Impact of MGNREGA on Rural Development in Mobiripatty Panchayati in Dharmapuri District


V Chinnasamy

Assistant Professor in Economics, Apollo Arts &Science College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Peer Review Report

Received Date

11.05.2019

Accepted Date

25.05.2019

Published Date

02.06.2019

Plagiarism

Accepted Level

Major Comments

Abstract is not fulfilling its purpose. Abstract should cover the complete need of the study and more number of keywords can be given. So the readers of the article can get narrative view of the entire study.

Selection of sample population on gender based is differs in different hamlets (in some areas no male respondents) and totally 9 male respondents only out 70 respondents which gives the result based on gender may be biased. Author needs to clear this point of major difference between male and female respondents. If the result does not affects because of this difference author should include some words of clearance in the paper.

In caste-wise analysis the total number of respondents given is 7,737 but the selected sample respondent for the study is only 70. Author should clear these confusing counts of respondents between sample respondents and given total number of respondents.

There was no mention of the limitations of the study, one of which is the apparently high dropout rate. Author needs to add limitations of present study.

In conclusion there is a stamen ‘This study concludes that the scheme does not improve the expected level of socio economic conditions of rural people’ where the author can add some suggestions for improving the services of MGNREGA scheme which will give the added value for the study.

Minor Comments

Non-frequency of the contents is there which are to be given more concentrate for valuable research study.

For every reference there should be a footnote in the relevant pages.

Researcher can be highlight the research gap and pave the way for future research.