indian handlooms

7/30/2019 indian handlooms

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/indian-handlooms 1/4

Confidential: Not for publication or distribution

Indian Handlooms: An Uncertain Future

By

Anjali Raj and Siddharth Deva, August 2001

Many people say that the future of Indian handlooms has never been as uncertain as it

is today. There are others who take the view that the Indian handloom sector has

managed to hold its own and will do so again in the face of new challenges. This essay

will not be taking part in this debate. It serves as background material for programme

development in textiles and market access policy work in India. It is based on

interviews with the Indian Ministry of Textiles, the Directorate General of

Handlooms, FabIndia Ltd. Dastkar and Urmul as well as on conversations with

weavers in western Rajasthan in July and August 2001.

It is important to note however that the handloom sector in India operates within alarger textile industry that is quite different from the one within which it operated in

the first half of the 20th century. Today powerlooms dominate textile production in

India and have encroached upon the handloom sector’s traditional market. If many

handloom weavers do not have enough raw materials, it is probably because the raw

material is being diverted to powerlooms. The steep rise in cotton yarn prices without

a corresponding increase in handloom product prices has meant that production in

some places has had to be suspended, destroying the livelihoods of handloom weavers

and laying off handloom wage workers.

The major handloom states in India are West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh,

Andhra Pradesh, Assam and Manipur. These 6 states account for 75% of handloomweaving in the country. Almost all handloom production in India is for domestic

markets. According to the Directorate General of Handlooms, only 1.3% of working

looms produce for export markets.

Handloom weaving in India is still largely a household enterprise, as well as being

predominantly a rural activity (with the exception of Maharashtra), providing

employment to the largest number of people next only to agriculture. Estimates of

number of people employed in the Indian handloom sector employs vary from 6.5

million (Census of Handlooms 1987-88) to 12.5 million people (Census of

Handlooms, 1995-96). According to the Directorate General of Handlooms, of the 2.3million full-time weavers, slightly less than half are independent weavers, about

340,000 work under a master weaver and 450,000 are members of co-operatives.

Outside the northeastern states of India, it is men mainly that do full-time weaving.

However women are involved in post-loom operations such as bleaching, dying,

finishing, and embroidery.

There appears to be a considerable amount of regional variations in the conditions of

the handloom sector in India. In certain states, such as Andhra Pradesh, weaving is

primarily an artisan and home-based rural activity, while Tamil Nadu at the other end

has a relatively high number of non-household units. Another regional variation is in

the productivity per loom, which is much higher in West Bengal and Uttar Pradeshand much lower in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. In Rajasthan we noticed that

Indian Handlooms: An Uncertain Future, Anjali Raj and Siddharth Deva, August 2001 1




productivity differences at the household level were reflected in the earnings of the

weaver households: some weavers were far more productive than others were, and

earning more than them. But in general the earnings of weaver families tends to be

quite low, especially if weaving is the only income earning activity for the weavers.

Handloom markets

The market for handloom products is four-tiered:· The self-consumption sector where handlooms are made for household

requirements and not for sale, as in the northeast of India.

· The rural market where weavers do the marketing themselves.

· The distant domestic market, largely urban, and which is beyond the reach of

weavers.

· Export markets.

Master weavers and private traders market 90% of handloom products. The traders

either retail these products through their own outlets or act as intermediaries supplying

wholesalers or retailers. The bulk of exports are handled through merchant exportersand manufacturer-exporters, the former getting their supplies from manufacturers and

master weavers, while the latter having their own production facilities.

The problem that many Indian weavers face

Low wages, high levels of indebtedness, unemployment and underemployment, even

starvation are the problems that many weavers in India are facing today. In recent

months weavers in Andhra Pradesh have killed themselves out of desperation.

Policies and Practices

The Indian government’s policy on handlooms till recently had an obsession with

employment generation at the expense of other objectives such as efficiency and

growth.

The overall policy on handlooms on the part of the Indian government had 4

instruments:

· Focus on forming and strengthening weavers’ co-operatives as part of a rather

complex organisational structure that also included “apex bodies” at the state and

central levels and is supposed to provide inputs, and credit and marketing channels

to weavers..

· Improving productivity and quality through improved looms, imparting new skills,

designs and technology to weavers.· Provision of subsidies, including assured supply of cotton yarn and credit at

subsidised rates; and other forms of protection including reservation of certain

items for the handloom sector. Under the Hank Yarn Obligation Order of 1985,

50% of yarn production by spinning mills has to be in the form of hanks, for

handlooms.

· Setting up of welfare schemes to help weavers improve their livelihood and

working conditions.

The primary objective of the government’s policy on handlooms since 1950 was the

production of cloth for the masses in sufficient quantities and at reasonable prices. Arange of varieties of cloth was reserved for production in the handloom sector,





especially controlled or “Janata” cloth (that is, cheap cloth for poor, rural households).

Moreover, the mill sector was forbidden in 1956 or thereabouts to install new looms

to increase their capacity. The Textile Policy of 1985 was a continuation of the earlier

policies of protection to handlooms in the form of reservations and hank yarn

obligations, while the Textile Policy of 2000 was much more of a departure. For

instance it recommended that the least skilled weavers should be shifted to semi-automatic powerlooms, and that the Hank Yarn Obligation Order be reviewed.

Government subsidies and protective measures includes reservation of 11 varieties

of cloth for the handloom sector; subsidy for Janata cloth that ate up over 50% of the

total allocation to the handloom sector in the early 1990s until it was disbanded in

1996.

Credit and marketing support by the government includes cash credit assistance at

concessional rates to primary co-operatives and state-level apex bodies. Credit

allocations across the states and districts are highly skewed and are based on very littleverification of credit requirements. There is much evidence of bogus co-operatives

that have cornered a large share of government credit.

Government modernisation schemes have included the promotion of frame looms

and jacquard looms, training to weavers in new techniques. Several drawbacks with

frame looms that weavers have identified themselves such as less flexibility, having to

weave in worksheds as opposed to in the house, more physically difficult, and

substantial additional investment expenses which weavers cannot afford.

The Indian government has also initiated many developmental programmes and

welfare schemes for weavers. For example the Handloom Development CentresSchemes introduced in 1993 and the Handloom Village Development Scheme, the

Workshed-cum-Housing Scheme, and the Thrift-cum-Savings scheme. It is hard to

differentiate one government scheme from another as their goals are vague and they

lack clearly defined priorities. They also seem to be devised by New Delhi and

implemented at the state level without much reference to regional specificities or

requirements.

The main criticisms of the government’s handloom policy include:

· The Janata Cloth Scheme de-skilled weavers by making them shift to poor quality

cloth.· Only 30% of weavers are covered by weavers’ co-operatives.

· The economic condition of weavers has not improved despite a plethora of

developmental schemes for weavers.

· Steep increases in cotton yarn prices. In the 1990s export-oriented spinning mills

were set up, which enjoy advantages over spinning mills in the Domestic Tariff

Area, because of which there was a steady increase in yarn exports and a steep rise

in yarn prices.

· Building of unsold stock and delayed payments by apex societies to weavers’ co-

operatives has resulted in further deterioration of weavers’ livelihoods.






If the Indian handloom sector has survived and been able to hold its own, it has done

so despite government policies. Handlooms have maintained a one-forth share of total

textile production in the country. Domestic demand for handlooms in India is growing

because of increasing incomes and increasing population. Several people that we met,

including Urmul and Dastkar said that demand for handlooms was not a function of

price alone. Considerations of quality, texture and design contribute significantly tothe demand for handloom products.

So what can Oxfam be doing and saying to help the handloom sector in India?

Clearly the Indian handloom sector has a great deal to with trade issues. Even in

Pokharan it was noticeable that the market for handloom products was an integrated

and developed market. The men and women weavers whom we interviewed in their

remote villages off the beaten track were not constrained by the small size of the local

market as they had access to exhibitions and retail outlets in Bombay and Delhi.

Oxfam should expand its work in the handloom sector. At the grassroots level, our interventions might include the following:

· Marketing and design support to weavers

· Supporting training in natural dyeing methods

· Improving productivity of weavers by helping them to shift to better technology

· Setting up weavers’ co-operatives.

In terms of policy messages, we can highlight the fact that the main need of weavers’

co-operatives is credit for production with transparent procedures. Government

institutions should also be supporting the efforts of co-operatives to develop their own

marketing network, rather than attempting to market the products themselves. The

Indian government must allow weavers’ co-operatives to function as autonomous,

decision-making entities as there is evidence to show that the co-operatives that have

been able to circumvent government regulations have thrived and have been able to

take advantage of the latest market trend, such as Urmul in Pokharan.

Documents

indian handlooms