Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.

T0124


Solidarity and partnership as collective capabilities: three grassroot experiments from India 
Convenor:
NEETU CHOUDHARY (Transformatory Research Collaborative)
Send message to Convenor
Format:
Thematic Panel
Theme:
Social solidarity, grassroots approaches, and collective action

Short Abstract:

The proposed panel includes three papers capturing three grass root experiments based on solidarity, partnership and collective action in varying Indian context. These papers illustrate how solidarity in action can invoke expansion of collective capabilities and resilience, in context of a crisis, day to day governance as well as in context of specific vulnerable group.

Long Abstract:

The unstable, unequal and atomistic characteristics of capitalism has caused much disenchantment, followed by debates and developments surrounding alternative forms of organizations. These developments, in particular, emphasize the importance of solidarity and partnership in various socioeconomic activities, for example - in the form of social and solidarity based economy - a term increasingly used to refer to forms of production and exchange that aim to satisfy human needs, build resilience and expand human capabilities through social relations based on cooperation, association and solidarity (UNRISD 2012). However, irrespective of a formal recognition as such, solidarity and partnership based initiatives have mushroomed as a means to address various development challenges. Although solidarity economy is often described as being autonomous of the state and the market (Neamtan 2002), this may not be the case with broader solidarity-based initiatives. In fact, these initiatives do not necessarily impair any integration into the market, and are like a common strategy for escaping adverse integration into the capitalist sphere of the market (Hespanha 2010 ). Although solidarity economy seeks to articulate an alternative form of economic system, the actual act of solidarity and collective action may be embedded in prevailing institutional structure. Solidarity based initiatives often function in close association with the state and the civil society but function with elements of solidarity and mutuality (Hespanha 2010). Democratic solidarity in particular works on the basis of reciprocity- voluntary social relations between free and equal citizens and redistribution - service drawn up by the state to reinforce social cohesion and to redress inequality (Laville 2013). Democratization is not possible just by developing a new model for the ideal society rather one needs to look at actual experiments that have been made around the world (Hart et al 2010). This proposed panel may be seen as an attempt in that direction. It comprises of three papers capturing experiments based on different forms of solidarity and collective action in India. These papers illustrate how solidarity in action can invoke capability expansion and resilience. The papers show that solidarity and collective action have much potential in context of a crisis, day to day governance as well as in context of specific vulnerable group.

An important aspect of solidarity based action is that it can enhance collective capabilities and achieve more than the sum of individual capabilities. This dimension of solidarity is highlighted in the first paper in the proposed panel. As an illustration of the case of community-university partnership, this paper depicts how through a university course, communities can be enabled to fight for their rights to access various social protection schemes with the help of clinical legal education. This paper shows how the community can collectively claim its rights to public support programmes, while also contributing to achieve inherent educational goals. This case is an example of solidarity between civil society and community and within community itself.

Often solidarity based actions may not be pre-designed as such and emerge as an organic response to certain crisis or situational development. The second paper in the proposed panel captures the dynamics underlying solidarity that fosters in response to the attempt to cope with the Covid-19 pandemic. The paper shows how a civil society organization (CSO), as representatives of street vendors, and the state express solidarity with each other and how this solidarity iteratively leads to evolution of PMSY [Pradhan Mantri Svanidhi Yojna]- a nationwide social protection scheme for unorganized street vendors. The implementation of the scheme involves another level of solidarity between the local administration, the CSO and the community. Coping with the pandemic invoked cohesion within the street vendors as a community, which acted in solidarity. This paper presents solidarity based action as a convergence between the state, civil society and the community.

Finally, the third paper in the proposed panel uses the concept of informational capabilities built on Sen’s Capabilities approach (1999) to explore how a network of persons who use drugs (PWUDs) utilize information and technology as collective capabilities to facilitate improved harm reduction care for the individual user. This paper examines three different cases. The first case demonstrates how technology is used as an information relay to avoid potential deaths due to drug overdose in the community. The second case demonstrates how the collective use of information feedback loops facilitates change within the daily practices of the harm reduction program as well as policy for the good of the individual PWUD. The third case depicts how the use of information technology creates gains for female PWUD by ensuring their participation in an international information network for women. These three cases in this paper underscore the role of digital technology in promoting collective informational capabilities.

All the three papers in the proposed panel capture real world experiments and lived experiences involving solidarity and collective action both in rural and urban areas. Emerged in different contexts, all of these experiments cause marked increase in collective capabilities of the communities concerned. These experiments do face certain challenges, but they can be easily addressed to achieve the larger community oriented goals. Taken together the three papers are an attempt to render recognition to some of the innovative grass-root initiatives and to the dynamics underlying them. These initiatives do not confront the prevailing economic regime, rather are embedded in them. Yet they empower the community to establish their spaces and claims in an explicit and organized manner. As such they imbibe an optimism that through solidarity and cooperation, communities can take charge of their lives at least to some extent. Now and then, the state surfaces up as an ally despite its commitment to market. This also explicates the changing configuration between state and non-state actors and among non-state actors themselves.

Accepted papers: