The strategies of development are related to the ideology of the NGO. Four distinct ideological proclivities can be noted :(I) Gandhian/Sarvodaya (J.P./Vinobha Bhave), (ii) Marxist, (iii) Church-inspired, (iv) Eclectic. An attempt will be made to discuss the salient features of each of the ideologies and relate these to the development, and/or programmes of mobilisation/empowerment, they are implementing.

To take the Gandhian/Sarvodaya NGOs first. As far as rural development is concerned, Gandhi believed in (villages as self-governing units) (iii) promotion of village industries; the small/cottage units would be labour intensive to provide employment and thus check the drift to the cities.

In the gramdan/bhoodan areas, some of these aims are being implemented. Gram Bharti in Bihar, Banwasi Sewa Ashram (Agrindus) in U.P., ASSEFA in several states have all set up khadi and village industries which are labour intensive, decentralised and located in villages. As for gram swarajya, as far as possible the gramdan villages are made self-sufficient through the gram sabha which maintains the land records (the villagers are thus not dependent on the patwari), collects taxes (land revenue) and introduces development programmes.

Other aspects peculiar to Gandhian organisations concern the members/staff. By and large (i) they wear khadi, are anti mill- made cloth, (ii) they do not drink alcohol, or eat meat, (iii) they live as a community; many NGO headquarters are called ashrams where the ashram / community way of life is observed (iv) they are of sacrifice, evident from the low salary structure.

Gandhian NGOs observe little or no hierarchy. This is true of most. At Gram Nirman Mandal (Bihar) it is not always easy to differentiate between the secretary of NGO or the peon; all dress simply, site and eat together, work in the same space. However, while the hierachy element is not obvious, it is there in such groups as the Anand Niketan Ashram (ANA), Bhartiya Agro - Industry Foundation (BAIF) and even Agrindus.

As with other ideological NGOs, so with Gandhian ones change are taking place, expecially with regard to lifestyles: (I) many of its younger recruits have little knowledge about Gandhian philosophy/ethics (ii) the profesional (medical doctors, agricultural scientists) are now being paid considerably higher salaries than other staffers.

The Gandhian ideals discussed above are fulfilled to an extent. But certain ideal have been entirely ignored. As Acharya Ramamurti, a noted Gandhian thinker, told this writer : Two crucial objective of the Gandhian development model, (a) the “villigisation” of land and (b) industralisation of the village, have not been attained by any Gandhian NGO.

Church-inspired NGOs are either (I) those that are controlled by the church or (ii) those that are manged by former priests. Among the fomrer category are: the Jana Seva Mandal (Fr. James Mascarenhas), Nandurba in Dhule district of Maharashtra and the Maharashtra Prabodhan Seva Mandal (MSM) at Nasik city, which was at one time headed by Fr. Peter Massanet. The Calcutta based Social Ecnomic Development Programme (SEDP) are NGOs run by former priests such as PREM in Orissa (Fr. Jacob Thundil, Fr. Puruvanany), CROSS in Andhra pradesh (Fr. Kurien) and MYRADA in Karnataka (aloysius Fernandes at one time trained for the priesthood).

Marxist NGOs of various “hues” for lack of a better term, are the Kashtagari Sanghatana run by Pradip Prabhu which is workin the Thane district of Maharashtra; the Rural Development Association formerly headed by Dipankar Dasgupta and which is functioning in Midnapore district of West Bengal; the Young Indian Project (set up by Narender Bedi), which is operating in Anangthapur district of Andhra Pradesh (Based in Penukonda).

Among athe Eclectic NGOs those that carry a “selective” ideoogical bag, are SWRC (Rajasthan) and Mahiti (Gujarat). Among this ideological category we can include “technial “ NGOs such as AFPRO and PRADAN. Other Eclectic groups include BCT (A.P.), SIRDI (M.P.), and Maharashtra groups like Rural Communes, Vidhayak Sansad, Gram Gaurav Pratisthan, Pride India, Agricultural Development Trust Baramati. Let us examine the development philosophy of a couple of htem.

It is correct to say that this depends on their environment i.e. the filed areas/villages where they operate. To take NIRID, the Thane district, Maharashtra, mainly based among tribal who once lived in the forest and are now denied its benefits. Naturally enough NIRID lays stress on the importance of the forest for the adivasis, as also within the context of the overall development philosophy of the country. According to NIRID, the planners have not given importance of the forest sector. Their priority has been farm land, the agricultural sector, to the utter neglect of the forests. While agricultural production has risen, it has reached a point of diminishing returns. The fertility levels of agricultural areas near forests have declined. And NIRID emphasises that the spread of wastelands has led to poverty and nowhere is this more apparent than in the hilly areas and forests where tribals live.

In the case of SWRC, during the initial phase i.e. 1972 onwards, the benefits of its development schemes were cornered by the rich. Gram Vikas of Orissa had a similar experience. Hence Gram Vikas, like SWRC, re-oriented its development programmes so the poorest of the poor benefited. SWRC’s contribution has been to provide professional services to the farmers. It maintains that if this measure is implemented, the farmers can step out of the morass of poverty in which they are sunk. SWRC lays great store by appropriate technology that is controlled by the people. On the other hand there are electic NGOs like AKRSP who are into heavy investment and complex technology (lift irrigation schemes) that is controlled by outside professionals. The same is the case with BAIF with regard to artificial insemination equipment, frozen semen maintained at certain temperature, all operated by professionals hired by the NGO from wherever it can get them.

As is to be expected of a plural society, there are variations within each categorisation. All Gandhian organisations will not observe the Sarvodaya ideology in an identifical fashion. For instance (I) not all are working on either bhoodan or gramdan land (Anthyodhaya Sangh, BAIF) (ii) not all have introduced cottage or khadi industries (Anthyodhaya Sangh, BAIF, Anand Niketan Ashram).

As for Marxist NGOs, the differences in their approach is even more marked. At one level, there are those that ven as they attack the State, and the superstructure it has created are willing to (a) take funds from it (b) implement its anti-poverty programmes.

The Rural Development Association (West Bengal) and Young India Project (Andhra Pradesh) fall into this category. Whereas the Kashtakari Sanghatana (Maharashtra) has for long had nothing to do with government funds and government programmes. It even takes up cudgels against the CPM for being status quo oriented: Witness its clashes with Godavari Parlulekar’s CPM workers.

Turning to Church-inspired NGOs, certain differences amongst them can be noted. For instance, the social activists with PREM in Orissa and CROSS in Andhra are radicals. They have been influenced by the Liberation Theology that ignited the Latin American church to action. Many of the CROSS workers, for example, are avowedly Marxist. MYRADA on the other hand is not radical.

Such dis-similarities apart, let us see what is common to the ideologically different NGOs.

Most Gandhian NGOs (i) follow the communal life-style : they live as a community; have a common dining room, observe certain routines like prayers (Anand Niketan Ashram, Gram Bharti,); those that do not, include Banwasi Sewa Ashram, ASSEFA (Rajasthan unit) (ii) are tightly controlled by the leader: some NGOs are almost autocratic in their set-up or authoritarian (ANA, Gram Bharti); some break away from this path, but only to an extent - ASSEFA, because of its large size, has done so and different state units follow their own pattern (iii) have older social workers with low levels of education; presumably many are high on commitment.

The members and staff of most Church-inspired NGOs (i) observe non-communal lifestyles i.e. do not live together as a community; their leadership provides a great deal of autonomy to social activists; the field staff of CROSS, MYRADA, PREM do not suffer from any imposition on the lifestyle in relation to drinking, eating, dress; (ii) are not into sacrifice, whether staffers or social activists; they are doing a job, and they expect to be paid according to the skills they offer; and they are paid well compared to Gandhian NGOs; (iii) the Church-inspired NGOs are stronger on professionalisation; they hire IRMA graduates and IIM graduates as well and (iv) by and large they are more development oriented than Gandhian NGOs.

Marxist NGOs are (i) confrontationist in their approach to the powers that be; they have been involved in any number of violent clashes with vested interests and the local bureaucracy. (ii) most tend to be small; do not go in too much for economic activities (iii) very strong on people’s participation; organisational work is their central focus; some of the best people’s groups have been set up by them (iv) put a lot into conscientization, awareness building through cultural intervention. This is not to say that other groups including Eclectic ones do not do so; but cultural action is one of their many activities. For Marxist ones, this is a priority function.

Then there are religious NGOs such as at Puttapurthi headed by Satya Sai Baba. It has adopted a 1,000 villages and is primarily into health and education programmes The Arpana Trust in Haryana is into similar work. The Ramakrishna Mission is in a category of its own within this ideological grouping.

In sum, there is considerable variation within each ideological grouping. Prior to independence the Church-inspired NGOs may have been the most numerous; after independence, Gandhian NGOs proliferated and thereafter, Marxist groups began to emerge. During the eighties and nineties the Eclectic voluntary agencies have come to the fore, with emphasis on professional inputs and alternative development models, models that are people-centred and promote decentralisation. But Eclectic groups are not hell-bent on confrontation - as Marxist, and even Gandhian groups are - to achieve their ends. In this respect they share much in common with Church-inspired voluntary agencies that go in for “area development”, and do not focus solely on the marginalised sections of society.

NGOs And Gramdan Lands

In the initial stages, when the Anand Niketan Ashram became involved with gramdan land - in the fifties and sixties - it was able to set up effective people’s organisations, the gram sabhas. Harivallabh’s book Light In Darkness deals entirely with the gram sabhas’ battles with the vested interests in the villages, the stories of their victory resembling those related by ASSEFA Rajasthan and Gram Bharti. These reveal that thanks to the strength that the unity of the gram sabhas developed among the people, they were able to challenge those who had perpetuated the oppressive system on them over the centuries.

Several benefits have accrued to the people on gramdan lands as a result of the actions of the gram sabha. The ashram publications have listed them as follows:
(a)        The village gains in organisational strength. The village has become awakened. The people have become aware of the force latent in them. They have got rid of the fear of the police.
(b)        They relinquish the ownership of their land and vest it in the gram sabha. This puts a ban on their right to mortgage and sell their lands. By this they stand to gain. Now their land cannot pass into the hands of the sahukars.
(c)        Prior to the formation of the gram sabha they followed traditional methods of cultivation ekeing out a difficult living. After their formation they have dug wells through cooperative efforts, secured loans from banks. They have installed pumpsets. The productivity of their lands has shot up.

This was the scenario prior to the seventies. Since then the gram sabhas have stopped functioning. A large part of the blame rests on the state government which has not formulated a Gramdan Act, demoralising the gram sabhas in Gujarat. Those in Rajasthan and Bihar continue to push ahead with development tasks because they have the backing of law. Not so the gram sabhas in Gujarat.

An excerpt for Development With A Bang by Gautam Vohra, Uppal Publishing House, New Delhi, 1992, Rs. 225.