Plastic is the new buzzword in India, where everybody is now talking of the curb on single-use plastics to reduce its impact on the environment. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants to make it a peoples’ movement but the expected imposition of a blanket ban on its use has been held off by his government as the measure was seen as too disruptive for industry at a time when it is coping with an economic slowdown and job losses.
While it may be a positive sign that such issues related to the environment are grabbing headlines and creating a sort of consciousness among the people, it is also worth pointing out that India has joined this relay quite late in the timeline of sustainable development goals, and the countries that have already followed the suit do not serve as good or successful examples for India to blindly follow.?
A ban on plastic, or repeated vociferous announcements to curb the use of single-use plastics, are, potential policies of appeasing the United Nations as well as the international community at this juncture when several raging questions are being raised about India on the global fore. Indeed, that which is hyped as internal to India is getting more external with the rising involvement of the global community. Eco-friendly goals, therefore, are a good distraction that have slightly eased the burden on Indian diplomats by adding another layer of subjects to be explored and hyped upon.?
Such promises also go hand-in-hand with the image that Indian PM Modi is projecting of himself. And frankly speaking, there is nothing wrong with it.?
But policies should not be formatted in the manner speeches are written. Nor should they be aimed at achieving political goals or boosting one’s brand image. More importantly, an understanding of the prevailing situations with case studies from the countries where norms on similar lines have been introduced should be taken into consideration before their formulation.?
They should, at the same time, be born out of consultations with expert groups and environment bodies that have been working in the direction long before the governments swing into action.?
India has failed to do so and is blindly shouting that single-use plastic is bad for the environment. Of course, it’s bad but what road-map does the country have in store??
The double standards in Indian government’s dealings and proclamations on curbing single-use plastics came to the fore in the manner that the government backtraced from banning it in the view of an economic slowdown and joblessness that has gripped the country.?
So, when the production is not being prevented, will its widespread use cease to exist??
The second contention is on the replacement. Suppose the use of plastic bags fall drastically, what will replace it? Jute bags, bags made out of clothes and eco-friendly materials? Will they be as cheap as plastic is? Do we have industries that are producing them? Is the government supporting such industries??
The third contention is on the employment of those involved in the plastic industry. According to several estimates, there are at least 50,000 plastic manufacturing industrial units which are currently functional in the country.
They provide employment to a staggering total of 4 to 5 million people. In the current scenario, joblessness is? a big problem in India and lakhs of people have already lost their jobs, with the auto sector being the worst-affected.
The textile industry, which could be instrumental in replacing plastic bags, is itself reeling under tremendous pressure and has axed thousands of jobs. ?
The fourth contention is government’s failure to learn from existing examples. It may be an inappropriate example to relate but even an Al-Qaeda backed terror organisation has supported the ban on plastic in the past. The al-Shabaab terror organization, which shows little regard for human life, had said it was banning single-use plastic bags in the territories under its control in 2018 but it yielded little results. Bangladesh introduced its first plastic bag ban in 2002 and it’s been 17 years since then and we all know what the reality is. The European Union, the United States and Kenya are among other countries which have said things years ago.?But most of them failed in such initiatives and are now beginning to learn from their mistakes.?
The fifth contention is on the nature of economies.
The developed nations, with higher per-capita income and job securities can afford to introduce path-breaking resolutions to protect the environment but the poorer countries are simply unable to do so because their population is already subjected to dozens of other pressing problems.
This is not to say that the environment is not important but give the people the resources to protect the environment first.
For example: Shops in Gurugram and Noida have already begun charging anywhere from Rs 2 to 15 for carry bags that are replacing the plastic ones in recent weeks. It’s not an achievement but a tight slap?in the face of the people who are paying more than petrol for onions, and then coughing up an additional sum for carry bags. And if you forgot, these are happening at a time when jobs are being lost, prices are rising, GDP is falling and there seems to be no immediate respite in waiting.?
The sixth contention is on the complete absence of the environment ministry in this entire process.
If they aren’t to be involved, why have them in the first place? The government may actually do better by doing away with such ministries when all its work has to be done by and in the name of one single person. It may save some money too. A process to tackle this menace should have been developed by the environment ministry as its officials and key contacts are in the best position to suggest solutions. India’s ruling dispensation has failed on this front too.?
The seventh contention is the lack of emphasis on reuse and recycle.
Despite strict laws in place in the United States, every person on average uses a plastic bag daily. Political opposition to bans in the United States has increased tremendously too. National Geographic cites Rebecca Taylor, an economist at the University of Sydney, who found that shoppers in cities that banned bags before the 2016 statewide ban took effect used fewer shopping bags, leading to a reduction of about 40 million pounds of plastic waste. But she found in her study that sales of trash bags rose, offsetting the reduction in plastic bags to 28 million pounds. India, during this ongoing cacophony against plastic, has ignored this key aspect.?
The eighth contention is on the demographic gaps that are found in India.
While eco-friendly and plastic-free India may be trendy words for the elites in our cities to use, but for the deprived and downtrodden what’s cheap, and more so what’s free, works best, and in many cases are the only things that work. Imagine that in a country where hundreds of thousands cannot afford daily meals, what degree of significance will they lay on this so-called nationwide movement?
The ninth and most worrying contention is on the tendency of the government to thump its chest and claim victory when the battle only begins.
The country’s prime minister declared India Open Defecation Free on the occasion of the 150th birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi yesterday. His government’s attempts to build toilets and promote hygiene deserve praise just as the claim that India is now ODF deserves to be condemned. The battle against plastic is going to be long and tedious, and the more the country’s governments indulge in chest thumping or claiming victory before it’s achieved, the more rugged and steep the road will be.?