The Water and Sanitation Program October 2006 is an international partnership for improving water and sanitation sector policies, practices, and capacities to serve poor people Case Study Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns Lessons and Implications In recent years, select examples have emerged of initiatives developed and launched by small urban local bodies in India that have transformed service levels and helped improve compliance with the Municipal Solid Waste Rules. A series of case studies has been compiled for three small towns in West Bengal, Goa, and Andhra Pradesh, focusing on decoding the institutional dynamics at work. Cover: Cleaned street in Kanchrapara. Old community garbage bin converted into flower pot with the message, `Do not use plastic'. The information and analysis provided in the case studies are based on information provided by municipalities and field assessments undertaken in the period April-July 2005. US$1 = Rs 45; 1,000 million = 1 billion. Estimates of waste generation in all three cases were provided by municipalities based on per capita waste generation norms (400-500 g) and not any empirical study. Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns Lessons and Implications The focus of the programs was on primary collection and transportation ...[however] the disposal end has remained unaddressed, with open dumping being the norm. Suryapet: Dumping on roadsides. 2 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications Since 1842, with the passing of the Box 1: Program Thrust first Municipal Act, the responsibility for municipal solid waste (MSW) Kanchrapara Community partnership management in India has been with urban Panaji Equipment innovation and financial incentives local bodies (ULBs). This was further Suryapet Stakeholder engagement and advocacy reiterated under the 74th Constitutional Amendment of 1992. In 1995, a plague in Surat brought the criticality of this local context; (b) potential that exists of small town experiences. All the three function back into focus and led to a for harnessing local resources and programs were launched with the aim of series of reform measures in the sector innovating through a bottom-up `improving the civic environment' (as since then. Subsequently, a legislative approach; (c) supportive role required against `safeguarding public health'). framework was provided by the to be played by state governments, Municipal Solid Waste (Management The focus of the programs thus was on which should guard against adopting a and Handling) Rules 2000 notification. primary collection and transportation, top-down prescriptive approach; and that is, increased frequency of Given these developments, it was to (d) need for more active intervention in collection, elimination of fixed be expected that the situation on the waste treatment and disposal that has community bins, and streamlining of ground would improve. However, despite tended to get neglected due to transportation systems. In all the three the clear identification of responsibility constraints existing at the local level. cases there has also been an attempt and pressures arising from growing at instituting segregation, composting, public awareness, the status of MSW Case Studies and recycling. To that extent, they services in most Indian towns has indicate a fundamental shift in approach remained far from satisfactory. Three towns from three different from basic cleaning services to states were selected for this study-- Yet, in recent years, select examples integrated sustainable waste Kanchrapara (West Bengal), Panaji have emerged of initiatives developed management. Despite this, the disposal (Goa), and Suryapet (Andhra Pradesh). and launched by small ULBs that have end has remained unaddressed, with The towns are similar in size, with transformed service levels and helped open dumping being the norm. populations of approximately 100,000, improve compliance with the MSW but with differing economic profiles and Funding for all three programs has been Rules. It is a matter of interest to explore political orientations. The programs almost entirely from municipal finances, the reasons that led to the development were similar in scope, but achieved with some contributions from local of these initiatives, the factors that the end outcomes using substantially stakeholders (for example, commercial supported their implementation, and the different strategies (see Box 1). establishments or business groups); lacunae that remain in these programs. Accordingly, while being comparable, little or no financial assistance was taken these cases represent a diverse set from higher levels of government. Focus of the Study Accordingly, a series of case studies were undertaken in April-July 2005, focusing on decoding the institutional dynamics at work; in particular, the factors that supported or constrained the design and implementation of the initiatives. Some important lessons that may be drawn from these cases include the (a) need for developing a reform program that is firmly grounded in the Panaji: Dump site at Curca. 3 In Kanchrapara, the inadequacy of financial resources with the Municipality necessitated the development of a low cost service delivery model that could be implemented by the people themselves. Kanchrapara: Door-to-door collection of segregated waste. 4 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications Case Study 1 Box 2: Program Summary Kanchrapara Outputs: Frequency of garbage collection increased from once in 10 to 15 days (West Bengal): to daily collection; fixed community bins eliminated. Attempt at treatment of Community- biodegradable waste through composting; open dumping of the rest. Period of implementation: 2003-2005 Based Service Coverage: Town-wide (achieved 80 percent coverage as of March 2005) Delivery User fees: Yes Segregation: Yes Program champion: Municipal Councilor Implementation phases: Kanchrapara was originally built as Ward-wise a township by Indian Railways. Program cost: Approximately US$66,700 for 15 wards Today it has expanded to include other (estimated US$100,000 for full town) economic activities as well, primarily small-scale trade and services. Given municipal status in 1917, the wards in the non-Railway areas are managed by Box 3: Profile of Kanchrapara the Kanchrapara Municipality (KM). The rapid growth of population in the Location: Municipality town located about 48 km. from Kolkata in North non-Railway areas had resulted in sharp 24 Parganas district of West Bengal increase in municipal solid waste Area: 3.07 sq. km. (plus 6 sq. km. under the management of Indian Railways) (MSW) generation in these areas. Secondary storage points for MSW No. of wards: 19 (plus 5 under the management of Indian Railways) (streetside vats) were cleared only two Population (2001): 126,000 (of which approximately 84,000 is under the or three times a month, resulting in Kanchrapara Municipality) unhygienic conditions on the streets BPL population: Approximately 20 percent and in open spaces. The Municipality Quantity of solid waste generated: Approximately 40 MT per day was unable to keep the town clean, given its inadequate MSW infrastructure and resources. Figure 1: Institutional Arrangements The idea of a participatory approach to solid waste management (SWM) emerged in mid-2002, in the course Kanchrapara Municipality of discussions between the Vice Chairman, Kanchrapara Municipality, Municipal SWM and the then Chief Environment Officer, committee Government of West Bengal. The inadequacy of financial resources with the Municipality necessitated the Conservancy Ward SWM department committee development of a low cost service delivery model that could be implemented by the people themselves. Sector Private contractor (150-180 households): After preliminary discussions and (proposed)-- 1 supervisor compost marketing + 1 worker subsequent approval from Municipal + Rickshaw Councilors, a provisional roadmap was developed, based on community 5 involvement, cost sharing, employment Table 1: Monthly Service Charges generation, gender sensitivity, and integrated waste management. Category Charges (in US$) The main elements of the SWM Residents 0.22 program were: · Families below poverty line (BPL) 0.10 · Introduction of door-to-door · Poorest 5 percent families of BPL population Free collection (DTDC) of garbage Commercial establishments against payment of a service · Shops 0.10 charge. · Restaurants and hotels 1-2 · Constitution of SWM committees at Collated by WSP-SA from data provided by the Municipality. the municipal and ward levels to oversee the SWM function. with any resistance from the Municipality municipal-level SWM committee. The · Substitution of community staff, since there were no retrenchments latter in turn is required to provide full dustbins by mobile trailers. under the program. support to the ward-level committees to enable effective functioning of the · Introduction of segregation at The most important quality of the SWM system. source to enable effective treatment decisionmaking process was that both of waste. the Chairman and Vice Chairman were The municipal-level SWM committee, keen to improve the situation and willing Implementation consisting of municipal councilors and to commit municipal funds for the other select nominees, has the overall Strategy purpose, with the latter acting as the responsibility for all aspects of SWM. program champion. It defines the operating guidelines for Launched in December 2002, the the ward SWM committees, including Public communication. For each ward, program was implemented on a ward- structure of service charges, wage the initial awareness creation was done wise basis, with the ward of the Vice rates and employment terms for ward primarily through group meetings in the Chairman, Kanchrapara Municipality, workers, price of compost and ward. Once the system was introduced serving as the pilot. Towards distribution of earnings from it, and in a particular ward, a campaign mode end-January 2003, the Municipal Board also initiates awareness creation. was adopted, using posters, school adopted the necessary guidelines to run Operational responsibility is, however, competitions, and even the singing of SWM committees at the municipal and divided between the KM conservancy songs by schoolchildren. ward levels. By March 2005, 15 wards department and ward-level (out of 19) had adopted the program.1 Institutional Arrangements SWM committees. To overcome the initial reluctance to pay Prior to the intervention, the SWM The conservancy department is service charges, the new SWM system function was managed entirely by the responsible for street sweeping, was operated free of charge for the conservancy department of KM. Under drain cleaning, transportation of first two months in each ward. No the program, SWM committees were garbage from trailers to the disposal `willingness to pay' study, however, was constituted at the municipal and ward site, composting operations, and done to arrive at the tariff structure. levels to oversee SWM service delivery managing the dump site. Instead, a brief consultation exercise for the town. These committees The ward-level SWM committee(s) using `local wisdom' led to the became the vehicle for the adoption consists of 12 or 15 members drawn formulation of the differentiated rate of the participatory approach under from the ward committee plus select structure. The program did not meet the program. nominees. It oversees all operational The ward-level SWM committees work and maintenance aspects of the DTDC 1The remaining four were undertaking groundwork (for example, service, including hiring of workers, surveys, awareness meetings) to adopt the program. within the framework provided by the 6 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications collection of charges, and maintaining Kanchrapara Municipality, and adopted specified points in the ward. In the financial accounts. for tracking operational aspects of afternoon, a tractor tows away the SWM service delivery systems. trailers (up to 10-12 trailers per Two market SWM committees have tractor) to the dump site where the also been created to coordinate and Operating System waste is unloaded (segregated oversee garbage collection from the biodegradable waste goes directly · Each ward (average population: two main markets in the town. into the compost chambers). 4,500) is split into four or six The funds generated through collection sectors; each sector consists of · The waste collector does the of service charges remain within the 150-180 Waste Generating Units2 physical work of collection, while ward, and are used only for SWM- (WGUs). Each sector is assigned the supervisor is responsible for related expenses. The ward committee one tricycle van accompanied monitoring the work (that is, maintains financial accounts for these by one waste collector and ensuring that all units under her funds, which are internally audited once one supervisor. charge are covered), collecting a year, and then disclosed to the ward monthly charges, maintaining residents in the annual general meeting. · Every morning, segregated garbage records, and encouraging [Note: SWM charges are the only funds is collected from households and segregation at source. This system raised by the ward committees.] dumped in the trailers stationed at is operational 365 days a year. As per the guidelines laid down, ward · Every family has been given two 2Mainly households, but also including shops, restaurants, workers should be hired from their own and schools. buckets--for storing biodegradable area from the underprivileged sections, typically for a tenure of one year. The Box 4: Operational Flow supervisors are required to be female, typically from the BPL category. There are no rewards or penalties linked to · 9 to 11 am: DTDC in a segregated form. performance; nevertheless, motivation · By 12 noon: SW deposited in trailers located at specified points in ward. levels run high, driven largely by public · 12 noon to 2 pm: Trailers towed by tractor to composting and disposal site. goodwill and a sense of civic pride. After unloading, trailers returned to original locations. A comprehensive monitoring schedule · Cleaning of main roads done in the morning by a team of sweepers. has been developed by the Figure 2: Operating System Dumpsite (~7 acres) Rickshaws Trailer Towed by tractor $$ Composting of Bagged and sold biodegradable waste Ward-level SWM committee KM's conservancy department Private contractor · Operational management, hiring workers, · Transportation, treatment, disposal (proposed) maintaining accounts · Street and drain cleaning · Awareness creation · All capex costs · Collection of charges · O&M costs for storage, transportation, · All O&M costs for DTDC treatment, and disposal · DTDC costs for first two months 7 organisms) solution.3 The composting method was initially developed and tested with the assistance of a research candidate from Jadavpur University (Kolkata). Disposal is clearly the weak link in the chain. The existing site is just an open dumping ground with no provision for leachate control. Moreover, it is surrounded by habitation. To mitigate the situation, KM proposes to construct a boundary wall and plant trees around the site, which should also address the currently prevalent cattle menace. At current rates of dumping, the site has a remaining life of about five to seven years. To address this challenge, a proposal has been mooted to set up a regional disposal facility in coordination with two Kanchrapara: Tractor with trailers unloading waste at dump site. neighboring municipalities. Marketing of compost and recycling and non-biodegradable waste--by inform the ward committee about of waste (currently entirely informal) the ward-level SWM committee. construction debris, which then gets are some of the areas with remaining The tricycles have provision for it collected for a charge. ambiguities, and require to be transporting the waste in · Cleaning of main roads and drains addressed for more effective operation. segregated form. Trailers are also is managed by the KM conservancy To this end, the Municipality has either partitioned or two trailers are department. Streets inside the submitted a proposal to the state provided at a spot, to store the wards, though cleaned by KM government for financing expansion biodegradable waste separately. workers, are managed by of composting facilities, and extending Mixed waste provided by some ward committees. the program to the remaining WGUs is sorted by the waste wards in the town. collector on the tricycle van itself. Treatment and Disposal Financial Resources · Roadside vats used for secondary The town has a treatment-cum-dump storage under the earlier system site located on the outer edge Costs associated with DTDC are have been done away with, and are of the town. It covers an area of shared between the Kanchrapara being gradually beautified into approximately seven acres, of which Municipality and ward-level SWM big flowerpots. about half is allocated for composting committees (see Box 5), while costs operations (started in early 2004). associated with transportation, · The Municipality plans to provide A multi-chamber framed structure treatment, and disposal are borne stands for workers, to facilitate the is provided for composting entirely by the Municipality. transfer of waste from tricycle vans segregated biodegradable waste into trailers. (approximately three-four tons per 3A liquid concentrate containing more than 80 strains of naturally available micro-organisms, for example, lactic acid bacteria, · Waste generators are required to day) using an EM (Effective Micro- photosynthetic bacteria, yeast. 8 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications Box 5: Door-to-Door Collection Costs (that is, bins, tricycles, shovels, spades, and trailers). Kanchrapara Municipality SWM ward committee Apart from a small grant from the One-time costs Ongoing costs Department of Environment for carrying out the program on a trial basis in two · Two bins per family · Wages of workers and supervisors wards, there has been no additional · Tricycles, bins (large), shovels or spades · Repairs and maintenance of tricycles funding for the Municipality. Going · O&M costs for first two months · Replacement of tricycle bins forward, however, it is expected that · Awareness creation · Gloves, raincoats, umbrellas additional funds would be required to sustain the SWM effort. · Signages and beautification of vats · Admin. expenses for committee Program Highlights · High level of public participation and decentralization through ward-level Table 2: Resource Mobilization SWM committees. Category Amount (in US$ approx.) · Payment of charges by all households, due to transparency Allotment from SFC grants 44,444 and accountability. Revenue Municipal fund 4,444 collections remain within the ward Grant from Department of Environment 11,044 and are spent only on SWM. of state government · Segregation at source-- Plus service charges collected approximately 60 percent. Provision for segregated transportation. Collated by WSP-SA from data provided by the Municipality. · Cost recovery: Service charges Most of the ward-level SWM operations per year (equivalent to 20 percent of cover the full cost of DTDC. are financially viable, with service KM's SWM costs). · Employment generation for 150 charge collections covering all ongoing Earnings from the compost plant are workers (50 percent women) costs associated with DTDC. In a few planned to be distributed equally from BPL population. cases where the ward does not have between the wards. adequate resources, KM may provide · Negligible increase in KM staff funds for maintenance and replacement Program Cost and Resource Mobilization or vehicles. of equipment. In the first two years of operation, the Issues The overall cost of the town's SWM Kanchrapara SWM program has cost · System is dependent on volunteers systems is approximately US$7 per US$66,700 and covered 15 of the 19 from the community, which can be a ton (excluding street cleaning). The low wards. The expenditure has been on constraint at times. costs are partly due to the low cost providing free bins for households; O&M equipment deployed and low wage costs for first two months (for each · Limited engagement of ragpickers. rates for DTDC.4 SWM costs account ward); trailers, tricycles, large bins; com- · No organized attempt at recycling. for about 15-16 percent of KM's total posting plant; and awareness creation. revenue expenditure (US$800,000 in · Weak disposal system. 2004-05). Service charge collections KM spends an average of US$4,000 for the town are roughly US$22,200 per ward for introducing the program, · Lack of coordination with other which includes two months of operating government authorities, namely the expenses associated with DTDC, initial Railways (which manages the other 4US$6.66 (Rs. 300) per month for the supervisor and US$11.11 (Rs. 500) per month for the collection worker. awareness creation, plus all equipment half of the town). 9 The rollout of the solid waste management program in Panaji was part of a multi-pronged campaign aimed at the revitalization of the city, called `Together for Panjim'. Panaji: Transfer of waste from trolley bins into trucks using a mechanized side loader. 10 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications Case Study 2 Box 6: Program Summary Panaji (Goa): Outputs: Frequency of garbage collection increased from once in 10 to 15 days Innovation to daily; fixed community bins eliminated. Incentivization of recycling. Attempt at and Incentives treatment of biodegradable waste through composting; open dumping of the rest. Period of implementation: 2003 Coverage: Town-wide Work Wonders (nine months) User fees: Yes (partial coverage) Segregation: No Panaji, the capital of Goa, is a city with Champion: Municipal Commissioner Implementation phases: Locality-wise a strong cultural heritage. Apart from being a popular tourist destination, it Program cost: Approximately US$88,900 is an administrative center and a commercial hub for the state. Till the early 1990s, the town's municipal Box 7: Profile of Panaji solid waste (MSW) management was characterised by a weak system Location: Corporation town located in North Goa, it lies on the banks of the with poor infrastructure, resulting in river Mandovi unhygienic civic conditions. In 1995, Area: 7.56 sq. km. with the assistance of the Government Number of wards: 14 of India, United Nations Development Population (2001): 86,000 (plus 25,000 floating population) Program (UNDP), and Water and Sanitation Program-South Asia BPL population: Less than 1 percent (WSP-SA), the Panjim Municipal Council Quantity of SW generated: 50 MT per day (PMC) undertook the Solid Waste and Resource Management (SWARM) project. However, despite detailed scheme piloted in Dona Paula was rolled SWM Program: planning and infrastructure upgradation `Bin Free in 2003' out to the entire city of Panaji. The key undertaken as part of the elements of the MSW program were (a) SWARM project, sanitary conditions DTDC for the entire city of Panaji along remained unsatisfactory. with the introduction of service charges; (b) substitution of community bins by In December 2000, with the help of trolley bins along with automated truck- the local Garbage Management loading systems; and (c) program for Committee5 and the NGO `People's the recycling of plastic waste. Movement for Civic Action', the PMC launched its `house-to-house garbage Implementation Strategy collection scheme' in Dona Paula (no popularity and in a little over a year's The rollout of the SWM program in longer a part of Panaji). The PMC time spread to approximately 200 Panaji was part of a multi-pronged appointed a contractor for the door-to- households. In early 2003, under the leadership of the Chief Officer6 of Panaji, campaign aimed at the revitalization of door collection (DTDC) and also a comprehensive city revitalization the city, called `Together for Panjim'. instituted a service charge of US$0.67 campaign was launched, which included The campaign encompassed improving per month for each household. Though MSW management as a critical element. the civic infrastructure and conserving initially implemented for only 70 As part of the MSW component, the city's heritage, thereby fostering households, the scheme gained christened `Bin Free in 2003', the DTDC civic pride among the citizens. It had the support of local as well as state-level 5Constituted under the Goa Non-Biodegradable Garbage (Control) Act, 1996. 6Equivalent to a Municipal Commissioner. political representatives. 11 efficient as well. Help was taken from the bin manufacturer to arrive at the final lid design. A unique feature of the city revitalization campaign was the way in which it harnessed local talent, by seeking widespread involvement from the city's residents at various stages of the program. For instance, architects and urban planners assisted in the restoration of heritage buildings, competitions were held to develop street art, music festivals were held to generate civic pride, and so on. For the MSW program in particular, musicians helped develop jingles for communicating the bin-free message, design inputs were sought from local experts to arrive at the look of the campaign as well as the SWM infrastructure (that is, street bins, trucks), and engineers contributed their Panaji: Door-to-door collection using trolley bin. inputs to design truck modifications. Improving the sanitary conditions of the several countries including Australia, The additional function of DTDC was city was an important element of this France, and Singapore. The trolley bin performed without any increase in campaign, reflected in the launch of has proved to be more functional than a manpower. Workers earlier responsible the Bin Free program. Based on the tricycle rickshaw, given the undulating for only street cleaning, drain cleaning, and removal of waste from community pilot in Dona Paula, the program terrain of Panaji. A similar process of bins were now given the job of DTDC as was implemented locality-wise. iteration was adopted for arriving at the well. Their cooperation was obtained by The implementation was managed street litter bin design. The hydraulic paying them a cash incentive from the directly by the Corporation of the arm of the garbage trucks was also service charges collected (details in City of Panaji (CCP)7 without any locally modified8 to enable transfer of subsequent sections). NGO assistance. waste from the trolley bin into the truck without manual intervention. This local This arrangement also served to As part of the pilot at Dona Paula, innovation in truck design resulted in counter resistance to payment of initially households kept the bins outside substantial savings in cost, which might charges, based on the argument that and a truck collected the waste directly. have been otherwise incurred had the the money collected was "not to make Later an intermediate stage of transfer Municipality purchased modified trucks the Corporation richer, but as an was introduced in the form of the trolley from the manufacturer. Modifications incentive for the worker doing bin, which refined the operational flow to were also made in the design of lids for the DTDC". its current form. The current trolley bin the bins provided to households. These design was arrived at after much prevented spillage of garbage by stray To gain public goodwill and credibility, experimentation with bin models from a quick response vehicle was also animals while being operationally introduced with a 24-hour helpline number, to clear garbage left 7In 2002, Panaji's municipal status was upgraded from Municipal 8 Council to Corporation and the civic agency, Panaji Municipal These were originally designed for picking up the SWARM bins of uncollected due to any reason. Council, was re-christened Corporation of the City of Panaji. the earlier system. 12 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications The program was started in early 2003 Table 3: Monthly Service Charges and completed within nine months, by November 2003. Category Charges (in US$) Public Communication Residents, shops 0.67 Strategies Hotels or restaurants (depending on size 3-13 of establishment) SWM by itself had little potential for engaging public interest. The subject, Collated by WSP-SA from data provided by the Municipality. however, drew a lot more attention and cooperation when publicized in the Box 8: Operational Flow context of overall civic revival under the `Together for Panjim' campaign. As part Morning shift: Street sweeping of the campaign, cultural programs such as music festivals, fairs, and carnivals · Sweepers clean roads and leave waste in trolley bins by the roadside. were held in which the message of civic · Vehicles load waste and then transport it to the dump site. hygiene was reiterated. Afternoon shift: DTDC For locality-level communication, the · 2 to 5 pm: DTDC done using trolley bins. On getting filled, these are left Chief Officer of CCP and the Waste by the roadside. Management Officer visited houses, · 3 pm onwards: Vehicles start moving along fixed routes, collecting garbage along with women volunteers, to from trolley bins left by the roadside. On completing their route these vehicles convey the details of the scheme and transport the waste to the dump site. garner the cooperation of residents. Night shift (by contractors): Collection from hotels and restaurants. Institutional Arrangements Within the CCP, the solid waste function management cell. It is headed by workers accordingly. Out of the is managed by the solid waste the Accounts/Taxation Officer, who collections made, the supervisors pay also has the dual charge of the cash incentives (Table 5) to the Figure 3: Institutional Waste Management Officer (in the collection and transportation workers, Arrangements absence of any alternate official with maintain accounts for these funds, and the requisite expertise). This officer deposit the surplus amount with the represents the continuity factor of CCP. The cash incentives serve as an CCP Panaji's SWM services, having handled informal contractual arrangement this charge for over a decade. Given between the workers and users, Ragpicker SWM cell this, as well as the limited community enhancing worker accountability for involvement, the system appears to proper service delivery. be excessively dependent on this Use of Financial Incentives for Recycling Zone: One supervisor one individual. + 10-15 workers · A collection center for PET bottles Field services are headed by a Municipal + has been established (with support Trolley bins, trucks Inspector and a Sanitary Inspector, from Pepsi Co.). Ragpickers deposit under whose charge are 15 Private contractor plastic bottles there, for which supervisors, to oversee the collection --hotels they are paid US$0.55 per 100 and transportation work for each zone. bottles. Bottles are transported to Private contractor Service charges are collected by a crushing unit near Vasco (set up (proposed)-- Treatment & Disposal supervisors, who also deal with by Coca-Cola), from where the customer complaints, and manage crushed plastic is sold to recyclers. 13 Figure 4: Operating System Ragpickers $$ Dump site (~3.6 acres) Trolley bin Hydraulic truck Vermi-composting $$ of biodegradable $$ waste Goa Dairy Hotels/ (milk bags) Restaurants Bagged and sold CCP's SWM cell Private contractor Private contractor · Operational management · Service contract (proposed) · Maintaining accounts · Management contract · Collection of charges Ragpickers · All capex and operational costs, except · Cost-free collection of recyclables from for DTDC, from hotels shops and offices · PET bottles collection center · People can return washed empty managed by a supervisor. The · After being swept, street waste is plastic milk bags of Goa Dairy at the supervisor manages the collection collected in the trolley bins, from booths, for which they are paid at as well as transportation for his zone, which it is transferred into garbage the rate of US$0.17 per 100 bags using 10-15 workers consisting of trucks, as in the case of DTDC. (approximately 250 gram). a mix of permanent and temporary · This system is operational 365 days staff. The same workers do street Privatization a year. sweeping in the morning and DTDC in The SWM function is managed entirely the afternoon. Transportation of waste is done using by the CCP, with the exception of a trucks (capacity: approximately · Each collection worker covers few service areas that have been, seven tons) that are fully closed, some approximately 250 households. or are being, outsourced to private of which have provision for hydraulic The worker takes garbage from contractors, namely (a) collection of loading (thus eliminating manual handling household bins (capacity: 20 liters) waste from the 250-odd hotels and of waste). Each vehicle makes two and transfers it into the trolley bin restaurants; and (b) management of trips--once in the morning for street (capacity: 240 liters). Later, the the treatment-cum-disposal facility in waste and the other in the evening for garbage trucks travel along a fixed Curca. In both cases, the CCP has DTDC waste. route and transfer garbage from the retained ownership of the underlying trolley bins left by the roadside into Market waste is received directly in a assets, having outsourced only the the closed truck. After completing truck parked at the location from where operational aspects (Box 9). their DTDC beat, workers place it is cleared more frequently in the Operating System empty trolley bins back inside course of the day, thus minimizing any fixed enclosures. accumulation of waste. With the The city is divided into zones9 for elimination of community bins, street operational purposes, with each zone · Waste from slum-like areas is litter bins have been installed all across received through common the city. The CCP has not yet instituted any fines for street littering. 9Not necessarily based on ward boundaries. storage bins. 14 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications Box 9: Contractual Arrangements Hotel or restaurant waste Scope: Collection of segregated waste from hotels or restaurants, between 7 pm and 1 am, for a service charge (fixed by CCP). Resources: CCP provides vehicle. Contractor hires CCP Payment: Contractor pays CCP US$200 per month for vehicle. staff and pays them as per norms defined by CCP. Retains surplus revenue. Treatment-cum-disposal facility (proposed) Scope: (a) treatment of mixed waste with effective micro-organism technology, followed by aerobic composting; assistance to CCP in marketing the compost and recyclables; (b) reclamation of old waste dumped on site; (c) improvement of site through tree plantation, roads, and drainage. Resources: CCP to provide machinery and equipment. Tenure: Five years. Payment: CCP pays fixed fees of US$1,222 per month and 7.5 percent of actual cost of civil and mechanical work. Construction waste is being used as (outside municipal limits), in what used Apart from the obvious inadequacies landfill cover. Residents are encouraged to be a stone quarry. Started in 1994, of the facility, matters were further to phone in to get construction debris it covers an area of 3.61 acres, and compounded by a nearby Municipality, collected, for which separate charges incorporates a vermi-composting Mapusa, directing its waste to Curca. are levied. facility. The site still lacks basic amenities The extra dumping continued for almost such as a proper boundary wall two years, till as late as March 2005, While segregation is being done at (resulting in cattle menace), electricity when it stopped after aggressive most commercial establishments such or a water connection. protests by Panaji representatives. as hotels or restaurants (biodegradable waste) and offices (recyclables), not much headway has been made on segregation at the household level. Segregated biodegradable waste is treated at the composting facility, while recyclables are re-processed with the involvement of ragpickers. Apart from the incentive schemes for PET bottles and milk bags (described earlier), the CCP has informally organized ragpickers to collect recyclable waste directly from offices and shops--a service it provides free of charge. For the residential areas, it sometimes coordinates with the DTDC workers and extract recyclables directly from the waste in the trolley bin. Treatment and Disposal The town's treatment-cum-dump site at Curca is located nine km. from Panaji Panaji: Transfer of waste from trolley bins into trucks using a mechanized side loader. 15 Table 4: Service Charge Collections from SWM Scheme10 · Sale of compost (currently negligible). Year Amount (in US$) These do not offset SWM costs to any 2002-03 2,918 significant extent. 2003-04 19,360 The operating cost (estimated) of the 2004-05 (estimate) 26,700 town's SWM systems is US$31 per 2005-06 (budget) 33,333 ton.11 This accounts for about 35-40 percent of the CCP's total revenue Collated by WSP-SA from data provided by the Municipality. expenditure. Service charge collections for the town are roughly US$26,700 This overloading has brought the facility Attempts have also been made at per year (equivalent to just about close to saturation levels, and also decentralized vermi-composting in three percent of the CCP's SWM costs). disrupted the vermi-composting select residential complexes, in partner- Currently the share of WGUs paying operations. The vermi-composting ship with local NGOs. These have, service charges is relatively small (about facility (set up in November 2001) however, remained isolated initiatives. 20 percent). The CCP has refrained consists of 14 vermi-beds and is used Financial Resources from aggressively pushing for increased for composting primarily hotel and market waste. When operational, the collections, since its primary objective at Panaji's SWM model offers the following vermi-compost generated is used this stage is to ensure participation of revenue-generating opportunities: mainly for the city's horticulture WGUs in the SWM system and not · Service charges from waste requirements. The CCP now proposes cost recovery. Nevertheless, collections generating units (WGUs). to upgrade the facility, using a private have been steadily rising on a yearly contractor, who will also subsequently basis since the start of the scheme · Fixed payment from contractors manage disposal-cum-treatment (see Table 4), from US$2,918 for collection of hotel or operations at the site (Box 9). restaurant waste. in 2002-03 to a budgeted US$33,333 for 2005-06. Not all service charge collections translate into revenue for the CCP since a share of these service charges is paid as cash incentives to the workers. While these incentives are defined by the CCP, their disbursal is managed at the supervisory level; the remaining surplus is deposited with the CCP. To further increase willingness to pay, the CCP has started a scheme for annual payment of SWM service charges along with the property tax at a discounted rate of US$6.67 instead of US$8.11. 10Net of cash incentives paid to workers, and also excluding collections from hotels or restaurants. 11Breakup (per ton): Collection cost: US$19; transportation cost: Panaji: Garbage truck parked at the vegetable market. US$11.50; disposal cost: US$0.50. 16 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications The CCP has spent roughly US$88,900 on the program, which includes the acquisition of trolley bins, large bins, street litter bins, modification of hydraulic trucks,12 augmenting of facilities at treatment-cum-disposal site, and awareness creation (a substantial part of this activity was covered under the larger civic revival campaign, well supported by local stakeholders such as corporates, NGOs, and clubs). The CCP's expenditure on the solid waste program has been funded entirely from its own sources, with no external funding for the Municipality. Program Highlights · Rapid implementation (nine months). · Dovetailing with multi-pronged campaign resulting in effective outreach. Panaji: Vermi-composting facility in a residential apartment complex. · Levy of service charges, resulting in part cost sharing for DTDC. Table 5: Sample Monthly Accounts for a Supervisor · Payment of cash incentives to Staff Incentive per No. of Total workers (~ 30 percent) from worker (fixed) workers amount collections. Results in (a) worker (in US$) (in US$) accountability; and (b) increased productivity without additional Supervisor 11.11 1 11.11 expenditure by the CCP. Sweepers 3.33 8 26.67 · Improved recycling efficiency Daily workers 3.33 7 23.33 through market creation for PET Driver 8.90 2 17.78 bottles and plastic milk bags. Operators 4.44 6 26.67 · Equipment choice and adaptation Total cash incentives paid 105.56 to suit local conditions. Service charge collections 333.33 · Minimal manual handling of waste. Net surplus deposited with CCP 227.77 · No increase in vehicles or manpower. Collated by WSP-SA from data provided by the Municipality. Issues · Poor downward allocation of decide pricing under contractual · No segregation at source in operational responsibility. arrangements. households. · Low public engagement in · Weak disposal system (inter- · Low level of user-fee collection. operations and monitoring. municipal `conflict'!) due to strong NIMBY (`Not In My Back Yard') sentiment in region. 12No additional vehicles were acquired under the program. · Inadequate cost information to 17 Though the Suryapet initiative was spearheaded by the Municipal Commissioner, it received strong backing from the political decisionmakers, namely the elected councilors. Suryapet: Cleaned streets in a residential area. 18 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications Case Study 3 Box 10: Program Summary Suryapet Outputs: Focus on primary collection and transportation; frequency of (Andhra Pradesh): garbage collection increased from once in 10 to 15 days to daily collection; fixed community bins eliminated. Treatment of biodegradable waste through Engaging composting, recycling of dry waste, and open dumping of the rest. Stakeholders Period of implementation: 2003 Coverage: Town-wide to Achieve User fees: No Segregation: Yes Program champion: Municipal Commissioner Service Delivery Implementation phases: Operationally phased. Phase I: Bin-free with daily Outcomes clearance; Phase II: Segregation at source Program cost: US$275,500 (from municipal finances and contributions from Suryapet was assigned municipal status local stakeholders) in 1952. Its population has since grown by over 10 times. Its main economic activities are agriculture and business. Box 11: Profile of Suryapet The town also has an industrial estate that includes industries such as PVC, Location: Municipality town located about 137 km. from Hyderabad HDPE pipes, rice mills, pharmaceuticals, in Nalgonda district of Andhra Pradesh. and stone polishing. Area: 34.54 sq. km. Prior to 2003, the town suffered from No. of wards: 28 poor sanitary standards. The frequency Population (2001): 103,000 (plus 30,000 floating population) of garbage collection was low, resulting Slums: 44 slum areas in waste spillage around bins. Incidence of disease in the town's populace was Quantity of MSW generated: Approximately 32 MT per day high. In an effort to clean up the city, the Municipal Commissioner launched a `Zero-Based Solid Waste Management' Implementation Strategy The first phase had won the goodwill initiative13 in early 2003, which was of the citizens by displaying the The project was launched in two implemented on a phased basis. The Municipality's commitment to improving phases, both of which were key elements of the initiative were: living conditions. This facilitated the implemented for the entire town: involvement of households in the · Introduction of door-to-door (DTDC) implementation of the second phase, · In January 2003, the municipal collection of garbage. that is, in doing segregation at source. council started DTDC, and Both these phases were accompanied · Eradication of community dustbins. eliminated community dustbins by an aggressive public outreach (approximately 360 bins). This · Introduction of segregation at source. program (further details below) for resulted in significant improvement creating awareness among the citizens · Installation of treatment and of the town's civic environment. and ensuring their cooperation. recycling facilities to minimize waste · From May 2003, a two-bin system Though the initiative was spearheaded disposal requirements. was introduced. Nearly 52,000 by the Municipal Commissioner, it green and red plastic bins were received strong backing from the 13A similar initiative had been attempted by the Municipal distributed free of cost to all political decisionmakers, namely the Commissioner in his previous assignment as Municipal Commissioner of Mandapeta (Andhra Pradesh). He drew from his residential houses to enable elected councilors. This allowed the previous experience for the design and implementation of the Suryapet SWM program. segregation at source. program to be implemented without 19 any political hindrances. Considerable was designed and implemented solely Figure 5: Institutional effort was devoted to engaging all the by the Municipality. Arrangements stakeholders--chairperson, councilors, Public Communication staff, union leaders, and specific Strategies Suryapat user groups (for example, trade Municipality associations, industry groups, schools, The Municipal Council undertook and colleges). Senior citizens were also aggressive efforts to generate public involved for collecting suggestions. awareness and engage the community. Sanitary Moreover, an integrated approach was The nature of communication differed department adopted for implementation. To this for each phase of the project. end, the involvement of decisionmakers from the Engineering, Town Planning, In the first phase, the message was a Zone--Workers + and Revenue sections was made part of overall civic awareness. Street Tractor-trailer mandatory for the purposes of project meetings were conducted to create monitoring and implementation. awareness on personal hygiene, along with other elements of civic well-being, Training was imparted to the local for example, family planning, literacy, communication channels--distribution of government staff and public health developmental schemes, and reasons leaflets, publicity in print and electronic workers under the leadership of for the spread of communicable media, street plays, pasting of stickers the Municipal Commissioner. The diseases. The aim was to sensitize on the doors of houses, house visits by Municipality even arranged for people to the importance of maintaining women volunteers (since the target meditation sessions and yoga hygiene, and thereby create a favorable audience was the female members of programs to correct behavioral mindset for their participation. households)--were deployed. attitudes to hygiene and improve Households were persuaded to store As part of the community engagement worker interaction with citizens. Special the garbage in their homes (as against effort, the Municipality also held efforts were made to recognize and dumping on roadsides) and hand it over reward workers for their hard work. meetings with trade bodies, and to the collection staff. No involvement was sought from any organized campaigns in schools private or non-governmental entity in In the second phase, the campaign and colleges. the change process. The entire exercise focused on segregation. Various Institutional Arrangements The entire SWM program and its operations are managed by the Municipal Commissioner. The engineering and sanitary departments function under him, and together provide the SWM services for the town. The smooth functioning of the system appears to depend heavily on the initiative of the Municipal Commissioner himself. It is unclear how well the system will continue to function once he is no longer with the Suryapet Municipality. The change process was self-initiated, without any diktat from central or state government agencies. This possibly Suryapet: Segregated dry waste stored at recycling facility. accounts for the commitment and 20 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications innovativeness displayed by the Box 12: Operational Flow Municipality in implementing the change process. · By 10 am: DTDC using tractors with trailers. On entering each lane at a The public goodwill generated as a pre-set time, the tractor driver blows a whistle to inform the residents to hand result of the SWM initiative has had a over their dustbins to the municipal staff. spin-off benefit in the form of improved · 10 am to 12 noon: Collection of waste from shops, business establishments, tax collections by the Municipality. and hospitals. The success with segregation has · 2 pm to 5 pm: Lifting of drainage silt and collection of waste from meat shops. created improved opportunities for recycling, which has in turn facilitated the · Waste is transported by tractors to a recycling and treatment facility. development of micro enterprises and · Sweeping of main roads is done at night. other income generation opportunities for the informal recycling sector. Figure 6: Operating System Half of the area dedicated to composting and recycling operations is inhabited by low-income groups and Recycling shed Packed and sold slums. The improved solid waste operations have provided poor people Vermi-composting the twin benefits of (a) improved hygiene Tractor-cum-trailer of biodegradable Bagged and sold waste resulting in improved health and productivity (in turn reflected in raised levels of savings); and (b) increased self Dump site and wage employment opportunities Suryapet Municipality's conservancy department · Full operational responsibility for them. · Full capex + O&M costs Operating System The town has been divided into seven The disposal site has an electrical and 90 percent recyclable waste is zones (of approximately 4,000-5,000 connection for lighting purposes. sold or reused. Nevertheless, households), with one tractor and During treatment and disposal (a) dry despite the high diversion rates 30-35 sanitary personnel assigned to waste is further segregated at a some amount of waste remains each zone for DTDC. Collection is done recycling shed, and recyclables are untreated or unused, and this is then directly by tractor-trailers; no tricycles packed and weighed. These are sold dumped on roadsides or other are used. There is, therefore, minimal to paper and other industries located low-lying areas. manual handling of wastes. in the vicinity; (b) organic waste is vermi-composted and sold to farmers No user charges are being levied Community dustbins (approximately or used for horticulture purposes; for collection and disposal of waste; 360) have been entirely eliminated. To and (c) rejects, debris, and other final the service is currently free of cost prevent street littering, pole bins have waste is used for leveling purposes. for the people. been installed along footpaths. Due to the success with segregation, However, the Municipal Council has Treatment and Disposal landfill diversion rates are very high. passed a resolution authorizing a Performance levels achieved till The treatment and disposal site has US$2.20 fine on defaulters. The now reflect this--60 percent of composting sheds, beds, and a fine, along with regular monitoring organic waste is composted,14 bore well pump. A shed has also for defaulters and on-the-spot been constructed for further action, has ensured a high level of 14The Municipality is unable to do more due to inadequate segregation of dry waste. compliance among the public. composting infrastructure at present. 21 Table 6: Operational Infrastructure In 2003, the Municipality earned US$575 by selling recyclables. Currently, the Municipality earns Category Before program After program approximately US$1,770 per month No. of workers for DTDC 217 226* through the sale of recyclables and Workers for road cleaning n.a. 12 compost (which it sells at the rate of Tractors 9 10 US$0.06 per kg). Community bins 360 Nil Program Highlights *Male: 98; Female: 128; n.a.: not available. · Achieved high levels of segregation Collated by WSP-SA from data provided by the Municipality. at source. Financial Resources sources such as the Lions Club, · Accomplished high landfill diversion industrial houses, and trade rates (60 percent biodegradable The Suryapet Municipality spent associations. The Municipality waste; 90 percent recyclables). about US$275,555 on cleaning implemented the program without any up the town. The money was spent · Led to income generation from support from the central or state primarily on equipping the residents sale of recyclables and compost government. It has, however, submitted with two separate dustbins, constructing ~ US$1,770 per month. a proposal for funds to augment the the vermi-compost and recycling transportation and composting and · Generated financial support from sheds, and implementing training recycling infrastructure for the town. local trade and civic groups. and awareness programs. There Operating cost is roughly US$5.80 was negligible increase in, and · Resulted in increased tax collections per ton. On the other hand, the SWM hence minimal expenditure on, due to public goodwill generated system is currently generating income operational infrastructure. by program. through the sale of recyclables for the Apart from its own finances, the production of paper and pulp, and also · Achieved engagement of all Municipality raised money from different through selling compost to farmers. stakeholder groups, thereby ensuring smooth implementation. · Resulted in income generation and improved living conditions for slum population. · Led to minimal increase in vehicles and manpower. Issues · No user fees or worker incentives resulting in an absence of contractual arrangement with user. · Inadequate decentralization of operational responsibility. · Low public engagement in operations and monitoring. · No provision for proper disposal Suryapet: SWM department workers near a tractor-trailer. of remaining waste stream. 22 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications Summary of Program Outputs Kanchrapara Panaji Suryapet (West Bengal) (Goa) (Andhra Pradesh) DTDC scope 100% 100% 100% Covered storage Approximately 30% 100% No storage Daily clearance Yes Yes Yes Collection from bulk Yes Yes Yes generators Covered transportation Approximately 30-40% 100% Partial Treatment (percent of Centralized composting Centralized and decentralized Centralized composting biodegradable waste) (less than 30%) vermi-composting (minimal) (approximately 60%) Recycling (percent of Ragpickers scavenging from Ragpickers coordinated with Centralized recycling non-biodegradable trailers or dump sites DTDC. Organized scheme center (approximately waste) (approximately 10-30%) for plastic bottles 90%) (approximately 40%) Disposal Open dumping Open dumping Open dumping Emancipation of Employment generation Reduced health hazards for Employment generation for informal sector for DTDC ragpickers; financial incentives treatment and recycling; reduced health hazards Community participation Very high (through ward Average Average committees) · Compliance · Compliance · Compliance · User charges · Segregation at source · Segregation at source · User charges · Operational control Financial summary (Figures not fully comparable due to differing accounting practices) Operating expenditure on 2003-04: 2003-04: 2003-04: SWM (percent of total US$113,333 (16%) US$688,890 (34%) US$348,890 (14%) revenue expenditure) 2004-05: 2004-05: 2004-05: US$117,778 (15%) US$800,000 (40%) US$175,556 (10%) Operating cost (per ton) Approximately US$8-10 Approximately US$40 Approximately US$15 Revenue generation Approximately Approximately Approximately (percent of cost recovery) US$22,200 p.a. US$26,700 p.a. and rising US$22,200 p.a. (sale of (100% of DTDC costs; 20% (3-4% of total SWM costs) compost and recyclables) of total SWM costs) (13% of total SWM costs) Program cost Approximately Approximately Approximately US$66,700 for 15 wards US$88,900 US$275,500 (estimate for full town US$100,000) Note: DTDC: Door-to-door collection; p.a.: per annum. Collated by WSP-SA from data provided by the Municipality. 23 Lessons and Challenges Program Outcomes · Significant improvement in civic environment, though final health outcomes has not been achieved due to absence of systems for safe and sanitary disposal. · Reduced incidence of health hazards associated with ragpicking (especially in Suryapet and Panaji). · Increased compliance with Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Rules 2000 (except disposal norms, which have not been met). · Improved system productivity as indicated by the negligible increase Kanchrapara: Door-to-door collection of segregated waste. in staff or vehicles despite improved service levels. exposed to alternative strategies for labor profile, and technical infrastructure SWM services--at Kanchrapara for maintenance of equipment; and by · Income-generating opportunities for through a workshop as well as inter- doing so, designed programs that were population living below the poverty action with a sector expert; at Panaji locally appropriate. This, however, did line and ragpickers. through a pilot undertaken in a specific not prevent them from drawing on · Improved citizen confidence in city locality by a local NGO; and at Suryapet external expertise where necessary, as administration, in some cases through a similar initiative attempted in a in the case of (a) Kanchrapara where a resulting in improved tax collections. previous work assignment. researcher from a nearby leading university assisted them in designing Lessons This enabled the concerned their composting process; or (b) in decisionmakers to proceed with their Why did the programs get initiated in Panaji where assistance was obtained programs with a greater degree of these towns? from the product supplier for confidence. They further leveraged their re-designing the household bins. None of these programs were already favorable relationship with driven by external pressures, such political stakeholders in the town to gain Extent of community engagement as a diktat from the state assurance of political support for their varies depending on the local government or the State Pollution programs. They were thus able to context. A community-based approach Control Boards (SPCBs); their effectively translate public discontent should be encouraged since it facilitates genesis lay in local drivers. In each into public cooperation for the program. greater public participation in the MSW of the three towns, one of the key management process. However, the Success Factors decisionmakers in the Municipality extent of community involvement needs recognized the need for reform in the Program design has to be firmly to be evaluated against the prevailing MSW management services, and grounded in the local context. All the local context, that is, community perceived public discontent with the programs drew heavily from local structures, past history of cooperation, prevailing state of affairs. In all three, knowledge of town layout, community and growth patterns. For instance, these decisionmakers had been behavior, functionality of equipment, broad-based community engagement 24 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications was effected in Kanchrapara in the form of a community-based service delivery system; largely facilitated by its extant system of ward committees. In Panaji, however, efforts at engaging the community for the SWM program have been less successful, possibly due to the absence of local platforms for community engagement, or the poor past track record of civic partnerships with the Municipality. Whatever the extent of community involvement, it needs to be well synchronized with Municipality operations since the primary responsibility for MSW management remains with the latter. This has been done effectively in the case of Kanchrapara where a clear framework Suryapet: Vermi-composting facility. of mutual cooperation has been put in place between the ward committees It is necessary to ensure the buy-in sustained improvements in service and the Municipality for ensuring of all the key stakeholders, quality that ensured continued public smooth ongoing operations. Functional especially political representatives. cooperation for the program. and financial responsibilities are clearly In all the programs, considerable effort Program outreach needs to be part delineated, guidelines for community- was made to ensure involvement of all of a larger message, and conveyed based operations are articulated to stakeholder groups, namely, political by an appropriate `messenger'. To ensure consistency across the town, representatives, workers, department draw the attention of the citizens, the and a system of information sharing has officials, commercial establishments, program communication in all cases been instituted to enable effective schools, and so on. This helped was made part of a larger message planning and monitoring at the minimize the incidence of unexpected such as health, child welfare, upliftment Municipality level. disruptions by any particular interest group. In particular, political support and of women or civic pride. The target Any program needs a program goodwill was crucial to the ultimate audience, especially in the door-to-door champion, preferably a local success of the programs. visits, was the female members of entity. The program champion households (the prime users of MSW Public cooperation follows from would be someone who takes management services). To facilitate this program credibility. In order to elicit responsibility for carrying the program interaction, female volunteers were public cooperation for segregation at forward. In each of the three cases, deployed to participate in the door-to- source, or payment of a service charge, success depended on the initiative door visits. it is necessary to first demonstrate taken by a single champion who credibility of intent. To do this, different Reform programs for collection and conceived the program and propelled strategies were adopted in the three transportation can be implemented the required activities. cases, such as phased implementation and largely sustained using local Moreover, ownership for the programs to demonstrate the efficacy of the finances. All the programs were was enhanced by the fact that in all program, free service for initial few financed by locally generated resources. three cases the program was initiated months or distribution of free bins. These cases illustrate that, at least for by a local functionary. In the end, however, it is visible and the collection and transportation 25 stages, service upgradation does not between the user and service provider program objectives, the livelihoods of necessarily entail a huge financial in the form of user charge collection, a this vulnerable section of society were commitment (roughly US$1.11-2.22 part of which is used to pay financial safeguarded and the long-term per head in the three cases), and to that incentives to the workers. sustainability of the program enhanced. extent need not depend on handouts by Engagement of the informal sector Challenges and the state government. Moreover, is necessary for long-term Interventions Required operational viability may be achieved to sustainability of the program. The quite an extent by levying user charges, Despite the success of these programs, informal sector is integral to any MSW which in turn would ensure long-term they suffer from some drawbacks management system, and all the three sustainability of the program. As that may hamper their long-term programs internalized this basic illustrated by Kanchrapara, it is possible sustainability and efficacy. Interventions premise in the program design. The to levy charges even on low-income are required (at the state and national form of engagement of the informal households. Willingness to pay can be level) to address these and develop an sector varied in the three cases, but increased by enhancing transparency enabling environment that encourages nevertheless ensured that improved and accountability in the way the user reform of the MSW sector. service levels were accompanied by charge collections are deployed. better working conditions for these Downward delegation and clear Private sector participation (PSP) is workers. For instance, in Panaji and allocation of responsibilities needed not the only way to improve service Suryapet, streamlined processing of for institutional continuity. Going delivery. The decision on whether or recyclables reduced the need for forward, one of the important not to use PSP, or the extent to which scavenging from open dumps and challenges facing all these programs it would be utilized, needs to be taken thereby reduced associated health is ensuring continuity. While a program after evaluating the local circumstances, risks for ragpickers, ensuring greater may be launched and implemented exploring alternatives available for security of earnings. In Kanchrapara, successfully, service quality often tends improving service delivery and efficiency workers for the door-to-door collection to deteriorate once the program levels. For instance, productivity of were drawn from the population living champion moves away. This risk may existing workers can be increased below the poverty line, often former be mitigated if efforts are made to even without PSP, as in Panaji, by ragpickers. By thus synergizing the institutionalize the program into routine establishing a contractual arrangement municipal service operations. interests of the informal sector with the Institutional continuity in any system is maintained by operational personnel. To this end, it is vital that responsibility is delegated downwards as far as possible, thereby reducing dependence on any one individual. This needs to be accompanied by constant upgradation of skills through capacity- building efforts. Additionally, streamlining of institutional structures is required for appropriate responsibility allocation. Ad hoc structures, such as the one in Panaji where the Accounts Officer also manages the solid waste function, need to be avoided. Clarity in roles and responsibilities would lead to greater transparency and accountability, and facilitate service Kanchrapara: Bagged products at a composting facility. improvements in the sector. 26 Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications Strengthening of local decision- making processes required. While local bodies are knowledgeable about the local operating environment, they lack information on solid waste technologies or equipment options available. This constrains them from making appropriate choices or else compels them to invest considerable time and resources on searching for relevant information (as in Panaji). To address this drawback, common information resources--which urban local bodies (ULBs) can access during their decisionmaking processes--need to be created. Similarly, decisionmaking on pricing Kanchrapara: Ragpickers on dump site. and contractual terms is often ad hoc. It is not supported by costing or participation in service delivery. Policy · For primary collection and performance data (as was evident measures should be considered to transportation the reform should from the Panaji experience with support this process. ideally be initiated and designed by contracting). Capacity building is the ULB itself. To this end, the state Introduction of service charges required for information systems and government should focus on service needs to be encouraged, with the accounting processes to enable outcomes by ULBs, and not on aim of increasing accountability, as more economically and operationally process specifications. well as financial viability, of these efficient decisionmaking. services. State government support To motivate ULBs (or champions Local planning processes need to may be required to help overcome therein) to initiate reforms, triggers be improved. Currently, there are no political reticence at the local level (as in may be designed using strategies systems to plan for future growth, the case of Suryapet). such as reward programs or and hence the MSW management state recognition. Balance between locally initiated requirements, of the town. This reforms versus a top-down state · For treatment and disposal undermines the long-term sustainability government-led approach. All three systems, greater intervention is of the system. cases revealed a willingness and ability warranted from state and national Measures required for fostering to address reforms in primary collection agencies. In particular, they could community engagement. Differing and transportation aspects of MSW assist in developing regional models levels of community engagement management. However, critical gaps for integrated waste management displayed in the three cases reflect the remained in treatment and disposal due facilities. While facilitating this differing socio-political environments to (a) a diluted focus on public health process, however, caution should prevailing in those towns. The three objectives of MSW management; and be exercised--the design and ULBs adapted their program design to (b) resource constraints faced by implementation of these facilities suit the prevailing context. Nevertheless, ULBs in addressing the complexities should be undertaken with the levels of engagement can be improved of designing and implementing a full involvement of ULBs. Their sense by fostering community organizations viable and effective treatment and of ownership for these aspects of such as ward committees or Resident disposal system. State governments MSW management, which remain Welfare Associations, which can could consider incorporating a dual their firm responsibility, should not then serve as a platform for public approach in their sector reform strategy. be diluted. 27 In all the programs, considerable effort was made to ensure involvement of all stakeholder groups--political representatives, workers, department officials, commercial establishments, schools, and social organizations. Panaji: Waste stored in a household bin. 28 Water and Sanitation Program- South Asia World Bank 55 Lodi Estate New Delhi 110 003 India Phone: (91-11) 24690488, 24690489 Fax: (91-11) 24628250 E-mail: wspsa@worldbank.org Web site: www.wsp.org October 2006 WSP MISSION: To help the poor gain sustained access to water and sanitation services. WSP FUNDING PARTNERS: The Governments of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States of America; the United Nations Development Programme, The World Bank, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. AusAID provides WSP-SA programmatic support. TASK MANAGER: Shubhagato Dasgupta PEER REVIEWERS: Deepak Sanan, Shafiul Azam Ahmed The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed are entirely those of the author and should not be attributed in any manner to The World Bank, to its affiliated organizations, PREPARED BY: or to members of its Board of Executive Directors or the companies they represent. Vandana Bhatnagar The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The Editor: Anjali Sen Gupta boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown in this work do not imply Pictures by: Vandana Bhatnagar and Asit Neema any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or Created by: Write Media the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Printed at: Thomson Press (India) Ltd Solid Waste Management Initiatives in Small Towns: Lessons and Implications FEEDBACK FORM 1. Is the format of this study easy to read? ¨Yes ¨No 2. Is the study a comfortable length to read? ¨Yes ¨No 3. If no, would you prefer ¨moredetails/data ¨lessdetails/data 4. Do you find the information contained in this study relevant to your work? ¨Yes ¨No If yes, how would you use this information in your work? (Use extra sheets of paper if required) If no, give reasons why (Use extra sheets of paper if required) What impact, if any, does this information have on: ·You: ·Your organization: ·Your colleagues: What are the main lesson(s) you have learnt from the information contained in this study? Would you like to share any study/research similar to the information in this study? 5. Give up to three subjects/issues in the Water Supply and Sanitation sector that interest you and you would like to know more about: i) ii) iii) 6. Do you know anyone else who might benefit from receiving our publications? If yes, provide the following details (optional) Name: Designation: Organization: Address: Phone Numbers: E-mail: Area of work: Government / NGO / Private Sector / Academia / Consultant / Bilateral Agency / Dev Bank / any other 7. Please provide your particulars: Name: Designation: Organization: Address: Phone Numbers: E-mail: Area of work: Government / NGO / Private Sector / Academia / Consultant / Bilateral Agency / Dev Bank / any other 8. Indicate your area of interest: ¨Water ¨Sanitation ¨Rural ¨Urban Water and Sanitation Program-South Asia E 32 Agargaon, Sher-e-Bangla Nagar 55 Lodi Estate 20 A Shahrah-e-Jamhuriat Dhaka 1207, Bangladesh New Delhi 110 003, India Ramna 5, G-5/1 Phone: (880-2) 8159001-14 Phone: (91-11) 24690488-89 Islamabad, Pakistan Fax: (880-2) 8159029-30 Fax: (91-11) 24628250 Phone: (92-51) 2279641-46 Fax: (92-51) 2826362 E-mail: wspsa@worldbank.org Web site: www.wsp.org