SOIL Report 2008 - ACCESS Development Services

Chapter VIIOn the other hand, some observers argue that ‘the logic of corporate growth’ will simply not assureIndia the employment she needs (Bhaduri 5 May 2007), and others lament that Indians are becomingso obsessed with money and what it buys that they have no appetite for ideas (Giridharadas 15 August,2008). Commentators can be quick to attribute to the corporates, sins for which there are sometimesscant evidence. Those working the backend to improve quality and product, for example, are derided fordestroying unorganised retail (illustrated above all, by the protests in West Bengal, UP, Jharkhand andOrissa against Reliance Fresh stores in 2007); ‘corporate’ farming, in which giant buyers acquire landand reduce peasants to wage workers, is sometimes assumed to be like organised retailers when they aremostly purchasing from farmers without even a contract.Whatever the view, by 2013, retail leaders will have sunk Rs 150,000 crore into various format stores,securing an industry turnover in organised retail of $110 billion 3 . While in 2004, corporate retail was just4 per cent of the total in the sector; it is projected to be 16 per cent by 2012 4 .Following anICRIERreport thatshowed themedium-termcosts of modernretail to the unorganisedsector,the governmentnow sees theimprovement ofquality, rangeand continuityof products tosmall retailersas a key contributionexpectedof the newretail giants.There are signs that public opinion towards corporate retail may be settling down. A leading publicationin South India recently showcased Reliance’s mid-supply chain investments in the ‘protest’ state ofKerala and highlighted the benefits to farmer and consumer, while a year earlier it had lambasted Reliancealong with other large retailers for the job losses to small retailers and intermediaries. Followingan ICRIER report that showed the medium-term costs of modern retail to the unorganised sector, thegovernment now sees the improvement of quality, range and continuity of products to small retailersas a key contribution expected of the new retail giants.For the sake of this analysis, corporate engagement in livelihood promotion has been divided into fourtypes. Among the most successful and dedicated livelihood promotion efforts are those managed bydevelopment professionals in trusts floated by corporates but similar in many ways to independent NGOs(such as the Tata Trusts, the Lupin Human Welfare and Research Foundation, or Aravind Eye Hospitals).Second, CSR initiatives around a plant or factory tend to be more closely guarded by a particular firm andare often driven by the need to bolster reputation in the face of politically sensitive investments and bringlocal communities on board (such as Vedanta-Sterlite’s vocational training work with tribal communitiesaround its refineries in Orissa, Coca Cola’s ‘little drops of joy’ campaign to restore historic water bodiesin Rajasthan, or IKEA’s work on getting children into school in the carpet belt of Eastern UP).A third variety of corporate initiative is collaborations for training and skills development. These tend toenjoy independence from the reputational risk of firms while also achieving scale and reach. Examplesinclude the RUDSETIs formed in 19 locations across 11 states 5 , the computer-based functional literacyprogramme of Tata Consultancy Services, and the N-Logue project to provide ICT for the rural masses(Mahajan 2005)But most of these initiatives are dwarfed by the effects, which corporates achieve on a daily basis, whenthey conduct their core business through their supply chains. And yet, sourcing from, managing andre-gearing one’s supply chain is hardly a deliberate effort to promote livelihoods for the poor. Instead,the priorities here are to source more goods of wider range and better quality, in a reliable and predictablemanner, for growing numbers of consumers, with deepening pockets. Jobs for producers, then, isthe main link with livelihood promotion in supply chains, but jobs for mid-chain agents, as well as inretail, are also significant. Many modern retailers aim to grow their customer base as much among theproducers or suppliers of there and others’ chains, as among elite, urban consumers. So the provisionof an improved range of better-priced goods and services is also a key, if indirect, livelihood contributionfor poorer groups.3Business Today, May 29, 20084Bailey, April 28 20085Rural Development and Self-Employment Training Institutes (RUDSETIs) are collaborations between the Sri Dharmasthala ManjunatheswaraEducational Trust, the Canara Bank and the Syndicate Bank.152