Migration from the Himalayan regions must be understood as a long-term structural outcome rather than a temporary social shift. It is not driven by ambition alone, nor is it a rejection of village life or cultural roots. In most cases, migration is the result of accumulated insecurity economic, educational, environmental, and institutional. Any meaningful way forward must therefore be grounded in responsibility rather than sympathy, governance rather than symbolism, and sustained intervention rather than episodic responses. The foremost responsibility lies with the state governments of hill regions. Over the years, everyday life in the mountains has become increasingly fragile. One of the most significant but often normalised factors is the sharp rise in human wildlife conflict. Wild animal attacks on crops, livestock, and even human settlements have become a regular phenomenon. What was once considered an occasional risk is now part of daily rural reality. Such conflict must no longer be treated as a marginal or seasonal issue This erosion does not happen overnight, but it is decisive.

Migration then becomes not a choice, but a survival response. Just as disaster management systems have been institutionalised, human wildlife conflict requires permanent administrative structures. Dedicated response units at the block and district levels, predictable compensation frameworks, preventive infrastructure such as fencing and early-warning systems, and community-based rapid response mechanisms are essential. When people see the state present consistently, confidence in village life begins to return. Without this, agriculture, food security, and rural stability will continue to decline.

Another major cause of migration is the weakening of the village-level education system.........

© Greater Kashmir