Abstract
Employing more than three million people, handloom weaving is one of the largest economic activities after agriculture. It constitutes 15% of the cloth production in India and 95% of the global handmade fabric. However, the return on investment in the sector remains low and the industry is under constant threats from power-loom and other substitutes. Nonetheless, the Sambalpuri Ikat is an unrivalled example, which has flourished over the years because of a series of innovations diffused by the weavers without compromising on the traditional Ikat artistry. Predominantly consisting of micro-enterprises, this cluster demonstrates that technological innovations have enhanced the income of the weavers by more than 300%, and ensured better occupational health and gender equity. The cluster ecosystem has enabled the adoption of innovations in more than 8,000 units, over 13 years. This article highlights learning from the Bargarh Sambalpuri Ikat Handloom cluster on how a traditional cluster could maintain its growth trajectory despite being threatened by several shocks and challenges.
Introduction
Indian textile industry is one of the largest in the world having an unparalleled raw material base and manufacturing strength across the value chain. As per the Ministry of Textiles (MoT), Government of India, with a 7% contribution to total industrial output in terms of value, and 2% of India’s GDP, the textile industry is one of the largest sources of employment in the country (MoT, 2020). It employs 45 million people directly, besides about 60 million people engaged in the allied sectors. The total textile export stood at 12% of export earnings in the fiscal year 2018–2019. Globally, India ranks only next to China as a manufacturer and exporter of textiles and apparels, with a 5% share in the world trade (MoT, 2020). Its strength lies both in the handwoven as well as in the power-operated capital-intensive mill sector, which is the second-largest in the world (FICCI, 2019). A large number of micro and small enterprises (SMEs) operating in the sector, especially the handloom and small-scale power-loom segments, are the biggest source of employment for millions of people in the rural and semi urban areas, and contribute to more than 75% of total textiles production in the country (MoT, 2020).
As per the Annual report of the Ministry of Textiles for 2019–2020, handloom weaving is one of the largest economic activities, after agriculture, providing direct and indirect employment to 3,144,839 people of which 2,748,445 people are engaged in it in rural areas and 396,394 in urban areas. In all, 33.4% belong to Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) communities, 33.6% to the Other Backward Classes (OBC), and the remaining 33% belong to the general communities. Of the total, 93% units are household units and 72.3% of weavers are women (DC handlooms, 2020). The income of 67.1% of weavers is less than ₹5,000 per month, and 26.2% have income ranging from ₹5,001 to ₹10,000. Around 60.2% live in Kucha (Non-concrete) houses, which indicates the poor economic status of most of the weaver communities (DC handlooms, 2020).
A large variety of handloom products, based on their regional identities, are manufactured in India. Some of the major varieties include Sambalpuri Ikat of Odisha, Brocade of Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, Jamdani of West Bengal, Kanchipuram Silk of Tamil Nadu, Pochampalli of Andhra Pradesh and Maheshwari of Madhya Pradesh. These have acquired the status of their regional brands that are globally recognised. It may be mentioned that the industry has been accorded the status of national heritage. There are about 6,000 traditional clusters in India, of which almost half deal with textile clothing products using cotton, silk/tussar, wool and jute fabric (Priyatam & Das, 2020). Keeping in view the growth potential of these clusters, Government of India has been making attempts to strengthen them. According to Handloom Development Corporation of India (NHDC), 1,137 handloom clusters were identified for intervention, by the Development Commissioner (DC) Handloom, Ministry of Textiles, under various schemes to promote sustainable development of handloom weavers in the identified handloom clusters during 2006–2007 to 2015–2016. 1
The handloom sector contributes to nearly 15% of the cloth production in the country and 95% of the world’s hand-woven fabric (IBEF, 2017). However, since the last two decades or so, the handloom industry has suffered a decline due to an incessant growth of the power loom sector that is more price competitive compared to the former, due to automation leading to cost advantage. It has, resulted in a decline in the handloom weavers population from 4.3 million to 3.1 million between the second handloom census of 1995 to the third handloom census in 2009 respectively (DC Handlooms, 2010; Jitendra, 2015). This also culminated into the overall reduction in wages and profitability (Punj, 2016; Sharma, 2019). However, unlike the overall declining trend in the handloom sector in the country, the Bargarh Sambalpuri Ikat cluster has experienced a positive change in the economic as well as social status of its stakeholders. One of the important factors that is responsible for this positive change is the diffusion of sustainable innovations in the less remunerative pre-loom process. 2
This article aims to understand the source and process of innovation in the Bargarh Handloom cluster and assess the role of the cluster ecosystem in its diffusion. The article is structured in six sections, including the introductory one. The second section captures the theoretical underpinning covering various aspects of innovation in cluster ecosystems. It also highlights different aspects of sustainability that can be applied to analyse the case study. The third section describes the methodological nuisances of our investigation. The fourth section captures the discussion and findings emanating from our field work of the Bargarh Handloom cluster and explains a series of innovations adopted/adapted by the weavers to enhance productivity and address sustainability issues. The next section discusses the policy implications, and the sixth section of the article captures the conclusion and the way forward.
Innovation and Cluster Development: The Theoretical Underpinning
The linkage between innovation and economic growth could be traced back to the Adam Smith’s magnum opus ‘Wealth of Nations’ (Smith, 1776). However, it did not find formal recognition until 1956 by Robert Solow who explained the linkages between the two (Solow, 1956; also see Rosenberg, 2004). In his growth theory, Solow explained that technological improvements are the major drivers of economic growth. He defined these improvements as ‘improvements in business processes or products’. Gradually, the significance of innovation as the engine of economic growth was accepted across the countries. To understand the role of innovation in economic development, one needs to understand the definition of innovation. A definition given in the OSLO Manual developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), is most comprehensive.
[It states] an innovation is the implementation of a new or significantly improved product (good or service), or process, a new marketing method, or a new organizational method in business practices, workplace organization or external relations. (OECD/Eurostat, 2005)
In 1934, Schumpeter defined innovation as ‘new combinations’ of new or existing knowledge, resources, equipment, and other factors. He emphasised the need to distinguish innovation from invention. He saw innovation as a specific social activity, or function, carried out within the economic sphere with a commercial purpose. He categorised innovations into five typologies—(a) launch of a new product or a new species of already known product; (b) application of new methods of production or sales of a product (not yet proven in the industry); (c) opening of a new market (the market for which a branch of the industry was not yet represented); (d) acquiring of new sources of supply of raw material or semi-finished goods; and (e) new industry structure such as the creation or destruction of a monopoly position (Schumpeter, 1934). OECD manual also defines Innovation has also been described as the commercialisation of creativity (OECD/Eurostat, 2005). It is also argued that an innovation is accomplished only with the first commercial transaction of the innovative product (Freeman, 1995). Broadly, innovation is defined as a process by which varying degrees of measurable value enhancement is planned and achieved by introducing new or improved goods or services and/or operational processes and/or organisational/managerial processes, resulting in commercial activity (Kolaskar et al., 2007). Innovation thus concerns introduction and progression rather than invention. The process of innovation is a collaborative effort that calls for networks of individuals or teamwork (Wessel et al., 2019). The common factors that underline various definitions are: (a) Innovation is a commercial concept; (b) Innovation is creation of completely new products, services or processes, or improvement of existing ones; and (c) Innovation is a network of individuals, or firms, working together to collaborate, ideate, implement and create value (OECD/Eurostat, 2005).
Innovation diffusion was first conceptualised by Everett Rogers, in his book ‘Diffusion of Innovations’ in 1962 (Rogers et al., 2019). He explained that diffusion is a process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system. Rogers believed that the success of innovation or in other words the likelihood of innovation depends on five factors, namely, (a) relative advantage implies new products that are most likely to succeed are the ones that appeal to the strongly felt needs; (b) compatibility indicates the degree to which the product is consistent with existing values and experience of the adopters; (c) complexity points towards the degree to which an innovation is perceived as difficult to understand and use; (d) trialability suggests the ability to make trials easy for new products without economic risk to the consumer; and (e) observability reflects the degree to which results from using a new product are visible to friends and neighbours (Rogers et al., 2019; Sahin, 2006).
Innovation and constant learning are the keys to the competitiveness and growth of countries and their industrial base (Milagrosa et al., 2013; Pietrobelli & Rabellotti, 2010). The competitiveness of industrial districts in advanced countries inspired the research on clustering in developing countries (Humphrey & Schmitz, 1995; Porter, 2008; Ketels, 2017). A cluster is defined as ‘geographical concentrations of interconnected enterprises making same or similar products and their associated institutions that face common challenges and opportunities’ (UNIDO, 2013). Clusters are also regarded as potential drivers of enterprise growth and innovation (Delgado, 2020; Porter, 2008; UNIDO, 2013). The leverage of public resources increases while working with groups/networks of enterprises (Nadvi, 1995). The collective approach lowers transaction costs and facilitates mutual learning and innovation. It becomes instrumental in upgrading the MSME clusters (Schmitz, 1999). The success of the European regions, including Italy and others in the 1970s and 1980s, signified the power of collective efficiency (Humphrey & Schmitz, 1995). Having seen these advantages in developed and developing economies, cluster initiatives are gradually considered to be efficient policy instruments for investing in targeted areas with a high growth and development potential (UNIDO, 2013).
Various degrees of innovation are experienced in the industrial sector in general. However, in the case of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), innovations, by and large, are incremental and rarely are pathbreaking (Bala Subramanya, 2012; Bala Subrahmanya et al., 2010). The innovation and its diffusion depend on a set of variables including social networks and local infrastructure in MSME clusters (Rajan, 2012; Singh et al., 2008). Moreover, the nature of the value chain, other supporting institutions (training, technical, research and development, credit and marketing, etc.), favourable government support, and also regulatory policies, also impact the pace of innovation and its diffusion (Humphrey & Schmitz, 1995). It is also argued that an adaptive institutional governance paves the path for innovation and sustainable industrial development (Bertassini et al., 2021; Wu et al., 2021). A study by German Development Institute (GDI/DIE) also indicates several factors (enterprise-specific as well as ecosystem related) that influence innovation and upgrading capacity of MSMEs. These include entrepreneur characteristics, firm characteristics, inter-firm linkages, regulatory and policy environment, availability and access to finance, availability of business development services (BDS), infrastructure, and so on (Milagrosa et al., 2013) . However, this calls for ‘Systems approaches’ to innovation, which shifts the policy focus to the inter and intra-relationships among the firms, institutions and other value chain stakeholders. This, to an extent, is determined by the seamless interactions among the cluster actors for the creation and diffusion of knowledge (OECD/Eurostat, 2005, 2018). Based on this understanding, the government bodies and practitioners have been attempting to create and strengthen the innovation ecosystems. The cluster approach is one of the key instruments in augmenting this approach.
The Cluster ecosystem impacts competition in three broad ways: first, by increasing the productivity of constituent firms or industries; second, by increasing their capacity for innovation leading to productivity growth; and third, by stimulating new business formation that supports innovation and expands the cluster (Porter, 1998). Therefore, clusters can be used to stimulate the upgrading of domestic firms, notably by integrating them in the supply-chain of transnationals (Altenburg & Meyer-Stamer 1999). It is also argued that collaboration guarantees the exchange of information between supply chain partners and controls uncertainties (Gunasekaran et al., 2015); and thus, facilitates interactions among the stakeholders. Cluster is not merely a reference to the place but indicates the level of local development that determines the cluster’s access to both social and economic infrastructure and institutions. In this direction, the role of social capital could hardly be overstated. The variety of internal and external linkages (namely intra-community ties, business associations, technology sharing, support from specialised institutions, trust, networking, cooperation, etc.) suggest the extent to which the sub-sectoral/regional policy and institutions can determine the path of progress of the cluster (Das & Joseph, 2010). This could play a crucial role in fostering innovation and its diffusion.
While these studies offer a good framework of analysis, there is a paucity of literature on innovations and their diffusion in the context of Indian MSMEs; and more importantly, in the context of traditional artisan sector within the MSMEs. Therefore, it becomes somewhat difficult to identify and isolate the factors responsible for innovations and their diffusion. On the basis of the above literature review and the articulation of various aspects on innovation and diffusion, it has also been observed that there has been less emphasis on the reasons of a low rate of adoption of innovations for sustainability of MSMEs in India. Few authors have articulated the driving and inhibiting factors of innovation and its diffusion and the roles of the different stakeholders in promoting and diffusing innovation in the context of developed economies, however the same in the area of developing economies like India and also in case of traditional industry has not been attempted. ‘National Innovation Survey’ conducted by the Ministry of Science and Technology, which uses primarily close-ended questions to get quantitative data from different types of industries, is possibly the only study of this ilk. While the survey gives hard data on broad parameters, it misses out on the process of innovation and the factors determining the process. Moreover, the survey does not have any representation of traditional, informal sectors (un-registered enterprises). In addition, in quantitative surveys of this kind, it becomes difficult to delineate explanatory, as well as the explained variable and their causal relationships. They seldom add to understanding of the process and influence of factors. Therefore, we adopted a case study method and combined both quantitative as well as qualitative parameters to gain deeper understanding of the process of innovation and its diffusion.
With this background, this article attempts to understand the issues related to growth and sustainability of an artisan cluster, as influenced by innovations and their diffusion. We have studied Bargarh Sambalpuri Ikat handloom cluster of Odisha to assess various innovations adopted/adapted by the stakeholders, their sources, triggers and the diverse roles of the ecosystem to support the same and their impact on sustainability and growth of the cluster.
Research Framework
As elaborated in the introductory section, after assessing the importance of the handloom sector in India, the Bargarh Ikat handloom cluster was purposively chosen for the detailed study to understand the sources of innovation and assess the role of various factors in cluster ecosystem in its diffusion process, for sustainability.
The data for the study were collected using a structured schedule, and focused group discussions (FGDs) with 50 weavers, covering various categories, namely, master weavers, entrepreneur weavers, contractual weavers, tie and dyers, besides six representatives from support system which included the representatives of Textiles and Handloom Department, Government of Odisha, financial institution, traders, and end buyers.
The list of innovations carried out successfully and abandoned in the cluster were listed down with the help of knowledgeable persons in the cluster and appropriate cases were selected. For personal interviews, a two-section structured schedule was developed and canvassed. Part one of the schedule primarily captured the basic details of the principal stakeholders (weavers) and their enterprises, such as name, age, educational qualification, level of skills, position in the enterprise, category of the enterprise (whether micro/small/medium), its legal structure, annual turnover, number of employees, number of generation(s) of the weaver respondents in the business, professional network, market catered to, market exposure, exposure to other similar enterprises operating in other geographies, and so on.
The second part of the schedule was designed to capture the entire process of innovation, the role of different enabling factors in the process and the result/impact of innovation on the weaver’s enterprise. This section included the typology of innovations such as new product, new process/modification, new technology, new raw material or organisational innovation. After a thorough assessment, we picked up the most successful innovation that had relevance to the subject of sustainability, with visible impact. Subsequently, the process of innovation and its adoption/adaptation was detailed out, adopting the case study method. The FGD was deployed with a select group of key stakeholders and a semi-structured but open-ended schedule was used to facilitate the discussion. The survey through personal interviews and FGD was conducted during 2019–2020.
The source of information or the trigger for undertaking the innovation was also captured to understand whether it was based on the need/demand of the customers/buyers; or was it undertaken to meet the increasing competition from similar enterprises; to attain better productivity; to tackle labour shortage; or to tackle the raw material related issue, and so forth. The role of various ecosystem actors along with the nature and intensity of support was also captured in detail from ideation to sustainability of the innovation process. The resistance, trouble or constraints faced during the process and the way it was resolved, was investigated through relevant questions. Adoption of the innovation by other similar weavers in the cluster was also focused to understand whether the ecosystem appreciates and helps scaling-up of such innovation in the cluster or not.
Process tracing within the case analysis of causal processes of decision making was used. Besides, the detailed personal interviews with the innovators, some of the analytical tools like value chain assessment, technology vintage, and analysis of business operation tools were also suitably used to identify the factors and understand the causality.
Findings and Discussions
Sambalpuri Ikat Handloom Cluster of Bargarh
Odisha is home to 63,223 handloom workers (weaving and allied activities) with an average family working size of 3.11 persons. Besides, the state has 26,183 pit looms 3 with dobby and jacquard (DC Handloom, 2020). Situated in the western part of the state, Bargarh district is one of the biggest Handloom clusters of Odisha. The cluster is known for its Sambalpuri Ikat fabric produced on pit looms by the craftsmen more particularly the ‘Mehers’ representing the ‘Bhulia’ and ‘Kosta’ communities belonging to Other Backward Castes (OBC). Ikat is locally known as ‘Bandha’, which is a tie-dye process on either the warp or weft or both, as per the need of the designs. When warp or weft is tied and dyed, it is called ‘Single Ikat’, whereas when both the warp and weft are tie-dyed, it is called ‘Double Ikat’. The design is infused over the yarn under the tie and dye process from a rough sketch paper diagram. Sometimes highly skilled weavers do it directly on the yarn without using the graphs.
In contrast to the Ikats of Gujarat and Telangana (Pochampalli), these sarees are woven with single and double Ikat curved forms and designs. The motif and designs (flowers, fish, animals, God and Goddesses, etc.) of the cluster are infinite and every motif or design is categorised under a special caption with a historical/mythological story. Based on this unique designing and production process, the Sambalpuri Ikat has obtained Geographical Indication (GI) also.
Key Stakeholders and Their Economic Status
Bargarh cluster is home to more than 35,000 Sambalpuri Ikat handloom weavers and allied handloom workers. As per the 3rd Handloom Census of India, for the reference year 2009 (DC Handloom, 2010), there were around 12,500 looms in 299 different villages spread over Bargarh, Barpali, Attabira, Bijepur and Sohella block of Bargarh District.
The main products of the cluster are cotton saris of tie and dye, and small quantities of dress materials, lungis, napkins, bedsheets and other fabrics. The annual production of the cluster is more than ₹150 million. The products are mostly marketed in locally Odisha. A smaller portion caters to the domestic as well as export markets.
The principal stakeholders of the cluster are the weavers, master weavers, and the National/State Awardees. The weavers in the cluster have been felicitated by Padmashree Kabiguru, 60 other national awards and hundreds of state awards. The uniqueness of the craft and the huge pool of awardees have created a brand image of the cluster in the regional and national markets.
There are 3 categories of weavers in the cluster, namely (a) Master Weavers (M-Weavers); (b) Entrepreneur Weavers (E-Weavers); and (c) Contractual Weavers (C-Weavers) who are also known as Labour Weaver. Master Weavers are highly skilled weavers who have tie and dye skills. They buy yarns, design, tie and dye, and give it to the C-weavers or labour weavers for weaving the fabric on a wage basis. The C-weavers are semi-skilled weavers who do not have tie and dye skills and also do not have the financial capacity to buy Ikat yarn from the market for weaving. Therefore they work for the master weavers on wages. These weavers are also known as Kuli weavers and, by and large, belong to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities.
Entrepreneur weavers (E-Weavers) are the ones who buy raw material, make their Ikat designs or buy Ikat yarns from the market, do the weaving using their looms and sell the products to traders/buyers. Since they have an entrepreneurial element in managing production, their earnings are much higher than that of the C-weavers/Kulis.
Usually, directly or indirectly, a master weaver controls between 10 and 40 looms. Considering a 3-month working capital cycle, it was estimated that a smaller master weaver with 10–15 looms makes a provision of about ₹0.2 million to ₹0.3 million, while a relatively bigger master weaver with 35–40 looms blocks about ₹0.7 million to ₹0.8 million in working capital.
Besides these three categories of weavers, there are about 200 tie and dyers who prepare exclusively Ikat yarns and sell them to the weavers/master weavers, and also to the traders in the market. The yarn price is determined by complexity of the design, that depends upon the size of the motif, its repeat size, the number of colours being used, and the intricacy of the work. A set of tied and dyed yarn (set consist of usually a pallu/anchal of a sari or the border of a sari) fetches about ₹50–₹500. The tie and dyers are mostly from the ‘Bhulia Meher’ community.
Other Stakeholders
The main raw materials required by the cluster are cotton, mulberry/silk and tussar yarns. Cotton yarn is obtained from traders/suppliers having linkages with the cotton mills of Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra whereas mulberry and tussar yarns are purchased from Karnataka and Chhattisgarh, respectively. This is usually through various traders that supply grey, bleached or dyed yarn to the weavers. Raw materials are also available in the weekly local market from the bulk suppliers. Besides, Sambalpuri Vastralaya (a handloom cooperative) also supplies raw materials through its production centre situated at Barpalli to its member weavers.
The cluster markets almost 80% of its products predominantly through the local weekly haat (market) known as Balijuri haat and through small traders/local shops. The remaining 15% to 20% of the stocks are sold by the Master Weavers and the National Awardees, in various metros like Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata. A small portion of the product is also marketed by the Boyanika/Sambalpuri Bastralaya. A strong local market within the cluster is the main reason for growth of the cluster. Moreover, demand in the domestic and international markets for Ikat is growing, and with a lot of interventions by the Textile Department and Sambalpuri Bastralaya, weavers are being connected with the right kind of buyers and markets.
A Brief Description of the Production Process
The production process of handloom products is divided into pre-loom and on-loom activities. Most pre loom activities like bleaching and dyeing, opening of hank yarn, pirn and bobbin winding, preparation of weft and warp, sizing, tie and dyeing, and so on, are done manually. Pre-loom activities are predominantly carried out by the women and other household members and take a lot of time; whereas on-loom activities are predominantly undertaken by the male weavers (see Figures 1 and 2).
Description of the Production Process (Pre-Innovation Situation)
Product—Single Ikat Sambalpuri Cotton Sari (for Two Saris)
Product—Cotton/Silk Bafta Sari with Phada Kumbha Design (Plain Body with Temple Design)
Production Process of Single Ikat Sari.
Production Process: Bafta Sari.
In the first case of full Ikat sari (Ikat on the whole body and anchal), pre-loom activity is carried out in a timeframe ranging between 73 hours 10 minutes to 83 hours 15 minutes. The corresponding time spend on weaving ranges between 56 to 62 hours. In the second case of a Bafta sari with Ikat on the anchal, the pre-loom activities take around 27 hours 40 minutes to 37 hours 10 minutes, whereas weaving takes 46 to 49 hours. It is evident from this, that the pre-loom process takes around 50% of the total production time, if we consider all varieties of products in the cluster. However, if we compare the real value addition in terms of skill intensity and price, tie and dye and weaving are the most remunerative work compared to pre-loom activities like winding and warping. In fact, winding and warping processes are most the labour intensive and full of drudgery. 4
Like most of the other handloom clusters, one loom requires two and a half persons (in terms of person- days). While one person is fully engaged in weaving, the remaining one and half persons (generally one female and a child) are required for pre-loom activities. With these manual processes, weaving has gradually become less remunerative, given that it is labour intensive for pre-loom work and also suffers high competition from cheaper power loom products. As a result, the new generation is losing interest to continue in the sector.
The Innovation and its Impact
The interviews and Focused Group Discussions (FGDs) carried out during the study, indicate that due to lack of knowledge on the use of modern pre-loom machinery, non-availability of common sheds, the pre-loom activities were carried out at the individual household level. Moreover, most pre-loom processes require open spaces, and thus were weather dependent. Longer time spent in pre-loom processes and suspension of the work during Monsoon months leads to low productivity. However, in 2007, a weaver-innovator from Bandhpalli village of Bargarh, Mr. Ram Prasad Meher, came up with his maiden technical innovation. Ram Prasad designed a machine which was a pirn winding machine and then with the other group members of Bijayini Bunakar SHG they started designing a range of machines. Ram Prasad Meher further added:
‘By trial and hit method, we chanced upon the use of cycle chain and ball bearing to modify an existing pirn winding mechanism. This new machine helps weavers complete the task in less than 40 seconds which earlier used to consume about 4 minutes,’ explains Prafulla Meher, another member of Bijayini Bunakar SHG.
The genesis of the innovation lies in an exposure visit to Pochampalli in Andhra Pradesh, organised by United Nations Industrial Development Organisations (UNIDO) under its cluster development programme, in 2007. The weaver-innovator Ram Prasad Meher was one of the delegates who were taken for the exposure visit. The visit led to creation of Bijayini Bunakar SHG by the likeminded weavers of Banghpali village who were optimistic about the technology innovation and other joint action for better productivity and growth. Ram Prasad told that:
During our trip we witnessed some of these new machines whereby weavers could save their time and generate additional income. This set our minds racing. How the technology could be adopted to our local conditions was what kept us busy for the next few days.
The first machine was developed and deployed at Ram Prasad Meher’s house. The group encouraged weavers of the village to visit and see the machine and also try their hands on it. On the suggestions of a few weavers, the machine was further modified to include Bobbin winding process. Having liked and tried their hands on the new machine, weavers started ordering the machines. Thus, started a process of development of additional new machines like mechanised weft winding machine with break and gear, winding machine for preparing warp and weft, short warping machine and long warping machine, and so on. All these machines helped save time and made the process easier and efficient.
By November 2020, the cluster boasted of deployment of 8000 pirn and bobbin winding machines, weft winding machines, short warping machines and long warping machine (As per the data shared by the machine manufacturing SHG-Bijayani Bunakar Sangh, Bandhpali).
Time Spent on Manual vs Mechanised Pre-Loom Activities.
Table 1 indicates that 10 to 11 hours are saved in producing two sarees by using mechanised processes. The women are now utilising this time for other high value-added work like tie and dye and weaving. The cluster has seen growth in the number of looms in the last few years. Members of Bijayini Bunakar Self-Help Group (SHG) in Bandhpali village in Bargarh cluster jointly manufacture these machines and supply then to other weavers in the area. Some more suppliers have also come up in the area. Families who have deployed all three machines have reported an increase in monthly income by more than 300% within a month of adoption/adaptation of the innovation. Additionally, the errors in winding have drastically reduced leading to reduction in the cost of production.
Moreover, women who know tie and dye work, have graduated themselves to more specialised work and have hired contractual weavers to get the weaving work done by supplying the tie and dyed yarn. This has not only enhanced their income levels but also helped them graduate from entrepreneur weavers to master weavers and actively contribute to the job creation and growth process.
The social impact of using modern machines is no less. While women now get more time for their families, parents who were not willing to send their girls to school/college are now allowing them to do so. In the words of a respondent Ms. Phaguni Meher
‘This (mechanization of pre-loom processes) has changed my life. I am now getting more time for my children and husband. I am relieved of physical pains and am happy’, says Phaguni from Barpalli. Moreover, whenever I am unwell, my husband doesn’t mind engaging himself in pre loom processes—thanks to ease of operation of the new machines,’ she further adds. Interestingly disputes between husband and wife, genesis of which was in errors in winding, have been reported to have drastically reduced.
Weavers from SC and ST communities known as Kuli weavers have less endowment of tie and dye skills. Weavers from the OBC community, called Bhulia weavers, are highly skilled in tie and dye work. However, they are generally not interested in passing on these skills to the Kuli community. This limits the upward mobility of the Kulis to the status of entrepreneur weavers and master weavers. While the cluster is experiencing positive growth, these sections of wage weavers have an inverted growth path. The Kuli weavers are moving out from weaving to other unskilled work including 100 days of guaranteed labour work under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) that guarantees daily wages of approximately ₹150 per person. This exodus of semiskilled weavers, at one point, was leading to shortage of manpower in the cluster. However, the mechanised pre-loom processes have enabled the highly skilled weavers of the Bhulia community to take the initiative to impart training to the semi-skilled and unskilled weavers and help them earn higher wages. This innovation has resulted in the upgradation of all categories of weavers, namely, entrepreneur weavers to master weavers; and contractual weavers to entrepreneur weavers.
Policy Implications
Collaborative Innovation and Diffusion in Traditional Sectors
Most of the traditional clusters in India are largely manual and lack mechanisation even for simple tasks. Even incremental innovations in technology can have a significant impact on income, reduce drudgery, and improve occupational health and working environment. The policymakers, in collaboration with the industry association and SHG, can incentivise innovations and use measures to upscale and disseminate the new technology in the cluster.
MSE Upgradation and Skill Retention
Micro and Small Enterprise (MSE) upgrading is a major challenge in most of the underdeveloped and developing economies. This provides a weak base for emergence and growth of medium-sized enterprises that could be major contributors to employment and GDP (Mehrotra & Giri, 2019; Milagrosa et al., 2013). The lessons from the Bargarh Handloom cluster indicate that upgradation of micro-enterprises in the traditional sector requires an integrated approach and collective upgradation of enterprises of different sizes and different types at different nodes of the value chain (like from E-weavers to master weavers, from C-weavers to E-weavers and so on). Moreover, skill exodus can be stopped if benefits of the upgradation trickle down to the bottom, that is, the poorest category stakeholder. In the case study, women could move up in the value chain, from less remunerative pre-loom processors to remunerative work, namely, on-loom weaving and tie and dye. It has, in turn, stoked demand for more skilled C-weavers. As a result, the semi-skilled C-weavers mostly from the Kuli community could get a space to upgrade themselves, through the skill transfer by the Bhulia community (from OBC) weavers. Natural cooperation started for the upgradation of all categories of weavers along the value chain and skill transfer was considered beneficial rather than a threat by the master and entrepreneur weavers. This led to an inclusive growth and enhanced competitiveness of the cluster.
Though there are several incentive schemes offered by various ministries and state departments for technology upgradation, but it requires an integrated sectoral approach. Sector policies focusing on innovation can be created by the ministries to identify the weak nodes in the value chains, and design comprehensive schemes for collective upgradation of enterprises by supporting all the required inputs like skill upgradation, finance, market linkages, and so on. Various stakeholders especially enterprises, associations, academia, financial institutions and other support stakeholders can be involved in the process of designing and rolling out the sectoral policy.
Thematic Intervention and Knowledge Transfer in Clusters
Agglomerations of firms have been extensively encouraged by government interventions. Traditionally, clusters were focused because of ease of promoting collective actions to address various cluster enterprise-based needs, opportunities, and challenges. However, in this case study, it is realised that even thematic interventions, market-based models, and interventions even without collective actions can also be promoted. Cluster, as an aggregate of enterprises, is a better option rather than targeting individual enterprises because of the benefits of scalability, selective customisation, and low transaction costs.
Sustainability and resilience are not only important aspects in the fabric production but also in its backward chain of cotton farming. Overuse of chemical pesticides and fertilisers affects human health; contaminates water resource and food crops; and creates environmental damages. However, like handloom weaving, cotton farming too is managed by marginalised farmers and therefore there is a need for fostering collective actions to adopt/adapt sustainable practices.
The study also indicates that an Industry association/SHG in a cluster can play a facilitating role to influence the innovation diffusion process by showcasing successful examples, linking enterprises with innovative solutions and support systems. Support to such organisations can be provided through special schemes of assistance to encourage them to take up real services for their member enterprises. They can also be supported in creating a technology incubator depending on the needs of the cluster.
Gender-Centric Innovation for Economic Growth and Inclusivity
Women constitute 48% of the Indian population, but only 21% of women are in the workforce. It is far below the world average of 47% (ILO, 2019). With 18%, their contribution to the GDP is one of the world’s lowest (McKinsey & Company, 2018). Only 13.7% of the total MSMEs are owned by women. According to CEO, NITI Aayog, raising female work participation could impact India’s GDP by USD 700 billion in the next 10 years and create employment opportunities for others and address sustainability issues (PTI, 2019). Despite being increasingly perceived to play a significant role in realising the transformation to a greener economy and poverty reduction in countries with developing and underdeveloped economies, there is hardly any literature which talks about the ways and means to promote women’s economic participation, especially as job providers and not simply job seekers. The Bargarh Ikat handloom cluster is a good case in point that explains that innovation can enhance women work participation in more remunerative work like shifting from pre-loom work to loom based weaving and also tie and dye work. Such inclusive innovations also create new jobs for women and pave avenues for their overall development and active contribution to the GDP. Several such opportunities exist in various sectors, which require a gender lens for creating and strengthening the ecosystem. Each sectoral ministry (like the Ministry of Textiles)/department should adopt a structured gender approach to understand the innovation need along the value chain to enhance women work participation and overall empowerment.
Mapping and Development of Enterprising Opportunities for Economic Resilience and Self-Reliance
Migrant workers from less developed states like Odisha to other states is rising steadily. According to Government sources, cited by the Times of India on 10 December 2020, ‘compared to 55,000 migrants in 2007, 0.146 million people left the state in 2015’ (Pradhan, 2020). The state has several distressed pockets where entrepreneurship opportunities are limited and therefore, the locals prefer to migrate to industrial areas/urban locations for livelihood. However, the Sambalpuri Ikat handloom cluster of Bargarh and similar clusters have been able to generate enough revenue and jobs for the people to become self-reliant. The Bargarh Sambalpuri Ikat handloom cluster is a testimony to how a series of social innovations could lead to higher productivity and inclusive growth and make the economy self-reliant. While jobless growth has been an alarming concern for planners and policy makers, this cluster has shown positive job growth over the last two decades. Mapping of such traditional skill-based economic opportunities may be taken up by the policymakers with appropriate provisioning of end-to-end business solutions for the migrants and people from the marginalised communities.
It is also worthwhile to note that, the COVID-19 pandemic has varied impact on different sectors and clusters. Tirupur textile cluster is constantly in the limelight since 24 March 2020 when 34-year-old garment manufacturer ended his life because of COVID-19 led economic stress (Indian Express, 2020). The cluster is facing huge threat because of the disrupted market demand. The cluster which has over 10,000 manufacturing units employing over 0.6 million people lost over ₹10,000 crore in just few months. For both the small and big firms, the road to revival seems difficult. Similar is the situation in Ludhiana, Kolkata, Jaipur, and other mega hubs of textile clusters of India who are primarily catering to national and export markets and are operating with migrated labourers. Market crisis has led to huge unemployment and distress, whereas clusters with local employment and local demand like Bargarh ikat handloom cluster are still being able to cope up with the distress, even though the demand is impacted partially. This calls for rethinking of the traditional concept of ‘vocal for local’ and ‘Gandhian economy’ to become self-reliant and sustainable.
Conclusion
Economic development through enhancing the industrial base, promoting sustainable production and creating job opportunities have been the primary objectives of developing nations including India. However, time and again, economists, policy stakeholders and practitioners emphasise that the competitiveness and growth potential of the ‘traditional micro-enterprises’ is limited. More emphasis has been given to capital intensive sectors and their linkages with Global Value Chains (GVCs). This article contradicts this view and highlights that even the traditional sector can add value to economic development, and become more resilient and inclusive. This article also adds to the slogan ‘vocal for local’.
There is a dearth of literature to highlight sustainability aspects of the value chains and their upgradation process. The case of Bargarh Ikat handloom cluster highlights how simple and incremental innovations can be induced at different nodes of the production process to help collective and inclusive upgrading of different types of enterprises and foster cooperation of knowledge and skill transfer. It highlights the ecosystem elements which can help diffuse the innovation at those weak nodes through an integrated and collaborative approach. The study also suggests an approach on how social capital could be leveraged for inclusive and collective growth.
Lastly, the article provides insights into the processes and desirable outcomes of innovations, howsoever incremental they could be. Therefore, the key to growth of the economy lies in fostering innovations in the country, at all levels. The policymakers should define pathways to promote innovations, and more importantly, their diffusion to ensure long-term, sustainable development and growth.
