🗞️ Why in News Newly formed states with large forest covers and tribal populations (Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand) consistently struggle with extreme poverty despite rich natural resources — a paradox driven by policy misunderstanding.
The Core Problem
- Policymakers focus on GDP-driven “economic poverty” (favouring mining, timber contractors, highways)
- Ignore “ecological poverty” — destruction of the natural resource base (forests, water, herbs) upon which rural poor depend for survival
- Adivasis being transformed into the “new Dalits” — displaced from lands, forced into undignified urban labour
Impact
- Massive land alienation and loss of adivasi culture
- Rise of Naxalite movements fuelled by resentment against autocratic forest management and corporate exploitation
- Saranda Forest (West Singhbhum, Jharkhand) — Asia’s largest sal forest — threatened by iron ore mining (Chiria village) and timber extraction
Case Study: Ho Adivasi People
- Austroasiatic Munda ethnic group in Kolhan State, Jharkhand
- Known for unique traditional governance systems and deep connection with Saranda forest
Way Forward
- State CMs must act as “Chief Environmental Officers”
- Shift to decentralised natural resource governance — hand forest regeneration ownership to local communities
- Leverage biodiversity for sustainable economic gains (Kerala model for herbal/Ayurvedic industries)
UPSC Angle
- GS1: Tribal society, social structure, poverty
- GS2: Governance, Centre-State relations, Fifth Schedule
- GS3: Environment, forest policy, Naxalism-development nexus