Child Marriage

10 Responses to Child Marriage

1. Subhash Mittal says:

   June 2, 2011 at 10:51 am

   Dear Akhil,

   Thanks for initiating a discussion, such interactions are welcome as these provide opportunity for group members to come out and share their own experiences.

   Knowing of your own vast experience in the sector all over the world, I would request you to share with the group any positive stories or stories which could be a learning lesson for all of us.

   warm regds

   subhash mittal
2. Akhil Jugran says:

   June 2, 2011 at 10:50 am

   Thanks for the information – Regards

   Akhil
3. Virendra Chaubisha says:

   June 2, 2011 at 10:49 am

   Akhil Jugran

   Greeting!

   We working in Mandwa area with Wells for India,Childfund India,
   Govt of rajasthan. Resently childfund change the policy. presently we are doing Water related ISSU,Children related ISSU.Woman related Issu.
   Voilence in the area very high.children condition is very very pover.
   Education status of the area very low. we are focous is water and agriculture. income leval so less in the area. we efforts to goverment
   INGO,NGO to support in the area for Water and agriculture issu.
   One major issu is deprived vulnerable child. so we want to support for children issu. over tem is very good working in the area.

   virendra
4. Akhil Jugran says:

   June 2, 2011 at 10:48 am

   The profile of the work area is unbelievable! My heart goes out to the
   communities there. With all that hardship, why do they continue to stay in those
   circumstances?

   Is your organisation working in that area? what kind of development work are you
   doing there? How successful have you been in addressing the issues there?

   Akhil Jugran
   Assurance Senior – International Program Specialist
   Global Assurance, Plan
5. Virendra Chaubisha says:

   June 2, 2011 at 10:46 am

   Akhil Jugran

   Greeting,

   My working area is chronic pover area so one study share with you are-

   An Analysis to understand Poverty level of People

   Mandwa Cluster Area of Kotra Panchayt Samiti
   —————————————————————————————
   Executive summary

   This is an overview of situations that are faced by people of 84 hamlets of Mandwa, Zed and Kukawas Panchayat of Kotra, Udaipur, which constitute RBKS-CCF CDP project area. The analysis here is based on hamlet level information collected by RRA exercise on hamlet level focus group discussions and data available for enrolled children and their families. The factors included General idea about ‘basic needs’ encompassing food, water, shelter, clothing, and access to assets such as education, health, credit, participation in political process, security and dignity. The information is summaries to the question whether Kotra is “Chronic Poverty area”

   1 Introduction

   RBKS has been working in three panchayat namely Mandwa, Zed and Kukawas, the most remote area of the district bordering Gujarat state, since 2004 under its CCF supported CDP projects. It was recognised that Kotra could be “Chronic Poverty” Area on the basis of general observations. To test this hypothesis RBKS undertook an exercise of Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA), including focus group discussions and semi structured interview with community leaders focussing on different aspects of life and livelihood. Under the hypothesis “those who are chronically poor are likely to be poor in several ways, not only in terms of income.” This exercise tried to analysis issue of Chronic poverty on various aspects described below:

   1.1 Location and Approachability

   Area in focus stretches around 84 hamlets of seventeen villages of three panchayat of Kotra Panchayat Samiti, also known as Kala Pani of Rajasthan.

   Deprivation in all forms comes from remoteness as reflected in the study where one has to travel up to 10 kilometres to reach to near by Pucca road. Remoteness was also found with reference to administrative locations and various facilities such as PHC, Health Sub Centre, Education institutions, Market etc

   1.2 Family size and number of Children in Family

   Poverty is often cursed with large family size and a larger population under the fertile age group which further adds to the worse. RRA showed that fourteen villages out of sixteen villages have family size exceeding six with Nivania and Rohini deviating slightly with family size of less than five. Rupani tops the list with family size of 7.49. While 27.6 percent families do have more than five children, 7.3 % families having no children were actually recently qualified for puberty age.

   1.3 Occupation and Annual Income

   Occupational analysis shows that out of 3048 families only 121 families has permanent source of income in form of salaries while rest 2927 families are victim of uncertainty in income sources.
   Another analysis showed that 2227 families (73.06 %) families are registered BPL families and holds Job cards under NREGS scheme. In addition to this major portion (21%) of families still lies out of purview of BPL category allocation due to inefficient systems. 60 % families are in Critically lower annual income group (less than INR 10000). In remote places like Kutarmariya, Rohini Padli, Adavela families having income more than 18000 is almost negligible. Bakhel, Mandwa, Jhanjhar, Anjani and Jed even with good connectivity of roads and somewhat fertile land qualifies only for annual income range INR 18000.
   2 Resource Ownership
   2.1 Land

   Land ownership was previewed under three different category total lands owned, Arable land owned and irrigated land owned. Despite of no landless farmer categorization in the study area, the per capita land holding and Quality of land in terms of productivity are very limited. Nearly 50% households have land less than 1 bigha, while 80% families owns only up to three bigha land. Only 1.2 % families enjoy land holding more than 6 up to maxima of 9 bigha. This analysis indicates about dominance of small and marginal farmers in the study area.

   Irrigation facility analysis shows that only 1 % families has irrigated command of 2 to 6 bigha, while 32% families own less than two bigha of irrigated land. Almost 67% families have no option other than dry land that often plays victim to uncertainty in rainfall.
   2.2 Livestock

   With greater risk in agriculture and with subsistence farming, livestock supports poor marginalized farmers as cushion effect. But this cushion was also victimized by characteristic of poor resource base in the study area. Ownership of Livestock was studied under three different categories of cows, bullocks, buffaloes and sheep/goats. Majority of household owned less than 3 cows. Only 1.32 % families have cows 6-10. 38% families do not have any cow while 50% have only one that too under non-breeding phase.

   With undulating land and small land sizes, bullock proves as only plough driving power in the area, but most of families are deprived of this basic resource. 32 % do not have even a single bullock rendering them to oblige of others having it. 55% families keep one bullock and live in mutual agreement with other families for agriculture operations. Only 13 % families are self dependant in this aspect.

   For dairy occupation, buffaloes serve as most important factor. The study area seems far from developing this mode of occupation in near future. The study found that 90% families do not own even a single buffalo. Only 16 families (Jed, Mandwa, Kodarmal and Buja) keep more than four buffaloes as dairy purpose, 8 % families do keep less than 3 buffaloes as milk animal.

   Goats and Sheep are considered as poor families resources but in this area number of goats and sheep are also not very high. 14.4 % families do not have goats and sheep; on the other hand families having more than 10 animals are limited to 5.4%. 65.9% families do not have complete unit of even five animals.
   2.3 Food base and forced adaptation:

   This is one most shocking observing qualifying for Redley’s believe it or not column. No city dweller might expect that in the study area, almost 75% families are forced to restrict to a single diet a day especially during three months in summer, while 3 % families have developed this habit forcefully for whole of the year. Ninety percent families indicated one time meal for a period till six months.

   A majority of families (80%) enjoys leafy vegetables along pulses just for 3 months but it reduces significantly to 8% families for rest of the year. On the other hand 50% families get only chapatti for more than nine months in a year.
   3 Access to Basic Amenities
   3.1 Drinking Water

   Under this section, hand pump is considered as source of germ free ground water, vital for good health. In the area 30 hamlets (723 families and 4786 persons) do not have access to a single hand pump. Other 84 hamlets have access to 114 hand pumps of which almost 30% goes defunct especially during peak demand period of summer. Most of the families are still dependent on shallow wells and hand dug Berrys in stream beds for their drinking water and domestic needs

   3.2 Education

   Education has been proposed as effective tools against capacity building and fighting poverty. The study area is found to be lagging on this aspect too. The study explains about the coverage education to less than 40% with only of primary level. In the area participation in education is nominal as it covers mainly 84% (Primary level) and 12.4% (Upper Primary level). The education which can be helpful in moving above poverty line i.e. higher education and vocational education is limited to 1.34 % only. This is also expressed by fact that only 121 persons are salaried. Except Mandwa, Bakhel and Buja (connected by roads) no village have education above primary level.

   3.3 Health Situation Facilities

   RRA also indicates skin problems and Malaria as two most common diseases followed by jaundice, continued cough (TB) and physically challenged ones.

   3.4 Social Security
   Kotra area is notorious for violent conflict and people here live under various threats leading to insecurity. In the project villages 15 are the known murder cases, while 76 families have to leave their houses due to fights/violence. 56 families have paid money to settle social issues such as leaving husband and live with other person (second marriage). In all 88 families accepts that they have court cases during last five years. In the area social discrimination, lack of social networks, are disadvantages for women who are in the category of mentally challenged, single and destitute, which is nearly 8 per 1000

   3.5 Access to Welfare programme:

   Welfare approaches by Governmental have failed to reach major population of the area. NREGS have gained some success but it is too victim of inefficient system. 94% families actually belong to Below Poverty Line categorization but 80% have obtained Job guarantee as Job card holders. Further only 15 % of the card holders were able to get 100 days employment, while 20% did not have given job for even 25 days. Access to other facilities such as health card (4%) and antyodaya card (15%) are also limited. Such conditions forces 88% families to migrate forcefully to adjoining mines. 50% families migrate for search of labour wage for more than three months. Economic burden is shown by the fact that nearly 31% families are under heavy and un payable credits laons with very high rate of interest (60-120%) from local money lenders.

   Conclusion: All the above data thus suggest towards the situation of Kotra to be categorised as a “Chronic Poverty Region” on the basis of rigours testing of parameters of remoteness, access to basic amenities and welfare programme, poor economic basis and vulnerabilities due to land degradation, drought and, conflict and instability, and infrastructural and social remoteness, particularly from markets, health centres and centres of administrative support and political decision-making, increasing the susceptibility of the entire population to chronic poverty

   Virendra Chaubisha
6. Akhil Jugran says:

   June 2, 2011 at 10:43 am

   Dear Virendra,

   What are the objectives of the programme on child marriage? What has been the outcome so far? What are the challenges?

   Akhil Jugran
7. Reena Banerjee says:

   June 2, 2011 at 10:41 am

   Dear subhash ji

   Greetings from Nav Srishti

   Thanks for your cooperation.
   Recently we had organized press conference and we shared our latest RTI finding which again not good indication for children in Delhi. Media had given due attention which I like to share with you.

   Warm Regards
   Reena Banerjee
8. Virendra Chaubisha says:

   June 2, 2011 at 10:40 am

   Dear Mr. mittal

   Greeting from Virendra!

   We recived your email regularly.child marrige is also big problem in our Field area Kotra, Udaipur, Rajasthan. we work in chlid marrige in the area.

   thanks for your email to share things!

   virendra choubisa
   Program Manager
   Rajasthan Bal Kalyan samiti
9. Subhash Mittal says:

   June 2, 2011 at 10:38 am

   Dear Mr Singh,

   Thank you for your New Year wishes, which I heartily reciprocate.

   I am happy to find that you have experienced success in your efforts at DIDT on child marriage issues. Through this mail I request you (and other group members) to share your experiences with other group members. I am sure it will be very informative and useful.

   with warm regds

   subhash mittal
10. D.P.Singh says:

    June 2, 2011 at 10:36 am

    Dear Sir

    Thanks for the New Years Greetings and same is to you and your team members. We in DIDT Bihar working on this issue with success.

    With regards
    D.P.Singh

Comments are closed.