SUFFiciENcy EcONOMy ANd GRASSROOtS DEvElOPMENt

286
The Meaning of Sufficiency Economy
International Conference
Results and Discussion
The occupation status of the respondents reveal that, out of 401 members
agricultural
study aim at
labours
organizing
with/
the
without
poor people.
animal
Initially
husbandry
the groups
activities
which
form
emerged
the single
naturally
largest
majority consisted (81.79%). of members It who is also came found forward that voluntarily. 92% of the members Invariably are the Hindus poorest followed people
by
were
6.48%
diffident
of Christians.
and unwilling
The
to
NGOs
join
involved
the groups.
in the
But
formation
on seeing
of
the
groups
successful
of the
present study aim at organizing the poor people. Initially the groups which emerged
naturally experience consisted of the other of members the who poor came agreed forward to form groups. voluntarily. Keeping Invariably the criteria the
poorest of family people income were of Rs.11,000/- diffident and as the unwilling cut off to point, join it the is groups. found that But 54.11% on seeing of the the
successful experience of the other members the poor agreed to form groups.
total members are below the poverty line. The poorest with annual income below
Keeping the criteria of family income of Rs.11,000/- as the cut off point, it is found
that Rs.6,000/- 54.11% are of found the total more members among are the below group the members poverty of line. MYRADA The poorest (21.05%). with
annual Vikasana income (18%) below and Pragathi Rs.6,000/- (17.78%). are found Economic more among status of the group group members members the of
MYRADA (21.05%). Vikasana (18%) and Pragathi (17.78%). Economic status of
group results members are presented the results in the table are presented - 1. in the table - 1.
Table – 1 Economic Status of Group Members
Table – 1
Sl. No. Poor Economic Status Average of Group Members High Total
Sl. No. 1. Poor 40 Average 49 High 11 Total 100
1. 40 49 11 100
2. 2. 8585 5 5 5 5 95 95
3. 92 64 50 206
3.
217
92
118
64
66
50 206
401
(54.11)
217 (54.11)
(29.43)
118 (29.43)
(16.46)
66 (16.46) 401
Note: Figures within parenthesis indicate percentage.
Note: Figures within parenthesis indicate percentage.
High
16%
Average
29%
Poor
55%
Poor Average High
Therefore it is concluded that poverty level of the members influence the
membership of SHGs.
Therefore it is concluded that poverty level of the members influence the
membership of SHGs.