Sustainable development is one of the ubiquitous paradigms of the 21st century (Costanza et al., 2014; Mensah, 2019; Combet, 2020; UNESCO, 2020). Poverty, biodiversity loss, and climate change are some of the encumbrances to sustainable development (Oyeshola, 2007; IISD, 2012; Roe et al., 2019). Fighting these hindrances in all their dimensions constitute the various targets embedded in the sustainable development goals which aim at achieving a more fruitful integrative paradigm of “sustaincentrism” (UNDP, 2020). Public work programs (PWPs) or public employment programs have a long history and has been popularized worldwide as possible engines for economic recovery and putting an end to crises such as droughts, famine, unemployment, and poverty (McCord, 2008, 2012; Holmes and Jones, 2011; Blattman and Annan, 2016). Carter et al. (2021) defined public work programming as “the provision of state-sponsored employment for the working age poor who are unable to support themselves due to under-productivity, seasonality of rural and urban livelihoods, or the inadequacy of market-based employment opportunities.” McCord (2008) elaborated PWPs as “those activities which entail the payment of a wage (in cash or in kind) by the state, or by an agent acting on behalf of the state, in return for the provision of labour, in order to (i) enhance employment and (ii) produce an asset (either physical or social), with the overall objective of promoting social protection” (p. 1).

Many variants of PWPs exists; however, most PWPs tend to offer either food or cash in return for physical labor and are therefore, respectively, classified as food-for-work (FFW) or cash-for-work (CFW) programs. The choice of an appropriate model (cash, food or other inputs) relies on the conditions upon which the need for the program itself was necessitated (McCord, 2008). Another common variant of PWPs is one in which wages (in the form of food) are harnessed as societal incentives for participation in training programs (food-for-training or FFT) or construction assets (food-for-assets or FFA). PWPs that remits food (not cash wage) have always received support from international agencies such as the World Food Program and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) as these agencies usually have surplus food inventories vis-à-vis capital to support PWPs (McCord, 2008).

There has been an upsurge in PWPs globally (The World Bank, 2009; Subbarao et al., 2013; Bahal, 2022). Representative examples of PWPs reported globally include Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Mandiri (PNPM) in Indonesia (Baker et al., 2013; Global Delivery Initiative, 2015), the Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) in Ethiopia (European Union, 2018), Programa de Jefes y Jefas de Hogar Desocupados (Program for Unemployed Male and Female Heads of Households) in Argentina (Galasso and Ravallion, 2004; Kostzer, 2008), the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme in India (Agrawal, 2019),Liberia’s Cash for Work Temporary Employment Project (CfWTEP), the Vision 2020 Umurenge Program in Rwanda (Subbarao et al., 2013; National Institute of Statistics Rwanda, 2021), and the Expanded Public Works Program in South Africa (South African Government, 2021).

It is proven beyond doubts that PWPs can build a strong social safety net through redistribution of wealth and generation of meaningful employment, thereby serving as countercyclical interventions to address both seasonal and short-term unemployment challenges (Grosh et al., 2011; Azam, 2012; Subbarao et al., 2013). PWPs on the whole entail remittance of a wage (in kind as food, cash or voucher) by the state or an agent acting on behalf of the same, in return for the provision of labor, to reduce poverty and vulnerability, produce a (physical or social) asset or service and/or improve employability (Subbarao et al., 2013; Alderman and Yemtsov, 2014; Berhane et al., 2014; McCord and Paul, 2019). Traditionally, PWPs have been adopted as a strategy to tackle poverty, mitigate economic, social, and humanitarian shocks or other country-specific transient circumstances in both middle income and low-income countries (del Ninno et al., 2009; Beierl and Grimm, 2017; Gehrke and Hartwig, 2018; Gilligan, 2020; Carter et al., 2021). Through provision of temporary low-wage employment opportunities to usually unskilled manual laborers, PWPs improves living standards and transfers income to the poor (vulnerable) households in a self-targeted manner while realizing accomplishment of other national initiatives such as reforestation and afforestation, soil conservation, irrigation infrastructure development, road construction and maintenance (Kanaan, 1997; Mackintosh and Blomquist, 2003; Global Delivery Initiative, 2015; European Union, 2018). ıVeritably, labor-intensive PWPs can induce productive investments via income and insurance effects when they are sufficiently reliable and long-term (Gehrke and Hartwig, 2018).

Recently, the role of PWPs has expanded due to globalization and economic integration that seeks to avail opportunities for all as well as function as a fundamental part of the social protection toolkit necessary to address risks and persistent poverty (Zimmermann, 2014; Gehrke and Hartwig, 2018). Thus, innovative dimensions of PWPs have emerged with the sole aim of achieving extra goals. Add-on interventions, such as capital infusion, training and mentoring, and behavioral therapy components are being inculcated into PWPs to improve the quality of labor supply and develop programs into more or less permanent initiatives so as to attain social protection goals, e.g., restoring dignity, reducing child labor and gender inequality (Dejardin, 1996; Holmes and Jones, 2011; Rimki, 2012; Ehmke, 2015; Kumar, 2017; Gehrke and Hartwig, 2018; Dinku, 2019; Mission Directorate, 2021) and maintaining social and political stability, particularly in fragile states (Mvukiyehe, 2018). This new image given to PWPs leaves only a thin commonality between all PWPs−they are all poised to (1) minimize persistent poverty through provision of low-wage employment opportunities for the vulnerable poor and at-risk youths, and (2) create or upgrade (repair) community assets e.g., social and economic infrastructure (The World Bank, 2009; Mvukiyehe, 2018). While PWPs have been beneficial, they also have some drawbacks. For example, they can revolutionize the rural wage market to the benefit of rural workers, which might adversely affect the private sector labor markets (pushes up the cost of agriculture) if the wages offered in PWPs are higher than the wages in local markets (JICA, 2011; Azam, 2012).

Taking a case in point of a developing country like India, the unemployment and out-of-labor force days of agrarian laborers exceed 100 (about 76 days for males and 141 days for females). An estimated 73% of the poor are in rural areas, more than 77% of the country’s total labor force is rural, and 85% of women participating in the labor force are in rural areas (IFAD, 2021). Persistent poverty and unemployment remain as direct outcomes of extensive erosion of natural resources over the past five decades. These are accompanied by natural disasters (floods, hailstorms and whirlwinds, heat waves, prevalence of pests and diseases) have been adversely impacting agricultural activities (Esteves et al., 2013; Bandyopadhyay et al., 2016; Parth, 2019; Amarasinghe et al., 2020; Angom et al., 2021; IFAD, 2021). Increasing poverty and unemployment have triggered other challenges: land fragmentation and an upsurge in the number of agricultural laborers. For instance, the number of agricultural laborers had increased exponentially from 56 million in 1981 to 107 million in 2008. Within almost the same time scale, the percentage of operational land holdings under small and marginal farmers increased from 70% in 1971 to 82% in 2001 (Sharma, 2011). Thus, policy responses to chronic poverty and inequality alike have laid emphasis on inclusive growth whose architecture is precisely defined by setting key areas that requires prioritization through major PWPs. Such PWPs target time-bound delivery of outcomes, including infrastructure, human resource development through basic education, and health and livelihood through skills development, income-generation through a wage employment program (Sharma, 2011; Gehrke and Hartwig, 2018).

This review followed a non-systematic approach to retrieve and scrutinize peer-reviewed journal articles and reports on National Employment Guarantee Program (MGNREGS) and the associated contribution on the rejuvenation and restoration of forests in India. The reports considered were retrieved electronically from multidisciplinary databases: Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed, Emerald Insight, Google Scholar, Taylor and Francis Online, Wiley Online Library and Springer Link. References in the returned results were screened and a further general Google search was done to capture reports and documents from international organizations, regional, national and subnational agencies. The documents obtained were screened using their titles, abstracts and keywords for the key terms and acronyms: “National Employment Guarantee Program,” “Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act,” “Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Scheme,” “Mahatma Gandhi National Employment Guarantee Program,” “National Employment Guarantee Act,” “India,” “forestry,” “afforestation,” “trees,” “reforestation,” “forests,” “plantation,” “agroforestry,” “terracing,” “NREGA,” “MGNREGA,” “NREGS,” and “MGNREGS.” Only relevant reports and articles with information pertaining to the role of MGNREGS and the role of women under the scheme in promotion of forestry, afforestation or reforestation were considered. Only full text reports published in or translated to English and dated until December 2021 were included in the study. In total, the study retrieved 127 reports. After removal of duplicates and assessment for their eligibility, 44 reports met inclusion criteria and were reviewed.

While there is great momentum by India in response to the threats of the decadal climate change, it is evident that the action points are rooted in restoration (species-dependent afforestation works) of the degraded and destroyed ecosystems (Kanwal et al., 2017; Ranjan, 2019; Saxena et al., 2021). These are exemplified by the restoration targets reflected in several flagship programs such as the National Afforestation Program (NAP), Joint Forest Management (JFM) program, the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM), the National Biodiversity Action Plan, and the National Mission for a Green India (GIM) under the National Action Plan on Climate Change (Singh et al., 2020; Bagai and Gergan, 2021).

Amongst other things, the MGNREGA envisaged that activities to be undertaken as part of the program would strengthen natural resource management and address auxiliary causes of chronic poverty like drought, deforestation and soil erosion, thereby insulating the rural poor against climate change impacts and encouraging sustainable development (Bhanumurthy et al., 2014; Narayanan et al., 2014; Bhat and Yadav, 2015). This is because, the scheme itself is not a permanent occupation for poor households, but creation of durable assets could uplift rural economies to levels of prosperity and thrust out the need for minimum-wage employment under MGNREGS (Bhattarai and Viswanathan, 2018). Forest restoration and rejuvenation is one of the objectives of MGRENGA that is nested under land development works (Tiwari et al., 2011; Ministry of Rural Development, 2012; Esteves et al., 2013; Dhakane and Mandan, 2014). As per the guidelines enshrined in the MGNREGA, the following works were allowed in drought proofing category (Dhakane and Mandan, 2014).

Thus, these activities can be broadly divided into afforestation, reforestation, terracing, agroforestry systems and horticulture development activities. Some of the works relating to MGNREGS forestry are under convergence with other departments that guarantees their implementation in the most efficient manner (Bhanumurthy et al., 2014). This is indicative that collective efforts are being put to support MGNREGS, which itself subsumed various PWPs initially launched in India.

Works relating to afforestation constitutes up to 10% of the total MGNREGS works (Ministry of Rural Development, 2012). A study undertaken in 31 of the 40 study villages of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan states indicated that forest (Neem and Dalbergia) and fruit-bearing (lemon, mango, jackfruit, and guava) tree species had been planted on individual farms and common property resources under MGNREGS (Table 1). Forest trees can be harnessed in the production of fodder, fuel (wood), and other non-timber forest products. The fruit trees yield fruits, flowers and nuts, which is a source of extra income for reducing vulnerability to climatic risks (Tiwari et al., 2011). Similar initiatives have been witnessed in Bihar state where planting of fruit trees such as mangoes, banana, jack fruit and litchis provide livelihood options for farmers under MGNREGS (Gandhi, 2016). Such initiatives standout to encourage the agrarian communities to practice forest restoration without reservations.

Similarly, horticultural plantations have been raised in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan states which in combination with forest plantations and fruit trees have the potential to confer both regional and global environmental benefits, including biodiversity conservation and carbon sequestration (Tiwari et al., 2011). Of the plantations (afforestation work) implemented in 12 out of 40 villages of the studied states (Table 1 and Figure 1), soil organic content was reported to have improved (increased). For example, a 70–75% increase of the beneficiary plots in Bhilwara district (Rajasthan) and Dhar district (Madhya Pradesh) were recorded (Tiwari et al., 2011).

The “Green Ambaji” project in Banaskantha district of Gujarat covering about sixty hectares of land under the green coverage employed MGNREGS women workers from poor families (Dhakane and Mandan, 2014), which has been instrumental in the restoration of plantation in degraded forestlands and increasing forestry in the district. Due to increased water availability, 60 hectares of forest land was created (TSIRD, 2013). Another project under MGNREGS in conjunction with the Joint Forest Management Committee (JFMC) raises a nursery of multipurpose tree species at Navaras in Banaskantha district which are then transplanted. This plantation initiative led to the creation of 200 hectares of land under forest cover (TSIRD, 2013; Dhakane and Mandan, 2014), exemplifying the potential role of MGNREGS in restoration of forests and other ecosystems in India.

A similar initiative (orchid nursery) was reported in Boko block of Assam state (Bhanumurthy et al., 2014) wherein a convergence partnership with MGNREGS for a cumulative budget of Rs. 2.04 lakhs were drawn. This convergence aimed at land development, institution of bamboo shelves, green house, water sprinklers, orchid blocks and orchids. Published data on the outcomes of this project were, however, not encountered.

A survey report by the Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research which surveyed 20 districts in Maharashtra state indicated that MGNREGS works had “replaced scrublands with forests, built earthen structures for impounding water and preventing soil erosion, cleared lands and levelled them to make them cultivable” (Narayanan et al., 2014). Afforestation and horticulture under MGNREGS are being undertaken as a drought prevention and flood-proofing strategy that conserve both the soil and water among agrarian communities of India. Specifically, more than half (52%) of the works in Bhandara district of Maharashtra were related to afforestation. In other districts, such as Jalgaon, Raigad, Thane and Ahmednagar, afforestation assets and works dominated by 26, 6, 5, and 5%, respectively. However, most households did not opine that they had any benefits accruing from afforestation of their farm lands (Narayanan et al., 2014); only a few reported to have benefited from the sale of fruits, medicinal plants (in Gadchiroli district), vegetables or other non-timber forest products. In Gadchiroli’s Kurkheda block specifically, afforestation involved major species of medicinal herbs and plants which are prepared by a local Ayurvedic doctor who distributes them for free as a source of remedy for common ailments. It is therefore reasonable to assert that, some of the benefits from the forests could materialize in the long run if the forests are maintained (Singh et al., 2020). Other convergence interventions in Odisha led to shifting from conventional agricultural crops to high-value crops such as coffee, mangoes, cashew and aromatic plants. In addition to cultivation of commercial horticulture species, this resulted into the development of 1,940 hectares of forest land in Koraput district, fruit trees in 8,226 hectares of land of 12,556 beneficiaries under MGNREGS in Mayurbhanj district (Mishra and Mishra, 2018). Another afforestation initiative in India is the landscape approach to forest restoration which is largely multisectoral in that it takes into account the interests of multiple stakeholders at various levels (Saigal et al., 2016).

In Nainital district of Uttarakhand, MGNREGS along with other forest development programs were reported to have led to increased afforestation, regeneration of forests (reforestation), increased production of forest products, access to forest for income generation and financial support for livelihood improvement (Kanwal et al., 2017).

A social afforestation project of the State Forest Department of Bihardovetailed with the MGNREGS was reported in six participating districts of East and West Champaran, Sitamarhi, Muzaffarpur, Hajipur, and Tirhut range-Vaishali (Down to Earth, 2009). This was a mass plantation drive in which villagers were supported to grow fruit-bearing tree species such as mango, jamun, litchi, guava and gooseberry, trees with supposed medicinal potential (like neem) or those that produce hard wood like teak and mahogany. Out of not less than 200 saplings, farmers were tasked to nurture them for the next 3 years after which annual payments of Rupees 10,200 (for 90% or more survival of the saplings) or Rupees 5,100 if 75% of the saplings survive (Down to Earth, 2009; Gandhi, 2016). Roadside planting of both fruit and wood trees under MGNREGS was also reported in Muzaffarpur district, and the initiative named “Muzaffarpur model on roadside plantations” was visited for possible extension to other locations (GOI, 2012). A similar initiative was reported on 5th July 2021 along Purvanchal expressway in Uttar Pradesh (Shukla, 2021). Such social forestry and flower-bearing tree planting initiative was also undertaken in Kodopal district (Sankrail block) where nurseries and orchard saplings were established (Mishra and Mishra, 2018).

Rural farmers under the MGNREGS convergence with sericulture department of Ramanagar district, Karnataka state were reported to have benefited from 1,460 man-days of employment annually for over 15 years (Dhakane and Mandan, 2014). This initiative was also a source of raw material for the silk industry which on the other hand avails an employment opportunity especially for those involved in silk worm rearing (Viswanathan et al., 2014a).

In another report, restoration of the forest protecting the remote habitats of the Sundarbans of West Bengal was reported to be due to the impact of the construction of farm ponds, renovation of earthen dams and structuring of river embankment under the convergence efforts of MGNREGS and forestry department (TSIRD, 2013). The Sundarbans is one of the important heritage sites housing globally endangered or rare animal species including the Indian python, the Ganges and Irawadi dolphins, olive ridley turtles, Royal Bengal tiger, estuarine crocodiles, critically endangered endemic river terrapin (Batagur baska) as well as the world’s only salt-tolerant mangrove forest harboring species of Panthera tigris tigris tigers (WWF, 2011; UNESCO, 2021). For this, plantation of more than a crore of mangrove seedlings in up to 2,485 hectares was registered in 24 Parganas of West Bengal. Further, restoration of the ecological lifelines of river embankments and earthen dams with mangrove plantation were also done, with planting of mangoes and other fruit trees in Bankura district of West Bengal (Mishra and Mishra, 2018). This highlights that such restoration initiatives can foster eco-tourism industry in India (Lengefeld et al., 2021). Other than the cited forest restoration reports, conservation terracing was another activity under MGNREGS (Tiwari et al., 2011).

The MGNREGA provide safeguards and prioritizes the interests of the deprived, marginalized and vulnerable Indian population (H.P. State Institute of Rural Development, 2017). MGNREGA vividly gives room for women equity (gender quota dictating) in both access to work and in the payment of wages (Pankaj and Tankha, 2010; Girard, 2014; Figure 2). Thus, the scheme gives room for women to take one-third share in the stock of employment if they demand. Interestingly, women were reported to make up more than half of the population in MGNREGS in some Indian states (Panda et al., 2009; Sudarshan et al., 2010; Holmes et al., 2011; Stahlberg, 2012; Ahangar, 2014; Kartika, 2015; H.P. State Institute of Rural Development, 2017). Proportion of women in MGNREGS in the financial year 2009–2010 and 2010–2011 at the national level were reported to be 48% (Sharma, 2015). In Kerala and Tamil Nadu, over 90% of the workers were reported to be women (Peedikakandi et al., 2015; Arya et al., 2017; Breitkreuz et al., 2017; Mahapatra, 2021). A more recent finding indicates that 55% of MNREGS beneficiaries who were allocated 2.35-billion-person days of work in 2015/2016 consisted of women, mostly of the scheduled castes (dalits), scheduled tribes (adivasi) or those hailing from other vulnerable sections such as other backward classes and the landless (Bhattarai and Viswanathan, 2018). These data attests to some extent that the “self-targeting social safety net program” has had long-term implications in poverty alleviation and correcting gender skewness and discriminatory wages prevalent in the rural labor markets of India (Pankaj and Tankha, 2010; Ahangar, 2014; Carswell and De Neve, 2014; Ravindar, 2016; Basavaraj and Nagaraja, 2017; Jose and Radhakrishnan, 2018; Mahapatra, 2021; Nagaraja, 2021).

The act also indicates that child care facilities should be availed at the workstations, in addition to ensuring that work for women are done as close as possible to the participant’s homes. Unlike in other poverty-alleviation schemes, women in MGNREGS have access to equal wages as men which is a major incentive for women (Rimki, 2012). In other words, MGNREGS’ potential to empower Indian women through provision of employment opportunities has been a subject of discussion by previous researchers (Drèze and Oldiges, 2007, 2009; Pankaj and Tankha, 2010).

However, the uptake of MGNREGS work by women is an expected trend. This is because women tend to be paid lower wages in the casual labor market than they might be earning from MGNREGS. For instance, Sudarshan et al. (2010) reported that wages paid by MGNREGS was 125 Indian rupees which is higher than 70–80 Indian rupees for agrarian manual labor in the private sector. Some researchers argue that MGNREGA, through improving women’s wages, has broadened consumption options for women and enhanced their economic independence (Pankaj and Tankha, 2010). This gender dynamism in MGNREGS as witnessed in various reports point to notion that upscaling the program can be harnessed for gender mainstreaming in the country.

Direct participation of women in MGNREGS has had an impact on forest rejuvenation and restoration in India. For example, in West Bengal, involvement of women drawn from local Self Help Groups were reported to have been instrumental in the rearing of mangrove sap (Mishra and Mishra, 2018). Other than the foregoing, there is paucity of published literature on the direct role of women under MGNREGS in forest restoration and rejuvenation of India. This can partly be explained by the asymmetrical inheritance of resources such as land and water by women which may limit them from participating in community tree planting programs currently being launched under MNREGS-convergence initiatives in India.

India’s MGNREGS is an epitome of a rights-based scheme integrating employment promotion and income security for rural populations in an entirely innovative way. Drawing on the experiences with similar PWPs with regional geographical scope, MGNREGS is a bold intervention to empower vulnerable rural population with a basic source of income and social security through 100 days of guaranteed employment per eligible household. The results of this study indicate that MGNREGS has and will continue to contribute immensely to reforestation and afforestation through its land development objectives to reduce vulnerability of local agrarian communities to recurrent droughts, floods and to conserve soil moisture and fertility. It is well marked that MGNREGS in convergence with other government forest development programs have the potential to promote afforestation and reforestation in Indian states as these have the potential to empower local people through income generating activities. However, the creation of forests as rural assets should be rolled out along with emphasis on their maintenance so as to ensure that they are given their due importance for sustainable and long-term benefit of the poor rural households. The study evinces the need to assess the status of village forest ecosystems, especially forest production systems that has been established through MNREGS. It is also important to integrate MGNREGS with the joint forest management interventions across states in India, by which, the reforestation and forest rejuvenation activities can be effectively implemented with potentially higher success. The role played by women under MNREGS in forest restoration of India is a theme that warrant more comprehensive future studies.

JA assembled the datasets and prepared the initial draft of the manuscript. PV contributed to reading and editing of the manuscript. Both authors approved the final manuscript submitted.

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.