This article aims to understand the methodological position that Marx takes in Capital Volume 1 and the implications of that on the individual units in his analysis. With the understanding that Marx adopts a fundamentally holist methodological standpoint, the article outlines how the individuals within classes and the system of capitalist production are measured and contextualised. This question is answered by examining Marx’s Capital Volume 1 as the primary text. Where relevant, the researcher engages with Marx’s intellectual background and tradition. The individual units discussed in this study are the commodity, the worker and the capitalist.

This article examines how the concept of the representative individual emerges through averaging and how this process unfolds in Marx’s Capital, shaped by his methodological approach. The article illustrates the method of averaging in Marx, through his intellectual engagement with Quetelet as it also focuses on Hegel’s influence on Marx’s method and elaborates on the parallels and divergences between them. With the given engagement with Capital and Marx’s intellectual interactions, the researcher arrives at a specific understanding of holism that can be attributed to Marx in Capital Volume 1.

Author: Sushmita Rama Subrahmanyam, Student, MA in Economics (2024−2026)

When the pandemic hit, the Indian economy was already in the most prolonged slowdown in recent decades. On top of this, there were legacy problems such as a slow rate of job creation and lack of political commitment to improving working conditions which trapped a large section of the workforce without access to any employment security or social protection.

The pandemic has further increased informality and led to a severe decline in earnings for the majority of workers resulting in a sudden increase in poverty. Women and younger workers have been disproportionately affected. Government relief has helped avoid the most severe forms of distress, but the reach of support measures is incomplete, leaving out some of the most vulnerable workers and households.

The report was released on 5 May 2021- you can watch the recording of the online event here.

Report Files

Executive Summary (pdf)

Figure data (spreadsheet)

Tables (spreadsheet)

Press Release (English | Hindi | Kannada | Marathi)

With the lack of official government data on unemployment and other labour market indicators, the most viable and recent source have been the regular household surveys conducted by the Centre for Monitoring the Indian Economy (CMIE). Given the differences in methods in data collection, it becomes exceedingly important to establish some comparability between the government and the CMIE datasets. This paper attempts to do that using two methods. First we fit a model of employment status on the CMIE data and see how well it predicts outcomes in the older Labour Bureau 2015 – 16 and NSS 2011-12 data. Then we compare state-level estimates of broad labour market indicators from CMIE 2016 and Labour Bureau 2015 – 16 datasets. The broad results are that despite differences in methodologies, the estimates for men are quite comparable between the surveys, while measures of women’s participation in the labour force seem particularly sensitive to the way questions are asked in surveys.

Authors:

• Rosa Abraham
• Anand Shrivastava

Author:

• Anumeha Yadav

This study is the outcome of the experience of the Shramajivi Mahila Samity, an independent, non-party mass organisation of mainly rural working women in West Bengal. Shramajivi Mahila Samity works on gender discrimination and rights of women. It does not run any direct income generating programmes. However, in the 28 years of our work in rural Bengal, we have seen women contributing in myriad ways to the economies of their families. They are an irreplaceable element in the survival of their families, often making the difference between starvation and subsistence. We have always been surprised by the official statistics which show West Bengal as having one of the lowest female labour participation rates in the country. It has led us to believe that there is a gross misunderstanding about women’s work and the importance of unpaid work in the economy of a poor household. In the past few decades, we have seen more and more women in rural Bengal joining paid work. We have seen that men are migrating and the agricultural labour force in many areas consists now almost entirely of women. We were therefore surprised to read about a debate on falling female labour particpation rate at the national level. It did not match our own work experiences. It has led us to the present study, which we hope will be able to shed some light on what is actually happening to women from the rural working class in West Bengal.

Author:

• Anuradha Talwar

In India, the relative importance of the handloom sector, one of the largest employers following agriculture, has been declining for last few decades. The All India Handloom Census data for the year 2009-10 however showed a rather modest decline in the number of weavers in West Bengal, in contrast to a 33% decline at the national level in the same year. But share of handloom income in total household income for the weaver households in the state has decreased significantly pointing to considerable occupational diversification among them. Based on a qualitative field study in three districts of West Bengal — namely, Hooghly, Nadia and Purba Bardhaman — this essay presents findings related to the condition of handloom weavers in West Bengal and in the light of the findings, examines two issues— intra-sector and inter-sector mobility of labour as well as weavers’ response to changing market conditions. The paper argues for a more labour-focused approach in place of currently dominant tradition-focused understanding of the sector.

Authors:

• Rajesh Bhattacharya
• Sarmishtha Sen

This study focuses on the Gurgaon-Manesar-Dharuhera-Bawal-Tapukara-Neemrana industrial belt in Haryana and Rajasthan, which is an important ​‘node’ or part of Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor (DMIC) and a major destination of capital in the last few decades. The study is based on primary survey work of qualitative nature of over 6 months from September 2017 to March 2018. Primary respondents are workers of different segments, plant-level Trade Union leaders and Trade Union activists of the belt, with some inputs from secondary literature, workers magazine and data published by the companies and the government.

Authors:

• Amit
• Nayanjyoti

After independence in 1947, India embarked on an ambitious path of industrialisation, following the standard modern developmental prescription drawn from the experience of the so-called developed countries. Since the inauguration of the reform era in 1991, this model of development, duly globalised, has been reinforced by the decisions made by metropolitan policy elites both within and beyond India.

Author:

• Aseem Shrivastava

The policy framework in India has provided support to the micro and small enterprises. In 2006, the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Act 2006 came into existence (msme​.gov​.in). This Act aimed at promoting and developing micro, small and medium enterprises. In India, the MSME sector’s contribution to GDP was 17 percent of GDP during 2004-05 to 2009-10. More recently, a comprehensive policy called the National Policy for Skill Development and Entrepreneurship 2015 came into existence. This policy supersedes the National Skill Development Policy of 2009. The vision statement of the policy is ​“To create an ecosystem of empowerment by Skilling on a large Scale at Speed with high Standards and to promote a culture of innovation based entrepreneurship which can generate wealth and employment so as to ensure Sustainable livelihoods for all citizens in the country.” Recent policies such as demonetization and implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) have created a setback for the micro enterprises that operated in the informal economy based mainly on cash transactions.

Authors:

• Jeemol Unni
• Ravikiran Naik