In terms of livelihood and development- public works programs are both good development and good politics.

South Asia has a history of public works- many structures were developed as public work prior to the British rule. At present, Nepal has several public works programs based on both cash and food. In the remote and intractable hill districts (known by the omnibus category of the “Karnali Zone”) the government implements a food for work program, for which the World Food Program delivers food. There are similar programs in southern Nepal.

Bangladesh similarly has a long history of both food and cash based public works programs. Its success in dealing with the chronic floods and cyclones is well known, but lesser known is the fact that public works programs have come to the rescue of households who have been hit by these disasters. Sri Lanka is considering similar interventions for its internally displaced persons. Bangladesh’s 100 Day Employment Program was evaluated independently by BRAC and the World Bank. The results have been very encouraging, showing reasonably good targeting of the poorest and efficient delivery of the program. Building on the experience of the 100 Day Employment Generation Program the Government of Bangladesh is now implementing the Employment Generation Program for the Poorest (EGPP), a cash-based workfare program. (http://blogs.worldbank.org/endpovertyinsouthasia/employment-programs-any-other-name).

Development around public works can be an important way to develop rural infrastructure. Paved roads, clean ponds, watersheds, canals, developed fisheries, grain banks, seed banks, storage facilities, the possibilities of the things that can be undertaken through public works are wide. These can be livelihood generation programs, anti-poverty program, safety net initiatives; land improvement programs, disaster management programs and so on. However, the business at usual approach persists. In the absence of strong rural civil society, there is just not enough pressure to perform. While initiatives like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Generation Scheme provide the platform to undertake a wide variety of programs, the opportunities have not been optimized in many parts of the countries.

While the program might appear as civil society driven and entitlement approach based, the role of the wider civil society is rather limited. The program is yet to be ‘owned’ by the groups working across the rural belts- that has unfortunately not happened. Performance of the widely acclaimed measures like citizen monitoring and social audits mandated twice a year have been uneven across states- while some have done remarkably good work backed up with insightful reflection (for example Rajasthan  -http://rdprd.gov.in/PDF/Implementation%20of%20NREGA-8.10.08.ppt )  others are still struggling with finding work against job cards issued (for example, West Bengal-www.ansiss.org/doc/seminar2007July20-22/jean_dreze.doc). In general, the demand of public works programs far outweighs the supply. Unless these issues are addressed, the opportunities offered by the program would remain grossly underutilized- and the marriage of politics and development would not happen.

Do you think that Public Work can work as a development strategy?