By Roney M. lyndem
In Shillong, whenever the topic of cleanliness comes up, the conversation quickly turns to blame. Someone drops litter on a street. A drain is clogged. A market corner smells unpleasant. Almost immediately, fingers point toward the public. We hear that people lack civic sense, that discipline is fading, that citizens must learn to behave better. It is an easy argument to make but, It is also incomplete.
Cleanliness is not something that emerges from lectures or scolding. It is not a natural instinct that people automatically possess or lack. Cleanliness is an acquired habit, one shaped by environment, access, and systems. If the system does not provide the basic facilities needed for clean behaviour, expecting consistent cleanliness from the public is unrealistic and unfair.
Across the world, cities that maintain clean public spaces do so not because their citizens are morally superior, but because infrastructure makes responsible behaviour easy and infrastructure makes the implementation and enforcement of rules and laws easier. When dustbins are placed at regular intervals, when garbage is collected reliably, when recycling is supported, and when clean toilets are available, most people will follow the simplest most least resistant path and they will use what is provided.
The reverse is also true. When bins are missing, toilets are ill maintained and unavailable, and collection is irregular, people are forced into poor choices because its easier, convenient for them not because citizens prefer mess, but because the system has left them with few alternatives.
A recent situation in Umiam illustrates this clearly. Residents and the Dorbar Shnong organised clean-up efforts after trash accumulated along roadside stretches near the dam. Traffic congestion caused by bridge repairs left travellers stranded for long periods with no access to garbage disposal or toilets. Community leaders warned that the lack of facilities had turned the area into a health concern.(https://highlandpost.com/no-garbage-collection-no-public-toilets-leave-umiam-a-mess/)
In such conditions, blaming individuals misses the obvious reality: There was nowhere appropriate to dispose of waste.
This is not an isolated case. Meghalaya’s urban centres generate roughly 315 tonnes of solid waste each day, yet processing capacity handles only part of this volume. (https://www.forpressrelease.com/forpressrelease/659125/17/government-of-meghalaya-launches-swacchta-hi-seva-2025-campaign)
When waste systems are stretched beyond capacity, rubbish spills into drains, roadside corners, and informal dumping areas. Overflowing or absent bins are not just an eyesore; they shape behaviour. People respond to what is immediately available, what is easy, what is in reach?
Compounding the challenge has been policy delay. Reports have highlighted that Meghalaya’s waste management framework lagged despite national guidelines being in place. (https://highlandpost.com/lackadaisical-urban-affairs-delays-waste-management-policy/).
Without strong local systems, segregation and recycling remain difficult to enforce. Citizens may be urged to sort their waste, but if collection does not support that effort, enthusiasm fades quickly. We know for a fact that Habits cannot be built on instructions alone and they require structure and repeated action.
The contrast with Mawlynnong is often cited, and rightly so. The village’s reputation for cleanliness is not a miracle of civic virtue. It is the result of simple, visible systems: strategically placed bins, composting practices, and community enforcement backed by infrastructure.
Residents maintain cleanliness because the tools exist. (https://www.indiatvnews.com/news/good-news-mawlynnong-village-in-meghalaya-is-asia-cleanest-village-swachh-bharat-abhiyaan-376837).
The lesson is not that some communities are inherently cleaner but it is effective systems that shape behaviour and mindset.
From a psychological perspective, this is exactly how habits form. Cleanliness is rarely the result of daily moral decision-making. Behavioural science shows that habits develop through repetition in environments that support them. When clean actions are easy, visible, and consistently reinforced, they become automatic. When the environment lacks the facilities required to perform that action, habit formation breaks down. People encounter friction — inconvenience that interrupts behavioural loops — and over time disorder becomes normalised because the environment teaches it.
Psychologists refer to this as environmental conditioning. Human behaviour follows cues, opportunity, and ease. Expecting a population to maintain cleanliness without infrastructure is equivalent to expecting disciplined outcomes without tools. Civic habits are not sustained by moral lectures; they are sustained by systems that make responsible action effortless and repeatable.
Shillong itself has shown that progress is possible. Recognition under national cleanliness rankings as a “Promising Swachh Shehar” reflects improvements in sanitation and citizen engagement (https://highlandpost.com/shillong-wins-award-as-cleanest-city-in-meghalaya/)
Mission Clean Shillong 2027 aims to modernise waste handling and address legacy landfill issues (https://highlandpost.com/meghalaya-govt-plans-elimination-of-legacy-waste-from-marten/)
These initiatives indicate momentum — but long-term success depends on everyday infrastructure that citizens encounter daily, not occasional campaigns or central funded projects.
Perhaps the most overlooked component of cleanliness is sanitation. Clean, accessible, separate toilets for men and women are basic public necessities. Yet reports show that many schools in Meghalaya lack usable facilities, and many even in main town “educational hub” Shillong have dirty, unclean, ill maintained facilities (https://highlandpost.com/1-in-3-meghalaya-schools-lack-usable-toilets/).
If children grow up in environments where sanitation is unreliable, expecting lifelong hygiene habits becomes difficult. Infrastructure shapes behaviour from an early age.
Childhood environments quietly teach behavioural expectations. When sanitation is unreliable, children adapt by lowering their expectations of cleanliness. Over time, disorder becomes psychologically normal. This is not indifference but learned adjustment. Clean facilities therefore function as behavioural classrooms. Habits form when systems are stable; without that stability, civic discipline remains fragile.
The issue extends beyond schools. Markets, transport hubs, and busy commercial areas often lack adequate public toilets and garbage bins. Anyone who has navigated Shillong’s crowded streets knows the anger filled anxiety of needing a restroom and finding none or holding that piece of thrash for hours on end. This is not merely inconvenient; it affects dignity, safety, and public health. Cleanliness cannot exist without sanitation. A city that demands orderly behaviour must provide the facilities that make dignity possible.
Urban planning decisions also reveal how infrastructure gaps undermine cleanliness. When street vendors were relocated in Shillong, concerns quickly emerged about insufficient water supply, sanitation, and waste disposal at the new site (https://eastmojo.com/meghalaya/2025/08/04/meghalaya-hawkers-body-slams-unlawful-eviction-arbitrary-relocation/).
Vendors and customers alike operate in environments where maintaining cleanliness becomes difficult and not because of indifference, but because basic facilities are absent or ill maintained.
Shillong’s Smart City vision highlights modernization, yet major civic facilities remain visibly absent. A smart city is not defined by signage, decorative structures, or symbolic beautification. It is defined by whether everyday life functions with dignity. Proper public toilets, accessible dustbins, and visible recycling infrastructure remain inconsistent across high-footfall zones. Without these fundamentals, smart city branding risks becoming rhetoric rather than lived reality.
Urban engineering and architectural planning also influence sanitation behaviour. Poorly designed or narrow footpaths humiliate pedestrian movement, push people into congested areas, and indirectly contribute to litter accumulation. Infrastructure must anticipate human flow, sanitation needs, and waste disposal points as integrated components. A city that ignores these fundamentals undermines its own cleanliness goals.
Symbolic signage, decorative monoliths, and cosmetic urban features cannot substitute for functional infrastructure. For people with disabilities, elderly citizens, vendors, and economically vulnerable residents, dignity depends on usable sanitation and accessible public systems. When essential facilities are missing, symbolic structures risk appearing disconnected from daily reality. Smart planning must prioritise usability over optics.
Public awareness drives such as ‘Swachhata Hi Seva’ encourage citizen participation and are valuable reminders of shared responsibility (https://www.forpressrelease.com/forpressrelease/659125/17/government-of-meghalaya-launches-swacchta-hi-seva-2025-campaign).
Yet awareness without infrastructure risks becoming symbolic. Posters cannot replace bins. Campaigns cannot substitute for toilets. Blame only becomes rhetoric and moralistic. Note that Behaviour and Mental change becomes durable only when systems are in place and the facilities support it.
Meghalaya has witnessed initiatives like the Clean WahUmkhrah campaign that mobilised public action and attention. While commendable in intent, such efforts often focus on surface beautification without correcting the structural causes that produce recurring waste accumulation. Removing visible trash without fixing disposal systems simply resets the cycle. Lasting cleanliness requires upstream infrastructure, not temporary clean-ups.
Consider a simple everyday scenario. A shopper in Police Bazar finishes a snack and carries the wrapper while walking several blocks without finding a bin. The expectation is that the person continues carrying it indefinitely or stores it until reaching home. Some will. Others will drop it. The outcome is not solely about character; It reflects the environment, as behaviour follows convenience.
Beyond Shillong’s core urban zones, another urgent dimension of cleanliness demands attention. Organisations and individuals working on environmental protection ( especially those funded to raise awareness and run sanitation or waste-management programmes ) must extend their work beyond the main town into surrounding ‘Khap-Sor’ areas and nearby villages. In many of these communities, streams remain a primary source of water for drinking, washing and daily needs. Yet these same waterways are being burdened by garbage, household refuse, and even human and animal waste flowing directly into them. This is not merely a matter of personal negligence. It reflects a lack of practical systems and coordinated community action. With straightforward interventions such as installing grill barriers and rubbish catchment structures that trap waste without disrupting natural water flow, these streams can be protected and restored. Awareness campaigns must translate into visible, functional infrastructure suited to rural realities. Crucially, Local Dorbar Shnongs and village authorities must be included as equal partners in planning and implementation. Clean water and environmental protection cannot stop at Shillong’s municipal boundary. A truly community-driven approach requires empowering local leadership, ensuring shared responsibility, and building systems that rural communities can maintain and own.
The path forward is straightforward, though it requires commitment. Firstly, lawmakers should establish clear policies and laws in this matter, and set up an independent implementation and enforcement agency—free from government or non-government influence—capable of taking direct legal action. Then, facilities like Dustbins must be installed at regular intervals in busy areas and emptied consistently. Designated waste points should support segregation so that recycling becomes meaningful, not symbolic. Composting and plastic recovery initiatives should be expanded visibly. Most importantly, clean, well-maintained, gender-separated public toilets should be standard at markets, bus stands, schools, hospitals, and public junctions.
When facilities exist, habits follow. People naturally adapt to systems that make responsible choices easy and convenient. This is not idealism, it is how successful cities operate. Behavioural change is not forced through criticism but grows from design.
Meghalaya is not lacking in civic spirit. For decades, Dorbar Shnongs cleaning drives, Volunteers groups, and local initiatives have shown that citizens care deeply about their surroundings. These efforts deserve institutional support, not replacement as cleanliness cannot rely solely on volunteer energy while the infrastructure remains inconsistent.
Blame is simple but building systems is harder but it is the only approach that will produces lasting results. If Meghalaya seeks cleaner towns, healthier communities, and genuine civic pride, the sequence must be clear. Provide facilities first, then expect compliance.
Cleanliness is not a moral lecture. It is a public system. When the state invests in that system — bins, waste collection, recycling infrastructure, and sanitation — citizens will respond. Until then, blaming people for outcomes shaped by a faulty system and missing facilities is to misunderstand the problem. After all, “You can’t scold clean cities into existence.”
(The writer is a trained counsellor and social activist with Thma U Rangli-Juki and the Meghalaya Progressive Counsellors Union, focusing on how psychology shapes behaviour and promoting practical solutions to social issues in Meghalaya. He and can be reached at roneymlyndem@gmail.com)
