The 19th, a nonprofit news organization dedicated to women and politics, has launched with a diverse and overwhelmingly female newsroom and publishing partners to bring its politics and policy coverage through a gender lens to a wider audience.

The first (digital) front page led with a feature on the pandemics disproportionate economic effect on women (Americas First Female Recession) and a slate of election-related coverage, including interviews with potential vice presidential picks Susan Rice and Elizabeth Warren co-published with The Washington Post. The 19th has also cemented partnerships with USA Today Network (which will republish work across their 250 local news markets), Univision, and The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Early on, Ramshaw and Zamora (previously the editor-in-chief and chief audience officer of The Texas Tribune, respectively) knew they wanted a newsroom that reflects the racial, ideological, socioeconomic and gender diversity of American voters. As New York Magazines The Cut noted, 2020 might be the perfect year to build that diverse newsroom from the ground up:

While legacy media grapples with the fact that most employees are overwhelmingly white (77%) and male (61%) and facing pandemic-fueled hiring freezes that make those statistics hard to change the 19th* staff of 22 people is 99% female (the only man on staff is the CFO) and 75% nonwhite.

(OK, one out of 22 is closer to 95%, but the point stands.)

The 19th also sought geographic diversity while hiring and counts residents of Philadelphia, Orlando, Des Moines, and New Orleans among its staff. Editor-at-large Errin Haines told The Cut that The 19th will cover women as issues voters, as rural voters, as educated voters, as blue-collar workers, as Southerners, and as Midwesterners and not treat them as a monolith or single special-interest group.

The 19th has adopted a nonprofit business model and will rely on donations, sponsorships for live events, digital advertising, and paid memberships starting at $19/year. At launch, The 19th counted 611 members giving between $5 and $999 and another 174 giving $1,000 or more.

Read more from the original source:

The 19th, a new nonprofit newsroom dedicated to women and politics, officially launches - Nieman Journalism Lab at Harvard

The COVID-19 pandemic has been widely described as unforeseen, and a black-swan event. It is, however, nothing of the kind.[1]Scientists had long warned the world about the eventuality of such a pandemic. It is therefore nothing short of a failure of policy for the international community to have been caught unawares by the magnitude of the COVID-19 outbreak.

For a long while, it seemed that the African continent had been spared the same magnitude of the pandemic that many countries in other regions were suffering. As of 30 June 2020, the continent had reported only 3.9 percent of the total global case count.[2] Since then, however, the crisis has caught up with Africa, and at the time of producing this report, there were 736,288 COVID-19 cases (5% of all cases globally) and 15,418 deaths in the continent. Among all African countries, South Africa (68.4 percent), Egypt (4.3 percent), Algeria (3.1 percent), Nigeria (3.2 percent), and Kenya (2.8 percent) accounted for 82 percent of all COVID-19 cases reported in the continent.[3]

This report provides an account of Africas battle against COVID-19, maps a profile of the continents vulnerabilities that render it susceptible to systemic collapse, and analyses ways in which it can build resilience in the face of future crises. The report takes a systemic perspective, and provides analyses oriented around four axeshealth, economic, socio-political and technological systems; and three key elementsrisk, response and resilience.

Even as the report is divided into these elements for purposes of clarity, it is crucial to understand the complex, interconnected nature of these systems. Inevitable trade-offs arise when crises hit, but their effects tend to cascade across systems.[4] The devastation caused by COVID-19 in Africa, for example, is made formidable not only due to weaknesses in healthcare systems but also the precarity of economies, varying degrees of socio-political turbulence, as well as the inability of technology to buffer the impact of the crisis.

An even more critical caveat relates to the scope of this report. The African continent is not a monolith, and capturing the nuances of its response to the COVID-19 pandemic is beyond the scope of a single report. It is therefore our endeavour to provide policy blueprints and recommendations in broad strokes, and map trends rather than magnify peculiarities.

The report opens with mapping pre-existing risks and vulnerabilities in Africa that the pandemic has the potential to exploit and exacerbate. Chapter 1 is a broad health and demographic profile of the continent. Prachi Mittal and Oommen C. Kurian analyse the demographic risks: including age distribution and population density, and healthcare risks: including the continents non-communicable disease (NCD) burden, access to clean water, food and nutritional insecurities, and its progress in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. The chapter also analyses the gaps in health capacities in Africa: with a profile on hospital infrastructure and healthcare workers, and provides an assessment of healthcare expenditure.

Chapter 2 profiles the economic vulnerabilities of the continent. The continents experience with COVID-19 has been defined so far more by economic upheaval than overwhelmed healthcare systems, due to early lockdowns and the precarious nature of economies in the continent. The coming recession is likely to reverse hard-won development gains for Africa, pushing millions back into extreme poverty. The chapter draws an estimate of the differential impact of the pandemic on various economic indicators. High levels of debt and trade dependence are highlighted as particular weaknesses for African economies, leaving them overexposed to the virus impact. Annapurna Mitra and Alisha George draw some insightful conclusions, for instance, that the impact on growth so far has been most striking in relatively well-off countries in Africa, even as the impact on poverty levels is disproportionately worse for poorer countries.

Chapter 3 is an exposition of the political factors that may amplify and complicate response to crises in Africa. While these risks are not exclusive to the continent, the specificities of their manifestation in Africa is discussed. Leo Kemboi and Jackline Kagume argue that instability, corrosive corruption and conflict have rendered some states politically fragile, and they will require assistance to bolster state capacity and combat the pandemic effectively. Weak state capacities, corruption and neopatrimonialism encumber crisis response, as does the lack of political legitimacy and authority. The pandemic is only likely to exacerbate instability unless managed properly.

The world has turned to technology solutions to keep economies afloat as the pandemic struck. However, the shortcomings of Africas technology ecosystem have prevented it from leveraging the full range of benefits that innovation has to offer, in providing a buffer against the pandemics effects. In Chapter 4, Arjun Jayakumar discusses the nature of three broad technological risks faced by the African continenti.e., low R&D capacity, a gaping digital divide, and poor technological capabilities.

The second section of the report presents an analysis of Africas response over the first four months of the COVID-19 pandemic, along the four axes of health, economic, political and technological response. In many ways, Africas response to the pandemic was both timely and robust. As the first wave of the pandemic sweeps across the continent, an analysis of successful practices as well as erroneous steps which cost the continent over the past months, can help enable a much more informed response.

Chapter 5 presents an analysis of the healthcare response mounted by African countries, by examining indicators such as testing rates, the progression in clinical management of cases, private sector response, as well as the ways in which countries like Nigeria and Sierra Leone have leveraged their experience of tackling the Ebola and HIV epidemics, in managing the current pandemic. Meghna Chadha and Ananya Pushpa Gandhi provide an assessment of Africas response, including the importance of addressing stigmas and mental health as crucial elements of the healthcare response, and the need to train professionals accordingly. The chapter also provides insights into Africas progress towards developing a vaccine for COVID-19.

The world has responded to the wholesale economic devastation caused by the pandemic by deploying a range of ameliorative fiscal and monetary policies, and Africa is no exception. Noah Wamalwa, John Mutua and Raphael Muya summarise the fiscal, monetary and tax policy measures deployed by 31 African countries to tackle the economic impact of the COVID-19 outbreak in Chapter Six. The chapter also discusses the role of international support extended by the World Bank, IMF, African Development Bank and bilateral partners in addressing deteriorating fiscal positions and debt burdens across the region.

Chapter 7 provides a critique of the politics of pandemic response in Africa. Meghna Chadha discusses the range of measures deployed by countries to ensure compliance, from social distancing to the imposition of lockdowns. The chapter also includes an analysis of the best and worst performers in the region, and explores whether political regimes matter when it comes to crisis response.

The pandemic has catalysed the use of technological solutions across the world. In Chapter 8, Sadhika Sasiprabhu takes a sweeping look at the acceleration of innovation in Africa sparked by the pandemic. Crucially, technological innovation in the field of healthcare and diagnostics has tremendous potential to bolster weak healthcare capacities in the continent. The chapter demonstrates how a number of African countries have also deployed innovations in the field of contact tracing, e-learning, supply of essential commodities and e-commerce and e-money, to ameliorate the pain inflicted by COVID-19-induced lockdowns.

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the state of unpreparedness of countries across the world. The upheaval presents an opportunity to recognise the pressing need to build resilience into the complex systems we inhabit, as we navigate the crisis and work to rebuild and recover from the devastation it has wrought.

In Chapter 9, Abhishek Mishra and Alisha George address the question of the moment: how to make Africas healthcare systems more robust and resilient to crisis. Their chapter analyses four significant elements of developing health resilience in the continent: household capacity, healthcare workers, training and capacity building, and financing. The chapter also analyses the role of international coordination in bolstering health-system resilience, and in this regard, explores the synergies and potential for cooperation between India and Africa.

Chapter 10 asks what building economic resilience implies for the African continent. Maureen Barasa, Annah-Grace Kemunto and Kwame Owino outline a number of policy priorities for Africa, in its quest to build back better after the COVID-19 pandemic. These include a drive towards structural transformation and economic diversification across the region, the need for social security frameworks to be strengthened and decoupled from formal employment, a green stimulus to help combat the looming climate crisis in time, a push towards investing in human capital and capabilities, resilience across production, banking and financial systems, as well as the dire state of debt unsustainability in the continent. The pandemics impact will affect the ability of African countries to work towards these goals, but with the state driving policy agendas proactively, economies can begin moving in a more sustainable direction.

Chapter 11 focuses on the underlying dynamic driving resilience across systems: socio-political resilience. The pandemic will be a stress-test for the strength of communities and political systems. The COVID-19 crisis has revealed that resilience is not only a function of better healthcare and economic systems, but is also fundamentally determined by political will and social cohesion. Sangeet Jain discusses the five critical components of resilience at the nation-state level in the African context: political legitimacy and trust, collaborative governance, leadership, combating corruption, and the need for transparent communication. The chapter also examines the role of global collaboration, knowledge-sharing mechanisms and foreign aid in enabling Africa to weather crises more effectively in the future.

The final chapter of the report, Chapter 12, envisions an agenda for building technological resilience in the African continent. Sangeet Jain and Sadhika Sasiprabhu offer a blueprint for fostering an inclusive, people-centred technological transformation, and the need to incentivise innovation that meets pressing societal needs. The chapter also discusses the key constraints for digitalisation in Africa, such as lagging investment and the digital divide, and advances policy recommendations to help circumvent them.

Read the entire report here.

[1]Bernard Avishai, The pandemic isnt a black swan but a portent of a more fragile global system, April 2020.

[2] Outbreak Brief 24: Covid-19 Pandemic, Africa CDC, 30 June 2020.

[3] Outbreak Brief 27: Covid-19 Pandemic, Africa CDC, 21 July 2020.

[4] Tackling coronavirus: contributing to a global effort, OECD, June 2020.

More:

The day after tomorrow: Africas battle with Covid19 and the road ahead - Observer Research Foundation

Testimonies published by the UN refugee agency, UNHCR, with the DRCs Mixed Migration Centre (MMC), reveal random killings, torture, forced labour and beatings.

Other people on the move said they had been burnt with hot oil and melted plastic, while others faced electrocution and being tied in stress positions.

Officials complicit

Smugglers and traffickers were key abusers, but so too were State officials, to a surprising extent, Vincent Cochetel, UNHCR Special Envoy for the Central Mediterranean, told journalists at the UN in Geneva.

In 47 per cent of the cases, the victims reported the perpetrators of violence are law enforcement authorities, whereas in the past we believed that it was mainly smugglers and traffickers, he said. Yes, they are key perpetrators of violence, but the primary perpetrators of violence are people who are supposed to protect.

Although accurate data is extremely difficult to gather, data suggests that at least 1,750 people died leaving western or eastern African nations en route to countries including Libya, Egypt or Algeria in 2018 and 2019.

70-plus deaths each month

This represents more than 70 deaths a month, making it one of the most deadly routes for refugees and migrants in the world, UNHCR said in a statement.

Almost three in 10 people died as people attempted to cross the Sahara Desert, according to the UN agency. Other lethal hotspots included locations in southern Libya such as Sabha, Kufra and Qatrun, in addition to the smuggling hub of Bani Walid southeast of Tripoli and several places along the west African section of the migrant route, including Bamako in Mali and Agadez in Niger.

To date this year, at least 70 people are known to have died, including 30 killed in June by traffickers in Mizdah, southern Libya, whose victims came from Bangladesh and African countries.

In a note accompanying the report, UNHCR noted that overland deaths are in addition to the thousands who have died or gone missing in recent years trying to cross the Mediterranean to Europe, usually in vessels unfit to make the crossing.

More than 70 per cent perish on land

We can consider that an estimate of 72 per cent minimum died overland even before reaching Libya or Morocco or Egypt, their place of initial destination on their journey, Mr. Cochetel said. Thats a low estimate in our view, in the sense that the number of deaths on land is more or less the same than the number of deaths at sea for 2018/2019.

Among the reports findings is clear evidence that Libya is by no means the only place where migrants and refugees face life-threatening dangers.

Abuse begins early

Abuse actually is along the route and even sometimes it starts within the country of origin and follows people as they move, said Othman Belbeisi, IOM Senior Regional Advisor to the Director General on Middle East and North Africa.

Especially as they are moving at the hands of those smugglers and traffickers. People do not know their locations and they do not have communications, so even if people die or go missing, its very difficult to verify or to know where those people get missed.

Describing the reports findings as unacceptable and calling for action to help vulnerable people on the move, Mr. Cochetel noted that internationally agreed measures to target business and individuals involved in people smuggling had shown limited success.

We have had no new names of traffickers listed for the last two years, we have not had one single arrest of a UN-sanctioned trafficker over the last two years, he said. So why cant States do like they do with trafficking of weapons, terrorism or drug trafficking; why dont we follow the money-flows, why dont we seriously go after those people and try to combat impunity.

Most stay in first country of arrival

Around 85 per cent of refugees usually stay in the first country where they arrive, the UNHCR Special Envoy insisted, before underscoring the need for investment in countries of origin, to provide desperate people with an alternative to having to put their lives in the hands of traffickers.

Access to education is difficult, socio-economic inclusion is inexistent in many countries, Mr. Cochetel said. Access to medical care is not available, weve seen it during COVID-19 in many of those transit countries for migrants or for refugees, so there is a lot to be done under this umbrella of inclusion.

Highlighting the fact that Libya is not safe for refugees and migrants returned from dangerous sea crossing attempts by the Libyan coast guard, IOMs Othman Belbeisi called for solutions beyond the war-ravaged nation.

The situation is not only in one country, (the) other side of the Mediterranean has also a big responsibility, he said.

Related

Follow this link:

Ravages of acute hunger will likely hit six in 10 in Zimbabwe - Modern Diplomacy

The Tipping Point Fund on Impact Investing, created in December 2019 to scale up impact investing, has announced its first batch of grantees.

Eight organisations will share $752,000 to help raise the voice of impact investors and to encourage leaders in Washington DC to consider how US federal policy can catalyse the flow of private capital towards urgent social, economic and environmental challenges.

The Tipping Point Fund was created with funding from organisations including Blue Haven Initiative, Ford Foundation, MacArthur Foundation and Omidyar Network; as of July 2020, it had raised $14m. The US Impact Investing Alliance facilitated the co-design and fundraising of the fund.

The eight grant recipients intended to present a wide array of policy solutions in the run-up to this years presidential election are:

The government-backed Youth Endowment Fund awarded 6.5m to 130 organisations in England and Wales as part of its Covid-19 grant round having received some 1,000 applications requesting over 54m in total.

The funding will help grantees charities, social enterprises, local authorities and youth organisations to work with young people at risk of getting involved in violent crime and to tackle problems arising due to the pandemic, through online programmes, work in schools and youth work.

The Youth Endowment Fund was established in 2019 with a 10-year, 200m endowment from the Home Office to reduce youth offending; it is delivered by Impetus, the Early Intervention Foundation and Social Investment Business. The full list of Covid-19 grantees is here.

Looking for funding?

Were publishinga regular update of funding announcements, upcoming deadlines and funds you may have missed.Find opportunities here.

Rethink Ireland (formerly Social Innovation Fund Ireland, having rebranded in June) confirmed a 1.27m, multi-year investment in GIY Ireland, with support from the Irish governments dormant accounts fund. The money will allow GIY, a social enterprise helping people to grow some of their own food at home, at work, at school and in the community, to reach 1 million new food growers by next year.

Last month Rethink Ireland also opened round 2 of its Innovate Together Fund, which backs social innovation projects responding to Covid-19. The fund has raised 500,000 from Z Zurich Foundation, the private foundation funded by the Zurich Insurance Group.

Separately, Nestl Ireland announced a 110,000 partnershipwith FoodCloud, which redistributes surplus food to families in need via its 700+ partners, and which has seen a significant rise in demand since lockdown. FoodClouds other corporate partners include Tesco and Lidl.

Sellafield Ltd the legal entity responsible for the Sellafield nuclear site in Cumbria, north-west England has relaunched its social impact programme and unveiled a first fund for vulnerable people.

SiX, which stands for social impact, multiplied, describes its work as significant shift and a new approach to social impact which prioritises projects co-created with the community and stakeholders. Sellafields latest social impact strategy says it aims to deliver the maximum social impact from the 2bn of taxpayer money that we spend at Sellafield every year.

The 2.2m Transforming West Cumbria fund is financed by Sellafield Ltd and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, and will be delivered by Cumbria Community Foundation. Initiatives include a 1.3m fund for community and voluntary groups, 660,000 to support families, 175,000 to fund financial education, and schemes supporting young entrepreneurs.

Social investment firm Resonance has created a new fund to help some of the thousands of adults with learning disabilities, autism or mental health problems who live in inappropriate housing or remain on long waiting lists due to housing shortages.

The Supported Homes Fund was created with learning disability housing provider Reside Housing Association and learning disability charity United Response. It has secured initial investment from Greater Manchester Combined Authority (5m), Big Society Capital (5m) and the Barrow Cadbury Trust (250,000).

The fund will buy, refurbish and adapt or potentially build residential properties, initially with half of the money invested in property in Greater Manchester and the rest in other regions, and aims to provide investors with a financial return from rent and capital appreciation. The charity partners will help people to move out of unsuitable accommodation and into homes of their choice in their local communities, and providefurther specialist support.

A Texas car repair social enterprise that aims to fill a skills gap and talent pipeline shortage has secured $3m seed investment from the Dallas-based Perot Foundation.

On the Road Garage is a new, year-long apprenticeship programme teaching advanced auto repair skills to vulnerable people, such as victims of domestic violence or former prisoners. It aims to train about 150 people over the next few years, according to Dallas News and trained apprentices have the potential to go on to earn a six-figure income.

The programmes founder, Michelle Corson, also created On the Road Lending in 2013, which provides low-interest loans, and On the Road Motors, a vehicle dealer that sources cars for clients directly at auction as a way to providea low-cost option. Corson also created Champion Impact Capital to make investments in social enterprises, and On the Road Sustainability Funds, a private equity fund.

Omidyar Network India has allocated the full budget of its Rapid Response Funding Initiative for Covid-19 to 67 organisations.

Announced in March with a $1m commitment, the fund was extended to $1.4m through personal contributions by Omidyar employees.

It aims to support what Omidyar calls the next half billion the people in the bottom 60% of Indias income distribution, including daily wage earners, gig-economy workers, and small businesses, who are among the most vulnerable to health and economic shocks of Covid-19.

Some 2,000 applications were received with most focusing on physical health, and nearly half technology-focused primarily online and mobile based solutions.

NGOs and nonprofits have responded rapidly... they are adopting new technologies at a fast pace -Roopa Kudva, Omidyar Network India

Roopa Kudva, managing director at Omidyar Network India, called the response of the nonprofit sector to the crisis truly awe-inspiring.

NGOs and nonprofits have responded rapidly to provide cost-effective solutions. They are adopting new technologies at a fast pace. They are collaborating with each other to create a more effective response. If they continue to be funded adequately, these organizations will continue to play an increasingly greater role in Indias response to the pandemic both in the medium and the long term.

Nordea Asset Management has become a founding member of The Big Exchange the new venture co-founded by The Big Issue which aims to make impact investing and saving open to all.

The mobile-first Big Exchange service will offer hand-picked funds to retail investors, charging among the lowest possible rates in the market (0.25 for every 100 invested, excluding management fees), while investing in businesses with a positive impact on society and the planet. It is currently in beta phase with launch expected by the end of the summer.

Nordeas responsible investment team is one of the largest in Europe in terms of pure ESG analysts. Anders Madsen, CEO of Nordea Asset Management UK, said: Delivering returns with responsibility is more than just a statement for Nordea Asset Management it has long been ingrained in our culture and business model. We are extremely pleased to support The Big Exchange, which will provide individual investors with the power to make a difference in helping to address todays environmental and societal challenges.

Nordea Asset Management joins 12 other founding members of the Big Exchange: Aberdeen Standard Investments, AllianceBernstein, Alquity, Civitas Social Housing plc., Columbia Threadneedle, Liontrust, Pictet, Quilter, Stewart Investors, Tortoise, UBP, and WHEB.

Jill Jackson, managing director of The Big Exchange, said: For the first time, people can see how their own money can count for more benefitting their financial future and the wider world Nordea fit with that philosophy perfectly It is fantastic to get the support of an industry leader like Nordea to add to the already impressive group of founding members, putting their weight behind our mission.

London-based ETF Partners has closed its third Environmental Technologies Fund at 167m, which will back innovative companies in Europe helping deliver long-term, sustainable economic prosperity.

ETF Partners was launched 14 years ago to identify and invest in high-impact companies in digitally-led sustainability. The third fund has invested in firms working in smart mobility, ethical cybersecurity, microbiome AI and software, and energy efficient data centres, among others. It was raised from a combination of existing and new limited partners, including British Patient Capital which provided a 20m cornerstone commitment and the European Investment Fund.

Patrick Sheehan, managing partner at ETF Partners, said Covid-19 had propelled us into a digital age while also making people think about the future of our planet making digitisation and sustainability the defining themes of the future.

Throughout this recent crisis, many digital companies have proved themselves to be robust, and they are also scalable able to grow fast in relatively capital-efficient ways, he said. So, by harnessing the right digital tools, the world can move quickly to achieve both sustainability and prosperity. Thats where we invest. By viewing the world through the lens of sustainability, we can see opportunities that may not be immediately obvious to all, but these companies can grow quickly to be large and significantly important.

By viewing the world through the lens of sustainability, we can see opportunities that may not be immediately obvious to all, but these companies can grow quickly - Patrick Sheehan, ETF Partners

Vital Capital, a private equity fund focused on sub-Saharan Africa, is to partner with the US governments Kenya Investment Mechanism a five-year programme funded by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) to unlock financing for businesses affected by Covid-19.

The Kenya Investment Mechanism, managed by impact advisory and management firm Palladium, aims to unlock $400m in investment for key sectors of Kenyas economy, including agriculture, and for regional trade and investment opportunities.

Under the new deal, Vital Capital will identify and execute at least five completed transactions, providing at least $5m in financing and sustaining 500 jobs.

The news follows the launch in April of the Vital Impact Relief Facility, a $10m emergency loan facility offering critical funding to promising African businesses during the pandemic. The facility is now operational with loans ready to be deployed.

In Kenya, Covid-19 threatens livelihoods and food security in a nation that is already grappling with the worst locust infestation in 70 years and trying to recover from extensive flooding. Around 27% of households are suffering from food shortages, according to a recent survey by the World Bank, while in May, the Central Bank of Kenya warned that some 75% of the countrys SMEs face collapse without funding from banks or equity partners.

USAID has awarded $2.5m to financial inclusion nonprofit Kiva to develop a $100m gender-focused impact fund.

The funding comes from the White House-led Womens Global Development and Prosperity Initiative, billed the first whole-of-government approach to womens economic empowerment.

Kiva Capital, an impact-first asset manager and wholly-owned subsidiary of kiva.org, will work with major asset owners and gender lens investing experts over 18 months to develop the new Kiva Invest in Women Fund. It aims to ultimately support 1 million women worldwide.

Since its founding in 2005, Kiva has deployed $1.4bn through its marketplace; more than 80% of these loans have gone to nearly 3 million women around the world.

We're working hard to provide the most up-to-date news and resources to help social businesses and impact investors share their experiences and get through the Covid-19 crisis. Butwe need your support to continue. As a social enterprise ourselves,Pioneers Postrelies on paid subscriptions and partnerships to sustain our purpose-led journalism so if you think it's worth having an independent, mission-driven, specialist media platform for the impact movement, please click here tosubscribe.

Read the original:

Impact Finance Bulletin: Tipping Point Fund makes first grants of $750k to influence US impact investing policy | The Social Enterprise Magazine -...

Bengaluru: In June 2020, the Deparment of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) in California, USA, filed a lawsuit against IT company Cisco Systems for caste discrimination. The lawsuit by DFEH--the state agency responsible for enforcing Californias civil rights laws--noted that higher caste supervisors and co-workers imported the discriminatory systems practices into their team and Ciscos workplace, the Los Angeles Times reported on July 2. The caste of a Cisco employee, an Indian-American Dalit engineer anonymised as John Doe, was allegedly revealed--and passed on to others at work--by an upper caste colleague who had studied with him, over two decades ago, at the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, and knew that Joe had been admitted to the premiere institution through reservation because his name was not on the general merit list.

The case lays bare the complex issue of caste dynamics that operate in the garb of merit while undermining affirmative action such as reservation. While India has for decades had reservation for marginalised groups such as the scheduled castes (SCs), scheduled tribes (STs) and other backward classes (OBCs), in January 2019, the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government also introduced a 10% quota for the economically weaker sections among the general category in government jobs and higher education institutions, IndiaSpend reported.

India needs to reimagine the idea of affirmation, says Surinder Jodhka, professor of sociology, Centre for the Study of Social Systems at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), in this interview on caste, race and reservation. The idea of reservation needs to be opened up and the government needs to collect more data on caste identities in consultation with academics, the private sector, and other stakeholders.

Jodhka is a 2012 winner of Indian Council of Social Science Research-Amartya Sen award for distinguished social scientists. His recent publications include Indias Villages in the 21st Century: Revisits and Revisions (edited with Edward Simpson) and Mapping the Elite: Power, Privilege and Inequality (edited with Jules Naudet). He has also published Inequality in Capitalist Societies (co-authored with Boike Rehbien and Jesse Souza), and The Indian Middle Class (co-authored with Aseem Prakash).

Edited excerpts from the interview:

The Department of Fair Employment and Housing in California has launched a lawsuit against Cisco for caste discrimination against an employee. In a 2007 Economic and Political Weekly article based on interviews with human resource managers in Indias organised private sector, you (and co-author Katherine Newman) had noted that their opposition to reservations was the relationship between modernity and meritocracy. How do you now perceive the idea of merit, and the problems posed by caste in India, particularly in the private sector?

It is a larger problem of liberal social order. The emphasis was to move from ascription to individual-based achievement. There is a foundational problem with modernity and that can be seen in the public sphere. The legitimacy of inequality is sought through invisibilisation of identities. Identities, like cultural capital, soft skills, social network, come from ascription. At some level it is not just an Indian problem where individual success is legitimated on the basis of IQ and hard work; these are facades.

In the last 20 years, literature shows that [social] mobility has stopped [even] in most of the Western countries.

Reservation allows upper castes to claim success on the basis of merit and [believe that it has] nothing to do with identity. They do not realise their own privileges. So when corporate managers say that they only value merit and give no credence to caste, they only blind themselves to the pre-existing disparities. They tend to also look for soft skills and call them merit. The desired social skill, in reality, are monopolies of the relatively privileged. Individualisation of merit works as a strategy to justify inequality.

Is this narrative of meritocracy witnessed more in the private sector than in the public or government sector?

Even in the government sector there is a narrative of merit. The Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) refuse to implement quota despite being funded by the state. Similarly, the armed forces do not implement reservations, and the upper judiciary, too, has been a privilege of the privileged.

There has been a debate around extending reservation to the private sector, and there has been a pushback too. Must reservations be extended to the sector? If yes, then how should it be done?

This is a difficult proposition. It will not be easy to implement or even justify. If I have a small company and want to hire five people [and are required to meet reservation criteria], it would create all kinds of issues [including legal ambiguity]. However, this does not mean that [the] private sector should have no social responsibility. Caste remains an important indicator of disadvantage and must be recognised to be so by everyone, and everyone must work towards levelling the field.

We need to reimagine the idea of affirmation away from how diversity has been classically understood in the Indian context. Diversity is not simply about language, region and religion. Caste should also be recognised as an important axis of diversity. Though caste is not everything and other identities also matter, such as gender and religion, it can be a very important variable in the measurement of diversity.

If the corporate or private sector has to be encouraged to introduce affirmative action, they should be allowed to open it up and individualise deprivation by recognising a number of variables, such as nature of schooling, rural residence or even gender. This could be operationalised through the notion 'deprivation points'. JNU has been using such a system for its admissions--giving deprivation points based on caste, education (rural government school or private), migration from rural areas, gender, etc.

Affirmative action must be based on identity, otherwise it is not affirmative action. But identities must be imagined more openly through constant research and dialogue. The Indian state continues to work with fixed categories of classification that originated in colonial times.

What is the best way of reimagining identities considering that we generally follow a classification made by the government?

It is not just the government, there are other vested interests too, even from within the Dalits, who would not like the reservation policy to be touched. They also have their apprehensions because they do not trust the elite. However, we need to move from [a] fixed notion of caste to a more general culture of promoting equal opportunities and affirmation in favour of the historically marginalised, and caste should be recognised as an important axis of deprivation though not the only one. Any kind of discrimination should be severely punished, like it is done in many countries of the West.

Diversity is good for the private sector because merit is not restricted to the elite. Most of merit gets confused with what is understood as soft skills in the private sector. Bringing in more diversity will change it. When it comes to employment it is not about eradicating caste, but it is about getting opportunities [of social mobility].

If quota is presented to the private sector in the form of meeting certain percentages in employment, it becomes a problem. They should also be incentivised [for instance, an independent agency could be asked to rate private companies pursuing affirmative action, which can be a determining factor in their consideration for government contracts or companies could be put on a list of good business practices companies for the general public.] That may change the status-quo.

Further, Indian society is changing very fast. There are others demanding quotas. In the last few years we have seen agitation by Jats, Patels and Marathas. These are dominant communities whose next generation has moved away from villages and agriculture, and are educated and aspirationally want to be in the cities.

While this is good for the country, we need to make space for them. Currently these spaces are monopolised by bania-brahmin [upper castes] clusters. Even though there are problems with their [dominant communities] methods of agitation, they are also trying to make an important point and could be seen positively. They are not just asking for backward class status, they are asking for dignified education and employment in cities. They also represent transformative aspirations and energies.

The 10% reservation for the economically weaker sections among the general category in government jobs and higher education institutions by the BJP-led government has already, in a way, diluted the idea of affirmative action in India. With a new and aggressive nationalist narrative emerging against caste-based reservation, what is your projection about the future of this policy?

I think the policy will continue though its value is declining. It will remain confined to public institutions and government jobs. However, the quality of public institutions has been declining and it may further decline. Our education system is getting fast differentiated, where most of the quality education happens in privately run institutions. This has already happened at the level of school education and it is happening quite rapidly at the level of higher education as well.

The job front is also changing. Jobs at the lower end are mostly being outsourced, leaving no scope for the newly mobile rural SCs to get into the system. Some of the higher-level jobs [in the government] are also being taken out of the system and are being opened to consultants and those joining through lateral entries.

The Supreme Court recently observed that the right to reservation is not a Fundamental Right. In 2016, we reported how reservations help students from disadvantaged social groups to pursue higher education. How do you assess the courts observation and its impact?

Reservation as a whole has had a positive impact on India, not just for the marginalised groups. It has developed stakes of those on the margins in the economic, democratic and educational system.

Education is a medium through which mobility can be attained, which implies that they have a stake in the system. I think people on the margins need to be reassured that their rights will not be taken away. Now, education has shifted from government to private institutions. Those from the reserved categories tend to see such pronouncement by the Supreme Court as a message against them. I am not sure if putting it like this serves any purpose.

There has been a demand for a fresh census to capture data on caste, which was last done in 1931. The Bihar state legislature passed a resolution that the demand be met. The Socio Economic and Caste Census (SECC) has not been updated in nearly a decade. How has this affected social mobility and opportunities?

The idea of reservation needs to be opened up. We need to collect more data on caste identities. For the first 50 years [after Independence] we were working with this illusion that modernisation will erase and eradicate caste. We know that it has not worked that way. Collective identities continue to matter almost everywhere and shape opportunities in everyday lives.

We need to collect rigorous data. It should be collected in consultation with academics, the corporate sector, and others [stakeholders]. The last time it [SECC data collection] was done in a hurry. There was no consultation.

Caste is not a pan-India system, and [is] not only about varna hierarchy or SC, ST and general category. There are many aspects that are regional and we need to look at how regional patterns of caste mobility have worked over the last half-century or more, like which are the castes and sub-castes that have gone up or down [in hierarchy]? These are aspects that the earlier generation of bureaucrats understood. For example, Jats in some pockets of Rajasthan are listed as OBCs, while in others they are not. Such bureaucratic wisdom may not exist now. So, we will need to generate data regularly (every five to 10 years), and need a body which is engaged in developing and understanding these aspects.

Inequality is a big issue that everyone is facing. If inequalities persist and become worse, [the] corporate sector may not be able to generate demand because wealth is getting centralised. Inequality is a systemic question. When it gets tied to categories and identities, they become politically dangerous. As a healthy society we must be able to do this, like through the use of technology. Brazil was able to connect socio-economic variables during [former President Lula Incio Lula da Silva] Lulas regime and were able to implement social welfare programmes effectively.

It is the only way to deal with poverty and exclusions in a society like ours. Even in situations like the current pandemic, we need systematic data to protect people from vulnerabilities, such as those of the migrant workers we witnessed recently.

The COVID-19 health crisis has exposed inequalities in India, particularly witnessed in the exodus of migrants from urban areas. Many migrants, usually from the marginalised castes and religious groups, continue to be employed in low-paying informal jobs. Governments and industry leaders have talked about extending work hours and relaxing labour laws. How do you look at social structures and the idea of labour change as a result of the pandemic?

People need to be assured that they would be taken care of. We need to change the narrative and say that we are with them, rather than create a narrative around [economic] opportunity [during a pandemic].

This is a moment of crisis and as a state system our resources and energy must be mobilised to make sure that people on the margins are offered all possible support. Everyone feels vulnerable in a situation like this.

The pandemic will have an effect. We can see how students are struggling with online teaching. Many have poor or no connectivity in rural areas. It is hard for research students to step out to do fieldwork. These social contexts are not liberating or opportune moments. If we do not have classroom education, it is going to collapse. If students have to study from home the next few years, we may not have a skilled population. We cant do science experiments or innovative research online. There is an entire supply chain [which will get affected].

Race relations are tense in the US which is witnessing the Black Lives Matter movement after the murder of George Floyd, and violence around it. India reported nearly 43,000 cases of atrocities against SCs and more than 6,500 against STs in 2018, as per NCRB data. How do you compare issues of caste and race, and why do we not see such an outpouring against discrimination in India?

We are a very different kind of society. Culturally and temperamentally, we are still not [a] very democratic people. We love our joint family, patriarchs and traditional orders. We are a political democracy, but substantively we are fine with having our gender and caste differences.

The race issue has been historically different. Although it is not easy to create binaries in understanding race, it is more clear [compared to caste]. Much of the Black population in the US is urban and the country is also urban. India is also going through this process [of urbanisation] but it is still rare to see non-Dalits joining Dalits in a protest.

[The] Khairlanji massacre [in 2006] led to Maharshtra being paralysed. Similarly, when a visiting Dalit religious leader was killed in Austria [in 2009], Punjab was paralysed. We witness such mass reactions occasionally, but they are all exclusively by Dalit groups, generally by a specific community of the Dalits. Even Dalits rarely come together on such issues. Caste-based divisions among them also continue to be strong and they continue to shape their politics and mobilisations.

Despite urbanisation and economic changes, and political parties like the Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party gaining support in the last three decades, SC and ST households earn 21% and 34%, respectively, less than the national average while OBC households fare better but still earn 8% less. How much has class-based politics changed the socio-economic structure in rural areas compared to caste-based politics? Do urban regions fare differently?

There has been [a] churning in our society and in the way we approach inequalities or vulnerabilities. For example, very rarely did social scientists focus on caste while talking about poverty and inequality during the early decades after Independence. [The] ground situation was also different. A large proportion of the rural population (20%-30% or more) was engaged in agricultural labour. They also had their unions. There was clearly a question of class in the rural context.

Similarly, farmers mobilised around question of price [of their produce] and their discrimination in urban markets. Nationally also there was [a narrative of] class politics. With mechanisation and growing use of technology, these identities have become fragile. There is hardly any working class politics in India today. Left politics and trade unions have declined.

There has also been a rise in right-wing religious groups. Do you find India becoming more religious in the last few decades?

Changes taking place on ground have created spaces for identity politics. Globalisation-led mobility has also created anxieties and insecurities. So one way was to go back to the perceived identity pride like in nationalism and religious identity. This is also a response to ontological anxieties (ones existence and the meaning or purpose of life) produced by the changes on ground. We see a growing fascination for religious identity--new babas, deras in Punjab and elsewhere. There is a new kind of demonstrative and mobile religiosity. This is also because community- and kinship-based ties have weakened and people feel lost. It is not only in rural areas that such changes are happening though these trends are generally more visible among mobile populations.

(Paliath is an analyst with IndiaSpend.)

We welcome feedback. Please write to respond@indiaspend.org. We reserve the right to edit responses for language and grammar.

Bengaluru: In June 2020, the Deparment of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) in California, USA, filed a lawsuit against IT company Cisco Systems for caste discrimination. The lawsuit by DFEH--the state agency responsible for enforcing Californias civil rights laws--noted that higher caste supervisors and co-workers imported the discriminatory systems practices into their team and Ciscos workplace, the Los Angeles Times reported on July 2. The caste of a Cisco employee, an Indian-American Dalit engineer anonymised as John Doe, was allegedly revealed--and passed on to others at work--by an upper caste colleague who had studied with him, over two decades ago, at the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, and knew that Joe had been admitted to the premiere institution through reservation because his name was not on the general merit list.

The case lays bare the complex issue of caste dynamics that operate in the garb of merit while undermining affirmative action such as reservation. While India has for decades had reservation for marginalised groups such as the scheduled castes (SCs), scheduled tribes (STs) and other backward classes (OBCs), in January 2019, the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government also introduced a 10% quota for the economically weaker sections among the general category in government jobs and higher education institutions, IndiaSpend reported.

India needs to reimagine the idea of affirmation, says Surinder Jodhka, professor of sociology, Centre for the Study of Social Systems at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), in this interview on caste, race and reservation. The idea of reservation needs to be opened up and the government needs to collect more data on caste identities in consultation with academics, the private sector, and other stakeholders.

Jodhka is a 2012 winner of Indian Council of Social Science Research-Amartya Sen award for distinguished social scientists. His recent publications include Indias Villages in the 21st Century: Revisits and Revisions (edited with Edward Simpson) and Mapping the Elite: Power, Privilege and Inequality (edited with Jules Naudet). He has also published Inequality in Capitalist Societies (co-authored with Boike Rehbien and Jesse Souza), and The Indian Middle Class (co-authored with Aseem Prakash).

Edited excerpts from the interview:

The Department of Fair Employment and Housing in California has launched a lawsuit against Cisco for caste discrimination against an employee. In a 2007 Economic and Political Weekly article based on interviews with human resource managers in Indias organised private sector, you (and co-author Katherine Newman) had noted that their opposition to reservations was the relationship between modernity and meritocracy. How do you now perceive the idea of merit, and the problems posed by caste in India, particularly in the private sector?

It is a larger problem of liberal social order. The emphasis was to move from ascription to individual-based achievement. There is a foundational problem with modernity and that can be seen in the public sphere. The legitimacy of inequality is sought through invisibilisation of identities. Identities, like cultural capital, soft skills, social network, come from ascription. At some level it is not just an Indian problem where individual success is legitimated on the basis of IQ and hard work; these are facades.

In the last 20 years, literature shows that [social] mobility has stopped [even] in most of the Western countries.

Reservation allows upper castes to claim success on the basis of merit and [believe that it has] nothing to do with identity. They do not realise their own privileges. So when corporate managers say that they only value merit and give no credence to caste, they only blind themselves to the pre-existing disparities. They tend to also look for soft skills and call them merit. The desired social skill, in reality, are monopolies of the relatively privileged. Individualisation of merit works as a strategy to justify inequality.

Is this narrative of meritocracy witnessed more in the private sector than in the public or government sector?

Even in the government sector there is a narrative of merit. The Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) refuse to implement quota despite being funded by the state. Similarly, the armed forces do not implement reservations, and the upper judiciary, too, has been a privilege of the privileged.

There has been a debate around extending reservation to the private sector, and there has been a pushback too. Must reservations be extended to the sector? If yes, then how should it be done?

This is a difficult proposition. It will not be easy to implement or even justify. If I have a small company and want to hire five people [and are required to meet reservation criteria], it would create all kinds of issues [including legal ambiguity]. However, this does not mean that [the] private sector should have no social responsibility. Caste remains an important indicator of disadvantage and must be recognised to be so by everyone, and everyone must work towards levelling the field.

We need to reimagine the idea of affirmation away from how diversity has been classically understood in the Indian context. Diversity is not simply about language, region and religion. Caste should also be recognised as an important axis of diversity. Though caste is not everything and other identities also matter, such as gender and religion, it can be a very important variable in the measurement of diversity.

If the corporate or private sector has to be encouraged to introduce affirmative action, they should be allowed to open it up and individualise deprivation by recognising a number of variables, such as nature of schooling, rural residence or even gender. This could be operationalised through the notion 'deprivation points'. JNU has been using such a system for its admissions--giving deprivation points based on caste, education (rural government school or private), migration from rural areas, gender, etc.

Affirmative action must be based on identity, otherwise it is not affirmative action. But identities must be imagined more openly through constant research and dialogue. The Indian state continues to work with fixed categories of classification that originated in colonial times.

What is the best way of reimagining identities considering that we generally follow a classification made by the government?

It is not just the government, there are other vested interests too, even from within the Dalits, who would not like the reservation policy to be touched. They also have their apprehensions because they do not trust the elite. However, we need to move from [a] fixed notion of caste to a more general culture of promoting equal opportunities and affirmation in favour of the historically marginalised, and caste should be recognised as an important axis of deprivation though not the only one. Any kind of discrimination should be severely punished, like it is done in many countries of the West.

Diversity is good for the private sector because merit is not restricted to the elite. Most of merit gets confused with what is understood as soft skills in the private sector. Bringing in more diversity will change it. When it comes to employment it is not about eradicating caste, but it is about getting opportunities [of social mobility].

If quota is presented to the private sector in the form of meeting certain percentages in employment, it becomes a problem. They should also be incentivised [for instance, an independent agency could be asked to rate private companies pursuing affirmative action, which can be a determining factor in their consideration for government contracts or companies could be put on a list of good business practices companies for the general public.] That may change the status-quo.

Further, Indian society is changing very fast. There are others demanding quotas. In the last few years we have seen agitation by Jats, Patels and Marathas. These are dominant communities whose next generation has moved away from villages and agriculture, and are educated and aspirationally want to be in the cities.

While this is good for the country, we need to make space for them. Currently these spaces are monopolised by bania-brahmin [upper castes] clusters. Even though there are problems with their [dominant communities] methods of agitation, they are also trying to make an important point and could be seen positively. They are not just asking for backward class status, they are asking for dignified education and employment in cities. They also represent transformative aspirations and energies.

The 10% reservation for the economically weaker sections among the general category in government jobs and higher education institutions by the BJP-led government has already, in a way, diluted the idea of affirmative action in India. With a new and aggressive nationalist narrative emerging against caste-based reservation, what is your projection about the future of this policy?

I think the policy will continue though its value is declining. It will remain confined to public institutions and government jobs. However, the quality of public institutions has been declining and it may further decline. Our education system is getting fast differentiated, where most of the quality education happens in privately run institutions. This has already happened at the level of school education and it is happening quite rapidly at the level of higher education as well.

The job front is also changing. Jobs at the lower end are mostly being outsourced, leaving no scope for the newly mobile rural SCs to get into the system. Some of the higher-level jobs [in the government] are also being taken out of the system and are being opened to consultants and those joining through lateral entries.

The Supreme Court recently observed that the right to reservation is not a Fundamental Right. In 2016, we reported how reservations help students from disadvantaged social groups to pursue higher education. How do you assess the courts observation and its impact?

Reservation as a whole has had a positive impact on India, not just for the marginalised groups. It has developed stakes of those on the margins in the economic, democratic and educational system.

Education is a medium through which mobility can be attained, which implies that they have a stake in the system. I think people on the margins need to be reassured that their rights will not be taken away. Now, education has shifted from government to private institutions. Those from the reserved categories tend to see such pronouncement by the Supreme Court as a message against them. I am not sure if putting it like this serves any purpose.

There has been a demand for a fresh census to capture data on caste, which was last done in 1931. The Bihar state legislature passed a resolution that the demand be met. The Socio Economic and Caste Census (SECC) has not been updated in nearly a decade. How has this affected social mobility and opportunities?

The idea of reservation needs to be opened up. We need to collect more data on caste identities. For the first 50 years [after Independence] we were working with this illusion that modernisation will erase and eradicate caste. We know that it has not worked that way. Collective identities continue to matter almost everywhere and shape opportunities in everyday lives.

We need to collect rigorous data. It should be collected in consultation with academics, the corporate sector, and others [stakeholders]. The last time it [SECC data collection] was done in a hurry. There was no consultation.

Caste is not a pan-India system, and [is] not only about varna hierarchy or SC, ST and general category. There are many aspects that are regional and we need to look at how regional patterns of caste mobility have worked over the last half-century or more, like which are the castes and sub-castes that have gone up or down [in hierarchy]? These are aspects that the earlier generation of bureaucrats understood. For example, Jats in some pockets of Rajasthan are listed as OBCs, while in others they are not. Such bureaucratic wisdom may not exist now. So, we will need to generate data regularly (every five to 10 years), and need a body which is engaged in developing and understanding these aspects.

Inequality is a big issue that everyone is facing. If inequalities persist and become worse, [the] corporate sector may not be able to generate demand because wealth is getting centralised. Inequality is a systemic question. When it gets tied to categories and identities, they become politically dangerous. As a healthy society we must be able to do this, like through the use of technology. Brazil was able to connect socio-economic variables during [former President Lula Incio Lula da Silva] Lulas regime and were able to implement social welfare programmes effectively.

It is the only way to deal with poverty and exclusions in a society like ours. Even in situations like the current pandemic, we need systematic data to protect people from vulnerabilities, such as those of the migrant workers we witnessed recently.

The COVID-19 health crisis has exposed inequalities in India, particularly witnessed in the exodus of migrants from urban areas. Many migrants, usually from the marginalised castes and religious groups, continue to be employed in low-paying informal jobs. Governments and industry leaders have talked about extending work hours and relaxing labour laws. How do you look at social structures and the idea of labour change as a result of the pandemic?

People need to be assured that they would be taken care of. We need to change the narrative and say that we are with them, rather than create a narrative around [economic] opportunity [during a pandemic].

This is a moment of crisis and as a state system our resources and energy must be mobilised to make sure that people on the margins are offered all possible support. Everyone feels vulnerable in a situation like this.

The pandemic will have an effect. We can see how students are struggling with online teaching. Many have poor or no connectivity in rural areas. It is hard for research students to step out to do fieldwork. These social contexts are not liberating or opportune moments. If we do not have classroom education, it is going to collapse. If students have to study from home the next few years, we may not have a skilled population. We cant do science experiments or innovative research online. There is an entire supply chain [which will get affected].

Race relations are tense in the US which is witnessing the Black Lives Matter movement after the murder of George Floyd, and violence around it. India reported nearly 43,000 cases of atrocities against SCs and more than 6,500 against STs in 2018, as per NCRB data. How do you compare issues of caste and race, and why do we not see such an outpouring against discrimination in India?

We are a very different kind of society. Culturally and temperamentally, we are still not [a] very democratic people. We love our joint family, patriarchs and traditional orders. We are a political democracy, but substantively we are fine with having our gender and caste differences.

The race issue has been historically different. Although it is not easy to create binaries in understanding race, it is more clear [compared to caste]. Much of the Black population in the US is urban and the country is also urban. India is also going through this process [of urbanisation] but it is still rare to see non-Dalits joining Dalits in a protest.

[The] Khairlanji massacre [in 2006] led to Maharshtra being paralysed. Similarly, when a visiting Dalit religious leader was killed in Austria [in 2009], Punjab was paralysed. We witness such mass reactions occasionally, but they are all exclusively by Dalit groups, generally by a specific community of the Dalits. Even Dalits rarely come together on such issues. Caste-based divisions among them also continue to be strong and they continue to shape their politics and mobilisations.

Despite urbanisation and economic changes, and political parties like the Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party gaining support in the last three decades, SC and ST households earn 21% and 34%, respectively, less than the national average while OBC households fare better but still earn 8% less. How much has class-based politics changed the socio-economic structure in rural areas compared to caste-based politics? Do urban regions fare differently?

There has been [a] churning in our society and in the way we approach inequalities or vulnerabilities. For example, very rarely did social scientists focus on caste while talking about poverty and inequality during the early decades after Independence. [The] ground situation was also different. A large proportion of the rural population (20%-30% or more) was engaged in agricultural labour. They also had their unions. There was clearly a question of class in the rural context.

Similarly, farmers mobilised around question of price [of their produce] and their discrimination in urban markets. Nationally also there was [a narrative of] class politics. With mechanisation and growing use of technology, these identities have become fragile. There is hardly any working class politics in India today. Left politics and trade unions have declined.

There has also been a rise in right-wing religious groups. Do you find India becoming more religious in the last few decades?

Changes taking place on ground have created spaces for identity politics. Globalisation-led mobility has also created anxieties and insecurities. So one way was to go back to the perceived identity pride like in nationalism and religious identity. This is also a response to ontological anxieties (ones existence and the meaning or purpose of life) produced by the changes on ground. We see a growing fascination for religious identity--new babas, deras in Punjab and elsewhere. There is a new kind of demonstrative and mobile religiosity. This is also because community- and kinship-based ties have weakened and people feel lost. It is not only in rural areas that such changes are happening though these trends are generally more visible among mobile populations.

(Paliath is an analyst with IndiaSpend.)

We welcome feedback. Please write to respond@indiaspend.org. We reserve the right to edit responses for language and grammar.

The rest is here:

'Individualisation Of Merit A Strategy To Justify Inequality' - IndiaSpend