BOCIO-ECONOMIC FEATURE6 OF

8AMPLE HOUSEDOLDB

SOCIO-ECONOMIC FEATURES OF SAMPLE HOUSEHOLDS

4.1 Tribal Economic Community

It has been stated in the previous chapter that the study blocks of the Jashpur Project are the most backward tribal blocks of the region. Physiographically, they are in the hilly terrain and topographically the land is uneven and undulating. Some tribals of the region are socially downtrodden, economically exploited and deprived, educationally illiterate, politically unorganised and powerless, and denied of employ-

ment.

For a better understanding of a social community, an analysis of its socio-economic features is necessary. The components of a social community ure infra-

structure and supra-structure as used by Karl Marx. The infrastructure means the

economic system related to economic activities of production and distribution. It means the way people of aparticular community earn their living. The type of relationship they

establish in the process of production and distribution shapes the supra-structure which implies the food habit, clothing, housing, social relationship, religion, culture and political status. Within the infrastructure of the tribal community, agriculture is the main

economic activity which is supplemented by the collection of minor produce from the

forests for their livelihood. Therefore, the sources of living for tribals are land and forests.

The main source of agriculture is land which the tribals possessed by clearing forests at

the initial stage and later they are given ownership.

In his article, Beni Ekka (1993) explained the economic and social relationship among the tribals where the ownership of land in the tribal society remained with the Patriach (senior male member of the clan). H e owned the land not for himself but for the community. Everybody participated in the economic activities ofthe land and shared the produce as well. In a tribal community, men, women and children are related

to land as cultivators and/or agricultural labourers. He distributed the land to the male children who received the ownership of land as the second line, as opposed to tenants in

the feudal system. The ownership of land of the tribal society resembled the primitive

communismwhich did not have hierarchical division of people. The tribals have the same

socio-economic status as agriculturists who are the producers, distributors and con- sumers. As in the past their aim of production was for their own livelihood at subsistcnn level, there was nodifference insupra-structure of tribal societyviz., food habits, clothing, housing, relationship, religion, culture, and political status.

Concerning social relationship, the tribals within the clan and outside

are related with a homely "NATAS (Relationship), like Father-Mother, Daughter-Son

(Mainya-Babu), Brother-Sister, Uncle-Aunty (Kaka-Kaki), Maternal Uncle-Aunty

(Mama-Mami), Bara-Bari (sons and daughters' relationship with persons elder to their parents) etc., and never find the relationship as Master-Servant, Lord-Slave, Sahab- Sevak and Hujur-Naukar. Therefore, they form a big tribal family. The depth of relationship expressed in sharing, co-operation, Madait (help), fellow- feeling is seen actualised in their socio-economic activities wherever they reside as a group or groups.

4.2 Social Status of Respondents

Among the tribal beneficiaries of the schemes, Oraons (48.32%), Konvas (15.21%), Kanwars (10.07%), Nagesias (9.62%), Bhuinhars (4.25%), Kharias (1.57%) and Gonds (1.57%) are the main tribes. Generally, each tribe lives together in

a group or forms a village itself. This is the reason why a village is called by its

community name, such as "Oraon Khuri" or "Kanwar Tola" or "Nagesia Para" etc. It means in each tribal village one community dominates. In modern tribal villages there are influx of different tribal communities as well as castes. There is deeper understanding

among various tribes and castes socially and culturally. They are invited for different

social functions where they eat, drink and celebrate together. In fact in the past the tribal

community represented an example of egalitarian society. What is conspicuous today

among the modern tribal communities is economic and educational distinction. Like the

caste people, the social status of tribals is not based on occupation and caste. In the tribal

society, women play a great role in economic and social activities. They co-operate with

men in agriculture and other economic activities whenever and wherever possible.

4 3 Exploitation

Basically, the tribal society is a sharing community. Within the tribal

community there is no room for exploitation or injustice as a system. It is opined that the

exploiters crept into the tribal society.from outside under the disguise of well wishers and benefactors. The landlords, money lenders, banias, contractors were the common exploiters in villages and market places in the past. Due to the awareness created by the educational institutions, financial institutions, social workers and missionaries, the extent of exploitation and the number of exploiters have come down. The banias and petty shopkeepers still exploit the village tribals through cheating in buying and selling commodities in village markets. They are paid much below the market rate, being provided with the false reason about the quality of their products.

At present the tribal beneficiaries feel that the development program- mes have given rise to the exploiters who are Government agents in various departments at block and village levels. The beneficiaries are deprived of getting the full amount of money sanctioned for theschemes. Almost all the beneficiaries of the liwandharascheme

are of the opinion that aminimum of 10% of investment per schemegoes into the pockets of block officials (cf., table V-8). In case of the other schemes (in which money is not given directly to the beneficiaries) cash is swindled from the contractors in the form of commissions. This is observed by the beneficiaries from the difference between the cost of bullock pairs, goats and goods; and their worth (values), or the difference between local price and the government price (which is relatively higher) for the scheme assets.

The experiences of the tribals in general and the beneficiaries of

schemes in particular reveal that exploitation by the revenue department is very common.

It is also observed that the tribals are highly exploited like people in the plain areas by

the government officials in issuing the income, resident, cast certificates for the purpose

of applying for the tribal schemes, scholarships, jobs etc. It is not merely the exploitation

of money but much more than that; it is the exploitation of time and energy of persons. Very often a tribal is harassed by delayingand postponing the cases for a number of times.

He is driven from pillar to post to get his work done in vain. Another set of complaints reveal that for the tribals the court of Tehsildars (revenue department) is highly expen- sive for cases such as "Phauti" (Transfer of names in the Patta), correction of demar- cation of land maps, issuing land patta etc. This makes the tribals reluctant to litigate their land.

Though tribals have a right to collect minor forest produce like fire

wood, leaves, vegetables and other minor produces they are harassed by the Forest

Department in small matters. They are fined even for the wood used for their houses. Moreover, the contractors have been given freedom to steal away the wood for which tribals have to bear the brunt.

The Police Department which issupposed to protect the tribalsand help themget their justice and right, is very often under the pressure of the influential persons of the area. In such cases, the tribals suffer and remain victims of injustice. This is an incident that occurred during the survey bout. For a police verification for a job, a tribal candidate was asked to bring a goat for the police Sub-Inspector (Thanedar) if the candidate really wanted a job. In fact that candidate did not have any single complaint or offence on his name. Yet he had to fulfil the unjust demand, no matter from where, because the job was more important for him.

TO solve the social problems outside the court or to help the community tribals have "lati- Panchayat". It is a community court of givingjustice to the tribal clients. Most of the community social problems are discussed and settled amicably, if necessary with reasonable penalty. This penalty may be in kind or cash. It is not acquired by any individuals, but kept in public fund which is utilised for public purpose.

4.4 Socio-Economic Variables

These indicators are taken in order to know their influence in the

process of economic development of beneficiaries. To have a comprehensive socio-

economic profile of the sample beneficiaries a demographic base becomes more relevant.

The demographic variables like sex ratio, age distribution, family size and dependency

ratio affect the economic conditions and in turn are affected by the socio-economic conditions. Tribe, education and religion give the socio-religious condition of beneficiaries. The level of education is an indicator of development. The higher the education better is the employment opportunities available for the tribals. Religion may create awareness of the dignity of human labourwhich may boost the economicactivities. The infrastructure and block facilities accelerate the service sectors in mobilizing the resources of economic activities. Economic indicators like assets, per capita income (post

scheme), loans and subsidy have direct impact on further income generation. Each

economic indicator is explained with respect to the sample beneficiaries.

4.5 Tribal Communities

The central and state governments are actively involved in the develop- ment of socially and economically backward tribes who are heterogeneously scattered all over the regions. They are approached by the government agencies for their welfare.

The Jashpur Project has a number of tribal (32 tribes at district level, Census of India

1961) communitieswho have been receivinggovernment schemes for their better income

generation. The rationale behind the study with respect to various tribal communities is to know which tribal communities are availing themselves more of the schemes. The tribe-wise distribution of beneficiaries is presented in table IV-1.

Table IV-1

Tribe-Wise Percentage of Sample Beneficiaries: Selected Blocks

Source: Primary Survey, 1992. *Indicates Kherwars, Mundds, Msnjhis, Harijans clc., Figurer in brackets indicale pcrcenlagc

69

Tribe

Oraons

Konvas

Kanwars

Nagesias

Bhuinhars

Kharias

Gonds

Others'

Total %

BAG Nos(%)

67 (44.67) 44 (29.33) 03 (2.00) 23 (15.33) 02 (1.33) 00 (00) 01 (0.67) 10 (6.67)

150 (100)

MNR Nos(%)

95 (63.33) 17 (1 1.34) 03 (2.00) 20 (13.33) 00 (00) 00 (00) 00 (00) I5 (10)

150 (100)

FRS Nos(%)

54 (36.74) 07 (4.76) 39 (26.53) 00 (00) 17 (11.56 07 (4.76) 06 (4.08) 17 (11.57)

147 (100)

Total Nos(%)

216 (48.32) 68 (15.21) 45 (10.07) 43 (9.62) 19 (4.25) 07 (1.57) 07 (1.57) 42 (9.39)

447 (100)

FIO+ Mort Important TTlbe8

Oreone Oraone

Kanware

Kor wa Other8 27%

26% 13%

Naaealae Bhulnhare 13% 12%

BAQIWA BLOCK PH ARSABAHAR BLOOK

-rwm Nageelea 13% 11%

MANORA BLOOK

The tableIV-1 indicates thatthe beneficiariesof theschemes hail mostly

fromoraons (48.32), Konvas (15.21), Kanwars (10.07), Nagesias(9.62), Bhuinhars(4.25),

Kharias (1.57), Gonds (1.57), and the rest from other tribes (9.39). Of them, the Oraons

as a single community dominate inall the selected blocks whereas the other tribalgroups vary from block to block. In order to know the other important tribes in each block other

than the Oraons, the table IV-2 is prepared.

Table IV-2 The Most Important Tribes of Selected Blocks

Source: Primary Suney, 1992. Note: Figures in parentheses are percentages.

Block BAG Oraons (44.67)

Konvas (29.33)

Nagesias (13.33)

Total (89.3%)

The above table indicates the major tribes on the basis of sample

beneficiaries of the blocks. It is observed that other than the Oraons, the Konvas and the

Nagesias form major tribal beneficiary groups in Bagicha and Manora blocks whereas

the Kanwars and the Bhuinhars are the main tribal beneficiaries of Pharsabahar block.

In Bagicha and Manora, the Oraow, the Konvas and the Nagesias together share 89.3%

and 88% of the total beneficiaries in their respective blocks whereas in Pharsabahar block

they constitute 75% of the sample beneficiaries. It is observed that the percentage of

the Oraon beneficiaries decreases as the physiography of the regionchanges from the hill terrainof the Manora block (63.33%) to the plain region of Pharsabahar (36.74%), (refer to Fig-1). This may indicate that the Oraons of the plain are better equipped socially and economically than the hilly block and the block with both hilly and plain regions. That is why they may not feel the need of schemes. This reason does not lead to the conclusion that in hilly regions other tribes are better off.

Block FRS Oraom (36.74) Kanwars (26.53)

Bhuinhars (1 1.56)

(74.83%)

* Block MNR Oraons (63.33) Nagesias (13.33)

Konvas (1 1.34)

(88.00%)

From the percentage distribution of the beneficiaries of various tribal communities it is clear that the tribal beneficiaries may be classified into twomaingroups that is, the Oraons (dominant community of the region) and the others. The distribution is shown below:

T a b l e IV-3

Oraons 1 1 i . 6 7 ) 1 i . 7 3 ) 1 ! 3 3 ) 1 f .32 1 Others (55.33) (63.27) (36.67) (51.68)

Total 150 147 447 (%) (100) (100) (100) (100)

Classification of Beneficiaries into Oraons and Others

Source : Computed from Table IV-2. Note : Figures in brackcln represent pcrccntage

Group

It is observed that amonga number of tribal communities amajor group of beneficiaries belongs to the Oraon community (48.32%).

4.6 Religion

BAG Nos

The respondents are classified with respect to their religions in order to know which religious tribal community is more receptive to schemes. They are

grouped into Hindus and Christians as shown in table 1V-4.

T a b l e IV-4

FRS Nos

Classification of Beneficiaries with Respect to Religion

MNR Nos

Source: Primary Survey, 1992. Note: Figurcs in brackets indicate pcrcenlnge.

Total Nos

Total Nos

276 (61.74)

171 (38.26) 447 (100)

BlockIReligion

Hindus

Christians

Total (%)

BAG Nos

99 (66) 5 1 (34) 150 (100)

MNR Nos

82 (54.67)

68 (45.33)

150 (100)

FRS Nos

95 (64.63)

52 (35.37)

147 (100)

From the given table, it is noticed that the majority (61.74%) of the beneficiaries are Hindus whereas 38.26% are Christians. It has to be recorded that the Hindu beneficiaries belong to various tribal communities as mentioned in table IV-1.

Regarding Christian beneficiaries, they belong to the Oraon community only. Their

percentage, out of the total Oraon beneficiaries, amounts to 79.17. The majority of the Oraon beneficiaries are Christians. It indicates that they are more open and receptive to developmental schemes.

4.7 Family Size

The demographic factors like family size of the household, sex-ratio and dependency may influence the economic activity of the family. Table IV-5 shows the distribution of beneficiaries on the basis of family size.

Table IV-5

Distribution of Beneficiaries According to Size of Household

Source : Primary Swey,l992. Note : Figures in brackets indicate percentage.

Block / Size

1 - 2

3 - 4

5 - 6

7 - 8

9 - 1 0

Above 10

Total %

BAG Nos(%)

10 (6.67) 35 (23.33) 45 (30) 33 (22) 19 (12.67) 08 (5.33)

150 (100)

FRS Nos(%)

06 (4.08) 24 (16.33) 57 (38.78) 35 (23.81) I5 (10.20) 10 (6.80)

147 (100)

MNR Nos(%)

10 (6.66) 21 (14) 46 (30.67) 40 (26.67) 21 (14) 12 (08)

150 (100)

Total Nos(%)

26 (5.82) 80 (17.90) 148 (33.11) 108 (24.16) 55 (12.30) 30 (6.71)

447 (100)

From the table IV-5, it is clear that out of the total sample (447), one-third of the households have the family size between 5 to 6 members.The block-wise distribution also indicates that Bagicha (30%), Pharsabahar (38.78%) and Manora (30.67%) have the maximum number of households having the family size between 5 to

6 members. From the household frequency distribution, it is observed that most of the

beneficiary households (57.27%) have members between 5 to 8. Most of the households

with members above 9 are joint families. Some members of these families go out for

seasonal employment but they are supported by the families for their basic needs.

4.8 Literacy of Respondents

Education is one of the most important factors that indicates the social status or development of a person, family or society. It also reflects the economic condition of the family. If at all tribals have developed themselves, the same should be

attributed to education. The education of the tribal beneficiaries may be basic or elementary, through formal or non-formal system which helps them to read and write. In the process of economic activities (scheme implementation), education imparts better knowledge, understanding and technological know-how. They may be more responsible

in acceptance and implementation of the schemes through participating activities.

Based on the knowledge of reading and writing, the sample beneficiaries have been considered literate or illiterate. They have been categorized into two groups to know the number and percentage of literate and illiterate respondents and thereby its impact on income generation. Table IV-6 presents the literacy wise

classification of beneficiaries.

Table IV-6

Number and Percentage of Literate and Illiterate Beneficiaries.

Source: Primary Survey, 1992. Note : Figurcr in brackets indicate percentage

Illiterate

Total (%)

Total Nos(%)

206 (46.09)

MNR Nos(%)

80 (53.33)

Block/ Literacy

Literate

92 (61.33)

150 (1 00)

BAG Nos(%)

58 (38.67)

79 (53.74)

147 (loo)

FRS Nos(%)

68 (46.26)

70 (46.67)

150 (100)

24 1 (53.91) 447

(100)

Table IV-6 reveals that nearly 54% of the total sample beneficiaries are illiterates and 46% literates. When block-wise literacy level is compared, the Manora block has the maximum percentage (53.33) of literate beneficiaries followed by Phar- sabahar (46.26) and Bagicha (38.67). The table IV-7 of literacy comparison also reveals that the literacy level of sample beneficiaries is higher than that of tribal and block literacy levels.

Table IV-7 Com~arison of Literaey Level

I Tribal 1 26.3 1 33.80 1 30.50

Literacy

Beneficiary

Source: District Statistical Hand Book, Raigarh, 1985.

BAG

38.67

Block

4.9 Dependency

The socio-economic life of a household is affected by the ratio of dependency, i.e., the ratio between non-working population and working population. If the earning members of the beneficiary households are more thannon-earning members,

the economic life may be better off than those who have less working members. Such a classification of households may help to know whether the persons are available to work in the schemes. Table IV-8 gives the number of dependents and households.

FRS

46.26

19.17

Table IV-8

MNR

53.33

Number of Dependents and Households : Block-wise

22.76 25.58

No, of Dependents

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 &above

Source: Primary Survey, 1992.

No, of Households

MNR

10 14 14 30 24 2 7 12 09 10

BAG

21 22 29 20 26 23 02 02 05

FRS

6 11 3 7 31 31 14 06 08 03

4.10 Land Assets

The economic status of the tribal household depends upon the amount of land holding and accordingly they are known as marginal or small or rich farmers. To know the number and percentage of beneficiaries holding different size of land, a block wise table is shown below:

Table IV-9

Distribution of Beneficiaries on the Basis of Land Holding

Source: Primary Survey, 1992. Note: Figures in brackets denote percentage.

Block / Size of Land(Acs)

0 - 0

0 - 2.5

2.5 - 5.0

5.0 - 7.5

7.5 - 10.0

From the above table, it is observed that out of the total sample beneficiaries a maximum of about 35% of tribal beneficiaries hold land between2.5 acres

to 5 acres, but when the size of land is taken 5 acres and below, the percentage of beneficiaries goes up to 68.68. The percentage of land holding for both Bagicha and

Above 15 (5.33) (3.80)

Total 150 147 150 447

BAG Nos(%)

12 (08)

4 1 (27.33)

59 (39.34)

11 (7.33)

11 (7.33)

FRS Nos(%)

15 (10.20)

54 (36.74)

41 (27.89)

13 (8.85)

16 (10.88)

MNR Nos(%)

04 (2.67)

25 (16.67)

56 (37.33)

29 (19.33)

16 (10.67)

Total Nos(%)

31 (6.93)

120 (26.85)

156 (34.90)

53 (11.86)

43 (9.62)

Pharsabahar blocks reaches 75 each whereas the Manora block has 56.67%. It reveals

that most of the tribal beneficiaries are either marginal or small farmers. About 7% of

the beneficiaries are landless. Still the scheme has not reached the vulnerable group

which is having below 2.5 acres of land. (See fig-2)

4.11 Occupalion

As land is the basis for livelihood for the tribals, their occupation

revolves around the land activities. Some way or the other they are linked to the land

either as cultivators or agricultural labourers. The occupation-wise classification of

beneficiaries may reveal the occupational distribution of the beneficiaries.

Table IV-10 brings out that out of the total sample beneficiaries, about

80% have agriculture as their main occupation and the rest 20% mostly depends upon agricultural labour. Among the blocks, Manora has a maximum of 88.67% beneficiaries whose occupation is agriculture whereas Bagicha and Pharsabnhar has 75% each. It

shows that the tribals are basically agriculturists.

Table IV-I0

Occupation-wise classification of Beneficiaries

Block1 Occupation I BAG / FRS ( MNR I Total I Nos(%) Nos(%) Nos(%) Nos(%)

Source: Primary Survey, 1992. Note: Figurcs ia brackets denote percentage.

Agri-Labourers Plus Others

Total (%) -

37 (24.67)

150 ( 1 W

37 (25.17)

147 (100)

17 (1 1.33)

150 (100)

91 (20.36)

447 (100)

4.12 Per Capita lncome

Income is another important economic yard stick for measuring the

economic conditions of the beneficiaries. The higher the level of income, the better is the living standard of the beneficiary households. Table IV-11 exhibits the post- scheme per capita income position of the beneficiiuy households. The household income is the sum total of main income, subsidiary income, forest produce and additional income from the schemes.

From the table IV-11, it is observed that a maximum of about 34.45% of total beneficiary households have per capita income (PCI) between Rs.1300 to Rs.1900. It also reveals that about 65 %of the beneficiary households remain below the

PC1 of Rs.1900. When it is computed block- wise, the percentage of Bagicha block goes

up to 68, followed by Manora(66.68%) and Pharsabahar(60.54%). The figures indicate

that even after the scheme implementation, the majority of the tribal beneficiary households are struggling to eke out their living. (Vide Fig-3)

Table N-11 Classification of Beneficiary Households with

respect to Per Capita Income.

Block / Income Range

Below Rs.700

700- 1300

1300- 1900

1900- 2500

2500- 3100

Above3100

Total %

Source: Primary Survey, 1WZ. Note: Figures in brackets indicate percentage.

BAG Nos(%)

00

39 (26) 63 (42) 24 (16) 09 (06) 15 (10) 150 (100)

FRS Nos(%)

01 (0.68)

46 (31.29)

42 (28.57)

17 (1 1.57)

14 (9.52)

27 (18.37)

147 (100)

MNR Nos(%)

04 (2.68)

47 (13.33)

49 (32.67)

24 (16) 10 (6.66)

16 (10.66)

150 (100)

Total Nos(%)

0 5 (1.12)

132 (29.53)

154 (34.45)

65 (14.54)

33 (7.38)

58 (12.98)

447 (100)

4.13 Additional lncome

Additional Income refers to the income supplemented by the schemes. The government schemes are implemented in order to generate income and thereby to

raise the economic life of the tribals above the poverty line. The classification of beneficianeswith respect to per worker additional income (only those who are involved)

from the schemes may reveal whether the beneficiary households have substantially

earned or not. Table IV-12 presents per worker income from schemes.

Table IV-12

Classification of Beneficiary Households on the basis of Per Worker Income from Schemes.

Source: Primary Survey. 1992. Note: Figures in brackeks indicake percentage

Income Range Rs.

0 - 100

100 - 200

200 - 300

300 - 400

400 - 500

Above 500

Total

The table IV-12 reveals that about 66.67% of beneficiary households

have earned per worker supplementary income ranging from Rs.0 to Rs.100 from the schemes. Among these beneficiary households, 167 (or 37.36%) households have zero income from the schemes. It is because the scheme assets are incomplete, dead or

78

BAG Nos/(%)

107 (71.33)

22 (14.67)

09 (06)

08 (5.33)

00 (00)

04 (2.67)

150 (100)

FRS Nos/(%)

92 (62.59)

37 (25.17)

07 (4.76)

05 (3.40)

05 (3.40)

01 (0.68)

147 (100)

MNR Nos/(%)

99 (66)

25 (16.66)

11 (7.33)

07 (4.67)

04 (2.67)

04 (2.67)

150 (100)

TOTAL Nos 1 (%)

298 (66.67)

84 (18.79)

27 (6.04)

20 (4.48)

09 (2.01)

09 (2.01)

447 (100)

unused. When compared block-wise, it is found that majority of the beneficiary

households in each block has the same range of income (i.e., Rs.0 to Rs.l00).The pattern

of frequency distribution shows that about 85% of beneficiary households get Rs. 200

and below per worker yearly additional income which is really very low. (cf. Fig-4)

4.14 Per Capita Assets

The per capita asset holdings of the beneficiary households is another

indicator which indicates the economic status of the family. The assets of the beneficiary

households include fixed, movable and scheme assets. The principal assets of tribals are land and house. Their movable assets are not certain. These assets are supposed to

provide them with economic security and hope for the further income generation. The land asset being low productive, cannot be the only source of income for the household,. In order to have a comparative idea about the assets of beneficiaries, the per capita asset

of beneficiary households is given in the table IV-13.

Source : Primary Survey, 199:. Note: Figures in the brackets indicate Percentage.

Table N-13

Distribution of Per Capita asset of Beneficiary Households

Asset-Value Rs./HouseH.

0-4000

4000-8000

8000-12000

12000-16000

1600-20000

ABOVE 20000

TOTAL

BAG Nos/(%)

29 (19.33)

23 (15.33)

33 (22) 21 (1 4) 19 (12;67)

25 (16.67)

150 (100)

FRS Nos/(%)

24 (16.33)

29 (19.73)

24 (16.33)

26 (1 7.68) 14 (9.52)

30 (20.41)

147 (100)

MNR Nos/(%)

8 (5.33)

2 7 (1 8) 27 (18)

30 (20) 26 (1 7.33)

32 (21.34)

150 (1 00)

TOTAL Nos/(%)

61 (13.65)

79 (1 7.67)

84 (18.79)

77 (1 7.23)

59 (13.20)

9 (19.46)

447 (1 00)

From the above table it is observed that the total percentage distribution of beneficiary households with respect to per capita asset value is symmetrical. It is also

found that about 50% of total beneficiary households hold per capita asset value of Rs.12000 and below and other 50% has the asset value of above Rs.12000. The across block distribution of beneficialy households shows that the Manora block has relatively more percentage of beneficiary households possessing higher asset-value than the Bagicha and Pharsabahar blocks. The percentage is higher because more number of beneficiaries have above 5 acres of land holding.

TABLE 1V-14

Expenditure on

Food items

Rice

Vegetables

Fire-wood

Oils

Fish-Meat

Pulses

Salt

Sugar

Cur

Total

Clothing

Education

Habits

Medicine

Kerosene

Electricity

Miscellaneous

Total

, Grand Total

Source:

Food and Non

BAG %

52.91

5.06

3.64

3.26

3.33

2.17

0.56

0.38

0.30

71.61

12.10

6.49

5.95

1.70

0.66

0.17

1.33

28.39

100

Primary Survey, 1992.

Food Items of

FRS %

54.39

4.35

3.54

3.59

2.39

2.20

0.54

0.49

0.26 71.67

11.28

8.14

3.45

1.88

0.64

0.23

2.72

2833

100

Beneficiary Households.

MNR %

54.20

5.20

3.17

3.26

3.06

2.00

0.57

0.65

0.27 7238

13.01

5.49

4.96

1.66

0.69

0.26

1.54

27.62

100

TOTAL %

53.83

4.87

3.45

3.34

2.93

2.12

0.56

0.5 1

0.28 71.89

12.13

6.70

4.79

1.75

0.66

0.22

1.86

28.11

100

Fb.6: Percentage Expundltwe On Food and Non-Food Itsma

Rioe 63%

Rloe

Other Fo 18%

BAQIWA BLOCK PHARSABAHAR BLOCK

Rloe 64%

MANORA BLOCK

4.15 Consumption Pattern

The consumption pattern of the households of the tribal beneficiaries indicates their standard of living. It also reveals what types and quality of food and non food items the tribals use for their livelihood. The percentage of expenditures on various items is shown in the table IV-14.

From the table IV-14 it is observed that out of the total expenditure, a conspicuous amount of 71.89% is spent on food items alone whereas non-food items share 28.11%. Among the food items, out of the total expenditure, the expenditure on rice is the maximum of 53.83%. With regard to other food items viz., vegetables, fire

wood, oils, fish- meats, and pulses (dal) the percentage of expenditure is 4.87%, 3.45%,

3.34% 2.93% and 2.12% respectively. The block- wise comparison of expenditures on

food items reveals that there is no significant difference among the blocks.

Regarding non-food particulars, clothing (12.12%), education (6.70%), habits (4.79%) have been the main channels of expenditures. From the computed percentages, it is evident that the sample house-holds spend a major share of 90.72% of

their annual income on the basic needs (food, clothing, education) in order to lead a life of subsistence. As the tribals have not much to spare to purchase other personal

household requirements, the quality of life is not improved. (Vide Fig-5)

To conclude, the analysis on socio- economic features of tribal sample beneficiaries from various tribal communities indicates that the majority ofthem are from Oraons (48%), followed by Konvas (IS%), Kanwars (10%) and Nagesias (9.62%). They,

together, represent about 83% of the beneficiaries. Theirpresent economic and social state related to the wide spectrum of factors (indicators), vu., tribal groups, family sue, depend- ency, literacy level, religion (Hindus- Christians), infrastructures, land, income, wets,

savings, consumption level, occupation etc. The beneficiaries classified into each category (ar shown in previous tables) could not exhibit strong diversification among the blocks in

most of the socio-economic indicators, but may be substantial across schemes. This helps

to understand whetherthevm'ables have influenceon theprocess ofeconomic development

(implementation ofschemes) as they contributepositively or negatively in incomegeneration

of schemes. Therefore, lhese socio-economic features may be used to mess the impact on scheme income generation analysis.