Relevance: GS-2- Issues relating to the development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources

Key Phrases: SBM 2.0, Extended Producer Responsibilities, National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4), Material Recovery Facilities (MRF), waste incinerators, Circular Economy, Wuppertal Institute

Context:

• Many environmental policies and guidelines like Extended Producer Responsibilities, Refuse Derived Fuels, Single Use Plastics enhance the demand for technological interventions to supplement the SBM for effective waste management.
• Recently, under SBM there is a massive policy shift in the waste management landscape, promoting the use of technology as a common tool.
• Likewise, the launch of SBM 2.0 on October 2, 2021 further signals the government’s continued focus on improving waste management in the country with technology in focus.

About Swachh Bharat Mission:

• Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) was launched in 2014 with the aim of ensuring a ‘Clean India’ by 2nd October 2019 as a fitting tribute to Mahatma Gandhi on his 150th Birth Anniversary.

Objectives of the Swachh Bharat Mission:

1. Eliminate open defecation.
2. Conversion of insanitary toilets to pour-flush toilets.
3. Eradication of manual scavenging.
4. 100% collection and scientific processing/disposal reuse/recycle of Municipal Solid Waste.
5. To bring about a behavioural change in people with regards to healthy sanitation practices.
6. To create an enabling environment for private sector participation in Capital Expenditure and Operation & Maintenance (O&M) costs.

Components of the Swachh Bharat Mission:

1. Construction of household toilets.
2. Community & public toilets.
3. Solid waste management.
4. Information, Education & Communication (IEC) and Public Awareness.
5. Capacity building and administrative & office expenses (A&OE).

Swachh Bharat Mission-Urban 2.0:

1. Envisions to make all cities ‘Garbage Free’ and ensure grey and black water management in all cities.
2. Make all urban local bodies as ODF+ and those with a population of less than 1 lakh as ODF++.
3. The Mission will focus on source segregation of solid waste, utilizing the principles of 3Rs (reduce, reuse, recycle), scientific processing of all types of municipal solid waste and remediation of legacy dumpsites for effective solid waste management.
4. The outlay of SBM 2.0 is around ₹1.41 lakh crore.
5. Make Swachhta a Jan Andolan.

Swachh Bharat Mission-Rural 2.0:

1. Emphasizes on the sustainability of achievements under phase I and to provide adequate facilities for Solid/Liquid & plastic Waste Management (SLWM) in rural India.
2. Implemented from 2020-21 to 2024-25 in a mission mode with a total outlay of ₹1.41 lakh crores under SBM 2.0 .
3. Inclusion of plastic waste management, Biodegradable solid waste management (including animal waste management), Greywater (Household Wastewater) management and Faecal sludge management.

Underlying challenges associated with Swachh Bharat Mission:

1. More emphasis on toilet construction rather than focussing on all parameters.
2. Even the ODF status has been questioned by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India in a September 2018 report.
3. Many reports alleged that there is over-reporting of government set targets of toilet construction.
4. High levels of coercion have been used to build the toilets and behavioral change has been slow to follow.
5. Concerns regarding the durability and quality of construction of toilets.
6. The National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4), 2016-17 found that open defecation remained fairly high in the rural areas of the BIMARU states – Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Orissa, and Uttar Pradesh.
7. Despite considerable progress in the door to door waste collection, only one-third of the waste being generated is being processed.

What are the existing technological interventions under SBM ?

• Mosaic of different technological models:
  1. These dynamic models range from capital intensive centralised solutions like waste incinerators to labour intensive decentralised solutions like Material Recovery Facilities (MRF) involving the informal sector.
  2. Focus on waste reduction is mainly seen through policies, such as plastic bans, and not yet in technology.
• Waste Incinerators vs Circular Economy:
  1. Waste incineration is one of the easiest ways for waste management.
  2. The main issue with a waste incinerator is that it is poor in recovering the resources embedded in the waste in a climate friendly way vis a vis other technology options.
  3. Europe has realised the problems caused due to the establishment of incinerators.
  4. In a paper published by the Wuppertal Institute, the authors identify excess capacity of incinerators as a key barrier in achieving the establishment of a closed loop circular economy in Europe.
• Indian strategy based on 'less energy recovery, more resources recovery':
  1. In the Prime Minister’s speech at the launch of SBM 2.0, there was no mention of energy recovery from waste by incineration, rather resource recovery through waste sorting in MRFs and recycling.
  2. He also emphasised on source segregation of waste into wet and dry.
• Lack of expertise and technology 'know-how' :
  1. Technological choices require specialist knowledge and expertise which most Urban Local Bodies (ULB) do not have access to.
  2. This constrains the urban local bodies capacity to make right technology choices.

What are the meaningful technology adaptation based solutions offered by the editor ?

1. Ensure ease in availability and accessibility of technology:
   • Bring expertise from national and international experiences and create, amongst others, a master pool of trainers that can work with the ULBs across the country.
2. Institutional Mechanism both at National and State level:
   • Institutionalised decision support systems for technology choices and be set up within the government systems.
   • Technical advisory groups with multi-disciplinary expertise can be set up at State and national level.
   • These Technical advisory consultancies can be consulted before and during the development of infrastructure.
   • IT based self-assessment and data enabled decision-making tools for waste processing technologies can support smaller cities for which capacity gaps are wider than metro cities.
3. Community participation in decision making :
   • Local communities through the power of social media can wield significant influence on local government institutions so that they choose to, or are forced to, open the black box of decision-making processes.

Conclusion:

• Lack of technological know-how was one of the main reasons for the partial success of SBM in solid waste management. Now, SBM 2.0 is committing to funding a significant portion of the project cost for technological interventions, thereby hoping to achieve the GoI target of waste disposal sites being free from old waste by March 2023.
• Moreover, the role of a well-capacitated Commissioner, with access to the requisite technical backstopping, would be critical in enabling the transformation to a Clean India and realising success factors of SBM 2.0.
• Critical to this transformation would be the technological choices made by the transformed city governments.

Source: The Hindu

Mains Question:

Q. Despite many efforts for 100٪ waste processing under Swachh Bharat Mission, it is still a long distance dream. In this background, analyse the significance of technological interventions to achieve GoI's target of making waste disposal sites free from old waste by March 2023. (15 marks).