Time filter

Source Type

Gouda, Netherlands

Wilson D.C.,Imperial College London | Rodic L.,Wageningen University | Cowing M.J.,Independent Consultant | Velis C.A.,University of Leeds | And 6 more authors.
Waste Management

This paper addresses a major problem in international solid waste management, which is twofold: a lack of data, and a lack of consistent data to allow comparison between cities. The paper presents an indicator set for integrated sustainable waste management (ISWM) in cities both North and South, to allow benchmarking of a city's performance, comparing cities and monitoring developments over time. It builds on pioneering work for UN-Habitat's solid waste management in the World's cities. The comprehensive analytical framework of a city's solid waste management system is divided into two overlapping 'triangles' - one comprising the three physical components, i.e. collection, recycling, and disposal, and the other comprising three governance aspects, i.e. inclusivity; financial sustainability; and sound institutions and proactive policies. The indicator set includes essential quantitative indicators as well as qualitative composite indicators. This updated and revised 'Wasteaware' set of ISWM benchmark indicators is the cumulative result of testing various prototypes in more than 50 cities around the world. This experience confirms the utility of indicators in allowing comprehensive performance measurement and comparison of both 'hard' physical components and 'soft' governance aspects; and in prioritising 'next steps' in developing a city's solid waste management system, by identifying both local strengths that can be built on and weak points to be addressed. The Wasteaware ISWM indicators are applicable to a broad range of cities with very different levels of income and solid waste management practices. Their wide application as a standard methodology will help to fill the historical data gap. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. Source

Castellano D.,WASTE | de Bruijne G.,WASTE | Maessen S.,WASTE | Mels A.,Wageningen University
Water Practice and Technology

The selection of suitable sanitation options is a complex issue. There are many factors that influence the performance of each system. Sanitation suitable for use in low-income housing areas in developing countries is normally based on a combination of options specific to the local context. That makes it really difficult to develop an effective tool for decision-making. To date, decision support tools have failed to make a long-term impact on the choice for sanitation services in rural as well as urban and peri-urban settlements in developing countries. Most relate the choice of a sanitation option to one element (i.e. septic tank or pit latrine) rather than considering the sanitation system as a whole. Some lack transparency or are guided by personal choices and assumptions, which can include as well as exclude relevant aspects for the selection of sanitation systems. Decision-models are generally complex to understand and use and sometimes seem inconsistent. WASTE in collaboration with international experts is developing a practical support instrument to facilitate informed choice of sanitation systems. The tool is a knowledge sharing or awareness mechanism intended to provide a more comprehensive view of a settlement's limitations on the one hand and available sanitation options on the other. It intends to assist a wide range of stakeholders from city officials, planners, CBO's, users, service providers to financial and political authorities. Furthermore WASTE wants to present a practitioner's tool that uses a three-step approach providing a simple interface, flexible framework and transparent outcome. This support tool can be used independently, integrated in strategic sanitation planning as well as provide the base-ground for the selection of sanitation options in a multi-stakeholder participatory process. © IWA Publishing 2011. Source

Scheinberg A.,WASTE | Scheinberg A.,Wageningen University | Spies S.,German Organisation for Technical Co operation GTZ | Simpson M.H.,Antioch University New England | Mol A.P.J.,Wageningen University
Habitat International

Recycling and valorisation of waste in urban centres in low- and middle-income countries is often misunderstood. Recycling in these countries represents neither the service of removal, nor an activity of "greening" related to ecological modernisation. Recycling is first of all an economic activity of commodities extraction, upgrading, and trading, and as such it provides a livelihood for millions of persons worldwide. Based on evidence of waste management and recycling activities in six urban centres in low- and middle-income countries, this paper explores the contribution of informal sector recycling to recycling and solid waste management. It interprets the variety of urban recycling systems as "modernised mixtures": the mixing of formal municipal waste removal systems with informal private sector recycling activities. Context-dependent factors determine how this mixture of formal and informal systems looks, and how effective informal recycling in these urban centres is. This approach to analysing existing recycling can contribute to improvement of solid waste management systems through sustainable and fair recycling. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. Source

Wilson D.C.,Imperial College London | Rodic L.,Wageningen University | Scheinberg A.,WASTE | Velis C.A.,Imperial College London | Alabaster G.,UN HABITAT
Waste Management and Research

This paper uses the 'lens' of integrated and sustainable waste management (ISWM) to analyse the new data set compiled on 20 cities in six continents for the UN-Habitat flagship publication Solid Waste Management in the World's Cities. The comparative analysis looks first at waste generation rates and waste composition data. A process flow diagram is prepared for each city, as a powerful tool for representing the solid waste system as a whole in a comprehensive but concise way. Benchmark indicators are presented and compared for the three key physical components/drivers: public health and collection; environment and disposal; and resource recovery-and for three governance strategies required to deliver a well-functioning ISWM system: inclusivity; financial sustainability; and sound institutions and pro-active policies. Key insights include the variety and diversity of successful models-there is no 'one size fits all'; the necessity of good, reliable data; the importance of focusing on governance as well as technology; and the need to build on the existing strengths of the city. An example of the latter is the critical role of the informal sector in the cities in many developing countries: it not only delivers recycling rates that are comparable with modern Western systems, but also saves the city authorities millions of dollars in avoided waste collection and disposal costs. This provides the opportunity for win-win solutions, so long as the related wider challenges can be addressed. © The Author(s) 2012. Source

Discover hidden collaborations