The specific goals of the Lok Jumbish project are:
1. universalisation of primary education, viewed as a composite programme of access to primary education for all children of upto 14 years of age; universal participation till they complete the primary stage; and universal achievement of the minimum levels of  learning

2. provision of opportunities to maintain, use, and upgrade their education and provision of facilities for development of skills to all persons who are functionally literate and those who have received primary education

3. creation of necessary structure, and setting in motion processes which would empower women and make education an instrument of women equality

4. making necessary interventions and creation of circumstances to enable the “lower castes”, most backward of the tribal people and poorest sections of society, to move towards equal participation in basic education

5. improving the content and process of education to better relate it to the environment, peoples culture and with their working and living

 “Education for all by the year 2000”. This is the slogan of the education programme in the state of Rajasthan.  Parallel programmes exist in Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and West Bengal, all of which are sponsored by different overseas agencies.  It should be remembered at the outset that the ultimate product of these programmes is not the school building or dispensary but a functional school or health centre.  They are however, inextricably linked to building projects which are the only perceived indicators for the success or failure of the programme and serve as excellent means of penetrating the rural building scenario and effecting a positive change in shelter conditions.

The “Lok Jumbish” programme initiated by the government of Rajasthan, and financed by Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) was conceived by the state government as early as March 1990.  The proposal divided the project into two phases, the first upto March 1993 and the second upto the year 2000.  Presently, 30 blocks have been taken up in phase one, half of which are concentrated in three districts to understand implications at the district level.  Interestingly, these have been entrusted to architects, identified for their involvement with the appropriate technology movement.  This phase is now nearing completion.

It was realised very early in the project that the construction programme could easily be jeopardised by building contractors and leakages prevalent in the system.  Therefore, by identifying the school teacher as the lead actor, the building construction activity was integrated with the education programme  This ensured community participation through the formation of village education committees who were entrusted with the work of building construction.  They were in effect the Bhawan Nirman Samitis: the building construction committees.  The other factor to discourage proliferation of a type design was to stipulate the preferred use of local materials and indigenous technology.  Boundary conditions were imposed on the participatory process and strict guidelines were subsequently adopted.  The project would, of course, be evaluated against a fixed time frame to avoid an open-ended process.

The state of Rajasthan began with identification of 1,32,000 primary and upper primary teachers as its principal asset.  Another important consideration at all levels of the programme was involvement of women.

The financial outlay in phase one was Rs. 72 crores.  The contribution was made by SIDA, Government of India and the Government of Rajasthan in the ratio of 3:2:1. The building estimates were based on existing norms and specifications conforming to low cost and easily available materials. Based on the estimates, a school building would cost Rs. 1.32 lakhs, implying an average cost of about Rs. 1200/square metre for a school with an area of 109 square metres.  The school sizes vary form 109-214 square metre as per the norms specifically evolved for the project.  To meet this in itself a daunting task, considering that only superior quality construction is permissible.

Architects sensitive to issues of community involvement and environmentally sound designs, were selected.  These architects are presently working in three blocks: Kishangang in Baran district and Lunkaransar in Bikaner district.  What is emerging is a treatise on the building material resource base for each of these areas and feasible delivery mechanisms. The architects, in spite of facing various problems and difficulties, are in agreement that the programme objectives are not Utopian, but can be translated into reality. The absence of a prototype phase has however, resulted in some wrong sequencing of activities leading to a temporary loss of credibility.

Work is on in full gear in all the districts.  A considerable amount of work involves repair of buildings and it is interesting to note that a Panchayati school that was recently completed at about Rs. 80,000/- in the Kishanganj block and abandoned during rains due to flooding has been repaired at a cost of approximately Rs. 10,000. Stone is used abundantly for walling and roofing in these schools which in fact do not ignore the local material because brick would probably be prohibitive in cost. The bane of these constructions is not necessarily poor workmanship but poor quality due to inadequate specifications.

Otherwise, work is moving fairly smoothly in the Garhi cluster, with a field centre nearing in place for the next field centre.  The repair work of 18 schools in one cluster has been completed.  The work in this block also includes the building of 25 Shiksha Karmi units, 6 Secondary schools and 1-2 residential schools, in the second stage.

The field centre uses fired brick walls and Mangalore tile roofs.  These have been identified after preparation of a detailed inventory of all the possible local options.  The stipulation that the architect must sign for structural stability of the buildings has ensured that they do not take undue risks.  In fact, the designs for this area include reinforcement at the plinth levels.  One could thus, also justify the need for structural designers although these buildings would normally not necessitate very sophisticated structural considerations.  A general observation is that maximum work has been achieved in the cluster where the mobilising agency is an external agency, the Block Steering Group and not the local NGO.  Various local skills like stone carving, pottery and GRAAM, the architectural group working here, is proposing a rural building centre.

In the Lunkaransar block which falls in the desert district of Rajasthan, Professor H.D. Chaaya of SPEID, maintains that the first phase of the project, due to be completed in June 1994, is actually the prototype phase.  He is confident that many of the hitches in implementation, like the institutional machinery which was not in place when the architects were appointed, are now getting resolved.  There is now a systematic approach to the work with all lead players understanding their respective role and their priorities.  He says that due to the absence of norms, which were formulated at a much later stage, he had to endure five revisions of his initial design that was prepared on the basis of a participative design effort.  The norms were drawn up in April whereas the architects had already been in the field for more than two months; even before the village orientation programme and the formation of Bhawan Nirman Samitis.

The work is now gaining momentum with the three stipulated field centres in place.  In the initial stage only four schools were repaired in three months but with the work standardised and scope planned out it seems as if completion of the remaining thirty-one schools is not an impossible task.  There are five new schools to be built and eight upgradations to be made in the block.  The buildings use fired brick in general, but there is an attempt to revive traditional techniques of construction like jack arches for roofs. The bricks available in this area are of superior quality and widely available, even in remote villages.  The villagers are also equipped with welding shops.  Commenting on the quality of construction Prof. Chaaya believes that innovations should be restricted to efficient designs with no compromise on quality of materials.  The cost of new construction here is estimated at about Rs. 150/square feet with repair costs ranging between Rs. 25-80/square feet.  The human resource development element implicit in the project also contributes to cost escalation, for which provision are made in the estimates.  Another aspect accounted for is the seasonal fluctuation of labour wages and brick prices.

It was encouraging to see involvement of women in a traditional Rajasthani society which discourages participation of women.  They were offered 7 weeks intensive training and assured work for the following period.  Fifteen women masons were trained in  Lunkaransar of which four are performing satisfactorily while one has even attained the level of a skilled mason.  The task was even more formidable because these women are totally illiterate and had to be taught numbers to enable them to read the measuring tape.

Compare this with the Kishanganj block where majority of the work involves new buildings: in the twenty villages seven new schools have to be built, while the rest is repair work.  Money for construction has reached 11 villages, but bank accounts of the Bhawan Nirman Samitis, have been opened only in three and land has been identified in only two villages.  DAAT, the architectural group working in Kishanganj has prepared an interesting documentation of the local building techniques including traditional features like water harvesting cisterns.  This block falls in the Chambal valley belt and is by far the most difficult terrain with widely scattered villages made inaccessible in the rains due to the black cotton soil and the nature of the topography.  The block is partially cut-off during the monsoons when the Parvati river overflows its banks.  Compared to the other two districts which have a rich tradition of crafts, this area which is part of the forested tract of Rajasthan, has been inhabited by generations of forest gatherers.  In fact the fast depleting forests are even today a storehouse of wealth of Ayurvedic herbs, gum and honey.  The area also has a large tribal population, who have been allotted agricultural land by the government.  The plots are still lying untilled, as these tribals would be first generation farmers.

The construction costs here are estimate on an average at Rs. 200/square feet, although attempts are being made to lower the cost to Rs. 150/square feet.  The local NGO Sankalp, the mobilising agency, believes that construction is achievable at Rs. 65/square feet, but teir specifications include using mud for mortar in stone masonry.  Will any architect sign for structural stability if her uses mud mortar in foundation even if he is aware that there is sheetrock in the sub-grade?  Hence this clause, inserted to ensure quality workmanship at an affordable cost appears to be counter-productive.  What is perhaps of much more concern is that the local building practice, which until now used mud in foundation and dry coarsed masonry, will be influenced by this new style of building. After all, reinforced cement concrete has found its way into rural areas through masons working on government projects. If so, is this shift away from a local building economy, a positive trend.

It appears that “Type” designs proliferate due to the lack of documentation and analysis of traditional rural building systems and their performance.  Just mud has been steadily replaced by fired brick in Western Uttar Pradesh, many local building styles will also probably die a natural death in this region.  One has to admit that Lok Jumbish, is a formal building programme which will lay down the framework for future construction work.  New building styles, new building material entrepreneurs and local building centres will emerge.  Along with this there is also going to be an improvement in the affordability of people.  The spate of building activity that the Lok Jumbish programme requires, is also going to create pressures on the natural resources of the regions, which also includes stone.  (There is not even a quarrying levy on the stone in these areas at present).

The Andhra Pradesh Primary Education Programme (see article) teaches us that low cost construction materials and peoples’ participation are necessary to achieve a sustainable building process.  Lok Jumbish is probably ahead in that it has accepted these conditions form the very beginning.  Even as the first phase of work is drawing to an end the numbers to be achieved in the stipulated time frame seem to be difficult targets as the ground reality of this mammoth task is coming to light .  It is also clear that the alternative route is best propagated through some formal mechanisms if any results are to be achieved.

The glass trombe wall now fast penetrating local designs in Ladakh and the shift from fired bricks to concrete blocks in Andhra Pradesh are some examples of positive transformation in the shelter scenario.  With various institutions like the UNICEF, the Overseas Development Agency, the British Council Division, and now the Swedish International Development Agency initiating such programmes in various states, it is crucial that all of them come together on a common platform to attack the problem of “effective delivery”. We have to stop rediscovering the wheel.

by Geeta Vaidyanathan