top of page

By:

Dr. Sanjay Joshi

31 August 2024 at 3:05:29 pm

Why is India Considered the Most Polluting Nation?

In the span of a few decades, India transformed from a clean, green country to a nation struggling under the weight of plastic pollution. About 30–35 years ago, when I used to travel to a small town near Pune to visit my parents, the landscapes of almost all the villages and towns on the way were open, green, and clean. Vast stretches of grassland, dotted with a few trees and bushes, created a sense of calm and natural beauty. Those journeys were marked by freshness and simplicity, where...

Why is India Considered the Most Polluting Nation?

In the span of a few decades, India transformed from a clean, green country to a nation struggling under the weight of plastic pollution. About 30–35 years ago, when I used to travel to a small town near Pune to visit my parents, the landscapes of almost all the villages and towns on the way were open, green, and clean. Vast stretches of grassland, dotted with a few trees and bushes, created a sense of calm and natural beauty. Those journeys were marked by freshness and simplicity, where nature still dominated the surroundings. Gradually, however, the scenery began to change. Plastic bottles, polythene bags, and other waste materials slowly started appearing along the roadsides and in open fields. What was once an occasional sight has now become an alarming reality. Today, if you travel through the same landscapes, you are likely to be shocked by the extent of plastic litter covering them. Tree branches now appear “decorated” with hanging polythene bags. Many more lie scattered on the ground, while some are seen ‘flying’ in the air, carried by the slightest breeze or a sudden whirlwind. Large and small plastic bottles, wrappers, and containers are spread everywhere, almost as if they are ‘adorning’ the landscape. The natural beauty has been replaced by an unsettling image of neglect and carelessness. The situation in cities is no different. A few decades ago, even small and large cities were relatively free from plastic waste. Today, however, almost all cities in India have literally turned into “Plastic Cities,” where plastic litter has become a common and accepted sight. Interestingly, although India tops the global list as the most plastic-polluting nation, its per capita plastic consumption and waste generation are much lower than in many other countries. For example, Belgium has the highest recorded per capita plastic waste generation, averaging 147.7 kg per person per year, followed by the USA and other high-income developed countries, including China. In comparison, India generates only about 11 kg of plastic waste per person per year. By this measure, India ranks almost at the bottom globally. This naturally raises an important question: if our per capita plastic waste generation is so low, why is India considered the most plastic-polluting country? The answer lies in multiple systemic challenges. The first and most critical is the lack of proper infrastructure to collect, segregate, and process plastic waste efficiently. Segregation at the source of generation is the most essential step in waste management, and this is precisely where we lag far behind countries like Belgium and others. As mentioned in my earlier articles, residents often dispose of unsegregated or mixed waste either along roadsides—leading to the formation of foul-smelling garbage heaps—or into municipal dustbins. These are then collected by the employees of urban local bodies, who themselves have limited facilities to deal with mixed waste effectively. It has been observed that most towns and cities lack proper waste-processing plants with sanitary landfill sites. Instead, they follow crude and outdated methods such as dumping or landfilling mixed and unsegregated waste. There is a severe shortage of modern sanitary landfills and advanced recycling facilities across the country. Another crucial missing link is the absence of Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) in most cities. An MRF is a dedicated facility where mixed or unsegregated, non-compostable solid waste can be temporarily stored and systematically sorted. It allows authorised agencies and the informal sector to segregate, recover, and recycle valuable materials before the remaining waste is sent for processing or disposal. The establishment of MRFs is a vital step towards scientific and sustainable plastic waste management. Unfortunately, their absence in most urban centres continues to weaken India’s ability to handle plastic responsibly, turning a low per capita waste generator into one of the world’s most visible plastic polluters. More on this in my next article. Till then, have a good weekend! (The author is an environmentalist. Views Personal.)

Lingua Pragmatica

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

As Southern leaders like M.K. Stalin rage against Hindi, Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu offers a model of pragmatism over parochialism.

Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh

Amid the cacophony of opposition in southern states to Hindi, Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu has taken a markedly pragmatic stance by remarking recently in the state Assembly that there was no harm in learning other languages. Hindi, Naidu noted, was useful for communication across India, particularly in political and commercial hubs like Delhi. His remarks, though avoiding explicit mention of the NEP, were widely seen as an endorsement of multilingualism and a rebuke to the linguistic chauvinism that has gripped parts of the South.


Few issues in India stir political passions quite like language. It is not merely a means of communication but a marker of identity, a relic of colonial resistance, and a source of political mobilization. In the southern states, where anti-Hindi sentiment has long been entrenched, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and its three-language formula have reignited old tensions. No state embodies this defiance more than Tamil Nadu, where the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by M.K. Stalin has framed the policy as an assault on its linguistic autonomy.


Naidu’s words, welcomed by his ally and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, mark a sharp contrast with the DMK’s position. Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Hindi dates back to the 1930s, when C. Rajagopalachari’s attempt to introduce it in schools met with fierce resistance. The anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s cemented the DMK’s ideological stance, with its first Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai, famously warning that Hindi imposition could push Tamil Nadu towards secession.


The question, however, is whether this rigid opposition serves Tamil Nadu’s interests. While Stalin, with an eye to the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, has been relentlessly portraying Hindi as a threat to his state’s regional identity, Naidu, a partner of the BJP-led Centre, is framing it as a tool for economic mobility. His argument is not that Hindi should replace Telugu or English but that it offers a competitive advantage.


The economic case for multilingualism is compelling. Indians who speak multiple languages tend to have better job prospects, higher earnings and greater geographic mobility. Andhra Pradesh’s Telugu-speaking diaspora is a case in point. Telugus make up a significant proportion of Indian-origin professionals in the United States, the Gulf, and Southeast Asia as Naidu pointed out, hinting that this success story was built not on linguistic rigidity but on adaptability.


In a country where inter-state migration is rising and where Hindi remains the most widely spoken language, refusing to learn it amounts to self-imposed isolation. Tamil Nadu’s approach, by contrast, risks limiting its youth. The DMK government has refused to implement the three-language policy, keeping schools strictly bilingual with Tamil and English. Its justification that Hindi is not necessary for global success could be true in a narrow sense but ignores the domestic context. If Tamil filmmakers can dub their movies into Hindi to expand their audience, why should Tamil students be denied access to the language that could open more doors for them within India?


The DMK has accused successive central governments, particularly under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of pushing Hindi at the expense of regional languages. Yet, rejecting Hindi outright is an overcorrection. The reality is that Hindi is an important language in India’s economic and political landscape. Naidu’s position, one of accommodation rather than confrontation, offers a middle ground that other Southern leaders would do well to consider.


Some states already recognize this. Karnataka, despite its own history of linguistic pride, has allowed Hindi to be taught as an optional language. Kerala, whose migrants work in Hindi-speaking regions and the Gulf, has been less hostile to Hindi education. Naidu’s model, balancing regional identity with practical necessity, offers a way forward. Languages should be embraced, not politicized. Southern leaders would do well to listen to him.

Comments

bottom of page