Beyond the Thread and Loom: Socioeconomic Realities, Structural Vulnerabilities, and the Future of Handloom Weavers in Telangana

This conceptual and exploratory study systematically investigates the socioeconomic development, livelihoods, and structural vulnerabilities in the lives of traditional handloom weavers across the state of Telangana, critically evaluating their contemporary challenges and long-term developmental prospects. Utilizing a nonempirical, qualitative, and exploratory research design, the methodology systematically synthesizes diverse peer-reviewed literature, official census reports, institutional government datasets, and current academic scholarship to construct a comprehensive, multi-dimensional conceptual framework. The core outcomes highlight deep-rooted systemic hurdles: severe fluctuations in raw material costs, low wage structures, high dependence on exploitative middleman networks, inadequate institutional credit avenues, poor marketing channels, and intense, uneven competition from modernized power-loom sectors. Conversely, critical growth prospects are identified within cooperative structural reforms, digital marketing integration, and state-supported micro-entrepreneurship models. Policy implications dictate an immediate paradigm shift away from passive, short-term welfare subsidies toward active, technology-driven capacity-building, direct-to-consumer e-commerce linkages, decentralized cluster-level infrastructure, and robust minimum wage protections. This study’s primary contribution is reframing the regional handloom cluster not as a declining legacy craft but as a self-sustaining, highly eco-friendly, decentralized green economic sector possessing massive livelihood potential. The theoretical novelty lies in directly linking regional weaving preservation and artisan empowerment to specific United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), thereby establishing a scalable socio-ecological framework for traditional crafts. Finally, limitations stem from its nonempirical character; the total reliance on secondary literature prevents direct validation of current, grassroots behavioral changes and field-level economic shifts within Telangana’s diverse rural weaving households, indicating a critical need for future, primary, and targeted empirical field studies.

Handloom weavers, Socio-economic development, Telangana State, Sustainable Development Goals, Nonempirical synthesis.

1. Akhtar, N. (2022). Vulnerability context and coping strategies of traditional weavers: A case of Sualkuchi silk industry, Assam. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 7(12), 4112–4128. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Araya, S. G., & Beyene, B. B. (2024). Effect of cultural appropriation on the cultural garment weaving industry: The case of weavers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1), Article 2351679. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2024.2351679 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bhagavatula, S. (2012). The working of entrepreneurs in a competitive low technology industry: The case of master weavers in the handloom industry (IIMB Working Paper No. 1318). Indian Institute of Management Bangalore. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century (IDS Discussion Paper No. 296). Institute of Development Studies. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Chari, S. (2004). Fraternal capital: Peasant-workers, self-made men, and globalization in industrial South India. Stanford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Dang, A. (n.d.). Supporting women weavers: Learnings from producer companies. Ideas for India. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Department for International Development (DFID). (1999). Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets. Department for International Development. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Devi, C. V. (2017). Handlooms for livelihood in the north-eastern region: Problems and prospects. Journal of Rural Development, 36(4), 515–534. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Frank, A. G. (1966). The development of underdevelopment. Monthly Review, 18(4), 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1215/00270520-18-4-17 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Geographical Indications Registry. (2013). State-wise registration details of GIs. Intellectual Property India. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Gereffi, G. (1994). The organization of buyer-driven global commodity chains: How U.S. retailers shape overseas production networks. In G. Gereffi & M. Korzeniewicz (Eds.), Commodity chains and global capitalism (pp. 95–122). Praeger. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Gereffi, G., & Korzeniewicz, M. (Eds.). (1994). Commodity chains and global capitalism. Praeger. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Goldsmith, D. (2018). WomenWeave daily: Social enterprise, naya khadi, and human development in rural India. Swedish School of Textiles. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Gosikonda, S. (2023, September 18). Padmashalis in Telangana: Lack of political representation hurts traditional weaving community. The South First. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Gosikonda, S., & Gundemeda, N. (2024). Caste, occupation, and educational mobility: A study of the weavers in Telangana town. In N. B. Lekha & M. Pradeep Kumar (Eds.), Routledge handbook of gender, culture, and development in India (pp. 309–326). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003474913-25 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Government of India. (1999). The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999. Ministry of Law and Justice. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Gunda, D. (2025). From loom to life: Narayanpet sarees. Textile: Cloth and Culture, 23(1), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759756.2025.2502242 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Haftu, D., Kerebih, H., & Terfe, A. (2023). Prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders and its associated factors among traditional cloth weavers in Chencha district, Gamo zone, Ethiopia, an ergonomic study. PLOS ONE, 18(11), Article e0293542. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293542 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hazarika, G., & Goswami, C. (2016). Micro-credit and women's empowerment: Is there a connection? Journal of Development Studies, 52(11), 1541–1556. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2016.1156093 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Hemalatha, T. (2025). Weaver Mart – A no-middle-man e-commerce website. International Journal on Science and Technology (IJSAT), 16(2), 1–8. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Kalita, A. (2025). Gamosa, the traditional handloom artefact of Assam: A case study. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge (IJTK), 24(1), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.56042/ijtk.v24i1.16417 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kaplinsky, R., & Morris, M. (2001). A handbook for value chain research. International Development Research Centre (IDRC). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Mahantare, Y., & Thakre, G. (2024). Ergonomic risk assessment of manual handloom weaving among female workers. Asian Journal of Applied Research, 10(1), 112–124. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Mewafarosh, R. (2026a). Socio-economic empowerment of women in the handloom sector: A systematic literature review. Journal of Communication and Management, 5(1), 112–126. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mewafarosh, R. (2026b). Socio-economic empowerment of women in handloom sector: A systematic literature review. Journal of Communication and Management, 15(1), 44–58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Ministry of Textiles, Government of India. (2024a). National Handloom Development Programme (NHDP) guidelines. Development Commissioner for Handlooms. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Ministry of Textiles, Government of India. (2024b). Sustainability in the handloom traditions of India. Development Commissioner for Handlooms. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Mooij, J. (n.d.). Welfare policies and politics: A study of three government interventions in Andhra Pradesh, India (Working Paper). UK Department for International Development (DFID). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Munda, M. S., & Tripura Sundari, T. (2026). Digital inclusion and socio-economic development of handloom weavers: A study of Nuapatna cluster. Journal of Daoist Studies, 19(S6), 776–785. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. National Innovation Foundation (NIF) India. (2023). Laxmi Asu making machine: Mallesham Chinthakindi. Department of Science and Technology, Government of India. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Palanithurai, G., Ragupathy, S., & Gurusamy, P. (2020). Informal learning among handloom weavers: A case analysis of Chinnalapatti, Tamil Nadu, India. TVET@Asia, 14, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Patia, B. (2026). Challenges and strategies for handloom retailers in Odisha's online and offline markets. International Journal of Arts, Architecture & Design, 15(1), 14–28. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Rahaman, M. A., Ahmed, F., & Islam, M. S. (2025). Mental health of handloom weavers in Bangladesh: A call for culturally adapted interventions. PLOS Global Public Health, 5(3), Article e0003411. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003411 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Rai, S. K. (2021). Communities of skill in the age of capitalism: Handloom weavers in twentieth-century United Provinces, India. Modern Asian Studies, 56(4), 1183–1221. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0026749x21000317 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Ramaswamy, V. (1985). The weaver communities in medieval South India. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Roy, S. (2024). Heritage meets innovation: Elevating traditional crafts through technological advancements for sustainability. NIFT Journal of Fashion, 4(1), 22–35. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Save Handloom Foundation. (2024). Weaving trust: How Save Handloom Foundation is battling counterfeits with blockchain tech. Handloom India Journal, 12(1), 34–41. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Seenivasan, P. (2024). The morbidity profile and working conditions of handloom weavers in Tamil Nadu - A descriptive study. Indian Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 28(2), 89–97. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijoem.ijoem_343_23 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. North-Holland. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Sharma, R. (2022). Socio-economic and financial vulnerability of rural artisans: Evidence from traditional textile clusters. Journal of Rural Development, 41(2), 145–162. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. https://doi.org/10.2515/jrd/2022/v41/i2/168393 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Sharma, R. W. (2015). Marketing of GI products: Unlocking their commercial potential (Working Paper No. 2015-18). Centre for WTO Studies. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Sharma, S. K., & Sharma, B. (2024). Women's empowerment through handloom and handicraft: Transforming economic and social status. Journal of National Development, 37(2), 42–55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. https://doi.org/10.62047/JND.2024.12.31.42 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Shaw, A., et al. (2016). Women's autonomy and structural barriers in traditional household cottage industries. Feminist Economics, 22(3), 82–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2015.1118602 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Srinivasulu, K. (1994). Handloom weavers' struggle for survival. Economic and Political Weekly, 29(36), 2024–2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Srinivasulu, K. (1996). 1985 Textile Policy and Handloom Industry: Policy, promises and performance. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(49), 3198–3206. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Sudharshan, R. (2021). Gender and the handloom sector: Challenging the "allied worker" paradigm in Southern India. Journal of Artisanal Studies, 8(2), 112–129. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Venkateswarlu, B. (2013). Handloom weavers' cooperative societies in Prakasam district, Andhra Pradesh. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 3(2), 15–28. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Yadav, S. (2024). Building a conceptual framework to study factors influencing e-commerce adoption by handloom weavers. NIFT Journal of Fashion, 4(1), 102–115. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• When Innovation and Commitment Don’t Pay: Evidence from Moroccan State Owned Enterprises
• Diversity And Inclusion Initiatives and Corporate Entrepreneurship in the Hospitality Industry in Enugu State, Nigeria
• The Dual Divide: Institutional Tier and AI Skills in AI-Driven Recruitment of Engineering Freshers
• The Impact of Recruitment and Selection Methods on Employee Performance in Selected Commercial Banks of Somalia’s Banking Industry