Relevance for UPSC:GS Paper II (Governance, Tribal Affairs) and GS Paper III (Environment & Ecology) 

In a significant policy clarification, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) has stated that the relocation of villages from inside tiger reserves must be done only on a voluntary basis, and that too in rare and exceptional circumstances. This directive aims to ensure that conservation efforts under the Project Tiger framework do not come at the cost of tribal rights and livelihoods guaranteed under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006.

The Background

India’s 54 tiger reserves host around 3,682 tigers (as per the 2022 Tiger Census) and cover nearly 2.3% of the country’s total land area. Many of these reserves include villages inhabited by Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFDs) who have lived there for generations.
While the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) advocates creating “inviolate areas” to ensure unhindered tiger movement and breeding, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs emphasises that human displacement cannot be forced and must strictly comply with legal safeguards.

Legal and Policy Framework

1. Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (as amended in 2006): Under Section 38V(4)(i), relocation of forest-dwelling communities from core tiger habitats can occur only if “absolutely necessary” and on mutually agreed terms.
   
2. Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006: No relocation can take place unless the recognition and settlement of forest rights have been completed. Forest-dwellers have the right to free, prior, and informed consent before any relocation.
   
3. Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA): In Scheduled Areas, Gram Sabhas must be consulted before any project affecting land or habitat is approved.
   
4. NTCA’s “Voluntary Village Relocation Guidelines”: States are required to offer affected families two options:
   • Cash Compensation: A fixed financial package for relocation.
   • Land-based Rehabilitation: Provision of alternative land, housing, and community facilities.

The Ministry’s directive reiterates that any deviation from these legal frameworks would violate both statutory rights and constitutional principles of justice.

Why the Issue Matters

• Ecological Argument: Tigers require large, undisturbed habitats for breeding and territory maintenance. Human activity—agriculture, livestock grazing, or resource collection—can fragment these areas and lead to human-wildlife conflict.
  
• Humanitarian and Rights Concerns: Tribes and forest-dwelling communities depend on forests not only for subsistence but also for cultural and spiritual identity. Forced relocation often leads to economic marginalisation, loss of livelihood, and disruption of traditional lifestyles.
  
• Implementation Gaps: Several reports suggest that “voluntary” relocation has, at times, involved coercion, misinformation, or incomplete rehabilitation. Many displaced families face challenges accessing promised land titles, employment, or social infrastructure.
  

Challenges in Balancing Conservation and Community Welfare

1. Voluntariness vs Coercion: Ensuring that consent is truly free and informed remains difficult, particularly where communities lack legal awareness.
   
2. Inadequate Rehabilitation: Compensation and alternative livelihood schemes are often delayed or insufficient, leaving families worse off after relocation.
   
3. Administrative Coordination: Poor coordination between the NTCA, State Forest Departments, and Tribal Welfare Departments weakens policy enforcement.
   
4. Cultural Displacement: Relocation disrupts traditional practices tied to forests — from festivals and rituals to indigenous ecological knowledge systems.
   
5. Legal Overlaps: Different interpretations of the FRA and Wildlife Act create confusion over whether conservation or rights recognition takes precedence.
   

Explanation of Important Terms

1. Inviolate Habitat: A core zone within a tiger reserve meant to be free of human interference, allowing tigers to breed and hunt naturally.
   
2. Critical Tiger Habitat (CTH): The legally designated core area within a reserve, notified under the Wildlife Act, essential for tiger survival.
   
3. Forest Rights Act (FRA): A law recognising traditional rights of forest-dwelling communities over land, forest produce, and habitation.
   
4. Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC): The principle that communities must voluntarily agree to projects affecting them, after receiving full information.
   
5. Gram Sabha: The village-level assembly empowered under PESA and FRA to make decisions on land, forest, and resource management.
   
6. Voluntary Relocation Package: A government scheme offering either cash or land-based compensation to families choosing to relocate.
   

The Way Forward

• Inclusive Conservation: Conservation policies should recognise that tribal stewardship and traditional knowledge often contribute to biodiversity protection.
  
• Community-Led Decision-Making: Empowering Gram Sabhas and involving communities in reserve management can reduce the need for relocation altogether.
  
• Strengthened Oversight: Both the NTCA and MoTA must jointly monitor rehabilitation outcomes to ensure compliance with legal and ethical norms.
  
• Alternative Models: Co-existence models, such as community-managed buffer zones and eco-development programmes, can reconcile conservation with livelihoods.
  

Key Takeaways

• Relocation from tiger reserves should be voluntary, rare, and rights-based, never forced or arbitrary.
  
• Legal frameworks like the FRA, PESA, and Wildlife Protection Act mandate consultation, consent, and fair rehabilitation.
  
• Sustainable conservation requires integrating tribal rights, traditional knowledge, and ecological goals into one framework.
  
• Strengthening local governance and ensuring accountability in relocation processes can prevent rights violations.

One-Line Wrap:
True conservation protects both the tiger and the tribes — ensuring that every relocation is a choice, not a compulsion.

UPSC Mains Question: Discuss how voluntary relocation of forest-dwelling communities from tiger reserves can be aligned with both wildlife conservation and tribal welfare in India.