Insecure land rights are the key deterrent factor for the development of life and livelihoods of the poor households in developing countries. Government- or NGO-supported livelihood development programmes for the poorest of the poor are often constrained by a lack of access to land. A rights-based approach advocates for securing land rights first, followed by non-land inputs through the government system for better utilisation of land, thus improving the lives and livelihoods of those poor families. Based on both primary and secondary data, this study reviews the role of an NGO in establishing collaboration with the government and securing land rights for the poor and promoting land-based livelihoods. The study finds that this rights-based approach to development in collaboration with the government has yielded many positive outcomes, which can make a far-reaching impact on the lives and livelihoods of the programme participants.
AgarwalB. (1994). A field of one’s own: Gender and land rights in South Asia. University Press.
2.
AshleyC., & CarneyD. (1999). Sustainable livelihoods: Lessons from early experience (Vol. 7, No. 1). Department for International Development.
3.
BakshiA. (2008). Social inequality in land ownership in India: A study with particular reference to West Bengal. Social Scientist, 95–116.
4.
BandyopadhyayD. (1986). Land reforms in India: An analysis. Economic & Political Weekly, 21(25/26), 50–56.
5.
BanerjeeA.V., GertlerP.J., & GhatakM. (2002). Empowerment and efficiency: Tenancy reform in West Bengal. The Journal of Political Economy, 110(2), 239–280.
6.
BardhanP., LucaM., MookherjeeD., & PinoF. (2014). Evolution of land distribution in West Bengal 1967–2004: Role of land reform and demographic changes [Working paper 14-006, Harvard Business School].
7.
BardhanP., & MookherjeeD. (2003). Poverty alleviation effort of West Bengal panchayats. Economic & Political Weekly, 39(9), 965–974.
8.
BaruahS. (1990). The end of the road in land reform? Limits to redistribution in West Bengal. Development and Change, 21(1), 119–146.
9.
BhattacharyyaM., & BhattacharyyaS. (2008). Agrarian impasse in West Bengal in the liberalisation era. Economic & Political Weekly, 42(52), 65–71.
10.
BrobergM., & SanoH. O. (2018). Strengths and weaknesses in a human rights-based approach to international development: An analysis of a rights-based approach to development assistance based on practical experiences. The International Journal of Human Rights, 22(5), 664–680.
11.
ChakrabortiA. (2002). Beneficiaries of land reforms: The West Bengal scenario. State Institute of Panchayats and Rural Development and Spandan.
12.
ChambersR., & ConwayG. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. Institute of Development Studies (UK).
13.
DattaP. K., & SenP. (2018). Land reforms in an Indian state: Lessons from the experiences of implementation. Journal of Asian Rural Studies, 2(1), 1–15.
14.
DeiningerK. W. (2003). Land policies for growth and poverty reduction. World Bank Publications.
15.
DeiningerK. W., JinS., & YadavV. (2011). Complete the incompleteness of land reform: Household level evidence from West Bengal (No. 321-2016-10898). Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
16.
Department for International Development (2001). Sustainable livelihood guidance sheet.
17.
FederG., & FeenyD. (1991). Land tenure and property rights: Theory and implications for development policy. The World Bank Economic Review, 5(1), 135–153.
18.
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) (2002). Land tenure and rural development. FAO Land Tenure Studies 3.
19.
GhatakM., & RoyS. (2007). Land reform and agricultural productivity in India: A review of the evidence. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(2), 251–269.
20.
Government of India (2011a). Report of the working group on national rural livelihoods mission. Planning Commission.
21.
Government of India. (2011b). Census of India 2011. Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India, Ministry of Home Affairs.
22.
Government of India. (2013). Draft national land reforms policy 2013. Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development.
23.
Government of India. (2019). Agriculture census 2015–16: All India report on number and area of operational holdings. Agriculture Census Division, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare.
24.
Government of India. (2021). Situation assessment of agricultural households and land and holdings of households in rural India, 2019. NSS 77th Round, National Statistical Office, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation.
25.
Government of West Bengal. (2018). Data collected from the department directly from updated progress report. Directorate of Land Record and Surveys, Land and Land Reforms Department, Kolkata.
26.
GuptaJ. (2002). Women second in the land agenda. Economic & Political Weekly, 37(18), 1746–1754.
27.
JoelT. K. E., & BergalyK. C. (2020). Land tenure security, credit access and agricultural productivity in Cameroon [Doctoral dissertation, AERC].
28.
KhasnabisR. (2008). The economy of West Bengal. Economic & Political Weekly, 43(52), 105–115.
29.
LeesR. (1972). Politics and social work. Routledge and Keegan Paul.
30.
LietenG. K. (1990). Depeasantisation discontinued: Land reforms in West Bengal. Economic & Political Weekly, 25(40), 2265–2271.
31.
LiptonM. (1985). Land assets and rural poverty (World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 744). The World Bank.
32.
LundyC. (2011). Social work, social justice, and human rights: A structural approach to practice (2nd ed.). University of Toronto Press.
33.
LundyC., & van WormerK. (2007). Social and economic justice, human rights and peace: The challenge for social work in Canada and the USA. International Social Work, 50, 727–739.
34.
MbudzyaJ. J., GidoE. O., & OwuorG. (2022). Effect of land tenure security on agricultural productivity among small scale farmers in Kenya: A conditional mixed processes analysis. Cogent Food & Agriculture, 8(1), 2139805.
35.
NatarajanN., NewshamA., RiggJ., & SuhardimanD. (2022). A sustainable livelihoods framework for the 21st century. World Development, 155, 105898.
36.
NoyooN. (2004). Human rights and social work in a transforming society: South Africa. International Social Work, 47, 359–369.
37.
RawalV., & SwaminathanM. (1998). Changing trajectories: Agricultural growth in West Bengal, 1950 to 1996. Economic & Political Weekly, 33(40), 2595–2602.
38.
RaychaudhuriA. (2004). Lessons from the land reform movement in West Bengal, IndiaConference Paper, Shanghai, 25–27May, World Bank.
39.
SantosF., FletschnerD., SavathV., & PetermanA. (2014). Can government-allocated land contribute to food security? Intra-household analysis of West Bengal’s microplot allocation program. World Development, 64, 860–872.
40.
SenA. K. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Elsevier Science Publishers.
41.
SenA. K. (1993). Capability and well-being. In NussbaumMartha C. & SenAmartya K. (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 30–53). Clarendon Press.
42.
SinghP., FaiziA. A. A., & RabhaD. K. (2015). Land and livelihood initiatives in India: Learning from Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Karnataka, Odisha, and West Bengal state. Centre for Rural Studies, Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie, India.
43.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2003). The human rights-based approach to development cooperation: Towards a common understanding among the UN agencies.
44.
World Health Organisation. (2013). Women’s and children’s health: Evidence of impact of human rights. http://repository.essex.ac.uk/7425/1/9789241505420_eng.pdf
