Through convergence and governance: embedding empowerment in community development interventions

Abstract

To achieve social justice, equality, and quality of life under the concerted efforts deliberated for community development, countries engage in a range of interventions focusing on participation, capacity building, and sustainability. In this study, we examine two specific characteristics of livelihood interventions, development and empowerment; their relationship; and impact on community well-being. The findings suggest that while outcomes related to development and empowerment processes have a positive but meagre impact on community well-being, there is lack of continuum between them and the relationship is conditioned by convergence and governance. Further, insights from interviews also suggest that though there are institutional voids, challenging changing context, and variations in the way mobilization and participation are employed, those that will integrate good governance and strong convergence can deliver better outcomes.

Does multifaceted livelihood intervention improve well‐being: Reflections on a case study from North‐eastern India

“…However, this regime faced challenges of low participation, poor targeting and selection of non‐viable activities (GoI, 2001). In 2011, India launched National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) that aims to develop local community‐based grassroots institutions to empower poor people with better alternatives and capabilities and gradually shift from the subsidy‐based to credit‐based regime (Kumar et al, 2020). In India's sub‐regional context, different typefaces of this intervention model are used (e.g., Bauchet et al, 2015).…”

“…The salient features of SHGs are fostering women participation in various livelihood activities, promoting formal channels of credit and savings, providing a common forum to a homogenous group of women to address micro‐credit needs, building social capital and solving social issues and challenges. SHGs are like that of NRLM which was launched nationwide in 2011 as the flagship programme for sustainable livelihoods (Kumar et al, 2020).…”

Interventions for sustainable livelihoods: a review of evidence and knowledge gaps

“…Another popular policy design, rights framework is built upon Amartya Sen's works on entitlements and this discourse subsequently merge with community development (Allison and Horemans, 2006; Kumar et al ., 2020). Rights framework associates with justice, democratic actions and food security and largely implemented through a combination of employment guarantee schemes, community-based or self-targeting and social accountability (Devereux, 2016).…”

“…Livelihood is a function of complex interactions among economic, social and environmental factors (Kumar and Giri, 2020; Kumar et al ., 2019; Alobo Loison, 2015; Neves and Silva, 2014; Ellis, 2012); therefore, integrated conceptualisation of livelihoods is required to achieve the goals of sustainable development (United Nations, 2015). Conceptualisation of sustainable livelihoods (Chambers and Conway, 1992; DFID, 1997) and resulting interventions often form linkages with transformations at the grassroots (Lam et al ., 2020; Kumar et al ., 2020; Stacey et al ., 2019). In literature, sustainable livelihoods are characterized by “if people are able to maintain or improve their standard of living related to well-being and income or other human development goals, reduce their vulnerability to external shocks and trends and ensure their activities are compatible with maintaining the natural resource base” (Allison and Horemans, 2006, p. 759).…”