At-risk tribal communities may be considered separately

At-risk tribal communities may be considered separately

A cautious approach is essential for not only recognizing but also tackling the needs of Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups, in order to promote social inclusion rather than mere assimilation

Introduction

The debate surrounding a separate enumeration of Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) in India’s census operations brings to the forefront critical questions of targeted policy, resource allocation, and the very definition of inclusion for the nation’s most marginalized communities. While the decennial census aims for comprehensive data, the distinct challenges and unique needs of PVTGs necessitate a nuanced approach that moves beyond aggregate tribal statistics.

Historical Context and Rationale for Separate Identification:

The concept of PVTGs emerged from the Dhebar Commission (1960-61), which identified a need for a separate category within Scheduled Tribes (STs) due to their alarmingly low development indices. Initially termed Primitive Tribal Groups (PTGs), they were rebranded as PVTGs in 2006 to remove the pejorative connotation of “primitive.” There are currently 75 PVTGs, spread across 18 states and one Union Territory, characterized by:

• Pre-agricultural level of technology: Engaging in hunting, gathering, and shifting cultivation.
• Stagnant or declining population: A worrying demographic trend.
• Extremely low literacy rates: Far below national and ST averages.
• Subsistence economy: Limited integration into the mainstream economy.
• Geographical isolation: Often residing in remote and inaccessible areas.

These distinct markers underscore why a blanket approach for all STs often fails to address the deep-seated vulnerabilities of PVTGs.

Arguments for Separate Enumeration:

• Targeted Policy Formulation: A separate count would provide precise demographic data on PVTGs, enabling the government to design highly specific and tailored policies addressing their unique challenges in health, education, livelihood, and infrastructure. Without accurate numbers, interventions remain generalized and potentially ineffective.
• Effective Resource Allocation: Many government schemes, like the “Scheme of Development of PVTGs,” struggle with inefficient resource allocation due to a lack of granular data. Separate enumeration would ensure that funds are directed where they are most needed, maximizing their impact.
• Monitoring and Evaluation: Accurate baseline data is crucial for monitoring the progress and evaluating the efficacy of development programs. A separate count would allow for precise tracking of PVTG development indicators over time, helping course correction.
• Preservation of Unique Culture and Identity: PVTGs often possess distinct languages, cultural practices, and traditional knowledge systems that are under threat. A separate count acknowledges their unique identity, potentially leading to specific cultural preservation initiatives.
• Addressing Data Deficiencies: The current census often subsumes PVTGs within the broader ST category, masking their dire situation. A separate enumeration would reveal the true extent of their marginalization, making their vulnerabilities visible to policymakers and the public.
• Human Rights and Social Justice: As the most vulnerable section of an already vulnerable group, PVTGs have a right to be distinctly recognized and supported. Separate enumeration is a step towards ensuring their human rights and achieving social justice.

Challenges and Concerns:

• Feasibility and Logistics: Identifying and enumerating PVTGs, often residing in remote and difficult terrains, poses significant logistical challenges for census enumerators.
• Defining “Separate”: Clarifying whether this means a separate column in the main census schedule or a distinct exercise altogether would be crucial. The former might be more practical.
• Risk of Further Stigmatization: While intended for positive discrimination, some argue that separate enumeration might inadvertently further “other” PVTGs, drawing unwanted attention or leading to social isolation.
• Data Reliability: Given the remote locations and potential distrust of outsiders, ensuring the accuracy and reliability of separately collected data could be an issue.
• Cost Implications: A more detailed and targeted enumeration would inevitably increase the financial and human resource burden on the census operations.

Way Forward:

• Pilot Projects: Before full-scale implementation, pilot projects could be conducted in regions with high PVTG populations to test methodologies and address logistical challenges.
• Community Participation: Involving PVTG community leaders and members in the census process can build trust, improve data accuracy, and ensure culturally sensitive enumeration.
• Training of Enumerators: Specialized training for census enumerators on PVTG cultures, languages (where possible), and sensitivities is paramount.
• Technological Integration: Utilizing GIS mapping and other technologies could aid in identifying PVTG habitations and streamlining the enumeration process.
• Integrated Approach: While separate enumeration is vital, it must be part of a larger, integrated approach that includes continuous development programs, robust monitoring mechanisms, and a focus on empowering PVTG communities.

Conclusion:

The proposition of separately counting vulnerable tribal groups is not merely an administrative exercise but a fundamental step towards recognizing and addressing the acute marginalization faced by PVTGs. While challenges exist, the potential benefits of accurate data for targeted policy formulation, effective resource allocation, and the preservation of unique cultural identities far outweigh the difficulties. A sensitive, well-planned, and participatory approach to separate enumeration could be a game-changer in ensuring that India’s “last person” among its indigenous communities is not left behind in the nation’s developmental journey.

UPSC mains exam question based on the provided topic:

GS Paper I: Indian Society (Salient features of Indian Society; Diversity of India), Social Empowerment.

GS Paper II: Governance (Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation), Social Justice (Welfare schemes for vulnerable sections of the population by the Centre and States and the performance of these schemes; mechanisms, laws, institutions and Bodies constituted for the protection and betterment of these vulnerable sections).

Question 1: “The idea of separately enumerating Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) in census operations is gaining traction as a vital step towards inclusive development. Discuss the core arguments supporting such a separate count, and critically analyze the potential challenges and ethical considerations involved.”

(15 Marks, 250 Words)

Question 2: “Beyond mere enumeration, what specific policy interventions and administrative reforms are essential to translate the data obtained from a separate PVTG count into tangible improvements in their socio-economic indicators and cultural preservation? Illustrate with suitable examples.”

(15 Marks, 250 Words)

(Source – The Indian express)