While in a discussion with my colleagues from another continent, this question popped up in the middle of a conversation - "Who supports the emergence of a strong and resilient Local Economy?"
I decided to think through this question.
The reason this question begs to be rigorously looked at in the Indian context is the apparent contradictions that manifest as departmental ventures in cross purposes. Let me give you an example -
Forest Departments everywhere in India are busy to increase the forest cover to exploit the potential of carbon trading that can provide the states with a new revenue stream. The global carbon value is booming and the government (department) wants to take advantage of this global need. Anything coming in the way is an impediment.
Tribal Welfare department meanwhile has the target of securing livelihoods for the tribal communities, including those that inhibit the forests, adhering to Forest Rights Act (FRA) that provides the tribal community members rightful title over the land they have forever lived. It provides them access to the forest produce, much of which does not have a market relevance beyond the immediate neighborhood local market.
I was invited to talk about Sustainable Livelihoods in a workshop organized by the Tribal Welfare Department for the District Forest Officers (DFOs) of Tamil Nadu recently. Having gone early to understand the nature of the workshop, I witnessed an interesting conversation between the DFOs and a legal expert who was updating them on the FRA and Tribal rights. At one point she mentioned that it was criminal for the Forest Department to evict any Tribal from the forest and such act does not have a legal sanction unless specifically obtained. She cited several Supreme Court ruling as evidence. The DFOs protested and cited a forest protection act which provides them such powers. The expert mentioned to them that it was enacted during the British rule and cannot supercede the FRA that gives the tribals the right over their land. Some of the forest officials seemed disappointed by this. Somehow along with the Colonial policy and structure, they seemed to have also gotten the attitude that the forest dwelling tribes are an impediment (more on this in a book review I wrote here).
The global carbon trade aspiring Forest Department wants to use the Colonial rule to counter the community that aspires local market development using their rightful entitlement. The community needs too are facilitated by another government department. In a normal governance, political economy is expected to provide coherence to the diverse department goals. It could prioritize what deserves to be focussed on as a policy and a programme at any point in time. Such coherence could come from political ideology, people's demands or popular needs. Unfortunately, such coherence does not exist in most governance. Each Department under a civil servant competes to complete 'their' target to show a linear achievement, better than their predecessor and all other departments, while they influence and direct the elected representatives towards their own views on issues. The elected representatives too are more tending towards opportunistic than any coherent thought resulting in conflicting policies, cross purpose programmes, and even the absurdities of colonial rules being implemented in a free country.
In Governments like all institutions, unless someone is made accountable for the Local Market development, there is no chance that it will actually be a priority. At this point in time, I do not think any government department is actually to be held accountable for local economy resilience, strength or development of local markets. Because there are no global rules or guidelines for development of local markets, and each one of these have to be locally evolved, bureaucrats often given to following orders, do not risk doing an original task.
Academics, Civil Society and Community institutions which can see the advantage of a strong local economy emergence need to come together to fill in the gaps within the government system today. Which means academics often working up the courage to say things that may be seen as countering the government stand, something not many in academia like doing. Civil society needs to wake up from its slumber of funder priority driven ventures to become social entrepreneurs, if they have to facilitate the emergence of such economies and community institutions as primary stake holders need to play a large role in the local economy everywhere becoming a resilient system.