UPSC Anthropology 2025

Write short notes demands concise, information-dense responses for each sub-part with precise terminology. Allocate ~30 words/2 minutes per sub-part (equal marks distribution). Structure each note with: definition → key features → example/theorist → significance. No introduction or conclusion needed across parts; maximize content density within 150 words each.

• (a) Mendelian traits: dominance, segregation, independent assortment with examples (blood groups, attached earlobes); non-Mendelian: polygenic inheritance, mitochondrial DNA, genomic imprinting, epistasis
• (b) Purum kinship: Das's study of Manipur, marriage rules with Maka and Chaka, alliance theory vs. descent theory debate, Levi-Strauss's elementary structures
• (c) Osteodontokeratic culture: Raymond Dart's term for Australopithecine tool use, bone-tooth-horn implements, Makapansgat evidence, debate with Leakey over true tool-making
• (d) Smell in primates: sternal glands in lemurs, brachial gland in slow lorises, territorial marking, reproductive signaling, predator avoidance, reduced olfaction in haplorhines vs. strepsirrhines
• (e) Embodiment: Mauss's techniques of the body, Bourdieu's habitus, Csordas's paradigm, phenomenological approach, Indian examples: yoga, classical dance forms as embodied culture

The directive 'discuss' requires a comprehensive, analytical treatment with balanced coverage across all three sub-parts. Allocate approximately 40% of word budget to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief integrated introduction → systematic treatment of (a) Miocene fossils with evolutionary significance, (b) comparative symbolic anthropology, and (c) political economy integration → synthesizing conclusion on anthropology's interdisciplinary nature.

• Part (a): Major Miocene hominoid sites (Ramapithecus/Sivapithecus from Siwaliks, Proconsul from East Africa, Dryopithecus from Europe) with their morphological features and dating
• Part (a): Significance of Miocene hominoids in understanding ape-human divergence, dental evidence for hominid status, and current reassessment of Ramapithecus as ancestral orangutan
• Part (b): Geertz's 'thick description,' webs of significance, interpretive anthropology, and culture as text; contrast with Turner's processual, performative approach focusing on social drama, liminality, and symbols as generating social action
• Part (b): Key distinctions—Geertz's static, semiotic, literary model versus Turner's dynamic, ritual-centered, conflict-resolution framework; both reject structural-functionalism but differ on agency
• Part (c): Political economy perspective (Wolf, Mintz) emphasizing colonialism, capitalism, and power structures shaping human biology and ecology
• Part (c): Integration with ecological/adaptability approaches: critical medical anthropology (Singer), political ecology of health, and how economic forces constrain biological adaptation (e.g., nutritional transitions, disease patterns)
• Part (c): Bio-cultural synthesis showing how political-economic forces become embodied through stress, growth patterns, and epidemiological profiles—Indian examples like Green Revolution impacts on rural health

The directive 'discuss' demands a comprehensive, analytical treatment with balanced argumentation. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief integrated introduction → systematic treatment of each sub-part with clear demarcations → synthesizing conclusion that links nutritional anthropology, culture theory, and kinship methods to contemporary anthropological practice.

• Part (a): Anthropometric, biochemical, clinical, and dietary assessment methods for nutritional status; intersectionality of ecology (seasonal food availability, agro-ecosystems), culture (food taboos, commensality, gendered food distribution), and social inequality (caste, class, gender-based deprivation) in shaping nutritional outcomes
• Part (a): Specific Indian examples such as protein-calorie malnutrition studies, ICDS data, or tribal nutrition surveys (e.g., Dangis, Birhors) demonstrating ecological-cultural-social intersections
• Part (b): Critical examination of the 'integrated-closed' system model (Radcliffe-Brown, Malinowski's functionalism); drawbacks including inability to explain culture change, hybridity, globalization flows, and internal contradictions; alternative frameworks (Barth's transactionalism, Bourdieu's practice theory, Appadurai's -scapes)
• Part (b): Contemporary Indian illustrations: diasporic cultural formations, urban slum hybrid identities, or digital cultural flows that defy closed-system assumptions
• Part (c): Clear differentiation: pedigree analysis (medical-genetic focus, individual proband, inheritance patterns, Mendelian tracking) versus genealogical analysis (anthropological kinship focus, relational networks, marriage alliances, descent systems); historical development from Morgan to Rivers to contemporary genetic anthropology
• Part (c): Applications: pedigree in disease genetics (sickle cell, thalassemia studies in Indian populations); genealogical method in village studies (Srinivas's Rampura), kinship terminologies, and forensic anthropology; convergence in anthropological genetics

The directive 'elucidate' demands clear, explanatory exposition with illustrative examples. Structure: Introduction defining anthropology's interdisciplinary nature; Part (a) ~40% (20 marks) covering four-field integration, scientific methods and humanistic interpretation with Indian examples like N.K. Bose's work; Part (b) ~30% (15 marks) on Mousterian tools, Levallois technique, Neanderthal makers with South Asian parallels; Part (c) ~30% (15 marks) critically examining Frazer's stages (magic→religion→science), then discussing secularization, fundamentalism and religion's public role in modern India; Conclusion synthesizing how anthropology bridges knowledge systems.

• Part (a): Anthropology as bridge—biological (scientific) and cultural (humanistic) dimensions; four-field approach; holistic methodology combining quantitative and qualitative methods
• Part (a): Specific illustrations—archaeological dating techniques vs. interpretive ethnography; N.K. Bose's integrative approach; M.N. Srinivas's 'sanskritization' as scientific-humanistic synthesis
• Part (b): Mousterian tool tradition—Levallois prepared-core technique, flake tools, scrapers, points; temporal-spatial distribution (Middle Palaeolithic, ~300,000-30,000 BP, Europe, West Asia, North Africa)
• Part (b): Mousterian makers—Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis), their cognitive capabilities, burial practices, symbolic behavior; Indian context: Middle Palaeolithic tools from Didwana, Nevasa, Bhimbetka
• Part (c): Frazer's evolutionary scheme—magic (sympathetic/contagious), religion (propitiation of gods), science (rational control); intellectualist theory; criticism by Malinowski (functionalism), Evans-Pritchard (rationality of Azande)
• Part (c): Religion in modernity—secularization thesis vs. desecularization; fundamentalism, commodification of religion; Indian examples: Ayodhya movement, Pentecostal growth, syncretic traditions; public anthropology of religion

The directive 'Write notes on' demands concise, information-dense responses for each sub-part with equal weight (10 marks each). Allocate approximately 30 words per mark, giving ~150 words per sub-part. Structure each note with a precise definition, 2-3 explanatory points, and one illustrative example or application. No introduction or conclusion is needed for the composite answer; begin directly with part (a) and proceed sequentially through (e). Manage time strictly: ~6 minutes per sub-part to complete within 30 minutes total.

• (a) Multispecies ethnography (Haraway, Tsing) on human-animal-plant entanglements; multi-sited ethnography (Marcus) on translocal fieldwork across sites; critical ethnography (Madison, Thomas) on power, reflexivity and social justice orientation
• (b) Grandmother hypothesis (Hawkes, O'Connell) on post-reproductive longevity enhancing inclusive fitness; mother hypothesis on maternal investment trade-offs; rare occurrence of menopause among primates (only humans, orcas, pilot whales)
• (c) Principle of spontaneous fission of 238U to 238Pu and recoil tracks in minerals/glass; etching and track counting under microscope; applications to archaeological glass, obsidian hydration, tephrochronology, and early hominin sites like Hadar, Ethiopia
• (d) Maternal inheritance, high mutation rate, lack of recombination; molecular clock for 'Mitochondrial Eve' (~150-200 kya in Africa); haplogroups L0-L6 and dispersal out of Africa; limitations (nuclear DNA integration, selection pressures)
• (e) Barker hypothesis on developmental origins of health and disease (DOHaD); thrifty phenotype; epigenetic programming in utero; Indian evidence from Pune, Mysore cohorts on low birth weight and adult diabetes/CVD risk; policy implications for maternal nutrition

The directive 'discuss' for part (a) demands a comprehensive treatment with critical examination, while 'justify' in (b) requires argumentation with evidence, and 'describe' in (c) calls for systematic exposition. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, with ~30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure with a brief integrated introduction, three distinct sections addressing each sub-part with clear sub-headings, and a unified conclusion linking genetic insights to broader anthropological methodology.

• Part (a): Definition of genetic markers (SNPs, STRs, RFLPs, mtDNA, Y-chromosome markers) and their technical characteristics; applications in population variation studies including human migration patterns and phylogenetic reconstruction; disease association studies covering GWAS, pharmacogenomics, and Mendelian disorders; forensic applications including DNA fingerprinting, CODIS database, and disaster victim identification
• Part (b): Transition from typological/racial anthropology to population genetics and evolutionary synthesis; key developments including Dobzhansky's work, Washburn's 'New Physical Anthropology' (1951), molecular revolution with PCR and sequencing technologies; shift from static classification to dynamic evolutionary processes; integration of quantitative methods and statistical rigor
• Part (c): Theoretical perspectives including Boasian relativism, Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (linguistic determinism vs. relativism), Malinowski's context theory, Hymes' ethnography of communication; relationship between culture, language and thought as mediated through these frameworks; contemporary developments in cognitive linguistics
• Integration of Indian context: Indian Genome Variation Consortium data for part (a); Indian anthropological institutional shift post-1950s for part (b); Indian linguistic diversity examples (Dravidian vs. Indo-Aryan) for part (c)
• Critical evaluation of limitations: ethical concerns in genetic studies, reductionist critiques of molecular approaches, challenges to strong linguistic determinism
• Applied synthesis connecting genetic markers to linguistic anthropology through studies of human dispersal and language family correlations

The question demands critical discussion across three distinct domains: marriage/kinship theory, origins of agriculture, and African paleoanthropology. Allocate approximately 40% word budget to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure with a brief composite introduction, three clearly demarcated sections addressing each sub-part with internal critical analysis, and a unified conclusion synthesizing how anthropological theory evolves through empirical challenges.

• For (a): Analysis of how same-sex marriages, polyandry (Toda, Jaunsari), and matriliny (Nayar, Khasi) challenged classical descent theory and led to Schneider's cultural critique of kinship as biology-based
• For (a): Discussion of Strathern's 'After Nature' and Carsten's 'substance' theory showing how marriage variation forced rethinking of social reproduction beyond Euro-American nuclear family model
• For (b): Evaluation of Boserup's population pressure theory, Sauerian 'domestication of environment' hypothesis, and Hayden's competitive feasting model regarding agricultural origins
• For (b): Analysis of Neolithic Revolution impacts—sedentism, social stratification, health decline (Cohen-Armelagos), and emergence of surplus-based political complexity at sites like Mehrgarh
• For (c): Critical assessment of 'Out of Africa' model (molecular evidence, fossil record at Omo-Kibish, Herto) versus multiregional continuity, addressing critiques of Eurocentric bias in paleoanthropology
• For (c): Discussion of Saharan pump hypothesis, Rift Valley as evolutionary theater, and recent Moroccan Jebel Irhoud findings complicating strict East African centrality

The directive 'discuss' demands a balanced, analytical treatment with critical engagement. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief introduction linking the three themes under anthropology's applied turn; body addressing each part sequentially with clear sub-headings; conclusion synthesizing how these diverse approaches collectively advance inclusive, evidence-based policy and justice.

• Part (a): Postmodernist theories (Lyotard's incredulity toward metanarratives, Foucault's power/knowledge, Derrida's deconstruction) and their application to subaltern voices, indigenous rights, and decolonizing anthropology; critique of universalism and grand theory in development discourse
• Part (a): Specific mechanisms—participatory action research, collaborative ethnography, reflexivity, and positionality—through which postmodernism enables empowerment of Dalits, Adivasis, and marginalized groups in Indian context
• Part (b): GWAS methodology (SNP arrays, case-control designs, population stratification correction) and its contributions to understanding polygenic diseases, pharmacogenomics, and precision medicine; limitations including 'missing heritability' and Eurocentric bias
• Part (c): Utility of human remains in forensic anthropology—estimation of biological profile (age, sex, ancestry, stature), trauma analysis, PMI determination, and individual identification; medico-legal significance in disaster victim identification and criminal cases
• Part (c): Facial reconstruction techniques—anthropometric methods (Gerasimov, American method), computerized 3D modeling, and DNA phenotyping; applications in unidentified remains cases including Indian examples like the Purulia skull case or Tsunami victim identification

The directive 'write short notes' demands concise, information-dense responses for each sub-part with precise definitions and key illustrations. Allocate approximately 30 words per sub-part (150 total): ~25-30 words each for (a) Soanian culture (Pleistocene tool tradition), (b) caste-politics nexus (Kothari's 'Congress system'), (c) regionalism-autonomy interface (Article 370/371), (d) Elwin's 'leave them alone' vs 'controlled integration' debate, and (e) Redfield's Little-Great Tradition model with Sanskritization. Structure each note as: definition → key feature → Indian example → brief significance.

• (a) Soanian: Lower Paleolithic chopper-chopping tool tradition; Soan/Sohan river valley (Pakistan/India); pre-Acheulian; associated with Pleistocene deposits; contrast with Madrasian industry
• (b) Caste domination: Dominant caste concept (Srinivas); factional politics (Reddy-Kamma conflicts in Andhra); vote bank mobilization; caste associations as interest groups; political vertical integration
• (c) Regionalism: Linguistic states movement; sub-regional demands (Gorkhaland, Bodoland); autonomy spectrum—administrative to political; Sixth Schedule vs Article 371A; development disparities
• (d) Elwin's philosophy: 'Leave them alone' (NEFA policy); later shift to 'controlled change'; criticism of assimilationist models; tribal rights advocacy; legacy in Fifth/Sixth Schedule protections
• (e) Little-Great Traditions: Redfield-Singer model; universalization-parochialization; Sanskritization as upward communication; Great Tradition's regional variants; folk-classical continuum

The directive 'discuss' demands a comprehensive, analytical treatment with balanced coverage across all three sub-parts. Allocate approximately 40% of word budget to part (a) [20 marks], 30% to part (b) [15 marks], and 30% to part (c) [15 marks]. Structure as: brief introduction highlighting Siwaliks' global importance; detailed body addressing each sub-part sequentially with clear sub-headings; and a synthesizing conclusion connecting palaeoanthropological evidence to contemporary understanding of Indian population diversity and tribal policy.

• Part (a): Three Siwalik subdivisions (Lower, Middle, Upper) with geological timeframes; key primate fossils including Sivapithecus, Ramapithecus, Gigantopithecus; major localities—Ramnagar, Haritalyangar, Potwar Plateau; significance for hominoid evolution and 'Out of Asia' vs 'Out of Africa' debates
• Part (b): Sarkar's anthropometric classification based on cephalic index, nasal index, stature; four racial types (Negrito, Proto-Australoid, Mongoloid, Caucasoid) with sub-types; comparison with Risley's seven-race typology based on nasal index; critical assessment of methodological improvements
• Part (c): Christianity's impact on Naga, Mizo, Khasi societies—education and literacy (Nagaland's high literacy), health infrastructure, shift from shifting cultivation, cultural erosion vs empowerment; role of church in identity politics and separatism
• Comparative dimension: Sarkar's statistical rigor vs Risley's ethnographic observations; both classifications' limitations in light of population genetics
• Applied angle: How Siwalik findings inform conservation; how racial classifications became obsolete; how missionary activities shaped Sixth Schedule and tribal welfare policies

The question demands descriptive coverage for (a), analytical examination for (b), and highlighting contributions for (c). Allocate approximately 40% word budget to part (a) given its 20 marks, with ~30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure as: brief introduction acknowledging all three parts; detailed body addressing each sub-part sequentially with clear sub-headings; conclusion synthesizing insights on Indian anthropology's development and contemporary relevance.

• Part (a): Chronology (40,000-10,000 BP), blade and burin technology, cave art (Bhimbetka), distribution across Belan, Son, Narmada, Mahanadi valleys, and distinguishing from Middle Palaeolithic
• Part (a): Specific sites—Patne, Kurnool caves, Renigunta, and the emergence of microlithic transition; mention of organic tools and symbolic behavior
• Part (b): Environmental factors—forest degradation, water contamination, altitude sickness in Himalayan tribes, malaria in central Indian tribes; biocultural factors—dietary transitions, genetic predispositions (sickle cell in Gonds), traditional medicine knowledge erosion
• Part (b): Specific tribal examples—Jarawa health crises, Dongria Kondh nutrition studies, and the intersection of development-induced displacement with health outcomes
• Part (c): B.S. Guha—racial classification of Indian population (1935), founding of Anthropological Survey of India, skeletal studies at Mohenjodaro, Negrito element theory
• Part (c): Irawati Karve—Hindu society as mosaic of endogamous groups, kinship studies (Yuganta), regional anthropology, first woman anthropologist in India with fieldwork emphasis
• Part (c): S.R.K. Chopra—human cytogenetics, dermatoglyphics, population genetics of Indian tribes, establishing anthropology departments, training next generation of Indian anthropologists

The question demands critical examination across three parts with different directives: (a) requires describing types and highlighting factors of caste mobility (20 marks, ~40% effort), (b) asks to elucidate demographic and social factors for population growth (15 marks, ~30% effort), and (c) needs critical examination of ST concept with limitations of administrative criteria (15 marks, ~30% effort). Structure with brief introduction, three clearly demarcated sections addressing each sub-part with appropriate depth proportional to marks, and a synthesizing conclusion connecting mobility, demographic transition, and tribal policy challenges in contemporary India.

• (a) Types of caste mobility: vertical (Sanskritization, Westernization, modernization), horizontal (occupational diversification, spatial migration), and collective mobility through political assertion; factors include education, economic change, political reservation, urbanization, and land reforms
• (a) Theoretical grounding: M.N. Srinivas's Sanskritization, Marriott's transactional analysis, Dumont's purity-pollution hierarchy, and Beteille's critique of caste-class convergence
• (b) Demographic factors: fertility differentials by caste/religion/region, mortality decline due to medical advances, age structure momentum, and migration patterns; social factors: son preference, patriarchal norms, early marriage practices, and fertility transition theories
• (c) Critique of ST concept: colonial construction vs. indigenous identity, fluidity of tribal boundaries, heterogeneity within STs, and debate over 'primitive' vs. 'backward' classification
• (c) Administrative limitations: Dhebar Commission and Lokur Committee criteria (primitive traits, distinctive culture, geographical isolation, shyness of contact, backwardness), problems of assimilation vs. isolation, and exclusion errors (denotified tribes, ineligible groups)

The directive 'write short notes' demands concise, information-dense responses for each sub-part with approximately 30 words per mark. Allocate roughly 30 words (20% time) to each of the five parts, ensuring balanced coverage: for (a) focus on displacement and cultural erosion mechanisms; for (b) prioritize the taxonomic reclassification debate; for (c) contrast structural tribalism with instrumental pseudotribalism; for (d) link traditional stages to modern constitutional values; for (e) emphasize archaeological evidence of maritime trade. No introduction or conclusion is needed across parts; begin each note with a precise definitional statement.

• (a) Urbanization impacts: land alienation, proletarianization, cultural disintegration, and specific mechanisms like mining-induced displacement (e.g., Jharkhand tribals) or urban migration of Bhil communities
• (b) Ramapithecus-Sivapithecus controversy: David Pilbeam's initial classification, subsequent synonymization based on GSP Siwalik fossils, reclassification as Sivapithecus (Miocene ape, orangutan ancestor), and implications for hominid origins in Asia vs. Africa debate
• (c) Tribalism vs. Pseudotribalism: structural solidarity based on kinship/territory versus instrumental identity mobilization for political/economic gain; cite N.K. Bose or contemporary regional movements
• (d) Varnashrama: four varnas and four ashramas as complementary systems, contemporary relevance through constitutional abolition of untouchability (Article 17), residual ritual roles, and debate on merit vs. birth
• (e) Lothal dockyard: SR Rao's excavation, trapeoidal structure with spill-channel, evidence of bead manufacturing, Persian Gulf trade (Mesopotamian seals), and significance for Harappan maritime commerce

The directive 'elaborate' demands detailed expansion with supporting evidence. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure as: brief introduction acknowledging all three dimensions of Indian social organization; body addressing each sub-part sequentially with clear sub-headings; conclusion synthesizing how village studies, NGO interventions, and OBC classification collectively reflect state-society negotiations in Indian anthropology.

• Part (a): Attribution to M.N. Srinivas and his concept of 'village as a social system' with design reflecting hierarchy, interdependence, and sacred geography (Srinivas 1955, 1960)
• Part (a): Elaboration of how village layout embodies caste hierarchy (dominant caste at center, 'polluting' castes at periphery), jajmani system, and ritual integration (Dumont's homo hierarchicus, Marriott's transactional analysis)
• Part (b): NGOs' socioeconomic role in credit access (SHGs, microfinance), education, health; political role in awareness-building, legal aid, and facilitating Panchayat participation for weaker sections
• Part (b): Facilitation mechanisms: bridging between state and community (interface NGOs), network building with CBOs, advocacy coalitions, and conflict mediation (examples: SEWA, MKSS, PRADAN)
• Part (c): Historical trajectory from 1931 Census (caste tables) to Kaka Kalelkar Committee (1953), Mandal Commission (1979-80), and post-Mandal implementation
• Part (c): Methods: social/educational backwardness criteria (Mandal's 11 indicators), field surveys, anthropological reports, state-level BC commissions, NCBC's role, and Supreme Court's creamy layer jurisprudence
• Synthesis: How these three domains—village studies, civil society interventions, and affirmative action—represent successive waves of anthropological engagement with Indian social structure

The question demands critical evaluation across three interconnected themes. Allocate approximately 40% word budget to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief integrated introduction → systematic treatment of each sub-part with clear sub-headings → synthesizing conclusion that links tribal development limitations, ethnic conflicts, and nation-state impacts into a coherent anthropological perspective on indigenous futures.

• Part (a): Top-down planning failures, displacement without rehabilitation, loss of customary rights, cultural erosion through 'mainstreaming', and anthropological contributions via participatory action research, cultural brokerage, and policy advocacy
• Part (a): Specific anthropological methods—rapid rural appraisal, ethnographic impact assessment, and indigenous knowledge documentation—as corrective tools
• Part (b): Root causes of ethnic conflicts—territorial autonomy demands, resource competition, migration pressures, identity politics—with cases like Bodoland, Nagaland, or Gorkhaland movements
• Part (b): Remedial measures—Sixth Schedule provisions, PESA implementation, cultural autonomy, economic packages, and truth-and-reconciliation approaches
• Part (c): Critical evaluation of nation-state as homogenizing project vs. multicultural reality; Benedict Anderson's 'imagined communities' and James Scott's 'Zomia' thesis
• Part (c): Impact on indigenous societies—territorial encapsulation, citizenship dilemmas, cultural assimilation pressures, and resistance strategies like ethnic federalism demands

The directive 'describe' in part (a) demands detailed portrayal of the Toda-Kota-Kurumba-Irula interdependence system, while 'elaborate' in (b) and 'examine' in (c) require explanatory depth and critical assessment respectively. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, with 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure with a brief composite introduction, three distinct sectional bodies addressing each sub-part with clear sub-headings, and a unified conclusion linking tribal interdependence, minority status, and PVTG vulnerability to contemporary development challenges.

• Part (a): Ritual-economic interdependence among Nilgiri tribes—Toda (pastoral/buffalo), Kota (artisan/musician), Kurumba (shaman/forest produce), Irula (agricultural labour)—with ceremonial exchanges (kash-tokh, teymisi) and hierarchical jajmani-like relationships
• Part (a): Post-colonial and post-Independence disruptions—land alienation, Shola forest degradation, wage labour substitution, tourism commodification, and breakdown of ritual obligations
• Part (b): Sociological definition of minority (numerical inferiority + structural disadvantage, not merely numerical), distinguishing from ethnic group; constitutional safeguards under Articles 29-30
• Part (b): Linguistic minorities—Dravidian vs Indo-Aryan tensions, Hindi imposition, state reorganisation, Sixth Schedule areas; Religious minorities—Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist patterns, Sachar Committee findings, regional concentrations
• Part (c): PVTG identification criteria—pre-agricultural technology, zero/negative population growth, extremely low literacy, subsistence economy, identified by Dhebar Commission and Lokur Committee
• Part (c): Current status—75 PVTGs across 18 states/UTs, nomenclature shift from PTG to PVTG (2006), habitat specificity (Andamanese, Birhor, Kamar), implementation gaps in micro-projects and habitat rights