Environmental Survey Report 14

TERI
EnvironmentAL
Survey
2014
TERI
EnvironmentAL
Survey
2014
The Energy and Resources Institute, 2014

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:
The Energy and Resources Institute
Darbari Seth Block, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi 110003, India
This study is funded by aid from the UK Government. However, the views expressed here are not necessarily of
the Government of UK.
Advisors
Dr R K Pachauri, Director-General, TERI
Dr Ligia Noronha, Former Executive Director, TERI
Dr Annapurna Vancheswaran, Director-SDO, TERI
Reviewer
Mr Shri Prakash, Distinguished Fellow, TERI
Project Team
Dr Bibhu Prasad Nayak, Fellow, TERI
Ms C Sita Lakshmi, Research Associate, TERI
Ms Divya Datt, Fellow, TERI
Dr Nidhi Pande, Assistant Professor, TERI University
Ms Nidhi Srivastava, Fellow, TERI
Mr Rahul Singh, Research Associate, TERI
Mr Saswata Chaudhury, Associate Fellow, TERI
Dr Shilpi Kapur Bakshi, Fellow, TERI
Mr Souvik Bhattacharjya, Fellow, TERI
Editorial and Designing Team
Ms Arpita Dasgupta, Assistant Editor, TERI
Ms Hemambika Varma, Editor, TERI
Mr Santosh Kumar Singh, Graphic Designer, TERI
Mr R K Joshi, Graphic Designer, TERI
Outreach Team
Ms Ahona Datta Gupta, Research Associate, TERI
Ms Malavika Varma, Research Associate, TERI
Mr S S Jeevan, Fellow, TERI
Ms Zainab Naeem, Research Associate, TERI
Published by
The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)
Website: www.teriin.org
For more information
Project Monitoring Cell
T E R I
Tel. :
Darbari Seth Block
E-mail :
IHC Complex, Lodhi Road
Fax :
New Delhi 110 003
Web :
India
ii
2468 2100 or 2468 2111

pmc@teri.res.in
2468 2144 or 2468 2145
www.teriin.org
India +91 Delhi (0)11
table of CONTENT
Foreword
Aknowledgements
Executive Summary
List of Figures
1. Introduction and Methodology

1.1 About TERIs Environmental Surveys

1.2 Methodology

1.2.1 Selection of Urban Agglomerations

1.2.2 Sample Selection in the Cities

1.2.3 Limitations of the Survey
1
2
2
2
4
5
2. Aggregate Results from the Survey

2.1 Demographic Profile of the Sample

2.2 Survey Results

2.2.1 Overall Environment

2.2.2 Water

2.2.3 Waste and Waste Management
7
8
8
8
10
11
3. Coimbatore

3.1 About Coimbatore


3.2 Status of Water, Waste, and Waste Management

3.4 Survey Results


3.4.2 Water

15
15
16
16
17
17
19
21
4. Delhi

4.1 About Delhi


4.3 Status of Water and Waste Management

4.4 Survey Results


4.4.2 Water

27
27
28
29
29
29
32
34
iii
5. Guwahati

5.1 About Guwahati



5.4 Survey Results


5.4.2 Water

39
39
40
40
41
42
44
45
6. Indore

6.1 About Indore



6.4 Survey Results

6.4.1 Overall environment

6.4.2. Water

6.4.3 Waste and waste management
51
52
52
52
53
53
56
56
7. Jamshedpur

7.1 About Jamshedpur



7.4 Survey Results


7.4.2 Water

61
61
62
62
63
63
65
67
8. Kanpur

8.1 Demographics from Kanpur



8.4 Survey Results


8.4.2 Water

73
74
74
74
75
75
77
78
9. mumbai

9.1 About Mumbai



9.4 Survey Results


9.4.2 Water

83
84
84
84
85
85
88
89
iv
10. Pune

10.1 About Pune



10.4 Survey Results


10.4.2 Water

95
96
96
97
98
98
101
103
11. Comparative analysis across Cities

11.1 Overall Environment

11.2 Water

11.3 Waste and Waste Management
107
107
110
111
12. Questionnaire

Appendix 1: Questionnaire

Final Survey Questionnaire
115
115
115
Foreword
apid urbanization is seen to weaken the linkages of people with nature and is failing to recognize
the need to protect the environment. This has resulted in environmental degradation including
increased air and water pollution, and problems of waste disposal and its management. Indeed,
cities in India present a sad picture today. However, restricting urbanization is not a solution; rather, it
is important to ensure that it proceeds in the right direction causing minimal impacts on the environment.
Citizens or residents of the cities are responsible for minimizing the impact on the environment
and promoting a sustainable pattern of living through their behaviour and actions. Urban areas
provide opportunities for environmental management by the citizens through measures such as water
conservation in homes and localities, recycling of waste, and expansion of public transport. This calls
for a more holistic and innovative approach to environmental policy making and implementation.
The responses and perceptions about issues related to the physical environment that citizens live
in is extremely relevant for local policy-makers and for reforming existing policies and designing
new policies in an informed manner and implementing them successfully. The views of citizens on
different issues related to the environment and the daily problems they may face due to environmental
degradation provide insights which can help improve the situation in our 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 attitudes, perception, awareness, and opinion
towards their local environment.
TERI conducts an annual exercise involving a rigorous survey of perceptions, behaviour, opinion
and awareness on issues related to the environment, the results of which are very revealing. This
survey helps us to understand the level of public concern for the different environmental problems
that we face today. It not only captures public attitudes on the issue of the environment, but also aims
to provide an understanding of their perceptions on the environment versus development debate.
The focus of TERI Environmental Survey 2014 has been to look at the issues of water and waste
in addition to overall environmental concerns. I am very pleased to release the results of this second
major survey. We hope that by sharing the findings of this survey, we would be able to contribute, at
least in a modest way, towards understanding the underlying realities of urban citizens and what they
feel about the environment in general and water issues in particular. I would also like to congratulate
my colleagues who have continued their hard work and taken the survey forward with enormous
dedication and diligence.
The findings from the survey show considerable diversity in the responses across environmental
issues and cities. However, the findings also show that citizens care about the environment and that
issues such as waste management and water conservation are assuming a position of very high priority
amongst them.
R K Pachauri
Director-General, TERI
vii
acknowledgement
e would like to express our gratitude to the Department for International Development
(DFID), Government of United Kingdom, for supporting this project. We owe this
study to respondents from the eight cities who participated in our survey. We are
grateful to them for their time and views.
We take this opportunity to thank Dr R K Pachauri, Director-General, TERI, for his overall
mentoring and encouragement throughout the project. We express our sincere thanks to Dr Ligia
Noronha, Former Executive Director, TERI, for her constant guidance. We gratefully acknowledge
Dr Annapurna Vancheswaran, Director, Sustainable Development Outreach, TERI, for leading the
outreach activities for this study. Mr Shri Prakash, Distinguished Fellow, TERI, provided valuable
comments which helped improve this report. We thank our colleagues, Dr Suneel Pandey and Dr
Debashish Goswami, for research inputs during the design of the survey.
We acknowledge the services provided by Language No Bar for translating the questionnaire
into regional languages and Innovative Consumer Research & Business Consulting for conducting
the survey.
Last, but not the least, we thank Ms Kiran Shivpuri and Mr Soy Joseph for their efficient
secretarial assistance.
ix
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ncreasing urbanization and its changing structure has resulted in drastic changes in our local
and global environment. Estimates show that cities account for 80% of energy consumption
and 75% of carbon emissions world over.1 The increasing population pressure on land in urban
areas also adds to the stress on fresh water, urban green spaces, biodiversity, and air and water
quality. Another issue of concern is the disposal of the ever-growing magnitude of urban waste.
These issues are inextricably intertwined with basic urban infrastructure housing, transport
system, health infrastructure, and other civic amenities, to name a few. This necessitates a holistic
and innovative approach to environmental policy integrated within basic urban planning.
Indias urban population as per 2011 Census was 377.10 million, a growth of 31% over the
last decade, and accounting for 31.16% of the countrys total population. This is projected to
reach 600 million by the year 2030.2 In a territory as diverse and complex as India, environmental
policy making has to be multilevel and participatory, taking into account the changing aspirations
and concerns of citizens. Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
states, environmental issues are best handled with participation of all concerned citizens, at the
relevant level.3
Citizen surveys are an important tool for making inclusive and informed policy decisions.
Insights into awareness, perceptions, and opinions of citizens on environmental issues and
interventions are valuable inputs for governments and other relevant agencies in reviewing
policies and interventions, and improving their uptake and implementation. TERI Environmental
Surveys are a step in this direction.
TERI Environmental Survey 2014 comprised a sample of 11,214 citizens spread over 8
urban agglomerates across the geographical span of India Coimbatore, Guwahati, Indore,
Jamshedpur, Kanpur, Pune and the two most-populated metros of Delhi and Mumbai. In general,
the survey focused on the environment, and in particular, issues of water and waste. The survey
was conducted between December 2013 and February 2014 through face-to-face interviews in
each city using a standardized questionnaire.
Overall Environment
Views on the overall environment were assessed in terms of perceptions about the state of the
environment over time and changes in climatic variables. The survey also attempted to gauge
awareness levels and opinion of the people on government policies in different environmental
1 http://www.un.org/en/sustainablefuture/cities.shtml (last accessed on 17 May 2014).
2 Shirish Sankhe, Ireena Vittal, Richard Dobbs, Ajit Mohan, Ankur Gulati, Jonathan Ablett, Shishir Gupta, Alex Kim, and
Sudipto Paul, Indias Urban Awakening: Building Inclusive Cities, Sustaining Economic Growth; 2010.

3 United Nations, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment
and Development, Annex I. New York: United Nations, 1992.
xi
domains, the role of various actors in environmental protection, and their opinion on the
development versus environment debate.
Looking at perceptions on state of the environment, we found that across cities, a large majority
of respondents perceived deterioration in air quality. The state of green cover and diversity of
birds was also thought to have worsened by the majority in all cities except in Coimbatore and
Pune where it was perceived to have been improved. Going by the survey, a greater proportion
of respondents perceived an improvement as compared to those who perceived a worsening in
drinking water quality (except in Guwahati) and availability (except in Guwahati and Indore).
A mixed picture emerged on the issue of waste management. A higher number of respondents
from cities, such as Coimbatore, Delhi, Kanpur, and Pune noted an improvement, while the
opposite was true in other cities such as Guwahati, Jamshedpur, and Pune. Overall, comparing the
perceptions about changes in environmental quality across cities, it can be seen that deterioration
in environmental quality across environmental parameters was perceived to be more in Guwahati
and Jamshedpur as compared to other cities.
The survey asked respondents for their opinion on climate change and changes in climatic
variables such as temperature, precipitation, wind pattern, and incidence of extreme events.
A majority of the respondents across the urban agglomerates adding up to 90% of the total
sample felt that global warming was a reality. The majority in all cities felt that the mean
temperature had increased while rainfall had decreased (except in Indore where people felt that
it had increased). Responses were more mixed when it came to wind patterns and extreme events,
with many respondents across cities saying that they did not know which way the trends were
going, especially in the case of extreme events.
When asked about their awareness and perception of government policies across environmental
domains, people were, by and large, aware of policies but were concerned about their adequacy
and level of implementation. There were however some exceptions, like that in Jamshedpur,
where a majority felt that there were no policies for air pollution and a significant number about
20% or more felt that there were no policies to address water conservation, pollution, waste
management and climate change. A majority of the respondents in Coimbatore and Pune seemed
satisfied with the implementation of policies on waste management, air, and water pollution.
Respondents were asked to rank different stakeholders government, business, consumers,
NGOs, and academic institutes for their roles in environmental management. Though the
responses varied by city, in general it may be said that respondents seemed to give a higher
rank to the government (except in Jamshedpur) and consumers (except in Kanpur and
Delhi), an intermediate rank to NGOs (except in Indore and Pune, where they were given a
low rank), and a low rank to business (except in Coimbatore where 36% gave it Rank 2) and
academic institutes (except in Kanpur, where over 50% gave them Rank 2).
An overwhelming majority of respondents across cities concurred that poor environmental
quality adversely affected health.
The survey also tried to understand peoples opinions on the global debate on whether
protecting the environment hindered the imperative of development. The majority either felt
that the two went hand-in-hand, as was seen in Pune, Coimbatore, and Guwahati or that the
environment should be prioritized over development, as seen in Mumbai, Delhi, Kanpur, and
Indore. However, it should be noted that about 25% of the respondents in some cities (Mumbai
and Delhi) and a higher share in others (Pune and Jamshedpur) felt that development should be
prioritized over the environment.
xii
TERI Environmental Survey 2014
Water
Since access to adequate and clean drinking water is one of the most pressing issues in urban
India, a number of questions were asked to elicit the views of citizens on major water problems
and their solutions. The majority of respondents (over 73%) relied on municipal water supply
and 50% treated their drinking water before consumption. It is noteworthy that a significant 32%,
mostly from low-income localities, did not treat water before consuming it. Most respondents
across cities (except in Coimbatore) agreed that water was being wasted and identified overconsumption, leakages from faucets/taps at houses and losses during distribution as the major
reasons. By and large, all respondents realized the need to protect water resources through measures
such as rainwater harvesting, improved waste water treatment, residential water conservation,
and awareness creation. In particular, more respondents, in the aggregate, felt that awareness
and education were very important measures in managing water resources as compared to
other options.
On water policy, the survey made an attempt to understand if people were aware of government
subsidies in water tariffs and if they were open to a reduction in these. Over 70% of the surveyed
people confirmed that supply of water was being subsidized, though the level of awareness was
slightly higher amongst men as compared to women and in high-income and middle-income
localities as compared to low-income localities. Many respondents in Mumbai, Pune, Guwahati
and a majority in Coimbatore had no knowledge about the subsidy. Over 50% of the respondents
who were aware of the subsidy felt that water should be charged at cost to discourage its wastage
though 35% were against the removal of subsidy. In Indore, Kanpur, Guwahati, Pune, and
Mumbai most respondents felt that consumers should pay the actual cost of water while in Delhi,
Coimbatore and Jamshedpur, the majority felt that water should be subsidized. In general, a
higher proportion of respondents from high-income and middle-income localities favoured costbased supply in comparison with respondents from low-income localities. When asked to choose
the ideal billing system from fixed charges, metered supply, and consumption-slab based rates
for water supply to households, over 45% were in favour of metered billing of water while
about 37% chose fixed charges. There was a large diversity of views across cities; while opinion
was divided in Guwahati and Mumbai, respondents in Indore and Coimbatore mostly preferred
fixed charges and those in Jamshedpur, Pune and Delhi mostly chose metered billing based
on consumption.
When asked about how well different stakeholders were discharging their responsibility in
managing water resources in their opinion, except in Kanpur and Jamshedpur, most respondents
seemed satisfied. In Kanpur, the majority was dissatisfied with all stakeholders except the
state government. In Jamshedpur, a large majority appeared dissatisfied with the central and
state governments while in Delhi, a small majority was dissatisfied with the central and local
governments. A significant proportion of people in Guwahati, Jamshedpur and Coimbatore did
not know enough about the work being done by NGOs.
Waste and Waste Management

Management of solid waste and e-waste is one of the most challenging tasks in urban India.
Respondents were asked for their opinions on the negative impacts of improper waste management
on human health. Close to 90% felt that improper waste management imposed severe (67%)
to moderate (23%) health hazards. There seemed to be consensus on this among respondents
across localities.
xiii
Proper collection of waste constitutes the basis of waste management, so citizens were asked
whether waste was being collected from their doorsteps. On the whole, close to 50% of the people
did not have garbage collected from their houses. This was higher for respondents from lowincome localities. While the majority in Kanpur, Guwahati, Coimbatore, Delhi, and Mumbai said
that waste was being collected from their homes, the majority in Indore and Jamshedpur reported
that this was not the case. Respondents were asked for their opinion on the strategy that was
best suited to manage the problem of solid waste. About 60% felt identified the need to generate
less in the first place, followed by 25% who chose waste segregation. Most of the respondents in
Jamshedpur, Kanpur, Coimbatore, and Delhi chose the first option while the majority in Guwahati,
Pune and Mumbai opted for the second.
Despite awareness on the issue, over 50% of respondents were not willing to segregate their
own waste into biodegradable and non-degradable categories. There were wide variations across
cities, localities, and gender. While the majority of respondents in Kanpur, Guwahati, Coimbatore,
and Mumbai said they were willing to segregate waste, the majority in the remaining four urban
agglomerates were not. Interestingly, respondents from high-and-low income localities had a
similar opinion on this while more respondents from middle-income localities expressed their
willingness to segregate waste. Willingness to segregate waste was higher amongst women (56%)
than men (45%). Most of those who were not willing to segregate viewed the task as the responsibility
of the municipal body, followed by roughly an equal number of people who thought the task was
cumbersome and required more space. Again, opinion was about equally divided about whether
the charges for waste disposal should vary with volume (47%) or remain fixed (43%). In Guwahati
and Indore, a large majority opted for volumetric-charges while in Jamshedpur, Kanpur, and
Coimbatore a large majority chose fixed fees as the ideal billing mechanism.
Most respondents across cities were aware of the hazards posed by e-waste. Across cities, such
waste was largely being repaired and reused, or sold in the second-hand market. With regard
to small IT products such as cartridges and pen drives, in most cities only a small proportion of
respondents ranging between 0.1% and 4.3% of the sample disposed of these items along
with their garbage. However, in Indore and Pune, almost 14% and 20% of the respondents,
respectively, were doing so.
The survey also sought the views of people on ways to encourage recycling. People felt that
recycling could be further encouraged through greater effort to create awareness (31%), pick
up recycles from curb-side (25%), and charge deposits on recyclable products (25%). Women in
general seemed to place more emphasis on awareness than men. For a majority of respondents
from Jamshedpur, Guwahati, Coimbatore, and Mumbai, awareness creation was the favourite
choice while majority of respondents in Kanpur and Delhi felt that charging deposit fees on
recyclable items and picking up of recyclables from curb side would be more effective measures.
Many in Indore and Mumbai saw the need for a law requiring recycling.
Citizens were also asked who they felt had the greatest responsibility to manage the citys
garbage. Over 40% of the respondents identified the municipal authority and 24% pointed
to individual households, while about 25% said that it was the combined responsibility of all
stakeholders. While the first option was chosen by the majority in Jamshedpur, Kanpur, and
Coimbatore, the second was favoured by most in Pune and Mumbai. In Guwahati and Delhi, most
respondents opted for the third option.
There was an overwhelming positive response for a ban on the use of polythene bags in all
cities and by all income groups, except in Kanpur where a majority of respondents from lowincome localities were not in favour of the ban.
xiv
List of Figures
Introduction and Methodology
Figure 1.1:
Cities included in the survey
Aggregate Results from the Survey

Figure 2.1:
Figure 2.2:
Figure 2.3:
Figure 2.4:
Figure 2.5:
Figure 2.6:
Figure 2.7:
Demographic profile of respondents

Perceived change in the state of the environment over the last five years
Perceived change in various climatic variables
Opinion and awareness on environmental policies
Ranking of the stakeholder groups working towards improving the
environment
Relative importance of various options in protecting water resources
Disposal of electrical and electronic waste
8
9
9
9
10
10
11
Coimbatore
Figure 3.1:
Figure 3.2:
Figure 3.3:
Figure 3.4:
Figure 3.5:
Figure 3.6:
Figure 3.7:
Figure 3.8:
Figure 3.9:
Figure 3.10:
Figure 3.11:
Figure 3.12:
Figure 3.13:
Figure 3.14:
Demographic profile of respondents

Perceived changes in the state of environment over the past five years
Changes in the climatic variables
Awareness and opinion on government policies to address different
environmental concerns
Different stakeholder groups ranking according to their efforts in
improving the environment-
Health problems associated with poor quality of environment
Major reasons for wastage of water
Readiness to pay actual cost of water among the respondents
Method of Treatment of drinking water
Importance of different measures in protecting water resources
Reasons cited for willingness and unwillingness to segregate wastes
at household level
Items sent typically for recycling or re-use
Greatest responsibility to dispose solid waste/garbage
Fate of electrical and electronic waste
xv
16
17
18
18
19
19
19
20
20
20
21
22
22
22
UNDER EMBARGO UNTIL 3rd June 2014 (4 P.M.)
Delhi
Figure 4.1:
Figure 4.2:
Figure 4.3:
Figure 4.4:
Figure 4.5:
Figure 4.6:
Figure 4.7:
Figure 4.8:
Figure 4.9:
Figure 4.10:
Figure 4.11:
Figure 4.12:
Figure 4.13:
Figure 4.14:
Figure 4.15:
Figure 4.16:
Demographic profile of the respondents

Perception about changes in the state of environment in Delhi over
past five years
Perception about changes in the climatic variables in Delhi over past five years
Awareness about government policies to address environmental concerns
Ranking of the stakeholder groups working towards improving the
environment
Perception about the environmentdevelopment debate
Environmental problem perceived to have most visible impact on health
Percentage of respondents on the wastage of water and its reasons in Delhi:
Willingness to pay the actual cost of water in Delhi
Importance of different measures for conservation of water
Best strategy to manage the waste in city
Willingness for segregation of household waste
Percentage of households selling/sending various household items for
recycling or re-use
Views on the factors that motivate to recycle/reuse
Stakeholders with greatest responsibility for the disposal of waste in the city
Disposal of household e-waste
28

Perceived changes in the state of environment in Guwahati over the past
five years
Perceived changes in the climatic variables
improving the environment
Impact of poor environmental quality on human health
Major reasons for wastage of water in Guwahati
Readiness to pay actual cost of water
Degree of negative impacts of improper solid waste management on
human health
Strategy to manage waste in city of Guwahati
Measures to promote recycling/re-use
Greatest responsibility to dispose Guwahatis solid waste/garbage
Fate of electrical and electronic waste in city of Guwahati
40
30
30
31
31
32
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
Guwahati
Figure 5.1:
Figure 5.2:
Figure 5.3:
Figure 5.4:
Figure 5.5:
Figure 5.6:
Figure 5.7:
Figure 5.8:
Figure 5.9:
Figure 5.10:
Figure 5.11:
Figure 5.12:
Figure 5.13:
Figure 5.14:
Figure 5.15:
xvi
42
42
43
43
44
44
44
45
45
46
46
46
46
47
Indore
Figure 6.1:
52
Figure 6.2:
Perceived changes in the state of environment in Indore over the

past five years
53
Figure 6.3:
54
Figure 6.4:
Government policies to address different environmental concerns
54
Figure 6.5:

54
Figure 6.6:
Debate between environment protection and objectives of development
55
Figure 6.7:
55
Figure 6.8:
Major reasons for wastage of water in Indore
55
Figure 6.9:
56
Figure 6.10: Importance of different measures in protecting water resources
56
Figure 6.11: Strategy to manage waste in city of Indore
57
Figure 6.12: Reasons for refusing to segregate wastes at household level
57
Figure 6.13: Measures to promote recycling/re-use
57
Figure 6.14: Greatest responsibility to manage solid waste/garbage
57
Figure 6.15: Fate of electrical and electronic waste in city of Indore
58
Jamshedpur
Figure 7.1:
Demographic profile of respondents in Jamshedpur
62
Figure 7.2:
Perceived changes in the state of environment over the past five years
63
Figure 7.3:
64
Figure 7.4:

64
Figure 7.5:

65
Figure 7.6:
65
Figure 7.7:
65
Figure 7.8:
Major reasons for wastage of water in Jamshedpur
66
Figure 7.9:
Willingness to pay actual cost of water
66
Figure 7.10: Importance of different measures in protecting water resources
66
Figure 7.11: Strategy to manage waste in city of Jamshedpur
67
Figure 7.12: Reasons for reluctance to segregate wastes at household level
67
Figure 7.13: Items sent typically for recycling or re-use
67
68
Figure 7.15: Greatest responsibility to manage solid waste/garbage
68
Figure 7.16: Fate of electrical and electronic waste in city of Jamshedpur
68
xvii
UNDER EMBARGO UNTIL 3rd June 2014 (4 P.M.)
Kanpur
Figure 8.1:
Figure 8.2:
Figure 8.3:
Figure 8.4:
Figure 8.5:
Figure 8.6:
Figure 8.7:
Figure 8.8:
Figure 8.9:
Figure 8.10:
Figure 8.11:
Figure 8.12:
Figure 8.13:
Figure 8.14:
Figure 8.15:

Changes in the state of environment in Kanpur over the past five years
Government policies to address different environmental concerns
Major reasons for wastage of water in Kanpur
Reasons for refusing to segregate waste at household level
Greatest responsibility for solid waste management
Disposal of electronic waste
Measures to promote recycling/re-use
74
75
76
76
Demographic profile of respondents in Mumbai

Changes in the state of environment in Mumbai over the past five years
Changes in climatic variables
Awareness regarding government policies to address various
environmental problems
Willingness to pay the actual cost of water supply
Major components of waste in respondent households
Best strategy to minimize waste
Reasons for refusing to segregate wastes at household level
Billing mechanism for waste management/disposal
Commodities sold/recycled by households
Fate of electrical and electronic waste in Mumbai
Promotion of recycling
84
85
86
76
77
77
77
78
78
79
79
79
80
80
Mumbai
Figure 9.1:
Figure 9.2:
Figure 9.3:
Figure 9.4:
Figure 9.5:
Figure 9.6:
Figure 9.7:
Figure 9.8:
Figure 9.9:
Figure 9.10:
Figure 9.11:
Figure 9.12:
Figure 9.13:
Figure 9.14:
Figure 9.15:
86
87
87
88
88
89
89
90
90
90
91
91
Pune
Figure 10.1: Demographic profile of respondents
xviii
96

Figure 10.2: Perception about changes in the state of environment in Pune over past
five years
98
Figure 10.3: Perception about changes in the climatic variables in Pune over past five years 98
Figure 10.4: Awareness about government policies addressing environmental concerns
99
Figure 10.5: Sources of information on environmental issues
99
Figure 10.6: Ranking of the stakeholder groups working towards improving the
environment
100
Figure 10.7: Perception about the environmentdevelopment debate
100
Figure 10.8: Perception on health impacts of environmental pollution
100
Figure 10.9: Major reasons for wastage of water: respondents could choose multiple
options as reasons
101
Figure 10.10: Willingness to pay the actual cost of water
101
Figure 10.11: Preferred water billing mode
102
Figure 10.12: Importance of different measures for conservation of water
102
Figure 10.13: Major components of the households waste
103
Figure 10.14: Willingness for segregation of household waste
103
Figure 10.15: Items that the households sell/send for recycling or reuse
104
Figure 10.16: What people do with their household e-waste
104
Figure 10.17: Measure to promote recycling/reuse
104
Figure 10.18: Greatest responsibility for the disposal of solid waste
105
Comparative Analysis across Cities

Figure 11.1:
Figure 11.2:
Figure 11.3:
Figure 11.4:
Figure 11.5:
Perception of change in environmental quality

Perception on climate change
Perceptions on changes in climatic variables
Awareness and perception on environmental quality
Aggregate (weighted) ranking of different stakeholders in
environmental responsibility
Figure 11.6: Perceptions on the tradeoff between environmental protection
and development
Figure 11.7: Awareness regarding subsidy in water tariffs
Figure 11.8: Views on whether water tariffs should be based on cost of supply
Figure 11.9: Preferred billing mechanism
Figure 11.10: Perceptions about performance of stakeholders in water management
Figure 11.11: Willingness to segregate waste
Figure 11.12: Percentage breakup of respondents response to reasons for not
segregating waste
Figure 11.13: Percentage breakup of respondents response to reasons for
segregating waste
xix
107
108
108
109
109
109
110
110
110
111
112
112
112
1
alf of the worlds population lives in cities and this share will increase as the coming
decades are likely to witness rapid urbanization, especially in developing countries.1
Indias urban population as per 2011 Census was 377.1 million, accounting for 31.16%
of Indias total population. Urbanization in India has been on an upward trend with 31% growth
in urban population over the last decade. The 2011 Census of India shows that absolute increase
in urban population has surpassed the increase in rural population for the first time.2 The urban
population in India is projected to reach 600 million by the year 2030.3
Estimates show that cities account for 80% of energy consumption and 75% of carbon
emissions world over.4 Besides emissions, increasing pressure on land in urban areas adds to
stress on fresh water, biodiversity, open spaces, and air and water quality. Increasing pollution
and problems associated with disposal of waste and its management are other environmental
challenges that urban areas have to deal with. While increasing urbanization poses great stress on
natural resources and the environment, urban areas also provide opportunities for environmental
management through measures such as recycling of waste and expansion of public transport.5
Thus, urbanization needs a more holistic and innovative approach to environmental policy
making and implementation.
In a territory as diverse and complex as India, environmental policy making has to be multilevel
and participatory, taking into account the changing aspirations and concerns of citizens. Principle
10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development states, Environmental issues are best
handled with participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level.6 According importance
to the perception and actions of citizens is a step towards such a participatory approach.
Citizen surveys are an important tool for making inclusive and informed policy decisions.
The surveys can provide valuable insights into citizens awareness, perceptions, and opinions
on environmental issues and interventions that can assist government in framing or reviewing
policies, and improving uptake and implementation. TERI Environmental Surveys are conducted
with these objectives in mind. It is hoped that the findings can feed directly into policy and
implementation measures of all tiers of the government as well as other concerned agencies, for
1 http://www.un.org/en/sustainablefuture/cities.shtml (Last accessed on 2 May 2014)

2 Census of India 2011, http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/paper2/data_files/india/Rural_Urban_2011.pdf
3 Shirish Sankhe, Ireena Vittal, Richard Dobbs, Ajit Mohan, Ankur Gulati, Jonathan Ablett, Shishir Gupta, Alex Kim,
and Sudipto Paul, Indias Urban Awakening: Building Inclusive Cities, Sustaining Economic Growth, 2010.
4 http://www.un.org/en/sustainablefuture/cities.shtml (Last accessed on 2 May 2014)

5 Integrating the Environment in Urban Planning and Management: Key Principles and Approaches for Cities in the 21st
Century
6 United Nations, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Report of the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development, Annex I. United Nations, New York, 1992.

a sustainable urban India.
1.1
About TERIs Environmental Surveys
TERI has initiated an annual exercise to assess public attitude towards the environment. Focusing
on the cognitive, affective, and behavioural aspects of attitude, these surveys are conducted to gauge
perception, awareness, opinion, and behaviour of people towards the environment in India. The
first environmental survey was a pilot survey conducted using an online platform in two selected
geographical areas of India the National Capital Region (NCR) and the State of Karnataka.7 The
second survey was conducted using face-to-face interviews in the six most populous metropolitan
areas of India Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Kolkata, and Mumbai.8 The findings
from the surveys were released in 2012 and 2013 around World Environment Day. The findings
of the survey drew significant interest and attention by the media and citizens at large.
In order to take this endeavour forward, TERI Environmental Survey 2014 has covered eight
urban agglomerates across the geographical span of India, namely Coimbatore, Guwahati, Indore,
Jamshedpur, Kanpur, Pune, and the two most populated metros Delhi and Mumbai (Figure
1.1). In general, the survey focused on the overall environment, and in particular on water- and
waste-related issues.
1.2
Methodology
The survey comprised a sample of 11,214 citizens spread across the selected 8 urban agglomerates
of India. The survey was conducted between December 2013 and February 2014, through face-toface interviews in each city using a standardized questionnaire. Apart from English, the survey
was translated into five other languages Hindi, Tamil, Malayalam, Marathi, and Assamese.
The survey was carried out by Innovative Consumer Research & Business Consulting (ICRB) on
behalf of TERI.
The questionnaire was designed to elicit respondents general perception, awareness, opinion,
and behaviour on environmental issues similar to the 2013 TERI Environmental Survey and
also included some specific questions focusing on issues of water and waste. The questionnaire
also required respondents to provide details on age, education, income, occupation, and gender to
be able to study how responses vary by these parameters. The detailed questionnaire is provided
in Appendix 1.
1.2.1 Selection of Urban Agglomerations

Eight urban agglomerates were selected for the survey to get a good spread of geographical coverage
while ensuring a mix of metro and non-metro regions. As per the 2011 Census, there are 475 urban
agglomerations in India.9 These were ranked by population and classified in to six geographical
7 http://www.teriin.org/pdf/Environmental-Survey.pdf (Last accessed on 4 May 2014)
8 http://www.teriin.org/files/TERI_env_survey.pdf (Last accessed on 4 May 2014)
9 In the Census of India 2011, an urban area has been defined as:
1. All places with a municipality, corporation, cantonment board or notified town area committee, etc.
2. All other places which satisfied the following criteria:
i) A minimum population of 5,000;

zones, i.e., north, east,
west, south, north-east,
and central. The top
two urban agglomerates
in terms of population
were selected, excluding
the six Mumbai,
Delhi,
Kolkata,
Chennai,
Bangalore,
and Hyderabad that
were covered in TERIs
2013
Environmental
Survey. Of these 12
urban agglomerations,
6 were shortlisted, 1
from each zone, taking
into
consideration
the relative salience
of waste generation
and water shortage.
The
final
selected
urban agglomerations
were Pune, Kanpur,
Jamshedpur,
Indore,
Guwahati,
and
Coimbatore. In addition, Figure 1.1: Cities included in the survey
the two most populated
urban agglomerations Mumbai and Delhi were selected for the survey in order to include
the largest metropolitans (million plus) in the sample as well as to have some continuity with
respect to the 2013 TERI Environmental Survey. This selection represents the rapidly changing
urban scenario of the country where fast-growing cities are joining the league of metros as hubs
for major economic activities.
Throughout this report, the term city or its name is used for the urban agglomeration that it
is associated with. The sample size for Delhi and Mumbai was fixed at 1,500 each. For the other
cities, a sample of 0.056% of their respective total population in 201110 was considered (Table 1.1).
ii) at least 75% of the male main working population engaged in non-agricultural pursuits; and
iii) a density of population of at least 400 persons per sq. km.
The first category of urban units is known as Statutory Towns while the second category of Towns (as in point 2) is
known as Census Town. 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. See,
http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/paper2/data_files/India2/1.per cent20Dataper cent20Highlight.pdf (Last
accessed on 4 May 2014)
10 http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/prov_results_paper1_india.html (Last accessed on 4 May 2014)

Table 1.1: Sample cities, population, and number of samples collected from each city
Sample Cities
Population (as per 2011 census)
Sample Size Rounded-off Figures (0.056% of

the population of the urban agglomeration)
City
Urban Agglomeration
Coimbatore (Tamil Nadu)
10,61,447
21,51,466
1,200
Guwahati (Assam)
9,63,429
9,68,549
539
Indore (Madhya Pradesh)
19,60,631
21,67,447
1,244
Jamshedpur (Jharkhand)
6,29,659
13,37,131
750
Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh)
27,67,031
29,20,067
1,651
Pune (Maharashtra)
31,15,431
50,49,968
2,830
Second-tier cities
Metro cities
A fixed sample of 1,500
Delhi
1,10,07,835 1,63,14,838
1,500
Mumbai
1,24,78,447 1,84,14,288
1,500
3,39,83,910 4,93,23,754
11,214
Source: Census 2011; available at http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/prov_results_paper1_india.html (Last accessed on 4 May 2014)
1.2.2 Sample Selection in the Cities

The objective of the study was to survey citizens representing diverse socio-economic segments
of society. The sample locations in city were classified under the following:
Low-income localities (including slums/ villages/jhuggi-jhopri cluster/unauthorized colonies)
Middle-class localities
High-income localities
A common method to classify the population of a region by its socio-economic status is to use
property tax zones or categories that divide areas according to the price of land.11 We adopted
this method and used property tax zones to identify high-, medium-, and low-income categories
in Delhi, Mumbai, Jamshedpur, Kanpur, and Indore, where data on property tax zones was
available. The income classification was based on Easterly12 who definesthemiddleclassasthat
lying between the 20th and 80th percentile on the consumption distribution, the upper class as
11 There may be other ways of classifying a population into different classes. One way to define the socio-economic classes
is by using the Engel coefficient as the boundary line. FAO (2001) defined Engel coefficient as the share of expenditure on
food, beverages and tobacco of the total expenditure. An Engel coefficient above 59%t denotes poverty, 5059% means
adequately fed and clothed, 4050% stands for ease, while people living with 3040% Engel Coefficient are rich, and those
below 30% are the richest. Another classification defines the Middle consumption class as that which lies between 75%
and 125% of the median per capita consumption. See, Satyaki Roy, Trends and Pattern in Consumption Expenditure. New
Delhi: Institute for Studies in Industrial Development, 2011.
12 Easterly 2001.

one lying above the 80th percentile, and the lower class as lying below the 20th percentile. Within
each category, colonies and households were selected randomly.
For Guwahati, Pune, and Coimbatore, property tax zones were not available. In these cities,
the local municipal corporation and other local agencies were consulted to arrive at different
socio-economic zones.
1.2.3 Limitations of the Survey

The survey sample in each city was designed to get a mix of various income categories (as proxied
by localities in different property tax zones). In the final sample, around 43% of the respondents
were from low-income localities in the city that included slums, villages, jhuggi-jhopri clusters,
and unauthorized colonies, followed by 33% from high-income localities and 24% from middleincome localities. In addition to localities, all survey responses were analysed on the basis of
education, occupation, age group, and gender. A major limitation that emerged in the sample
is the relatively small share of women as compared to men. We found that several enumerators
faced a problem in getting women to respond to the questionnaire, especially when men were
available in the house. As a result, the malefemale ratio of the survey (70:30) was skewed towards
males more in some cities than others. At the same time, it is worth mentioning that in most
cases, we did not find a perceptible difference in the responses of men and women, and where
these differences were significant, they have been highlighted while discussing the findings.
2
Key Highlights
On the whole, a large majority felt that air quality had worsened and the number of bird
species had declined in their cities. However, a majority of people felt that drinking water
availability and quality as well as waste management in their cities had improved.
A vast majority of respondents (90%) felt that climate change was a reality and a majority
out of those felt that average temperatures had risen and rainfall levels had gone down
over time.
Close to 40% of the respondents felt that environment and development went hand in hand.
More than 30% respondents opined that the government should prioritize environment
over development.
Most respondents were aware of relevant governmental policies across environmental
issues but a vast majority felt that these were either inadequate or not well implemented.
In terms of efforts to improve environment, over 40% of the respondents ranked the
government the highest followed by general consumers (by nearly 30%). Nearly one-third
of respondents felt that academic/research organizations were putting in the least effort to
address environmental concerns.
Over 70% of respondents were aware of water being subsidized. Of those who were aware,
over half felt that water should be charged as per usage, while 35% were against it.
Almost 90% of respondents felt that improper waste management imposed severe to
moderate health hazards.
Generating less waste was seen as the best strategy to address the problem of waste
management by around 60% of respondents, followed by segregation of waste by 25%.
More than 50% of respondents were not willing to segregate their waste into biodegradable
and non-degradable.
Over 80% of respondents were aware of the problem of e-waste, and most respondents
either repaired or re-used electronic goods. Very few respondents disposed of electronic
goods along with household garbage.
Around 86% of respondents felt that polythene bags should be banned.
his chapter combines responses from all 8 urban agglomerates to see what the 11,000 plus
people surveyed across the country were saying about environmental issues. The survey
was limited in size and spread, which imposes restrictions on how far these results can be
generalized. But, given that it was designed to get a mix of geographical coverage, metro and non7

metro cities, and represents a diversity of socio-economic segments of society, it may not be too
unrealistic to say that the overall results represent the general perception of urban Indian citizens
on major environmental issues.

The total size of the sample across
2%
the 8 urban agglomerates was 11,214
6%
33%
21%
respondents. These respondents were
12%
selected from different parts of the eight
24%
cities representing various property
Age
Locality
tax categories as a proxy for the level of
23%
income. About 43% of the respondents
36%
43%
came from low-income localities, 24%
from middle-income localities, and
25-34 years
18-24 years
High Income
Middle Income
35-44 years
45-54 years
Low
Income
33% from high-income localities. The
55-64 years
Above 65 years
distribution of the sample across age
3% 3%
group, educational qualification, and
19%
31%
14%
occupations are depicted in Figure 2.1.
15%
Youth constituted a large percentage of
Education
Occupation
the sample respondents, with 21% of the
13%
23%
respondents belonging to the age group of
33%
5%
1824 and 36% belonging to the age group
32%
9%
of 2534. Around 23% of the respondents
Up to primary
Housewife
Student
were in the age group of 3544 and the
Middle and secondary
Casual / daily wage worker
Higher secondary/diploma
Regular salaried (government)
balance 20% were over 45 years of age. The
Undergraduate and above
Regular salaried (private)
distribution of respondents according to
Self-employed/Business
Retired
Unemployed
their educational qualification shows that
32% of the respondents had studied up to
higher secondary and diploma, followed
by 31% in the category of under graduates and above. Around 23% of the respondents had middle
and secondary education and the remaining 14% had only primary education.
The occupational pattern of the sample respondents varied considerably, with about 33% in
the category of regular salaried (private) employment followed by self-employment/business
(19%). Students and housewives constituted 13% and 15% of the respondents respectively. About
9% of the respondents were employed in regular salaried (government), 5% worked as casual/
daily wage workers and the remaining 6% were unemployed and retired from service.
2.2 Survey Results

In general, the respondents showed a great deal of awareness and concern about the state of
the environment. Over 90% felt that the quality of the environment had an immediate impact

on health. While close to 40% felt that the
Waste and waste management
environment and development went hand
Number of bird species in your city
in hand with no apparent trade-offs, a
Green cover in your area
significant proportion (over 30%) thought
Ground water availability
Surface water quality and availability
that the government should prioritize
Drinking water availability
environment over development. It is
Drinking Water Quality
worth noting that a higher proportion of
Air Quality
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
women (48%) as compared to men (36%)
No
change
Better
Worse
No direct experience
Dont know
felt that the objectives of environmental
protection and development went hand
Figure 2.2: Perceived change in the state of the environment
in hand.
over the last five years
When asked about their perception
on various environmental issues, a large majority felt that air quality had worsened and that the
number of bird species in their cities had declined. On a positive note, the majority of people felt that
drinking water availability and quality as well as waste management in their cities had improved
(Figure 2.2). However a slightly higher percentage of women (28% and 30%) noted deterioration
in drinking water quality and availability as compared to men (24% and 24%). The responses
varied, though marginally, across localities for some of the indicators. Interestingly, the proportion
of those who perceived an improvement in indicators such as air quality, drinking water quality
and availability, and tree/forest cover, was higher in high-income localities when compared to the
other two localities. On the other hand, the proportion of those who stated that trends were getting
worse for all indicators except number
of bird species was higher in low- or
Frequency of extreme events
middle-income localities. There was
Intensity of extreme events
no substantial variation in perceptions
Wind pattern
regarding changes in environmental
Rainfall
Temperature
quality by education.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
An overwhelming majority of
Increase
Decrease
Extreme patterns
No Change
Dont know
respondents (90%) felt that climate change
was a reality. Of these respondents, over Figure 2.3: Perceived change in various climatic variables
80% felt that average temperatures had
risen and over 63% felt that average rainfall levels had gone down over time (Figure 2.3).
Across environmental issues, most respondents were aware of relevant governmental policies
but the vast majority felt that these were either not adequate or not properly implemented (Figure
2.4). Some of these responses varied across localities, albeit marginally, with a larger proportion
of respondents from middle- and low-income localities, 33% and 30% respectively, stating that
policies to control air pollution were well
implemented in compared to respondents
Climate change
Forest
conservation
from high-income localities (25%).
Waste management
In terms of ranking efforts of
Water conservation
various stakeholders government,
Groundwater usage
Water supply
business,
consumers,
non-profits,
Water pollution
and academic/research organization
Air Pollution
in environmental management,
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
over 40% of respondents ranked FigureExist
2.4:
and awareness
environmental
policies
andOpinion
well implemented
Exist buton
inadequate
or not implemented
No govt policy exists
Dont know

the government at the top, followed
by general consumers (about 29%). A
large number of people (over 30%) felt
that academic/research organizations
were putting in the least effort amongst
stakeholders to address environmental
concerns (Figure 2.5).
2.2.2 Water
Academic /research organisations

Non profit organisations
Consumers (like you and me)
Business
Government
Rank 1
0% 20% 40%
Rank 2
Rank 3
60% 80% 100%

Rank 4
Rank 5
Figure 2.5: Ranking of the stakeholder groups working towards

Focusing on water issues, the majority (over 73%) relied on municipal water supply though it
is noteworthy that about 10% of people relied each on packaged water and groundwater/bore
well. Often, groundwater is used to supplement municipal sources of supply; hence reliance on
groundwater in cities is likely to be much larger than indicated here. Over 50% of respondents
indicated that they were treating their drinking water before consumption though a significant
32% did not do so. A larger percentage of respondents from high-income localities (68%) reported
to be treating their water before drinking as compared to respondents from middle-income (46%)
and low-income (40%) localities. By and large, all respondents realized the importance of various
measures to protect water resources
including
rainwater
harvesting,
Awareness and education
improved waste water treatment,
Residential water conservation
residential water conservation (including
Improved wastewater treatment
improving home and garden practices),
Rainwater harvesting
and awareness and education amongst
0% 20%
40% 60% 80% 100%
citizens. In particular, it is worth noting
Very Important
Important
Somewhat Important
Not Important
No Opinion
that more respondents felt that awareness
and education was very important in Figure 2.6: Relative importance of various options in protecting
managing water resources as compared water resources
to other options (Figure 2.6).
On the policy front, over 70% of the surveyed people confirmed that the supply of water was
being subsidized, though the level of awareness was slightly lower for women (67%) as compared
to men (74%). There were variations across localities with 78% of the respondents of high-income
localities stating that water was being subsidized as against 74% among middle-income and 66%
among low-income localities. While most people were open to change towards more cost- and usebased supply, there was also a large proportion that was reluctant to change. Larger proportion
of respondents from high- and middle-income localities, 43% and 41% respectively, favoured
cost-based supply in comparison with respondents from low-income localities (34%). A larger
proportion of respondents (close to 50%) with education till higher secondary were in favour of
metered consumption. Over 50% of the respondents who were aware of the subsidy felt that water
should be charged at cost to discourage its wastage though 35% were against the removal of the
subsidy. Over 45% were in favour of metered billing of water while about 37% felt that supply of
water to households should be based on fixed charges.
10

On the issue of waste, close to 50% of the people did not have garbage collected from their houses.
This was higher for respondents from low-income localities (56%) than high- and middle-income
localities, 44% and 45%, respectively. Once again, people showed a lot of awareness about the
issue. Close to 90% felt that improper waste management imposed severe (67%) to moderate
(23%) health hazards. There seemed to be consensus on this among respondents across localities.
About 60% felt that the best strategy to manage household waste was to generate less of it in
the first place; this was followed by 25% who felt that waste segregation was the best solution
to managing waste. A small percentage, about 4%, felt that imposition of user-charges would be
the best strategy. Despite awareness on the issue, over 50% of respondents did not seem willing
to segregate their own waste into biodegradable and non-degradable. Interestingly, respondents
from high- and low-income localities had a similar opinion on this. However, more than 50% of
respondents from middle-income localities expressed their willingness to segregate waste. It
needs to be mentioned however that the willingness to segregate waste was higher amongst
women (56%) than men (45%). Most of those who were not willing to segregate viewed the task
as the responsibility of the municipal body, followed by roughly an equal number of people who
thought the task was cumbersome and required more space. Most of those who were willing to
segregate were either already doing so or wanted to in the interest of the environment (Table 2.1).
Again, opinion was about equally divided on whether the cost of waste disposal should vary with
volume (47%) or remain fixed (43%).
Table 2.1 Willingness to segregate waste and reasons chosen by respondents
Not willing to segregate
No. of
Wiling to segregate
Respondent
No. of
Respondent
Cumbersome task
1,696
It is good for the environment
1,894
Will require more space to keep two separate bins
1,721
I can use biodegradable waste to compost
1,658
It is the local civic authoritys/municipal

corporations responsibility
1,959
I already segregate my household waste
1,898
Even if I segregate waste, it is not collected

separately by the civic authorities
388
5,764
5,450
People were in general cognizant of the problems associated with electronic waste; over 80%
said they knew of the hazards it posed. Only a negligible proportion of respondents said that
they disposed of electronic waste with
household garbage. It was interesting
Awareness and education
to observe that the share of primaryResidential water conservation
educated respondents, who were aware
Improved wastewater treatment
of the problems of electronic waste, was
greater than share of respondents who
0% 20%
40% 60% 80% 100%
were at least graduates. The general trend
Very Important
Important
Somewhat Important
Not Important
No Opinion
seemed towards repairing and re-using
household appliances and small and large Figure 2.7: Disposal of electrical and electronic waste
11

electronic appliances, such as mobile phones and computers. With small electronic products such
as pen drives and toners, people were, in about equal proportion, giving them away to kabadiwalas,
domestic helps, etc.; selling them at second-hand markets or getting them repaired. Responses
varied across localities with larger proportion of respondents from low-income localities stating
that they repaired and re-used electronic waste (44% against 37% in high-income for sized IT and
telecom items).
The main motive to sell waste, in general, seemed to be the money that it generated. People
felt that greater recycling could be encouraged through greater effort to create awareness (31%),
pick up recyclable materials from curb side (25%), and charge deposits on recyclable products
(25%). Women in general seemed to place more emphasis on awareness than men. About 38% of
the women respondents said that waste recycling could be improved through greater awareness
creation as against 28% men. Over 40% of the respondents felt that the municipal authority had
the biggest responsibility to manage waste while 24% felt that it was primarily a household
responsibility. About 25% felt that it was the combined responsibility of all stakeholders.
Close to 86% felt that polythene bags should be banned.
12
Coimbatore
Western Ghats, Palakkad-Coimbatore Highway
3
Coimbatore
Key Highlights
Most of the respondents felt that waste management as well as the quality and availability
of surface water had improved over the last five years. The number of respondents who
found an improvement in air quality and drinking water quality was roughly equal to those
who found a worsening in these parameters.
Nearly all the respondents felt that climate change was a reality and a large majority
felt that temperatures had risen and rainfall had decreased in recent years.
Almost all respondents felt that environmental protection and development went
hand-in- hand.
While 44% of the total respondents felt that policies to address air pollution existed and
were well implemented, 37% felt that policies existed but were either inadequate or not
well implemented. In the case of waste management and water supply, most respondents
felt that policies existed but were either inadequate or not well implemented.
In terms of efforts to improve the environment, almost equal number of people assigned
first rank to the government, consumers, and not-for-profit organizations.
A majority of the respondents felt that water was not being wasted.
A large majority (90%) of the respondents were not aware that water supply was subsidized.
Among the respondents who were aware that water was subsidized, 68% believed that
consumers should not be charged the actual cost of water.
A majority (64%) of those surveyed felt that waste management had improved in last
five years.
Generating less waste was seen as the best strategy to address the problem of waste
management by 80% of respondents, followed by segregation of waste by 14%.
Over 70% of the respondents were willing to segregate waste before disposing.
Nearly all the respondents were aware of the problem of e-waste and were either repairing/
reusing electronic goods or selling these in the second-hand market.
Nearly all respondents agreed with the idea of banning the use of polythene bags.
3.1 About Coimbatore
oimbatore is a major industrial city located in the western part of the State of Tamil Nadu.
The city is the administrative capital of Coimbatore district. As per the 2011 Census of
India, the city has a population of 1,050,721 with femalemale ratio of 997:1,000. Population
15
Coimbatore
density of the city is 10,052 per square km, while the average literacy rate is 82.43%. The principal
languages spoken in the city are Tamil, Telugu, and Kannada. About 8% of the city population
lives in slums. The primary industries in the city are engineering and textile, and the city has more
than 25,000 small, medium, and large industries.1

The sample size in Coimbatore was 1,200, which is about 9% of total sample (across 8 cities).
The educational distribution of the
5.5%
sample is represented in Figure 3.1.
17.6%
11.2%
It shows that almost half of the respondents
29.8%
(45%) had up to primary level education,
38.3%
15.8%
32% were under graduates (UGs), and
Age
Locality
above 18% were educated at higher
27.9%
secondary or diploma level, while 5% of
22.0%
31.9%
the sample respondents had middle and
secondary education.
High Income
Middle Income
35-44
18-24
25-34
Above 65
There was a significant representation
45-54
Low Income
55-64
of the age group between 25 and 34 years
3.8%
(28%), followed by the 35 to 44 years
6.4%
age-group (22%), and finally the age31.7%
15.4%
group of 1824 years (18%). Respondents
41.7%
45.4%
were distributed amongst different
Education
Occupation
occupations ranging from house-wives
14.3%
(42%), self-employed/business (15%),
17.5%
2.6%
regular salaried (private companies)
9.3% 6.5%
5.4%
(14%), students (7%), casual/daily wage
Up to primary
Housewife
Student
worker (9%), and unemployed (4%).
The sample in Coimbatore had 38%
respondents from low-income localities
Self-employed/business
Retired
Unemployed
that included slums, 32% from middleincome, and 30% from high-income
localities.

Being an industrial city and urban agglomeration, air pollution and degradation of water bodies
are major environmental issues in Coimbatore. In addition, the lack of a proper waste management
infrastructure is a growing environmental challenge.
There are two major sources for drinking water supply in Coimbatore City: the Siruvani and
the Pilloor schemes. The corporation is responsible for the distribution of water supply. The entire
water supply from Siruvani takes place as a result of gravitational forces. On the other hand,
water supply from the Pilloor scheme takes place through pumping. A separate scheme has
1 http://www.psgtech.edu/acbe.php (last accessed on 20 March 2014).
16

been sanctioned, for which work is under progress under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban
Renewal Mission (JNNURM) to augment the Pilloor water supply scheme.2 However, to reduce
the demandsupply gap in water supply, Coimbatore Municipal Corporation has approached the
central government to undertake a new project. Under this project, the corporation is planning
to clean the water tanks and improve the water quality stored in those tanks through fencing of
tanks, building of community toilets, and waste water treatment.3
The Municipal Corporation of the city has put in place some infrastructure to collect the waste
generated (601 MT per day) on a daily basis through 2,545 Sanitary Workers. The collected waste is
transported and dumped at the dumpsite located at Vellalore-Kurichi Village. The Public Health
Department of the corporation monitors activities, and such as door-to-door collection, street
sweeping, cleaning of open drains, secondary collection, transportation of the waste collected at
the source to the transfer stations. On the other hand, the Engineering Department is responsible
for the construction of a transfer station, setting up and maintenance of processing plants and
incineration plants, along with management of the disposal sites in an environment-friendly
manner. The modernization of solid waste management (SWM) in Coimbatore is taking place
under JNNURM.4
3.4 Survey Results

Respondents were asked to rate specific environmental indicators in their surrounding areas. Across
all indicators, a majority of the respondents perceived that the situation had improved in the city.
While about 70% of the respondents felt that surface water quality and availability had improved,
64% reported that waste and
waste management had improved
waste & waste 11.58
management
However, in case of air quality,
bird species 12.67
around 41% of the respondents
tree cover 19.42
felt that air quality had improved
and a similar percentage perceived
ground water 24.67
it to have worsened. Similarly, in
surface water 13.92
case of drinking water quality and
drinking water
11.33
availability
availability, a similar proportion
drinking water 13
perceived it to have improved and
quality
worsened, respectively (Figure
air quality 18.67
3.2). The responses varied across
0%
15% 30% 45% 60% 75% 90% 105%
localities in the city for some of the
Better
Worse
No Direct experience Don't Know
No Change
indicators. Larger proportion of the
respondents in high- and middle- Figure 3.2: Perceived changes in the state of environment over the past
income localities stated that the five years
2 Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation: www.ccmc.gov.in (last accessed on 22 March 2014).
3 http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Coimbatore/coimbatore-tanks-to-get-a-new-lease-of-life/article5515149.ece
(last accessed on 31 March 2014).
4 https://www.ccmc.gov.in/ccmc/index.php/services/34-top-menu-links/top-menu-cat/97-solid-waste-management
(last accessed on 1 March 2014).
17
Coimbatore
state of the environment had worsened in the city over last five years for all indicators except the
number of bird species and surface water quality and availability.
The survey revealed that almost all
respondents (98.8%) irrespective of their
Frequency of
extreme events
age, gender, education or occupation, felt
Intensity of
that climate change/global warming was
extreme events
occurring. In terms of specific climatic
Wind pattern
parameters, almost 87% of the respondents
Rainfall
felt that rainfall had decreased and 74%
reported that temperature had increased.
Temperature
On extreme events, close to 49% of the
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Increase Decrease Extreme Patterns No Change at all Don't Know
respondents indicated a decrease in the
intensity of climatic events, while 39%
felt that their pattern had become more Figure 3.3: Changes in the climatic variables
erratic (Figure 3.3).
Respondents were asked about their awareness regarding different environmental policies
and to reveal their perception about the efficacy and adequacy of such policies. Almost 44%
of the total respondents felt that policies to address air pollution existed and were being well
implemented, while 37% felt that policies existed but were either inadequate or not well
implemented. A larger proportion of respondents from high- and middle-income localities (39%
and 33%, respectively) felt that policies concerning air pollution were not well implemented in
comparison to the respondents from low-income localities (29%). For water pollution, the opinion
was divided with 45% viewing that policies were not well implemented and 31% stating otherwise.
However, a smaller percentage of respondents from high-income localities (23%) stated that
polices concerning water pollution were not well implemented in comparison to middle- and lowincome localities (37 % and 32%, respectively). In case of waste management, 52% felt that policies
existed and were well implemented, while 21% said that there was absence of government policy.
In case of water supply, as high as 66%
respondents perceived that policies
Climate change
existed but were either inadequate or not
Forest conservation
Waste management
well implemented. Similarly, in case of
Water conservation
forest conservation and climate change,
Groundwater usage
52% and 53% respondents, respectively,
Water supply
Water pollution
felt that policies existed but were either
Air Pollution
inadequate or not properly implemented
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
(Figure 3.4).
No government policy exist
Policy exist and well implemented
Respondents
in
Coimbatore
Policy exist but, are not implemented Policy exist but, are inadequate
Don't know
identified television (92%) and local/
regional newspapers (89%) as the most
Figure 3.4: Awareness and opinion on government policies to
important sources of environment-related address different environmental concerns
information.
Respondents were also asked to rank different groups of stakeholders based on their effort
to improve the environment (with Rank 1 assigned to the group making the greatest effort and
Rank 5 to the group making the least). Almost 26% respondents assigned the first rank to the
government, followed by consumers (25%) and non-profit organizations (NPOs) (25%). Businesses
18

were accorded Rank 1 by the least
Rank 5
number of respondents (11%). However,
37% of the respondents ranked NGOs at
Rank 4
Rank 5 followed by academics (35%) in
Rank 3
terms of their efforts in improving the
environment (Figure 3.5).
Rank 2
These responses also varied by
Rank 1
education. A higher proportion of those
educated till higher secondary level gave
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
a lower rank to the government vis--vis
Business
Academic
Government
Consumers
NPO
the 20% respondents who were educated
till middle or secondary levels. Similarly, Figure 3.5: Different stakeholder groups ranking according to
a higher proportion (43%) of those their efforts in improving the environment
educated till higher secondary level gave a higher rank to business as compared to the 29% who
were educated up to middle or secondary levels.
The survey also attempted to gauge public perception about the relationship between
objectives of environmental protection and development. Almost all (97%) respondents felt that
environmental protection was not against the objectives of development and the two went handin-hand.
Highlighting the inherent linkage
between health and environment, a large
43.0%
majority (85.5%) felt that the quality of
13.6%
Water-borne diseases (43.0%)
the surrounding environment had an
Skin diseases (13.6%)
0.4%
1.2%
Others (0.4%)
immediate impact on human health.
0.9%
All (0.9%)
None(1.2%)
About 41% respondents attributed a
Respiratory illnesses (40.9%)
variety of respiratory illnesses to poor
40.9%
environmental quality and another 43%
identified water-borne diseases as the
most common health hazard caused Figure 3.6: Health problems associated with poor quality
due to poor quality of the environment of environment
(Figure 3.6).
The survey also asked the respondents to identify the environmental issues having the most
visible health impact. While 58% respondents identified poor water quality as the most important
factor behind health problems, 41% respondents identified air quality.
3.4.2 Water
0.4%
One of the themes of the environmental
I dont know (0.4%)
survey this year was related to water
Leakages from taps/faucets in
13.3%
your house (13.3%)
78.5%
management. The survey in Coimbatore
Leakages during distribution (0.8%)
0.8%
revealed that the majority (79%) of
Too much water used where less
7%
is required (7%)
respondents felt that water was not
Water is not being wasted (78.5%)
being wasted at all. However, 13% of the
respondents reported that leakage from
taps/faucets in houses was the main Figure 3.7: Major reasons for wastage of water
19
Coimbatore
reason behind water wastage; this fraction was higher (about 25%) amongst the middle- and
secondary-class educated respondents. On the other hand, 7% respondents thought that too much
water was being used where less was required (Figure 3.7).
The surveyed population showed limited knowledge about provision of subsidies in water
supply; only 10% of the surveyed population was aware that the price charged to them for water
supply was subsidized by the government. This awareness varied significantly across the localities
with 20% in high-income localities, 12% in middle-income localities, and 1% in low-income
localities stating that they were aware of the subsidy on water charges. However, about 68% of
those who were aware of subsidized water supply were of the opinion that users should not be
charged the actual cost of water. This response varied across
occupation groups. More than 50% of the respondents who
were aware of subsidized water supply from the regular
32.5%
salaried (government) and retired group were not in favour of
Yes (32.5)
charging the actual cost of water while the majority of casual/
No (67.5%)
daily wage earners (80%) who were aware of subsidized water
67.5%
supply felt that consumers should be charged the actual cost
of water (Figure 3.8). Responding to the question on the ideal
billing mechanism for water consumption, as high as 61%
of respondents preferred fixed charges vis--vis 36% who Figure 3.8: Readiness to pay actual cost
preferred metered consumption as a billing mechanism.
of water among the respondents
The survey highlighted that in Coimbatore, municipal
supply was the major source of drinking water for
most (93%) of the respondents. However, 59% of the
32.3%
respondents undertook some treatment on that water
supply to make it safer for drinking. This varied across
Water filter/RO (32.3%)
localities with all the respondents from high-income
2.8%
Other (2.8%)
localities treating the water before drinking whereas
Boil (64.9%)
for middle-income localities this proportion was 52%
64.9%
and for low-income localities it was only 33%. The
most common way of purifying water was found to
be boiling (65%) followed by the use of water filter/
reverse osmosis (Figure 3.9).
Figure 3.9: Method of treatment of drinking water
The survey sought to qualitatively
through public perception rating
Creating
measure the relevance of different water
awareness
conservation measures. While 65% of the Residential water
conservation
respondents perceived improving water
treatment as being a `very important water Improving Water
Treatment
conservation measure, another 30% perceived
it to be `important. However, over 70% of the Rain Harvesting
respondents thought that creating awareness,
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
residential water conservation, and rain water
Very Important
Important
Somewhat important
No opinion
Not Important
harvesting were important measures towards
water conservation (Figure 3.10). Close to Figure 3.10: Importance of different measures in protecting
30% of those educated up to middle school or water resources
20

secondary level felt that rain water harvesting was very important for protecting water resources,
while only 14% of those who had received only primary education had a similar perception.
As water conservation is the responsibility of different stakeholder groups, respondents were
asked to rate stakeholders based on how well they fulfilled their responsibilities towards water
conservation. The state government was given a poor rating by 33% of the respondents. About
18% of the respondents rated the central government as `poor while 51% rated it as having
performed `moderately well. About 37% respondents believed that individual citizens and local
governments/municipal bodies had performed moderately well in this respect.

In Coimbatore, only 53% respondents reported that garbage was being collected from their
homes. The percentage was even lower amongst women (50%) as compared to men (56%). The
response on garbage collection varied across respondents based on their educational qualification
and/or occupation. While majority of respondents with qualification up to primary and
middle and secondary reported that garbage was not being collected from their homes, the
majority of respondents with higher educational background (higher secondary or diploma and
undergraduate and above) stated the opposite. Similarly, a majority of the casual/daily wage
earners (62%) and unemployed (67%) respondents reported that garbage was not being collected
from their homes (for other occupations, a majority said that it was been collected from their
homes). While a majority of respondents from middle- and high-income localities, 86% and 84%,
respectively, said that garbage was being collected from their houses, almost all of the respondents
in low-income localities said that this was not being done.
The survey also tried to assess public perception on the severity of health impact due to
improper solid waste management. Almost all respondents in Coimbatore felt that the impact of
improper solid waste management on human health was severe.
According to the respondents, the best strategy to manage waste was to generate less waste
at the household level itself (80%). A total of 18% respondents felt that segregation could help in
managing solid waste. About 73% respondents expressed their willingness to segregate wastes
before disposal. Among those who were willing to segregate, 51% said that their main motive was
the resulting positive impact on the environment. Another 25% of those willing to segregate said
that they could use bio-degradable wastes to make compost. Among those unwilling to segregate
waste, the majority (61%) attributed their reluctance to the cumbersome nature of the task, while
another 33% referred to lack of space (Figure 3.11).
23.95%
already do segregate
use the biodegradeable

wastes to make compost
waste not collected seperatel

by the civic authorities
3.10%
civic authority's responsibility
2.79%
25.20%
32.82%
require more space

50.86%
good for the environment
Cumbersome task
0%
14%
28%
42%
56%
61.30%
0%
14%
28%
Figure 3.11: Reasons cited for willingness and unwillingness to segregate wastes at household level
21
42%
56%
70%
Coimbatore
The survey also sought to gauge public perception about waste management charges. In
Coimbatore, 62% of the survey respondents felt that the same fees should be charged to all
households irrespective of the amount of waste produced, while 38 per cent suggested that the
fees should vary with the amount of waste generated.
The survey also went into perceptions
on waste recycling. On the composition of
3.33%
None
waste sold/sent for recycling/reuse, the
Broken furniture/
majority (43%) reported that it was mainly
household items 0.08%
metallic items followed by newspaper
Electronic waste 0.08%
and magazines (31%), glass items (15%),
Paper, magazines
and cardboard including tetra-packs
31.25%
and newspapers
(12%) (Figure 3.12).
Cardboard including
11.58%
Respondents were also asked to
tetra packs
identify reasons for recycling and reuse. In
15.08%
Glass items
Coimbatore, 57% of respondents said that
43.42%
Metallic items
they undertook recycling for generating
money, while 41% respondents said that
0%
14%
28%
42%
56%
they did so as part of their responsibility
to conserve resources and environmental Figure 3.12: Items sent typically for recycling or re-use
management.
Respondents were asked to identify
the stakeholder group with greatest
2.8%
responsibility for disposing of citys
Individuals/Households (2.8%)
solid waste and garbage. Close to 70%
All of the above(24.9%)
69.0%
felt that it was the local municipality or
24.9%
Private companies (3.3%)
other government agencies. On the other
Municipality or other government
hand, 25% respondents thought that all
department/agencies (69.0%)
3.3%
stakeholders including individual citizens/
households and private companies along
with government agencies should take the Figure 3.13: Greatest responsibility to dispose solid waste/garbage
responsibility (Figure 3.13).
The survey also dealt with the issue of electronic waste explicitly. In Coimbatore, almost all
respondents (99%) were aware of the problem of e-waste. When asked about common disposal
methods for major electronic product categories, 51% respondents said that they reused their
household appliances after repairing these.
Likewise, 43% and 26% respondents repaired
Household
and reused small IT and telecom products appliances
(such as CDs, printer/toner cartridges, etc.)
Small IT &
Telecom
and sized IT and telecom products (such
as computers, laptops, etc.), respectively.
Sized IT &
Telecom
Almost 29% of the respondents, who were
undergraduates, reported that they recycled
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Give
it
away
Store
it
at
home
small IT and telecom products as against
sell it in second hand market
Get it repaired and reuse it
only 19.6% of respondents educated up to the
primary level. However, 43% respondents Figure 3.14: Fate of electrical and electronic waste
22

said that they preferred to sell sized IT and telecom products in the second-hand market. Another
30% respondents stored the sized IT and telecom products at their home (Figure 3.14).
Almost 95% of the respondents agreed with the idea of a ban on the use of polythene bags.
23
Delhi
India Gate
4
Delhi
Key Highlights
The state of waste management and drinking water, both quality and availability, in the city
were perceived to have improved by more than 50% of respondents. Air quality, however,
was stated by over 50% of respondents, to have worsened.
Over 90% of respondents stated that climatic changes were occurring, 95% felt that
temperature was increasing, and 64% stated that rainfall was declining.
Only 15% citizens viewed that there was no conflict between the objectives of environmental
protections and development. Over 50% favoured prioritizing environment over development.
General awareness about government policies on various aspects of environment was
found to be high across environmental issues; the majority view was the policies
existed but were either inadequate or not well implemented.
Amongst different stakeholders that contribute to improving environment, the government
was ranked the highest by a maximum number of respondents.
Among reasons for wastage of water, 70% stated that citizens use more than what
was required.
Nearly all the respondents were aware of the subsidized cost of water, but only 17%
expressed their willingness to pay the actual cost of water.
Generating less waste was seen as the best strategy for managing waste, followed
by improving recycling capacity. But, only 35% of the respondents were willing to
segregate waste.
Almost all the respondents were aware of the problem of e-waste and a very small percentage
of the respondents reported that they were throwing away household appliances, e-waste,
small IT, and sized IT products.
When asked about measures to promote recycling, 52% felt that a charge in the form of a
deposit or fee on recyclable items would be a good incentive.
Ninety seven per cent of the respondents were in favour of a ban on use of polythene bags.
4.1 About Delhi
elhi, the national capital of India, is the second largest city and the largest urban
agglomeration in the country.1 Delhi is part of The National Capital Territory (NCT) of
Delhi. NCT of Delhi with a geographical area of 1,483 sq. km has 16.8 million people of
1 http://pibmumbai.gov.in/scripts/detail.asp?releaseId=E2011IS3 (last accessed on 12 April 2014).
27
Delhi
which 97.5% are an urban population.2 As per the Census of 2011, with 16.3 million people, Delhi
is second only to Mumbai with its population of 18.4 million. The urban agglomeration of Delhi
includes cities from its neighbouring states, i.e., Noida and Ghaziabad from Uttar Pradesh and
Gurgaon and Faridabad from Haryana, and together has a population of 21.6 million.
The estimated per capita income in Delhi for the year 201213 at current prices is Rs 2.01 lakh,
which is the highest in the country and is three times the national average.3 The literacy rate in
Delhi is 56.34% as per 2011 census and the city state has also seen a substantial improvement in
sex ratio from 821 in 2001 to 866 in 2011.4 The density of population for Delhi (11,297 per sq. km)
is more than three times of national average.5 Delhi also has the distinction of being the city with
largest number of vehicles in the country. As on 31 March 2013, Delhi has 77.7 lakhs registered
vehicles that include 24.7 lakh cars and 49.6 lakh motorcycles.6
4.2 Demographic
Profile of the Sample
6.9%
11.0%
2.7%
27.9%
33.3%
The sample size in Delhi constituted
1,500
respondents
selected
from
Locality
Age
55.0%
different parts of the city representing
19.4%
residential locations across the property
11.7%
32.0%
tax categories. The sample for Delhi
constituted 13%. The total survey sample
High Income
Middle Income
35-44
18-24
25-34
(across all the 8 cities) covered in the
Low Income
Above
65
45-54
55-64
survey. The distribution of sample across
1.5% 1.5%
different socio-economic categories, such
10.6%
13.2%
as age-group, educational qualification,
25.2%
31.7%
and occupations are depicted in Figure
25.0%
18.1%
4.1. Youth constituted a large percentage
Education
Occupation
of the sample respondents. Majority of
4.2%
the respondents (32%) were from the age
6.3%
group of 2534, followed by the 1824
32.7%
30.1%
age-group (28%). Around 19% of the
Up to primary
Housewife
Student
respondents were in the age group of 35
44, 11% in the age group of 4554, 7% in
the age group of 5564, and the remaining
3% were above 65 years (Figure 4.1).
Retired
Unemployed
Distribution of respondents according
to their educational qualification shows Figure 4.1: Demographic profile of the respondents
2 Census of India, 2011: http://www.censusindia.gov.in/pca/default.aspx (last accessed on 30 April 2014).

3 http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-09-12/news/42011594_1_capita-income-2-28-lakh-sound-economicsituation (last accessed on 30 April 2014).
4 Economic Survey of Delhi 201213, p. 3. Available at http://delhi.gov.in/DoIT/DoIT_Planning/ES2012-13/EN/
Introduction.pdf (last accessed on 30 April 2014).
5 Economic Survey of Delhi 201213
6 Delhi Statistical Handbook 2013, p. 202 .http://www.delhi.gov.in/wps/wcm/connect/4d90e9004113b00ea16ee9136af50
79a/sbook.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&lmod=-764539459&CACHEID=4d90e9004113b00ea16ee9136af5079a (last accessed on 30
April 2014).
28

that 33% of the respondents had studied up to higher secondary and diploma, followed by 32%
of under-graduates and above. Around 25% of the respondents had studied up to middle and
secondary school and the remaining 10% studied only up to primary school.
The occupational pattern of the sample respondents varied considerably with 30% in the
category of regular salaried (private) employment, followed by 25% of self-employed and
businessmen. Students and housewives constituted 18% and 13% of the respondents, respectively.
Only 6% of the respondents were employed in regular salaried (government), 4% worked as
casual/daily wage workers, and the remaining 4% were unemployed and retired from service (2%
each). More than half of the respondents (55%) were drawn from low-income localities, followed
by 33% from high-income and 12% from middle-income localities (Figure 4.1).

The rapid urbanization of Delhi along with the level of growth in economic activities in the city and
its surrounding areas has stressed its natural environment significantly. Among the environmental
problems, air pollution, water pollution, loss of biodiversity, and municipal waste are major
environmental challenges that the city is facing. Delhi faces multiple challenges concerning water
that includes huge demandsupply gap, poor quality of water supply, inequities in water supply
levels, depletion of ground water, and water pollution.7 The entire 48 km stretch of River Yamuna
in Delhi is highly polluted due to the release of untreated sewerage as well as industrial effluents.8
The water quality monitoring results of the drains in the city found pollution levels to be above the
stipulated standards for all parameters such as BOD, COD, and TSS (ibid.). Delhi generates around
8000 MT municipal solid waste daily9 and this is expected to increase to 17,00025,000 MT per day
by 2021 (GNCTD, 2010). The estimated volume of e-waste in the city is 20,000 MT per year in 2012
which is much higher than the hazardous wastes (5,000 MT per annum) or healthcare waste (65
MT per annum) (GNCTD, 2010).
4.4 Survey Results

The perception of citizens concerning different aspects of environment in the city showed mixed
trends. The state of waste management and drinking water, both quality and availability, in the
city were perceived to have improved by 65%, 54%, and 50%, respectively, over the last five years
whereas air quality in the city was stated to have worsened by more than 50% of the respondents
(56%). About 16% of the respondents thought the state of waste and waste management had
worsened. About 15% and 29% of the respondents shared similar views about drinking water
availability and quality, respectively. Surface water and tree cover in the city was also perceived to
have worsened by 47% and 46% of the respondents, respectively, during last five years. Looking at
the perception on change in the number of bird species in the city is concerned, 39% of respondents
stated that diversity had plummeted whereas 14% stated that it was getting better. The perception
7 GNCTD, 2010.
8 GNCTD, 2013.
9 http://www.delhi.gov.in/wps/wcm/connect/environment/Environment/Home/Environmental+Issues
Waste+Management (last accessed on 1 May 2014).
29
Delhi
on the trends in ground water was found to be divided with more or less similar percentage
stating contrary views (Figure 4.2).
Perception about various environmental indicators varied, though marginally, across gender,
localities, age group, education, and occupation. A smaller proportion of women respondents
44% and 60% felt that drinking water quality and waste management, respectively, had
improved as compared to 52% and 66% of men. A higher percentage of respondents from lowand middle-income localities (57% and 62%) felt that air quality in the city was getting worse
when compared to high-income localities (51%). Views on drinking water quality also varied
across localities with a smaller percentage (42%) stating that it was getting better when compared
to low- and middle-income localities (53% and 61%). The response on the state of drinking water
availability also varied with 61% from
middle-income, 57% from low-income,
waste & waste management
and 45% from high-income localities
bird species
stating that it was getting better. A larger
tree cover
percentage of respondents from lowerground water
middle and upper-middle localities stated
surface water
that the green cover had worsened in the
drinking water availability
drinking water quality
city over the years. A larger percentage
air quality
of men (48%) thought that the green
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
cover had worsened than women (37%);
No Direct Expenses
Don't Know
Better
Worse
No Change
however, a much higher proportion of
women (close to 51%) indicated a decline
Figure 4.2: Perception about changes in the state of environment
in the number of bird species in the city as
in Delhi over past five years
compared to (36%) men.
When asked about their perception
about climate change or global warming,
frequency of extreme events
91% of the respondents stated that
such changes were occurring. As far
intensity of extreme events
as the perceptions of the citizens on
wind pattern
changes in various climatic variables
are concerned, 95% of the citizens stated
rainfall
that temperatures were increasing over
temperature
the years and 64% stated rainfall was
0%
20%
40%
60%
80% 100%
declining. The response on wind patterns
Extreme patterns
Increase
Decrease
No Change
Don't Know
were mixed with 39% stating a decline
and 36% stating extreme patterns. A large
Figure 4.3: Perception about changes in the climatic variables in
percentage of respondents stated that
Delhi over past five years
they did not see any change or expressed
their ignorance on the intensity and frequency of extreme events in the city (Figure 4.3).
Interestingly, general awareness about government policies on various aspects of environment
was found to be fairly high in the city with a significant percentage of the respondents having
some or the other opinion on policies. However, the opinion on adequacy of the policies or their
implementation was divided and varied across the sectors (Figure 4.4). On policies concerning air
pollution, 40% of the respondents felt that the policies were not implemented and 30% stated that
policies were well implemented, whereas 14% found the policy inadequate. For water pollution,
30

31% of the respondents stated that the policies to deal with air pollution though in existence, were
not implemented, whereas 25% felt that they were well implemented. Almost 30% of respondents
viewed the policies to address water
pollution in the city as inadequate (Figure
Air pollution
Water
pollution
4.4). The awareness as well as perception
Water supply
varied across education and residential
Groundwater
usage
localities for some of the indicators. For
Water conservation
example, 58% of the respondents from
Waste management
middle-income localities stated that the
Forest conservation
policies on groundwater usage were
Climate change
well implemented, whereas only 35% of
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
respondents from high-income localities
Policy exists and well implemented
No Government policy exist
and 42% from low-income localities share
Policy exist, but not implemented
Policy exist but, inadequate
similar views. In general, respondents
Don't Know
with higher educational qualification
were found to be more aware about Figure 4.4: Awareness about government policies to address
the policies.
Television was the most important source of information for the surveyed citizens on
environmental issues as stated by 76% of the respondents, followed by national newspapers (41%),
and regional newspapers (22%). Internet and informal conversations were chosen by 18% and 16%
respondents, respectively, as the most important sources of information on environmental issues.
Only 4% of the respondents indicated magazines as a source of information on environmental
issues. Though the capital city hosts numerous seminars, conferences, and other national and
international events on environment, a very small fraction of respondents looked at these events
as sources of information on environment. Similarly, an insignificant proportion of respondents
stated research publications and school/college curriculum as sources of information on
environment and related matters. However, almost all respondents stating seminars and research
publication belonged to undergraduate and above educational categories and high-income
localities. Television as a source of information was chosen by respondents from across different
socio-economic categories.
As regards the perception of citizens on the efforts made by different stakeholders to improve
the city environment, government
agencies were given Rank 1 by 31% of
Rank 5
the respondents. Business and academic
Rank 4
institutions were also accorded Rank 1 by
21% respondents each, while consumers
Rank 3
and non-profit agencies were given Rank
Rank 2
1 by 18% and 10% of the respondents,
respectively.
Rank 1
The survey sought to understand
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
the opinion of citizens on environmental
Business
Government
Consumers
Non-Profit
Organisations
protection versus the development
Academic/Rese arch Institutions
debate and found interesting responses.
Only 15% of the citizens opined that there Figure 4.5: Ranking of the stakeholder groups working towards
was no conflict between the objectives improving the environment
31
Delhi
of
environmental
protection
and
0.9%
4.7%
development and therefore both went
Yes, Government should prioritize
14.9%
hand in hand (Figure 4.6). Almost 79%
development
27.4%
Yes, Government should prioritize
saw some conflicts between the objectives,
enviornmenal protection
with 52% prioritizing environment
No, development & enviornmental
over development and 27% stating that
protection go hand in hand
Can't say
Don't Know
development should be prioritized.
52.1%
The responses varied across different
socio-economic categories. A higher
Figure 4.6: Perception about the environment-development debate
percentage of respondents from middleincome localities (41%), when compared to high- and low-income localities (24% and 26%,
respectively), stated that development should be prioritized over the environment. Only 4% of
respondents from middle-income localities stated that environmental protection and development
could go hand in hand whereas 13% and 21% of respondents from low-income and high-income
localities, respectively, had similar views. With regard to education, more than 57% of the
primary-educated respondents reported
that the government should prioritize
8.3%
environment over development.
12.7%
Air Quality
Almost 99% of the respondents agreed
that the quality of environment had an
Water Quality
immediate impact on health. When asked
Waste
about the environmental problem having
79.1%
No Problem
the most visible impact on peoples health
in city, 79% of the respondents pointed
towards air quality, 13% stated water
Figure 4.7: Environmental problem perceived to have most visible
quality, and the remaining 8% selected impact on health
waste (Figure 4.7).
4.4.2 Water
The survey attempted to gauge the
80
70
opinion of the citizens on wastage of
70
60
57
water in the city and the reasons for the
60
50
same. Almost 95% of the respondents felt
40
that water was being wasted and only 5%
30
20
viewed otherwise (Figure 4.8). Among
5
10
0.3
reasons for wastage, 70% stated that the
0
Leakages from Leakages
Too much
Water is not I dont know
pattern of usage by the citizens caused
taps/faucets in during
water used being wasted
your house distribution where less is
wastage as people use more than what
required by us
was actually required. Leakages from the
as consumers
taps/faucets at home were identified as a
reason by 60% of the respondents whereas Figure 4.8: Percentage of respondents on the wastage of water
1
leakages during distribution were cited and its reasons in Delhi
as the cause of wastage by more than 50% of the respondents (57%).
1 Respondents could select multiple options in response to this question.
32

By and large, a majority of respondents identified municipal supply as the major source of
drinking water though about 34% men as compared to 24% women identified bottled water
as an important source of drinking water. The response varied across localities. For instance,
municipal supply as a source of drinking water was reported by 68% of the respondents in highincome localities whereas it was 48% for middle-income and 56% for low-income localities. More
women respondents (62%) than men (49%) also reported to be treating water before use. The
respondents were asked questions about subsidy on water tariff, as well as pricing and billing
mechanism of water to assess their perceptions and views on such issues. Around 99% of the
respondents stated that they were aware of such a provision by the government.
However, when asked whether they should pay
the actual cost of water that reflected the scarcity value
6.7%
17.4%
of water, 76% of the respondents replied in negative.
Yes
Only 17% expressed their willingness to pay the actual
cost of water and 7% did not have any opinion on this
No
(Figure 4.9). Most of the respondents expressing their
Can't Say
willingness to pay the actual cost of water were from
75.9%
high-income localities and from educational groups
of higher secondary and diploma or undergraduate
and above.
Figure 4.9: Willingness to pay the actual cost of
On the preferred billing mode for water charges,
water in Delhi
58% stated that the water bills should be metered/
consumption-based whereas 23% preferred fixed charges/flat rates. Around 19% preferred
slab-rate billing mechanisms with a low rate up to a certain level of consumption and a higher
rate beyond that.
Respondents were asked to rank different water conservation measures in order of their
importance to conserve water in the city. All the four measures rainwater harvesting,
improving waste water treatment, residential water conservation, and creating awareness and
educating citizens were ranked very
important or important by a majority of the creating awareness and
educating citizens
citizens (Figure 4.10). Creation of awareness
among the citizens on water conservation
residential water
conservation
was opted as very important by 38% of
the respondents and important by 43% of
improving waste water
treatment
the respondents. Similarly, residential water
conservation was viewed as very important
rainwater harvesting 1
by 40% of respondents and important by
46% respondents. Rainwater harvesting and
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Not Important
Somewhat Important
No Opinion
improving waste water treatment was viewed
Important
Very Important
as important by 57% and 48% respondents,
respectively, whereas these two measures
Figure 4.10: Importance of different measures for conservation
were considered very important by 29% and
of water
28% respondents, respectively.
A higher proportion (60%) amongst respondents who were undergraduates or above reported
that rainwater harvesting was an important strategy for water conservation as compared to 45%
amongst those having primary education.
33
Delhi
The survey sought the opinion of citizens on the role of different stakeholders in the city in fulfilling
their responsibilities towards conserving water resources; the responses were mixed for all the
stakeholders except the local government, i.e., municipal corporations and state government.
Fifty-one per cent rated the performance of local government in fulfilling their responsibility
as very well and 35% rating it as moderately well. Around one-fifth of the respondents rated
the local governments performance as poorly (14%) or very poorly (7%). Fifty-one per cent of
the respondents stated that the state government (Government of National Capital Territory of
Delhi) was performing moderately well in this regard. The responses on the central government,
NGOs, and individual citizens were mixed, though a large percentage stated that they were doing
very well or moderately well.
34
already
segregating
making compost
good for
environment
no use as not
collected separately
municipal's
responsibility
requires more
space
its cumbersome
As far as the pattern of household waste disposal is concerned, a large percentage of respondents
(87%) stated that garbage was being collected from their homes and the remaining 13% took it to
a central point. Though, almost all respondents from middle-income localities stated that garbage
was being collected from their homes, it was found to be 89% for high income and 82% for lowincome localities. It is important to note that no respondent indicated burning their household
waste as a method for disposal. Organic waste (96%) and paper/paper bags/tetra pack cartoons
(3%) comprised a major portion of waste
generated in the households surveyed.
4.9%
When asked about their opinion on
13.5%
the best strategy to manage waste in the city,
Generate less waste
6.3%
75% of the respondents selected generating
Segregation of waste
less waste and 14% favoured improving waste
Improve waste recycling capacity
recycling (Figure 4.11).Only 6% thought
User Charges
75.3%
segregating of waste could help whereas
the remaining 5% felt levying a user charge
could be the best strategy to manage waste
Figure 4.11: Best strategy to manage the waste in city
in the city.
In order to understand the perception of citizens on the impact of improper waste management
on their health, the survey included relevant questions for the respondents. The responses suggest
that 88% of the respondents felt improper
65% not willing to segregate waste
35% willing to segregate
waste management had severe health impacts
with another 9% stating the impact to be 60
53
50
moderate.
40
40
Segregation of waste is an important 30 25
25
23
22
20
12
step towards better management of waste.
10
The survey attempted to understand the
0
willingness of the citizens to segregate
their household waste into bio-degradable
and non-biodegradable categories before
disposing it. It was found that only 35% of the
respondents were willing to segregate waste.
The survey also asked the respondents to Figure 4.12: Willingness for segregation of household waste
ite
old
eh
us
ctr
e/
ho
Ele
sa
nit
ur
ine
az
Br
ok
en
fur
ag
r, m
pe
Pa
ms
te
on
ic
wa
s
pe
pa
ws
ne
nd
ing
lud
nc
di
ar
bo
rd
Ca
35
rs
ck
s
pa
ra
tet
as
Gl
Me
ta
llic
si
ite
tem
ms
state the reasons behind their willingness or unwillingness to segregate waste (Figure 4.12). The
respondents who said no for segregating their waste cited different reasons for this response:
25% found it cumbersome, 23% thought it required more space, 40% felt it is the responsibility
of the municipal corporation, and 12% believed that segregation at home was futile as it was not
being collected separately. Among those who expressed their willingness to segregate, 53% were
already segregating at home, 25% thought biodegradable waste could be used as compost, and
22% were willing to do so for the environment.
When asked about their opinion on the fee structure for waste management for residential
households, 52% of the respondents stated that the fee should be based on the volume of waste
generated by the households whereas 46% preferred a flat rate where all households are charged
a uniform fee irrespective of the waste amount generated.
The survey included questions on the
95
100
85
behavioural responses towards recycling
90
82
80
66
or reuse of waste. Paper, magazines, and
70
60
newspapers were the most commonly sold
50
40
products as indicated by the respondents
30
19
20
12
(95%). Glass items, metallic items, and
10
0
cardboard including tetra packs were
other major products usually sold/sent for
recycling/reuse by their households as stated
by 85%, 82%, and 66% of the respondents,
respectively. Electronic waste and other items
such as broken furniture, etc., were sold by
19% of respondents while 12% claimed that Figure 4.13: Percentage of households selling/sending
various household items for recycling or reuse
they sent it for recycling.
An attempt was made to understand the
0.1% 0.1%
factors that motivated households to recycle
12.0%
or reuse waste. Almost 42% respondents
Conserve Resources
stated that they did so to conserve resources
Family Activity
12.7%
whereas 25% stated the money from selling
Getting Money from
42.1%
Selling Recyclable Products
of the recyclable products was the main
landfill Space is limited
incentive. The understanding that the landfill
Required by Law
space is limited in the city and hence more and
25.0%
Mandated by RWA
8.1%
more waste needs to be recycled is the reason
Don't Know
stated by 13% of the respondents whereas 12%
viewed that they do so as the law required Figure 4.14: Views on the factors that motivate to recycle/reuse
them to recycle (Figure 4.14). The concern for resource conservation as a motivation for recycling
was higher among respondents from middle-income localities (58%) than respondents from both
high- and low-income localities 42% and 39%, respectively.
When asked about their opinion on measures that would promote recycling further, 52% of
the respondents viewed that a charge in the form of a deposit or fee on recyclable items would
incentivize users to send products for recycling whereas 42% respondents felt that there should be
some mechanism to pick up recyclables from curb side. Awareness creation and introducing laws
to make recycling mandatory were measures chosen by a small percentage of the respondents
(3% and 2% respectively).
Delhi
The survey attempted to assess the views
of citizens on which stakeholder(s), according
19.5%
to them, had the greatest responsibility in
Individuals/households
Municipality or other government
disposing solid waste and garbage. Responses
agencies
64.0%
15.6%
on this issue are presented in Figure 4.15.
Private companies
All of the above
Around 66% of the respondents viewed
0.9%
that all three individuals/households,
municipality, and private companies have
shared responsibilities in disposing waste.
However, 26% of the respondents stated that Figure 4.15: Stakeholders with greatest responsibility for the
municipality has the greatest responsibility disposal of waste in the city
whereas 6% stated that it was the responsibility
of private companies. Only 2% of the respondents found individual citizens and households
responsible for disposing the citys waste and garbage (Figure 4. 15). Around 41% of respondents
from high-income localities fixed the responsibility to manage waste with the municipality whereas
14% from middle-income and 20% from low-income households expressed similar views.
The respondents were asked about their
awareness regarding the problems of e-waste
and how they disposed such waste. Almost Household appliances
99% of the respondents were aware of the
Small IT and Telecom
problem of e-waste. A very small percentage
products
of respondents stated that they threw e-waste
1% for household appliances, 3% for small
Sized IT &Telecom
products
IT and telecom products, and 0.3% for sized
IT and telecom products along with the
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
household garbage (Figure 4.16). Fifty-two
Throw with household garbage
Give it away
Store it home
per cent respondents repaired and reused
Get it repaired
Sell It in second hand market
household appliances whereas 9% and 37%
of the respondents did so for small IT and Figure 4.16: Disposal of household e-waste
telecom products and sized IT and telecom
products, respectively. A higher proportion of women (19%) reported to repairing and reusing
small IT and telecom products than men (6.5%). Selling goods in the second-hand market was
another means of disposal adopted by respondents for household appliances (41%), small IT and
telecom products (51%), and sized IT and telecom products (14%). Around 40% and 23% of the
respondents reportedly gave away their sized and small IT and telecom products, respectively.
When asked whether the use of polythene bags should be banned in the city, an overwhelming
majority (97%) were in favour of the measure.
36
Guwahati
River Brahmaputra
5
Guwahati
Key Highlights
More than 50% of respondents felt that the quality of all environmental indicators air
quality, tree cover, surface and ground water quality and availability, waste and waste
management, and number of bird species had worsened over the last five years.
Eighty-nine per cent of respondents felt that climate change/global warming was occurring.
The majority (about 85%) felt that temperatures had risen and rainfall had declined.
Nearly all respondents felt that the objectives of protecting the environment and
development went hand in hand.
Nearly 50% of the respondents of the upper-middle class and high-income localities were
not aware of any government policies relating to the environment as compared to around
30% in the low-income category.
An equal number of respondents gave a high rank to the government, consumers, and
academic institutions in terms of their efforts for improving the environment.
Over 60% of respondents felt that water was being wasted and almost half of the respondents
attributed this to leakage from faucets/taps at houses.
Over 75% of the surveyed population was aware that the price charged to them for water
consumption was being subsidized. About 80% of these respondents were of the opinion
that users should be charged the actual cost of water.
Nearly 50% of the respondents chose segregation of waste as the best strategy to manage
waste and a high majority was willing to segregate waste before disposal.
Very few respondents indicated disposing of electronic waste with household garbage.
Most of the respondents repaired and reused these goods.
Ninety-six per cent of the surveyed population was in favour of a ban on polythene bags.
5.1 About Guwahati
uwahati is the largest city in the State of Assam in the north-eastern part of India. It is
often referred to as the Gateway of North Eastern Region of the country. The city lies
between the banks of the Brahmaputrariver and the foothills of the Shillong plateau.
As per the 2011 Census of India 2011, the population of Guwahati city in 2011 was 9,63,429, with
a male to female ratio of 52:48. The population of the Guwahati Metropolitan area was 9,68,549,
of which 5,05,542 were males and 4,63,007 females.The population density in Guwahati is 4,445
39
Guwahati
persons per sq. km.1 The average literacy rate of Guwahati city is 91.11% with male and female
literacy being 92.89% and 89.16%, respectively.2

The sample from Guwahati constitutes about 5% out of the total survey sample from across
8 cities. The sample was divided evenly among low-income/poor, middle-income, and highincome areas.
The educational distribution of
0.7%
the sample is represented in Figure
6.3%
15.6%
5.1, showing that almost 29% of the
16.3%
respondents were undergraduates and
33.2%
35.3%
above, 39% were educated till higher
Locality
Age
secondary and diploma, 20.10% till
middle and secondary level (Class X),
36.0%
25.0%
while up to 12% up to primary school.
31.5%
Age distribution is depicted in Figure
35-44
18-24
High Income
25-34
Middle Income
5.1 and it shows that there was a significant
Above 65
45-54
55-64
Low Income
representation of the age group between
0.9% 3.0%
25 and 34 years (36%), followed by the
11.7%
age group 35 to 44 years(25%).
21.7%
29.3%
The occupational distribution of the
20.4%
sample shows that respondents were
Education
Occupation 36.5%
distributed amongst different occupations
16.1%
from self-employed/business (22%),
regular salaried (private companies)
7.6%
38.6%
9.8%
4.3%
(16%), students (8%), regular salaried
Up to primary
Housewife
Student
government (10%), and housewives
(37%). Looking at the distribution of
sample respondents from different
localities in the city, 35% were from lowRetired
Unemployed
income localities, 33% from high-income,
and 32% from middle-income localities. Figure 5.1: Demographic profile of the respondents

According to the Guwahati Development Department, currently only 40% of the population
has access to a central-piped water supply system. The present production capacity is 110.85
MLD, while actual production of water is 73.4 MLD (66%). Out of around 74 MLD of potable
water produced, 72 MLD is drawn from the River Brahmaputra and the balance of about 1.5
MLD is pumped from deep tube wells installed at various locations by the Guwahati Municipal
Corporation (GMC). Most of the treatment plants are old and damaged due to which they
1 http://www.ijsrp.org/research-paper-1112/ijsrp-p1127.pdf (last accessed on 2 April 2014).
2 http://www.census2011.co.in/census/city/191-guwahati.html (last accessed on 2 May 2014).
40

are running much below their actual capacities. Table 5.1 present the features of the water
supply system.3
Table 5.1: Salient features of the present water supply system
Particulars
Quantities
Present production capacity
110.85 MLD
Present actual production
73.4 MLD
Estimated unaccounted for water
40%
Overall per capita water availability at households
35 lpcd
Maximum supply hours
23 hours per day
Source: http://auiip.nic.in/wss.html
Notes: MLD = million per litres, Lpcd = litres per capita per day
The Government of Assam has envisaged improvements in the water supply sector to provide
access to potable water to 100% of the residents of the Guwahati Metropolitan Area (GMA).
The City Development Plan (CDP) for Guwahati, prepared under the Jawaharlal Nehru National
Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM), envisions providing safe and sustainable water to its citizens
at an appropriate pricing with the ultimate goal of providing 24-hour water across the city.
There is around 500 TPD solid waste generated daily in Guwahati. There are six Conservancy
Divisions manned by 860 conservancy workers/officers. Currently, solid waste management is
being handled by a joint venture between the Guwahati Municipal Corporation (GMC) and Ramky
Enviro Engineers Ltd. The collection of waste is being done at primary and secondary levels. At
the primary level, it involves door-to-door collection through thelas and auto vans for 1 lakh
households along with street sweeping and collection of garbage. Secondary collection involves
collecting from bins and collection points to dump sites through vehicles, compactors, and open
trucks. The West Boragaon dumpsite is the only disposal ground of the city. A composting unit for
200 TPD is on the anvil, out of which a capacity of 50 TPD, has been completed and is operational.
A wasteto-energy plant for 6 MW is yet to be started. Major problems in solid waste management
faced by GMC4 are:
Door-to-door collection not as conceptualized due to apathy of citizens
Narrow roads not favourable for positioning bins
Dearth of staff for conservancy
There is no concept of transfer stations for collection of garbage from neighbourhoods to
major roads
Lack of civic sense among the general public; drains and major water bodies are used as
garbage bins
5.4 Survey Results

3 http://auiip.nic.in/wss.html (last accessed on 17 May 2014).
4 http://www.icrier.org/pdf/guwahati.pdf (last accessed on 23 April 2014).
41
Guwahati

In order to understand how citizens of Guwahati perceived their natural surroundings to have
changed over the last five years, they were asked to rate specific environmental indicators. Across
all indicators, the situation was perceived to have deteriorated in the city by a majority of the
respondents. Almost 64% of the respondents perceived that air quality had worsened, while
about 54% and 70%, respectively, felt that drinking water quality and drinking water availability
had worsened. A higher proportion of women (57%) indicated that drinking water quality had
worsened than men (51%).
Again, almost 62% of the respondents reported that tree and green cover had worsened
over the last five years. When asked about waste and waste management, nearly 54% of the
respondents perceived the situation had
worsened (Figure 5.2). The response
Waste and waste
management
varied across the localities, though
Number of
marginally. For several of the indicators,
bird species
a larger proportion of respondents from
Tree cover/
green cover
middle-income localities stated that
Ground water
availability
trends were worsening over the years,
Surface
water
quality
when compared to views of respondents
and availability
from high- and low-income localities.
Drinking water
availability
The perception of a deterioration of
Drinking water
environmental indicators appeared to
quality
increase with education. For example,
Air Quality
a higher proportion of undergraduates
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
and above (68% and 80%) perceived
No Change
Better
Worse
No Direct Expenses
Don't Know
deterioration in air quality and surface
water quality as compared to those Figure 5.2: Perceived changes in the state of environment in
educated up to the primary level (50% Guwahati over the past five years
and 61%), respectively.
As high as 89% of the respondents in Guwahati felt that climate change/global warming was
occurring. This trend was mostly consistent across age groups (except the above 65 age category)
as well as responses across localities.
When asked to rate different climate variables and how they had changed, almost 86% of the citizens
interviewed felt that the temperature had
Frequency of
increased, while a significant number (85%)
extreme events
reported that rainfall had decreased. On
Intensity of
extreme events, almost 36% responded extreme events
that their intensity had increased, while
Wind pattern
47% felt that their pattern had become more
Rainfall
erratic. Over 65% of respondents also felt
that the wind pattern had become erratic
Temperature
(Figure 5.3).
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
To assess the level of awareness
Increase
Decrease
Extreme Patterns
No Change at all
Don't Know
amongst citizens on government
policies related to environment, the
Figure 5.3: Perceived changes in the climatic variables
42

survey respondents were asked about
Climate change
their knowledge on policies related to
Forest conservation
different environmental issues and their
Waste management
perception about their implementation
Water conservation
Groundwater usage
and adequacy. It was also seen that for
Water supply
a majority of these issues, there was a
Water pollution
significant lack of awareness among
Air Pollution
the people. For instance, almost 45% of
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
the total respondents were not aware
Policy exist but, are not implemented
Policy exist but, are inadequate
of any government policy related to air
Don't Know
pollution, while 35% felt that policies
existed but were either inadequate or not Figure 5.4: Awareness and opinion on government policies to
well implemented. Across environmental address different environmental concerns
issues, there was a perception that
policies existed but were inadequate or not well implemented (Figure 5.4). A larger percentage
of respondents from low-income localities viewed that the policies addressing a variety of
environmental issues in the city were inadequate when compared with respondents from highand middle-income localities. The perception of inadequacy of policies appeared to increase with
education in the case of water supply, in particular.
On sources of information on environment for the respondents, television and local regional
newspapers were identified to be most favoured options by amongst as high as 78% and
67% of respondents.
Respondents were asked to rank
different groups according to their efforts
Rank 5
in improving the environment (with
Rank 4
Rank 1 to be assigned to those making
Rank 3
the greatest efforts and Rank 5 for the
group making the least efforts). The
Rank 2
rankings were very evenly distributed.
Rank 1
According to the respondents in
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Guwahati, academic institutions, the
Business
Government
government, and consumers were
Non profit organization
Academic institutions/research organizations
making the maximum effort to improve Figure 5.5: Different stakeholder groups ranking according to
the environment all three were their efforts in improving the environment
given a Rank 1 and 2 by nearly 25%
of the respondents. Business was ranked low by most people. About 30% of the population
also felt that the government was doing the least in terms of protecting the environment
(Figure 5.5).
On the question of whether protecting the environment went against the objectives of
development, an overwhelming 99% of the surveyed people felt that these objectives went hand
in hand.
Highlighting the inherent linkage between health and environment, almost all survey
respondents felt that the quality of the surrounding environment had an immediate effect on
human health. Nearly 42% of the respondents attributed respiratory illnesses, water-borne diseases,
43
Guwahati
and skin diseases to poor environmental
quality (Figure 5.6).
Also, the survey respondents were
asked to select an environmental problem,
which according to them had the most
visible impact on peoples health. Over
50% of the people identified poor water
quality as the main problem, while 33%
picked on poor air quality.
5.4.2 Water
12.5%
41.8%
29.4%
Respiratory illnesses
Water-borne diseases
Skin diseases
All
16.3%
Figure 5.6: Impact of poor environmental quality on human health
Since one of the underlying themes of this years environmental survey was water and related
issues, an effort was made to understand the viewpoint of citizens of Guwahati about the major
reasons of water wastage in their city. More than 60% of the respondents felt that water was being
wasted while 38% felt that there was no water wastage. A number of people felt that leakage
from taps/faucets in the house was the major source of wastage. This was particularly echoed by
respondents from low-income localities (55%). However, only 23% of the people from middleand high-income areas felt that leakage from taps/faucets in the house was the major source
of wastage. Nearly 17% felt that leakage during distribution and excessive use of water was
responsible for wastage (Figure 5.7).
Around 80% of the surveyed
population was aware that the price
100%
charged to them for water consumption
80%
was subsidized by the government. This
60%
awareness varied significantly across
38%
40%
30%
17%
localities 95% from high-income, 79%
16%
20%
1%
from low-income, and 60% from middle0%
Leakages
Too much
Water is
I dont know
Leakages
income localities. About 80% of those
during
water used
not being
from taps/
distribution where less
wasted
faucets
who were aware of the subsidy had the
in homes
is required
opinion that users should be charged the
actual cost of water to reflect the scarcity Figure 5.7: Major reasons for wastage of water in Guwahati
value of water and discourage its wastage
(Figure 5.8). Surprisingly, a higher proportion (90%) of those educated up to the primary level
indicated that citizens should pay the actual price
of water as compared to the 71% of the surveyed
5.7%
undergraduates.
14.7%
Municipal supply was the only source of
drinking water as stated by all the respondents
Yes
in the city. Thirty-five per cent of the respondents
No
reported that they treated water before drinking.
Can't Say
79.6%
The practice of treating drinking water was more
prevalent in high-income localities (75%) as
compared to middle-income (18%) and low-income
(11%) localities.
Figure 5.8: Readiness to pay actual cost of water
44

To gauge peoples perception on the importance of different water conservation measures,
the survey respondents were asked to rate various measures on a scale of relevance (from very
important to not important). Creating awareness was perceived by the majority, nearly 50% of the
surveyed population, as the most important measure for protecting water resources. More women
(57%) thought that awareness creation was
very important in conserving water resources
Creating
awareness
than men (45%). Forty five per cent perceived
residential water conservation, improving Residential water
conservation
waste water treatment, and rainwater
Improving
harvesting as equally important sources of
wastewater
water resource protection (Figure 5.9).
treatment
Since water conservation measures fall
Rainwater
harvesting
under the purview of a number of stakeholder
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
groups, survey respondents were asked to
Not Important
No opinion
Somewhat important
rate how well each of these groups were
Important
Very Important
fulfilling their tasks. By and large, a large
number of respondents felt that none of the Figure 5.9: Importance of different measures in protecting
groups were fulfilling their responsibility water resources
very well.
Also, most of the respondents had no opinion on the functioning of NGOs, while only 25%
felt that NGOs were contributing very well or moderately well in protecting water resources. The
majority felt that the local government/municipal corporation contributed moderately well in the
protection of water resources. About 45% had the same opinion about the state and the central
government. Overall perceptions about the role of the state and central governments were similar.

The majority, nearly 60%, of the survey respondents identified organic waste to be the major
component of their household garbage followed by paper and plastic.
People were generally aware of the linkage between human health and improper solid
waste management. About 74% of the respondents felt that the impact of improper solid waste
management on human health was severe, while 23% rated impacts as being moderate (Figure
5.10).
According to almost 39% of the surveyed population, the best strategy to manage the problem
of solid waste was to generate less waste in the first place. A total of 48% felt that segregation of
waste could help in managing the problem of solid waste
disposal, and over 85% of those surveyed were willing
3%
to do this. Of those who supported segregation of waste
23%
before disposal, nearly 50% felt that this was good for
Severe
Moderate
the environment. About 35% of the respondents said
Low
that they already segregated waste (Figure 5.11).
74%
On the issue of a fee for waste management, a majority
of the survey respondents (82%) felt that it should vary
depending on the amount of waste being generated.
On the other hand, 18% of the surveyed population Figure 5.10: Degree of negative impacts of improper
suggested that the same fee should be charged to all solid waste management on human health
45
Guwahati
households, irrespective of how much waste
2.0% 0.7%
they produced.
10.4%
Most households in Guwahati were
Generate less amount of waste in house
recycling/reusing waste material. Of the
38.8%
Improve waste recycling capacity
surveyed respondents, a large fraction (88%)
User charges
recycled or reused paper, magazines, and
Others
newspapers. Most of the households were
48.1%
also recycling/reusing metallic and glass
items as well as cardboard and tetra pack
Figure 5.11: Strategy to manage waste in city of Guwahati
cartons (Figure 5.12).
Survey respondents were also asked
100%
about their opinion regarding strategies to
88%
90%
encourage recycling and re-use practices
80%
amongst the public. A large proportion
73%
70%
(54%) felt that creating awareness among
61% 63%
60%
53%
the general public could greatly promote
50%
such practices (Figure 5.13).
40%
40%
According to 64% of the respondents
30%
surveyed in Guwahati, the responsibility
20%
for disposing of the citys solid waste
10%
and garbage rested equally with the local
0%
0%
municipality and other government agencies,
Metallic items
Glass items
Cardboard including tetra packs
individuals, and private companies. About
Paper, magazines and newspapers
Electronic waste
None
Broken furniture/household items
Others, please specify
19% felt that only individuals needed to
take up this responsibility, while 16% felt
that the greatest onus was on the
municipality (Figure 5.14). This response
was nearly uniform across age, gender,
11% 7% 14%
11%
54%
0.37%
locality, and occupation.
2.97%
Citizens were asked about commonly
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
produced electronic waste and how it
Charge deposit fee on recyclable items
Pick up recyclables from curb side
was being disposed of. Around 63% of
Law requiring recycling
Periodic revision in prices of recyclable products
Creating awareness
More convenient centres/locations for recycling
the respondents stated that they were
Provide bins for recycling
aware of the problems associated with the
disposal of e-waste. This response varied Figure 5.13: Measures to promote recycling/re-use
across localities with a larger proportion of
respondents from high- and middle-income
19%
localities (85% and 78%, respectively) found
Municipality or other Government
to be aware of the same in comparison to
agencies
16%
respondents from low-income localities
Private companies
64%
(29%). Very few households in Guwahati
All of the above
1%
said that they disposed electrical and
electronic waste with household garbage.
A large proportion of respondents (54% Figure 5.14: Greatest responsibility to dispose Guwahatis
and 41%) repaired and reused household solid waste/garbage
46

appliances and small IT and telecom products,
respectively. Sized IT and telecom waste
Household appliances
computers and laptops were usually sold in
the second-hand market (46%). A relatively Small IT & Telecom such
as toner cartridges, CDs
smaller percentage of respondents (18%) did
the same with household appliances. Nearly
Sized IT & Telecom such
20% of the surveyed households disposed
as computers, laptops
of electrical and electronic waste by giving
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
them away (Figure 5.15).
Give it away
Store it at home
On the question of banning polythene
Repair and reuse
Sell in second-hand market
bags, almost 96% of the surveyed population
Figure 5.15: Fate of electrical and electronic waste in city of Guwahati
was in favour of the measure.
47
Indore
Patalpani Waterfall
6
Indore
Key Highlights
A higher percentage of respondents felt that air quality, drinking water quality, and ground
water availability had worsened in the last five years as compared to those who found it
to have improved. However, a higher percentage of respondents perceived tree cover,
surface water, and drinking water availability to have improved than those who reported
a deterioration.
A high majority of the respondents felt that climate change/global warming was occurring.
Almost 80% and 69% of the citizens interviewed felt that temperature and rainfall had
increased, respectively.
Sixty-five per cent of the respondents felt that the government must prioritize environment
protection over development objectives.
Most of the respondents felt that policies pertaining to air pollution, water pollution, water
supply, water conservation, and waste management existed and were well implemented.
In some areas, such as forest conservation, respondents felt that policies existed but were
inadequate or not well implemented.
In terms of ranking the efforts made by stakeholders in protecting the environment, 50%
and 36% assigned Rank 1 to consumers and governments, respectively. The least number
of respondents (5%) assigned Rank 1 to NPOS and academic institutions.
Leakage of water during distribution was identified as the primary cause of wastage of
water by a majority, followed by leakages from taps/faucets in homes.
Over 90% of the respondents were aware of the subsidized price of water, and 92% were
of the opinion that users should be charged the actual cost of water.
The best strategy, according to almost 50% of the respondents, to manage the problem of
solid waste, was to improve waste recycling capacity, followed by generating less waste at
the household level.
A majority of the respondents felt that mandatory laws pertaining to recycling can greatly
promote re-use.
Only 58% of the survey respondents expressed willingness to segregate waste before
disposal.
People were aware of the problem of e-waste. Very few respondents said that they threw
e-waste along with the household garbage.
Almost 90% of the surveyed population felt that polythene bags must be banned.
51
Indore
6.1 About Indore
ndore, located on the southern edge of the Malwa Plateau, is the largest city in Madhya Pradesh.
The city lies on the Saraswati and Khan rivers on an elevated plain with the Vindhyachal range
to the south. Hailed as being a part of the fastest growing economic regions in India, the city is
home to numerous small-, medium-, and large-scale manufacturing and service industries, such
as automobile, pharmaceutical, software, and textile trading. As per of the 2011 Census of India,
the population of Indore in 2011 was 1,960,631, of which there were 10,20,883 and 9,39,748 males
and females, respectively. The urban/metropolitan population was 21,67,447, of which 11,29,348
were males and 1,038,099 were females. Indore has an average literacy rate of 87.38% with a male
and female literacy of 91.84% and 82.55%, respectively.

The sample from Indore constituted
1.0%
about 11% of the total survey sample
5.0%
19.1%
from across 8 cities. Almost 48% of the
14.3%
32.9%
respondents were educated up to the
35.0%
undergraduate and above levels, 21%
Age
Locality
were educated till higher secondary and
26.7%
diploma, and 25% were educated up to
33.9%
the middle and secondary level (Class
32.1%
X). There was a significant representation
High Income
Middle Income
35-44
18-24
25-34
of the age-group of 3544 years (34%),
Above 65
Low Income
45-54
55-64
followed by the age-group of 2534
5.0%
3.0%
12.5%
years (27%), and the age-group of 1824
5.9%
years (19%).
13.3%
25.5%
The occupational distribution of
20.3%
47.9% Education
Occupation
respondents from Indore comprised
16.2%
regular salaried (government) (23%),
regular salaried (private) (20%), student
20.7%
5.9%
23.1%
population (16%), housewives (13%),
Up to primary
Housewife
Student
and self-employed/ involved in business
(12%). Respondents from low-income
localities constituted 35% of the total city
sample while 33% were from high-income
Retired
Unemployed
and 32% from middle-income localities
Figure 6.1: Demographic profile of the respondents
(Figure 6.1).

The Indore Municipal Corporation is responsible for functions pertaining to water supply,
sewerage, storm-water drainage, waste collection and disposal, and sanitation in the city. Water
supply in the city is handled by two departments; one that looks into locally sourced water and
the other that draws its water from the Narmada river. The estimated water supply in Indore is
252.5 million litres per day.
52

The Indore Municipal Corporation has taken multiple initiatives in order to efficiently utilize water.
In 2000, the Indore Municipal Corporation established a Rainwater Harvesting and Recharging
Department to create awareness among citizens and assist them in adopting water harvesting
techniques. There are several such initiatives in residential and institutional buildings as well.
However, despite such initiatives, the quality of water is a crucial issue in the city. In a recent
analysis of water-borne bacterial pathogens from surface water, various water samples taken from
different sources in Indore were found to have significant impurities and highlighted the need to
control fecal pollution of water bodies.1
The city generates a total sewage of 200 million litre per day (MLD), out of which the Indore
Municipal Corporation is treating only 90 MLD of sewage. The remaining is disposed of without
treatment into River Khan. The total quantity of municipal solid waste generated in Indore is to
the tune of 600 metric tons per day which is collected through private operators under the control
of Indore Municipal Corporation. The civic body is trying to identify more transfer stations for
proper municipal solid waste management under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal
Mission (JNNURM) project.2
6.4 Survey Results

The citizens of Indore were asked about their perception on the environment over the last five
years. More than 50% of the respondents felt that air quality (51%), drinking water quality (48%),
and ground water availability (38%)
Waste and waste
had worsened in the last five years. In
management
contrast to this, a considerable section of
Number of
bird species
the respondents felt that tree cover/green
Tree cover/
cover (35%), surface water quality and
green cover
availability (43%), and drinking water
Ground water
availability
availability (56%) had improved over
Surface water quality
the past five years. Fewer women (26%)
and availability
and (53%) perceived an improvement in
Drinking water
availability
drinking water quality and availability,
Drinking water
respectively a compared to 33% and
quality
57% of men. In terms of waste and waste
Air Quality
management and the number of birds/
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
bird species found in the city, 38% and
No Change
Better
Worse
No Direct Experience
Don't Know
27%, respectively, responded by saying
that they had no direct experience in these Figure 6.2: Perceived changes in the state of environment in
domains. The responses varied across Indore over the past five years
1 Sohani Smruti and Iqbal Sanjeeda, Microbiological Analysis of Surface Water in Indore, India, Research Journal of Recent
Sciences, Vol. 1(ISC-2011) (2012), pp. 323325.
2 The Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) is a massive city-modernization scheme launched by
the Government of India under Ministry of Urban Development. The mission aims to encourage reforms and fast-track
planned development of identified cities with a focus on efficiency in urban infrastructure and service delivery mechanisms,
community participation, and accountability of urban local bodies/parastatal agencies towards citizens.
53
Indore
localities for some of the indicators.
Amongst those who felt that surface
water quality and availability had
worsened, most were from low-income
localities (44%). A larger proportion of
respondents from high-income localities
stated that the forest and tree cover in
the city had improved as compared to
middle-income and low-income localities
(Figure 6.2).
As high as 87% of the respondents
in Indore felt that climate change/
global warming was occurring. While
responses varied across different age
groups, a majority of people in each age
group agreed with the occurrence of
climate change. Disaggregating at the
occupational level, it was observed that
as high as 93% of the casual/daily wage
workers believed that climate change
was occurring.
In terms of changes in climate variables,
a majority of respondents felt that there
had been a rise in temperature (80%)
and rainfall (69%). A high percentage
of respondents (63%) reported a change
in the wind pattern. Also, a majority
(38%) of the students feel that there has
been a reduction in the intensity of
extreme events.
Respondents were asked about
their awareness of government policies
related to environment and their opinion
on implementation and adequacy of
such policies. Around one-third of the
respondents in Indore felt that policies
pertaining to air pollution (32%), water
pollution (36%), water supply (32%),
water conservation (41%), and waste
management (31%) existed and were well
implemented. However, as high as 55%
and 45% of the citizens of Indore felt that
there were no policies for climate change
and groundwater usage, respectively.
Twenty six per cent respondents were of
Frequency of
extreme events
Intensity of
extreme events
Wind pattern
Rainfall
Temperature
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Increase
Decrease
Extreme Patterns
No Change at all
Don't Know
Figure 6.3: Changes in the climatic variables
Climate change
Forest conservation
Waste management
Water conservation
Groundwater usage
Water supply
Water pollution
Air Pollution
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Don't Know
Figure 6.4: Government policies to address different environmental concerns
Rank 5
Rank 4
Rank 3
Rank 2
Rank 1
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Government
Business
Non profit organisation
Academic institutions/research organisations
Figure 6.5: Different stakeholder groups ranking according to

their efforts in improving the environment
54

the opinion that policies concerning forest conservation were either inadequate or not implemented
(Figure 6.4).
The two most preferred sources of information on environment for the respondents were
national newspapers and television at 50% and 42%, respectively.
Respondents were asked to rank different stakeholder groups according to their efforts in
improving the environment (with Rank 1 to be assigned to those making the greatest efforts
and Rank 5 for the group making the least efforts). Almost 50% and 36% chose consumers and
government, respectively, for Rank 1. The least number of respondents (5%) assigned Rank 1
to NPOs (3%) and academic institutions/
research organizations (Figure 6.5).
4.7% 3.0%
Yes, They should be treated
10.5%
On the issue of linkage between protecting
differently and the govt should
priortize development
the environment and the objectives of
17.0%
Yes, they should be treated
development, only 10% of the surveyed
respondents felt that the government should
priortize environmental protection
No, environment protection and
prioritize development over environment,
development go hand in hand
65.0%
while a majority (65%) felt that the government
Can't Say
must prioritize environment protection over
Don't Know
development. About 17% of the respondents
Figure 6.6: Debate between environment protection and
felt that protecting the environment was not
objectives of development
against the objectives of development, and
they rather went hand in hand (Figure 6.6).
The opinion varied across localities with a larger
14.8%
proportion of respondents from high-income
localities (77%) stating that environmental
6.1%
protection should be prioritized and
only about 60% of the respondents from
13.7%
Skin diseases
65.3%
middle- and low-income localities expressing
All
similar views.
Highlighting the inherent linkage between
health and environment, almost all the
survey respondents felt that the quality of the Figure 6.7: Impact of poor environmental quality on human health
surrounding environment had an immediate
effect on human health, and as high as 65%
100%
2%
attributed a variety of respiratory diseases to
I dont know
90%
17%
poor environmental quality (Figure 6.7).
80%
The survey respondents, when asked
Water is not being
70%
wasted
to select an environmental problem, which
60%
Too much water used
according to them had the most visible impact
50%
61%
where less is required
on peoples health, 85% of the respondents
40%
Leakages during
chose poor air quality. Very small percentages
30%
distribution
of the respondents identified waste and
20%
Leakages from
10%
water quality as more crucial environmental
19%
taps/faucets in homes
0%
hazards affecting human health (9% and 6%,
respectively).
Figure 6.8: Major reasons for wastage of water in Indore
55
Indore
6.4.2. Water
Upon being asked about the main reason for wastage of water, most of the survey respondents
identified leakage of water during distribution (61%) as the primary cause for wastage, followed
by leakages from taps/faucets at homes (19%) (Figure 6.8).
Awareness on subsidized water pricing was very
2.8%
high (93%). Ninety-two per cent of the respondents were
5.7%
of the opinion that users should be charged the actual cost
of water that would reflect the scarcity value of water
Yes
and also discourage wastage (Figure 6.9); however, the
No
proportion was smaller at about 70% among those with
Can't Say
primary education.
91.6%
When asked about the preferred billing mechanism
for water consumption, majority of the respondents
chose fixed charges as the ideal billing mechanism
Figure 6.9: Readiness to pay actual cost of water
(75%), followed by metre-based (15%), and slab-wise
consumption charges (10%).
The survey respondents were asked to rate different water conservation measures based on
importance, as perceived by them. Residential
water conservation and improving waste Creating awareness
water treatment measures were found to be
Residential water
important by 66% and 73% of the respondents,
conservation
respectively. Creating awareness was
Improving
wastewater
rated by almost 8% of the respondents as
treatment
a very important measure and by 9% as
Rainwater
harvesting
an important measure in protecting water
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
resources. However, 54% of the respondents
Not Important
No opinion
Somewhat important
felt that it was not an important measure.
Important
Very Important
Surprisingly, a majority of respondents
(72%) felt that rainwater harvesting was not a Figure 6.10: Importance of different measures in protecting
vital measure to protect water resources water resources
(Figure 6.10).
Since water conservation measures fall under the purview of a number of stakeholder groups,
survey respondents were asked to rate them in terms of how well each of these groups were
fulfilling their tasks. Overall, a majority of respondents felt that the state government (75%),
central government (72%), citizens (64%), and NGOs (69%) were moderately fulfilling their duties
towards protecting water resources. Fifty five per cent of the respondents felt that the local-level
government/municipal corporations are fulfilling their tasks very well.

Almost 64% of the survey respondents identified organic waste to be a major component of
their household garbage. Surveyed citizens in Indore were cognizant of the impact of improper
solid waste management on human health. About 86% of the respondents found the impact of
56

improper solid waste management on human health to be severe, while 11% rated the impact
as moderate. More women respondents
0.3%
(29%) as compared to men (19%) indicated
that garbage was being collected from their
9%
Generate less amount of
homes.
27%
waste in house
According to almost 51% of the
surveyed population in Indore, the best
Improve waste recycling
strategy to manage the problem of solid
capacity
11%
51%
User charges
waste, was to improve waste recycling
I don't Know
capacity, followed by reducing the amount
of waste generated at the household level Figure 6.11: Strategy to manage waste in city of Indore
itself (27%) (Figure 6.11).
Waste segregation was not seen as a
favourable option by citizens of Indore,
with only 11% of the respondents indicating
that it could help in managing solid wastes
(Figure 6.11). About 58% of the survey
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
respondents expressed willingness to
Cumbersome
Requires
Civic authority's
Waste not collected
segregate waste before disposal. The reason
more space responsibility
seperately by the
civic authorities
most commonly cited by the respondents
(82%) for reluctance in waste segregation
Figure 6.12: Reasons for refusing to segregate wastes at
was that they felt it required more space.
household level
Seven per cent of the respondents felt that
segregation was the responsibility of the civic authorities (Figure 6.12).
With respect to willingness to pay for the management of waste, 71% of the survey respondents
felt that the fees should be commensurate
with the amount of waste being generated.
Twenty-six per cent of the surveyed
population suggested that same fees
should be charged across all households
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
irrespective of the amount of waste they
produced.
Survey respondents were also asked
Creating awareness
More convenient centers/locations for recycling
about strategies to encourage recycling and
re-use practices amongst the public. Forty Figure 6.13: Measures to promote recycling/re-use
five per cent of them felt that mandatory
laws pertaining to recycling could greatly
12.4%
16.7%
promote re-use (Figure 6.13).
Municipality or other
19.3%
surveyed in Indore, private companies
Government agencies
should have the biggest responsibility for
Private companies
All of the above
disposing citys solid waste and garbage.
51.6%
While 19% felt that the local municipality
or other government agencies ought to
assume this responsibility, 12% of the Figure 6.14: Greatest responsibility to manage solid waste/garbage
57
Indore
respondents felt that the greatest responsibility is on the individual citizens or households
(Figure 6.14).
In order to understand the fate of electrical and electronic waste in the city of Indore, citizens
were asked about the practices adopted by them for disposal of such waste. Household appliances
such as refrigerators and television, etc.,
were given away by almost 56% of the
surveyed population. About 16% stored
them at home or repaired and reused them.
Small IT & Telecom such
Fifty seven per cent of the respondents
gave away smaller IT and telecom items
such as CDs, printer/toner cartridges in
the second-hand market.
0%
50%
100%
Throw it with other garbage
Give it away
Store it at home
Repair and reuse
were in favour of such a measure.
Figure 6.15: Fate of electrical and electronic waste in city of Indore
58
Jamshedpur
Dalmia Wildlife Sanctuary
7
Jamshedpur
Key Highlights
Almost 81% of the respondents perceived the air quality to have worsened in recent years,
56% felt that green cover in the surrounding areas had declined, and nearly 70% felt that
waste management had worsened. Around 50% of the respondents felt that drinking water
quality and availability had improved.
Almost all the respondents felt that climate change/global warming was occurring with
93% of those surveyed indicating a rise in temperatures and 71% indicating a decline in
rainfall in recent years.
About 45% of the respondents felt that protecting the environment went hand in hand with
the objectives of development while about 42% felt that the government should prioritize
development over the environment.
Across environmental issues, respondents were either of the opinion that relevant policies
did not exist and where they did exist, these were inadequate or not implemented properly.
In terms of efforts for protecting the environment, the maximum number of respondents
assigned Rank 1 to consumers, and assigned the lowest rank to the government.
Forty-five per cent of the respondents felt that the key reason for water wastage was
excessive water consumption.
A high majority (about 83%) of respondents were aware of the subsidized price of water.
However, most respondents were not in favour of cost-based pricing.
The best strategy to manage solid waste, according to almost 87% of the respondents, was
to generate less waste at the household level itself.
Only 12% of the survey respondents expressed willingness to segregate wastes before
disposal. The most common reason cited by people (48%) for this reluctance was that
segregation according to them was the responsibility of the civic authority
Re-use and recycling of e-waste was reported to be widely practices.
A large majority felt that recycling could be improved through greater awareness.
Ninety-six per cent of the respondents agreed with imposing a ban on the use of polythene bags.
7.1 About Jamshedpur
amshedpur is located in the East Singhbhum district of the State of Jharkhand in India on the
Chota Nagpur plateau and is surrounded by the Dalma Hills and the rivers Subarnarekha and
Kharkhai. It is home to the first private iron and steel company in India and spans an area of
61
Jamshedpur
64 sq. km. It is also the largest and the most populous urban agglomeration in Jharkhand and is
regarded as one of the major industrial zones in eastern India. As per the 2011 Census of India,
the population of Jamshedpur in 2011 was estimated to be 6,29,659. The population of the urban/
metropolitan region (urban agglomeration) population was 1,337,131 of which 696,858 were
males and 640,273 were females. Jamshedpur has one of the highest literacy rates in Jharkhand,
estimated at 77%.1

The sample from Jamshedpur constituted
about 7% of the total survey sample across
3.2%
8 cities. The educational distribution of
6.8%
18.3%
the sample shows that almost 29% of
14.4%
32.9%
38.3%
the respondents were educated at the
Locality
Age
undergraduate and above level, 31%
were educated till higher secondary and
31.7%
25.6%
diploma, 24% were educated at middle
28.8%
and secondary level (Class X), and 16%
up to primary school level.
35-44
18-24
25-34
High Income
Middle Income
Above 65
45-54
55-64
In the sample of Jamshedpur, there
Low Income
2.5%
was a significant representation of the
4.0%
age group between 25 and 34 years (32%),
7.3%
15.6%
followed by the 3544 year age group
29.2%
31.3%
10.8%
(26%), and the 1824 age group (18%).
nOccupation
oitapuccO
Education
The respondents were distributed
24.5%
9.3%
amongst different occupations from
2.5%
self-employed/business (31%), regular
30.7%
32.1%
salaried (private companies) (32%) to
Housewife
Student
Up to primary
student population (11%), casual/daily
wage worker (9%), and housewives (7%).
Looking at the distribution of respondents
by locality, about 38% were from lowRetired
Unemployed
income localities, 33% from high-income
localities, and 29% from middle-income
Figure 7.1: Demographic profile of respondents in Jamshedpur
localities (Figure 7.1).

As per the City Development Plan for Jamshedpur 2006, the coverage area of water supply
distribution in all areas of the Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration (JUA) was less than 50%.
Further, there was uneven distribution of the water supply with the areas under Jamshedpur
Utilities and Services Company (JUSCO),2 getting the best of services. Overall, water supply
1 http://www.jharenvis.nic.in/Database/SexRatio_1661.aspx
2 The Jamshedpur Utilities and Services Company (JUSCO) was set up in the industrial city of Jamshedpur as a wholly
owned subsidiary of Tata Steel in 2004. JUSCO is a one-stop utility service provider in the water sector and waste water
62

coverage area (by piped connections) was approximately 25% of the total area of JUA. The
dependence on groundwater has been increasing at an alarmingly rate.
One of the tasks undertaken by JUA is that of connecting every household and industrial
unit in Jamshedpur to its water supply system. JUSCO also took up an initiative to provide
adequate water services in the informal settlements located outside the industrial area. However,
Jamshedpur is one of Indias worst-hit cities in terms of water woes, where the gap between
demand and supply is a yawning 70%.
In the context of waste and waste management, until the last decade there was an absence
of adequate facility for collection of waste, and whatever was collected ultimately landed up on
the streets, lanes or backside of houses due to shortages in appropriate landfill sites. There was
neither a system of door-to-door collection of waste nor was there any facility of community bins.
Further, there was no segregation of waste hazardous, bio-medical, etc. and no provision
for treatment of the waste. Also, there was an absence of a proper waste-disposal site in JUA,
except for areas maintained by JUSCO. Finally, the waste-disposal site of JUSCO was unsuitably
located, being very close to the rivers, and without any treatment or recycling mechanism in
place. Although the situation has improved since then, the desired service level benchmarks as
identified by the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India, are yet to be reached.
7.4 Survey Results

In order to understand how citizens of Jamshedpur perceived their surroundings to have changed
over the last five years, they were asked to rate certain environmental indicators. Across most
indicators air quality (81%), green cover
Waste and waste
(56%), and waste management (70%) the
management
situation was perceived to have deteriorated
Number of
in the city by majority of the respondents.
bird species
However, more than half of the respondents
Tree cover/
felt that there was an improvement in
green cover
drinking water quality (52%) and drinking
Ground water
availability
water availability (55%) (Figure 7.2). The
responses varied across the localities for Surface water quality
and availability
some of the indicators. A larger proportion
Drinking water
of respondents from high-income localities
availability
found the state of drinking water quality
Drinking water
and availability, forest and tree cover, and
quality
waste management to have improved.
Air Quality
As far as perception with respect
to education is concerned, 9% of the
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
respondents educated up to primary school
No Change
Better
Worse
No Direct Expenses
Don't Know
felt that waste management had improved
as against 27% of undergraduates or above Figure 7.2: Perceived changes in the state of environment over
the past five years
who had the same perception.
management, construction, municipal solid waste management, horticulture, integrated facility management, and the
power sector.
63
Jamshedpur
As high as 98% of the respondents in
Frequency of
Jamshedpur felt that climate change/
extreme events
global warming was occurring.
Intensity of
extreme events
When asked to rate different climate
variables in terms of how they had
Wind pattern
changed, almost 93% of the citizens
Rainfall
interviewed felt that temperatures had
increased and 71% reported that rainfall
Temperature
had decreased. On extreme events, almost
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
44% of the respondents opined that the
Increase
Decrease
Extreme Patterns
No Change at all
Don't Know
intensity of such events had decreased,
while 28% felt that their pattern had Figure 7.3: Changes in the climatic variables
become more erratic (Figure 7.3).
To assess the level of awareness amongst the citizens on government policies related to
environment, the survey respondents were asked about their views on existence, adequacy,
and implementation of policies related to different environmental issues. Almost 50% of the
respondents were not aware of any government policies related to air pollution. Also, over 25%
were not aware of any policies on water pollution and waste management. By and large, across
environmental parameters, the majority view was that policies existed but were inadequate or not
well implemented (Figure 7.4). In general, more women (e.g., 51% in the case of waste management)
than men (22%) thought that no policies existed to address environmental issues, but more men
(e.g., 69% in the case of waste management) than women (40%) thought that policies existed but
were inadequate or not well implemented.
Similar differences were noted across
educational classification. Almost 45% of
Climate change
the respondents with an undergraduate
Forest conservation
or above degree felt that government
Waste management
policies were not adequately implemented
in managing municipal wastes, whereas
Water conservation
only 27% respondents with only primary
Groundwater usage
education shared this opinion. Similarly,
Water supply
more respondents with higher secondary
Water pollution
educaton found forest policies poorly
Air Pollution
implemented than those educated up to
the primary level.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%
The main sources of information
Policy exist but, are not implemented Policy exist but, are inadequate
Don't Know
on the environment were found to be
television and national newspapers by
78% and 61% of respondents, respectively. Figure 7.4: Awareness and opinion on government policies to
Respondents were asked to rank address different environmental concerns
different groups according to their efforts in improving the environment (with Rank 1 to be
assigned to those making the greatest efforts and Rank 5 for the group making the least). Almost
44% assigned Rank 1 to consumers, followed by academic institutions and research organizations.
Business entities were given Rank 1 by the least number of respondents (8%). Most of the surveyed
population (44%) assigned Rank 5 to the government central, state, municipal corporation for
64

its efforts at improving the environment.
Rank 5
Non-profit organizations were ranked at
number 2 by almost 49% of the survey
Rank 4
respondents (Figure 7.5). More women
Rank 3
gave a higher rank to individuals and
Rank 2
NGOs but a lower rank to governments
Rank 1
and business as compared to men.
On the question of a linkage between
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Government
Business
the environment and development,
almost 45% of the surveyed population
felt that protecting the environment is not
Figure 7.5: Different stakeholder groups ranking according to their
against the objectives of development;
efforts in improving the environment
rather, they go hand in hand. Forty-two
per cent of the surveyed respondents said that environment protection and development should
be treated differently and government should prioritize development, while 9% felt that the
government needed to prioritize environment protection over development objectives (Figure
7.6). The views of the respondents varied across residential localities, with more respondents from
high-income localities (60%) stating that
3.5% 0.3%
development and environment went hand
differently and the govt
in hand in comparison to respondents
should priortize development
from middle-income (44 per cent) and
42.3%
low-income groups (33%). Similarly, the
45.1%
proportion of households from low- and
middle-income localities 55% and 43%
respectively who felt that development
Can't Say
9.1%
Don't Know
should be prioritized was much higher
than the respondents from high-income Figure 7.6: Debate between environment protection and objectives
of development
localities (26%).
existing between health and the
8%
1%
environment, almost all the survey
7%
respondents (99%) felt that quality of
the surrounding environment had an
Skin diseases
immediate effect on human health.
All
Eighty-two per cent of the respondents
82.3%
attributed a variety of respiratory diseases
to poor environmental quality (Figure 7.7).
The survey respondents were asked Figure 7.7: Impact of poor environmental quality on human health
to select an environmental problem that,
according to them, had the most visible impact on peoples health. The percentage of respondents
who felt that air quality had the most visible impact was high at 86%.
7.4.2 Water
Respondents were asked about their views on the reasons for wastage of water. The survey
results revealed that a majority of respondents (45%) felt that water consumption was more
65
Jamshedpur
than their actual needs. However, 33%
100%
felt that water was not being wasted at
80%
all. Leakage of water during distribution
60%
45%
as well as from taps at home was identified
33%
40%
as a cause for wastage of water by
11%
10%
20%
2%
about 21% of the surveyed population
0%
Leakages
Leakages Too much
Water is
I dont
(Figure 7.8).
from
during
water used not being
know
About 83% of the surveyed population
taps/faucets distribution where less
wasted
in homes
is required
was aware that the price charged to them for
water consumption was subsidized by the
government. Seventy-six per cent of them Figure 7.8: Major reasons for wastage of water in Jamshedpur
were of the opinion that users should not be charged the
actual cost of water (Figure 7.9). More women (78%) were
3.1%
20.8%
against water being charged on actual cost as compared
Yes
to men (62%).
No
Responding to the question on billing mechanism
Can't Say
for water consumption, as high as 75% of respondents
identified metering consumption as the ideal billing
76.1%
mechanism for water. More than 80% respondents from
high- and middle-income localities favoured metred
charges as compared to 60% from low-income localities. Figure 7.9: Willingness to pay actual cost of water
To gauge peoples perception on importance of different water conservation measures, the
survey respondents were asked to rate certain measures on varying scales of relevance (from very
important to not important). Creating awareness was rated by almost 38% of the respondents
as a very important measure and by 52% as an important measure. Improving waste water
treatment facilities was also selected as a very important measure by 29% and rainwater harvesting
as an important measure by about 49% of the surveyed population. More respondents with an
undergraduate or higher degree (28%) identified rainwater harvesting as an effective way of
conserving water resources than others, especially those educated up to primary school (14.5%).
More women (69%, 46%, 41%) than men
(49%, 26%, 22%) thought that rainwater
Creating awareness
harvesting, waste water treatment, and
Residential water
home/garden practices were very important
conservation
for water conservation.
Notably, residential water conservation Improving wastewater
treatment
measures were rated as a not important
measure by almost 21% of the survey
population (Figure 7.10).
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Since water conservation measures fell
No opinion
Not Important
Somewhat important
under the purview of a number of stakeholder
Very Important
Important
groups, survey respondents were asked to
rate them in terms of how well each of these Figure 7.10: Importance of different measures in protecting
groups were fulfilling their tasks. Overall, water resources
66

both the state and the central government were given poor ratings by the respondents in terms of
fulfilling their duties towards protecting water resources. The state government was rated very
poor by 28% and somewhat poor by 48%, while the central government given a rating of very
poor by 34% and somewhat poor by almost 40% of the surveyed population, on the basis of their
work towards protecting water resources. More women respondents (57%, 44%, 41%) rated the
central and state governments, respectively, as very poor and individuals as very well as compared
to men (33%, 27%,25%). While more than half of the respondents with primary education felt that
the government was fulfilling its role vis1.6%
-vis conservation of water resources, less
4.9%
6.0%
than a fourth of the respondents who were
undergraduates and above shared this view.
Generate less amount of waste in house

Ninety-one per cent of the survey
respondents identified organic waste to
be a major component of their household
garbage. Respondents were aware of the
linkage between human health and improper
solid waste management. When the survey
respondents were asked to rate the impact in
terms of severity, about 91% agreed that the
impact of improper solid waste management
on human health was severe, while 7% gave
it a moderate impact rating.
The best strategy, according to almost 87%
of the surveyed population, to manage the
problem of solid waste was to generate less
waste at the household level itself, followed
by segregation of waste and improving
recycling capacity (Figure 7.11).
Waste segregation did not seem to be a
favourable option for citizens of Jamshedpur,
with only 12% of the survey respondents
expressing willingness to segregate waste
before disposal. The reason most commonly
cited for this reluctance (48%) was the fact
that they felt it was the responsibility of the
civic authority and not the citizens. Thirtyone per cent of the respondents found it
a cumbersome task and therefore were
not willing to undertake it themselves
(Figure 7. 12).
On the question of a use-based fee for
waste management, more than half of the
survey respondents (54%) felt that the same
Improve waste recyclibng capacity

User charges
87.5%
Figure 7.11: Strategy to manage waste in city of Jamshedpur

Waste not collected
seperately by the
civic authorities
3%
Civic authority's
responsibility
48%
Requires
more space
19%
31%
Cumbersome
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Figure 7.12: Reasons for reluctance to segregate wastes at

household level
31 7
27
0%
20%
40%
Metallic items
Glass items
59
60%
80%
100%
None
Electronic waste

67
Jamshedpur
fee should be charged across all households, irrespective of the amount of waste they produced.
However, 44% of the surveyed population suggested that the fee should vary depending on the
amount of waste being generated. More men (47%) were in favour of volumetric pricing of waste
as compared to women (27%).
Almost 59% of the respondents typically sold or sent papers, magazines, and newspapers for
recycling or re-use, followed by 27% respondents who did the same with cardboards, including
used tetra pack cartons (Figure 7.13).
Survey respondents were also questioned
on strategies to encourage recycling and re8
5 5 4
82
use practices amongst the public. A majority
of them (82%) and an even higher proportion
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
of women felt that creating awareness
Law
requiring
recycling
Periodic
revision
in prices of recyclable products
among general public could greatly promote
More convenient centers/locations for recycling
Creating awareness
recycling/re-use.
surveyed in Jamshedpur, the local Figure 7.14: Measures to promote recycling/re-use
municipality or other government agencies
needed to take on the greatest responsibility
towards disposing of the citys solid waste
14.7%
14.8%
and garbage; this perception was strongest
amongst women. While 18% felt private
Municipality or other Government
18.0%
agencies
companies ought to take up this responsibility,
Private companies
only 15% of the respondents felt that the
All of the above
52.5%
greatest responsibility was on the individual
citizens or households (Figure 7.15).
Examining responses across different
occupational groups, it was seen that a Figure 7.15: Greatest responsibility to manage solid waste/garbage
majority of regular salaried (government)
persons identified this to be the joint responsibility of all stakeholder groups, as opposed to a
majority of all other occupational groups who identified the greatest responsibility to be that of
the government.
While electrical and electronic waste was a small component in the overall household waste,
its disposal is an area of concern. In order
to understand the disposal practices of
electrical and electronic waste in the city of
Jamshedpur, citizens were asked about such
commonly produced waste and how it was Small IT & Telecom such
disposed. Most of the respondents (73%)
repaired and reused IT and telecom items
such as computers, laptops etc. Similarly,
household appliances such as refrigerators
0%
50%
100%
and television, etc., were also repaired and
Throw it with other
Give it away
Store it at home
reused by almost 62% of the respondents,
Repair and reuse
while 19% of them gave these away. Thirtythree per cent of the respondents sold the Figure 7.16: Fate of electrical and electronic waste in city of Jamshedpur
68

smaller IT and telecom items such as CDs, printer/toner cartridges in the second-hand market.
In general, more women were getting IT and electronic products repaired for re-use than men
while more men were selling these in the second-hand market (Figure 7.16).
As one of the means to address the problem of waste management, respondents were asked
if a ban should be imposed on polythene bags. Almost 96% of the surveyed population favoured
the measure.
69
Kanpur
Green Park Stadium
8
Kanpur
Key Highlights
More respondents felt that green cover, number of bird species, surface water quality and
availability, and air quality had deteriorated rather than improved in the city while the
opposite was true for waste management and drinking water quality.
As high as 91% of the respondents felt that climate change/global warming was occurring.
Almost 88% of the citizens interviewed felt that temperature had increased and a significant
96% reported that rainfall had decreased in recent years.
In general, the majority of respondents felt that across environmental parameters, policies
existed but were either inadequate or not well implemented.
In ranking the efforts being made to improve the environment, the majority assigned
Rank 1 to the government (54%) and Rank 5 to businesses (37%).
On the environment versus development debate, only 17% of the surveyed population felt
that protecting the environment went hand in hand with the objectives of development.
Forty-five per cent felt that the government must prioritize environment protection over
development objectives.
Leakage of water during distribution was identified as the primary cause of wastage by
a majority of the surveyed population.
Fifty-seven per cent were of the opinion that users should be charged the actual cost of
water to reflect the scarcity value of the resource and discourage its wastage.
According to over 90% of the surveyed population, the best strategy to manage the
problem of solid waste was to generate less of it.
About 50% of the respondents expressed their willingness to segregate waste before
disposal. The reason most commonly cited by the respondents (60%) for their reluctance
was that they found the task cumbersome, while 29% felt that it was the responsibility of
civic authorities.
Almost 50% of the respondents were in favour of a fixed charge on waste management,
irrespective of the amount of waste generated, while 30% preferred amount-linked
charges.
Re-use and recycling of e-waste was widely practised among respondents.
Almost 74% of the surveyed population felt that polythene bags must be banned.
73
Kanpur
8.1 Demographics from Kanpur
anpur, situated on the bank of the Ganges River in the state of Uttar Pradesh, is one of the
largest industrial cities in India, primarily known for its tannery industry. The city was
one of the main centres of Industrial Revolution in the history of modern India. As per the
2011 Census of India, the population of Kanpur is 27,67,031, with a male to female ratio of about
54:46. The citys urban/metropolitan population (urban agglomeration) is 29,20,067. Kanpur has
an average literacy rate of 84.14% with male and female literacy rates being 85.77% and 82.21%
respectively.

The sample from Kanpur constitutes about
2.1%
15% of the total survey sample. About 41%
8.1%
of the samples were from high-income
23.9%
33.4%
12.5%
localities (Figure 8.1). Twenty-six per cent
40.9%
Locality
Age
were from middle-income localities and
33% were from low-income localities.
25.5%
27.9%
The educational distribution of the
25.6%
sample shows that almost 33% of the
respondents were undergraduate and
25-34 years
18-24 years
High Income
Middle Income
above and 35% were educated till higher
45-54 years
35-44 years
Low Income
55-64 years
Above 65 years
secondary and diploma levels , while the
5.2% 3.6%
balance 32% were educated till middle and
11.6%
secondary levels (Class X) or lower.
6.7%
24.8%
32.9%
The age distribution of the sample
20.4%
shows maximum representation of the
Education
20.8%
Occupation
age group between 25 and 34 years
18.5%
(28%), followed by the age group 3544
8.7%
years (26%) and the age-group 1824
11.6%
35.1%
years (24%).
Housewife
Student
Up to primary
The occupational distribution of the
sample shows that respondents were
distributed amongst different occupations
Retired
Unemployed
ranging from self-employed/business
(25%), regular salaried (private companies) Figure 8.1: Demographic profile of the respondents
(18%) to students (21%), casual/daily wage
worker (9%), and housewives (7%). There was a small percentage of unemployed (4%) and retired
(5%) people in the sample.

The major sources of water supply in the city of Kanpur are the catchments of the Ganges and
Pandu Rivers. According to Kanpur City Development Plan under the Jawaharlal Nehru Urban
Renewal Mission, the citys total water supply requirement is 600 million litre per day (mld), but
74

only 385 mld of potable water is being supplied. Of this, supply from treatment plants is about
255 mld water (210 mld raw water from Bhaironghat pumping station and 45 mld from Lower
Ganga Canal), and approximately 130 mld water is drawn from groundwater comprising 80 mld
from tube wells (about 135) and 50 mld from hand pumps (about 9,830).
With regard to solid waste management, the city generates 1,500 metric ton of waste each day.
Apart from solid waste generated by households, commercial establishments, and institutions,
there are also other types of waste including biomedical waste, sludge, and industrial waste
produced by tanneries as well as textile, rubber, and other industries operating in the city. Some
of the major issues related to waste management include out-dated equipment, inadequate bins,
no segregation of waste, inadequate composting/disposal arrangement, and non-operative
treatment facilities of tannery waste.1
8.4 Survey Results

When asked about their perception about changes in environmental quality over the last five
years, a majority of the respondents felt that green cover (44%), number of bird species (31%),
surface water quality and availability (49%), and air quality (46%) had deteriorated in the city.
Interestingly, 41% and 42% of the respondents, respectively, felt that waste and waste management
and drinking water quality had improved over the past five years (Figure 8.2).
For some of the indicators such as forest and tree cover, waste management, and drinking
water quality, a larger proportion of respondents who perceived an improvement belonged to
high-income localities. With respect to response analysis by education, fewer respondents with
higher education (37%) than respondents with primary education (52%) found the quality of
drinking water quality to have improved. Similarly, fewer respondents from the category of
undergraduate and above (30%) perceived the green cover to have deteriorated as opposed to
50% of the primary-educated respondents.
Waste and waste
As high as 91% of the respondents in
management
Kanpur felt that climate change/global
Number of
bird species
warming was occurring.
Tree cover/
When asked to rate changes in different
green cover
Ground water
climate variables, almost 88% of the citizens
availability
interviewed felt that temperatures had Surface water quality
and availability
increased and a significant 96% reported that
Drinking water
rainfall had decreased. On extreme events, a
availability
majority felt that that their intensity (74%) Drinking water quality
and frequency (37%) had decreased. Over
Air Quality
80% of the respondents also associated wind
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
with extreme patterns in the city (Figure 8.3).
Better
Worse
No Direct Experience
Don't Know
No Change
Respondents were also asked about
the existence, efficacy, and adequacy of Figure 8.2: Changes in the state of environment in Kanpur over
environment-related government policies. the past five years
1 Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission, Kanpur City Development Plan, 2006.
75
Kanpur
More respondents felt that policies
pertaining to waste management
Frequency of
extreme
events
(33%), water conservation (33%), water
Intensity
of
supply (41%), water pollution (32%)
extreme events
and air pollution (28%) existed but were
Wind pattern
not being implemented properly as
compared to those who felt that policies
Rainfall
were well implemented. In general, the
Temperature
majority felt that across environmental
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
parameters and policies existed but
Increase
Decrease
Extreme Patterns
were either inadequate or not well
No Change at all
Don't Know
implemented (Figure 8.4).
On sources of information on the Figure 8.3: Changes in the climatic variables
environment, national newspapers and
television were identified as the main
Climate change
sources, with as high as 95% and 53%
Forest conservation
of respondents having selected these
Waste management
options, respectively.
Water conservation
Respondents were asked to rank
Groundwater usage
different groups according to their
Water supply
Water pollution
efforts in improving the environment
Air Pollution
(with Rank 1 indicating the most
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
effort and Rank 5 indicating the least)
(Figure 8.5). Almost 54% assigned
Rank 1 to the government, followed
Don't Know
by 19% that assigned Rank 1 to nonprofit organizations (19%). Academic Figure 8.4: Government policies to address different
institutions were assigned Rank 2
by almost 55% of the survey respondents. Almost 37% ranked business at the fifth position in
terms of their efforts at improving the environment.
A higher proportion of women (45%) as against men (35%) gave Rank 5 to business while
a higher proportion of women (27%)
than men (17%) gave Rank 1 to NGOs.
Rank 5
Research organizations were ranked high
Rank 4
by a greater percentage of respondents
with primary education (60%) than
Rank 3
undergraduates or above (45.5%).
Rank 2
On
the
environment
versus
Rank 1
development debate, almost 17% of
respondents felt that protecting the
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Government
Business
environment was not against the
objectives of development and the
two went hand in hand. However,
45% felt that the two must be treated Figure 8.5: Different stakeholder groups ranking according to their
differently and that the government efforts in improving the environment
76

must prioritize environment protection
11.1%
over development objectives (Figure 8.6).
20.7%
6.7%
between health and environment, 94% of
16.7%
the survey respondents felt that quality
of the surrounding environment had an
Can't Say
44.9%
immediate effect on human health, and as
Don't Know
high as 83% of the respondents attributed
a variety of respiratory illnesses, water- Figure 8.6: Debate between environment protection and
borne diseases, and skin diseases to poor objectives of development
environmental quality (Figure 8.7).
The survey respondents were asked
6.8% 3.5%
to select an environmental problem
6.6%
which according to them has had the
most visible impact on peoples health.
The percentage of respondents who
Skin diseases
identified air quality was high at 48%; this
All
83.1%
was followed by waste (40%).
8.4.2 Water
Figure 8.7: Impact of poor environmental quality on human health
Almost all respondents agreed that water

was being wasted. Respondents were also asked about their perceptions on major reasons of
water wastage in their city (Figure 8.8). Leakage of water during distribution was identified as
the primary cause of wastage by 38% of the surveyed population. About 30% of the respondents
each identified over-use of water and leakages from taps/faucets in homes as the major reason
of water wastage.
About 94% of the respondents were aware that the price charged to them for water consumption
was subsidized by the government. Fifty-seven per cent were of the opinion that users should
be charged the actual cost of water to reflect the scarcity value of the resource and discourage
its wastage. However, a large proportion
100%
of regular salaried government employees
I dont know
90%
(38%) and retired respondents (44%) were
31%
80%
not willing to pay the actual cost of water.
Water is not being
70%
While 46% of undergraduates and above
wasted
60%
respondents felt that citizens should pay the
Too much water used
50%
actual price of water, 60% of respondents
38%
where less is required
40%
with education up to the primary level agreed
Leakages during
with this proposition. Responding to the
30%
distribution
question on a preferred billing mechanism
20%
Leakages from
29%
for water consumption, 58% identified
10%
taps/faucets in homes
slab-wise consumption as the ideal billing
0%
mechanism for water, followed by metrebased consumption (22%) and fixed charges Figure 8.8: Major reasons for wastage of water in Kanpur
77
Kanpur
(20%). More men (25%) than women (12%)
were in favour of metered consumption
20.3%
(Figure 8.9).
Fixed Charges
To gauge peoples perception on the
57.5%
Metered/Consumption
importance of different water conservation
22.2%
measures, the survey respondents were
Slab wise
asked to rate them on varying scales of
relevance (from very important to not
important) (Figure 8.10). Residential water
conservation (34%), creating awareness and Figure 8.9: Readiness to pay actual cost of water
educating citizens (31%), and improving
wastewater treatment (30%) were rated as very important measures by a large number of
respondents. Rainwater harvesting was rated by almost 82% of the respondents as an important
measure and by 5% as a very important measure for protecting water resources. However, only
11% of primary-educated respondents found rainwater harvesting to be an important strategy
for water conservation. About 30% of respondents were of no opinion apropos to the role of
residential water conservation in protecting water resources. A majority of housewives (49%)
felt that improving wastewater treatment was very important in protecting water resources as
compared to lower proportion of respondents from other employment categories.
Since water conservation measures
fall under the purview of a large number of
Creating
awareness
stakeholder groups, survey respondents
were asked to rate different agencies in
Residential water
conservation
terms of how well each of these groups
Improving
were fulfilling their roles. A large number
wastewater
treatment
of respondents felt that individual
Rainwater
citizens (54%), the central government
harvesting
(43%), local government (46%), and
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
NGOs (49%) were performing their roles
Not Important
No opinion
Somewhat important
Important
Very Important
`somewhat poorly. However, a majority
(57%) felt that the state government was
Figure 8.10: Importance of different measures in protecting water
performing moderately well in protecting
resources
water resources.

Almost 76% of the survey respondents identified organic waste to be the major component of
their household garbage. According to over 90% of the surveyed population, the best strategy
to manage the problem of solid waste was to generate less waste itself. A small fraction (4%)
advocated the application of user charges while only 2% of the respondents felt that segregation
of wastes and improving the waste-recycling capacity could help in managing solid waste.
To assess peoples awareness on the linkage between human health and improper solid waste
management, survey respondents were asked to rate the impact in terms of severity. About 66%
of the respondents feel that the impact of improper solid waste management on human health
was severe. Surprisingly, 22% of the respondents thought that there were no negative impacts of
improper solid waste management on human health.
78

About half of the respondents expressed their willingness to segregate waste before disposal.
The reason most commonly cited by people (60%) for their reluctance was the fact that they found
the task to be cumbersome, while 29% of the
respondents felt that it was the responsibility
60%
7%
29%
5%
of civic authorities (Figure 8.11). Among
those who were willing to segregate waste,
17% said that they would do so either because
they could use the biodegradable wastes to 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Waste not collected
Cumbersome Requires
Civic authority's
make compost or thought it was good for the
more space
seperately by the
responsibility
civic authorities
environment.
On the issue of user-charges, 50% of Figure 8.11: Reasons for refusing to segregate waste at
the survey respondents felt that the same household level
fee should be charged to all households,
irrespective of how much waste they
1.0%
produced. About 30% of the surveyed
population suggested that the fee should
25.3%
vary depending on the amount of waste
Municipality or other
Government agencies
being generated.
57.2%
Private companies
All of the above
16.5%
surveyed in Kanpur, municipal corporations
or other government agencies should have
the greatest responsibility for disposing of
citys solid waste and garbage. About 25% Figure 8.12: Greatest responsibility for solid waste
of the respondents felt that the greatest management
responsibility was on the individual citizens

or households, while 16% felt that private
companies ought to take up this responsibility
(Figure 8.12).
Almost 20% of the responses suggested
18%
17%
12%
20%
15%
18%
that they typically sold or sent electronic
waste for recycling or re-use, followed by
18% respondents who give away paper,
magazines or metallic items. In addition to
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
this, 15% respondents gave away cardboards
Metallic items
Glass items
Electronic waste
(including used Tetrapak cartons) for
recycling or re-use (Figure 8.13).
As much as 98% of respondents were Figure 8.13: Items sent typically for recycling or re-use
aware of the problem of electronic waste. In
order to understand the fate of electrical and electronic waste in the city of Kanpur, citizens were
asked about their disposal options for some commonly used electronic products (Figure 8.14).
It was revealed that most of the respondents (51%) gave away IT and telecom items such as
computers, laptops, etc. Household appliances such as refrigerators and television, etc., were
repaired and re-used by almost 42% of the surveyed population, while 41% of the respondents
sold them at second-hand markets. Similarly, the largest proportion of respondents (41%) sold
79
Kanpur
smaller IT and telecom items such as CDs
and printer/toner cartridges at the secondHousehold appliances
hand market. In general, more women
were getting home appliances and small IT
Small IT & Telecom such
products repaired for re-use than men.
Survey respondents were also questioned
on strategies to encourage recycling and reas computers, laptops
use practices amongst the public (Figure
0%
50%
100%
8.15). A majority of them (54%) felt that a
Give it away
Store it at home
Repair and reuse
charge or deposit fee on recyclable items
could greatly promote re-use.
Figure 8.14: Disposal of electronic waste
felt that this must be done. Interestingly,
while more than 95% of the respondents from
54%
44%
2%
high- and middle-income localities favoured
such a ban, only 42% of respondents from
low-income localities agreed.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
80
Mumbai
Marine Drive
9
mumbai
Key Highlights
More respondents thought that the situation with respect to air quality, waste management,
green cover, and number of bird species had deteriorated than improved. But, over 50% felt
that drinking water availability and quality had improved.
More than 80% of the total respondents believed that global warming was occurring. Close
to 90% of these respondents reported an increase in mean temperature while over 50%
reported a decrease in rainfall over the years.
Thirty, two per cent of the respondents felt that protecting the environment and attaining
economic development went hand in hand while 44% felt that the government should
prioritize the environment over development.
Seventy per cent of the respondents felt that the changes in the surrounding environment
affect human health.
Most respondents felt that policies for environmental management existed but were either
not well implemented or inadequate. In the case of groundwater and climate change, many
respondents did not know whether or not relevant policies existed.
Close to 50% of the respondents gave Rank 1 to the government and over 60% gave Rank
5 to academic institutions in their efforts to improve the environment.
More than 63% of the respondents felt that water was being wasted. Of these, about 25%
each felt that water was wasted during distribution and due to over-consumption.
Sixty-two per cent of the respondents reported that they were aware that water tariff was
subsidized and a similar number felt that water should be charged on the cost of supply
Close to 50% of the respondents felt that the best strategy to manage the problem of solid
waste was to segregate waste before it is disposed.
More than 63% of the respondents were willing to segregate their waste.
Forty-three per cent of the respondents felt that cost should vary with the amount of
waste generated.
More than two-thirds of the respondents reported that they are aware of the electronic
waste management. By and large, e-waste was being reused or sold in the second-hand
market.
A large majority was in favour of a complete ban on the use of polythene bags in the city.
83
Mumbai
9.1 About Mumbai
umbai is the largest urban agglomerate in India. It is made up of 8 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 citiesDelhi, Kolkata, and Mumbaihave a low sex ratio,
Greater Mumbai has the lowest at a mere 861 females per 1,000 males. The Greater Mumbai urban
agglomerate has a literacy rate of 90.78%.

The sample from Mumbai constitutes
1.1%
about 13% of the total survey sample from
4.1%
the 8 cities. The profile of the sample is
9.9%
28.3%
represented in Figure 9.1. Almost 10%
33.4%
of the respondents were educated up to
45.4%
Age
Locality
23.3%
primary school, followed by 25% of the
respondents who had studied till middle
and/or secondary level. The share of
33.3%
21.5%
respondents who received education till
25-34 years
18-24 years
Middle Income
High Income
higher secondary or were diploma holders
45-54 years
35-44 years
Low Income
Above 65 years
55-64 years
was 26% while 27% of the respondents
2.0% 1.7%
were at undergraduate and above level.
10.3%
17.2%
There was a significant representation
13.8%
of the respondents in the age group of
38.3%
25 to 34 years (33%), followed by the 1824
Education
25.5%
Occupation
16.0%
age group (28%), 3544 age group (23%),
and the age group 5564 years (4%) in the
3.0%
41.7%
4.6%
sample. Only 1% of the respondents were
25.9%
from the age group, above 65 years.
Up to primary
Housewife
Student
With
regard
to
occupational
distribution, 42% of the respondents were
regular salaried professionals working
Retired
Unemployed
in the private sector, followed by 17%
who were either self-employed or owning
Figure 9.1: Demographic profile of respondents in Mumbai
businesses. Almost 16% of the respondents
were students, while 14% were housewives. Seven per cent were either casual/daily workers,
unemployed or retired individuals. Finally, 5% were salaried individuals working with the
government/public sector. Out of the total sample size of 1,500, a total of 45% were from lowincome localities, 21% from middle-income localities, and 34% from high-income localities.

Being the commercial capital as well as the most populous city in India, Mumbai experiences
significant pressures on the local environment. The main environmental problems include solid
84

waste management, water pollution surface and ground air pollution, loss of green cover,
etc. Mumbai has emerged as one of the greatest producers of solid waste in the country and
is estimated that the urban agglomerate of Mumbai generates more than 6% of the total waste
generated in India. The average generation of municipal solid waste is more than 6,500 tons while
an additional 2,500 tons of construction and demolition waste is generated per day.1 However, due
to shortages of resources, collection efficiency is still 7075%, against the service level benchmarks
of 100% identified by the Ministry of Urban Development. Further, challenges related to scientific
disposal of solid waste are significant resulting in environmental pollution.
Out of a total water demand of more than 4,000 million litres per day (MLD), the water supply
from the municipal corporation of Greater Mumbai, is close to 3,500 MLD. There are also issues
related to loss of water during transportation, malfunctioning of metres, as well as non-metred
water supply to a substantial number of households.2 There are also issues related to contamination
of water at the transmission and distribution levels.
9.4 Survey Results

In order to gauge the perception of citizens about their surrounding environment, respondents
were asked about the changes they found in the state of environment over the last five years. A
large number of respondents perceived the environmental indicators to have deteriorated (Figure
9.2). Almost 38% and 27% of the respondents felt that air and water quality had deteriorated. More
respondents living in low-income localities (42%) perceived that the air quality had worsened,
whereas a smaller percentage of middle-income and high-income respondents shared this
perception (30% and 36% respectively).
Thirty-nine per cent of the respondents
Waste and waste
felt that there was a decline in the number of
management
Number of
bird species. Forty-seven per cent reported
bird species
that the waste management services in their
Tree cover/
neighbourhood had worsened and 39% of
green cover
Ground water
the respondents perceived the tree/green
availability
cover to have declined.
On a positive note, 59% of the
and availability
respondents found the quality of drinking
Drinking water
availability
water to have improved and 56% found an
Drinking water
improvement in drinking water availability.
quality
More women (22%) than men (12%)
Air quality
thought that surface water quality and
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%
availability had improved.
Better
Worse
No Direct Expenses
Don't Know
No Change
While 23% of the respondents who were
undergraduates or above perceived that Figure 9.2: Changes in the state of environment in Mumbai
water quality in Mumbai had fallen over over the past five years
1 http://www.mcgm.gov.in/irj/portal/anonymous/qlcleanover (last accessed on 29 April 2014).
2 http://www.icrier.org/pdf/Maharashtra_05nov12.pdf (last accessed on 4 May 2014).
85
Mumbai
the last five years, the share of primaryFrequency of
educated respondents with a similar
extreme events
observation was 38%. However, only
Intensity of
20% of the higher secondary educated extreme
events
respondents perceived an improvement
Wind pattern
in green cover over the last five years,
although the share of respondents who
Rainfall
were undergraduates or above for the
same response was more than 35%.
Temperature
More than 81% of the respondents felt
that global warming was occurring. It is
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Increase Decrease Extreme Patterns No Change at all Don't Know
interesting to note that more than 75% of
the respondents in every locality had a Figure 9.3: Changes in climatic variables
similar perception. Eighty-eight per cent
of the respondents felt that the mean
Climate change
temperature had increased significantly
Forest conservation
(Figure 9.3). Forty-one per cent reported
that rainfall had increased while 53%
Waste management
perceived that rainfall had decreased.
Water conservation
Fifty-four per cent reported that wind
Groundwater usage
patterns had decreased.
Water supply
For understanding the awareness of
Water pollution
citizens on environment-related policies
Air Pollution
of the government and their opinion on
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
the same, respondents were asked if they
No government policy exists
Policies exist and are well implemented
were aware of government policies, the
Policies exist but are not implemented
Policies exist but are inadequate
efficacy of those policies, whether they
Don't know
were being implemented and if they were
adequate (Figure 9.4). Almost 43% did Figure 9.4: Awareness regarding government policies to address
not know about the existence of polices various environmental problems
with regard to climate change, 33% did not know about the existence of any policy for water
conservation, and 38% were unaware of any policy to regulate groundwater use. In other cases,
most respondents felt that policies existed but were either not being implemented properly or
were inadequate. Twenty per cent of the primary educated and 34% of the middle school educated
respondents felt that policies exist for forest conservation but were not adequately implemented.
About 75% of the total survey respondents reported that television was the most important
source of any environment related information. Fifty-seven per cent of the respondents reported
that local/regional newspapers as their second most important source.
Survey respondents from the city were asked to rank different groups in the society according
to their role in efforts for improving environmental quality (Figure 9.5) (with Rank 1 indicating
highest efforts and Rank 5 the least efforts). Almost 49% assigned Rank 1 to the government, while
40% of the respondents assigned Rank 1 to consumers. Almost 54% of the respondents from the
lowest education group perceived the governments measures in managing the environment as
most valuable. Only 3% of the total sample assigned Rank 1 to business for their efforts in improving
the environment. Nineteen per cent of the respondents felt that businesses were taking the least
86

measures in improving the environment. Not a single respondent above the age of 50 assigned top
rank to businesses. Thirty-nine per cent of the respondents chose Rank 2 for consumers, and 29%
gave Rank 2 to government for their efforts in improving the environment quality. With regard
to the ranking of groups whose efforts were considered least in improving environment quality,
63% of the respondents gave Rank 5 to academic institutions and research organizations, 19% to
businesses, and 12% to the government. The ranking pattern varied across localities with a higher
proportion of respondents from high-income localities (54%) than those from low and middle
income localities (33% and 31% respectively) assigning Rank 1 to government.
Rank 5
Rank 4
Government
Business
Rank 3

Non Profit Organization
Rank 2
Academic institutions/research organizations
Rank 1
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Figure 9.5: Different stakeholder groups ranking according to their efforts in improving the environment
On the issue of prioritizing environmental
0.7% 0.1%
protection or development or balancing
Yes, they should be treated differently
both, 32% of the respondents felt that
and the government should priortize
23.9%
development
protecting the environment was not
31.7%
Yes, they should be treated differently
against the objectives of development,
and the government shoul priortize
environmental protection
but went hand in hand instead (Figure
9.6). It is interesting to note that almost
Can't say
43% of the respondents who were casual
43.5%
Don't know
labourers felt that the environment and
development should go hand in hand.
Figure 9.6: Debate between environment protection and objectives
This response was remarkably different
of development
from other occupational categories, such
as unemployed (26%) and retired persons (12%). Twenty-four per cent of the respondents reported
that environment protection and development should be treated differently and the government
should prioritize development, while 44% felt that government must prioritize environment
protection over development objectives (Figure 9.6). Thirty-nine per cent of the respondents with
higher secondary education felt that government should prioritize environment over development.
However, the proportion of the primary-educated respondents with the same response was 52%.
It is an established fact that environment quality and health condition have strong correlation.
For understanding citizens awareness on the impact of changing environment quality on health,
they were asked to identify environmental problems that have the most visible impact on health.
Seventy per cent of the respondents felt that the changes in the surrounding environment
affect human health. Out of those respondents who felt that there was a linkage between
87
Mumbai
local environment and human health, the largest share of the respondents felt that air quality
had the most visible impact on health (37%) followed by water quality (36%) and waste
management (25%).
9.4.2 Water
Citizens were asked for their views on the key reasons for water wastage in the city of Mumbai.
Twenty-seven per cent of the respondents reported that significant quantity of water was wasted
during distribution, while 26% felt that water consumption was more than the required amount.
Regular leakage of water from taps at home was also identified as a cause of water wastage by
15% of the respondents.
More women (37%) than men (23%) indicated bottled/packaged water as a source of drinking
water while more men (73% as against 51% women) identified municipal water as the main
source of water. In response to a question on awareness about whether water tariff in the city
was subsidized or not, 62% of the respondents were of the view that water tariff imposed was
subsidized, and 38% did not know whether it was subsidized or not. More respondents who had
at least a graduate degree perceived the water price to
be subsidized (82%), than those who had either a higher
secondary degree or a diploma (46%).
More women (71%) than men (59%) were aware that
36.0%
the price of water was subsidized by the government.
Yes
More than 80% of undergraduate and above respondents
Can't say
were aware of this in comparison to 42% of respondents
64.0%
educated up to the primary level. A large proportion of
(80%) respondents from middle-income localities were
aware of the water subsidy as compared to respondents
from both high- and middle-income localities (56% and
Figure 9.7: Willingness to pay the actual cost of
57% respectively).
water supply
When asked if citizens should pay the actual cost of
water, 64% of the respondents felt that citizens should pay the actual cost of water that reflected
the scarcity value of water (Figure 9.7). Seventy-eight per cent of respondents from the highest
education category i.e, who were at least graduates perceived that citizens should pay
the actual cost of water as opposed to
Creating
only 45% of the respondents with primary
awareness
education, who shared this opinion.
Residential water
With regard to an ideal billing
conservation
mechanism, close to 50% of respondents
Improving
perceived that the amount charged
wastewater
treatment
should be based on the amount of water
Rainwater
consumed.
harvesting
A list of activities relevant for
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
protecting water resources was shared
Not Important
Somewhat
important
with the various respondents and they
No opinion
Important
Very Important
were asked to rank the same based on their
importance (Figure 9.8). Thirty-three per Figure 9.8: Importance of different measures in protecting
cent of the respondents felt that creating water resources
88

awareness was the best policy for conserving water resources. More than 20% of the respondents
felt that rainwater harvesting was the best approach, followed by conservation of residential
water (by 19%). More women (55% as against 46% men) identified rainwater harvesting as an
important way to conserve our water resources.
However, the largest share, i.e., 24% of the respondents, felt that waste water treatment
activity was a somewhat important measure to protect water resources. Twenty per cent of the
respondents working in the private sector perceived that improving waste water treatment was
extremely important towards water conservation.
The responsibility of protecting and conserving water resources, according to the respondents,
was spread across stakeholder groups including the government, individuals, and certain
agencies. Overall, the central and the state government were given a poor rating by respondents
in terms of fulfilling their duties towards protecting water resources. Twenty-three and 16%
of the respondents felt that the central government and the state government, respectively,
performed somewhat poorly in fulfilling their responsibility for protecting water resources in
the respondents communities. The local government/municipality was reported to be the worst
performer in this respect with 12% of the respondents finding their performance very poor and
18% of the respondents finding it somewhat poor. The respondents felt that individuals and local
NGOs outperformed the government agencies in protecting water resources in their community.
Almost 34% of the respondents felt that an individuals role had been very effective in protecting
water resources, while 45% of the respondents felt their role had been moderate. Further, 33%
of the respondents felt that role played by NGOs in protecting water resources had been very
well too. More respondents from the group with higher secondary education found NGOs to
be fulfilling their responsibility for conserving
water resources (37% from high secondary
1%
education as compared to 21% from primary
17.3%
education).
Organic waste
Paper / paper bags / tetra
pack cartons
In India, most of the municipal solid waste
Cloth waste
generated is organic; this is not only evident
81.7%
from the secondary review of literature, but
also from the results of the primary survey.
Review of literature reveals that the average Figure 9.9: Major components of waste in respondent households
proportion of compostable waste generated in
1.0%
urban areas in India ranges from 40% to 60%.
4.8%
More than 80% of the respondents reported
11.0%
Generate less amount of
that most of the waste generated in their
waste in house
households belonged to the organic waste
33.5%
category (Figure 9.9). Results of the survey
Improve waste recyclibng
capacity
revealed that waste was collected from the
User charges
doorsteps of more than 64% of the respondents.
Others
As far as dealing with the rising problem
49.7%
of waste management is concerned, 50% of
the respondents felt that the best strategy
to manage the problem of solid waste was Figure 9.10: Best strategy to minimize waste
89
Mumbai
to segregate waste before it was disposed. Eleven per cent of the respondents felt that waste
reduction at source can help in managing solid waste (Figure 9.10).
Survey respondents were asked to rate the impact of improper solid waste management on
health in terms of the severity of the impact. About 56% of the respondents felt that the impact
of improper solid waste management on human health can be severe. Thirty-five per cent of the
respondents felt that the impact was moderate while only 6% reported the impact to be low.
While 40% of retired respondents felt that the impact is severe, 78% of housewives perceived these
impacts to be very high.
In terms of willingness to segregate
waste, it was interesting to note that more Waste not collected
seperately by the
than 63% of the respondents were willing to
civic authorities
Civic authority's
do so. But, the respondents, who were not
responsibility
willing to segregate, cited various reasons
Requires
for their inaction and unwillingness (Figure
more space
9.11). Almost 48% of the respondents who
Cumbersome
were not willing to segregate waste reported
that more space was required to keep two
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
separate bins. Twenty-seven per cent felt that
the responsibility of waste segregation was Figure 9.11: Reasons for refusing to segregate wastes at
with the local municipalities and not with household level
the consumers. There were also respondents
(9%) who reported that the entire exercise of
23.5%
waste segregation at the household level was
Cost should vary with the amount
futile as waste was not collected separately
of waste generated
42.7%
by the civic authorities.
Same fees should be charged at
With regard to the question on the
all households
Don't Know
waste management fee to be charged to a
33.8%
household, 43% of the respondents replied
that cost needed to vary with the amount
of waste generated while 34% of the survey Figure 9.12: Billing mechanism for waste management/
respondents felt that same fee should be disposal
charged to all households, irrespective of the
amount of waste they produced (Figure 9.12).
Most of the waste sent for recycling
included cardboard items (42%) followed
by paper, magazines, and newspapers (20%)
8%
16% 3% 11%
42%
20%
(Figure 9.13).
Given that every household generated
some form of electronic waste and there existed
potential threats associated with unscientific
disposal of waste, respondents were asked
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
whether they were aware of the problems
Metallic items
Glass items
Electronic waste
associated with its disposal. More than twoPaper, magazines and newspapers
Don't Know
third of the respondents reported that they
were aware of the problem. Respondents Figure 9.13: Commodities sold/recycled by households
90

were then asked about their waste disposal
behaviour for electronic waste (Figure 9.14).
With respect to household appliances, 59% of
the respondents reported that they normally Small IT & telecom such
repaired and re-used household items. When as toner cartridges, CDs
asked about sized IT and telecom products,
Sized IT & telecom such
61% of the respondents reported they either
repaired and re-used these products or
0%
50%
100%
Give it away
Store it at home
stored them at their home. With regard to
Repair and re-use
small IT and telecom products, such as toner
cartridges, CDs, etc., only a limited share of Figure 9.14: Fate of electrical and electronic waste in Mumbai
respondents were either repairing or re-using
their products or storing it at homes. In fact, 34% of respondents reported that they gave these
products away without knowing the fate of these products once they were given away. Thirteen
per cent of the respondents threw these products along with other household garbage and 21%
reported that they that the sold these products
in the second-hand market.
Thirty-nine per cent of the respondents
felt that creating awareness was the best
28%
5%
24%
3%
39%
strategy for reducing waste, while 28% felt
that charging a deposit fee for recyclable items
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
can minimize waste generation and promote
recycling (Figure 9.15). Twenty-four per cent
of the respondents felt that there should
Creating awareness
More convenient centres/locations for recycling
be stringent laws for waste management
to deal with the problems associated with
Figure 9.15: Measures for promotion of recycling
waste disposal.
Finally, 85% of the respondents were in favour of ban on plastic bags. All respondents above
65 years of age felt that polythene bags should be banned completely.
91
Pune
River Mula
10
Pune
Key Highlights
Forty-three per cent of the respondents felt that air quality was getting worse while 34%
thought there was no change. The quality and availability of drinking water and waste
management was perceived to be getting better by 73%, 62%, and 51% respondents,
respectively.
Over 90% felt that climate change was occurring. Sixty-eight per cent of these stated that
the temperature was increasing and nearly half reported a decline in rainfall.
Forty-four per cent citizens did not see any conflict between the objectives of environment
protection and development, 37% favoured prioritization of development over the
environment.
By and large, respondents were equally divided between those who thought that
environmental policies were well implemented and those who thought that these were
inadequate ornot well implemented.
About 50% gave Rank 1 to the government and 40% gave Rank 5 to academic institutions
in their efforts to improve the environment.
Forty-one per cent felt that it was the consumption patterns of individuals that caused
wastage of water in the city closely followed by those who identified leakage during
distribution and from household taps/faucets.
Around 57% favoured cost-based tariff for water whereas 39% were against it. About 60%
of respondents favoured metered consumption charges while 30% preferred fixed charges
or flat rates.
Only 17.5% stated that garbage was collected from their house with the remaining
respondents taking it to a central point for disposal.
Segregation of waste was considered the best strategy for waste management by 46% of
respondents. However, close to 60% were not willing to segregate waste mostly because
they thought it was the responsibility of the municipal body.
Opinion was about roughly divided on the fixed versus amount-linked charges for waste.
People were mostly aware of the hazards associated with e-waste and such waste was
largely being reused or resold.
Thirty-seven per cent felt that curb-side pick of recyclables would be most effective in
improving waste recycling while another 30% opted for awareness creation.
Seventy-nine per cent of the respondents were in favour of a ban on plastic bags in the city.
95
Pune
10.1 About Pune
une, located in Pune district of Maharashtra, is the second largest city in the state after
Mumbai. Pune is the ninth largest city in the country and ranks eighth among the most
populous urban agglomerations of India. The city with its historical importance for education
and culture in the country has emerged as a centre of education in the post-Independence era and
more recently thrived as an economic hub for both manufacturing and service sector. The city
is the administrative headquarter of Pune district as well as of western Maharashtra division.
Pune metropolitan region or urban agglomeration that consists of 2 municipal corporations, 3
cantonment boards (CBs) and around 100 other census towns and villages has a population of
50,49,968 as per 2011 census. The sample for this survey was drawn only from the citizens living
in two municipal corporations (Pune and Pimpri-Chinchwad) which account for 96% of the total
population of the metropolitan region. Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) has a population of
31,15,431 whereas for Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (PCMC) it is 17,29,359. The
geographical area of PMC and PCMC are 250.56 sq. km and 177.3 sq. km, respectively.

The sample for Pune constitutes 25% of the total survey sample across the 8 cities. Of the 2,830 sample
respondents for Pune city, 1,821 respondents are drawn from different residential areas in PMC
and 1,009 from PCMC. The details of the
sampling design are discussed in Chapter
0.5%
2.8%
1. The distribution of sample across age
10.7%
15.0%
groups, educational qualification, and
Locality
33.0%
occupations are presented in Figure 10.1.
46.3%
18.9%
With respect to age group distribution
Age
Locality
of the sample, more than 50% of the
respondents (52%) were in the age group
52.0%
20.6%
of 2534 (Figure 10.1) and around 97% of
the respondents were below the age of
25-34 years
18-24 years
High Income
Middle Income
54. Respondents within the age group of
35-44 years
45-54 years
Low Income
Above 65 years
55-64 years
3544 and 1824 constituted 19% and 15%
1.3% 2.2%
of the city sample, respectively. As the
7.0%
7.8%
14.0%
18.4%
distribution of sample respondents across
8.7%
different localities are concerned, 46%
2.5%
belonged to low-income localities, 33% are
32.2%
Occupation
Education
9.2%
from high-income and 21% middle-income
localities.
42.5%
54.3%
Around 43% of the sample respondents
had studied up to 12th or had a diploma
Housewife
Student
Up to primary
degree and 32% were in the category of
middle and secondary school education.
Only 18% of the sample respondents had
Retired
Unemployed
undergraduate and above degrees whereas
7% of the sample population had studied
only up to primary school.
96

The distribution of sample respondents in city across different occupation shows that 54% were
regular salaried in private sector and 14% were self-employed or had their own business. Regular
salaried (government), and students constituted 9% each of the total respondents whereas 8% of
the respondents were housewives. Around 3% of the respondents were casual workers/daily wage
laborers. Unemployed and retired constituted 2% and 1% of the total respondents, respectively.

As Pune is one of the emerging megacities in the country, issues concerning the state of environment
in the city have drawn significant attention from the researchers and policy-makers as is evident
in research and publications on various aspects of city environment. Both PMC and PCMC also
regularly assess the state of environment in the city and publish environmental status reports
annually.
The Environmental Status Report (ESR)1 201213 of PMC suggests that air pollution, water
pollution, and noise pollution in the city (PMC area) are on rise and above permissible standards.
Water demand in PMC is met from the three rivers and two lakes located in the city along with
around 5,000 bore wells and dug wells. The water pollution (both DO and COD) in the water
bodies (lakes and nalas) of the city is within the safe limits but has deteriorated over the years.
However, water quality in lakes has improved in recent years over the 2009 assessment due to
the pollution control measures initiated by the municipal corporation. Pollution loads in the city
have a bearing on human health conditions and the ESR also pointed out to instances of various
diseases respiratory, water-borne, and skin diseases in the city over the years. The ESR also
suggests that there are 806 different plant and animal species within the PMC area indicating a
rich but threatened biodiversity in the city. The city (PMC area) generates 1,300 MT to 1,400 MT
of solid waste which amounts to 400450 grams per-capita per day.2 Waste from households
constitutes 69% of the total solid waste in PMC.
The ESR3 for PCMC suggests that the air pollution in PCMC area is on rise over the years. With
1.13% of area under surface water bodies, PCMC has host of water bodies that includes rivers,
lakes, reservoirs, ponds, etc. The water demand of the city is mostly met from Pawana river and
in some areas it is complemented by ground water through bore wells. The ESR maintains that
Pawana river is highly polluted in compared to other two rivers. The average COD values are
within the MPCB limits whereas the BOD, DO, TSS and total coliform levels are above the MPCB
standards. Open nalas are the most polluted among the water bodies. PCMC area generates 646
MT on solid wastes daily with a per-capita generation of 350 grams per day and household waste
constitutes 84% of the total waste generated.
The Pune City Sanitation Plan 2012 maintains that 94% of the areas in PMC are covered with
tap connection and the per capita per-day average water supply is 194 litres. For PCMC, the
average per capita daily water supply in residential area is 179 litres. The estimated loss of water
1 Environmental Status Report 2012-13, Pune Municipal Corporation http://www.punecorporation.org/pmcwebn/

informpdf/greenper cent20Pune/ESR_2012-13_Marathi.pdf last accessed on 14th March 2014
2 Revised City Development Plan for Pune 2041, http://www.punecorporation.org/pmcwebn/informpdf/CDP/1_CDP_
Intro.pdf last accessed on 15th March 2014
3 Environmental Status Report 2012-13, Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation http://www.pcmcindia.gov.in/pdf/
esr_eng_2013.pdf last accessed on 14th March 2014
97
Pune
in T&D is 25% in PMC4 whereas for PCMC5 it is 20%. The duration of water supply in Pune varies
across the wards (20 hours in Dhole Patil Road and 2 hours in Yerwada) and in PCMC the average
supply duration is three hours daily.
10.4 Survey Results

The respondents were asked about their
waste & waste management
perception about trends of changes in
bird species
various environmental indicators such
tree cover
as air quality, water quality as well as
ground
water
availability, biodiversity, waste and
surface water
waste management in the city during
drinking water availability
last five years (Figure 10.2). The findings
drinking water quality
of the survey suggest that majority
air quality
of the citizens perceived the citys
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Worse
Better
No Direct Expenses
Don't Know
No Change
environment to be getting better in terms
of all environmental indicators except air
Figure 10.2: Perception about changes in the state of environment
quality. Almost 43% of the respondents
in Pune over past five years
felt that the air quality was getting worse,
34% found no change and 19% perceived it to be getting better (Figure 10.2). The quality and
availability of drinking water was perceived to be getting better over last five years in the city
by 73% and 62% respondents, respectively. The survey found mixed response on availability of
ground water and quality as well as availability of the surface with 35% respondents finding both
these indicators to have improved, whereas 25% thought the latter was getting worse and 18% had
similar opinion about the former. More than half of the respondents felt that were improvements
in waste management in the city and 22% viewed otherwise. The tree cover in the city was
perceived to have increased by 45% of the
respondents whereas only 34% thought
the diversity of birds had improved. The frequency of extreme events
responses on some of these indicators
intensity of extreme events
varied marginally across the sociowind pattern
economic groups. For instance, a larger
rainfall
percentage of respondents living in high
and middle-income localities stated that
temprature
they experienced improvements in water
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
quality and availability as well as tree
Increase
Decrease
Don't know
Extreme patterns
No Change
cover and waste management. Responses
varied across educational background Figure 10.3: Perception about changes in the climatic variables in
too. A larger percentage of respondents Pune over past five years
4 Pune City Sanitation Plan 2012, http://www.urbanindia.nic.in/programme/uwss/CSP/Draft_CSPper cent5CPune_CSP.
pdf last accessed on March 18, 2014
5 Environmental Status Report 2012-13, PImpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation. http://www.pcmcindia.gov.in/pdf/
esr_eng_2013.pdf last accessed on 14th March 2014
98
al
ion
tio
Na
Lo
ca
l/R
eg
na
lN
ew
s
pa
pe
rs
Ne
ws
pa
pe
rs
Te
lev
isi
on
Int
er
Se
ne
mi
t
na
Ma
rs
ga
an
z
ine
dp
s
Re
ro
gr
se
a
ar
m
ch
Sc
me
ho
Pu
s
ol/
bli
ca
Co
t
lle
ion
ge
s
Inf
cu
or
rri
ma
cu
lc
lum
on
ve
r sa
tio
ns
educated upto primary school (40%) than those with and undergraduate or above degree (25%)
found water quality to have improved. However, a high percentage of respondents from primary
education group found air quality to have deteriorated.
More than 90% of the respondents in the city thought that climate change or global warming
was occurring. When asked about their perception on the changes in different climatic variables,
68% stated that temperatures were rising with another 12% pointing out extreme patterns in
temperature (Figure 10.3). Similarly, 50% reported a decline in rainfall in the city over the years.
Around 25% viewed increasing trends in rainfall. Increase in temperature and decline in rainfall
was noted by large proportion of elderly respondents. The views of citizens on wind pattern and
extreme events showed mixed responses.
The survey attempted to assess
Air pollution
the awareness of the citizens about
Water
pollution
government policies addressing various
Water supply
environmental concerns and found that
Groundwater usage
the awareness level was fairly high
Water conservation
with a large proportion of respondents
Waste management
expressing some or the other opinion
Forest conservation
on policies (for all areas except climate
Climate change
change and air pollution) (Figure 10.4).
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Awareness seemed to increase with the
No Govt. policy exist
Policy exists and well Implemented
Policy exist, but not implemented
Policy exist but, inadequate
level of education. Interestingly, the
Don't
know
majority opinion on policies was that
the policies are well implemented for
Figure 10.4: Awareness about government policies addressing
all areas of concern except for climate
change. A significant proportion of the
respondents (around one-fourth) in the city viewed that the policies for conservation of forest,
waste management, water supply, and ground water usage were not implemented. Similarly,
around one-fifth of the respondents were of the view that the policies to address the problems like
water pollution, water supply, ground water usage, waste management, and climate change were
inadequate. The awareness varied marginally across the educational qualification categories and
residential location of the respondents.
As sources of information on environment-related issues are concerned, television and local
newspapers were ranked as the two most important sources by most respondents followed by
national newspapers and the internet
70
60
59
(Figure 10.5). Research publication,
60
50
seminars and conferences and school
40
curriculums were found to be sources
30
24
24
20
of information for the least number of
10
3
3
2
respondents. Television and regional
1
1
0
newspapers were the major sources of
information across all socio-economic
groups whereas national newspapers
and internet were chosen mostly by
respondents living in high-income localities
and with higher educational qualification. Figure 10.5: Sources of information on environmental issues
99
Pune
When asked to rank different
Rank 5
stakeholders in terms of their efforts in
improving environment in the city (with
Rank 4
Rank 1 to be assigned to ones making
Rank 3
the greatest efforts and Rank 5 to ones
Rank 2
with least effort), government agencies
that includes central, state and municipal
Rank 1
were accorded Rank 1 by almost 49% of
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
the respondents followed by individual
Government
Business
Consumers
Non-Profit Organisations
citizens (26%) and academic and research
Academic/Res earch Institutions
institutions (14%). As is evident from
Figure 10.6, non-profit organizations and Figure 10.6: Ranking of the stakeholder groups working towards
businesses were given Rank 1 by the least
number of respondents, 5% and 7% respectively. In Rank 2, government and business figured
prominently as stated by 23% respondents each, followed by academic and research institutions
(21%). Non-profit organizations and academic/research institutions were favoured in Rank 4 and
Rank 5, respectively, by the largest number of respondents.
The survey made an attempt to
0.4%
gauge the opinion of citizens on the
1.5%
environment versus development debate
Yes, Govt should prioritize
Development
by asking them whether they think
Yes, Govt should prioritize
protecting environment is against the
Enviornmenal Protection
37.3%
No, development and
objective of development. Around 98% of
44.2%
enviornmental protection go
the respondents expressed their opinion
hand in hand
Can't say
on this with 44% stating that there was
Don't Know
no conflict between these two objectives
16.6%
and both should go hand in hand (Figure
10.7). However, 54% respondent viewed
that environmental protection and Figure 10.7: Perception about the environment-development debate
development should be treated differently with 37% favouring prioritization of development
and 17% favouring prioritization of environmental protection over developmental objectives. The
opinion varied across the educational qualification and occupational categories. A large proportion
of respondents in the category of undergraduate and above educational qualification opined that the
government should prioritize environment over development. A higher proportion of respondents
in regular private salaried occupation
category viewed that development and
environmental protection went hand
23.0%
(asthma, lung cancer, etc)
in hand.
37.3%
0.2%
The finding of the survey suggested
(diarrhoea, etc)
that the citizens were well aware of the
Skin diseases (allergies, etc.)
14.6%
health impacts of environmental quality
Others (Pls Specify)
with 88% respondents making this
All
25.0%
linkage. When asked about the instances
of health problems associated with
poor environmental quality, respiratory Figure 10.8: Perception on health impacts of environmental pollution
100

illnesses were viewed by 37%, water-borne diseases by 25%, and skin diseases by 15% whereas
23% felt that environmental pollution caused all these diseases (see Figure 10.8).
Air quality, among other environmental problems in the city, was perceived to have had the
most visible impact on peoples health as stated by 64% of the respondents followed by problems
due to waste and water quality as reported by 24% and 12% of the respondents, respectively. It is
worth mentioning here that a very large number of the respondents (43%) viewed that air quality
in the city had worsened over last five years.
10.4.2 Water
The survey tried to understand the views
0.45
41.45
39.08
of the citizens on the major causes of
0.4
35.05
34.10
0.35
wastage of water in the city and responses
0.3
are presented in Figure 10.9. The results
0.25
0.2
found that 41% of the respondents
12.97
0.15
0.1
felt that it was the use pattern of the
0.05
individual consumers that cause wastage.
0
Leakages from Leakages
Too much Water is not I dont know
The other sources of wastage as viewed
taps/faucets in during
water used being wasted
by the respondents were leakage during
your house distribution where less is
(from
required by us
distribution (39%) and leakage from taps
municipalities, as consumers
tankers, etc. to
and faucets in the house (34%). However,
your house)
Figure
10.9:
Major
reasons
for wastage of water: respondents
more than two-third of the respondents
could
choose
multiple
options
as reasons
viewed that water was not being wasted.
Around 63% of the respondents were aware that the government subsidizes water charges
that citizens pay and the remaining 37% expressed their ignorance on this issue. The awareness
level varied across the socio-economic characteristics such as age, education, and localities of the
respondents. A large proportion of respondents from middle- and high-income localities (73%
and 74% respectively) were found to be aware of this when compared low-income localities (51%).
Similarly, the awareness level was found to be more with increased age (55% for the age group
18-25 and 85% for age group 65 and above) and educational qualification (58% for respondents
educated up to primary and 72% for undergraduates and above) of respondents.
An attempt was made to understand the opinion of the citizens towards charging the actual
cost of water to discourage its wastage. Those who were aware of the government subsidy on water
charges were asked whether people should pay the actual cost. Around 57% respondents viewed
that they should pay the actual cost whereas
39% were not in favour of paying the actual cost
3.7%
(Figure 10.10). Interestingly, higher proportion of
respondents from high-income localities (41%)
Yes
did not favour paying the actual cost when
38.6%
No
compared with middle- and low-income (35%
57.6%
and 34% respectively). While 46% of the primary
Can't say
and middle school educated respondents felt that
citizens should pay the actual price of water, only
26 % of the respondents who were undergraduates
or above had a similar opinion.
Figure 10.10: Willingness to pay the actual cost of water
101
Pune
1
31.
25
The two municipal corporations in the city have different billing mechanisms for water
charges. The water charges in PMC are linked to the property tax6 whereas in PCMC it is
based on consumption volumes, which are metered.7 When asked about the preferred billing
mechanism, 61% of respondents favoured metered consumption charges, 31% preferred fixed
charges/flat rates, and 4% favoured slab
-wise volumetric consumption rates (low
7.5
2.6
rate up to a level and higher rate beyond
10.1
an amount of water consumption). The
Fixed Charges/Flat Rates
views varied across the respondents from
Metered/Consumption Based
two municipal corporations with 64% and
PM
Slabwise Rates
57% preferring metered consumption in
64 C,
.0
PMC and PCMC, respectively. Around 10%
respondents in PMC preferred slab-wise
rates, whereas in PCMC 3% respondents The inner circle in the doughnut represents responses in PMC, middle circle
preferred the same. The responses on the represents responses in PCMC and the outer circle represents aggregate
response.
preferred water billing mode is presented in
Figure 10.11.
Figure 10.11: Preferred water billing mode
Almost 98% of the respondents reported
to be dependent upon municipal supply for drinking water and 60% treated this water at home to
make it safer for drinking purposes. When asked about the treating methods, 50% used Reverse
Osmosis (RO) and 46% resorted to boiling water to make it safer to drink.
The survey attempted to understand the perception of the citizens about the importance of
different water conservation measures and
the responses are presented in Figure 10.12. creating awareness and
educating citizens
Residential water conservation measures were
residential water
perceived to be very important by 37% of the
conservation
respondents with another 29% consider this
improving waste
water treatment
as important. Similarly, creating awareness
about the water conservation was considered
rainwater
harvesting
very important by 35% of the respondents
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
and important by 45% of the respondents.
Not Important
No Opinion
Somewhat Important
Rainwater harvesting was viewed as a very
Important
Very Important
important measure by 33 respondents and
important by 41% while 16% respondents Figure 10.12: Importance of different measures for
conservation of water
considered this as not important.
When asked about the opinion of the citizens on the role of different stakeholders in
protecting the water resources in the city, municipal corporations were considered to be fulfilling
their responsibility very well by 51% of the respondents with another 22% respondents rating
municipal corporations performance as moderately well. However, around 14% opined
that municipal corporations fulfilled its responsibility somewhat poorly and 7% very poorly,
respectively. The state government was rated very well by 20% respondents and moderately well
by 51% respondents whereas 15% rated it somewhat poorly or very poorly. Similarly, the central
40.7
.8
.7
, 56 61.4
PMC
C,
PM
6 http://www.indiaurbanportal.in/bestpractices/bestpractices42/bestpractices420.pdf last accessed on 1st April 2014

7 Information obtained from municipal corporation officials
102

government, individual citizens, and NGOs were rated with mixed response. More men (23%)
than women (13%) thought that NGOs were doing very well in terms of their environmental
responsibility.
103
already
seggregating
waste can be
composted
good for
environment
waste not collected

separately
its not my
responsibility
requires
more space
its cumbersome
Only 17.5% of the respondents stated that

0.2% 0.4%
garbage was collected from their house with
4.7% 5.0%
remaining 82.5% said they took the garbage to a
Organic waste
central point for disposal. As the composition of
Paper waste
the household garbage is concerned, 90% of the
Plastic
household viewed that organic waste constituted
the major component of their household garbage
Electonic waste
(Figure 10.13).
Cloth waste
89.7%
The survey also explored the opinion of the
citizens on different strategies to manage the
problem of solid waste. Segregation of waste
Figure 10.13: Major components of the households waste
was considered the best strategy to address the
problem of solid waste in the city by 46% of the respondents whereas another 44% emphasized
upon generating less waste in households as the best strategy. This apart, 8% of the respondents
stated improving the waste recycling capacity was the best strategy and only around 3% considered
levying user charges on the volume of waste disposed as the best strategy to manage waste in city.
The citizens were asked their perception on health impacts of improper solid waste
management. Almost 31% of the respondents felt it had several impacts on health with another
51% stating moderate impacts.
Segregation of waste was viewed as a strategy for the management of waste by a very large
percentage of respondents. Both PMC and PCMC have initiated some measures to promote
segregation at the household level. However, when asked about whether they were willing to
segregate their household waste to biodegradable and otherwise before disposing it, only 42%
of the households expressed their willingness to do so. Of those respondents who expressed
their willingness to segregate, 31% were already doing it whereas 22% thought that segregation
was good for environment and the rest 47% felt that once segregated, biodegradable waste could
be used to make compost. Of those who
were not willing to segregate household 60% 58% not willing to segregate waste 42% willing to segregate waste
48.12
47.71
waste, 48% thought it was the responsibility 50%
of the municipal corporation to do so. 24% 40%
30.56
21.73
found it cumbersome to separate waste, 21 30% 24.46 21.13
20%
felt segregation required more space and 10%
6.30
6% respondents opined that segregation at
0%
household level did not make sense as the
municipal corporation was not collecting it
separately (Figure 10.14).
The opinion of the citizens on the waste
management fee structure was found to be
mixed with 47% of the respondents favouring Figure 10.14: Willingness for segregation of household waste
Ca
r
db
oa
No
ne
Do
n'
tk
no
w
Me
ta
llic
ite
ms
G
r
di
Pa
las
nc
pe
s
ite
lud
r, m
ms
ing
ag
az
tet
ine
ra
sa
pa
ck
nd
s
ne
Br
w
s
ok
p
ap
en
Ele
er
fur
s
ctr
nit
o
nic
ur
e/
wa
ho
s te
us
eh
old
ite
ms
a fee that varies with the amount of waste

80.00%
71.31%
generated whereas 43% preferring a lump
70.00%
60.00%
sum fee that is same for all households.
50.00%
Around 10% respondents did not have any
40.00%
32.79%
30.39%
opinion on the fee structure.
30.00%
18.27%
20.00%
The survey asked the citizens about
11.20%
7.77%
10.00%
3.99%
0.64%
items that the household typically sold or
0.00%
sent for recycling or reuse to understand
their approach towards recycling. Paper,
magazines, and newspapers were the most
commonly items sold followed by broken
furniture, glass items, metallic items, waste,
and cardboards (Figure 10.15).
When asked on awareness about the Figure 10.15: Items that the households sell/send for
problems associated with electronic waste recycling or reuse
and their disposal in the city, 71% of the
respondents reported to be aware of the same.
The survey also asked the respondents about
household
appliances
what they do with their household e-waste and
the respondents (Figure 10.16). Concerning
Small It and
household electronic appliances such as
Telecom products
television, refrigerator, air conditioners, 61%
Sized IT &Telecom
of the household got such devices repaired,
products
19% sold these in the second hand market,
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
and 12% gave these away. When it came to
Throw with household garbage
Give it away
Store It
sized IT and telecom electronics items such
Get it repaired
Sell It in 2nd hand mkt
as computers, cell phone, laptops, personal
stereos, etc., around 60% of the respondents
Figure 10.16: What people do with their household e-waste
repaired and reused these, 18% sold these
in the second-hand market, and 11% give
1.5% 1.3%
these away. Small IT and telecom electronics
Charge Deposit/Fees on
gadgets such as printers, toner cartridges,
10.5%
Recyclable items
pen drives, CDs, etc., were reportedly thrown
Pick Up recyclabes from
29.4%
away with garbage by 13% respondents and
Curb Side
Law Requiring Recycling
repaired and reused by 33% of respondents.
Periodic revision in prices
37.3%
When asked about the views of the
of recyclable products
citizens on the strategies that can promote
Creating Awareness
8.4%
more Convenient Centers
recycling/reuse, the largest proportion (37%)
11.6%
as recycling centers
felt that provision to pick up recyclables from
curb side would help followed by 29% who
Figure 10.17: Measure to promote recycling/reuse
favoured awareness creation (Figure 10.17).
More than half of the respondents were of the opinion that individuals/households had the
greatest responsibility in disposing the solid waste in city and 37% of the respondents consider
the municipal corporation or other government agencies to have the greatest responsibility
(Figure 10.18). Around 10% opined that all the stakeholders have roles in managing the solid

waste. The responses varied with the age,
0.2%
gender, and educational qualification of
Individual/Households
2.2% 10.0%
the respondents with larger percentage of
younger respondents (less than 34 years) and
Municipality
male respondents preferring greater role for
Private Companies
50.5%
private companies. The respondents from
37.1%
higher educational qualification category
All of Above
(undergraduate and above) preferred a
greater role for municipalities in the disposal
Don't Know
of solid waste.
The survey also attempted to gauge the Figure 10.18: Greatest responsibility for the disposal of solid waste
opinion of the citizens on banning plastic
bags. It was found that 79% of the respondents were in favour of a complete ban on plastic bags
in the city.
105
11
Comparative analysis across Cities
n this chapter, we bring together key results from the eight cities in a comparative assessment.
Bearing in mind the limitations posed by the sample size, this analysis allows us to make some
overall deductions about differences in perceptions, awareness, and opinions on various
environmental issues, with a focus on issues of waste and water, across the cities covered in
the survey.
11.1 Overall Environment

Considering the first responses on perceptions around changes in key environmental indicators,
Figure 11.1 plots, for each city, the
Indore
difference between the proportion of
80
respondents who reported a worsening
of environmental quality and those who
40
Jamshedpur
Mumbai
reported an improvement. The grey
0
area (above zero on the axis) represents
a higher relative share of those who
-40
perceived deterioration in environmental
quality, while the green area (below
Delhi
Kanpur
-80
zero on the axis) represents a higher
relative share of those who perceived an
improvement. As can be seen from the
Figure 11.1, among the selected cities, this
difference was much higher for Guwahati
Pune
Guwahati
and Jamshedpur across environmental
parameters. On the other hand, in
Coimbatore
Air
Coimbatore and Pune, an equal or higher
Drinking water quality
proportion of respondents reported an
Drinking water availability
Surface water quality and availability (lakes, rivers, ponds, etc.)
improvement across most environmental
Ground water availability(change in groundwater level)
Tree cover/green cover in your area (forest cover, parks, open spaces, etc.)
parameters. A notable exception is air
Number of bird species in your city (ex. sparrows, butterflies, etc.)
Waste and waste management (garbage collection, treatment, dumping, etc.)
quality where a much higher proportion
of respondents perceived deterioration
The axis represents the difference between the proportion of respondents who
perceived deterioration and improvement, respectively in the indicator . Thus, a
than improvement across cities. The state
positive number (area shaded in grey) represents a higher relative share of those
of green cover and birds was also reported
who perceived deterioration in environmental quality, while a negative number
to have worsened by the majority in all
(area shaded in green) represents a higher relative share of those who perceived an
improvement. For each indicator, the more widespread the perception of deterioration
cities except Coimbatore and Pune where
in environmental quality relative to an improvement, the further up the plot from zero.
it was perceived to have improved. Going
by this survey, among environmental Figure 11.1 Perception of change in environmental quality
107
Comparative analysis across cities

parameters, more respondents perceived
Is climate change or global warming occurring
an improvement than deterioration in the
81.6
Mumbai
case of drinking water quality (except
91.0
Delhi
in Guwahati) and availability (except
90.3
Pune
in Indore and Guwahati). The inter-city
98.8
Coimbatore
picture on surface and ground water as well
89.1
Guwahati
as waste management was more mixed.
90.7
Kanpur
On the question of climate change, a
98.1
Jamshedpur
majority of the respondents across cities
Indore
86.6
felt that global warming was occurring
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
(Figure 11.2). On specific climatic
Yes
No
May be
Can't Say
variables (Figures 11.3), the majority
of respondents in all cities felt that Figure 11.2: Perception on climate change
temperature had increased, while rainfall
had decreased (except in Indore where
Temperature
Rainfall
people felt that rainfall had increased). In
Indore
Indore
Indore, Jamshedpur, Coimbatore, Pune,
100
100
Jamshedpur Mumbai
Jamshedpur
80
Mumbai
Delhi, and Mumbai, most respondents
60
50
40
felt that the number of windy days had
20
shown a decreasing pattern, while in
0
0
Delhi
Kanpur Delhi
Kanpur
Kanpur and Guwahati most felt that the
pattern had become more extreme. In the
Pune
Guwahati
Pune
Guwahati
case of intensity and frequency of extreme
Coimbatore
Coimbatore
events, views were more mixed and many
Wind pattern
respondents across cities said they didnt
Indore
know which way the trends were going.
100
Jamshedpur
80
Mumbai
The survey asked people about their
60
40
awareness regarding government policies
20
Delhi
Kanpur
0
related to the environment and their
perception on the adequacy and efficiency
Pune
Guwahati
in implementation of such policies.
Figure 11.4 presents the proportion of
Coimbatore
respondents who chose one or the other
Increase
Decrease
Extreme Patterns
of three options: policies do not exist;
Axes represent proportion of respondents
exist and are well implemented; exist but
are inadequate/not well implemented. Figure 11.3: Perceptions on changes in climatic variables
By and large, people were aware of the
policies but were concerned about their adequacy and level of implementation (as evident from
the red octagon being the outermost for most parameters). There were some exceptions as well. In
Jamshedpur, the majority felt that there were no policies for air pollution and a significant number
(about 20% or more) felt that there were no policies to address water conservation and pollution,
waste management, and climate change. Likewise, a majority in Indore felt that no policies
existed for groundwater use and climate change. The majority of respondents in Coimbatore
and Pune seemed satisfied with the implementation of policies on waste management, air, and
water pollution. Though not shown in Figure 11.4, respondents had an additional `dont know
option. The results show that in general more people from Guwahati used the dont know option
as compared to other cities. Also, the maximum number of dont know responses was elicited
108
80.00
Mumbai 60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
Delhi
80.00
Mumbai 60.00
40.00
20.00
Kanpur Delhi
0.00
Jamshedpur

Pune
Guwahati
Pune
Pune
Guwahati
Pune
Water supply
Indore
80.00
Jamshedpur Mumbai
Mumbai 60.00
40.00
20.00
Kanpur Delhi
0.00
Delhi
Pune
Guwahati
Guwahati
Pune
Coimbatore
Guwahati
Pune
Forest conservation
Indore
100.00
Jamshedpur Mumbai
Mumbai 80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
Kanpur Delhi
0.00
Delhi
Pune
Guwahati
Guwahati
Coimbatore
Coimbatore
Waste management
Indore
80.00
60.00
Jamshedpur
Jamshedpur Mumbai 60.00
Mumbai 50.00
Figure 11.4:40.00
Awareness and perception40.00
on environmental policies
30.00
20.00
20.00
10.00
Kanpur
0.00 and Kanpur
Delhi
on Delhi
policies0.00for water
conservation
Guwahati
Coimbatore
Coimbatore
Groundwater
Indore
80.00
Jamshedpur
60.00
40.00
20.00
Kanpur
0.00
Guwahati
Waste management
Water conservation
Indore
Indore
80.00
60.00
Jamshedpur
Jamshedpur
Mumbai 60.00
Mumbai 50.00
40.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
20.00
10.00
Kanpur
Kanpur Delhi
0.00
Delhi
0.00
Coimbatore
Coimbatore
Pune
Water pollution
Indore
80.00
Jamshedpur
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
Kanpur
Kanpur
Coimbatore
Coimbatore
Air pollution
Indore
80.00
Jamshedpur Mumbai
Mumbai 60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
Kanpur Delhi
Delhi
Jamshedpur
Climate change
Indore
60.00
Jamshedpur
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
Kanpur
0.00
Pune
Guwahati
Coimbatore
Not exist
Exist and well implemented
Exist but not implemented/inadequate
Water conservation
Axes representIndore
proportion of respondents
Indore
4.25
climate change.
Mumbai
Jamshedpur
3.75
Pune to rankGuwahati
Pune
Guwahati
Respondents
were asked
3.25
Government
Coimbatore
2.75
different stakeholders
for their Coimbatore
roles in
Business
2.25
Forest conservation
Climate change
environmental
1 to 5,
Consumers
Kanpur
Delhi
Indore management fromIndore
1.75
100.00
60.00 5 the
NGOs
withMumbai
Rank
1
being
the
best
and
Rank
Jamshedpur Mumbai 50.00
Jamshedpur
80.00
40.00
Academic
60.00 11.5 gives the average
worst. Figure
30.00 rank
40.00
Institutions
20.00
20.00respondents in a city
10.00
given
by
all
to
each
Pune
Guwahati
Kanpur Delhi
Kanpur
0.00
0.00
Delhi
stakeholder weighted by the proportion
Coimbatore
Axes represent average rank
of respondents
that
each rank.Guwahati
Pune
GuwahatigavePune
Though the
responses varied byCoimbatore
city, in Figure 11.5: Aggregate (weighted) ranking of different
Coimbatore
stakeholders in environmental responsibility
general it may Not
beexistsaid that
respondents
Exist and
well implemented
Exist but
implemented/inadequate
seemed to give
a not
higher
rank to the
Environment-development
government (except in Jamshedpur)
Mumbai
and consumers (except in Kanpur and
Delhi
Delhi), an intermediate rank to NGOs
Pune
(except in Indore and Pune, where
Coimbatore
they were given a low rank), and a low
Guwahati
rank to business (except in Coimbatore
Kanpur
where 36% gave it Rank 2) and
Jamshedpur
academic institutes (except in Kanpur,
Indore
where over 50% gave them Rank 2).
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
On the issue of trade-offs between
go hand in hand
Don't Know/Can't Say
environment and development, the
majority of the respondents either felt Figure 11.6: Perceptions on the trade-offs between
that the two went hand-in-hand (in Pune, environmental protection and development
109

Coimbatore and Guwahati) or that the environment should be prioritized over development
(Mumbai, Delhi, Kanpur, Indore). However, it should be noted that about 25% of the respondents
in some cities (Mumbai and Delhi) and a higher share in others (Pune, Jamshedpur) felt that
development should be prioritized over the environment (Figure 11.6).
An overwhelming majority across cities concurred that environmental quality had affected
their health.
11.2 Water
Awarenss of water subsidy

Mumbai
Majority of respondents in all cities, except

Delhi
Coimbatore, were aware that the water
Pune
Coimbatore
price charged to them was subsidized
Guwahati
by the government (Figure 11.7). Many
Kanpur
respondents in Mumbai, Pune, Guwahati,
Jamshedpur
and a majority in Coimbatore had no
Indore
knowledge about the subsidy. However,
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
only in Indore, Kanpur, Guwahati, Pune,
Yes
No
Don't know
and Mumbai, respondents felt that the
consumers should pay the actual cost of Figure11.7: Awareness regarding subsidy in water tariffs
water (Figure 11.8). In Delhi, Coimbatore,
Should we pay actual cost of water that reflects the
and Jamshedpur, majority felt that water
scarcity value of water and discouragewasage?
should be subsidized. When asked to
Mumbai
choose the ideal billing system (from
Delhi
Pune
fixed charges, metered supply, and
Coimbatore
consumption-slab based rates) for water
Guwahati
supply to households, opinion was
Kanpur
divided in Guwahati and Mumbai, while
Jamshedpur
respondents in Indore and Coimbatore
Indore
mostly preferred fixed charges and those
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
in Jamshedpur, Pune, and Delhi chose
Yes
No
Cant Say
metered billing based on consumption
Figure 11.8 Views on whether water tariffs should be based on
(Figure 11.9).
Respondents were also asked to cost of supply
rate different measures for protecting
What is the best / ideal billing mechanism?
water resources. In most cities, except
Mumbai
Indore, people rated awareness creation
Delhi
and residential water conservation as
Pune
importantvery important. Improving
Coimbatore
waste water treatment was cited as an
Guwahati
Kanpur
importantvery important action in all
cities by a large number of respondents Jamshedpur
Indore
except in Indore and Jamshedpur, where
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
it was rated as a somewhat important
Fixed Charges
Metered/Consumption
action by most. Similarly, majority of
respondents in all cities, except in Indore,
Figure 11.9 Preferred billing mechanism
110

rated rain water harvesting as an important action in protecting water resources. In Indore, most
of those surveyed felt that rain-water harvesting was not important.
Citizens of the eight cities were asked to rate different stakeholder groups according to
their performance in discharging their
responsibilities for protecting water
Indore
resources in their community. Figure
80
11.10 plots, for each city, the difference
40
Jamshedpur
Mumbai
Central government
between the proportion of respondents
0
who rated a stakeholder as performing
State government
-40
moderatelyvery
well
and
the
Kanpur
Local government
Delhi
-80
proportion of those who gave a rating
Individuals
of somewhatvery poor. It may be seen
NGOs
that majority people were satisfied
Guwahati
Pune
with most stakeholders. The important
exception is Kanpur, where the majority
Coimbatore
was dissatisfied with the stakeholders
The axis represents the difference between the proportion of respondents who rated
a stakeholder as performing moderatelyvery well and those who gave a rating of
except the state government. Also, in
somewhatvery poor. Thus, a positive number (area shaded in grey) represents a
Jamshedpur, a large majority appeared
higher share of respondents who gave a poor ranking, while a negative number (area
shaded in green) represents a higher relative share of those who gave a good ranking.
dissatisfied with the central and state
For each stakeholder, the larger the relative proportion of respondents who gave a poor
governments, while in Delhi a small
ranking, the further up the plot from zero.
majority was dissatisfied with the central
and local governments. Not shown in Figure 11.10: Perceptions about performance of stakeholders
the graph, a significant proportion of in water management: difference between the proportion of
people in Guwahati, Jamshedpur, and respondents who reported moderatelyvery well and those who
Coimbatore were unaware about the reported somewhatvery poor when asked about the performance
of different stakeholders
work done by NGOs.
11.3 Waste and Waste Management

Management of solid waste and e-waste is one of the most challenging tasks in urban India.
Respondents across the surveyed cities were asked a number of questions related to waste and
waste management as a part of this survey. When asked about the linkage with health, in all
cities, except Pune, majority of the respondents said that improper waste management had
severe impacts on health, while in Pune most of the surveyed citizens felt that the impacts were
moderately severe.
Proper collection of waste constitutes the basis of waste management, so citizens were asked
whether or not waste was being collected from their doorsteps. While the majority in Kanpur,
Guwahati, Coimbatore, Delhi, and Mumbai said that it was being collected, the majority in Indore,
Jamshedpur, and Pune reported that this was not the case. Citizens were asked their views on the
best strategy to manage solid waste. Most of the respondents in Jamshedpur, Kanpur, Coimbatore,
and Delhi felt that it was best to generate less waste at the household level, while majority of the
respondents in Guwahati, Pune, and Mumbai opted for segregation of waste as the ideal strategy.
Majority of the respondents in Indore chose improvements in waste recycling capacity as the
best strategy.
111

On their willingness to segregate waste
Are you willing to segregate?
at the household level, majority of
Mumbai
respondents in Kanpur, Guwahati,
Delhi
Coimbatore, and Mumbai said they were
Pune
willing to do so, while in the remaining
Coimbatore
four cities most respondents said they
Guwahati
were not (Figure 11.11).
Kanpur
Jamshedpur
Almost 48% of the respondents in
Indore
Indore felt that waste segregation would
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
be difficult due to requirement of more
NO
YES
space. About one-third of the respondents
in the cities of Jamshedpur and Kanpur Figure 11.11 Willingness to segregate waste
however reported their inability to
segregate since this was cumbersome
Delhi NCR
(Figure 11.12).
50%
Close to two-fifths of the total
Greater
40%
Guwahati
Cumbersome task
Mumbai
respondents in cities, such as Coimbatore,
30%
Guwahati, and Mumbai reported their
20%
Will require more
10%
space to keep two
willingness to segregate waste since this
Indore
Pune
separate bins
0%
was good for the environment (Figure
11.13). A number of respondents in
It is the local civic
authority's/municipal
several cities (as high as 34% in Kanpur)
corporation's
Jamshedpur
Kanpur
reported that they already segregate
repsonsibility
wastes in their houses.
Coimbatore
People were also asked about
their preferred option for payment for
waste management services. Opinion Figure 11.12 Percentage breakup of respondents response to
reasons for not segregating waste
was divided between volume-based
charges and fixed charges. In Guwahati
Delhi NCR
and
Indore, a large majority opted
50%
It is good for the
Greater
for
volumetric-charges,
while
in
environment
Mumbai
40%
Guwahati
Jamshedpur, Kanpur, and Coimbatore
30%
a large majority chose fixed fees as the
20%
I can use the
10%
ideal billing mechanism.
biodegradable
Pune
Indore
0%
Most respondents across cities were
wastes to compost
aware of the hazards posed by e-waste.
I already segregate
Across cities, such waste was largely
the wastes
Jamshedpur
Kanpur
being repaired and re-used (by self
generated at home
or given away to others for use) or
Coimbatore
sold in the second-hand market. With
regard to small IT products, such as
toners, cartridges, pen drives, etc., in Figure 11.13 Percentage break-up of respondents response to
reasons for segregating waste
most cities only a small proportion of
respondents (ranging between 0.1% and 4.3% of the city sample sizes) disposed of these items
along with their garbage. However, in Indore and Pune, almost 14% and 20% of the respondents
112

surveyed respectively reported that they disposed of small, sized IT products along with
their garbage.
The survey also sought the views of people on ways to encourage recycling. Majority of
respondents in Kanpur and Delhi felt that charging deposit fee on recyclable items and picking
up of recyclables from curbside would be a way. For, majority of respondents from Jamshedpur,
Guwahati, Coimbatore, and Mumbai, awareness creation was the favourite choice, while many in
Indore and Mumbai felt the need for a law requiring recycling. Citizens were also asked who they
felt had the greatest responsibility in managing the citys garbage. A large majority of respondents
in Jamshedpur, Kanpur, and Coimbatore felt that municipality and other government agencies
had the greatest responsibility, while in Pune and Mumbai most respondents felt that individual
citizens and households had the greatest responsibility. In Indore, most people felt that private
companies should bear the largest onus for waste management. In Guwahati and Delhi, most
respondents felt that each stakeholder had an equal responsibility towards managing the citys
solid waste.
Majority respondents across cities favoured a complete ban on polythene bags. However,
most of the respondents from low-income localities in Kanpur were against this measure.
113
12
Questionnaire
Appendix 1: Questionnaire1
Citizens Survey
Final Survey Questionnaire

Hello, my name is ______________ from the public opinion research firm of ICRB Consulting.
In collaboration with The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), we are conducting a survey of
peoples views/perceptions, behaviour, opinion, and awareness about important issues faced
by them 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 8 cities in India. Shall we begin
the survey?
Background Information
A. 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. High-income localities
D. City
i.
National Capital Region
ii.
Greater Mumbai
iii.
Indore
iv.
Jamshedpur
v.
Coimbatore
1 Translations of the questionnaire in other languages used for the survey are available on request
115
Questionnaire
vi.
vii.
viii.
Kanpur
Pune
Guwahati
E. Age group
i.
824 years
ii.
2534 years
iii.
3544 years
iv.
4554 years
v.
5564 years
vi.
Above 65 years
F. Gender
i.
Female
ii.
Male
iii.
Others
G. Education
i.
Up to Primary School (till Class V)
ii.
Middle and Secondary (Class X)
iii.
Higher Secondary (Class XII) or Diploma
iv.
v.
H. Occupation
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
Student
vi.
Housewife
vii.
Unemployed
viii.
Retired
I. Annual household income
i.
Upto 1 Lakh
ii.
1 to 3 Lakhs
iii.
3 to 5 Lakhs
iv.
5 to 10 Lakhs
v.
10 to 20 Lakhs
vi.
Greater than 20 Lakhs
vii.
No response
J. How long have you been living in the city?
i.
Upto 1 year
ii.
1-2 years
iii.
2-5 years
iv.
Over 5 years
116
Overall Environment
1. Do you perceive a change in the following indicators for the state of the environmentaround your area over the
last five years (2009 onwards)?
No change
Better
Worse
No direct
experience
Dont know
Air quality (smoke,

smog, particles,
dust, smell)
Drinking water quality
Drinking water
availability
and availability (lakes,
rivers, ponds, etc.)
Ground water
availability(change in
groundwater level)
Tree cover/green cover
in your area (forest
cover, parks, open
spaces, etc.)
Number of bird
species in your city
(ex. sparrows,
butterflies, etc.)
Waste and waste
management (garbage
collection, treatment,
dumping, etc.)
2. a. Do you think climate change or global warming is occurring2? (Surveyors--please give the definition of climate
change and if possible, some examples)
1. Yes
2. No
3. Maybe
4. Cant say
2 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
117
b. What has been the change in the following climatic variables?

Climatic variable
Increase
Decrease
Extreme
patterns
No change at all Dont know
Temperature
Precipitation/rainfall
Wind pattern
Intensity of extreme events
(floods, drought, storms, etc.)
Frequency of extreme events
(floods, drought, storms, etc.)
3. Are you aware of any government policies that address the following environmental concerns?
No government
policies exist
Yes, government policies exist

And are well
implemented
But, are not

implemented
Dont know
But, are
inadequate
Air pollution
Water pollution
including wastewater
treatment
Water supply
Groundwater usage
Water conservation
(rainwater harvesting
in buildings, wastewater
usage for horticulture
etc.)
Waste management
Forest conservation
Climate change
4. Which are the two most important sources of information on environment related issues for you? (Surveyors--Do
not prompt unless they want options)
Source of information
National newspapers
Local/regional newspapers
Television
Internet
Magazines
Seminars and programmes
Is the information provided by the

source adequate? (Yes/No)

Research publications
School/college curriculum
Informal conversations
Any other source, please specify
I dont have any information
5. Assign rank (1-5) to the following groups in their efforts to help improve the environment (Rank 1 is for the
greatest efforts and rank 5 is for the least efforts).
Stakeholder group
Ranking
Government (Central, State, Municipal Corporation)

Businesses
Non-profit organizations
Academic institutions/Research organizations.
6. 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.)?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Yes, they should be treated differently and the government should prioritize development
Yes, they should be treated differently and the government should prioritize environmental protection
No, environment protection and development go hand in hand
Cant say
Dont know
Any other, please specify
7. Health and Environment

1. Do you think that the quality of the environment has an immediate impact on our health?

a)
Yes
b)
No
(If the option is Yes, then move to question 7b, If the option is No, then move to question 8)
2. Which of the following instances of health problems can be attributed to poor environmental quality?
1. Respiratory illnesses (asthma, lung cancer, etc.)
2. Water-borne diseases (diarrhoea, etc.)
3. Skin diseases (allergies, etc.)
4. Others, please specify
5. All
6. None
3. Which environmental problem do you think has had the most visible impact on peoples health (identify only
one option-most visible)
1. Air quality
2. Water quality
3. Waste
4. No problem
119
Questionnaire
Water
8. What are the major causes of wastage of water in your city (please choose all that apply)?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
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
Water is not being wasted
I dont know
Others, please specify______________
9. a. Are you aware that the price of water charged to users is subsidized?
Reason/explanation for your choice
Yes
No
Dont Know
b. If yes, alignment do you think we should pay the actual cost of water that reflects the scarcity value of water and
discourage wastage? (Surveyors could elaborate as--should water be more expensive if it is scarce and/or is
being wasted)
1. Yes, always
2. No
3. Cant say
4. Others, (please specify)
10. What is the best/ideal billing mechanism that can be used to price water supply to households?
1. Fixed charges/flat rates
2. Metered/consumption based
3. Low rate for up to a level and higher rate beyond an amount of

water consumption/slab wise
4. Others, please specify _ _____________
11. a. What is the source of drinking water at your house?

1. Municipal supply
2. Groundwater/bore well supply
3. Packaged/bottled/mineral water
4. Others ( please specify)
b. Do you treat your water in any way to make it safer to drink?
1. Yes, always
2. No
3. Sometimes
4. Dont Know
If yes in 11.b , then move to 11.c, otherwise move to Q.12
c. If yes, What do you usually do to make the water safer to drink?(Select all that apply)
1. Boil
2. Add bleach/chlorine
3. Cloth filtration
4. Use a water filter (ceramic, sand, composite, etc.)
5. Let it stand and settle
6. Aquaguard/RO
7. Other (please specify)
8. Do not know
120

12. How important are the following actions in protecting our water resources?
Not important
Somewhat
important
No opinion
Important
Very important
Improving wastewater treatment
Residential water conservation (including
improving home and garden practices)
Creating awareness and educating citizens
Dont know
Other ways, please specify
13. How well do you feel each one of these groups is fulfilling their responsibility for protecting water resources in
your community?
Very well
Moderately well
Dont know/cant say
Somewhat poorly
Very poorly
Central government
State government
Your local
government/
municipal corporation
Individual citizens
NGOs
Solid and electronic waste management
14. Is garbage collected from your house?

Yes
No
Have to take it yourself to a
central point
Burn it
15. What is usually the major component of the garbage that you generate at home?
1.
2.
1.
1.
1.
2.
Organic waste (vegetable/fruit peels, leftover or stale food, horticulture waste etc.)
Paper / paper bags / tetra pack cartons etc.
Plastic and PET bottles (wrappers and plastic bags used to pack food etc.)
Electronic waste (cables and wires, fused lights, used batteries etc.)
Cloth waste (rags, tailoring waste, sacks etc.)
Any other, please specify___________________
16. Are you aware of the problem of electronic waste?

(Surveyors could use the definition to explain- E-waste comprises wastes generated from used electronic devices
and household appliances, which are not fit for their original intended use and are destined for recovery, recycling
or disposal. Such wastes encompasses wide range of electrical and electronic devices, such as computers,
hand held cellular phones, personal stereos, and large household appliances, such as refrigerators, air conditioners etc.)
121
Questionnaire
1. Yes, always
2. No
17. What you do with the following electrical and electronic waste?
Throw it with other Give it away
garbage of the
(for example
household
to Kabadiwala,
maids,
manufacturer,
retailer, etc);
please specify
Store it at
home
Sell it in
Get it repaired
second
and reuse it
hand market
Any other
method
Sized IT & Telecom, such

as computers, hand held
cellular phones, laptops,
personal stereos
Small IT & Telecom,
such as printer/toner
cartridges, pen drives,
CDs
Household appliances,
such as refrigerators, air
conditioners etc
18. According to you, which amongst these is the best strategy to manage the problem of solid waste/garbage?
Choose one option
1. Generate less amount of waste in the house
2. Segregation of waste
3. Improve waste recycling capacity
4. User charges (charges for the amount of waste generated, ex. In

kilograms or the number of bags collected)
5. Others, please specify _____________
6. I dont know
19. What is the degree of negative impacts of improper solid waste (garbage) management on human health
1. Severe
2. Moderate
3. Low
4. No impact
5. I dont know
20. Are you willing to segregate your waste (into biodegradable and non-biodegradable component) before disposing it?
No
Yes
Reasons for No (not willing to segregate)
Reasons for Yes (willingness to segregate)
21. For residential households, do you think waste management fees should be based on how much waste a
household produces, or should all households be charged the same amount?

1. Cost should vary with the amount of waste generated
2. Same fees should be charged to all households
3. Dont know
122

22. What does your household typically sell/send for recycling or re-use? (Select all that apply)
1. Metallic items
2. Glass items
3. Cardboard including tetra packs
4. Paper, magazines, and newspapers
5. Electronic waste
6. Broken furniture/household items
7. None
9. Dont know
23. If you recycle or re-use, why are you doing so?

1. Conserve resources and environmental management
2. Family activity
3. Getting money from selling recyclable products
4. Landfill space is limited
5. Required by law
6. Mandated by the local RWA/society, etc.
8. Dont know
24. How can we promote recycling/re-use?

1. Charge deposit/fee on recyclable items
2. Pick up of recyclables from curb side
3. Law requiring recycling
4. Periodic revision in prices of recyclable products
5. Creating awareness
6. More convenient centres/locations as recycling centres
7. Provide bins for recycling
25. Who do you think should have the greatest responsibility for disposing of citys solid waste and garbage?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Municipality or other government departments/agencies
Private companies
All of the above
Other (if any), please specify________________
Dont know
26. Should the use of polythene bags be banned?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Dont know
123

Environmental Survey Report 14

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Environmental Survey Report 14

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

TERI

The Energy and Resources Institute, 2014

2468 2100 or 2468 2111

2. Aggregate Results from the Survey

11. Comparative analysis across Cities

TERI Environmental Survey 2014

Waste and Waste Management

Cities included in the survey

Aggregate Results from the Survey

Demographic profile of respondents

Demographic profile of respondents

UNDER EMBARGO UNTIL 3rd June 2014 (4 P.M.)

Demographic profile of the respondents

Demographic profile of the respondents

TERI Environmental Survey 2014

Demographic profile of the respondents

Perceived changes in the state of environment in Indore over the

Changes in the climatic variables

Government policies to address different environmental concerns

Different stakeholder groups ranking according to their efforts in

Debate between environment protection and objectives of development

Impact of poor environmental quality on human health

Major reasons for wastage of water in Indore

Readiness to pay actual cost of water

Figure 6.10: Importance of different measures in protecting water resources

Figure 6.11: Strategy to manage waste in city of Indore

Figure 6.12: Reasons for refusing to segregate wastes at household level

Figure 6.13: Measures to promote recycling/re-use

Figure 6.14: Greatest responsibility to manage solid waste/garbage

Figure 6.15: Fate of electrical and electronic waste in city of Indore

Demographic profile of respondents in Jamshedpur

Changes in the climatic variables

Awareness and opinion on government policies to address different

Different stakeholder groups ranking according to their efforts in

Debate between environment protection and objectives of development

Impact of poor environmental quality on human health

Major reasons for wastage of water in Jamshedpur

Willingness to pay actual cost of water

Figure 7.10: Importance of different measures in protecting water resources

Figure 7.11: Strategy to manage waste in city of Jamshedpur

Figure 7.12: Reasons for reluctance to segregate wastes at household level

Figure 7.13: Items sent typically for recycling or re-use

Figure 7.14: Measures to promote recycling/re-use

Figure 7.15: Greatest responsibility to manage solid waste/garbage

Figure 7.16: Fate of electrical and electronic waste in city of Jamshedpur

UNDER EMBARGO UNTIL 3rd June 2014 (4 P.M.)

Demographic profile of the respondents

Demographic profile of respondents in Mumbai

TERI Environmental Survey 2014

Comparative Analysis across Cities

Perception of change in environmental quality

1 http://www.un.org/en/sustainablefuture/cities.shtml (Last accessed on 2 May 2014)

4 http://www.un.org/en/sustainablefuture/cities.shtml (Last accessed on 2 May 2014)

Environment and Development, Annex I. United Nations, New York, 1992.

Introduction and Methodology

About TERIs Environmental Surveys

1.2.1 Selection of Urban Agglomerations

TERI Environmental Survey 2014

accessed on 4 May 2014)

10 http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/prov_results_paper1_india.html (Last accessed on 4 May 2014)

Introduction and Methodology

Population (as per 2011 census)

Sample Size Rounded-off Figures (0.056% of

Coimbatore (Tamil Nadu)