Summary of the Workshop
SUMMARY OF THE WORKSHOP ON PARTNERSHIP FOR SUSTAINABLE RURAL LIVELIHOODS IN RAINFED TRIBAL AREAS HELD ON 28 JANUARY 2004 AT VIGYAN BHAWAN, NEW DELHI
Inaugural Session :
The one day workshop on Partnership for Sustainable Rural Livelihoods in Rainfed Tribal Areas was held at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi.
The workshop started with lighting of lamp by the honourable Chief Guest Shri M. Shankar, Secretary, Ministry of Rural Development, Govt. of India.
Shri V. N. Rai, Managing Director, KRIBHCO welcomed the guests and participants attending the workshop. Shri Nripendra Misra, Secretary, Dept. of Fertilizers, Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers, Govt. of India chaired the session.
Shri Balvinder Kumar, Joint Secretary, Dept. of Fertilizers, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, Govt. Of India gave a brief introduction on the purpose for organizing the workshop. Shri Amar Prasad, IFS and Chief Executive Officer of Gramin Vikas Trust (Gramin Vikas Trust) gave a presentation on the role of GVT with respect to poverty for alleviation programmes in rural India.
Shri M. Shankar rewarded select Jankars (Village volunteer force trained by GVT) from different Project States for the commendable works towards the sustainable livelihoods of the poor tribal communities.
During the session new CDs on 'GVT at a Glance' and 'Badhta Kadam' and publications on 'GVT at a Glance', 'Legacy of Learning', 'The way we Work', 'Partnership Development- A case study of EIRFP on Sustainable Livelihoods' of GVT were released by the Chairperson, Chief Guest and Managing Director, KRIBHCO.
Mr. Ken DeSouza , Rural Livelihood Advisor, DFID, New Delhi gave brief remarks on scope for development of partnership from all sectors ( Govt., Funding Agencies, NGOs) for sustainable livelihoods in the rainfed areas.
The honourable Chief Guest Shri M. Shankar, Secretary, Rural Development during his address stressed the need for focus on rural development, particularly the poor. This development process, he said should be collaborative and lead to achieving sustainable livelihoods of poor rural communities.
During his address, the Chairperson Shri Nripendra Misra, Secretary, Dept. of Fertilizers stressed on the joint efforts of development agencies.
Shri Amar Prasad, CEO, GVT proposed a vote of thanks.
DETAILS OF TECHNICAL SESSIONS:
The Technical Discussions were divided into two Sessions, with four presentations in each.
Technical Session -I:
The first session was chaired by Shri Shiv Basant, Agricultural Production Commissioner, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi and Shri M. K. Khanna, Principal Secretary (P & RD), Govt. of Rajasthan and facilitated by Mr. Steve Jones, Project Advisor, DFID, New Delhi.
During the first session there were four deliberations given as below:-
a) On Innovations and learning of GVT by Meera Shahi and Henry Mohanraj of GVT;
b) Participatory Research by Dr. J. Witcombe from Centre for Arid Zone Studies, Bangor, UK,
c) Experience of Andhra Pradesh Rural Livelihood Project by S.P. Tucker; Coordinator;
d) Comprehensive Tribal Development Programme of NABARD by Dr. B.P. Nautiyal.
There were lively discussions after presentations.
Some of the key comments and questions of the participants are captured below:
1. There is a need to formulate a policy on working with NGOs for the Government. Given the varying quality and strengths of NGOs, an independent rating mechanism would be very useful for Government Departments to access.
2. Should we promote migration as a policy ?. There is a need to leverage Natural Resources better, improve employment opportunities locally. Migration should not be seen as the only or ultimate solution for the poor. An analysis of assets available locally, possibility of developing these assets should also be the focus of rural development projects.
3. During the discussion on participatory crop research, points were raised (and answered) regarding the quantum of yield increases, benchmark of local condition, cost of fertilizers and irrigation. It was also pointed out that in participatory research, there is greater need of good networking and holistic approach.
4. Country Plans to double the food production - maximum contribution should come from rainfed areas. In that case a combination of different approaches required.
5. The country is well on its way towards sustainability. There is a requirement for inter-ministerial co-ordination. In that situation GVT has a very crucial role to play for coordinating with different Ministries.
6. Recent study in Rajasthan shows that people spend substantial part of their income on health and other social expenditure (wedding, marriage, funerals etc.). Development agencies need to take this into account while talking of livelihoods.
7. Key steps for Govt. need to take up scaling, learning needs to be facilitated and a clear strategy on poverty should be in place.
8. Migration has to be understood in its context. A large percentage of scientists and professionals in US from India and contributing foreign exchange. Kerala is the best example where migrants have very little poverty. However, Bihar migrants work in Punjab and Delhi and in most cases are very poor. A single approach to migration may not be appropriate.
9. Varieties of examples were given to highlight the fact that India is a land of opportunities and with effort much can be achieved. Example of Ambani of Reliance was given and point made that sometimes education inhibits entrepreneurship !
10. In interventions, market linkages need to be developed, support structures put in place so that sustainability can be achieved. Otherwise slippage is possible.
11. Tribal craft has not been developed. A holistic approach where NGO collaboration is highly essential.
Technical Session -II:
The second / post lunch session was chaired by Shri S. P. Tucker, Coordinator, APRLP, Hyderabad and Shri K.T.Chacko, Development Commissioner & Principal Secretary, Rural Development. Govt. of M.P. and facilitated by Mr. Shiv Kumar by Catalyst Management Services, Bangalore.
In all there were four deliberations in this session:
a) Experiences of Forest Dept. in Partnership with Civil Societies by Shri R. K. Zutshi, Executive Director, Waste Land Development Board, Govt. of Jharkhand.
b) Partnership for Sustainable Livelihood in Jharkhand State by Dr. D. K. Saxena, Jt. Secretary, Agriculture, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
c) Challenges of Sustainable Rural Livelihood in Rainfed Tribal Areas of Rajasthan by Prof. R. P. Singh, V.C., MPUA & T, Udaipur.
d) Natural Resource Management and Livelihoods in MP; Opportunities for Development by Prof. P. K. Biswas, IIFM, Bhopal.
Some of the key comments and questions of the participants are captured below:
1. Can CBOs like Village Forest Management Committee (VFMC) be given membership within the Cooperatives? Proposals and scope exists for Panchayats to select VFMC and provide legal recognition to VFMC.
2. Load on the community members in attending multiple committees was discussed.
3. Suggestion came from the floor that Gramin Vikas Trust can take-up the role of being a repository of information on marketing. It should also provide dissemination services.
4. Some tribal related issues in Jharkhand like land rights, right for access to MFP, traditional agriculture etc need to be addressed. Tenancy law exists, but the quality of implementation at grass roots does not exist fully.
5. There is law for non-timber forest produce in place. There is opportunity for value added products from timber.
6. All aspects of rural livelihoods have not been discussed; this workshop has been short and there are still several areas where more discussions required.
7. Institutionalising learning was discussed in the context of replication.
8. There is no right or wrong about migration. But migration is common phenomenon that need to be recognized. This issue is one of how to support and help poor people.
9. Providing support to migrants and also improving local areas - both the issues are important and not mutually exclusive.
Wrap up Comments by Panel members:
The panel members consists of Shri V. N. Rai, Managing Director, KRIBHCO; Shri S. P. Tucker, Coordinator, APRLP, Hyderabad and Shiv Basant, Agricultural Production Commissioner, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
1. Govt. programme is mostly budget oriented whereas GVT approach is bottom up. There is role for the Government and the Civil Society; both have their strengths and different roles to play.
2. Project vs. Programme is a question of semantics. It requires learning and replication for good results. What is the value of large scale spending by Government and learning from experiments. How well can all of us use the learning for large scale Government implementation is the key question.
3. How to use learning and work together ?. Some key questions like replicability vs. up scaling and building partnerships were discussed. Several examples already exist like - Aravalli experience, APRLP LC from where best practices can be adopted; focussed on the outcomes of poor people's livelihood.
4. There are good as well as not so good examples which exist in NGO and GO. There is now a definite need to work together.
5. Community resource persons ( Jankars) - there is a need to have lot more of them and competent ones.
6. Govt. money is nothing but the people's money. There is a need to broad base dialogue and bring people together especially where things have worked well. Need to avoid reinventing the wheel.
7. Need to bring implementers and policy makers together through a variety of mechanisms like workshops and state level dialogues.
8. Other than GO & NGO - Private sector has also a role to play in development (Example. CII). Govt also has role in encouraging the private sector.
9. Co-ordination among the NGOs is highly required. Coming together of GO, NGOs and private sector is required which needs coordination among all stakeholders.
10. State level credit rating of Development Agencies is necessary for development of partnership with Government. Could DFIDI set up a centralized data bank of NGOs with their ratings ?
11. Oversight mechanisms are required for NGOs. There is a need to have a layer of small and bigger NGOs which provide support to each other.
12. Competency matrix is being made available for development of partnership. Currently it is very individualistic which needs to be institutionalised.
13. Move to set up a brand promotion of 'India' and Indian products. Partnership were sought.
14. Linkages between forestry and sustainable watersheds necessary.
15. Key demands for Eastern plateau rural people are employment, potable water, education and road. All these factors are to be considered.
16. Suggest for a small group to get together to take forward some of the issues raised in the workshop.
17. DFID's own projects need to learn from each other and also new development programmes, where learning forum can be set up.
In summary, the key recommendations of the Workshop:
1. Take forward some of the suggestions made in the workshop in a small but inclusive group.
2. Government need to focus on regulating and facilitating rather than 'doing'.
3. A rating mechanism for NGOs would be useful in the context of partnership.
4. Greater co-ordination at all levels starting from national, state, local, GO, NGO, private sector is highly essential.
5. Learning forums, federating, learning from communities is essential.
6. More focus should be given to marketing and support structures.
7. Government is focusing more on inputs rather than impacts and outcomes. Shift needs to be made in thinking.
8. DFIDI should encourage learning amongst its own projects (being done now but it should be more intensive).
****************
| 