The attitude of viewing the 'primitive' and 'tribal' as artefacts continues in the administrative echelons, even if some enlightened social scientists see it another way. As has been seen more than once in India, the attempts at reorienting the tribes' way of living, have been overwhelmingly un-intelligent. Locked up in the jungles of south and middle Andamans, the Jarawas are one of six tribes here who shun modern living. Anthropologists who spent five months between 1998 and 2001 with them found that the Jarawas maintain a lifestyle in total harmony with their environment. Much to their surprise, the researchers learnt that this aboriginal tribe is content with its hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
Though bundled together with 698 other scheduled tribes in the country, the Jarawas by definition are considered 'primitive'. For their distinctive culture, shyness from public exposure, geographical isolation and socio-economic backwardness, Article 342 of the Indian Constitution characterises them as 'primitive'. There are 75 other tribes that are thus considered primitive; together they constitute 2.5 million primitive scheduled tribes-people representing 0.3 percent of the country´s population.
Ever since the scheduled tribes were first 'notified' in 1950, they have been seen as those who live in a pre-agricultural stage of economy, have low literacy rates and whose populations are seen to be stagnant or declining. Reason enough for the government to launch schemes that could pull these tribes into the mainstream of development. However, after five decades of investing resources on the tribes, it is clear that a majority of them are still on the margins, de-rooted from their rich cultural and ecological past. What is more, attempts at bringing 'development' their way have left them socially and environmentally pauperised.
But if the draft National Policy on Tribals, released in early 2004, is any indication, no lessons seem to have been learnt. No wonder to find here a renewed emphasis on schemes that promise infrastructure and human-capital investment to bring a turnabout in their lives. Critical to this approach is the dominant understanding that the tribals are people with severe limitations, who lack power to make a case for themselves, and are limited by intellectual and financial capital. If this were not to be the assumption, how could the policy lay emphasis on strengthening the allopathic system of medicine in tribal areas while acknowledging the fact that tribal people have a well-developed system of medicine based on herbs and other natural products? Contradicting itself, the draft policy seeks to preserve and promote their traditional knowledge and wisdom as well. However, it fails on details when it comes to preserving the tribal knowledge-system and benefit-sharing in the event of knowledge transfer.