National Tribal Policy — 2014 Paper II
Critically evaluate the National Tribal Policy.
Model Answer
VAID ICSApproach
- Demand of Question: Examine the objectives and major provisions of the proposed National Tribal Policy and critically assess its capacity to address structural tribal problems.
- Structuring the Response: Present its broad policy priorities, identify its strengths, and then examine limitations relating to implementation, participation and resource rights.
- Key Dimensions to Cover: Draft National Tribal Policy 2006, land, displacement, forest rights, PVTGs, education, health, self-governance, cultural identity and implementation gaps.
Model Answer
Introduction: The Draft National Tribal Policy, 2006 sought to provide an integrated framework for the development and protection of India's Scheduled Tribes. It recognized that tribal deprivation was linked not merely to poverty but also to land alienation, displacement, loss of forest access and erosion of cultural autonomy.
Major concerns of the policy
The proposed policy emphasized:
- protection of tribal land;
- prevention of exploitation;
- improved rehabilitation of displaced tribes;
- education and health;
- livelihood security;
- protection of traditional knowledge;
- development of PVTGs;
- preservation of tribal culture and identity;
- strengthening of tribal administration.
Its broad orientation can be represented as:
Protection + Development + Participation + Cultural preservation
Strengths
- Holistic approach:
It treated tribal development as more than welfare expenditure. - Recognition of land and resource rights:
It acknowledged land alienation as a central cause of tribal impoverishment. - Focus on displacement:
It recognized the disproportionate impact of dams, mining and industries on tribal communities. - Attention to vulnerable groups:
Special emphasis was placed on:
- PVTGs;
- tribal women;
- remote communities.
- Cultural sensitivity:
It recognized the need to protect:
- customary institutions;
- languages;
- indigenous knowledge.
This broadly resonates with Verrier Elwin's Tribal Panchsheel, which advocated development in accordance with tribal social and cultural institutions.
Limitations
- Implementation deficit:
Policy intentions depend heavily on state-level administrative commitment. - Weak community participation:
Development may still remain bureaucratically designed rather than genuinely Gram Sabha-led. - Conflict between development and resource rights:
Mining, infrastructure and industrial priorities may contradict protection of tribal land. - Institutional fragmentation:
Responsibilities are distributed among:
- Tribal Affairs;
- Forest departments;
- state governments;
- local administration,
creating coordination problems.
- Insufficient emphasis on autonomy:
Welfare-oriented approaches may overshadow the constitutional principle of tribal self-governance under the Fifth and Sixth Schedules and PESA. - Policy status:
The 2006 proposal did not mature into a fully implemented comprehensive National Tribal Policy, limiting its operational impact.
Conclusion
The National Tribal Policy framework correctly identified the central tribal issues of land, forests, displacement, cultural identity and human development. Its weakness lies in translating these principles into enforceable rights and participatory governance. Tribal policy becomes meaningful only when communities move from being beneficiaries of development to decision-makers over their own resources and future.
Want feedback on your answer?
Join the Anthropology workshop or get structured answer-writing guidance from VAID ICS.