‘HAND’ MADE IN INDIA: TRIBAL

SUSTAINOPRENEURS OF CHANGE
AND PROSPERITY
Tamanna M. Shah

ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the bamboo-based livelihoods of the tribal artisans of
Tripura and studies entrepreneurship, through the perspective of innovative
small and medium enterprises, as a way to achieve sustainable development.
Under a cluster-based approach of the Tripura Bamboo Mission, this chapter
intends to understand how tribal entrepreneur’s belief in sustainability moti-
vates them to develop and enhance livelihood opportunities. It is in addressing
this basic question of an entrepreneur’s ‘drive’ in achieving sustainable liveli-
hood that the development goals are met.
Keywords: Sustainable entrepreneurship; ecopreneurship; social
entrepreneurs; innovation; Tripura; India; Bamboo

INTRODUCTION
It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives;
but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing
environment in which it finds itself.
Charles Darwin (1986, p. 87)

Handicrafts are an expression of the uniqueness of a culture, tradition and heri-

tage of a country. The Indian bamboo sector is a highly creative sector with low
capital investment and provides income to a large number of rural communities
in India. Bamboo is found in abundance in the state of Tripura, covering an
area of 2,397 sq. km., with around 15 different varieties spread across the state.

Entrepreneurship and the Sustainable Development Goals

Contemporary Issues in Entrepreneurship Research, Volume 8, 69 83
Copyright r 2018 by Emerald Publishing Limited
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved
ISSN: 2040-7246/doi:10.1108/S2040-724620180000008009
69
70 TAMANNA M. SHAH

Bamboo cultivation, therefore, has a great potential for commercialisation

which can drive the economic development of the rural areas.
Quintans (1998) reported on the enormous potential of Bamboo in alleviating
the social and environmental problems of the developing world. Asian literature
reveals that bamboo supports rural development, appeals to producers and has
several pro-poor characteristics (Wang, Innes, Dai, & He, 2008). However, the
rapid scale of deforestation and the cutting of young bamboo shoots pose a
threat to the domestic bamboo industry. To counter this demand supply mis-
match in the North-East of India, a need was felt for additional 5,600 Ha to be
brought under plantation that would include the right mix of bamboo species.
Government of Tripura accordingly formulated the first state bamboo policy,
namely, Tripura Bamboo Mission (TBM) in 2006 with a focus on increasing the
turnover of bamboo sector coupled with livelihood opportunities.
The aim of this chapter, therefore, is to examine tribal entrepreneur’s ideolog-
ical belief in sustainability, which motivates them to seek out, develop and
exploit opportunities using a combination of goals. It is in addressing this basic
question of an entrepreneur’s ‘drive’ in achieving sustainable livelihood that the
sustainable development goals (SDGs) are achieved. Cut off from the develop-
ments of the globalised world, it is this internal drive/motivation together with
government support that leads to the fulfilment of the targets under SDGs. Case
studies present the different contexts and forms of intervention covered under
TBM, as well as their focus on different aspects of innovation. The case studies
reveal the importance of networking and collaboration. TBM asserted that the
most valuable function of the clusters is to ensure a continued dialogue among
the enterprises concerned. Initiatives also include government implementing
detailed diagnostic work and adopting a facilitatory role.
The conclusion emphasises a need for the government to address market fail-
ure with stress on collaborative efforts and networking to achieve the desired
outcomes and increase market reach. Such networking and partnerships also
bring in global benefits. Specifically, the integration of national, regional and
local initiatives and institutions is strongly advocated. Shah (2013) argues in
favour of such interventions that ensure ‘economic development and [instil] in
them an undesirable competition for achieving education for employment,
thereby negating all other important aspects of life’ (p. 408).

LITERATURE REVIEW
Hines (2000) argues that the process of globalisation is driven by the growth
model of neoclassical economics, and occurs increasingly at the expense of soci-
ety, the natural environment and labour, resulting in rising inequality in the
world. Consequently, Max-Neef et al. (1989) suggested that human scale devel-
opment should focus on and be:
based on the satisfaction of fundamental human needs, on the generation of growing levels of
self-reliance and on the construction of organic articulations of people with nature and tech-
nology, of global processes with local activity, of the personal with the social, of planning
with autonomy and of civil society with the state. (p. 36)
‘Hand’ Made in India 71

In order to cope with globalisation and make local economies sustainable,

scholars suggest that local economies of place must be developed that provide
the means for satisfaction of basic human needs locally, within the constraints
of socio-ecological principles for sustainability (Korten, 2001). In such times,
Shuman (2000) argues that the creation of self-reliant communities or the crea-
tion of a sustainable global society at the community scale is most relevant
because:
collaborative decision-making is more feasible between local sectors and organizations; local
community authorities are most often the decision-makers around transportation, water sup-
ply, energy supply, waste management and land use planning; the reliability of information
and economic signals increase on a local level. (pp. 67 72)

Shah (2019) argues that collective collaboration is essential to ensure success

of a ‘socially sustainable design’. Apostolopoulos, Newbery, and Gkartzios
(2018) also argued in favour of using community resilience and a bottom-up
response to market failure to survive the changing global markets.
The creation of self-reliant communities is guided by some basic socio-
ecological principles of sustainability, where a sustainable community is continu-
ally adjusting to meet social and economic needs of its residents while preserving
the local environment’s ability to support it. A glocal view, therefore, takes into
consideration the global changes with local production and consumption.
‘Glocalization is of enormous importance because it brings us from the global
question down to issues at the human scale, and to issues of humanity and peo-
ple’ (Wolfensohn, 2005). Additionally, glocalisation intends to promote local
and regional diversity, and increase networking among localised business units
as the origin of and basis for collective entrepreneurship that can exploit global
opportunities (Johannisson et al., 2002).
Entrepreneurship, as a concept, has gained a lot of attention from scholars
but there is a lack of consensus on its definition. It is generally agreed that there
is no universally accepted definition of entrepreneurship so far (Carsrud &
Brännback, 2007). ‘Entrepreneurship is not about action within existing frame-
works, but rather consists of creating new frameworks through the creative pro-
cess of new means-end relationships’ (Shane, 2004, p. 78). Entrepreneurial
action provides a solution to environmental, social and economic problems in
the society. It is important to the development of modern economic and social
life (Stokes, Wilson, & Mador, 2010). Modern concept of entrepreneurship has
focus on exercising creativity in business activities, product development, process
development, problem solutions and change management at large (Robinson,
2004). An entrepreneur, therefore, innovates new products and processes, and
blends the traditional methods with the new ones, thus creating sustainable
livelihoods.
Baron and Shane (2008) consider entrepreneurs as ‘engine of economic
growth’ (p. 76). Entrepreneurs are ‘change agents in communities through their
will to create new goods or qualities of goods, new methods of production, new
markets, new sources of supply, and new organizational forms’ (Bull,
Howard, & Willard, 1995, p. 78).
72 TAMANNA M. SHAH

In addition, Fayolle (2007) suggests that entrepreneurship has significantly

contributed towards economic development; for example, job creation, business
opportunities utilisation and product innovation have improved the economic
condition of a country. The economic growth of Taiwan, for example, has relied
heavily on the development of small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and spe-
cifically the entrepreneurs (Boulton & Turner, 2005). Entrepreneurial activities
have also gained momentum in many Asian developing and emerging econo-
mies, such as Thailand, China, Malaysia and India. Over the past few decades,
many new fields of entrepreneurship have emerged though research around sus-
tainability issues in most small, medium and micro-sized enterprise (SMME)
and entrepreneurship is still low. Only entrepreneurial innovations appear to
link sustainable development with wealth generation and prosperity (O’Neill,
Hershauer, & Golden, 2009).
SMEs are important sectors that help disseminate sustainability for the entre-
preneurs. ‘Strategically located, SME hotspots lead to innovative interdependen-
cies through the sharing of knowledge, expertise, and resources that foster local
industrial development’ (Shah, 2017a). ‘SMEs depend on the indigenous knowl-
edge of the tribal communities and harness the untapped potential in rural areas’
(Shah, 2016, p. 36). They ‘help transform tribal handicraft artisan communities
into dynamic economically sustainable clusters through innovative knowledge
bases, pro-poor growth strategies, and appropriate market development’ (Shah,
2016, p. 35).
In areas where artisans are largely dependent on local knowledge and means
of production, SMEs can function as vehicles that catalyse employment and cre-
ate self-reliance (Ilegbinosa & Jumbo, 2015). With the growing realisation of
including SMEs in the sustainability conversation, the nexus of entrepreneur-
ship, innovation and sustainable development is also gaining momentum.
SMEs on a collective basis, therefore, have the potential to catalyse a positive
change in the society and make it sustainable for future generations. Scholars
have established that sustainability issues cannot be addressed by single organi-
sations but need a more systemic approach focusing on co-evolutionary changes
in technology, culture, economy and organisational structures (Loorbach, Van
Bakel, Whiteman, & Rotmans, 2010).
‘Sustainable Development’, ‘Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship’, ‘Social
Entrepreneurs’, and ‘Sustainable Entrepreneurship’ are the terms that have devel-
oped over the past many years. Most literature on the subject is published under
the banner of sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability entrepreneurship.
A fairly recent term being used by scholars refers to ‘Sustainopreneurship’. It was
first introduced in 2000 by Schaltegger; the phenomenon developed with publica-
tions in 2003 by Hockerts, and further evolved and tentatively was defined by
Abrahamsson (2006). It is the business world that has been nominated as a
premier force to create a sustainable world (Hart, 2005), especially when acting
as a source of innovation and creativity for example Robinson (2004, p. 378)
puts it:
‘Hand’ Made in India 73

In addition to integrating across fields, sustainability must also be integrated across sectors or
interests. It is clear that governments alone have neither the will nor the capability to accom-
plish sustainability on their own. The private sector, as the chief engine of economic activity on
the planet, and a major source for creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship, must be involved
in trying to achieve sustainability.

Therefore, this new conceptual construct suggests innovation for socioeco-

nomic development and environmental protection. Sustainopreneurship merges
entrepreneurship with social and ecological development and to some extent is
similar to social entrepreneurship suggested by Dr. Muhammad Yunus
(Abrahamsson, 2006). Makower (2006) suggests that to make society sustain-
able, focus needs to be directed towards small businesses because their impact,
on a collective basis, to society and the environment, is similar to large corpora-
tions. This argument is further reiterated by Madié (2006): ‘When communities
can better provide for their own essential needs, they will reduce their vulnerabil-
ity to the crises of others over which they have little or no control’.
Several studies have demonstrated how clusters foster entrepreneurship in
developed countries like Colorado, US (Porter, 2000), and in UK (Porter, 2000).
Schmitz (1995) opined that clustering opens up efficiency gains that individual
firm can rarely attain. Especially, in case of India, Chawla (2011), Saxena (2009)
and Clara, Russo, and Gulati (2000) opined in favour of a cluster approach for
promoting entrepreneurship in SME sector.
The cluster approach is in line with the Transition Management concept pro-
posed by Loorbach et al. (2010). It takes a ‘process approach that aims to
change the dominant culture, structures and practices of unsustainable systems
by connecting innovations at the micro-level to macro-level changes in mind-
sets’ (Gorissen, Vrancken, & Manshoven, 2016, p. 5). Such a change is achieved
through collaboration among different actors: institutes, companies, government
bodies, NGOs, etc. When it is applied to clusters, it reflects on the participatory
nature of the process, which stimulates:
systemic thinking, a shared language, new networks and coalitions, shared breakthrough
experiments to identify new system settings and barriers that need to be overcome and gener-
ate trust and confidence in a future that is more sustainable. (Rotmans, 2012, p. 67)

However, in recent years, a new perspective on the entrepreneurs’ contribu-

tions has developed, that is the environmental degradation as a negative conse-
quence of entrepreneurial activities due to market failures (Cohen & Winn,
2007). As such, there are researchers who claim that the environmental degrada-
tion caused by entrepreneurs should be and could be resolved by them (Hall,
Daneke, & Lenox, 2010). The cluster approach under TBM caters to such envi-
ronmental degradation and maintains social and ecological stability.
Entrepreneurship is seen as an alternative to unemployment and poverty
which could be the panacea for development (Bogan & Darity, 2008). It is
thought by most entrepreneurs:
that success cannot be achieved solely through maximizing short-term profits and the growing
importance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on business success and positive impact
74 TAMANNA M. SHAH

on society is accepted responsible for breakthrough innovations that influence the growth of
free market economy and its general performance. (Iyigün, 2015, p. 1226)

Cluster approach clubbed with the skills training component helps ‘mitigate
the high unemployment rates’ and ‘absorb the impact of demographic and tech-
nological advances, adjust skills mismatch, and spur global competition for tal-
ent’ (Shah, 2017b, p. 17).
Skill development, therefore, is the vehicle for social transformation in developing countries.
Having the right skills and competencies coupled with the opportunities to use and develop
these attract better jobs that have a spill-over effect on the earning potential of the youth.
(Shah, 2017b, p. 17)

THE CASE OF TBM

TBM brings together the artisan entrepreneurs to gain new knowledge and skills
and develop strategies for creative, independent and non-traditional ways of crea-
tive thinking in their local environments. It has a ‘Farm to Market’ approach that
organises the farmers into groups to supply products to identified markets. It also
optimises the end-to-end value chain (process innovation) spanning from planta-
tion and resource generation to marketing of value-added finished products (prod-
uct innovation). These processes in turn boost the turnover of the Bamboo sector
and provide sustainable livelihood opportunities to the communities.
TBM implemented the bamboo plantation development project across the
State over a 5-year period. The long-term vision enabled a shift from conven-
tional cultivation practices to commercial bamboo plantations with a higher
yield to meet the domestic and industrial requirements of the state. The objec-
tive, therefore, is to create a sustainable resource base with the right mix of bam-
boo species and a quality stock, increase productivity and form a reliable supply
source that provides quality raw material to the bamboo industry.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
‘Sustainable entrepreneurship is difficult to measure and there is no method agreed
upon, […] as these are complex multi-dimensional concepts’ (Kardos, 2012,
p. 1032). The research goal is to determine how the innovations under TBM and
the entrepreneurial actions that enable them destroy or replace unsustainable prac-
tices. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with both artisan entrepreneurs
and support organisations. The participants were given leeway to pursue topics
and express opinions in order to allow unexpected themes to emerge. Data was
also collected on the farmer’s landholding size, their socio-economic conditions
and the sustainability and effectiveness of the bamboo plantation under TBM.

Study Area
The study area covers the rural development (RD) blocks of Hezamara and
Mohanpur of the West Tripura district. The farmers in this district are mostly
dependent on agriculture and horticultural activities and few on businesses and
‘Hand’ Made in India 75

yet others find employment in nearby brick kilns as daily wagers. Bamboo pro-
ducers and harvesters, in this region, are all farmers who manage bamboo as
part of their land use system and all of them possess the bamboo variety
Kanakaich, besides having other varieties like Mritinga, Barak and Muli. There
were a total of 740 beneficiaries (artisans) in the two blocks from which 148 ben-
eficiaries were selected (20 per cent of the total size) through random sampling.
Secondary data was collected based on the information available from the TBM
Office and Tripura Forest Department offices.

METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATION
The chosen methodological approach was subject to a variety of limitations and
possible biases. These had to be taken into account when drawing conclusions
out of the obtained findings. Cultural and lingual barriers might have biased the
interviews. All interviews were carried out in English, which were then trans-
lated in the local language, Bengali, by a translator. Biases may arise in the
understanding of the answers by the translator.

FINDINGS
Entrepreneur Sample Composition
Age was balanced among the interviewees, concentrating in the age groups
26 35 and 36 45 years old. The program gives more opportunities to women
and encouraged their participation in business development. In addition, most
interviewed entrepreneurs had only little formal work experience. Production of
bamboo products and their sale was restricted to the local market and sold by
the artisans themselves. Artisans were not selling these products through
intermediaries in markets out of the state. They had a family size of four,
thereby requiring additional labour for managing the plantation area.
Most of the farmers are marginal with small landholding size (62 per cent) with
less than 1 Ha of cultivable land available for production, whereas 40 per cent
have landholding size of above 1 Ha for production. But it was observed that this
pattern varied across the blocks. At Hezamara, only 40 per cent of the farmers
have less than 1 Ha of cultivable land, whereas 29 per cent have an area of over 2
Ha for cultivation. In Mohanpur, most farmers are marginal farmers (73 per cent),
while only 3 per cent of the farmers have cultivable land of more than 2 Ha.
Cultivation of paddy, jute, rubber, bamboo, fruits and vegetable orchards was the
primary activity of most marginal farmers followed by working as an agricultural
labourer. The artisan community had low economic status. The sample consisted
largely of Below Poverty Line (BPL) families.
On a cluster-based approach, TBM introduced interventions in the following
categories for the entrepreneurs to benefit from:
(1) Process innovation
• Cluster development
• Technology induction
• Institution development
76 TAMANNA M. SHAH

(2) Product innovation and Capacity building

(3) Resources and plantation development
(4) Market development

PROCESS AND PRODUCT INNOVATION

Unsustainable Processes
• Entrepreneurs reported lack of finishing machines and new designs. They
were unable to establish linkages with markets and relied on Purbasha, a fair
that was organised on an irregular basis to connect artisans to the market. It
is a Tripura Handloom and Handicrafts Development Corporation Limited
venture, which has been able to support the artisan entrepreneurs of the clus-
ters with better product quality and price. Purbasha is the single largest pur-
chaser of quality products in reasonable quantity in Tripura.
• Many of the bamboo poles are not cut and transported properly which leads
to damage of the poles and thereby adds to wastage. Further, the problem is
exacerbated by poor finishing, which are eventually discarded.
• Given the bulk needs of the market and low level of mechanisation, entrepre-
neurs are unable to deliver large quantities of standardised products at eco-
nomical costs. So far, entrepreneurs have produced a variety of bamboo
handicrafts with traditional designs. They have the potential to innovate their
products but they lack the skills and knowledge about the global and local
market demands.
• The workers employed by the entrepreneurs possess low skill levels.
• There is shortage of the matured Dolu bamboo species, used specifically for
the production of Handicraft products.

TBM Intervention
• ‘Partnerships under TBM have brought artisan entrepreneurs together such
that the benefits of cooperation are demonstrated. Entrepreneurs with special
skills producing higher volume of value-added bamboo products are concen-
trated in small pockets, called common facility centres (CFC), with a distinct
sub-sector created within it. These are the “Hubs of Innovation” that augment
social inclusion. Clusters are made hubs of training, procurement, marketing
and production with a package of incentives in the form of hard and soft
components’ (Shah, 2016, pp. 40 41).
• For handicrafts, TBM support was extended to the entrepreneurs at the tool-
ing level till their entrepreneurial capacity and skills were enhanced.
Production of utility handicrafts like hangers, baskets, planters, placemats,
coasters, etc., was given priority and quality was improved. More than
machinery, skill development and tools that address design expectations of
the market as a strategy were adopted to improve output of the sector.
• Entrepreneurs producing value-added products like handicraft, blinds, divi-
ders and furniture require a reasonably high level of artisanship, and are
therefore formed into artisan clusters. In these clusters, few entrepreneur
‘Hand’ Made in India 77

families are also traders and connect with local traders to explore new mar-
kets. With the introduction of technology at the CFCs established within the
communities, basic process like grading or treatment of bamboo and
manufacturing of slivers or sticks is done in-house and quality is ensured. It
also reduces wastage of bamboo poles.
• TBM improves not only the skills but also educates artisans on entrepreneur-
ship development, livelihood options and self-sustenance. Improved under-
standing of markets through exposure trips and participation in workshops
and fairs further add to artisan knowledge.

Sustainable Practices
(1) Two small units set up by entrepreneurs in Bishramganj in South Tripura
displayed potential to be converted into Cluster Training Centres for the
community. One of the units was not self-managed and had no government
support. The unit procured the entire bamboo machinery and deputed a
technically qualified professional for the maintenance of the equipment.
They also developed a training schedule for potential community entrepre-
neurs. This unit is a training-cum-job work centre that is able to contribute
to entrepreneurial needs on regular basis.
(2) Bakhiro is a handicraft cluster in South Tripura. The cluster caters to 107
artisans and 6 Self Help Groups. The cluster functions as a training centre.
Each new entrepreneur is trained for 4 months. Entrepreneurs make the pro-
ducts at home and the cluster helps them to sell these finished products at
Purbasha (85 per cent sold here), and the remaining are sold at the local
market. Selling through the cluster helps get a higher price for the entrepre-
neurs’ products along with a bigger and better market to sell at.
(3) Clusters also house NGOs. Income generation, housing, handicraft and
social work are some of the activities of the NGOs. In order to ensure that a
budding entrepreneur is able to sustain his business, they provide loans for
cane and bamboo handicrafts, jute and tailoring. The NGOs also provide
training in bamboo handicrafts and have dedicated instructors to build arti-
san capacities. The NGOs actively participate in the industry and handicraft
workshops and fairs all over India, that provides an understanding of the
market needs and helps them network with potential buyers.
(4) TBM supports entrepreneurs and provides them with better market opportu-
nities, access to capital, design support and quality ability are areas where
support would be beneficial.
• Technical support institution: Technical support is provided for developing
processes for bamboo treatment, providing colour for aesthetics or protec-
tion from insect attack. Increasing applicability of bamboo or further pro-
cessing by the development of locally appropriate technologies is also
provided under the Mission.
• Design support: Design transformations are kept in tandem with the
domestic and global market with branding and market support. Design
support is particularly important for the handicraft and furniture sector.
78 TAMANNA M. SHAH

While artisans excel in traditional designs, they need to produce products

with innovative designs that are competitive in the global market and
cater to growing production and aesthetic demands of the customers.
TBM initiated branding through ‘Olom’ and online sale of artisan bam-
boo products on platforms like Amazon and Flipkart.

RESOURCES AND PLANTATION DEVELOPMENT

Unsustainable Practices
Most tribals in the state live adjacent or within the forest areas in remote areas
and till date a significant percentage of them continue to depend on the forest
products and practice traditional shifting cultivation (Jhum) to support their
livelihoods.

TBM Intervention
In order to maintain natural resources and control indiscriminate harvesting,
TBM has established a system of sustainable utilisation that is supplemented
with planned cultivation. TBM addresses the needs of sustainable plantation
through:
• Awareness and training on proper management of bamboo: While homestead
clumps are often well managed, bamboo is usually neither well cut nor any
basic management procedures as carried out by the artisans. TBM stresses on
the participation of local people in forest management, and in many areas
issues such as illicit felling of timber have been greatly reduced. Local people
are trained on clump management techniques.
• Encourage homestead planting: Local people have traditionally planted bam-
boo in homesteads. They supported under the Mission and provided with
good quality planting material of appropriate species that would increase the
prevalence of this practice and reduce pressure on forests. As the enormous
potential for creating livelihoods through bamboo is realised, the forest
department has channelled some of its resources into this sector that also
helps enhance incomes.
The above measures create avenues for long-term asset-based income genera-
tion through perennial tree crop plantation. In Tripura two pilot crops that is
Rubber and Bamboo have been effectively piloted and large-scale commercial
plantations of bamboo have transformed the lives of many tribal dwellers in the
state. The economic rehabilitation project for tribal communities with monthly
income levels as low as Rs. 200 per month have led to the creating income levels
of Rs. 25,000 30,000 per month leading to holistic social upliftment measured
in terms of education levels, access to housing, savings, access to health care.
The pilot project covering 3,000 Ha and 2,000 families paved the way for
tribal shifting cultivators embracing bamboo as a viable economic activity
across the state, putting the state as the second largest bamboo producer in the
country. The hallmark of the project is the community-led block plantation
‘Hand’ Made in India 79

model with structured and need-based capacity building programs and a value
chain approach ensuring sustainability.

Sustainable Entrepreneurial Practices

Entrepreneurs were educated on the different species of Bamboo and the ways
of maintaining them. The bamboo planted by TBM is now protected but the
growth is hampered because of continues grazing during the initial time of plan-
tation. 45 per cent of the interviewees reported selling Bamboo once in
2015 2016 and 65 per cent sold their harvest multiple times in the same year.
Majority of the farmers (69 per cent) in the study area only sold the bamboo
poles. The rhizomes were used for their own plantation area while some of the
rhizhomes were sold at least once for additional profit. It is clear that the ecopre-
neurs have a localised approach of sustainability by using the rhizomes to fill the
gaps in the plantation and to sustain their plantation.
Through the different interventions and support mechanisms, artisans are
able to now carry forward progress and contribute to local economic develop-
ment. The evolution of the entrepreneurial culture in the communities of
Tripura is shown below.

Social Entrepreneurs
Jyotsna started her first business in 2008 at the age of 19, with a capital invest-
ment of Rs. 10,000 borrowed from her father. Her first business was to make
bamboo sticks for local Bamboo mat manufacturers. With the support of TBM,
she founded the Swami Jogananda Self-help group, a private company, with an
annual turnover of 24 lakhs. Her company designs, develops and distributes
innovative bamboo products. She is able to build local economic capacity in her
community, and provide profit, addressing the alleviation of poverty and women
empowerment in the local community through the introduction of jobs, eco-
nomic infrastructure and education programs for human development.

Ecopreneurs
Dharampal Tripuri has undertaken Bamboo plantation on his 2 Ha of land. He
is able to sell more than the previous years and is making profit. He now pro-
duces environmentally redesigned household and gift items. Dharampal has
been involved as an educator and entrepreneur in numerous volunteer activities
in the local community, which leverage wider public movement towards ecologi-
cal sensitivity.
Atanu Das is a physically challenged person from Kumartila, Abhoynagar in
Agartala. His talent to make bamboo handmade products was first observed by
his teachers. He later started making different bamboo decorative products with
his small team which included his wife who is also a physically challenged
person. He is now strengthening his team with technology and design inputs
from TBM.
80 TAMANNA M. SHAH

Community Entrepreneurs
Manisha is all about bringing together the people in her community to work
towards sustainability and values building community self-reliance. She
encourages sharing stories and building relationships through community pro-
jects such as community gardens, ‘buy local’ campaigns and community out-
reach events.
All of these Tripura artisan entrepreneurs share a passion for social change
and sustainable living. They are all pioneers in providing products and services
to improve their community and the world.

DISCUSSION
Through literature review, expert interviews and case studies of entrepreneurs,
the entrepreneur’s belief in sustainability emerges as a prominent theme which
motivates them to develop and enhance livelihood opportunities. The collabora-
tive efforts of the intervention and the artisan interviewed reflect on the making
of future entrepreneurs. This is in agreement with the findings of Shane (2004),
who argue for the creation of new frameworks through the creative process of
new means-end relationships. The results of this study also support the findings
of Baron and Shane (2008) and Bull et al. (1995) who suggest that entrepreneurs
are community change agents.
Research was able to understand the mindset of the artisan entrepreneurs in
their attempts towards sustainability. This mindset evolved through learning
about the challenges they face, and collaborative learning (Loorbach et al.,
2010). Entrepreneurs demonstrate leadership towards sustainability by becoming
social, economic and community change leaders. The result of this study is in
agreement with the findings of Stokes et al. (2010), who argue that entrepreneur-
ial action provides a solution to environmental, social and economic problems
in the society and stresses on its importance to the development of modern eco-
nomic and social life.
Case studies reflect on how entrepreneurship has significantly contributed
towards economic development; for example, job creation, business opportu-
nities utilisation and product innovation have improved the economic condition
of a country, which is in agreement with Fayolle’s (2007) study. It is also evident
that the interventions have facilitated self-reliance among the individuals and
the community, which not only satisfy ‘fundamental human needs, [and gener-
ates] growing levels of self-reliance’, as suggested by Max-Neef et al. (1989).
This is also in agreement with the findings of Shuman (2000), who argues that
collaborative decision-making benefits the global economy. Wolfensohn’s (2005)
idea of Glocalisation is also highlighted in the findings. TBM interventions pro-
mote local and regional diversity and increase networking among localised busi-
ness units as the origin of and basis for collective entrepreneurship that can
exploit global opportunities.
Results of the study point in the direction of the findings by O’Neill et al.
(2009), who argue that entrepreneurial innovations link sustainable development
with wealth generation and prosperity. TBM interventions foster entrepreneurship
‘Hand’ Made in India 81

Fig. 1. Impact of TBM (2006 2017).

in rural Tripura. The study supports the findings of Chawla (2011), Saxena (2009)
and Clara et al. (2000) who opined in favour of cluster approach for promoting
entrepreneurship in SME sector in countries like India.
TBM, through its series of interventions, fulfils some of the goals under
SDGs. Fig. 1 depicts the extent of impact of TBM and the fulfilment of the tar-
gets under the goals beginning with the first SDG that is ‘to end poverty in all
its forms everywhere’. Perhaps no other industry addresses the SDG Goals as
extensively as does the craft industry.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the intersections of the collaborations described above have an
important common characteristic. The process of enabling sustainable liveli-
hoods through different interventions is always accompanied by the production
of new knowledge while the preservation of indigenous knowledge. New knowl-
edge is about the user needs and behaviour, new ways of using the old and new
technology and new business strategies. In the process that characterises the
adoption and diffusion of process and product innovation, new knowledge is
produced. In the past 12 years of activity, Tripura artisans not only delivered
new technological artefacts but also accumulated valuable knowledge that was
dispersed in the communities, which gave rise to new tribal entrepreneurs.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author would like to acknowledge Renu Maurya for her Concept Design and the
TBM team of IL&FS Clusters for their support.

REFERENCES
Abrahamsson, A. (2006). Sustainopreneurship Business with a cause. In Science for sustainable
development Starting points and critical reflections (pp. 21 30). Uppsala: VHU
Föreningen Vetenskap för Hållbar Utveckling (Swedish Society for Sustainable Development).
Apostolopoulos, N., Newbery, R., & Gkartzios, M. (2018). Social enterprise and community resil-
ience: Examining a Greek response to turbulent times. Journal of Rural Studies. doi: https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.03.017.
82 TAMANNA M. SHAH

Baron, R. A., & Shane, S. A. (2008). Entrepreneurship: A process perspective (2nd ed.). Mason:
Thomson South-Western.
Bogan, V., & Darity Jr, W. (2008). Culture and entrepreneurship? African American and immigrant
self-employment in the United States. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(5), 1999 2019.
Boulton, C., & Turner, P. (2005). Mastering business in Asia: Entrepreneurship. Singapore: Wiley.
Bull, I., Howard, T., & Willard, G. (1995). Entrepreneurship: Perspectives on theory building. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Carsrud, A. L., & Brännback, M. E. (2007). Entrepreneurship. London: Greenwood Press.
Chawla, S. (2011). Clusters development: A tool for sustainable growth of micro and small enter-
prises. Laghuudyogsamachar, XXXVI(80).
Clara, M., Russo, F., & Gulati, M. (2000). Cluster development and BDS promotion: UNIDO’S
experience in India, International conference, Hanoi, Vietnam April 306.
Cohen, B., & Winn, M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneur-
ship. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 29 49.
Darwin, C. (1968 [1859]). On the origin of species by means of natural selection. London: Murray
Google Scholar.
Fayolle, A. (2007). Entrepreneurship and new value creation: The dynamic of the entrepreneurial pro-
cess. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gorissen, L., Vrancken, K., & Manshoven, S. (2016). Transition thinking and business model
innovation Towards a transformative business model and new role for the reuse centers of
Limburg, Belgium. Sustainability, 8(2), 112.
Hall, J., Daneke, G., & Lenox, M. (2010). Sustainable development and entrepreneurship: Past con-
tributions and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5), 439 448.
Hart, S. L. (2005). Capitalism at the crossroads: The unlimited business opportunities in solving the
world’s most difficult problems. Philadelphia, PA: Wharton School Publishing.
Hines, C. (2000). Localization: A global manifesto. London: Earthscan Publications.
Ilegbinosa, I. A., & Jumbo, E. (2015). Small and medium-scale enterprises and economic growth in
Nigeria: 1975 2012. International Journal of Business and Management, 10(3), 203 216.
_
Iyigün, N. Ö. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and ethics in management in light of sustainable
development. In U. Akkucuk (Ed.), Handbook of research on developing sustainable value in
economics, finance, and marketing. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Johannisson, B., et al. (2002). Bridging global complexity and local diversity Building glocal develop-
ment strategies. In Paper submitted to SAM/IFSAM VII World Congress, management in a
world of diversity and change, July 5 7, 2004, Göteborg, Sweden.
Kardos, M. (2012). The relationship between entrepreneurship: Innovation and sustainable develop-
ment. Procedia Economics and Finance, 3, 1030 1035.
Korten, D. (2001). When corporations rule the world. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press.
Loorbach, D., Van Bakel, J. C., Whiteman, G., & Rotmans, J. (2010). Business strategies towards
sustainable systems. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19, 133 146.
Madié, D. (2006). Interview by Itzel Orozco, Rachelle McElroy, Renée Simard, 20 March 2006.
Written.Startup Company Aps. Retrieved from www.startupcampany.dk
Makower, J. (2006). “The state of green business: Good news and bad” world changing: Another world
is here. Retrieved from www.worldchanging.com. Accessed on Jan 10, 2006.
Max-Neef, M., Elizalde, A., Hopenhayn, M., Herrera, F., Zemelman, H., Jataba, J., & Weinstein, L.
(1989). Human scale development. A journal of international development cooperation.
Uppsala: The Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation.
O’Neill, G. D. Jr., Hershauer, J. C., & Golden, J. S. (2009). The cultural context of sustainability
entrepreneurship. Greener Management International, 55, 33 46.
Porter, M. E. (2000). Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global
economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15 34.
Quintans, K. N. (1998). Ancient grass, future natural resource: The national bamboo project of Costa
Rica: A case study of the role bamboo in international development. INBAR Working Paper
No. 16. 58PP.
Robinson, J. (2004). Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development.
Ecological Economics, 48(4),369 384.
‘Hand’ Made in India 83

Rotmans, J. (2012). Nederland in Transitie. In Het Oog Van De Orkaan. Boxtel: Aeneas.
Saxena, A. (2009). Marketing challenges and opportunities in SME cluster. Yojana, 53, 16 18.
Schmitz, H. (1995). Collective efficiency: Growth path for small-scale industry. Journal of
Development Studies, 31(4), 529 566.
Shah, T. M. (2013). Young people making it work: Continuity and change in rural places. Rural
Sociology, 78(3), 406 409.
Shah, T. M. (2016). Tripura Bamboo Mission: Cohesive power of small and medium enterprises. In
M. Habboushi (Ed.), Proceedings of innovation, inspiration and hope in a VUCA world, 21st
century academic forum Harvard conference proceedings, Bozeman, Montana (ISSN: 2330-
1236), Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 35 45.
Shah, T. M. (2017a, April 08). Textile hotspots [Letter to the editor]. Economic and Political Weekly,
52(2), 14.
Shah, T. M. (2017b). The skills milieu of India: Pathway to social inclusion and decent work.
International Journal of Research in Sociology and Anthropology, 3(3), 16 31. doi:10.20431/
2454-8677.0303003
Shah, T. M. (2019). Designing future livelihoods: The sustainable value of Tripura Bamboo Mission.
In K. W. M. Siu & Y. Wong (Eds.), Practice and progress in social design and sustainability
(pp. 29 47). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Shane, S. (2004). A general theory of entrepreneurship: The individual-opportunity nexus.
Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing Incorporated.
Shuman, M. (2000). Going local: Creating self-reliant communities in a global age. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Stokes, D., Wilson, N., & Mador, M. (2010). Entrepreneurship. Hampshire: South-Western Cengage
Learning.
Wang, G., Innes, J. L., Dai, S., & He, G. (2008). Achieving sustainable rural development in
Southern China: The contribution of bamboo forestry. International Journal of Sustainable
Development & World Ecology, 15, 484 495.
Wolfensohn, J. D. (2005). Glocal forum. Retrieved from http://glocalforum.existhost.com/gf/New_
Glocal_Website/home.asp