Solid Waste and Beach Maintenance: Rs 711 Million Invested with No Effectiveness
Mauritius allocates significant resources for environmental protection. However, the latest report from the National Audit Office reveals a concerning gap between stated ambitions and actual results.
In terms of climate goals, the country aims for a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2035. For the financial year 2024-2025, a decrease of 1,200 Gg of CO2 was anticipated. In reality, the actual reduction was only 184 Gg, which is about 15% of the target set. This outcome indicates a largely insufficient performance. The audit report highlights a lack of rigorous monitoring and timely corrective actions, despite the establishment of a committee for climate change.
The management of plastic waste also illustrates these challenges. A division specifically for plastic management was created in 2021 to combat pollution. However, a key regulatory instrument, namely the extended producer responsibility regulations, was still not finalized by November 2025. Without this framework, mechanisms aimed at improving recycling and holding producers accountable remain ineffective.
Financially, the amounts involved are significant. The audit report states that Rs 711 million was spent on the management of solid and hazardous waste as well as beach maintenance. However, these investments do not translate into satisfactory operational effectiveness. Gaps were noted in the management of cleaning contracts, the operation of transfer stations, and the maintenance of waste treatment infrastructure.
The Mare Chicose landfill serves as a revealing example. It did not have a valid fire safety certificate and was affected by a fire that halted its operations. This site was operated under a contract totaling Rs 181.2 million. This situation highlights significant weaknesses in regulatory compliance and risk management.
Other dysfunctions concern environmental monitoring capabilities. The National Environmental Laboratory (Mauritius) has experienced operational failures, limiting the reliability of the data necessary for decision-making. Additionally, delays have been noted in the implementation of coastal protection projects, which are essential in the face of climate change effects.
Overall, the audit report does not challenge the country’s environmental objectives but highlights structural shortcomings in their implementation. It reveals that responsibilities are fragmented among various actors, monitoring mechanisms remain inadequate, and the results achieved do not reflect the resources mobilized. The conclusion: Mauritius has policies and funding for the environment, but the results fall short of expectations.