Abstract
In response to donor concerns that funds reach the neediest, evaluations of anti-poverty programmes are increasingly focused on identifying targeting failures: ‘F-mistakes’, where some of the target group (for example, the ‘poor’) are excluded from benefits, and ‘E-mistakes’, where benefits are provided to the non-poor as well as the poor (Cornia and Stewart, 1995). Yet the identification of F- and E-mistakes in itself does little to help us understand why targeting failures occur — and what can be done to address the problem. There is a dearth of studies of this kind, including in the context of social protection2 interventions, an emerging set of targeted programmes in developing countries.
This chapter is based on data collected by the author in October 2003 and June 2004 as part of his D.Phil. at Oxford University. It is drawn from a longer paper presented to the Social Protection for Chronic Poverty Conference, and subsequently published as a CPRC Working Paper (Pellissery, 2005). The author is grateful to the participants of this conference for their useful comments, and offers special thanks to George Smith and Barbara Harriss-White for suggestions during the design of the study. Karen Moore and David Hulme provided insightful thoughts and revision of the final manuscripts. Any errors remain the author’s.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Banik, D. (2002) Democracy, Drought and Starvation in India: Testing Sen in Theory and Practice. Oslo: Department of Political Science, University of Oslo.
Blalock, H. M. (1991) Understanding Social Inequality: Modelling Allocation Process. London: Sage Publications.
Breman, J. (1993) Beyond Patronage and Exploitation: Changing Agrarian Relations in South Gujarat. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Cornia, G. A. and F. Stewart (1995) ‘Two errors of targeting’, in D. van de Walle and K. Nead (eds), Public Spending and the Poor: Theory and Evidence. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 350–385.
Debroy, B. (2003) Mritak Sangh and Lal Bihari. The Financial Express (Jan. 7).
Dev, S. M. (1998) ‘Government intervention and social security for rural labour’, in R. Radhakrishna and A. N. Sharma (eds), Empowering Rural Labour in India: Market, State and Mobilization. New Delhi: Institute for Human Development, pp. 173–204.
Drèze, J. and A. Sen (1991) ‘Public action for social security: foundations and strategy’, in E. Ahmad, J. Drèze, J. Hills and A. Sen (eds), Social Security in Developing Countries. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 1–40.
Government of India (GoI) (1997) India’s most backward districts: list of 1997 Sarma Committee.
Harriss-White, B. (2004) ‘Socially inclusive social security: Social assistance in the villages’, in B. Harriss-White and S. Janakarajan (eds), Rural India Facing the 21st Century. London: Anthem Press, pp. 429–466.
Harriss-White, B. (1999b) ‘State, market, collective and household action in India’s social sector’, in Harriss-White and S. Subramanian (eds), Ill-fare in India: Essays on India’s Social Sector in Honour of S. Guhan. New Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 303–328.
Harriss-White, B. (1995) ‘Economic restructuring: state, market and collective and household action in India’s social sector’, The European Journal of Development Research, 7 (1), 124–147.
Hulme, D. (2004) ‘Thinking “small” and the understanding of poverty: Maymana and Mofizul’s story’, Journal of Human Development, 5 (2), 161–176.
Jutting, J. (2000) ‘Social security systems in low-income countries: Concepts, constraints and the need for cooperation’, International Social Security Review, 53 (4), 3–24.
Kabeer, N. (1994) ‘Gender-aware policy and planning: a social-relations perspective’, in M. MacDonald (ed.), Gender Planning in Development Agencies. Oxfam: Oxford, pp. 80–97.
Lipsky, M. (1980) Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Mehta, A. K. and A. Shah (2001) ‘Chronic poverty in India: an overview study’, CPRC Working Paper 7. Manchester: IDPM/CPRC.
NCAER (National Council of Applied Economic Research) (2002) West and Central India Human Development Report. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Pellissery, S. (2005) ‘Process deficits or political constraints? Bottom-up evaluation of non-contributory social protection policy for rural labourers in India’, CPRC Working Paper 54. Manchester: CPRC/IDPM.
Prabhu, K. S. (2001) Economic Reform and Social Sector Development: A Study of Two Indian States. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Sankaran, T. S. (1998) ‘Social assistance: evidence and policy issue’, in van Ginneken (ed.), Social Security for all Indians. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 57–76.
Singh, R. (1988) Land, Power and People: Rural Elite in Transition, 1801–1970. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Subrahmanya, R. K. A. and R. Jhabvala (2000) ‘Meeting basic needs: the unorganized sector and social security’, in Jhabvala and Subrahmanya (eds), The Unorganised Sector: Work Security and Social Protection. New Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 17–29.
Walker, T. S. and J. G. Ryan (1990) Village and Household Economies in India’s Semi –Arid Tropics. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2008 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pellissery, S. (2008). Process Deficits in the Provision of Social Protection in Rural Maharashtra. In: Barrientos, A., Hulme, D. (eds) Social Protection for the Poor and Poorest. Palgrave Studies in Development. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-0-230-58309-2_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-0-230-58309-2_12
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-230-27358-0
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-58309-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)