Historically, the people considered tribals were living in remote forest and hilly areas as part and parcel of India population.  They had enjoyed an autonomous life of their own. Colonial policy towards tribe resulted in exploitation of the tribes and breakage of their nexus with ecological environment. The past experiences of the policies of isolation and assimilation followed by the colonial government introduced disparities in tribal situation. The western notion of modernity followed by the administrators and missionaries resulted in attempts to assimilate and them to the national mainstream. Certain tribes were left isolated and some others like parts of Kerala, Tamilnadu  and north east got modern education. 

This forced the thinkers and social reformers to go a midway which might have been more fruitful. The ideal of “unity in diversity” was followed in order to reconcile divergent interests with Indian nationalism. The social reformers, politicians, anthropologists as experts on the tribal ways of life and the administration combined their skills and adopted an integrated approach towards the tribals. Therefore, policy of integration has found acceptance particularly after independence. The fundamental premise of this policy is to integrate the tribal groups in the national mainstream without compromising with their own identity. This policy gets its broad conception from the late Jawaharlal Nehru’s “Tribal Panchsheel[1]”, i.e., five fundamental principles for the tribal upliftment, as an integrational approach which was later confirmed by the researches of anthropologists. The principles are:

• 1.   People should develop along the lines of their own genius and we should avoid imposing anything on them. We should try to encourage in every way their own traditional arts and culture.
• 2.   Tribal rights to land and forests should be respected.
• 3.   We should try to train and build up a team of their own people to do the work of administration and development. Some technical personnel form outside will no doubt, be needed, especially in the beginning. But we should avoid introducing too many outsiders into tribal territory.
• 4.   We should not over administer these areas or overwhelm them with a multiplicity of schemes. We should rather work through, and not in rivalry to, their own social and cultural institutions.
• 5.   We should judge results, not by statistics or the amount of money spent, but by the quality of human character that is evolved.

The tribal development programmes undertaken after Independence aimed at extending the fruits of development to the tribes without comprising of their identity. The term tribal welfare has been used to cover an all-round development of the tribals as a weaker section of the Indian population. The Constitution of India envisages that “the State shall promote with special care and educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes ands shall protest them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation”. 

Therefore , Constitutional of India gives a special status to the tribes for the purpose of their development, without interfering in their social life directly. All these initiative at the level of ideology must conform to the policy of integration.

Particular approaches, i.e.: (i) single-line administration, (ii) comparatively small districts due to communicational difficulties, (iii) area development approach to develop the area in its totality in the Fourth Plan and drawing the Sub-Plans in the Fifth Five Year Plans are a clear reflection of the policy of integration with the regional and national setting. It is also a good sign that a recently all the three districts of Nagaland have been bifurcated into seven districts and one big district of Madhya Pradesh, i.e. Raipur, have been bifurcated into two districts. The single district, Bastar, has been put under a Commissioner. In Bihar, too, the number of districts has been doubled to give better administration and to speed up development.

Certain constitutional provision like 5^th schedule promise separate administration structure for Scheduled and Tribal areas. Thus keeping the tribes isolated. The sub-committee, with Shri A. V. Thakkar, , as Chairman, had emphasized that the great need of the aboriginal was protection from alienation of land and virtual serfdom under the  moneylender.  This clearly indicates that the Constituent Assembly had never recommended isolation of some area as specific area but had simply wanted the end of the exploitation.  In the different Five Year Plans the tribal development faced financial segregation.  The fund meant for “tribal welfare” was kept reserved for tribal development. Even Verrier Elwin, Advise on tribal affairs to the Government of Assam regarding isolation [2]of tribals groups in certain extreme cases was later, modified by him, in the second edition of his book (1959),he said,  “we do not want to preserve the tribesmen as museum specimens, but equally we do not want to stop the clock of  progress but we do want to see that it keeps the right time.  We may not believe in the myth of noble savage but we do not want to create a class of ignoble……”

There is no denying the fact that if one looks from the broader perspective in the last seventy years of planning the policy is one of integration.

Policy of assimilation

The assimilation either directly of indirectly[3] of the tribal people with the rest of the population is another trend which has picked up firstly as a continuous process of the culture contact with the neighboring population and secondly as an outcome of government policy though not deliberate. Construction of developmental projects leads to submergence of land. Unfortunately, the area that comes under submergence lies in the tribal areas. Entire villages and close-knit tribal communities get displaced and uprooted from their habitat. Similarly large-scale mining of coal, iron, bauxite, copper, limestone and diamond which have already come up in the tribal areas devastating large areas and displacing local communities. Exposure to same education system haves also created problems like a perceived threat of identity.

Forest and tribals

Soon after independence the Government of India considered the preparation of a fresh forest policy at the time of initiating planned development effort. The National Forest Policy resolution stated to denote same rethinking, seems to, be by and large, an extension of the colonial policy. The resolution, claimed to take into account factors like pressure of population, climatic importance of forests, their economic importance, and country’s defence needs. The destruction of forest for the  construction of roads and other large projects was justified in the name of national interest whereas cultivation of land shown as forest land though without any tree cover was treated as encroachment. The salient features of the policy, as far as tribals were concerned, were :

• i)   This policy totally banned release of forest lands for cultivation.
• ii)  Villager’s needs were not to be met at all from the reserved forests and only village forests (almost non-existent) were to serve the needs.
• iii) Rights/privileges became rights and concessions and their recording procedures were made difficult. Grazing was drastically curbed.
• iv)              Rights to water, digging of well, collecting of dead wood, fishing, hunting, etc, were also curtailed.

v)         Private forests of the tribals were also controlled.

vi)        The policy was opposed to shifting cultivation which was further restricted.

But the Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes Commission (1961) brought to the fore the changes in the rights of tribal communities over forests and forest produce. They highlighted the undermining of their rights and claims and reluctance of forest officials to allows the facilities. The Commission specifically mentioned vast areas of treeless forests and the notification of large areas which had never been actually afforested by the forest Department. The Commission also pointed out the condition and inadequacy of village forests, existence of near serfdom in forest villages and other problems faced by the tribals.

The report of the National Commission on Agriculture (1976) dealing with forestry, however, took a contrary view. The Commission recommended a drastic reduction in people’s rights to forest, further strengthening of forest legislation, and a more effective commercialization-  of forests. Forest (Conservation) Act 1980  imposed a total ban on any conversion of land notified under forests for any other use. The law has made it difficult to obtain even small patches of land necessary to provide infra-structural facilities like electric lines, schools, etc in the tribal areas. However, certain States like Gujarat, taking shelter under legal lacunas, have been releasing forest lands for large projects without any regulation by the Centre.

The Ministry of Home Affairs had appointed a committee to suggest guidelines to reorient Forest Policy to serve the tribal economy under the chairmanship of the reputed anthropologist, Dr. B.K. Roy Burman. Its report (1982) emphasized the importance of forests in tribal life and pointed out that besides getting fuel, fodder, wood for housing and other needs, the tribal also earned one-third of their income from MFP. The committee noted that forestry had gradually come to be linked with the consumption of timber in urban areas and industries. They felt that efforts to develop imaginative  forestry programs for the benefit of tribals had not been undertaken and recommended that :

• (i)   A triangular forest policy should have the individual tribal, local tribal communities and national interest as its three corners;
• (ii) Forest policy must fulfill the needs of ecological security, food, fruits, fuel etc. and the needs of cottage, medium and large industry;
• (iii)             Community’s participation and role in forestry should be made unambiguous and active; and
• (iv)             Social forestry must be expanded to ensure supply of community needs.

National Forest Policy 1988 , is significant in the sense that it eliminates some of the insensitivity of forest policy to the tribals and puts forth a new strategy. The objectives of the policy have been spelt out much more clearly to include maintenance of environmental stability; conservation of natural heritage, checking soil erosion and denudation, massive afforestation and social forestry programs to meet the needs of rural and urban population, efficient utilization of forest produce and creation of massive peoples movement for achieving these objects. The policy, however, relates rights/concessions for the local communities to the carrying capacity of the forest which is a very controversial issue and a vague test. The tribals feel that defining this concept should not be left to the forest officials alone. Moreover, the resolution emphasizes social forestry as the main source for meeting the needs of the forest dwellers. But development of social forestry, again, is very much, in the hands of the Forest Department, who, it has been seen in a many tribal areas like. Bastar, Nilgiris, etc., have planted such commercial species as pine and eucalyptus which are of no use to the tribal households. It is also seen at while the forest produce from reserved and protected forests is given for industrial use at throw away prices, the needs of the tribal handicraft workers are fulfilled at much higher prices. There are some other difficulties with this policy. It bans totally the entry of tribals to reserved forests and to supply them rights/concessions only from forest depots. It is known that the these depots are inadequate by way of numbers and locations and tribals face exploitation and harassment in these depots.

The 1988 policy breaks a new ground in the case of shifting cultivation. It makes a general resolve to find out way to discourage shifting cultivation and take up social forestry and plantations in the areas damaged by shifting cultivation. But shifting cultivation is not of a homogeneous variety and some areas may even be suitable for shifting cultivation. Suitable packages of alternative cultivation/plantation have to be evolved for different areas at micro level. As the Working Group for VIII Plan has pointed out, these efforts are still in an initial stage.

Moreover, the tribals were finding the restrictions quite confusing. Good forests have been clear-felled to make room for industries and mines. Major river valley projects have submerged large chunks of forests. Large thermal power stations and major iron ore, coal and bauxite mines have come up in the midst of forests causing irreparable damage to the environment.

The state refuses to recognise forests as a life-support of the tribal communities living in and around them. It exercises first right on this asset and has persisted in pursuing the anti-people colonial forest policy in an even more unscientific way inimical both to sustainable management of this asset and the tribal communities who draw sustenance from it.

• THE SCHEDULED TRIBES (RECOGNITION OF FOREST RIGHTS) ACT , 2005
• The Bill is based on an admission that historical injustice has been done to tribals in taking away their land in order to reserve forests for imperial and commercial purposes.

Thus over all the government has been following a policy of integration towards tribes. But there are other aspects of the policy which has resulted in the dissatisfaction among the tribes.

Issues of autonomy

The attempts of Integration after Independence have raised number of issues leading to disparity in the development of different tribes in different regions. 

• Tribes in number of areas have accused the state Government for not giving enough attention to their problem and there by developing the perception of discrimination.
• Exposing tribes to the same education system has resulted in perception of threat to identity.
• This unrest becomes aggravated by non-recognition of tribal cultural / languages at the national or the state level. Due to non-availability of written script the tribes are unable to preserve their culture heritage.
• In some areas, the geographically boundaries tribes, do not conform to state boundaries, thereby leading to dissatisfaction because of differential treatment to the members of the same tribe. All these have led to the generation of social movement among tribes generally expressing their distribution through demands of autonomy.

The various all- India tribal Conferences organized by the Government or actively supported by it indirectly created solidarity in tribal India. But he found in this only additional encouragement to the demands for autonomy in some parts of the country. They take the forms of movements[4] for autonomy, for creation of sub regional autonomy, separate states, demands for secession. Autonomy demands are also expressed in terms of freedom to pursue their own culture. Movements for demand for recognition to tribal languages for protection of the culture have been seen in different parts of the country. Autonomy has also been understood in terms of economy of the “sons of the soil” from the outside exploiters.  Tribal movements find their expression in all forms of insurgency, ethnic conflicts, demands from the state, political mobilization etc.