. Amongst the Gonds and Korkus, a minority have derived the benefits of
settled agriculture, formed common interest networks, and sought to assert
higher social identity and influence within villages. In multi-caste settlements,
tribal communities generally face higher levels of discrimination than scheduled
                            castes, as a result of their low „perceived‟ status in
                            the society.
    Tribal Groups in Selected
    Project Districts           A3.8. Compared to non-tribal districts in the state
                                and non-tribal communities within the project
 Jhabua & Dhar: Bhils, Bhilala, districts, tribal groups have been largely under-
 Patlia, Barela
                                served through public systems, both due to supply
 Mandela & Dindori: Gond,       (failure of resources to reach) and demand factors
 Korku, Kol, Baiga              (poor ability to demand resources and services)9. Tribal
 Shahdol: Oraons, Korwa, Kol,   groups have low visibility and representation in key
 Kamar, Panika                  positions at state, district and sub-district levels.
                                Increasing levels of poverty and inequality have
contributed to mass activist movements in these areas, reflecting tribal people‟s
dissatisfaction with certain development policies and programmes.

A3.9. Among the non-tribal poor communities, scheduled castes face relatively
higher levels of social marginalisation and economic deprivation than other
castes. Among the rural poor, the landless constitute the most vulnerable group.

8
  Madhya Pradesh Human Development Report, 1998. Gender Development Index (GDI) uses the same
variables as the HDI, but adjusts the average achievement in life expectancy, education attainment and
income in accordance with the degree of disparity in achievement between women and men.
9
  Tribal Development Strategy for DPIP, prepared for World Bank, 1999.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                         18
Despite legislation ensuring land tenancy rights of tribals according to 1991
data10, 34.4% of the STs in MP are landless agricultural labourers.

A3.10. Women and especially women-headed households are particularly
vulnerable groups. While recent trends at the state level point to increased
feminisation of agriculture, women have little control over land and poor access to
extension services. As women often depend on common property and forest
resources for meeting subsistence and income needs, the impact of continuing
resource degradation is felt mainly by women.

A3.11. The top ten districts in MP in terms of female-male sex ratio are all
predominantly tribal districts these figures appear to point to the relatively higher
status of women in tribal society. At the same time, however, the 2001 census
data shows that both districts are amongst the last three in the ranking of female
literacy in the state.

A3.12. Reservation of one-third seats for women in Gram Panchayats and
implementation of the state‟s policy on women (2002) has brought women into
key decision-making positions at the village-level and in state-constituted
advisory boards. However, their long history of exclusion from such processes
and low levels of literacy have resulted in men continuing to hold and exercise
power on their behalf.

KEY APPRAISAL ISSUES:

A3.13. Currently, GoMPs social policy articulation is supportive of poor and
marginal segments like „Dalits‟ i.e. tribals and Scheduled Castes, and women.
Social appraisal issues focus on how livelihood constraints of poor people can be
met by leveraging existing government programmes cascading from the
progressive policy instruments.

Land Rights
A3.14. The project will focus on second-generation issues related to use of
watershed management as a poverty reduction strategy. To meet the equity
concerns, the project will need to engage with issues related to land rights of
tribals and SCs.

A3.15. GoMP has undertaken a number of measures to reduce inequities in land
distribution and strengthen tenure rights of those occupying and cultivating land.
However, the process has been criticised for allotting poor quality land, delays in
allocation, and inability of allotttes to retain physical possession due to
intimidation by powerful landholders11. In addition, there are cases of tribal
communities losing land through “legal transfers” that have used loopholes in
provisions designed to restrict alienation of tribal land.

A3.16. The project is well positioned to co-ordinate at the state level with the Task
Force on Land Issues that includes representatives from the government and civil
10                                                        st
  The Bhopal Document, Charting A New Course for Dalits for the 21 Century, GoMP, 2002.
11
   Land Administration and Management in Madhya Pradesh: Report of an FAO Preliminary Issue
Identification Mission, March 2001.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                              19
society organisations. This is expected to address land alienation issues as well
as those related to encroachment and problems raised by the Forest
Conservation Act (1980) that restricts the state from regularising long-standing
occupation by poor agriculturalists. As part of the project milestones,
mechanisms will need to be developed to establish linkages with the Task Force
on land issues.

A3.17. Capacity building of PFTs and subsequently of user groups will need to
comprise information regarding the various land rights legislations and
government measures. This includes the “Pattadar Possession Verification
System” that make it mandatory for revenue officials to record the state of
possession of pattadars (leased land) at the end of the kharif cropping cycle. As
more than 75% of pattadars (lessees) are scheduled castes and tribes, this
administrative measure provides an opportunity to restore land to dispossessed
pattadars.

Forest-Based Livelihoods

A3.18. Community forest Management is one of the key strategies to be
implemented at the village level by the project. Approximately 90% of the tribal
population in MP living on forest fringes and are highly dependent on forest
resources for their livelihoods. The project will need to evolve ways of addressing
constraints faced by gatherers of NTFPs, nearly 70 percent of who are women12.

A3.19. At the state and district level the Empowered Committee and the Project
Management Committee will need to coordinate with the Forest Department to
address issue such as timely payment for nationalised NTFPs by the State
Federation. Late payments and the absence of storage facilities force gatherers
to sell even nationalised products to traders and shopkeepers at very low rates.
Information dissemination and capacity building of community groups is essential
to ensure they can bargain for better returns. Additionally, while designing micro
enterprise activities, the project will need to ensure the involvement of women at
the value-addition stages, where the real profit margins lie. Currently, their
participation is mainly in the low return collection stage and not in processing and
value-addition activities.

A3.20. Under the Panchayat Raj (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act (1996),
GoMP has decided to give its entire net profit from NTFPs to Primary
Cooperatives at the village level. The project will need to develop mechanisms to
ensure that poorest groups within the villages can accrue benefit from such
efforts.

Community Access To Forests

A3.21. The project covers „forest villages‟ or habitations on the forest periphery,
that are directly affected by forest rules and regulations. Under the 1994 Nistar
Policy, people living within 5km radius of forest boundaries are eligible for forest
produce on concessional rates. However, forest villages are among the poorest,

12
     Documentation review and discussions with the Minor Forest Produce Federation, Bhopal.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                        20
as they cannot access development funds, water supply and electricity. Advocacy
groups such as Ekta Parishad have been pressing the GoMP to implement its
1978 decision to transfer all forest villages into revenue villages. The project will
need to evolve a strategy to engage in these forest villages and highlight
constraints to poverty reduction in these areas at the Livelihoods Forum.

Unorganised Employment

A3.22. The project recognises the critical role of seasonal and out migration in the
livelihood strategies of the poor. Labour is the main asset for the majority of the
poor. According to 1993/4 data, only around 6.2% of the labour force is employed
in the organised sector in MP13. The majority (around 94%) of workers are in the
unorganised or informal sector, where poor households work in agricultural
labour, construction labour, forestry, fishing, bidi rolling, and village artisanry. In
the project districts, 23.2% of households on average are reliant upon income
from agricultural labour14. Seasonal migration for at least four months of the
year is a regular feature, and is a particularly important livelihood strategy for
poor households in the western project districts due to their proximity to
employment opportunities in the neighbouring states of Maharashtra and Gujarat.

A3.23. The planned migrant support programme, focussing on developing their
bargaining skills technical expertise and disseminating information on legislative
rights will operate at the village level. The project also provides a good testing
ground for putting into practice the action plan to be drawn up by the GoMP
constituted Task Force on Unorganised Labour.

Gender

A3.24. In the project areas the female work force participation rate is as high as
42%. The project will need to implement its „livelihood interventions‟ recognising
gendered roles and women‟s needs and priorities. The project will need to
develop its gender strategy based on the GoMP women‟s policy, which is
currently being revised. It will need to define a participation norm for women,
reflecting not just representation but participation in decision making as well. The
project also provides an opportunity to test gender sensitive district and village
level capacity building programmes, aimed particularly at supporting women‟s
participation in decentralised bodies. This will enable it to give effect to policy
recommendations at the village level while implementing livelihood support
programmes, as also contribute to the issue at the state level via the learning
forum

Dalit Agenda

A3.25. The GoMP has signed up to a „Dalit‟ (SC/STs in the state) agenda15
calling for stringent implementation of existing laws, programmes, expansion of
positive affirmation to the private sector, steps to secure a right to livelihood

13
     Draft Madhya Pradesh Human Development Report, 2001.
14
     Refer Appendix 2 for data on all project districts.
15
  Drafted by Dalit intelligentsia, activists and civil society representatives from different parts of the
country. Local civil society groups were not engaged by the state in this process.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                                       21
including promotional interventions to expand the capital base of the Dalits. It has
constituted a task force to develop an action plan for implementing the agenda.
The project can at the state level, through the Learning Forum contribute to the
Dalit agenda by highlighting what works to reduce poverty for STs and SCs.

Tribal Sub Plan

A3.26. The state has an extensive apparatus for planning and implementing
development programmes in tribal areas. With population based financial
allocation, the Tribal Sub Plan (TSP) comprises almost 22% of the divisible
development budget. Given that project districts are covered by ITDP
programmes, also targeting primitive groups, the project will need to develop
synergy with the TSP planning. An issue to be addressed by the project will be
how capacities of the gram sabhas, both in PESA and other villages, can be
strengthened to participate in planning and implementation of the programmes
funded by TSPs. The project will need to establish linkages with the ITDP in
order to leverage effective service delivery at the village level and capacity
building of concerned functionaries and representatives at the district level. At the
state level, the learning forum provides an opportunity to reflect lessons regarding
planning and implementation of the Tribal Sub Plans.

Engagement With Civil Society Organisations

A3.27. The project will need to address issues related to engagement with civil
society organisations. Currently, the project intends to broaden institutional space
for NGOs by collaborating on capacity building of primary and secondary
stakeholders; information dissemination; conducting action research on key
issues such as livelihood assessments, poverty monitoring, review and
evaluations and feeding lessons regarding the same to the Livelihoods Forum.

A3.28. An ongoing issue for the project will be broadening engagement with
diverse CSO players, including mass based organisations. Increasing levels of
poverty and inequality have contributed to mass activist movements led by mass
based organisations (MBOs) in tribal areas, reflecting their dissatisfaction with
certain development policies and programmes. Though mechanisms for dialogue
between such MBOs and GoMP exist, the relationship is also marked by
confrontation. It is pertinent for the project to develop a strategy for engagement
with CSOs. Establishing linkages with the task forces on unorganised labour and
land reforms provide an opportunity for such engagement, as they comprise both
an informal workers Trade Union and an active MBO.

Capacity Building Of Primary And Secondary Stakeholders

A3.29. The project will work towards strengthening the capacities and
performance of newly created Gram Sabha committees and other
resource/activity specific community institutions (e.g. WDCs, FPCs, CIGs, and
SHGs).

A3.30. At the village-level, the project will aim to support the different Gram
Sabha committees and community institutions to:

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                         22
        undertake participatory planning and improved targeting of poor and
         vulnerable groups with support from Livelihoods Promoters16;
        access a range of relevant service providers;
        increase levels of participation and equitable representation in the Gram
         Sabha;
        monitor progress and review the performance of the project interventions
         in terms of meeting the project objectives in key poverty, livelihood and
         social areas; and
        more effectively access and use livelihoods-related information.

A3.31. At the district-level, the project will aim to strengthen the capacity of the
Project Management Committee to:
  provide effective support to Gram Sabhas, relevant committees and other
    community institutions for participatory planning and implementation;
  screen group proposals for focus on poorest and vulnerable households,
    potential of building on people‟s existing strengths and capacities, developing
    new livelihood opportunities, consistency with sustainable livelihood
    principles, gender sensitivity, and environmental impact;
  identify and facilitate information dissemination, orientation and access to
    capacity building inputs for poor people‟s groups, as well as government field
    staff; and
  monitor and review project performance in terms of meeting key poverty and
    livelihoods objectives.

Informing Policy-Makers

A3.32. The project, through the livelihoods forum, offers a platform for giving
„voice‟ to the concerns of the poor and excluded in policy influencing forums. It
also allows an interface between government, research organisations, and Civil
Society Organisations. However, for the forum to effectively raise issues pertinent
to primary stakeholders, it will need to develop mechanisms that allow such
upward linkages to the livelihood forum, both directly by the poor and through the
livelihood promoters/ project facilitation teams. The Forum could potentially
contribute to the National Policy on Tribals, which is proposed to be drafted by
the Government of India.

Improved Targeting Of The Poor

A3.33. The project will strengthen targeting of the poor by using a combination of
methods, including verification of BPL status with assistance from Social Justice
Committees and Livelihoods Promoter. As part of process documentation, the
project will record who amongst the poor are excluded and why and how the
project is reaching them. To avoid elite capture, the livelihood promoter needs to
be selected against criterion that includes representation of marginalized groups
within the ST community, SCs, primitive groups and women.



16
  Roles and responsibilities of village-level Livelihoods Promoters are outlined in the Technical
and Project Management Annexes.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                       23
Improving Access To Information

A3.34. The projects potential to empower poor communities lies in providing them
with timely and accurate information about their rights, entitlements and the
process for accessing government programmes. Access to livelihoods-related
information will be strengthened through support from Livelihoods Promoters and
awareness-raising in Gram Sabha and GVS meetings. Livelihoods Promoters
could facilitate linkages with Janpad level information centres that have been
proposed by the Department of Panchayat Raj. The project would need to
develop innovative ways of reaching information to tribals in remote locations.

A3.35. The project milestones will need to include design of mechanisms for
linkages of micro-level project activities with the learning forum, design and
development of the gender strategy in conjunction with the State Women‟s policy,
the guidelines for selection of beneficiaries, and the strategy for engagement with
CSOs. Mechanisms for collaboration with various policy forums such as the task
forces on unorganised labour, land issues and The Dalit agenda will also need to
be reflected in project milestones.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                       24
SOCIAL APPRAISAL APPENDIX 1: SUMMARY STAKEHOLDER
ANALYSIS

1. Project stakeholders are outlined in the table below. Interests have been
   derived from consultations with government representatives and NGOs, a
   GoMP design workshop, and field visits.

2. The first seven categories of primary stakeholders (see table) are the focus of
   the project, representing the poor and marginalised. Such groups may be
   used for targeting and monitoring the outreach and equity impacts of the
   project in due course.

3. Primary stakeholder groups will have differing interests in the project
   depending on their livelihood needs and priorities. The project is expected to
   have a positive impact in many aspects of poor people‟s livelihoods. However,
   in some areas, it may be difficult to attribute impacts solely to the project, or
   impacts may not become evident during the project period. The project‟s
   success will largely be determined by its outreach to and impact on the
   different groups.

2. There is potential for conflict amongst these groups, for example over
   resource access, entitlements, caste status and political control. Whilst they
   all share common problems of insecure access to a range of livelihoods
   assets and social marginalisation, the project may exacerbate existing
   competition to capture resources and benefits from any new activities. In
   addition, the project will be among the first major sources of direct funding to
   Gram Sabhas, with a focus on poorer groups. This has the potential to
   generate resistance and animosity from the powerful groups and local elites
   on whom the poor may still depend for distress loans, crop advances and
   labouring opportunities and, from the Gram Panchayat whose control over
   funds and village-level planning will be considerably reduced. The project will
   need to manage such conflict where it may be damaging to special focus
   group interests.

4. Some primary stakeholder groups may have an ambiguous interest in the
   project. The project might lead to the emergence of new village leaders and
   community-based organisations who may see opportunities to increase their
   sphere of power and influence, which may run counter the project‟s intention
   to support more pro-poor and equitable village level planning.

5. The secondary stakeholders comprise those who are essentially distant from
   the village but have an immediate and/or potential interest in the project as:
    opportunity to address key poverty and livelihood issues e.g. District
      government, Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj;
    suppliers of services such as training, material, information, capacity
      building and technical inputs e.g. relevant line departments, NGOs,
      contractors;



MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        25
      interest in lesson learning e.g. Government departments, donors, NGOs,
       academic institutions;
      participating in research e.g. academic institutions, NGOs;
      political gain e.g. Chief Minister, Mass Tribal Organisations; and
      challenge the project approach e.g., Mass Tribal Organisations, political
       activists.


Stakeholder Group             Interests                                       Potential
                                                                              project
                                                                              impact
Primary Stakeholders
Small and marginal              Improved short and long-term                 +
farming households               employment opportunities.
below poverty line,             Improved food security and reduction of      +
especially from                  seasonal vulnerability.
Scheduled Tribes,               Increased agricultural productivity.         +
Scheduled Castes and            Improved ability to access credit,           +
Other Backward Castes            processing and marketing support for
(mainly involved in              NTFPs and agricultural produce.
subsistence farming,            Reduced indebtedness.                        +
agriculture labour/             Secure access to resources.                  +/?
sharecropping/seasonal          Improved access to information on rights     +
migration, NTFP                  and entitlements, and on government
collection, and small-           schemes and programmes.
scale income generating
activities).
Women from poor                 Improved access to income generating         +
households, particularly         activities.
women-headed                    Improved food security.                      +
households.                     Enhanced social capital and skills.          +
                                Increased visibility of women‟s priorities   +/?
                                 and needs.
                                Increased involvement in community-          +/?
                                 level decision-making and planning
                                 processes.                                   +
                                Improved access to information on social
                                 protection schemes.
Poor and vulnerable             Improved access to land and other key        ?
groups from landless             livelihood resources.
and displaced                   Improved food security.                      +
households.                     Improved short and long-term                 +/?
                                 employment opportunities.
                                Improved access to credit, processing
                                 and marketing support.                       +
Poor households with            Improved access to secure wage               +/?
members engaged                  labouring opportunities.
mainly as migrant               Increased wage rates.                        ?
and/or casual labourers         Enhanced skills.                             +

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                            26
under insecure and
exploitative contractual
arrangements.
Other occupational              Improved access to key livelihood           +/?
groups (e.g., fisherfolk,        resources.                                  +
artisans, handicraft            Improved food security.                     +
producers).                     Improved short and long-term
                                 employment opportunities.                   +/?
                                Improved access to credit, processing
                                 and marketing support.
Gram Sabhas, including          Improved planning, implementation,          +
Gram Vikas Samitis and           decision-making and technical skills and
other common interest            capacity.
groups (e.g.Self-Help           Increased access to funding and             +
Groups, Forest                   services.
Protection Committees           Increased access to information on          +
etc).                            government schemes and expertise
                                 available with private service providers.   +
                                Opportunities for training and exposure     +/?
                                 visits.
                                More access to public arenas.               +
                                Improved interface with government and
                                 other private service providers
Middlemen for                   Secure supplies of produce for local and    +
producers and                    intermediate markets.
migrant/casual                  Secure interest repayments on loans to      -/?
labourers.                       producers and migrants.
                                Secure commission on migrant labour         -/?
                                 contracts.
Village and local elite.        Maintain position of influence in the       +/-
                                 village.                                    -
                                Capture benefits from the project.
Secondary Stakeholders
Gram Panchayat.         Representing community members‟                     +
                         interests.                                          +
                        Disbursement of funds to Gram Sabhas.               +/-
                        Retain control over funds and activities in
                         Gram Sabhas.
District Government -   Improved ability to address livelihood              +
District Planning        needs of the rural poor
Committee and Zila      Meeting targets for government                      +
Panchayat.               programmes and schemes
                        Increased access to resources                       +
                        Improve ability to plan, co-ordinate and
                         monitor rural development initiatives               +
                        Maintaining control of funds and budget
                         allocations                                         +/-
                        Management of political and economic
                                                                             +/-

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                           27
                                    aspects of local policy implementation
                                    e.g. NTFP
Line departments and               Access to training opportunities and            +
staff at district and sub-          capacity building support.
district levels.                   Improved performance in utilising and           +
                                    targeting schemes and programmes.
                                   Career advancement                              +/-
Learning Forum.                    Enhanced knowledge and application of           +
                                    best practice in support to rural
                                    livelihoods.                                    +
                                   Recognition by government and CSOs for
                                    inputs to policy influence.
MP Rural Livelihoods              Enhancing rural livelihoods in poorest           +
Project                            tribal areas.
                                  Promoting intersectoral co-ordination.           +
                                  Promoting convergence of government              +
                                   schemes and missions.
Department of Rural               Rationalising state and centrally                +
Development and                    sponsored schemes and guidelines for
Panchayat Raj.                     greater livelihood impact.
                                  Opportunity to extend decentralisation           +
                                   and increase capacity and effectiveness
                                   of Gram Sabhas.
Chief Minister                    Meeting commitments to rural electorate          +/?
Government of Madhya              Enhancing rural livelihoods in project           +
Pradesh.                           districts.                                       +
                                  Scaling up rural development initiatives.        +
                                  Increased effectiveness and convergence
                                   of schemes and missions.                         +/?
                                  Government image enhanced both within
                                   the state and nationwide.                        +
                                  Mobilising additional resources.                 +/?
                                  Support to ongoing decentralisation
                                   process.
DFID India.                       Responding to GoMP request for                   +
                                   assistance to poorest predominantly tribal
                                   districts.                                       +
                                  Addressing newly emerging agenda for
                                   rural livelihoods in MP.                         +/?
                                  Ensuring transparent and accountable
                                   use of resources.                                +
                                  Development of new state partnership
                                   programme and relationship.                      +
                                  Convergence of lessons learnt between
                                   inter and intra-state livelihoods initiatives.
State-level Missions              Exchange of lesson learning.                     +
(Rajiv Gandhi                     Feeding lessons into government                  +
Watershed                          structures and systems.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                  28
Management, Health,             Improved convergence and impact.                +
Education etc.).
Department of Tribal            Enhancing rural livelihoods in poorest          +
Affairs and Tribal                tribal areas.
Advisory Council.               Monitoring tribal development initiatives.      +
Scheduled Tribes Co-            Enhanced marketing opportunities and            +
operative Development             incomes for tribal producers.
Corporation.                    Improved social capital and skills for tribal   +
                                  producers.
Tribal Research                 Enhancing rural livelihoods in poorest          +
Institute.                      tribal areas.
                                Opportunities for engagement on tribal          +/?
                                livelihoods research.
Other livelihood-related        Enhanced rural livelihood opportunities         +
Departments (e.g.                 and assets for poor in project districts.
Agriculture, Revenue,           Increased access to resources.                  +/?
Forest, Labour, Water,          Increased capacity to plan and implement        +/?
Women and Child                   government programmes and schemes
Development, Social             Increased outreach of services.                 +/?
Security, Co-operation,         Improved value addition and marketing
Information Technology,           opportunities for poor NTFP collectors.        +
MP State Minor Forest
Produce Federation).
Mass Tribal                     Increased opportunity to represent rights       +/?
Organisations (e.g. Ekta         of tribal people through direct advocacy.
Parishad) and Tribal            Increased responsiveness of government          +
Organisations (e.g.              and foreign donors to tribal livelihood
Gonds Welfare                    needs and priorities.
Society).                       Improved equity of access to resources,         +
                                 government programmes, and
                                 opportunities for tribal people.
                                Reduced exploitation of tribal population       ?
                                 by non-tribal people.
                                Increased opportunities to strengthen           +/?
                                 bargaining power of tribal groups in
                                 political and economic arenas
                                Increased cultural identity                     +/?
Local NGOs.                     Increased engagement with GoMP for              +
                                 poverty reduction.
                                Increased engagement with external              +
                                 donor agency.
                                Access to additional funding.                   +
International NGOs.             More knowledge on rural livelihood              +
                                 constraints and opportunities.
                                Greater co-ordination and networking on         +
                                 common issues.
Other donors (World             Improved impact on rural poverty and            +
Bank, World Food                 food insecurity.
Programme etc.)                                                                  +

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                               29
                                More knowledge on rural livelihood
                                 constraints and opportunities.              +
                                Greater co-ordination and networking on
                                 common issues.
Environmental                   Improved natural resource management        +
government                       and conservation.
organisations (e.g.             Greater co-ordination and networking on     +
EPCO, WALMI)                     environmental issues.
Government Training             Lesson learning on effective rural          +/?
Institutions (e.g.,              development and decentralisation
Academy of                       approaches and implications for improved
Administration, Bhopal;          administrative training and research.
ICSSR)
Academia (e.g. Indian           Opportunities for engagement on poverty     +/?
Institute of Forest              and livelihoods research.
Management, Bhopal;
Indian Institute for
Management, Indore;
National Law Institute,
Bhopal; University).
Labour Organisations.           Representing rights and interests of        ?
                                 organised labour.
Contractors.                    Opportunities to obtain contracts.          +/?
Journalists.                    Critical review and analysis of             +
                                 government‟s achievements/inadequacies
                                 in policies and programmes.
                                Greater access to information on ground     +
                                 realities in poor tribal areas.
Radical political               Exposing ineffectiveness and corruption     ?
activists.                       in government.
                                Increasing awareness among the rural        +
                                 poor on the opportunities/inadequacies of
                                 government schemes and programmes.
                                Mobilising the rural poor to promote        ?
                                 political and policy change.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                           30
SOCIAL APPRAISAL APPENDIX 2: DISTRICT-WISE DATA ON
KEY INDICATORS
S.No.     Project       Total        % ST to % SC to HDI (Rank GDI (Rank in                      NSS Poverty Estimates
          Districts      Pop.         Total   Total   in MP)       MP)
                       (million)      Pop.    Pop.
                                                                                                Head Count Head Count
                                                                                                Ratio - Total Ratio - Rural

Data Year                  1991       1991       1991     1998                   1998             1993-94         1993-94
     1 Jhabua                  1.1      85.7        3.1 0.356 (45)               0.521 (39)            31.2             30.2
     2 Dhar                    1.4      53.5            6.9 0.537 (16)           0.606 (14)              21.8               18.0
     3   Badwani*              2.0      46.2            9.8 0.401 (44)           0.587 (23)              75.6               78.6
     4   Mandla*               1.3      60.8            5.2 0.449 (38)            0.625 (8)              53.7               53.9
     5   Dindori*
     6   Shahdol*              1.7      46.3            7.7 0.431 (42)           0.547 (34)              33.4               28.6



S.No.     Project       Infant        Life Expectancy          Gender Ratio                      % Literacy
          Districts    Mortality
                         Rate
                                      Years     Females         All         SC      ST        Male      Female         SC          ST
                                                 at birth

Data Year                  1991       1991           1991      1991         1991  1991  1991             1991          1991        1991
     1 Jhabua                  130      51.5            48.4     977          954   986   26.3             11.5          23.6        10.9
     2 Dhar                     84      61.7           60.8      951          940       977      47.6      20.7          32.3          16.2
     3   Badwani*              104      57.1           56.2      950          941     973        48.0      23.2          32.4          14.1
     4   Mandla*                88      60.9           61.5      988          942    1011        52.2      22.2          51.5          27.2
     5   Dindori*
     6   Shahdol*              110      55.9           56.8      940          936       977      48.4      20.1          28.4          17.6



  S.No.        Project             Total               Agriculture           Precarious             Workers                Female
               Districts      Employment in            Labour (%)           Employment**          Participation            Workers
                              Farm Sector (%)                                   (%)                 Rate (%)             Participation
                                                                                                                           Rate (%)

Data Year                            1991                 1991                   1991                   1991                    1991
          1 Jhabua                               -                    5.9                 7.2                      -                      52
          2 Dhar                              84.1                24.1                   25.9                   46.7                      40
          3 Badwani*                          84.8                28.8                   31.1                   45.9                      39
          4 Mandla*                           90.3                24.3                   27.5                   51.2                      47
          5 Dindori*
          6 Shahdol*                          79.3                25.4                   30.1                   43.5                      33
Source: Madhya Pradesh Human Development Report 1998
*For the following districts, available data pertains to pre-bifurcation period and is therefore combined:
West Nimar has been split into 2 districts,Badwani and Khargone;
Mandla into Mandla and Dindori;
Shahdol into Shahdol and Umaria;
Jablapur into Katni and Jabalpur; and
Sheopur was part of district Morena.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                                                                  31
                     ANNEX 4: ECONOMIC JUSTIFICATION

THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN SUSTAINABLE RURAL LIVELIHOODS

Overview

A4.1 Several market failures give GoMP an important role in poverty reduction
in the State. In a predominantly rural state such as MP the creation of
sustainable rural livelihoods is clearly a key component of this. Consensus has
largely been reached on the most effective interventions for creating sustainable
livelihoods, but these require resources. The GoMP is working with the AsDB
and DFID to make these resources available and increase the effectiveness of
their spending, but this process is ongoing. Recent evidence from, inter-alia, the
World Bank shows a clear economic rationale for decentralisation, concluding
that the poor do know what investments are in their own best interests and that,
given adequate resources and the correct support can implement these
effectively. In addition the increased transparency associated with intervention at
a lower level may reduce the fiduciary risk of the project. That said, the
increased difficulty associated with monitoring decentralised projects might
reduce this advantage.

Rationale For Government Intervention

A4.2 Being poor in India means lacking the good health and skills to make the
most of the economic opportunities growth can open17. So eradicating poverty
from its root causes requires interventions that address the health and education
issues of poor people. A range of market failures in the provision of goods that
address these issues mean that individual private provision may not be possible,
and almost certainly will not be optimal if our intention is to target the poor. For
example, an insurance company is not able to take the positive externalities of a
healthy population into account when pricing a policy, and will look only at the
private costs and benefits of health insurance. This will almost certainly result in
too little provision of healthcare. Therefore there is a strong case for government
intervention in certain areas to achieve a reduction in rural poverty.

A4.3 While there is no broad consensus on the specific interventions recent
reviews, including the GoI‟s Mid Term Review of the 9th Development Plan
(2001), the Approach Paper for the 10th Development Plan (2001) and a recent
review of rural development by the World Bank (1998) all show a consistency in
how they predict government policy should develop.




Optimal Interventions


17
  Poverty also prevents the individual from contributing towards economic growth creating potential for a
negative downward spiral.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                             32
A4.4 The basic conclusions are two fold. First, the reports suggest that the
optimal interventions for poverty reduction are primary education, reducing
communicable diseases, improving water and sanitation and reducing household
insecurity. These interventions would both make the poor better educated and
healthier, positive aims in themselves, as well as allowing them to raise their
economic well being through the higher earnings that higher productivity and
growth offer. Second, while increasing the resources available for these
interventions is a necessary condition for poverty reduction it is not sufficient.
Work is also required to ensure that money is well targeted and efficiently spent.
This is particularly true in MP where, for example, the health indicators are lower
than those of other states with similar per capita health spending.

Conditions For Effective Government Involvement

A4.5 Within this broad approach, key policy implication for livelihoods is that a
clear broad conception of what the role of government should, and perhaps even
more importantly, should not be. Several conditions will be required for
implementation of this role. First, government needs to expand the amount of
resources available for social sector spending (see section titled Fiscal situation
of MP). Second, these resources need to be efficiently targeted and spent
through efficient budgeting and financial management systems.

A7.6 A key challenge, and area of ambiguity within the proposed policy, is
identifying how to reform present government investment in social safety nets to
ensure that such expenditure is well targeted, cost efficient and cost effective.
This will be further complicated by the present reality that many of the „schemes‟
intended to invest government resources in creation of more productive rural
assets are in practice implemented in a way that means that they are more akin
to social welfare programmes, that are neither cost-efficient or cost-effective.

A4.7 In MP, the major initiative directed at increasing the cost-efficiency and
effectiveness of government investment at the village level and below is
decentralisation as envisaged under the enacted the pathbreaking Panchayati
Raj and Gram Swaraj (Sanshodhan) Act (2001). This mandates further
devolution of powers and resources to the Gram Sabha or village assembly. The
spirit of the Act is based on direct participative democracy at the village level in
addition to the existing indirect representative panchayat and parliamentary
democracy.

Fiscal Situation Of MP

A4.8 Throughout the 1990‟s MP was one of the most fiscally prudent of the
Indian states. But over the past few years several factors, including the outcome
of the fifth pay commission and reductions in transfers given by the centre to the
states and increasing demands on government resources have caused a severe
deterioration. The lack of a medium term fiscal framework, and the structural
processes for spending mean that where cuts are unavoidable because of
adverse fiscal shocks these affect investment spending disproportionately (it is
much more difficult to stop paying salaries or pensions or stop servicing loans).
This may be sustainable in the short-run, but with the situation continuing the

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        33
potential for growth is being constrained as the economic infrastructure
deteriorates. This is creating a poor environment for poverty reduction both now
and into the future unless structural problems are addressed. And poverty
reduction does need to be addressed with some urgency. 40% of the population
are currently below the poverty line.

A4.9 In addition resource constraints are putting pressure on health and
education spending, with neither component keeping pace with the growth of the
GSDP. Given the importance of these areas for sustainable poverty reduction
this must be addressed. The GoMP is taking steps to address the issue of
financial sustainability. Most notably the key objective of the Asian Development
Bank‟s (AsDB) Public Resource Management Loan is to increase the resources
available for social sector spending. The measures address the issue on a
variety of fronts. First, through seeking to reduce the amount of money the
government spends on non-poverty reducing items, such as stemming losses in
the power sector and public sector undertakings more resources will be made
available for poverty reduction.       Second, through improving the financial
management of the state these resources will be used more effectively and
efficiently for poverty reduction. Finally, on a macro level, Government using
resources to invest in infrastructure will help the state grow, and growth is one of
the key components of successful sustainable poverty reduction.

A4.10 Our ongoing dialogue with GoMP, including joint reviews of the existing
ADB-supported reform programme has shown that, although good progress has
been made in the implementation of various economic reform measures, a
number of potential opportunities for GoMP to strengthen its economic reform
activities have also been identified. GoMP is in discussions with DFID about a
consistent and complementary set of work that will further enhance the
Government‟s capacity in this regard.

A4.11 In short, without the GoMP‟s full commitment to the politically difficult task
of improved resource management, it is difficult to see how the state can fulfil its
role in improving rural livelihoods.

Can The Poor Identify And Implement Profitable Opportunities?

A4.12 A major assumption of this project is that the best level at which to (1)
identify opportunities within the village and locally for the poor to enhance their
livelihoods and (2) achieve integration between differing sources of government
support is the village and below.

A4.13 These assumptions are similar to those underlying the World Bank
financed MP District Poverty Initiatives Project (DPIP) which started in November
2000. During DPIP‟s design significant resources were used to consider the
validity of these assumptions. Major conclusions of this work included that:

    Indicative economic net benefits of some of the investments identified in
   social assessments showed financial and economic IRRs ranging from 38%
   and 51%.


MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        34
    Given the budget constraint at the village level introduced in the project
   and the fact the funds are untied in nature, poor groups will choose the best
   projects for themselves, and these are likely to be the ones with the highest
   economic return.
    Since communities are actively involved in prioritisation, implementation,
   operation and maintenance, it is also expected that the sub-projects they
   select will be viable for them, and sustainable.
    Experience from similar Bank supported projects in other regions shows
   that demand driven projects of this type, involving beneficiary contributions,
   are usually economically highly beneficial and cost-efficient.

A4.14 That said, in resource poor areas with poor connectivity, low demand and
under developed markets, the opportunities for promoting market based income
generating activities are limited. The project has initiated a range of wage and
self employment opportunities on individual and group ownership basis. The
project is ensuring part capital contribution from participating individuals/ group
members for initiating new enterprises.

A4.15 In such contexts demonstrating viability of diverse enterprises is also a
public good. But continued capital contribution by the project to take up or
expand enterprises already operational in the area, could distort incentives for
take up of the activity and affect long term sustainability. The project authority is
encouraged to reflect further on this and sharpen distinction between public and
private goods.

Fiduciary Risk

A4.16 DFID is responsible to Parliament for ensuring that funds are applied only
for the purposes and to the extent authorised. The risk that funds are not used in
this way is known as fiduciary risk. The GoMP is working to improve its financial
management and monitoring systems, and this forms one component of the
current Asian Development Bank Public Resource Management Loan. In the
longer term we would expect this work to lead to a significant fall in the level of
fiduciary risk. However, given the relatively short time scale of this project short-
term safeguards will be required. An additional issue on this project is the effect
of Decentralisation on fiduciary risk. We would expect decentralisation to have
two opposing effects.      First, it may reduce the risk by increasing both
transparency in funds use and upward accountability. Second, it may increase
the risk through making detailed monitoring and auditing more difficult. It is not
possible to say which of these effects dominates.

A4.17 In the immediate future, strategies used to manage fiduciary risk are:

A4.18 With regard to funds flowing to the gram sabhas (village assemblies),
fiduciary management depends upon three mechanisms:

    A major assumption underlying the move to decentralisation is that it will
   both increase transparency and upwards accountability within the system of
   funds use.


MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                         35
    Even within the previous PRI system, fiduciary risk was a problem.
   However, moving accountability for funds from the gram panchayat to gram
   sabha level, should increase upwards accountability and transparency.
    The requirement that the gram sabha ensure that an initial contribution is
   made by beneficiaries before disbursement of funds and the use of staged
   fund release help to manage this risk. Given the initial lack of funds
   disbursement on a reimbursement basis is not considered feasible.

A4.19 At district and state capital level, the main strategies to address fiduciary
risk will be:

        Transparency in funds use; and
        Auditing of accounts – the unit costs of independent external
       monitoring/ auditing at district/state level are much lower making this much
       more reliable.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                       36
                      ANNEX 5: ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL

BACKGROUND

A5.1.     The livelihoods of the rural poor in Madhya Pradesh, particularly the
scheduled caste and tribal populations, are highly dependent on natural
resources and are vulnerable to periodic drought and continued degradation of
the natural resource base. The project seeks to promote more sustainable
livelihoods through:

      improving poor people‟s capacity to manage land, water and forest resources
       through integrated watershed development and community forest
       management;
      developing microenterprises based on agricultural and forest produce, as
       well as other non-land based micro-enterprises; and
      support to policy and institutional development.

PROJECT CONTEXT: ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

Natural Regions

A5.2.     Madhya Pradesh (MP) has an area of 308,245km², and is the second
largest state of India. The state is traversed by a series of plateaus that are
bisected by low mountain ranges and river basins. Nearly 80% of the state lies in
semi-arid upper parts of the river basins. The six project districts are located in
three different plateau regions:

      The Malwa Plateau covers almost the entire western region of MP and
       includes Badwani, Dhar, and Jhabua districts in the southwest. This plateau,
       formed by the Deccan trap rocks, starts north of the Narmada and extends
       up to the Chambal River in the north. Average annual rainfall is around
       900mm.

      Shahdol district is located on the Baghelkhand plateau in the north-eastern
       part of MP. The area is rich in mineral resources, and is heavily forested with
       dry monsoon forests. Average rainfall is around 1,250mm.

      Mandla and Dindori districts are found in the eastern Satpura and Maikal
       region, which lies south of the Narmada valley. Average rainfall is between
       1,250 and 1,500mm. The area has dense teak and mixed forests and is rich
       in mineral resources.

Forest Resources

A5.3.    The recorded forest area of the state is 31% of its geographic area 18.
Teak and sal are the most important forest species. Increased biotic pressure
over the years has led to exploitation of forests beyond their carrying capacity,
18
     State of Forest Report 1999, Forest Survey of India.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                          37
resulting in qualitative as well as qualitative depletion of forest resources. With
the qualitative decrease in vegetative cover, the availability of non-timber forest
products (NTFPs) per capita has decreased.

A5.4.     As shown in table below, the rate of forest depletion is significantly
higher in the western project districts:

                District            Forest Area            % Change in
                                Hectares    Percent        Forest Cover
                                                              1991-99
           Badwani                187590         43.36               -32.8
           Dhar                   120159            17               -22.0
           Jhabua                 155000            23               -22.8
           Dindori                       -            -                   -
           Mandla                        -        48.5                +7.8
           Shahdol                327800            30                -4.4
                             Source: PLPs, Project District Plans & FSI report (1999)

Land And Agriculture

A5.5.     Historically, tribal groups have been pushed out of forest areas and
cultivable lands onto marginal lands on hilltops and slopes with thin, low fertility
soils. With regular cultivation and poor agricultural practices, there is increased
risk of run-off and soil erosion, resulting in low agricultural productivity.
Productivity in the project districts varies from 45-70% of the state average.
Principal crops are food grain, wheat, oilseeds, soybean, pulses and sugarcane.
The table below provides a comparison of agricultural productivity in the four of
the project districts:


                  District           Yield in Kg/Ha (95-96 fig)   Average
                                                                   Yield*
                                   Wheat     Rice       Gram
            Dhar                      1860     439           803    1034
            Jhabua                    1991     315           521      942
            Mandla                     730     745           536      670
            Shahdol                    865     772           463      700
            State Average             1921    1073           931    1227
                                 Source: Annual Statistical Handbooks of the Districts

A5.6.      Land distribution is highly unequal in the state, and the majority of
marginal farmers and landless are scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (refer
to Social Annex). Population growth and land fragmentation has contributed to
reductions in the average size of land holdings, and hence increased
environmental pressure on land and water resources. The following table
provides a temporal comparison of changes in the average size of land holdings
in the six project districts:




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                          38
                  District              Average land holdings                 Decline
                                                                              (1981-
                                                                                91)
                                    1980-81        1985-6       1990-91
             Badwani                  -          -         -        -
             Dhar                   5.0       4.1        3.7  25.4%
             Jhabua                 3.8       3.1        2.6  31.1%
             Dindori                  -          -         -        -
             Mandela                3.7       3.1        2.7  26.1%
             Shadow                 3.0       2.7        2.4  18.6%
             State Average          3.4       2.9        2.6  24.0%
                       Source: Land Administration and Management in MP (2001)

A5.7.    District-wise variation in soil type, per capita land availability and
average land holding size combined show that the western districts in the Malawi
region are better placed than the eastern districts19. Western MP has been the
hub of the oilseed revolution in the state.

Surface Water Resources

A5.8. Most of the rivers in the state are seasonal, and all the major rivers flow
interstate. Since the state is situated across a drainage divide, the terrain is
undulating and water storage in the natural system is low. Hence Madhya
Pradesh cannot make use of its share of water resources without considerable
investment. There are several traditional systems of water management, mostly
in the form of village ponds and irrigation reservoirs. In the project districts, the
percentage of irrigated land is generally lower than the state average. Access to
water has become a dominant issue as a result of recent severe droughts.
Jhabua, Dhar and Shadow are amongst the six most chronically drought-affected
districts of the state20.

Ground Water Resources

A5.9.      Whilst a large proportion of the irrigated surface water potential remains
unutilised, ground water provides for nearly half of the irrigation in the state. The
Deccan traps, covering western and central Madhya Pradesh have several
intertrappean aquifers, but these generally suffer from poor recharge due to low
rainfall. Overexploitation of these aquifers has resulted in a severe decline in the
water table, especially in the Malwa plateau. Overexploitation of ground water in
the agriculturally developing western part of the state has caused the drying of
borewells affecting handpumps. With no mechanism available for controlling
groundwater, the GoMP has had to deepen existing borewells and dig new ones
on a continued basis. Drainage is another major problem in settlements located
in the black cotton soil areas. In eastern MP, water shortages are a problem


19
  Madhya Pradesh Environmental Status Report, EPCO, 2000.
20
  Status of Infrastructure in Madhya Pradesh, National Centre for Human Settlements and Environment
(2001)

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                          39
during low rainfall years. The ground water situation in hilly and/or forested tribal
areas is mostly poor due to terrain conditions.

A5.10.The following table provides a comparison of the area of irrigated land as a
percentage of total cultivable area in the project districts, highlighting the very low
irrigation rates in the eastern districts:

                          District                 % Cultivated
                                                   Area Under
                                                   Irrigation
                          Badwani                             33.7
                          Dhar                                32.5
                          Jhabua                              17.4
                          Dindori                               0.3
                          Mandela                               6.1
                          Shadow                                5.9

Biodiversity
A5.11. For in situ conservation of biodiversity, 9 National Parks and 25 Wildlife
Sanctuaries have been created in the state. One of the state‟s four tiger reserves,
Kanha, is located in Mandela district. It is anticipated that the region is likely to
experience biodiversity-based industrial growth in the future, which may impact
on biological wealth and local people‟s livelihoods. Since forests are the main
storehouse of biodiversity in the state, there is greater need to both conserve
forests and build on traditional knowledge systems of tribal peoples for livelihoods
improvement.

KEY ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FRAMEWORKS AND PROGRAMMES
A5.12. GoMP has a comprehensive vision of sustainable development, as
expressed in its Human Development Report series.

Forests
A5.13. The National Forest Policy of 1988 and consequent implementation
amendments in 1990 led to the adoption of Joint Forest Management (JFM)
approaches for the joint management and conservation of forests by people and
government. JFM activities have been taken up by the Forest Department as a
stand-alone programme. JFM committees i.e. Village Forest Committees (VFCs)
and Forest Protection Committees (FPCs) have been constituted over the past
decade in villages within five kilometres of degraded and dense forests
respectively. Donor-funded forestry programmes have provoked considerable
controversy in recent years. The MP Forestry Project funded by the World Bank
(1995-99) involuntarily displaced an estimated 4.4 million tribal people from their
lands and overlooked their customary and traditional rights to land, forests and
minor forest products21.


21
 Workshop on Indigenous Peoples, Forests, and the World Bank Policies and Practice, Washington DC,
May 2000.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                     40
A5.14. The GoMP now intends to develop the concept of JFM further towards
Community Forest Management (CFM). However, concerns have been raised
about the need to reconcile the Forest Conservation Act with the Panchayati Raj
(Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act which is intended to increase the capacity of
tribal populations to sustainably manage and benefit from forests.

Water
A5.15. The state has few laws relating to water rights and use, and is
considering legislation to regulate groundwater use following concerns about
over-extraction in some western districts. The existing Water Resources Sector
Policy is primarily driven by irrigation needs22. The 1999 Act provides for
consitution of elected Water Users Associations, which will become the main
vehicle for farmers‟ activities and participation in irrigation management.

Land And Agriculture

A5.16. MP does not have its own Agricultural Policy, and the majority of
interventions are carried out according to central GoI policy. Chronic land-related
problems in the state include tenure insecurity, cumbersome regulatory
frameworks, high levels of land-related disputes and ineffective resolution
mechanisms. Historically, land distributed to the poor through application of land
ceilings or allocation of state lands has typically been of poor quality23. In 2000, a
Task Force was constituted at the state level to examine a number of land issues
including:
      Classification of forest lands and problems caused by the Forest
       Conservation Act with respect to the inability of the state to regularise long-
       standing occupation by poor agriculturalists;
      Encroachment of government land; and
      Loss of tribal land through abuses of provisions designed to restrict
       alienation of tribal land.

Environmental Policy

A5.17. The Environmental Planning and Co-ordination Organisation (EPCO) of
MP prepared the state Environmental Policy in 1999. A major challenge for policy
implementation has been the lack of interdepartmental co-ordination on
environment-related activities and policies.

Biodiversity Action Plan

A5.18. EPCO is in the process of formulating the state Biodiversity Strategies
and Action Plan with GEF/UNDP funding. Community Biodiversity Registers,
which aim to identify traditional uses and conservation approaches for flora and
fauna, are being prepared in all districts of MP.

Rajiv Gandhi Watershed Development Mission
22
   Situation Analysis for State Strategy for Water and Environmental Sanitation, Madhya Pradesh, prepared
for DFID, by Taru Leading Edge, December 2000.
23
   Land Administration and Management in Madhya Pradesh, MPIP, 2001.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                            41
A5.19. Watershed development has been promoted in the state as a holistic
approach to address both livelihood security and environmental rehabilitation.
Watershed development activities are typically financed from sectoral allocations
of the Rural Development Department, which accounts for 10% of the 9 th Five
Year Plan allocations. Experience in India has demonstrated that drought prone
areas facing acute water, fodder, fuelwood and food crises have been the most
likely areas for watershed development programmes24.

A5.20. The Rajiv Gandhi Watershed Development Mission (RGWM) started in
1994 with the objective of improving land and water resources and productivity of
400,000 hectares of degraded land in Madhya Pradesh. A recent evaluation of
RGWM25 in MP highlights the following findings:
    Increase in the cropped area, irrigated area and biomass in project villages;
    Increase in ground water levels in project villages by reduction in the dry
     period of wells, especially during March and April;
    Landless households benefit from direct wage employment opportunities
     and share in grass, fodder and biomass products from CPRs, however the
     longer-term impacts on employment levels is uncertain; and
    Increase in cropped area and crop-mix changes differentially benefit
     medium and large farmers.
    Few NGO and government project implementing agencies have the skills
     and capacities to use any flexibility in the existing watershed development
     guidelines to adapt interventions to local resource and socio-economic
     conditions.

KEY ENVIRONMENTAL INSTITUTIONS IN MADHYA PRADESH

Government Departments And Institutes

A5.21. The Water Resources Department is responsible for all irrigation
schemes in the state and is the custodian of surface water resources. In addition,
there is a separate Narmada Valley Department and Narmada Valley
Development Authority. The Water and Land Management Institute (WALMI) is
located in Bhopal, and conducts training, research, adaptive trials, groundwater
exploration, soil testing and social impact assessments. WALMI has been active
in providing support to the RGWM, and has recently been placed under the
Department of Panchayat and Rural Development. It has therefore become a key
resource centre for watershed management in the state.

A5.22. The Central Ground Water Board has offices in Bilaspur, Japalpur and
Bhopal. Eight district Geohydrological units undertake water level measurements
in key observation wells in different blocks. The Department of Agriculture has




24
     Watershed Management in Poor Rural Areas of Madhya Pradesh, Taru Leading Edge, 1999.



MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                      42
only one extension worker per 1200-1600 farmers, reflecting the poor reach of
extension services in the state26.

A5.23. The Environmental Planning and Coordination Organisation (EPCO)
was established by the Housing and Environment Department of GoMP in 1981.
Its role is to assist and advise the GoMP on environmental policy and planning
through: data reporting, project formulation, appraisal, evaluation, management,
research, training, and co-ordination. It promotes improved co-ordination between
NGOs and public agencies, and provides environmental awareness and
education. It is responsible for producing of the Environmental Status Report for
Madhya Pradesh, which outlines critical areas that require priority attention. It is
conducts baseline studies, EIAs, environmental monitoring system design, and
underground water recharging programmes in DPIP districts. EPCO is currently
undergoing restructuring to shift its focus to support to rural livelihoods.

Environmental Ngos

A5.24. The National Centre for Human Settlements and Environment (NCHSE)
is an implementing NGO for the RGWM and has developed a research and GIS
programme. In 1999, the RGWM had 105 NGO Project Implementing Agencies in
the state, including CARD and ASA. Ekta Parishad has played a key role in
advocating land and forest rights for the tribal poor, and has played a catalytic
role in the formation of a state Task Force on Land Issues.

Community Level

A5.25. The recent devolution to PRIs and the Gram Swaraj Amendment
provide a supportive climate for devolving some of the decision-making to Gram
Sabha level institutions with regard to the management and use of natural
resources. The newly created Community Resources Committee at the Gram
Sabha level will have responsibility for all matters related to land, forests, water
and mineral resources. As of January 2002, these committees have been
formally constituted, however training on roles and responsibilities has not yet
been undertaken by the Department of Panchayat Raj. Under Gram Swaraj,
existing Water Users Committees (with responsibility for groundwater
management), WDCs, FPCs and VFCs will become ad hoc committees of the
Gram Sahba. There will be provision for joint committees across more than one
Gram Sabha27.

PROJECT APPROACH: ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

A5.26.     Specific issues to be considered during the project include:

      opportunities for the project to promote micro and macro level planning for
       equitable and sustainable use of natural resources;



26
   Agriculture in Madhya Pradesh: A Status Report and Policy Overview, ODI Livelihood Options Study,
2000.
27
   Consultation with the Secretary of the Department of Panchayat Raj.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                         43
     how the project can identify environmentally sustainable practices to be
      integrated in policies and programmes for livelihood improvement;
     how the project can support the implementation of existing GoMP
      legislation on land holdings in tribal areas; and
     how the project can support both micro and macro-level planning on the
      use of ground water resources.

Promoting Equitable And Sustainable Natural Resource Utilisation

A5.27. The project will support a watershed development approach which
provides important opportunities to promote microlevel planning for the
sustainable use of natural resources, and to strengthen land-based livelihoods.
Experience from RGWM and elsewhere indicates that poor landless tribal
communities on the uplands are likely to receive fewer benefits than better-off
water basin agricultural communities (who also control access to land). Whilst
landless households may benefit from increased availability of agricultural
labouring opportunities in the longer-term following wider improvements in
agricultural productivity, the development of non-land based and context-specific
activities will be an essential strategy. After several years of mixed experience in
watershed development, the state offers fertile ground for further developing
more equitable and flexible approaches, which could be replicated elsewhere in
Madhya Pradesh.

A5.28. While JFM has been an advance on the conventional government
approach to forest management, there is now demand within GoMP to expand
towards CFM. The availability of vast tracts of cultivable wastelands in the project
districts (particularly Shadow) offers scope for both afforestation activities as well
as providing a captive area for use as a resource for forest-based micro-
enterprises. The following table highlights the proportion of cultivable wastelands
in the project districts:

        District       Land that can be brought Uneconomical Total
                      under cultivation (‘000 ha)  Patches
                     Immediatel     After some
                          y        improvement
    Jhabua                  8.30              6.80       6.50 21.60
    Mandela                 19.30                7.30           4.40    31.00
    Dhar                      6.00               6.70           7.10    19.80
    Shadow                  21.00               14.00          27.00    62.00
    State                   13.42                7.78           9.04    30.22
    Average

                                         Source: MP Human Development Report 1998

A5.29. To date, JFM activities have not been integrated with watershed
development activities. Combining CFM with other watershed development




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                          44
activities will be critical, especially in watersheds with considerable proportion of
degraded forest lands, such as in the eastern districts28.

A5.30. Recent policy changes regarding utilisation of NTFPs provide important
opportunities for the expansion of forest-related livelihood options for poor tribal
and women‟s groups (refer to Social Annex). The project will support GoMP to
test and implement CFM methodologies, as well as group approaches to NTFP
value-addition and marketing.

Supporting Community-Level Natural Resource Management Institutions
For Microplanning

A5.31. The gap between village resource user groups and formal institutions
(FPCs, VFCs and WDCs) will need to be bridged for better articulation of
people‟s needs, and promotion of integrated natural resource management at the
community level. The project should identify ways in which the new Community
Resources Committee can be supported, and appropriate linkages developed
with WDCs and JFM Committees. As elaborated in the project implementation
guidelines, Livelihoods Promoters will support the different NRM committees and
CIGs to undertake environmental monitoring.

Supporting Implementation Of Land Legislation

A5.32. The project will seek to promote the implementation of existing GoMP
legislation on land issues. It will be important to identify what additional support is
required for newly created Community Resources Committees to take on
potential new roles in land administration, as envisaged under Gram Swaraj.
Community Resources Committees and Livelihoods Promoters could play a role
in monitoring land-related problems that arise in project villages and exploring
approaches to address them, as well as increasing awareness of land rights and
procedures amongst community members (e.g. land possession verification
exercises). Opportunities may exist to create linkages between the Task Force
on Land Redistribution and the Learning Forum.


Supporting Policy Development

A5.33. Macro-level planning on the use of ground water resources is currently
inadequate. Ground water depletion is a major problem in two of the project
districts and opportunities exist to feedback lessons emanating from project
monitoring and management approaches to the Learning Forum. Overall project
learning on environmentally sustainable practices and approaches will be
channelled through the Learning Forum to inform policy-makers.

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS



28
 Watershed Management in Poor Rural Areas of Madhya Pradesh: A Situation Analysis, Prepared for
AusAid by Taru Leading Edge, May 1999.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                       45
A5.34. Environmental impacts of project activities could be positive or negative
depending on the type of land and non-land based activities identified by
communities,   technical    capacity     of   implementing    agencies      and
development/adaptation of appropriate technology.

A5.35. The likely environmental benefits of watershed development and CFM
range from hydrological, soil conservation, aesthetic and conservation of flora
and fauna. Specific impacts of watershed development would relate to the
use/over extraction of water resources, intensification of farming practices, soil
management, and effect on indigenous biodiversity, including traditional crop
varieties. Impacts of CFM would relate to changes in access to forest resources
and changes in biodiversity associated with silvicultural practices.

A5.36. Potential negative environmental impacts associated with watershed
development include local trade-offs in water use for agricultural practices and
drinking water. Possible downstream effects include impact on water quantity and
quality, especially if run-off is contaminated with agri-chemicals.

A5.37. Environmental safeguards and mitigation measures based on existing
experience will be implemented as appropriate. As part of the Project
Effectiveness Review, environmental impacts of project interventions will be
assessed to determine whether any environmental screening system for
microenterprises should be designed for the second phase.

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND EVALUATION

A5.38. The project‟s environmental monitoring system will focus on both
community-level interventions (water, land, forests) and opportunities to inform
state policies and legislation through the Learning Forum.

A5.39. At the community-level, a combination of community assessment of
environmental trends as well as technical monitoring of water, land and
biodiversity parameters will be an integral part of the project. An initial baseline
study will be commissioned and followed by periodic monitoring reviews over the
duration of the project, building on existing sources of data. Key technical
environmental indicators are likely to include; biodiversity index, water quality
index, and changes in land use. Simple formats for biodiversity monitoring have
been developed under the GEF/UNDP Biodiversity Project.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        46
APPENDIX 1: ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING: SUMMARY NOTE

1. Project Title:    Madhya Pradesh: Livelihoods Security Mission
2. Project Cost:     up to £100 million
3. Duration:         7 years
4. Country:          India
5. Department:       DFID India (Madhya Pradesh Programme)
6. Lead Project Officer:    Rick Woodham
7. Officer responsible for Environmental Screening: Kevin Crockford

         8. Environmental Screening Summary
         (i) Brief project description The project will support GoMP with
         implementation of the Rajiv Gandhi Livelihoods Security Mission. This
         Mission will target 17 predominantly tribal districts in Madhya Pradesh
         that have a total population of about 12.5 million. Key features are
         empowerment of targeted villages through microplanning by community
         based interest groups; field level interventions including watershed
         development, joint forest management, livestock improvement and non
         land-based activities; development of institutional structures and systems
         at district and sub-district level to efficiently respond to identified needs;
         capacity building of primary beneficiaries, elected representatives and
         government functionaries.

         (ii) Environmental issues apparent at screening (scope of environmental
         impacts, risks and/or benefits - Checklists A-C) The tribal populations of
         Madhya Pradesh are highly dependent on forest resources, which
         account for 30% of the State‟s land area. The Livelihoods Security
         Mission will affect the environment through policy and institutional
         developments that relate to the environment and local level activities
         based on the use of water, land and forest resources. Beneficial impacts
         should include on peoples‟s livelihoods, sustainable land management,
         forest quality and water quality/quantity. The environmental impact of
         disputed land claims of tribal populations will need to be considered.
         Macro-level planning on the use of ground water resources is currently
         inadequate.

         (iii) Significance of environmental impacts, risks and/or benefits and likely
         mitigation measures required - Checklist D) The project should have
         positive impact on the policy and institutional structures related to land,
         water and forest resources. Although it is unlikely that the Mission would
         be operating in areas subject to tribal land disputes, the project should
         promote the implementation of existing GoMP legislation on this issue.
         Environmental issues associated with watershed development include
         local trade-offs in water use for agricultural practices and drinking water.
         Possible downstream affects include on water quantity and quality,
         especially if run-off could be contaminated with agri-chemicals. Although
         generally positive, joint forest management will result in changes in
         access to forest resources and biodiversity associated with silvicultural
         practices.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                           47
           (iv) Environmental investigations proposed (Environmental Analysis, EIA,
           audit) and/or any other special information required An environmental
           analysis should be included as part of the design process. This should
           focus on both the field level interventions (water, land, forests) and
           opportunities to influence State policies and laws. Available evaluations
           of the existing watershed mission and joint forest management
           programme should be considered to ensure that the design builds on
           experiences and optimises environmental benefits at a local and state
           level.

           (v) Other issues None

           (vi) Actions to be taken (indicate officer responsible) Project Officer and
           Lead Adviser to ensure that environmental issues are fully considered
           during project design. The DFIDI Environment Adviser will provide inputs
           on drawing up TORs and monitoring of consultant outputs.




Signature: .................................. Date: ..............................
Adviser


Signature: .................................. Date: ..............................
Lead Project Officer




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                               48
                      GOVERNMENT OF M.P. ANNEXES
      Prepared by GoMP as part of the proposal, describing the livelihoods
interventions that would be undertaken through the project. A technical appraisal
                  of the proposed approach is given in Annex 1.


                       ANNEX 6: PROJECT APPROACH
1.     Approach Summary
1.1     The Madhya Pradesh Rural Livelihoods Project (MPRLP) is aimed at
providing both scale (through additional funds) and enhanced responsiveness to
the state government's rural livelihoods related initiatives. A focal area of the
project would be to strengthen the decentralised institutions, namely the Zila
Panchayat and the Gram Sabhas, in the 6 districts selected for first phase of the
project, for taking up effective planning, implementation and monitoring of
livelihoods-related interventions and programmes. This would be complemented
by a Rural Livelihoods Forum at state level to stimulate exchange of experiences
between livelihoods programmes and schemes in MP and to analyse constraints
to effective and sustainable enhancement to the livelihoods of rural poor people.
1.2    The geography of poverty affects all the people living in a region. In MP,
pockets of acute underdevelopment exist where the resources are locked or
degraded- generating sub-optimal returns, infrastructure base is poor,
accessibility to services and provisions is limited and all the benefits reach them
at the end. The project intends to address this geography of poverty by targeting
all the poor living in these identified pockets of deprivation, irrespective of
whether they are tribal or non-tribal.
1.3    The Project would be housed in the Department of Panchayat and Rural
Development (DoP&RD) in order to avail the capacities, orientation and reach of
the existing structures and institutions at the command of the department.
Location of the project with the DoP&RD will avoid duplication and ensure that
necessary synergies are established with the large number of development
programmes and schemes that are implemented through this department.


2.     Introduction
2.1     Rural development is a shared responsibility between the Central and
State Governments in India. It is informed by a perspective that poverty is an
interlocking condition of assetlessness, underemployment, low wages and
incomes, proneness to disease, illiteracy, economic vulnerability, social
disadvantage and political powerlessness. The Centre and the states together
have been operating a battery of programmes to address each of these issues,
with varying degrees of success. Together they seek to give a concrete shape to
the vision articulated in the five-year plans of Growth With Equity.
2.2   Since the 5th plan, Government of India has been promoting targeted
programmes of poverty reduction to complement poverty reduction that results
from acceleration of growth itself. These have mostly been in the form of area-
development programmes, wage-employment programmes and self-employment
programmes. These programmes are funded on a shared basis between the GoI

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                       49
and State Government. The targeted programmes for rural poverty reduction
alone account for an investment of 200 million pounds annually in the state of
Madhya Pradesh.
2.3    In the decade of the nineties, with the re-invigoration of PRI‟s the
management of these programmes has undergone major changes. PRI‟s have
now exercised effective control in the management of these programmes. There
has also been effort to combine area-development programmes with livelihood
opportunities for the ultra-poor by addressing the Geography of Poverty through
specific programmes like watershed management and Joint Forest Management.
Both these programmes have also developed people-centred models of action
complementing Panchayat Raj.
2.4      Tribal development in India, on the other hand, has been informed by the
difficult relationship between integration into the mainstream economy and the
need for a certain "autonomy" and preservation of a way of life. Though in theory
there has been a judicious balance that was suggested 29, in practice tribal
development programmes were conceived more in an integrative framework.
However, with increasing salience for the idea of decentralisation it has become
possible to involve people in choosing a development model that can conceive
poverty reduction and sustainable environment management in a combined
manner in a context of local decision making.
2.5    The GoMP had been constantly working to create an effective paradigm
for rural development. The planning framework for rural development
programmes has been strengthened through the inter-sectoral arrangement at
the district level through the District Planning Committee (DPC), loosely called
the District Government or the Zila Sarkar in Madhya Pradesh.
2.6    District planning was initiated in MP in April 2002, where the districts are
able to identify local priorities and demand resources from the state budget. This
becomes a logical step in institutionalising the process of decentralised
governance in MP and will allow targeted programmes for rural poverty to be
handled at the district and sub-district levels. The State and Central Government
will increasingly become financial and technical support organisations. The
creation of new capacities at the district level is therefore critical for planning any
new rural development initiative.


3.         Institutional Approach
3.1     The key innovative institutional aspect of the project approach is that funds
will be channelled from the Zila Panchayat to the Gram Kosh (treasury) of the
Gram Sabha (village assembly). This will enable assessment of the plausible
impact of this and related critical variables (see Box 1) on poverty reduction
through the Rural Livelihoods Forum. The institutionalisation of the Gram Sabha
at the heart of rural development programmes will create a new potential for
downward accountability to the village assembly for the project and GoI/GoMP
resources invested in rural development. It will also put a new level of demand on
district bodies and line departments to act in a responsive way. These should, in
theory, result in improved performance of a wide range of programmes. However,

29
     This was articulated in India in the early fifties as the Nehru-Verrier Elwin pact.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                     50
this will require that these organisations change their role to that of facilitator
rather than controller of development. This is a big change, and will be an
incremental process.

              Box 1: Critical variables to be tested by the project:

          Impact of flow of funds to Gram Kosh on effectiveness and efficiency of
           delivery of rural development programmes.
          Whether the involvement of the gram Sabha generates more
           sustainable livelihoods impacts; in particular does it help move from the
           creation of temporary employment to more sustained increases in
           income for poor people?
          Does the addition of capacity development activities at the village level
           increase the probability of poverty focused work?
          The efficacy of capacity development of Block and District bodies, as
           well as other development and key market intermediaries in creating
           greater responsiveness to village level plans?

3.2    The project will attempt to learn what level of impact is achieved by routing
the flow of funds to the Gram Sabha. It can also learn what additional levels of
impact can be derived from supporting capacity development of any of the
following different organisations: self-help groups,        Gram Sabha and its
committees, the block administration, the district bodies and line departments,
and private sector and non-government organisations.
3.3   Appendix 1 outlines the institutional arrangements and support for
implementation of the project.


4.     Gram Sabha Level
4.1    The key strategies to be implemented at this level are Watershed
Management, Community Forest Management and support to micro-enterprises.
In order to avoid adding to the number of village level institutions, and to build on
existing social, human and natural capital, the existing and functioning watershed
and JFM committees and SHGs would be utilised. The procedure for electing
members of the new watershed samiti would be as per the rules set by the Rajiv
Gandhi Watershed Mission.
4.2    In the case of CFM, committees will report on work done to the Gram
Sabha and to the Village Development Committee, which would be the nodal
agency for approval and monitoring the implementation of project activities in the
selected villages.
4.3    The structure for cluster-level support would be similar to watershed
programmes, with a Project Facilitation Team (PFT) under a Project Facilitation
Officer (PFO). The PFT would be a multi-disciplinary team having members from
cross-functional areas (Agriculture, Forestry, Veterinary, W&CD etc.) to provide
support in a wide range of areas. They will facilitate implementation of the work at
village level. The Project facilitation teams will support community groups and
committees to develop proposals, source capacity building and access technical
expertise from the most appropriate source. In areas where watershed PIAs
already exist, these could be used to facilitate project supported activities in

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                 51
targeted villages. Credible NGOs working within a region may also be appointed
as the PFT for that cluster of villages. The District level Project Management
Committee would have the prerogative to decide whether a competent NGO can
take up the job or not.
4.4      The district PSUs would ensure that the PFTs have the necessary social
mobilisation and micro-enterprise skills to be able to support community groups
and committees. This would be achieved through a combination of training/
exposure and contracting in additional livelihoods related skills to Project
facilitation teams. The team would be responsible for supporting the work of
livelihood promoters and play an active part in capacity building, awareness
generation, mobilisation and organisation of people for collective action. It would
also assist the villagers in the preparation of their development plans and
facilitate appropriate backward, forward and horizontal linkages. Each PFT would
be responsible for facilitating interventions in a cluster of about 10 villages.
Although NGO PFTs would be paid from the project funds located at the district
level, all development activities within targeted villages would be funded from the
Gram Kosh account.
4.5     The gap between village resource user-groups and formal institutions
(FPCs, VFCs and WDCs) will be bridged for better articulation of people‟s needs,
and promotion of integrated natural resource management at the community-
level. The project would also identify ways in which various user-groups and
SHGs can be supported and appropriate linkages developed with WDCs and
CFM Committees.


Livelihood Promoters
4.6    For the animation of people at the village level there would be village
specialists employed by the Gram Sabha, supported by the PFTs and District
Project Co-ordinators. These livelihood promoters could either be existing village
workers (e.g. associated with forestry, agriculture and SHG programmes) or
innovative farmers and the project would support coalitions of these workers
within and across villages. Selected livelihood promoters (who may or may not
belong to the same village or area) would be given intensive training in
community mobilisation and other skill-sets (e.g. in soil and water conservation,
crops, livestock, and micro-enterprises). Incentives for the promoters would
depend on their skills. Promoters associated with longer term community/public
goods would be reimbursed by the relevant group funds while those involved in
development of new enterprises and private goods would get back-ended
incentives with the project paying a part of their incentives and rest being borne
by the beneficiaries. The incentives to the promoters would also depend on the
number of „livelihoods‟ that are generated by him/her. This would be based on the
successful model tried during the Padhna Badhna Andolan of Rajiv Gandhi
Shiksha Mission.
4.7     In the area of micro-enterprises, livelihoods promoter would be the key
resource persons at the local level for the various district and state-level agencies
involved in imparting training to people, helping people identify appropriate
activities and relevant linkages.



MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                         52
4.8 Although the roles and responsibilities of promoters will vary depending on
the community group and village, their core functions are expected to be to:
    Facilitate the process of community and group-level planning, monitoring and
     implementation, including targeting the poor.
    Facilitate improved access by the poor to livelihoods-related information
    Help in the formation of affinity based groups/ SHGs centred around different
     activities, as an entry point to confidence building of people and lead to the
     formation of social capital at the village-level.
    Assist VDCs and affinity groups to source relevant expertise from a range of
     service providers, including NGOs, private sector, and government line-
     departments.
    Act as a link between the community, implementing agencies and the market.
    Relay lessons through the PFT and District Project Co-ordinator to the Rural
     Livelihoods Learning Forum.


Poverty Focus
4.9    To enhance the poverty focus of interventions the project will also support,
through the Gram Sabha, the development of existing and new women and
men‟s SHGs, affinity groups and other local organisations in which collective
representation of the poor is assured and through which there is scope for
enhancing the livelihoods of poor people. For individual and group-based
interventions like the micro-enterprises the selection and prioritisation of people
would be left to the gram sabha to ensure better targeting and pro-poor focus.
4.10 Based on experience to date, critical aspects of this support to hamlet and
village organisations include:
    The involvement of well-trained and supported local level facilitators
     (Livelihoods Promoters), who may be contract employees or volunteers.
    Organisation at the hamlet or neighbourhood level work best. The village is
     often too large and socially fragmented to produce the relatively
     homogeneous groups, which work best.


5.      District Level
5.1    District is the key level for implementation of the project. There will be a
Project Management Committee (PMC) chaired by the Collector, supported by
the CEO and heads of departments of Forests, Agriculture, Tribal Welfare,
Industries, Lead Bank Manager, co-opted experts and members of legislative
assembly of the project area . The PMC will report to the Zila Panchayat (ZP)
periodically and the latter will be responsible for co-ordination and monitoring of
the project.
5.2    The Chief Executive Officer of the ZP will be the member-secretary of
PMC and Project Co-ordinator for the district, taking guidance from the PMC for
project implementation. This will help ensure effective co-ordination of the project,
as the CEO is in charge of all rural development programmes/ schemes in the

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                           53
district. The PMC would commission the development of guidelines for Project
implementation and seek to develop the convergence of resources and efforts.
5.3     Funds for the project would be placed with CEO-ZP to be operated under
directions of PMC, which will allocate funds to the village for watershed
management, CFM and micro-enterprise development. The funds will flow from
the District into the Gram Kosh held by the Village Development Committee,
which will make this available to the concerned community groups and village
institutions. The PMC and CEO will also be responsible for ensuring that
proposals are screened by technical experts at the appropriate levels. It is
expected that all low-cost and technically simple proposals are screened at the
GVS and PFT levels. The District will manage an untied fund called the
“Innovation Fund” to respond to proposals selected for rewarding initiatives in the
area of livelihood promotion. This fund would be placed with the Zila Panchayat
and managed by the Project Management Committee. The district level body will
catalyse the micro-enterprises strategy for the district and respond to the
proposals with support from the fund. Location of the fund in ZP will serve to
bring in linkages for successful operation of micro-enterprises in terms of training,
additional credit support and marketing opportunities.
5.4     The CEO would be supported by a District Project Support Unit (DPSU),
which would be the main resource centre for handling the operationalisation of
the project in the selected districts. This Unit would be headed by an Assistant
Project Officer with a small staff responsible for work in the fields of Finance &
Administration, MIS and Monitoring & Evaluation. The Unit would have funds to
contract Task Managers (e.g. in social development and livelihoods) and
consultants for limited periods when necessary, and to undertake studies or other
works.. Some funds would be made available at the district level for taking up
action research so that it can inform the livelihoods enhancement strategy at the
district level. The findings of such studies would be shared at the State-Level
Rural Livelihoods Forum for wider discussion and learning.
5.5     To begin with, the PMC would commission a detailed mapping of
resources, capabilities and expertise available at the district and sub-district level,
critical for the success of the project. Based on the results of this mapping
exercise and subsequent analyses, the district would undertake capacity building
(of people at different levels of administration and institutions like , PRIs,, Gram
Sabha and its committees) and development of systems to enable the ZP to
utilize resources from the project and existing programme/schemes to effectively
respond to poor people‟s livelihood opportunities.
6.     State Level
6.1    The project will be fully integrated within the Department of Panchayat and
Rural Development. Strategic direction would be provided by an Empowered
Committee, which would also review progress against agreed milestones and
consider the outputs of the Rural Livelihoods Forum. The Empowered Committee
would be headed by the Chief Secretary and would have the Secretary to the
Chief Minister and heads of major departments handling activities related to the
project as its members. DFID (I) would be represented on the Empowered
Committee.



MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                           54
6.2     To discharge the executive functions and monitor the progress of project
activities at state level, there will be a Project Management Unit at Bhopal housed
in the Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, headed by the State
Project Co-ordinator. The Project Co-ordinator would report to the Department of
Panchayat and Rural Development. The State Project Co-ordinator would head
the Project Management Unit, which would be a small team created for
developing the necessary horizontal and vertical linkages with other
governmental/ non governmental agencies/ institutions, co-ordinating the project
at State level. The PMU would consist of a core team of managers, assisting the
Co-ordinator and would be in-charge of the following areas:
 Management Information System/ Monitoring & Evaluation
 Financial Administration
 Programme Support
 Gender & Equity/ Social Development
 Human Resource/ Capacity building
 Communications
6.3    In addition, the PMU would have the freedom to field studies or hire
services of people (e.g. in enterprise development) as and when required. This
Unit would closely monitor the progress of work against stipulated milestones,
undertake periodic reviews, initiate impact assessments by external agencies,
audit of the project and liaise with DFID (India) and other agencies. It would also
extend all possible support to selected districts in developing their capacities and
the requisite approach to the project. The PMU would prepare broad operational
guidelines with flexibility for the project districts to make changes as appropriate
to the area-specific strategies of those districts.


Co-Ordination With Other Agencies
6.4    Given that MPRLP would be fielded in areas where a number of other
agencies-governmental and non-governmental are working, the project would
need to create linkages to utilise their core competencies for setting the required
systems and achieving effectiveness. It would involve the agencies in periodic
reviews and monitoring of interventions, capacity building and training of people
and strengthening of communication channels.
6.5     Apart from local level agencies the project would also build on other
national and international experiences of DFID (I) and other agencies working in
the field of livelihoods and poverty reduction through information exchange and
consultations.


Funds Flow
6.6   Funds for the project would flow from the State to the Zila Panchayat to
the Gram Kosh of the Gram Sabhas of selected hamlets/villages. For the
watershed related activities the funds would go from the Gram Kosh to the
watershed committees for planning and implementation while the PFT for the
watershed, whether GO/NGO would be responsible for facilitating the process.
The same kind of fund flow would be followed for CFM with the existing JFM and
new committees given the money to undertake forestry related works by the

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        55
Gram Sabha. Learning from DPIP, funds would also be held by the Gram Kosh
for funding proposals from SHGs and individuals for micro-enterprise and other
livelihood related activities.
6.7     At all levels - State, district and village - funds would be retained for
capacity building, institution development and related activities which would help
in effective participatory planning and improved targeting.
6.8   The 'Innovation Fund' would be placed with the Zila Panchayat and
managed by the District level Project Management Committee (PMC) for
supporting innovative proposals capable of generating livelihoods.
6.9   The support to the project from DFID (I) would be tranched and release of
funds would be based on the achievement of commonly agreed milestones and
the submission of quarterly claims by the state.


7.     The Rural Livelihoods Forum
Outline
7.1     The project will catalyse a Rural Livelihoods Forum to undertake
concurrent action research and experience sharing on issues relating to rural
livelihoods. This Livelihoods Forum will be steered by a group consisting of
policy makers, development professionals, social scientists, NGO representatives
and people working in the area of women in development. Key resource persons
from outside Madhya Pradesh would also be invited. A Secretariat to the
Livelihoods Forum would be housed in the Tribal Research Institute (TRI), Bhopal
(Madhya Pradesh) to provide support to the work of the Steering Group and the
Forum. TRI is the states‟ Apex Research Institute mandated to study issues
related to the welfare and impact of Government programmes targeting tribal
groups.
7.2    The Steering Group would set the research agenda, monitor research
studies and ensure follow through into the Empowered Committee (within GoMP)
and through it to the Government.


The Need
7.3     MP is uniquely placed to contribute ideas for learning and change across
the country through its path-breaking decentralisation initiatives, especially in the
area of Gram Swaraj. All rural development programmes, including those in
watersheds, forestry and micro-enterprise will henceforth interact closely with and
be influenced by Gram Sabhas. Targeting the poorest in villages is likely to be
much improved and sharpened as a result. As Gram Sabha capacities develop,
they will make new kinds of demands for support from government line
departments in the districts, from the private sector, NGOs and others. Project
experience will feed into learning and change in communities and government at
district as well as state levels. The Livelihoods Forum has an important role in
understanding and documenting the experience, and making appropriate
recommendations to GoMP. In doing so, the Forum will go beyond project
experience to capture and analyse other experiences in MP and elsewhere, and
integrate that with project learning.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                         56
7.4    The Livelihoods Forum would contribute a high quality feedback loop
within government, complementing traditional reporting and monitoring activities
with an in-depth process of generating knowledge about what works when trying
to reduce poverty.
7.5    It would commission work in three main areas:
  i. Increasing understanding of the multiple causes and dimensions of poverty
 ii. Identifying what works in different contexts for reducing and eliminating
     poverty.
iii. Identifying solutions to the problems that GoMP might have in implementing
     such examples of what works.
7.6    Therefore, it is also quite clear that to address this challenge, the function
of the Livelihoods Forum is not to commission research exclusively on project
supported activities in the six districts. While the project‟s district based activities
would be the main source of ideas on what works after several years, it is clear
that initially the Learning Forum would need to focus on looking for examples
from sources other than the project.
7.7   Another kind of space is needed – for informal and lateral processes
through which communities and district administrations can quickly access
information, learn from each other (and the world outside) about what works and
how to do things better.
7.8   In the first phase of three years, the project will support a Rural Livelihoods
Forum. While a Livelihoods Learning Network for lateral and informal learning
may be considered in the second phase, the project will support information
exchange between those districts supported through Phase 1 (i.e. Badwani, Dhar
and Jhabua in the West and Mandela, Dindori and Shadow in the East of MP).


Functions
7.9    Overall direction and development of the Livelihoods Forum would lie with
the Steering Group, for which the Project Coordinator would act as the member-
secretary. The Steering Group would nominate the convenor of the Livelihood
Forum. Costs of time, travel and expenses (where appropriate) of members will
be borne by the project. Major functions of the Steering Group would be:
 Define the overall work plan for action research and comprehensive analysis;
 Selection of consultants to carry out the required work plan;
 Assessment of the quality of the work plan.
 Presentation of reports to the Empowered Committee.
7.10 The Secretariat to the Livelihoods Forum, would have to contract
individuals and organisations (government, civil society, private sector and
academia) to carry out the work programme developed by the Steering Group.
The Forum will have access to project information, particularly outputs of
monitoring systems. It will present regular reports to GoMP through the
Empowered Committee, including reviews of key lessons learnt from this and
other projects and programmes. It will make recommendations to government,
and also organise workshops and events around specific issues and themes.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                            57
7.11 The Forum would also seek involvement of (and funds from) other
agencies to avoid over-dependence on DFID. Projects and programmes (such as
DPIP) would be approached for the purpose.


Outputs
7.12 There would need to be a balance between outputs which inform target
audiences about the structural causes of persistent rural poverty and those which
reflect on the economic, social and institutional barriers to poverty reduction
through public action.
7.13 A specific output expected from the Forum would be a design for the
expanded Phase 2 of the project, drawing on experience of Phase 1. Other
suggested outputs fall into the following categories:
    Syntheses of existing works (e.g. the many evaluations of watershed
      development projects, JFM and micro-enterprise work).
    Working groups to bring field experience as well as research knowledge to
       the table on specific issues, which require action. Examples would be:
                    Best practice in increasing the poverty focus of watershed
            development projects
                    Best practices in developing SHGs
                    Changing roles and capacity building needs of community
            and village institutions (particularly gram sabhas) as well as district
            level administration and government line departments.
    Analyses of existing data-sets such as BPL lists, NSS data, household
      surveys, Participatory Poverty Assessments, programme monitoring
      systems, to clarify the nature and causes of poverty in the target districts
      and state.
    Commissioned research projects. Possible candidates include:
       The key constraints to effective gram sabhas, and ways of overcoming
       them
                    The key adaptation which district government and other
            public bodies need to make to respond to the challenge of Gram
            Swaraj
      Workshops to provide a forum for promoting the findings of work such as:
                    The task force on unorganised labour
                    Externally funded research, e.g. on livelihoods diversification
            (ODI led) and rural non farm economy (NRI led);
    Workshops to present and debate the findings of Outputs to targeted
      audiences.
    Thematic syntheses of major outputs submitted to the Empowered
      Committee
    Publications – leaflets/briefing papers (short summary papers); newsletter;
      newspaper articles, videos as well as reports
    Effectiveness review – „what plausibly reduces poverty in tribal areas?‟ –
      should also reflect on the value of the Learning Forum to policy makers
      and programme managers in MP and beyond.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        58
             Appendix 1            Institutional Arrangements




   State level                         Empowered Committee
                                        Chair: Chief Secretary



     Forum Steering Group                             Project Management Unit
      Convenor: to be nominated                         (Panchayat & RD Dept.)
    Secretary: Project Co-ordinator                       Project Co-ordinator



     Rural Livelihoods Forum
     Secretariat: Tribal Research Inst.




   District level                                            Project Management Committee
                                                               Collector, CEO, dept. heads.


                                           Zila Panchayat
                                 CEO: District Project Co-ordinator


                                    District Project Support Unit


                  Project Facilitation Teams
                  Govt. multi-disciplinary teams,
                 NGOs. (clusters of 10 villages)

   Village level

                                            Gram Sabhas
                                   Village Development Committee
                                         (Gram Kosh account)


                      Area Based Committees              Affinity Based Groups
                    i.e. watershed and joint forest      i.e. SHGs, user groups,
                       management committees




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                             59
      ANNEX 7: TECHNICAL/LIVELIHOODS INTERVENTIONS30
1.      SUMMARY
GoMP Approach
1.1    The project seeks to present an inter-linked two-track strategy to enhance
people‟s livelihoods in tribal dominated districts of MP. One, by strengthening the
resource base that generates livelihoods; and two, by fostering micro-enterprises
that provide employment and income opportunities to the rural poor. The first
track seeks to improve land, water and forest resources of poor people through
integrated watershed management and community forest management. The
second track seeks to promote enterprises that lead to value-addition of
agricultural and forest produce as well as other micro-enterprises. Both
approaches are based on learning by GoMP and DFID on what has worked and
what has not.
1.2    The key innovative institutional aspect of the strategy is that project funds
will be channelled from the Zila Panchayat to the Gram Kosh (treasury) of the
Gram Sabha (village assembly). This will support the Gram Swaraj policy of
GoMP and enable the testing of related critical variables (see Annex 6, Box 1).
1.3     The project will focus on filling the crucial resource gaps that constrain the
implementation of identified strategies on an effective scale. It would also spend
considerable efforts and resources on the development and performance of the
Gram Sabha, other organisations/user groups in which poor are represented, and
district level institutions to support the implementation of Gram Swaraj.
1.4    A Rural Livelihoods Forum (described in Annex 6) will be established by
GoMP‟s Rural Development Department to enable lessons to be learnt around
this key innovation as well as the more general question of „what works to reduce
poverty in MP‟. This Livelihoods Forum will be managed by a Steering Group,
and supported by a Secretariat housed in the Tribal Research Institute, Bhopal.
Its work will feed into GoMP policy debates through the project Empowered
Committee.


2.      THE LIVELIHOODS INTERVENTIONS
2.1     The proposed project seeks to strengthen the initiatives for enhancing
livelihoods of poor people in 6 of the most vulnerable districts of Madhya
Pradesh, expanding to 17 districts in a proposed second phase 31. The World
Bank supported District Poverty Initiatives Project (DPIP) targets a further 14
districts. The districts proposed for this project, with a predominantly tribal
population, need specially crafted strategies sensitive to their natural and skill
resource base to be effective. These are districts where a “standard set” of rural
development programmes becomes less effective and sub-optimal because new
livelihoods possibilities that relate to the forest resource base remain unexplored.
Through effective district level planning that focuses on vulnerable villages within

30
 The approach to implementing these interventions is described in Annex 2.
31
 Sheopur, Ratlam, Dhar, Jhabua, Khandwa, Khargone, Badwani, Betul, Chhindwara, Seoni, Balaghat,
Mandla, Jabalpur, Dindori, Katni, Umaria and Shahdol and Part area of three other districts: Dewas,
Hoshangabad, and Harda

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                          60
the district and identifies the resource endowments to be built upon, there is
potential for substantial enhancement of livelihoods.
2.2      The district level formulation of the project will follow 2 principal strands:
         a) Strengthening the programmes that have worked and demonstrated
            their impact like Watershed management and JFM;
         b) A second strand would attempt to create livelihoods though the
            creation of micro-enterprises drawing on their agriculture, forests, and
            livestock resource base and skill endowments.
2.3     The project will seek to address both the structural causes of poverty in
these six districts, which relate to degradation of the resource base as well as
seek to develop entrepreneurial skills that promote self-employment. The former
strategy by working through community organisation will both draw strength from
and strengthen the model of participatory governance put in place by the state
government since 1994. The latter strategy by empowering individuals to
effectively participate in the market will enable the diffusion of some benefits of
new economic opportunities created to reach out to poorer people.
Supplementary livelihoods support will also be provided through migrant labour
support and promotion of access to information.
2.4     The key constraints that emerge from an analysis of the problems specific
to the tribal population and area can be summarised as follows:
     Land based livelihood strategies are under productive and insecure;

     The poorest depend upon daily wage labour and face difficulty in obtaining
      sufficient days‟ work in either their villages or in neighbouring areas to which
      they migrate;

     Poor access to resources, markets, information and services, presents a
      significant constraint to realising the potential of available opportunities; and
      hinders diversification of livelihood strategies.

Figure 1 illustrates some of these points.
ASSET BASE                                           STATUS


        Land                        Less Productive

       Forest                     Degraded
      Resource                    Unexplored Opportunities for
        Base                      Value addition
      Livestock                  Less Productive
                                 Under Exploited
    Traditional                     Needs Modernisation
     Skill Set                      Needs Better Market Integration


2.5   Watershed management programmes have been in operation in the state
since 1994 and Joint Forest Management since 1991. The experience from

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                              61
these programmes is that they have been able to strengthen the environmental
resource base and have led to reduced vulnerability and enhanced livelihoods.
These strategies serve to combine the twin objectives of poverty reduction and
environment management and by focussing on degraded forest and agricultural
lands, which are often owned by the poorest people, become self-targeting. DFID
has supported Watershed and Joint Forest Management programmes in other
States generating experiences on what can be done to improve their poverty
focus, particularly with respect to ensuring that the most disadvantaged and
marginalized groups benefit from area development programmes. The project
support would operate through established institutional arrangements like
watershed and JFM committees, but with the innovative aspect that these
committees will be accountable to the Gram Sabhas.
2.6     The area development approach would be complemented by a micro-
enterprises based strategy drawing on the modest successes achieved in tribal
districts on non-wood forest produce (NWFP) -based enterprise development as
well under rural development programmes. This will involve support through
training, credit and market support to maximise livelihoods creation. These
micro-enterprises could either be individual or group based and would build on
the experiences of similar initiatives, e.g. the SHG based livelihoods creation
through NWFP attempted in Van Dhan, Common Interest Group based
methodology of the World Bank-aided DPIP and SGSY.


3.     WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
3.1   Poor soil and water management is one of the root causes of poor
productivity of tribal farms. The traditional dependence on rain-fed agriculture
causes fluctuations in production levels and imparts instability to the tribal
economy. Moreover, if a shift towards more intensive agriculture is desired, there
needs to be greater availability of water and better soil fertility to support it.
3.2     Lessons within Madhya Pradesh and neighbouring states like Gujarat and
Rajasthan have shown that drought proofing through the creation of water
harvesting structures, as a community movement, is an effective approach to
stabilise people‟s incomes and reduce their vulnerability. This needs to be done
by providing incentives and the necessary enabling environment to farmers for
demand-driven, on-farm soil and water conservation activities in addition to the
traditional watershed development. The present low-level of irrigation
underscores the need for more immediate interventions in these districts.
3.3     Watershed development becomes a very important intervention for the
tribals given the twin benefits that it leads to. In the short term it leads to income
transfers through wage employment given its labour intensive nature. In the
medium term it leads to creation of assets that contribute to the sustainability of
livelihoods. The work of Rajiv Gandhi Mission for Watershed Management in
7300 villages, now supplemented by Pani Roko Abhiyan covering all the villages
has demonstrated the impact that water harvesting can have on agriculture and
reduction of people‟s susceptibility. This intervention, having a history of known
impact on the rural resources, would be replicated in tribal areas of selected
districts on a priority basis for building water harvesting structures on community
land as well as private farmlands. The creation of these structures would also be


MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                          62
combined with methodologies to improve productivity of rainfed farming and low
cost mechanisms for lift irrigation so that tribal farms on an undulated terrain are
able to access available ground water.
3.4     The poor level of agricultural productivity of tribal districts is generally
marked and improvements can have a positive impact on the tribal economy. The
increase in soil fertility and water availability achieved through watershed
management would allow increased productivity and production to enable
farmers to take two or more crops per year, with both food security and cash
income benefits. This would require support for crop diversification and
participatory technology development. The Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana
started recently as a food for work programme provides a large programmatic
framework for supporting this activity.
3.5    The strategy for watershed development within the project would involve
the transfer of capacities and skills to the local communities and their social
organisation before the actual technical interventions so that the processes
created ensure full and sustainable benefits to people. This will also eliminate the
dependency syndrome which one otherwise witnesses in such interventions.
Given the high dependence on agriculture in tribal areas, the intervention would
not be justified if it does not lead to a quantum jump in productivity or to enlarge
the portfolio of their income sources so as to spread the risk -through:
   Mixed cropping-and multi-cropping given the increased availability of water,
    improved soil and better extension;
   Livestock rearing- with greater access to water and green fodder
   Pisciculture-as the creation of water harvesting structures would provide
    opportunities for it
   Micro-enterprises development- as the adjoining area could become ideal for
    captive farming of the desired raw materials for value-addition.
3.6    Thus the conscious objective of the project would be to see to the increase
in productivity and stability of people‟s incomes and assets.
3.7   The project would address second-generation issues related to use of
watershed management as a poverty reduction strategy, including:
   Spread of watershed development effort on not only community lands but also
    on private lands in a demand-driven framework. The emphasis would be on
    incentive-based work on land owned by private people and would involve a
    cost-sharing model, to be built depending on the proportion of benefits derived
    by each member.
   Experiments in Jhabua and other districts with private farm bunding showed
    that such interventions prevent run-off and conserve soil. Depending on
    location, similar advantages can be derived. Structures on private farms instil
    greater confidence and ownership among people, leading to better
    maintenance and hence sustained benefits.
   Community-led water harvesting actions would be introduced as against the
    technically complicated interventions that tend to make the ownership of such
    structures by people difficult (given the complications in managing them).
    Under the aegis of the project, special effort would be made to ensure simple

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                        63
    interventions for trapping water by arresting its mobility through simple
    structures like percolation tanks, trenches, and roof-top rainwater harvesting
    that do not involve heavy technical inputs and are easier to manage.
   One of the issues that earlier interventions in watershed have not been able to
    address satisfactorily has been of equity, both in terms of sharing of benefits
    as well as stakes in management. Generally, the benefits in a watershed are
    derived either by people with land or capital to invest. The poor and assetless
    get left out as they have neither, and this leads to their non-participation in the
    management and maintenance of watersheds, very crucial for their
    sustainability. This requires that a sense of ownership be developed among
    the poor by due involvement and representation in the management. The
    project would bring the poor and the marginal into watershed development
    committees to improve equity and ensure that their rights and interests are not
    compromised at any stage.
   Generally the social capital created in initial years of the project tends to get
    diluted subsequently in the absence of strict norms for benefit sharing and
    inability of people getting smaller benefits to raise their voice. The project
    would advocate a legal regime so that violation of prescribed sharing
    arrangements attracts legal action to prevent wasteful exploitation and
    facilitate judicious use of available resources. Thus with respect to
    watersheds the effort would be to prevent development from being zero-sum
    and cross-subsidisation of benefits by the landless and marginal.
   Another issue is of utilisation of capacities developed through watershed
    development. This project would promote convergence of inputs, resources
    and opportunities in the form of development of non-farm sector and
    information accessibility that have a positive effect on the resource base of
    people. The increased agriculture production, fodder and biomass availability
    would all be utilised for enhancing the livelihoods options.
3.8    The approach will be consistent with the revised Guidelines for Watershed
Development (2001) recently issued by MoRD. Specifically, the project will
promote convergence of schemes at the village level, a central role for Gram
Sabha, probation period for new projects, effective involvement of women and
poorest groups, institutional partnerships and seeking both short and long term
benefits from watershed development.


Extension and Technology Development
3.9     Watershed development interventions would be redundant if they are not
accompanied by more effective extension. This would be done both through
greater co-ordination with the Department of Agriculture (in support of the recent
National Agriculture Extension Policy) and by developing village specialists who
can facilitate more informed decision-making by the people. The effectiveness of
this intervention would be greatly increased by the GoMP by training one farmer
in each village as a Kisan Bandhu, to be the local resource person and act as the
disseminator of innovations and good farming practices among all the farmers in
the village. In the initial years, there would be focus on timely accessibility of
extension so that the initial users can get an understanding of appropriate


MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                           64
practices and this helps to enrich and strengthen the knowledge base of the
community for the benefit of later users.
3.10 This would require widespread information dissemination regarding the
use of various inputs/ practices so that farmers actually receive the desired
returns. This stream of intervention would not be limited merely to prescriptive
information dissemination but would also provide scope for horizontal transfers of
technology, innovations and practices in a participatory mode with focus on farm/
resource specific needs of people. The extension provided under the project
would also cover marketing extension with the help of other agencies/ institutions
available at the cluster and district level. All extension efforts in the project would
focus on tapping inter-linkages of all resources available with people- agriculture,
irrigation, livestock and micro-enterprises.
3.11 The project would seek to facilitate an increase in the cropped area as well
as a broader cropping mix. An experiment underway in Jhabua and Mandela
districts is the Nagaland variety of maize (NLD) that has resulted in a quantum
jump in productivity and received overwhelming response from people. Similar
innovations would be encouraged and promoted in the project through supporting
participatory development of improved farming systems technologies.


4.     COMMUNITY FOREST MANAGEMENT
4.1    Forests and vegetation help in maintaining the hydrological cycles in water
catchment areas, acting as a buffer against extreme situations like flood and
drought. Apart from providing these services, forests also offer an opportunity for
securing livelihoods opportunities for people living in tribal areas by providing
usufruct rights to the NWFP and planned timber harvesting.
4.2    Increased biotic pressure over the years has led to use of forests beyond
their carrying capacity, resulting in quantitative as well as qualitative depletion of
the forest resources. This depletion in forest cover is more pronounced in the
western region of the State. Control over the reducing forest resources,
interspersed with tribal population, often leads to conflict between the
government and adivasis. In such a situation it becomes difficult to use the forest
resources to the advantage of the disadvantaged. The State of MP is trying
innovative measures within the existing forest policy framework to address the
needs of tribal livelihoods from forests.
4.3     The forests are vast storehouses of rare herbal plants, which are used for
the preparation of medicinal and herbal formulation. These formulations have a
high demand in the pharmaceutical, toiletries and cosmetic industry. Most of the
tribals are unaware of the prices that these herbs and medicinal plants fetch in
the open market, as they simply collect them and pass them on to the local
agents and sub agents of the middlemen for a nominal price. Many such herbs
and plants are showing signs of disappearance from their traditional habitats due
to ignorance and making way into the fields of entrepreneurs who want to skim
the highly lucrative market for these products. With the resurgence of interest in
herbal medicines and cosmetics world-wide, a proper strategy can lead to many
sustained livelihoods from this important resource.
4.4  Non-Wood Forest Produce (NWFP) are not only used within the tribal
household but are also exchanged/traded in haats or local markets for cash. This

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                           65
supplementary income supports them at a time when options of livelihoods are
limited. The NWFP thus play an important role in the tribal economy. The
availability of NWFP has decreased with the decrease in forest quality.
4.5    The experience with Joint Forest Management (JFM) has led to mixed but
secure tangible benefits to communities in the form of assured returns as well as
improvement of common property resources (CPRs) for the benefit of community
as a whole. The benefit sharing mechanism ensures that people have a stake in
the management of forest while maintaining ecological balance. For using the
potential of the forests it becomes important to make an effort towards
regenerating it. JFM by addressing this provides adequate raw material for
promoting forest-based micro-enterprises. The practice of JFM has led to benefits
getting accrued to the community both in terms of resource improvement-
quantitative and qualitative as well as ownership and sustainability through the
preparation of micro-plans which give people the confidence to visualise their
own development and mobilise resources for them. Another advantage of JFM
has been the virtual ownership (even if joint) of the forests and its resources in
the eyes of people, which has helped in greater participation of people in
decision-making and more harmonious relations with the forest department.
4.6      While JFM has been an advance on the conventional government
management of forests, there is now a widely recognised need for it to further
evolve to become community forest management (CFM). In moving towards this
methodology the project would capitalise on the space provided by the National
Forest Policy, the Indian Forest Act, and the Panchayat Extension to Schedule
Areas Act (PESA, 1996) in transferring greater ownership and say to
communities in the management of forests. Changes in policy regarding
utilisation of NWFP provide opportunities for the expansion of forest-related
livelihood options. The evolution of GoMP‟s approach to CFM is consistent with
the Guidelines for Strengthening JFM (February 2000) issued by MoEF,
specifically providing legal status to JFM committees, effective representation of
women, extension of JFM into „good forest‟ areas and recognition of self-initiated
groups. The amended GoMP resolution of October 2001 encourages
convergence of development efforts and funds with the ZP/DRDA and other
departments and in the granting of rights to minor forest produce under the
provisions of PESA.
4.7    The dynamism within the forest policy of the state has led to the gradual
move from Working plan based management of forests to a micro-plan based
system which incorporates the felt needs of the people and leads to a greater
sense of autonomy and ownership. The project will support testing and
implementation of CFM methodologies, which lead to greater community
autonomy in the management of the forests through greater stakes and
integration with livelihoods generation options. The project will benefit from
experiences gathered while implementing the World Bank sponsored Forestry
Project. It would work on issues related to equity that pose in Joint Forest
Management. The stress would be more on the development of capacities of
communities and committees rather than on the creation of infrastructure or other
assets that do not also provide long term benefits.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                      66
5.     MICRO-ENTERPRISES FOR LIVELIHOODS
5.1     Given the typical agro-climatic and geographical regions in which the
Project intends to operate agriculture alone would not be able to carry the burden
of the entire village economy. It can at best reduce the vulnerability and burden of
the household. Therefore, there would also be a cafeteria of interventions for
targeted communities to pick and chose from, as per their context specific need
and the comparative advantage offered by their area of residence, largely in the
form of micro-enterprises. One of the major support offered by the project in this
direction would be to field studies for undertaking a detailed mapping of the
micro-enterprise and other livelihoods opportunities available in the pilot districts.
Examples of these are given below.
Value Addition Activities
5.2   The Van Dhan programme tried on an experimental basis in Bastar District
has opened a window of possibility for involving tribal populations in the area of
primary processing of forest products.
5.3    There is a possibility of introducing buy-back arrangements for these
micro-enterprises with major enterprises. Madhya Pradesh has begun to see its
rich bio-diversity resources as one of its key growth engines. There is an
increasing demand for herbal medicine, green foods and green products. This
upsurge in demand as well as timing of the project on livelihoods provides an
opportunity to break new ground.
5.4    The value-addition of the NWFP offers huge opportunities for wage as well
as self-employment. Recently the Gram Sabha has been given the ownership of
NWFPs. It would, over the years, encourage setting up of successful forest based
micro-enterprises after the issues of marketing and quality have been addressed.
The project will focus on making this a reality.
5.5    Some Income Generating Activities that may be promoted by the proposed
project are:
 Value addition in both nationalised and non nationalised NWFPs
 Primary processing (and even secondary processing subsequently) of the
    edible forest products, especially medicinal plants.
 Oil extraction from various seeds like neem, for neem-based products
5.6   Depending on the location, there are a number of specific areas where
opportunities for value addition exist, like:
     Lac extraction and processing
     Distillation/ processing of medicinal/ aromatic herbs/plants
     Manufacture of boxes/ boards from wood waste (saw dust)
     Fruit-pulp making
     Decortications and packaging of NWFPs


Livestock Based Micro-Enterprises
5.7    Livestock is one of the resources the tribal livelihoods depend on, apart
from land and forests. Tribal households are characterised by the presence of

MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                          67
livestock, which they keep both as an asset to be monetised in case of
emergency as well as for meeting the immediate food insecurity. Livestock
rearing like dairying on a commercial scale would be promoted under the
proposed project through its open-ended interventions. The project would provide
financial support to targeted people interested in taking up livestock based micro-
enterprises as an activity.
5.8    There has been a quantum increase in egg and meat consumption in MP.
The efforts of the project would be in the area of linking poor rural households to
poultry markets.
Fisheries
5.9   With the creation of numerous water-harvesting structures in the State
under Pani Roko Abhiyan opportunity for taking up fisheries has grown
tremendously. In all the tribal districts there exist skills for catching fish from the
ponds, rivulets and puddles. The project would attempt to link beneficiaries to the
demand in local markets as well as in urban growth centres, which still lie
untapped.
5.10 In some districts prawn cultivation is also gaining popularity and can be
piloted in some of the project districts. Depending on the success in these
districts it can be brought to scale.


Handicrafts
5.11 Many tribals are involved in the preparation of handicrafts out of locally
available raw materials for their household. With the increasing attractiveness of
the handicraft industry many middlemen entered the market with the result that
the contact of the primary producer with the market has been lost. The Project
would try to promote and link them to the market.
Integrated Strategy Linking Natural Resources with Micro-Enterprises
5.12 There is a new possibility of linking the strategies of natural resource
management with micro-enterprises. Under this integrated strategy targeted
populations would be given incentives to improve the natural resources of
degraded private as well as community lands so that they may be used as
catchments for the natural resource based micro-enterprises.
Herb processing
5.13 The Technology Information Forecasting and Assessment Council of India
(TIFAC) has identified 45 “potential winners” from among the herbal products in
India whose national and export market potential has been mapped. From
among these cultivation of some of the plants could be taken up on lands owned
by or made available (degraded forest land for example) to Self-Help-
Groups/JFM committees, who will be engaged in the production and basic
processing to be able to capture the value-addition. They could take up as many
activities amenable in the value chain and develop horizontal as well as forward
linkage with major business firms in the sector. The entire exercise could begin
with a consultation with these business firms and research organisations and
after mapping the potential, organise backward linkages with a view to creating


MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                           68
livelihoods and additional incomes for people in the districts identified for the
project.
Micro-Market Reform through Dis-intermediation
5.14 Almost all districts in the project area are characterised by the vulnerable
position of individual tribal players and the operation of predatory markets that
haemorrhage the tribal economy. This situation arises primarily because of
information asymmetry predominant in all the commodities traded and marketed.
There has been in recent times effort to “tame” these markets (“making markets
work for the poor”) through Self-Help Group based production and marketing.
The Project would promote SHG formation under various programmes and
extend support for undertaking activities. The already functioning savings and
credit groups in these districts, which have achieved a certain discipline in
handling finances, would be given special attention.
5.15 The project would seek to build on such experience and combine it with
the use of Information Technology to remove the multiple levels that exist in the
value-chain and play a significant part in adding to the costs without making any
value addition in terms of form in the products/ commodities. Here again the
project would draw on experiences within the state like Gyandoot which uses
Information and Communication Technologies to provide information access to
farmers on market prices in intermediate and terminal markets so that they can
realise the optimal transactions that would assure them best returns.
5.16 As a part of demand driven interventions the Project would focus on
support to value addition activities and establishment of micro-enterprises based
on comparative advantage offered by the location and its endowment. As an
example, the south-west part of Madhya Pradesh's tribal belt has geographical
proximity to numerous pharmaceutical companies in Gujarat and Maharashtra
and given its agro-climatic features can grow large amounts of herbal and
medicinal plants. It can thus supply value added medicinal extracts to them.
There even exists scope in these districts for cleaning, preservation and
packaging of numerous edible items where a lot of demand exists.
5.17 People‟s collectives can organize around such activities, form loose
confederation in certain geographical areas for handling greater volumes of trade.
Innovation Fund to Respond to Project for Micro-enterprises
5.18 It is proposed to place an untied fund called the Innovation Fund at the
District level to respond to innovative proposals for supporting the development of
micro-enterprises. This will be located in the Zila Panchayat and managed by the
Project Management Committee headed by the Collector, with the CEO-ZP, Lead
Bank Manager etc represented in it.
5.19 The PMC will both catalyse the micro-enterprises strategy for the district
and respond to the proposals with support from the Fund. It will need to
incentivise this operation by providing support to the Livelihoods Promoters.
Location of the fund in ZP will serve to bring in linkages for successful operation
of micro-enterprises in terms of training, additional credit support and marketing
opportunities.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                       69
6.     SUPPLEMENTARY LIVELIHOOD SUPPORT
Support to Migrant Populations
6.1     The objective of the present project is to reduce the vulnerability of people
living in tribal areas, give them a broader set of choices from which to select the
ideal one, depending on their situation, and ensure that these choices have an
positive impact on their livelihoods.
6.2     The area in which the proposed project is to be implemented is marked by
a high incidence of migration, (more prominent in the resource degraded western
districts of Jhabua, Dhar and Badwani), to other rural as well urban areas, as a
coping strategy. This is largely distress migration in the lean season in search of
labour opportunities, to sustain their livelihoods. This migration ranges from
working as agriculture labour in adjoining rural areas to working on construction
sites in distant urban locations. Most tribals move to growth centres within the
State like Indore, Hoshangabad, Harda and Bilaspur or adjoining states like
Dhulia, Nagpur in Maharashtra or Vadodhara, Surat and Ahmedabad in Gujarat.
Largely the employment opportunities available to the migrants are the worst
paying, involve high exploitation and require least skills.
6.3     Migration impacts on the household, leading to a break in the smooth flow
of lives, non-availability of social security systems like education, health facilities,
group solidarity and subsidised foodgrains from PDS. The living conditions of
migrants in their urban destinations are very poor affecting their health and hence
productivity. Many times they are also forced into a debt trap by contractors who
give them advances for the next season to ensure availability of their cheap
labour in future. As soon as the season begins the contractors pack them off to
distant locations to work as agriculture labour, construction workers or other
labour-intensive industries where relatively low skills are required. Tribals are
preferred over others as they are less demanding and are in a more vulnerable
position.
6.4    It is neither appropriate nor feasible for GoMP to provide wage
employment to all vulnerable people during the entire lean season. Though in the
heavily forested districts of the eastern tribal belt (Mandela, Shadow and Dindori)
the forestry-related wage earning opportunities reduce migration pressures as
compared to the western belt, it is not sufficient to stop the migration.
6.5 The migrants usually belong to assetless or marginal categories. Apart from
supporting watershed development and CFM, which lead to the creation of
additional person-days of employment in these areas, the project would develop
a thorough understanding of migration pressures vis-à-vis livelihoods options that
migrants confront.
6.6    Given the project objectives, it would also attempt to reduce the
vulnerability of migrants by enhancing their skills in their existing occupations and
by training them in new semi-skilled/skilled activities that are in demand at places
to which they migrate. The project would develop among the forced migrants an
understanding of the existing labour laws and other protective legislations, to
make them informed about their work environment, as well supporting their
mobilisation and organisation so that they may be able to directly bargain with
their potential employers as a collective.



MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                            70
Improving Access To Information
6.7     People‟s constraints on quick and timely access to information on key
livelihood-related issues is also a major cause of poverty. The project would
address this information asymmetry by support through its village specialists and
awareness- raising in Gram Sabha and GVS meetings. The information system
with due inputs from the PFT and the Livelihoods Promoters would also build on
existing innovative approaches in multiple media communication channels (like
internet kiosks, street theatre, wall posters, newsletters) in order to enable
improved access to information in support of poor people‟s livelihoods.
6.8     Key areas where access to information can be improved are:
 Implications of Gram Swaraj- the rights and responsibilities of people
 State policy on women and opportunities available for women‟s in governance
    and employment.
 Commodities and NWFP market prices at different geographical locations and
    at different points in the value chain.
 Labour opportunities, rights, and wage rates.
 Existing legislation and records on land and NWFP rights.
 Social security entitlements (e.g. pensions).
 State and Central government schemes.
6.9    The representation below highlights the significance of information in
reversing marginalisation.




     Information on:
                                         Combats                     Impact
     Rights                             negative
                                                                Downward
     Entitlements                       processes
                                                                 accountability
     Markets                             Exclusion
                                          Marginalisation      Enhanced
     Government                                                 participation
      schemes                                                   Improved
     Operations of                                              bargaining power
      local                                                      with institutions
      government




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                     71
     ANNEX 8: BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
       A detailed description of the budget prepared by GoMP is available on file


1.        Project costs

1.1   The following is an indicative budget, which will be further during the three
month inception period. The participatory planning processes would decide the
funds per village and the types of livelihood interventions to be supported through
FA funds. The TC component would be determined during implementation in
support of institutional development and capacity building at district and Gram
Sabha levels, and the needs of the Livelihoods Forum in lesson learning and
commissioning policy research. Annual budgets will be prepared as part of the
annual plans of operations developed by GoMP and agreed with DFID India.

Please note that the budget table is presented in Rs. Lakhs (100,000).

       Financial Aid                                                 PY 1 PY 2     PY 3          Total
1. Gram Sabha Level - Capacity Building, Institutional                 150  300       450           900
Development, Monitoring & Administration (Output 1)

i} Training of GS representatives & LP's @ Rs 5 lakh per               40    132     207           379
district
ii} Exposure visits                                                    10     15      25            50
ii} Stakeholders workshop for networking with government                6     12      18            36
bodies/ NGOs @ Rs 1 lakhs/ district
iii} Projects share of Livelihood Promoters salary @ Rs 1000/ LP       20     36      36            92
for 2 villages
iii} Administration (includes establishment, stationery, training      18     30      42            90
material & aids, vehicles etc)
iv} IEC, Organisation & Mobilisation @ Rs 3 lk/ district               30     30      30            90
v} Process Documentation for sharing & training module                  6     10      26            42
development
vi} Participatory Monitoring @ Rs 2 lakhs per district                 12     20      36            68
vii} Miscellaneous                                                      8     15      30            53

2. Gram Sabha level – Support To Livelihood Strategies               1050   2100    3150          6300
(Output 2)

a) Livelihood enhancement based on improved land &                    750   1575    2400          4725
forest resources
                  Watershed management related
i} Physical activities (soil & water conservation, construction of    375    750    1300          2425
watershed structures, etc)
             32
ii} Training of beneficiaries for undertaking the activities           40     48      60           148
iii} Miscellaneous                                                     12     15      15            42
                Community Forest Management related
i} Physical activities (includes plantations, management of           275    700     950          1925
nurseries etc)
             1
ii} Training of beneficiaries for undertaking the activities           36     48      60           144
iii} Miscellaneous                                                     12     14      15            41

32
     Includes expenses incurred on the exposure visits of beneficiaries
MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                      72
b) Supplementary Livelihood Support                                  100   125   150        375
                        33
i} Agriculture extension Improvement                                  66    81    99        246
ii} Support to Migrants and Access to Information                     24    30    36         90
iii} Miscellaneous                                                    10    14    15         39

c) Micro-enterprises for livelihoods                                 200   400   600        1200
i} Financial support to micro-enterprises                            150   300   450         900
ii} Training of beneficiaries (in value-addition, management          25    50    50         125
functions etc)
iii} Information access, establishment of backward-forward           20    40    90         150
linkages
iv} Miscellaneous                                                      5   10    10          25

3. District Level Interventions - Six Districts (Output 3)           440   560   560        1560


a) Basic Support (capacity building, institutional dev,              210   210   210        630
monitoring & administration)
i} Participatory Planning exercise @ Rs 5 lk per district            30    18    10          58
ii} IEC activities for environ. building (advertising, folk media,   15    10     5          30
printing etc)
iii} Capacity building after Training Needs Analysis of              24    42    42         108
functionaries, DPSU staff, PFTs, Livelihoods Promoters @ Rs 5
lakhs/distt
iv} Administrative cost of DPSUs (fixed assets/costs, recurring      96    72    84         252
expenses, salaries) @ Rs 16 lakh
v} Salaries of PFT members @ 7500/ 3-member team/cluster             35    54    54         143
vi} Miscellaneous                                                    10    14    15          39

b) Innovation Fund (managed under Project)                           30    150   150        330
i} Support to Innovations                                            27    135   135        297
ii} Miscellaneous                                                     3     15    15         33

c) Micro-market reform (through SHGs)                                200   200   200        600
i} Formation of SHGs @ Rs 2000/ SHG (assuming a target of             20    15    10         45
2000 groups)
ii} Member training in commodity mgmt, orgn & mobilisation,          30    30    30          90
finance & accounts, monitoring)
iii} Exposure tours of groups                                         10    10    15         35
iv} Material Support to SHGs @ Rs 1000 p.a./ group                    10    15    15         40
v} Grants to groups                                                  100   100   100        300
vi} Miscellaneous                                                     30    30    30         90

4. Establishment of state level learning mechanisms to               108   108   186        402
inform policy and implementation (Output 4)

a) Livelihoods Forum                                                 90    90    90         270
i} Conduct workshop and hold consultations                           10    15    15          40
ii} Commissioning studies, action research & evaluations             10    15    15          40
iii} Publications & documentation                                    25    20    20          65
iv} Administrative expenses (fixed costs, recurring and incidental   30    25    25          80
expenses)


33 Includes crop diversification & improvement and extension services.
MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                 73
v} Miscellaneous                                                        15      15      15           45

b) Review of Project                                                    18      18      96          132
i} Concurrent Evaluation                                                12      12      16           40
ii} Participatory review by stakeholders-consultancy                     0       0      40           40
iii} Miscellaneous                                                       6       6      40           52

5. Project Administration                                              220     170     170          560


a) Centrally commissioned trainings, communication,                     60      60      60          180
information Collection & events
i} Trainings                                                            15      30      36           81
ii} Preparation of manuals and other field instructions                 15       6       4           25
iii} Baselines surveys of selected villages                             20      10       5           35
iv} Exposure visits                                                      5       6       5           16
v} Miscellaneous                                                         5       8      10           23

b) PMU administration costs                                             60      60      60          180
i} Fixed Costs including fixed assets & other Capital                   28      16      12           56
Expenditure
ii} PMU Staff Salary costs                                              20      24      28           72
iii} Recurring Costs & incidentals-Communication, TA/ DA, office        12      20      20           52
maintenance etc.

c) Project Monitoring                                                  100      50      50          200
i} Software development for on-line monitoring                          15       5       5           25
ii} Format development for participatory monitoring &                   25       5       5           35
evaluations & pilot testing
iii} Monitoring costs from PMU                                          50      30      30          110
iv} Miscellaneous                                                       10      10      10           30

                            TOTAL FINANCIAL AID (Rs lakhs)            1968    3238    4516         9722
                                                        (£ million)   2.811   4.626   6.452       13.889




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                       74
   Technical Co-operation                                              PY 1    PY 2    PY 3         Total

   a) Capacity building and institutional development at              90        90      90     270
   district and Gram Sabha levels.
   TC Inputs to support::
    Development of district level guidelines
    Awareness raising activities amongst stakeholders at district and sub-district levels
    Analyses of institutions and resources at district and sub-district levels
    Institutional development based on institutional analyses/mapping
    Training needs analyses and subsequent capacity building activities
    Training in participatory planning
    Improvement of planning and expenditure management systems related to rural livelihood
       programmes
    Undertaking water resource audits and development of related district level planning systems
    Lesson learning events and peer reviews between districts
    Undertaking market analyses and development of district micro-enterprise strategies
    Analysis and development of capacities at Gram Sabha levels

   b) State level learning and livelihoods forum                      210 210       210     630
   TC inputs to support:
    Development of monitoring systems, undertaking environmental and livelihood baselines,
       contracted-out process and outcome monitoring and commissioned impact studies
    Inception/planning workshop
    Establishment of Secretariat to the Livelihoods Forum
    Consultancy support to work of the Livelihoods Forum
    Institutional links with national and international organisations
    Commissioned policy and action research
    Commissioned analyses and syntheses of livelihood strategies and programmes
    Operationalising the recommendations of GoMP task forces related to rural livelihoods
    Working groups on themes to be identified by Livelihoods Forum
    Development and implementation of a communications strategy

   c) Review of project                                                  12      12       64           88
   (including: evaluations, appraisal studies, project
   effectiveness report)

   d) Training, study visits (including exposure and exchange            40      40       40          120
   visits)

   Contingency (managed by DFID India)                                  220     220      220          660

                            TOTAL TC ALLOCATION (Rs lakh)               572     572      624         1768
                                                         (£ million)   0.817   0.817   0.891        2.525




                                      GRAND TOTAL (Rs lakh)            2540    3810     5140        11490
                                                    (in £ million)     3.628   5.443   7.343    16.414

Exchange rate used: £1= Rs 70




MP Rural Livelihoods Project - Annexes                                                         75
2.       Staff requirements for the Project

2.1     The project would require placements at the state, district and sub-
district levels using a combination of existing departmental functionaries,
Government staff on deputation and contract staff. This reflects the range of
Government agencies and specialist skills involved in the project.

2.2    The Government staff will get paid from the departmental funds placed
under the budget of the Rural Development Department. Those appointed as
consultants on contract would be paid from the Project funds. Those on
deputation would return to their parent departments, while appointments of
those on contract would expire at Project completion. This is to ensure that
the Project while filtering its learnings to the government agencies does not
leave behind a recurring financial burden.
2.3   While it is not possible to provide exact details for all the positions
envisaged in the Project (contract or deputation), the tentative positions
needed to begin with are specified in the subsequent paragraph’s:

For State-level Project Management Unit-PMU
     1) Project Co-ordinator-(An officer of the State Government - Deputation)
     2) Managers/Co-ordinators for the following functional areas:
          Financial Administration-(Deputation from state's financial services)
          Programme Support/Interventions- (Deputation from Agriculture
           department/ Contract)
          MIS/ Monitoring & Evaluation-(Contract)
          Human Resource Management (Contract or out-sourced)
          Gender & Equity/ Social Development- (Contract)
          Communications (Deputation / Contract)

     3) Other Associates
          Administrative Officer-1 (Deputation)
          Accounts Officer-1 (Deputation)
          Data Entry Operators-2-(Contract)
          Office Assistants-2-(Deputation)
          Drivers-2-(Deputation)
          Peons-3 (Contract/Deputation)

Livelihoods Forum
     1) Manager/ Co-ordinator Livelihoods Forum (Contract)
     2) Assistant Manager- Finance & Administration (Deputation)
     3) Other Associates:
          Data Entry Operator-1 (Contract)
          Office Assistant-1 (Deputation)
          Peon-1 (Contract)
For each District Level Project Support Unit-DPSU
     1. Project Management Committee-chairperson-District Collector-(ex-
        officio)
     2. District Project Co-ordinator- Chief Executive Officer-Zila Panchayat-
        (ex-officio)
     3. Project Support Officer-Assistant Project Officer (APO) rank
        (Deputation)
     4. Officers responsible for following area:
         Finance & Administration (Deputation)
         MIS/ Monitoring & Evaluation (Contract)

Other Staff:
       Data Entry Operator–1 (Contract)
       Office assistant-1 (Deputation)
       Driver-1 (Deputation)
       Peon-1 (Contract)

For Sub District/ Cluster Level
A three member multi-disciplinary Project Facilitation Team at the cluster-level
(comprising of officers with skill-sets equivalent to that of Block Extension
Officers with full-time responsibility of Project implementation. Where
competent people are unavailable the work would be out-sourced to local
NGOs and paid at the rate provided in the budget.
At village-level a Livelihoods Promoter would be selected & trained and paid
partly from Project funds and partly from people's contribution.


3.      Management Responsibilities

 Organisation/            Responsibilities

 Individual
 Gram Sabha level:
 Gram Sabha               Selection of target beneficiaries
                          Identifying priorities through micro-planning
                          Monitoring of activities
                          Conduct audit
 Livelihood Promoters     Facilitating the process of community-level planning, monitoring &
 (responsibilities will   implementation, including targeting of the poor.
 depend on                Supporting the identification and development of enterprise opportunities
 specialisation           Facilitating improved access by the poor to information
                          Assisting GVSs & affinity and user groups to source relevant expertise from
                          a range of service providers
                          Acting as a link between the community and PFTs
                          Relaying lessons through the District Project Co-ordinator to the Learning
                          Forum
                          Report to GVS
 Gram Vikas Samiti        Co-ordination of micro-enterprise related activities
 (Village Development     Development of micro-plans
 Committee)               Ensure accounting of Gram Kosh funds
                          monitoring of activities

MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                                     78
 Community Forestry     Manage natural resource related activities
 and Watershed
 Management
 Committees
 Project Facilitation   Identify the Livelihoods Promoters
 Teams                  Arrange training for Livelihoods Promoters
                        Facilitate the provision of technical support to village committees
                        Support groups in the development of proposals for consideration by GVS
                        Facilitate inter-village co-ordination
                        Provide technical screening for plans
 District level:
 Zila Parishad          Monitors project progress
                        Conflict resolution
 Project Management     Provide direction to the CEO as district head of the project
 Committee (PMC)        Commission development of guidelines of livelihood enhancement
                        Commission development of improved planning and monitoring systems
                        Hire specialists for undertaking tasks/ studies/ evaluations
                        Select the project Gram Sabhas
                        Manage the „Innovation Fund‟
                        Maintain linkages with the Livelihoods Forum on experiences and
                        constraints from the district
                        Develop & manage programme to ensure target gram sabhas understand
                        project‟s approach
                        Manage monitoring system at district level
                        Identify capacity building needs for district and sub-district level staff
                        Commission capacity building and systems development activities for district
                        level staff/institutions.
 District Project       Supports CEO in implementation
 Support Unit           Provides specialist guidance for project implementation
 State level:
 Project Co-ordinator   Finalise and manage updating of implementation guidelines.
 (Project Management    Overall project management
 Unit)                  Secretary to the Learning Forum
                        Establishment and management of project‟s M&E systems
                        Preparation of budgets and annual work plans
                        Preparation of six monthly reports to Empowered Committee and DFID.
                        Commission trainings from state
                        Facilitate work of CEO-ZP and DPSUs
 Livelihoods Forum -    Provide overall direction
 Steering Group         Identify overall work programme
                        Monitor quality of work commissioned
                        Bring in experience from elsewhere in India
                        Draft ToRs for review of project effectiveness, including effectiveness of the
                        Livelihoods Forum itself
 Livelihoods Forum –    Provide logistical, admin. and management support
 Secretariat            Carry out some of the research
                        Identify and contract national consultants, research institutions and NGOs

 Overall:
 DFID (I)               Manage TC funds (contracted to a management consultant)
                        Contract in overseas consultants as and when agreed
                        Member of the Livelihoods Forum – Steering Group
                        Member of the Empowered Committee
 Empowered              1. Overall direction
 Committee              Dissemination of lessons on what works within GoMP
                        Agreement of annual budget and activities.
                        Agree amendment of guidelines




MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                                      79
     ANNEX 9: MILESTONES, MONITORING AND REVIEW OF
                     EFFECTIVENESS
 1.1.   MILESTONES

 1.1.1 As a process project and partnership between GoMP and DFID, it
 would be inappropriate to set detailed milestones in place. However, there are
 7 critical milestones, which line the pathway to achieving phase 1 outputs and
 against which quarterly tranches will be disbursed. A more detailed list of
 milestones would be produced by project management on an annual basis
 and agreed with the Empowered Committee and DFID and thereafter form a
 part of the monitoring system against which the project reports. The 7 initial
 milestones are:

Date (milestone           Milestone
achieved by end of
project month X)
PM 3                      Implementation Guidelines produced, field tested and revised
                          and training programme formulated
PM 3                      Rural Livelihoods Forum established and operational
PM 12                     Monitoring system operational, including a focus on quality of
                          participatory planning at village level and appropriateness of
                          interventions to poor people‟s needs
PM 12                     Rural Livelihoods Forum portfolio work balanced between
                          structural, economic, social and institutional impediments to
                          poverty reduction
PM 12                     Detailed mapping of capacity, systems and expertise
                          available at district level undertaken
PM 30                     Effectiveness report produced
PM 30                     Rural Livelihoods Forum has produced and effectively
                          disseminated ideas to policy makers and implementers

 1.1.2 Greater detail on what would be incorporated into these milestones is
 as follows:

 1.1.2.1 Implementation Guidelines produced, field-tested and revised and
 training programme formulated (PM 3)

 These will have guidelines for the three main levels at which the project will
 operate: the village, the district and the project as a whole.
 The contents will be as follows:
 Section
 1         Content of the programme
 2         Organisation and Administration
 3         Finance
           3.1        Accounting arrangements
           3.2        Flow of funds
           3.3        Delegation of powers

 MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                         80
4         Rights of communities
          4.1       Accountability
          4.2       Transparency


The processes which will go into achieving this milestone are as follows:

An abridged version of the Project document produced in Hindi and
disseminated to Ministers, MLAs and officials.
The guidelines will be drafted in Hindi, and disseminated to relevant
stakeholders.
These guidelines will be field tested, and revised based on feedback from
testing.
A training programme will be formulated to ensure understanding of the
guidelines.

1.1.2.2 Rural Livelihoods Forum established and operational (PM3)

The processes, which will contribute to achievement of this milestone include:

Establishing the Steering Group with appropriate individuals from key
secondary stakeholders represented.
Agree to ToR for the secretariat to Livelihoods Forum, and evaluate
proposals from suitable institutions within MP.
Agreeing to the institutional arrangements for the Forum, including
responsibilities of the Empowered Committee, the Steering Group, and the
Forum secretariat.
Empowered Committee reviews the approach and agenda developed by the
Steering Group, and identifies the target audience for the work.

1.1.2.3 Monitoring system operational, including a focus on quality of
participatory planning at village level and appropriateness of interventions to
poor people’s need (PM12)

A series of actions will be needed over the first year to ensure this milestone
is achieved. Examples include:

Capacity development for gram sabhas so that they can plan the
enhancement of poor people‟s livelihoods through watershed development,
forest-based activities, micro-enterprise development and other activities.
Pilot village micro-planning and livelihoods assessment.
Monitoring and evaluation system operational.

1.1.2.4 Rural Livelihoods Forum portfolio work balanced between structural,
economic, social and institutional impediments to poverty reduction (PM12)

Persistent poverty has many causes, among which are the various barriers to
effective public action for poverty reduction. In order to produce a balanced
analysis by the end of phase 1 the work initiated by the Forum needs to cover
the range of impediments, which are likely to prevent faster poverty reduction.

MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                       81
In order to ensure this it is likely that the expertise available to the Steering
Group will itself need to be balanced. This will have to be considered as the
Group is set up. In case there are lacunae in the membership, others with
specialist skills may be co-opted.

1.1.2.5 Detailed mapping of capacity, systems and expertise available at
district level undertaken (PM 12)
The district PMCs would commission a detailed mapping of resources,
capabilities and expertise available at the district and sub-district level, critical
for the success of the project. Based on the results of this mapping exercise
and subsequent analyses by PM12, the district would undertake capacity
building (of people at different levels of administration and institutions like,
PRIs, Gram Sabha and its committees) and development of systems to
enable the ZP to effectively utilize resources and to effectively respond to poor
people‟s livelihood opportunities. District level strategies for capacity building
and institutional development and progress with their implementation would
be agreed as a further milestone for PM 24.

1.1.2.6   Project Effectiveness Report produced (PM 30)

The project effectiveness report will set the scene for phase 2. It will need to
synthesise experience on the project as a whole to answer the question –
„what plausibly reduces rural poverty in MP?‟ It will assess the
appropriateness of the development and institutional strategies pursued by
the project, and the knowledge generated by the Livelihoods Forum about
what works to come to conclusions about the desirable approach for phase 2.
This would be an independent report, and would be commissioned in good
time to contribute to phase 2 design. Production of a useful effectiveness
report will depend, among other things, on:

The success of the Livelihoods Forum in getting good quality research
commissioned and delivered in good time
Success in analysing the results of the monitoring system

1.1.2.7 Livelihoods Forum has produced and effectively disseminated ideas to
policy makers and implementers (PM30)

This will be a critical indicator of project effectiveness, which the effectiveness
report will assess. Not only should the Livelihoods Forum produce its
products, but they need to be effectively disseminated and found useful by
policy makers and implementers, particularly inside GoMP, but also
conceivably in opinion formers in MP civil society, and also GoI or other all-
India level stakeholders. A consumer satisfaction survey would form a useful
part of the effectiveness study.

1.2.   PROJECT MONITORING

1.2.1 Information gathering requirements will be the responsibility of the
Project Co-ordinator, Districts and GVSs. An early project activity will be the
development of simple participatory monitoring systems at district and village

MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                             82
level. The MPRLP monitoring and review system would be designed to enable
project participants and Gram Sabha at the village-level, project management
departments in GoMP and DFID (I) to facilitate establishment of an effective
information system that:

 Includes baselines, project inputs and targeted outputs.
 Enables regular monitoring of project activities and financial targets.
 Promotes space for reflection, mid-course corrections and responding to
change required by ground realities.
 Reviews the performance of organisations involved in project
implementation and management in terms of project objectives, processes,
capacities and focus.
 Establishes effective links between the information system and decision-
making.
 Enables lesson learning from project implementation to feed into and
benefit from the Livelihoods Forum.
 Feeds into the end of phase 1 review of effectiveness as well as the end of
project evaluation.
 Assists in designing the second phase and feeds into project outcomes
and impacts.

1.2.2 It will operate at a variety of levels and use a number of approaches.
For example, it will include reporting of expenditure and activities carried out
using project funds at gram sabha meetings to increase transparency (e.g. via
Watershed Development Committees, JFM committees and Gram Sabha
committees). Monitoring and evaluation functions related to quality of
processes and outcomes would be contracted out to an appropriate
organisation, as in the case of DPIP.

1.2.3 Responsibility for the design and management of the MPRLP
monitoring and review system will be contracted out to an organisation with
appropriate skills. Guiding principles in design of the system will be that it is
based on providing information required by the various stakeholders in a
timely manner and of sufficient quality to allow them to make more effective
decisions. This will need to be balanced against a system that is cost-effective
and does not impose unreasonable reporting requirements upon
stakeholders.

1.2.4 As a basis for design of the system, indicative information requirements
are shown below. During design these would need to be assessed against the
real needs perceived by the stakeholders.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                         83
                       Information requirements for monitoring and review
Project level
Empowered
Committee/DFID         Project review through quarterly meetings:

                       Reports of Project Co-ordinator on overall progress in terms of
                       meeting the project objectives, milestones and financial targets.

                       Issues raised on project management, capacities for district
                       service delivery, inter-sectoral coordination issues and
                       implications arising from project implementation and Livelihoods
                       Forum for informing rural development/poverty reduction policies
                       and design and implementation of programmes, projects and
                       schemes.

Project Co-            Routine Project monitoring:
ordinator
                       Quarterly review reports submitted by Project Management
                       Committees on achievements, constraints and further
                       opportunities for district-level interventions and Gram Sabha level
                       interventions.

                       Quarterly meetings with Project Management Committees of
                       districts.

                       Project disbursements and expenditure (cash flows, audit)
                       Direction to the Project:

                       Recommendations/suggestions from minutes of the meetings of
                       the Empowered Committee.

                       Monthly reports from the Livelihoods Forum convenor and minutes
                       of the Steering Group.

                       Field visits to Project areas.

                       Assessments/review and research documents from the
                       Livelihoods Forum as well as from external agencies within and
                       outside MP.
                       Project review:

                       Participatory poverty assessments

                       Review of value added by the Livelihoods Forum to knowledge on
                       best practices, informing policy and design of programmes and
                       schemes.

                       Annual project reviews and mid-term review reports.


   MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                           84
                       Suggestions/recommendations of reviews/visits by DFIDI.

                       Externally commissioned reports and studies on the project.

District Project       Routine tracking of progress of Project activities at the District and
Management             Gram Sabha Levels:
Committees
                       Monthly group meetings with the village professionals.

                       Monthly meetings of the Project Facilitation Teams .

                       Monthly reports from affinity and user groups on village-level
                       interventions and from individuals/groups involved in district level
                       interventions.

                       Six monthly Project review meetings with groups and project
                       formulation teams to review and steer the progress of district-level
                       interventions as per the proposed objectives, suggest mid-course
                       corrections and identify inputs for further strengthening.

                       Field visits to projects sites for both village and district level
                       interventions.

                       Project disbursements and expenditure (cash flows, audit)

                       Annual Review of Project’s Focus:

                       Assessments of Gram Sabha and district level interventions for
                       parameters: pro-poor focus; livelihood outcomes; gender-
                       sensitivity; environmental impact;

                       Assessments of planning, implementation and management
                       capacities of affinity/ user groups and Gram Sabhas.

                       Reviews on capacities in district government for delivery of
                       relevant services and response to needs from Gram Sabhas and
                       groups.

                       Identification of policy constraints in Project implementation.

Gram Sabha
                       Routine Tracking of Progress and Review of Project:

                       Documentation of monthly self-monitoring by Groups with
                       assistance from the Committee of Social Justice and village
                       professionals for parameters – physical, financial, economic, pro-
                       poor, gender-sensitivity, livelihood outcomes, information, capacity
                       building, environmental impact, delivery of services by government

   MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                                85
                     and others.

                     Monthly reports submitted to Project Management Committee.

                     Six-monthly self-assessment report by groups.

                     Peer reviews

                     Livelihood stories by village professionals, members of groups and
                     others.

                     Annual Audit and Special Audit reports34 undertaken by the Gram
                     Sabha, review by the Village Development Committee for activities
                     of groups.



1.3.    THE PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS REPORT

1.3.1 During PY3 there will be an independent review of effectiveness
commissioned by the Livelihoods Forum Steering Group. This will be
commissioned early enough to ensure that the results can be fully
incorporated into the phase 2 design process. It will be an attempt to answer
the question – what plausibly reduces tribal poverty in Madhya Pradesh? After
two and half years the project will not have had a measurable impact on
poverty, but project and other experiences combined with the results of action-
research and research projects will enable an evidence-based design for
phase 2. This will be based on a range of policies, programmes and
measures, which together or in sequence can plausibly be argued to reduce
poverty. The effectiveness review will take account of and synthesise
information from all these sources, as well as evidence on what has worked in
contiguous areas of neighbouring states where poverty has been reduced
faster and where basic conditions may be similar. The study should be carried
out by a national level reputable organisation35 with international expertise (if
necessary), whose competence and conclusions have a strong chance of
acceptance by GoMP and DFID.

1.3.2 Detailed ToR would be drawn up in PY3 although there are some
specific issues, which can be anticipated:

 Whether micro-plans reflect poor people‟s needs/opportunities and are
being translated into action?
 Is there adequate flexibility in the use of funds at the village level to enable
the key drivers and maintainers of poverty to be addressed?


34
   As currently prescribed under the Madhya Pradesh Gram Sabha (Audit) Rules, 2001.
Special Audits are authorized by the Collector or any other person as may be authorized by
him/her.
35
   Jointly agreed to by both GoMP and DFID (I)

MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                                        86
 What constrains effective and flexible use of resources for poverty
reduction at village and district levels?
 What alternative arrangements might be less constraining?
 What works – judged in terms of interventions, which significantly reduce
rural poverty in the tribal context? How effective have the livelihoods
strategies been at:
         Generating employment and self-employment
         Improving productivity of existing resources
         Improving access to resources and services
         Improving information flows to poor households
 What else might work in addition to or better than what has been
attempted?
 What implications does this have for policy making and implementation at
state and GoI levels?
 What changes in programme effectiveness have occurred?
 What measures have been identified and taken to improve effectiveness of
planning, resource allocation, implementation, and financing?
 What further measures can be undertaken in future?
 Has the Livelihoods Forum built a platform capable of delivering insights
into the effectiveness of programme delivery and rural development policy?
 Have the Livelihoods Forum‟s findings been put to good use by the
GoMP?

1.3.3 The study would feed into the design process for phase 2, which
should occur in the last six months of PY3. The Livelihoods Forum, its
Steering Group and the project Empowered Committee would have a strong
hand in this design process.




MP Rural Livelihoods Project: Annexes                                   87

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:26
posted:2/6/2010
language:English
pages:87