Celebrating National Handloom Day On August 7 Sans Proper Action

When the textile landscape of the country and the world is changing fast, it would not be enough for India to only celebrate National Handloom Day every year on August 7. The country will have to do much more than celebrating the day by releasing commemorative document and press releases giving an account of what the Union Government has been doing. Government actually needs to give proper attention to the structural issues that continue to affect the industry’s competitiveness, low and uncertain incomes, ageing artisans, powerloom imitation, fragmented marketing channels, technological gaps, export compliance, and week global branding.

As India prepares to celebrate the National Handloom Day 2026, the Union Government has branded the observance an important point in its journey reflecting the growing relevance of handloom among contemporary consumers and its greater visibility in global market. It is worth mentioning that the day was instituted on 2015 to give long-standing heritage a dedicated national platform.

In its celebratory tone the government boasts that India’s handloom tradition has deep historical roots, with its earliest traces dating back to the Indus Valley Civilisation. Spinning and weaving find mention across the Rigveda, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. The fine quality of Indian cotton and silk is also documented in these texts and in the works of Kautilya. Over the centuries, weaving skills and techniques have been passed down from one generation to the next. These traditions have evolved through the distinctive practices of different regions across India. Now National Handloom Day is celebrated annually on August 7. It commemorates the launch of the Swadeshi Movement in 1905, which promoted indigenous goods and encouraged self-reliance.

It is very pleasant to hear that the occasion celebrates India’s weaving tradition and recognises the socio-economic and cultural contribution of the handloom workers. However, it gives pain to know that weaving communities have been undergoing great distress due to government lack of proper and enough support to them. Government claims what the handloom sector represents but offers little to this sector so that it must overcome to remain economically viable in the domestic and international textile market.

India has conducted four censuses so far of this sector in 1987-88, 1995-96, 2009-10 and 2019-20. They are conducted at intervals averaging 8-12 years. According to the Fourth All India Handloom Census 2019-20, the comprehensive official census of the sector, recorded around 31.45 lakh handloom households. It also counted 35.22 lakh handloom weavers and allied workers across the country. Of these, 8.48 lakh were allied workers engaged in pre-loom and post-loom activities such as winding, warping, dyeing and calendaring. Further, social and geographical patterns show that handloom is closely tied to rural livelihoods.

Government’s policy oriented celebratory document seems to only praise the government initiatives but fails to critically assess the sector. The documents effectively trace the historical, cultural and economic significance of Indian handlooms, highlights government initiatives, and showcases success stories. However, it largely sidesteps the structural challenges that continue to constrain the sector.

Union Government skillfully tries to derive political mileage from the celebrations only by reinforcing the role of handloom as both an economic and nationalist movement. It emphasizes that handloom is among India’s largest rural non-farm employers; supports millions of weavers and allied workers; contributes to women-led household enterprises; and preserves intangible cultural heritage through hundreds of traditional weaving traditions.

Government’s documents also give comprehensive list of their initiatives such as: National Handloom Development Programme, Handloom Marketing Assistance, India Handloom Brand, Handloom Mark, cluster development, Weaver MUDRA loans, raw material supply through NHDC, digital marketing initiatives, design development and skill upgradation, export promotion initiatives, and technology interventions including the new Handloom Technology Centre announced this year, etc. They also stress on sustainability, eco-friendly production, slow fashion, GI-targeted products, global appreciations for handmade textiles to convince us about genuine opportunities as global consumers increasingly seek ethical and sustainable products.

Nevertheless, they underplay the income crisis suffered by the weavers community. It should be noted that the fundamental issue today is not employment but livelihood viability. Many weavers continue to earn incomes that are below comparable occupations despite possessing highly specialized skills. This explains why younger generations are exiting the profession. Without attractive incomes, heritage alone cannot sustain the sector.

Government mentions marketing but avoids discussing the biggest commercial threat of -powerloom imitation, digitally printed replicas, imported look-alike fabrics, and counterfeit “handloom” products. Consumers often cannot distinguish authentic handloom from machine-made textiles. The result is price suppression across genuine handloom products.

The government projects export potential but pays little attention to current realities. Indian handloom exporters face intense competition from China, Vietnam and Bangladesh on price; competition from Indonesia, Thailand and Peru in handcrafted textiles; increasingly demanding sustainability, traceability and compliance requirements in Europe and North America; and difficulty supplying uniform quality in commercial volumes. These issues determine export competitiveness as much as craftsmanship.

Government experts treat technology mainly as an opportunity and highlight technology initiatives such as the Handloom Hackathon and Technology Centre. However, they do not fully acknowledge that most weaving clusters still suffer from: obsolete looms, low productivity, limited digital literacy, poor design software access, and inadequate product development. Technology adoption remains highly uneven.

Government focuses chiefly on exhibitions and branding. However, they pay little attention to structural problems such as: dependence on middlemen, fragmented producer base, lack of professional branding, inadequate retail presence, and limited access to international buyers. For many weavers, market access—not production—is the binding constraint.

It should be noted that today’s textile market is increasingly driven by: fast fashion, lower prices, rapidly changing designs, and online retail. However, handloom production is inherently slower and more expensive. We should give more attention to how handloom can compete commercially in a fast-fashion world.

Lastly, the biggest long-term concern is that young people are leaving weaving. Reasons include uncertain income, physically demanding work, better opportunities elsewhere, and lack of social prestige. This threatens continuity of traditional skills far more than declining demand. (IPA Service)