Development programmes for the poor: do strategies make a difference?

Abstract

Special progranmmes for the 'weaker sectvdns' of the poputlation have fouincd cani imiportant plicce inl the Five-Year Plans since the Sevien2ties. The increased plant allocationis for these prograinnmcs -were a re sponse to the growing criticism that beniefits of eco. ;'omic progress vere ntot reachingc the poor. The n&ti4or promnise of these programmnes is that benzefits wvill flow to the wveaker sections beccause of thle specificity of the target grouzps aoid of the activities chosen. The performcanice of the differenit programizmes for the w eaker sectionts, however, s;eemis to hcave vcaried a oreat dec41 tlhou,gh their :ntentit)-ons wvere sinilar. This leads Ius to a significant quCestionI: unider what concdi lionls do benefits of derelopmnent prograzmmes flow to the weaker sections? The pit)'pose uf this paper is to address this issute in a preliminiary fashioni through an. investigation of the experienices of eighit programmnn !.S (1) Sm))all Fartmzers Developm)lenit Agenicy, (2) Marginal Farmers and/ Agricultutral Labourers Programzme, (3) Antyodaya, (4) Drought Pronte Areas Proguranmmne, (5) Crash Schem2e for- Rur. l Emnploymnent, (6) Empk,yntent Guarlatee Schemze, (7) Food for Work, anwd (8) Operation VVhile !he primairy focA10us of the paper is oni thesv e progri-ammiiiies, smppleinentary evidenice fr/)on thle ex)erienice of other prv-ogramnmes related to those undcler review is also presetitecl anl, where directliz rele vvnt, lessonis fro)77 the positive or negative effect of changes in other programnnes are (discussed).