Solid Waste and Beach Maintenance: Rs 711M Invested with No Efficiency
Mauritius allocates significant resources to environmental protection. However, the latest report from the National Audit Office highlights a concerning gap between stated ambitions and actual results.
On the climate front, the country aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2035. For the financial year 2024-2025, a reduction of 1,200 Gg of CO2 was expected. In reality, the actual reduction was only 184 Gg, which is about 15% of the target set. This result indicates a severely inadequate performance. The audit report points out the lack of rigorous monitoring and timely corrective measures, despite the establishment of a committee for climate change.
The management of plastic waste also illustrates these challenges. A division dedicated to 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. In the absence of this framework, mechanisms aimed at improving recycling and holding producers accountable remain ineffective.
Financially, the amounts committed are significant. The audit report states that Rs 711 million was spent on the management of solid and hazardous waste as well as on beach maintenance. However, these investments do not translate into satisfactory operational efficiency. Gaps have been identified 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 relate to 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 observed in the implementation of coastal protection projects, which are essential in the face of climate change effects.
Overall, the audit report does not question the country’s environmental objectives but highlights structural deficiencies in their implementation. It reveals that responsibilities are fragmented among various actors, monitoring mechanisms remain insufficient, and the results achieved do not reflect the resources mobilized. The conclusion: Mauritius has environmental policies and funding, but the results fall short of expectations.