Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
EXPLORING THE POTENTIAL FOR
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN SOLID
WASTE MANAGEMENT IN HIGHFIELDS
HARARE
By
Judith C Mlanda Zvikaramba
A mini dissertation submitted to the University
of Pretoria in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the degree
Magister Artium Environment and Society
In the Faculty of Humanities
University of Pretoria
October 2008
2
I, Judith C Mlanda Zvikaramba, declare that the dissertation which I hereby submit for the degree of Master of Arts (Environment and Society) at the University of Pretoria, is my own work and has not previously been submitted by me for a degree at this or any other tertiary institution. Where secondary material is used, this has been carefully acknowledged and referenced in accordance with university requirements. Signature:………………………………. Date:…………………………
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The production of a work of this magnitude cannot be entirely attributed to myself. I acknowledge the hand of the Almighty God without whose assistance, guidance and mercy, this whole project would have been impossible. I am also greatly indebted to my supervisor, Dr. Jane Olwoch for her continued support, patience and selfless sharing of knowledge. My sincere appreciation also goes to my family and friends for their constant support, encouragement and prayers.
3
ABSTRACT
Title: Exploring the potential for community participation in solid waste management in Highfields Harare.
Author: Judith C Mlanda Zvikaramba
Supervisor: Dr. Jane Olwoch
Centre: Centre for Environmental Studies
Department: Geography, Geo-informatics and Meteorology
Institution: University of Pretoria
Degree: MA. Environment and Society
This dissertation aimed to assess the potential for community participation in solid
waste management. The study took place in Highfields, which is a suburb in Harare
the capital city of Zimbabwe. Two approaches were used to collect the data:
qualitative and quantitative approach. Qualitative methods included focus group
discussions and in-depth interviews with residents, resident representative and
members of some prominent environmental groups. Quantitative data was collected
using questionnaires designed in such a way as to capture knowledge attitudes and
perceptions. In the course of the study it emerged that people were more concerned
with the visual and sanitary impacts of poorly managed or uncollected waste as
opposed to the environmental impact. Moreover very few residents were aware of the
environmental impacts of inappropriately managed waste.
The study revealed that there was a prevailing culture of dependence on municipal
management of solid waste. The mentality that waste management is the sole
responsibility of municipal authorities is one of the greatest challenges that is proving
to be an obstacle in integrating the community in waste management.
It is concluded that though there is a definite need for improvement in the current
solid waste management system the concept of the community playing a role is
hindered by the prevailing attitude that the responsibility of waste management reset
in the hands of municipal authorities.
Keywords : Solid waste, Waste management, Community, Attitudes, Perceptions, Harare, Zimbabwe
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 6
1.1 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN ZIMBABWE ......................................................................... 8 1.3 COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ............................................. 9
1.3.1 Key factors affecting community participation .............................................................. 9 1.3.2 Community participation the theoretical framework ................................................... 10
1.4 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ........................................................................................... 11 CHAPTER TWO: MATERIALS AND METHODS ..................................................................... 12
2.1 RESEARCH AREA AND UNIT OF ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 12 2.1.1 Unit of analysis .......................................................................................................... 13
2.2 STUDY DESIGN .................................................................................................................... 14 2.3 DATA COLLECTION TOOLS ................................................................................................. 15 2.4 DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................. 16
CHAPTER THREE: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................... 18
3.1 EDUCATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................... 18 3.2 PREVAILING METHODS OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ......................................................... 19
3.2.1 Municipal collection .................................................................................................. 19 3.2.2 Open dumping ........................................................................................................... 20 3.2.3 Burning ..................................................................................................................... 20 3.2.4 Recycling and reusing practices ................................................................................. 22 3.2.5 Waste separation ....................................................................................................... 23 3.2.6 Composting of waste .................................................................................................. 24
3.3 RESPONSIBILITY FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT: ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTIONS ........................... 25 3.4 COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION ................................................................................................ 27 3.5 GENDER AND SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ........................................................................... 29
CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................ 31 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 33
5
LIST OF ACRONYMS UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organisation
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
WHO World Health Organisation
6
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background For a long time the perception of waste as a valueless and harmless substance played a major
influence to the manner in which solid waste was managed. However the growing realisation
that waste disposed of improperly can pose serious problems not only to the environment but
to the health of society has seen the development of conscientious approaches to solid waste
management (UNIDO, 2003).
The emergence of waste management as an important component of environmental control
has clearly evolved due to the growing urgency of urban environmental problems identified
by various studies. It has also been highlighted in Agenda 211, an important output of the
Earth Summit (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development) in 1992
(UNCED, 1992), that improperly managed waste has short and long term implications to the
environment and human health. Despite the growing awareness of the potential threat that
inappropriate handling of solid waste poses to the environment, there has been no resultant
improvement in the manner in which solid waste management in developing world is handled.
In contrast to the developed world, cities in developing countries such as Harare (Zimbabwe)
and Mexico City (Mexico) are still in a transition stage towards better solid waste
management methods. Currently they have inadequate solid waste collection and improper
disposal systems (Srinivas, 2003). High levels of poverty in some developing countries and a
mass exodus of people from the rural areas into towns has multiplied waste management
challenges.
Mulenga et al (2004) postulate that solid waste management is given low priority in
developing countries because they are facing more pressing challenges such as high infant
mortality ,staggering rates of HIV/AIDS related deaths as well as difficulties in providing
basic amenities such as potable water and reliable energy sources .
Where solid waste management is priority, transportation equipment is out of service or in
need of serious repair or maintenance. In the event that the waste is collected and transported,
11 Agenda 21 is a programme of the United Nations related to sustainable development. It is a comprehensive blueprint of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the UN, governments, and major groups in every area in which humans’ impact on the environment.
7
it usually ends up at improper waste disposal sites were it poses a hazard to the environment
(World Bank 2005).
Existing studies on solid waste management also point to the relationship between governance
and solid waste management. Tevera (1991) cites urban solid waste disposal problems as
indicative of economic policy failures at either local government level or national
governments. He further attributes the presence of inefficient solid waste management
systems to poor revenue base, which precludes meaningful investment in solid waste
infrastructure and hampers maintenance of equipment. MacGranaham (1991) and Amis
(1992) have cited administrative incapacity and institutional weaknesses as major factors
accounting for poor solid waste management systems in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, this
stand point is refuted by Hardoy et.al (2001) who defensively argues that prolonged under-
investment is the major factor that leads to deterioration of the quality of solid waste
management systems. Unstable macro-economic environments have also been cited as
contributory reasons.
Southern Africa is experiencing the world’s highest population growth rates and in addition to
this 40% of the population in Southern Africa is now resident in urban areas (UNDP, 2001).
This 40% is increasingly being joined by more and more people in search of a better living
standard in the city (UNDP, 2001).
According to Glazewski (2005) South Africa is producing 300 million tons of solid waste per
year. Of this waste 2 million tons are classified as being hazardous. Ninety five percent
(95%) of this waste generated be it hazardous , domestic or industrial waste is disposed of in
the most common and cheapest method utilised in South Africa which is land filling. South
Africa has an estimated total number of 1,200 landfills which are being operated by
municipalities (ADB, 2002).
8
1.2 Solid waste management in Zimbabwe
Solid waste has become an environmental threat in Zimbabwe as well (Kativu, 2000). In
Harare alone about 1040-1400 tonnes of waste are produced everyday. The waste
composition in Zimbabwe is mostly characterised by organic wastes with a moisture content
of 55-75% making it very suitable for composting. However of the 1040 tonnes of waste
produced daily, only 180 tonnes is collected for disposal at open dumps which are the most
prevalent disposal sites for waste. None of the collected waste is composted. The remainder
of the waste that is not collected becomes an eyesore on every street corner and alley. The
solid waste crisis being experienced in Zimbabwe has been compounded by rapid
urbanization and a slowly developing economy that can scarcely afford to divert large sums of
money towards waste management.
Solid waste in Harare is managed by the Harare City Council; however municipal
responsibility for waste management has not had satisfactory results. In the face of
insufficient waste management services, residents have resorted to burying or burning their
waste, or dumping their waste where ever they see fit. This has brought about a situation
where heaps of uncollected wastes, thrown away chaotically have become part and parcel of
urban life in Zimbabwe.
A research on waste management in Zimbabwe carried out by the Ministry of Local
Government Rural and Urban Development (MLGRUD) in 1995 brought to light that all over
the country, urban solid waste disposal is mainly achieved through crude dumping, open
burning, incineration, land filling, burying and very rarely by means of composting.
Therefore, in order to improve this prevailing situation community involvement in the solid
waste management process is crucial.
9
1.3 Community participation in solid waste management
A community is a group of people living in a certain geographical or administrative area, such
as a neighbourhood and who have access to and uses the same service (Anschütz, 1996).
Whilst Community participation can be defined in numerous ways, in this research it is taken
to be an active process by which the community influences or plays a role in a development
project. This will enhance their well being or other values that they hold dear such as sanitary
living conditions as the case maybe in terms of waste management. Community participation
can even be defined as a process in which community members are involved at different
stages and degrees of intensity in the project cycle with the objective to build the capacity of
the community to maintain services created during the project after the facilitating
organisations have left (Waste, 2002). Community participation can simply be some sort of
contribution or involvement by the community, for example it can even be the separation of
waste at household level before municipal collection. Thomas-Hope (1998) also identified
that citizen participation in the management of solid waste can have numerous benefits for
municipal authorities in terms of saving on collection and disposal costs.
1.3.1 Key factors affecting community participation For community participation to be effective, there has to be inclusion of community leaders
and women. Women, because they are the first to be affected by solid waste mismanagement,
as they are the ones more often than not assigned the role of keeping the surroundings clean
and sanitary (Zurbrugg and Ahmed, 1999). In addition to this, there has to be awareness that
there is a waste management problem and the community needs to be aware that solving of
this problem is to their benefit. In order to reach the community and to get them to play a role
in intervention strategies, it is important to identify community leaders who will assist in
making the intervention acceptable to the community (Waste, 2002).
In the same way that there are factors which influence the success of community participation
in solid waste management, there are also factors which have been identified as having the
potential to hinder community participation. The first of these is a low willingness to keep
public spaces clean, low willingness to participate in, at source separation, collection,
composting or recycling. Anschutz (1996) recognizes that a felt need is a precondition for
successful realization of community participation in waste management; hence the low
10
community prioritisation of solid waste management can be the biggest obstacle to
community participation.
1.3.2 Community participation the theoretical framework
This study is heavily informed by the Social Capital theory and the Bottom up approach
championed by Chambers (in Field, 1985). Social Capital refers to the institutions,
relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society’s social interactions,
which make societies or communities work. It is not the just the sum of social the institutions
which underpin a society, it is the glue that holds them together (World Bank, 1999). Social
Capital is more about the connections among individuals, social networks and the norms of
reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them (Putnam 2000, John Field 2003).
The central thesis derived from the Social Capital theory is that interaction enables people to
build communities, to commit themselves to each other and to knit the social fabric. A sense
of belonging and a concrete experience of social networks (and relationships of trust and
tolerance that can be involved), it is argued, bring great benefits to people. The Social Capital
theory advances a normal argument that, trust between individuals thus becomes trust
between strangers and trust of a broad fabric of shared institutions; it becomes a shared set of
values (Field, 2003).
In the quest for solid waste management solutions, the whole discourse cannot be analysed in
isolation of community participation. There are some social interactions that should be
factored in. According to Thomas-Hope (1998), the community is an entity with
knowledgeable actors who should be afforded a special platform in the solid waste
management process. Primacy should therefore not be given to the modern approaches, but
also to what the community know, think and feel about the whole process. Knowledge,
practices and attitudes form part of their social worlds.
This study argue that social networks have value and there is tangible evidence that
communities with a good ‘stock’ of such social capital are more likely to benefit from lower
crime figures, better health, high educational achievement, and better economic growth.
11
Thomas-Hope (1998) postulates that community members are a social capital and where a
community has accumulated substantial levels of social capital, it is possible with regards to
environmental issue to reorganize the existing solid waste management system. Such that it
brings about a transformation whereby there is a transfer from sole reliance on the public
sector for solid waste management to a situation were the household also plays a crucial role.
In a nutshell, the inclusion of the least regarded of the society is being championed here. This
is what Chambers (1985) refers to as the Bottom Up Approach. Though Chambers (1985)
wrote on Rural Development, this study adopts the same ideology and contextualises it in the
Solid Waste Management process in Highfields Harare. Instead of imposing Waste
Management on the community, there is a need to make them part of the program. Solid
waste management therefore, should not be a preserve of the administrators alone, but a
community issue.
1.4 Statement of the problem
The transition from colonial rule to majority rule in 1980 saw the lifting of decades of racial
restrictions and increased influx of Africans into cities in Zimbabwe. The rise in urban
populations also increased rates of waste generation. However, from 1980 up to 1998
increases in waste generation were matched with waste collection in about 80% of most urban
centres (Chenje et al, 1998). Since 1995, nearly all waste management systems in urban
centres in Zimbabwe started to collapse due to a number of reasons which include urban
population boom, economic instability and development of shanty houses. Poor solid waste
management methods do not only pollute the environment, but they also affect human health
hence they are a threat to human security. It is clear that this burden needs a collective action
involving government and the communities; this study therefore, seeks to explore the
potential for community participation in solid waste management in the high density suburbs
of Harare, focusing specifically on Highfields area.
The aim of this study is to explore the potential for community participation in solid waste
management. This aim will be achieved by compiling the trends in solid waste management
practices in Highfields and examining the community’s attitudes and practices in solid waste
management, so as to ascertain the potential for community participation.
12
CHAPTER TWO: MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1 Research area and unit of analysis
Land locked and situated in Southern Africa lays the country of Zimbabwe. The country is
bordered by South Africa to the south, Zambia to the north, Botswana to the west, and
Mozambique to the east, a narrow strip of Namibian land called the Caprivi Strip extends
eastwards from Namibia to Zimbabwe.
MASVINGO
MIDLANDS
MATEBELELAND NORTH
MANICALAND
MASHONALAND WEST
MATEBELELAND SOUTH
MASHONALAND EAS
T
MASHONALAND CENTRAL
HARARE
BULAWAYO
HARARE
N
Figure 1: Map of Zimbabwe, subset of Harare
The country has a total population of 11.63 million (Mapako & Mbewe 2004:48). Thirty six
percent (36%) of this population resides in urban centers. Those who reside in rural areas
make up about 64% of the total population.
The study was conducted in Highfields, a high density area located in Harare, the capital city
of Zimbabwe. Highfields is characterised by a population size of 30,283 forming 8,636
households, the average household size in Highfields is 4.1.
13
N
Highfields
WaterfallsGlen Norah
Glen View
Mbare
Built up areaRailwayMajor roadShopping area
Greater Harare boundary
CBD
Figure 2: Map of Harare showing the location of Highfields
Highfields area has attracted attention to this study because it is one of the oldest townships
and it harbours a high population density. It is also one of the areas where most people who
would have arrived from the rural area reside. Like most high density suburbs which were
established in colonial times, Highfields was designated to accommodate the industrial
workforce. However, inadequate attention has been given to such densely populated areas
with regard to research on solid waste generation and management at house hold level.
2.1.1 Unit of analysis The unit of analysis in the study are the household and the individual. There are various
definitions that have been put forward to define the term household (Allan & Crow 2001:5-6).
However, for purposes of this study the term ‘household’ was used to refer to people who stay
together, cook together, share meals together, live in the same dwelling and share chores and
a common domestic economy .
14
2.2 Study design The research study used a blend of qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques. The
quantitative mode of inquiry is related to the numerical measurement of selected variables
(Neuman, 2000). According to Denzin and Lincoln (2000), qualitative research is a field of
naturalistic inquiry which cross cuts disciplines and subject matters, and studies phenomena
in its natural setting. Denzin and Lincoln (2000) subscribe to the notion that qualitative
research is multi-method in focus and involves an interpretive and naturalistic approach to
subject matter.
This research has used a case study as a strategy of enquiry. According to Creswell (1998), a
case study is an exploration, in depth analysis of bounded systems, bounded by time or place;
the case study can either be of a process, activity or of people. The inquiry of the case takes
place by means of in depth data collection methods such as interviews and observations. The
case study took place from October 2006 until early January 2007 in the Harare suburb of
Highfields.
Quota sampling was used in order to obtain the same proportions of our unit of analysis which
was the household. The quotas were stratified according to socio economic status, the criteria
utilised to determine which strata a household fell into was rent, condition of the house and
the size of the stand. Utilising this criteria, four stratifications were obtained.
Strata 1 Poor households living in a state of squalor.
Houses in a state of disrepair with no yards.
Rent in this area was the cheapest in Highfields.
Strata 2 Houses with a small yard adequate to contain a
vegetable garden.
Houses not well maintained.
The rentals are higher than those of strata 1.
The general condition of the houses was not as
shabby as strata 1 but they were slightly unkempt.
Strata 3 Houses with approximately 3 bedrooms,
Good condition with a yard that could
accommodate a vegetable garden and a small
lawn patch.
15
Strata 4 Highest rental rates throughout Highfields.
Well maintained houses, with big yards as well as
gardens and lawns.
A sample size of 200 households was taken from a population of 8636 households which is
the total number of households recorded in Highfields by the census 2004 report.
The sample size of 200 households was determined using the statistical package Survey
System Version 9.5 the following assumptions were made to determine the sample size of the
study:
Total number of Households = 8636
Level of significance of test = 6.5 for 95% confidence level
Power of test = 46%
Confidence level of survey:= 6.5%
Two-sided test
Making use of the above values, a sample size of 200 households was arrived at.
2.3 Data collection tools
Data for the study was gathered from residents of the study area, the municipality and other
stakeholders involved in waste management using the following tools;
Questionnaires, Participant observation and Focus group discussions.
Questionnaires were utilised as a means of gathering information from the households
forming the sample group. A questionnaire is a group sequence of questions designed to elicit
information upon a sequence of subjects from an informant (Denscombe, 2004). The
questionnaire was designed in such a why as to gather information of Knowledge Attitude and
Practices (KAP) of the respondents, the KAP questionnaires were administered by five
research assistants who were familiar with the local language, the area and had been trained
by the researcher on how to interview and utilise probes. The questionnaire was in English
and Shona, the local language so as to make it user friendly. The questions were open ended
in order to obtain as much data as possible.
16
In addition to the open ended questionnaires, participant observation was also utilized.
Denscombe (2004) postulates that participant observation is a research method that sheds
light on peoples attitudes in that it does not rely on what participants claim to do or what they
claim to think. It is a method of gathering first hand evidence of people’s attitudes and
practices wherein the researcher gathers information first hand rather than depending on
secondary sources.
In order to observe phenomenon in its natural setting the researcher stayed in the study area
from October 2007 till early January 2008. Data depicting attitudes and practices was
collected in a systematic manner by utilizing observation schedules, these observation
schedules were in the form of a table that aimed to measure the frequency of certain practices
such as open dumping and putting out of solid waste in anticipation of municipal collection
services. (Refer to Appendix 1 Photo plate).
In an attempt to validate the data obtained, focus group discussions were also employed.
Focus group discussions were conducted in different locations of Highfields suburb. The
main objective of Focus group discussions was to explore in depth residents’ perspectives,
knowledge and attitudes on solid waste management in their area.
Two discussions were conducted. The first discussion group consisted of representatives from
the Environmental non- governmental organization, Environment Africa Foundation and two
health and hygiene community workers from the Highfields community. In the subsequent
discussion, the researcher spoke to respondents at an open dumping area and held a brief
discussion with the people who had come to dispose of their solid waste at the illegal
dumpsite. Furthermore document reviews were also conducted.
2.4 Data analysis
The data obtained from the questionnaire was transformed to quantitative information by
means of coding. The responses obtained in this process, raw data was transformed into
numerals to generate statistics while at the same instance allowing the same data to be
17
analyzed qualitatively. The numerical data was entered into the software Statistical Package
for the Social Sciences (SPSS) which was used to generate statistics, create tables, carry out
cross tabulations as well as examine the relationships between variables.
18
CHAPTER THREE: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter discusses the key results of this research. The chapter firstly discusses the
correlation between education levels and knowledge with regards to solid waste management
issues. The various solid waste methods that were utilised by the residents of Highfields are
also presented and discussed followed by a discussion of attitudes and perceptions as these
two issues allow us to determine and indicate the potential for community participation in
solid waste management.
3.1 Education and the environment It is agreed by many scholars that education is the most effective tool that society possesses
to overcome the many obstacles and challenges that confront the human race. “….access to
education is the sine qua non for effective participation in the life of the modern world at all
levels. Education, to be certain, is not the whole answer to every problem. But education, in
its broadest sense, must be a vital part of all efforts to imagine and create new relations
among people and to foster greater respect for the needs of the environment.” (UNESCO,
2001).
The responses obtained from the quantitative and qualitative enquiry showed that there was a
positive correlation between knowledge and education. Of the respondents interviewed only
those who had attained at least Advanced level (Higher General Certificate of Education) and
those with a tertiary education were aware that inappropriate disposal of waste could result in
environmental pollution.
Of the entire sample of 200 households only 12.5 % of respondents had any awareness of the
environmental implications associated with improper solid waste management. The rest of
the respondents Eighty two percent (82%) indicated that the most critical challenge posed by
improper management of solid waste was the increase in diseases and disease vectors. The
table below which is a cross tabulation of educational levels and awareness of environmental
implications associated with improper solid waste management illustrates this trend.
19
Major problems of inappropriate solid waste management?
DiseasesPests and rodents
Environmental Contamination
Visual Blight Total
Education background of respondent
Primary level 7 12 19 Ordinary level 49 53 1 7 110 Advanced level 18 12 17 4 51
University 8 7 15 No formal education 5 5
Total 79 85 25 11 200 Table 1: Educational background of respondent and their responses to the question what are the major problems of inappropriate solid waste management
3.2 Prevailing methods of solid waste management In this section, the methods of solid waste management which are being utilised by residents
of Highfields are discussed. The prevalence of usage of the various strategies is also
discussed as it becames apparent during the course of the research that no single method of
solid waste management was being used exclusively.
3.2.1 Municipal collection The data collected revealed that the collection of household solid waste by the municipality
had fallen into disarray and services were erratic and irregular. This trend is in line with what
African Development Bank (2002) postulated about collection of solid waste by
municipalities of developing countries. The management of solid waste in developing
countries is characterized by inefficient collection methods, insufficient coverage of the
collection system and improper disposal of municipal solid wastes. As the statistics below
show Highfields is not an exception to the rule.
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Rarely 25 12.5 12.5 12.5
Never 175 87.5 87.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 2: Solid waste collection by municipal services
The majority of respondents 87.5% indicated that the municipality never collected household
solid waste, only 12% of the respondents indicated that the municipality collects solid waste
however, they also indicated that this collection only took place rarely. The respondents also
made it clear that they did not rely solely on municipal collection.
20
3.2.2 Open dumping In the wake of municipalities not being in a position to adequately manage and dispose of
household solid waste, households have had to improvise and be resourceful with regards to
dealing with their own solid waste; this effort to manage their own solid waste has often been
at the expense of the environment.
In Highfields 47 % of the households interviewed indicated that they made use of open
dumping.
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent Open dumping 94 47.0 47.0 47.0 Burning 18 9.0 9.0 56.0 Burying 57 28.5 28.5 84.5 Composting 7 3.5 3.5 88.0 Municipal collection
12 6.0 6.0 94.0
Burning and dumping
8 4.0 4.0 98.0
Burying and burning
4 2.0 2.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0 Table 3: Methods of waste disposal
3.2.3 Burning Some of the respondents interviewed indicated that they have resorted to burning of
household solid waste so as to minimise the volume of waste which they will eventually
dump or bury. The major concern expressed by respondents with regards to burning of
wastes was that the smoke produced during burning was a nuisance to neighbours and as one
respondent said “ burning things like papers and plastics helps us but what a smell!! And if
you have just done laundry and your neighbour starts to burn their rubbish it can lead to
arguments I am telling you”. It seemed there was no widespread awareness as to the negative
environmental impacts of burning waste such as air pollution, this assumption was further
confirmed by the fact that in the focus group discussion, participants championed for the
burning of combustible material in the believe that this would reduce the volumes of waste
accumulated at popular open dumping areas ! “ if only people would stop throwing away
papers and plastic bags, they should burn those at home then we would at least be able to
21
keep putting the garbage at the same corner instead of having to find a new place because
that corner by the tower light is too full. Even when the municipal workers finally come, it
would be better that they collect the rubbish from one place instead of all over. I think people
just need to throw away things that they cannot burn at home. This was the opinion of one of
the respondents interviewed by the researcher at an area popularly used by some residents as a
dumping area (Refer to Appendix 1 Photo plate). Overall burning was not the most favoured
waste management practice, as can be seen in the graph below the majority of respondents
indicated that they never burn their waste. The researcher concluded that this trend can be
explained by the fact that burning of waste has an immediately visible impact on the
environment in terms of poor air quality due to smoke and fog and that is why it is not a
favoured means of disposing of solid waste.
NeverRarely
OftenVery often
Most of the time
100
80
60
40
20
0
Table 4: How often do you use burning?
22
3.2.4 Recycling and reusing practices In order to identify practices with regards to recycling, respondents were posed with the
question “do you recycle?’’ 17.5% of respondents indicated that they are engaged in recycling
activities, whilst the majority 82.5% indicates that they don’t engage in recycling.
Do you recycle?
FrequencyPercent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Yes 35 17.5 17.5 17.5 No 165 82.5 82.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 5: Responses on recycling behaviour
What do you recycle?
Dont recycle
Other waste
Plastic
Bottle
Table 6: What do you recycle? The question what do you recycle was asked not only to find out about the types of materials
that residents of Highfields recycled but also to establish knowledge amongst respondents as
to what recyclable materials constituted.
With regards to knowledge pertaining to recyclables, it was clear that bottles, paper and
plastics were the most well known recyclables with almost no respondents indicating
awareness as to the recycling potential of bones and textiles.
In contradiction to the ideas of Pinderhughes (2004) who puts forward that poorer household
have a higher tendency of recycling it became apparent that this is not the case for households
in Highfields. In an effort to shed more light on the recycling behaviours of respondents the
23
researcher went further to ask what sort of waste was recycled by those who indicated that
they recycled. Respondents indicated that they mostly reused bottles and plastic which they
would use as water containers or to refill with homemade peanut butter.
Eighty two (82.5%) percent of respondents interviewed indicated that they did not engage in
any recycling activities. This in itself is an indicator of the important role that education can
play. If more people are made more aware as to the benefits of recycling a large percentage
of people would engage in recycling activities.
Those who did not recycle said this was as a result of the fact that there was no place where
one could resell plastics or even the bottles and hence there was no point in recycling. It
emerged that in Zimbabwe, the state of affairs with regards to the marketability of recycled
goods is quite different to the prevailing trends in Latin America and various Asian countries
where cans, car bodies, waste paper and certain plastics can not be easily found at waste
disposal sites or on kerb sides as they are all collected for the recycled goods industry.
As a matter of interest, one respondent informed the researcher that he neither recycled or
separated waste for the reason that there was no market for the recycled items and moreover
“my child how can I even think about separating waste when I am doing illegal dumping
there is no time for …separating ….when its dark we quickly ...throw the garbage away
…what if municipal police find me trying to separate waste ….they will say I am the one
who…dumped that whole pile by the corner...There is no time….”
3.2.5 Waste separation In order to verify the recycling practices of Highfields residents, respondents were asked “do
you separate waste?” This question was asked on the premise that if one recycled then it
follows that they also separated waste so as to remove the recyclables from the non
recyclables
Sixty four percent 64% of respondents indicated that they did not engage in waste separation
practices; on the other hand 35 % of respondents indicated that they did separate their
household waste. These figures correlate to the identified recycling practices in that 17.5%
respondent indicated that they recycled and this 17.5% also falls within the 35% who
24
indicated that they separated their household waste. Out of the 35% who responded that they
separated waste 17.5% indicated that they recycled and the remaining 18% are those who
indicated that they separated their waste so that they could separate the compostable wastes
from the combustible wastes, which they would compost and burn respectively.
3.2.6 Composting of waste In an effort to establish the prevalence of composting as a waste management strategy in
Highfields, respondents were posed with the question “do you compost?” the following
results were obtained:
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Yes 72 36.0 36.4 36.4 No 126 63.0 63.6 100.0 Total 198 99.0 100 Missing System 2 1.0 Total 200 100
Table 7:Do you compost
36.4% of respondents indicated that they composted with 63.6% indicating that they did not
engaged in the composting of household waste. It is important to note that the entire sample
was asked this question because some respondents could be engaging in burying of waste
under the assumption that they are composting.
In order to examine respondents’ knowledge levels with regards to composting a question was
asked to find out if respondents were aware that only organic materials were compostable.
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Biodegradable items
66 33.0 33.0 33.0
Bottles and Plastics
4 2.0 2.0 35.0
All waste 5 2.5 2.5 37.5 Don’t compost 125 62.5 62.5 100.0 Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 8: What do you compost?
It emerged that 4% of respondents were not aware that composting was only possible with
organic biodegradable matter. Therefore some residents of Highfields mistakenly engage in
burying of waste while under the impression that they are composting.
25
The researcher attempted to establish the reason as to why composting has not become a
favourable waste management practice to the residents of Highfields who currently have had
to come up with their on measures of dealing with waste, in the wake of municipal collection
having become almost non existent. Respondents forming the focus groups who were
interviewed were asked why they did not engage in composting, it emerged that a large
proportion of residents in Highfields did not own the dwelling in which they resided either
they were renting or had been given shelter by a relative. Out of 200 respondents, 126
indicated that they did not compost, when the data of house ownership was cross tabulated
with that of composting behaviour it emerged that 65 respondents who indicated that they did
not compost were also not the owners of their current place of dwelling, they were either
renting the premises or they were staying with relatives. Count
25 61 8633 40 7314 25 3972 126 198
owner of the houseLodger Stay with relatives
Houseownership
Total
Yes NoDo you compost?
Total
Table 9: Cross tabulation house ownership and composting
The above mentioned data was further validated during a focus group discussion when the
researcher asked a respondent why she did not compost waste, she replied by saying “I cant
dig a pit on someone else’s yard at least I can burn the stuff which can be burnt and there
wont be any damage in the yard for which a landlord can ask you to pay extra money”. It
was further established that some respondents resided in apartments and therefore there was
no space for making a composting pit. The idea of in-vessel composting was a notion that
seemed to be unfamiliar to respondents
3.3 Responsibility for waste management: attitudes and perceptions
As a measure of assessing the potential for community participation, respondents were
questioned as to who they thought is the ideal person or entity to handle matters regarding to
solid waste management. The responses with regards to this question are represented in the
Table below;
26
3 1.5 1.5 1.5197 98.5 98.5 100.0200 100.0 100.0
ResidentsMunicipalityTotal
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Table 10: Who is the best person to deal with waste management?
The results of the research indicated that only 1.5% of respondents were of the opinion that
residents should bear the responsibility of management of solid waste. The majority of
respondents 98.5% indicated that they felt the best authority to bear responsibility should be
the municipality (local authority). In a focus group discussion, some respondents were
recorded as saying “the municipality is taking our money for that reason so they have to
collect the waste and it’s their job to worry about waste, for as long as we pay that is the way
it should remain!” in support of this view point that the municipality must take responsibility
a respondent was recorded to have said “we(residents) don’t know anything about waste
management so they(municipality) are the people who have been doing that since
independence in 1980 so they have to continue they have experience and they know better”. It
became apparent that the outlook of respondents as to who should be responsible for waste
management was governed by some independent variables such as the age of the respondents
and the educational level of the respondents.
By cross tabulating education levels and the opinions of respondents with regards to who
should be responsible for waste management (refer to Table 11) it came into view that those
respondents who felt that residents must play a role in waste management had attained tertiary
level education. The majority of respondents who thought that the responsibility of waste
management should rest in the hands of the municipality were those who had only attained
basic education (Primary level) and those who had attained general education (Ordinary
level).
27
Count
19 19110 110
51 513 12 15
5 53 197 200
primary levelordinary leveladvanced leveluniversityno formal education
Educationbackgroundof respondent
Total
Residents Municipality
Who is the best personto deal with waste
management?Total
Table 11: Cross tabulation education and the best person to deal with waste
management
In a focus group discussion with some residents of Highfields, it emerged that 38% of
respondents felt that the inclusion of residents in waste management did not have any benefit
with regards to waste management. In terms of community participation this response was
not favourable, however it was encouraging to see that the rest of the respondents were
equally divide between the opinion that it would lead to more efficiency if residents were to
play a role in waste management and it would result in more hygienic conditions if residents
were to also play a role in waste management.
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
More efficient 74 37.0 37.0 37.0 More hygienic 50 25.0 25.0 62.0 No benefit 76 38.0 38.0 100.0 Total 200 100.0 100.0 Table 12: What are the benefits of household managing their own waste?
3.4 Community participation
In the study carried out, it was found that it is not a clear cut matter to pronounce that there is
potential for community participation in solid waste management or there is no potential
within Highfields, this was as a result of the fact that a prevailing attitude exists that solid
waste management is the domain of the municipality and that they are the most capable of
rendering effective management of solid waste. When asked who they thought was in the
best position to handle issues of solid waste management an over whelming 98% of residents
indicated that they believed that municipal collection was the best option for managing solid
waste management issues as indicated below.
28
Burning and burying
Burning
Burying
Open dumping
Composting
Municipal collection
Table 13: What is the best method of disposing of waste
However there were other indicators that there is room for community participation in solid
waste management. Waste (1996) identifies four indicators that could be a potential threat to
community participation in solid waste management, namely low community priority for
solid waste management, low willingness to participate in collection and recycling, low
willingness to keep public spaces clean and low willingness to pay. In analysing the research
data especially with regards to assessing the potential for community participation these four
were kept in mind as a point of reference.
One of the resident interviewed said : “my
child not having electricity we can adjust to,
even poverty and not being able to eat
whatever we want to eat we can get used to
but living with all this dirt all over as if we
are animals we cant not ever get used to….
we are fed up….”
29
Clearly there is a felt need for an improved solid waste management strategy and residents
prioritize the need for a solution to the current crises this in itself is an indicator that
community participation can play a role in solid waste management.
It is quite apparent that there is a need for a community based solid waste management project
in Highfields Harare and this is evidenced by the heaps of uncollected household waste
occupying every vacant lot and open space in the neighbourhood.
Aside from this evidence, residents interviewed in the Focus Group Discussions expressed
growing frustration with the current system whereby they pay for services which are not
rendered, a clearly frustrated and angry resident said “the thing that hurts me the most is our
money which is just going, these people are just collecting our money …they are
robbers…how can they just take our money yet they never ever collect anything not even one
bin! We want our money back we would rather hire people on our own to bring a big truck
and take the garbage away”. This gives indication that there could be a high level of
willingness to pay. Many respondents indicated in the qualitative questionnaire that they
didn’t have a problem with paying the municipality if it collected their waste but they were
unhappy with paying but yet not receiving any service
3.5 Gender and solid waste management
An investigation on the role of women in solid waste management is vital, because if an
intervention strategy or project is to be successful it must involve woman. All cultures assign
roles to people based on gender. Many cultures have assigned women the role and
responsibility of keeping the home and its immediate environment clean and as such the
management of waste is one of their daily tasks. Therefore any disruption or inefficiency of
solid waste management systems is felt the most by them, they also usually give improvement
of services a higher priority than men as they are the ones who must come up with alternative
strategies if for example the municipality does not provide efficient service.
Whilst the issue of gender has been marginalised in waste management discourse, this
research could not circumvent the matter, having said this the study carried out uncovered
interesting dynamics with regards to gender roles and solid waste management in Highfields,
30
though this was out of the scope of the objective and aims of the study, it was deemed
necessary by the researcher to discuss the gender dynamics with regards to solid waste
management because as mentioned earlier, community participation can not be looked at
outside of the context of gender roles as women play a vital role in community participation.
To divorce the two would mean removing a vital component of the public participation
process.
When asked whose duty or responsibility it was to dispose of waste and generally manage
solid waste respondents answered as indicated in the table below.
Table 14: Who disposes of waste in this household?
Without a doubt one can say that the present solid waste crisis in Highfields has transcended
gender roles that would normally be assigned in a patriarchal society such as Zimbabwe. One
respondent said “there is nothing like this is the maid or my wife’s job because what we need
is our yard to be clean so who ever can carry the bin and empty it at that space (pointing at a
garbage heap) will do the job after all the garbage is to much and to heavy to expect the maid
to throw it away on her own.” Another respondent was quoted as saying “I send my kids to
throw the bin because if the municipality finds them throwing it away, who will they fine?
They can’t fine children!! But if I was caught that would be a problem so I send the young
kids.”
It was interesting to note that although the management of waste had transcended culturally
assigned gender roles, the pervasive nature of male patriarchy was such that of all responses
given by respondents only 2.5% indicated that the father ever had the responsibility of
disposing of household waste.
31
CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSIONS
In Zimbabwe some of the major setbacks faced in terms of solid waste management are lack
of infrastructure for adequate solid waste management, lack of appropriate technologies that
can be utilised to effectively deal with the waste produced in ever increasing quantities,
insufficient resources to provide extensive waste collection services as well as the
proliferation of illegal dumpsites. Despite the picture seeming very bleak for effective solid
waste management there are numerous possibilities that can be tailored made for developing
countries to win the struggle against the waste crisis. Numerous possibilities have been
proposed, however these solutions can be put in a nutshell as follows:
The implementation of the waste hierarchy approach.
The utilisation of the extended producer responsibility approach.
The involvement of various stakeholders such as the private sector and the
community.
All the solutions that have been put forward all point to the need for a multidisciplinary
approach to solid waste management. One that combines sanitation with social objectives and
undertakes to provide consistent service and raises public awareness of its significance.
Moreover, it must bring together the private, public and community-based actors and give
them well defined responsibilities in the various fields from preliminary collection to
recycling waste.
It was the aim of this research to investigate the potential for community participation in
Highfields Harare. From the research carried out, it came to light that there is a definite felt
need for an improvement in the current solid waste management system which is
characterised by heaps of uncollected waste. However the idea of the community playing a
role has not gained popularity as yet, the prevailing attitude is that the municipality should be
responsible for all aspects of waste management. Despite this, there seems to be a growing
awareness that the municipality is unable to offer a satisfactory services single handed in
addition, there seemed to be some indications of a willingness to pay for a better service
32
hence from the researchers opinion, these are all pre determinants that show the potential for
community participation in waste management within Highfields.
In conclusion, it is the contention of the researcher that for the development of a waste
management strategy that not only meets the goal of environmental protection as well as
human health protection such a strategy must be based upon the tenets of community
participation. Furthermore the researcher believes that the success of community
participation in solid waste management depends on the involvement of actors such as the
municipality, community-based organisations, micro enterprises and local leaders.
Emanating from the findings and the conclusions drawn from the study, the following
recommendations are made:
Awareness raising should be undertaken, people need to be educated so that there is an
awareness of the importance of proper solid waste management; this education should
preferably be started at the primary school level so as to ensure awareness amongst the
future generation.
It was identified that one of the biggest obstacles to recycling was the lack of a market for
recyclable goods; therefore there is a need to make recycling a viable and profitable option.
In order to promote separation of waste, collection points for different types of waste need
to be implemented.
33
REFERENCES Amis, P. (1992) Urban Management in Uganda: survival under stress, the institutional
framework of urban Government University of Birmingham Birmingham
ADB(2002) Study on Solid Waste Management Options for Africa
African Development Bank Abidjan Côte d’Ivoire
Anschütz, J. (1996) Community-based solid waste management and water-supply projects:
Problems and solutions compared - A survey of the literature. UWEP working
Document 2. Gouda: WASTE.
Agenda 21 Stockholm (2001). Source Separation Guide. Stockholm:
Beall, J 1997 Social Capital in Waste: A solid Investment, Journal of International
Development, Vol.9 pp960-67
Chenge.M, Tevera D.S (1998) urban solid waste management in eastern and southern Africa
sapes publishing Harare Zimbabwe
Denscombe .M. (2004) The Good Research Guide for small scale social research projects.
Open University Press McGraw Hill Education England.
Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), 2and edition (2000). Handbook of qualitative Research.
California: Sage Publications.
DNR, (1993) Industrial Waste Management in Zimbabwe: Report from Waste Dump
Assessments, Department of Natural Resources, Ministry of Environment and
Tourism, Harare.
DNR, (1994) Guidelines on Industrial Waste Management, Department of Natural resources,
Ministry of Mines, Environment and Tourism, Harare.
Field, J.(2003) Social Capital Routledge Publishers United Kingdom
Hardoy, J.E., Mitlin, D. and Satterthwaite, D.: (1992), Environmental Problems in Third
World Cities, Earthscan Publications, London.
Hardoy, J. E., D. Mitlin, and Satterthwaite, D (2001). Environmental Problems in an
Urbanizing World: Finding Solutions for Cities in Africa, Asia and Latin
America. London, Sterling, Earthscan publications Ltd.
Holloway, A. (1995). Challenges for Long-term Disaster Reduction: Elements of
Telemedicine, Harare, Zimbabwe, unpublished (after UNEP, GEO-
2000,www.unep.org).
34
Kativu, D. (2000) “Economic Aspects of Solid Waste Management in Harare”, An
Unpublished MEPP Dissertation, Department of Geography and Environmental
Science, University of Zimbabwe, Harare.
Lesser, E. L. (2000) Knowledge and social capital: foundations and applications Boston:
Butterworth-Heinemann
Lynne, G. D. and Rola, L. R. (1988). Improving attitude-behaviour prediction models with
economic variables: Farmer actions toward soil conservation. Journal of Social
Psychology, 128(1), 19-28.
Mafusire, A. (2000) “Harare” In Porter, R.C etal (eds) The Economics of Water Waste in
Three Africa Capitals, Ashgate, Hampshire.
Mapako, M.C. and Mbewe, A. (Eds). (2004). Renewables and Energy for Rural Development
in Sub-Saharan Africa. London: ZED Books.
Mac Granaham, G. (1991) Environmental Problems and the Urban Household in Third World
Countries, Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm.
Mulenga, M. Manase, G. and Fawcett, B. (2004) Building Links for Improved Sanitation in
Poor Urban Settlements Recommendations from research in Southern Africa, 1st
Edition Institute of Irrigation and Development Studies
MLGRUD (1995) Zimbabwe urban solid waste management Study, Ministry of Local
Government Rural and Urban Development Government of Zimbabwe Harare
Zimbabwe.
Putnam, R.D. (1995) ‘Bowling Alone’: America’s Declining Social Capital., Journal of
Democracy 6:1, January, 65-78
Read, A.D. (1999) “A weekly door step recycling collection, I had no idea I could!
Overcoming the local barriers to participation .resources, conservation and
recycling, 26:217-249.
Senkoro, H. (2003). Solid Waste Management in Africa: A WHO / AFRO Perspective. Paper
1, presented in Dar es Salaam at the CWG Workshop, March 2003. Available
at: http://www.skat.ch/sf-web/activities/ws/cwg/pdf/cwg-01.Pdf [Accessed
December 15, 2006]
Schertenlieb, R. and Meyer, W. (1992) "Municipal solid waste management in developing
countries: problems and issues; needs for further research." IRCWD NEWS, no.
26, pp. 2-9.
Tavengwa, T. (1995). SADC Unites in War Against Malaria: WHO Lays Platform of Action.
The Herald, December 7. Harare, Zimbabwe
35
Tevera, D.S. (1993) “Waste –Recycling as a Livelihood in the Informal Sector: The Case of
Teviotdale Garbage in Harare”, In Zimunyama, L., Harare, the Growth and
Problems of the City, University of Zimbabwe Publications, Harare
Tchobanoglous, G. H. Theisen and Vigil, S. (1993). Integrated Solid Waste Management.
Engineering Principles and Management Issues. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Tevera, D. S. (1991) Urban Solid Waste Management in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Introduction
to Environmental ,Financial and Economic Issues, Unpublished Report, World
Bank ,Department of Infrastructure and Urban Development ,Washington DC.
Tevera, D.S. (1991b) “Solid Waste Disposal in Harare and its Effects on the Environment:
Some Preliminary Observations,”The Zimbabwe Science News,Vl.25.no.1/3
Thomas- Hope, E. (1998) Solid Waste Management .Canoe Press University of the West
Indies, West Indies.
UNEP (1994) Environmental Data Report,. GEMS monitoring and Assessment Research
Centre, London UK in co-operation with the World Institute, Washington DC,
UK Department of the Environment, London.
UNESCO (2001). “Education for Sustainable Development”. [Online].Available:
http://www.unesco.org/education/esd/english/education/role.shtml[2002,
December 31]. [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization].
UNIDO (2003) waste management programme http://www.un.org accessed 29 March 2006
Velma, I.G. and Masocha, M. (2003). “Solid waste management and recycling in Victoria
Falls, Zimbabwe”, Warmer Bulletin, Issue 90, pp. 8-10.
Volger, G. (1984) “Waste recycling in developing countries: A review of the social,
technological and market forces, in managing solid wastes in developing
countries” edited by JR Holmes Chichester, England John Wiley & Sons 241-
266.
WASTE, (2002). The Second Arab Fair and Forum for Recycling and Waste Management
Technologies and Services. WASTE 2002 Newsletter No. 2. MultiFairs, Cairo,
Egypt, June.
Waite, R. (1995) Household Waste-Recycling, Earthscan Publications, London
World Bank. 2005. Developing country data sets. Http //www.worldbank.org. Internet. Html.
Accessed: 6 January 2006
Zurbrugg, C. and Ahmed, R. (1999) ‘Enhancing community motivation and participation in
36
Solid waste management’ in: Sandec News, no.4, pp. 2-6. Duebendorf: EAWAG.
37
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Educational background of respondent and their responses to the question what are
the major problems of inappropriate solid waste management............................................... 19
Table 2: Solid waste collection by municipal services ........................................................... 19
Table 3: Methods of waste disposal ...................................................................................... 20
Table 4: How often do you use burning ................................................................................ 21
Table 5: Do you recycle ........................................................................................................ 22
Table 6: What do you recycle ............................................................................................... 22
Table 7:Do you compost....................................................................................................... 24
Table 8: What do you compost ............................................................................................. 24
Table 9: Cross tabulation house ownership and composting .................................................. 25
Table 10: Who is the best person to deal with waste management ......................................... 26
Table 11: Cross tabulation education and the best person to deal with waste management .... 27
Table 12: What are the benefits of household managing their own waste .............................. 27
Table 13: What is the best method of disposing of waste. ..................................................... 28
Table 14: Who disposes of waste in this household. .............................................................. 30
TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1: Map of Zimbabwe, subset of Harare ...................................................................... 12 Figure 2: Map of Harare showing the suburbs of Harare including Highfields ...................... 13 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1: Photo Plate ....................................................................................................... 38 Appendix 2: Key Informant Questionnaire ........................................................................... 39 Appendix 3: Observation Schedule ....................................................................................... 40 Appendix 4: Questionnaire ................................................................................................... 41
38
APPENDIX 1: PHOTO PLATE
39
APPENDIX 2: KEY INFORMANT QUESTIONNAIRE
KEY INFORMANT QUESTIONNAIRE
1) What are the prevailing solid waste management strategies that are utilised in Harare?
2) What illegal solid waste strategies are you aware of that are being utilised in Harare by
residents?
3) Are you aware of any community based solid waste management initiatives in Harare.
4) In many countries in Asia and recently in east Africa and in morocco there has been a great
expansion in community based initiatives in matters of solid waste such as community based
compost plants, community based collection of house hold solid waste wherein communities
pay some hired members of the community to collect household waste and dispose of it at the
local landfills. Do you think that such strategies could be viable options for Harare?
40
APPENDIX 3: OBSERVATION SCHEDULE
DATE& TIME PLACE OF ACTIVITY
APPROXIMATE AGE OF
SUBJECT
GENDER OF SUBJECT OBSERVED BEHAVIOUR COMMENTS
41
APPENDIX 4: QUESTIONNAIRE
Morning ……..My name is ….., I am a student at ……. I am carrying out a research as a research assistant for a fellow master’s student. I am kindly asking for your time if you are interested in participating in this study. Participation in this study is voluntary. Your responses will be used for academic purposes only. If you have any questions regarding this research, please don’t hesitate to contact Judith Mlanda on 091767688. Thank you in advance for you participation. Interviewer name …………………………….. ___________________________________________________________________________ 1,Gender 1, Male 2, Female 2,Age of respondent 1,20-25yrs 2,26-30yrs 3,31-35yrs 4,36-40yrs 5,41-45yrs 6,46yrs+ 3,Educational Background 1 Primary level 2 Ordinary level 3 Advanced level 4 University 5 No formal education
4,House ownership 1 Owner of the house 2 Lodger 3 Stay with relatives 5, How many people form your household? Circle appropriate response.
Paimba pano panogara vanhu vangani? 1, 2-3 people 2, 4-5 people 3, 6-7 people 4, 8-9 people 5, 10 or more 6, How many times a week is your household waste collected? Marara anotorwa nevekanzuru kangani pasvondo. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ KNOWLEDGE
42
7,Please indicate the types of household waste you dispose of. Tsanangurai kuti marara amunowanza kurasa akamira sei uyezva muno rasa kangani. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8, How do you dispose of your household waste please indicate by ticking all the appropriate. Marara apano pamba munomarasira kupi 1 Open dumping 2 Burning 3 Burying 4 Composting 5 Municipal collection 6 Recycling 9, Do you separate your household waste? Munoparadzanisa marara pamunomarasa here? YES NO If yes why Neyi muchidaro? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10, Do you recycle? Pamarara pane amunoshandisa zve here kana kutengesa, sezvenenge ma bodoro ?
1, Yes 2, No
11, What do you recycle? Ndeapi acho anonoshandisa zvekare kana kutengesa ___________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 12,How often do you use open dumping. Munorasira marara kusango kakawanda sei? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 13,Why do you use open dumping? Nemhaka yeai muchi rasira musango? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 14, How often do dispose of your waste through Burning. Munopisa marara kakawanda sei?
1,Most of the time
43
2,very often 3,often 4,rarely 5,never
15,How often do you dispose of your waste through burying? Munocherera marara pasi kakawanda sei? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 16,Do you compost the waste? Muno compostah marara here? Yes No 17,How do you compost? Munocherera marara akaita sei? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 18, How often do you dispose of your waste through municipal collection? Marara munorasa mega here kana kuti munomirirra veminiciparati kuti vatore. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 19,What do you think are the major problems posed by inappropriate solid waste disposal mechanisms. Ndeapi matambudziko anokonzerwa nemarara asina kuraswa zvakanaka _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 20,How do you rate the quality of solid waste disposal service by the municipality? Munoti chii nekutorwa kwemarara neminiparati? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 21, what do you think is the best way to dispose of solid waste? Please tick one appropriate response. Sekuona kwenyu nzira yakanaka yekurasa marara ndeipi? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 22,what should the following people do about solid waste management? Vanhu vanotevera vonofanira kuita basa ripi panyaya yemarara? 1 residents- vagari venzvimbo ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
44
2 municipality
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3 NGO’s and other civic organisations –
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
23, What are the benefits of people managing their own household waste? Zvakanakirei kuti imba imwe neimwe izvionere panyaya yekurasa marara zvakanaka _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 24, How can residents help to solve the problem of uncollected solid waste? Vagari venzvimbo vangabatsira sei kugadzirisa dambudziko remarara _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 25,Who disposes of waste in this household? Pano marara ano raswa nani? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 26,Are there any other issues that are related to this topic that you want to raise. Pane zvimwe zvamungade kukurukura here zvatisina kutaura zviri maererano nemarara? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Thank you very much for your participation.
