The debate on environmental protection is often steered in a convenient direction—governments don't formulate policies, ministries are inactive, and laws remain confined to paper. This criticism isn't entirely misplaced. Looking at the record of environmental ministries at the central and state levels, nature often becomes the first casualty of development projects. Deforestation, river pollution, toxic air, and groundwater scarcity—all of these are attributed to policy failure. But this is an incomplete truth. The full truth is that the environmental crisis is deeply rooted in our own lifestyles.

We have treated the environment as a government subject, as if it were a departmental file separate from civic life. This mindset is the biggest crisis. Air, water, soil, and forests are not the property of any ministry, but a collective responsibility. When citizens distance themselves from this responsibility, no policy remains effective.
Today, the bulk of pollution isn't generated by factories, but by everyday household behavior—excessive private vehicles, countless plastics, uncontrolled waste, and wasteful water and electricity consumption. We consider conveniences a right and their consequences a problem of governance. This very thinking is slowly pushing the environment toward destruction.
In a developing country like India, environmental protection is often dismissed as anti-development. This is an artificial and misleading argument. The truth is that the destruction of nature is itself antithetical to development. Floods, droughts, extreme heat waves, water scarcity, and diseases—these are all the products of “development” that ignores the balance of nature.
But even in this debate, the role of the citizen is relegated to a secondary role. We don't ask how much our individual habits contribute to our development model. Is it necessary to take out a car for every short distance? Is unnecessary ostentation necessary at every wedding, ceremony, and festival? Is life impossible without single-use plastic? We avoid these questions because the answers make us uncomfortable.
Environmental protection isn't possible through laws and regulations alone. It's a question of civic character and social values. Countries that demonstrate environmental discipline are not just driven by strict laws, but also by disciplined citizens' habits. The problem in India is that we are extremely conscious of our rights, yet almost indifferent to our duties.
We don't hesitate to litter outside our homes, yet we expect the government to ensure cleanliness. We pollute rivers in the name of worship, then protest for their cleanup. This contradiction exposes our social mindset.
When it comes to tree planting, enthusiasm is limited to government campaigns and photo opportunities. Trees are planted on Tree Planting Day and forgotten the next day. No one takes responsibility for their conservation. This is why millions of trees are planted in statistics, but on the ground, forests continue to dwindle.
There's an old saying: "If a man carries nine maunds of wood throughout his life, he should leave behind at least nine maunds of trees." This saying is even more relevant today. Do we strive to give back something equal to the resources we consume in our lives?
Today, planting trees is no longer a noble deed, but rather a minimal moral obligation. Yet, we avoid it. Space, time, water, and care—we have excuses for everything. The truth is, we've prioritized convenience and considered responsibility a burden.
Not planting trees is not just environmental negligence, but an injustice to the lives of future generations. It's a crime our children will pay for—in the form of dirty air, toxic water, and an insecure future.
It's also not correct to say that governments have no role to play. Strict enforcement of environmental laws, honest environmental assessments of projects, stringent penalties for polluters, and empowerment of local bodies are all essential. But history shows that when society is inactive, even the best laws become ineffective.
The Swachh Bharat Abhiyan is an example of this. Where citizens participated, results were seen. Where it was considered merely a government scheme, the situation remained the same. Environmental protection will also work on this principle.
The solution to the environmental crisis lies not in one big decision, but in millions of small citizen decisions. Household waste segregation, rainwater harvestng, using public transportation, energy-efficient appliances, local tree planting—these steps are all simple yet impactful.
Environmental education in schools and universities must not be limited to curriculum, but must be translated into practice. Children must be connected to nature, so that they develop not only information but also sensitivity. The role of the media and social organizations is also crucial. The environment must be presented not only as a disaster or a day-to-day issue, but as an everyday concern.
Ultimately, the most honest answer to the environmental crisis is to ask ourselves—what are we giving to nature? Until this question arises in the minds of every citizen, policies will continue to come and go, and nature will continue to be quietly destroyed.
Nature is not the responsibility of any ministry; it is a test of our collective character. And so far, we have failed this test. There is still time—if we truly want development, it must be built in harmony with nature, or future generations will never forgive us.

Email:---------------------priyankasaurabh9416@gmail.com