ICSSR funds systemic study of Vachana philosophy’s role in decentralized governance and ecological stewardship

Vachana literature, composed by marginalized *sharanas* (devotees) in the 12th century, encodes ecological reciprocity through metaphors of shared rivers, communal labor, and anti-caste ethics—principles now recognized as indigenous sustainability frameworks. Modern management studies rarely engage with these texts as living systems, instead treating them as historical artifacts. The ICSSR grant’s focus on 'management' risks instrumentalizing this wisdom without acknowledging its roots in devotional resistance to feudal and Brahminical oppression.

Vachana emerged during the Kalachuri and Hoysala dynasties as a radical counter to caste hierarchy, with figures like Basavanna and Akka Mahadevi advocating for gender and class equity. This period paralleled other global movements, such as the European peasant revolts or Islamic *ijtihad* reforms, where marginalized groups reclaimed spiritual and political agency. The grant’s focus on 'management' echoes colonial-era attempts to categorize indigenous systems as 'primitive' precursors to modern economics, ignoring their role in sustaining communities through droughts and famines.

Vachana’s communal ethics align with Indigenous Australian *Dreamtime* narratives, where land and law are co-created by collective memory, and with Nordic *lagom* (balance) principles in resource sharing. In Japan, the *mura* (village) governance model similarly prioritized consensus over hierarchy, a parallel to Vachana’s *kudalasangha* (communal assemblies). These cross-cultural threads reveal a pattern of 'relational governance' that modern institutions could adopt to address climate-induced displacement and economic precarity.

Vachana texts contain empirical observations on water conservation (e.g., *kalyani* stepwells), soil regeneration, and labor-sharing, which align with modern agroecology and commons governance research. Studies on indigenous water systems in India (e.g., *aahar-pyne* in Bihar) validate these practices as climate-resilient alternatives to industrial models. The ICSSR grant could bridge this gap by applying ethnographic methods to extract actionable knowledge, but risks reducing complex traditions to 'case studies' without interdisciplinary collaboration.

Vachana’s poetic form—*vachana* means 'word'—blurs the line between governance and devotion, using metaphors like 'cotton in the field' to symbolize purity and interdependence. This artistic-spiritual fusion is echoed in Sufi poetry or Native American ledger art, where governance is not bureaucratic but embodied in daily rituals. The grant’s focus on 'management' risks stripping this dimension, reducing spirituality to a tool for productivity rather than a framework for collective flourishing.

Vachana-based governance models could inform decentralized climate adaptation strategies, such as community-led water banks or cooperative agriculture, tested in Karnataka’s dryland regions. Scenario modeling could compare these systems to neoliberal austerity measures, predicting resilience under 2°C warming scenarios. The ICSSR grant’s potential lies in co-designing futures where 'management' is not extractive but regenerative, but this requires shifting from academic extraction to community co-creation.

The Lingayat community, historically persecuted for challenging caste norms, preserved Vachana traditions through oral transmission and secret gatherings. Women like Akka Mahadevi and male artisans like Channabasavanna were central to this movement, yet their voices are often erased in institutional narratives. The grant’s focus on a 'professor' at a Central University risks centering elite academia over the lived expertise of *sharanas* and their descendants, who continue to practice these principles in rural Karnataka.