ICRISAT Archival Report 2006 - The seedlings of success in the ...

due to population pressure and sub-division of holdings. The incidence of poverty declined over the last twenty
five years but still 35 per cent of the sample households live below the poverty line. The average per capita
income is Rs. 6286 ($ 145) per year. Despite increases in income and consumption levels, still more than one
half of the households are calorie deficient while about one-fourth of the households are protein-deficient.
Cropping patterns changed significantly in favor of cash crops. But farmers are unable to recover the costs in
case of both food and cash crops on the rainfed lands. The crops which received irrigation support have yielded
positive net returns mainly because of subsidies. Even in case of livestock, the returns over variable costs are
quite meager. Despite low returns from crop and livestock enterprises, the net household incomes have
increased due to higher contributions from non-farm sources, caste occupations, migration and other minor
sources. Self-help groups of women are able to contribute to family incomes.
Farmers invested heavily on water exploration but under-invested on soil and water conservation. Most of the
farmers displayed risk aversion and showed interest in purchasing well-designed rainfall insurance schemes.
The rural households participated in the development and welfare programs of the government. A household, on
an average, received a benefit of Rs. 4288 over the 17 years period (1995-2002). Despite these programs, a
substantial proportion of labor force is indulging in seasonal migration in search of work and livelihood.
1F.2. First and second generation VLS data bases integrated and documented through tracking surveys
One of the objectives of the Second Generation VLS (2001-07) was to establish comparability with the OLD-
VLS (1975-84) sample. A systematic tracking survey was initiated in 2005 and continued in 2006. A lot of
changes occurred in the demographic profile of sample villages between 1984 and 2005. Out of the 1998
individuals present in the sample households during first generation VLS, 432 persons died during the two
decades period. 675 individuals migrated out of the village. Quite a few of them were the young women who
moved out after their marriage with a person belonging to other village/town/city. But a considerable number of
individuals have also moved out of the village in search of work. Many of them are seasonal migrants who come
back to the village at least for some months in a year. Some of them have migrated permanently as they expect
to get better opportunities for livelihood, employment and income. The remaining 857 members continued to
stay in the village. Only 581 of them were included in the sample for second generation VLS during 2001-05.
For a comparative analysis of the livelihoods, it is necessary to include the migrants and the people residing in
the village but was not included in the sample. A two-pronged approach was used to establish comparability
between the samples of the first and second generation VLS. The size of the sample was enhanced from 446 to
592 households. All the split-offs from the original households were added to the sample since 2005-06 in order
to cover most of the individuals from the original sample. The results of tracking survey are presented in the
table below.
Tracking and attrition
Status by 2005
Full sample of
individuals included in
1975-1984 with
tracking information in
2005
Of which:
Included in the 2001
survey, i.e. in the village
and in the sample in 2001
Dead by 2005 432 24 408
Migrated by 2005 675 45 630
In village by 2005 857 581 276
No information by
2005
34 4 30
Total 1998 654 1344
Of which:
Not included in the
2001 survey.
Efforts were also made to collect information from the migrants who visit the villages for festivals, annual getto-gathers
and other social occasions. In case of the migrants who do not come back to the villages, a special
survey was conducted to collect data from migrants residing outside the village. With the limited funds
available, migrants staying in the villages near by to the VLS villages and those who are living around
Hyderabad city were interviewed. Even after a great effort to locate the migrants, some could not be reached as
they have moved to a new place by the time we try to contact them at their old address known to the people in
the VLS villages. We are continuing our efforts to track them and elicit their responses to the questions designed
for the purpose of the study.
32