The first decade of this century saw the Congress-led government focusing on providing basic necessities such as education, healthcare, and jobs through welfare schemes. In contrast, the Narendra Modi government has prioritized the targeted delivery of goods, with specific focus on women and those from scheduled castes and tribes (SC/ST). The Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (Gramin) (PMAY-G), launched in 2016, is a repackaged and expanded version of the Indira Awaas Yojana from the Congress era. It aims to provide pucca houses to rural households, with a specific target of 60% of houses to be built for SC/ST households. An analysis of data from the scheme’s dashboard reveals that PMAY-G has so far managed to provide state-funded houses to around 11.4 million SC/ST households, which form about 22% of India’s 53 million rural SC/ST households (Socio-Economic Caste Census, 2011). Notably, women individually or jointly own nearly 72% of the houses built under the scheme, against the national rate of 43% reported by the 2019-21 National Family Health Survey. This focus on women empowerment is seen as a potential ‘x-factor’ for the ruling party, although questions remain about whether this approach reduces the electorate to passive recipients of state largesse. An analysis of data for the past seven years (2017-18 to 2023-24) indicates that the PMAY-G scheme has been starkly back-loaded. Of the 25.3 million houses sanctioned during this period, 22 million have been built. Strikingly, nearly 68% of them were built in just three years —2019-20 to 2021-22 – and the pace has been slower in the past two fiscal years. The scheme provides financial assistance of 1.2 lakh for building a house in plains and 1.3 lakh in hilly areas, with the onus of construction lying with the beneficiary. Beneficiaries can also avail of up to 95 person-days of unskilled labour wages under the rural jobs guarantee scheme during the construction period, and a loan up to 70,000 from financial institutions to aid the construction. The scheme had aimed to build 29.5 million pucca houses by March 2022, with the targets set annually; the deadline was later extended to March 2024. As a centrally sponsored scheme, the union government and states share the cost in a 60:40 ratio (90:10 in northeast and Himalayan states). Over 2.5 trillion was released by the Centre during the period of analysis, making up 23.7% of the total expenditure of the ministry of rural development. The lopsided pace of construction is also visible in the faster completion of key stages of construction in the second half of the Modi government’s tenure. Government data shows that while on an average it took about a year (356 days) between 2016-17 and 2018-19 to clear the three hoops (administrative, financial, and actual construction), it took around 193 days to do so in the past three fiscal years. The average construction time shrank from 242 days to around 150 days (five months) during this period. This could raise doubts about the quality of houses being built. A performance review by a Parliamentary panel, tabled in March 2023, had also raised concerns about the lack of monitoring of quality at various stages of construction. The panel emphasized the need for quality monitoring as the houses built under PMAY-G are expected to last for a long time. The government responded by stating that geo-tagged photographs were being captured at different stages of construction to review the quality. A deeper look at the state-wise implementation reveals a mixed picture. Large and relatively underdeveloped states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh have managed to meet the rural development ministry’s targets since 2017-18. However, despite higher central assistance, north-eastern states have lagged behind, with Manipur, Meghalaya, and Nagaland achieving only up to a fourth (25%) of the ministry’s house-construction targets. The government has expressed its aim to achieve 100% ‘saturation’ of its welfare schemes, including PMAY-G. However, this raises the question of whether this model will continue to be effective in the long run. With basic safety nets such as subsidized houses, cooking gas, and bank accounts now in place, voters may seek more than handouts in the future. Signs of discontent around employment and stagnant incomes are already visible in the current election cycle. The winner of these polls will need to address these concerns and develop a new-age welfarist agenda for India.
Targetted Delivery of Welfare: Modi’s Focus on Housing for Marginalised Communities
