 |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
There are some exercises for setting
the stage for a conducive learning process to unfold. One
of the exercise helps people to talk about details of the
family members in the group and at the same time clarifies
the concept of 'household'. While the another one helps
developing understanding about the 'livelihood'. It also
lays the ground and generates data on 'gender' issues to
be taken up later during the process.
|
| |
|
|
The group moves on to create a detailed
and comprehensive list of the "things required to manage
the household comfortably and to live with dignity". At
this stage the group generally needs a bit of push, little
clarifications and some encouragement to be meticulous with
details. There are various ways to deal with this process
with different type of groups.
|
| |
|
|
This long list is then divided into
two - the requirements that are met by putting in labour;
and the requirements that are met by spending cash. At this
step, a lot of sorting out takes place within group that
needs to be carefully facilitated. Once the shared understanding
is evolved in the group, the stage is set for cracking the
key issue of 'gender'.
|
| |
|
|
'Who performs the tasks
that meet 'non - cash' needs?', is the question thrown in
the ring. Group members are asked to reflect about their own
household and share with rest of the group. 'Why is the work
that does not involve cash done mainly by women?'; 'Why is
this work not considered work at all?' ; and 'What is the
importance of the work done by women?'; are some questions
emerge as corollary to the first one. |
| |
|
|
After sorting out this issue the group
begins to identify the resources from which the 'non - cash'
requirements of livelihood are met. The group moves on to
take stock of the present status of these resources and
the terms and conditions of access to these resources.
|
| |
|
 |
Once the differences in
people's perception are sorted out and a common understanding
is arrived at, the group is asked to reflect upon the changes
that may have occurred on account of the status and/or terms
and conditions of their access to these resources. |
| |
|
|
At this stage the question
"Why?" throws open the Pandora Box of micro issues. At this
juncture the group should be encouraged to explore linkage
of the local phenomenon with the macro processes and structures
by repeatedly asking 'why?'. It is also the stage when the
'resource person' role of the facilitator comes to the fore,
as additional informations are needed for group to march on.
These linkages are broadly situated in socio-political; public
policy; market; and/or demographic domains and the facilitator
needs to be well versed with these. |
| |
|
|
A lot may have been achieved
by now but there is still a long way to go. The next step
is to understand how the cash comes in and goes out of the
household. This is a long exercise with lots of hiccups. It
also requires creative ways to help a particular set of group
to deal with the task at hand. |
| |
|
|
At
the same time, this exercise leads to interesting insights
and instant actions by the group members both individually
and collectively. There are ample evidences thrown up in the
process that bear direct linkages to the macro level policies,
processes and structures. |
| |
|
|
Now
comes the time to review the experience collectively and then
move forward. The review shall lead to a shared understanding
about the usefulness of such learning process for the group;
the group members; and the organisation. Based on such understanding,
the negotiation should be done with the group members to carry
out monitoring of 'income and expenditure' on a regular basis.
If the group agrees, necessary arrangements for periodic sharing
and analysis need to be put in place. |
| |
|
|
The
organisation needs to incorporate the 'learning' from such
process in its strategic and programme planning and utilise
the insights and information generated in the process to strengthen
the knowledge base of the struggles. |
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
