Imkong Walling
A previous piece on this column commented how the Government of Nagaland’s attempts at curbing disposable plastic have been no more than “repeat performance of past failures.” And, rightly so, the state government is on record issuing atleast 5 directives, over the past 20 years, starting with a ban on ‘polythene bags’ in 2004. The latest, or the fifth, was issued on July 15, 2024, repainting a standing order professing to put a lid to Single-Use Plastic (SUP) products.
The government’s intention, while well-evident, does not hide the futility of proscribing everyday products that humanity at large cannot shun. The failed alcohol prohibition law should serve as an example.
This is not to dispute the damaging effects of use-and-throw plastic on the environment. The point, or rather, the question is on the intelligence of the authorities that came up with the idea to put a blanket ban, when it is known that it is not going to work, if past efforts have been any indication.
Learning from mistakes of the past is the ideal. In this case, however, the government is paving a series of failures without putting in a paise’s worth of thought towards enforceable solutions. Prohibitory orders of this nature go on to become convenient legal instruments for enforcement personnel, and the myriad Naga political groups, for money-on-the-side, hardly doing anything to impair the demand-supply dynamic. All it serves is conducting intermittent surprise checks, conjuring an artificial notion of enforcement.
The answer to engendering civic responsibility rests on stimulating a culture of waste segregation, starting at home and at public spaces, including in the government establishments. At present, there is hardly any, save a couple of isolated pilot waste segregation initiatives, which face the prospect of premature death without assured upkeep funding.
Stimulating sustainable practices require proactive governance that ensures funding for establishing dependable waste management programmes integrated with the 3 Rs (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle). In practice, translating into a paying salvage industry centred on recovering and transforming disposed SUP and organic waste into wealth.
There have been experimental ventures, in Nagaland itself, proving the potential of reusing SUP products as binder in road-making. Some 15 years ago, the Nagaland Pollution Control Board successfully demonstrated one. The Dimapur Municipal Council followed up with an announcement to utilise plastic waste in road-making in 2017. It did not take off.
Critics have questioned the feasibility of such a venture citing the industrial scale demands of road construction. Securing a green future, however, far outweighs the challenge of cost and scale. The prospect of Nagaland as a potential plastic waste processing hub does not sound bad either.
There is promise in unlocking environment-friendly solutions driven by tax incentives. It could start with loosening tax grip – mirroring the baby steps taken in the EV sector – on enterprise or investment in green alternatives, which have, till today, succumbed to higher manufacturing costs.
Like in the case of alcohol prohibition, the SUP ban has only helped to demonise a product that present-day humans cannot live without, and at a great cost to the unorganised sector. It is not only absurd but also unfair to come up with double standard regulations giving free passage to single-use plastic that come coated in big-name brands, while small business owners become the scapegoat.
Instead of continuing with unenforceable decrees, the government should shift focus towards sustainable alternatives that are within reach.
The writer is a Principal Correspondent at The Morung Express. Comments can be sent to imkongwalls@gmail.com
