Choices

I just read an article about bottled water consumption ("A Battle Between the Bottle and the Faucet") in the NY Times. The trend towards bottled water is probably catching on in India too - many of the restaurants I have gone to recently have offered a choice between tap (free) water and mineral/bottled water. It is interesting how perception and symbolism drives consumption. I myself love certain brands (Sony, Swatch, Adidas to name some) and often don't even adequately consider competing brands which command a similar premium, let alone value-for-money buys. Since these are my personal choices, with no bearings about my opinions on public policy, economics or ethics, I don't give two hoots about whether I'm being rational/intelligent in my decisions or not.

But should governments promote a certain type of consumption? Promoting tap water over bottled water, for example, due to its environmental benefits? From the economic viewpoint, it probably makes sense - the ecological damage wrought by the processing and packaging of bottled water is much more harmful than any benefits (if any, especially in an area with adequate water purifying systems). But is it OK to spend public money on promoting certain lifestyle choices? I'm not too keen on government interference, but so long as it does not involve too much expenditure, is free of legally restrictive measures, and is restricted to persuasion and advocacy, I can go along. As for environmental damage, adequate taxation to compensate for it is probably the correct approach.