Sunil Dowarkasing
Delivering the budget on World Environment Day 2025 (WED 25) should have been an opportunity to send a powerful message about Mauritius’ commitment to integrating sustainability into its economic model. “Innovative Mauritius” should have been built on sustainability blocks endorsing a Green Economy philosophy. Looks like there is not only a financial bankruptcy but also one of ideas and goodwill.
The National Budget 2025–2026, the first presented by the newly elected government, was delivered in the afternoon of the Thursday the 05th of June 2025 coinciding with the WED 25, at the National Assembly by the Prime Minister, under the theme “From Abyss to Prosperity: Rebuilding the Bridge to the Future”. At its core, the Budget is anchored on three strategic pillars: Economic Renewal, A New Social Order, and Fiscal Consolidation.
The Environmental Component Forgotten on a Day for the Planet
While the National Budget 2025–2026 sets forth a roadmap under the theme “From Abyss to Prosperity: Rebuilding the Bridge to the Future,” it is important to reflect on what may have been left behind in this journey. The timing of the Budget, presented on World Environment Day 2025, a day globally dedicated to ecological awareness and action, offered a symbolic opportunity to align national priorities with environmental stewardship. Yet, despite this coincidence, the environmental pillar of sustainable development, remained conspicuously absent from the spotlight. While economic renewal and social equity are rightly championed as foundational goals, the third dimension, ‘environmental sustainability — continued to be sidelined. This oversight not only weakens the coherence of our sustainable development strategy but also risks compromising the resilience and well-being of future generations.
Some may point to the Rs 3.3 billion allocated to the Ministry of Environment, Solid Waste Management and Climate Change, as evidence of the Government’s commitment to safeguarding the environment for future generations. However, the mere announcement of large financial allocations has never been enough to address the complex and urgent environmental challenges we face. What this budget lacks is not money – it lacks an “Environmental Soul”.
Simply allocating funds without a comprehensive strategy and a well-defined action plan cannot drive meaningful progress, particularly in the realm of sustainability. For far too long, budgets have announced millions and billions in funding, yet the lack of concrete outcomes continues to undermine these efforts. In the meantime, many of our natural ecosystems are rapidly losing their resilience. Coastal erosion has already affected 37 kilometers of our beaches. Our endemic forests continue to shrink, now covering only about 1.3% of the island’s total land area. Live coral cover has declined drastically, leaving us with just around 30%. Simultaneously, according to FAO reports, we rank among the highest in the world for chemical use per hectare of agricultural land. Alarmingly, the State of the World’s Trees Report, places us second globally in terms of the number of threatened tree species.
What I wish to emphasize here is that these large funding allocations remain largely symbolic and have done little to truly place Mauritius on a sustainable development path. Audit reports provide clear evidence of the persistent misuse and mismanagement of public funds.
Revisiting some Sustainability Claims of Budget 2025–26
- “Waste to Wealth Scheme”- What others are doing?
Among the latest government announcements is the launch of a “Waste-to-Wealth Investment Scheme,” aimed at promoting initiatives like turning waste into art, compost, energy, and reusable materials such as metal scrap. At first glance, it sounds promising—but is it truly a game-changing policy or just a flashy label on a well-worn idea?
Let’s not forget: this concept isn’t new. Countries like Sweden, Germany, and Singapore have already paved the way with comprehensive waste-to-wealth programs. So, is this scheme backed by thoughtful planning and genuine commitment, or is it simply a recycled idea being dressed up for political appeal?The “Waste-to-Wealth Investment Scheme,” is designed to promote innovative approaches to waste management including transforming waste into art, compost, energy, and repurposed materials such as metal scrap. While this may be a new concept locally, similar models have been successfully implemented for years in advanced economies mentioned below. Sweden, widely regarded as a global leader in this field, with less than 1% of its waste ending up in landfills. Remarkably, as of 2025, Sweden has progressed to the point of importing waste from other countries to fuel its waste-to-energy plants, underscoring the effectiveness of its circular waste strategy.
Singapore has adopted a comprehensive master plan aimed at establishing a circular economy, with particular focus on managing food waste, electronic waste, and packaging. A standout example is the Tuas Nexus facility — a groundbreaking integrated plant that combines waste and water treatment to generate energy.
Germany, through its Circular Economy Act, places strong emphasis on recycling, upcycling, and extended producer responsibility. Waste-to-energy conversion and material recovery from industrial waste are standard practices, contributing to a national recycling rate of approximately 60%. This legislative and industrial alignment has created a robust framework for sustainable waste management.
India joined this global movement in 2021, with the launch of its Waste to Wealth Mission, aimed at fostering innovative technologies to convert urban waste into valuable resources such as bio-CNG, compost, and construction materials. This mission underscores India’s growing commitment to sustainable urban development through resource recovery.
What all these initiatives have in common is a strong political will, continuity of purpose across changing governments, and well-structured partnerships with industries and civil society. These are the foundational pillars that have enabled real and measurable progress and they are essential if Mauritius is to successfully follow the same path.
- “Waste to Wealth Scheme”- What are we going to do?
Do Our Leaders Have the Vision to Turn Waste into Wealth—Or Is This Just Another Investment Gimmick?
The big question isn’t whether the “Waste-to-Wealth Investment Scheme” sounds good on paper—it’s whether our leaders truly have the vision, commitment, and long-term strategy to make it work. Right now, it feels more like a glossy financial pitch than a well-thought-out blueprint for sustainable waste management.
Are we seeing a real shift toward circular economy principles, or just another headline-grabbing initiative designed to check a box? The difference will be clear in the execution.
When I read the prompt reactions from certain members of the private sector — including the CEO of Business Mauritius — in the press, I couldn’t help but think: Wow… some people just can’t resist the scent of “wealth,” even when it comes from waste.
The messaging already feels misguided. So, what exactly is the plan to operationalize the “Waste-to-Wealth Investment Scheme”? Which model — or combination of models is best suited to our local context? We have a long history of replicating schemes from elsewhere, but too often, we falter in adapting them effectively. Let’s hope this time, we get the “XEROX COPY” right.
- More Clarity is needed on two components mentioned under the scheme. Among the objectives of the Waste-to-Wealth Investment Scheme” are two which I would like to discuss deeper; waste to energy and waste to compost.
- Waste to compost
Given the composition of our waste, this initiative has strong potential — but let’s be clear: it is not an innovative project. Approximately 70% to 75% of the waste generated in Mauritius is organic. In 2024, the country produced 539,086 tons of waste. If 70% of that is organic, we’re looking at a composting potential of roughly 377,360 tons. Based on standard conversion rates — where one ton of organic waste yields between 0.5 to 0.6 tons of compost — Mauritius could have produced approximately 188,680 tons of compost in a single year.
This raises critical questions: What will happen to all that compost? Will it be used strategically to reduce our dependence on chemical fertilizers — especially given that Mauritius ranks among the highest globally for chemical use per hectare of agricultural land?
A Bold Promise with No Backbone?
Sadly, beneath the shiny surface of the “Waste-to-Wealth Investment Scheme,” there seems to be little substance. There’s no clear vision, no cohesive strategy, no policy framework, and—perhaps most telling—no concrete plan for how the compost or other outputs will actually be used.
Without tackling these fundamental gaps, the initiative risks going the way of so many before it: big on promise, short on delivery. Unless these issues are urgently addressed, we may once again watch a well-intentioned project fade into irrelevance.So, Prime Minister, let’s make sure the cart is finally placed behind the bull – with purpose, direction, and proper coordination.
- Waste to energy
Here comes the Waste-to-Energy project once again – a familiar headline that brings back memories of the Covanta/Gamma initiative at La Chaumière. Such projects were announced in previous budgets but never materialised. I am not opposed to such projects, provided that state-of-the-art technology and strict environmental safeguards are used. A small island like Mauritius simply cannot afford the burden of yet another landfill.
Just days before the budget, the Junior Minister for Environment declared that by 2027, waste segregation at source would become a reality — meaning that household and commercial waste would be sorted into distinct components. This is a welcome step, but it also raises critical questions: Which components of the waste stream will be targeted for energy production? Understanding the composition of our waste and selecting the appropriate fractions for energy recovery are essential if this initiative is to succeed both environmentally and economically.
This question is particularly important, especially considering that a few years ago, a major bottling company announced plans to operate a pyrolysis plant to recycle its own plastic bottles. While the initiative was promising on paper, it highlighted the need for a clear national framework to guide the selection of waste streams for energy recovery and ensure such technologies are aligned with broader sustainability goals.
Plastic has a very high energy content – higher than most other types of municipal solid waste. For example, polyethylene (used in bags and bottles) has a calorific value of around 40 MJ/kg, close to that of conventional fuels like diesel. This makes plastic waste a valuable fuel source in incineration-based WTE systems.
Using plastic waste for energy generation can send the wrong signal about plastic consumption. If we continue producing PET bottles for mass consumption only to incinerate them for energy, we risk reinforcing a linear and wasteful model. This approach could undermine efforts to reduce, reuse, or ban unnecessary plastic altogether, by creating a false sense of sustainability and reducing the incentive to shift toward more responsible production and consumption patterns.
Honourable Prime Minister, there appears to be significant ambiguity surrounding this issue. It is clearly high on your agenda, as the “Waste-to-Wealth Scheme” was mentioned twice in your Budget Speech in paragraphs 63 and 180.
However, to move from rhetoric to results, we urgently require clear, coherent, and consistent policy direction — not only to guide effective implementation but also to ensure public understanding and stakeholder alignment.
