‘Ways of Seeing’—Policy paradigms and unfree labour in India

This article traces the trajectory of different initiatives to address unfree labour and their impact on workers’ capacity to aspire to and exercise their rights in India. We attempt to understand the dimensions and effects of different ‘ways of seeing’ precarity and exploitation within the larger c...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lorena Arocha, Meena Gopal, Bindhulakshmi Pattadath, Roshni Chattopadhyay
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women 2020-09-01
Series:Anti-Trafficking Review
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.antitraffickingreview.org/index.php/atrjournal/article/view/493
id doaj-fb51527972d546f4b14143548f441620
record_format Article
spelling doaj-fb51527972d546f4b14143548f4416202020-11-25T02:48:21ZengGlobal Alliance Against Traffic in WomenAnti-Trafficking Review2286-75112287-01132020-09-011513715310.14197/atr.201220158441‘Ways of Seeing’—Policy paradigms and unfree labour in IndiaLorena ArochaMeena GopalBindhulakshmi PattadathRoshni ChattopadhyayThis article traces the trajectory of different initiatives to address unfree labour and their impact on workers’ capacity to aspire to and exercise their rights in India. We attempt to understand the dimensions and effects of different ‘ways of seeing’ precarity and exploitation within the larger context of economic policies, social structures such as caste-based discrimination, gender-based violence, and state indifference. In a caste and gender-unequal society such as India, with deep regional disparities, we examine how different lenses have impacted on development-led historical processes of informalisation and flexibilisation of work. We do this by contrasting two different ‘models’ in the country, one in the north in a rural setting and the other in the west in an urban context. Context is important, but the organisations and activists involved in our two case studies saw their role and that of workers differently, operating according to distinct goals and working practices. Our research demonstrates that ‘ways of seeing’ matter, as they lead to disparate results in terms of workers’ capacity to mobilise and claim their rights.https://www.antitraffickingreview.org/index.php/atrjournal/article/view/493‘ways of seeing’slaveryunfree labourbonded labourworkers’ collective efforts
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Lorena Arocha
Meena Gopal
Bindhulakshmi Pattadath
Roshni Chattopadhyay
spellingShingle Lorena Arocha
Meena Gopal
Bindhulakshmi Pattadath
Roshni Chattopadhyay
‘Ways of Seeing’—Policy paradigms and unfree labour in India
Anti-Trafficking Review
‘ways of seeing’
slavery
unfree labour
bonded labour
workers’ collective efforts
author_facet Lorena Arocha
Meena Gopal
Bindhulakshmi Pattadath
Roshni Chattopadhyay
author_sort Lorena Arocha
title ‘Ways of Seeing’—Policy paradigms and unfree labour in India
title_short ‘Ways of Seeing’—Policy paradigms and unfree labour in India
title_full ‘Ways of Seeing’—Policy paradigms and unfree labour in India
title_fullStr ‘Ways of Seeing’—Policy paradigms and unfree labour in India
title_full_unstemmed ‘Ways of Seeing’—Policy paradigms and unfree labour in India
title_sort ‘ways of seeing’—policy paradigms and unfree labour in india
publisher Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women
series Anti-Trafficking Review
issn 2286-7511
2287-0113
publishDate 2020-09-01
description This article traces the trajectory of different initiatives to address unfree labour and their impact on workers’ capacity to aspire to and exercise their rights in India. We attempt to understand the dimensions and effects of different ‘ways of seeing’ precarity and exploitation within the larger context of economic policies, social structures such as caste-based discrimination, gender-based violence, and state indifference. In a caste and gender-unequal society such as India, with deep regional disparities, we examine how different lenses have impacted on development-led historical processes of informalisation and flexibilisation of work. We do this by contrasting two different ‘models’ in the country, one in the north in a rural setting and the other in the west in an urban context. Context is important, but the organisations and activists involved in our two case studies saw their role and that of workers differently, operating according to distinct goals and working practices. Our research demonstrates that ‘ways of seeing’ matter, as they lead to disparate results in terms of workers’ capacity to mobilise and claim their rights.
topic ‘ways of seeing’
slavery
unfree labour
bonded labour
workers’ collective efforts
url https://www.antitraffickingreview.org/index.php/atrjournal/article/view/493
work_keys_str_mv AT lorenaarocha waysofseeingpolicyparadigmsandunfreelabourinindia
AT meenagopal waysofseeingpolicyparadigmsandunfreelabourinindia
AT bindhulakshmipattadath waysofseeingpolicyparadigmsandunfreelabourinindia
AT roshnichattopadhyay waysofseeingpolicyparadigmsandunfreelabourinindia
_version_ 1724748416269942784