Anthropologists call for overhaul of criteria used for identifying STs

Anthropologists call for overhaul of criteria used for identifying STs

Sub: Geo

Sec: Human Geo

Context:

• Anthropologists and experts are calling for a paradigm shift in defining “tribes” in India.
• Instead of a binary classification, a “spectrum of tribalness” is being proposed.
• The demand comes amid rising claims for ST status, including by the Meitei community in Manipur.

Current Criteria for ST Classification

• The Union government follows the criteria set by the Lokur Committee (1965), which include:

1. Primitive traits
2. Distinctive culture
3. Geographical isolation
4. Shyness of contact with the larger community
5. Backwardness

• These criteria are now criticized as obsolete, condescending, and meaningless by experts.

Need for a New Approach

• No community fully meets the existing criteria.
• Instead of rigid criteria, scholars propose a matrix or spectrum with weighted indicators to assess a community’s degree of tribalness.
• The Anthropological Survey of India (AnSI) and National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) are deliberating on a systematic tool for classification.

Proposed Indicators for Defining ‘Tribalness’

• Experts suggest considering both tangible and intangible indicators, including:

1. Social institutions – Marriage, kinship, classification of relatives
2. Rituals and practices
3. Language and dialect
4. Material culture – Headgear, weaponry
5. Self-identification of communities

• A possible tool may include up to 150 indicators, rather than just five.

Concept Note & Policymaking

• A concept note highlights the “persistent difficulty” in defining tribes.
• A systematic classification tool will help Tribal Research Institutions (TRIs) in preparing ethnographic reports for policymaking.

Growing Demands for ST Status

• India currently has 756 ST entries (including sub-entries).
• Since the 2011 Census, 27 communities have been added.
• Hundreds of communities seek inclusion, sometimes leading to inter-community conflicts (e.g., Meitei vs. Kuki-Zo & Naga tribes in Manipur).

Civilisational Approach vs. Evolutionary Approach

• Scholars advocate moving from an evolutionary approach (used in Australia, China) to a historical or civilisational approach.
• This ensures that communities are seen as they perceive themselves, rather than as the “other” studied by outsiders.

Conclusion

• A revised classification system will help in better governance, equitable distribution of benefits, and conflict resolution.
• The focus should shift to cultural, historical, and self-identification aspects, rather than outdated criteria.