Collective Action Model For Promoting Sustainable Livelihood Interventions: Lessons From Case Studies In Chhattisgarh State, IndiaMay 20, 2023 2023-06-24 11:14
Collective Action Model For Promoting Sustainable Livelihood Interventions: Lessons From Case Studies In Chhattisgarh State, India
S. N. Tripathy
The present paper with the help of secondary sources of data attempts to capture the major events that shaped the course of cooperative movements in Odisha. The paper portrays the prevailing socio-economic factors and key events which contributed to the development of cooperatives in different phases and its genesis and growth trend in Odisha in the national perspectives.
- Bengal under the Lieutenant-Governors, Vol. I. In C. Buckland – Northcok, S. (n.d.).
- Madras Provincial Banking Enquiry Committee Report, 5 Vols. Madras. – Government of Madras. (1930).
- Contractual Labour in Agricultural Sector. Discovery Publishing. – Tripathy, S. (2000).
- Co-operative Movement in Odisha: Highlights of Progress. Odisha Review, February – March, 51-54. – Senapati, S. (2012).
- Annual Activity Report 2018-19. Cooperation Department. – Government of Odisha.
Cooperatives Movements, Rural credit, Money lenders, Farmers.
Sagar Kisan Wadkar
The promotion of sustainable livelihood interventions is an integral part of agriculture and rural development. The sustainability of any (development) interventions through the collective action approach primarily depends on the ‘sense of belongingness and ownership’ by
the clientele group. The paper aims to examine the process of collective action in promoting sustainable livelihood interventions for tribal people by analyzing the three case studies from Chhattisgarh State. The study analyses the three case studies viz. “Enroute women
empowerment through convergence and group formation in Surgujadistrict”, “Creating market linkages for millets produced in tribal regions of Kabirdham district” and “Harihar Bastar Bazaar, Bastar district” of Chhattisgarh State.
The author had observed the planning and implementation of the above intervention and collected data collected during 2015 to 2017 from Prime Ministers Rural Development Fellows (PMRDF), who had worked at the district level to improve effectiveness and efficiency of flagship programmes, as part of the Prime Ministers Rural Development Fellowship Scheme (PMRDFs), Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India.
As a result, author has modified the collective action model developed by Kruijssen, et al. (2009) in order to understand the collective action process in promoting sustainable livelihood interventions in a given area. The case studies illustrated underscore the importance of first two levels of collective action model – ‘conscientization’ and ‘social capital’ in the process of collective action, and how ‘social learning’, a byproduct of each level, feeds into the goal of achieving a collective action for the sustainability of efforts undertaken.
These cases differ in their degree of collective action and its form as cooperatives, self-help groups, and farmer producer companies. Comparative analyses of cases identified that ‘the institutionalization of collective efforts’ and ‘developing forward/ market linkages’ contributes to the sustenance of efforts undertaken
- Agrawal A.2001. Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources. World Development29 (10): 1649-1672.
- Ashley C and Carney D.1999. Sustainable Livelihoods : Lessons from early experience. Department for International Development, London.
- BandieraO, Barankay I andRasul I. 2005. Cooperation in collective action. The Economics of Transition13 (3): 473–498.
- Bandura A. 1963.Social learning and personality development. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
- Bandura A. 1977.Social learning theory. Oxford, England: Prentice-Hall.
- Campilan D. 2002. Linking social and technical components of innovation through social learning, In: Leeuwis C and R Pyburn (Eds.) Wheelbarrows Full of Frogs: Social Learning in Rural Resource Management. Assen, The Netherlands, pp. 135–146.
- Carney D. 1998. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: What contribution can we make? DFID, London.
- Chambers R and Conway G R. 1992. Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. IDS Discussion Paper. Brighton, IDS. 296.
- Coleman J.1988. Social capital and the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology 94: 95–120.
- Coleman J. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
- Di Gregorio M, Hagedorn K, Kirk M,Korf B, McCarthy N, Meinzen-Dick R and Swallow B. 2004. Property rights, collective action and poverty: the role of institutions for poverty reduction. Paper prepared for the Tenth Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Property (IASCP), Oaxaca, Mexico, 9–13 August 2004.
- Freire P. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
- Freire P.2005. Education for Critical Consciousness. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
- Giere R N. 2002. Discussion note: distributed cognition in epistemic cultures. Philosophy of Science69 (4): 637–644.
- Hardin G. 1968. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science162 (3859): 1243–1248.
- Hardin G. 1998. Extensions of the tragedy of the commons. Science280 (5364):682–683.
- Johnson N, Suarez R and Lundy M. 2002. The importance of social capital in Colombian rural agro-enterprises. CAPRi Working Paper No. 2. Washington, DC, IFPRI.
- Jordan N, Becker R, Gunsolus J, White S andDamme S. 2003. Knowledge networks: an avenue to ecological management of invasive weeds.Weed Science2 (51): 271–277.
- Kruijssen F, Keizer M, and Giuliani A. 2009. Collective action for small-scale producers of agricultural biodiversity products. Food Policy34: 46–52.
- Koelen M and Das E. 2002. Social learning: a construction of reality. In: Leeuwis C, R Pyburn (Eds.) Wheelbarrows Full of Frogs: Social Learning in Rural Resource Management. Assen, The Netherlands, pp. 437–446.
- Kumaran K P. 2002. Role of Self Help Groups in promoting micro enterprise through micro-credit: An empirical study. Journal of Rural Development21 (2): 231-250.
- Markelova H,Meinzen-Dick R, Hellin J and Dohrn S. 2009. Collective action for smallholder market access.Food Policy34 (1): 1-7.
- Marshall G. 1998.A dictionary of sociology. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Meinzen-Dick R, Gregori M D and McCarthy N. 2004.Methods for studying collective action in rural development, CAPRi Working Paper No. 33, CGIAR system wide program on collective action and property rights, IFPRI, Washington DC.
- Moustier P, Tam P T G,Anh D T,Binh V T and Loc N T T 2010. The role of farmer organizations in supplying supermarkets with quality food in Vietnam. Food Policy35 (1): 69-78.
- NarrodC, Roy D, Okello J, Avendano B, Rich KandThorat A. 2009. Public–private partnerships and collective action in high value fruit and vegetable supply chains. Food Policy34 (1): 8-15.
- Naziri D, Aubert M,Codron J M,Loc N T T andMoustier P. 2014. Estimating the impact of small-scale farmers’ collective action on food safety: The case of vegetables in Vietnam. The Journal of Development Studies50 (5): 715-730.
- Olson M.1965. The logic of collective action. Harvard University Press, Cambridge: Massachusetts.
- Ostrom E.2003. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Possardt M.2003. Is there a roadmap to critical consciousness? Critical Consciousness: A Study of Morality in Global, Historical Context. One Country15 (2).
- Poteete A and Ostrom E. 2003. In pursuit of comparable concepts and data about collective action.CAPRi working paper 29. Washington DC: IFPRI.
- Pretty J and Ward H. 2001. Social capital and the environment.World Development29 (2): 209–227.
- Reardon T, Barrett C B, Berdegue J A and Swinnen J. 2009. Agri-food industry transformation and small farmers in developing countries.World Development37 (11): 1717-1727.
- Reardon T, Codron J M, Busch L,Bingen J and Craig H. 1999. Global change in agrifood grades and standards: Agribusiness strategic responses in developing countries.International Food and Agribusiness Management Review2 (3): 421-435.
- Rogers C R. 1967. The process of basic encounter group. In Bugental, J. F. T. (Ed.) The Challenges of Human Psychology, New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Roy D and Thorat A. 2008. Success in high value horticultural export markets for the small farmers: The case of Maha-grapes in India. World Development36 (10): 1874- 1890.
- Scoones I. 1998. Sustainable rural livelihoods – A framework for analysis. IDS Working paper. Brighton, IDS. 72.
- Srivastava A. 2005. Women’s Self Help Groups: Findings from a Study in Four Indian States. Social Change35 (2): 156-164.
- Tuckman B W. 1965. Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin63 (6): 384–399.
- UphoffN T. 1995. Grassroots organizations and NGOs in rural development: opportunities with diminishing states and expanding markets. World Development 21 (4): 607–622.
- Van der Fliert E, Dilts Rand Pontius J. 2002.Farmer researcher teams, farmer field schools and community IPM. In: Leeuwis C and R Pyburn (Eds.) Wheelbarrows Full of Frogs: Social Learning in Rural Resource Management. Assen, The Netherlands, pp. 121–133.
- Wadkar S K. 2018. Farmers Producers Organisation: Present Status, Challenges and Way Forward. Cooperative Perspective Journal, Special issue on ‘Making FPOs Smart, Competitive and Sustainable’,53 (1): 71-80.
- World Bank. 2005. Food safety and agricultural health standards: Challenges and opportunities for developing countries exports, World Bank Sector Report No 31207, Washington, DC, World Bank.
- World Bank. 2007.World development report 2008: Agriculture for development, The World Bank, Washington DC.
Collective Action; Conscientization; Social Capital; Social Learning; Sustainable Livelihoods.