Sunday Reading
New Delhi, 9 December 2009
Helping Environment
INITIATE LOCAL
INNOVATION
By Suraj Saraf
While world statesmen are busy holding global parleys to
face threats to humanity being posed by climate change resulting in global
warming, it would be pertinent to mention what India’s President, Pratibha Patil has strongly advocated i.e the
need to adopt innovative approach to tackle the minatory situation at the grass-root
level.
“World attention is focused on the Copenhagen (climate change) conference. I
think our grassroots local innovation can be useful not only for national
problems but also for world problems and answer for our second Green Revolution
and climate change,” she said while addressing the recent Fifth National
Grassroots Innovation Awards in the country’s capital, New Delhi.
She underlined that it was not necessary that high-tech
facilities were required for an innovation. “It is a fallacy to think that
innovation is a high-end activity that takes place only in sophisticated laboratories.
Innovation is a wide-ranging term that could mean technological, a fresh way of
management or a different way of doing the same task but which would result in
better performance,” emphasized President Patil.
Further, she maintained that innovation could be the result
of accumulation of collective knowledge of a civilization. “It is important
this knowledge is preserved and when used due recognition and recompense given
to the holders of traditional knowledge.” The outlay for research and development
in national plans must go up manifold and the “government should embark on
laying down a National Innovation Policy to bring about the much-needed
coordination among various initiatives in research, education, agriculture,
medicine and business.
It has also been highlighted that the quality of research
should be upgraded and institutions and agencies receiving funds must be made
“fully accountable. The result of innovation should be harnessed to become
products and services for the betterment of society. However, this translation
is often unpredictable and long-drawn requiring substantial efforts.
According to an earlier world report on “Development and
Environment”, many developing countries in recent years had begun to develop
policies and institutions for tackling environmental problems. The report specifically
underlined the fact that because developing countries had to start from scratch
and because their problems were extremely pressing, they had sometimes
considered solutions that were untried or little used in the industrial world.
This was not a conjecture but that a number of cases were
cited wherein the instances of innovative approaches to the environmental
situation from developing nations were quoted. One, the report had cited control
from pollution from transport in Mexico where a combination of regulations
and incentives had been used. These were claimed to be less costly than
regulation alone because they discouraged driving whereas most industrial
(developed) countries encourage the use of cleaner engines and fuels. In Mexico measures
such as gasoline taxes were being used to reduce demand and shift the travel
towards less polluting modes of transport.
In Thailand,
an Industrial Environment Fund had been proposed to finance the treatment of
hazardous waste from industrial sources. The fund would be financed from
charges on waste generation, and its proceeds would be used to establish and
operate central treatment and disposal facilities.
In line with “polluter pays” principle, the fund would be
financed from waste charges that would first be estimated for each industry and
later verified by environmental auditing. The charge would be set at a level to
cover the cost of transport, treatment and disposal of hazardous waste and provide
a margin for implementing the programme. Interestingly, all factories would deposit
with the fund their waste charge for the entire year.
Plants that attained lower waste per unit of the output, as
verified by accredited private environmental auditing firms, would then be
eligible for rebate in the operation of the treatment and disposal facilities
would be contracted out to private waste management firms through competitive
bidding.
Clearly, the main message of this initiative is that
pollution control costs could be maintained if the incentives are right, according
to the report. The more efficient an industry’s production process, the less
waste it generates and the less it pays for waste treatment and disposal. Indeed,
the scheme has given the industry an incentive to reduce waste and encourage
developing business opportunities in hazardous waste management.
A study of air pollution in Southern
Poland found net benefits to be the highest if stricter control on
emissions of suspended particulate matter rather than on emissions of both
particulates and sulphur dioxide were enforced. Apparently, the costs of
protecting and improving the environment appear at first sight to be large, yet
such investments must and can be afforded. With good policies, the costs are
modest in comparison with the potential gains from improved efficiency and
economic growth.
In all likelihood, most investments would pay for themselves.
Such investments must and can by afforded with good policies. Moreover, costs
are modest in comparison with potential gains. But increased international
support would be essential, the report advocated. It also added that local
environmental concerns needed to be better embedded in official assistance
programmes, and the close link between environmental quality and poverty
reduction warranted additional support.
The advocacy for innovative approach to face challenge of environmental
control (and thus climate change and global warming), by President Patil does come
timely for India.
If given proper heed, Union Environment and Forest Minister Jairam Ramesh would
not have reported to lament again that if there were any Nobel Prize for dirt
and filth, India
would get it. He is learnt to have done so at a function while releasing a
report on “Green India, 2047.” Said the overview of the report,” Our limited
analysis suggests that unclean air and water may be taking toll in terms of
over eight lakh deaths in the country each year and morbidity costs amounting
to 3.6 per cent of the GDP.” It is time
that our political class encourages innovation at the local level and have
something to share with the rest of the world. –INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|