Rural road connectivity is a necessary but not sufficient condition for inclusive growth among PVTGs. Discuss.
New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) are 75 communities in 18 States and one UT. They live in small, remote habitations and are the most deprived among Scheduled Tribes. PM-JANMAN (2023) plans 8,000 km of roads for them [1]. Access has to come first, but a road only opens the door. Inclusive growth depends on what reaches the village along it.
Why connectivity is necessary
- Livelihoods: All-weather roads cut travel time and transport costs. This lets PVTGs sell forest produce and take up non-farm work. The NRIDA–IIM Kolkata impact study tracks exactly these channels [2].
- Services: Roads bring schools, health centres and banks within reach. The same study measures education, healthcare and financial-service outcomes [2].
- Enabler for other schemes: PM-JANMAN's housing, water, electricity and telecom work all need physical access for materials and staff [1].
- Policy recognition: PMGSY-IV has lower population cut-offs: 250+ in Schedule V areas and 100+ in LWE districts [3].
Why it is not sufficient
- Exclusion by threshold: Hamlets below these cut-offs still get no road [3].
- Decaying assets: 41% of PMGSY roads are in poor condition because States have not given enough maintenance funds. Contractors' low-tendering also weakens quality [4]. Once the road wears out, the gains fade.
- Hard terrain: Only 56% of LWE-area road work (RCPLWEA) was complete by January 2023. Forest clearances and law-and-order problems slowed it down [4].
- Capability gaps: Without literacy, skills and good health, a road may bring middlemen and outside traders rather than income. It also carries risks of land alienation and cultural erosion.
- Outputs, not outcomes: Kilometres built do not show welfare gained. That is why a baseline–endline impact assessment has now been commissioned [2].
Way forward
- Converge roads with PM-JANMAN's health, education and livelihood components in the same habitations [1].
- Secure upkeep: Every State should adopt a maintenance policy, and e-MARG should be used to enforce the five-year maintenance contracts [5].
- Plan with the community: Involve Gram Sabhas in choosing road alignments, in the spirit of the Fifth Schedule.
- Use the study's PVTG-specific findings to design later phases.
Roads are the base of PVTG inclusion, but they need to be backed by capabilities, services and maintenance. Combining connectivity with community-led convergence can turn access into lasting well-being. That serves Article 46's mandate to promote the interests of Scheduled Tribes and SDG 10 on reducing inequality.
Sources
- 1PIB – PM-JANMAN Scheme for PVTGs75 PVTGs in 18 States + 1 UT; 8,000 km road target; list of interventions under the mission
- 2PIB – NRIDA and IIM Kolkata Sign MoU for Four-Year Impact Assessment Study of PMGSY-IV and PM-JANMAN (2026)outcomes the study measures (livelihoods, travel time and cost, education, health, financial services); baseline–endline design
- 3PIB – Cabinet approves implementation of PMGSY-IV during FY 2024-25 to 2028-29population thresholds (250+ for Schedule V areas, 100+ for LWE districts)
- 4PRS – Standing Committee on Rural Development and Panchayati Raj report on PMGSY (2023)41% of roads in poor condition; low-tendering; RCPLWEA 56% complete
- 5PIB – Maintenance of Roads Under Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojanae-MARG and five-year maintenance contracts