Independent academic research Academic research has focused on many dimensions of the NREGA: economic security, self-targeting, women's empowerment, asset creation, corruption, how the scheme impacts agricultural wages. An early overall assessment in 2008 in six north Indian states suggested that NREGA was "making a difference to the lives of the rural poor, slowly but surely." The composition of NREGA workers included the poorest and socially and economically deprived. A majority of them belong to
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, are illiterate and do not have electricity at home. Agricultural wages have increased, especially for women, since the inception of the scheme. This indicates that overall wage levels have increased due to the act, however, further research highlights that the key benefit of the scheme lies in the reduction of wage volatility. This highlights that NREGA may be an effective insurance scheme. A particular focus has been to understand whether the scheme has reduced migration into urban centres for casual work. Studies have suggested that women's participation has remained high, though there are inter-state variations. One study in border villages of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat studied the effect on short term migration and child welfare and found that among children who do not migrate, grade completed is higher. The study found that demand for NREGA work is higher, even though migrant wages are higher. A few studies focusing on the potential for asset creation under NREGA suggest that (a) the potential is substantial; (b) in some places, it is being realized, and (c) lack of staff, especially technical staff, rather than lack of material are to blame for poor realization of this potential. Others have pointed out that water harvesting and soil conservation works promoted through NREGA "could have high positive results on environment security and biodiversity and environment conservation". A study conducted by researchers at the
Indian Institute of Science and other collaborators found that activities related to natural resource management under the MGNREGA can capture 249 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2030. India has placed emphasis on MGNREGA as a contributor to
carbon sequestration in its Third Biennial Update Report submitted to the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2021. Improvements in reducing corruption are attributable to the move to pay NREGA wages through bank and post office accounts. Some of the success in battling corruption can also be attributed to the strong provisions for community monitoring. Others find that "the overall social audit effects on reducing easy-to-detect malpractices was mostly absent". A few papers also study the link between electoral gains and implementation of NREGA. One studies the effect in Andhra Pradesh - the authors find that "while politics may influence programme expenditure in some places and to a small extent, this is not universally true and does not undermine the effective targeting and good work of the scheme at large." The two other studies focus on these links in Rajasthan and West Bengal. Several local case studies are also being conducted to identify the regional impacts of NREGA.
Assessment by the constitutional auditor The second performance audit by the
Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India covered 3,848
gram panchayats (GPs) in 28
states and 4
union territories (UTs) from April 2007 to March 2012. This comprehensive survey by the CAG documents lapses in implementation of the act. The main problems identified in the audit included: a fall in the level of employment, low rates of completion of works (only 30.3 per cent of planned works had been completed), poor planning (in one-third of Gram Panchayats, the planning process mandated by the act had not been followed), lack of public awareness partly due to poor information, education and communication IEC) by the state governments, shortage of staff (e.g., Gram Rozgar Sewaks had not been appointed in some states) and so on. Not withstanding the statutory requirement of notification, yet five states had not even notified the eight-years-old scheme. The comprehensive assessment of the performance of the law by the constitutional auditor revealed serious lapses arising mainly due to lack of public awareness, mismanagement and institutional incapacity. The CAG also suggested some corrective measures. Even though the mass social audits have a statutory mandate of Section 17 (As outlined in Chapter 11 of the NREGA Operational Guidelines), only seven states have the institutional capacity to facilitate the social audits as per prescribed norms. Although the Central Council is mandated to establish a central evaluation and monitoring system as per the NREGA Operational Guidelines, even after six years it is yet to fulfill the NREGA directive. Further, the CAG audit reports discrepancies in the maintenance of prescribed basic records in up to half of the
gram panchayats (GPs) which inhibits the critical evaluation of the NREGA outcomes. The unreliability of
Management Information System (MIS), due to significant disparity between the data in the MIS and the actual official documents, is also reported. To improve management of outcomes, it recommended proper maintenance of records at the
gram panchayat (GP) level. Further the Central Council is recommended to establish a central evaluation and monitoring system for "a national level, comprehensive and independent evaluation of the scheme". The CAG also recommends a timely payment of unemployment allowance to the rural poor and a wage material ratio of 60:40 in the NREGA works. Moreover, for effective financial management, the CAG recommends proper maintenance of accounts, in a uniform format, on a monthly basis and also enforcing the statutory guidelines to ensure transparency in the disposal of funds. For capacity building, the CAG recommends an increase in staff hiring to fill the large number of vacancies. For the first time, the CAG also included a survey of more than 38,000 NREGA beneficiaries. An earlier evaluation of the NREGA by the CAG was criticized for its methodology.
Evaluation by the government The Prime Minister of India
Manmohan Singh released an
anthology of research studies on the MGNREGA called "MGNREGA Sameeksha" in New Delhi on 14 July 2012, about a year before the CAG report.
Aruna Roy and
Nikhil Dey said that "the MGNREGA Sameeksha is a significant innovation to evaluate policy and delivery". Minister of Rural Development
Jairam Ramesh says in the 'MGNREGA Sameeksha': Proponents of the scheme enumerate number of benefits. For example,
Rejaul Karim Laskar, an ideologue of the
Congress party- the largest constituent of the
UPA Government which introduced the scheme, claimed that the scheme has multifarious benefits including "reduction in poverty, reduction in migration, women empowerment, improvement of productivity of agricultural land and regeneration of water resources".
Social audit Civil society organisations (CSOs),
nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), political representatives, civil servants and workers of
Rajasthan and
Andhra Pradesh collectively organise social audits to prevent corruption under the NREGA. As the corruption is attributed to the secrecy in governance, the 'Janasunani' or public hearing and the
right to information (RTI), enacted in 2005, are used to fight this secrecy. Official records obtained using RTI are read out at the public hearing to identify and rectify irregularities. "This process of reviewing official records and determining whether state reported expenditures reflect the actual monies spent on the ground is referred to as a social audit." Participation of informed citizens promotes collective responsibility and awareness about entitlements. A continuous process of social audit on NREGA works involves public vigilance and verification at the stipulated 11 stages of implementation: registration of families; distribution of job cards; receipt of work applications; selection of suitable public works; preparation of technical estimates; work allocation; implementation and supervision; payment of wages; payment of unemployment allowance; evaluation of outcomes; and mandatory social audit in the Gram Sabha or Social Audit Forum. The Gram Panchayat Secretary is designated as the authority responsible for carrying out the social audit at all stages. For some stages, the programme officer and the junior engineer is also responsible along with Sarpanch. The statute designates the Gram Sabha meetings held to conduct social audit as the 'Social Audit Forums' and spells out three steps to make them effective: publicity and preparation of documents; organizational and procedural aspects; and the mandatory agenda involving questions verifying compliance with norms specified at each of the 11 stages of implementation. An application under the
RTI to access relevant official documents is the first step of the social audit. Then the management personnel of the social audit verify these official records by conducting field visits. Finally, the 'Janasunani' or public hearing is organised at two levels: the
Panchayat or village level and the
Mandal level. The direct public debate involving the beneficiaries, political representatives, civil servants and, above all, the government officers responsible for implementing the NREGA works highlights corruption like the practice of rigging muster rolls (attendance registers) and also generates public awareness about the scheme. These social audits on NREGA works in Rajasthan highlight: a significant demand for the scheme, less than 2 per cent corruption in the form of fudging of muster rolls, building the water harvesting infrastructure as the first priority in the drought-prone district, reduction of out-migration, and above all the women participation of more than 80 per cent in the employment guarantee scheme. The need for effective management of tasks, timely payment of wages and provision of support facilities at work sites is also emphasised. To assess the effectiveness of the mass social audits on NREGA works in Andhra Pradesh, a
World Bank study investigated the effect of the social audit on the level of public awareness about NREGA, its effect on the NREGA implementation, and its efficacy as a grievance redressal mechanism. The study found that the public awareness about the NREGA increased from about 30 per cent before the social audit to about 99 per cent after the social audit. Further, the efficacy of NREGA implementation increased from an average of about 60 per cent to about 97 per cent. In 2014 a large number of localities did not conduct NREGA social audits. Social audits have been found lacking in terms of quality and retrievability.
Wages Wage transfer processes in relation to NREGA have undergone significant changes since its initial implementation. In 2011/2016, the wage payment method was shifted to the National electronic Fund Management System (Ne-FMS), a
Direct Benefit Transfer system. The Consumer Price Index-Agriculture Labour (CPI-AL) now provides a guide to fixing MGNREGA wages. The scheme has resulted in an increase in the growth rate of wages when the initial pre and post NREGA years are considered. As of 2019, the wages are less than the minimum wages in a majority of states and union territories. Since 2009 wages stipulated under MGNREGA are disconnected from wages determined by the
Minimum Wages Act. There has been some debate with regard to comparison between the two wages. One day is considered as 9 hours of work with one hour of rest. Payment is on a
piece work basis. In addition to expanding the transparency of the scheme via digitization, Strong increases in the minimum wage improved the plan. As was previously mentioned in section II, the previous salaries had resulted in a lack of desire among employees and harmed the caliber of work completed under the program. As a result, the minimum wage was raised by 10% to Rs. 169 per day as part of the 2014 programs. Even though the rise was not significant, it greatly increased the motivation of low-income rural workers, encouraging them to enter the labor field. These are also affected by "last mile" issues. While the scheme stipulates 100 days, in practice the average is around 45 days.
Asset creation Assets created include rural connectivity assets such as pucca roads and brick soling, land development assets which improve productivity of land such as the creation of new plantations, unskilled construction such as poultry shelters, cattle shelters and fish drying yard platform. Water-related assets include village tanks and ponds, check dams, water harvesting tanks, bunding, irrigation channels, renovation of existing water assets. Infrastructure construction also includes sanitation works and grain storage facilities. The act also provides for maintenance of created assets. Asset creation varies widely between states with five states accounting for a majority of the assets. The focus of MNREGA has also shifted to quality of assets and skilling workers to map assets. Over the last decade, it has been observed that more than half the NREGA funds have been spent on water related projects. This was very much needed because water bodies have been shrinking, especially in rural India. India became a water deficient nation 5 years ago, and every year since then, the water level has shrunk further. Though over Rs 20,000 crores under MGNREGA has been spent each year during the last decade on developing rural water bodies, wells, aquifers, catchment areas, etc, these were not permanent assets.
Convergence There has been increasing rationale for convergence of MNREGA with other government schemes. Assets created under the act have been converged with aligning assets from other schemes such as housing and sanitation schemes.
Member of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme was converged in 2012. Trekking trails have been planned in Himachal Pradesh. Convergence calls for greater inter-department cooperation. While convergence has been seen as a way to save resources, at the same time it weakens income means for those availing the scheme. This has been projected by a section of analysts as a reflection of rural distress intensifying. == Subsequent developments ==