This book makes a critical assessment of the Dalit Agenda or Bhopal Declaration, Undertaken by the Government of Madhya Pradesh to empower scheduled castes and scheduled tribes population by way of distributing grazing land to them.

Dalit assertion has been a central feature of the states in the Hindi heartland since the mid-1980s, leading to the rise of political consciousness and identity-based lower-caste parties. The present study focuses on the different political response of the Congress party to identity assertion in Madhya Pradesh under the leadership of Digvijay Singh. In Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, in response to the strong wave of Dalit assertion that swept the region, parties such as the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) used strategies of political mobilisation to consolidate Dalit/backward votes and capture state power. In Madhya Pradesh, in contrast, the Congress party and Digvijay Singh at the historic Bhopal Conference held in January 2002 adopted a new model of development that attempted to mobilise Dalits and tribals and raise their standard of living by providing them economic empowerment. This new Dalit Agenda constitutes an alternative strategy at gaining Dalit/tribal support through of state-sponsored economic upliftment as opposed to the political mobilisation strategy employed by the BSP in Uttar Pradesh. The present study puts to test the limits of the model of state-led development, of the use of political power by an enlightened political elite to introduce change from above to address the weaker sections of society. The working of the state is thus analysed in the context of the society in which it is embedded and the former’s ability to insulate itself from powerful vested interests. In interrogating this state-led redistributive paradigm, the study has generated empirical data based on extensive fieldwork and brought to the fore both the potentials and the limitations of using the model of ‘development from above’ in a democracy. It suggests that the absence of an upsurge from below limits the ability of an enlightened political elite that mans the developmental state to introduce social change and help the weaker sections of society.

Society is continually moving towards global interaction, and nations often contain citizens of numerous cultures and backgrounds. Bi-culturalism incorporates a higher degree of social inclusion in an effort to bring about social justice and change, and it may prove to be an alternative to the existing dogma of mainstream Europe-based hegemonic bodies of knowledge. The Handbook of Research on Indigenous Knowledge and Bi-Culturalism in a Global Context is a collection of innovative studies on the nature of indigenous bodies’ knowledge that incorporates the sacred or spiritual influence across various countries following World War II, while exploring the difficulties faced as society immerses itself in bi-culturalism. While highlighting topics including bi-cultural teaching, Africology, and education empowerment, this book is ideally designed for academicians, urban planners, sociologists, anthropologists, researchers, and professionals seeking current research on validating the growth of indigenous thinking and ideas.

CONTENTS: Chapter 1 - Introduction, Chapter 2 - Socio Economic Profile, Chapter 3 - Political and Organizational Profile, Chapter 4 - Needs and Priorities, Chapter 5 - Case Studies, Chapter 6 - Findings and Conclusions. PREFACE: Decentralized development in rural area requires networking or partnership among the grassroots organizations. The village level panchayats are local self-government institutions responsible for the planning and implementation of various activities for socio-economic development in rural areas. The NGOs are working for the development of rural areas by executing various development programmes of the government and non-government agencies. The CBOs, as Users Groups have been working to protect their interest through participatory management of the resources. In context of convergence approach, these organizations are expected to work together for the cause of development. In the case of these organizations, nature and origin differ from each other, but they have a common goal of development and of their own interest. The PRIs are local self-government with Constitutional authority; the NGOs are registered societies working as development catalyst; and CBOs are association of users of various resources and services.

Vols. 1- include the association's Annual report, 1939- .