It seems obvious that government should have a system for us to complain about the environment, doesn't it? After all, we are told by government that we should have a cleaner, better environment. So, as this newspaper reports: “The National Information and Service Helpline ‘333-4’ has been launched to receive complaints related to the environment. Through this, people can formally complain about water pollution, air pollution, noise pollution, biodiversity loss, and illegal forest/mountain destruction and tree felling.“
We'd probably want to make sure there's always someone to answer the call of course. Possibly even suggest that an email form might be a good idea and so on. But the main idea seems good in itself and so we can just celebrate, correct?
No, we should do more than that. For there's a significant leverage to this. To grasp why, we need to move back to basic theory.
There's an observation called the Kuznets Curve. Places tend to get dirtier, have worse environments, as they start to develop. Then, at some level of higher wealth in the society the place gets cleaner again -- until, at a higher level of development a country is cleaner than it ever was. One example of such observations is that the air in London is now cleaner than it has been since 1300 AD -- which is when we started to use coal and we no longer do at all. Yes, lots of motor cars and so on, but no coal and that's what makes the difference. The Thames now has salmon in it again, something not seen in 300 years.
So, why? Well, in a truly poor society no one is doing very much, so there's not all that much done that pollutes. But as the economic wealth grows more is done, resulting in more pollution. In a society that's still poor, even if growing, no one really cares much about that environment. Growing the economy enough that everyone can have two, then three, meals a day is more important than air pollution.
Now we might say that that's right or wrong on moral, or environmental, grounds but that is the way that everywhere, any researcher has studied, has worked out. Those first steps to growth are filthy.
But then something happens which is what causes the curve. A society reaches a certain level of wealth (and that level at which the switch happens has been getting lower and lower over the past century) and the demand comes for that cleaner again environment.
Now, exactly where this switch takes place is a matter of great debate -- the number has been changing downwards over history. But a reasonable estimation (that's also known as a guess but with a little more information) is that it's around where Bangladesh is now. The outside observer would expect Bangladeshi society to be arguing in favour of cleaner air, water and so on right about now that is.
Which is the thing that is the leverage on the service hotline. Things are always more effective when they're going with the flow of what the people in general want to happen. We really do think that Bangladesh is at, or around, that turning point in the Kuznets Curve. This is, around and about, when some parts of the next stage of economic growth are going to be -- because people demand it -- devoted to cleaning the place up a bit, not just to doing anything necessary, however dirty, to making just a bit more money.
So, properly run, this helpline should be very effective. One of the things which will make it so -- other than however good the bureaucracy is at the other end of the line -- is how many people call it with which complaints. So, use it, do it.
Another way to put this is that you're being offered a tool to remake the country the way you want it to be. Why wouldn't you give them a call? The aim of this whole democracy thing is, after all, that the country turns out like we'd like it to be. And it's absolutely possible to vote by doing, not just at election time.
Tim Worstall is a senior fellow at the Adam Smith Institute in London.
