Research among 160 tribal women in North Gujarat finds differences in dairy practices and social empowerment. It also points to the costs and service gaps that continue to affect women’s livelihoods.
A woman may feed the cattle, clean the shed, collect fodder and milk the animals. Yet her work is only one part of what makes a dairy household earn. The family also needs affordable feed, veterinary support and a buyer willing to pay a reasonable price.
Researchers spoke with 160 tribal women who kept dairy animals in Gujarat’s Sabarkantha and Aravalli districts. Half belonged to self-help groups (SHGs); the other half did not.
The SHG members scored higher on dairy practices and measures of social and economic empowerment. But women in both groups reported difficulties, including high costs and limited access to veterinary care. The study was published in Frontiers in Sociology on 22 October 2026.
Women behind India’s milk production
In 2024–25, India produced 247.87 million tonnes of milk—3.58% more than the year before, according to the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying.
Women carry out much of the work behind this production. In a parliamentary reply on
White Revolution 2.0, the government said women constitute nearly 70% of the dairy-farming workforce. They undertake activities such as feeding, milking, managing cattle and caring for animal health.
For households that keep a few animals alongside farming or other work, dairy can provide a regular source of income. But participation in that work does not automatically answer another question: how much influence do women have over the decisions and income associated with it?
What the Gujarat researchers studied
The study, by Khushboo Kumari, Laxmi R. Dubey and Dilip R. Vahoniya, interviewed 160 tribal women involved in dairy farming during 2024–25.
The sample included 80 SHG members and 80 women who were not members. They came from 16 villages across four talukas in Sabarkantha and Aravalli. Researchers selected the districts and talukas for their tribal SHG membership and the relevance of dairy livelihoods; they then selected villages and identified eligible women in each.
The team examined dairy practices, household circumstances, social and economic empowerment, and the difficulties women faced in livestock production.
A difference in dairy practices
The researchers assessed 35 practices covering breeding, feeding, animal healthcare, shed management, milking and other activities.
Women in SHGs had an average dairy-practice adoption score of 70.33, compared with 58.45 among non-members. Each practice received a score depending on whether it was fully, partly or not adopted.
These figures need careful reading. They are index scores, not percentages. The scale ran from 35 to 105 because even a practice that was not adopted received one point. A score of 70.33 therefore does not mean that women adopted 70.33% of the practices.
The researchers also found differences in their empowerment indices. SHG members scored 65.49 on economic empowerment, against 54.06 for non-members. On social empowerment, the scores were 69.40 and 37.77, respectively.
What does “empowerment” mean here?
The study’s economic index included household assets, income, expenditure, savings, loans and housing. Its social index included self-confidence, social awareness and recognition, skills, and access to public services.
These measures help compare the two groups. They do not, however, tell us everything about a woman’s independence.
For example, a household may own assets or have savings. That alone does not establish whether the woman can decide how to use them. Similarly, a higher dairy-management score does not by itself show who receives the milk payment or decides how it is spent.
Those questions matter when assessing whether a livelihood programme changes women’s position within a household, alongside the household’s financial condition.
Why the difference cannot be credited to SHGs alone
The findings are promising, but the study does not prove that joining an SHG caused the higher scores.
The researchers interviewed the two groups at one point in time. They did not formally match the women by characteristics such as education, income, landholding or herd size. Women who joined groups may already have differed from those who did not.
The study also focused on selected areas of two districts. Its findings should not be treated as representative of every tribal woman dairy farmer in Gujarat or India. The authors themselves caution against a causal interpretation.
The challenges remain
Feed was expensive. Veterinary services were difficult to access. Women also reported problems getting credit and technical information, while the price they received for milk often fell short. These concerns came from both SHG members and non-members.
An SHG can provide a setting for savings, credit and access to information. But a woman still needs those services to be available and useful in her village. Better knowledge about animal care, for instance, has limited value if veterinary help is too far away or too expensive.
The study’s findings suggest that women’s dairy programmes should look beyond membership and training alone. They should also examine whether women can obtain services, afford feed and access reliable markets.
What should programmes measure?
The Gujarat paper offers a useful starting point for programme designers and evaluators.
Alongside the number of women enrolled in groups, they could ask:
- Has the woman’s income from dairy changed after accounting for costs?
- Can she access veterinary care when an animal falls ill?
- Who receives the payment for milk, and who decides how to use it?
- Has her workload changed as dairy activity has grown?
- Can she influence decisions about animals, borrowing and sales?
Each answer describes a different part of a livelihood. Together, they can show whether women have gained better opportunities, greater control over their work and a fair return for their contribution.
Clear Cut Livelihood, Research Desk
New Delhi, UPDATED: October 27, 2026 16:09 IST
Written By: Clear Cut Research Desk
