| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Examines the relationship between civil society and human security in the Indian state of Meghalaya, part of the region known as Northeast India. Civil society has been revived over the last two decades and is now one of the key concepts in development, politics, and international aid. The concept has gained particular significance as part of attempts to analyze and instigate grassroots democratization through widespread political participation. This is seen as enabling a broader range of issues to be politicized and made a part of political agendas at the local, national, and global levels. However there are few studies that examine the constraints on civil society at the local level, even in contexts where civil society may appear to be active and vibrant. Those studies that do exist tend to focus on the constraints coming from the state, overlooking the constraints that come from within civil society itself.
During the same period human security has gained prominence as a challenge to state-centric conceptions of security and as an alternative approach to development by focusing on the security and insecurity of groups and individuals. The concept has been taken up by international organizations, development agencies, and bilateral donors as a more effective way to understand the difficulties people face in their everyday lives that go beyond conventional categories and indicators. In order for those experiencing insecurity to identify and contest the causes of insecurity, participation in civil society is necessary. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||