From heritage to imitation, Kashmir’s artisan economy at crossroads

The handicrafts sector in Kashmir, once a thriving pillar of the region’s economy and identity, is facing a deep and gradual decline amid rising imitation, weak policy enforcement, and changing market dynamics.

The issue has come into renewed focus following the inauguration of the ‘Know Your Artisan’ exhibition by Chief Minister Omar Abdullah at Kashmir Haat, where narratives of survival and revival were highlighted.

However, experts and stakeholders argue that what is being showcased today as heritage was once a robust, self-sustaining economic ecosystem.

Historically, the handicraft sector was second only to agriculture in employing in the Valley.

Large sections of the population, particularly in downtown Srinagar, were engaged in crafts such as carpet weaving, shawl making, embroidery, papier-mâché, and wood carving.

These crafts were not merely occupations but a way of life, passed down through generations.

There was a time when the handicrafts sector stood next only to agriculture as the largest source of employment in the region. In downtown Srinagar alone – within a radius of a few kilometers – the majority of the population was engaged in traditional crafts. Carpet weaving, shawl weaving and embroidery, papier-mâché, wood carving, namdah, wagoo, khatamband, chain stitch – these were not niche occupations but the very fabric of economic life.

This ecosystem was not built overnight, nor was it sustained by accident.

It was anchored in skill, patience, and authenticity – qualities that gave Kashmiri crafts their unmatched identity in global markets.

Families functioned as institutions of learning, where craft was not merely taught but absorbed as culture.

That continuum, however, has been steadily eroded.

The decline did not come abruptly; it crept in through years of policy indifference and a gradual disconnect between planners and the ground reality of artisans.

As economic priorities shifted, the artisan was left to compete in an increasingly unregulated and distorted marketplace – without institutional protection, and without a policy framework that could preserve authenticity while enabling growth.

In recent years, there has been a visible attempt to revive the sector through schemes, exhibitions, and policy announcements.

Yet, a fundamental question remains: is this revival addressing the core of the problem, or merely curating its remnants?

Today, crafts that once defined Kashmir’s identity are increasingly being replicated through machines.

Pashmina and raffal shawls, once hand-woven, are now mass-produced, blurring the line between pure and blended fibers.

Kani shawls are mechanically imitated, wood carving is reduced to CNC precision, and sozni and ari embroidery are machine-stitched.

Even papier-mâché is now replicated through screen-printed designs on MDF – visually similar, but devoid of the craft’s soul.

There is, of course, no denying the place of mechanisation in a modern economy. Markets demand scale, affordability, and speed.

Machine-made products have their own space, their own consumers, and their own commercial logic.

The issue is not their existence – it is the absence of distinction.

However, when machine-made products are passed off as handmade by unscrupulous dealers, the damage is twofold: the artisan loses his market, and the consumer is deceived – turning authenticity, once the hallmark of Kashmiri crafts, into its greatest casualty.

Despite GI tagging, there is no effective market mechanism – weak enforcement, low awareness, and no reliable way for buyers to distinguish genuine from machine-made, allowing imitation to outpace authenticity.

It is more troubling that the Government departments and allied agencies – meant to safeguard authenticity – are procuring and showcasing machine-made products as genuine handicrafts.

Displayed in tourist infrastructure, reception centres, and even shrines and khanqahs, these imitations not only legitimise duplication but directly undermine the very artisans they are meant to support.

Equally concerning is the breakdown of the traditional transmission of skills.

The generational transfer of craftsmanship – once the backbone of this sector – has nearly collapsed.

Younger generations, witnessing declining returns and uncertain futures, have largely moved away from traditional crafts.

What took centuries to build is now at risk of disappearing within a generation.

The policies governing the sector have struggled to keep pace with these realities. There is little by way of a robust framework to clearly define, protect, and promote genuine handicrafts while simultaneously regulating and categorizing machine-made products.

The absence of such differentiation has created a blurred ecosystem where authenticity carries no premium and imitation falsely projected as genuine bears no penalty.

“Ease of Doing Business” in this context cannot be reduced to procedural simplifications or digital interfaces.

For the handicraft sector, it must mean creating an ecosystem where artisans are able to practice their craft with dignity, access markets that value authenticity, and operate in a system that protects rather than dilutes their identity.

A credible system of authentication should have been institutionalised – one that goes beyond tagging and certification on paper, and translates into verifiable, technology-backed assurance for consumers.

Each handcrafted product could have carried a traceable identity – linking it to the artisan, the craft, and the process.

Such a system would not only have restored trust but also position genuine handicrafts as premium, niche products in high-value markets where quality outweighs price.

Simultaneously, machine-made products must be clearly classified, labeled, and marketed – and promoted separately through export-focused incentives – allowed to grow, but not to blur into the domain of genuine handicrafts.

The current trajectory, if left unchecked, risks reducing Kashmir’s handicraft sector to a symbolic relic, celebrated in exhibitions, but absent in reality.

The stories of survival being told today may soon become stories of extinction.

The question is not whether the artisan can survive – the question is whether the system is willing to let him.

Until that is answered with clarity and conviction, the narrative of ‘Ease of Doing Business’ will remain incomplete – because no economy can claim ease when it allows its most skilled hands to fall idle.