Why VB-G RAM G raises fears over future of rural jobs in Andhra Pradesh

With the VB-G RAM G Act replacing MGNREGA, a key question arises for Andhra Pradesh’s rural poor: will the legal guarantee of work survive in practice? Even under MGNREGA, households in the state received employment for an average of just 51 days out of the mandatory 100 last year despite the Centre releasing the required funds.

A new study by research group LibTech warns that the shift to the VB-G RAM G framework, which limits work to notified areas and budgetary allocations, could further weaken access to employment, especially for a debt-burdened state like Andhra Pradesh.

Further, VB-G RAM G is expected to raise the states’ financial burden from 10 to 40 per cent. For Andhra Pradesh, already grappling with a debt of nearly ₹10 lakh crore, this raises doubts about whether the scheme can be implemented on a large scale.

Limited scope

MGNREGA guaranteed rural residents the right to demand work and to receive an unemployment allowance if employment was not provided within 15 days. This entitlement applied universally across rural India. However, VB-G RAM G, which replaces it, will operate only within the budget allocated by the Centre and only in areas notified by it.

Also read | Naidu admits BRS allegations: AP took Telangana mandals without consent

While the Centre claims the new law increases workdays from 100 to 125, organisations that have examined its design and likely implementation remain sceptical. Even under MGNREGA, although households were entitled to demand 100 days of work, they received an average of only 51.6 days. Just 11 per cent of families managed to secure the full 100 days.

The Centre argues that increasing the ceiling to 125 days addresses concerns about employment security. However, analysts point out that under the new law, work will be provided only in areas identified by the Centre. This has triggered fears that the universal right to demand work, the cornerstone of MGNREGA, will be significantly weakened.

More vulnerable among rural poor

LibTech, which has studied MGNREGA extensively, notes that Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and women form a substantial share of those dependent on the scheme. It warns that the new law could undermine their livelihoods.

According to its data, 19 per cent of beneficiaries under MGNREGA were from SC communities, 9.3 per cent from ST, and 58–60 per cent were women. These figures underline how critical employment guarantee schemes are for marginalised communities.

LibTech is a non-profit organisation comprising engineers, social workers, and scientists using technology and RTI data to improve transparency and accountability in India's rural social welfare programmes such as MGNREGA.

Demand and delivery gap

In 2024-25, even when 100 days of work was a legal entitlement under MGNREGA, rural households received only 51.6 days of employment on average, and only 11 per cent reached the 100-day mark. LibTech argues that since the VB-G RAM G Act does not recognise work as a right, raising the cap to 125 days offers no assurance that jobs will actually be provided.

This concern was echoed in the 2023-24 Economic Survey, which noted that rural employment generation does not keep pace with demand. It was observed that work requests are often not properly recorded at the grassroots level, resulting in official data that understates the scale of rural economic distress.

LibTech has also criticised the Andhra Pradesh government for directing officials to hold gram sabhas highlighting the “benefits” of VB-G RAM G, while failing to address its potential risks. The officers have been told to convince people that VB-G RAM G is an improvement over MGNREGA.

Key limitation

LibTech activist Chakradhar Buddham points out that this overlooks a key limitation. “The new scheme applies only to areas notified by the Centre, yet gram sabhas are being held across the state. If the scheme is restricted to limited areas, numerically smaller tribal communities will be the worst affected,” he told The Federal Andhra Pradesh.

Also read | Andhra local body polls in doubt after Backward Classes reservations row

Chakradhar also highlighted the state’s strained finances. “Andhra Pradesh has a debt of nearly ₹10 lakh crore and very little fiscal space. If employment is provided at the 2024-25 level, the state’s burden will rise from ₹517 crore to ₹3,470 crore. Providing 125 days of work per family will require around ₹8,400 crore annually. Under the 60:40 Centre-state cost-sharing formula, providing work to 65.5 lakh families will cost about ₹11,700 crore.”

He added that these figures were estimates and that the law offered no assurance that the Centre would meet its 60 per cent share. If states spend more than the Centre’s allocation, they must bear the additional cost themselves. “Financially stressed states will inevitably try to cut back the scheme,” the LibTech report warns.

Digital exclusion

Chakradhar argues that the mandatory use of technology under the VB-G RAM G Act could further exclude vulnerable workers. “The new law makes technology compulsory, from identifying workers and marking attendance to monitoring work and paying wages.” Technology, he argues, should only be used to simplify administration.

Referring to Andhra Pradesh’s experience under MGNREGA, he said: “Linking workers to Aadhaar led to nearly 78 lakh names being removed in a year. Aadhaar-based e-KYC resulted in another 16 lakh deletions in just one month. Elderly people, single women, persons with disabilities and those living in remote tribal areas were the worst affected. In many cases, wages were not paid even for completed work.”

Reduced local control

MGNREGA allowed states some flexibility to adapt implementation to local ecological and livelihood conditions. For a diverse state like Andhra Pradesh, this was crucial. Under VB-G RAM G, priorities are aligned with Centrally defined Viksit Bharat goals, reducing the space for panchayats and states to respond to local needs.

Also read | Falling yields, rising oil imports crush Anantapur’s groundnut farmers

The new law also mandates stopping employment for 60 days during peak agricultural seasons. Chakradhar questions how this would be implemented. “There is no single agricultural season in Andhra Pradesh. Agricultural cycles vary between regions and even within districts. Under MGNREGA, work would reduce during peak seasons but never stopped completely,” he said. “Stopping work altogether strikes at the very idea of a right to demand employment."

MGNREGA strengthened the bargaining power of Dalits and women by providing a fallback source of income. LibTech warns that the administrative controls and conditions under VB-G RAM G could reverse these gains. With employment now shaped by central directives and constrained state finances, whether the new law can act as a safety net for rural Andhra Pradesh remains an open question.

(This article was originally published in The Federal Andhra Pradesh.)