The poor especially in market economies, need the strength that collectivities offer for creating more economic, social and political space for themselves, for enhancing their socio-economic well-being and voice, and as a protection against free market individualism. It has been argued that a group approach to farming, especially in the form of bottom up agricultural production collectivities, offers substantial scope for poverty alleviation and empowering the poor as well as enhancing agricultural productivity. To realise this potential, however, the groups would need to be voluntary in nature, small in size, participative in decision making and equitable in work sharing and benefit distribution. There are many notable examples of such collectivities to be found in varied contexts, such as in the transition economies. All of them bear witness to the possibility of successful cooperation under given conditions. And although the gender impact of the family cooperatives in the transition economies are uncertain, the Indian examples of women-only groups farming offer considerable potential for benefiting women. Consider the following assumptions: 1. It is imperative for transition economies to have agricultural collectivities. 2. Agricultural productivity can be increased by group approach to farming. With reference to the above passage, which of these assumptions is/are valid?