We dream of colonizing Mars, establishing long-term deep space habitation, and building Artificial Intelligence (AI) that mimics human intelligence -- yet we still struggle with polluted cities, contaminated water, and overflowing landfills.
Avoiding littering and minimizing waste should come as naturally as following traffic rules. However, civic responsibility cannot be taken for granted. We cannot solely depend on a culture of mutual respect and accountability. At times, enforcing and regulating behaviour change becomes necessary.
The problem of waste has long been viewed as a production issue, leading to the depletion of our finite resources. It has also been seen merely as a recycling problem or an end-of-lifecycle issue.
But have we ever considered what happens to waste after we discard it?
What does “away” really mean in terms of waste?
Where is this so-called away?
Can waste simply be wished away?
The reality is that there is no true “away.” What we throw out often ends up littered and dumped in our environment, polluting rivers and oceans or being sent to landfills.
Take Dhaka city, for instance; it generates approximately 5,000 tons of waste daily. Yet, only about half of that is properly collected, and a mere 30% is recycled.
What happens to the remainder? With the challenges of finding new landfill sites and Dhaka’s ever-increasing waste production, we need a plan that goes beyond merely improving the waste management system.
We have been encultured in the attitude that once we are done with something, once we discard it, it is no longer our problem. This mindset must change.
I argue that waste is also a problem of consumption, with waste issues being central to modern civilization and stemming from our contemporary lifestyle. This problem is directly linked to consumption and results from human activities.
Consequently, it is crucial to ensure that individuals are held accountable for their consumption and the waste they create. Introducing a tax on waste generators -- whether households or businesses -- can draw attention to the issue and promote awareness.
Establishing a specific garbage tax or waste disposal fee is necessary, rather than including it with local taxes or charging a flat rate. In such scenarios, people lack motivation to minimize waste, as they do not recognize any increased costs associated with their actions.
Although taxing individuals based on the amount of waste they produce may seem simple, the administration may encounter strong resistance from waste generators due to increased costs and concerns about affordability.
Additionally, implementing a tax or levy alone will not solve waste management problems; it should be integrated into a broader strategy encompassing initiatives for waste reduction, reuse, and recycling.
Most importantly, introducing a garbage tax will raise questions about its fair and equitable application. Similar initiatives have been successful in countries such as Australia and New Zealand, as well as in cities like Singapore, Seoul, and Taipei.
Their experiences demonstrate that the foundation of the levy is crucial for successful implementation. For instance, Singapore and Bangalore determine their fees based on the size and type of dwelling, while Taipei and Seoul charge according to the volume of waste produced.
In 2000, Taipei launched a "per-bag trash collection fee program," mandating residents to purchase specific trash bags for their waste disposal. Similarly, in Seoul, residents pay for waste disposal based on the amount of non-recyclable garbage they generate.
In both cases, this approach appears more reasonable, as the aim of a garbage tax is to enhance awareness of waste management rather than to serve as a punitive measure.
A parallel example can be found in the water crisis of South Africa during 2017-2019, when Cape Town faced the looming threat of Zero Day -- a point when municipal water supplies would be cut off.
The disaster was averted through a series of measures, including stringent water conservation efforts and significantly increased tariffs. Residents, who previously used up to 183 litres of water per person per day, were restricted to just 50 litres at the peak of the restrictions.
The city demonstrated political will by raising water consumption tariffs and placing the responsibility on residents. By ensuring transparency in tracking individual water use and enforcing charges based on consumption, the city successfully navigated this critical challenge.
The introduction of the “consumer pays” or pay-as-you-throw principle does not absolve producers of responsibility, as consumers can steer demand towards companies that actively reduce waste. For instance, a milk supplier might implement a take-back program for their pouches and bottles.
In this case, consumers would likely choose a company that eases their waste burden and associated costs. Here, the “polluter” -- the company producing the packaged milk -- still incurs costs by establishing a buy-back facility, but the initiative is driven by the most significant stakeholder: The customer.
The “consumer pays” idea mirrors the “polluter pays” principle from environmental policy, holding people accountable for the resources they consume and the biodiversity they impact.
Current waste management systems are designed to maximize disposal and minimize recovery. We must take action to shift this balance. A relatively straightforward starting point could be the introduction of a waste disposal tax, calculated based on the size of residences in Dhaka.
While this method may not be entirely equitable -- since a 2,400-square-foot home with only two occupants may generate less waste than a family of ten living in a 600-square-foot space -- it would act as a deterrent and signal the government's commitment to tackling waste issues.
For commercial establishments, fees could be based on their waste they generate. The funds collected could then be reinvested in improving waste management infrastructure.
As our waste generation continues to rise, no amount of cleanup will be enough to save us. Unless we slow the waste stream to a trickle -- and eventually stop it -- we will continue to drown in waste.
Sankalita Shome is Chief Coordinator of Bangladesh Sustainability Alliance at BRAC.
