Category: Op-ed

Plastic pollution needs industrial transformation, not just environmental regulations.

On World Environment Day this year, hundreds — if not thousands — of events were organised across India to address plastic pollution, echoing the day’s official theme: “Beat Plastic Pollution”. A quick scan of social media reveals that the primary focus of these events was on eliminating polythene bags, reducing littering, improving collection and segregation, and promoting recycling and reuse.

But the sobering reality is this: Despite decades of effort, globally, only 9% of plastic waste is recycled, 50% ends up in landfills, 19% is incinerated, and the remaining 22% is either littered or openly burnt — polluting land, water, and air. Even in advanced economies, plastics largely end up in landfills or incinerators —very little is actually recycled.

In India, where plastic consumption is surging, the challenge is particularly acute due to weak waste management infrastructure. While the plastic recycling rate is relatively high — about 40% — much of this is downcycling into low-value products that re-enter the waste stream relatively quickly. As a result, India is now considered the world’s top producer of unmanaged plastic waste. So, can we truly “beat” plastic pollution by just improving recycling and reuse?

First, it is important to understand the profound disconnect between the inherent nature of plastic and the products manufactured from it. Plastic is, quite literally, a “forever material”, It can take decades to centuries to decompose, and even then, it never truly disappears. Instead, it fragments into progressively smaller pieces, ultimately becoming microplastics — insidious particles now linked to serious health ailments, including cancer.Yet, this “forever material” is predominantly used for short-life products — items designed to be used and discarded within days. These are what we commonly refer to as single-use plastics (SUPs), used mostly for packaging.

From thin plastic bags to food wrappers, bottles, and sachets, plastic packaging dominates our lives — and our garbage bins. It is cheap to produce but expensive to collect and recycle, leading to widespread littering. In India, the use of plastic packaging has ballooned. Today, 60% of all plastic is used for packaging — far higher than the global average of 40%. What’s more, this segment is growing at 8-9% annually, faster than overall plastic use at around 6%. If current trends continue, India’s plastic packaging consumption will nearly double — from 11 million tonnes in 2022 to 20 million tonnes by 2030. Of this, about 70% will be single-use packaging for the food, beverage, and personal/home care sectors.

Regulating plastic packaging

India has been a trend-setter in regulating SUPs. It banned polythene bags thinner than 20 microns in as early as 1999. By 2011, this threshold increased to 40 microns, and municipal authorities were tasked with setting up waste collection centres. The Plastic Waste Management Rules of 2016 further expanded regulations, raising the minimum thickness to 50 microns, extending rules to rural areas, and introducing an extended producer responsibility (EPR) framework to make plastic producers responsible for waste collection and recycling. In 2022, 19 specific SUP items were banned, and EPR guidelines mandated the recycling of 60-80% of plastic waste by 2027-28. However, the results of all these efforts have been modest. Banned SUPs, including thin plastic bags, are still sold, and plastic producers and recyclers have been found gaming the EPR system by inflating recycling rates.The reason these rules have not delivered is that they have often been enacted in haste, without preparing the ground for transition. For instance, many states banned SUPs with just 90 days’ notice to the industry. Expecting a multi-billion-dollar industry that employs millions of workers to transform overnight is unrealistic.

If there’s one lesson from our 25-year struggle with plastic regulation, it is this: bans and regulations alone will not work. What we need is a well-planned industrial transformation in the plastic and packaging industry.Reducing plastic pollution, therefore, is not just a matter of increasing recycling and reuse; it requires building an entirely new industrial ecosystem. This calls for an integrated industrial, regulatory, and investment road map grounded in five strategic pillars

National plastic strategy: India needs a long-term National Plastic Strategy focused on developing and investing in alternatives to plastics, reducing single-use plastic packaging, cutting plastic demand, and enabling a circular plastic economy.

Packaging policy and standards: A clear policy and enforceable standards for packaging, based on lifecycle assessments, must be developed. These should encourage alternatives, improve recyclability, and reduce overall packaging demand.

Investment in recycling and innovation: Plastic recycling in India is dominated by underfunded and technologically outdated micro, small, and medium enterprises. We need large-scale investments in advanced recycling — including chemical recycling, depolymerisation, and other next-generation methods. This must be backed by dedicated research and development funding to support innovation in recycling processes.

Infrastructure and capacity upgrades: A strong emphasis should be placed on improving existing waste management infrastructure for segregation, sorting, and recycling.

Behavioural change and social awareness: Managing plastic waste requires behavioural shifts in how we buy, consume, and dispose of products. This means investing in public awareness campaigns, school education, and nudging industries to adopt more responsible packaging practices. Ultimately, fighting plastic pollution is not just a technical challenge — it is a cultural one.

The plastic crisis is deeply embedded in our economy, infrastructure, and daily habits. If we continue to treat it solely as an environmental problem, we’ll be stuck in an endless loop of regulations, bans, enforcement failures, and symbolic themes on World Environment Day.

Urgent reforms required to make District Mineral Foundations an instrument for social justice.

The District Mineral Foundation (DMF) was conceived as a transformative institution to ensure those who bear the brunt of mining activities also share its benefits. Set up in March 2015 under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, the DMF is designed to channel mining revenues to improve the lives and livelihoods of affected communities. However, a detailed assessment of 23 states and key DMF districts by me and my colleagues paints a concerning picture.

While DMFs have collected over Rs 1.03 lakh crore, only about 40% has been utilised. Worse, much of this spending has been directed towards capital-intensive projects — roads, bridges, buildings, parking lots, and water pipelines — that should ideally be funded by state and central government budgets. The projects that matter most to mining-affected communities — livelihoods, skills, education, health, and support for small businesses — have received minimal investments.

With India’s continued economic growth and increasing mineral demand for the energy transition and net-zero goals, this fund will continue to expand. Our projections indicate Rs 2.5-3 lakh crore could be collected over the next 10 years. If this money is utilised prudently, it can transform the lives of millions of India’s poorest people. We must therefore ask: Will the DMF be yet another noble initiative that failed to deliver, or will it evolve into a truly participatory and people-centric institution?

Intent vs reality

DMFs came into being after decade-long discussions on the issue of “resource curse”. The fact that India’s richest mining districts are inhabited by some of its poorest people prompted the government to set up the DMF as a non-profit trust. Mining firms are required to contribute an amount equal to 10-30% of the royalty to DMFs for investments to improve the lives of affected people. In September 2015, the government launched the Pradhan Mantri Khanij Kshetra Kalyan Yojana (PMKKKY) to guide DMFs on planning, prioritising, and utilising the funds.

DMFs are present in 645 districts, but the funds are largely concentrated in 50. In fact, the top 21 districts, which have each collected at least Rs 1,000 crore, account for nearly two-thirds of the total DMF accruals. These districts are largely tribal-dominated with high multi-dimensional poverty.

Our assessment shows that the biggest challenge with DMF implementation is governance. DMFs in all districts essentially function as extensions of the district collectorate, with district collectors/magistrates chairing both the governing council (GC) and managing committee (MC), undermining the accountability of the institution. The GC and MC are also dominated by officials, MPs, and state legislators, with minimal representation of the affected communities despite legal provisions for their participation. Worse still, none of the districts have identified mining-affected people, making it easier for DMF projects to be dictated by district administrations rather than community needs.

Investment planning is also unstructured in most districts. While annual and perspective planning is mandated under the PMKKKY, no DMF has developed a structured annual plan or published a five-year perspective plan. Most projects are approved in an ad-hoc manner without thorough need assessments involving gram sabhas, another legal infringement.

The failure of the institution has translated into the misallocation of funds. As mentioned above, infrastructure projects have received the largest share of DMF spending, locking the districts into expensive servicing and maintenance.

Consider Jharkhand, where over 40% of the funds have been allocated to large piped drinking water projects. But these projects are plagued by delays and operational inefficiencies, with little investment in decentralised water management solutions that could sustainably serve affected communities. Similarly, in Chhattisgarh, a significant portion of education funds has been spent on building schools and hostels, but without corresponding investments in teachers, learning material, or digital education infrastructure.

The lack of investment in human capital is particularly concerning. Our analysis shows that less than 5% of DMF funds have been spent on employment generation initiatives. In mining districts like Dhanbad and Kendujhar, where thousands of workers have lost livelihoods due to mechanisation and mine closures, DMFs have failed to provide meaningful alternatives.

Need for urgent reform

Despite the shortcomings, the DMF remains the only hope to alleviate poverty and bring development to mining-affected regions. To make it an effective instrument for social justice, the following reforms are critical:

Reform governance: DMFs should be independent, community-led institutions rather than extensions of district administrations. Mining-affected communities must have at least one-third representation in the GC and MC.

Participatory planning: All DMFs should be required to develop five-year perspective plans based on comprehensive community consultations. These should align with district development goals but prioritise the needs of the people.

Fund utilisation in high-priority sectors: The revised PMKKKY guidelines should be strictly enforced to ensure at least 70% of DMF funds are spent on critical needs like healthcare, education, livelihoods, and skill development. State governments must be held accountable for aligning their DMF spending with national guidelines.

Independent oversight: DMFs should be subject to mandatory social audits and financial reviews by independent agencies. The Comptroller and Auditor General should conduct periodic evaluations of DMF spending and impact.

Endowment fund: Many coal-mining districts are facing a future of declining production. DMFs should create endowment funds to support economic diversification and just transition strategies for workers and communities affected by mine closures.

Improve transparency and accountability: Every DMF should maintain an up-to-date website with real-time information on fund allocations, expenditures, and project progress. A grievance redress mechanism should be established to address community concerns about DMF spending.

A decade after its creation, the DMF remains a work in progress. The problem is not a lack of funds but a lack of vision and political will to ensure the DMF serves its intended purpose. For the DMF to truly fulfil its mandate, we need urgent, systemic changes that put communities at the centre of decision-making. Anything less would be a betrayal of the very people the DMF was meant to serve.

Given the powerful sway of faith, it must work together with science and technology to repair humanity’s broken relationship with nature.

Faith must unite with science to heal humanity’s bond with nature.

The Mahakumbh Mela 2025 has left an indelible mark on history. According to official data, more than 650 million people participated in this monumental event — equivalent to the combined population of the US and Indonesia, the third- and fourth-most populous countries in the world. This staggering figure cements the Mahakumbh as the largest human gathering ever recorded. Yet, beyond the numbers lies an experience that cannot be explained through statistics — the palpable energy of faith, the profound sense of unity, and a seemingly primal instinct that drew millions across thousands of kilometres for a fleeting moment of spiritual renewal. To witness the Mahakumbh was to feel humanity at its most elemental.

However, the event was not without its challenges. Many devotees died in a tragic stampede, logistical hurdles tested organisers, and concerns about water quality lingered. Still, the Mahakumbh concluded with remarkable order, safety, and a surprising degree of environmental care.

The grounds were strikingly free of plastic litter, open defecation, or festering garbage piles. Thousands of mobile toilets and three temporary sewage treatment plants were installed to ensure proper sanitation. Additionally, the mela was illuminated with solar power and single-use plastics were banned.

Even more astonishingly, there were no disease outbreaks, which might have been expected at a gathering of such magnitude. Charity and compassion were evident everywhere, with numerous organisations providing shelter and food to countless pilgrims. It is difficult to imagine any other nation managing such a colossal convergence with similar care and generosity. But as the last pilgrims depart, a pressing question looms: Can such a gathering of faith endure in a world increasingly battered by climate change and environmental degradation?

The fact is that the Ganga and Yamuna are already under grave threats. Despite four decades of river-cleaning efforts through the Ganga Action Plan (started in 1986), Yamuna Action Plan (1993) and the Namami Gange Programme (2014), a little more than half of the sewage entering the rivers is treated, while chemical-laden agricultural run-off continues to degrade water quality. On top of this, melting glaciers in the Himalayas, coupled with erratic rainfall — accelerated by global warming — is projected to further reduce both the quality and quantity of water in these rivers and their tributaries. These persistent and emerging environmental concerns raise serious doubts about the continuity of a tradition that has thrived for millennia.

This tension between reverence and sustainability took centre stage at a groundbreaking conclave during the Mahakumbh Mela on February 16. Titled “Faith of Kumbh and Climate Change,” the conclave brought together religious leaders, scientists, policymakers, and civil society to discuss the role of faith in addressing climate and environmental crises. Topics such as environmental management during religious congregations and greener places of worship were also explored.

The initiative, organised by the environment department of the Uttar Pradesh government and iFOREST, sought to merge the sacred with the sustainable, recognising that religious leaders and faith-based organisations — armed with moral authority and vast grassroots networks — could be vital allies in combatting climate change and environmental degradation.

The power of faith

India is a deeply religious country, and faith holds an unparalleled sway over the majority of its people. It has shaped, and continues to shape, values and behaviours in ways that science and government policies have struggled to achieve.

The fact is that the teachings of all major religions provide guidance on environmental preservation. Hinduism and other Indic faiths consider nature divine, making its protection a sacred duty. Abrahamic religions, too, emphasise stewardship over God’s creation. But these teachings are rarely reinterpreted for the present or emphasised in sermons and religious gatherings. While some spiritual leaders have championed environmental causes, sustainability remains a low priority for most faith-based institutions. Imagine, however, if every sermon and religious gathering urged followers to shun plastic, conserve water, plant trees, install renewable energy, and embrace sustainable lifestyles. Such shifts, rooted in religious duty, could ignite a grassroots revolution.

At the conclave, this potential of faith-based organisations in raising environmental awareness, educating communities, and driving meaningful action garnered support from all. The need to integrate science with religious teachings to tackle the environmental crisis was also endorsed. Many religious leaders also emphasised the necessity of making the Mahakumbh more sustainable. As one prominent spiritual leader pointed out: “If we do not care for the environment, the Mahakumbh of the future will take place on the sands of Prayagraj, not in the waters of the Triveni.”

The Mahakumbh Declaration

A key outcome of the conclave was the Mahakumbh Declaration on Climate Change. Under this, the UP government has pledged to “green” religious institutions and congregations across the state. The state envisions temples, mosques, and shrines becoming models of sustainability. The state’s pledge includes funding faith-based organisations to promote environmental and climate education, campaigns, and practices.

It is important to recognise that the environmental crisis, including the climate crisis, is not just a technological or economic challenge but also deeply spiritual. It reflects humanity’s broken relationship with nature, a disconnect that faith, science, and technology must work together to repair. And in this, faith may well be our most powerful ally.