2

We started by bringing in certain practices to ensure a certain level of quality in procurement of herbs and semi-processing. The next step was to supply the produce to a few corporates in small quantities and this is where we got into initially some problems as the corporates had certain expectations. It took us four years till when we could borrow some money to reach volumes such that we could break even. Thus as a company today, it is a viable entity.

What has it managed to do? It has managed to gain control over the pricing. Earlier they were dependent on the local traders for pricing. Here there is assured stable price through the year. The price is fixed. Secondly it ensured guaranteed returns. Earlier when they went into the forest they are not sure whether it is going to be procured by the trader or not, or at what price they would be able to sell it. Here there is a guaranteed market because most of it is based on assured orders. Third, it has also given them an identity as a collective, which gives them access to credit and other things which was not accessible before, because these were real small farmers and collectors. Fourth in the process of ensuring quality they have put in place a lot of systems, good practices, including conservation practices. Earlier the collection process was such that it could have destroyed the produce in the process of collection.

But at the end of fourth year, that is last year, we extended our work which was hitherto only with collectors to farmers as well. We brought together farmers and farmer groups particularly in tribal areas ensuring supply. As far as market was concerned, we also started emphasizing on tapping the local market. During this year we therefore tried out three models of retailing--namely direct supply and the retail chain and the super market models. After looking into the results, we have now decided to streamline the retail model.

The herb gatherers who were tribals realized that they had the technology to provide the end products namely Ayurvedic and Siddha based medicines. Instead of just passing on the raw produce to the corporate entities like Himalaya, they decided to produce the medicines themselves. A manufacturing unit was set up last year, and the formulations were supplied to local Vaidyas, at a much lower price than what Himalaya or anyone else could.

We realized that there is a very good possibility of creating what Shiv described as supply chain democracy. It is gaining control over your own supply chain all the way till the customer. Earlier you were dependent on so many factors and were not at all sure how you were going to get returns for your produce. So in principle this is trying to get control over the local economy, to ensure that we form a self-sustaining local area. I do not claim that we have reached anywhere there. But currently, it is very promising in terms of the response we have received from the farmers.

The first project took about four years to break even. In the new model, within one year, the unit has reached a stage where it can get back its working capital in just three months. This is something that we had not anticipated initially, when we were rather skeptical in terms of the amount of capital that would be required to start a business of this kind.

We got into this kind of work, because we felt there is no point trying to protest. Can we engage with the issue instead of protesting?

I want to share a few related thoughts, which connect to some of the debates. Someone mentioned the term “substantial equivalence” used by bio-tech firms to justify some of its research. I was surprised because it did not look like a scientific term. So I dug up a bit. Gandhiji was having this debate with some scientists, who were extolling the virtues of polish rice. Gandhiji obviously is talking about unpolished rice as model. At some point in response to a direct question, one scientist used the term “almost like”. Gandhiji said: “You are a scientist. You can’t say some this is almost a right angle triangle. It is either a right angle triangle or not. I am not a scientist. Substantial equivalence is like saying something is almost a right angle triangle.

Dharampalji tells of his experience when he took a memorandum to submit to the Britishers. The Britishers said they would accept the memorandum, but asked for it to be toned down. So Dharampalji and his colleagues went back, and re-worked it. The second time, the Britishers said that the language was not acceptable, tone down the language. Like in the Colonial times, how much are we going to dilute what we have to say and compromise? This was the dilemma which Shibu and Ramanjenelu were talking about. How much do you compromise, adapt, or give in? You have to tone down the memorandum’s language or your approach till it is acceptable by the system. This is a colonial hangover that seems to be prevalent even now.

Talking about the technology debate, I am reminded of this letter to the Secretary of the State for India from the Governor of Bengal in 1875. This is with regard to the fact that there were quite a lot of Indians who speak good English and they talk in English in almost as equal terms with the British. The letter says “No doubt the alumni of our schools and colleges do become as a class discontented. But this arises partly from our higher education being too much in the direction of law, public administration, and prose literature, where they may possibly imagine, however erroneously, that they may approach to competition with us. But we shall do more and more to direct their thoughts towards practical sciences, where they must inevitably feel their utter inferiority to us”. This was when science and technology education was introduced in India way back in 1875.

And then I quote from an essay called Modern India in the History textbook of class VIII published by the NCERT: “These weaknesses of the Indian states were further aggravated by the backwardness of their economy and technology. This backwardness became an extremely important factor when the industrial revolution took place in England. The British army had better artillery”.

Another quote from a class V book: “Can you imagine that for many centuries man did not have such inventions that could help express his thoughts on paper, no paper, and printing nothing. You will also be shocked to know that there were no machines, medicines, and no doctors in hospitals like they have today. Then man did all kinds of work himself. There were no machines.”

So this is the kind of education we start with. When you talk about policy we need to understand that in education we have lost the battle in class V itself! Why talk about universities.

Further Reading: Network Economy Model of Development: http://www.samanvaya.com/main/swaraj07.html

<<< PREVIOUS

NEXT >>>