The Future of the Social Action in India: 2018-2047

Vijay Mahajan

Who are we, the Individuals? .................................................................................................... 1

Intrinsic Reasons for Building Robust Eco-Social Institutions.................................................... 3
The Role of Eco-Social Institutions............................................................................................. 4
Enhancing the Normative Influence of Eco-Social Institutions on the Mainstream ................. 5
Using Eco-Social Institutions to Influence the State .................................................................. 6
Using Eco-Social Institutions to Influence the Market .............................................................. 8
Building Effective Institutions for Eco-Social Action .................................................................. 9
Conclusion – The Time for Eco-Social Institutions Has Come.................................................. 12
 The Future of the Social Action in India: 2018-2047
Vijay Mahajan1

This is the second of two related articles. The first one was titled, “A Retrospective Overview of
Social Action in India: 1817-2017”. This article turns to the question: what is the likely role of social
action in India, going forward? This question can only be answered subjectively and not for a long
time horizon. Nevertheless, in the interest of triggering a discussion, we offer the following scenario
for the next 30 years, till 2047, which is also the centenary of India’s independence. We do,
however, make an assumption that social action will primarily be through institutions: organisations
with normative influence, even as individuals will be critical to building those social institutions.

Who are we, the Individuals?

Before we think about the future of social action in India for the next thirty years, we need to think
more fundamentally about our role as individuals in society. Unfortunately, the overwhelming
concerns for survival, securing livelihoods and the growing influence of market institutions, has
converted most of our relationships with other individuals into merely transactional relationships.
We have reduced ourselves to economizens - mere producers and consumers, sellers and buyers.
The interactional aspect of relationships has taken a back seat, as pointed out by Rajni Bakshi2 a
decade ago when she distinguished between the markets versus the bazaar. While transactions
happened in both, the bazaar was conversational and interactional, while the market is faceless and
efficiently transactional, to the point where screen based trading enables large and numerous
transactions to happen in milliseconds, without the buyers or sellers knowing or meeting each other.
On the other hand, the rise of the state, including its encroachment in essentially social sectors such
as health and education in the name of the welfare state, has reduced the definition of the word
citizen into a relationship of a person in a geography with the state in control of that geography. In a
recent speech, Rajesh Tandon3, the founder of the Society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA),
explained that citizenship has been reduced to merely a vertical relationship between the individual
and the state – if the person is given certain rights such as voting, she is a citizen. Rajesh Tandon
argued further that we need to broaden the concept of citizenship from merely a vertical
relationship between the individual and the state, to numerous horizontal relationships among
individuals. As these two concepts of citizenship are quite different, we feel the word citizen should
be left alone and the word societizen should be used instead to reflect the far broader range of
individual relationships with each other rather than just with the state as a mere “citizen”.

1
Vijay Mahajan has worked full-time in the field of social action in India since 1981, when he graduated from
the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad. In 1982, he established PRADAN, now regarded as one of
India’s foremost NGOs, to work with rural poor communities, promoting their livelihoods. In 1996, he
established the BASIX Social Enterprise Group, which used a combination of microfinance, training, technical
services and market linkages to promote the livelihoods of poor communities. He also worked closely with the
private corporate sector as well government development agencies and policy making bodies for this purpose.
2
Bakshi, Rajni (2009). Bazaars, Conversations and Freedom. Penguin India, New Delhi.
3
Tandon, Rajesh (2018). Speech at Samagam, PRADAN’s 35th Anniversary Celebrations. PRADAN New Delhi
1
In an article4 in 2017, the author had referred to a third level at which individuals need to relate.
This is the transcendental level, encompassing the natural environment on the one hand, and the
spiritual dimension on the other. There is an urgent need to pay attention to the transcendental
level of our existence. We have to come to terms with the fact any human individual is just one of
several billion of Homo sapiens, and that the Homo sapiens is just one of the millions of life forms on
this Earth. Thus, at the least, we need to be responsible about ensuring that nature (or the
environment in modern parlance) can continue to support all the diverse life forms, not just humans.
We have mastered the ability to destroy human life on Earth through nuclear war, climate change
and just dysfunctional existence. There is an epidemic of meaninglessness that even the most
accomplished individuals feel – in the form of helplessness, loneliness and normlessness. While we
have still to fully comprehend the reasons for all this, we need to find meaning and purpose in day to
day life. So cultivating a relationship with the spiritual aspect of oneself, has become a necessary
corrective. So an individual who is not only engaged in transactions and interactions, but has
humane relationships with other individuals, cares for nature and cultivates the spiritual side of
existence is a more evolved individual than the mere producer-consumer economizen.
The evolutionary path is to grow from our individual role as economizens, to being full citizens, then
societizens with humane relationships, and finally as Earthizens, with concern for nature and the
spirit. This is illustrated in the diagram below.

Who are we, the individuals?

Economizen

Citizen

Societizen

Earthizen

4
Mahajan, Vijay (2017). India@70: The Anxiety of Asymmetry. https://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/toi-
edit-page/the-anxiety-of-asymmetry-india70-acknowledge-and-address-deep-imbalances-that-threaten-the-
idea-of-this-nation/
2
Intrinsic Reasons for Building Robust Eco-Social Institutions
The central challenge of the 21st century is to restore centrality to the individual, but not as a
transactional economizen, nor even as a citizen of a state, nor even an interactional societizen, but
an Earthizen. An Earthizen is an evolved human being, who explores the transcendental purpose and
seeks the meaning of life, not as an atomised individual, but one living in community and in harmony
with nature and his spirit. This then makes the case for building robust eco-social action institutions
which can nurture Earthizens. The term “eco-social” is being used to emphasise that it is time
humans recognise that the Earth is not merely for human beings but for all living species and nature,
as envisaged in the Sanskrit sloka “vasudhaiva kutumbukam” (all of creation is one family).
There are at least seven intrinsic reasons to build robust eco-social institutions.
 First, only eco-social institutions can educate individuals that their natural evolutionary path is
to become Earthizens, not just economizen consumers and producers, nor just citizens with
political rights and responsibilities, nor even interactive societizens. Eco-social institutions can
educate individuals to evolve into Earthizens and create the incentive systems and institutional
norms for promoting evolved behaviours.
 Second, eco-social institutions are like the bio-diversity reserves for preserving a vast variety
of ideas and beliefs. Nature preserves a vast number of species in certain eco-systems such as
tropical rain forests, so that when the environment changes, at least some species will have the
adaptive mechanisms to survive the change, and life will continue on the planet. If only similar
species were preserved and the environment became adverse for them, these would all perish
and life would end. Thus bio-diversity is essential for perpetuation of life. Similarly, diverse
ideas and beliefs must be preserved and eco-social institutions alone can preserve those.
 Third, eco-social institutions are incubators for innovative approaches to resolve refractory
problems which neither the state nor the market have been able to crack. Eco-social institutions
can promote innovation which decentralises power or reduces profits while increasing welfare.
 Fourth, eco-social institutions are practice fields for democracy. Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in
“Democracy in America” that it was “a nation of joiners” in which people formed numerous
neighbourhood groups and wider social associations, to address a number of needs and issues.
These groupings and associations then gave them the practice for political democracy.
 Fifth, eco-social institutions are early warning mechanisms, which are able to detect and
amplify perturbations on the ground, among the people, and alert society, the state and the
market to take corrective action. For example, movements such as Chipko arose in opposition to
environmental destruction long before the mainstream world in India woke to this problem.
 Sixth, eco-social institutions play a role in balancing between the state and market institutions
and are essential for “restoring sanity” whenever either of these crosses a line, such as state
institutions did during the Emergency in 1975-77 in India, and market institutions did in several
sectors post-liberalisation in 1991. Eco-social institutions influence political change and
enactment of pro-consumer/pro-user and pro-environment laws to control market players.
 Seventh, only eco-social institutions can focus on enhancing overall Earthizen well-being.
Market institutions are designed for maximising profits, while state institutions are designed for
maximising power or control or order. Thus eco-social institutions need to take the lead to help
India achieve “civilizational greatness” as Prof Pradip Khandwalla has put in his recent book.i

3
The Role of Eco-Social Institutions
If the above intrinsic reasons for building eco-social institutions are accepted, then their role in the
next thirty years in India becomes clear, as follows:
 Mass Education at All Levels: Eco-social institutions will have to take the lead to remould the
education system, from schools to higher and professional education, to inculcate values which
promote humane behaviour, a concern for the environment and cultivation of the spirit. These
values will not replace but build on the foundations of existing economizen values such as
efficiency, seeking a return on investment and avoiding risk out of line with probable returns;
citizen values as enshrined in our Constitution – justice, liberty, equality and fraternity; societizen
values of community, mutuality and participation. The role of eco-social institutions will not be
confined only to moulding formal education but also to continuing education of adults outside the
education system and would collaborate with the media and cultural institutions to reinforce these
values. This is work that will take a generation, but it is the most fundamental work to be done.
 Promoting Diversity and Pluralism: Eco-social institutions will themselves have to be diverse in
their approaches and plural in their beliefs and methods, and even more importantly, promote
diversity and pluralism as a value in society. To operationalize this, they would have to specially
work with disadvantaged groups, ethnic minorities, and those persecuted or ignored by the state
and those victimised or under-served by the market. To do this better and more vigorously, eco-
social institutions will have to less ideological and more based on Earthizen values.
 Promoting Eco-social Innovation and Incubation: Eco-social institutions will have to seek and
promote social innovation, based on diverse approaches and plural beliefs and methods. They
would have to nurture these innovations in the early stage and provide resources for incubating
the promising ones till they can incorporate on their own, in the form of social movements,
voluntary organisations, NGOs and social enterprises. Thus new generation eco-social institutions
will have to span a larger range of skills and focus on a catalytic rather implementation role.
 Practicing Participation and Accountability: New generation eco-social institutions will have to
walk their talk – they would have to be highly participatory and the old style paternalistic doing-
good will have to be replaced with enabling those whose problems are being addressed to address
it themselves as much as possible, particularly over a period of time. At the same time, as eco-
social institutions garner more and more resources, as argued later, from the state and market,
they need to make themselves as or more accountable as state and market institutions.
 Being Social Observatories, Listening and Amplifying: By being close to the communities they
serve, and by dint of being more humane, new generation eco-social institutions will have to act as
social observatories, constantly watching for trends and shifts. They would use their ears close to
the ground to listen to the ground truth and amplify it for state and market institutions.
 Balancing between the State and the Market and each of them: The most important role of eco-
social institutions will be to act as referees between the state and market institutions so that the
wasteful story of the 20th century is not repeated. In addition, when any of these institutions
crosses humane boundaries or damages the environment, eco-social institutions would contain
and if necessary combat them.
 Focussing on Earthizen Well-Being: This will be the raison d’etre of eco-social institutions. Their
mission, strategies and activities will be have to evaluated on how well they promote the overall
well-being of human beings, but in community, and in communion with nature and the spirit.

4
Enhancing the Normative Influence of Eco-Social Institutions on the Mainstream
The public arena can be conceptualised as a triangle, whose three vertices are the state, the market
and the eco-social institutions. Eco-social institutions such as the family, the clan, customs and
mores, were primeval but slowly market and state institutions arose and took greater primacy. The
20th century saw a major tug-of-war between the state and the market institutions. State
institutions dominated in the first half-century, whether in the communist or the capitalist world.
Lenin converted the Communist ideal into state control of both economic institutions (e.g. farms,
enterprises) and social institutions (e.g. churches, schools) in the name of equality. In the capitalist
world, after the Great Depression, Keynes’ economic theories legitimised control of the state over
the economy in the UK, in the name of demand creation. Later, President Roosevelt legitimised the
welfare state with the New Deal. Many of these ideas were later adopted by all “enlightened”
liberal democracies, social democracies and even newly independent nations such as India.
In the last two decades of the 20th century, market institutions reasserted themselves. Communist
states disintegrated, central planning lost credibility, the public sector began to be privatised and the
welfare state was dismantled. However, the problems of the unbridled market became quickly
visible – in the form of repetitive financial crises, increased homelessness and disparities among the
rich and the poor in the developed countries. The reduction in the quality of health and urban
services in the UK; increased hard-core unemployment in many countries of the European Union;
and worst of all, the rise of mafia capitalism in Russia, were other examples. The global financial
crisis in 2008 was the ultimate proof that market institutions were incapable of regulating
themselves, partly because the herd mentality takes over at the times of a crisis.
If the 21st century has to avoid the folly of the reassertion of the state in response to the excesses of
the market, the strength of the social institutions needs to be built up, as a balancing force between
the state and market institutions.
Social Institutions

State Institutions Market Institutions

Normative influence is what distinguished an institution from a mere organisation. There is a limit to
the number of persons and organisations that a social institution can directly serve or impact. Yet, it
can increase its sphere of influence by standing for certain norms, articulating and practising those
norms, constantly questioning their contemporary relevance and modifying those norms when
needed. Normative linkages go beyond “similar others”. For example, a microfinance organisation
which regularly records a 98 percent plus repayment rate from its poor borrowers, not only sets
standards for banks and government programs, but also establishes a new norm for the borrowers
themselves. They learn that the best way to get out the poverty trap is to repay loans and be eligible
for further credit rather than kill the golden goose (or the black buffalo) by not repaying the loan.

5
Social institutions have a huge responsibility to work at the normative level. This is partly because
governments have ripped the normative fabric of society in name of social good. Our hard-working
farmers have been taught, for the cause of increasing agricultural output, that it is fine to pay
nothing for electricity and canal water, and get fertilisers and credit at a price below cost. In the
name of protecting them from political interference, Article 311 of our Constitution gives our public
service employees job security. But instead of using this to be promote constitutional values, many
public servants think that salary is their recompense for coming to office, and that to work they need
either overtime payments or gratification from clients. The private sector has not been far behind.
In many cases, for maximising profits, it produces goods without concern for consumer benefit,
worker safety or environmental pollution. In the cause of “getting the job done”, it has learnt to
illegally gratify inspectors, regulators and politicians. Social institutions have their own problems
too. There are many cases of misuse of resources for personal inurement, and numerous examples
of waste and inefficiency.
Yet, with all this, the normative fabric of our society will have to be darned, if not re-woven. Eco-
social institutions have a leading role to play in this. This partly stems out of the fact that they are
neither driven by the profit motive of market institutions, nor by the power motive of state
institutions. But mere absence of these two driving motives does not lead to a sense of purpose.
Eco-social institutions have to articulate and work towards a positive normative vision: that of
widespread, equitable social welfare, which is in harmony with nature and sustainable for the
coming generations. A normative vision that will ensure liberty of life and the basic freedoms – of
expression, belief, occupation and association, a safe and clean habitat, with a minimum level of
health, education, economic opportunity, political representation and cultural self-expression for all.
State as well as market institutions have failed to offer these to us. It is time that eco-social action
institutions step in and influence both the state and the market.

Using Eco-Social Institutions to Influence the State

Since Independence, many social institutions have sought to influence state institutions to bring
about desired changes in society. State institutions include elected bodies such as the Parliament,
the state legislative assemblies and zilla and gram panchayats. Government departments and
programmes are very much part of state institutions, as are state owned banks, promotional and
regulatory institutions. The state created institutions of the people, such as the primary agriculture
credit cooperatives and water users’ associations, and state sponsored informal institutions such as
self-help groups for linking with banks for credit or joint forest management committees and
watershed committees are also part of this group.
One approach to influencing the state institutions tries to modify the behaviour of these institutions
by working with them and coaching them to become more participatory, equitable and inclusive,
and more conscious of sustainability, both financial and environmental. Many NGOs have worked
with the Government of India and of the states for decades as ground implementation partners as
well as programme designers and policy advisers.
The second approach to working with state institutions relies on militant activism. The Chipko
movement of the 1970s, to protect community rights over village forests in the Uttaranchal hills,
used the unique method of hugging trees to prevent those from being felled by forest contractors.
Eventually this led to the heightening of political aspirations of the hill people and the formation of a
separate Uttarakhand state out of Uttar Pradesh. The Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) from the mid-
6
1980s to give voice to so-called ‘project affected persons’ and draw attention to their plight. The
efforts of the NBA changed the way the economics of large dams was hitherto conceived, with the
benefits being overstated and the environmental costs of inundating forests and eco-social costs of
displacement of tribals being grossly understated. All this has changed in a major way due to the
work of the NBA and related activists. The NBA’s efforts also led to huge changes in the formulation
and implementation of rehabilitation and resettlement packages, culminating in The Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Another successful example of the militant approach is the work of the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti
Sangathan in Rajasthan which insisted on transparency and accountability in public works at the
village level. This eventually led to the Right to Information Act, 2004. A related campaign, to ensure
wage work for the rural unemployed, led to the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA).
This transformed a long-standing but not very effective government programme of rural wage
employment into an enforceable right to paid work for up to 100 days a year, positively impacting
millions of poor landless households every year.
The third approach to influence the state was used largely by the so-called “left wing extremists” in
tribal India and various separatist movements in Kashmir and the North eastern states. The former
went into the deep forest areas of central India, while the latter used their proximity of borders to
establish bases in neighbouring countries. They used armed struggle and had to face adverse state
response, often violent. The efficacy of this approach lies in its creating a pressure for change.
Given the enormity of the challenges in the human-human interface and the human-environment
interface, and increasing inadequacy of state as well as market institutions to address these
challenges, radical action is called for , through a process that is legitimate and constitutional. This
would require a combination of the first and second of the three approaches to social change,
described above. The second approach will ensure that the current system gets challenged
adequately to want to reform itself, while the first approach will ensure that the proposed changes
get institutionalised.
In order to give the primacy to social institutions, several Constitutional Amendments and
amendments in specific laws are required. The amendments would
 Make the Directive Principles a conjoint responsibility of the state and social institutions by
amending Article 38 (1) which begins by saying “The State shall strive to promote the welfare of
the people…” This is often interpreted (wrongly) by some that ONLY the State may strive to
promote the welfare of the people and anybody else doing so is doing it illegitimately. This can
be corrected through an amendment as follows: Article 38 (1) “The State shall strive, directly as
well as by enabling associations of citizens, to promote the welfare of the people…”
 Establish a permanent National Commission on Eco-Social Institutions
 Add to the terms of reference of the Finance Commission as well as the State Finance
Commissions to devolve at least a minimum portion of the tax revenues to social institutions
 Broaden the ambit of the Comptroller and Auditor General, the Central Vigilance Commission
and the Central /State Information Commissions to cover social institutions.
 Ensure that the Union and the State Public Service Commissions have at least two members
from the social sector to ensure the selection of right people in public service.
 Ensure all regulatory commissions have at least two members from the social sector

7
Using Eco-Social Institutions to Influence the Market
Since the 1990s, along with liberalisation, and the entry of large number of trained professionals in
the social sector, there was some coming together on issues of markets, technology and capital.
Social enterprises - organisations that use the means and methods of business to address eco-social
problems – were established to address a number of unmet eco-social needs such as drinking water,
sanitation, solid waste management, handloom and handicraft promotion, health care, school
education and vocational training, agricultural value chains. This approach of working with market
institutions works well in those circumstances where the social problem is amenable to a business-
like approach.
Today, with markets getting integrated, technology creating disruptive changes in both demand and
how it is met, and the increasing need for capital, many activists have taken a business-like approach
to make livelihood promotion efforts more sustainable. Hence social action is metamorphosing into
a new form called ‘social entrepreneurship’. Here, the action aims to use the power of market
institutions to scale up. Elements of this include new generation philanthropies like the Gates
Foundation which are more like social venture capital funds rather than grant makers. Another
element of their strategy is the use of highly paid but cause-driven professionals in place of
volunteer human resources. High technology and marketing savvy, including targeting what C.K.
Prahlad called The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid, is an integral part of this paradigm.
An example of the approach of using the first approach is the microfinance sector in particular and
social enterprises in general. Microfinance rose from nothing to serve over 100 million poor
households by 2017, channelling over Rs 125,000 crore (USD 10 billion) of bank funds to meet their
needs for subsistence and livelihoods. To handle such large sums, adding up perhaps to ten times of
what the rest of the social sector was spending, the microfinance sector quickly acquired
professional expertise in dealing with capital markets, equity investors, and financial regulators and
so on. But in the process, it also lost some of its pro-poor orientation and became the lowest rung of
market expansion by the mainstream financial sector. Nevertheless, microfinance, in India, as well
as worldwide, represents an example of how the social sector innovated and incubated a new
approach to a problem that neither the state nor market institutions had been able to address.
While social enterprises are using the means and methods of business to address refractory
problems, it is more important that businesses and institutions that feed them resources, are
influenced by social thinking. To ensure this,
 Companies must have at least two Board members, one male and one female, who are from the
social sector. Banks, insurance companies, utility companies and companies in the health,
education and training sectors, must have at least one third of the Board from the social sector.
 Universities, business and management schools, accounting institutes, law schools, medical
colleges and regional and urban planning schools must have adequate representation from
social sector on their Boards and offer compulsory courses in social sector issues.
 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) spending requirement of 2% of profits, should be split
50:50, with 1% to be spent by CSR foundations established by the respective companies and the
second 1% to be given to independent social institutions to undertake various other programs.
 To underline its importance, we repeat that all regulatory commissions must have at least two
members from the social sector so that perspectives other than that of business.

8
Building Effective Institutions for Eco-Social Action
The process of influencing both the state and the market institutions and their agendas, to retain
and sharpen focus on the issues of the socially disadvantaged, would have to be an ongoing one.
This requires strengthening the eco-social institutions, and it is to this we turn next. The primary
challenge of the 21st century then is to build the strength of eco-social institutions at all levels. For
this purpose, we define eco-social institutions broadly, subsuming within that category, community-
membership institutions, voluntary organisations, non-government organisations (NGOs) and a new
kind of institution, social enterprises, which use the means and methods of business to address
refractory problems which neither the state nor market institutions have been able to crack.
What do eco-social institutions need to become more effective? Eco-Social institutions themselves
need to become more democratically governed, participatory and accountable. They also need to
be more thorough and professional in their chosen fields of work, be it grassroots action or policy
advocacy. Only then can the eco-social sector develop the internal strength to become a progenitor
of eco-social institutions and also become an integral part of it. We hypothesise that the following
five resources are crucial for the survival and growth of eco-social institutions:
 Inspiration
 Leadership
 Legitimacy
 Resources
Inspiration: The primary resource for eco-social action for collective good is inspiration. In the
earlier days, it used to emanate from religion. All the religions extol the value of serving others.
Among Hindus, the tradition of parmaarth, working for the good of others, co-existed with
personalised seeking of salvation. In Islam, through the institution of zakat, it was enjoined upon the
more fortunate to work for the good of others not so fortunate. In Christianity, this was enshrined in
the concept of charity, and serving others was most organised in the form of the various orders of
priests and nuns, such as the Jesuits and the Sisters of Charity.
In the nineteenth century, eco-social action found inspiration beyond religion – due to the rise of
various ideologies. Interestingly, it was the western liberal tradition, which fostered eco-social
action to a great deal. Part of this had to do with a suspicion of the state as an instrument of
welfare. The establishment of the New World with a pioneer spirit, in which small communities had
to make do for most of the services that the state provided, also led to a strong sense of eco-social
action and the primacy of citizen’s associations. In contrast, the communist ideology quickly became
statist and thus in fact repressive of eco-social action by citizens. Leftist ideology nevertheless was a
major source of inspiration for eco-social work, particularly in the field of rural poverty. There were
also some syncretic ideologies, such as “liberation theology” which was an interesting combination
of the Christian concern for the downtrodden with the radical critique of the capitalist system.
In India, the Gandhian ideology was a major source of inspiration, with its combination of concern
for the poor (Sarvodaya) with a new ethic for public conduct based on non-violent assertion of the
truth (Satyagraha), eventually aiming at a utopian world of tiny, self-reliant village republics (Gram
Swarajya). Even the ethical basis for environmental conservation was built into Gandhian ideology –
in the form of self-control over consumption as well ahimsa, non-destruction of any other life.

9
The remarkable feature of the late twentieth century was the absence of ideology and ideologues.
Even though the dominant paradigm was western style liberal democracy, it would be incorrect to
infer that this remains so in the current times. In the 21st century, the younger generation of
Millennials is sceptical of all ideologies. The only passion seems to be with people in terrorist
movement, religious fundamentalists and political opportunists. As Yeats wrote in the Second
Coming: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity”.
Thus the task in front of eco-social institutions is to create systematic opportunities for young people
to establish a wider worldview, taking into account the problems of poverty, environmental
degradation, violation of human rights, and the breakdown of institutions. Out of this exposure,
inspiration will emerge, which may not be religious or ideological, but perhaps more “eco-rational”.
The last term implies enlightened self-interest in the widest sense of “vasudhaiva kutumbukam” (all
of creation is one family).
Leadership: Social action is triggered by individuals, usually by those who feel strongly about some
or the other social condition, “the elite of calling” to use sociologist Dipankar Gupta’s phraseii.
Usually, such people are from among the upper echelons of society or have had education and/or
professional opportunities of a high order. There is nothing contradictory about the elite origins of
the leaders of eco-social change. Indeed the elite are the only people who can afford the
opportunities required to be adequately equipped for eco-social action in today’s complex world.
This is of course a double-edged sword, for the elite have the main vested interest in favour of status
quo. Also, giving up on mainstream opportunities is not easy for someone from the elite.
Nevertheless, this is where leaders are drawn from. The leaders of eco-social action in the next
century will continue to come from the elite strata. Every once in a while there may be a leader who
had non-elite origins, but by and large, the leaders will be like Dr Kurien, drawn from the elite, who
gave up mainstream opportunities to take up a cause.
Where to look for such people? They are likely to be found in some of our best universities and
professional institutions. They are no different from the others in their class, and perhaps are
pursuing careers similar to them – sitting for civil services exams, joining Indian companies or
multinational corporations, or planning a career in law, the media or academia. They are not joining
social institutions, and indeed should not. The best training for reform is to work in the mainstream.
Aruna Roy was in the Indian Administrative Service before she resigned to work with the rural poor.
Medha Patkar of the Narmada Bachao Andolan used to work for Foster Parents PLAN, an
international child sponsorship NGO. Having said this, we are not denying that leaders of social
action can come from elsewhere – from religious orders, social movements and political parties.
What transforms a member of the elite into a reformer? Partly it is the historical conditions. At
certain junctures, a society has to take a certain turn and someone or the other emerges as a leader
of the process. But systematic exposure to eco-social conditions is helpful. Those managing a
particular sub-system, when exposed to another sub-system, almost always emerge with a critique
of both. When they are thrust into leadership roles, they draw upon their vast experience of running
mainstream institutions, their professional networks and their educational capital. Thus there is a
need to systematically look for eco-socially motivated individuals in the government and in the
corporate sector to induct into eco-social institutions. One way to initiate them is to invite them to
serve on the Boards of eco-social institutions. This would also improve governance of eco-social
institutions and help build bridges with the other two sectors.

10
Legitimacy is the next important resource needed for eco-social action. In the public field nothing of
significance can be done unless it is seen to be legitimate by a vast majority of the people. Yet, all
kinds of factors militate against achieving this. The personal background and conduct of the leaders
is an important determinant of legitimacy. Since leaders come with inspiration from some source,
those who draw inspiration from elsewhere question their legitimacy. It is very difficult for a
“westernised liberal” to concede that Nanaji Deshmukh’s work in Gonda or Chitrakoot can be eco-
social action and not “RSS propaganda”, just as many leftists cannot concede that anyone with a US
degree can engage in public spirited action without being “a CIA agent”. Of course, both the RSS and
the westernised liberals think that the leftists are trying to defend an ideology – communism – which
has proven to be not just ineffective but which caused a lot of human hardship. A lot of energy is
thus lost in simply questioning each other’s credentials. We need to learn to acknowledge
ideological pluralism as a fundamental rule of the game. Questioning each other’s legitimacy
because of ideological differences, needs to be stopped.
In addition to ideological stereotyping, there is the issue of personal conduct. Legitimacy can be
earned by ensuring that the personal conduct is consistent with the cause for which a person is
working. This used to be narrowly interpreted earlier as the level of salary. People working in social
institutions, who drew even a living salary, were frowned upon till the early 1980s. It was expected,
for example, that if one was working for rural poverty alleviation, then one should live with the rural
poor and share their deprivation. Many young people who were drawn into development work in
the 1970s went through a phase of “identifying with the poor” in various ways – living in remote
villages, taking very little salary, etc. However, as the complexity of the problems became better
understood, it became obvious that effectiveness is more desirable than self-abnegation.
Now, it is accepted that one could work for the rural poor and draw a decent professional salary, and
even live in a city. Of course, this is not to justify a substantial amount of professional parasitism
that has crept into the sector. One aspect of this is foreign donor agencies paying nearly
international salaries to their Indian staff. While this is justified on grounds of international equity, it
certainly distorts the human resource situation for eco-social institutions, with many people unable
to resist what is sometimes a five to ten fold increase in salaries, if they join an international agency.
New generation eco-social institutions need to sit together and work out a modality by which gross
inequalities in salaries and opportunities within their own sector are reduced.
Resources: Closely linked to legitimacy is the question of where the funding comes from. For some,
accepting funds from government is not acceptable, as it is seen to reduce autonomy. For others,
accepting foreign funds is a sure sign of “working at the behest of foreign masters”. Within this,
finer distinctions are made – some find American money to be a problem but not Scandinavian
money, etc. Yet another cleavage is in accepting funds from the corporate sector. A grant from say,
the Tata Trusts to an activist organisation is seen by some as an attempt to “buy them”. Finally, a
few eco-social institutions which have made serious attempts to raise funds through greeting cards,
events and appeals are seen as primarily in the business of fund-raising. No source of funds is seen
as completely legitimate by everyone, just as no ideological or professional background of leaders is.
Social institutions in the twenty first century should make a major attempt at rising funds from the
constituency they seek to serve. There are cases, such as while helping very destitute people or
terminal HIV/AIDS patients, where this may not be possible. But by and large, disadvantaged
communities are in a position to make significant material contributions to their own betterment.

11
The field of micro-finance is a classic example of this. A vast majority of the lending resources of
micro-finance institutions such as the SEWA Bank in Ahmedabad since 1974, the Basix KBS Local
Area Bank since 2001, and the more recently established Bandhan Bank and nine small finance
banks, come in the form of small savings deposits of their members. Even in the matter of rural
housing, drinking water and sanitation, poor communities are willing to pay provided the facilities
are designed to be relevant to them. Gram Vikas in the remote tribal villages of Orissa, has
motivated people to establish village corpus funds to maintain common drinking water and
sanitation facilities. Of course, all resources may not possibly be mobilised from the communities.
This is the reason why in the earlier sections we have spoken of earmarking a portion of the tax
revenues for social institutions and also reserving half of the 2% corporate profits being spent under
CSR, for granting to independent social institutions.

Conclusion – The Time for Eco-Social Institutions Has Come

The central thesis of this paper has been that the time has come for individuals to evolve from being
mere passive participants in market institutions – as producer and consumers – as economizens; or
as “citizens” - mere passive recipients of state institutions doling out “rights” and “welfare”. To go
beyond the control of market and state institutions, individuals need to come together and form and
strengthen social institutions, as societizens. We must recognise that humanity is on the verge of
not just self-destruction through nuclear war or institutional dysfunction, but on the verge of
destroying all life through massive climate change. So individuals need to develop a higher level of
consciousness, which is based on an understanding our purpose for being on Earth, to nurture our
spirit and to be at communion with nature. A new generation of “eco-social” institutions would
have to be established, imbued with a deep ecological and spiritual consciousness.
Eco-social institutions have several intrinsic reasons to exist and to thrive. The paper delineated
seven such reasons and then based on each, identified the role that eco-social institutions will have
to play over the next thirty years in India. To do this well, eco-social institutions must exert a
normative influence on state and market institutions, not the least because they are the only ones
who can play a role a moderating role against the excesses of the state and the market institutions,
and a role mediating between them. The players in state institutions are focussed on maximising
power, while those in market institutions, maximising profits. Only social institutions permit
individuals to focus on enhancing human well-being.
To perform their role effectively, eco-social institutions will have to be strengthened in numbers and
become more effective. For this, eco-social institutions have to take a number of internal steps,
making themselves more participatory, professional, accountable and responsible. Only then can
they have the gravitas needed to establish a balance with state and market institutions. The paper
asserts that to give eco-social institutions their rightful place, the Constitution as well as a number of
laws need to be amended as also the norms and governance of several institutions of resource
allocation, regulation and professional education need to be changed.
If we see progress as an improvement of our collective ability to address various issues sensibly –
from material concerns like the provision of adequate livelihoods to all, to socio-political ones such
as how we relate to each other and govern ourselves, to transcendental ones such as our
relationship with nature and our place in this universe – then building and strengthening eco-social
institutions is central to our collective future. The time has come for action: we have only 30 years
left to win our true Independence, a hundred years after the political one.
12
1. Khandwalla, Pradip N. (2017). Fast Forward Toward Civilizational Greatness: Agenda For India.
Ahmedabad Management Association, Ahmedabad.

2. Gupta, Dipankar (2014). Revolution from Above: India's Future and the Citizen Elite. Rupa
Publications. New Delhi.

13