Garibi Hatao': Improving Implementation Mukul Sanwal HOW can the anti-poverty programme be made more effective? Following Nilkanth Rath [Rath, 1985], a number of articles have appeared highlighting the shortcomings of the IRDP. They, however, ignore two important points regarding the essentials of the programme. Firstly, the shortcomings in the choice of beneficiaries are not uniform. Rath quotes from a recent survey [N A BARD, 1984] that misclassification is less than one per cent in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Orissa; half the nation's poor are in these states. Secondly, the choice of the major activity is sound; studies [PEO, 1974-75] have shown that the incremental income from dairying is about 45 per cent of the loans advanced. The alternative strategy suggested by Rath, of wage employment through the NREP and RLEGP, also suffers from distortions [Dantwala, 1985]. Those with land both determine the schemes and their location and also benefit disproportionately from them [PEO, 1980], backward areas and groups are not adequately covered [Hirway, 1985], and the quality of the work is patchy. This is not to say that such programmes have no relevance. There is need for massive social forestry on common lands [Sanwal, 1983]. The point needs to be stressed that either strategy programme, the institutional arrangements adopted largely determine the outcomes. Since all are agreed that the magnitude and extent of poverty is such that its alleviation will need a multi- pronged attack, the critical issue is not the strategy options but implementation.
