Dinesh C Sharma
The new rules make product manufacturers responsible for collecting their end-of-life products for safe recycling or re-use.
For long, we have known that the quantum of waste a country generates is closely linked to its level of economic growth. High-income countries generate higher amounts of municipal waste per capita than low- or middle-income countries. And within countries, irrespective of their overall economic growth rate, urban areas or high-income households generate more waste. This is a harsh reality which India has ignored for all these years, despite the country recording high economic growth in the last decade.
Our waste management systems and municipal bodies have failed to keep pace with the byproducts of economic growth. As a result, the phenomenal growth witnessed in generation of all kinds of wastes – electrical and electronic, plastic, biomedical – has become a major environmental problem.
India is counted among the top 5 producers of electronic waste. The informal system of waste pickers and recyclers is unable to take care of such waste, much of which is hazardous to its handlers as well as the environment. Inadequate and unscientific recycling of such waste results in release of heavy metals, toxic gases and chemicals into the environment, posing a threat to soil, surface and groundwater as well as human health. About 15,000 tonnes of plastic waste is generated every day but just 9,000 tonnes is collected and recycled.
The ‘food chain’ of waste is complex and involves many players – manufacturers of products, waste generators, informal waste pickers, institutional and individual consumers, recycling intermediaries, recyclers and a host of government agencies. Without involving each of these players, we won’t be able to arrive at sustainable solutions to the waste problem. Till now the policy and regulation approach has been fragmented. For instance, while shopkeepers are held responsible for providing polythene bags of certain thickness to their consumers, the manufacturers were let off hook. Similarly, handlers of electric and electronic goods were covered under e-waste rules and not manufacturers. A major source of hazardous waste – mercury-containing CFL lamps – was not included in the list of products annexed to e-waste rules because CFL manufacturers had lobbied against it.
Now, the Ministry of Environment and Forests has tried to plug all such loopholes in the existing rules for management of e-waste, plastic waste and biomedical waste. New rules have been notified to replace old ones, removing all ambiguities. In addition, waste not covered previously – such as construction and demolition waste – has been brought under regulation.
The most significant change in new regulations is the introduction of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) as the guiding principle. Simply put, it makes producers or product manufacturers responsible for collecting their end-of-life products for safe recycling or re-use. This means the responsibility of manufacturers does not end with their products leaving factory gates but extends till the full lifecycle of their products. The idea behind this principle is not only to encourage recycling by manufacturers but also prod them to design better products so that they can minimise costs associated with end-of-life management.
For instance, they can design products that are more amenable to repair and maintenance or products that contain less of hazardous substances and more recyclable parts. Producers also have to cover all or part of the costs for collection, recycling or final disposal of products they manufacture. These costs could be paid for directly by producers or collected through a recycling fee.
