|
PART II
The questions guiding this discussion were :
-
What do we mean by the phrase "effective participation of the
people" in the context
of MWSs?
-
What is required to each staff
member involved in PIDOW to foster such participation?
The Rural Management System
Paper - 5, served as a basis for the discussion.
The group came to a common
understanding that "effective participation of people" which is
not
symbolic but which is institutionalised, innovative and self-sustaining.
Thus in the context of PIDOW,
participation of people by organising themselves as labour or as contractors
for executing soil and water conservation structures is symbolic and
adhoc; this can be a good
entry point for mobilising people, but is not adequate; while
participative action of the
people living in a watershed which progresses towards building up
peoples capacity, resources
and institutions leading to effective and sustained management of the MWSs by the people themselves is an
appropriate example of peoples participation.
Effective participation
therefore requires :
-
that in every programme the
people mobilise atleast part of the resources from themselves and plan, manage and
monitor all the
programmes and resources of the MWSs.
-
that people manage common
assets of the MWSs for eg., grazing lands, water sources,
forestry on upper reaches of the watershed, even on lands belonging
to the Government, nala-
bunds, gully checks, etc; those assets should be managed in a manner
where rights and responsibilities are shared by all the people
utilising the resources
of the MWSs.
-
that the people evolve and
implement innovative systems for managing resources and
see their way through emerging incompatibilities in community
participation.
What is expected of our staff at
Gulbarga to foster such participation? The group felt that
each one, as well as the group has:
-
to be committed
to the people and
communicate this commitment through their behaviour,
approach and interaction with the people.
-
to be professional in their
approach to the development and
able to transfer this professionalism to the people
and their institutions.
-
to be innovative
- entrepreneurs in
development capable of identifying, organising and
building up appropriate institutions of the people which can develop
and manage the resources
and in turn foster entrepreneurship among the people.
-
to cultivate a
participatory
approach and a
supportive role in every programme.
What is required to cope
with the diverse demands of the above tasks? The group felt that
:
-
adequate time
is
required with the people and their institutions.
-
proper attitudes, skills and
knowledge to relate with people and gain their confidence.
-
To develop a good
understanding of people and the traditional and existing systems for managing resources of the
MWSs. In a situation of scarce resources which is "normal"
to them, they have managed to survive all these years; much can be learned from these experiences
from which new institutions can be gradually developed
which are more participatory, equitable and geared to monitoring
the quality
of resources in the watershed and not exploiting
them.
PART III :
Structural Features of People's Institutions :
The discussion was based on the experience gained and not the
concepts treated in RMSPaper - 5.
What should be the
structural features of
people's institutions in a mini-watershed which
would promote effective participation of its members? Can
we organise people's institutions with the required
structural features for facilitating effective participation by
all and reconcile the
structural incompatibilities which are emerging?
Reflecting on the
experiences the group felt that to foster effective participation, people's institutions, irrespective
of what they manage, need to be socially
viable. The members
need to be able to work together as a group; they should be able to
function in a group where collective efforts of its members
towards the goals of the institution are more
effective than the sum of individual efforts of its members. To be
socially viable the group
needs to be :
-
Small in size; an ideal of
15-20 members and a maximum of 30 members. A group larger
than 30 members finds it difficult to function. True, there may be a
few large groups which
are homogeneous and where the members are aware of their responsibilities,
but in general, participation of each member in such groups is restricted. Some members are shy
or diffident and can talk and function only in small
groups. This is a feature that is common in all our seminars or
workshops where ten or
twelve is the maximum number allowed in a group. Where a small group meets not only to discuss
issues but to mobilise,
manage and monitor
common resources,
it is even more imperative for every member to participate and to do
so effectively which
means more than being present. The dynamics of the groups functioning
should encourage
each and every member
to talk and decide without inhibition
or fear; in a large group this is difficult if not impossible. Size
is therefore a structural
feature which has to be given importance.
-
Homogeneous in composition
i.e., they should be composed of people with similar interests.
Similarity in economic status may be essential in groups involved in
management of scarce
inputs - like
credit; while it may not be essential for groups involved
in management of common resources, for eg., sanitation, drinking
water, roads, etc.
-
Fully participative
where
decisions are not delegated to representatives but where all
the members gather to arrive at any decision; where the thrust of
non-formal education is
on helping the silent observers in the group to participate
effectively.
-
Voluntary
-
Where common values like mutual support, care for family, self
restraint, small family
norms, etc., are established and sanctions accepted by all. Many
of these values operated in traditional society, but have been
diluted or lost.
-
Where rules and regulations of the group are evolved, observed and
changed by the members
themselves. This encourages the emergence of values, rules
and regulations which are appropriate to the activities of
the group, which help to
establish better living systems for its members and enables them
to cope with the continuously changing demands of the environment.
The credit management concept
which underlies the principles of community organisation
has been explained in an earlier paper which may be referred to for further clarification.
But on the other hand the group
realised that watershed development requires that all the
people utilising the resources of the MWSs should be involved in managing
these resources through appropriate institutions. This is where the incompatibilities emerged. The
effort to reconcile them led the group towards identifying
specific roles for various types of groups and associations.
The Watershed Management
Associations for example, should include all members living
in a watershed and with lands in the watershed; this Association should manage the following resources.
a
|
Land:
|
Land Development
|
:
Agricultural lands and waste lands whether owned
by Government or private farmers, contour/field
bunds, nala bunds, gully checks.
|
|
|
Land
Use
|
: Land for grazing, fodder, forestry,
agriculture,
horticulture.
|
b. Water :
c.
Other natural resources : -
management of trees/fuel management
of dung management of farm and human wastes.
d. Livestock :-
working towards a balance between livestock population and
grazing/fodder availability.
e.
Social infrastructure like drinking water, wells, public sanitation etc.
All
the families are involved; however there are several categories of
people in these Watershed
Management Associations; for eg :
-
people staying
inside the
mini-watersheds and with
land inside the mini-watershed.
These people utilise and manage all the resources of the MWSs
listed above.
-
people
staying inside the MWS with lands outside the MWS; these people utilise and manage all the
resources of the MWS
other than those which are privately owned.
-
landless people staying inside the MWS. These people utilise all the
resources of the watershed except
agricultural lands on which they many be hired
as labour.
-
people staying
outside the MWS and
with lands inside
the mini-watershed. These
people normally do not utilise or manage the common resources of the MWS.
If we followed the principle of involving all these categories of
people each association would
be :
-
LARGE - an average of 90
families.
-
HETEROGENEOUS - would consist of
people from different cultural backgrounds (lambanis and non-lambanis)
economic status, interest groups, political parties etc.
-
NON-PARTICIPATIVE
-
decision making will have to be delegated to a small number
of members who would represent the others. Further, as
it will include people who
are staying 3-4 kms., away from the MWS, it is difficult for all the members to come together.
-
Vulnerable to party politics and to political interference.
HOW DO WE RECONCILE THE FOUR MAJOR FEATURES OF SOCIETY VIABLE AND
FUNCTIONAL PEOPLE'S INSTITUTIONS
WHICH FOSTER EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION
NAMELY SMALL, HOMOGENEOUS, FULLY PARTICIPATIVE AND NON-POLITICAL
WITH THE WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT APPROACH WHICH REQUIRES
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATIONS WHICH OFTEN TEND TO BE
LARGE, NON-PARTICIPATIVE AND POLITICAL.
After reflection the group felt that:
-
As a first step several SMALL
groups, may be formed with a maximum of 30 members,
which are homogeneous (people from the same cultural or
economic status or interest
group), FULLY PARTICIPATIVE (not with a representative but with a collective system of
decision making), Voluntary and non-political may be formed.
-
Non-formal education programmes
would be strengthened to help the weaker members
in each of these sub-groups to participate fully and
effectively.
-
Time and
effort should be given to educating these sub-groups on ecology and
the need for watershed
development and to help these sub-groups to develop the skills and
knowledge - technical and managerial - required for the development
and management of MWSs.
This would ensure that all the sub-groups are working towards
the same goal.
-
Each
sub-group should be encouraged to nominate representatives to the Watershed Management Committee
which would consist of a maximum of 15 people. The
number of representatives each sub-group could nominate may be
proportional to the number
of members in the sub-groups. To ensure that these representatives
do not start controlling the resources of the watershed the group felt that :
-
No decision would be taken in the WMA committee without prior
discussions in the
sub-group. -
The
decisions of the sub-groups on activities of the watershed may be forwarded through the
representatives to the WMA committee. These recommendations
of the sub-groups may form the basis of the decisions taken,
in the Watershed Management Committee. -
The representatives from the sub-groups to the WMC may be rotated
every six months.
The Role of the Watershed Management Association :
The Watershed Management Association (WMA) would :
-
Create awareness among the sub-groups on the importance of ecological
balance of the watershed as an
ecological unit which needs to be properly managed.
-
Co-ordinate and integrate the efforts
of all the sub-groups; so that all the sub-groups
work towards the same goal, namely the integrated development and management
of the resources of the MWSs.
-
Work out systems to ensure that common
resources and assets like nala-bunds, gully
checks, grazing lands, drinking water resources etc., are managed by the sub-groups in a manner where
rights
and responsibilities are shared appropriately.
-
Provide the necessary support to the
weaker members of each group to develop and participate
effectively.
-
Co-ordinate, lobby and bargain with
the Government, contractors, financial institutions,
Mandal Panchayats, MYRADA (as long as we are there) and other interest
groups so as to mobilise, plan
and manage programmes offered by these institutions
for watershed development and for the development of weaker sections.
-
Network with other WMAs and
institutions involved in similar programmes so as to help
the sub-groups to develop appropriate skills etc.
The Role of the Sub-Groups
:
The sub-groups will be formed on the
basis of resources to be managed eg., credit, seed, etc.
Their role will be to evolve an appropriate system for managing this
particular resource. Once this
group begins to operate effectively to manage this resource, it can be motivated
to become in the mini-watershed.
Its role in this area will in some
respects be similar to that of the WMA. The sub-groups would
:
-
Meet regularly and evolve their
rules, regulations, sanctions, behaviour patterns, etc.,
accept and develop values required to support this system; foster savings
and thrift etc.
-
Create an awareness among its
members on the importance of ecological balance - the
watershed as an ecological unit - which needs to be properly managed.
-
Participate in the creation and
management of common resources of the MWS.
-
Select beneficiaries for various
projects of the MWSs; keeping in mind the preference for the poor and
women .
-
Evolve a strategy for resolving some
of the incompatibilities mentioned earlier .
-
Ensure that through each activity
implemented by the sub- group, the groups financial
and managerial resource base increases.
-
Lobby with the big farmers on whose
lands investment needs to be made for land development/land
use measures so that the sub-group benefits through these programmes
to the maximum extent possible. Lobby with Government and credit institutions
for programmes especially meant for the poor.
-
Focus on nurturing habits and
values like savings, discipline, mutual respect, concern,
etc., and help to reduce alcoholism, smoking, dowry and wasteful spending on social functions etc.
-
Support issues in favour of the poor
where their rights are affected.
PART IV : ANALYSIS OF THE GROUPS IN
THE PIDOW MINI WATERSHEDS
Various types of groups have emerged in the 4 mini watersheds of the first
phase. Based on the model evolved
in the previous section for organising the community, do we need to assist
the people to re-organise these groups? If so what changes need to be brought about?
To answer these questions the workshop
:
|