Insights from a Gandhian approach to solid waste management in urban India

Kautilya’s Arthashastra, an ancient Sanskrit treatise, has countless references to fines and regulations intended to maintain civic order: 12 pana for neglecting a field at the time of sawing, 24 pana for selling perishable goods, and so on.

One would think that such strict penalties will be useful for urban solid waste management in India today. But upon looking deeper into the issue, the thinker who comes to mind is not Kautilya, but Mohandas Gandhi.

Consider the difference between the two major government frameworks at the national level on waste management. The Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000, promoted a centralised approach, advocating for large waste collection facilities. Unsurprisingly, this proved unsuccessful and was revoked in 2016.

The Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, instead emphasise decentralisation, encouraging segregation of waste at the source – within households, shops, and institutions. It reflects a crucial truth: involving individuals who generate waste in the management process is essential.

This principle echoes Gandhi’s broader economic and social philosophy. Gandhi believed that the challenges of modernity must be addressed at the individual level. While philosopher Karl Marx and anti-caste icon BR Ambedkar emphasised class or caste or society, Gandhi placed responsibility first and foremost on the individual.

In the case of waste management, this means that solutions start with each person consciously processing or reducing their own waste. Without waste segregation at the source, garbage inevitably ends up in dump yards, where it produces dangerous gases and leachates.

Gandhi himself insisted on the effective use of resources. He was known for reusing even the smallest of scraps – for example, the cover of an inland letter – toward his cause. The modern principles of waste management – reduce, reuse and recycle – fit Gandhi’s philosophy.

Had Gandhi been alive today, he would likely have made urban solid waste generation an immediate public concern, just as he once mobilised millions to wear khadi in response to rural unemployment in India.

The staggering amounts of waste produced everyday in urban centres make his personal practices – such as frugality and dietary restraint in his ashrams – seem remarkably prescient. What once seemed like personal austerity can now be a blueprint for addressing today’s waste crisis.

Caste and welfare

Gandhi recognised the caste dimension of waste in India. Social hierarchies linked dignity with distance from waste: the farther one was from handling it, the higher one’s status. To challenge this mindset, Gandhi cleaned toilets in his ashrams, both in South Africa and India, in a direct confrontation with caste prejudice.

Similarly, for Gandhi, welfare included not only individual satisfaction but also the well-being of animals, rivers, lakes and the environment. This is why he advocated for trusteeship as a form of business ownership: because individuals, acting alone, can easily overlook harms that do not affect them personally. Collective decision-making, Gandhi believed, could reduce such risks – a point echoed in the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016.

Kerala’s slogan “My waste is my responsibility” strikes a Gandhian stance. In today’s democratic framework where rights dominate the public discourse, Gandhi reminds us that duties are equally important.

Economic system of waste

Equally important is Gandhi’s critique of centralised, large-scale industrial and economic systems of production.

In his book Hind Swaraj, published in 1909, Gandhi argued that the harm caused by modern civilisation lay not in the British people but in civilisation’s very nature. For him, mass production lowered prices, but also damaged society and culture.

Modern economists often treat the negative effects of this economic system – such as pollution, toxic emissions, or mountains of plastic – as mere “externalities”, secondary to the supposed benefits of growth. But the term externality itself reveals a troubling bias: it sidelines environmental and social costs while claiming objectivity.

Urban waste, especially plastic pollution in today’s cities, can be seen as a direct outcome of modern production and the economic ideas that bolster it. Merely replacing rulers in the same economic system, Gandhi would argue, is no real solution.

Waste generation is tied to modern centralised production itself, whether under capitalism or state socialism. Both systems normalise large-scale production while ignoring the broader ecological consequences.

Gandhi once called the principle of demand and supply a “devilish law”. Though widely accepted as a reasonable principle, he warned that what is accepted by the majority at one moment may not be wise for all time.

The blind faith in demand and supply underpins the normalisation of harmful practices – such as single-use plastics and nominal fines for air pollution – because as long as demand exists, producers will continue to supply, regardless of the long-term damage. A plastic bag may meet immediate consumer “welfare,” but it will remain in the earth for hundreds of years.

From this perspective, individual choices – such as the decision to use single-use plastics – must be limited so that preferences do not prioritise short-term pleasure over long-term consequences.

Gandhi’s idea of reducing wants are in contrast to modern economists who often celebrate rising demand as the engine of growth. Gandhi believed that true happiness arises from a contented mind and a simple life, not from endless consumption.

In this vein, his support for village life is often misunderstood as reproducing traditional village structures – what Ambedkar famously called “the den of ignorance”. But Gandhi was not advocating for the preservation of caste-based exclusion or other discriminatory practices. Rather, he envisioned localised production for smaller communities, even if this reduced profit margins or increased commodity prices. He would have seen large-scale urban waste as the inevitable byproduct of an economic philosophy that glorifies higher income, higher investment and constant growth.

He argued that peace among nations ultimately depends on individuals cultivating contentment rather than pursuing profit or greed as the basis of national economic growth. As he once said, “The mind is a restless bird; the more it gets, the more it wants, and still remains unsatisfied.”

Gandhi was not a politician in the modern sense focused on short-term election victories or popular demands. His ideas, including those on waste and resource use, extended beyond immediate political gains. For those who still believe in the enduring power of ideas, his vision continues to provide guidance.

Sunilkumar Karintha designs business development plans for unorganised sector urban sanitary workers( Haritha Karma Sena) under the Kerala Solid Waste Management Project.