EDITORIALS

Disempowering the Empowered

Closing down the womens empowerment programme Mahila Samakhya will directly affect lakhs of women.

cademics, womens activists and others have expressed

disquiet at the impending closure of the innovative and
globally acknowledged womens empowerment programme, Mahila Samakhya. Yet, is it realistic to expect a government so hostile to non-governmental efforts to continue a partnership of the kind that this programme pioneered? When conceived in
1988 as a pilot project in 10 districts spread over three states, Mahila
Samakhya attempted to imbue a government-funded programme
for womens empowerment and literacy with a non-governmental
sensibility that encouraged women to set its course. From a topdown effort, the programme actively sought to make it the complete opposite. The fact that it worked and has been around for
more than 25 years suggests that something of this kind is possible.
Yet, the central government appears to have decided to stop
funding the programme by March 2016. Without these funds,
although some parts of the programme could still survive, it
would be scaled down drastically, ultimately leading to its closure.
The decision is not based on any kind of adverse evaluation of
the programme. On the contrary, the latest national evaluation
by the Ravi J Matthai Centre for Educational Innovation, Indian
Institute of Management, Ahmedabad in November 2014, done
at the behest of the central government, is largely positive with
a few suggestions on how it could be improved. Therefore the
decision to stop funding it is as inexplicable as it is opaque.
When Mahila Samakhya began as a pilot project in 1989 with
funding from the Government of the Netherlands, it stood out for
its different approach. Bringing both central and respective state
governments to the table, it also included and consulted womens
groups and voluntary organisations. Its aim was to work in areas
where female literacy was low, and to innovate in bridging the
gender gap in literacy. Rather than just focusing on literacy, it took
a cue from the National Policy on Education 1986 that had stated
that education will be used as an agent for basic change in the
status of women. To do this, sanghas or collectives of the poorest
and most marginalised women were formed with the help of local
voluntary organisations. Through these sanghas, the women received
not just basic literacy skills but also learned how to get information
about their rights and entitlements, what to do about employment, legal literacy and health (including reproductive health).
The sangha members were viewed as active agents in their empowerment rather than passive recipients of welfare or charity.

Economic & Political Weekly

EPW

NOVEMBER 28, 2015

vol l no 48

The 2014 evaluation records the very real changes that had
come into the lives of sangha women both in the public arena
and in their private spaces. A long-term objective of ultimately
being autonomous of government funding was also built into
the programme with the sanghas forming federations that
aimed to generate funds to sustain their work.
At the time of last years review, the programme had grown from
the initial pilot in 1989 to one spread over 130 districts in 11 states,
679 blocks/mandals and with a presence in 44,446 villages.
There were 55,402 sanghas with over half the members from
the lowest castes. Altogether there were well over 14 lakh women
members of sanghas organised into 325 federations. Of these,
around five lakh women were in savings and credit groups
(21,825) and the programme also innovated through its Mahila
Shikshan Kendras and Nari Adalats (womens courts). The programme is also credited with preparing women to participate
in panchayati raj institutions. Over the years, 30,390 sangha
members had contested panchayati raj elections and 12,905 were
elected. The evaluation concluded that, [the] approach to
empowerment, which begins by addressing multiple modes of
discrimination first has held MS [Mahila Samakhya] in good
stead. Nowhere in this evaluation was it recommended that the
programme be wound up or its central funding curtailed.
When programmes like Mahila Samakhya, conceived in a way
that run counter to most government programmes, are scaled up,
there is often a danger that while the framework remains, the spirit
disappears. Yet what one must remember is that the very fact of
women coming together to understand their rights and entitlements, and to be allowed into spaces from which they had always
been excluded, is something that is worth nurturing and supporting. It is these processes that give substance to programmes that
would otherwise be shells of good intent leaving behind little that
is sustainable over time. Unfortunately, given the proclivities of the
current government at the centre and its open hostility to NGOs, it
is unlikely that the positive aspects of Mahila Samakhya will be
appreciated. Possibly, as with other programmes initiated by the
previous regime, this government prefers to set it aside rather than
build on its positive outcomes. In effect, even as it mouths slogans
of womens empowerment, it will disempower the thousands of
sangha women across India who have demonstrated the real meaning of an inclusive and gender-sensitive developmental policy.