The participation of women in the
National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) programmes is an
important intervention towards women’s empowerment as it provides them,
often for the first time, an independent source of income and
livelihood. In many instances, NREGA is also the only source of
livelihood available to women close to the vicinity of their villages.
It is not surprising therefore, that women have come out in large
numbers to take part in this programme. While official statistics
estimate around 50 per cent participation by women on average across
the country, in some States, like Tamil Nadu, it is as high as 80 per
cent.
Even in Uttar Pradesh, which showed very poor response in the first
year, the numbers are gradually going up. In a State where women have
virtually no income-earning opportunities of their own, being able to
earn Rs. 100 a day at their doorstep is an unprecedented opportunity.
Across the country, women working on NREGA are able to articulate in
very clear terms the benefits they derive from the scheme. From the
simple pleasure of being able to buy a gift for a grand child to
investing in a chit fund to acquiring the confidence of operating a
bank account, there can be no doubt that NREGA has opened up a whole
vista of possibilities for women hitherto unavailable to them.
Disturbing
However, these statistics hide some disturbing aspects of the
participation of single women as was brought out by a recent survey of
NREGA in Jhalawar district, Rajasthan. The category of single women
constitutes a separate social unit in its own right. But in the NREGA,
these women are being systematically excluded by not being issued
separate job cards. Without a separate job card they are forced to be
dependent on other family members and subject themselves to various
forms of exploitative arrangements. In effect therefore, the full
benefits of independence and empowerment that employment could bring
are not being realised by this section of women.
According to the NREGA, “all members of a family related to each other
by blood, marriage, or adoption and normally residing together and
sharing meals or holding a common ration card” are included in the
definition of a household [Section 2(f) of the Act]. On the one hand,
this definition extends beyond the standard definition of family by
including adoption but on the other hand it leaves out some important
configurations, especially related to single women. The Operational
Guidelines have tried to streamline this definition by using the
concept of nuclear family interpreted as father, mother and their
children and “any person wholly or substantially dependent on the head
of the household”. Further, the guidelines have added “single member
families” as also eligible to be treated as a household.
Damaging
However, there is a tension not only between the Act and the Guidelines
but also within the Guidelines. In particular, the inclusion of
“dependents” in the basic definition of the nuclear family inhibits the
realisation of the category of single member households, with women as
head of the household. Single women in rural areas are almost
invariably dependent on others — typically male members of their
family, because they are unable to secure an independent means of
livelihood for themselves. Hence, by explicitly including “dependents”
within the definition of a nuclear family, women are being de facto
forced into that category. In practice therefore, the current
definition perpetuates the patriarchal norm of male-headed households.
Single women include not just single, un-married women, but divorced,
separated, abandoned and widowed women as well. While widows,
constituting roughly 10 per cent of the female population in rural
areas, have been recognised as a highly disadvantaged demographic
group, the category of divorced and abandoned women is not
insubstantial either as became evident in the Jhalawar survey. They
too, represent a highly distressed group with few, if any, social
security options. In many instances, married women are forced to return
to their parental home, often with their children and have to fend for
themselves. Being separated or divorced or even abandoned, they do not
get recognition as a separate household and become reliant on their
father or brother. For instance, Janibai of Gharbholia Panchayat was
simply thrown out when she gave birth to a girl child. Denied a
separate job card, she has been forced to work on the card of her
brother without the full benefit of a hundred days of work. In addition
she is unable to use the wages earned by her as she has to hand them
over to her brother. The story of Kalyanibai of Chandipur Panchayat is
similar. Living in her father’s house for the last 15 years with her
daughter, she can work only on her father’s job card. In her case, she
would like a separate job card for herself and her daughter so that
they can sustain themselves as a credible and viable family unit. There
are important implications here for empowerment of women, especially in
difficult family relationships as access to a separate income would
provide them with a viable source of livelihood and thus the option of
extricating themselves from unhappy circumstances. In particular, it
would go a long way in challenging the patriarchal norm of male-headed
households, giving women the opportunity to live with dignity and
independence.
Don’t deny the lifeline
A potential problem is the difficulty in making a distinction between
women who are single, un-married and those who are married but not
living in their marital home. For women who move back to their parental
home the case is often made that they might return to their marital
home and thus to their husband’s job card. In other words, a temporary
return does not qualify for a separate job card. But does it matter? In
any case the women would not be able to work on two job cards in two
separate places at the same time. Even if they end up getting a new one
in their parental home and then return to their marital home, only one
or the other would apply. On the other hand, having the option of
separate livelihood devoid of marital dependency would go a long way in
putting them in a position of strength which is so often lacking for
women in difficult marital situations. While it is being increasingly
recognised that NREGA is the sole source of income for many women in
rural areas, for single women it is a potential lifeline. Without it
they are in effect being denied the right to live with dignity and
independence.
Left out: Single women
households are family too.
The issue of intra-household exploitation applies to another category
of single women, i.e., widows living with married sons. After the death
of their spouse, one of the sons usually becomes the head of the
household and the widowed mother becomes dependent on him. More often
than not, old people, especially women, are being treated as a
liability and in many instances become victims of neglect, abuse and
even abandonment. Without a separate source of livelihood, they have no
choice but to be dependent on another household. Evidence from Jhalawar
confirms that many women in these circumstances would benefit greatly
from having a separate card and not be at the mercy of their kin.
Finally, adult un-married women should also be entitled to a separate
job card allowing them the freedom and dignity to live on their own.
Coherent definition
The imminent extension of NREGA to the whole of rural India (on April
1, 2008) makes it imperative to formulate a coherent and appropriate
definition of the household, and to incorporate it in the Act as well
as in the Guidelines. The current definition in the Act leaves a lot of
scope for interpretation resulting in certain categories of adults
being left out. Unfortunately, the Guidelines do not address the needs
of single women either. Since deeply entrenched patriarchal norms tend
to influence the interpretation of both definitions it might be useful
to make an explicit provision for single women. In a scenario where
their identities are linked to male relatives, the possession of a job
card goes a long way in giving them a sense of themselves as
individuals and not tied to a male dominated social unit. This became
evident in the repeated pleas from single women across Jhalawar, who
said simply: just get us a separate job card.
http://www.hindu.com/mag/2008/03/16/stories/2008031650040200.htm
Copyright © 2008, The Hindu
