{"id":73290,"date":"2026-06-19T15:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-06-19T09:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/idronline.org\/?post_type=article&p=73290"},"modified":"2026-06-19T14:35:36","modified_gmt":"2026-06-19T09:05:36","slug":"lessons-from-working-in-the-northeast-india","status":"publish","type":"article","link":"https:\/\/idronline.org\/kn-in\/article\/perspectives\/lessons-from-working-in-the-northeast-india\/","title":{"rendered":"Lessons from working in the Northeast India"},"content":{"rendered":"

Since 2015, Bindi International Association<\/a> has been training women from rural areas to become solar technicians and entrepreneurs. We work in partnership with the government and local nonprofits to identify indigenous, last-mile communities for electrification using solar energy and select women to be part of the programme.<\/p>

This is a community-owned model that ensures villages take responsibility for managing, maintaining, and financing solar energy over time. We expanded to Northeast India in 2020, focusing on states like Mizoram, Meghalaya, Manipur, Nagaland, and Assam. We cover nearly 30 districts which largely remain unelectrified or poorly served because centralised grid systems struggle in hilly terrain with sparsely populated and scattered settlements.<\/p>

There are certain challenges that come with expanding to these regions. From a logistical standpoint, the terrain makes transportation costly and solar efficiency drops due to climatic conditions. In remote regions, we have experienced delays in shipment of solar equipment by as long as 58 days, which translates to solar systems going non-functional with no timely replacement parts, directly affecting community trust.<\/p>

\"What<\/a><\/div>

From an operational side, as an organisation trying to deploy a programme in the Northeast from the outside, building relationships with local nonprofits and village level councils is a hurdle of its own. We learned that:<\/p>

1. The terrain is not easy to navigate<\/h3>

In Mizoram, the terrain is a challenge. Especially during the monsoon, roads in remote regions are prone to landslides which disrupt supply chains for solar components, and constrain the movement of both people and equipment. Climatic conditions such as prolonged rainfall, cloud cover<\/a>, and severe winters also affect system performance: Achieving the same energy output often requires higher-wattage panels than in the plains, increasing overall costs. <\/p>

To combat these difficulties, we invested in building local capacity by training village-level technicians who did not have to travel far and could respond quickly in case a system broke down. They are always there in case of emergencies, unlike external teams which took longer to reach during extreme weather events. Local technicians are equipped with spare parts and basic technical training to fix components of solar panels.  We also implemented projects in districts in phases, allowing systems to stabilise before scaling up.<\/p>

2. Community buy-in takes time<\/h3>

Cultural and geographic diversity in the Northeast makes decentralised solutions necessary. For any programme to take root, especially for an organisation not from the Northeast, sustained engagement, ongoing interaction, cross-learning, and the sharing of best practices within the region are critical.<\/p>

In several Northeast states, institutions such as village councils and zila parishads<\/em> (district councils) exercise authority over decisions<\/a> within the village, including on development projects run by external organisations. Our team constantly witnessed that councils were protective of their people’s culture and region when we tried to interact with them, and they exercised strict scrutiny. <\/p>

\"donate<\/a><\/div>
\n

In several villages, the initial concerns were not about the solar technology itself, but about intent.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>

As a result, village leaders naturally become the decision-makers. We had multiple rounds of community meetings, where costs, responsibilities, and potential risks were discussed openly. Only after collective agreement did implementation of any work begin. While this process is slower than top-down approaches, it is far more likely to ensure that systems remain functional for a long time because it promotes trust and mutual agreement.<\/p>

In our case, in several villages, the initial concerns were not about the solar technology itself, but about intent. Questions emerged early on: Who owns this system? Is it temporary or permanent? What happens after the organisation leaves? In at least one instance, our entry into the village was delayed as leaders discussed whether the intervention might disrupt existing structures. However, since it is the people from the village that ultimately hold the programme as solar technicians, such concerns are dissipated over time.<\/p>

In order to work with these systems, we built the programme in a way that requires deep engagement with village-level leadership and a decision-making process that is both democratic and collective. This meant repeated visits, transparent discussions around finances, and actively involving local leaders in planning and decision-making. <\/p>

\"a<\/source><\/source><\/source><\/picture>
We invested in building local capacity by training village-level technicians who did not have to travel far. | Picture courtesy: Bindi International Association<\/figcaption><\/figure>

3. Compliance and clearance delays are inevitable<\/h3>

Implementing a programme requires many approvals and formalities from institutions such as state power departments and local administration. We have to rely heavily on local nonprofits and community-based organisations (CBOs) for both community engagement, and for navigating the administrative landscape. Many states also have features such as the Inner Line Permit<\/a>, which regulate the entry of non-local personnel. Together, these factors create delays that are far more pronounced than in other regions we work in.<\/p>

Local nonprofits and CBOs play three critical roles: as cultural translators who help navigate local norms and sensitivities, as administrative facilitators who support documentation and approvals, and as community mobilisers who bring people together for meetings and discussions. We were able to build ground-level partnerships by treating them as equal stakeholders, rather than just implementation support.<\/p>

At the same time, non-local personnel—such as technical trainers, engineers, and programme coordinators—remain essential in the early stages. Solar deployment requires specialised technical and institutional expertise that is not always immediately available within the community. However, their role is intentionally temporary. They are there to train local people, set up systems, and then gradually step back to transfer ownership and control to the community, not to create long-term dependency.<\/p>

4. Sustaining staff from outside is difficult<\/h3>

Sustained work in the region requires operating in remote locations with limited infrastructure, navigating cultural and language differences, and spending long periods away from home.<\/p>

For many staff from mainland India, this level of isolation and adjustment can be difficult to sustain. The reluctance to take up or continue long-term postings in remote tribal areas further compounds the issue, making team continuity a persistent challenge in programmes in the Northeast.<\/p>

Over a six-month period, four members of our core programme team were unable to continue citing personal reasons. As a result, we started hiring personnel from our local partners who were close to the programme location.<\/p>

5. Financial stability is yet to be achieved<\/h3>

For our programme to function as intended, solar sakhi<\/em>s (local women trained as solar entrepreneurs) should be paid on time, and transparency must be maintained in all financial decisions and communication. However, in villages such as in Mizoram where our work is at an early stage, establishing this self-sustaining financial cycle remains an ongoing challenge.<\/p>

\n

We have explored several avenues, including adjusted contribution structures, where payment is based on a household’s income level instead of the actual cost of the equipment.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>

The sakhis<\/em>‘ income depends on the amount of solar components they are able to sell. People can purchase the products on EMI based on their income level. However, irregular household income leads to inconsistent payments, making it difficult for sakhi<\/em>s to have a regular income. <\/p>

We have explored several avenues, including community pooling mechanisms (where the community collectively contributes money for solar to be installed in their village) and adjusted contribution structures (where payment is based on a household’s income level instead of the actual cost of the equipment). While these approaches offer partial relief, they do not fully resolve the underlying constraint of income volatility.<\/p>

6. Dependency dynamics affect participation<\/h3>

Long-standing socio-economic structures and local power dynamics continue to shape the extent to which individuals can pursue independent livelihoods in the Northeast.<\/p>

For instance, in the tea garden communities in Assam, awareness of government entitlements and rights remains limited, often as a consequence of geographic remoteness. This has a direct bearing on access to opportunities for income diversification and participation in decision-making, particularly for women. <\/p>

In Mizoram, community institutions, including tribal bodies and religious organisations, have played a central role in social and development processes for decades. <\/p>

As a result, in several villages, community members were initially hesitant to independently manage solar systems or make any financial contributions. During community meetings, discussions about household contributions for maintenance are repeatedly postponed because residents rely on village leaders to first approve the payment structure.<\/p>

These power and dependency dynamics mean that meaningful engagement and alignment with these institutions is critical to any organisation’s work if they wish to implement a programme in the Northeast. It remains essential for ensuring both the acceptance and long-term sustainability of programmes.<\/p>

As our experience in the Northeast shows, sustainable development is not achieved through technology or infrastructure alone. For solar or any other kind of development initiative to succeed in the region, organisations need to invest in patient trust-building, shared ownership, strong local partnerships, and gradual shifts in community participation and institutional dependency structures. <\/p>

—<\/p>

Know more<\/h3>