Why our brick kilns need to modernise

Due to their lack of access to capital, brick kilns use the cheapest inputs, technologies with minimal capital, and are among the most polluting in India's manufacturing landscape

More than a lakh brick kilns in India reportedly employ around 10 million people. This number is the same as the number of farmers benefiting from PM-Kisan. The difference is that these workers are more likely to be poorer and belong to underprivileged social groups. Brick kilns may not be considered to be at the forefront of the Indian economy, but they are important and will become more so as India ramps up its infrastructure and builds housing for all.

The labour-intensity of brick-making combined with the piece rate structure of compensation to the workers ensures that poverty-driven families end up using many household members, including children. Worse, studies have found that it is not uncommon for workers to be given a loan which they are barely able to repay by working for the rest of the season. The terms bonded labour and even slavery are commonly used by researchers studying this industry.

Many brick kilns use not just humans but also animals to transport bricks from the moulding site to the kiln. Animal rights activists would be horrified to see the exploitation of overworked, underfed and uncared for horses, mules and donkeys. Heat stress, colic and injuries add to the misery of animals that rarely get proper nutrition or veterinary care.

In other words, due to their informal nature and lack of access to capital, such units are forced to operate in a regime where cost minimisation is the norm. They use the cheapest inputs, technologies with minimal capital, and take the most out of their workers and their animals.  And just as important, this is among the most polluting sectors in India’s manufacturing landscape.

Digging of the soil, transporting moulded bricks, and baking them, all cause significant environmental damage. But by far the most toxic has been the use of cheap PET coke, coal dust, and lignite. These may or may not be mixed with biomass; but the technology being what it is, the emissions are directly released. The consequent emission comprises of fine coal and dust particles, and also gases such as SOx, NOx, carbon monoxide, and so on. If tyres or PET coke are used as fuel, then emission levels are worse.

China, with a similar population, uses more than 700 bricks per capita annually, whereas in India that number is a little above 200. Brick consumption will rise in India and so will the negative environmental and human impact emanating from producing units. India can attempt to take the brick-making industry out of such an inhumane, exploitative and environmentally toxic domain. The solution lies in creating an ecosystem that encourages the brick-kiln owner to invest, pay efficiency wages, ensure a better work environment and, of course, expand production while being environmentally sustainable.

There are economically feasible and environmentally better alternatives, but market conditions in this sector are clearly not able to create the right incentives for their adoption.  External intervention is therefore required to hasten the process of beneficial change in this sector. This can broadly be divided into research and development, demand generation, monitoring and enforcement, and investment and formalisation.

R&D is required to find economically feasible and environmentally sustainable alternatives but pays off over a long time. We need to start development and experimentation now to ascertain practicality of select options. These include technologies for cheaper unfired bricks, locally available biomass-based fuel, energy-efficient kilns, emission reduction equipment, and so on. A comprehensive R&D programme to develop and commercialise such options led by the Niti Aayog via engineering colleges and research institutes could be that external support. Such interaction would also expose brick-kiln owners to skilled engineers.

At the same time, at least for large government contracts, alternatives to standard fired mud bricks can be mandated. The government continues to be among the major consumers of bricks in the country and just as in the case of LED bulbs and solar panels, using other options to bricks in government projects will encourage entrepreneurs to shift their focus.

Lack of monitoring and lack of enforcement enables brick kilns to break the law and local government functionaries to “allow” them to do so. A researcher in the UK, using satellite imagery and machine learning algorithms, was able to remotely identify more than 56,000 brick kilns in an area spanning the Indus and Gangetic river basins. New remote and crowd-sourcing monitoring technologies enable real-time red-flagging of potential violators for further action.

However, irrespective of the above, it is imperative that all brick kilns be brought into the formal fold. With stricter mandates to follow accounting, labour and environmental norms, their ability to access credit and other forms of investment will improve. Support routed either through Sidbi (Small Industries Development Bank of India) or through other means can help such entrepreneurs meet the funding gap.

The alternative is to retain the status quo.  But that means three times as much pollution. The choice is ours.  

The writer heads Indicus Foundation