SEWA’s approach to rural organizing is area specific and demand driven or need based. The members are organized around a common issue or need of the communities/ members. SEWA designs the programme by strategically linking with existing Government programmes or schemes, thus organizing village level primary groups/ co-operatives of workers, and district level federations of workers/ producers.

During the drought of 2000, SEWA implemented several innovative programmes as part of the drought relief activity. As drought proofing measures, SEWA took different approaches. In Kutch, craft activity was tried out as a means of livelihood, while in Surendranagar, salt activity proved to be the livelihood providing activity. In Banaskantha, entire regional development was taken up, including crafts, salt and fodder. The work in various areas of artisan support programme, forestry programme, masonry training programme and rainwater harvesting work generated around 2.75 lakh man days of work for around 10,000 families. Just when SEWA was consolidating its drought proofing efforts, Gujarat experienced the worst ever earthquake. SEWA immediately initiated the economic rehabilitation programme for the earthquake affected members and their families. Some of the major economic and social interventions of SEWA to restore livelihoods of its members, with people’s participation are highlighted below. These interventions have consolidated community solidarity, provided alternative employment and have contributed to children’s education and women empowerment.

The three worst affected districts of Kutch, Surendranagar and Patan have, in the last decade, experienced floods, epidemic of malaria, two successive cyclones, two successive droughts, and an earthquake. SEWA, based on its past ten years of experience in building regional development programmes in these disaster prone areas, designed a livelihood security strategy for disaster preparedness and mitigation. SEWA decided to set up a "Livelihood Security Task Force", comprising representatives from the Government of India, NGOs and experts in the areas of disaster mitigation and rehabilitation. Based on this plan, a "Livelihood Security Fund" would be made operational. This would act as a vulnerability and risk reduction measure for poor communities and provide livelihood security through sustained economic programmes, based on local skills and resources. The Fund would be treated as a "Revolving Fund or Working Capital" for each district, towards the production of craft, salt and fodder goods.

Salt pans in the deserts had been damaged by the earthquake, thus affecting salt crystalisation. Salt farmers had incurred heavy losses. Entire saltpans had to be rebuilt as early as possible. It was estimated that salt farmers would need a working capital of Rs. 30,000 per farmer so that they could level the land, rebuild salt pans, brine wells, install pump sets and prepare the pans for evaporation and crystallisation. SEWA geared up to help salt farmers restart salt farming activities and they were able to reap at least one salt harvest by May 2001.

Approximately 60,000 houses were damaged by the earthquake. SEWA, with the inputs of expert organisations such as the Disaster Mitigation Institute and the People’s Science Institute, Dehradun, designed monsoon, cyclone and earthquake resistant houses of 11 ft X 20 ft dimension. The cost of each dwelling unit was Rs. 55,000, out of which 70% was a grant to the family. SEWA involved communities in the reconstruction. The approach was to have owner driven housing reconstruction programmes. This would also generate local employment. SEWA initiated a two month technical training programme in masonry and construction work. Trainees were provided a stipend of Rs. 40 per day. Local communities were also trained in developing appropriate building materials, such as micro concrete roofing tiles.

This included levelling of land and revival of bore wells. The small and marginal farmers would be provided with scientific agricultural kits containing improved variety of seeds, tools and equipment, prepared in collaboration with the Rural Technology Institute, Gujarat and the Gujarat Agriculture University.

SEWA’s water campaign team mobilised local communities and technical training to local people in the revival of bore wells, the construction and deepening of ponds and the construction of roof rain water harvesting structures. Most of the water harvesting structures were reconstructed before the onset of summer.

SEWA insurance insured at least 50,000 women in the three affected districts. Spearhead teams of local women leaders in all districts were consolidated. These women promoted insurance services in their villages and served as a link between their communities and SEWA insurance, helping the insured with claim applications and procedures. Small trainings were also organised in the villages to promote and encourage women to seek insurance coverage. The concept of insurance was elucidated.

The entire effort of livelihood building by SEWA was collaborative and participatory. This implicated grassroots, member based organisations, technical support organisations and resource agencies. The implementation of its livelihood security measures was undertaken through village level micro planning and district-wise implementation by district level associations (the Kutch Craft Association, the Banaskantha DWCRA Association, the Surendranagar Mahila and Balvikas Mandal). Technical support organisations such as SEWA Bank, Mahila Housing Trust, SEWA Academy, Disaster Mitigation Institute, SEWA-AMA Centre and Resource Organisations, notably the People’s Science Institute, The Gujarat Institute of Development Research and NCAER, Dastakar and NIFT were also mobilised. The entire institutional arrangement and implementation strategy constituted SEWA’s integrated approach towards developing a model of sustainable development with disaster mitigation and livelihood building as its goal.

The SEWA movement is committed to mainstreaming of the people’s sector. It is a movement for economic freedom of poor self-employed women so that they may enter the economic mainstream and markets by organising their strength. It does this through sponsoring membership-based organisations at local, state, national and international levels – self-help groups, co-operatives, mandals, etc. There are about 1300 such small village or mohalla level organisations, 85 co-operatives and 11 district federations. q

Back to Contents