Reference Article: The Hindu
UPSC Relevance:
– GS Paper II: Government Policies and Interventions for Development in various sectors, Issues arising out of their Design and Implementation
– GS Paper III: Environment, Conservation, Biodiversity, and Environmental Governance
– Essay Paper: Balancing Ecological Conservation with Social Justice
India’s conservation strategy has often been perceived as a “fortress model”, where wildlife is protected by excluding human presence. The new Union Tribal Affairs Ministry’s policy framework seeks to challenge this paradigm by promoting a more inclusive and community-centred approach to conservation. It recognizes that protecting tigers is not merely an ecological mission but a social contract involving the people who share these landscapes.
The policy comes as a response to the 2024 directive by the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), which had called for mass relocation of villages from tiger reserves. This framework instead emphasizes coexistence and protection of rights under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2006, ensuring that communities are viewed as stakeholders, not trespassers.
Key Provisions and Policy Vision
- Relocation as an “Exceptional” Measure: The policy clarifies that people living in or near forests cannot be relocated until the FRA process is fully completed. Displacement is no longer a default conservation tool.
- Protection of Rights: It invokes the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act to safeguard communities from unlawful evictions, marking an important legal protection rarely seen in conservation frameworks.
- Three-Tier Redress Mechanism: The introduction of a grievance redress structure strengthens accountability and provides communities a formal avenue for justice.
- Promotion of Co-Habitation: By encouraging research and pilot projects on human-wildlife coexistence, the framework redefines conservation as an integrated ecological and social pursuit rather than an exclusionary one.
Significance and Progressive Aspects
The framework represents a shift in conservation philosophy — from exclusion to participation. It attempts to bridge the historic conflict between wildlife protection and tribal rights by recognising that sustainable conservation must also ensure social legitimacy.
This approach aligns with the principles of environmental justice, asserting that the costs and benefits of conservation must be shared equitably. It also highlights that displacement without consent violates both human rights and long-term conservation goals, as communities often play crucial roles in monitoring and protecting forest ecosystems.
Challenges and Institutional Resistance
Despite its progressive outlook, the policy faces multiple practical challenges:
- Conflicting Institutional Jurisdictions: Conservation in India largely falls under the Environment Ministry and State Forest Departments, which retain wide powers in implementing the FRA. The new framework under the Tribal Affairs Ministry may lack enforcement authority on the ground.
- Potential Dual Policy Structures: States may continue forced relocations if they do not adopt the new framework, leading to inconsistencies between national and state-level practices.
- Implementation Burden: The policy’s emphasis on consultation and social safeguards may slow habitat consolidation and complicate administrative processes.
- Scientific vs. Social Balance: Conservation biologists argue that human-free core zones are necessary to protect apex predators like tigers, given their sensitivity to human disturbance.
Balancing Rights and Ecology
Forest-dependent communities are not homogenous — while some demand healthcare, education, and modern facilities, others strive to preserve their traditional lifestyles. This diversity requires fine-grained, localised mechanisms rather than one-size-fits-all national policies.
Effective coexistence demands:
- Site-specific planning reflecting ecological and social realities.
- Participatory governance involving local communities, NGOs, and scientific experts.
- Monitoring mechanisms to ensure that conservation objectives are not compromised while upholding human rights.
Analytical Perspective
The policy framework signals an important ideological correction in India’s conservation narrative. It underscores that protecting biodiversity should not come at the expense of social justice. However, the challenge lies in translating intent into action within a multi-layered governance system dominated by bureaucratic inertia and conservation orthodoxy.
Moving away from fortress conservation must not mean abandoning scientific rigour. The goal should be to evolve a hybrid model — one that ensures inviolate core zones for tigers where essential, but integrates human communities through sustainable buffer zone management and community stewardship.
Conclusion
India’s new community-centred conservation policy is a step towards a more democratic and humane environmental governance model. It recognises that tiger protection and tribal welfare are interdependent, not conflicting goals.
Yet, the policy’s success will depend on inter-ministerial coordination, state-level compliance, and local empowerment. Without these, the risk of fragmented implementation remains high.
Ultimately, India’s conservation future lies in finding a middle path — where science, law, and compassion converge to protect both people and predators in the shared landscapes they call home.
UPSC Mains Practice Question:
The new community-centred conservation framework redefines India’s tiger protection model from exclusion to coexistence. Critically examine its implications for ecological and social sustainability.
