asked in 2005

1. Can you give an example of practical changes achieved by Lokayan?

Since its inception, Lokayan has been working on the issues of human rights, gender and the diversity of the indigenous people. With the number of debates and dialogues it has been involved in, over the years, there has been a shift in the thinking of the planners and policy makers towards these issues. The issue of the rights of the poor, be they in housing or employment on the roads, were never brought to the table for discussion. Today they are integral in the process of policy formulation at least, even though, at the implementation level, there is much that still needs to be done.


2. How has Indian civil society changed since you received the award 20 years ago?

Two decades ago, the ideals and issues raised by Lokayan were considered anti-development as progress was defined as reaching towards a high-tech society – technology being the panacea of all that ailed our society then. However, today our work has become a part of a powerful stream of voices, raised from the country and in the international arena, which are raising issues of sustainability and the rights of the indigenous peoples. The civil society in India is now working for the same goals.


3. What is Lokayan’s biggest concern today?

Lokayan has always worked on human rights issues. Over the last decade, our work has become more urban centred, with the issues of shelter, transport and livelihood becoming the prime focus of our work. With the constant marginalization of the livelihood of the urban poor, by the processes of relocation of small industries and forced eviction from the urban slums, this issue finds centre-stage in the efforts of Lokayan.


4. Why is there a inequity in development and income generation between the countries of the “North” and “South”?

The very comparison of the North and South creates inequities by putting them together on the same platform and by judging the South by the rules and indicators developed in the “North”. The development patterns, values and societal structures of both regions are entirely different. In the post industrial era of the modern world, technology and technical empowerment has been seen as the solution to all problems. This has marginalized the role of human labour and relegated it to inhumanity and indignity. There has been no effort to question how a development model, which is based on a homogeneous society with low population, can be applied to a heterogeneous society with higher availability of human resources. When the planning and economic models of the North are applied to the South, the latter is judged as chaotic and poor. The truth is that it is the very perceived backwardness of our people and systems which help us find a faster path to sustainability compared to the North, which now has to invent and rediscover sustainable systems as their own do not have a future. A case in point here is the cycle rickshaw – we still have them plying on our roads and only need to include them in formal transport planning to make our systems both environmentally and economically sustainable. Some developed cities of the North are now trying to introduce the cycle rickshaw as a sustainable mode of transport, but will have an uphill struggle because human powered vehicles are no longer a part of their tradition or planning. The mythical perception of “North” as the giver and “South” as the recipient needs to be realigned. An equitable relationship of giving and taking, and learning from each other would be the true definition of globalization.


5. What effect has the RLA had on your work?

The RLA has brought us and the issues we are fighting for a world-wide recognition. This has given us internal strength and external support – both of which have made our cause stronger.