27 April 2008
Rural Poverty Alleviation Through Infrastructure Development
This is perpetuated by the implicit assumption that the responsibility of providing basic and other services to the common citizen is entirely the State’s. To alleviate poverty in rural areas, much government expenditure had been directed to this end in the name of poor. Almost all infrastructure development activities in rural India had, over the past decades, been taken over by the governments- central, state or local as the case may be; yet the impact had not been substantial. The benefits of economic growth had not yet reached the millions of the poor and neglected Indian masses. The class elites in politics had not facilitated as much interest shown on those capitalists as the needy. Both the economic pressure of the international finance institutions and a weak domestic economic system had warranted a changed role of the administrative system. In brief, the capital path has succeeded in modernizing the economy but it has also led to deepening the crisis in the domestic governance.
Rural infrastructure is implicitly linked to agriculture and it is well known and accepted that an inadequate rural infrastructure has been a bottleneck for the efficient commercialization for agriculture. Indian farmers are by and large competitive in terms of production costs but face grave disadvantages ensue from poor provision of infrastructure.
Some studies have expressed disquiet over dealing adequate investment in agriculture resulting in lack of optimum development of this sector. In order to promote the agriculture sector with a much needed boost, the union government must give tax incentives to rural infrastructure projects such as warehousing, cold storage and others. Today the government is not taking as much interest in providing funds for infrastructure development in agriculture sector in rural as being sown in urban development with massive investments in cities. Since a significant portion of growth in economic activity is in urban areas, it would be unwise to neglect them. Furthermore, no nation has so far developed in a manner that keeps more than two-thirds of its people in rural areas. While it is necessary to concentrate on rural development, it would be utopian to believe that development can be achieved without being accompanied by a large increase in the share of urban population.
Infrastructure development in rural would reduce poverty and improve human well-being as much as directly funded poverty amelioration programme. A paradigm shift is called for to completely overthrow the existing ways of doing things and put in place a more dynamic process of ensuring solutions rather than attempting to convince the society with speculative activities. A study conducted by the Asian Institute of Transport Development has revealed that incidence of poverty is lower than that of the villages situated farther away from the National Highway. Despite the government’s repeated lip-service of setting up beyond the monsoons infrastructure, 60% of the country’s cultivated land still depends heavily on good monsoons for a good output. Agriculture sector should be given much importance as this sector alone can provide gainful employment to millions of people in the country.
The high global prices for food staples, edible oil, pulses and horticulture produce have impacted local prices. Government’s policy on the farm front has a key role to play in the farmer’s decision to sow crops and to what extent.
There are a large number of opportunities for private finance infrastructure in delivering urban services and building and maintaining infrastructure in urban areas. The nature of many of these services would also permit a much more intensively commercial role for the private sector. The increase of rural infrastructure funding would help alleviate the burden on urban areas by boosting developments in rural areas and thereby reducing migration to the urban areas and the burden on urban infrastructure.