Abstract

The failure of the colonial Indian state to institutionalise, intervene and regulate development policy for the benefit of people, especially for the tribals, has led to a new wave constitutional planning for affirmative action in postcolonial India. This wave has basically been associated with the shift of power from the colonial rule to the nationalistic ethos reflected during the Indian freedom struggle, giving prominence to the state for the welfare activities with a special provision for the development of the tribals. However, after more than six decades of Indian independence and planning for development has failed to achieve the basic developmental objectives while looking at tribal development. It indicates that the postcolonial Indian state has also failed by and large to institutionalise, intervene and regulate development policy to achieve the objective of the welfare of the marginalised people, that is, tribals. In such a context, the currency of the so-called transformative language, such as ‘development’, ‘empowerment’, ‘participation’ or ‘capacity building’, is undermined by the process of ‘integration and assimilation’ approach towards the tribal development policy of postcolonial Indian state. Furthermore, with the inception of new economic policy (liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation), shifting power from the state to the market rather than to the poor made tribal development policy more vulnerable. Ultimately, both the weakening of state and its welfare policies indirectly denied tribal development. Thus, the policy for tribal development and an alternatives political leverage is necessary for appropriate development policy and practice for the tribals. This chapter seeks to discuss tribal development policy and its history of denials for development to the tribal people of India. This chapter also tries to interrogate the idea of ‘social capital’ in the process of the discussion on tribal development in India. The contemporary policy makers of tribal development in India were putting blame on the lack of the use of social capital as the major factor for underdevelopment of tribals and their area. It looks as if it is one of the ways to shift the institutional responsibility of the Indian state towards its historically deprived citizens, the tribals. The chapter tries to question the bureaucratic and apolitical answers to tribal underdevelopment and presents the paradigm of development policy for tribals as well.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call