Introduction

The Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs has drafted a new policy framework titled “Reconciling Conservation and Community Rights” to ensure that any relocation from tiger reserves aligns with the Forest Rights Act, 2006 (FRA) and ensures community consent, accountability, and post-relocation monitoring. This follows increasing complaints from Scheduled Tribes that relocations are being conducted without proper consent, despite the FRA granting them rights to reside within traditional habitats.

What is the significance of the new policy framework?

1. Institutional reform: The framework proposes a National Framework for Community-Centric Conservation and Relocation involving both the Environment and Tribal Affairs Ministries.
2. Integration of agencies: Suggests joint procedural standards, timelines, and accountability mechanisms across ministries.
3. Centralized database: Recommends creation of a National Database on Conservation-Community Interface (NDCCI) to record data on relocations, compensation, and post-relocation outcomes.
4. Independent audits: Mandates annual independent audits by empanelled agencies to ensure FRA compliance and voluntary consent in relocation projects.

Why was this policy needed now?

1. Implementation gaps: Multiple representations from States and tribal groups highlighted “serious concerns” about non-implementation of FRA in tiger reserves.
2. Violation of rights: Tribes alleged coercion into relocation despite the FRA allowing habitation within reserves.
3. Poor monitoring: The Ministry noted lack of data and follow-up on families relocated from reserves since 2007.
4. Scale of issue: Over 1,566 villages have been relocated from tiger reserves since 2007, affecting 55,000 families; another 94,000 families remain within reserve areas.

What safeguards does the framework propose?

1. Voluntary relocation: Relocation only if consent is obtained at both Gram Sabha and household levels.
2. Right to reside: Reaffirms that forest-dwelling communities cannot be relocated without exercising FRA rights to remain in traditional habitats.
3. Scientific validation: Any relocation must be justified through demonstrable ecological necessity.
4. Ethical relocation: Proposes “voluntary, scientifically justified, and dignity-based” resettlement, monitored by the NDCCI and independent auditors.

How does the framework address inter-ministerial coordination?

1. Collaborative approach: Establishes a joint mechanism between the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) and Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) for approval, execution, and evaluation of relocations.
2. Defined accountability: Ensures that both ministries share equal responsibility in monitoring and redressal of rights violations.
3. State participation: State governments to designate nodal officers to ensure compliance with FRA provisions before any relocation.

What challenges remain on the ground?

1. Administrative inertia: State agencies often bypass FRA provisions, citing wildlife protection laws.
2. Inadequate consultation: Many Gram Sabhas report incomplete or manipulated consent processes.
3. Livelihood uncertainty: Compensation often delayed or inadequate, leading to impoverishment post-relocation.
4. Social dislocation: Tribes such as the Jenu Kuruba in Karnataka allege forced displacement without restoration of ancestral land rights.

How does this align with India’s conservation policy?

1. Balancing dual goals: The framework emphasizes that tiger conservation and tribal rights are not mutually exclusive.
2. Legal synchronization: Seeks to harmonize FRA (2006) with Wildlife Protection Act (1972) and National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) directives.
3. Ethical conservation: Shifts focus from coercive protectionism to participatory conservation involving local communities.

Conclusion

The proposed framework is a crucial step toward redefining India’s conservation ethics by embedding human rights into environmental protection. Its success will depend on genuine participation of tribal communities, transparent auditing, and strict accountability from both central and state authorities. Only then can India achieve inclusive conservation that respects both its people and its tigers.

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2025] Does tribal development in India centre around two axes, those of displacement and of rehabilitation? Give your opinion.

Linkage: It directly aligns with the issue of forest tribe relocation, where development often entails displacement for conservation followed by inadequate rehabilitation efforts. This highlights the need for a rights-based, consent-driven framework ensuring dignity and livelihood security for displaced tribal communities.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now