Kochi fire must be an eye-opener for cities, state governments

Waste management systems are often failing in India, the latest example being the land dump at Brahmapuram in Ernakulam District, Kerala. The land dump of Kochi Municipal Corporation (KMC) located at Brahampuram, about 20 km away from the city, caught fire a week ago, and the efforts to douse the fire are still going on.

No one can ascertain neither what went wrong this time, nor what could be done to prevent such a disaster in the future. There are allegations of nepotism, corruption, lack of efficiency, and accountability as every such anthropogenic disaster unfolds. As the smoke continues to grapple the land dump and its surroundings covering an area of more than 25+ km radius depending on the wind direction. It is worthwhile to understand the framework of waste management for the KMC and the actors in it, and the roles they are expected to perform.

A Flop Show

To borrow an analogy from the world of cinema, this waste management movie now showing in Kochi and its suburbs is based on a very weak script, and yet the producer and director blame the lead actor, the censor board is reticent on the certificate (license) issued, while the movie goers blame the director for its flop show!

Also read: 'Operation Safe Breath' which contained Kochi garbage fire gets appreciation

Who is the producer, the director, the censor board, and the lead actor?

There are four main players in KMC’s waste management framework, and they are: the state government (the producer cum co-director), the state pollution control board(the censor board), the city municipal corporation(the director), and the private company contracted to process the waste (the actor)

The challenge here is to define the roles and responsibilities of each of these players without overlapping their functions, maintaining the principle of subsidiarity, and ensuring that each player remains accountable without it turning into a blame game.

Continuing with the above analogy, in Kochi’s case the producer and director are blaming the actor , when the former two are the ones calling the shots. The producer-director duo have misread the demands of the audience (the citizens of Kochi) and have made the lead actor the scapegoat. In doing so, they are unsuccessfully trying to deflect the blame from them onto the actor. The censor board is silent or failed in their responsibilities as the question arises on how come the censor board could release such a movie given the allegation against the script is debated.

Different Stages Of Failure

Brahmapuram vindicates the classic failures of the decentralised governance. The past 25 years of waste management in Kochi often saw interferences from the state government, and directives from the High Court of Kerala. With the advent of the Municipal Solid Waste (Management & Handling) Rules (MSW Rules), 2000, and the directions from the high court, the KMC became duty-bound to establish the infrastructure for management of solid waste generated in the city.

Also read: Many leave Kochi as toxic fumes continue

This led to the search of a land at the outskirts of the city. The KMC tried to work out a plan with the neighbouring municipalities to ensure a minimum of 250 to 300 tonnes of waste reaching Brahmapuram daily to sustain the plant’s operations. At different stages, different technologies and operators were introduced, but every attempt failed in its substance and sustenance, amidst the frequent visits of the officials to other cities to choose the best possible solution for Kochi. None of them fructified due to various reasons, the most prominent being the dumping of mixed waste.

Accountability

The question here is who gets to decide, and how is waste management done. What is the expertise and the capacity built within the KMC to assess and categorise the waste produced in Kochi, and what are the scientific approach to treat them. Even though the role of a regulator like the pollution control board is articulated in the MSW Rules, what is the efficiency and efficacy of its monitoring mechanism, and how accountable is the regulatory institution? Is it truly independent and audited for its performance?

In Kochi, most of the directions regarding the type of waste processing to be adopted come from the state government. Even at the state level, what is the institutional capacities of those involved in decision-making and management?

The concerns and objections raised by the local body is often overruled by the state government. Local bodies are not strengthened by setting up labs to test the air, soil, and water quality, and are not helped by appointing experts with domain knowledge. The lack of availability and transparency of data and information in the public domain is not helping social audits and community involvement either, though community involvement is expected to be a key factor as per the MSW Rules.

Empower Local

Waste management in a city demands for the assessment of the local ecosystem and it is a continuous process to track with the changing patterns in the city development. The local body administration needs to be professionally equipped to deal with the fast-changing trends in consumption patterns. The decisions cannot be imposed on them from the state capital. Awareness creation and community involvement using scientific data is vital to the success of the MSW Rules. There should not be any conflict of interests in defining the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders.

Let’s hope the Brahampuram incident is an eye-opener for all cities, and state governments across India learn from it.

(D Dhanuraj is Chairman, Centre for Public Policy Research, Kochi, and Ananthitha Anandan is General Manager, ULTRA TECH.)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.