The Deposit Refund Scheme (DRS), set to launch on April 1, 2026, and seen as a significant milestone in the state's environmental policy of tackling plastic and non-biodegradable waste, may be an ambitious experiment, but there is a sense of unease already creeping in, with various sections opposing it.
What is a DRS? It’s a State-wide environmental initiative notified under the Goa Non-Biodegradable Garbage (Control) Act, 1996, under which consumers pay a small "green deposit" above the Maximum Retail Price when purchasing products in non-biodegradable packaging. This deposit is later fully refunded when the container is returned to any designated collection point. This means people will be paying extra for any items sold in plastic or glass packaging (from Rs 2 to Rs 10), which will be refunded when the containers are returned.
Such schemes in various forms and formats are already in operation across the world, including some countries in Europe. The aim has been to either discourage litter or encourage reuse and recycling. By engaging the public in the waste disposal mechanism, the government is eyeing environmental cleanliness. Goa is currently generating over 26,000 tonnes of plastic waste annually, the highest per-capita rate in India at roughly 20-22 kg per person. The majority of coastal litter is plastic and glass bottles. In fact, broken glass bottles strewn along the coast have been one of the concerns among visitors. The DRS aligns with the idea of cleanliness and fosters some element of responsibility.
However, the question is whether Goa is ready. Any new system that is introduced comes with a host of issues and inconveniences, whether it is UPI payments or online registrations. The DRS, primarily, would pinch the pockets of consumers because the amount collected would be above the MRP. Moreover, in fast-paced lives, claiming refunds is not going to be a breeze because there will be an added layer of transporting the junk to the collection centres, probably standing in queues depending upon the situation, and eventually getting that rightful refund. If infrastructure is limited in rural Goa, people would be required to travel distances, leading to further hassles. For working professionals, this could be even more challenging.
One may argue on the purpose of having a parallel garbage collection or disposal mechanism when there are well-established systems in place. Several rural and urban areas in Goa have door-to-door collection systems in place. For example, Panaji claims 99 per cent source segregation and a comprehensive door-to-door collection system, and has earned the distinction of being one of India’s best in terms of waste management. How does the DRS help in such areas? It comes as a burden rather than a blessing in these cases.
Such schemes may be well-intentioned, but need wider consultation and logistical understanding. There have to be extensive consultations with stakeholders, including local bodies, industry experts and even civil society. Currently, Goa is recording high inflation figures, having ranked among the top three most inflation-hit states in India during the 2025-26 financial year. Goa’s rising inflation is driven by hikes in food, housing, and service costs, and every rupee paid over the MRP, even if it is to be refunded subsequently, is going to pinch pockets.
Before introducing DRS, the government should have contemplated re-enforcing the ban on single-use plastics. Goa, which has to its credit several “firsts” including “Har Ghar Jal” and “Defecation-free State”, could do well to have another go at eradicating plastics below 120 microns. Copy-pasting concepts without assessing all parameters could lead to chaos.
The DRS may not be a bad idea, but currently, it lacks clarity and fails to project itself as a sustainable model of environmental filtering. It would be prudent to first tick all the boxes of concern and then selectively roll it out.
