The Hindu Business Line : Rural electrification — Ambitious targets, wrong approach

The problem does not lie with the objective of the rural electrification programmes but the approach, which is to provide electricity for consumptive needs rather than productive needs.

"WHY you are providing us with electricity?" These were the exact words of Tolo Nayak, an elder of Govindpur village, Sonua block, West Singhbhum district, Jharkhand.

He posed this question to TERI's project team during a visit to Jharkhand to discuss the provision of electricity with some villagers. He asked whether the electricity was to be used for domestic purposes or something that would enhance their income levels.

It is a general perception of the villagers in these regions that there is no point providing electricity if they do not have the ability to pay for the power consumed. The economic condition of most villages is bad and the people have barely enough resources to pay for their basic needs.

The villagers would rather be provided electricity for irrigation or energy for any other productive use, so that the overall benefit to the region would be more and they would then have the ability to pay for energy for domestic lighting.

An estimated 1.64 billion people worldwide lack access to electricity, of which approximately 80 per cent live in the rural areas of South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

In India, only 31 per cent of rural households have access to electricity as per the 1991 Census. This number has not changed substantially in the last decade and recent estimates suggest that rural household electrification still stands at around 33 per cent in India (International Energy Agency 2002).

Of the 5,87,258 inhabited villages in the country (1991 census) 5,09,653 villages (or 87 per cent of them) were declared electrified by October 2002, according to the old definition of electrification, and 30.54 per cent of rural households had access to electricity.

This percentage is likely to go down in the coming months after the reassessment of villages based on the new definition. But, as of now, only 80,000 villages remain to be electrified.

Official sources declare that ten States have achieved 100 per cent village electrification, while seven are about to achieve that status . The level of household electrification in the States with most of the un-electrified villages is below the all-India average of 31 per cent, except in Madhya Pradesh and Arunachal Pradesh, which have a marginally higher percentage than the national average.

To achieve its objectives of improving the quality of life of the rural populace, the rural electrification programmes would have to intervene at two distinct levels. First, electrify the un-electrified villages by 2007. And, two, the bigger task, provide energy in the form of electricity to all households by 2012.

Therefore, the initiative should be targeted towards the electrification of the un-electrified villages and then only be extended to all households.

An example of this can be seen in the Kutir Jyoti Programme (KJP), launched by the Government in 1988-89 for extending single light point light connections to the households of rural families below the poverty line, including Harijan and Adivasi families.

Under this programme, the one-time cost of the internal wiring and service connection charges is provided by way of 100 per cent grant to the States. The respective State Electricity Boards/State governments are responsible for executing the target connections, against which they receive the grant through the REC.

When the programme was introduced in 1988-89, the grant amount was Rs 180 per KJP connection (both unmetered and metered). This was increased to Rs 400 per connection in 1992-93 and further enhanced to Rs 800 for the unmetred connection and Rs 1,000 for metered connection since 1996-97.

To cover the increased cost of material and labour charges, the cost for a Kutir Jyoti connection has been increased to Rs 1,800 per connection in special category States and Rs 1,500 per connection in other States. The special category states include J&K, HP, Uttaranchal, Sikkim and North-Eastern States.

The progress and impact of the Kutir Jyoti programme has not been up to the mark due to partial utilisation of funds.

Most SEBs partially used the funds because of the rising cost of providing KJP connections, misuse of KJP connections by way of extension and multiple points, use for other purposes rather than lighting and non-payments of bills by beneficiaries.

At the same time, other SEBs did not have enough funds for proper LT distribution lines. The problem does not lie with the objective of the rural electrification programmes, which aim to provide energy for the rural areas, but the approach, which is to provide electricity for consumptive needs rather than productive needs.

The energy provided for household electrification will not raise the economic status of the beneficiaries. Only a better-focussed programme aimed at increasing productivity in the region will result in the real empowerment of the people.

(The author is a Research Assistant in the Renewable Energy Division, TERI.)