By Dr. Treemmi Lamare
The recent coal mine tragedy in East Jaintia Hills has once again brought the coal issue of Meghalaya into sharp public focus, not only within the state but also at the national level. In any democratic society, such incidents naturally invite criticism, questioning and political debate. Opposition parties have raised concerns, accountability has been demanded and discussions have intensified across different platforms be it in person or social media. This in itself reflects the strength of democracy. However, at a time when families are mourning and many households are anxious about their economic survival, the larger question before us should not be limited to who is responsible. The deeper and more urgent question is how we move forward in a way that protects both human life and human livelihood.
Coal in Meghalaya has never been merely an industrial activity. For decades, particularly in the undivided Jaintia Hills, it has functioned as the economic backbone of many people. The coal economy has not been confined to mine owners alone. It has sustained daily wage labourers, truck drivers, loaders, mechanics, roadside vendors, tea stall operators, small shopkeepers and transport workers and this economic chain has been wider and interconnected across the state. In many villages of Jaintia hills, coal income financed education, medical treatment, construction of homes and basic household security. For a significant section of society, coal was not simply a source of income but a means of upward mobility and self reliance. Generations grew up in an environment where mining was part of everyday life, shaping livelihood and economic behaviour. To ignore this historical reality is to misunderstand the depth of the issue. The ban imposed in 2014 by the National Green Tribunal on rat-hole mining was driven by genuine concerns regarding environmental damage and safety risks. However, while the ban aimed at environmental protection and worker safety, it did not fully address the immediate economic consequences for thousands of families dependent on coal. A legal prohibition, even if justified, does not automatically create new sources of employment. The sudden disruption left many communities facing uncertainty and financial hardship. Alternative livelihood schemes were introduced over time, but the transition from a coal-based economy to diversified sectors is complex and cannot happen overnight. From field observations and ongoing research that I carried out, it is evident that while efforts have been made, the shift remains gradual and incomplete. Economic transformation requires time, planning and sustained support. In this difficult phase, the role of the State Government becomes central.
The Meghalaya Democratic Alliance Government led by the National People’s Party has had to govern within constitutional limits, court directives and financial constraints, while also responding to the expectations of the people. Managing such a sensitive issue requires balance and patience. Rather than engaging only in political confrontation, the present government has attempted to create alternative economic pathways to reduce overdependence on coal. This approach deserves careful recognition.
One of the key areas of focus has been youth empowerment and entrepreneurship. Through initiatives such as the Chief Minister’s Elevate Programme, young people have been encouraged and supported to start their own ventures. This is significant in a state where government jobs alone cannot absorb the growing workforce. The Meghalaya Grassroots Music Project has also recognised the economic potential of the creative sector, showing that culture and talent can become sources of income. These initiatives reflect a broader understanding that development must expand into multiple sectors and not remain limited to extractive activities. Alongside these efforts, the government has placed emphasis on agriculture, horticulture and rural development. Support for organic farming, value addition, farmer cooperatives and better market access has aimed to strengthen traditional sectors.
Tourism promotion has sought to use Meghalaya’s natural beauty and cultural richness as economic assets. Skill development programmes have been introduced to prepare youth for emerging opportunities. While these measures may not immediately match the scale of the coal economy, they indicate a serious attempt to diversify income sources and build resilience. The process may be gradual, but it is visible and ongoing.
It is also important to remember that a government is not an abstract machine operating in isolation. It is run by individuals who must weigh court orders, environmental responsibilities, public welfare and financial realities. Decisions are often shaped by constraints beyond the state’s full control. In such a situation, stability and steady policy direction become essential. The present government has attempted to maintain this balance while gradually expanding livelihood options. These efforts should be evaluated fairly and strengthened where necessary, rather than dismissed outright.
At the same time, the public conversation must rise above extreme positions. The issue is not about defending mining at any cost, nor about rejecting it without considering the consequences for workers and families. If mining is to continue in any form, it must follow scientific methods, proper safety standards and strict environmental safeguards. However, any reform must also be phased and sensitive. Abrupt actions without proper rehabilitation planning can push vulnerable populations into deeper hardship or informal activities, which defeats both environmental and social objectives.
Repeated political accusations, especially in the immediate aftermath of tragedy, may create noise and temporary attention but rarely produce long-term solutions. Blame alone does not rebuild livelihoods, improve safety mechanisms or restore damaged ecosystems. Democracy requires accountability, but it also requires responsibility and constructive engagement. Those who criticise must also contribute workable alternatives. If the genuine concern is for coal-dependent families, then practical policy suggestions must accompany public statements. Meghalaya stands today at an important turning point.
The real challenge is to balance environmental protection with economic dignity. Court directives define legal boundaries, but lasting change requires cooperation between the Centre, the State Government and local communities. No family should be forced to choose between compliance with environmental rules and survival. The way forward must include careful livelihood mapping, structured rehabilitation plans, scientific regulation where mining is permitted and strong enforcement of safety standards. At the same time, the Central Government should recognise that regions historically dependent on coal require targeted assistance during this difficult transition.
Ultimately, the coal issue in Meghalaya is not simply a political controversy or an environmental dispute. It is a question about how a society manages change while protecting its people. A mature democracy does not remain trapped in cycles of accusation; it moves forward by building solutions through dialogue, planning and shared responsibility. This is a moment for steady leadership, thoughtful reform and collective commitment. At the same time, this is also a moment for critics and opposition voices to rise to the responsibility that democracy entrusts to them.
Criticism is necessary and accountability strengthens governance, but repeated accusations without constructive proposals do little to secure either safety or livelihood. If there are shortcomings, let them be identified clearly. If there are better pathways, let them be articulated with clarity and sincerity. The people whose lives depend on these decisions deserve more than political contestation; they deserve practical recommendations and collaborative problem-solving. The future of Meghalaya’s coal regions cannot be shaped by blame alone. It must be shaped by informed debate, realistic planning and shared commitment across party lines. If approached with balance, mutual respect and genuine concern for those on the ground, Meghalaya can move beyond crisis and build a more diversified, secure and hopeful economic future for the generations to come.
(The writer is Post Doctoral Fellow, ICSSR, New Delhi).
