Our beliefs: Our beliefs are the product of constant analysis and reflection on feedback and experiences of the poor and vulnerable as a result of various poverty mitigation interventions; the burden of change must not borne by the poor as a result of our ideology, administrative needs, program design and the pressure for quick results.

  • We believe that the poor and marginalised have a right to form their own institutions which need to be respected and not made to conform to official requirements. Striving to “mainstream’ the poor can also be dis-empowering if they have to fit into the pattern of the officials/ donors’ terms and conditions. Myrada lobbies with the official system to recognise these alternate institutions. Myrada believes that these institutions of the poor, when provided with adequate institution capacity building can overcome the hurdles created by caste, class, bureaucracy and tradition by neutralising oppressive power relations and opening new doors and opportunities to access resources. The basic “needs approach” without a direct focus on promoting institutional empowerment of the poor is inadequate for sustained growth of the individual poor family; it does not factor power and market forces into the equation which the poor cannot counter individually. 
  • Myrada believes that it needs to constantly dig deeper to reach the poor and vulnerable. Asserting that we are working with the poor over a period of time in one area -especially if the intervention is effective – results in working with the emerging enterprising poor. Efforts are required to reach out to thosewho are left out of any system no matter how inclusive it may claim to be.
  • We believe that our interventions should build on people’s strengths not on their needs to which they will respond at their time and pace. To start on the basis of needs is to re-enforce existing relations of dependency. Their strengths are based on the relations of mutual trust and support or affinity/social capital, which is still strong in rural areas. This affinity always existed before Myrada entered. It is like a diamond in the sand, which we happened to kick. We can only take credit for stopping to pick it up and polish it. Other strengths lie in the willingness of the poor to save once they realise that their savings are safe and can be quickly accessed, to invest time and energy to build institutions through which they manage finance and natural resources, open access the market, provide services and influence governance in health and education systems.
  • We believe in investing in children, not in isolation, but together with the mother and in the context of the family by promoting supportive gender relations and sustainable livelihoods strategies through the dynamics of an affinity group and a healthy surrounding environment. Our approach to female sex workers and MSMs is holistic. It does not reduce them to one dimension – namely sex work. As one sex worker said: “Yes, we are sex workers but we are women first.”
  • We believe that gender equity is about empowering women and their institutions to foster a process of exposing oppressive power in existing relations between men and women, boys and girls, in order to challenge them at their pace and build more supportive relations at home and in society. All our reports and evaluations incorporate gender disaggregated data.
  • We believe in inclusion. The SAGs, Soukhya Groups self-select their members on the basis of affinity, which is built on relations of trust, and mutual support or what is called traditional social capital. Myrada finds that in villages, which have several religions, castes and dalits, the SAGs comprise members from all groups.  Institutional capacity building and group dynamics helps the weaker members to build confidence and skills and to mobilise the support of all to change traditional practices which are exclusive and oppressive.  However it is important that the members of the SAGs are all poor/ marginalised for this strategy to be effective. The official policy to extend different subsidies for various groups has often resulted in officials forcing a mixed group which tends to fragment into castes and creeds, economic status etc.
  • We believe that the livelihoods of poor cannot be promoted by market forces and the private sector only; on the contrary they could easily be undermined.   Institutions of the poor need to exercise a degree of control over market linkages and intermediary institutions.  To intervene effectively in these areas, the poor need to be supported by Government investment in appropriate infrastructure including roads (particularly rural roads), transport, storage and marketing facilities and by NGOs to promote appropriate institutions.
  • We believe that the poor and the marginalised need a safety net to ensure food security and the minimum health care and education. Government needs to take the lead and invest in these sectors, but management and implementation has to involve people’s institutions and not left to the existing delivery system only. However we also believe that it is more effective to subsidise the support services rather than the asset provided to the poor under programs like SGSY.
  • We believe that primary and secondary education and technical institutions providing basic skills training should be privatised or at least placed under a private-public partnership management model. Micro Finance Institutions with a social mission should be provided adequate space to function independently. Others who maximise profit should also be required to cope with the risks involved.
  • We believe that the livelihood strategy we promote should take into account the close relationship between the removal of poverty and the concern for the environment which provides the livelihood base of the poor and which has been a traditional feature of India’s past. Myrada will continue to support the over-all policy to reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions.