Skip to main content

India's failed model?: Urban Gujarat is poor performer in solid waste management

 
Despite big talk about Gujarat being a model state of urban development, latest figures, made available at a workshop organized by Paryavaran Mitra, an Ahmedabad-based environmental NGO, has said that just about 14.67 per cent of the solid waste collected in the state’s eight municipal corporations and 159 municipalities, is processed. This puts Gujarat way behind the national average of 27.94 per cent of the solid waste being processed, with seven out of 20 selected states performing better.
Revealed during a presentation by Shailendrasinh Jadeja of Seva Foundation Trust, Rajkot, in the presence of senior experts, consultants and a Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) official, the figures suggest that there has been slight improvement of less than two per cent since 2010, when 12.94 per cent of the solid waste was being processed. However, the progress vis-à-vis the all-India average was dismal – in 2010, 17.78 per cent of the solid waste was being processed, suggesting an improvement of 10 per cent in the country as a whole up to 2014.
Jadeja’s presentation, titled “Scenario on Municipal Solid Waste Management”, said that, in Gujarat, 9,277 tonnes of municipal waste was generated every day in 2014. And, if official Government of India figures – on the basis of which Jadeja has maked his calculations – are any guide, all of it was collected. Of this, 1,354 tonnes of solid waste was processed. In 2010, 7,379 tonnes was generated, 6744 tonnes was collected, and 873 tonnes was processed. However, he indicated, the figures do not tell the full story, and there appears to something amiss.
Thus, Jadeja’s presentation said that of the eight municipal corporations, in 2014, three did not have any functional compost plants, and four did not have any landfill sites. Things were found to be worse in 159 municipalities, where 66 of them did not have any compost plant, and 106 did not have any landfill sites. Further, three municipal corporations out of eight (Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar, Surat, Vadodara, Rajkot, Bhavnagar, Jamnagar and Junagadh) and 125 municipalities never filled up necessary monthly details of how much of solid waste was being generated, collected and processed.
Talking to Counterview, Paryavaran Mitra’s Mahesh Pandya said, the workshop was held against the backdrop of the national consultations currently being held on finalizing rules on hazardous waste, e-waste, solid waste, plastic waste and biomedical waste. “This is being done by keeping at pay the country’s senior environmental experts”, he added. While the consultations have already taken place in Delhi (May 1) and Mumbai (May 8), they are scheduled for May 22 in Bangaluru and May 23 in Kolkata. Only industry representatives and consultants have been invited.
“If ignoring environmentalists was one reason why we held the workshop, another reason was, Gujarat a highly industrial state, as very level of pollution levels and poor environmental management. The consultations should have take place in Ahmedabad or Gandhinagar, but this has not happened”, Pandya said, adding, “This is one reason why we decided to hold the workshop and prepare a list of recommendations to be sent to the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) for consideration.”
An important point raised at the workshop was that the rural areas have been completely kept out of solid waste management draft rules despite the fact that they also generate all types of waste – degradable as well as non-degradable. It was suggested, the Government of India should work out a proper authority which should monitor solid waste management. The participants also raised concern over the fact that there has been a steady downward slide in the amount of waste that is being generated, despite official “efforts” to the contrary.

Comments

TRENDING

A Hindu alternative to Valentine's Day? 'Shiv-Parvati was first love marriage in Universe'

The other day, I was searching on Google a quote on Maha Shivratri which I wanted to send to someone, a confirmed Shiv Bhakt, quite close to me -- with an underlying message to act positively instead of being negative. On top of the search, I chanced upon an article in, imagine!, a Nashik Corporation site which offered me something very unusual.  I don't know who owns this site, for there is nothing on it in the About Us link. It merely says, the Nashik Corporation  site   "is an educational and news website of the municipal corporation. Today, education and payment of tax are completely online." It goes on to add, "So we provide some of the latest information about Property Tax, Water Tax, Marriage Certificate, Caste Certificate, etc. So all taxpayer can get all information of their municipal in a single place.some facts about legal and financial issues that different city corporations face, but I was least interested in them."  Surely, this didn't interest...

Beyond the 'plum' posting: Why the caste lens still defines bureaucratic success

Following my recent blog on former IAS bureaucrat Atanu Chakraborty’s sudden exit as non-executive chairman of HDFC Bank, a few colleagues from the Gujarat cadre — mostly those I interacted with during my Gandhinagar stint (1997–2012) as the Times of India representative — reacted rather sharply. Most of them sent their responses directly on WhatsApp, touching upon on the merits and demerits of Chakraborty’s controversial move. One former IAS officer, a Dalit, however, went further, raising a broader question: why do some officials like Chakraborty secure plum post-retirement assignments, while others are overlooked?

Blaming RTE, not underfunding: Education groups hit back at NITI Aayog working paper

A preliminary working paper by Arvind Virmani, economist and member of the Government of India think tank NITI Aayog, has concluded that the Right to Education (RTE) Act — enacted to guarantee free and compulsory schooling for children between six and fourteen — has actually worsened learning outcomes rather than improved them. The paper, published in March 2026 and reported by The Print on 16 April, has drawn sharp pushback from education rights advocates, who argue it builds a politically motivated narrative against constitutionally guaranteed entitlements.