Reassessing Tribal Classification in India

GS II-Vulnerable section

Context

Recent anthropological research challenges the outdated Lokur Committee criteria (1965) for identifying Scheduled Tribes (STs), advocating for a spectrum-based classification that better reflects India’s diverse tribal identities.

Existing Tribal Classification System

• Lokur Committee (1965) defined STs based on five criteria:
  1. Primitive Traits
  2. Distinctive Culture
  3. Geographical Isolation
  4. Shyness of Contact
  5. Backwardness

• Criticism of the Existing Criteria:

• • Considered outdated, impractical, and derogatory in modern contexts.
  • No tribal community fully aligns with all five parameters.
  • Despite expert recommendations, the government continues using these outdated parameters for ST classification.

Need for a Spectrum-Based Approach

• Accommodating Tribal Diversity: The rigid binary classification fails to capture the socio-cultural variations among India’s tribes.
• Graded Tribalness Matrix:
  • Proposal to assess tribal characteristics on a spectrum rather than a fixed definition.
  • Suggested framework includes up to 150 indicators, covering:
    • Social structures
    • Marriage customs
    • Rituals & traditions
    • Linguistic uniqueness
    • Material culture
    • Kinship patterns

• Practical Advantages:

  • Enables a more accurate ethnographic assessment of ST status.
  • Ensures inclusion of deserving communities without political bias.

Challenges in Defining ‘Tribalness’

• Subjectivity in Indicators: Assigning weight to social, cultural, and economic factors remains complex.
• Regional Variations: Tribal communities differ widely across India, making standardization difficult.
• Ethnic Conflicts: Inclusion of new groups may trigger disputes, such as the Meitei-ST demand in Manipur.
• Institutional Delays: Government inertia in updating classification methods despite growing consensus.

Potential Implications of a New Classification System

• Policy Reform: A refined classification ensures fairer distribution of reservations and welfare benefits.
• Academic Contribution: Strengthens the link between anthropological research and policymaking.
• Legal & Administrative Adjustments: Requires revised research methodologies and legal frameworks.
• Community Relations: Potential risk of tensions between groups over ST recognition.

Key Institutions Involved

• Anthropological Survey of India (AnSI): Conducting research to redefine ST classification.
• National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST): Evaluating policy implications and recommendations.
• Indian Anthropology Congress: Hosting expert discussions on tribal classification frameworks.

Way Forward

• Reassessment of ST Criteria: Move towards a dynamic, evidence-based classification.
• Consensus-Based Framework: Engage tribal communities, scholars, and policymakers in defining ‘tribalness’.
• Periodic Re-Evaluation: Regularly update ST classifications to reflect socio-economic changes.
• Strengthening Ethnographic Research: Enhance data collection methods for more accurate classifications.