Evaluate the role of community institutions such as EDCs and JFMCs in reducing human–wildlife conflict when apex predators are reintroduced.

On 2 October 2026, tigress T138 from Valmiki Tiger Reserve (Bihar) was released into Buxa Tiger Reserve (West Bengal). This was Phase 1 of a tiger reintroduction programme, and the programme makes 64 Eco-Development Committees (EDCs) and Joint Forest Management Committees (JFMCs) permanent partners in coexistence [1]. These village bodies are essential for reducing conflict. However, they cannot fix the deeper causes alone.

Strengths: how community institutions reduce conflict

• Social licence: The committees hold regular dialogue with villagers, support livelihoods and share the benefits of conservation [1]. This makes local people stakeholders rather than opponents, which lowers the risk of revenge killings after livestock losses.
• Ground-level early warning: Villagers can add their own field knowledge to the radio-collar, camera-trap and field monitoring of T138 [1]. Collar alerts passed on through committees can warn villages before a tigress reaches fields or settlements.
• Less pressure on the forest: Livelihood support reduces grazing and fuelwood collection. This protects the ~380 ha of restored grassland and the 800+ chital (spotted deer) released as prey [1]. When prey is plentiful, predators are less likely to stray towards livestock.
• Shared learning: NTCA's national workshop on reintroduction "opportunities and challenges" reviewed case studies from nine reserves [2]. Lessons on community involvement can be applied across sites.

Limitations

• Structural causes are beyond their reach: Buxa lost its resident tigers even though it had been a Tiger Reserve since 1983. The causes were broken-up habitat and changes in land use [1]. Sariska and Panna also lost their tigers despite reserve status [3]. Village committees cannot reverse these problems.
• Unclear powers and benefits: The committees depend on the Forest Department. The release text does not say how much benefit villagers will receive or how compensation will be paid [1].
• Limited reach: Tigers move across the Assam–Bhutan landscape [1]. Local committees cannot manage conflict outside their own area.
• Untested at scale: Only one tigress has been released so far [1]. Conflict will grow as the population grows.

Overall, EDCs and JFMCs are the human foundation that makes reintroduction possible, but they are only one layer of the solution. Their role should be strengthened with formal links to collar data, fast and fair compensation, and cooperation with Assam and Bhutan. The goal should match the programme's own measure of success: a self-sustaining tiger population living alongside secure communities [1]. This also supports SDG 15 (Life on Land).