teri environmental survey - india water portal...mr rahul singh, research assistant, the energy and...

TERI Environmental Survey2013

The Energy and Resources Institute

TERI Environmental Survey

2013


©The Energy and Resources Institute, 2013

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without prior permission in writing to The Energy and Resources Institute, New Delhi, India, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate organizations. Enquiries concerning reproduction should be sent to the address


Darbari Seth Block, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi RoadNew Delhi – 110003, India

This material has been funded by UK aid from the UK Government. However, the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the UK Government’s official policies.

Advisors:

Dr R K Pachauri, Director-General, The Energy and Resources InstituteDr Ligia Noronha, Executive Director (Research Co-ordination), The Energy and Resources InstituteMr R K Batra, Distinguished Fellow, The Energy and Resources InstituteDr J V Sharma, Senior Fellow, The Energy and Resources InstituteDr Suneel Pandey, Senior Fellow, Thew Energy and Resources InstituteDr Arabinda Mishra, Director, Earth Science and Climate Change Division, The Energy and Resources Institute Mr Anshuman, Associate Director, Water Resources Division, The Energy and Resources Institute

Project Team:

Ms Ipsita Kumar, Research Associate, The Energy and Resources InstituteMr Rahul Singh, Research Assistant, The Energy and Resources InstituteMr Souvik Bhattacharjya, Associate Fellow, The Energy and Resources InstituteMs C Sita Lakshmi, Research Associate, The Energy and Resources InstituteMr Saswata Chaudhury, Associate Fellow, The Energy and Resources InstituteDr Shilpi Kapur Bakshi, Fellow, The Energy and Resources InstituteMs Nidhi Srivastava, Associate Fellow, The Energy and Resources InstituteDr Bibhu Prasad Nayak, Associate Fellow, The Energy and Resources InstituteDr Kavita Sardana, Assistant Professor, TERI University

Editorial Team:

Ms Hemambika Varma, Editor, The Energy and Resources InstituteMs Harsha Meenawat, Associate Fellow, The Energy and Resources InstituteMs Nandini Mathur, Assistant Editor, The Energy and Resources InstituteMs Arpita Dasgupta, Assistant Editor, The Energy and Resources InstituteMr R K Joshi, Graphic Designer, The Energy and Resources InstituteMr Rajiv Sharma, Graphic Designer, The Energy and Resources InstituteMr Santosh Kumar Singh, Graphic Designer, The Energy and Resources Institute

Published by The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)Website: www.teriin.org

iii

ContentsForeword ...................................................................................................................................................................v

Acknowledgement .....................................................................................................................................................vii

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................... ix

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................1

2. Methodology ..................................................................................................................................................... 3

3. Environmental Domains ...................................................................................................................................... 5

4. Results from Bangalore ...................................................................................................................................... 15

5. Results from Chennai ......................................................................................................................................... 25

6. Results from Delhi .............................................................................................................................................. 37

7. Results from Hyderabad ..................................................................................................................................... 51

8. Results from Kolkata ......................................................................................................................................... 61

9. Results from Mumbai ......................................................................................................................................... 71

10. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................... 83

11. Annexure ........................................................................................................................................................... 87

v

In recent months and years there has been considerable debate on what is seen as the conflict between environment and development. There are, in particular, some serious problems associated with environmental clearance for a number of activities in areas which would involve encroachment

on forest land and tree cover of various kinds. Fortunately, in a democratic system of government, it is the will of the people that will prevail, and often if transgressions take place in violating the environmental space that we have inherited, the public would retaliate by demanding very strict and stringent measures. To some extent, this is already happening in some parts of the country as a symptom of a much larger problem, which unfortunately has reached serious proportions.

The issue assumes much greater significance and a somewhat different meaning when we consider some of our large metropolitan areas. Our towns and cities, particularly the largest ones, are often populated by people who have lost their linkages with nature, and are often seen to be generally opposed to any legislation or action to protect the environment. It is also a fact that often towns and cities possess disproportionately large power in influencing public opinion, resource allocation decisions, and policies. In order to generate knowledge on the perceptions that people carry in our largest cities, TERI carried out this very valuable survey of perceptions related to the environment, the results of which are very revealing. It is intended that this very first survey will become a regular annual exercise, so that we not only capture public attitudes on the issue of environment versus development, but also the changes that take place over time. Also, it would be useful to focus on some specific themes or subjects to define public perceptions and how they are measured from time to time. While releasing this very first survey, I would like to congratulate my colleagues who have worked very hard to put the conceptual framework for this study together and to implement it with enormous effort and diligence. We hope through the completion of this very first project we would be able to contribute, at least in a modest way, to understanding the realities underlying what people feel about the environment in the major metropolitan areas of India.

R K Pachauri, Ph.D

Director-General, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)

Foreword

vii

At the outset, we are grateful to the Department for International Development (DFID), Government of United Kingdom, for supporting this project. We thank all the individuals from six different cities who have spent their valuable time in responding to our survey

questionnaire patiently. We take this opportunity to thank Dr R K Pachauri, Director-General, TERI, for his overall mentoring as well as his invaluable support and encouragement throughout the project. We express our sincere thanks to Dr Ligia Noronha, Executive Director (Research Coordination), TERI, for her guidance throughout the research process. We are thankful to Mr R K Batra (Distinguished Fellow), Dr J V Sharma (Senior Fellow), Dr Suneel Pandey (Senior Fellow), Dr Arabinda Mishra (Director), and Mr Anshuman (Associate Director) for sharing their valuable comments in shaping this report. We also thank our colleagues Mr Aditya Ramji, Ms Ritika Sehjpal, Dr G Mini, and Mr Vivek Jha for their research inputs. We acknowledge the support of the Ralibha Design Management Studio for conducting the extensive field survey in six major cities of India. We acknowledge the support of Language No Bar for translating the survey questionnaires into various regional languages.

We sincerely acknowledge the support of Ms Hemambika Varma, Ms Harsha Meenawat, Ms Nandini Mathur, Ms Arpita Dasgupta, Mr R K Joshi, Mr Rajiv Sharma, and Mr Santosh Kumar Singh for editing and designing this final report. Finally, we thank Ms Kiran Shivpuri for her efficient secretarial assistance.

Acknowledgements

ix

India has been growing at an average GDP growth rate of 8.025 per cent for the last eight years (Ministry of Finance, 2013). The cities, in

particular, have grown at rapid rates according to the Census of India 2011. The urban population increased from 286.1 million in 2001 to 377.1 million in 2011, at an average annual growth rate of 2.76 per cent. Rapid urbanization has resulted in environmental degradation caused by increased pressures on the limited land available, leading to reduced open spaces, increased air and water pollution, and problems of waste disposal and its management. Various climate related changes pose additional stresses.

The 2013 Human Development Report highlights that “unless people can participate meaningfully in events and processes that shape their lives, national human development paths will neither be desirable nor sustainable.” Keeping this view in mind, the 2013 TERI Environmental Survey sought to assess people’s perceptions, behaviour, awareness, and opinions towards the environment. The findings of this survey, it is hoped, will feed into policy and implementation measures in the context of moving towards sustainable metros (and if possible, sustainable cities).

Six themes were selected for the study: overall environment, air quality, water quality, forest/green cover, climate change, and waste and waste management.

The survey was conducted in the six most populous cities in India with a total sample of 4,039, distributed as a proportion of the total population of these six cities. The cities of Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi NCR, Hyderabad, Kolkata, and Mumbai were chosen and the sample was spread across the cities to capture diversities of localities, age groups, occupation, education, income, and so on.

The key findings for each city are highlighted below.

Results from different environmental domainsOverall EnvironmentThe views on the overall environment were assessed in terms of perceptions of the state of the environment over time in the different cities, awareness and perception towards government policies for different environmental domains, the role of various actors in environmental protection, and its interplay with development. The responses have been varied for the aforementioned parameters.

Air quality for the respondents in the six cities over time has either become worse or has seen no change. In terms of drinking water quality and availability, there is a perception that it has improved in all cities barring Hyderabad, where the respondents felt it has worsened. Surface

Executive Summary

x

Execut i ve Summary

water quality is seen to have worsened in all cities apart from Mumbai (no change). Five cities have seen worsening of ground water availability (excluding Chennai) and tree and forest cover (excluding Mumbai), and all six cities have seen a decline in the number and species of birds and animals. Respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Hyderabad have seen deterioration of waste and waste management in their city, while respondents from Kolkata and Mumbai have seen an improvement.

Assessments of how aware people are of government policies relating to different environmental domains provided a mixed picture. Respondents from Hyderabad, Kolkata, and Mumbai felt that policies on air quality existed, but were inadequate or not well implemented. Respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Kolkata, and Mumbai felt that the policies on water pollution were well implemented, while respondents from Hyderabad felt the policies were inadequate or not well implemented. Respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Kolkata, and Mumbai perceived that policies on water availability existed and were well implemented. Respondents from Hyderabad felt that the policies were not well implemented or were inadequate. Waste and waste management policies in Bangalore, Chennai, and Hyderabad were perceived to be inadequate or not well implemented. Kolkata respondents were equally divided in their perceptions that policies were well implemented and not well implemented/inadequate. Delhi respondents indicated a significant lack of awareness of policies on all environmental domains. Respondents from Chennai also showed a lack of awareness on policies related to air pollution and climate change. The majority of the respondents from other cities were aware of policies related to forest conservation and climate change, but felt that they were inadequate or not well implemented. The respondents’ opinions on groups, which should take the lead in protecting the environment, varied across the cities. The respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Mumbai felt that the government should take the lead, followed by

business. Respondents from Kolkata stated that the government should take the lead, following which consumers/citizens should be proactive. In Hyderabad, however, respondents felt that academic and research organizations should take the lead while the government came second.

A global debate exists on whether protecting the environment hinders the imperative of development. Respondents were asked for their opinions on this debate and varied responses were received from the different cities. Nearly equal numbers of respondents from Chennai felt that the two go hand in hand or that environmental protection should be prioritized (approximately 30 per cent each). Delhi was the only city where nearly 59 per cent felt that environmental protection and development could go hand in hand. Nearly 85 per cent of the respondents in Hyderabad felt that environmental protection and development should be treated differently, with a majority of respondents amongst this 85 per cent responding that development should be prioritized. Only 1 per cent of the respondents in Kolkata felt that environmental protection and development go hand in hand, with nearly 65 per cent of the respondents stating that environmental protection should be given priority. Equal numbers of respondents from Mumbai stated that the two go hand in hand and development should be prioritized (approximately 34 per cent each). The majority of respondents from Bangalore could not say or did not know.

Yes, they should be treated differently and the government should prioritizedevelopmentYes, they should be treated differently and the government should prioritizeenvironmental protectionNo, environment protection and development go hand in handCan’t sayDon’t know

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Figure I: Views on Environment Protection and Development in the Six Cities

TERI Env i ronmenta l Su rvey 2013

xi

AirThe views of respondents on air quality was obtained through their perceptions of the sources of air pollution in their cities, impacts of air pollution on human health, usage of public transport as an action to reduce air pollution, and their perceptions of the strategies adopted by the government to improve air quality in the cities. Amongst the various causes of air pollution, the respondents were asked for their opinions on the top two causes pertaining to their city. The transport sector was ranked the highest followed by factories in and around the city as the second highest contributor towards air pollution in Chennai, Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai. The respondents from Bangalore rated factories as the highest contributor followed by transport, and those in Hyderabad rated construction activities in the city as the worst offender followed by the transport sector.

Given that the transport sector was seen as a major contributor to air pollution in all cities, the respondents were asked whether they use public transport more than three times a week. More than 50 per cent respondents in all cities and as many as 90 per cent respondents in Bangalore used public transport more than three times a week.

The respondents were asked for their reasons for using or not using public transport. The respondents from Hyderabad used public transport because they felt it is good for the environment. Respondents from Chennai and

Mumbai used public transport to save time and the majority of the respondents from Delhi cited all of the above as their reason for choosing public transport. For those who did not use public transport in Chennai, Delhi, and Hyderabad, the main reason was that they do not find it convenient. Respondents from Bangalore and Mumbai felt that the time spent travelling on public transport is more than when using private vehicles. The respondents in Kolkata cited the low frequency of public transport as the main deterrent. Safety concerns were also relatively high for respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Mumbai.

In order to improve air quality in their city, respondents from Hyderabad felt that there is a need to improve the public transport infrastructure in the city. A need to tax private vehicles in Bangalore and Chennai (followed very closely in Chennai by setting up of industrial clusters for industries to enjoy common environment friendly technological facilities) was highlighted to reduce air pollution. Respondents from Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai felt that there is a need to convert all polluting industries into environment friendly ones.

WaterSince water availability is seen as a big concern in all cities, the survey asked the respondents to choose the major causes of water wastage in their

Figure II: Sectors Contributing the Most to Air Pollution in the Six Cities

Transport sector Factories in and around the city

Construction activities Domestic fuel burning Garbage burning

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Enhance public transport infrastructure

Levy heavier congestion tax and other taxes to discourage private vehicles

(taxes on cars)

Convert all polluting industries into environment friendly industries

Set up local industrial clusters to enjoy common environment friendly

facilities to reduce pollution

Stringent monitoring and ensuring environmental standards are met

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Figure III: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Air Quality in the Six Cities

xii

Execut i ve Summary

cities. The survey asked for the respondents’ views on the cost of water supply and whether there is willingness to pay the actual cost of water supply and the relevant billing mechanisms to change current practices (as households in Indian cities do not pay the actual cost of water supply). The respondents were asked for reasons for wastage of water in their city. Respondents from Chennai, Hyderabad, and Mumbai felt that water is being wasted during its distribution to the households. Most respondents from Bangalore felt that water is being wasted due to leakages in taps and faucets in the household, while respondents from Delhi and Kolkata felt that water is being wasted due to overconsumption by consumers.

The respondents were asked whether citizens should pay the actual cost of water supply. Respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Kolkata said that citizens should not pay the actual cost of water, while respondents from Hyderabad and Mumbai felt that citizens should. Quite a large number of respondents from Chennai, Bangalore, Delhi, and Hyderabad stated that they did not know whether they should pay the actual cost of water.

The respondents were asked what their preferred billing mechanism for water delivery to households was, that is, whether they preferred metered or consumption based pricing, fixed or a flat charge for water, or other mechanisms. Most respondents in all cities apart from Chennai preferred metered or consumption based pricing

while Chennai respondents preferred a flat charge on water delivery.

Forest/Green CoverThe forests and green cover in every city is important for recreational and social activities, to reduce air pollution, as well as for the beautification of cities. The survey asked respondents about the frequency of their interface with the green cover in their city and how it can be improved. They were asked for their opinions on the strategies they feel the government should adopt to improve the forest/green cover in the cities. Declaration of protected areas was the best strategy according to the respondents from Bangalore, Delhi, and Kolkata. According to the respondents from Chennai, reclamation of wasteland for parks and other such green zones was considered the best policy; the respondents from Hyderabad and Mumbai felt that the government needs new and improved policies to improve its forest/green cover.

Climate ChangeThe survey asked respondents for their opinions towards climate change and any observed changes in climatic variables like temperature, precipitation, wind pattern, and incidence of extreme events. The respondents were given a broad definition of climate change and were asked whether they felt that the climate was changing. Those respondents who felt that climate was changing were then asked about their perception of changes in the climatic

Figure IV: Major Causes of Wastage of Water in the Six Cities

Leakages from taps/faucets in your house

Leakages during distribution (from municipalities, tankers, etc. to your house)

Too much water used where less is required by us as consumers

I don’t know

Water is not being wasted

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 50% 100%

Improved/new government policies

Reclamation of wasteland

Voluntary activities

Declaration of protected areas

Public-private partnership

Intervention by civil society

organizations

Figure V: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Forest/Green Cover in the Six Cities


xiii

factors in their cities over time. Most respondents in all cities felt that climate change was occurring, except in Chennai, where a very large number of respondents felt that climate change was not occurring.

Respondents from all cities apart from Mumbai perceived that there has been a lot of change in temperature over time in the cities and precipitation or rainfall pattern has also seen some change. In Mumbai, the respondents felt that there has been some change in the temperature, but rainfall/precipitation has seen a lot of change in the city. In terms of wind patterns, all cities saw some change other than Chennai, which was equally divided between a lot of change and no change in wind patterns. Respondents from Delhi, Kolkata, Hyderabad, and Mumbai perceived some changes in terms of extreme events in the city while respondents from Chennai and Bangalore perceived changes to be very high.

Waste and Waste ManagementOn the subject of waste and waste management, the respondents were asked for their opinions on the negative impacts of improper waste management on human health. In Bangalore, Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai, the respondents’ opinion was that the impacts of improper waste and waste management on health are very severe. The respondents from Hyderabad thought the impacts were severe, and equal numbers of respondents from Chennai felt that the impacts were moderate or severe.

The respondents were asked about the waste collection practices in their locality. The majority of the respondents from Delhi said that the waste from their households is collected by private entities, followed closely by public entities. In Bangalore, Kolkata, and Mumbai, waste is being collected by public entities while the majority of the respondents from Chennai and Hyderabad said that waste is being collected through public-private-partnership. A significant number of respondents in Chennai were not aware of who collected the waste from their city.

The respondents were asked for their opinion on a government strategy they thought was best suited to manage the problem of solid waste. Respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Mumbai felt that the best way to manage the problem of solid waste would be to segregate waste at source, that is, it should be segregated by the households. Respondents from Hyderabad and Kolkata felt that the consumers should generate a smaller amount of waste to manage the problem of solid waste.

Following their opinion on the best strategy to manage solid waste in the city, the respondents were asked whether they were willing to segregate their waste at home. Respondents from all cities apart from Kolkata said that they were not willing or not at all willing to segregate their waste. Respondents were also asked the reasons

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Generate less amount of waste Segregate waste at source

Enhance waste recycling capacity User charges I don’t know

Figure VI: Best Strategies to Improve Waste Management in the Six Cities

Not willing at all Not very willing Willing Very willing

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

Total

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Figure VII: Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in the Six Cities

xiv

Execut i ve Summary

for their willingness or unwillingness. The respondents who were unwilling from Chennai, Hyderabad, Kolkata, and Mumbai stated that having two dustbins requires more space in the house. Respondents from Delhi felt that it was the job of the local authority and the respondents from Bangalore felt that it is cumbersome to

segregate the waste. Amongst the respondents who were willing to segregate the waste, those from Bangalore, Kolkata, and Mumbai stated that it was good for the environment while those from Chennai, Delhi, and Hyderabad said that they could use the biodegradable waste for compost making.

1

INTRODUCTION

Today, one in two people in the world live in cities, and another 3 billion are likely to join them by 2050. Majority of this growth

will be seen in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, which sees an increase of approximately 5 million inhabitants every month (Barbier, Renard, Jozan, & Sundar, 2010). Although the cities around the world only occupy 2 per cent of the earth’s land, it accounts for 60–80 per cent of energy consumption and 75 per cent of carbon emissions.1

India is an emerging economy and has been growing with an average GDP growth rate of 8.025 per cent for the last eight years (Ministry of Finance, 2013). The real income in India has been rising for a long period of time and will continue to rise given the accelerated growth rate in the country. The cities, in particular, would expand at rapid rates. According to the Census 2011, the urban population increased from 286.1 million in 2001 to 377.1 million in 2011, at an average annual growth rate of 2.76 per cent. India has the second largest urban system in the world with more than 350 million people living in more than 5,000 cities and it is predicted that close to 600 million will be living in cities by 2030 (Gopal n.d.). Rapid urbanization has caused environmental degradation due to increasing pressure on the limited amount of land available. This has also led to receding open spaces, increasing air and water

pollution, problems with the disposal of waste and its management, and various climate related issues. Figure 1.1 shows the performance of Indian cities across these key indicators of quality of life. None of these indicators meet even the basic standards of service and with a growing population and increasing urbanization; these pressures will continue to rise and may lead to greater strain on the environment.

The citizens or residents of the metro cities are very much responsible through their behaviour and actions in promoting sustainable standard of living. Their responses and perceptions about issues relating to the physical environment they live in is extremely relevant for local policy-makers and for reforming existing policies and designing new policies. The citizens views on different issues related to the environment and the daily problems they may face would give an in-depth knowledge of the situation in the cities. Given that the government at the national and local level have been designing and formulating new and improved policies, it is important to understand the citizens’ behaviour, perception, awareness, and opinion towards their local environment. The findings of this survey will therefore feed directly into policy and implementation measures in the context of moving towards sustainable cities. The 2013 Human Development Report highlights

1 http://www.un.org/en/sustainablefuture/cities.shtml

I n t roduct ion

2

that “unless people can participate meaningfully in events and processes that shape their lives, national human development paths will neither be desirable nor sustainable” (UNDP 2013). Keeping the above view in mind, the objective of this study is to assess people’s perceptions, behaviour, awareness, and opinions towards the environment. Six themes were selected, namely: (i) Overall Environment, (ii) Air Quality, (iii) Water Quality, (iv) Forest/Green Cover, (v) Climate Change, and (vi) Waste and Waste Management. The survey was conducted in the six most populous cities in India, i.e., Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi NCR, Hyderabad, Kolkata, and Mumbai and a total of 4,039 responses were collected, divided according to the population of each city. Prior to this exercise, TERI also conducted an online survey to assess perception, behaviour, awareness, and opinion of people in Delhi and Karnataka towards the environment. The online nature of that survey limited the responses only to people who have internet access. This survey seeks to overcome that limitation as it has been administered as a face-to-face interview exercise. There is a need to understand that almost all the issues addressed in the survey are in fact multi-dimensional and have implications for other environmental domains. While the key pressing issues highlighted in the city-level survey are based on secondary literature, they

may not highlight all the environmental issues the cities face. The key pressing issues also do not form any bias towards the survey results. This report highlights some of the key findings from the survey on the different environmental domains and city level analysis. This report only intends to capture the responses and does not look into the actual state of the environment in the cities. The following chapters describe the methodology for the survey and report on the main findings from the survey on the larger environmental domain followed by a city-wise analysis.

References Barbier, Carine; Renard, Vincent; Jozan, Raphael; and Sundar,

Sanjivi. “Cities: Steering Towards Sustainability.” In Cities: Steering Towards Sustainability, by Pierre Jacquet, Rajendra K Pachauri, and Laurence Tubiana, pp. 17-23. Delhi: TERI Press, 2010.

Gopal, Karuna. “Sustainable Cities for India - Can the Goal be Achieved?” www.futurecities.org. n.d. http://www.futurecities.org/images/media/pdf/Sustainable%20Cities%20-%20Karuna%20Gopal.pdf (accessed April 11, 2013).

McKinsey Global Institute. India’s Urban Awakening: Building inclusive cities, sustaining economic growth. McKinsey & Company, 2010.

Ministry of Finance. Economic Survey 2011–12. New Delhi: Ministry of Finance, Government of India, 2012.

UNDP. Human Development Report 2013, The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World. New York: United Nations Development Programme, 2013.

Water supply

quantity (litres

per capita per

day)

Share of Public

transport (%

total trips)

Parks and open

spaces (square

meters per

capital)

Sewage treated

(% sewage

generated)

Solid waste

collected (% solid

waste generation)

105

150

220

30

50

82

2.7 9 1630

72

100 100 100 100

Current level Basic service standard Best in class

Figure 1.1: Performance of Indian Cities across Key Indicators of Quality of LifeSource: (McKinsey Global Institute, 2010)

3

METHODOLOGY

1 Available at: http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/prov_results_paper1_india.html

This study is based on the survey conducted by TERI with a sample of 4039 households spread across six cities of India. The survey

was conducted between December, 2012 and February, 2013, through face-to-face interviews in each city using a standardized questionnaire. The questionnaire made use of the 5-point rating scale and rank order tools to assess the perception of the respondent towards the environment and its various aspects; and the awareness of the respondent towards causes of environmental

issues in their cities and the relevant actions being taken to address them.

2.1. Site Selection The study was conducted in the six most populous cities in India, as they represent the rapidly changing urban scenario of the country. According to the Census 2011 of the Government of India1, these cities are Delhi NCR, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Bangalore, and Hyderabad. The table below provides a glimpse of the urban

Table 1: Sample Cities, Population, and Number of Samples Collected from Each City

Sample Cities Extended UA Population in 2011* Percentage of Total Population of the Six Cities** Sample Size

Delhi NCR 21,753,486 27.58 1,114

Mumbai 20,748,395 25.01 1,010

Kolkata 14,617,882 17.43 704

Chennai 8,917,749 10.67 431

Bangalore 8,728,906 9.93 401

Hyderabad 7,749,334 9.38 379

Total Population of the Six Cities

82,515,752 100.00 4,039

Source: Census 2011 *Note: Urban Agglomeration (UA): An urban agglomeration is a continuous urban spread constituting a town and its adjoining outgrowths (OGs), or two or more physically contiguous towns together with or without outgrowths of such towns. An Urban Agglomeration must consist of at least a statutory town, and its total population, i.e., all the constituents put together, should not be less than 20,000 as per the 2001 Census. In varying local conditions, there were other similar combinations which have been treated as urban agglomerations satisfying the basic condition of contiguity. Examples: Greater Mumbai UA, Delhi UA, etc. (as per Census 2011, available at: http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/paper2/data_files/India2/1.%20Data%20Highlight.pdf)** Percentage of the Total Population of the Six Cities = (Extended UA Population of the City/Total Population of the Six Cities)*100

4

Methodo logy

agglomeration and the sample size for each city with Delhi emerging as the most populous city and Hyderabad the least populous amongst the six. A sample number of 0.005 per cent of the total population of the six cities was considered ideal for this survey and the survey collected 4,039 responses spread across the study cities. The sample in each city was proportionate to the ratio of population of each city with the total population of all cities combined.

2.2. Sample Selection in the CitiesThe objective of the study was to survey citizens of the six cities representative of diverse segments of society. Property tax zones were taken as a proxy for economic classification after consultation with the Municipal Corporations of the cities. Property tax zones or categories divide all the areas or colonies in each city according to the price of land in the area. The price of land also determines the rental value of the area; and this was used as a proxy to help divide the city into economic sections. For Hyderabad and Chennai, the property tax zones were not available, and therefore, an alternative methodology was applied to ensure representation from each economic category. For Chennai, a study by

the Town and Country Planning Organization (TCPO 2006) was taken as a reference to look at the market value of land in all the localities in Chennai. For Hyderabad, a consultation with the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation was undertaken to divide the localities into the economic zones, and therefore, the selection of sites was more subjective. Within the property tax zones, localities were selected randomly. These localities were further divided into high property tax, medium property tax, and low property tax categories. Since the selection was from urban agglomerations, the sites also included satellite cities with population of more than 20,000.

The survey was conducted in 6 languages to elicit responses from all groups of the cities. Apart from English, the survey was translated into Hindi, Kannada, Telugu, Marathi, and Bengali. It was ensured that the surveyors were well versed in the local language of the cities to capture all aspects of the interaction during the survey.

References TCPO. Trends in Land Prices of Chennai. Available at: http://

www.tcpomud.gov.in/Divisions/IEP/Study.html, Chennai: Town and Country Planning Organization, Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India, 2006.

Figure 3.1: Changes in the State of Air Quality in the Past Five Years

Figure 3.2: Changes in the State of Drinking Water Quality and Availability in the Past Five Years

ENVIRONMENTAL DOMAINS

3.1. Overall Environment

Significant changes are observed in different environmental domains over time in all cities. The views on ‘overall environment’

were obtained through questions on perception towards the state of the environment over time in the different cities, perception and awareness of government policies for different environmental domains, the role of various actors in environmental protection, and the environment-development interface.

The respondents in each city were asked to state their perceptions of these changes. In terms of air quality, the cities of Bangalore, Chennai, and Mumbai cited no change while Delhi, Hyderabad, and Kolkata perceived it as having become worse. In terms of drinking water quality and availability, there is a perception that it has improved in all cities barring Hyderabad, where

the respondents felt it has worsened. Surface water quality and availability has been perceived to have worsened in all cities barring Mumbai where the majority felt there was no change. Groundwater availability, according to the respondents in all cities, has worsened. In Chennai, however, the number of respondents who felt that groundwater availability has worsened was equal to the number of respondents who felt that it has improved. The respondents in all cities apart from Mumbai felt that tree and forest cover has decreased. In Mumbai, the respondents felt that there has been no change in the forest/green cover in the city. The respondents perceived a decrease in the number of birds and animal species in all cities. The majority of the Chennai respondents had no direct experience when it came to birds and animal species. Respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Hyderabad perceived that waste and waste management

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

No change Better Worse No direct experience Don’t know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad


Resu l t s f rom d i f fe rent env i ronmenta l doma ins

6

Figure 3.3: Changes in the State of Surface Water Quality and Availability in the Past Five Years

Figure 3.4: Changes in the State of Ground Water Availability in the Past Five Years

Figure 3.6: Changes in the Number of Birds and Animal Species in the Past Five Years

Figure 3.5: Changes in the State of Tree/Forest Cover and Plant Species in the Past Five Years

Figure 3.7: Changes in the State of Waste and Waste Management in the Past Five Years

had worsened in their city. In Chennai, most respondents did not know whether there has been any noticeable change. On the other hand, respondents from Kolkata and Mumbai felt that the waste and waste management has in fact improved.

The survey asked for people’s perception and awareness of government policies related to the environment. The respondents were asked

whether policies existed, did not exist or they did not know of any policy. If policies existed, respondents were asked to state whether they perceived the policy to be well implemented, not implemented or inadequate. It should be noted that environmental policies exist in all the environmental domains that were asked about and, therefore, if the respondents stated that policies did not exist, they were in fact, not aware of these policies.

In terms of policies on air pollution, the majority of the respondents in Chennai and Bangalore felt that no policies existed, showing their lack of awareness about this. Nearly 70 per cent of the respondents in Delhi were unaware of policies on air pollution. The majority of the respondents in Hyderabad, Kolkata, and Mumbai felt that policies on air pollution existed, but were either inadequate or not well implemented.

For water pollution, the majority of the respondents in Bangalore, Chennai, Kolkata,

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad


Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad



7

and Mumbai stated that policies existed and are well implemented. In Hyderabad, respondents answered that policies existed, but are either inadequate or not well implemented. In Delhi, again, nearly 70 per cent of the respondents were not aware of policies on water pollution. It is interesting to compare this with the previous question where the respondents of all cities other than Mumbai perceived that surface water quality had worsened, which shows conflicting results.

Government policies on water availability show results similar to water pollution, where the respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Kolkata, and Mumbai felt that policies existed and are well implemented. Respondents from Hyderabad felt that policies existed, but are either inadequate or not well implemented. In Delhi, nearly 75 per cent of the respondents were not aware of policies on water availability. Comparing this with the previous question shows similar results, where the respondents of all cities felt that drinking

water quality and availability has improved in all cities apart from Hyderabad.

Respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, and Hyderabad felt that policies on waste management existed, but were not well implemented. The Kolkata respondents were equally divided, with some feeling that waste management policies were well implemented and others saying that they were not well implemented or were inadequate. The majority of the respondents in Mumbai felt that waste management policies were in place and well implemented. Again, Delhi shows a low level of awareness, with over 70 per cent of the respondents not aware of waste management policies. This again is similar to the perception of the respondents on the state of waste management over time, where the respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Hyderabad perceived waste and waste management to have worsened over time.

Figure 3.8: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies on Air Pollution

No government policies exist Policies exist and are well implemented

Policies exist, but are inadequate Policies exist, but not implemented

Don’t know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad



Don’t know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

Figure 3.9: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies on Water Pollution

Figure 3.11: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies on Waste Management



Don’t know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad



Don’t know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

Figure 3.10: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies on Water Availability


8

The majority of the respondents in all cities apart from Delhi perceived that policies on forest conservation are either inadequate or not well implemented. In Delhi, again, more than 75 per cent of the respondents were not aware of policies related to forest conservation. In the previous question, all cities felt that the forest/green cover had worsened over time (barring Mumbai, where respondents perceived no change).

The respondents from Bangalore, Hyderabad, Kolkata, and Mumbai felt that policies on climate change are either inadequate or not well implemented. Respondents from Chennai and Delhi differed on this. In Delhi, nearly 80 per cent and in Chennai, nearly 42 per cent of the respondents were not aware of policies related to climate change.

There has been a lot of debate the world over regarding the interface between environmental protection and development. The debate mainly revolves around whether environmental

protection and development could go hand in hand or whether they should be treated differently, with one being given preference over the other. The respondents were asked whether environmental protection was against the objectives of development, and if it is, which of these should the government prioritize. Every city had different opinions about this.

The majority of the respondents from Bangalore could not decide or did not know the answer to this question. Among those who did respond, the majority felt that the government should prioritize development. Chennai had nearly equal numbers of respondents saying environment protection should be prioritized over development; and environment protection and development go hand in hand. Delhi was the only city where nearly 59 per cent felt that the two could go hand in hand. Nearly 85 per cent of the respondents in Hyderabad felt that environmental protection and development should be treated differently, with the majority of respondents amongst this 85 per cent feeling that development should be prioritized. Only 1 per cent of the respondents in Kolkata felt that environmental protection and development go hand in hand, with nearly 65 per cent of the respondents stating that environmental protection should be given priority, with the rest prioritizing development. An equal number of respondents from Mumbai said that the two go hand in hand and that development should be prioritized over environmental protection.

Figure 3.12: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies on Forest Conservation

Figure 3.13: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies on Climate Change



Don’t know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad



Don’t know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Figure 3.14: Interplay between Environment Protection and Development

Yes, they should be treated differently and the government should prioritizedevelopmentYes, they should be treated differently and the government should prioritizeenvironmental protectionNo, environment protection and development go hand in handCan’t sayDon’t know

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


9

800

600

400

200

0Delhi Mumbai Bangalore Chennai Kolkata Hyderabad

Transport sector Factories in and around the city

Construction activities Domestic fuel burning

Garbage burning

To costreduce To reduce contribution towards vehicular pollution

To save time All three

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

3.2. AirRespondents were asked to rank the two sectors which cause the highest level of air pollution in their city. The transport sector, followed by factories in and around the city received the highest and second highest scores in Chennai, Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai. The respondents from Bangalore rated factories as the highest contributor to air pollution followed by transport, and those in Hyderabad rated construction activities in the city followed by the transport sector as the top two causes of air pollution.

The respondents were asked whether air pollution in cities cause diseases, such as asthma, lung cancer, other respiratory diseases, skin diseases, and so on. Respondents in all cities said that they completely agree with the statement, while most respondents in Chennai felt that air pollution is one of the major contributing factors to these diseases.

Given that the transport sector majorly contributed to air pollution in all cities, the respondents were asked whether they use public transport more than three times a week. More than 50 per cent respondents in all cities and as many as 90 per

Figure 3.15: Sectors Contributing the Most to Air Pollution Figure 3.17: Reasons for Using Public Transport

cent respondents in Bangalore said that they used public transport more than three times a week.

The respondents were asked to give reasons for choosing or avoiding the use of public transport. For those who use public transport in Bangalore and Kolkata, cost saving was the most important factor. The respondents from Hyderabad used public transport because they felt it is good for the environment. Respondents from Chennai and Mumbai used public transport to save time, and the majority of Delhi’s respondents cited all of the above as their reasons for choosing public transport. Amongst those who do not use public transport in Chennai, Delhi, and Hyderabad, the main reason was that they do not find it convenient to use. Respondents from Bangalore and Mumbai felt that the time spent travelling on public transport is more than when using private vehicles. In Mumbai, convenience and frequency of public transport was more of a reason than time spent. The respondents in Kolkata cited the frequency of public transport as their main deterrent. Safety concerns were also relatively high for respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Mumbai.

Figure 3.16: Usage of Public Transport Figure 3.18: Reasons for Not Using Public Transport

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Yes No

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

Unsafe to use Not convenient to use The time spent is more

It is not very frequent Expensive to use

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad


10

The respondents were asked for their opinions on the best strategy the government could adopt in order to improve air quality in their city. Respondents from Hyderabad felt that there is a need to improve the public transport infrastructure in the city. Bangalore and Chennai respondents felt that private vehicles should be taxed followed very closely in Chennai by the suggestion to set up clusters for industries to enjoy common environment-friendly technological facilities. Respondents from Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai felt that there is a need to convert all polluting industries into environment-friendly units.

3.3. WaterWater availability is a big concern in all cities and the respondents were asked for the perceived reasons for wastage of water in their cities. Respondents from Chennai, Hyderabad, and Mumbai felt that water is being wasted during its distribution to households. Most respondents from Bangalore felt that water is being wasted due to leakages in taps and faucets in the household, while respondents from Delhi and Kolkata felt that water is wasted due to overconsumption by consumers.

Water is currently highly subsidized in India and urban Indian households do not pay the actual cost of water. The respondents were asked

whether citizens should pay the actual cost of supply of water. Respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Kolkata said citizens should not pay the actual cost of water, while respondents from Hyderabad and Mumbai felt that citizens should. Quite a large number of respondents from Chennai, Bangalore, Delhi, and Hyderabad stated that they did not know whether they should pay the actual cost of water.

The respondents were asked what their preferred billing mechanism for water delivery to their households was — whether they preferred metered or consumption-based pricing, fixed or a flat charge for water, or some other method. Most respondents in all cities apart from Chennai preferred metered or consumption-based pricing, while Chennai respondents preferred a flat charge on water delivery.

3.4. Forest/Green CoverThe forest and green cover in every city is important as it is needed for social activities, to reduce air pollution as well as for the beautification

Figure 3.19: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Air Quality

Figure 3.20: Major Causes of Wastage of Water

Figure 3.21: Should we pay the actual cost of water?

0% 40% 60% 80%20% 100%

Visit a park in your

neighbourhood

Visit a forest or

adjoining area

Participate in

management of parks

Plant a tree

Gardening at home

Involved in cutting/

chopping of a tree

Never Once a year Once in a month More than onace a month

More than once a week

Leakages from taps/faucets in your house

Leakages during distribution (from municipalities, tankers, etc. to your house)

Too much water used where less is required by us as consumers

I don’t know

Water is not being wasted

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Yes No Don't know

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


11

of urban landscapes. The respondents were asked for their opinions on the strategies they feel the government should adopt to improve the forest/green cover in cities. Declaration of protected areas was the best strategy that the government could adopt according to the respondents from Bangalore, Delhi, and Kolkata. According to respondents from Chennai, reclamation of wastelands for laying out parks was considered the best policy. The respondents from Hyderabad and Mumbai felt that the government needs new and improved policies to increase forest/green cover.

3.5. Climate ChangeThe respondents were given the basic definition of climate change and were asked whether they perceived that climate change was occurring. Most respondents in all cities felt that climate change was indeed occurring. In Chennai, a very large number of respondents also felt that climate change was not occurring. In all the cities, those respondents who felt that climate change was occurring were asked about their perceptions of changes in the different climatic factors in their cities over time.

Respondents from all cities except those from Mumbai perceived that there has been a lot of change in temperature over time in the cities. In Mumbai, the respondents felt that there has been some change in the temperature. Precipitation or rainfall patterns saw some change, according to

the respondents, in all cities apart from Mumbai, where the respondents felt that rainfall/precipitation has undergone a lot of change in their city. In terms of wind patterns, all cities saw some change other than Chennai, which was equally divided between a lot of change and no change in wind patterns. Respondents from Delhi, Kolkata, Hyderabad, and Mumbai perceived some changes in terms of extreme events in their cities, while respondents from Chennai and Bangalore perceived it to be of a very high degree.

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 100%

Improved/new government policies

Reclamation of wasteland

Voluntary activities

Declaration of protected areas


Intervention by civil society

organizations

20% 40% 60% 80%

A lot of change Some change No change at all Don’t know

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

Figure 3.22: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Forest/Green Cover

Figure 3.23: Changes in Temperature over Time

Figure 3.24: Changes in Precipitation/Rainfall over Time

Figure 3.25: Changes in Wind Patterns over Time


12

Figure 3.26: Changes in Extreme Events over Time

Figure 3.27: Collection of Waste from Households

Figure 3.28: Best Strategies to Improve Waste Management

Figure 3.29: Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components

3.6. Waste and Waste ManagementImproper waste disposal and waste management may lead to negative impacts on health, and the respondents were asked for their opinions on the severity of the health impacts. In Bangalore, Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai, the respondents’ opinion was that the impacts are very severe. The respondents from Hyderabad thought the impacts were severe and an equal number of respondents from Chennai felt the impacts were moderate to severe.


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

Public entities Private entities Public-private partnership

Not aware Not collected at all

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Generate less amount of waste Segregate waste at source

Enhance waste recycling capacity User charges I don’t knowNot willing at all Not very willing Willing Very willing

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

Total

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

The respondents were asked about who collected the waste from their households. The majority of respondents from Delhi said that the waste from their households is collected by private entities followed closely by public entities. In Bangalore, Kolkata, and Mumbai, waste is being collected by public entities, while the majority of the respondents from Chennai and Hyderabad said that the waste is being collected through public-private partnership. A significant number of respondents in Chennai were not aware of who collected waste in their city.

The respondents were asked for their opinions on the government strategy they think would be best to manage the problem of solid waste. Respondents from Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, and Mumbai felt that the best way to manage the problem of solid waste would be to segregate waste at source, that is, in the households. Respondents from Hyderabad and Kolkata felt that the consumers should generate a smaller amount of waste to manage the problem of solid waste.

Following their opinions on the best strategy to manage solid waste in the city, the respondents were asked whether they were willing to segregate the waste generated at home. Respondents from all cities apart from Kolkata said that they were not very willing or not willing at all to segregate the waste themselves. The respondents were also asked for the reasons for their willingness or unwillingness. Respondents from Chennai,


13

Figure 3.30: Reasons for Unwillingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components

Figure 3.31: Reasons for Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components

Cumbersome task Requires more space

Local authority’s responsibility Wastes are not collected separately

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Good for the environment Compost making

Already segregate wastes Others

Delhi

Mumbai

Bangalore

Chennai

Kolkata

Hyderabad

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Hyderabad, Kolkata, and Mumbai who were unwilling stated that having two dustbins requires more space in the house. Respondents from Delhi believed that it was the job of the local authority, and the respondents from Bangalore felt that it is cumbersome to segregate household

waste. The respondents from Bangalore, Kolkata, and Mumbai who were willing to segregate the waste stated that doing so would be good for the environment. Respondents from Chennai, Delhi, and Hyderabad said that they could use the biodegradable waste to make compost.

Results from Bangalore

Figure 4.1a: Age Distribution of Respondents in Bangalore

Figure 4.1b: Occupation of Respondents in Bangalore

Results fRom BangaloRe

4.1. Demographics of Bangalore

Located in the southern state of Karnataka, Bangalore is the fifth most populated urban agglomeration in India, surpassing

Hyderabad. It has a population of nearly 8.5 million with a sex ratio of 914. While the sex ratio is better than most other metropolises, it is still lower than the national average of 940 females per 1,000 males. A total of 92.6 per cent of Bangalore’s males and 86.2 per cent of the females are literate.

4.2. Demographics of the SampleThe sample from Bangalore constituted 10 per cent of the total selected sample for the survey. In this sample, the age distribution is represented

in Figure 4.1a. As can be seen from the sample, the age group 25–34 years had the maximum representation of 31 per cent and the minimum representation in the sample was that of the age group 65 years and above. Figure 4.1b represents the occupational distribution in the sample. The respondents are spread across a variety of occupations ranging from the regular salaried within the private sector (38%) to those self-employed or running their own business (31%), to government sector (6%) and even housewives (15%).

Twenty three per cent of the respondents from Bangalore are female. The educational distribution of the city is seen in Figure 4.2, which shows 41 per cent of the sample to be of graduate level and

55 64 (6%)–

45 54 (14%)–

Above 65 (2%)

18 24 (24%)–

25 34 (31%)–

35–44 (25%)

Self-employed/Business

(31%)

Regular salaried (private)

(38%)

Regular salaried (government)

(6%)

Casual / daily wage (1%)

Student (9%)

Housewife (15%)

Resu l t s f rom Banga lo re

18

Figure 4.2: Educational Distribution of Respondents in Bangalore

above, 30 per cent at higher secondary (grade XII) and diploma level, 24 per cent at middle and secondary (up to grade X) level, and up to 6 per cent up to primary school (till grade V) level.

4.3. Key Pressing IssuesBangalore, a city hailed as a centre for science and technology, faces one of the biggest waste management problems. In August 2012, more than 7,000 tonnes of garbage piled up and the city’s civic body, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), was unable to manage the garbage content. The civic body continues to be constantly censured for its inability to deal with the crisis pertaining to waste management (Reddy 2013, The Hindu News Bureau 2012, The Hindu News Bureau 2012, The Hindu News Bureau 2012).

As per the BBMP, Bangalore generates, on average, 3,000 tonnes of waste per day with per capita waste of 350 grams per day (domestic waste). Households, markets, and commercial establishments contribute 54 per cent, 20 per cent, and 17 per cent of the total waste, respectively. The city has 198 wards for management of sanitation functions. The waste collection is mostly carried out by assigned private agencies on contract basis and by the BBMP. About 70 per cent of the Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) activity, starting from primary collection to disposal, has been outsourced and 30 per cent is managed by BBMP. Considering the fact that the amount of waste is

Upto Primary

School (till class V)

(6%)

Middle and

Secondary (Class X)

(24%)

Higher Secondary

(Class XII) and Diploma

(30%)

Undergraduate

and above (41%)

likely to grow due to increasing population, it will present a formidable challenge for the authorities to carry out efficient waste management in the city.

The primary (door to door) collection in the city is performed using pushcarts and auto tippers. However, only 10 per cent of waste is segregated at source. The secondary collection and transportation is done using 600 MSW transportation vehicles by both BBMP and contractors. The waste is then shifted to the treatment sites through compactors and tipper lorries. Since very little segregation of waste happens at source, a lot of unsegregated waste reaches the processing plants (Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagar Palika 2013). This poses a problem at the processing units and has thus, led to the amendment of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 by the Cabinet (The Hindu News Bureau, 2013). As per the amendment, BBMP can penalize citizens for spitting, littering, urinating, and defecating, besides failing to segregate garbage. Some of the Resident Welfare Associations are also performing door-to-door collection wherein the waste is segregated at source and the organic waste is composted in the community.Interestingly, MSW from residential areas is characterized as having a high degree of fermentable component (72% of overall MSW) (Chanakya, Ramachandra and Vijayachamundeeswari 2006, Rajabapaiah 1998). On a household scale, the size of fermentable MSW is quite small and is, thus, suited only for composting and vermicomposting at the household level (Aus-AID 2002). However, in practice, community-scale options, as mentioned above, have been more successful in Bangalore as the household units for composting and vermicomposting either turn malodorous or have problems associated with worm predation or worm migration (TIDE 2000, TIDE 2003, Sathishkumar, Chanakya and Ramachandra 2001, Chanakya, Ramachandra and Vijayachamundeeswari 2006).


19

Measures, such as minimizing production of waste, disaggregation of waste at source, maximizing waste recycling and reuse, encouraging composting and biogasification of organic waste (comprising 72 per cent of the total waste), and encouraging safe disposal of wastes, while ensuring adequate sanitary measures, will certainly help in stopping the transition of Bangalore from being the ‘garden city’ to the ‘garbage city’ of India.

4.4. Results for Bangalore

4.4.1. Overall environment

In order to assess how the residents of Bangalore perceive the state of the environment around them, responses were collected about the state of different environmental dimensions, such as air quality (in terms of clean air, smog, particles, smell), drinking water quality and availability, surface water quality and availability (from lakes, rivers, ponds, etc.), ground water availability, tree cover/green cover and plant species in the area (forest cover, parks, open spaces, etc.), the number of birds and/or animal species in the city (such as sparrows, butterflies, and so on), and those related to waste and waste management (garbage collection, dumping, and so on). The responses indicated that a majority of respondents perceived the quality of the environment to have deteriorated over the last five years, except for surface water and drinking water quality and availability, which have been perceived to have become better over this period of time (Figure 4.3). The majority of respondents feel that there has been no change in the quality of air in the city. Moreover, looking at the gender differentiated responses, it is noticed that for all dimensions of the environment, except that of waste and waste management, a higher percentage of women perceive deterioration in environmental quality compared to men. Also, there were differences seen in the responses across different types of localities.

The perception and awareness of respondents about existing government policies that address

environmental concerns varies a lot with respect to different dimensions. Most of the respondents perceive an existence of policies for climate change, forest conservation, and waste management, but feel that these are inadequate. In the context of water availability and water pollution, policies are perceived to be existing and being well implemented. However, in the context of air pollution, respondents feel that there are no government policies in place.

The main source of information for respondents about environment-related activities is television and national newspapers, followed by local/regional newspapers, and seminars and programmes. The responses received indicate that 57 per cent respondents consider national newspapers to be the most important, and 59 per cent of these respondents felt that the information they received on environment-related activities was adequate. On the other hand, 87 per cent of the respondents indicated that they did not feel informal conversation was providing them with adequate information. A total of 55 per cent of respondents ranked government and 25 per cent ranked business as the top groups who should work to help improve the state of the environment (Figure 4.4).

When asked if they believe that environmental protection and development have contradicting objectives, majority of the respondents were not able to tell if the contradiction exists, 22 per cent of the respondents indicated that environment protection and development should be treated differently and the government should prioritize development, whereas 19 per cent indicated that the government should prioritize environmental protection. A higher percentage of women compared to men preferred to prioritize development over environment. Only 10 per cent of the respondents felt that environment protection and development go hand in hand.

The results of the survey have been further analysed by grouping them under five


20

Figure 4.4: Opinions on the Top Groups that Should Work towards Improving the State of the Environment in Bangalore

environmental dimensions — air, water, forest/green cover, climate change, and waste/waste management.

4.4.2. AirThe respondents were asked about their perception of the sectors that contribute most to air pollution. Thirty-nine per cent of respondents consider factories in and around the cities to be contributing the most to air pollution, followed by 32 per cent pointing to the transport sector. A total of 31 per cent of the surveyed population in the city has also ranked construction activities as the second most polluting sector. The resulting

FIguRe 4.3: Changes in the State of the Environment in the Past Five Years in Bangalore

11%9%

53%14%

13%

17%24%

51%9%

0%

6%19%

47%17%

12%

2%3%

77%18%

1%

4%9%

28%50%

10%

7%2%

13%68%

11%

10%2%

17%26%

46%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Air quality (clean air,

smog, particles, smell)

Drinking water quality

and availability

Surface water quality and availability

(lakes, rivers, ponds, etc.)

Ground water availability

Tree cover/green cover and

plant species in your area

(forest cover, parks,

open spaces, etc.)

Number of birds and/or animal

species in your city (ex. Sparrows,

butterflies, etc.)

Waste and waste management

(garbage collection, dumping, etc)

Don’t know No direct experience Worse Better No change

Government (55%)

Businesses (25%)

Consumers (like you and me) (9%)

Non-Profit Organizations (4%)

Academic institutions/

Research organizations (7%)


21

Figure 4.5: Strategies Government should Adopt to Improve Air Quality in Bangalore

air pollution can lead to many diseases, such as asthma, lung cancer, and other respiratory and skin diseases. When the respondents were asked if they think that air pollution is the cause of these diseases, the responses show that 31 per cent of them consider air pollution to be the cause of these diseases, whereas 39 per cent perceive it to be only one of the major contributing factors. A significant proportion of the respondents (25 per cent) consider air pollution to be a very minor contributing factor.

Since the transport sector has been shown by many studies to be a major contributor to air pollution, the survey also tried to understand the behaviour of the respondents with respect to their use of public transport. A total 90 per cent of the respondents use public transport more than three times a week, with 61 per cent of them indicating cost reduction as the reason for this, 36 per cent use public transport for reducing vehicular pollution, 56 per cent using it to save time, and 4 per cent of the respondents use it for all these factors.

As per the survey, regarding the strategy that should be adopted by the government to improve air quality, 39 per cent respondents support levying of heavier congestion tax and other taxes to discourage private vehicles and 25 per cent consider enhancement of public transport infrastructure to be another important strategy. Conversion of all polluting industries into environment-friendly industries is perceived by 20 per cent respondents to be the strategy that the government should adopt. Setting up of local industrial clusters to enjoy common environment-friendly facilities to reduce pollution, and the option of stringent monitoring and ensuring that environmental standards are met received 11 per cent and 6 per cent supportive responses, respectively (Figure 4.5).

4.4.3. Water The main cause of wastage of water in the city has been identified as leakages from taps and faucets in houses by 38 per cent of the respondents. This

is followed by 25 per cent of the respondents perceiving leakages during distribution to households (from municipalities, tankers, etc.), and 17 per cent considering over-use of water by consumers as being the cause of water wastage in the city. When asked for their views on paying the actual cost of water supply, it was found that a very large percentage of the population (74 per cent) do not support this idea (Figure 4.6).

Similarly, when asked if either fixed/flat charges or metered consumption-based billing mechanisms should be used to price water delivery at home, more than 99 per cent respondents favour the latter option where they want to pay their water bill on the basis of their consumption.

4.4.4. Forest/Green Cover In order to understand the perception, behaviour, and awareness of the respondents about the

25%

39%

20%

11%

6%

0 0

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Public

transport

Heavier

taxes

Green

industries

Industrial

clusters

Stirct

monitoring

Others Don't

know

Figure 4.6: Should We Pay the Actual Cost of Water in Bangalore?

Don't Know (24.25%)

Yes (1.25%)

No (74.50%)


22

forest/green cover in the city, they were asked about the different environment-related activities that they were involved in. When asked about their visits to neighbourhood parks, 88 per cent indicated that they go to a park more than once a week and 12 per cent go more than once a month. Visits to forests or adjoining areas more than once a week were indicated by 53 per cent of the population, whereas 17 per cent also indicated that they have never visited a forest. With regard to the behaviour of people in terms of participating in the management of the parks in their neighbourhood, 33 per cent engage in this more than once a week and another 33 per cent participate more than once a month. Planting of a tree is done by about 19 per cent of the population once a year, but 45 per cent of the respondents have never planted a tree. Gardening at home is practiced on a regular basis by only 10 per cent of the respondents (more than once a week), while 70 per cent of the respondents say they have never engaged in this activity. A total 80 per cent of the respondents have never been involved in the cutting/chopping of a tree, but 5 per cent of the respondents have been involved in cutting a tree more than once a week (Figure 4.7).

The respondents’ opinion on ways to improve the green cover in the city (32 per cent) supported the strategy of declaration of protected areas where no commercial activity can take place,

Figure 4.7: Behaviour Towards and Frequency of Usage of Surrounding Forest/Green Cover in Bangalore

0% 10%

12%

17%

21%

45%

16% 3% 2% 10%

80% 12% 3%1%5%

19% 13% 7% 17%

2% 12% 33% 33%

5% 2% 24% 53%

88%

20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Never Once a year Once in a month More than once a month More than once a Week


chopping of a tree

Gardening at home

Plant a tree

Participate in management of

parks in your neighbourhood

Visit a forest or adjoining area

(not necessarily in your city)


neighbourhood

and a nearly equal percentage of respondents perceived reclamation of wastelands for parks to be another such important step.

4.4.5. Climate Change Perceptions about climate change, when analysed through this survey, depict that 64 per cent of the respondents think that climate change is occurring, while 35 per cent believe that it is not. Results regarding the perceptions of the various parameters of climate change are depicted in Figure 4.8. Respondents perceive a lot of change in temperature and occurrence of extreme events like floods and droughts (53 per cent for the former and 42 per cent for the latter). Sixy nine per cent of the respondents perceived some change in precipitation, while 65 per cent of the respondents notice some change in wind pattern.

4.4.6. Waste and Waste ManagementThe problem of waste and its management is extremely significant in Bangalore. The negative impacts of improper solid waste management on human health are considered to be very severe by 69 per cent of the respondents, severe by 24 per cent of the respondents, and less than 10 per cent consider the impact to be moderate or low. The responses show that the age group 25–34 years has the highest percentage of respondents who perceive deterioration in the quality of

0%

53%

19%

26%

42% 34% 20% 4%

65% 7% 2%

69% 8% 4%

40% 4%3%

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Temperature

Precipitation/rainfall

Wind pattern

Extreme events (floods,

drought, storms, etc.)


Figure 4.8: Changes in Climatic Factors over Time in Bangalore


23

waste management, followed by the age group 35–44 years.

Collection of garbage/waste from households is extremely important in managing the waste. When asked about the entity responsible for collecting waste from households, 44 per cent reported public entities, 30 per cent reported private entities, and 24 per cent indicated public private partnerships.

Perceptions of respondents were also collected to gauge the best strategy to manage the problem of solid waste. Figure 4.9 depicts the preference of the different strategies, out of which segregation of waste at the source is perceived to be the best strategy for managing solid waste, followed by reducing the generation of waste itself.

The respondents were also asked about their willingness to segregate their waste into biodegradable and non-biodegradable waste before disposing it. The responses show that 44 per cent of the respondents are not willing to segregate waste at all and only 11 per cent of the respondents in the city showed high willingness to segregate. A total 34 per cent of the respondents were not very willing and 12 per cent were willing to segregate. The large number of respondents from the age group of 35–44 years (almost 50 per cent) have answered that they are unwilling to segregate their waste at all.

As for the reasons for their unwillingness to segregate waste, 34 per cent consider separating the wastes to be a cumbersome task, 31 per cent feel that they will need more space to keep the two separate bins, and 23 per cent consider segregation to be the responsibility of the local authority. There is also a small percentage of respondents (11 per cent) which feels that even if they segregate the wastes, it is not collected separately by the civic authorities. However, amongst those respondents who have regular salaried jobs in the private sector, a very small percentage (less than 5 per cent) consider it to be a cumbersome task. They mostly think that the space constraint for segregation is the limiting factor. Gender differentiated responses show that men are less willing to segregate as compared to women and they identify segregation to be more cumbersome.

Of those respondents who showed willingness to segregate wastes, 50 per cent consider segregation to be good for the environment and 27 per cent stated that they can use the biodegradable wastes to make compost.

References Aus-AID. “Overview Report on Environmental Sanitation,

Vol 1. Solid Waste.” 2002.

Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagar Palika. Details of Solid Waste Management. 2013. http://bbmp.gov.in/web/swm. (accessed March 28, 2013).

Chanakya, H N, Ramachandra, T V, and Vijayachamundeeswari, M. Anaerobic Digestion and Reuse of Digested Products of Selected Components of Urban Solid Waste. Bangalore: Centre for Ecological Sciences, 2006.

Rajabapaiah, P. Energy from Bangalore Garbage — A Preliminary Study. ASTRA Technicap Report. Bangalore: Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science, 1998.

Reddy, Y Maheswara. “Waste of Management in Bangalore.” Bangalore: Daily News & Analysis, February 2013.

Sathishkumar, R; Chanakya, H N; and Ramachandra, T V. Feasible Solid Waste Management. Bangalore: Centre for Ecological Sciences, 2001.

The Hindu News Bureau. “Soon You Will Be Fined If You Don’t Segregate Garbage.” March 21, 2013.

—. “Garbage Issues Raise a Stink.” The Hindu , August 1, 2012.Figure 4.9: Best Strategies to Improve Waste

Management in Bangalore

35%

52%

9%

3%

0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Don’t know

User charges

Recycling

Segregation

Less waste


24

—. “Garbage Not a Nano Issue.” The Hindu, August 29, 2012.

—. “Vox Pop on Bangalore’s Garbage.” The Hindu, August 25, 2012.

TIDE. Energy Recovery from Municipal Solid Wastes in Around Bangalore. Malleswaram, Bangalore: Technology

Informatics Design Endeavour, 2000.

TIDE. Municipal Solid Waste in Small Towns. Malleswarm, Bangalore: Technology Informatics Design Endeavour, 2003.

25

Results from Chennai

Results fRom CHeNNAI

5.1. Demographics of Chennai

Chennai is the fourth largest urban agglomeration in India with a population of 8.7 million inhabitants. Chennai’s

sex ratio and the literacy rate are higher than the national average at 981 and 90.35 per cent, respectively. A total 87 per cent of the female population of Chennai is literate, which is second only to Greater Mumbai UA amongst the cities surveyed.

5.2. Demographics of the SampleThe majority of the respondents in Chennai were from the age group 18–24 years (48 per

cent), followed by the age group 25–34 years (40 per cent) (Figure 5.1). The gender classification was skewed towards males, with more than 90 per cent responses coming from them. In terms of educational qualifications, most of the respondents had an undergraduate degree or above (60 per cent), while 25 per cent were educated up to higher secondary level or had a diploma degree (Figure 5.2). In terms of the occupations of the respondents, the maximum response was received from the student population (42 per cent), followed by regular salaried employees of the private sector (21 per cent), and self-employed persons in business and related activities (14 per cent) (Figure 5.3).

Figure 5.1: Age Group-wise Distribution of Respondents in Chennai

Figure 5.2: Educational Distribution of Respondents in Chennai

18 24 (48%)–

25–34 (40%)

35 44 (10%)–

45 54 (1%)–

55 64 (1%)–

Middle and

secondary

(class X) (12%)

Higher secondary

(class XII) and

diploma (25%)

Up to primary school

(till class V) (3%)

Undergraduate

and above (60%)

Resu l t s f rom Chenna i

28

Figure 5.3: Occupational Distribution of Respondents in Chennai

Self-employed/

business (14%)

Regular salaried

(private) (21%)

Regular salaried

(government) (13%)

Casual/daily wage (3%)

Student (42%)

Housewife (2%)

Unemployed (5%)

5.3. Key Pressing Issues Known as the Gateway to South India, Chennai is located on the south-eastern coast of India and has the world’s second largest beach. Two major rivers, Cooum and Adyar, carve picturesque meandering paths through the centre and south of the city, respectively. River Kortalaiyar flows through the northern fringes of Chennai at Ennore. However, the resemblance in all the three major rivers is the pervasive dark, blackish tinge of colour.

The level of hydrological pollution is a major concern in the Chennai coastal zone on account of uncontrolled disposal of wastewater and pollutants due to anthropogenic factors. This is primarily due to the increase in development activities of small-, medium-, and large-scale industries, disposal of municipal waste, expansion of harbours, and numerous other commercial and recreational activities. These factors pose an imminent threat to the quality of water and marine biotas, and are health hazards (Shanmugam 2007, Tran, Euan and Isla 2002, Beiras, et al. 2003). The sewage carried by the six major waterways and drains — Adyar, Cooum, Captain Cotton Canal, Buckingham Canal, Otteri Nallah, and Mambalam drain — is more than the quantity of sewage collected by

the metro’s water treatment plants. According to the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, all these water bodies in the city are polluted and not suitable for any of their designated uses, viz., drinking, bathing, propagation of wildlife, such as animal husbandry and fisheries, industrial uses, cooking and washing, and agriculture. Also, the contamination level is relatively high in Buckingham Canal, followed by Otteri Nallah and Cooum River (Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority 2013).

In practice, it is advisable to discharge wastewater at a depth greater than 20 metres in the ocean for better dispersion and diffusion (Beder 1989). Discharge at this depth ensures and facilitates the maintenance of the organic and inorganic material’s concentration level below the threshold limit. Contrary to this, most of the wastewater is disposed on the Chennai coast.

In a recent study of the Chennai coast in the Bay of Bengal, it was reported that the highest levels of petroleum hydrocarbons are found in areas where shipping activities and land-based waste waters are disposed into the sea through rivers like Cooum and Adyar (Venkatachalapathy, Veerasingam and Ramkumar 2010). There have even been reports of certain types of dermatological problems due to coastal pollution in the north Chennai zone (Gowri and Ramachandran 2001). Moreover, there are a number of studies highlighting the accumulation of toxic heavy metals in the biota present in the water bodies in and around Chennai, particularly in crabs and shrimp (Vasanthi, et al. 2012, Prabhu Dass Batvari, et al. 2013, Santhiya, et al. 2011).

All these issues bring out the need to ensure that the waste discharged into Chennai’s water bodies is below the threshold levels of parameters, such as biochemical oxygen demand, concentrations of dissolved oxygen, chemical oxygen demand, nutrients (nitrites, nitrates, and phosphates), maximum probable number of bacteria, and turbidity.


29

5.4. Results for Chennai

5.4.1. Overall EnvironmentThe survey respondents were asked whether they perceived a change in the state of the different environmental domains over the last five years (2007 onwards). A total of 47 per cent of the respondents felt that surface water quality and availability had worsened in Chennai, and 23 per cent felt that the condition of waste and waste management had also exacerbated. On the contrary, a sizeable number (47 per cent) perceived the drinking water quality and availability to have improved in the current scenario as compared to pre-2007 conditions. Fairly mixed responses were obtained for ground water quality and availability, with almost an equal number of respondents perceiving it as having improved and worsened. In terms of air pollution, a significant number of respondents (45 per cent) felt that there was not much change in the air quality since 2007, whereas 26 per cent felt that it has deteriorated in this timespan (Figure 5.4).

Almost 67 per cent of the respondents in the age group of 45–54 years felt that the state of surface water quality and availability had worsened since 2007 while 29 per cent in the age group of 18–24 years perceived it to have become better in comparison to the situation since then.

Occupation-wise, almost 67 per cent of self-employed respondents and 47 per cent of government employees and students felt that drinking water quality and availability had improved over the past five years, whereas 67 per cent of daily wage labourers and 57 per cent of housewives felt that it had worsened.

In terms of awareness and perception about government policies for various environment-related issues, more than half of the respondents felt that no policies exist for combating air pollution, and even if they exist, 20 per cent felt they were either inadequate or not well implemented. A total 42 per cent of the

Figure 5.4: Changes in the State of the Environment in the Past Five Years in Chennai

Waste and waste

management

Number of birds and

animal species

Ground water

availability


and availability

Tree cover/

green cover

Surface water quality

and availability

Air quality

8%18%

23%21%

29%

17%26%

25%19%

12%

12%

5%26%

27%28%

15%

5%14%

25%40%

47%

45%

16%

1%

1%

3%

3%

31%

26%25%

18%

16%25%

28%20%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 60% 80%70% 90%50% 100%

18 24–

25 34–

35 44–

45 54–

55–64

No change Better Worse No direct experience Don't know

Figure 5.5: Changes in the State of Drinking Water Quality and Availability in the Past Five Years for Different Age Groups in Chennai


30

respondents stated that policies on climate change did not exist. Both these statistics show a lack of awareness on air quality and climate change related policies. About 35 per cent and 45 per cent of the respondents felt that policies exist and are well implemented for water availability and pollution, respectively. However, 30 per cent also felt that even though policies exist, they are inadequate when it comes to water availability issues, while for water pollution, about 29 per cent said that government policies do not exist at all. Twenty nine per cent of the respondents felt that government policies do exist for forest conservation while another 25 per cent perceived them as existent, but inadequate to address the issue of forest conservation suitably (Figure 5.6).

The respondents were asked to rank, according to their preferences, the sources that they generally use to get information about the environment. Almost 50 per cent of the respondents chose national newspapers as their first choice, followed closely by television, which was also the first choice for 40 per cent of the respondents (Figure 5.7). On the other hand, 51 per cent of the people surveyed stated that informal conversations were the second most popular choice for information on the environment.

The respondents were also asked to rank different groups, according to their preferences, that they deemed as having a major role to play in working towards improving the state of the environment. More than 70 per cent of the respondents ranked

Figure 5.6: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies in Chennai

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

National newspapers Local/regional newspapers Television

Internet

Research publications

Informal conversations

School/college curriculum

Magazines Seminars and programmes

Rank 2

Rank 1

55%

29%

20%

7%

7%

6%

22%

45%

35%

26%

19%

15%

17%

18%

30%

32%

25%

18%

4%

5%

10%

24%

29%

19%

2%

2%

6%

12%

19%

42%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Air pollution

Water pollution

Water availability

Waste management

Forest conservation

Climate change

Don’t know Exist, but not implemented Exist, but are inadequate

Exist and are well implemented No government policies exist

Figure 5.7: Means of Getting Information on Environment-related Activities in Chennai

government as first and consumers as second with about 14 per cent of responses, closely followed by business with 10 per cent of responses (Figure 5.8).

Government (74%)

Business (10%)

Consumers

(like you and me)

(14%)

Non-profit

organizations (1%)

Academic

institutions/research

organizations (1%)

Figure 5.8: Top Groups that Should Work Towards Improving the Environment in Chennai


31

In terms of the debate between environment and development, respondents were asked whether they felt that protecting the environment was against the objectives of development. Almost 30 per cent of the respondents felt that these two go hand in hand, while another 30 per cent felt that the government should prioritize environment protection. Another 13 per cent of the respondents were of the opinion that the government should prioritize the objectives of development over environment protection (Figure 5.9).

5.4.2. AirWhen asked about the link between air pollution and the occurrence of different diseases (such as asthma, lung cancer, and other respiratory diseases), 38 per cent of the respondents said that air pollution is just one of the major contributing factors and not the sole cause. Only 5 per cent respondents stated that air pollution is not a causal factor at all for the occurrence of these respiratory diseases (Figure 5.10).

About 57 per cent of the Chennai respondents claimed that they use public transport more than three times a week and of those almost 34 per cent respondents do so to save time, while 32 per cent

Figure 5.9: Interplay between Environment Protection and Development in Chennai

Can’t say (18%)

Don’t know (10%)

Yes, government should

prioritize development

(13%)

Yes, government should

prioritize environmental

protection (30%)

No, environment

protection and

development fo hand

in hand (29%)

Figure 5.10: Does Air Pollution Cause Diseases, such as asthma, lung cancer, etc., in Chennai?

stated that they do so to reduce their contribution towards vehicular pollution (Figure 5.12).

Respondents were asked for their opinions on the best strategies to tackle air pollution and improve

Yes, I totally agree Yes, but it is just one of the major contributing factors

Yes, but it is a very minor contributing factor

No, I don’t think air pollution causes any of these diseases

I don’t know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

26% 38% 23% 5% 9%

Figure 5.11: Reasons for Not Using Public Transport in Chennai

0 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

The time spent is more on public transport It is expensive for me to use

It is not very frequent

I do not find it safe to use

It is not convenient for me to use

6%

18%

25%

25%

19%

0 10% 20% 30% 40%

All of the above

To save on cost

To save time

To reduce my contribution towards vehicular pollution

Figure 5.12: Reasons for Using Public Transport in Chennai


32

air quality in cities. Almost 25 per cent of them felt that levying a heavier congestion tax and other taxes to discourage the use of private vehicles would help this cause. Converting all polluting industries into environment-friendly industries and setting up local industrial clusters were also seen as feasible options to tackle air pollution in cities by Chennai respondents (Figure 5.13).

5.4.3. Water With regard to people’s perception of the major causes of wastage of water in their city, about 39 per cent of them termed leakages during distribution (from municipalities, tankers, etc., to houses) as the primary cause, while a significant percentage (32 per cent) of the respondents felt that it was being wasted owing to leakage from taps and faucets in their homes. About 17 per cent of them felt that water is not being wasted at all (Figure 5.14).

In terms of the pricing structure of water, almost 42 per cent of the respondents were of the opinion that consumers should not pay the actual cost of water, rather, they should continue with the current subsidized structure, while only 22 per cent felt that consumers should pay the true cost of water (Figure 5.15). When asked about a feasible billing mechanism for water, only 32 per cent of the respondents said that billing must be based on metered consumption and not on flat rates (Figure 5.16).

When classified by the educational qualifications of the respondents, 23 per cent of the respondents with undergraduate degrees and above felt that consumers must pay the true cost of water, while 63 per cent of the respondents with education up to middle and secondary schooling felt that

Figure 5.13: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Air Quality in Chennai

Figure 5.15: Should we pay the actual cost of water in Chennai?

Figure 5.16: Preferred Billing Mechanism for Water Delivery to Households in Chennai

Figure 5.14: Major Causes of Wastage of Water in Chennai

0% 50% 100%

Public transport Heavier taxes Green industries Industrial clusters

Strict monitoring Others Don't know

15% 25% 25% 23% 4% 9%

Yes (22%)

No (42%)

Don't Know (36%)

Fixed charges/

flat rates (68%)

Metered/

consumption

based (32%)

100%90%

80%

70%

60%

50%40%

30%20%

10%0%

Transport

sector

Factories in

and around

cities

Construction

activities

Domestic

fuel burning

activities

(cow-dung

cake, wood

and charcoal

burning for

cooking,

heating, etc.)

Garbage

burning

45%

31%

7%3%

15%


33

consumers should continue paying the subsidized rate of water (Figure 5.17).

Out of all the groups, 42 per cent self-employed persons and 38 per cent students were in favour of metered consumption, while 77 per cent each of regular salaried respondents in private and government organizations favoured flat rates for billing water consumption (Figure 5.18).

5.4.4. Forest/Green CoverRegarding the behavioural aspect of the Chennai respondents in relation to the surrounding green cover, they were asked about the frequency of the environmental activities that they undertook. About 38 per cent of the respondents were

involved in the cutting of a tree, while 17 per cent were engaged in some form of gardening more than once a week. Moreover, 31 per cent participated in the management of parks in their neighbourhood more than once a month. Almost 39 per cent visited a forest or adjoining area (not necessarily within Chennai) once a month, and 34 per cent of them said that they planted a tree once a year (Figure 5.19).

The Chennai respondents were asked, which strategy, according to them, is the best to improve their city’s green cover. A significant number (36 per cent) felt that reclaiming barren land and wastelands would be a good strategy. About 21 per cent also felt that public–private partnerships could play an important role in improving Chennai’s green cover, while 11 per cent of the respondents gave weight to the voluntary actions of citizens to address this issue (Figure 5.20).

5.4.5. Climate ChangeA majority of Chennai respondents (41 per cent) feel that climate change is actually occurring, while 38 per cent feel it is not (Figure 5.21).

When climate change was further disaggregated, almost 62 per cent respondents stated that they felt that temperature had undergone a lot of change and 67 per cent felt there was some change in the Figure 5.17: Opinions of Different Educational

Groups on Paying the Actual Cost of Water in Chennai

Figure 5.18: Preferred Billing Mechanism for Water Delivery to Households in Chennai for Different Occupations

Undergraduate

and above

Higher secondary


Middle and

secondary (class X)

Up to primary

school (till class V)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

23%

22%

17%

27%

35%

45%

63%

45%

42%

32%

20%

27%

Yes No Don’t know

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Self -employed/Business

Regular salaried (private)

Regular salaried

(government)

Casual/daily wage

Student

Housewife

Unemployed

Retired

Fixed charges/flat rates Metered/consumption based

Figure 5.19: Behaviour Towards and Frequency of Use of Surrounding Forest/Green Cover in Chennai

0% 40% 60% 80%20% 100%


neighbourhood

Visit a forest or

adjoining area

Participate in

management of parks

Plant a tree

Gardening at home


chopping of a tree

Never Once a year Once in a month More than onace a month



34

be severe, while 18 per cent term them to be very severe. Only 7 per cent of the respondents felt that improper solid waste management has no impact on adverse health effects (Figure 5.23), showing a relatively sound level of awareness amongst the Chennai citizens in terms of solid waste handling.

The respondents were asked to select the best strategy to tackle the issue of solid waste

Figure 5.20: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Forest/Green Cover in Chennai

Figure 5.21: Is climate change occurring in Chennai?

0

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Percentage

Improved/ new government policies Declaration of protected areas

Reclamation of wasteland for parks, etc. Public-private partnership

Voluntary activities by citizens Intervention by civil society organizations

Others

10%

18%

21%

11%

7%

36%

Yes (41%)

Can’t say (10%)

May be (11%)

No (38%)

Figure 5.22: Changes in Climatic Factors over Time in Chennai

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Temperature


Wind pattern

Extreme events


29%

32%

22%

62% 28% 9% 1%

67% 8% 2%

24%

28%

18%

31%

28%

9%

pattern of rainfall. In terms of the wind pattern, almost 31 per cent reported that they did not feel any change at all. About 24 per cent respondents were of the opinion that there was some degree of change in terms of occurrence of extreme events, such as flood, drought, etc. (Figure 5.22).

5.4.6. Waste/Waste ManagementTo assess the perception of the respondents in terms of the link between improper solid waste management and adverse health impacts, they were asked to rate them. Results showed that almost 23 per cent respondents reckon these impacts to

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

I don’t Know

No Impact

Low

Moderate

Severe

Very Severe

9%

7%

20%

23%

23%

18%

Figure 5.23: Negative Impacts of Improper Solid Waste Management on Human Health in Chennai


35

Figure 5.24: Who collects garbage from your household in Chennai?

Other (1%)

Not collected at all

(5%)

Public entities (13%)

Not aware (23%)


(29%)

Private-private (29%)

Figure 5.25: Best Strategies to Improve Waste Management in Chennai

management. Almost 28 per cent of them felt that waste segregation at the source itself is the best strategy while 25 per cent thought waste recycling was likewise an effective strategy. Only 12 per cent were of the opinion that charging the users as per their waste generation is a good strategy to deal with the issue of solid waste management (Figure 5.25).

Though the majority of respondents felt that waste segregation is the best strategy to manage solid waste properly in a city; almost 49 per cent of the total respondents are not willing at all to segregate waste themselves in their homes (Figure 5.26). Only 33 per cent of them showed some level of willingness to segregate their solid waste into biodegradable and non-biodegradable components. When asked about the reasons for their stated unwillingness, a majority of the respondents (36 per cent) identified space

20%

28%

25%

12%

16%

Don't know User charges Recycling Segregation Less waste

Figure 5.26: Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Chennai

Willing (27%)

Very willing (6%)

Not very willing (18%)

Not willing at all (49%)

Figure 5.27: Reasons for Unwillingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Chennai

23%

36%

23%

18%

Cumbersome Space constraint

Local authority's responsibility Waste not collected separately

5%

0%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

constraints as the primary reason (Figure 5.27). This was closely followed by other reasons, such as the activity of segregation being cumbersome and considered to be primarily the responsibility of the local authority. Out of those who expressed their willingness to segregate wastes in their houses, almost 37 per cent were willing in order to make compost out of the biodegradable wastes, while 25 per cent agreed to segregate wastes since they consider it to be an environment-friendly step (Figure 5.28).


36

ReferencesBeder, S. Curr Aff Bull. “Engineering Sydney’s Sewerage

Pollution: Public Relations Assisted Technology.” Curr Aff Bull 66 (1989): 27-31.

Beiras, R; Bellas, J; Fernández, N; Lorenzo, J I; and Cobelo-Garcı́a, A. “Assessment of Coastal Marine Pollution in Galicia (NW Iberian Peninsula); Metal Concentrations in Seawater, Sediments and Mussels (Mytilus Galloprovincialis) Versus Embryo–larval Bioassays Using Paracentrotus Lividus and Ciona Intestinalis.” Marine Environmental Research 56, no. 4 (2003): 531-553.

Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority. Chennai: Environment. 2013. http://www.cmdachennai.gov.in/Volume1_English_PDF/Vol1_Chapter11_Environment.pdf. (accessed March 28, 2013).

Gowri, V S, and Ramachandran, S. Coastal Pollution of Chennai City, Coastal Geomorphology of India. Chennai: Anna University, 2001.

Prabhu Dass Batvari, B, et al. “Heavy Metals Accumulation in Crab and Shrimps from Pulicat Lake, North Chennai Coastal Region, Southeast Coast of India.” Toxicology and Industrial Health, 2013.

Santhiya, G; Lakshumanan, C; Selvin, J; and Asha, D. “Microbiological Analysis of Seawater and Sediments in Urban Shorelines: Occurrence of Heavy Metals Resistance Bacteria on Chennai Beaches, Bay of Bengal.” Microchemical Journal 99, no. 2 (2011): 197-202.

Shanmugam, Palanisamy; Neelamani, S; Ahn, Yu-Hwan; Philip, Ligy; and Hong, Gi-Hoon. “Assessment of the Levels of Coastal Marine Pollution of Chennai City, Southern India.” Water Resources Management 21, no. 7 (2007): 1187-1206.

Tran, K C; Euan, J; and Isla, M L. “Public Perception of Development Issues: Impact of Water Pollution on a Small Coastal Community.” Ocean & Coastal Management 45, no. 6-7 (2002): 405-420.

Vasanthi, L A; Revathi, P; Arulvasu, C; and Munuswamy, N. “Biomarkers of Metal Toxicity and Histology of Perna Viridis from Ennore Estuary, Chennai, South East Coast of India.” Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 84 (2012): 92-98.

Venkatachalapathy, R; Veerasingam, S; and Ramkumar, T. “Petroleum Hydrocarbon Concentrations in Marine Sediments Along Chennai Coast, Bay of Bengal, India.” Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 85, no. 4 (2010): 397-401.

25%

37%

33%

5%

0

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Environment friendly Compost making Already segregating Others

Figure 5.28: Reasons for Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Chennai

37

Results from Delhi

Results fRom delhi

Figure 6.1: Distribution of Sex of Respondents in Delhi

Figure 6.2: Age of Distribution of Respondents in Delhi

6.1. Demographics of Delhi

Delhi or the NCT of Delhi is the second largest urban agglomeration in the country. It has a population of 16.3

million inhabitants. Delhi’s population growth rate has witnessed a decline from 52.24 per cent to 26.69 per cent between 2001 and 2011. The sex ratio of 867 is more than 70 points below the national average. The literacy rate in Delhi is 86.43 per cent.

6.2. Demographics of the SampleA total of 1,114 respondents were interviewed in NCR Delhi for the survey, of which 44 per cent were females and 56 per cent were males

(Figure 6.1). The majority of the respondents (24 per cent) were in the age group of 18–24 years, followed by 25–34 and 35–44 years (22 per cent for both) (Figure 6.2). In terms of education, 42 per cent of the respondents had studied up to the undergraduate degree level and above, followed by middle and secondary education (class X) (25 per cent). Around 23 per cent of the respondents had studied up to higher secondary (class XII)/diploma and the remaining 10 per cent were only up to primary school (class V) (Figure 6.3).

The occupational pattern of the sample varies considerably, with housewives constituting the largest share (34 per cent), followed by regular salaried employees in the private sector (21

Male (56%)

Female (44%)

55–64 (8%)

18–24 (24%)

25–34 (22%)

45–54 (16%)

35–44 (22%)

Above 65 (8%)

Resu l t s f rom De lh i

40

per cent). Students constitute the third largest respondent group (17 per cent) with around 12 per cent of the sample population reported to be self-employed (Figure 6.4). (Figure 6.5).

Figure 6.3: Education Distribution of Respondents in Delhi

Figure 6.5: Annual Household Income Distribution of Respondents in Delhi

Figure 6.4: Occupational Distribution of Respondents in Delhi

Up to Primary School

(till Class V) (10%)

Middle and Secondary

(Class X) (25%)

Higher Secondary (Class XII)

and Diploma (23%)

Undergraduate and

above (42%)

3 to 5 L (17%)

5 to 10 (13%)

10 to 20 L (1%)

Upto 1 L (12%)

No response (36%)

1 to 3 L (21%)

Self-employed/Business (12%)

Regular salaried (private) (21%)

Regular salaried (government) (5%)

Casual / daily wage (1%)Student (17%)Housewife (34%)

Unemployed (3%)

Retired (7%)

6.3. Key Pressing IssuesDelhi, the capital of India, holds the distinction of being one of the greenest capitals in the world. Ironically, problems pertaining to air pollution have always been at the forefront in the National Capital Region (NCR). With growth across all sectors — housing, transport, and industry — there has been an increase in the air pollution levels. Interestingly, the sector-wise contribution to air pollution has changed drastically over the years. According to the Planning Department, Government of NCT of Delhi (Economic Survey of Delhi 2001-02 2003), in 1970–71, the industrial sector made the maximum contribution to air pollution (56 per cent air pollution by sector of origin in Delhi), which had reduced to 20 per cent in 2000–01. Also, the share of the transport sector increased from 23 per cent in 1970–71 to 72 per cent in 2000–01. While initiatives like phasing out 2-stroke engine two- and three-wheelers; introduction of low sulphur content diesel; encouraging, implementing, and increasing the use of Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fuel for vehicles; metro rail system; and relocation of industrial units away from the city have certainly helped in improving the existing quality of air; the rate of growing air pollution has surpassed these efforts made by the government (Siddique, et al. 2010, Chhabra, et al. 2001, Delhi Urban Environment and Infrastructure Improvement Project 2001).

The annual average of all nine air quality monitoring stations in Delhi reveals that in the last 10 years, the level of sulphur dioxide has reduced from 14 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) in 2001 to 5 µg/m3 in 2010. However, the levels of nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 10 µm have increased substantially from 29 and 120 µg/m3, respectively, in 2001 to 55 and 261 µg/m3, respectively, in 2010. The levels of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide are below the national ambient air standards (80 µg/m3 for sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide) (Government of India 2012). All the same, the figures for particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 10 µm are indeed alarming when compared to 100 µg/m3 as the national


41

ambient air standards (Economic Survey of Delhi 2001-02 2003).

In order to tackle the issue of air pollution in the urban environment, the government must formulate robust air quality management strategies related to transport, industrial sources, indoor pollution, and open burning of waste emanating from natural sources. In the transport sector, this may be achieved by regular vehicle inspection and maintenance, improving fuel quality, introducing new vehicle technologies, and managing travel demand and improving transportation supply. For the industrial sector, physical planning and zoning, promoting pollution control in factories, and promoting cleaner production (prevention solutions rather than end-of-pipe remedies) must be ensured. Similarly, indoor air pollution can be tackled by improving coal quality (importing better quality coal) and by adding a sulphur dioxide absorbing agent, shifting to cleaner fuels, encouraging the use of cleaner stoves, and introducing smoke control zones. There is a need to assess the extent of the problem as far as open burning of waste is concerned. Sensitization of various stakeholders involved will definitely help in reducing the problem (United Nations Environment Programme, and United Nations Human Settlements Programme 2005).

Considering the fact that air pollution is a major environmental risk to health, and by taking measures to reduce air pollution levels, we can help countries reduce the global burden of diseases from respiratory infections, heart disease, and lung cancer; there is a compelling need to address various issues pertaining to air pollution.

6.4. Results for Delhi6.4.1. Overall EnvironmentThe perception concerning different aspects of the environment in the city depicts very clear trends. A significant share (80 per cent and more) of the respondents thinks that the state of surface water quality and availability, ground

water availability, tree cover, biodiversity, and waste and waste management has become worse, whereas a very small percentage (6 to 16 per cent) of the population perceives that conditions have become better, in the last five years. The perceptions on air quality and drinking water quality and availability are found to be divided with more or less similar percentages stating contrary views. Around 40 per cent stated that the air quality in the city is getting worse with 39 per cent stating otherwise (getting better). Similarly, 41 per cent were of the opinion that the situation of drinking water quality and availability in the city was getting better, and 39 per cent stated the same to be getting worse. Around 15 per cent of the respondents (both for drinking water and air quality) think that there is not much change. The perception of these environmental indicators varies across the localities, age groups, education, and income levels. A greater percentage of respondents from slums and upper middle-class localities feel that the air quality in the city is getting worse whereas the majority opinion in posh and lower middle-class localities reported otherwise. On birds and animal species diversity, respondents in slums, lower-middle class, and upper-middle class localities feel that it is getting worse. Though the majority of respondents from posh localities also share this opinion, some of them reported that they think it is getting better. Similarly, the respondents with lower levels of income and education stated that the bird and animal species diversity is getting worse in the city. When it comes to surface water quality and availability, older people stated that it is getting worse and respondents from lower income groups also shared the same view. The respondents from slums and middle-class localities feel that it is getting worse whereas some respondents from posh localities feel otherwise. Interestingly, the number of respondents stating don’t know and no direct experience responses for all aspects of overall city environment are significantly low, showing the general awareness of the population on these issues (Figure 6.6).


42

The general awareness and perception about the government policies on various aspects of the environment is found to be low, with a significant percentage of the respondents stating their ignorance about the existence of different policies (Figure 6.8). Among those aware of the policies, a significant share of them found them to be inadequate or not implemented. The

awareness level varies across education, income groups, and residential localities. For example, the level of awareness on climate policy is higher among respondents from middle class and posh localities and respondents with higher education and income levels are found to be more aware of these polices.

Television (69 per cent) and national newspapers (20 per cent) are found to be the main sources of information on environmental issues for the city population and the majority of respondents hold the view that information from these two sources is adequate. Internet, local/regional newspapers, and informal conversation are other sources, but these do not provide the respondents with adequate information (Figure 6.9).

The majority of the respondents in the city have ranked the government (60 per cent) as the top agency that should work to improve the environment, followed by the business sector (14 per cent). Only 13 per cent of the respondents ranked consumers and 12 per cent ranked non-profit organizations as important agencies to help improve the environment. Only 1 per cent

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Air quality (clean air, smog, particles,

smell)

Drinking water quality and availability

Surface water quality and

availability(lakes, rivers, ponds, etc.)


Tree cover/green cover and plant species in your

area (forest cover, parks, open spaces, etc.)

Number of birds and/or animal species in

your city (ex. Sparrows, butterflies, etc.)



16%

15%

5%

4%

3%

3%

3%

39%

41%

6%

11%

16%

6%

14%

40%

39%

85%

83%

79%

87%

80%

1%

2%

1%

1%

1%

1%

1%

4%

2%

3%

2%

1%

2%

2%


Figure 6.6: Changes in the State of the Environment in the Past Five Years in Delhi

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Slums/ villages/jhuggi-jhopri

cluster/unauthorized colonies

Lower middle class locality

Upper middle class locality

Posh localities


Figure 6.7: Changes in the State of the Air Quality in the Past Five Years in Delhi for Different Localities


43

Figure 6.8: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies in Delhi

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Air pollution

Water pollution

Water availability

Waste management

Forest conservation

Climate change

2%

3%

1%

4%

1%

1%

11%

9%

11%

3%

11%

7%

17%

19%

8%

9%

8%

10%

3%

2%

4%

3%

4%

3%

68%

67%

76%

81%

76%

80%

Don’t know Policies exist, but not implemented Policies exist, but are inadequate

Policies exist and are well implemented No government policies exist

Figure 6.9: Means of Getting Information on Environment Related Activities in Delhi

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

20%

45%

6%3%

69%

25%

7%6%1% 2% 0% 0% 1% 0%0% 1%1%

14%

1% 1%

National n

ewspaper

Local/

regio

nal newsp

aper

Tele

visio

n

Inte

rnet

Magazin

es

Semin

ars a

nd pro

gram

mes

Researc

h public

ations

School/colle

ge curriculu

m

Info

rmal c

onvers

ations

Others

Rank 1 Rank 2


44

of the responses are found to consider academic/research organizations as the leading agencies to improve environment (Figure 6.10).

On the issue of environment and development, the majority opinion (59 per cent) was that environment protection and development go hand in hand. Only 14 per cent feel that the environment and development goals should be treated separately and government should give priority to developmental goals. In contrast, 22 per cent of the respondents stated the need for the government to prioritize environmental conservation over development. Only 5 per cent of the respondents have been found to be undecided or ignorant on this issue (Figure 6.11).

6.4.2. Air According to the respondents in Delhi, the transport sector is viewed as the largest source of air pollution (45 per cent) followed by industries in and around the city (31 per cent). Garbage burning is perceived to be another major cause of air pollution by 15 per cent of the respondents. Construction activities and domestic fuel burning are stated as the sources of air pollution by 7 per cent and 3 per cent of the respondents, respectively (Figure 6.12).

A total 80 per cent of the respondents agreed with the hypothesis that air pollution is the cause of diseases like asthma, lung cancer, and other respiratory diseases as well as other diseases in the city, while another 18 per cent agreed partially, stating the view that air pollution is one of the contributing factors for such diseases (Figure 6.12).

Transport being perceived as a major source of air pollution by a large number of respondents, the views of the citizens on the use of public transport was also considered. Around 54 per cent of the respondents are found to be using public transport in the city at least three times a week, while the remaining 46 per cent did not use public transport (Figure 6.13a). The use of public transport also varies across gender and age groups. A higher percentage of male respondents reported using public transport more frequently. Furthermore, the use of public transport is more prominent amongst the younger age group of 18–24 years (Figures 6.13b and 6.13c).

The preference for public transport over other mediums, as viewed by the users of public transport, reflects cost and time saving as the primary reasons stated by 12 and 15 per cent of the respondents, respectively, whereas only 6 per cent respondents were found to be using public transport because of their concern towards pollution. Around 32 per cent of the respondents view all these reasons as the factors influencing their decision. Those who do not use public transport cite reasons like inconvenience to use (27 per cent), lack of good frequency (25 per cent), and safety (22 per cent) of the city’s public

Consumer

(like you and me) (13%)

Business (14%)

Non-profit

organizations (12%)

Academic institutions/

Research organizations (1%)

Government (60%)

Figure 6.10: Top Groups that Should Work Towards Improving the Environment in Delhi

Yes, they should be treated

differently and the

government should

prioritize development (14%)

No, environment protection

and development go hand

in hand (59%)

Can’t say (4%)

Don’t know (1%)


differently and the

government should

prioritize environmental

protection (22%)

Figure 6.11: Interplay between Environment Protection and Development in Delhi


45

45%

31%

7%3%

15%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Transport

sector

Factories in

and around

cities

Construction

activities

Domestic fuel

burning

activities (cow-

dung cake,

wood and

charcoal

burning for

cooking,

heating, etc.)

Garbage

burning

Figure 6.12: Sectors Contributing the Most to Air Pollution in Delhi

No (45.60%)

Yes (54.40%)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

No Yes

18–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 Above 65

Figure 6.13a: Usage of Public Transport in Delhi Figure 6.13b: Usage of Public Transport in Delhi by Different Age Groups

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Female MaleNo Yes

Figure 6.13c: Usage of Public Transport in Delhi for Different Sexes


46

transport system as the major deterrents. Around 6 per cent of the respondents viewed public transport as expensive and for another 1 per cent, public transport is more time consuming (Figure 6.14).

The opinions of the citizens about measures to improve air quality reveal that the majority favours measures like provision of public transport (26 per cent), greening the industries (28 per cent), a heavier taxation regime to discourage private vehicles (24 per cent), and setting up industrial clusters with common environmental facilities (18 per cent). The remaining 4 per cent of the respondents feel that stringent monitoring and enforcing compliance of the specified environmental standards would help in improving the air quality in the city (Figure 6.15).

6.4.3. WaterA large majority of the citizens surveyed (94 per cent) perceive that water is being wasted in the city. Excessive consumption (58 per cent) along with leakage in distribution (49 per cent), as well as leakages in taps and faucets in the house (27 per cent) are considered as the major causes of wastage of water by the respondents. Only 7 per cent of the respondents feel otherwise, that is, water is not being wasted, and 1 per cent stated they did not know whether water is being wasted (Figure 6.16).

On the issue of water pricing, 61 per cent of the respondents expressed the view that water should not be subsidized and that citizens should pay the actual cost of water. Around 11 per cent felt otherwise and responded that the government should bear part of the cost, whereas 28 per cent of the respondents admitted to having no opinion on this issue (Figure 6.17).

When asked about the billing mechanism for water delivery at home, 89 per cent of the respondents favoured metered/consumption-based billing mechanism for water charges with only 10 per cent favouring fixed charges/flat rates (Figure 6.17).

Figure 6.14: Reasons for Not Using Public Transport in Delhi

Figure 6.15: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Air Quality in Delhi

22%

27%

25%

6%

1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

I do not find it

safe to use

It is not convenient

for me to use

It is not very frequent

It is expensive

for me to use

The time spent is more

on public transport

26%

24%

28%

18%

4%

0%

0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Public transport

Heavier taxes

Green industries

Industrial clusters

Strict monitoring

Others

Don't know

Figure 6.16: Major Causes of Wastage of Water in Delhi

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

00%

27%

49%

58%

7%1%

Leakage

in house

Leakage during

distribution

Excessive

consumption

Not being

wasted

Don’t know


47

6.4.4. Forest/Green CoverThe pattern for demand and use of green cover shows mixed trends amongst the city’s respondents. Though around 48 per cent of the respondents visit the park in their neighbourhood more than once a week, only 10 per cent stated that they visit a forest in the city or in an adjoining area once a year. The survey also revealed the low level of participation of people in the management of parks in their neighbourhoods. Around 89 per cent of the respondents never participated whereas only 1 per cent reported participating more than once in a week or month. The study also reveals that 82 per cent of the respondents

reported that they have never planted a tree. When asked about their gardening habits, 71 per cent have reported not doing it at all. Around 93 per cent of the respondents affirmed that they were not involved in the felling of trees (Figure 6.18).

When asked about measures to improve forest/green cover in the city, a majority of the respondents favoured measures such as declaration of protected areas (33 per cent), reclamation of wasteland for green cover (31 per cent), and improved new government policies (23 per cent). Around 8 per cent see the role of public–private partnership to be of great importance and 4 per cent view voluntary activities by citizens as a vital mode to achieve the desired results (Figure 6.19).

6.4.5. Climate ChangeThe survey revealed high levels of awareness about climate change among the citizens. Around 79 per cent respondents think that climate change is occurring and only 18 per cent view it to be otherwise. The remaining 3 per cent are either not sure of such trends or do not have any knowledge about this.

When asked about further details on climatic variables like temperature, rainfall, wind pattern, and so on, the perceptions of citizens revealed

Yes (10.77%)

No (60.68%)

Don’t know (28.55%)

Figure 6.17: Should we pay the actual cost of water in Delhi?

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Never Once a year Once in a month More than once a month


chopping of a tree

Gardening at home

Plant a tree

Participate in management of

parks in your neighbourhood

Visit a forest or adjoining area

(not necessarily in your city)


neighbourhood

Figure 6.18: Behaviour Towards and Frequency of Usage of Surrounding Forest/Green Cover in Delhi


48

interesting trends. Temperature (99 per cent) and rainfall (97 per cent) are the two climatic variables perceived to have gone through some or a lot of change. However, there is a divided opinion when it comes to wind pattern and extreme events in the city. Approximately 85 per cent of the respondents viewed some or a lot of change in wind pattern, whereas 62 per cent of the respondents feel the same in case of other extreme events. Very insignificant percentages (1 per cent each for temperature and rainfall, 3 per cent for wind pattern, and 5 per cent for extreme events) of respondents have stated their ignorance on the trends of the changes in climatic variables (Figure 6.20).

Figure 6.19: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Forest/Green Cover in Delhi

23.2%

33.2% 31.3%

7.9%3.9%

0.5% 0.0%0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Improved/ new

government policies

Declaration of

protected areas (where

no commercial activities

can take place) / ‘no-go’

areas (where no one is

allowed)

Reclamation of

wasteland for parks,

etc.

Public-private

partnership

Voluntary activities by

citizens

Intervention by civil

society organizations

Others

Figure 6.20: Changes in Different Climatic Factors over Time in Delhi

51%

37%

12%

12%

48%

60%

73%

50%

0%

3%

13%

33%

1%

1%

3%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Temperature


Wind pattern



Don’t know No change at all Some change A lot of change

6.4.6. Waste/Waste Management

There seems to be unanimity apropos the problem of solid waste in the city. The impacts of its improper management on health in the city are perceived to be very severe by 69 per cent of the respondents and severe by 26 per cent, with only 4 per cent considering the same as moderate. None of the respondents felt that solid waste management had a low or no impact on health.

When asked about the agency responsible for the collection of household garbage, about 13 per cent reported it to be public entities, 29 per cent each reported private entities and public–private partnership, and about 23 per cent indicated that that they are not aware of the same.

The survey also asked the citizens about their opinions on the best possible way to deal with the problem of solid waste. Around 28 per cent supported segregation at source, 25 per cent indicated improved recycling, and 20 per cent thought that generation of less waste in the house is the necessary strategy to manage waste in the city (Figure 6.21a). When asked about their willingness to segregate, only 6 per cent respondents expressed strong willingness to do so, and 27 per cent showed moderate willingness. Around 49 per cent expressed strong unwillingness and the remaining 18 per cent reported to be unwilling towards the idea of waste segregation at source (Figure 6.21b). Amongst those who expressed their unwillingness to segregate waste at source, 36 per cent cited


49

reasons like space constraints, 23 per cent found the task to be cumbersome, and around 23 per cent feel that it is the responsibility of the local authorities to do so (Figure 6.21c). Interestingly, 18 per cent of the respondents perceive that since waste is not collected separately by the agencies, segregation at source does not make much sense. Furthermore, amongst those who expressed their willingness to segregate waste at source, around 33 per cent are already segregating the waste, 37 per cent would be willing to make compost out of the household waste, and 25 per cent consider it to be good for the environment (Figure 6.21d).



Willing (27%)

Very Willing (6%)

23%

36%

23%18%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Cumbersome Space constraint Local

authority's

responsibility

Waste not

collected

separately

25%

37%33%

5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Environment-

friendly

Compost

making

Already

segregating

Others

Figure 6.21a: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Waste Management in Delhi

Figure 6.21b: Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Delhi

Figure 6.21c: Reasons for Unwillingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Delhi

Figure 6.21d: Reasons for Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Delhi

20%

28%

25%

12%

16%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Less waste

Segregation

Recycling

User charges

Don't know


50

ReferencesDelhi Urban Environment and Infrastructure Improvement

Project. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India and Govt. of NCT of Delhi. 2001.

Chhabra, S K; Chhabra, P; Rajpal, S; and Gupta, R K. “Ambient Air Pollution and Chronic Respiratory Morbidity in Delhi.” Archives of Environmental Health: An International Journal 56, no. 1 (January 2001): 58-64.

Economic Survey of Delhi 2001-02. Planning Department, Government of NCT of Delhi, 2003.

Government of India. “Rajya Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1417.” March 27, 2012.

Siddique, S; Banerjee, M; Ray, M; and Lahiri, T. “Air Pollution and Its Impact on Lung Function of Children in Delhi, the Capital City of India.” Water, Air, & Soil Pollution 212, no. 1-4 (2010): 89-100.

United Nations Environment Programme, and United Nations Human Settlements Programme. “Urban Air Quality Management Toolbook.” 2005.

51

Results from Hyderabad

Results fRom hydeRabad

Figure 7.1: Age of Distribution of Respondents in Hyderabad

Figure 7.2: Occupational Distribution of Respondents in Hyderabad

7.1. Demographics of Hyderabad

Hyderabad is the sixth largest metropolitan city in India with a population of 7.7 million. Its population comprises 3.06

million males and 2.6 million females; making the city’s sex ratio is a little higher than the national average. However, it scores poorly on the literacy front, as its literacy rate, at a mere 82.92 per cent, is much lower than the national average for urban literacy rate.

7.2. Demographics of the SampleThe total sample size used for analysis of data for the city of Hyderabad was 379, out of which 71

per cent respondents were male and 29 per cent were female. The majority of respondents (almost 31 per cent) were in the age group of 25–34 years, followed by the age group 18–24 with a share of 29 per cent. The detailed sample distribution across different age groups is presented in Figure 7.1.

The sample size of 379 comprised of respondents working in the private sector (38 per cent), followed by students (17.41 per cent), housewives (17.15 per cent), and those who are self-employed (16 per cent) (Figure 7.2).

The education profiles of the respondents reveal that the majority of them were either undergraduates or above, followed by

45-54 (15%)

55-64 (4%)

Above 65 (2%)

18-24 (29%)

25-34 (31%)

35-44 (19%)

Self-employed/Business

(16.09%)

Regular salaried (private) (37.99)


(3.96%)

Casual/daily wage (3.96%)

Student (17.41%)

Housewife (17.15%)

Unemployed (2.11%)

Retired (1.32%)

Resu l t s f rom Hyderabad

54

respondents having education till the tenth standard, those who had cleared the twelfth standard, and finally people who have received only primary education (Figure 7.3).

7.3. Key Pressing IssuesThe city of Hyderabad, with its history dating back to as far as 1591, is one of the fastest growing megacities in central south India. The city has witnessed three drought years between 2000 and 2007, severe floods in 2002, and strong heat waves in 2003 (Walk and Schröder 2009). Recent climate phenomena in the city and its surrounding areas deeply reflect the city’s vulnerability to climate change in terms of its impact on human life, and social and economic development (Parry, et al. 2007).

The impacts of climate change on Hyderabad would be serious. In the report ‘Hyderabad as a Megacity of Tomorrow: Climate and Energy in a Complex Transition towards Sustainability’ (Reckien, Lüdeke, et al. 2009), Hyderabad’s future climate analyses was done using outputs from the atmospheric and oceanic global climate models (AOGCMs) for the central south Indian region. The study revealed that Hyderabad may witness more intensive rainfall in the second half of the 21st century. Also, the cases of extreme precipitation events greater than 160 mm/day (as in the case of August, 2000) will increase proportionally. The frequency of occurrence of heat waves longer

than one week will double to triple until 2050 and increase further until 2100. Under high emission scenarios, the city may witness a rise in the mean annual temperature by 5° Celsius, even under (very uncertain) conditions of an increase in the total rainfall, thereby altering the natural water balance towards increased dryness.

Climate change is interlinked with a number of other issues, such as air pollution, green cover, water availability, waste and waste management among others; it cannot be isolated from these. Extreme drought and flood events will affect the availability of good quality water by either generating severe ground and surface water scarcity or contaminating the existing resources with wider implications for the population and the agricultural and industrial sectors. Similarly, climate extremes will impact the communication and transport infrastructure of the city, making them dysfunctional, damaged, inaccessible, unreliable or uncomfortable to use (Shukla, et al. 2003). In case of serious precipitation events, there is an increased probability of freshwater contamination from municipal and toxic waste that may result in diarrheal diseases, cholera, and intoxication. It may also increase the cases of climate sensitive diseases like dengue, malaria, and chikungunya (Young, Balluz and Malilay 2004, Reckien, Hofmann and Kit 2009).There is an urgent need to integrate disaster and climate change mitigation concerns into urban planning and development. Capacity building and training of bureaucrats and public functionaries in climate change risk assessment and adaptation will be an important human resource investment. An important first step will be to address alleviation of poverty and the vulnerability associated with it in the city with interventions in housing markets and public service delivery, real estate, and a supportive policy and institutional atmosphere at the state level. Moreover, there is a need to re-examine the city’s development plans in terms of poverty reduction, infrastructure upgrades, and better governance (Revi 2008).

In comparison to global carbon dioxide emissions,

Figure 7.3: Educational Distribution of Respondents in Hyderabad

Undergraduate

and above (63%)

Up to primary school

(till class V) (2%)

Middle and

secondary

(class X) (20%)

Higher secondary

(class XII) and

diploma (15%)


55

the contribution of Hyderabad as a city is relatively small; yet Hyderabad has to prepare for climate change apropos influence networks, namely transport and other infrastructure, water provision, food security, and health (Reckien, Hofmann and Kit 2009). There is also a need for sensitization of all stakeholders about the linkage of climate change to various problems of livelihood and social equity.

7.4. Results for Hyderabad7.4.1. Overall EnvironmentRespondents were asked to share their perception of the changes in environment quality in their surroundings over the last five years. Around 68 per cent of them felt that air quality has deteriorated over the last five years, while 15 per cent responses revealed that there has been no change. Almost 60 per cent felt that drinking water quality and availability has deteriorated, although 21 per cent of them perceived an improvement. As for the availability and quality of surface and ground water, 59 per cent and 47 per cent of the respondents, respectively, reported impairment over the last five years. Figure 7.4 presents the summary of responses reflecting the state of the environment in Hyderabad.

In order to understand the awareness and perception of the respondents regarding the existence of policies that can address the above mentioned environmental concerns, they were asked for their opinions on the matter. The results showed that most of them felt that either policies exist, but are not implemented; or that the current policies are inadequate to address environmental issues (Figure 7.5). At the same time, many respondents believe that there are no government policies to address the problems of environmental degradation and thus, along with those respondents who did not know that these policies exist, show a lack of awareness.

There are various means by which people get to know about the state of the environment and the policies of the government by which environmental problems can be addressed. The major sources, as shared by the respondents,

include television (72 per cent), school and college curriculum (53 per cent), Internet (45 per cent), and national newspapers (38 per cent).

When asked who can take the primary lead in improving the environment quality in the city

Air quality (clean air, smog,

particles, smell)


and availability


(lakes, rivers, ponds, etc.)


Tree cover/green cover and plant

species in your area

(forest cover, parks, open spaces, etc.)


species in your city

(ex. Sparrows, butterflies, etc.)



0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Don’t know No direct experience Worse

Better No change

8%15%

33%25%

20%

7%18%

50%14%

11%

7%22%

46%11%

13%

3%25%

47%13%

11%

4%18%

59%6%

12%

12%21%

1%6%

60%

8%68%

9%15%

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Air pollution

Water pollution

Water availability

Waste management

Forest conservation

Climate change

Don’t know Policies exist, but not implemented

Policies exist, but are inadequate Policies exist and are well implemented

No government policies exist

27%

12%

10%

11%

13%

19%

15%

22%

22%

23%

16%

15%

19%

30%

35%

34%

29%

27%

36%

33%

27%

24%

32%

26%

2%

2%

5%

8%

10%

13%

Figure 7.4: Changes in the State of the Environment in the Past Five Years in Hyderabad

Figure 7.5: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies in Hyderabad


56

of Hyderabad, 61 per cent felt that research and related organizations should be taking the lead, while 58 per cent of the total respondents felt that the government must take the primary responsibility. Quite a significant share of the respondents (54 per cent) also felt that consumers should be the key agents in improving the situation.

Regarding respondents’ perceptions on the interplay between environment and development, 53 per cent felt that the two should be treated differently and government should give more emphasis to development. Around 32 per cent felt that both environment and development should be treated differently and environment should receive prior attention. A meagre 11 per cent felt that both environment and development go hand in hand (Figure 7.6).

7.4.2. Air The major sources of air pollution in the city of Hyderabad (respondents could choose multiple options) are construction activities (reported by 62 per cent of the respondents), emissions caused by private and public transport (61 per cent), and emissions from nearby factories (44 per cent).

Approximately 70 per cent respondents felt that air pollution is a major cause of various diseases, followed by 20 per cent who felt that air pollution is indeed one of the many causes of modern day health problems.

When the respondents were asked about the possible strategies which the government could

adopt to reduce air pollution, 67 per cent felt that the government should enhance and promote public transport, 50 per cent believed that it should levy heavier congestion charges, while 40 per cent thought that there exists a need to have local industrial clusters which can enjoy common environment-friendly facilities (Figure 7.7).

7.4.3. Water Wastage of water is a cause for concern in most parts of India. When the respondents were asked to share the reasons for this wastage, 77 per cent stated that the leakages mostly take place during the distribution of water. Around 64 per cent shared that people consumed more water than they required while 48 per cent revealed that wastage took place due to leakages from taps, household water pipelines, etc. (Figure 7.8).

When asked whether citizens should pay the actual cost of water, which is considerably higher than the current subsidized rates, with the difference being borne by the civic authorities, almost 50 per cent respondents said that people need to pay the actual cost of water supply, and that this can significantly reduce water wastage. Interestingly, 29 per cent respondents felt that they should not be paying the true cost of water as this high cost is

Yes, they should be treated differently

and the government should prioritize

development (53%)



environmental protection (32%)

No, environment protection and

development go hand in hand (11%)

Can’t say (2%)

Don’t know (2%)

67%

50%

40%

17%

4% 1%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

En

ha

nce

pu

blic

tra

nsp

ort

infr

ast

ruct

ure

Levy

he

avi

er

con

gest

ion

ta

x, a

nd

oth

er

taxe

s to

dis

cou

rage

pri

vate

veh

icle

s (t

axe

s o

n c

ars

)

Se

t u

p lo

cal i

nd

ust

ria

l clu

ste

rs t

o

en

joy

com

mo

n e

nvi

ron

me

nta

l

frie

nd

ly fa

cilit

ies

to r

ed

uce

po

lluti

on

Str

inge

nt

mo

nit

ori

ng

an

d e

nsu

rin

g

en

viro

nm

en

tal s

tan

da

rds

are

me

t

Oth

ers

I do

n’t

kn

ow

Figure 7.6: Interplay between Environment Protection and Development in Hyderabad

Figure 7.7: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Air Quality in Hyderabad


57

the responsibility of parastatal agencies. As far as the billing mechanism is concerned, the majority of the respondents (56 per cent) felt that the best way of monitoring consumption is through metering water usage.

7.4.4. Climate ChangeA significant share of the respondents (60 per cent) from Hyderabad felt that climate change is occurring, while 15 per cent perceived that climate change may be occurring.

An analysis of the responses, when categorized by occupation, reveals that the majority under each category felt that climate change is happening. Almost 93 per cent of the daily wage earners felt that climate change is taking place, followed by the unemployed (75 per cent) and regular salaried persons (69 per cent). About 34 per cent of the housewives from the respondent group perceived the onset of climate change, the least among all the occupation categories (Figure 7.9).

Analysing the respondents by education categories on their awareness of climate change shows that the majority of them under each category accept the fact that climate change is occurring. It was interesting to learn that 64 per cent of the respondents within the primary schooling group are aware of climate change. This is followed by undergraduates and above

(61 per cent), and respondents who have either passed senior secondary school or are diploma holders (Figure 7.10).

Male respondents are found to be relatively more aware about climate change (64.5 per cent)

Figure 7.8: Major Causes of Wastage of Water in Hyderabad

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

48%

77%

64%

5%1%

Leakages

from taps

Leakages

during

distribution

(from

municipalities,

tankers, etc.

to your house)

Too much

water used

where less is

required

by us as

consumers

Water is not

wasted

I dont’

know

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Self-em

ploye

d/business

Regular s

alarie

d (priv

ate)

Regular s

alarie

d (gove

rnm

ent)

Casual/

daily w

age

Student

Housewife

Unemplo

yed

Retired

Can't Say May be No Yes

Figure 7.9: Is climate change occurring in Hyderabad?

Figure 7.10: Awareness and Perception of Government Policy on Climate Change in Hyderabad for Different Educational Groups

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Up to P

rimary

School (til

l Cla

ss V

)

Mid

dle a

nd

Secondary (C

lass

X)

Higher S

econdary

(Cla

ss XII)

and D

iplo

ma

Undergra

duate

and above

Can't Say May be No Yes


58

than female respondents (47 per cent). When the responses are further analysed on the basis of perceptions about change in temperature, precipitation, wind, and extreme events, the awareness ratio of males and females does not vary much across these climate change characteristics.

The respondents were asked about changes in different climatic factors like temperature, precipitation, wind pattern, and extreme events (like floods, droughts, and so on). More than 67 per cent respondents reported that they experienced a lot of change in temperature, followed by that of precipitation and extreme events (16 per cent), and then wind pattern (14 per cent). Moderate changes were reported by 69 per cent, 62 per cent, and 57 per cent of the total respondents with regard to precipitation, wind pattern, and extreme events, respectively. Finally, a very small number of respondents felt that there has been no change in any of the indicators representing climate change (Figure 7.11).

With regard to awareness about the existence of policies addressing climate change, 46 per cent of the salaried respondents (the highest across all occupation categories) working in the public

67%

16%

14%

16%

27%

69%

62%

57%

6%

13%

18%

18%

1%

7%

9%

Temperature


Wind pattern

Extreme events

(floods, drought

,storms, etc.)

Don’t know No change at all Some change A lot of change

Figure 7.11: Changes in Different Climatic Factors over Time in Hyderabad

sector felt that either policies exist, but are not well implemented; or are inadequate in tackling the issue (Figure 7.12).

Furthermore, 33 per cent of the respondents having completed primary education felt that there are policies in place to tackle climate change, but these are not implemented effectively. Approximately 32 per cent of the respondents who have either passed the higher secondary level or are diploma holders felt that current climate change policies are not adequate. Finally, 20 per cent of the most educated (undergraduate and above) amongst all the categories reported that there is no existing policy on climate change. The results are presented in Figure 7.13.

Moreover, in terms of perception amongst the two genders, 20 per cent of the female respondents and 17 per cent of the male respondents feel that there is no existing climate change policy. Around 27 per cent of both male and female respondents feel that there is an existence of policies pertaining to climate change, but these are inadequate for handling the issue. That the policies are poorly

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Self-employed/business

Regular salaried (private


Casual / daily wage

Student

Housewife

Unemployed

Retired



Don’t know

Figure 7.12: Awareness and Perception on Climate Change Policies among Different Occupational Groups in Hyderabad


59

Figure 7.13: Awareness and Perception of Different Educational Groups about Climate Change Policies in Hyderabad

0% 50% 100%

Up to Primary School

(till Class V)

Middle and

Secondary (Class X)

Higher Secondary


Undergraduate

and above



Don’t know

implemented is the opinion held by 19 per cent of the female respondents and 28 per cent of the male respondents.

7.4.5. Waste and Waste ManagementSolid waste is a growing problem in urban areas, and when the respondents were asked about the negative impacts of improper solid waste management on health, 39 per cent of them felt that it would have a severe health impact while 32 per cent believed that it would have a very severe health impact. Around 26 per cent shared that improper waste management will have a moderate impact on health (Figure 7.14). About 48 per cent of the respondents reported that collection of garbage in their localities is conducted using a public-private partnership (PPP) model. Waste management being carried out by public and private entities was reported by 31 per cent each. Only 1 per cent reported that there was no collection of garbage.

In order to address the growing problems of waste generation, its transportation and scientific disposal, 50 per cent said that there should be reduction at source, followed by segregation at source, as brought out by 48 per cent respondents. Finally, 31 per cent feel that recycling is an

important way to reduce waste generation.

When asked about their willingness to segregate waste at source, 45 per cent reported that they are not willing to do so since it is cumbersome and also requires space. Moreover, they felt that even if they did segregate waste at the household level, the garbage is mixed once it is taken out of the house.

Thirty per cent of the respondents are still willing to segregate waste, with 4 per cent even extremely willing to undertake segregation owing to their belief that such practices result in readily generated inputs for composting and improving overall environment quality.

References Parry, M L; Canziani, O F; Palutikof, J P; van der Linden,

P J; and Hanson, C E. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Climate Change 2007: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007.

Reckien, D, et al. Sustainable Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Options in the Future Megacity of Hyderabad/India: Scenario Development and Leverage Points. Bonn: United Nations University, 2009.

Reckien, D; Hofmann, S; and O Kit. Qualitative climate change impact networks for Hyderabad. Project Report Supplement WP1/2009, Sustainable Hyderabad Project, 2009.

Revi, A. “Climate Change Risk: An Adaptation and Mitigation Agenda for Indian Cities.” Environment and

Figure 7.14: Degree of Negative Impact of Improper Solid Waste Management on Human Health in Hyderabad

Very Severe (32%)

Severe (39%)

Moderate (26%)

Low (1%)

No Impact (1%)

I don’t Know (1%)


60

Urbanization 20, no. 1 (April 2008): 207–229.

Shukla, P R; Sharma, S K; Ravindranath, N H; Garg, A; and Bhattacharya, S. Climate Change and India, Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation. Hyderabad, India: Universities Press, 2003.

Walk, H, and Schröder, S. Low Emission Lifestyles in Megacities: Communication and Participation Strategies in Hyderabad.

Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley, Institute of European Studies, 2009.

Young, S; Balluz, L; and Malilay, J. “Natural and Technologic Hazardous Material Releases During and After Natural Disasters: a Review.” Science of the Total Environment 322 (2004): 3-20.

61

Results from Kolkata

Results fRom kolkata

Figure 8.1: Age Distribution of Respondents in Kolkata

Figure 8.2: Occupational Distribution of Respondents in Kolkata

8.1. Demographics of Kolkata

With a population of 14,112,536, Kolkata is the third largest urban agglomeration in India. Kolkata’s sex ratio, as in other

Indian mega cities, is 899, much lower than the national average of 940. However, it is two points above the average urban sex ratio in the country, that is, 926. More than 88 per cent of the city’s population is literate.

8.2. Demographics of the SampleThe sample from Kolkata constituted 17 per cent of the total selected sample for the survey. In this sample, the age group 25–34 years had the

maximum representation of 27 per cent, followed by 25 per cent responses from the 35–44 age group, while the minimum representation in the sample was of the age group 65 years and above (4 per cent) (Figure 8.1). In terms of the sex of the respondents, 58 per cent of the respondents were male and 42 per cent were female.

The respondents were spread across a variety of occupations, with highest representation from housewives (28 per cent) followed by self-employed respondents or those running their own businesses (24 per cent), and the regular salaried in the private sector (18 per cent) (Figure 8.2).

18-24 (19%)

25-34 (27%)

Above 65 (4%)

55-64 (9%)

45-54 (16%)

35-44 (25%)

Regular salaried

(government)

(5%)

Regular salaried

(private)

(18%)

Casual/daily wage

(6%)

Student (8%)

Housewife (28%)

Self-employed/

Business (24%)

Retired (6%)

Unemployed (5%)

Resu l t s f rom Ko lkata

64

Figure 8.3 represents the education distribution in the sample. Respondents are spread across educational groups with the category undergraduate and above constituting more than 31 per cent of the sample.

8.3. Key Pressing IssuesThe city of Kolkata is situated within the lower Ganges delta along the east bank of the River Hoogly in the eastern part of India. Despite an abundance of water in its vicinity, the city faces a grave problem of quality of water supply. A 2003 survey of 1,000 locations in Kolkata revealed that there was high faecal contamination in 87 per cent of water reservoirs serving residential buildings and 63 per cent of taps (Bhaumik 2003). Moreover, 20 per cent of the water samples taken from the city’s hospitals also turned out to be polluted. With augmenting water consuming economic activities and population growth, there has been a decline in the per capita water availability. According to a study by Shaban and Sharma (2007), overuse of groundwater has led to an increase in the arsenic concentration in many wards of the city. Also, there are mounting reports of a water crisis, especially in South Kolkata (The Times of India News Bureau, 2010; The Times of India News Bureau, 2010; The Statesman News Bureau, 2011; Ganguly, 2010).

In part, the problem stems from the antiquated supply infrastructure. For example, as the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) points out, the Palta waterworks was built in 1865 with a capacity of supplying 6 million gallons of water per day. It is now supplying a gigantic 190 million gallons per day with hardly any change in the infrastructure. Additionally, the city lacks accurate maps of the complex network of water pipes (that also happens to date back to the British period) (The Times of India News Bureau 2003).

Interestingly, the city also happens to be one of the few places where the domestic water supply is not billed. The KMC, which administers an area of about 185 sq km, states that it supplies about 300 million gallons per day (mgd), considering the water demand (290 mgd) of the city. With 94 per cent of the city being supplied piped water, there are hardly any meters installed at the residences, thereby rendering an absence of a proper monitoring mechanism for water distribution in its command area (Ghoshal 2009). In the absence of water meters, water pricing in Kolkata is based on an annual property tax and the size of the ferrule, which controls the flow of water from the supply line (Majumdar and Gupta 2007).

The general opinion about the KMC water supply is that the water availability is better than other sources, yet it is not satisfactory. There are numerous complaints regarding the low pressure, irregular supply, and unsatisfactory water quality in households (Majumdar and Gupta 2007). In terms of willingness to pay, the World Bank conducted a study (Project Preparation Studies for Calcutta Water Supply, Sewerage and Drainage Projects 2001) among residents in Kolkata and found that in general, households were willing to pay for improved drinking water supply.

In a city with one third of its population living in slums, about 78 per cent of the slum households utilize no water purification method (Shaban and Sharma 2007). Slum dwellers generally complained about the few sources available for

Figure 8.3: Educational Distribution of Respondents in Kolkata

Up to Primary school

(till class V) (25.82%)

Middle and secondary

(class X) (31.49%)

Higher secondary

(class XII) and

diploma (21.42%)

Undergraduate

and above (21.28%)


65

water supply, inconvenient timings and non-adherence even to that timing, low pressure, overcrowding of sources, and the resultant loss of time while fetching water (Majumdar and Gupta 2007).

Considering the widespread inefficiencies in the water sector of the city, there is a lot of scope for improvement and reform. The immediate areas of focus include pricing and fiscal reform, infrastructure, participation of the private sector in urban water delivery, and political-economic reform (McKenzie and Ray 2009). These reforms will not only ensure a consistent and non-erratic water supply for the populace, but will also ascertain that the levels of water quality meet the national standard uniformly in the city.

8.4. Results For Kolkata8.4.1. Overall EnvironmentWhen the respondents were asked about their perceptions of the changes in the different domains of the environment around their area

in the past five years, the majority felt that the domains of number of birds and animal species (55 per cent), tree and green cover (40 per cent), ground water availability (39 per cent), surface water availability (37 per cent), and air quality (48 per cent) had worsened. Waste and waste management (52 per cent), and drinking water quality and availability (61 per cent), according to the respondents, have improved over time. Thirty one per cent of the respondents also felt that there was no change in the surface water quality and availability (lakes, rivers, ponds, etc.) in their area (Figure 8.4).

When assessing the awareness and perception of different environmental policies, a large number of the respondents from Kolkata felt that policies on water availability (42 per cent) and waste management (52 per cent) existed and were well implemented. Many respondents felt that policies existed, but were not well implemented or were inadequate in the domain of climate change (41 per cent), forest conservation (54 per cent), water availability (47 per cent), water pollution (55 per

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Air quality (clean air, smog,

particles, smell)


and availability

Surface water qualityand

availability (lakes,

rivers, ponds, etc.)


Tree cover/green cover and plant

species in your area (forest cover,

parks, open spaces, etc.)


species in your city

(ex. Sparrows, butterflies, etc.)



27%

10%

31%

19%

26%

20%

25%

22%

61%

22%

16%

27%

15%

52%

48%

27%

37%

39%

40%

55%

17%

3%

2%

10%

19%

7%

10%

6%

0

0

0

1%

7%

0


Figure 8.4: Changes in the State of the Environment in the Past Five Years in Kolkata


66

cent), and air pollution (54 per cent). A very large number of respondents were not aware of policies on climate change (23 per cent) or felt that they did not exist (20 per cent), which also shows their lack of awareness on policies. Thirty three per cent of the respondents in the domain of air pollution also showed a similar lack of awareness (Figure 8.5).

The main sources of information for the respondents about environment related activities were television (71 per cent), followed by local and regional newspapers (35 per cent), and national newspapers (10 per cent). Most respondents (78 per cent) felt that the information they receive on environment-related issues is adequate. From other sources of information, the majority of respondents felt that they did not receive adequate information about environment-related activities.

According to 75 per cent of the respondents, government is the most important group that should work towards improving the environment, while 11 per cent of the respondents felt that it was consumers like us who should, in fact, work towards improving the environment.

To understand the interplay between environment and development, the survey asked whether these two domains work together or should be treated differently. Only 1 per cent of the respondents felt that environment and development go hand in hand. Ninety nine per cent of the respondents felt that they should be treated differently and development should be prioritized (37 per cent) or environment should be prioritized (62 per cent) (Figure 8.6).

Figure 8.5: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies in Kolkata

Air pollution

Water pollution

Water availability

Waste management

Forest conservation

Climate change

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

17%

3%

8%

25%

9%

20%

13%

33%

42%

52%

24%

16%

32%

32%

34%

17%

28%

21%

22%

23%

13%

6%

26%

20%

16%

9%

3%

13%

23%

Don’t know Policies exist, but not implemented Policies exist, but are inadequate

Policies exist and are well implemented No government policies exist


67

8.4.2. AirThe respondents were asked which sector contributes the most to air pollution in Kolkata and 60 per cent of the respondents felt that the transport sector was the biggest contributor, followed by 30 per cent of the respondents citing factories in and around the city. While assessing the respondents’ perception on whether air pollution causes respiratory problems, such as asthma, lung cancer, and skin diseases, 60 per cent of the population thought it was the main contributor to such health problems. Thirty per cent of the population thought it was one of the major contributors to these problems. Not a single respondent felt that air pollution did not cause any health-related problems.

As seen by the results above, according to the respondents, the transport sector contributed the highest to air pollution in the city. The respondents were then asked about their usage of public transport and nearly 80 per cent did, in fact, use public transport more than three times a week (Figure 8.7). The primary reason for using public transport for the respondents (53 per cent) was to save on cost (Figure 8.8). Sixty six per cent of the respondents did not use public transport owing to their belief that it would require more time than using private vehicles (Figure 8.9).

8.4.3. WaterWhen asked about the causes of wastage of water in the households, 73 per cent of the respondents felt that water was being wasted due to excessive consumption. Fifty four per cent



development (37%)






Can’t say (0%)

Figure 8.6: Interplay between Environment Protection and Development in Kolkata

Yes (79.55%)

No (20.45%)

Figure 8.7 : Usage of Public Transport in Kolkata

To save on cost (53%)

To reduce my

contribution towards

vehicular pollution (14%)

To save time (29%)

All of the above (4%)

Figure 8.8: Reasons for Use of Public Transport in Kolkata

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

I do not find

it safe to use

It is not

convenient

for me to

use

It is not very

frequent

It is

expensive

for me to

use

The time

spent is

more on

public

transport

8% 10%

17%

0%

66%

Figure 8.9: Reasons for Not Using Public Transport in Kolkata


68

of the respondents also felt that water is being wasted due to leakage during its distribution. When asked whether residents should pay the actual cost of water, given that water is highly subsidized for households, nearly 57 per cent of the respondents felt that they should not pay the actual cost of water (Figure 8.10).

The percentage of respondents who agree that consumers should pay the actual cost of water supply is indicative of an increasing trend with increasing levels of education. Only 30 per cent of the respondents with a primary education background agree that citizens should pay the actual cost of water supply, while 59 per cent respondents with an education background of undergraduate and above agree to paying for the actual cost of water supply, showing an increasing acceptance with attainment of higher education (Figure 8.11).

When asked about the billing mechanism for water delivery to households, 59 per cent of the respondents felt that there should be metered consumption, while the remaining felt that there should be a fixed rate for water delivery. However, only 44.97 per cent of the respondents with a higher level of education (undergraduate and above) favoured metered/consumption based pricing as compared to 63.18 per cent of respondents with education up to primary school. (Figure 8.12).

Figure 8.10: Should we pay the actual cost of water in Kolkata?

Yes (43.4%)

No (56.68%)

Don't Know

(0.285)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Up to Primary

School (till Class V)

Middle and

Secondary (Class X)

Higher Secondary

(Class XII) and

Diploma

Undergraduate

and above

Yes No Don't Know

59.06%

50.99%

37.84%

29.67%

40.27%

48.34%

62.61%

70.33%

0.67%

0.66%

Figure 8.11: Should we pay the actual cost of water in Kolkata? Distribution by Educational Groups

Metered/consumption based Fixed charges/flat rates

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Up to P

rimary

School (til

l Cla

ss V

)

Mid

dle a

nd

Secondary (C

lass

X)

Higher S

econdary

(Cla

ss XII)

and D

iplo

ma

Undergra

duate

and above

63.18% 62.61% 60.93% 44.97%

36.81% 37.39% 39.07% 55.03%

Figure 8.12: Billing Mechanism for Water Delivery to Households in Kolkata for Different Educational Groups

8.4.4. Forest/Green CoverTwenty nine per cent of the respondents in the city of Kolkata revealed that they had never visited a park, 40 per cent had never visited a forest in the city or in adjoining areas, 57 per cent had never participated in management of parks in their neighbourhood, 46 per cent had never planted a tree, and 52 per cent had never engaged in gardening at home. Forty per


69

cent of the respondents had visited a forest in the city or adjoining areas and 78 per cent of the respondents have never been involved in cutting/chopping of trees.

The respondents were asked about how the city could improve its green cover. Fifty two per cent felt that it could be done by declaration of protected areas (where no commercial activities can take place). An equal number of respondents (43 per cent each) felt that green cover could be increased by improving or formulating new policies and through reclamation of wasteland for parks (Figure 8.13).

8.4.5. Climate ChangeAround 99 per cent of the respondents in Kolkata were aware of climate change and were asked for their perceptions on changes in different climatic variables in Kolkata over time. About 63 per cent of the respondents felt that there has been a lot of change in the temperature, while 45 per cent felt that there has been a lot of change in extreme events (floods, droughts, storms, etc.). Almost 62 per cent respondents felt that there has been some change in rainfall patterns and 52 per cent felt that there have been some changes in the wind pattern (Figure 8.14).

8.4.6. Waste and Waste ManagementWhen asked about the severity of health impacts due to improper solid waste management, 55 per

Figure 8.13: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Forest/Green Cover in Kolkata

43%

52%

43%

14%

11%

4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Improved/ new government policies

Declaration of protected areas (where no commercial activities

can take place) / ‘no-go’ areas (where no one is allowed)

Reclamation of wasteland for parks, etc.


Voluntary activities by citizens

Intervention by civil society organizations

cent felt that it had a very severe impact, and 39 per cent felt that it had a severe impact. Not a single respondent felt that improper solid waste management had no impact on health, showing their concern towards improper solid waste management in Kolkata.

When asked about the willingness of respondents to segregate waste before disposing it, 48 per cent of the respondents said that they were willing to do it while 14 per cent were very willing to do it (Figure 8.15). The 38 per cent respondents who were unwilling to segregate their waste cited space constraints (60 per cent) as the major reason (Figure 8.16). For those who were willing, 53 per

63%

31%

35%

45%

37%

62%

52%

48%

0

7%

14%

6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Temperature


Wind pattern



No change at all Some change A lot of change

Figure 8.14: Changes in Climatic Factors over Time in Kolkata


70

Very willing (14%)

Willing (48%)



33%

60%

5%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Cumbersome

Space constraint

Local authority's

responsibility

Waste not collected

separately

53%

28%

20%

0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

It is good for the environment

I can use the biodegradable

wastes to make compost

I already do segregate the

wastes generated at home

Ghoshal, Devjyot. “Kolkata Assumes Domestic Water Supply Is Free.” Business Standard, December 24, 2009.

Majumdar, Chirodip, and Gupta, Gautam. “The Debate over Municipal Water Pricing: Evidence from Kolkata, India.” International Journal of Water Resources Development 23, no. 4 (2007): 571–582.

McKenzie, D, and Ray, Isha. “Urban Water Supply in India: Status, Reform Options and Possible Lessons.” Water Policy 11 (2009): 442–460.

Project Preparation Studies for Calcutta Water Supply, Sewerage and Drainage Projects. The World Bank, 2001.

Shaban, A, and Sharma, R N. “Water Consumption Patterns in Domestic Households in Major Cities.” Economic and Political Weekly 42, no. 23 (June 9 2007): 2190–2197.

The Statesman News Bureau. “South Kolkata Reels Under Water Crisis.” The Statesman, January 24, 2011.

The Times of India News Bureau. “No End to Water Crisis in South Kolkata.” The Times of India, October 14, 2010.

—. “Raj Legacy Mainstay of Water Supply.” The Times of India, September 3, 2003.

—. “Water Crisis in South Kolkata.” The Times of India, September 2, 2010.

Figure 8.15: Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Kolkata

Figure 8.16: Reasons for Unwillingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Kolkata

Figure 8.17: Reasons for Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Kolkata

cent said that it was good for the environment and 28 per cent said that they could use the biodegradable waste to make compost (Figure 8.17).

ReferencesBhaumik, Subir. “Warning over Calcutta Water Quality.”

BBC News, August 29, 2003.

Ganguly, Deepankar. “Water Crisis Looms on South.” The Telegraph, December 1, 2010.

Results from Mumbai

73

9.1. Demographics of Mumbai

Mumbai is the largest Urban Agglomeration (UA) in India. It is made up of eight constituent units,

namely Greater Mumbai, Mira-Bhayandar, Thane, Navi Mumbai, Kalyan-Dombivli, Ulhasnagar, Ambarnath, and Badlapur. It has a total population of 18.4 million inhabitants. While all the three mega cities—Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai—have a low sex ratio, Greater Mumbai has the lowest at a mere 861 females per 1,000 males. The Greater Mumbai UA has a literacy rate of 90.78 per cent which is the highest amongst the UAs included in this survey.

9.2. Demographics of the SampleThe sample size for Mumbai was 1,010, nearly 25 per cent of the total survey sample for the study. The sample is diversified across gender, age, education, occupation, and income of the respondents. However, being a random sample, only 22 per cent of the respondents were female (Figure 9.1). The majority of the respondents are distributed between the age groups of 18–24 (27 per cent), 25–34 (31 per cent), and 35–44 (24 per cent) years, while 18 per cent of the respondents were above the age of 45 (Figure 9.2). A total 40 per cent of the respondents had middle or secondary education followed by

Figure 9.1: Sex Distribution of Respondents

Female (22%)

Male (78%)

Figure 9.2: Age Distribution of Respondents

18 24 (27%)–

35–44 (24%)

45 54 (13%)–

55 64 (4%)–

Above 65 (1%)

25 34 (31%)–

Results fRom mumbai

Resu l t s f rom Mumba i

74

Figure 9.5 : Occupational Distribution of Respondents in Mumbai

Self-employed/Business (21%)

Casual/daily wage (3%)

Student (21%)

Unemployed (2%)Retired (2%)

Housewife (15%)

Regular salaried (government) (8%)Regular salaried (private) (29%)

Figure 9.3 : Educational Distribution of Respondents

Higher secondary and

diploma (33.27%)

Under graduate and

above (21.88%)

Upto primary (5.05%)

Middle and

secondary (39.8%)

Figure 9.4: Annual Household Income Distribution of Respondents in Mumbai

Upto 1L (15.05%)

No response (12.28%)

3 to 5 L (20%)

1 to 3 L (48.91%)

More than 20 L (0.2%)10 to 20 L (0.5%)5 to 10 L (3.07%)

higher secondary and diploma (33 per cent) and under-graduate and above (22 per cent) levels of education (Figure 9.3). Nearly half the respondents are in the INR 1–3 lakh income bracket, followed by 3–5 lakh (20 per cent) and up to 1 lakh (15 per cent) income brackets (Figure 9.4). According to occupation, students and the self-employed are equally represented (each 21 per cent) in the sample (Figure 9.5). The largest number of responses (37 per cent) was obtained from the regular salaried persons, including private and government, with the majority coming from the private sector.

9.3. Key Pressing IssuesMumbai, the commercial capital of the country, is an old city with a port that has seen a lot of changes in landscape. With an increase in urban migration

and limited space for expansion, the city has the dubious distinction of having rather haphazard urban growth over the years. As a result, the built fabric of the city is a skewed urban landscape.

Contrary to general belief, Mumbai is not a vertical city and skyscrapers do not loom as large as one might think. There are pockets of tall buildings on old mill lands and along the city’s west coast but most of the east coast has land controlled by the port authority, derelict factory sheds, ramshackle low-rise rent-controlled buildings, and slums. To the south is the old city centre with its lofty colonial motifs and the match-box type high- and low-rise structures of the business district and the Reclamation. The nearest green spaces are the ones at the race course, Malabar Hill, and a few of the private clubs in the city. Moreover, the green cover in the north eastern region of Mumbai (with Sanjay Gandhi National Park) is characteristically different from the south (The Economist 2012).

Edward Glaeser of Harvard University has rightly mentioned that Mumbai has some of the most extreme land-use restrictions in the developing world. Moreover, the ratio of a new building’s floor space to its plot area is capped at 1.3 times in most parts of the city (compared with over five times in Hong Kong and New York). Moreover, the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) rules inhibit new construction and redevelopment near the coast. This further adds stress on the land-use efficiency in the city (The Economist 2012).


75

Towards the inland portion of the city, with land locked under development control rules and crowded slums, the green zones are virtually non-existent. The city’s 1.3 crore inhabitants have a green cover of just 19.12 lakh trees. This implies that there is just one tree breathing out oxygen for every six people (Viju and Sharad 2011). The Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) which includes the western, eastern, and central suburbs is no better when it comes to green zones or green cover. Encroachment of sanctuaries, depletion of the buffer zone, and illegal settlements in and around the unprotected forests has drastically affected these regions (Rangnekar 2009).

Efforts by the authorities such as plantation drives, mandatory plantation of trees by developers, maintaining an appropriate ratio of compulsory open spaces in new development projects, and in general, increasing the level of awareness amongst the public will aid in improving the green cover of the city. Innovative methods like tagging of trees with a barcode system by the Government of Maharashtra aim to keep track of the numbers and species of trees, thereby, helping to pinpoint those which are heading towards extinction (National Forest Development Commission, Government of India 2013).

In addition to the above, there is an urgent need to restructure the development rules for land use, free land banks for public spaces, and tackle encroachment by slums and developers. At a micro level, in the neighbourhoods, local citizen bodies need to identify potential tree plantation tracts, wasteland, and encroached land which can be turned into green patches.

9.4. Results for Mumbai

9.4.1. Overall EnvironmentWhen asked about their perceptions on changes in the different domains of the environment, 40 per cent of the respondents answered that there has been no change in air quality, 46 per cent of the respondents saw an improvement in waste and waste management and 39 per cent saw an improvement in drinking water quality and availability. Respondents saw no change in the number of birds and animal species (35 per cent), tree or green cover (38 per cent), surface water quality (31 per cent), and air quality (40 per cent). In terms of ground water availability, respondents felt that it had worsened over time (Figure 9.6).

When asked about awareness and perception of government policies related to different

40%

25%

31%

13%

38%

35%

18%

29%

39%

24%

28%

26%

18%

46%

13%

28%

28%

42%

22%

20%

22%

16%

5%

11%

15%

10%

19%

11%

2%

2%

5%

2%

3%

8%

4%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Air quality




Tree/green cover and plant species in your area

Number of birds/animal species in your city



Figure 9.6: Changes in the State of the Environment in the Past Five Years in Mumbai


76

environmental issues, most respondents felt that policies existed but were either inadequate or not well implemented for air pollution (51 per cent), forest conservation (64 per cent), and climate change (47 per cent). Policies on waste management (47 per cent), water availability (41 per cent), and water pollution (49 per cent), according to the respondents, existed and were well implemented (Figure 9.7).

Newspapers and television are the most important sources of information related to the environment for Mumbai residents. A total 75 per cent of the respondents found that television is an adequate source for environment-related information, followed by national newspapers (67 per cent). Local/regional newspapers (47 per cent), research publications (30 per cent), and the Internet (28 per cent) are other significant sources of information.

When the respondents were asked to rank the group that should be most active in

improving the state of the environment, 66 per cent of the respondents chose government, and 14 per cent of the respondents considered the business sector to play an important role (Figure 9.8). However, 40 per cent have chosen non-profit organizations as the other important or responsible agent, followed by consumers (29 per cent). There is difference of opinion across all individual characteristics of respondents (age, gender, occupation, education, and income). For example, as the level of income and education increase, the perception of importance of non-

profit organizations declines. On the other hand, respondents with income ranging from INR 1-3 lakh and/or ‘middle and secondary’ education level have low confidence in the government as an agent to improve the environment.

When the Mumbai residents were asked about their perceptions of the interplay between environment and development, 34 per cent said that the two go hand in hand, while 62 per cent said that they are conflicting in nature (Figure 9.9). Among those respondents who perceive that there is conflict, the majority (34 per cent of total respondents) thought that development should be given priority over environment.

0% 20% 40% 60%

Air pollution

Water pollution

Water availability

Waste management

Forest conservation

Climate change

Don’t know

Policies exist, but not

implemented

Policies exist, but are

inadequate

Policies exist and are well

implemented

No government policies

exist

8%38%

47%4%

3%

5%49%

27%12%

6%

6%

6%

8%20%

30%17%

26%

4%

4%

41%34%

11%10%

47%

37%27%

27%

26%

15%5%

Figure 9.7: Awareness and Perception of Government Policies in Mumbai

Figure 9.8: Top Groups that should Work towards Improving the Environment in Mumbai

66%

14%

14% 9% 10% 0%

16% 29% 40% 2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Rank 1

Rank 2

Government Businesses Consumers (like you and me) Non-Profit Organizations

Co-Academic institutions/Research organizations


77

9.4.2. AirWhen asked about sources of air pollution, factories and the transport sector topped the list, where 45 per cent of the respondents ranked factories in and around the city as the biggest source of air pollution and 44 per cent ranked the transport sector as the biggest source of air

pollution (Figure 9.10). Domestic fuel burning and garbage burning were seen to be the other contributing factors.

Almost all respondents (99 per cent) perceive that deterioration of urban air quality due to pollution is the cause of diseases such as asthma, lung cancer, other respiratory diseases, and skin diseases (Figure 9.11). A total 74 per cent of the respondents totally agreed with this causal linkage whereas 13 per cent perceived it to be a major cause and 12 per cent perceived it as a minor contributing factor.

Since transport is a major polluting sector, using public transport can be a mitigating strategy and respondents were asked about their use of public transport; 88 per cent of the Mumbai respondents stated that they use it (Figure 9.12). Those who use the public transport system were further asked about their reasons for the same (Figure 9.13). The study found that while 64 per cent use it to save time, 41 per cent use it to reduce cost. However, about 37 per cent of the respondents say that they use public transport to reduce their contribution towards air pollution. On the other hand, the lack of frequency and convenience (each 54 per cent) along with the additional time required (58 per cent) for public transport are the major reasons for not using it. Another important reason for not using public transport is lack of safety as stated by 37 per cent of the respondents (Figure 9.14).

As a strategy to improve the city’s air quality, 75 per cent of the respondents suggested conversion


differently and the government

should prioritize development (34%)

Can’t say (4%)Don’t know (1%)






Figure 9.9: Interplay between Environment Protection and Development in Mumbai

Figure 9.10: Sectors Contributing the Most to Air Pollution in the City in Mumbai

44%

29%

45% 5% 5%1%

19% 15% 20% 17%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Rank 1

Rank 2

Transport Sector Factories in and around cities

Construction activities Domestic fuel burning activities

Garbage burning

Figure 9.11: Does Air Pollution Cause Diseases (such as asthma, lung cancer, etc.) in Mumbai?

Yes, I totally agree (74%)

Yes, but it is just one of the major

contributing factors (13%)

Yes, but it is a very minor

contributing factor (12%)

No, I don’t think air pollution

causes any of these

diseases (1%)

I don’t know (1%)No (12%)

Yes (88%)

Figure 9.12: Usage of Public Transport in Mumbai


78

41%

37%

16%

64%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

To save on cost

To reduce my

contribution

towards vehicular

pollution

All of the above

To save time

37%

54%

54%

10%

58%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

I do not find it

safe to use

It is not

convenient

for me to use

It is not very

frequent

It is expensive

for me to use

Time spent is

more on public

transport

Figure 9.13: Reasons for Using Public Transport in Mumbai

Figure 9.14: Reasons for Not Using Public Transport in Mumbai

Figure 9.15: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Air Quality in Mumbai

49%

67%

39%

17%

75%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Enhance public

transport

infrastructure

Levy heavier

congestion tax

and other taxes

to discourage

private vehicles

(taxes on cars)

Set up local

industrial clusters

to enjoy common

environmental

friendly facilities to

reduce pollution

Stringent

monitoring

and ensuring

environmental

standards

are met

Convert all

polluting industries

into environmentally

friendly industries

of polluting industries to environment-friendly units, while 67 per cent suggested the imposition of congestion and other taxes to discourage use of private vehicles (Figure 9.15).

9.4.3. Water Exploring the causes of water wastage, 65 per cent thought that the main reason is leakage during distribution, while 51 per cent have identified leakage from taps/faucets in the house (Figure 9.16). On the other hand, 15 per cent of

the respondents believe that water is not being wasted at all. Since water is highly subsidized for the domestic sectors, respondents were asked whether consumers should pay the actual cost of water supply (Figure 9.17). While 51 per cent agree that consumers should pay the actual cost of service, 46 per cent were averse to the idea. A total 69 per cent of the respondents perceive that billing mechanisms to price water supply should be metre/consumption based while 31 per cent supported flat rates or fixed charges.


79

9.4.4. Forest/Green CoverTo explore the behaviour of the respondents with respect to green cover, they were asked about their frequency of undertaking some activities related to it (Figure 9.18). A total 40 per cent of the respondents stated that they visit neighbourhood parks more than once a week, a significant number visit a forest (39 per cent) or participate in management of parks (30 per cent) or tree plantation (43 per cent) once a year. At the same time, 86 per cent say that they have never engaged in any activity related to cutting/chopping of trees.

However, in the case of gardening, there is a difference in response across income, education, and occupation categories. Similarly, in the case of visiting a park, there are differences across gender, occupation, and education while income and occupation-wise differences exist in the case of participation in park management. Female respondents and housewives spent much less time visiting parks than their male counterparts. Similarly, people with lower levels of education (up to primary) get less time to visit parks.

Leakages

from taps/

faucets in

your house

Leakages

during

distribution

(from

municipalities,

tankers, etc.

to your house)

Water is not

wasted

I dont’

know

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

51%

65%

43%

15%

Figure 9.16: Major Causes of Wastage of Water in Mumbai

No (46%)

Don’t know (3%)

Yes (51%)

Figure 9.17: Should We Pay the Actual Cost of Water in Mumbai?

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


neighbourhood

Visit a forest or

adjoining area

Participate in

management of parks

Plant a tree

Gardening at home


chopping of a tree

Never Once a year Once in a month More than once a month More than once a week

4% 13% 2% 20% 40%

22% 39% 17% 14% 8%

34% 30% 15% 15% 5%

28% 43% 17% 7% 4%

46% 25% 11% 8% 11%

86% 8% 5% 2%0%

Figure 9.18: Behaviour Towards and Frequency of Use of Surrounding Forest/Green Cover in Mumbai


80

45.2%

25.8%

20.4%

54.2%

4.5%

49.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Reclamation of

wasteland for

parks, etc.

Public–private

partnership

Voluntary

activities

by citizens

Improved/new

government

policies

Intervention

by civil society

organizations

Declaration of

protected areas

(where no commercial

activities can take

place)/‘no-go’

areas (where no

one is allowed)

Figure 9.19: Strategies Government Should Adopt to Improve Forest/Green Cover in Mumbai

To explore strategies for improving the green cover in their city, more than half of the respondents (54 per cent) opted for the requirement of improved/new government policies while almost half have suggested declaration of protected areas (Figure 9.19). Other important suggestions were reclamation of wasteland for parks (45 per cent) and implementation of public–private partnership (26 per cent).

However, there are differences of opinion across individual categories. While female respondents are more in favour of reclamation of wasteland for parks, male respondents and those over the

age of 45 support new/improved government policy or public–private partnership.

9.4.5. Climate ChangeWhen asked for their opinion on whether climate change was occurring, 79 per cent perceived that it is occurring. Further, those who agreed were asked about their perception of changes in different climatic factors (Figure 9.20). The majority (45 per cent) has claimed that some change has occurred in temperature, wind pattern (40 per cent), and extreme events (31 per cent). Approximately 41 per cent of the respondents

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Temperature


Wind pattern

Extreme events


28% 45% 6% 0%

41% 25% 13% 1%

20% 40% 18% 2%

14% 31% 21% 13%

Figure 9.20: Changes in Climatic Factors over the period in Mumbai


81

To manage the problem of solid waste, almost half (48 per cent) of the respondents believe that segregation of waste at source is the best strategy (Figure 9.22). Other important strategies suggested are generating less waste (37 per cent) and improving waste recycling capacity (33 per cent). However, very few respondents (8 per cent) thought that imposition of user charges can be a good strategy.

Even if segregation of waste is considered an important strategy, 80 per cent of the respondents were not willing to segregate the waste before disposing it (Figure 9.23). Only 4 per cent were very willing to segregate, and another 17 per cent were somewhat willing to segregate. When asked about the reasons for their unwillingness to segregate, the majority of respondents (64 per cent) cited lack of space as the main reason (Figure 9.24). Another significant reason is the collection process which does not benefit the segregation (44 per cent). Concern for the environment (63 per cent) was the main reason for those who were willing to segregate waste at source (Figure 9.25).

also claimed that a lot of change had occurred in rainfall patterns.

9.4.6. Waste and Waste ManagementThe respondents were also asked about their perceptions regarding the severity of negative impacts of improper solid waste management on human health (Figure 9.21). The survey has revealed that it is very severe from the perspective of the majority (57 per cent) of the respondents and 24 per cent felt that it has severe impacts, whereas only 11 per cent thought it had moderate impacts.

The study also showed that garbage from households is mostly (51 per cent) collected by public entities. Private entities are also involved in collecting garbage (36 per cent) along with public–private partnership (as in the case of 12 per cent respondents).



Willing (17%)

Very willing (4%)

37%

48%

8%

33%

0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Generate less

amount of waste

Segregate waste

at the source

User charges

Improve waste

recycling capacity

I don’t know

Figure 9.22: Best Strategies to Improve Waste Management in Mumbai

Severe (24%)

Moderate (11%)

Low (7%)

No impact (1%)

Very severe (57%)

Figure 9.21: Negative Impacts of Improper Solid Waste Management on Human Health in Mumbai

Figure 9.23: Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Mumbai


82

30%

64%

44%

36%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Cumbersome task

to separate the

waste

Will require more

space to keep two

separate bins

Even if I segregate

the wastes, it is not

collected

separately by the

civic authorities

It is the local

authority’s

responsibility,

not mine

63%

54%

36%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

It is good for the

environment

I can use the

biodegradable wastes to

make compost

I already do segregate

the wastes generated at

home

Figure 9.25: Reasons for Willingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Mumbai

Figure 9.24: Reasons for Unwillingness to Segregate Waste into Biodegradable and Non-Biodegradable Components in Mumbai

ReferencesNational Forest Development Commission, Government of

India. Forest Department Raises the Bar by Tagging Trees. 2013. http://www.hrdnfdc.org.in/news/?id=7 (accessed 28 March, 2013).

Rangnekar, Prashant. “Vanishing Green Cover of Mumbai.” Expressindia, June 15, 2009.

“The Minimum City.” The Economist, June 9, 2012.Viju, B, and Sharad, V. “Only 19 L Trees in Mumbai Makes

Greens See Red.” The Times of India, May 31, 2011.

83

CONCLUSION

The survey, with a total sample of 4,039, was conducted in the six most populous cities of India, and each city sample

population was proportionate to the ratio of population of the city with the total population of all cities combined. The survey aimed to collect information from citizens across all sections of society from each of the six cities regarding their perceptions, behaviour, awareness, and opinions towards the environment.

Key ObservationsOverall EnvironmentRespondents in all the cities surveyed perceived the quality of overall environment to have deteriorated. There are some variations, however, in responses for different components of the environment across different cities.

Changes over the last five years

In the past five years, respondents have reported an overall deterioration of the environment. However, mixed responses were received for different environmental parameters.

For air quality, on the one hand, a little less than half of the respondents in Bangalore (46 per cent), Chennai (45 per cent), Kolkata (48 per cent), and Mumbai (40 per cent) perceived no change to have occurred. On the other hand, 68 per cent

respondents in Hyderabad and 40 per cent in Delhi find it to have deteriorated. A total 39 per cent from Delhi and over 20 per cent in Bangalore and Mumbai find the air quality to have actually improved.Drinking water quality and availability in Mumbai has been perceived by a majority to have undergone no change. A total 68 per cent of respondents in Bangalore, 41 per cent in Delhi, 47 per cent in Chennai, and 61 per cent in Kolkata perceive drinking water quality and availability to have improved. In Hyderabad, however, 60 per cent respondents found it to have deteriorated.Ground water availability has been perceived to have declined over the years in all the surveyed cities. Most respondents from Delhi and Bangalore (83 per cent and 77 per cent, respectively) held this opinion. With respect to tree cover/green cover and plant species in the area, and the number of birds and/or animal species, responses suggest an overall deterioration. Nearly half the respondents from Bangalore and Chennai feel there has been a decline. Around 80 per cent respondents from Delhi share this perception. In Mumbai, however, more respondents perceived no change in this regard as compared to worsening or improvement.Waste and waste management has been perceived to have deteriorated by a majority of respondents in Delhi (80 per cent) and Bangalore (53 per cent),

Conc lus ion

84

compared to Hyderabad (33 per cent) and Chennai (23 per cent). The situation is seen as improved by 53 per cent in Kolkata and 46 per cent in Mumbai.The perception of these environmental indicators varied not only across cities, but across localities, age groups, education, and income levels as well.

Sources of information

Most respondents treat TV and national newspapers as the main source of information on environment and related matters and find it adequate. The second most important source of information varied from city to city, but most respondents in the surveyed cities identified it as local/regional newspapers, internet, and informal conversations. In most cases, this information is seen as inadequate. School and college curriculum as a source of information on environmental issues was rated highly only in the city of Hyderabad with 53 per cent of the respondents choosing it.

Awareness of government policies

Overall awareness about government policies in different spheres of the environment exists, but the common opinion suggests that these policies are either inadequate or not being implemented to meet their desired objectives. In Bangalore, most of the respondents felt that policies for climate change, forest conservation, and waste management exist, but are not adequate and the policies to check water pollution are not being implemented. In nearly all the surveyed cities, awareness about existence of an air pollution law or policy is poor.

Stakeholders with the most important role

In most cities, 50 per cent or more respondents believed that the government has the most important role to play, followed by business communities and consumers. The only exception can be found in the responses received in Hyderabad, where 61 per cent felt that research institutions have a major role to play in this area. It is interesting to note that only 1 per cent of the respondents from Delhi shared this opinion. The role of not-for-profit organizations was seen as

important in Delhi and Mumbai by 12 per cent and 40 per cent of the respondents, respectively.

Environment or development

One of the questions with the most varied response across cities was whether environment and development can go hand in hand. More than 50 per cent of Delhi’s respondents agreed that it is possible for environment and development to be looked at together. Over 30 per cent respondents from Chennai and Mumbai, and around 10 per cent of the respondents from Bangalore and Hyderabad agreed with this idea. Amongst respondents who felt that environment and development should be treated separately, more people in Hyderabad, Mumbai, and Bangalore felt that development should be prioritized when choosing between the two. Fewer people in Delhi and Chennai seemed to hold this view, where 22 and 30 per cent people thought that the environment should be a priority, if one were to choose between environment and development.

AirSources of air pollution

The three most commonly identified sources of air pollution across cities were found to be factories in and around cities, emissions from transport, and construction activities. Most respondents from Delhi found transport to be the most polluting sector, whereas most respondents from Mumbai and Bangalore considered factories in and around the cities as the main source of pollution. Unlike other urban agglomerations (UAs) surveyed, more than half the respondents in Hyderabad cited construction activities as a primary source of pollution.

Air pollution as a cause of respiratory and skin diseases was recognized by respondents in all the cities, albeit in different degrees. Most people in Delhi, Mumbai, and Hyderabad saw a direct causal relationship between air pollution and diseases like asthma, respiratory disorders, skin diseases, and lung cancer.


85

Measures to reduce air pollution

Respondents were asked for their opinions on the measures to reduce air pollution and improve air quality. Around one-fourth of the respondents in most of the surveyed cities feel that enhancing public transport infrastructure is an important measure to address the problem of increasing air pollution. Levying of congestion and similar taxes to discourage private vehicles was considered as an option by 75 per cent of the respondents in Mumbai, followed by Hyderabad and Bangalore. Other measures voted for by the respondents include encouraging conversion of polluting industries so as to use environment-friendly technologies, and establishment of industrial clusters which can use common facilities and infrastructure for environment-friendly processes (with more inclusion of green space, plants, etc.).

Use of public transport

Most of the respondents claimed to be using public transport at least three times a week. More than a majority of respondents in Bangalore, Kolkata, and Mumbai used public transport and more than half of the respondents from Chennai and Delhi also used public transport. The main drivers for the choice of public transport are to save money and time. However, around one-third of the respondents in most UAs used public transport to reduce vehicular emissions too. Usage of public transport also varied with age and gender. For example, a higher percentage of the male population and those from younger age groups used public transport. The main deterrents to using public transport were identified to be a lack of convenience and lack of frequency. Time is another deterrent factor in cities, such as in Mumbai and Kolkata (58 and 66 per cent, respectively). Only 1 per cent of Delhi respondents cited the time factor as a reason for not taking public transport.

WaterPrimary causes of water wastage

A vast majority of citizens in all the surveyed UAs agreed that water is being wasted in their

cities. The three main reasons for this wastage were identified as leakage during distribution and supply, leakage in the taps and faucets, etc., in homes, and over consumption by people. Leakage during distribution and supply is seen as the biggest cause in all the cities except Bangalore, where more respondents find leakage from taps and faucets in homes to be the main cause. Most respondents in Hyderabad (up to 64 per cent) hold overuse by consumers responsible for wastage of water.

Payment for water

While respondents in all the cities agreed that water is being wasted, including in homes due to leakage and overuse, they are not willing to pay for the actual cost of water. Around 74 per cent respondents in Bangalore, 61 per cent in Delhi, 42 per cent in Chennai, 46 per cent in Mumbai, and 56 per cent in Kolkata did not agree with the idea of paying the actual cost of water. Hyderabad was the only city where a relatively small number (only 29 per cent) of respondents opposed the idea of such payment.

Respondents were also asked about whether a flat rate or a consumption-based meter is the appropriate billing mechanism for water. While citizens want water to be subsidized and are not willing to pay for the actual cost in general, they are agreeable to the idea of billing based on their actual consumption. A total 99 per cent of the people surveyed in Bangalore chose metered consumption, followed by Delhi (89 per cent) and Mumbai (69 per cent). In Chennai, only 32 per cent of the respondents were in favour of consumption-based meters as a billing mechanism.

Forest/Green CoverMeasures for improving forest/green cover

The most agreed upon measure for improving forest/green cover was reclamation of barren areas and wastelands, followed by declaration of certain areas as protected and, thus, restricted for commercial activities. Another measure rated high by respondents from Mumbai and Delhi is improvement of government policies in this

Conc lus ion

86

domain. Public-private partnerships were also seen as a useful means to enhance green cover, especially in Mumbai and Chennai.

Participation in maintaining green cover

In most of the surveyed cities, people were sensitive towards the green cover in their neighbourhood. However, only about one-third of the respondents participated in the management of parks in their neighbourhoods. In Delhi, that figure is even lower, where nearly 90 per cent respondents have never participated in the management of any parks in their area. A large number of respondents have never planted a tree in their lifetime. More respondents from Chennai and Bangalore say that they have planted trees than respondents from other cities. Interestingly, the maximum number of respondents who admitted to having been involved in felling a tree was from Chennai (38 per cent).

Climate ChangeThe percentage of respondents believing that climate change is indeed occurring varies in different UAs. It ranges from 99 per cent in Kolkata to 41 per cent in Chennai. Temperature variations were perceived in most cities, followed by extreme events and precipitation. Mumbai respondents noted significant changes in rainfall patterns.

Waste and Waste ManagementWaste disposal and management is an issue across all the six UAs. Most respondents from Bangalore, Delhi, and Mumbai recognize improper waste management as a very severe threat to human health.

Strategies to improve waste management

When respondents were asked to choose the best strategy for better waste management, most of them, nearly half in some cases, opted for segregation of waste at source as the best strategy. This was followed by other measures, such as recycling and reducing the generation of waste itself. Very few respondents found imposition of user charges for generating waste to be a good strategy.

Willingness to segregate

While segregation of waste is a common response, not many respondents are willing to do so themselves. Nearly half of the total respondents in all the cities have categorically stated that they are not willing to segregate their waste into biodegradable and non-biodegradable components. In Mumbai, as many as 80 per cent respondents said that they are not willing to segregate their household waste. Less than 10 per cent respondents are highly willing. However, it should be noted that most respondents from Kolkata (48 per cent) are willing to segregate waste. The most common reasons cited for unwillingness to segregate waste include lack of space, cumbersome process, lack of segregated collection, and a strong belief that segregation is a responsibility of the local authorities. Lack of space was the biggest disincentive for respondents in Kolkata and Mumbai (60 and 64 per cent, respectively). Besides being seen as a complicated process, the respondents also felt that their efforts do not help as the waste is not collected in a segregated manner. This view was held by 44 per cent Mumbai respondents and 18 per cent Delhi respondents. As many as 23 per cent respondents from Delhi and Bangalore felt that waste segregation is the sole responsibility of the entity that collects it.

87

annexure

Questionnaire

Hello, my name is ______________ from the public opinion research firm of Ralibha Insights. We are conducting a survey of people’s views on a number of important issues faced by people with respect to the environment. Please be assured that we are not selling or soliciting anything. This is strictly a research project, being conducted in India. Shall we begin the survey?

Background Informationa. Name:

b. Contact information (phone number/email ID) – Optional

c. Type of locality (answered by the surveyor)

i) Tax category of locality/socio-economic status of locality

ii) Name of locality

iii) Type of locality

i. Slums/ villages/ Jhuggi-jhopri cluster/unauthorized colonies

ii. Lower middle class locality

iii. Upper middle class locality

iv. Posh localities

d. City

i. National Capital Region iv. Chennai

ii Greater Mumbai v. Kolkata

iii Bangalore vi. Hyderabad

Annexure

88

e. Agei. 18–24 iii. 35–44 v. 55–64ii. 25–34 iv. 45–54 vi. Above 65

f. Gender

Female Male Others

g. Education i. Up to Primary School (till Class V)ii. Middle and Secondary (Class X) iii. Higher Secondary (Class XII) and Diploma iv. Undergraduate and abovev. Others, please specify _______

h. Occupation i. Self-employed/Businessii. Regular salaried (private)iii. Regular salaried (government)iv. Casual / daily wagev. Studentvi. Housewifevii. Unemployedviii. Retired

i. Annual household income

i. Upto 1 Lii. 1 to 3 Liii. 3 to 5 Liv. 5 to 10 Lv. 10 to 20 Lvi. Greater than 20 Lvii. No response

j. Whether migrated to the current city of residence and for how long

i. Yes, first generation migrant (Time: ______________)ii. Yes, second generation migrant (Time: ______________)iii. No


89

OVERALL ENVIRONMENT1. How do you perceive a change in the state of the environment around your area over the last five

years (2007 onwards)?


Air quality (clean air, smog, particles, smell)


Surface water quality and availability(lakes, rivers, ponds, etc.)


Tree cover/green cover and plant species in your area (forest cover, parks, open spaces, etc.)

Number of birds and/or animal species in your city (ex. Sparrows, butterflies, etc.)

Waste and waste management (garbage collection, dumping, etc)

2. Have you heard of the government policies that address the following environmental concerns?

No government policies exist

Policies exist and are well implemented

Policies exist, but are inadequate

Policies exist, but not implemented

I don’t know

Air pollution

Water pollution

Water availability

Waste management

Forest conservation

Climate change 3. What are the means you use to get the most information about environment related activities and

is this source adequate? (please rank the top two) (Do not prompt unless they want options)

This information is adequate (Yes/No)

National newspapers

Local/regional newspapers

Television

Internet

Magazines

Seminars and programmes

Research publications

School/college curriculum

Informal conversations

Any other source, please specify _______________

I don’t have any information

Annexure

90

4. Rank the top two amongst the following groups in working to help improve the environment?

Government

Businesses

Consumers (like you and me)

Non-Profit Organizations

Academic institutions/Research organizations.

5. Do you think protecting the environment (reducing air pollution, water pollution, controlling deforestation, preserving our minerals, etc.) is against the objectives of development (poverty reduction, increasing levels of education, improving the health of people, etc.)?

a. Yes, they should be treated differently and the government should prioritize developmentb. Yes, they should be treated differently and the government should prioritize environmental

protectionc. No, environment protection and development go hand in handd. Can’t saye. Don’t knowf. Any other, please specify -___________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________

AIR6. Which sector do you think contributes the most to air pollution in cities (please give the top two

responses and rank them)? (Do not prompt unless they want options)

Rank

Transport sector

Factories in and around the city

Construction activities

Domestic fuel burning activities (cow-dung cake, wood and charcoal burning for cooking, heating, etc.)

Garbage burning

Others, please specify __________________

I don’t know

7. Do you think air pollution is the cause of diseases, such as asthma, lung cancer, other respiratory diseases, skin diseases, etc.?

a. Yes, I totally agreeb. Yes, but it is just one of the major contributing factorsc. Yes, but it is a very minor contributing factord. No, I don’t think air pollution causes any of these diseasese. I don’t know


91

8. Do you use public transport more than three times a week (yes or no and why)?

Yes Noa. To save on cost a. I do not find it safe to useb. To reduce my contribution towards vehicular pollution b. It is not convenient for me to usec. To save time c. The time spent is more on public transport d. All of the above d. It is not very frequente. Any other, please specify ____________ e. It is expensive for me to use

f. Any other, please specify ______________

9. In your opinion, what strategy should the government adopt in order to improve air quality in cities (you may choose more than one option but a maximum of two)? (Do not prompt unless they want options)

a. Enhance public transport infrastructureb. Levy heavier congestion tax, and other taxes to discourage private vehicles (taxes on cars)c. Convert all polluting industries into environmentally friendly industriesd. Set up local industrial clusters to enjoy common environmental friendly facilities to reduce

pollutione. Stringent monitoring and ensuring environmental standards are metf. Others, please specify _____________________g. I don’t know

WATER10. What are the major causes of wastage of water in your city (please choose all that apply)?

a. Leakages from taps/faucets in your house b. Leakages during distribution (from municipalities, tankers, etc. to your house)c. Too much water used where less is required by us as consumersd. Water is not being wastede. I don’t knowf. Others, please specify ______________

11. Water is currently highly subsidized by the government for the households and agriculture (we pay only 10% of the actual cost of water). Do you thing that we should pay the actual cost of water supply? (you may explain why yes or no)

a. Yes ____________________________________________________________b. No ____________________________________________________________ c. Don’t know _________________________________ ____________________

12. What could be an billing mechanism used to price water delivery at home?

a. Fixed charges/flat ratesb. Metered/consumption basedc. Others, please specify ______________

Annexure

92

FOREST/GREEN COVER13. How often do you undertake the following?

Never Once a

yearOnce in a month

More than once a month


Visit a park in your neighbourhood Visit a forest or adjoining area (not necessarily in your city)

Participate in management of parks in your neighbourhood

Plant a tree Gardening at home Involved in cutting/ chopping of a tree

14. How do you think the city can improve its green cover? (Please give the options)

a. Improved/ new government policiesb. Declaration of protected areas (where no commercial activities can take place) / ‘no-go’ areas

(where no one is allowed)c. Reclamation of wasteland for parks, etc.d. Public-private partnershipe. Voluntary activities by citizens f. Intervention by civil society organizationsg. Others, please specify ____________

CLIMATE CHANGE15. Do you think climate change is occurring1? (please give the definition of climate change and if

possible, some examples)

a. Yesb. Noc. Maybed. Can’t say

15a. If yes, which among these climatic variables you think has undergone changes?

A lot of change Some change No change at all Don’t knowTemperaturePrecipitation/rainfallWind patternExtreme events (floods, drought, storms, etc.)

1 Climate change is defined as “Climate change means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that

alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.” OR you can use “any significant change in the measures of climate lasting for an extended period of time. In other words, climate change includes major changes in temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns, among other effects, that occur over several decades or longer”


93

WASTE AND WASTE MANAGEMENT16. How severe do you reckon are the negative impacts of improper solid waste (garbage) management

on human health?

a. Very severeb. Severec. Moderated. Lowe. No impactf. I don’t know

17. Currently, who collects garbage from your household?

a. Public entitiesb. Private entitiesc. Public-private partnershipd. Not awaree. Any other, please specify _____________________________________f. Not collected at all

18. According to you, which amongst these is the best strategy to manage the problem of solid waste (you may choose more than one option to show a combination)?

a. Generate less amount of waste in the houseb. Segregate waste at the source c. Improve waste recycling capacity d. User charges (charges for the amount of waste generated, ex. In kilograms or the number of

bags collected)e. Others ¬_____________f. I don’t know

19. How willing are you to segregate your waste (into biodegradable and non-biodegradable component) before disposing it?

Options Not willing at all Not very willing Willing Very willingReasons a. Cumbersome task to separate the

wastes.b. Will require more space to keep

two separate binsc. It is the local authority’s

responsibility, not mined. Even if I segregate the wastes it

is not collected separately by the civic authorities

e. Others, please specify ___________.

a. It is good for the environmentb. I can use the biodegradable wastes

to make compost c. I already do segregate the wastes

generated at homed. Others, please specify___________

teri environmental survey - india water portal...mr rahul singh, research assistant, the energy and...

Documents