Ownership development in rural schemes
In the rural areas conflicting objectives are common but ownership should quite rightly be regarded as the central principle of development of schemes. One should start with recognizing the delivery of the schemes. No doubt needful getting benefit and getting the opportunity to plan is thought about, but we are somewhere lagging behind in participation of stakeholders in planning, implementation and finally ownership of the asset made under the schemes. In this age we are witnessing the great deal of government schemes for rural people. We are acknowledging the same in the fields too but not up to that extent. We are not making the total beneficiaries interested in the way that it actually should be. We can see find some good reasons behind this reluctance. In any scheme, we have people as beneficiary in different manners and not as much as per the planning. The suffering of total interest generation can hamper the schemes in various ways. Despite the government agencies and prd department’s efforts some of the missing issues are yet to be addressed. Community sense of ownership for the assets made under the rural development schemes could be a key factor in ensuring sustainable delivery. We have seen some emptiness in participation of community in rural developments schemes and most of the schemes focus on employment, food, shelter, connectivity, education and health.
Right from Gram sabha planning and social auditing to create an impact of governance, it values the voice of stakeholders including marginalized groups whose voices are rarely heard. These activities are taken up for the purpose of enhancing local governance, particularly for strengthening accountability and transparency in local bodies. Still the employees and agencies should take significant steps to overcome the disparaged achievements because the non participation creates a persistent discouraging image of schemes among stakeholders.
Traditionally twice a year social audit is good as a means to measure the contribution, relevance, responsibility and impact of an organization, but for rural development schemes it should be regular with participatory techniques to involve all stakeholders in measuring, reporting and improving the implementation of a programme or scheme with gram sabha for planning process. Regular public meetings for grievance redressal, field visits will cater the IEC lapses. The findings and discussions encourage the referral know how and draw the attention and helps gain interest of the participants. It could be shifted in a debate mode in meeting to meeting which will further determine the impact of assets.
For schemes of individual benefits, beneficiary participates in the planning to execution process; while in public assets community remains reluctant. Districts like Sitamarhi initiated some activites like video presentation, photos as IEC tool, and some eye catching colours of the assets to draw the attention of community. As we know colours are ubiquitous are a source of information. It is proven in branding that 62-90 percent of assessment is based on colour alone. So, prudent use of colours can contribute to influence moods and feelings of stakeholders and therefore change their attitude towards the certain asset and make them more interested.
Now the eye catching colours of the asset can be used as a tool to get the community involved along with traditional practices like formal and informal social audits, gram sabha and effective IEC tools and materials.
