Debt Bondage : Issues & Perspectives

Objectives

Until recently labour bondage in India used to be mainly discussed in the context of the agrarian economy. Even to the extent that the Abolition of Bonded Labour Act in 1976 was meant to remove practices of unfree labour which had lingered on in the relationships between landowners and agricultural workers. However, far from being a residue of “tradition”, bonded labour remains surprisingly current in India. It may have faded away in certain sectors, but reappears in others, sometimes giving rise to new forms of subordination and exploitation.

By bringing together academics, actors from the civil society and decision makers, this seminar is an attempt to analyze the diversity of bonded labour mechanisms in contemporary India. Defining bondage is a first challenge. We suggest that the analysis of bonded labour cannot be dissociated from a broader analysis related to the whole landscape of labour. The emergence of neo-bondage relations is strongly connected to the reinforcement of the casualisation and the informalisation of labour relationships, as well as the intensification of circulation and seasonal migration. We also suggest an analysis of labour relations and their recent evolution in a more general perspective related to dependency and exclusion from civil rights. In a context of very high rates of unemployment and sharp fluctuations in the demand for labour, dependence to a single employer or job-broker might be experienced by the workers as a guarantee and job security. Furthermore, in a context of very great uncertainty, of violence and in the absence of formal institutions guaranteeing everyone’s basic rights, clientelism, paternalism and eventually bondage might appear as the best means of ensuring the fragile safety of the most vulnerable.

We suggest the distinction of two perspectives: 1) at a micro-level: how people understand and experience labour relations. How do they perceive themselves their dependence to their employer/job-broker? Do they define themselves as bonded? What is their own definition of freedom and unfreedom and how far does this opposition suit to personal experiences and perceptions?

2) at an institutional-level: what are the consequences of the macro-economic and political trends: globalisation, liberalisation and privatisation, and, to some extent, depending on the regions and the sectors, the various pressures to respect labour laws, and the various actions against bondage.

Programme

Download detailed programme schedule.

Organisers

• Institute for Human Development
• French Institute of Pondicherry
• FNV Vakcentrale (Dutch Trade Union)

Venue

Institute for Human Development (Committee Room), IIPA Campus, IP Estate, New Delhi

Participants

• Augendra Bhukhut (IFP)

• Jan Breman (Amsterdam School for Social science Research, Netherlands)

• Navin Chandra (Institute for Human Development, New Delhi, India)

• Hiranmay Dhar (Gandhian Institute, Varanasi, India)

• Isabelle Guérin (IRD / IFP)

• S.S. Jodhka (Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India)

• Dr. J. John (Centre for Education and Communication, New Delhi, India)

• K.P. Kannan National Commission for Enterprises in Unorganised Sector, New Delhi, India)

• Neetu Lamba (International Labour Organisation, New Delhi, India)

• Jens Lerche (School of Oriental and African Studies, London, England)

• Prabhu Mahapatra (University of Delhi, India)

• Kamala Marius- Gnanou (IFP / CNRS)

• David Picherit (IFP)

• Jacques Pouchepadass (CNRS)

• Aseem Prakash (Institute for Human Development)

• Dr. K.T Rammohan (M.G.University, Kottyam, India)

• D. Narasimha Reddy (Institute for Human Development, New Delhi, India)

• Marc Roesch (IFP)

• Mitu Sengupta (Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada)

• Alakh N. Sharma Director, (Institute for Human Development (IHD), New Delhi, India)

• Ravi Srivastava (National Commission for Enterprises in Unorganised Sector, New Delhi, India)

• Venkatasubramanian (IFP)