The recognition of disability as a human rights and developmental issue encouraged social scientists to study the phenomenon of disability more scientifically and objectively. Concerns raised by both disabled and non-disabled academicians and disability rights activists in the First World lead to a greater response from academia. The issue of disability thus, over the years, became a critical part of the agenda for public policy and social science studies. A section of western sociologists understood that, by and large, the onus of disability did not lie with affected individuals but rather on society which was responsible for their activity and for imposing restrictions. Unlike western academia, however, the issue of disability has not found space in India. Its absence from the subject matter of Indian sociology has created a gap in the discipline’s understanding, creating the risk to exercise sympathy and charity rather than a sociological sensibility which sees disability as a human rights issue to be dealt with at the level of rehabilitation and social work. The present article seeks to locate disability as an indispensible part of the curricular of the Indian sociology discipline; rejecting the ‘charity’ outlook favoured by sections of academia, policy makers, bureaucracy, activists and the general populace towards disabled people.

are unable to implement these aspects. The proposed changes refer to management functions such as strategy formulation, distribution of power and control, exercise of authority, etc. The changes in structure, procedures, communication practices, are normal and have been made by organizations as and when these have become necessary. Therefore, the nature of changes that are being contemplated in this volume, as spelled out by Pritam Singh and Asha Bhandarker in chapter 2, refer to directional and managerial functions, and not to procedural or system-related issues alone.Groups such as TVS, Parry's, Reliance, and many other companies have markedly improved their global presence without basic changes in their established management processes. Even in the USA turnaround experiences in more recent years such as IBM and those earlier in Crysler, 15 or so years ago, have similarities. Decision making at GE under Jack Welch and at ITT under Harold Gennen many years earlier, for example, do not seem to be markedly different.Serious consideration of two related questions is necessary: ,

P. Singh. 2015. How Solidarity Works for Welfare: Subnationalism and Social Development in India. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press, pp. xv + 304, Price: ₹473. ISBN: 9781316633892.

No abstract