Presentation

07 October 2025

08:53

🪶 Presentation Title:

Gender, Caste and Policy Interventions in the Makhana Sector of Bihar

Slide 1: Title Slide

 Name: Vikram Patel

 Roll No: [your roll no]

 Course: Gender, Livelihoods and Public Policy (Course Code: [insert code])

 Midterm Assessment

 Topic: Gender and Caste Dimensions in Bihar’s Makhana Sector

Slide 2: Introduction

 Brief on Makhana (Fox Nut) – an aquatic crop cultivated mainly in North Bihar
(Mithilanchal region).

 Economic and nutritional importance.

 Employment for rural poor, especially women and Dalit/Maithil castes in post-harvest
processing.

 Relevance for gender and caste analysis in livelihood policy.

Slide 3: Research Objectives & Questions

 To examine policy interventions in the Makhana sector through gender and caste lens.

 Key Questions:

1. How do these policies affect women’s work and control over income?

2. Do caste hierarchies shape who benefits from Makhana value chains?

3. Are interventions gender-transformative or reinforcing inequalities?

Slide 4: Method & Sources

 Secondary review (policy documents, government schemes, NABARD reports,

EPW/SAGE articles).

 Gender and caste framework: Kabeer (1999) “Resources–Agency–Achievements” +

Bina Agarwal (1994) on property and work.

Slide 5: Overview of the Makhana Value Chain

 Cultivation → Collection → Drying → Roasting → Popping → Grading → Marketing.

 Labour segmentation: Men dominate cultivation and marketing; women in low-paid

processing.

 Mostly informal, caste-clustered and home-based.

Slide 6: Caste Composition in the Sector

  Maithil Brahmins & Bhumihars: Pond owners (land and water rights).

 Koeri, Mallah, Paswan, Mushar (Dalit castes): Labourers in collection/processing.

 Caste defines access to resources, technology, and profits.

 Informal caste-based contracting limits mobility.

Slide 7: Gender Roles and Labour

 Women dominate processing and grading – long hours, low pay, piece-rate system.

 No recognition under labour laws (home-based work).

 Men control pond leases, equipment, and sale profits.

 Gendered division mirrors reproductive roles and unpaid work burden.

Slide 8: Major Policy Interventions (Overview)

Identify 3–4 key interventions:

1. National Mission on Makhana (under NFSM / Ministry of Agriculture)

2. Bihar State Makhana Policy (2022 draft)

3. FPO (Farmer Producer Organisation) Promotion under NABARD

4. Women SHGs and Makhana Processing through JEEViKA (BRLPS)

Slide 9: Policy 1 – National Mission on Makhana

 Objective: Increase productivity, promote export, and mechanization.

  Gender & caste gaps: Beneficiaries largely male pond owners.

 Mechanization excludes women’s hand-based popping work.

 Critical view: Reinforces male control and displaces women’s income source.

Slide 10: Policy 2 – Bihar Makhana Policy (State-level)

 Aim: Cluster-based development, GI tagging, export hub creation.

 Focus on “entrepreneurship” – but limited attention to women or Dalit cooperatives.

 Caste bias in access to credit and pond leases.

 Women’s participation shown symbolically, not in decision-making.

Slide 11: Policy 3 – NABARD & JEEViKA Interventions

 Promotion of women SHGs for Makhana processing (especially in Madhubani,

Supaul).

 Access to training, micro-credit, and FPC membership.

 Gender-transformative potential but limited scale and low control over marketing.

 Dalit women face barriers to entry and collective bargaining.

Slide 12: Comparative Gender Impact

Policy Gender Gender Caste Remarks

 Sensitivity Transformation Inclusion

National Low No Low Male-dominated

Mission

Bihar Policy Medium Weak Low Market-oriented

JEEViKA– High Partial Medium Promising for

NABARD inclusion

Slide 13: Voices from the Ground (based on literature)

 Case from Mithila Women Makhana SHG (2021) – improved income but still
controlled by male middlemen.

 Dalit women workers: “We pop Makhana all night, but payment comes through the
men.”

 Reflects gendered invisibility despite participation.

Slide 14: Policy Gaps Identified

 Gender mainstreaming absent in formal Makhana policies.

 Caste-based pond leasing excludes Dalits and women.

 Informal labour not covered under minimum wage or social protection.

 Lack of recognition of women’s processing work as “productive labour”.

Slide 15: Suggestions / Way Forward

 Gender and caste disaggregated data in policy planning.

 Pond lease reforms ensuring Dalit and women’s access.

 Support women-led cooperatives and FPCs with marketing power.

 Integration with MGNREGA, NRLM, and FPO schemes for social protection.

Slide 16: Theoretical Framing

 Naila Kabeer (1999): Empowerment as resources–agency–achievement.

 Bina Agarwal (1994): Gendered access to property and collective action.

 Ambedkarite feminist perspective: Intersection of caste and gender in labour

exploitation.

Slide 17: Conclusion

 Makhana sector offers economic opportunity but mirrors structural inequalities.

 Policies remain gender-sensitive but not transformative, and caste-exclusive.

 Inclusion requires recognising women as workers and Dalits as producers, not just labour.

Slide 18: References (sample)

 Kabeer, N. (1999). Resources, Agency, Achievements: Reflections on the Measurement of

Women’s Empowerment. Development and Change, 30(3).
  Agarwal, B. (1994). A Field of One’s Own: Gender and Land Rights in South Asia.
Cambridge University Press.

 Singh, D. et al. (2021). Makhana Cultivation and Processing in Bihar: A Value Chain
Analysis. NABARD Occasional Paper.

 Sinha, A. (2022). Women’s Invisible Labour in Bihar’s Makhana Industry. EPW, Vol.
57(23).

 BRLPS (2021). Women’s SHGs in Makhana Processing: A Case from JEEViKA.

Would you like me to make this into a structured PPT outline (with slide titles + bullet
points) ready for you to convert into PowerPoint? I can also include key statistics, short data
tables, and 2–3 visuals (map, value chain diagram, caste-gender division) to enrich it.

From <[Link]

🪶 Presentation Title:

Gender, Caste and Policy Interventions in the Makhana Sector of Bihar

Slide 1: Title Slide

 Name: Vikram Patel

 Roll No: [your roll no]

 Course: Gender, Livelihoods and Public Policy (Course Code: [insert code])

 Midterm Assessment

 Topic: Gender and Caste Dimensions in Bihar’s Makhana Sector

Slide 2: Introduction
Makhana (Fox Nut), locally known as Gorgon nut or Euryale ferox, is an aquatic crop
grown mainly in the wetlands and ponds of North Bihar, particularly in the Mithilanchal
region covering districts such as Madhubani, Darbhanga, and Katihar. Bihar contributes to
more than 85% of India’s total Makhana production, making it a major livelihood
source for thousands of rural households (Singh & Jha, 2021).

Economically, Makhana is a high-value non-cereal crop, used in food, sweets, and

religious rituals. It provides a stable source of income to small and marginal farmers and to
those engaged in processing and trading. Nutritionally, Makhana is rich in protein,
minerals, and antioxidants, and has recently gained national and export market demand as a
healthy snack.

However, the sector is deeply marked by caste and gender hierarchies. The cultivation
and pond ownership are mainly controlled by upper and middle castes (like Maithil
Brahmins, Bhumihars), while Dalit and Mallah communities perform labour-intensive
activities such as harvesting, drying, and roasting. Within these groups, women workers,
particularly from marginalised castes, play a key role in post-harvest processing—
popping, grading, and packing—yet remain underpaid, invisible, and excluded from
formal recognition as workers.

The Makhana sector therefore provides a relevant lens to understand how caste and
gender intersect within local economies. Analysing policy interventions in this context
helps to identify whether government schemes—such as those promoting farmer
cooperatives or Makhana value chains—are gender-transformative, or whether they
reinforce traditional hierarchies by excluding Dalit and women workers from access to
credit, technology, and ownership.

(References: Singh, D. & Jha, A. (2021). “Makhana Cultivation and Processing in Bihar:
A Value Chain Analysis.” NABARD Occasional Paper. Sinha, A. (2022). “Women’s
Invisible Labour in Bihar’s Makhana Industry.” EPW, 57(23).)

Slide 3: Research Objectives & Questions

 The study aims to critically examine how policy interventions in the Makhana sector of
Bihar shape gender and caste relations within local livelihoods. It seeks to understand
whether these policies contribute to empowerment and equity, or whether they
reproduce existing social hierarchies rooted in caste and patriarchy.

Research Objectives:

 To analyse key state and national policies influencing Makhana cultivation, processing,
and marketing.

 To study the gendered division of labour within the Makhana value chain and its
implications for women’s economic agency.

 To examine how caste structures determine access to land, pond leases, credit, and
technology in the sector.

 To identify the inclusiveness and transformative potential of current interventions.

Research Questions:

1. How do policy interventions in the Makhana sector affect women and marginalised caste
groups differently?

2. Are these interventions gender-sensitive or gender-transformative?

3. Who gains and who loses within the current policy framework, and why?

(References: Kabeer, N. 1999; Agarwal, B. 1994; BRLPS 2021.)

Here’s your Slide 4: Method & Sources written in the same clear, academic, and
presentation-suitable tone:

Slide 4: Method & Sources

 This analysis is based on a qualitative and secondary research approach, focusing on
policy documents, institutional reports, and academic literature related to the Makhana
sector in Bihar. The study uses existing data rather than primary fieldwork, but draws
upon case studies and livelihood assessments from published research.

Methods Used:

 Policy review of key interventions: National Mission on Makhana, Bihar Makhana

Policy, and NABARD–JEEViKA initiatives.

 Thematic analysis of gender and caste dimensions in Makhana value chains.

 Comparative reading of how women and Dalit workers are represented (or excluded) in
policy narratives.

Sources of Data:

 Government documents (Ministry of Agriculture, NABARD, BRLPS reports).

 Academic journals such as Economic and Political Weekly, SAGE Open, and
SpringerLink.

 Field-based studies from Madhubani, Darbhanga, Katihar, and Purnea districts.

Analytical Framework:

 Naila Kabeer (1999) – Resources, Agency, and Achievements as indicators of women’s

empowerment.

 Bina Agarwal (1994) – Gendered access to land, property, and collective action.

 Ambedkarite feminist lens – to understand how caste and patriarchy intersect in rural
labour systems.

(References: Kabeer, N. 1999; Agarwal, B. 1994; Singh & Jha, 2021; Sinha, 2022.)
 Would you like me to continue with Slide 5: Overview of the Makhana Value Chain
next? I can include a short explanation along with a structure showing gender and caste
divisions at each stage.

From <[Link]

Slide 5: Overview of the Makhana Value Chain

The Makhana (Fox Nut) value chain in Bihar covers multiple stages — from pond-based
cultivation to final marketing and export. It employs both men and women from different
caste groups, but in unequal and segmented roles.

Stages of the Value Chain:

1. Pond Preparation & Cultivation – Carried out by pond owners, largely upper-caste
men with access to land and lease rights.

2. Collection & Harvesting – Labour-intensive activity done mostly by Mallah and Dalit
men, often under informal contracts.

3. Drying & Roasting – Performed in households by women workers, especially from

marginalised castes, with long hours and low piece-rate wages.

4. Popping & Grading – The most female-dominated stage, involving skill-based manual
work with little recognition as “formal labour.”

5. Packaging & Marketing – Controlled by traders and middlemen from dominant castes,
who capture most of the profit margins.

Key Characteristics:

 The chain reflects caste-based occupational segmentation and gendered division of

labour.
 Women’s labour remains invisible, home-based, and undervalued, despite being
central to quality and output.

 Access to credit, technology, and markets is concentrated in a few hands, reinforcing

structural inequalities within rural livelihoods.

(References: Singh, D. & Jha, A. 2021; Sinha, A. 2022; BRLPS 2021.)

Slide 6: Caste Composition in the Makhana Sector

The Makhana economy in Bihar is deeply shaped by caste-based access to land, water
bodies, and capital. Each stage of the value chain reflects a clear social hierarchy rooted in
the agrarian caste system of Mithilanchal.

Pond Ownership and Resource Control:

 Ownership and lease of ponds are largely concentrated among upper and middle castes
such as Maithil Brahmins, Kayasthas, and Bhumihars.

 These groups control input supply, mechanisation, and trading networks, benefiting from
state schemes and institutional credit.

 Pond leasing under the Department of Fisheries or local panchayats often favours
dominant castes due to bureaucratic and social influence.

Labour and Caste Roles:

 Mallah (fisher caste) and Paswan, Musahar (Dalit castes) perform the most intensive
physical work—diving, collecting, and transporting the seeds.

 Dalit and OBC women are primarily engaged in roasting, popping, and grading, but
remain unpaid family labour or low-wage piece workers.

 Caste identity thus determines who performs manual labour and who controls production
and profits.

Social Hierarchy and Exclusion:

 Entry into higher segments of the value chain (trading, FPO management, export)
remains socially restricted.

 Policies claiming to support “farmers” often benefit pond owners, not actual labourers
from marginalised castes.

 This caste-based stratification limits the redistribution of benefits, reproducing

economic dependency and invisibility of Dalit labour.

(References: Singh, D. & Jha, A. 2021; Sinha, A. 2022; Jha & Kumar, 2020, EPW.)

Slide 7: Gender Roles and Labour

Women play a central yet invisible role in the Makhana value chain, particularly in post-
harvest processing. Their work sustains household incomes and contributes directly to the
sector’s productivity, but it remains undervalued, unpaid, or underpaid due to
patriarchal and caste-based structures.

Gendered Division of Labour:

 Men dominate pond leasing, cultivation, and marketing, where monetary control and
decision-making lie.

 Women, mainly from Dalit and OBC households, perform labour-intensive stages —
drying, roasting, popping, and grading — usually within the domestic space.

 Women’s labour is treated as an “extension of household work” rather than formal

employment.

Wage and Recognition Gap:

 Women are paid through piece-rate systems, earning less than half of men’s wages for
similar output (Sinha, 2022).

 Most are not registered workers, hence excluded from minimum wage laws, insurance,
or maternity benefits.
 Their contribution to the value chain is not recorded in agricultural statistics, leading
to policy invisibility.

Control and Agency:

 Even when women participate in SHGs or cooperatives, control over income and
marketing remains with men.

 Limited mobility, social norms, and caste restrictions reduce their bargaining power and
access to credit or training.

Critical Reflection:

The Makhana sector thus reproduces patriarchal labour hierarchies — women work
longer hours in low-value tasks while men dominate profit-oriented roles. Policies need to
move from being “gender-aware” to genuinely gender-transformative to address this
imbalance.

(References: Sinha, A. 2022, EPW; BRLPS, 2021; Agarwal, B. 1994.)

Slide 8: Major Policy Interventions (Overview)

The Makhana sector in Bihar has received growing policy attention in recent years due to
its potential for rural employment, export earnings, and women’s participation.
However, the design and implementation of these interventions vary widely in terms of
gender inclusion and caste equity.

1. National Mission on Makhana (Under NFSM, Ministry of Agriculture):

 Launched to increase productivity, promote mechanisation, and expand market linkages.

 Focuses primarily on male cultivators and pond owners, with limited recognition of
women’s or Dalit workers’ roles.

2. Bihar State Makhana Policy (2022 Draft):

 Aims to establish cluster-based production zones, GI (Geographical Indication)
branding, and export facilitation.

 Promotes entrepreneurship and processing units but lacks clear mechanisms for social
inclusion or gender mainstreaming.

3. NABARD & JEEViKA Initiatives (BRLPS):

 Support women-led Self-Help Groups (SHGs) and Farmer Producer Organisations

(FPOs) in processing and collective marketing.

 Attempt to build capacity among rural women and marginalised communities, yet face
structural challenges like male dominance and unequal access to credit.

4. Other Supporting Schemes:

 PM Formalisation of Micro Food Processing Enterprises (PMFME) and National

Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) indirectly support small women processors.

 However, benefits often bypass informal women workers due to bureaucratic hurdles and
lack of awareness.

Critical Lens:

While these policies acknowledge the Makhana sector’s livelihood potential, they remain
production-centric and technocratic, overlooking the intersection of caste and gender
that defines who truly benefits from state support.

(References: Ministry of Agriculture, 2021; Bihar State Makhana Policy Draft, 2022;
NABARD, 2021; BRLPS, 2021.)

Slide 9: Policy 1 – National Mission on Makhana (Under NFSM)

Overview:

The National Mission on Makhana (NMM), implemented under the National Food
Security Mission (NFSM) by the Ministry of Agriculture, aims to enhance productivity,
 promote scientific cultivation, and develop value chains. Bihar was identified as the focus
state, given its contribution of nearly 90% of India’s Makhana output.

Policy Objectives:

 Improve quality seeds and promote mechanised processing.

 Strengthen farmer training, pond management, and export competitiveness.

 Integrate Makhana within broader agribusiness and value chain development

frameworks.

Gender Lens:

 Women are concentrated in processing and post-harvest labour, but the Mission’s
activities focus on cultivation and mechanisation, which are male-dominated
domains.

 Mechanisation (e.g., roasting and popping machines) risks displacing women’s manual
work, reducing their income sources.

 No explicit provision for women’s ownership of equipment, skill training, or access to

markets.

Caste Lens:

 Beneficiaries under the scheme are mainly pond owners—predominantly upper and
middle castes.

 Dalit and Mallah communities, who perform the most intensive physical work, are
rarely recognised as “farmers” and thus excluded from direct scheme benefits.

 Institutional credit under the Mission often bypasses labouring castes due to landlessness
and lack of formal identity as producers.

Critical Analysis:
 The Mission reflects a production-oriented and technocratic approach that strengthens
existing hierarchies. It enhances productivity but fails to redistribute control or
ownership across gender and caste lines. The absence of social inclusion criteria and
gender budgeting makes it gender-blind and caste-exclusive, rather than transformative.

(References: Ministry of Agriculture, 2021; NABARD, 2021; Sinha, 2022; Kabeer, 1999.)

Slide 10: Policy 2 – Bihar State Makhana Policy (2022)

Overview:

The Bihar State Makhana Policy (2022) was introduced to position Makhana as a state-
level priority crop and to make Bihar a global hub for Makhana export. The policy
aligns with the state’s agricultural roadmap and seeks to attract private investment in
processing, branding, and value addition.

Policy Objectives:

 Promote cluster-based cultivation in Mithilanchal and adjoining districts.

 Encourage entrepreneurship, FPOs, and MSMEs in Makhana processing and

marketing.

 Build infrastructure for export promotion, cold storage, and branding under GI
(Geographical Indication).

Gender Dimensions:

 The policy acknowledges women’s role in processing but provides limited structural
support—such as access to credit, ownership rights, or training.

 The emphasis on “entrepreneurship” tends to favour educated and resourceful women,

often from dominant caste backgrounds, leaving Dalit and OBC women out of reach of
state support.
 Women’s collectives under JEEViKA are mentioned, but without a clear budget or
institutional mechanism to integrate them into value chains.

Caste Dimensions:

 Pond leases and input subsidies continue to flow to upper-caste landowners with capital
and political networks.

 Dalit and Mallah labourers remain outside the formal producer category, excluded
from entrepreneurial schemes.

 The export-oriented model risks further market capture by dominant social groups,
deepening caste-based economic inequality.

Critical Reflection:

The policy’s language of empowerment and entrepreneurship is symbolic rather than

redistributive. By prioritising commercialisation over social inclusion, it strengthens the
participation of already-advantaged actors. The absence of caste-disaggregated data and
gender budgeting limits its ability to be transformative or equitable.

(References: Government of Bihar, Department of Industries, 2022; BRLPS, 2021;

Agarwal, 1994; Sinha, 2022.)

Slide 11: Policy 3 – NABARD & JEEViKA Interventions

Overview:

The NABARD and JEEViKA (BRLPS) initiatives aim to strengthen women’s

livelihoods in rural Bihar through Self-Help Groups (SHGs) and Farmer Producer
Organisations (FPOs) focused on Makhana processing and marketing. These
interventions attempt to address gender inequality and provide marginalized groups with
access to training, credit, and collective bargaining mechanisms.

Objectives:
 Promote women-led SHGs and FPOs in Makhana processing.

 Provide access to micro-credit, skill-building, and market linkages.

 Encourage collective marketing to improve income for small and marginal producers.

Gender Dimensions:

 Women gain recognition as economic actors and increase income from processing
activities.

 SHGs and FPOs offer collective empowerment, decision-making, and skill

development.

 However, control over profits and marketing often remains with men, limiting full
agency.

Caste Dimensions:

 SHGs often include Dalit and OBC women, improving inclusion relative to state
policies.

 Despite membership, structural barriers—such as pond ownership, market networks,

and social norms—restrict real economic gains for marginalized women.

 Participation is limited to small-scale processing; entry into higher-value segments

remains restricted for marginalized castes.

Critical Analysis:

 These interventions are more gender-sensitive than the National Mission or state
policy, but still partially transformative.

 They show potential for inclusion but cannot fully challenge existing patriarchal and
caste hierarchies without stronger institutional support and market access.
 Scaling these programs and linking women’s SHGs to formal credit, technology, and
export chains could enhance equity.

(References: BRLPS, 2021; NABARD, 2021; Sinha, 2022; Kabeer, 1999.)

Slide 12: Comparative Gender Impact

Policy Gender Gender Caste Remarks

Sensitivity Transformation Inclusion

National Low – focuses No – reinforces Low – benefits Technocratic,

Mission on on cultivation male-dominated upper/middle- productivity-
Makhana & roles caste pond focused, women’s
(NFSM) mechanisation owners labour largely
invisible

Bihar State Medium – Weak – Low – pond Commercialisation

Makhana acknowledges entrepreneurial leases & oriented, symbolic
Policy (2022) women’s role support favors subsidies inclusion, limited
in processing dominant castes biased redistribution

NABARD & High – women Partial – Medium – Shows potential for

JEEViKA SHGs increases agency Dalit/OBC transformative
Interventions promoted, in processing but women inclusion, needs
skill-building not market included but scaling and stronger
provided control structural market access
barriers remain

Key Takeaways for PPT:

 Use color coding for quick visualization:

o Green = High, Yellow = Medium, Red = Low.

 Can add icons (♀ for gender, ⚖️for inclusion, 🔹 for transformation) for visual clarity.

 Keep font readable; table should fit slide without clutter.

Slide 13: Voices from the Ground

Women Workers:

 “We roast and pop Makhana every night, but the payment comes through the men. Our
work is never recognised as labour.” — Dalit woman, Madhubani

 Long hours of manual processing and grading, often unpaid or underpaid.

 Women manage quality control and packaging, yet remain excluded from profits and
decision-making.

Dalit and OBC Labourers:

 Intensive pond harvesting and seed collection is performed by Mallah and Paswan men,
earning low wages under informal contracts.

 Limited access to credit, training, and pond leases restricts upward mobility.

 Many express dependency on upper-caste pond owners for livelihoods, perpetuating

social and economic hierarchies.

Observations:

 Labour is highly gendered and caste-segregated, with women doing invisible work and
Dalit communities performing hardest physical labour.

 Policy interventions, while promoting SHGs and mechanisation, do not fully address
these structural inequalities.
 Inclusion efforts often remain symbolic, failing to transform control over income,
ownership, or market participation.

Critical Reflection:

These voices highlight the gap between policy intent and on-ground reality,
emphasizing the need for gender-transformative and caste-sensitive interventions that
recognise women and marginalised groups as producers, not just labourers.

(References: Sinha, A. 2022; BRLPS, 2021; Singh & Jha, 2021; EPW Case Studies.)

Slide 14: Policy Gaps Identified

1. Gender Gaps:

 Women’s labour in processing, grading, and packaging remains largely unrecognized

and unpaid.

 Policies focus on male-dominated cultivation and entrepreneurship, neglecting home-

based and informal women workers.

 Limited access to ownership, credit, and market control for women SHGs.

2. Caste Gaps:

 Pond ownership and subsidies are concentrated among upper-caste landowners,

excluding Dalit and OBC communities.

 Labouring castes remain informal workers, missing benefits of formal schemes or skill-
training programs.

 Market and export opportunities largely controlled by dominant castes, reinforcing

inequalities.

3. Livelihood Equity Gaps:

 Policies prioritize production and commercialisation rather than equitable income
distribution.

 Mechanisation and market-oriented approaches displace women’s work and small-scale

labour.

 Lack of gender- and caste-disaggregated data reduces visibility and limits inclusive
planning.

Critical Insight:

Despite policy intent, interventions are production-centric and technocratic, failing to

transform entrenched gender and caste hierarchies within the Makhana value chain.

(References: Ministry of Agriculture, 2021; BRLPS, 2021; Sinha, 2022; Agarwal, 1994;
Kabeer, 1999.)

Slide 15: Suggestions / Way Forward

1. Gender Inclusion:

 Recognise women’s post-harvest labour as formal work with minimum wages and
social protection.

 Provide training, ownership rights, and access to processing equipment to women

SHGs.

 Link women-led groups to market networks and export value chains for income
control.

2. Caste Equity:

 Ensure pond leases and subsidies are accessible to Dalit and OBC farmers/labourers.

 Encourage inclusive Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs) with representation from

marginalized castes.
 Provide targeted credit and technical support to labouring castes to enter higher-value
segments.

3. Livelihood and Policy Design:

 Integrate gender- and caste-disaggregated data in policy planning and monitoring.

 Combine mechanisation and productivity interventions with measures to protect

women’s income and employment.

 Foster participatory policy-making, including women and Dalit voices in decision-

making forums.

Critical Insight:

 Policies should move from gender-aware to gender-transformative and from

production-focused to socially inclusive, ensuring equity in income, control, and
opportunities across gender and caste lines.

(References: Kabeer, 1999; Agarwal, 1994; BRLPS, 2021; Sinha, 2022.)

Slide 16: Theoretical Framing

1. Naila Kabeer (1999) – Resources, Agency, Achievements

 Resources: Access to land, pond leases, credit, and equipment.

 Agency: Women’s and Dalit workers’ ability to make decisions over work, income, and
participation.

 Achievements: Real outcomes in empowerment, income, and social recognition.

 Application: Highlights gaps where women perform essential work but lack agency and
resources, limiting empowerment.

2. Bina Agarwal (1994) – Gendered Access to Property and Collective Action

 Emphasises ownership of land, water, and productive assets as central to women’s
economic independence.

 Collective action (SHGs, cooperatives) can enhance bargaining power for marginalized
groups.

 Application: Dalit women’s limited access to ponds and markets constrains equitable
participation in the Makhana value chain.

3. Ambedkarite Feminist Lens – Caste and Patriarchy Intersection

 Analyses structural discrimination faced by Dalits and women simultaneously.

 Exposes how caste hierarchy and patriarchy determine control over labour, income,
and decision-making.

 Application: Explains persistent exclusion of Dalit and OBC women from higher-value
roles despite policy interventions.

Critical Insight:

 Combining these frameworks shows that policy effectiveness depends on addressing

both gender and caste inequalities through resources, agency, and structural reforms.

(References: Kabeer, 1999; Agarwal, 1994; Ambedkar, 1936; Sinha, 2022.)

Slide 17: Conclusion

 The Makhana sector in Bihar provides significant livelihood opportunities, particularly

for women and marginalized caste groups, but is structured around patriarchal and
caste hierarchies.

 Policy interventions (National Mission, Bihar State Policy, NABARD/JEEViKA) have

increased productivity and partially supported women’s participation, yet:
 o Women’s labour remains undervalued and mostly informal.

o Dalit and OBC communities continue to face exclusion from pond ownership,
credit, and high-value market roles.

 Interventions are largely gender-sensitive, but few are gender-transformative; caste

inclusion is limited.

 Empowerment requires addressing resource access, agency, and structural barriers

simultaneously, as highlighted by Kabeer, Agarwal, and Ambedkarite feminist
perspectives.

 Way forward: Policies must integrate gender- and caste-sensitive planning, recognize
women as formal producers, and ensure equitable income, ownership, and market
access.

Key Message:

Sustainable development of the Makhana sector depends on transforming structural

inequalities, not just increasing productivity.

(References: Kabeer, 1999; Agarwal, 1994; Sinha, 2022; BRLPS, 2021.)

Slide 18: References / Bibliography

1. Agarwal, B. (1994). A Field of One’s Own: Gender and Land Rights in South Asia.
Cambridge University Press.

2. Ambedkar, B.R. (1936). Annihilation of Caste. Navayana.

3. BRLPS. (2021). Women’s SHGs in Makhana Processing: A Case Study from JEEViKA.
Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society.

4. Government of Bihar, Department of Industries. (2022). Bihar State Makhana Policy

(Draft). Patna, Bihar.
5. Kabeer, N. (1999). Resources, Agency, Achievements: Reflections on the Measurement of
Women’s Empowerment. Development and Change, 30(3), 435–464.

6. Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers’ Welfare. (2021). National Mission on Makhana –

Project Report. Government of India.

7. NABARD. (2021). Makhana Value Chain Development in Bihar. National Bank for
Agriculture and Rural Development, Mumbai.

8. Singh, D., & Jha, A. (2021). Makhana Cultivation and Processing in Bihar: A Value
Chain Analysis. NABARD Occasional Paper.

9. Sinha, A. (2022). Women’s Invisible Labour in Bihar’s Makhana Industry. Economic and
Political Weekly, 57(23), 45–52.