The Madhya Pradesh experience of BPL census

BPL survey: Unlimited questions

Sachin Kumar Jain

The unjust indicators
Residing in a hut in the village Ghandila of Seoni district in Madhya Pradesh is Halki Bai an abandoned tribal woman. She works as a labourer and earns a meager amount of Rs.15/- per day. For this she has to struggle hard and manages to get work for just around 8 days in a month. In an accident she got wounded and the treatment turned her into a debtor of Rs. 31, 000/-. Being landless and with no alternate source of income she stays in very miserable condition. Upon all these factors the biggest surprise and irony is that she scored 19 points out of the total of 52 points in the BPL Survey which automatically excluded her from the BPL category and placed her in the category of the rich. Similar is the situation with Rajjo Bai, the widow of village Pottia. The earlier survey list had enlisted Rajjo Bai in the BPL category and had been availing the much required benefits of government schemes and antodaya scheme but according to the recent survey she no longer belongs to the BPL category. In this survey she scored 17 points and with the tentative Cut off being 13 for Seoni district, poor and unfortunate Rajjo Bai stands out of the BPL list for no fault of her.

This is not just the story of Halki Bai or Rajjo Bai but of 10 lakh marginalized and vulnerable families in the state of Madhya Pradesh who are facing the opera of discrimination. And have been excluded from the Below Poverty Line list because of irrelevant and inhuman indicators and the non-committal process of survey. From an in-depth study by the Democratic Alliance Campaign for Good Governance in coordination with ActionAid (Bhopal) confirms that proving to be poor, has been a tough battle for the real poor while an easy one for the non-poor, further the motive to reduce burden to the possible extent, the government has already decided the results in advance without completing the entire process decided for identifying poor. Thus the parameters fixed and the process undertaken to identify the poor has become quite questionable. The process of BPL survey primarily involved a questionnaire of 13 questions (indicators), each question has 5 options, to which 0 to 4 points were allotted. Further, to this the state identifies 37.43% people who have derived minimum points and consider them to be as those poor people who can be taken in the BPL list.

On analysis of the indicators one realizes the irrelevant perceptions it is based upon, it is understood that size of land holding is considered as an important indicator; but quality of the land is the additional factor which provides weightage to this indicator and unfortunately this aspect has been totally ignored. While going through the two years study conducted by the alliance of Civil Society Organisation in the state of Madhya Pradesh and is purely a people centered effort, to ensure effective survey, it was realized that 58% families from the villages covered in the study feel that productivity of land is more important than the total landholding. For example- Sambu, a Korku adivasi (tribal) of Rayatvadi village of Betul district was given 18 points in the survey for possessing 3 acres of hilly, unirrigated, stony and unproductive land thus making him overqualified for being in the BPL list.

In the last five years, the Government of Madhya Pradesh has implemented various developmental schemes and sanitation campaign in which 10 lakh toilets were constructed in the villages by contributing Rs.650/- for construction of each. Now this survey considers toilet as an indicator, due to which all those poor families who had constructed toilets under the government’s scheme received 3 to 4 points which ultimately increased their total points. Thus availing benefit of a scheme which is again non-productive in nature has proved to be a curse for these families. Further, type of house is another indicator which has become a woe for the poor. Families having pucca houses earned more points; no care was taken to address the issue of those pucca houses which were actually built under the Indira Awas Yojana which provides poor families with Rs.20,000/- for construction of house in mere 20 square meters. Again, all Indira Awas Yojana supported is expected to have a toilet in built, thus the poor family who availed the benefit of a government scheme to have a shelter looses on the BPL survey aspect by earning more points for both having a pucca house and toilet too. During the discussion with the community at the time of the study, it was realized that as the scheme was target oriented the beneficiaries were under pressure of completing the construction and in several cases the families have had to sell of their land, bullocks and other assets. Further, due to corruption they did not even get the entire allotted amount. This raises the question of the basis on which a family can be considered above BPL if it has benefited from Indira Awas Yojana. It is obvious that this scheme is not giving any regular or productive returns nor is a source of income. Hence, it is essential to further analyse the indicator of pucca house and differentiate between a house built through Indira Awas Yojana and a pucca house built by the family themselves.

Ruddi adivasi of Duni village of Betul district used to migrate and work as agriculture laborer, looking at his poor status he was donated with 7 pair of cloths two years back by his employer, which he still possesses. But this gift turned against him during the BPL survey. Possession of this many number of clothes made him a non-poor man as per the survey schedule which includes clothes as one of the indicators and in the gambit Ruddi got 18 points and got excluded from the list. As per the government norms family possessing more than four pair of clothes is not considered as poor. In this regard every villager and sensitive person who believes in humanity has criticized and opposed this criterion. The reason behind this is that during the times of any festival or ceremony poor families are rewarded with cloths by the upper class (rich) families and in addition the poor also go to the extent of taking loans from local money lenders for purchase of clothes for festivals which pushes them into the vicious cycle of povety. Thus possessing clothes seem to be an improper indicator to measure family well-being. Similarly, the analysts while defining poverty has given importance to food availability – this indicator focuses on the number of the times the family avails food, whether the family gets food for one time or gets two square meals; however the quality and nutritional aspect of food has been totally ignored. Even the means of livelihood which is an important indicator linked with food intake has been completely ignored. For example a person may fill his belly by begging, eating from garbage or thrown food, prostitution, or by manual scavenging. Thus as per the analysis a person who avail food is straight away earns 4 points.

Although landless adivasi Ram Prasad of Semori panchayat (Betul) has no resources for his survival, possessing a cycle and radio and sending his two sons to school has deprived him from being included in the BPL list. Looking to the present circumstances any person earning Rs. 1000/- can purchase a radio of Rs.100/-, TV and cycle of Rs.800/-, but possession of these items have cost the poor families by earning of an additional 3-4 points. In the new definition of development it is easy to have consumer able items. One can have sales promotion schemes for Television, Radio or Computer which provides easy means to possess these items by the person but the toughest job of life is to arrange for food, and particularly for the marginalized families and children. In the case of education and children going to school, it is quite obvious that presently there is an increase in the number of school going children and this majorly due to the promotional aspects linked with the school like the midday meal scheme. This has encouraged quite a number of poor families to send their children to school. Another aspect regarding education which has reflected during the survey is the belief that an educated person cannot be poor. This perspective has led to the loss for several poor families who have unemployed and educated persons in their families, by getting rewarded with 3-4 points. In relation to earnings (occupation) for livelihood, government believes that skilled workers have secured and regular jobs and so they and the other category of wage-earners (government and private jobs) have been given the same weightage.

In this survey a puzzling question is asked regarding the kind of government help needed by the poor people? This question has equally confused the enumerators and the community. The community thought that the government is willing to extent loan support to them and this prompted them to answer in expectation to availing of loan. The larger the amount requested the lesser the points earned. This led to several disqualification of several genuinely poor families from the BPL list in a very different manner – the poor did not expect nor did have the capacity to ask and then repay the loan amount hence they did not request for any leading to the assumption to that non-requirement of loan means self sufficiency and hence not to be included in the BPL list as they earned more points (3-4 points) for this pseudo sufficiency. Neither the government nor the Department of Rural Development has conducted any study on how the villagers are trapped in the clutches of the credit machineries functioning in the rural areas. Thus those who have taken loans from banks were considered rich and given 3 points, but the ground reality is that the banks have distributed maximum loan in the tribal area; but still not much change have been noticed in the poverty status of the region. In Petelavad block of Jabhua district, banks have distributed loans of around Rs.12 crores in the last three years and now most of the tribals have been declared as defaulters and these loans are being repaid by selling off their land, houses or other assets. Thus one who does not have loan is rich, however on another hand one who is very poor does not borrow loans because there is no one ready to give him.

Thus in this context a very pertinent question arise on whether there is a possibility of an effective process for identification of the poor? Undoubtedly, the possibilities are certainly there but only if the criteria are fixed on humanitarian basis. In the present context it is clearly felt that the government for showing success of its developmental programs like construction of toilets, implementation of Indira Awas Yojana and campaign on education is trying to portray that these programs have been successful in eradicating in rural areas and people have become self-sufficient. Besides, the state has also failed to set a norm to put a control on those non-eligible persons who have managed to get included in the list and fix any criteria for punishment for such persons thus discouraging any such endeavors. Thus even though everyone has fulfilled assigned responsibilities there is a sincere need to be more sensitive else such tokenism would land a genuinely poor family far away from the benefits and would further slip into the abyss of poverty never being able to come out of the laid 13 indicators for many more years to come.

Who gets the Benefit of being identified as poor?

Located in the dense forest ruins of Satpuda region is Harra the tribal forest village in Betul district of Madhya Pradesh having no access to roads. No developmental work has been taken up in this village in the last five years. As the village land falls in the forest area, according to law, the amount allotted for development of this village goes into the account of the forest department, and no investment is made for the development of the village. On one hand while the 1997-98 BPL survey identified 30 families in BPL but the recent set indicator and process-based survey could only consider one family as poor. While on the other hand the participatory study conducted by the Democratic Campaign for Good Governance in coordination with ActionAid (Bhopal) revealed that 51 families even after staying in the stage of poverty were not included in the list. This is not the only example, but extend to almost all the villages in the state where 10% -15% of families have not been included in the list of Below Poverty Line even after being in the state of acute poverty.

Even though the economists from their study concluded that poverty in Madhya Pradesh has not declined and has instead increased the development department concluded that during the past five years poverty has reduced by 5.09% in Madhya Pradesh and now it is 37.43%. This conclusion has raised several controversial questions. Even the Supreme Court in its decision given on 8th May 2003, recommended to immediately give benefits of Antyodaya and other Welfare schemes to all the primitive tribes, women headed families, families having mentally and physically disabled member, Destitute and Widows in the village. Thus even the Supreme Court has put question mark on the authenticity of the BPL survey. This means that more than 5 lakh families living Below Poverty Line are not included in the list in Madhya Pradesh. The government has however accepted that the 1996-97 survey was extremely controversial and due to lack of systematic process and proper monitoring system the non-eligible people (rich section) were also included in the BPL list, thus the actual vulnerable and marginalized people were deprived of the developmental and Welfare benefits.

Experience suggests that there are still some loopholes in the process of BPL survey. The Democratic Campaign for Good Governance with help of over 230 other agencies monitored the process of survey in over 10 thousand villages and tried to be just. It is only because of presence of this campaign, was it able to clarify that Charua Singh of Jalpani village of Mandla district was excluded for the BPL list because the enumerator had filled the form with out concerning Charua Singh and thus ignored that he was a bonded laborer. Similarly, in Panna district an amount of Rs.200/- was charged from the poor families as fees for filling the BPL form. The economists believe that around 7% -10% people in our society are facing hidden poverty and starve for food every day. They do Not get two square meals a day but no priority is been given to the problems of mentally and physically disabled, scavengers and beggars.

On the basis of points allotted (the maximum points fixed for the 13 questions is 52. Out of which 12 to 15 points will any family to be identified as a poor family) those deriving minimum points were included in the BPL list. To ensure proper selection, provision was made to read this BPL list in gram sabha (Village Meeting) so that the villagers come to know about the points allotted to them. In this regard the gram sabha was given right to present and approve the list of actual poor in the village, a lot of confusion was created in this process. Hence, the norm was set that the list would be read in the gram sabha first and the claims raised or controversies/ problems would be sorted out, later and the improvised list would again be presented in the second gram sabha. Although, the top government officials said that their would be two gram sabhas, the block level Panchayat officials declared the list in the first sabha itself, in Patelawad the responsible officer of Block Panchayat Chief Executive Officer gave this order in written. Even after this no clear orders have been given by the State government to solve this confusion. The Kotma Block Panchayat officer refused to disclose the list in public and said that the list was confidential. On the other hand in Bhimpur of Betul district, the Block panchayat officer declared the efforts of NGOs as anti-government activity and ordered to stop them. As per the study of 100 panchayats it was known that in 67 panchayats, no second gram sabha meeting was organized for approving the list and the panchayats where the list were disclosed, no clarity was provided to the villagers regarding the meaning of allotted points. Thus the villagers did not know the points required to be included in the BPL list or to be out of it. Thus, it would be a high time to neglect the role of gram sabha in this process and if even now the gram sabha is not involved the interest of the poor would again be overlooked and the rich and influential people will dominate the list.

Influenced by political interest the government has disapproved the conclusion of famous economists Sundram and Tendulkar who believe that the reduction in percentage of poverty among Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe categories is very low in each state as compared to the reduction in poverty in general or higher category. But as per the government in tribal district Balaghat, rate of poverty has reduced to 53.63% from 63.82% which means a straight decline by 10.19%. Similarly, in tribal dominated Mandla and Dindori poverty reduction is from 9.11% to 9.43%. Even in the Jhabua district, which has nearly 90% of tribal population the percentage of people living Below Poverty Line, has reduced from 54.37% to 45.69%. In contrast to this reduction in percentage of poverty amongst the general and upper category districts have been very low, for example, Datia - 2.72%, Indore - 3.18%, Ujjain – 4.69%, Gwalior – 4.9%, Hoshangabad – 5.64%.

Even after accepting that the 1997-98 survey was irrelevant and partial, the government has still taken it as a base for the new survey and by taking the ratios as baseline have standardized poverty for different states and districts. Thus there is a need to analyze this economics from the political point of view. The communities and districts, which have their hold in politics of Madhya Pradesh, have decided the percentage of poverty as per their convenience. For example, the district of Narsinghpur has good and productive land but when it comes to BPL the survey says that the district has 46.58% of its population living Below Poverty Line, because it is a politically powerful district. In this context the district of Hoshangabad too is no different, it too holds a good share of good quality productive land but the reduction in poverty has been recorded to be only 5.64%. On the other hand the districts with high population of Sahariya community like Shivpuri and Sheopur and where people die of starvation showed only 24.89% and 26.14% of people living Below Poverty Line. In Balaghat, Mandla and Badwani although the number of people living below poverty line is higher but as compared to the last survey the number have reduced considerably.

The BPL cutoff point (the point/ one obtaining minimum points would be included in the BPL list) will play vital role in deciding the percentage of people living below poverty line in a district. As per the decided percentage of BPL families for a district those families obtaining minimum points would be considered as poor and this point would be considered as cut off point for the district. The family of Gulab adivasi of Dobri village, Seoni obtained 20 points. Thus the family of eight members earnings of Rs.35/- per day was excluded from the BPL list, because as per the government norms only 34.79% of families of Seoni district could be included in the BPL list and as the figure got completed with the families obtaining 13 points, this point was considered as cut-off point for the district. Thus family of Gulab, which struggles hard for its survival, was out of the BPL list. While going through the figures of BPL families in Balaghat 53.63% families were identified as BPL families and the points obtained by these families was 14, which was declared as cut-off point. The cut-off point varied from 12-15 in different districts like in Mandla (15), Badvani (15), Morena (12), Datiya (13), Seoni (12), and Gwalior (13). Thus the controversy is that by deciding different cut-off points the parameters taken for measuring poverty is different for each district, thus the government has tried to relate the figures. However, one suggestion has come that instead of taking districts wise cut-offs why not prepare one survey list at state level and consider 37.43% from the bottom as the cut-off point for all districts. However the government for making its work simpler has adopted easy way.

Considering the limitations of technical process and decided indicators for conducting wealth survey, the Government of Madhya Pradesh in August 2002, gave relevant suggestions to the central government, which said that for keeping the non-eligible people out of the BPL list and including the actual needy, a participatory approach involving the villagers should be adopted at village level. One such exercise identified and suggested is by doing a wealth ranking. Besides this the gram sabha should decide the list of poor families and each state should be given free hand to change the survey questioner as per their requirements and status of poverty in their state. But these suggestions were overlooked by the Central Government. After this the state government did not raise the issue nor did it take any constructive measures by itself in its region. This is the reason why people’s participation has been questioned in this survey. Some perception clarify that even after putting claims-objections no changes were made in the below poverty list, mainly because with this the organizers would have fallen in circle of skepticism. In such situation many eligible poor people were excluded from the below poverty line list.

One can only conclude from the nature of events that the government is not at all serious in poverty eradication. The functionaries too do not wish to admit that their region is still in the strong grips of poverty and starvation. This very clearly means that the poor must remain poor till the extent they are unable to express and retaliate, and food must only be provided to the extent that it keeps the flame of worry of filling belly burning on the platter of hope. With the consistent worry for survival the poor would be forced to think only about food, clothing and shelter and unable to think about their entity in the larger society. Thus it stands true that the poor and poverty works as a better proposition to some administrators who enjoy the luxury of power – one can always use this struggling section of the society as cheap but quality labour force and earn profits without even voicing out for justice and rights. They form the major section that can be used by the politicians to rule. In context to rights the irony of the situation is that the poor does not even have the right to determine whether they are poor, deprived, marginalized and battling hunger.

The unsolved question of social security

The experiences strengthen the demand for 'universalisation' of the concept of welfare in the Indian context. The Indian state has divided the poor society between APL and BPL (Above Poverty Line and Below Poverty Line) households in the rural areas. Unfortunately this division has further put the most marginalized communities into a black hole of negligence and chronic hunger. The entire BPL census survey depends on 13 indicators on the basis of which status of poverty is decided or rather calculated. It is a proven fact that one can not define the status of poverty just on the basis of 13 indicators decided by the Government of India and Planning Commission. There is also a wide range of social and vulnerability aspects, which defines the concept of acute poverty. The Below Poverty Line politics does not consider marginalization as a most important aspect of the definition. Persons with disability (Mentally or physically), who can not produce or earn their livelihood and thus fulfill the basic needs of life, are not considered as poor. Further, communities who have been forced to live a life less of self esteem and dignity (Manual scavengers and communities involved in caste based prostitution) due to the occupation they have are denied the right to benefit from welfare schemes because dignity of occupation is not considered as an indicator of poverty by the Planning Commission thereby never getting a berth in the BPL category.

Nathu, a mentally disabled tribal resides in Pati village in Badwani district. He stays in hut in the village which is so small that one would have to think twice and be careful while taking a turn to the other side. His wife who finds work as a labourer for subsistence often has to forgo work to take care of her mentally disabled husband. Struggling hard for survival, starvation has become part of daily life. The gram sabha, panchayat and the villagers, all agree that Nathu must get government support, which he is deprived off. With the Supreme Courts order that, families having any mentally or physically disabled member be given the benefit of Antyodaya scheme (scheme which provides food grains are available at cheaper rates). With hope of availing the benefit Nathu applied for the same but did not attach certificate approving his disability, leading to rejection of the application. Life is not less than a curse for around 70 thousand poor deprived mentally disabled people of Madhya Pradesh. For having their rights this vulnerable section has to depend on the certificate of the government doctor (Psychiatric specialist).

It is undoubtedly an issue of misfortune that like other districts of Madhya Pradesh the government hospital of Badwani too has no Psychiatrist leading to which the disabled are unable are deprived of their rights and from getting benefits of government schemes. As per the government records, out of a total 11.31 lakh disabled people in Madhya Pradesh, 8.9 lakhs (78%) live below poverty line, but only 3.8 lakh disabled are availing social security pension. Analysis clearly show that the main reasons behind this deprival and marginalization is due to failure in identifying people with disability, non possession of medical certificate by the disabled, high prevalence of corruption and insensitivity towards this section. It is clearly felt that the government does not consider disability as an indicator of poverty and the evidence of this is the recent BPL survey list, which has set various indicators to identify the families living below poverty line. To the surprise the list gives weightage to possession of 2-3 pair of clothes, fans, cycles etc, but disability is not addressed in any form.

Efforts have been made towards equity and over all development of society, but still the communities facing hidden poverty have been totally ignored. The perception developed to distinguish problems faced by this community from the other existing problems has further aggravated their pain and deprivation. Even though being part of the society the Valmiki community and Hela caste even today are engaged in the inhumane work of manual scavenging. Even the law has not able to check this and put a stop to this practice due to lack of sensitivity. How to stop the upper-caste communities for treating these communities as untouchables and undignified? Shobha Bai of district Dewas in exchange of Rs.100/- works as scavenger in 50 household of her village. Her family includes 6 daughters and a disabled husband. She left this work for the sake of her dignity and thought of accepting any other occupation or work as laborer. But after leaving the work of scavenging she was denied for working as laborer and did not get food grains from the low priced shops. Thus she had to pay heavy price of starvation for protecting her dignity and self-respect. Her daughter was deprived from getting scholarship for her studies, because now she was no more a daughter of a manual scavenger. This raises a pertinent question – whether the state is sincere in eradicating this inhumane job or indirectly encouraging over 18 thousand scavengers like Shobha Bai to continue with this inhumane job? Fighting poverty or poverty elevation means working for the upliftment of the poor, establishing them and helping them to fight against forces, which exploit them. Thus poverty cannot be just measured on the basis of food availability and consumption. We will have to accept that discrimination and social discrepancy are the root causes of the increasing poverty.

On Economic and statistical grounds it is believed that around 7-10% of the families in our society are victims of natural or manmade calamity, disability and biased government policies. This vulnerable section is experiencing acute problem of food insecurity, increasing terrorism and communal violence has further added the number of families living below poverty line. In the last decade over 13 lakh families were dragged into the mouth of poverty because of these reasons.

In our busy life we all come across families and children living beside the roadside in the poorest of poor conditions but seldom give a thought to it. In Madhya Pradesh 23 thousand families are residing in the pavement and roadsides being deprived from availing any benefit from the government schemes. Their fault is that they reside on the pavements and therefore have no address hence cannot be allotted ration cards. It is worth quoting that the ration card is not only for availing cheap food grains but is also an important evidence to prove identity of being a citizen. But these pavement dwellers are denied this identity. This section is one, which faces extreme natural calamities and is still neglected. Due to instability and no house to live they are not even able to cook for themselves. In such critical situation these helpless children purchase food, beg or search food from garbage for filling their belly. The problem is so grave that they cannot save anything from their earnings and this raises the question of why should they save now.

Politics of communal violence/ riots are now becoming one of the reasons of increasing poverty and starvation. These riots not only ruin basic resources for survival but also shatter houses and livelihood of the people. Riots of Gujarat, Bombay and violence in other parts of the country have proved that when people are living in peace these incidences divert their minds from basic issues and no compensation can ever actually repay the loss of these victimized families. Around 3.5 thousand families in Gujarat lost their family earners while many of them became disabled in the aftermath which shook the nation. Similarly, efforts of rehabilitating were tried for the victims of Bhopal gas tragedy and widow like Samsun Nisha was given a house in new constructed colony, where only widows will live, but the family lost its happiness forever. She not only lost her husband but also became disabled, with no one to support the family her 8 years son was forced to work. Government has classified new category for discrimination in the society. At present the 18 thousand effected families are seriously struggling to get stable means of survival and have been forced to accept poverty and starvation.

The problems faced by the leprosy and HIV patients are quite grave. On one hand when they are struggling hard with their health problems, the social boycott by the society makes their death even more painful. Although a person having these diseases can work and remain self-dependent, but social constrains and the negative approach drags the person far not only from the society but also from his only family members. In Rajasthan 20 thousand people who have been victims of HIV Aids have been abandoned by their family members and now they live in isolation. Definitely, this issue is such, which cannot be sorted out by implementing government schemes but it has to be dealt with sensitivity.

In advanced principals' approach, while preparing work plan for fighting out poverty first priority is given to able people and for some reasons the disabled are ignored, and this has become view of the society. In our daily monotonous life, we pass through crowd, but hardly bother to notice who this crowd is? The crowd may have elderly persons, garbage pickers, pavement dwellers, physically or mentally disabled and some time even prostitutes who are forced to bargain with their body for filling their belly, but still none of them are included in the definition of poor. The only measure found in this regard is establishments of rehabilitation centers or jails. Thus by forming these institutions they are separated from the so called “civilized society”, for precautions are taken that this section does not spoil/ harm the civilization, besides this by forming these institutions even the government fulfills its duties and does not remain answerable to anyone. There are several people around us who are facing serious problems of poverty, for this concretive measure must be taken up. This becomes still more necessary because the right to work norm does not cover them and they cannot relate themselves to the concept of work in exchange of food. In such situation for ensuring social security bold initiatives will have to be taken up.

This article is based on the participatory study conducted by Democratic Campaign for Good Governance in 100 villages of Madhya Pradesh. This group also monitored the process of BPL census with the support of 76 civil society organizations.