pre publication

8/14/2019 Pre Publication

1/72

Solid Waste Managementin the Worlds CitiesPre-publication presentation


2/72

This is a pre-publication presentation o the orthcoming UN-HABITAT report:

Solid Waste Management in the Worlds Cities

Prepared on behal o UN-HABITAT by:

WASTE, Advisers on urban environment and development, Gouda, the Netherlands. (www.waste.nl)

Edited by:

David C. Wilson, [email protected], www.davidcwilson.com

Anne Scheinberg, [email protected], www.waste.nl

Ljiljana Rodic-Wiersma, [email protected]

Co-written by a team o international experts including the editors and:

Lilia Casanova, Philippines

Sonia Dias, Brazil

Sanjay K. Gupta, India

Michael H. Simpson, USAPortia M. Sinnott, USA

Reka Soos, Romania

Andrew Whiteman, Bulgaria

With support rom:

UN-HABITAT: Graham Alabaster, Gora Mboup, Philip Mukungu, Paul Onyango, Grace Wanjiru

City proles: Lizette Cardenas, Alodia Ishengoma

Researchers: Kossara Bozhilova-Kisheva, Ivo Haenen, Irmanda Handayani, Arnold van de Klundert

Other contributions: Jarrod Ball; Stephen Bates; Lilliana Abarca; Peter Faircloth, Tariq bin Yusu; Manus Coey

Layout and graphics: Daniel Vilnersson, UN-HABITAT (layout), Verele de Vreede, WASTE, using materials (co-)

developed by EnviroComms UK; WASTE and VNG International, the Netherlands

Cover photo: Plastic collection with metal hooks by SHE team in Siddhipur. Bhushan Tuladhar

DISCLAIMER

The designations employed and the presentation o material in this report do not imply o any opinion

whatsoever on the part o the Secretariat o the United Nations concerning the legal status o any country,

territory, city or area or o its authorities, or concerning the delimitation o its rontiers or boundaries, or

regarding its economic system or degree o development. The analysis conclusions and recommendations o

this publication do not necessarily refect the views o the United Nations Human Settlements Programme or

its Governing Council.

Copyright United Nations Human Settlements Programme

(UN-HABITAT), 2009. All rights reserved

United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT)

P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi 00100, KenyaTel +254 v v 762 3120

Fax +254 20 762 3477

www.unhabitat.org

Printed by: UNON Print Shop, Nairobi, 2009


3/72

Solid Waste Managementin the Worlds Cities

Pre-publication presentation


4/72

Contents

A Note or Decision-makers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Three Key System Elements in ISWM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Public health (collection) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Environmental protection (waste treatment

and disposal) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Resource management (valorisation o

recyclables and organic materials) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Three ISWM Delivery Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Inclusivity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Financial sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Sound policies and institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Concluding remarks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1 Setting the scene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

1.1 Introducing this book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

1.2The scale of the solid waste problem . . . . . . . . . . 7

What is municipal solid waste? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

How much municipal solid waste?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

1.3Historical perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Development Drivers in Solid Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Modernisation o Solid Waste in OECD

Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

1.4The solid waste challenge in developing

and transitional country cities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11 Why is solid waste a priority? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Solid waste and the MDGs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

1.5Sustainability in solid wastemanagement

is possible . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

The ISWM ramework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Think outside the box . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

1.6Structure of this book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

2 Three Key System Elements in ISWM . . 16

2.1Public Health (Waste collection). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Approaches and good practice solutions . . . . . . . . .17

A good collection service? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Improving cost-eectiveness and service

coverage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Keeping the streets clean and drains clear . . . . . . 18

Engaging the users and creating eective

channels o communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

2.2Environmental Protection (waste

treatment & disposal). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Approaches and good practice solutions . . . . . . . . .21

Phasing out or upgrading open dumps . . . . . . . . . . .21

Adapting technologies to local conditions . . . . . . 23

Reducing GHG emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

2.3Resource Management (valorisation ofrecyclables and organic materials). . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Approaches and good practice solutions. . . . . . . . 26

Reduce and Reuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Recycle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Organic waste valorisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3 Three ISWM delivery strategies . . . . . . . . . . 30

3.1Inclusivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30


The solid waste platorm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Participatory planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Siting acilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

The inormal sector as key stakeholders . . . . . . . . . 34

3.2Financial Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36


Analysing costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Raising revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Living within your means. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

39 Carbon Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Extended producer responsibility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

3.3Sound institutions & governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42


National Policy Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Institutions and management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Inter-municipal Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

PPPs and 5-Ps: Public Private Partnerships

and Pro-poor PPPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Proessional competence and internationalnetworking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Annex 1Glossary o terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Annex 2Reerences, Sources and Additional

Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Annex 3City Proles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Moshi, Tanzania. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Quezon City, Philippines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Solid Waste Management in the Worlds Cities Pre-publication presentation


5/72

1


A Note or Decision-makersA solid waste crisis can signicantly undermine the cred-

ibility o a city government. Solid waste is embarrassing

and dicult to discuss, so policy-making and political

discussions have to deal with an array o taboos that trou-

ble the process o arriving at a transparent political visionand concrete, achievable goals. And yet managing solid

waste well and aordable is one o the key challenges o

the 21st century, and one o the key responsibilities o a

city government. It may not be the biggest vote-winner,

but it has the capacity to become a ull-scale crisis, and a

denite vote-loser, i things go wrong.

A good solid waste system is like good health: i you are

lucky to have it, you dont notice it, it is just how things

are, and you take it or granted. On the other hand, i

things go wrong, it is a big and urgent problem and every-

thing else seems less important.

Te urgency o the problem may tempt you to grab at

whatever is oered that sounds like a solution, particularly

i it appears to solve an urgent problem in a politically

comortable way. But i a solution seems too good to be

true, probably its not true. Unortunately, many shadowy

gures keep popping up with a promise that they oer the

one right answer, the magic bullet to slay the garbage

dragon.

Instead, the reality is complex but in its complexity

lies also its strength and resilience. In low- and middle-income countries, there are usually a variety o ormal and

inormal, public and private systems operating at one time,

so the basis or a stable mixed system is present. What

most low- and middle-income cities miss is organisation,

specically, a clear and unctioning institutional rame-

work, a sustainable nancial system, and a c lear process

or pushing the modernisation agenda and improving the

systems perormance. As long as there is no overarching

ramework, the mixture remains a cluster o disjointed

sub-systems that do not unction well together or at all.

Tis is a pre-publication short version o the book SolidWaste Management in the Worlds Cities, which will be

available in early 2010. Te book aims to show, through a

consistent and parallel analysis o some 20 reerence cit-

ies on six continents, that cities everywhere are making

progress, but also that there is plenty o room or improve-

ment. Te authors are interested in understanding and

sharing insights on what works and what doesnt, under

what circumstances, and why.

I you take just one message rom this book, it should

be that there are no perect solutions, but also no absolute

ailures: the specic technical and economic approaches

that work in Denmark or Canada may not work in your

country. Seeking the perect solution can delay improve-

ments when they are desperately needed. Much like in

most other human endeavours, also in waste management

the best is the enemy o the good.Tere is only one sure winning strategy, and that is to

understand and build upon the strengths o your own city

to identiy, capitalise on, nurture, and improve the

indigenous processes that are already working well. We

hope that this book will inspire you to be both creative

and critical: to design your own models, to pick and mix,

adopt and adapt the elements and components and

strategies that work in your particular circumstances. You

Man in ront o his collected and selected carton in Serbia.

WASTE

Dierent technologies or waste collection in one city.

UN-HABITAT, Jeroen IJgosse

Some recent solid waste crises 2008: waste piled up in Naples streets or months, as

the local disposal sites were all ull. National govern-ment intervened.

1993, 2000, 2005: major waste slides at dumpsites inTurkey, Philippines and Indonesia hit the world head-lines, killing 39, over 200 and 147 persons respectively.

1994: major outbreak o plague in Surat, India, blamedon uncollected solid waste blocking drains


6/72

2


and your citizens and stakeholders deserve the best system

or your circumstances, and nothing less. I this book can

contribute to that, we will have done our work well.

Tis book and these notes are built around the concept

o integrated and sustainable (solid) waste management,

known as ISWM.

We look rst at the three key elements which ALL

need to be addressed or an ISWM system to work well

and to work sustainably over the long term:

public health: maintaining healthy conditions in cities,

particularly through a good waste collection service;

environment: protection o the environment throughout

the waste chain, especial ly during treatment and dis-

posal; and

resource management: closing o nutrient and materials

cycles, through high rates o reuse and recycling.

We then ocus on how to deliver an ISWM strategy.

Until the 1990s, the ocus would likely have been prima-

rily ramed around technology, but there is consensus

today on the need or a much broader approach. Tree

inter-related requirements or delivering ISWM are dis-

tinguished here, namely the need:

to be inclusive, involving a ll the stakeholders;

or the system to benancially sustainable, i.e. both

cost-eective and aordable; and

or sound institutional arrangements andgood governance.

Build on the human and other capacities present in your

city, including small enterprises and the inormal sector.Focus on understanding and strengthening what is al-ready working well.

SOLID WASTE is a vital municipal responsibility. You needto address all three elements collection, disposal ANDmaterials recovery.

Three Key SystemElements in ISWM

Public health (collection)Sae management o human excreta (sanitation) and

removal, treatment, and management o solid waste aretwo o the most vital urban environmental services. While

other essential utilities and inrastructure l ike energy,

transport and housing oten get more attention (and much

more budget); ailing to manage the back end o the

materials cycle has direct impacts on health, length o lie,

and the human and natural environment.

Te responsibility o municipalities to provide solid

waste collection services dates back to the middle o the

19th century, when inectious diseases were linked or the

rst time to poor sanitation and uncollected solid waste.

Tere are major cities in all continents that have had col-

lection services in place or a century or more.

Cities spend a substantial proportion o their available

recurrent budget on solid waste management, perhaps as

much as 20-50% or some smaller cities. Yet

UN-HABIA data shows waste collection rates or

cities in low- and middle-income countries generally in

the range o 10-90%, which means that large portions o

the population receive no services at all, and much waste

ends up in the environment. Te data also show that rates

o diarrhoea and acute respiratory inections are signi-cantly higher or children living in households where solid

waste is dumped, or burned, in the yard, compared to

households in the same cities, which receive a regular

waste collection service.

Uncollected solid waste clogs drains and causes food-

ing and subsequent spread o water-borne diseases. Amajor food in Surat in India in 1994 caused an outbreak o

a plague-like disease, and the ocial inquiry cited uncol-

lected solid waste blocking drains. Annual foods in East

and West Arican, and Indian cities are blamed, at least in

part, on plastic bags blocking drains.

Perhaps surprisingly, even in Europe and North

America uncollected waste can still hit the headlines, as

in the recent example o Naples, Italy, where mountains o

solid waste lined the streets or months, collectors stopped

picking up the waste because all o the regions landlls

were ull, and residents went into erce protests.

Waste collection removing waste rom residential andcommercial areas is essential or protecting publichealth.

Tiles made rom plastic waste, Benin.

WASTE, Justine Anschtz


7/72

3


Environmental protection (wastetreatment and disposal)Until the environmental movement emerged in the 1960s,

most unwanted materials were discharged to land, as

open dumping, to air, as burning or evaporation o volatile

compounds, or to water by discharging solids and liquidsto surace or groundwaters or the ocean. Tere was lit-

tle regard or the eects on drinking water resources and

health o those living nearby, because disposal was based

on the idea that wastes decomposed and returned to the

environment without harming it.

Over the last 30-40 years, environmental control over

has seen development o a series o steps, rst phasing out

uncontrolled disposal, then introducing, and gradually

increasing, environmental standards, or example on water

pollution and methane emissions rom sanitary landlls

and air pollution rom incinerators.

Attention in high-income countries may now be mov-

ing on to other aspects, but many cities in low- and

middle-income countries are still working on phasing out

open dumps and establishing controlled disposal. Tis

is a rst step towards good waste management, and isdesigned to pave the way or a sanitary landll, seen to

be an essential part o any modern waste management

system.

Whatever technologies and equipment are used, they

should be adapted to the local conditions, or example

with the skills and spare parts available locally or smooth

operation and timely maintenance.

Resource management (valorisation ofrecyclables and organic materials)

Prior to the industrial revolution, most cities had ewmaterial resources, money was scarce, and households had

more needs than they could meet. Wastage was mini-

mised, products were repaired and reused, materials were

recycled and organic matter was returned to the soil1.

Extensive inormal recycling systems fourished, but

began to be displaced by emerging ormal municipal

waste collection systems in the 19th century. Recycling

and materials recovery became large but almost invis-

ible private industrial activities. During the past 10-20

years, high-income countries have been rediscovering the

1. Strasser 1999.

Phasing out and upgrading open dumps and controllingthe disposal o waste is a necessary rst step towards agood waste management system.

value o recycling as an integral part o their waste (and

resource, management systems, and have invested heavily

in both physical inrastructure and communication strate-

gies to increase recycling rates.

Many developing and transitional country cities still

have active inormal sector recycling, reuse, and repair

systems, which oten achieve recycl ing rates comparable

to those in the West, at no cost to the ormal waste

management sector. Not only does the inormal recycling

sector provide livelihoods to huge numbers o the urban

poor, thus contributing to the Millennium Development

Goals, but they also save the city 15-20% o its waste

management budget, by reducing the amount o wastes

that would otherwise have to be collected and disposed oby the City. In eect, the poor are subsidising the rest o

the city.

Tere is a major opportunity or the city to build on

these existing recycling systems, to maximise the use o

waste as a resource, to protect and develop peoples liveli-

Waste is a resource, and your SOLID WASTE systemshould be designed to maximise the benets rom thewaste.

The frst global meeting or the inormal sector has taken place

in March 2008 in Colombia. Sonia Dis

Selling o recyclables in Lagos, Nigeria. Adebesi Araba


8/72

4


Three ISWM Delivery StrategiesInclusivity

Te municipal government is responsible or solid waste

management in a city, but cannot deliver on that responsi-

bility by prescribing or undertaking measures in isolation,

entirely on their own. Te best-unctioning solid wastesystems involve allthe stakeholders in planning, imple-

menting, and monitoring the changes.

A solid waste system consists o three main groups o

stakeholders: the providers, including the local authority,

who actually oer the service; the users, who are the cli-

ents; and the external agents in the enabling environment,

who organise the boundary conditions and make change

possible.2

Users, or waste generators, are key stakeholders in

waste management, as are the NGOs, womens unions,

and other organisations that represent them in the policy

and governance processes. Service providers include the

ormal municipal waste organisation, in partnership with

a variety o private, inormal and/or community actors. In

urban waste systems in most low- and middle-income

countries, as well as in the US, Canada, Europe, and

Japan, the inormal recycling sector is particularly

important, oten providing a livelihood or up to 1% o the

urban population and in eect subsidising the costs o the

ormal sector.

2. Spaargaren, G. and B.J.M van Vliet, 2000; Scheinberg 2009 (inpress)

Ensure that you are inclusive in your plans, by workingwith others and engaging both the local community andprivate ormal and inormal service providers.

hoods, and to reduce the costs to the city o managing the

residual wastes. Te ormal and inormal sectors need to

work together, or the benet o both.

Major priorities to improve environmental perorm-

ance and conserve resources work to shit the ocus o

waste management. Te goal o sae disposal shits to anemphasis on valorisation, and commercialisation, o three

sets o materials:

products which can be re-used, repaired, reurbished,

or re-manuactured to have longer useul lives;

recyclable materials which can be extracted, recovered,

and returned to industrial value chains, where they

strengthen local, regional, and global production; and

bio-solids consisting o plant and animal wastes rom

kitchen, garden, and agricultura l production, together

with saely managed and treated human excreta, which

are sources o key nutrients or the agricultural va lue

chain, and have a major role to play in ood security

and sustainable development.

Waste management and climate change

Te importance o public health, environmental protection

and resource management are reinorced by the impera-

tive to reduce carbon emissions in a move to a sustainable,

carbon neutral, society.

Municipal solid waste management and wastewa-

ter contribute about 3% to current global anthropogenicgreenhouse gas emissions, about hal o which is meth-

ane rom anaerobic decomposition o organic waste in

landlls and other waste disposal sites. One orecast sug-

gests that, without mitigation, this could double by 2020

and quadruple by 2050. It is ironic that these alarming

increases are largely due to improved disposal in low- and

middle-income countries open dumps decompose partly

aerobically, and so generate less methane than mostly

anaerobic sanitary landlls.

Eective mitigation consists o a mix o technical

xes, including landll gas extraction and utilisation, andupstream instrumental and economic measures, particu-

larly reduction, reuse, recycling, and recovery o organics.

Prevention is especially benecial, as it also reduces the

amount o indirect carbon used to make the products that

were being thrown away as waste.

People bringing their own waste to the collection truck.

UN-HABITAT, Jeroen IJgosse


9/72

5


Financial sustainabilityFinancial sustainability in solid waste management is a

major issue or cities all over the world. In developing and

transitional country cities, solid waste management repre-

sents a high proportion o the recurrent budget, as much

as 20-50% according to the World Bank. Yet in spite ohigh costs, collection service coverage is low and disposal

standards remain poor. Making service delivery more e-

cient should ree up some resources, but many cities can

expect to see costs rise substantially, as population and

waste quantities increase, service coverage expands and

open dumping is phased out.

Costs in high-income country cities are continuing

to increase, as wastes are collected in several separate

streams to acilitate recycling, wastes are diverted rom

landll to higher cost acilities and the costs o environ-

mental protection at treatment and disposal sites have

increased.

For most cities in low- and middle-income countries,

the coming years will see increased waste, more people,

more vehicles, more labour needed or collection, more

transer stations, more types o collection, more adminis-

tration, and more space taken up by landlls. As the city

spreads, places or dumping will be scarcer, urther rom

the city centre, and (much) more expensive. Te costs will

go up, as will the imperative to nd regular sources o

nance or them.

Where international donors, or other investors, are

involved in providing nance to cities or new waste

management vehicles, equipment or inrastructure, one

precondition is oten that the city can demonstrate that

There is no such thing as a ree lunch beware the sales-man whose technology will solve your problem at littleor no cost.

they are able to pay or the recurrent costs. Tis usually

involves discussion both on establishing the ull current

costs o providing the service, which is commonly under-

estimated by up to 50%; and on the introduction o user

ees, which in turn raises the issues o equity, aordability

and will ingness to pay.Experience has shown that users, even in slum areas,

are prepared to pay or their waste to be removed, when

they agree with the service levels, when the charging

system is transparent, and when services are provided

or locally acceptable prices. Moving rom a position

where solid waste management is paid or through gen-

eral revenues, to one where it is paid or entirely rom

user charges, is likely to be a gradual transition, particu-

larly i the overall costs are rising at the same time. So, at

least in the medium term, a signicant proportion o the

total cost will sti ll have to be paid or by the municipal-

ity or the national government rom general revenues, as

part o its public health and environmental protection

responsibilities. Some o the resources will come rom

cross-subsidising, key activities with resources earned

rom high-end services to wealthy payers, because they

also benet rom a cleaner city, or suer rom waste-

related pollution and negative health impacts.

Sound policies and institutions

A strong and transparent institutional ramework isessential to good governance in solid waste. Without

such a ramework, the system wil l not work well over

the long term. Conversely, it was suggested at the 2001

UN-HABIA global conerence that the cleanliness

and eectiveness o a citys solid waste management sys-

tem could be used as a useul proxy indicator o good

governance.

I waste services are to be eective, a city must have

the capacity and the organisational structure to man-

age nances and services in an ecient and transparent

manner, streamline management responsibilities withcommunities, and listen to users. For waste manage-

ment to work well, the city needs to address underlying

issues relating to management structures, contracting

procedures, labour practices, accounting, cost recovery

and corruption. Clear budgets and lines o accountability

are essential. Te adequacy o services to lower-income

communities also refects on how successully a city is

addressing issues o urban poverty and equity.

Public-private partnerships (PPP) in service delivery

are an option or improving both cost-eectiveness and

service quality and coverage. However, PPP in waste

management is not simple privatisation. Te municipal

Poster encouraging the people to take a subscription to waste

collection in Benin. WASTE, Justine Anschtz


10/72

6


authorities, as contracting body, need to have sucient

understanding and capacity to carry out their client

unction. Te necessary conditions, which must be met

or successul PPP, include competition, transparency

and accountability, which are all required to help ensure

that the contracting process is ree rom corruption andcitizens receive the services as contracted. Te concept

o Pro-Poor PPP (5-P) develops this more explicitly, by

addressing the need to engage users, the rights o small

and micro enterprises and the inormal sector to hold on

to their livelihoods, and the obligation to serve poor com-

munities airly and eectively.

Concluding remarksTere are no easy answers, as can be seen rom the

inter-relationships between the three elements o ISWM

and the three delivery requirements. But a reliable

approach is to be critical and creative; to start rom the

existing strengths and build upon them; to involve all thestakeholders to design your own models; and to pick and

mix, adopt and adapt the solutions that will work in your

particular situation.

There is no one right answer to solid waste manage-ment, rather a diversity o measures and approaches. Youneed to develop the solutions that will work in your city.


11/72

7


1 Setting the scene

1.1 Introducing this bookTis is a pre-publication short version o the bookSolid

Waste Management in the Worlds Cities, which will beavailable in early 2010.

Te book is designed to raise and address questions o

policy, good and bad practice, management, communica-

tion and sustainable nancing. Te core o the book will

be detailed proles o urban solid waste and recycling sys-

tems in some 20 cities across six continents. Te proles

will illustrate how solid waste works in practice in tropical

and temperate zones, in small and large cities, in rich and

poor countries, and at a variety o sizes and scales. Each o

the cities will provide a parallel data set, allowing analysis,

comparison, and cross-reerencing.

We believe that the book will provide a resh perspec-

tive and new data on solid waste management, which is an

important challenge acing al l the worlds cities.

Tis book distinguishes itsel in a number o ways:

First and oremost, it is based on the ramework o

Integrated Sustainable Waste Management (ISWM),

especially the concepts o sustainability and inclusive good

practice that have broadened and enriched the eld.

It uncovers the rich diversity o waste management

systems that are in place throughout the world. Tisbook brings out common elements and develops a lens

or viewing a solid waste management system, while at

the same time encouraging every city to develop its own

individual solution, appropriate both to its specic history,

economy, demography and culture and to its human, envi-

ronmental and nancial resources.

It is not a how-to book nor a lets x it book, but more

o a how do they do it now and what do they want to x

book.

Tis preview version o the book has been prepared pri-

marily or the chie executives o cities, decision-makersin general, including political and social leaders, managers

and opinion makers, who all take interest in the welare o

their cities. Tey can be at the top or ground level o the

decision-making structure, rom the greater municipality

o a mega-city to a neighbourhood or village council. Tey

can come rom the public or private sector, rom corporate

entities or non-governmental or community based organi-

sations (NGOs/CBOs). Tey share the commitment and

the potential to contribute to change in their cities.

Tis pre-publication version seeks to set the scene on

the solid waste management challenge acing cities

worldwide; to examine three keyphysical elements o an

ISWM system; to elaborate on the three ISWM delivery

strategies; and to provide a favour o the nal book by

interspersing a number o early city proles through the

text. Te preview is based on more than 300 person-years

cumulative experience o solid waste management

practitioners rom 20 countries. It will be updated in the

light o the nal city proles to become the decision

makers guide in the nal book.

1.2 The scale o the solidwaste problem

What is municipal solid waste?Denitions o municipal solid waste (MSW) vary

between countries, so it is important to establish at the

outset just what is being discussed in this book. A work-

ing denition is wastes generated by households, and

wastes o a similar naturegenerated by commercial andindustrial premises, by institutions such as schools, hospi-

tals, care homes and prisons, and rom public spaces such

as streets, markets, slaughter houses, public toilets, bus

stops, parks, and gardens.

Some establishments are likely to produce both munici-

pal and non-municipal wastes:

Manuacturing industry: generates municipal solid

waste rom oces and canteens, and industrial wastes

rom manuacturing processes. Some industrial wastes

are hazardous, thus requiring special management.

Hospitals and other healthcare establishments/services:

generate municipal solid waste such as ood waste,

Honourable Mayor, this book is or you!The intention is to encourage you to think about yourcontribution to both reducing and managing solid wastein your city.

Keep our city clean poster in Colombo Sri Lanka.

WASTE, Anne Scheinberg


12/72

8


newspapers etc; and healthcare hazardous wastes con-

taminated with inected body fuids, various chemicals

and sharp objects.

Construction sites: generate some municipal solid

waste rom oces and canteens, and construction and

demolition (C&D) waste rom building works.

Other major non-municipal waste streams include agri-

cultural wastes and mining and quarrying waste.

Tis working denition includes most commercial and

business wastes as municipal solid waste, with the excep-

tion o industrial process wastes. Some countries include

as municipal solid waste only that proportion o commer-

cial waste collected by or on behal o the municipality,

rather than that collected by a private contractor hireddirect by the waste generator.3 Other sources suggest that

all industrial and C& D wastes should be included in the

denition o municipal solid waste.4

In practice, there are some grey areas in the working

denition. For example, industrial process wastes rom

small workshops in urban areas are likely to be collected

with municipal solid waste. Similarly, construction and

demolition wastes rom household repairs and reurbish-

ment, particularly do-it-yoursel wastes, are most likely

to enter the municipal solid waste stream.

Te working denition implies that parallel waste man-agement systems will exist within an urban area, one or

municipal solid waste run by or on behal o the munici-

pality, and others or industrial, C&D, healthcare and

other hazardous wastes.

At an early stage o development, when the municipal

disposal site is essentially open access, then it is likely

that it will be used by all waste generators, and receive

both hazardous industrial and healthcare wastes. In

developing an ISWM system ocusing on municipal solid

3. OECD Environmental Data Compendium 2006-2008 www.oecd.org/dataoecd/22/58/41878186.pd

4. Daniel Hoornweg and Laura Tomas (1999)

waste, it is important that eective systems or other types

o waste are also developed; cost-eectiveness will oten

suggest a degree o integration between the systems.

A working assumption in this book is that hazardous

industrial and healthcare wastes are eectively segre-

gated rom municipal solid waste and managed separately.Substantial guidance on managing hazardous wastes is

available, or example rom the Basel Convention5 and

UNEP6, and on managing healthcare hazardous wastes

rom WHO7.

Municipal solid waste does include some so-called

household hazardous wastes, which are segregated and

managed separately in a ew developed countries, and

which will orm part o the MSW collected elsewhere.

Te composition o municipal solid waste varies widely,

both within and between countries, and between dierent

seasons o the year. able 1.1 presents data on municipal

solid waste composition or three o our proled cities,

representing high-, middle- and low-income cities.

Table 1.1 Municipal solid waste composition inhigh-, middle- and low-income cities.

MaterialQuezonCity

SanFrancisco Nairobi

Organics 52.1% 30.9% 61.4%

Paper 17.1% 24.3% 11.8%

Plastic 21.4% 10.5% 20.6%

Glass 3.1% 3.3% 0.8%

Metal 3.2% 4.3% 0.6%

C&D 2.3% 12.2%

Bulky waste 5.3%

Textiles 3.9% 0.6%

Other 0.8% 5.3% 4.2%

Waste generated[kg/capita/day]

0.7 2.4 0.8

How much municipal solid waste?Solid waste data are oten largely unreliable and seldom

capture inormal activities or system losses. Tis situa-

tion is only now being addressed in developed countries or example some countries generate regular and reliable

statistics on municipal solid waste, but not on other waste

streams. Even when waste data exist, they are dicult to

compare even within a city, due to inconsistencies in data

recording, collection methods and seasonal variations in

the quantities o waste generated. Few developing and

transitional countries have systems or weighing or meas-

uring wastes disposed and wastes generated are usually

estimated based on fimsy data.

5. Basel convention, www.basel .int6. David C. Wilson, Fritz Balkau and Maggie Turgood (2003)7. Prss et al (1999)

It is essential to collect hospital waste separately, Benin.

WASTE


13/72

9


Figure 1.1 shows data rom a range o cities on the

quantity o municipal solid waste generated per capita per

year. Tis shows a wide range, rom a low o around 100

kg/capita/year in Accra or Hanoi, to a high around 900

kg/capita per year in Guelph, Ontario, Canada and San

Francisco, Caliornia, USA.Estimating global waste generation gures is di-

cult, given the unreliability o the data, particularly or

low- and middle-income countries. One estimate puts

municipal solid waste generation worldwide in 2006 at 2

billion tonnes, with a 37% increase orecast by 20118. Te

world population in 2006 was around 6.5 billion9, giving

an average per capita generation rate o just over 300kg/

year. able 1.2 shows corresponding estimates o what

world municipal solid waste generation would have been

in 2006, or could become by 2025, i everyone in the world

generated waste at either the current average rate or the

high-income OECD countries (580kg/year)10 or at the

current rate or San Francisco.

Table 1.2 Estimates o world MSW generation by OECD

World municipalsolid waste

kg/capita/day

billion tonnes/yr

2006 2025

Current estimates 310 2.0 2.4

At average currentrate or OECD

580 3.8 4.6

At current rate orSan Francisco

880 5.7 7.0

8. Key Note Publications Limited (2007)9. US Census Bureau, Population Division, International Data Base.

www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpop.php10. OECD,able 2A.. ibid

Figure 1.1 Waste generation (kg/year) per capita in selected cities. Source: UN-HABITAT (2009)

The world currently generates an estimated 2 billiontonnes o municipal solid waste per year.

I in 2025 everyone in the world generated municipalsolid waste at the current per capita rate in San Fran-cisco that would become 7 billion tonnes.

Waste quantities have grown rapidly in high-income

countries over the last ew decades, oten at a rate o 3%

per year. Cities in low- and middle-income countries are

experiencing even higher growth rates, due to a com-

bination o increasing population, increasing collection

rates and higher per capita generation due to rising liv-ing standards. Although there are some indications that

growth may now be slowing down in some developed

countries, in most o the world substantial growth rates

are likely to continue or some time to come.

Data on waste volumes as well as quantities are impor-

tant in planning waste collection. In a low GDP city,

waste density can be as high as 400 kg/m, due to high

ractions o wet organics. In some OECD cities, densities

may be less than 100 kg/m, because the large volumes o

packaging waste dont weigh much.11

I we all continue to move towards the current waste

generation patterns o the wealthiest cities in high

-income countries today, then by 2025, we could be gener-

ating as much as 70 billion/m o MSW each year, enough

to bury a large city o 1000 km to a depth o 70 m.

Moreover, municipal solid waste is only a small propor-

tion o total waste generation, so the total generation in

much larger.

1.3 Historical perspectivesDevelopment Drivers in Solid Waste12

Why has waste management developed? What have been

the main dr iving orces or development? In parallel with

industrialization and urbanization, there have been three

specic drivers or the development and modernization o

waste management: resource value o various waste mate-

rials, improvement o public health, and protection o the

environment.

11. Manus Coey (2009)12. David C. Wilson (2007)


14/72

10


Driver 1: the resource value of the waste.Beginning

with urbanization in the 19th century. In pre-industrial

times, resources were relatively scarce, so household

goods were repaired and reused.13 Food and garden

waste entered the agricultural supply chain as animal

eed or ertiliser. As cities grew with industrialisation,large numbers o people ound an economic niche as

street buyers or rag-pickers, collecting and using or

selling materials recovered rom waste, oten linked to

itinerant selling and product distribution chains. Tis

activity continues today virtual ly unchanged in

many developing and transitional country cities, where

inormal sector activities in solid waste management

and recycling secure the livelihood o millions o people.

Driver 2: public health. Starting in the middle o the

19th century, as cholera and other inectious diseases

reached the cities o Europe and North America, legis-

lation was gradually introduced to address the problem

o poor sanitation conditions. Tis legislation both

established strong municipal authorities and changed

them with progressively more responsibility or remov-

ing solid waste and keeping streets clean and litter ree.

Driver 3: environment. Te ocus o solid waste

management remained on waste collection, getting

waste out rom under oot, or a century right up to

the emergence o the environmental movement in the

1960s. New laws were introduced rst on water pollu-tion, and rom the 1970s on solid waste management,

prompted by crises o contamination o water, air and

land and their impacts on the health o those living

close to abandoned hazardous waste dumps. Te initial

response ocussed on phasing out uncontrolled disposal.

Subsequent legislation gradually ramped up envi-

ronmental standards on, or example, emissions rom

sanitary landlls into groundwater and air pollution

rom waste incinerators.

Emerging Driver 4: climate change. Since the early

1990s, climate change has directed attention in theWest on the need to divert organic waste rom landll

to reduce methane emissions associated with uncon-

trolled anaerobic decomposition. At least partly as

a result, recycling and organic waste diversion rates,

which declined to single gures as municipal authorities

ocused on waste collection, have now risen dramati-

cally. Other policy measures have been introduced,

including landll bans or recyclable waste materials,

extended producer responsibility and waste prevention.

Waste management is beginning to evolve into a mixed

13. Strasser, S. Waste and Want (1999)

system or sustainable resource management, so one

could argue that history has come ull circle.

Modernisation of Solid Wastein OECD CountriesFor most OECD countries, modernisation began when

there was a crisis o contamination rom waste, either in

the city, at the disposal site, or in ground or surace waters.

More important than the crisis itsel, the political discus-

sion around it is usually the immediate stimulus or change.

Modernisation usually begins with climbing on the

disposal-upgrading ladder, that is, with the phasing outo open dumps. Driver 2 usually results in the closing o

town dumps, and a plan, oten not realised or many years,

to develop and operate a state o the art regional land-

ll. Te relatively high costs or installing and operating

environmental controls tend to push the economy o scale

upwards: regional landlls are bigger than town landlls,

serve many cities and towns, and are usually not very close

to the main population centres. In this they match the

economy o scale and degree o institutionalisation o the

agencies that control them that is, the scale o the acili-

ties mirrors the scale o the ministries and inspectorates.Regionalisation sets in motion a series o rapid changes,

including an upward spiral in costs, based on introduc-

ing landll gate ees and increasing the average distance

a vehicle has to carry waste to get to the disposal site. In

OECD countries, the result was a kind o sticker shock

at the increasing price o solid waste management, and a

search or less expensive ways to be modern and envi-

ronmentally responsible. Tis in turn led to an increasing

interest in transer stations, as a orm o improved e-

ciency o transport, and a strong commitment to recycling

and composting, as less expensive orms and environmen-

tally preerable options or materials management. During

Waste management and climate changeData show that municipal solid waste management andwastewater contribute about 3% to current global an-thropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, about hal owhich is methane rom landlls. One orecast suggeststhat, without mitigation, this could double by 2020 and

quadruple by 2050. It is ironic that these increases arelargely due to improved disposal in low- and middle-income countries open dumps decompose partly aero-bically, and so generate less methane than an anaerobicsanitary landll.

Mitigation needs to be a mix o the technical x ap-proach, such as landll gas collection and utilisation, andupstream measures, particularly reduction, reuse, recy-cling, and composting. Reduction is especially benecial,as it also reduces the amount o indirect carbon used tomake the products that are being thrown away as waste.


15/72

11


the period o active modernisation in the US, or example,

recycling goals in many states increased rom 15% o total

waste to more than 50% in a relatively short period o time

at the end o the 1980s.

Tis required active engagement with households, to

persuade them to change their habitual behaviour andto separate their waste into several streams. Collecting

several source separated waste streams without greatly

increasing collection costs was a challenge, and has led in

some instances to a reduction in collection requency or

the residual waste or disposal. Waste quantities have gen-

erally continued to grow, and only recently have begun to

level o in some countries14.

1.4 The solid waste challengein developing andtransitional country cities

Why is solid waste a priority?Solid waste management is a challenge, but it can

easily become a crisis i it is ignored. Te plague epi-

demic in Surat is one example. Another comes rom

Europe: mountains o solid waste lined the streets in the

Campagna (Naples) region o Italy or months at the

beginning o 2008, when collectors stopped picking up

the waste because all o the regions landlls were ull.Tere were at-times violent protests, both by residents

orced to live beside stinking heaps o waste in the street,

and by neighbours protesting at attempts by the authori-

ties to orcibly reopen the ul l landlls.15

Tere have also been cases o disasters at dump-

sites in low- and middle-income countries which have

received international coverage. For example a landslide

at the Payatas dumpsite in Quezon City, Philippines in

July 2000 kil led 200 persons, while that at Bandung in

Indonesia in February 2005 killed at least 40.

Solid waste management is a major challenge or manycities in developing and transitional countries. Te urban

areas o Asia were estimated to spend about $25 billion

on solid waste management each year in 1998.16 Solid

waste management may represent 20-50% o a citys

budget, with 80-90% o that spent on waste collection.17

Collection rates in urban areas vary widely, oten in the

14. For example, average MSW growth rates in England averaged -0.4%per annum or the 5 years to March 2008 (Dera, 2008).

15. Charles Hawley and Josh Ward, Naples rash rauma,03/07/2008. Spiegel online www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,563704,00.html

16. Hoornweg and Tomas (1999). ibid17. World Bank website (undated). Urban solid waste management

homepage.

range 10-70%, in cities where the norm or waste disposal

is still open dumping.

Experience in the West is that modernisation in the

waste management sector has increased costs dramatically,

challenging a mayor or city management give priority to

improving solid waste management when there is so muchcompetition or municipal resources. Why should the

authorities choose to invest in a waste system?

A basic answer is public health. UN-HABIA data

shows signicant increases in the incidence o sickness

among children living in households where garbage is

dumped or burned in the yard. ypical examples include

twice as high diarrhoea rates and six times higher preva-

lence o acute respiratory inections, compared to areas in

the same cities where waste is collected regularly.18

Uncollected solid waste clogs drains and causes food-

ing and subsequent spread o water-borne diseases. In

Surat in India, solid waste blocking drains and causing

fooding in 1994 was identied as a main cause o a major

outbreak o plague. Uncontrolled disposal a lso aects

those living nearby: in one small city in Egypt, 89% o

villagers liv ing downwind o the burning dumpsite were

suering rom respiratory disease.19 Contaminated liquids,

or leachate, leaking rom dumpsites may also pollute a

citys drinking water supplies.

Te modernisation challenge acing a low- and middle-

income country city generally has an additional dimension

18. UN-HABIA, State o the Worlds Cities 2008/09, page 129.19. SWM case study or Sohag City, as part o the DFID unded SEAM

(Support or Environmental Assessment and Management) project inEgypt, 1999.

Plague outbreak, Surat, India1

A major food in Surat, India, in 1994 caused an outbreako a plague-like disease, and the ocial inquiry cited un-collected solid waste blocking drains. The disease causedpanic countrywide and while the citizens blamed themunicipality, the public authorities in turn blamed thecitizens or their lack o civic sense.

Over 1000 plague suspected patients were reported,with the nal death toll o 56 people. The city incurreda daily loss o 516.2 million Indian rupees during theplague period and total loss amounting to 12 billion.This was a high price to pay or negligence in the area osolid waste management.

Alarmed at the situation, the Surat Municipal Corpo-ration undertook a stringent programme o cleaning thecity.

Within a year ater the plague, the level o (daily) sol-id waste collection increased rom 30% to 93%, and 95%o streets are cleaned daily. Market areas, major roadsand litter prone spots are cleaned twice a day. Surat is

now identied as one o the cleanest cities in the region.1. Gupta, Sanjay own experience


16/72

12


to that aced in the West in the 1970s: how to extend col-

lection coverage to unserved parts o the city where there

is less inrastructure and the ability to pay is lower.

Solid waste and the MDGs

Te Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were rati-ed by 189 heads o state at the UN Millennium Summit

in September 2000, with the overall objective o halving

world poverty by 2015. Improving solid waste management

systems will contribute to achieving many o them, as

summarised in able 1.3.

Tis conclusion based on the MDGs is reinorced by

recent work, which shows that the inormal sector is sav-

ing many cities perhaps 15-20% o their municipal budget,

through reducing the amount o wastes that the ormal

sector would otherwise have to handle.20

Much o the table ocuses on recycling. Modernisation

o solid waste management in the West started when

recycling rates had declined to a very low level, and has

included a drive to rebuild recycling through the ormalwaste system. Most developing and transitional country

cities still retain their inormal recycling systems, which

provide a source o livelihood to vast numbers o the

urban poor. So building on this existing system makes

good sense.

20. GZ and CWG (2007) see also Section 3.1 below

Table 1.3 Relevance o improved solid waste management to the Millennium Development Goals

Millennium develop-ment goals (MDGs) Achieving MDGs through Improved Solid Waste Management

1. Eradicate extreme povertyand hunger

Inormal sector sel-employment in waste collection and recycling currently provides sustainable livelihoodsto millions o people who would otherwise have no stable source o income and would be most susceptibleto extreme poverty and hunger. City authorities can both promote recycling and create more opportunitiesor the inormal sector to provide waste collection services in unserved areas and thereby help eradicateextreme poverty and hunger.

2. Achieve universal primaryeducation

Waste management activities contribute indirectly to education, through income generated by the parents.Many waste pickers earn sucient income to send their children to school and do so with pride. The poorestwaste pickers do engage their children or picking and sorting waste, but in instances where NGOs areinvolved, classes are organised or these children, ater their working hours, and parents are inormed aboutthe need and the benets o primary education.

3. Promote gender equalityand empower women

A substantial percentage o inormal sector waste collectors and waste pickers are women. Eorts toimprove solid waste management services and enhanced recycling can include improvement and equalworking conditions or men and women, by creating nancial and other arrangements that build capacityand empower women.

4. Reduce child mortality Eective solid waste collection and environmentally sound disposal practices are basic public health protec-tion strategies. Children living in households without an eective waste collection service suer signicantlyhigher rates o or example diarrhoea and acute respiratory inections, which are among the main causeso childhood deaths. Co-operation with inormal sector waste collectors and recyclers will improve theirlivelihoods, reduce child labour and hence direct contact o children with the wastes.

5. Improve maternal health Almost all women waste pickers have no maternal healthcare available to them. Enhanced recycling maydirectly/indirectly improve maternal health through achieving improved living standards among householdsengaged in the sector.

6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malariaand other diseases

Originally, waste management activities started due to public health concerns. The reasons are almostsel-evident: uncollected waste clogs drains, causes fooding and provides breeding and eeding grounds ormosquitoes, fies and rodents, which cause diarrhoea, malaria, and various inectious and parasitic diseases.Mixing healthcare wastes with municipal solid waste and its uncontrolled collection and disposal can resultin various inections, including hepatitis and HIV. Reliable and regular waste collection will reduce access oanimals to waste and potential or clogging o drains. Proper waste management measures can practicallyeliminate risks associated with healthcare waste.

7. Ensure environmentalsustainability

Few activities conront people with their attitudes and practices regarding sustainability as waste manage-ment does. Reduce-reuse-recycle is yet to realise its ull potential as a guiding principle or environmentalsustainability through conservation o natural resources and energy savings, as well as through reduction oGHG and other emissions.

8. Develop a global partner-ship or development

Through co-operation and exchange, developed and developing countries can develop and implementstrategies or municipal services and job creation where unemployed youth will nd decent and productivework and lead a dignied and good lie.

Reerences: Barbara Gonzenbach et al (2007); Adrian Coad (2006); Doug Hickman et al (2009)


17/72

13


1.5 Sustainability in solid wastemanagement is possible

The ISWM frameworkWhen the modernisation process started in developed

countries in the 1970s, solid waste management was seenlargely as a technical problem with engineering solu-

tions. Tat changed in the 1980s and 1990s, as it became

clear that municipalities could not successully collect and

remove waste without active co-operation rom the serv-

ice users. Cities also learned that technologies depend on

institutional, governance, and policy rameworks, which

are both highly varied and complex, and directly related

to local conditions.

Tere is now broad international consensus or what

has come to be known as ISWM, i.e. integrated and sus-

tainable waste management. As shown in the box below

and Figure 1.2, this identies three important dimen-

sions which all need to be addressed when developing or

changing a solid waste management system, namely the

stakeholders, the elements and the sustainability aspects.

ISWM is designed to improve outcomes and solid

waste system perormance, by balancing short-term crisis

management and long-term vision.

Te severity o the solid waste management problem

may lead a city mayor to grab at whatever is oered that

sounds like a solution, particularly i it appears to solve anurgent problem in a politically comortable way. But i a

solution seems too good to be true, probably its not true.

Unortunately, many shadowy gures keep popping up

with a promise that they oer the one right answer, the

magic bullet to slay the garbage dragon.

Tis applies both to waste collection and disposal.

echnologies need to be both appropriate and nancially

sustainable under local conditions. For example, large

waste compaction collection vehicles designed to collect

low density, high volume wastes on broad suburban streets

in Europe or North America, are unlikely to be suitable

or use in a low-income city, or collecting much denser

wastes rom narrow streets and transporting it over roads

built to a lower technical specication and on which the

legal payloads are thereore less.

Integrated Sustainable WasteManagement (ISWM)

Integrated Sustainable Waste Management (ISWM), as

shown in Figure 1.3 is a ramework that was irst de-veloped in the mid-1980s by WASTE, a Dutch NGO, andWASTEs South partner organisations, and urther devel-oped by the CWG in the mid 1990s, since when it has be-come the norm.

ISWM is a systems approach which recognises three im-portant dimensions, which all need to be addressed whendeveloping or changing a solid waste management system.The dimensions, shown in Figure 1.3, correspond to threekey questions:

1. The stakeholders the people or organisations witha stake or interest in solid waste management whoneeds to be involved?

2. The elements the technical components o a wastemanagement system what needs to be done?

3. The aspects which need to be considered as part o asustainable solution how to achieve the desired re-sults?

Stakeholders: The main recognised stakeholders in-clude the local authority (mayor, city council, solid wastedepartment), the national environment and local govern-ment ministries, and one or two private companies work-ing under contract to the municipality. Oten unrecognisedstakeholders include (emale) street sweepers, (male)workers on collection trucks, dumpsite waste pickers,

some o whom may actually live on or at the edge o thedumpsite, and amily-based businesses that live rom re-

cycling. Other key stakeholders include the waste genera-tors, the uses o the waste management service providedby the city, including households, oces and businesses,hotels and restaurants, institutions such as hospitals and

schools, and government acilities such as airports or thepost oce.

Elements: These are the technical components o a wastemanagement system. Part o the purpose o using theISWM ramework is to show that these technical compo-nents are part o the overall picture, not all o it. In Figure1.3, the boxes in the top row all relate to removal and saedisposal, and the bottom row o boxes relate to valorisa-tion o commodities. Solid waste management consists oa variety o activities, including reduction, reuse, recyclingand composting, operated by a variety o stakeholders atvarious scales.

Aspects: For a waste management system to be sustain-able, it needs to consider all o the operational, nancial,social, institutional, political, legal and environmentalaspects. These orm the third dimension in Figure 1.3, inthe lower box. The aspects provide a series o analytical

lenses, which can be used or example or assessing thesituation, determining easibility, identiying priorities, orsetting adequacy criteria.

Integrated in ISWM reers to the linkages and inter-dependency between the various activities (elements),stakeholders and points o view (sustainability aspects).Moreover, it suggests that technical, but also legal, institu-

tional and economic linkages are necessary to enable theoverall system to unction.


18/72

14


A landll site that meets the latest EU standards is

unlikely to be either appropriate or nancially aordablein, or instance, a smaller city in Arica. A modern

waste-to-energy incinerator designed or high-heating

value Japanese or European waste is likely to require

supplementary uel to burn a typical waste in a transi-

tional country. And a novel waste treatment technology,

which has not yet ound a buyer in a European market

crying out or alternatives to politically unpopular

incineration, is not likely to be a good choice or the

low- and middle-income country mayor who needs a

guarantee that his wastes wil l be collected reliably, 365

days a year.

Te examples rom countries like Denmark or Japan

which some would regard as world icons o good waste

management practice suggest that a sustainable, aorda-

ble waste management system consists o a stable mixture

o technologies and institutions, which unction fexibly

under a clear policy umbrella. Such systems mimic an

One important message o this book is that there is nomagic bullet, and chasing the illusion o a single perecttechnology is a waste o time, resources, and politicalcredibility.

eco-system, which is robust and resilient when there is a

mix o unique niches and competition or resources. I onespecies alls out, others move in to take its place. Similarly,

a mixed solid waste system gives opportunities to many

stakeholders to earn livelihoods, conserve resources, and

keep the city c lean and healthy. Internal diversity pro-

motes sustainability.

In low- and middle-income countries, there are oten a

variety o ormal and inormal, public and private systems

already operating, so the basis or a stable mixed system

is already in place. What most low- and middle-income

cities miss is organisation, specically, a clear and unc-

tioning institutional ramework, a sustainable nancialsystem, and a clear process or pushing the modernisation

agenda and improving the systems perormance. As long

as there is no umbrella ramework, the mixture remains a

cluster o separate parts that do not unction well together

or at all.

Think outside the boxMost books on solid waste view developing and tran-

sitional country solid waste systems as imperect or

incomplete copies o an ideal system that operates in

developed countries like Canada or Sweden. Many, i not

most, waste interventions seek to perect or improve the

Figure 1.2 The Integrated Sustainable Waste Management (ISWM) Framework


19/72

15


copying process and spread the ideal. Or, at most, low-

and middle-income countries have, up until now, sought

to adapt the models rom developed countries to their

local circumstances.

Tis book takes a dierent view, responding to a

growing global consensus that cities in low-income,middle-income and transitional countries need to take

charge o the modernisation process and develop their

own models or modern waste management that are

more and other than simply imperect copies - models

with ocus and approaches that t their own local

conditions.

But the real hard work o guring out what is right

or their particular c limates, economies, and citizens is

largely yet to be done. We hope that, by identiying good

and innovative practices rom cities at all stages o devel-

oping their waste management systems, this book will

contribute to helping countries nd innovative and dier-

ent solutions that are appropriate to their own particular

circumstances.

It is also part o our ambition to encourage decision

makers to think outside the box, and to think beyond

Low- and middle-income countries deserve better thanan imperect copy

the short term. An eective collection system serving the

whole city, and a sae and environmentally sound disposal

site, are essential components o an ISWM system. But

so also are eective systems to address the 3Rs (Reduce,

Reuse, Recycle), i.e. to reduce the quantities o waste

generated, and to build on the existing, largely inormalsector, systems or reuse and recycling.

1.6 Structure o this bookTe remainder o this pre-publication version o the book

is organised around two o the dimensions o ISWM.

Section 2 discusses the three key drivers in waste

management (section 1.3), linking each to key physical ele-

ments in an ISWM system, i.e.:

public health waste collection;

environment waste disposal; and

resource management.

Section 3 turns rom what needs to be done, to how to

deliver an ISWM system. Tree inter-related require-

ments are distinguished, namely the need or:

inclusivity (involving all the stakeholders);

nancial sustainability; and

sound institutional arrangements and good governance.

o provide a favour o the nal book, wo proles are

included in Annex 3.


20/72

16


2 Three Key SystemElements in ISWM

2.1 Public Health

(Waste collection)Issues

ogether with sae management o human excreta (sanita-

tion), eective removal and treatment o solid waste is one

o the most vital urban environmental services, and needs

to be seen as both an essential utility, alongside electric-

ity, gas and clean water, and as a necessary part o urban

inrastructure and serv ices, alongside housing and trans-

port, education and healthcare.

Poor solid waste management has a direct impact on

health, length o lie and the urban environment. able 2.1

provides data rom Habitats Global Urban Observatory,

based on Demographic and Health Surveys in 12 selected

countries, on waste collection rates in urban areas.

Collection coverage, percent o households receiving serv-

ices rom both ormal and inormal, public and private

providers, varies widely, rom less than 10% to more than

90% in Arican cities, and rom less than 50% to 100% in

Latin American cities.

Table 2.1 Waste collection rates in urban areas (%) in

selected Arican and Latin American countries21

Region/Country Year Average Minimum Maximum

Africa

Benin 2001 27.3 12.4 47.4

Egypt 2005 86.6 40.8 96.4

Ethiopia 2005 39.0 19.6 69.6

Ghana 2003 39.6 30.1 64.4

Kenya 2003 28.5 5.6 57.7

Senegal 1997 62.6 34.3 85.9

Latin America

Bolivia 2004 79.9 67.9 84.8

Colombia 2005 97.2 89.0 100.0

Dominica 2002 83.6 78.2 85.8

Guatemala 1998 56.2 42.9 89.5

Nicaragua 2001 64.7 56.1 80.8

Peru 1991 70.8 59.1 85.6

Figure 2.1 compares data or non-slum and slum house-

holds, demonstrating that access to waste collection is an

equity issue.

I solid waste is not collected, it ends up in any conven-

ient place that can be ound. Te largely organic waste is

21. UN-HABIA, Global Urban Observatory 2009. Data compiledrom national Demographic and Health Surveys.

dumped in backyards, public spaces, alongside roads or

pathways and in watercourses, or is burned. Tis matters:

the DHS data shows signicant increases in the incidence

o sickness among children living in households where

garbage is dumped, or burned, in the yard. ypical exam-

ples include twice as high diarrhoea rates and six times

higher prevalence o acute respiratory inections, com-

pared to the areas where waste is collected regularly.22

Uncollected solid waste clogs drains and causes food-ing and subsequent spread o water-borne diseases.

Blocked storm drains and pools o stagnant water provide

breeding and eeding grounds or mosquitoes, fies and

rodents. Collectively, these can cause diarrhoea, malaria,

parasitic inections and injuries.

Te annual foods in Kampala and other East Arican

cities are blamed, at least in part, on plastic bags, known

as buveera in Uganda, blocking the drains. In response to

annual fooding in Mumbai, the State o Maharashtra in

India banned the manuacture, sale and use o plastic bags,

in 2005. Poor enorcement means that the ban has so arbeen ineective. In West Arica, the foods are blamed on

the small plastic pouches or drinking water.

Uncollected waste has economic costs or a city. A dirty

and unhealthy city wil l make it dicult to attract busi-

nesses. In angier, Morocco, pollution o beaches by solid

wastes was cited in the late 1990s as the leading cause o

tourism decline that cost hotels in the area $23mill ion/year

in lost revenues.23

22. UN-HABIA (2009). Page 129.23. MEAP Solid Waste Management Centre website Highlights

Decision Makers Support Document. www.metap-solidwaste.org/index.php?id=12

0

20

40

60

80

100

[%]

Non-slum households Slum households

Peru

Nic

aragua

Guatem

ala

Dominic

a

Colombi

a

Bolivia

Sene

gal

Kenya

Gh

ana

Ethi

opia

Egypt

Benin

Africa and the Middle East Latin America and the Carribean

Figure 2.1 Collection coverage in percent or non-slum and

slum households.Source: UN-HABITAT Global Urban

Observatory 2009. Data compiled rom national Demographic andHealth Surveys.


21/72

17


Even in Europe uncollected waste can still hit the

headlines, as in the recent example o Naples, where the

collection service broke down due a ailure o governance

and disagreements on siting o a new waste disposal acil-

ity and nancing o the system between elected ocials,

private companies, and citizens.24

Approaches and good practice solutionsEver since the middle o the 19th century, when inectious

diseases were linked or the rst time to poor sanitation

and uncollected solid waste, municipalities have been

charged with providing solid waste collection servicesto their citizens. Tere are major cities in all continents,

which have had ormal collection services in place or a

century or more. Te World Bank reports that it is com-

mon or developing and transitional country cities to

spend 20-50% o their available recurrent budget on solid

waste management25; yet it is also common that hal the

urban solid waste remains uncollected and hal the city

population unserved.

So how can city authorities resolve this dilemma

o high costs or poor service? We explore this in our

headings: A good collection service in your city?

Improving cost-eectiveness and service coverage;

Keeping the streets clean and the drains clear;

Engaging the users o the system and creating eective

channels o communication between users and provid-

ers.

A good collection service?I people are to trust a waste management system, it needs

to be regular, reliable, user-riendly, and aordable. It also

24. Hawley and Ward (2008)25. World Bank website (undated).

needs to match expectations and develop with them over

time.

Frequency o collection is oten seen as a measure o

good practice, but requency actual ly tends to drop during

the modernisation process. Most developed country cities

collect waste once per week or even less, while low- and

middle-income countries particularly in the tropics are

convinced that once per day is necessary. Daily collection

may be necessary and justied in your local circumstances,

but the question should be asked whether this is really the

case.

So what constitutes a good collection service? Teanswer is dierent in dierent places, but results talk.

The economic cost o poorwaste managementAccording to the Chairman o Nigerias House o Repre-sentatives Committee on Environment: Unhealthy andpoor environment costs the ederal government o Ni-geria a whopping N10billion (Naira) annually. A World

Bank report puts the environment cost to the countryo water contamination rom improper waste disposalat N10billion each year and the lives o about 40 mil-lion Nigerians being at risk. He added that municipalwaste [remains] the most visible and grave environmen-tal problem especially in urban areas.1 (N10 billion =USD86 million, 29 July 2008).

1. Nigeria: Country Loses N10 Billion Annually to UnhealthyEnvironment Rep. Nasidi Adamu Yahaya, 29 July 2008 http://allarica.com/stories/200807290311.html

Collecting air in Byala, Bulgaria1

In 2002, Byala Bulgaria was a sleepy Black Sea shingtown with a ew modest summer resorts and small hotels.Together with ve extremely rural villages, it had a win-ter population o less than 2,500. The economic transi-tion was accelerating, and uel prices were rising rapidly.The cleansing department was using up its yearly uelbudget in the rst 4 months o the year.

In the process o updating its solid waste plan, Byalainvited an international consultant to help with cost re-

duction. During a visit in the o-season month o No-vember, the consultant and sta did a eld audit o therelationship between waste generated and requency ocollection. It turned out that 90% o the 40-litre contain-ers were less than 20% ull at the time that they werecollected three times a week.

Based on a simple calculation, the cleansing compa-ny was able to reduce o-season collection rom threetimes per week to once per month or 9 months o theyear. This allowed the department to cover its uel needswith the existing budget during the entire year, includingtourist season. The consultant is still welcomed in Byalaas that girl who came rom abroad to ask us why we

were collecting empty containers.1. Scheinberg and Mol, in press

Street sweeping in Latin America. Jeroen IJgosse


22/72

18


Te collection service that serves all areas o the city on

a regular basis, keeps streets clean and drains clear, hires

collectors in a sae working environment or a living wage,

and meets the needs o the users, comes pretty close to the

ideal.

Improving cost-effectivenessand service coverageProviding a good collection service to the poor as well

as the rich is more than just an equity issue inectious

diseases will aect the whole city. But i a city is strug-

gling to nd the money to pay or its existing collection

service, how can it hope to extend the service to unservedcommunities?

Part o the answer is to improve the cost-eectiveness

o present services, so as to ree up resources to expand the

service. Habitat has recently updated its seminal publica-

tion on waste collection in developing countries26, the key

26. Manus Coey (2009)

message o which is to design your system to be sustain-

able under local conditions. Many cities rely on oreign

donors or collection vehicles: this will only work i those

vehicles are appropriate to the local waste, which tends to

be wetter and denser in low-income countries than in the

North, and the local roads, which oten have lower legalweights or trucks, as they are built to a lower specica-

tion. It requires that spare parts, specialized equipment

and skilled labour are local ly available or maintenance.

Expanding service coverage outside the city centre is

a challenge. Where neighbourhoods cannot be served by

large vehicles, a common approach is to provide primary

collection using hand-carts, tricycles, animal carts or

small vehicles, which bring the waste to secondary collec-

tion points or small transer stations or transer to bigger

vehicles. In many cities, primary collection is organised by

community groups micro enterprises or the inormal sec-

tor, while secondary collection is organised by or on behal

o the municipality. Tere are at least three key principles

o success, one technical and two organisational:

Use collection vehicles and transer systems appropriate

to the local waste characteristics, street and trac con-

ditions and distances between collection and disposal

points.

Keep costs down by avoiding multiple manual handling

o the waste. Te ideal is or waste to be collected

rom household containers into a cart, rom which itis tipped directly into a larger transer container (or

tipping vehicle), or direct transport to disposal onto

a special tipping foor or sorting table and loading by

hand. ipping may be a good option when nothing else

is available.

Ensure co-ordination o the primary and second-

ary collection services, that the overall system works

eectively and reduces the risk o illegal disposal by

the primary collectors. Separate systems or dierent

materials acilitate high-value recycling and reduce

contamination.

Keeping the streets clean and drains clearMunicipal cleansing services are intimately linked to

waste collection. As Habitats DHS data shows, much

waste that is not collected is dumped in the street, in pub-

lic spaces and in watercourses. Many cities keep streets

clean in the central business district but leave other areas

unattended. Tis is unsightly and o-putting to visitors

to the city, and discourages investments. It has even been

suggested that the visual cleanliness o the wholecity

can be used as a surrogate perormance measure or city

governance.

Customer satisaction witha collection serviceRecent market research in the UK1 has identied 5 mainactors, which drive customer satisaction with wasteand recycling collections systems: Frequency, reliability, regularity and consistency o

collections A commitment to recycling Clean streets Sensitivity to circumstance Customer serviceThe results are being used to develop a set o principlesor a good collection service, which all local authoritieswill be invited to commit to.

1. Survey undertaken by Brook Lyndhurst or Wrap, 2008.

Ensure that donated vehiclescan be maintained locally1

More waste management systems in low-income cit-

ies have ailed due to the use o imported vehicles andequipment, without an adequate local spare parts andservice back-up, than rom any other cause. As a con-sequence, municipal workshops are lled with brokendown vehicles awaiting spare parts while the collectionsystem alters. A key to reliable and sustainable wastecollection must be to encourage the local manuactureo vehicles and vehicle bodies on locally available truckchassis, thus ensuring the availability o the spare partsand service and interesting a local manuacturer inproviding an on-going service. In that way, the current

crisis management repair o vehicles ater they havebroken down can give way to a preventive maintenance

that is easible under local conditions.1. Manus Coey (2009)


23/72

19


In the Phil ippines and Indonesia, cities organize

annually a street cleaning competition among their

communities to encourage active participation o their

local residents, while national environmental agencies

grant awards to outstanding clean and green cities. In

Japan, street cleaning is a regular activity that cityauthorities invite their residents to participate in at least

once a month.

Engaging the users and creatingeffective channels of communication

Tis is arguably the most important act

pre publication

Documents