Thumbnail Image

Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar

Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University popularly known as HAU, is one of Asia's biggest agricultural universities, located at Hisar in the Indian state of Haryana. It is named after India's seventh Prime Minister, Chaudhary Charan Singh. It is a leader in agricultural research in India and contributed significantly to Green Revolution and White Revolution in India in the 1960s and 70s. It has a very large campus and has several research centres throughout the state. It won the Indian Council of Agricultural Research's Award for the Best Institute in 1997. HAU was initially a campus of Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. After the formation of Haryana in 1966, it became an autonomous institution on February 2, 1970 through a Presidential Ordinance, later ratified as Haryana and Punjab Agricultural Universities Act, 1970, passed by the Lok Sabha on March 29, 1970. A. L. Fletcher, the first Vice-Chancellor of the university, was instrumental in its initial growth.

Browse

20131
Reset filters
Author: Ella Rani × End date: 2014 × Start date: 2010 × Type: Thesis × Thesis Type: Ph.D ×
Reset filters

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    ThesisItemOpen Access
    Gender dimension of poverty and well being in rural households
    (CCSHAU, 2013) Ella Rani; Kaushik, Sushma
    The present study was conducted in Hisar district of Haryana state 400 household from two small village viz: Bir Babran from Hisar-II block and Kirara village from Agroha block of Hisar district were selected including 283 males and 70 females headed households. A set of twelve independent variables and two dependent variables were selected for the study. Poverty status was measured with the help of three tools viz: BPL Survey (Govt. of India, 2002), Monthly Per Capita Expenditure (NSSO, 2005) and Multidimensional Poverty Assessment Tool (IFAD, 2009). Socio-personal profile of the respondents revealed that majority of the households were headed by males, belonged to lower middle age group, matriculate, married, had medium size joint families and were from middle caste, almost nil social participation, had monthly income between Rs. 20,000-30,000, farming as their family occupation, mixed type of housing, having medium size of land holding and had green cards. As regards of communication profile of the respondents, majority had low mass media exposure, high utilization of localite resources and medium cosmopolite source of information. As preference of poverty indicators, the cut off points for identification of BPL was perceived differently by the BPL and APL respondents on various prevalent indicators. The scores of APL respondents were higher as compared to BPL respondents for all the indicators. Availability of meals was most important criteria as perceived by BPL respondents whereas income/ expenditure was most preferred criteria of APL families. In Overall, 55 percent of respondent were satisfied and 45 percent were not satisfied with BPL Survey, However, ‘high proportion of non-poor or non- eligible are BPL card holder’ ‘high level of corruption’ were the reasons for the dissatisfaction with the BPL survey. Poverty mapping of rural household as per the prevalent 13 point criteria of Govt. of India, revealed that none of the household was found below poverty line and majority of respondents scored high on these indicators. None of the sampled population was deprived on six out of total thirteen indicators. The level of deprivation on other criteria ranked between 9.5 to 22 percent, maximum with respect to means of livelihood and minimum for ownership of consumer durables. Majority had monthly expenditure of Rs. 1001-2000/ person/month in both the village and 14.5 percent of respondents had Monthly Per Capita Expenditure below Rs. 1000/ person/ month. Only 8 per cent had per capita expenditure below Rs. 26/day which means they fell into the criteria of BPL. However, per capita per day expenditure for majority of households was much higher than the BPL criteria of Rs. 26/day/person. Majority of the respondents had maximum expenditure on cereals and pulses, milk and milk products and fruits and vegetables as a food items while clothing and footwear and other non-food items as a non-food items. Multidimensional Poverty Assessment Tool (MPAT) showed excellent score on Food and Nutrition Security, Housing , Clothing and Energy, Farm Assets and Gender and social equality while Health and Healthcare, Non-Farm Assets and Exposure and Resilience to Shocks was rated as average on both the villages. There were marked differences in various dimensions of MPAT among landless and other farmers although medium and large farmers did not differ much. The male and female heads of households differed on aspects of Food and Nutrition Security, Domestic Water Supply, Health and Healthcare, Education and Gender and Social Equality. Very few females owned land, property and household assets except jewellary. Majority of males were highest educated in comparison to females, though, majority of females and males were enrolled, however, dropout rate was more in females as compared to males. Educational aspirations were higher for male children in comparison to female children. Occurrence of serious illness was more in females as compared to males in all categories and they could afford treatment for males with some difficulty while for females with much difficulty. Non significant association of MPCE was found with head of household and level of education while significant association was formed with type of house, family occupation, type of family and size of land holding.