 |
|||||||
| About UNEP | UNEP offices | News centre | Publications | Calendar | Awards | Milestones | UNEP Store |
|
|||||||
|
 |
|
|
|
||
| UNEP>DTIE>IETC | |
|
|
<Municipal Solid Waste Management> Asia 2.2 Topic h: Management and planning East Asia/Pacific Development concepts and technologies for integrated solid waste management are normally related to the public's awareness of resources, economics, and the quality of the environment in countries with high levels of education. The overall management responsibility lies with municipal authorities, but in most cases the tasks are divided between different levels of central government and various levels of local authorities. In cities of industrialized countries, resources and skills are available and planners may be quite well informed. Short-, medium-, and long-term plans are common. In Japan and Australia, for example, cities have implemented laws and regulations governing disposal bans on substances such as batteries, waste oil, tires, CFC gases, PCBs, etc. There is a mandatory deposit/take-back requirement for some goods such as mercuric oxide batteries, aluminum and plastic containers, tires, and nondegradable plastic bags. In Japan, to ensure that separation of wastes is carried out properly, households are required to use transparent plastic bags for waste disposal so that collection crews can see the contents. In 1992 South Korea passed a law promoting recycling. A major issue for MSW planning in these countries is public resistance to the siting of disposal facilities. The most common MSWM problems in developing countries of the region are: institutional deficiencies, inadequate legal provisions, and resources constraints. There is considerable overlap of administrative and enforcement authorities at the national, regional, and local levels as far as environmental control is concerned. There is a lack of long- and short-term planning due to resources constraints and the shortage of experienced specialists. Many of the laws and regulations dealing with MSWM are outmoded and fragmented; they are inadequate to deal effectively with the complications of managing wastes in large cities. National legislation for land use and environmental control is now being formulated. In many cases, the regulations are directly copied from industrialized countries without any serious study of the social and economic conditions, the technology, the level of skill required, and the local administrative structure. As a result, they prove to be unenforceable. Often the old regulations are not cleared off the books. Lack of authority to effectively enforce existing environmental regulations is a major problem. In most developing nations recycling laws, if they exist, are not enforced (China being the main exception). Although there are community initiatives to separate and collect recyclables for sale and reuse, these activities are "informal" and not supported by the municipal authorities, except in China, North Korea, and Vietnam. With regard to monitoring, again, in contrast to cities of industrialized countries where MSWM authorities have well-structured programs to monitor waste management operation including leachate and gas migration at landfills, the monitoring programs of developing nations are in general not satisfactory. The decision-making process is slow and complicated due to unnecessary paper work and bureaucracy, and this is a factor in illegal dumping of hazardous substances on lands and into the waterways. Better communications and more open and active international trade and aid in recent years have spurred reform in the current systems. The richer of the developing countries are examining a variety of incentives such as tax exemptions, especially for foreign experts, to install, monitor, control, or operate waste management equipment. Reduced import duties on equipment and tools is encouraging more advanced technology in waste management. Pilot projects are being tried out in cities like Manila, Bangkok, and Jakarta to make waste collection and disposal at squatter settlements an integral part of community improvement. A major challenge of many of the pilot projects is to compare how waste is viewed by the poor, on one hand, and urban planners and waste management authorities, on the other. In developing countries, NGOs could play a more effective role in the improvement of solid waste management if they were given more recognition by the municipal authorities. Community participation in waste management is vital for improvement. Traditionally, decision making has been top-down, with no input from the local communities. In places where the municipal authority does not do primary collection, however, people have created community organizations to collect wastes. These work well in parts of Jakarta and Hanoi, and are extensive in South Korean cities. South and West Asia Planning, management, and decision making depend on a country's administrative structures, bureaucratic style, and political values. In the Indian subcontinental urban areas, MSW departments still operate on the principles (and even regulations) set during the colonial period, when official concern about public health for central urban places governed administrative actions. Most municipalities do not have any legislation that uses the term "solid waste management." While the health orientation remains extremely important, and many would argue that it should be paramount, it has limited the openness of authorities to integrated approaches to waste management and to citizen participation in decision making. Municipalities in most South Asian countries operate under the health, environment, or local government ministries of the central or regional governments. In the central part of the region and in some countries in the north, health ministries are expanding to more directly oversee municipal corporations. In the subcontinent, on the other hand, there is a movement toward decentralization, with municipalities being expected to raise their own funds and take on more responsibilities. MSWM here is characterized by bureaucratic fragmentation; interlinked aspects may be under different departments or ministries. Although many countries now have environmental protection agencies that are directing their attention to this sphere, legislation relevant to modern waste management is deficient. As a result of great concern following the outbreak of plague in Surat, India in 1994, however, the country is formulating a national plan on MSWM, examining all laws relating to the subject. Decisions on legislation, major capital spending, or administrative changes need approval from the superordinate ministries or departments. With regard to routine management and planning, there is considerable variation in procedures throughout the region. For example, in Oman, the Ministry of Regional Municipalities is responsible for providing municipal services in all the cities except Muscat, where the municipal council has been given powers for decision making; in the subcontinent, municipalities have responsibility for routine management. In large cities, in democratic regimes, major decisions are made in city municipal corporations by elected councillors, headed by a mayor or equivalent officer. Important matters that influence MSWM, for instance revenues obtained through property taxes, are therefore determined by elected representatives. These urban areas thus have the advantage of access to citizen opinions through the representatives. On the other hand, there is the ever-present possibility of political resistance to technically and economically feasible, but unpopular, options. Politicians often endorse "visible" and large projects that may not be appropriate for local problems. Corrupt motives may seriously distort financial and technical decisions. Planning and decision making are ad-hoc. Major discussions about MSWM are initiated following public health crises. Master plans have been prepared for some of the large cities at considerable expense but very few of their proposals have been implemented. Smaller towns do not attempt long-term planning. Planning for MSWM at the regional level has not yet responded to important worldwide trends in thinking about the subject (cf. the new "agenda for solid waste management" in the "Waste reduction" portion of the Sound Practices section). Hence, waste minimization, recycling, helpful procurement policies, etc., for the most part find no place in MSW regulations. This should change gradually, under the influence of national legislation and advice on environmental protection. There are management difficulties in workforce relations in several countries in the subcontinent. Management regards the strong labor unions as too powerful and as protecting inefficiency, whereas the unions find there are many deficiencies in the payment and working conditions for their members. Strikes affecting solid waste collection can quickly imperil public health in hot and humid climates. Very often solid waste managers opt for mechanized equipment in the hope of preventing an increase in workers and avoiding extra training and supervision. Privatization is being strongly opposed by labor unions of waste workers in the subcontinent. The implementation of plans and systematic performance monitoring are deficient nearly everywhere. A problem with performance monitoring in MSWM is that there are no agreed-upon, up-to-date criteria for it. In some cases there are no performance guidelines (to give one example: there are none governing street sweeping in India and Bangladesh). In general, solid waste workers are poorly paid, barely trained, and inadequately supervised. The hierarchical structure of local bureaucracies, which results in lack of communication between top decision makers and field staff, restricts the flow of practical experience and insights from field officers to planning departments. There are few opportunities for the operational staff to exchange information with their colleagues in similar cities and towns. The solid waste management department is usually considered low-status, and chief engineers frequently transfer out of it after a short stint, which hampers continuity in management. Major changes toward decentralization are taking place in some countries (e.g., in India), which will have an impact on municipal taxation. Similarly, the trend to privatization has implications for planning and management. Abrupt privatization, without careful construction of contracts and good monitoring criteria, has led to problems. However, some functions such as provision, repair, and maintenance of vehicles have been successfully privatized. An important question is how well the poor sections of a city or town will be serviced under private arrangements. A major challenge for MSW departments in this region (with the exception of Israel) is how the needs and views of underprivileged communities (e.g., squatter settlements) can be expressed, understood, and incorporated into decision making. As long as squatter areas are treated as illegal and denied services, it is difficult for the solid waste authorities to arrange for effective interface between the MSWM system and the informal arrangements of the settlements. Such cooperation is being achieved, however, through the mediation of NGOs in several countries (for example, Orangi Pilot Project in Karachi, PROUD in Bombay, Society for Clean Environment and United Way in Baroda, Sneha Bhavan in Cochin, Save Pune Committee in Pune). Citizens' environmental organizations are on the increase in the region, and, especially since the plague cases in India in 1994, they are turning their attention to MSWM. In general, the role of NGOs and local communities can be extremely helpful in checking on performance, and in experimenting with waste reduction through neighborhood composting and the promotion of more recycling. Even in middle-class areas in the subcontinent, local groups are organizing to improve street cleanliness and to facilitate more efficient waste collection (e.g., the Civic Exnora street groups in India). Concern about the siting of, and conditions at, garbage dumps is developing in some large cities, such as Bangalore and Calcutta. A recent development is computer modeling to aid administration and planning for MSWM, which is undertaken in national institutes. The National Environmental Engineering Research Institute in Nagpur, India, for instance, is engaged in this work; the results will be disseminated to metropolitan cities. The usefulness of the models, however, depends on the reliability of the basic data for the place where conclusions are to be applied. The role of international agencies and donors is sometimes a matter of debate. Expertise and funds delivered by multilateral and bilateral agencies and donors have been of great importance in the full range of MSW services and decisions in the less affluent countries. On the other hand, there are complaints that pressure from international loan agencies and equipment vendors has led to hasty or poorly conceived privatization or the adoption of inappropriate equipment and procedures. A recent example is the inoperative waste-to-energy incinerator built with foreign aid in New Delhi. This situation should improve with the increase in understanding of solid waste issues worldwide. Perhaps the greatest impediment to improving planning in MSWM in this region is lack of knowledge: of waste quantities and characteristics and factors that affect their variations; of generators' attitudes, behaviors and needs; of how much different operations actually cost; of staff performance; and of sound practices elsewhere. The smaller and poorer places will not have the capacity to conduct surveys in the foreseeable future; in the better-off areas, the main handicap is lack of knowledge of the appropriate ways to gather the data that would assist good planning.
|
|
|
|||
 |
© United
Nations Environment Programme | privacy
policy | terms
and conditions |contacts|support
UNEP | UNEP
sitemap
|