Is closure a panacea?

To regulate pollution, the courts have directed to close down the polluting units and have directed the polluter to set up infrastructure to treat pollution, restore environment and pay compensation to the victims of pollution. Even the NGT orders have been insisting on the same lines i.e. closure of the polluting units and imposing higher fines. Similar has been the approach of the regulator. It has relied more on closing down the polluting units as compared to other options available under environmental laws to check pollution (Bansal & Solanki, 2015). So, is the closure of polluting units a panacea to check pollution? Looking at the increasing number of polluted water bodies, it seems to be unlikely. How far the current strategies of closing down the polluting units and setting up of the infrastructure to treat pollution been successful in improving the ground situation has been examined in the subsequent chapters.

Notes

1 DO (Dissolved Oxygen) is a measure of the amount of oxygen dissolved in the water body.
2 BOD (Bio-chemical Oxygen Demand) is the amount of dissolved oxygen needed by aerobic biological organisms to break down organic material present in a given water sample at certain temperature over a specific time period.
3 TOOL (Total Coliforms) is a measure of the total coliform bacteria present in the water body.
4 MPN stands for the ‘most probable number’ and indicates that the water in question has been contaminated with faecal material.
5 The author is a member of the Expert Committee.
6 Handmer and Dovers (1996) have suggested a three-way classification of resilience, defined in terms of the responses to the threats of disturbance: Type 1—‘Resistance and maintenance’ is characterised by resistance to change, where the system or individual in authority would do its utmost to avoid change, would typically deny that a problem exists and where enormous resources will be expended in maintaining the status quo. Type 2—‘Change at the margins’ is characterised by the acknowledgement that the present system is not sustainable and that change is needed. The rhetoric will be there, but only minor changes occur, largely directed at alleviating symptoms. Type 3—‘Openness and adaptability’ is characterised by identification of the structural causes of the problem, options explored and changes put in place.