The tribes of India constitute a numerically small minority, just about 9 per cent of the total population. But their expanse is vast, and their cultural imprint on Indianness way deeper than the rest—with many of them seen as descendants of the subcontinent’s original inhabitants. Spread over the length and breadth of the landmass, mostly in forested and mountainous country, they are a heterogeneous set, varying greatly in language, culture, means of primary livelihood and state of development.
Nearly 80 per cent of them are concentrated in nine states—Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Odisha and Andhra Pradesh. About 12 per cent live in the northeastern states, five per cent in the south and three per cent in the northern region. Of the 700-plus recognised tribes, only two have more than 10 million population and 30 more than 500,000.
When India adopted its Constitution in 1950, the communities identified and enumerated as tribes by the British government were rechristened Scheduled Tribes (ST). No criteria were defined for the recognition of the STs. Later, the Lokur Committee of 1961-62 recommended five criteria for their identification that now seem remnants of colonial anthropology—primitive traits, distinctive culture, geographical isolation, shyness of contact with the community at large and backwardness. Despite relying on tropes that fit ill with contemporary understanding, those criteria linger in the formal lexicon because the idea of a ‘tribal’ marks out not just a sociocultural entity but also a politico-administrative category: it is on these bases that administrative and political concessions are extended to them. Including reservations in education and employment. Indeed, when the Gujjars agitated for tribal status a few years ago, it was denied to them because—after holding up trains for weeks and other modes of public protest—the courts found them lacking in ‘shyness of contact’!
Two distinct administrative arrangements have been made for India’s tribal populations in the Constitution in the form of the Fifth and Sixth Schedules, theoretically applicable in places where they are numerically dominant. The Fifth Schedule provides for constitutional safeguards to tribals living in “scheduled areas” in 10 states—Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, MP, Maharashtra, Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Rajasthan. The President can declare an area ‘scheduled’ based on some criteria: high share of tribal population, social and economic backwardness, and the possibility of a compact administrative unit. The discretionary powers of the governor play a critical rol 
The Sixth Schedule covers the administration and control of 10 autonomous tribal regions in Assam, Tripura, Meghalaya and Mizoram. Here, greater powers are devolved to the Autonomous District Councils (ADCs), which have significant legislative, judicial and administrative autonomy. As the Sixth Schedule has been more empowering than the Fifth, several other regions, including parts of Chhattisgarh, Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh, have been demanding this provision.
The key concern everywhere, of course, is people-oriented development. India has multiple welfare programmes for the socioeconomic uplift of tribals. Around 40 central ministries and departments earmark 4.3 to 17.5 per cent of their total scheme allocation every year as tribal sub plan or scheduled tribe component funds. These allocations rose by 50 per cent between 2017-18 and 2020-21: from Rs 22,906.54 crore to Rs 34,492.87. The ministry of tribal affairs provides additional funds to these initiatives to plug the gaps. Its budget shot up by 53 per cent from Rs 5,494.51 crore in 2020-21 to Rs 8,451.92 crore this fiscal. Besides these, the Pradhan Mantri Adi Adarsh Gram Yojna (PMAAGY) aims to provide basic infrastructure in 36,428 villages with significant tribal population. And the Pradhan Mantri Janjatiya Vikas Mission (PMJVM), with a total outlay of Rs 1,612.27 crore for five years (2021-26), is designed to facilitate tribal entrepreneurship initiatives and livelihood opportunities.
On almost all health indicators, tribals have fared much worse than the general population
Despite all this, socio-economic indicators suggest tribals are among the poorest and most marginalised sections of India. Some 90 per cent live in rural areas, according to the 2011 Census—which is natural, given their old life patterns. But in terms of poverty, there is huge disparity between tribals and the rest—45 per cent of rural tribals were in the BPL category in 2011-12 as against 26 per cent of all rural Indians. Their literacy rate in 2011 was just 59 per cent, compared to 74 per cent for India. On almost all health indicators, such as infant mortality rate, underweight children and anaemia in women, tribals have fared much worse than the rest. This stark contrast further alienates many tribals, with human development nowhere commensurate with the official spend. A focused, inclusive approach is clearly imperative. With a tribal now as the first citizen, this could be the beginning of a new era.