IPP217, v2 Social Assessment Including Social Inclusion A study in the selected districts of Bihar Public Disclosure Authorized (Phase II report) Public Disclosure Authorized Rajeshwar Mishra Public Disclosure Authorized ASIAN DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE Public Disclosure Authorized PATNA OFFICE : BSIDC COLONY, OFF BORING PATLIPUTRA ROAD, PATNA - 800 013 PHONE : 2265649, 2267773, 2272745 FAX : 0612 - 2267102, E-MAIL : [email protected] RANCHI OFFICE : ROAD NO. 2, HOUSE NO. 219-C, ASHOK NAGAR, RANCHI- 834 002. TEL: 0651-2241509 1 2 PREFACE Following the completion of the first phase of the social assessment study and its sharing with the BRLP and World Bank team, on February 1, 2007 consultation at the BRLP office, we picked up the feedback and observations to be used for the second phase of study covering three more districts of Purnia, Muzaffarpur and Madhubani. Happily, the findings of the first phase of the study covering Nalanada,Gaya and Khagaria were widely appreciated and we decided to use the same approach and tools for the second phase as was used for the first phase. As per the ToR a detailed Tribal Development Project (TDP) was mandated for the district with substantial tribal population. Purnia happens to be the only district, among the three short listed districts, with substantial tribal (Santhal) population. Accordingly, we undertook and completed a TDP and shared the same with BRLP and the World Bank expert Ms.Vara Lakshnmi. The TDP was minutely analyzed and discussed with Vara, Archana and the ADRI team. Subsequently, the electronic version of the TDP has been finalized and submitted to Ms.Vara Lakshmi for expediting the processing of the same. During the discussion it was also suggested to integrate the findings of the second phase studies –Purnia, Muzaffarpur and Madhubani-and prepare an integrated report on social assessment. The second phase report is, therefore, an aggregation of the findings of all the six districts- Gaya,Nalanada,Khagaria,Muzaffarpur,Purnia and Madhubani. The second phase study has been a challenge as the districts were distantly located. The intervening period being March proved difficult considering the involvement of the officials in financial closure under their respective jurisdiction. They were, however, quite accommodative But for their encouragement, support and consistent follow-up the study would not have been possible. We would like to put on record our sincere sense of appreciation for the district and block level officials for their time especially in their attending the block level consultations. We are equally grateful to Ms. Vara Lakhmi from the World Bank, Delhi and Ms. Archana Tiwari, BRLP for their support and encouragement. Professional support was also supplemented by the faculty and team of researchers from ADRI-especially Prof.P.P.Ghosh, Prof.Shaibal Gupta, Mr. B.N Patnayak and Ms.Sunita Lall.I would like to thank all of them. The field work including participative exercises, institutional linkage, Block level consultations, analysis of the data and reporting were ably coordinated by Akhilesh Kumar and Rajeshwar Sharma, the two coordinators of the project. They put up their time, energy and intellectual endowment to test. They proved that they could achieve result even under trying situations. I 3 would like to congratulate them for their hard work, perseverance and sense of autonomy in taking crucial decisions. All the BDOs, Paramukhas, Mukiyas and other PRI functionaries, members and functionaries of the SHGs and cooperatives and civil society in the respective districts, where consultations were organized, responded warmly with their active participation. Their loud and clear voices enriched our understanding. We are grateful to them. In the end we pay our tribute to the people from the Dalit, and marginalized communities, especially women and members from the tribal communities, who defied all constraints and inhibitions and participated in the study. Several of them also attended the block level consultations and made their points listened and responded to. The project would be successful only if the issues and concerns expressed by them are further followed through and sincerely responded to. We salute them for their benevolence, pride and forthrightness in letting us learn the local nuances to be able to share the same with the world outside! We might not, however, be fully competent to do so for which we regret our inability and inaptness! Patna Rajeshwar Mishra The 10th of April , 2007 4 CONTENTS Preface Executive Summary i-iv Chapter – I 1.0 The Context 1 1.1 The poverty / trap-the nature of poverty 2-4 1.2 The entitlements 4-5 1.3 The divide and category 5 1.4 Institutional anchorage 5-6 1.5 Interventions 6 1.6 The village level plan : Plan for and by the Poor 6 1.7 Participative planning and action (PPA) 6 1.8 The emerging scenario 8 Chapter – II 2.0 The Bihar Rural Livelihood Project (BRLP) 9 2.1 The Project 9 2.2 The project's main components proposed are 9 2.3 Approach and strategies 10 2.4 Expected outcome 10 Chapter – III 3.0 The Social Assessment Study 11 3.1 Identify those sections of the Bihar.... 12 3.2 Major obstacles in preventing the poor from moving out of poverty 12 3.3 Constraints in mobilizing the poor 12 3.4 Institution of the vulnerable groups 12 3.5 Indicators of exclusion 12 3.6 Factor responsible for inclusion/exclusion of the poor from the existing… 12 3.7 Conflicts and types 12 3.8 Impact of conflict on the poor 12 3.9 Conflict mitigation mechanisms 12 3.10 Method 12 3.10.1 The approach 12 3.10.2 Sample 13 3.10.3 Coverage 13-15 5 3.10.4 Tools 15 3.10.5 Step 16 Chapter – IV 4.0 Result 17 4.1 The plan of the report 17 4.2 Who are the socially and economically marginalized and what are the 17-33 indicators 4.3 Institutions of the vulnerable groups 33-42 4.4 Factors responsible for the inclusion/exclusion from the existing 42-44 institutions 4.5 Constraints in mobilizing the poor 44-45 4.6 Major obstacles in preventing the poor from moving out of poverty 45-47 4.7 Conflict, type of conflict and its impact on the poor 47-48 4.8 The conflict resolution mechanisms available in the village 48 Chapter – V 5.0 Intervention suggested 49 5.1 Influencing and sensitizing the macro-micro environment 49-50 5.2 Institutional collaboration 50-51 5.3 Culturally compatible media campaign and effective communication 51-52 5.4 Sensitization an orientation to the project staff 52 5.5 Entry with the non-financial and neutral intermediations 52 5.6 Capacity building-compatible pedagogy and strategy 52-53 5.7 Process documentation as capacity building input 53 5.8 Participative monitoring and evaluation 53 5.9 Regular sharing of PME outcome among the stakeholders 53-54 5.10 Special interventions for the Mushahars 54-57 5.11 Special Plan for the Tribal Community 58 References 60 ANNEXURE 0.1 Annexure I : TOR of the Study 64 0.2 Annexure II : Profile of Mushar 65-66 0.3 Annexure III : Santhal in Purnea 67-68 0.4 Annexure IV : District Profile of Gaya 69 0.5 Annexure V : Block and Village profile of Bodh Gaya 70-80 6 0.4 Annexure VI : List of the participants of block level stake 81-82 holders consultation 0.5 Annexure VI : District profile of Kahagria 83 0.6 Annexure VIII: Block and village profile of Alauli 84-93 0.7 Annexure IX : District profile of Nalanda 94 0.8 Annexure X : Block and village profile of Harnaut 95-105 0.9 Annexure XI : List of the participants of block level stake 106-107 holders consultation 1.0 Annexure XII : District profile of Purnea 108-109 1.1 Annexure XIII : Block and Village profile of Dhamdaha 110-120 1.2 Annexure XIV : List of the participations of block level 121-123 consultation at Dhamdaha. 1.3 Annexure XV : District profile of Muzaffarpur 124-125 1.4 Annexure XVI : Block and village profile of Bochahan. 126-136 1.5 Annexure XVII: List of participants of blocklevel consultation 137-139 at Bochahan 1.6 Annexure XVIII: District profile of Madhubani 140-141 1.7 Annexure XIX : Block and village profile of Rajnagar 142-155 1.8 Annexure XX : List of the participants of block level consultation 156-158 at Rajnagar. 7 SOCIAL ASSESSMENT INCLUDING SOCIAL INCLUSION STUDY REPORT Executive Summary The first phase study report on social assessment and social inclusion has been an opportunity for us, at ADRI, to sharpen our appreciation of the dynamics and mechanism of exclusion/ inclusion as indicators of poverty and deprivation. The feed back from among the professionals and the official proved very useful. We fine tuned the tools and approaches and proceeded for the second phase study in the rest of the districts-Purnia, Muzaffarpur and Madhubani. To begin with we agreed to concentrate on the six identified districts where the BRLP is planned for implementation based on a spatial analysis of poverty (also done by ADRI) in different clusters of Bihar against agreed indicators. Subsequently, we located our study in Khagaria, Gaya and Nalanda Districts in the first phase followed by Purnia, Muzaffarpur and Madhubani in the second phase. One administrative block in each of the identified districts were jointly finalized with the BRLP professionals and authorities. Subsequently, seven blocks namely Alauli (Khagaria), Bodh Gaya (Gaya),Harnaut (Nalanda),Dhamadaha(Purnia), Bochaha(Muzaffarpur) and Rajnagar and Jaynagr(Madhubani) were identified and selected. In each of the blocks we further identified three villages according to the demographic dominance of different caste groups.