Cash transfers in Andhra Pradesh: a gaping lifeline

The YSR Rythu Bharosa scheme, launched in 2019, provides annual financial assistance of ₹13,500 to farming families. File | Photo Credit: The Hindu

In Andhra Pradesh, the current and previous governments have relied heavily on cash transfers to support vulnerable citizens. These transfers reflect a global trend that favors direct financial aid over traditional aid, based on the belief that recipients can meet their needs more effectively. However, while the State’s cash transfer programs, such as YSR Rythu Bharosa (RB) and Jagananna Amma Vodi (AMV), are ambitious, our latest research shows that these programs are not reaching many of those who want to help them, especially in tribal communities. .

Unlike in-kind support, which involves a complex array of assets, cash transfers deliver funds directly to beneficiaries, allowing them to make their own decisions. In Andhra Pradesh, cash transfers form the backbone of the government’s social welfare agenda, providing financial assistance in various sectors. Between 2019 and 2024, the government claims to have spent around Rs 2 lakh on cash transfer programmes.

The RB scheme, launched in 2019, provides annual financial assistance of ₹13,500 to farming families. Meanwhile, the AMV scheme provides ₹15,000 per year to mothers or guardians of school-aged children.

However, our December 2022 survey of over 1,100 households in the State’s Integrated Tribal Development Agency districts revealed that nearly 24% of eligible RB beneficiaries and 15% of AMV beneficiaries did not receive any benefits. These statistics are alarming as they highlight the failure to reach the most vulnerable.

Administrative and technical barriers often cause these exclusions. Our research identified issues such as unlinked Aadhaar numbers, errors in bank account mapping, and unresolved technical issues. Discrepancies in land records, such as changed village names, have led to denial of payment to eligible farmers. The challenges for the authorities in solving these issues are often great, especially for those with limited literacy and access to support.

Silvia Masiero and Chakradhar Buddha’s research on the RB system highlights three important issues. Many beneficiaries remain unable to be excluded, and grievance redressal mechanisms are often ineffective. Design flaws block access to funding. Information barriers occur when beneficiaries are not informed about denial of benefits or remedies. Structural challenges, including the difficulty of updating inaccurate records, increase emissions. These problems emphasize the need for inclusive social welfare programs.

The poor are often excluded because of errors and complex error-solving processes. In tribal communities, especially women, getting help is even more difficult due to long travel times and cultural biases in public services.

These challenges raise important questions about the effectiveness of digital infrastructure in delivering well-being. Technological change has increased the burden on already difficult administrative systems and on high-risk beneficiaries, for whom a “crisis” can mean missing out on vital financial assistance. Instead of simplifying, digital public infrastructure has, in some cases, added layers of complexity.

To address this, the government needs to move beyond the current digital-first approach. A concerted effort is needed to simplify administrative procedures, improve quality support services, and improve access to raise awareness of eligibility criteria and registration procedures. Investing in local help centers, deploying more mobile support teams, and providing guidance in local languages ​​can close the accessibility gap.

The lessons are clear, technology can make social delivery faster and easier for managers, but it cannot replace the need for transparent, human-centered programs. Information gaps, such as unclear reasons for exclusion of benefits and ineffective grievance redressal mechanisms, must be addressed to ensure that these programs truly reach and elevate disadvantaged populations. The State must ensure that the cash transfer offer is not limited to the click of a button but reaches every eligible beneficiary. Only then will these ambitious social programs become the lives of the poor.

Chakradhar Buddha is a Senior Research Associate with LibTech India. Upasak Das is Senior Lecturer at the Global Development Institute at the University of Manchester. Diego Maiorano is Professor at the University of Naples L’Orientale and Visiting Research Fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore.