FACTORS AFFECTING THE PARTICIPATION OF RURAL WOMEN IN THE SELF HELP GROUP-LED MICROFINANCE PROGRAMME IN UDHAM SINGH NAGAR DISTRICT OF UTTARAKHAND

S. KUMAR¹, R.R. GANGWAR²*, C. DEV³, S. MISRA^4
1Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, G.B.Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, 263153, Uttarakhand, India
²Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, G.B.Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, 263153, Uttarakhand, India
³Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, G.B.Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, 263153, Uttarakhand, India
⁴Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, G.B.Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, 263153, Uttarakhand, India
* Corresponding Author : ruchigangwar16@gmail.com

Received : 03-03-2022     Accepted : 27-03-2022     Published : 30-03-2022
Volume : 14     Issue : 3       Pages : 11205 - 11207
Int J Agr Sci 14.3 (2022):11205-11207

Keywords : Microfinance, Women empowerment, Probit regression model, Self-Help Groups
Academic Editor : Shweta Bijla, V. Yadav, Mekuria Guye, Shaloo
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, G.B.Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, 263153, Uttarakhand, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

The goal of the research is to examine the factors that restrained rural women's participation in the Self Help Group programme. As not all women displayed active participation in the programme, it is critical to identify and understand various factors influencing women's participation in Self Help Groups (SHGs). In comparison to metropolitan areas, there is a wide socio-cultural variance in rural areas, as the rural people differ in terms of attitude and acceptance towards new phenomena. Rural poor people, particularly women, are marginalised and vulnerable as they have a very negligible say in the society, especially in financial decisions which makes it even more difficult for them to embrace change. The study aims to examine the factors determining the participation of rural women in the SHG-Led microfinance programme. The study was conducted in the year 2020-21 in U.S. Nagar district of Kumaon region of Uttarakhand. The study was based on sample size of 120 respondents with 80 SHG members selected from 2 blocks and 40 non-SHG members selected from the same locale. Probit regression model was used to determine the factors that influenced the participation of women in SHG programme. The probit model estimation showed that probability of participation in the SHG programme increased with the increase in the family size i.e., a positive relationship while it decreased with the increase in age and landholding size i.e., a negative relationship. Physical labour is draining, financial situations are dire, and social norms are rigid. As a result, the motives for joining the programme and the factors that influence participation must be investigated. Rural women would be empowered only if their contributions to the family and society are valued more. SHGs are becoming an increasingly important means of organising women to take action and empower themselves thus leading them towards making self- reliant

1. Verner D. (2006) Rural poor in rich rural areas: poverty in rural Argentina, 4096, World Bank Publications.
2. Hulme M., Doherty R., Ngara T., New M. and Lister D. (2001) Climate Res., 17, 145–168.
3. Bhaduri A. (1986) World Development, 14(2), 267-272.
4. Pitt M.M. (2014) Journal of Development Studies, 50(4), 605-610.
5. Chowdhury P.R. (2012) Microfinance: the SHG-linkage program the oxford handbook of the Indian economy, New Delhi: Oxford University Press Mar, 13, 149.
6. Basu P. and Srivastava P. (2005) Economic and Political Weekly, 40(17), 1747-1756.
7. Sarangi S. and Lahiri D. (2007) Asia Pacific Journal of Rural Development, 17(2), 107-122.
8. Uzunoz M. and Akcay Y. (2012) Economics Research International, 21(4), 35-39.
9. Nair T.S. and Tankha A. (2015) Inclusive finance India report 2014. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
10. Sha D., et al., (2015) Indian Journal Agricultural Economics, 70(3), 405.
11. Paramanandam D.A. & Packirisamy P. (2015) Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Emerald Group Publishing, 9(4), 298-314.
12. Gombe S.Y., et al., (2016) Journal of Education Social Science Research, 6(3), 55-56.
13. Joshi G. (2019) Rajagiri Management Journal, 13(2), 2-11.
14. Rana K., Ansari M.A., et al., (2020) International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 5(1), 101-111.
15. Mc Fadden M.L. (1981) Econometric Models of Probabilistic Choice Structural Analysis of Discrete Data, Cambridge: MIT Press.
16. Gujarati N.D. (2003) Basic Econometrics, New York: McGraw Hill Companies Inc.
17. Anjugam M. and Ramasamy C. (2007) Agriculture Economics Research Review, 20(2), 283-298.
18. Sinha D. (2008) Indian J. Dev., 8(1), 123-136.