The Supreme Court’s judgement on pollution in the Palar river is significant as it emphasises the responsibilities of both industry and government. The court observed that nature will not spare us. In its opinion, while the ‘polluter pays’ principle is valid, the government is equally responsible to regulate and contain environmental damage. It is a matter of grave concern that this pertains to a public interest litigation moved more than 30 years ago in 1991 and the problem of pollution caused by untreated effluents discharged by tanneries still persists.
The fact is that pollution of water bodies is happening right under the nose of pollution control boards, despite environmental protection laws and a large number of activists raising the issue. The argument that industries contribute to GDP, pay compensation when ordered, and are not the only source of effluents is specious.
Time and again, the judiciary has emphasised that a healthy environment is integral to human rights and the right to life itself. Environmental degradation disproportionately affects vulnerable populations and pose threats to their health and livelihoods. The success stories that have contained environmental damage and restored ecosystems all point to the efficacy of collaborative efforts among all stakeholders: citizens groups, non-profit organisations, administrative authorities and industries.
In the textile hub of Tiruppur in Tamil Nadu, joint efforts involving the entire community affected by the pollution of water bodies have resulted in cleaning and restoration. But this is a mammoth task and involves continuous monitoring.
In another district in Tamil Nadu—Sivakasi—where water-guzzling paper units are located, efforts to restore old Chola-era lakes have been undertaken in recent years. With support from the local industries and a responsive district administration, the Sivakasi Green Forum, a citizens’ group, has set about cleaning and desilting lakes that were either dry and or were filled with sewage.
It has been an uphill task at every step—overcoming the local population’s initial scepticism and raising funds that involved volunteers bringing in small amounts on their own and industries contributing from social responsibility funds. Gradually, with the removal of encroachments while combating vested interests, their efforts are beginning to show results. Miyawaki forests have been planted in areas surrounding the lakes to ensure better precipitation, air quality and a living habitat. At present, six water bodies covering 205 acres have been restored. The mission of the forum is to maintain the quality of water and make Sivakasi fully green by 2035.
The installation of sewage and effluent treatment plants is vital in industrial hubs. Such plants can be approved as private-public partnerships. Projects funded by private parties and ultimately transferred to a local body would allow access to recycled water wherever required by businesses. While the polluter pays principle is laudable, a better option would be to enforce extended producer responsibility. This will shorten timelines in creating social infrastructures and can tackle the problem at the source itself. Opposition can be anticipated from vested interests that look at infrastructural contracts as a source of gain. However, with strong political will and administrative support, these challenges can be overcome.
India has had a tradition of industrial houses looking beyond profit margins and being invested in the larger good of stakeholders. A systematic approach that promotes solutions to environmental challenges, if factored into business processes, would be a game changer. This can be incentivised by offering tax breaks, deduction of maintenance expense and GST concessions for using recycled materials. It’s true that contributions are being made out of CSR funds; but making a direct contribution to a capital expenditure that benefits both the business and the community would result in a win-win and shorten timelines.
Decentralisation of powers and responsibilities is an important aspect in making environment protection schemes work. Just as the problems are unique to a particular region, so are the solutions. Delegating implementation to local authorities that are more in tune with the ground realities would be efficacious. It’s also true that a growing number of young entrepreneurs are concerned about the environmental impact of the activities they undertake. It’s necessary to use their resources and adapt technology for real-time monitoring to improve the quality of air and water. While there are several government schemes in place under the Swachh Bharat umbrella, there is a need for continuing vigilance and rapid response to tackle environmental challenges.
As our understanding evolves, learning from past failures and best practices across jurisdictions is the way forward. For the pain and suffering caused by treating environment as a limitless resource, which should also absorb discarded waste and polluting it with impunity has resulted in disease and suffering to countless human beings. This largely affects those who live in the vicinity of polluting industries and have little recourse to justice.
Robert McFarlane, in Is a River Alive, writes about his encounter with a villager in Ennore Creek who, while taking of the future, says, “We are all getting cancer. It would be nice if we just got asthma.” It’s indeed unfortunate when in our helplessness we start thinking of a lesser evil as a greater good. The right to clean air and water is a basic human right. Concerted and coordinated efforts can make this a reality.
Read all columns by Geetha Ravichandran
Geetha Ravichandran
Former bureaucrat and author, most recently of The Spell of the Rain Tree