APPROACHES AND STRATEGIES OF DEVELOPMENT IN INDIA

Dr Keya Pandey
Department of Anthropology
University of Lucknow
Lucknow

Disclaimer: The e-content is exclusively meant for academic purposes and for
enhancing teaching and learning. Any other use for economic/commercial
purpose is strictly prohibited. The users of the content shall not distribute,
disseminate or share it with anyone else and its use is restricted to advancement
of individual knowledge. The information provided in this e-content is authentic
and best as per my knowledge.
 APPROACHES AND STRATEGIES OF DEVELOPMENT IN INDIA

There are no universally accepted approaches to rural development. It is a choice influenced

by time, space and culture. The term rural development connotes overall development of
rural areas to improve the quality of life of rural people. In this sense, it is a comprehensive
and multidimensional concept, and encompasses the development of agriculture and allied
activities, village and cottage industries and crafts, socioeconomic infrastructure, community
services and facilities and, above all, human resources in rural areas. So, the types of
approaches to rural development are as follows: i) Broad front Approach: ii) Sectoral
Approach: iii) Participatory Approach: iv) Area Development Approach: v) Target Approach:
vi) Basic Needs Approach: vii) Employment-oriented Integrated Approach to Rural
Development: viii) Integrated Development Approach: ix) Growth Center Approach: x)
Community-driven development (CDD) or Approach: xi) Gandhian Approach and its current
relevance:

Broad front approach

Community Development and Panchayat Raj were often described as *Broad-front’ or

’Multipronged* development strategies as they aimed at development of villages covering all
the major spheres like Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Rural Industries, Communication,
Health, Education, Women Welfare and Social Welfare(Desai, 1983). In the early 1960*s
India revised its rural development strategy and adopted sectoral approach of development,
due to financial limitations and pressing needs and priorities (Sharma, 1977)* In the process,
it launched specific sectoral development programmes such as Intensive Agricultural District
Programme, Intensive Agricultural Area Programme, Intensive Cattle Development
Programme, etc. While the sectoral approach to development was fruitful to a major extent in
eleminating scarcity of food, it has also contributed to the growing regional imbalances and
inequality among the people within the community, the later has affected significantly the
rural poor, viz., the landless labour, artisans, marginal and small fanners. As a result, the
development policy of India was revised once again in late 1970*s in which development of
the rural poor became the primary concerned of rural development. Antyodaya, Integrated
Rural Development Programme, National Rural Employment Programme are some of the
programmes that were introduced in India for the development of rural poor. The present
study is an attempt to review the functioning of Integrated Rural Development Programme
with specific reference to the progress made by the beneficiaries and the problems confronted
by them in the development process. A theoretical introduction to the Integrated Rural 3
Development Programme (IRDP) covering the aspects of its history, meaning and scope is
given hereunder. In early fifties, rural development efforts began with multi-purpose
approach which included activities related to agriculture, animal husbandry, co-operation,
irrigation, village and small scale industries, health, sanitation, housing, transport and
communication, welfare of women and rural employment. The Community Development
Programmes (CDP) and National Extension Service (NES) initiated in 1952 fell under this
approach. Though CDP, as a holistic approach, did not succeed as expected. The impact of
programme was ephemeral. It was said that the community development programme has
been like film of butter spread over a large loaf, thus provide ineffective in a complex society.
Hence, it could not make a dent into social fabric as was expected. The critics also point out
that; i) It brought about a great disparity between the rich and the poor, ii) It hardly touched
the problem of meeting the felt needs of the people, iii) It failed to bring about the process of
modernization through social education, and iv) Lack of people’s participation. In spite of the
criticisms leveled against CDP and NES, the fact cannot be denied that the programme added
a new dimension to the process of change and generated community consciousness to solve
community problems. 46 The multi-purpose approach was a significant approach, which laid
the foundation stone for the upliftment of rural India.

Sectoral approach

Sectoral development planning in individual sectors like education, health, housing and social
security are included in sectoral approach of development. This approach advocates
compartmentalization of development in different sectors as if these are watertight
compartments and have nothing to do with each other. Its inadequacies stem from this
compartmentalized approach. Little attempts are to be made to integrate them. By 1960’s the
situation was rather critical on the food front. The need for great concentration on food
production led to strategy for locating potential sectors and wellendowed districts and areas
capable of yielding higher agricultural production. More attention was paid in improving
productivity per acre than on extending the acreage. Thus, the Intensive Agriculture
Development Programme (1960) (IADP) and later in 1963 intensive Agricultural Area
Programme (IAAP) were launched. Both IADP and IAAP constituted landmarks in the
development of agriculture, indeed of the rural sector in India. The programmes placed
agriculture on a qualitatively different footing with wide ranging repercussions on rural
scenario. The programmes resulted in a spectacular breakthrough in total agricultural
production and productivity per hectare but at the expense of social equality and social
justice.

Participatory Approach

This concept has been developed from participatory development. “Participatory

development is a process through which stakeholders can influence and share control over
development initiatives, and over the decisions and resources that affect themselves”(ADB,
1996). • A process to engage local populations in development projects. • PD uses local
decision making and capacities to steer and define the nature of an intervention. • PD aims at
achieving a localized capital accumulation process based on the skills development and local
resources generation. • The essential feature of PD is social mobilization • PD gives a new
self-confidence through which the community can engage in more ambitious projects
involving collective action and management. Scope and Applications of Participation •
Participation at the micro level of projects such as project planning and design decisions,
project implementation, monitoring and evaluation. • Participation at the macro level, for
instance, participatory poverty assessments (PPAs) are designed to influence policy
particularly in relation to development and poverty reduction strategies (Norton et al., 2001).
• Between the micro and the macro level, a number of exercises in participation at an
intermediate or meso level such as participatory budgeting in local governments and various
forms of territory-based rural development. Types of Participation: Passive Participation
People are told what is going to happen or has already happened. Top down, information
shared belongs only to external professionals. Information giving People answer questions
posed by extractive researchers, using surveys etc. People not able to influence the research.
Consultation People are consulted and external agents listen to their views. Usually externally
defined problems and solutions. People not really involved in decision making. Participation
by material incentives Provision of resources, e.g. labor. Little incentive to participate, for
example farm research, some community forestry.

Functional Participation Groups are formed to meet predetermined objectives. Usually done
after major project decisions are made, therefore initially dependent on outsiders but may
become self dependent and enabling. Interactive Participation Joint analysis to joint actions.
Possible use of new local institutions or strengthening existing ones. Enabling and
empowering so people have a stake in maintaining structures or practices. Self-Mobilization
Already empowered, take decisions independently of external institutions. May or may not
challenge existing inequitable distributions of wealth and power. Participatory Rural
Appraisal (PRA) and Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) To enable people so that they can express
and analyze the realities of their lives and conditions, to plan themselves what actions to take,
and to monitor and evaluate the results. The difference is that PRA emphasizes processes that
empower local people, whereas RRA is mainly seen as a means for outsiders to gather
information (Chambers and Blackburn, 1996) Key Elements of Participatory Development
Process: Growth of consciousness and group identity. The realization of the creative potential
of the poor. Empowerment: The process of reconstructing a group identity, raising
consciousness, acquiring new skills and upgrading their knowledge base. Participation:
Power to break the vicious circle of poverty Variations of Participatory Development
Manifestations • Enabling "mutual learning“to enhance “communication, listening and
learning between development workers and those they serve. Implementation 1. Information-
sharing tools: News and updates via media 2. Consultation tools: Discussion forums, debates,
focus groups etc. 3. Collaborative planning tools: Establishment of local-level planning
committees 4. Benefits High start-up cost but less expensive and more sustainable in the long
run 5. More relevant to local populations than traditional development projects 6. Addressing
local needs Criticisms 7. Costly and slow 8. Smaller target population than traditional
development 9. Treating everyone same in the communities. 10. Participatory Approaches to
Rural Poverty Alleviation Diagnosis/ project identification, community planning, and
formulation • Diagnosing the situations that give rise to problems, setting priorities for their
resolution, identifying and formulating project interventions that may help solve some of
those problems. Research and extension, innovation, knowledge • The research and
development realm consists of cocreative processes to identify needs and opportunities,
generate new information and innovations, consolidate them with existing practices, and then
translate them into learning objectives and activities for enhanced performance. 11. Natural
resource management - Natural resource management development is a main area of
application of participatory approaches to help poor in managing the natural resources
available to them. Governance and Decentralization • Good governance makes it possible for
citizens, individually or in groups, to articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights and
negotiate their differences. • Within the broad area of governance, decentralization, which
brings decision-making closer to the local level, is potentially important to participation, if it
is done well, lead to more responsive government and new opportunities for citizens to
participate.

Area development approach

This approach contemplates that development of an area depends not only on the
development of an adequate infrastructure network but also the way factors of the local
economy are activated around the production infrastructure. In other words, for development
of an area, spatial and functional integration is necessary. Thus, while rural growth centers
provide ideal locations for the provision of infrastructural facilities, their hinterlands are
regarded as basic planning units for integrated multi-sectoral planning to achieve integrated
development of an area. The approach, while taking area poverty into consideration, provides
a balance between various sectoral activities as well as spatial pattern of growth; however, it
does not ensure that economic growth is being shared by all classes and communities of the
rural areas.

Target approach

In order to accommodate the lagging sectors/regions rural development was reconceptualized

to highlight the improvement of the social and economic life of a specialized group of people.
The target group comprised of marginal and small farmers, landless agricultural labourers for
whom special programmes such as Small Farmer Development Agency 47 (SFDA) and
Marginal Farmers Development Agency (MFALDA) were started. It was noticed that the
target group approach showed a better results where information facilities were satisfactory
and administrative and organizational arrangements were reasonably strong. This approach
was for the correction of regional imbalance. In this connection, mention may be made of
Tribal Area Development Programme (TADP, 1972), Hill Area Development Programme
(HADP, 1974-75), Drought Prone Area Programme (DPAP, 1970), Desert Development
Programme (DDP, 1977-78), and Command Area Development Programme (CADP, 1975).
These programmes were fairly successful in terms of implementation.

Basic needs Approach

The basic needs approach gives primacy to the need for a minimum standard of living of the
poor as a central concern of development planning. It therefore contributes to the formulation
of a development strategy, which aims at reducing poverty and inequality, promoting growth
of employment and distributive justice. The basic needs concept is a wider scope covering
personal and social consumption and also human rights, peoples participation, employment
and growth with justice. 48 The Minimum Needs Programme (MNP) in India was introduced
in 1974 during the first year of fifth plan period. The fifth plan proposed MNP with the
objectives of establishing network of basic services and facilities of social consumption in all
areas of upto nationally accepted norms within in a specified time frame. It is essentially a
programme of investment in human resources development and seeks to improve the
consumption of those living below poverty line and thereby improving productive efficiency
of people and their quality of life. The main components of MNP are: (1) Rural health, (2)
Rural education, (3) Rural roads, (4) Rural drinking water, (5) Rural electrification, (6) House
sites for landless, (7) Environmental improvement in slums, and (8) Nutrition.

Employment-oriented Integrated Approach to Rural Development:

With a view to overcome the limitations of earlier approaches and to improve the quality of
life of the poor living in the rural areas, a multilevel, multi-sector, with multisection concept
of integrated rural 49 development was launched in 1978-79. The different programmes were
brought under single umbrella of Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP). It aimed
at ensuring accelerated welfare and development of the poorest of the poor based on
Gandhian concept of Antyodaya. Several programmes for providing employment to rural
poor, namely, rural works programme, rural employment guarantee programme, IRDP,
Training Rural Youth for Self-Employment (TRYSEM), Development of Women and
Children in Rural Areas (DWCRA) and Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) were introduced.

Integrated Development Approach:

In the context of problems in the area development approach to tackle the problems of rural
poverty, a new strategy of development, i.e. the integrated development approach has been
developed because the area development approach by and large failed to address the question
of inequalities in the distribution of employment, incomes and assets. A mere geographical
emphasis, as is the case with the area development approach, has been found to be inadequate
in solving the problems. The Indian economy and social structure are characterized by
widespread poverty, poor health conditions, illiteracy, exploitation, inequitable distribution of
land and other assets and lack of infrastructure and public utilities (roads, communications
etc). Clearly, this means that the problem requires an approach that will take into account all
these factors in devising a comprehensive strategy to further rural development. The concept
of “integrated rural development” came into vogue with the need for a multipurpose thrust to
rural planning. It stresses that various facets of rural development, which have an impact on
rural life, are interrelated and cannot be looked at in isolation. Thus, an integrated approach
towards rural development is essential. The various dimensions of rural life---growth of
agriculture and allied activities, rural industrialization, education, health, public works,
poverty alleviation and rural employment programmes -- all form a part of an integrated
approach to the problems of rural development.

Growth Center Approach

It is most appropriate for planning integrated rural development. Based on the principle of
“equal accessibility”, this approach can bring all these facilities, services and local
administration [panchayats] within easy reach of the population. The growth center should be
equipped with all the required facilities such as: [a] Training center to impart practical
training and build capacity to enhance productivity of agriculture and rural/cottage/agro-
based industries [b] Mobile training-cum-demonstration unit to provide on the spot training,
repair and maintenance, services for agricultural and industrial machineries [c] Marketing-
cum-warehousing facilities that can provide safe storage and marketing of farm produce and
cottage industries products [d] Forest and grass nursery to provide fruits, fuel, fodder and
forest cover [e] Developmental school based on the “ earning while learning principle” and
oriented to develop a cadre of self-employed workers in the area of human, animal, plant and
soil-health care and [f] Residential housing complex for workers in the project area.

Community-driven development (CDD) or Approach:

It is derived from community-based development (CBD),which is a developmental initiative

that provides control of the development process, resources and decision making authority
directly to community groups. The underlying assumption of CDD projects are that
communities are the best judges of how their lives and livelihoods can be improved and, if
provided with adequate resources and information, they can organize themselves to provide
for their immediate needs. Moreover, CDD programmes are motivated by their trust in people
(Naidoo and Finn, 2001) and hence it advocates people changing their own environment as a
powerful force for development. By treating poor people as assets and partners in the
development process, previous studies have shown that CDD is responsive to local demands,
inclusive, and more costeffective compared to centrally-led NGO-based programmes. CDD
can also be supported by strengthening and financing community groups, facilitating
community access to information, and promoting an enabling environment through policy
and institutional reform.

References

1 Satyasundaram. I(1997) Rural Development, Himalaya Publishing House, New Delhi

2. Katar Singh(1986) Rural Development – Principles, Policies and Management, SAGE

Publications, New Delhi

3. Venkata Reddy K.(1992) Rural Development in India – Poverty and Development,

Himalaya Publishing House, New Delhi

4. Sundaram K.V.(1999) Decentralised Multilevel Planning, Concept Publishing Company,

New Delhi.

Webliography

http://egyanagar.osou.ac.in/slmfiles/RD-2-Block-3-1519680507.pdf