Upload
others
View
10
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A Systems Approach to Community Engaged Solid Waste Management in Todos Santos Cuchumatán, Guatemala
by
Rachael Marshall
A Thesis
Presented to The University of Guelph
In partial fulfilment of requirements
for the degree of Master of Applied Science
in Environmental Engineering and International Development Studies
Guelph, Ontario, Canada
© Rachael Marshall, January, 2013
ABSTRACT
A systems approach to community engaged solid waste management in Todos Santos Cuchumatán, Guatemala
Rachael Marshall, Advisor:
University of Guelph, 2013 Professor K. Farahbakhsh
Solid waste management (SWM) is a growing problem in developing countries
around the world. In Guatemala, indigenous communities, which are predominantly
rural and remote, are particularly hard hit by a lack of basic SWM services. Todos
Santos, situated in the Cuchumatanes mountain range of northwestern Guatemala, is
one such community. As projects developed, planned, and implemented from 'the
top down' continue to be ineffective, the literature provides little insight about
remote communities' perspectives on exactly what issues SWM creates, influences,
and exacerbates, and how they might respond to these concerns themselves. Using a
participatory systems approach, this study investigated the systemic structures and
behaviours that maintain and exacerbate SWM challenges in Todos Santos, and
where key places (leverage points) to intervene in the system may exist. The study
presents a wide selection of locally appropriate SWM solutions to target these
leverage points in the form of four future scenarios These scenarios act as a step-‐
wise implementation plan for gradual implementation in the community, each
building upon the previous, ultimately reaching a community-‐defined vision for
SWM.
iii
Acknowledgements This work would not have come about without the generous contributions of many
people. The process of undertaking this thesis has been more than a journey – it has
been a learning and growing experience that has changed how I see the world and
also the person I am. I am very grateful for and indebted to a number of wonderful
people that I would like to thank personally.
First, I would like to thank my advisor, Khosrow Farahbakhsh for the guidance and
support you have provided me with over the last two years. Thank you for sharing
many long talks about the workings of the world – your profound perspectives on
science, society, and spirituality have left a lasting impact and helped me in
developing the skills to answer messy questions. But most significantly, I want to
thank you for the important life lessons you helped me face; I never imagined how
much I could grow over just two years. Thank you for the pushes, for your great
generosity, and for your invaluable mentorship.
I also want to thank Karen Morrison for your strength, wisdom, inspiring charisma
and moral support. You are an incredible mentor and a truly kind and caring person.
I am so lucky to have had the opportunity to take in a small piece of your knowledge,
wonderful creativity, and kind words. Your support really has meant the world to
me. Thank you so much.
I’d like to extend a special thanks to the rest of the CoPEH-‐Canada community, from
whom I gained inspiration, hope, and a place to fit in. I would like to thank Margot
Parkes, who first rescued me from a desire to divorce my profession, showed me
that I myself, and my aspirations for the future belonged to something bigger, and
took me under her wing – all over a cup of tea. I would also like to thank Karen
Houle, Martin Bunch, David Waltner-‐Toews, and Rachel Hirsch for sharing your
exceptional insights and for being such welcoming, wonderful people. To Chris
Charles, Phil Chen, Zee Leung, Lindsay Beck, Lindsay Galway, Gillian Wigmore, Anna
iv
Chudyk, and the rest of the gang, thank you for inspiration, fun, crazed late night
talks under pine trees in the rain, and friendship.
I would like to thank my family for the unconditional and constant moral support,
love, advice, long-‐distance hugs, laughter, ideas, and writing rescues. To my parents,
thanks for the many long hours of editing, coaching, and reassuring. To my sister
and brother, you are both hilarious, fantastic people – thank you for reminding me
of what life is about. I love each one of you so dearly, and could never thank you
enough.
This research would have been impossible without the help, collaboration, and
support of the people of Todos Santos. Thank you for welcoming me into your
homes and lives, and for sharing your hopes and your fears; your anger and your
pain; your laughter, intuition, and knowledge; and your passionate aspirations for
the future. To Ingrid, my Guatamalan mother, gracias por las pláticas junto al fuego,
su hospitalidad inconmensurable, y por ser la madre amorosa que necesita cuando
estaba lejos de la mía.
A very, very special thanks must go to Kelly “Carolina” Chauvin, whose friendship
and research help in the field and beyond proved to be utterly invaluable. Thank you
so much for your relentless dedication; for sharing your home, your experiences,
your connections and friends, and your passion for the people of Todos Santos; and
for taking such good care of me. Your kindness got me through this research!
This research also could not have come about without the countless hours and
contributions from faculty and students at EARTH University. Specifically, to Alex
Pacheco, Jane Yeomans, Sofia Montero Vargas, Carlos Alvarez, Karla Cruz, Raoul
Botero, and Yanine Chan – thank you for your guidance, for sharing your research
findings and stories, and for your immeasurable hospitality. To Piero, gracias por
todas las risas y por ser un gran amigo. Liz, gracias por asegurar el tiempo que pasé
en Costa Rica fue lo mejor que podría ser. David, gracias por las conversaciones
nocturnas sobre las aspiraciones y esperanzas para el mundo, por tu pasión por el
v
medio ambiente y los movimientos de la gente, y por tu cuidado. Es tan bueno saber
que tengo casa, finca, familia, y calor sincero cuando lo necesito.
I would like to thank Margaret Hundleby for the wonderful talks, invaluable writing
help, moral support, and refuge.
A warm thanks must go out to many other colleagues and friends for your support
and encouragement: Matthew De Luca, Renata Stanaityte, Jamie Miller, Graham
Aikenhead, Jonathan VanderSteen, Jason McCullough, Nymisha Sridhara, Alia
Ziesman, Megan Thomas, Cam Harris, and Walter Marshall.
To Steph-‐Marie, though you’re a relatively new one, I have to thank you for sing-‐a-‐
longs, empowering talks, face paint, and for being the truly caring, thoughtful person
that you are. You have supported me in ways that will forever indebt me to you. You
are a rare friend, and I’m so glad to have had you in my life.
To Megan Mathieson, thank you as always for the moral support, hilarity, and
endless love you provided me with over the past two years, just as you unfailingly
have over the last 20. You are my personal gift from the universe and I plan to hang
on to you until I can’t hang on to anything at all. May we always meet in the next life.
Finally, to Jeff, thank you for your patient, quiet kindness; for always lending an ear,
a helping hand, a terrible pun, and a brilliant idea. Most of all, thanks for being so
steadfast and grounding.
vi
Table of contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................................. iii
Table of contents ....................................................................................................................................................... vi
List of tables .............................................................................................................................................................. xiv
List of figures ............................................................................................................................................................ xvi
1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Solid waste management in Todos Santos Cuchumatán, Guatemala ................................. 2
1.2 A systems approach to solid waste management ....................................................................... 3
1.3 Problem statement ................................................................................................................................... 4
1.4 Research goal and objectives ............................................................................................................... 4
1.5 Interdisciplinary approach ................................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Thesis organization .................................................................................................................................. 5
1.6.1 Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................. 5
1.6.2 Chapter 2: A systems approach to integrated solid waste management in developing countries – A review ............................................................................................................... 6
1.6.3 Chapter 3: Narrative-‐based participatory model building as a systems approach to integrated solid waste management in Todos Santos Cuchumatán, Guatemala ............. 6
1.6.4 Chapter 4: Developing locally appropriate leverage for change: Integrated solid waste management in rapidly developing rural Guatemala ......................................................... 6
1.6.5 Chapter 5: Local innovation, ownership, and action: Evaluating the systemic impacts of four future scenarios for integrated solid waste management in Todos Santos Cuchumatán, Guatemala ................................................................................................................ 6
1.6.6 Chapter 6: Conclusions and recommendations ................................................................... 7
1.7 References .................................................................................................................................................... 8
2 Literature review ............................................................................................................................................... 9
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 9
2.2 Solid waste management in high-‐income countries .................................................................. 9
2.2.1 Historical origins of solid waste management .................................................................. 10
vii
2.2.2 Driver 1: Public health – the sanitary revolution ............................................................ 12
2.2.3 Driver 2: Environment – The ‘modernization’ of SWM ................................................. 13
2.2.4 Driver 3: The resource scarcity and value of waste ....................................................... 15
2.2.5 Driver 4: Climate change ............................................................................................................ 17
2.2.6 Driver 5: Public Awareness and Participation – NIMBY and Behavioural Change 17
2.2.7 Integrated solid waste management – the current paradigm .................................... 18
2.3 Solid waste management in developing countries .................................................................. 22
2.3.1 Developing country contexts .................................................................................................... 25
2.3.1.1 Urbanization, inequality, and economic growth ..................................................... 25
2.3.1.2 Cultural and socio-‐economic aspects ........................................................................... 28
2.3.1.3 Political landscapes: Policy, governance, institutional issues ........................... 30
2.3.1.3.1 Policy .................................................................................................................................. 30
2.3.1.3.2 Governance ..................................................................................................................... 31
2.3.1.3.3 Institutions ...................................................................................................................... 32
2.3.1.3.4 International influences ............................................................................................ 35
2.4 The need for a systems approach .................................................................................................... 38
2.4.1 Post-‐Normal Science .................................................................................................................... 39
2.4.1 Systems thinking: the foundations of systems approaches ........................................ 41
2.4.2 Complex, adaptive, eco-‐social systems ................................................................................. 43
2.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................. 48
2.6 References ................................................................................................................................................. 50
3 Narrative-‐based participatory model building as a systems approach to solid waste management in Todos Santos, Guatemala ................................................................................................... 56
3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 56
3.1.1 Solid Waste Management: Developing Country Trends ............................................... 57
3.1.2 SWM in Guatemala ........................................................................................................................ 58
viii
3.1.2.1 National and international attention ............................................................................ 63
3.1.3 Area of Study: Todos Santos Cuchumatán .......................................................................... 66
3.1.3.1 Solid Waste Management in Todos Santos ................................................................ 68
3.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................. 70
3.2.1 Theoretical approach ................................................................................................................... 72
3.2.2 Methodological Approach .......................................................................................................... 74
3.2.2.1 Case Study Approach ........................................................................................................... 74
3.2.2.2 Qualitative Methods: Understanding complexity through narrative ............. 74
3.2.2.3 Blended Assessment Methods and Problem-‐Solving Approach ....................... 76
3.2.3 Data collection ................................................................................................................................ 76
3.2.3.1 Snowball and random purposeful sampling methods .......................................... 76
3.2.3.2 Causal mapping ...................................................................................................................... 77
3.2.3.3 Semi-‐structured interview process ............................................................................... 79
3.2.4 Data analysis .................................................................................................................................... 80
3.2.4.1 Group maps .............................................................................................................................. 80
3.2.4.2 Leverage point analysis ...................................................................................................... 81
3.2.4.2.1 Causal Matrices .............................................................................................................. 82
3.2.4.2.2 Causal Grid ....................................................................................................................... 83
3.3 Results ......................................................................................................................................................... 84
3.3.1 Group map 1: Men’s perspectives .......................................................................................... 85
3.3.2 Men’s Causal Grid .......................................................................................................................... 87
3.3.3 Group map 2: Women’s perspectives ................................................................................... 89
3.3.4 Women’s Causal Grid ................................................................................................................... 90
3.3.5 Group map 3: Youth’s perspectives ....................................................................................... 92
3.3.6 Youth’s Causal Grid ....................................................................................................................... 94
3.3.7 Group map 4: Community perspectives .............................................................................. 95
ix
3.3.8 Community Causal Grid .............................................................................................................. 96
3.4 Discussion .................................................................................................................................................. 99
3.4.1 Men’s causal map and grid ...................................................................................................... 100
3.4.2 Women’s causal map and grid ............................................................................................... 102
3.4.3 Youth’s causal map and grid ................................................................................................... 104
3.4.4 Community-‐wide causal map and grid .............................................................................. 105
3.4.5 Successes and limitations ........................................................................................................ 109
3.5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 111
3.6 References ............................................................................................................................................... 113
4 Developing locally appropriate leverage for change: Integrated solid waste management in rapidly developing rural Guatemala ........................................................................................................ 118
4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 118
4.2 Appropriate Technology ................................................................................................................... 120
4.2.1 Defining and redefining appropriate technology .......................................................... 121
4.2.2 Appropriate technology criteria ........................................................................................... 122
4.2.3 Appropriate solid waste technologies ................................................................................ 125
4.3 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................... 127
4.3.1 Defining the local context ......................................................................................................... 127
4.3.2 Solid waste audit .......................................................................................................................... 127
4.3.2.1 Snowball and random purposeful sampling methods ........................................ 127
4.3.2.2 Data collection ...................................................................................................................... 127
4.3.3 Building a ‘Bank of Ideas’ ......................................................................................................... 128
4.3.3.1 Data collection ...................................................................................................................... 129
4.3.4 Developing criteria for locally appropriate system levers ........................................ 129
4.3.5 System lever assessment .......................................................................................................... 129
4.4 Results ....................................................................................................................................................... 130
x
4.4.1 Local context: Solid waste in Todos Santos Cuchumatán .......................................... 130
4.4.1.1 Socio-‐economic, cultural, environmental, and political contexts ................... 130
4.4.1.2 Technical context: Waste audit results ...................................................................... 131
4.4.2 A ‘Bank of Ideas’ for Solid Waste Management .............................................................. 135
4.4.3 Selection criteria for Todos Santos Cuchumatán ........................................................... 137
4.4.4 Refining the ‘Bank of Ideas’: System lever assessment ............................................... 139
4.4.4.1 The Foundations Scenario ............................................................................................... 141
4.4.4.2 The Religious Partnerships Scenario .......................................................................... 142
4.4.4.3 The Private Sector Involvement Scenario ................................................................ 143
4.4.4.4 The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario ......................................................................... 145
4.5 Discussion ................................................................................................................................................ 146
4.5.1 Residential solid waste audit .................................................................................................. 146
4.5.2 Bank of Ideas ................................................................................................................................. 148
4.5.3 System lever assessment .......................................................................................................... 151
4.5.3.1 Foundational system management options ............................................................ 152
4.5.3.2 Foundational waste characterization options ........................................................ 152
4.5.3.3 Foundational waste reduction options ...................................................................... 153
4.5.3.4 Foundational collection, transport, and financing options ............................... 153
4.5.3.5 Foundational resource recovery options ................................................................. 154
4.5.3.6 Foundational disposal options ...................................................................................... 154
4.5.4 The Foundations Scenario ....................................................................................................... 155
4.5.5 The Religious Partnerships Scenario .................................................................................. 157
4.5.6 The Private Sector Involvement Scenario ......................................................................... 158
4.5.7 The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario ................................................................................. 160
4.5.8 Scenario selection ........................................................................................................................ 162
4.5.9 Challenges and setbacks ........................................................................................................... 163
xi
4.6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 164
4.7 References ............................................................................................................................................... 166
5 Local innovation, ownership, and action: A systems approach to context-‐specific ‘best’ options for integrated solid waste management in Todos Santos, Guatemala .......................... 170
5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 170
5.2 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................... 171
5.2.1 Scenario implementation ......................................................................................................... 173
5.2.2 Implementation analysis .......................................................................................................... 173
5.3 Results ....................................................................................................................................................... 174
5.3.1 The Foundations Scenario ....................................................................................................... 174
5.3.1.1 Targeting the five action entry points ........................................................................ 175
5.3.2 The Religious Partnerships Scenario .................................................................................. 176
5.3.2.1 Targeting the five action entry points ........................................................................ 177
5.3.3 The Private Sector Involvement Scenario ......................................................................... 178
5.3.3.1 Targeting the five action entry points ........................................................................ 179
5.3.4 The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario ................................................................................. 180
5.3.4.1 Targeting the five action entry points ........................................................................ 181
5.3.5 New influential relationships ................................................................................................. 182
5.4 Discussion ................................................................................................................................................ 183
5.4.1 The Foundations Scenario ....................................................................................................... 183
5.4.1.1 Benefits .................................................................................................................................... 183
5.4.1.2 Drawbacks .............................................................................................................................. 184
5.4.2 The Religious Partnerships Scenario .................................................................................. 185
5.4.2.1 Benefits .................................................................................................................................... 185
5.4.2.2 Drawbacks .............................................................................................................................. 186
5.4.3 The Private Sector Involvement Scenario ......................................................................... 187
xii
5.4.3.1 Benefits .................................................................................................................................... 187
5.4.3.2 Drawbacks .............................................................................................................................. 187
5.4.4 The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario ................................................................................. 188
5.4.4.1 Benefits .................................................................................................................................... 188
5.4.4.2 Drawbacks .............................................................................................................................. 189
5.5 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 190
5.6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 192
5.7 References ............................................................................................................................................... 193
6 Conclusions and recommendations ...................................................................................................... 195
6.1 Research synthesis .............................................................................................................................. 195
6.1.1 Literature review key findings .............................................................................................. 195
6.1.2 Key study findings ....................................................................................................................... 196
6.2 Outstanding issues ............................................................................................................................... 198
6.3 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 199
6.3.1 Building action momentum ..................................................................................................... 199
6.3.1.1 Short-‐term stage: Capacity development and foundational system elements 201
6.3.1.2 Long-‐term stage: Transitioning to a community-‐owned vision of SWM .... 201
6.4 “Situatedness” and local ownership ............................................................................................. 202
6.5 A new methodology for SWM and engineering inquiry ...................................................... 203
6.6 Final remarks ......................................................................................................................................... 204
6.7 References ............................................................................................................................................... 206
Complete Reference list ..................................................................................................................................... 208
Appendix A: Interview guide ........................................................................................................................... 219
Appendix B: Feedback loop descriptions ................................................................................................... 223
A. Men’s feedback loops ............................................................................................................................ 223
xiii
B. Women’s feedback loops ..................................................................................................................... 224
C. Youth’s feedback loops ......................................................................................................................... 225
Appendix C: Bank of Ideas ................................................................................................................................ 227
Appendix D: System lever assessment ........................................................................................................ 235
xiv
List of tables Table 1. Common solid waste management challenges in developing countries, categorized
by sector ............................................................................................................................................................ 57
Table 2. Example of a causal matrix (adapted from Scholz & Tieje, 2002) ................................... 83
Table 3. Men's causal grid results .................................................................................................................... 88
Table 4. Women's causal grid results ............................................................................................................. 92
Table 5. Youth's causal grid results ................................................................................................................ 94
Table 6. Community-‐wide causal grid results ............................................................................................ 99
Table 7. Common Appropriate Technology criteria .............................................................................. 124
Table 8. Weight and volume of residential solid waste components per capita per day ...... 131
Table 9. Average regional waste composition in Latin America and the Caribbean, and OECD member countries (adapted from Hoornweg and Bhada-‐Tata (2012)) ............................. 131
Table 10. Waste practices by neighbourhood .......................................................................................... 134
Table 11. Bank of Ideas summary of options ............................................................................................ 135
Table 12. Constraints for locally appropriate system levers for use in Todos Santos ............ 137
Table 13. Criteria for locally appropriate system levers for use in Todos Santos .................... 138
Table 14. Framework criteria .......................................................................................................................... 139
Table 15. Scenario Summary ........................................................................................................................... 140
Table 16. Sum of strengths of new relationships influencing action entry points ................... 182
Table 17. Implementation Stage 1: Momentum-‐building projects ................................................. 191
Table 18. Overall system management options ....................................................................................... 227
Table 19. Waste characterization options ................................................................................................. 228
Table 20. Waste Reduction Options .............................................................................................................. 228
Table 21. Collection and transport options ............................................................................................... 230
Table 22. Resource recovery options ........................................................................................................... 232
Table 23. Waste transformation options .................................................................................................... 234
Table 24. Disposal options ................................................................................................................................ 234
xv
Table 25. System lever assessment ............................................................................................................... 235
xvi
List of figures Figure 1. SWM Drivers and Progress ............................................................................................................. 12
Figure 2. Stages in the development of modern SWM policy (from Wilson, (2007)) ............... 14
Figure 4. Integrated Solid Waste Management .......................................................................................... 19
Figure 5. Developing Country SWM Contexts ............................................................................................. 24
Figure 6. Population Living in Slums and Proportion of Urban Population Living in Slums, Developing Regions, 1990-‐2010 (UNFPA, 2011) ............................................................................ 26
Figure 7. Problem Solving Strategies (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993) .................................................. 40
Figure 8. Complex Adaptive Systems: Nested Sets of Four Phase Adaptive Cycles (adapted from Holling (2001)) ................................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 9. Conceptual Model of the Dissipative Nature of a Self-‐Organizing System (adapted from Kay et al. (1999)) ............................................................................................................................... 46
Figure 10.Guatemala's SWM Context ............................................................................................................. 59
Figure 11. Environmental and health related SWM impacts in Guatemala ................................... 62
Figure 12. Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 72
Figure 13. Participatory Model Building (adapted from Vennix, 1996) ......................................... 80
Figure 14. Example of a causal grid (adapted from Scholz & Tietje, 2002) ................................... 84
Figure 15. Group map 1: Men's perspectives ............................................................................................. 86
Figure 16. Causal Grid 1: Men's perspectives ............................................................................................. 88
Figure 17. Group map 2: Women's perspectives ...................................................................................... 90
Figure 18. Causal grid 2: Women’s perspectives ...................................................................................... 91
Figure 19. Group map 3: Youth's perspectives .......................................................................................... 93
Figure 20. Causal grid 3: Youth's Perspectives .......................................................................................... 94
Figure 21. Group map 4: Integrated community causal map .............................................................. 96
Figure 22. Causal grid 4: Integrated community perspectives ........................................................... 98
Figure 23. Overlapping perspectives ........................................................................................................... 107
Figure 24. Residential solid waste distribution by weight in Todos Santos ............................... 132
xvii
Figure 25. Residential solid waste distribution by volume in Todos Santos .............................. 133
Figure 26. Conceptual diagram of SWM tasks and stakeholder groups in The Foundations Scenario ........................................................................................................................................................... 142
Figure 27. Conceptual diagram of SWM tasks and stakeholder groups in The Religious Partnerships Scenario ............................................................................................................................... 143
Figure 28. Conceptual diagram of SWM tasks and stakeholder groups in The Private Sector Involvement Scenario ............................................................................................................................... 144
Figure 29. Conceptual diagram of SWM tasks and stakeholder groups in The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario ................................................................................................................................. 146
Figure 30. Conceptual diagram of current SWM service provision in Todos Santos .............. 162
Figure 31. Key places to intervene in the Todos Santos SWM system ......................................... 172
Figure 32. Impacts of The Foundations Scenario system levers on the community-‐wide causal map ...................................................................................................................................................... 175
Figure 33. Impacts of The Religious Partnerships Scenario system levers on the community-‐wide causal map .......................................................................................................................................... 177
Figure 34. Impacts of The Private Sector Involvement Scenario system levers on the community-‐wide causal map ................................................................................................................. 179
Figure 35. Impacts of The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario system levers on the community-‐wide causal map .......................................................................................................................................... 181
Figure 36. Waste Education causes tree ..................................................................................................... 185
Figure 37. The staged implementation process ...................................................................................... 200
Figure 38. Long-‐term stage: Community-‐wide transition through the scenarios .................... 202
1
1 Introduction Solid waste management (SWM) is a critical service for the protection of human
health and the natural environment. Dealing with society’s solid waste is a growing
problem in all countries, and a desperate problem in many developing countries
where solid waste management services can be quite rudimentary (Schübeler, 1996;
Wilson, 2007). Solid waste is inevitably being produced at a rising rate as
developing countries follow the historical, unsustainable Northern model that
emphasizes high production, high consumption, and disposability (Dijkema, Reuter,
& Verhoef, 2000; Duru, 1981; UNEP, 2009). As the North moves towards the
conservation of natural resources through increased recycling and environmentally
conscious production and consumption, accumulating waste in the South continues
to threaten crucial environmental resources, human health, and the quality of life
(UNEP, 2009). It is increasingly evident that the costs of rising consumption trends
do not impact everyone equally; unequal distribution of solid waste services
perpetuates and aggravates inequalities already being experienced by the most
vulnerable populations (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Konteh, 2009). Such is certainly the
case in Central America, which contributes to Latin America’s number one ranking
in the world for inequality by having some of the highest rates of income, health and
education inequality, as measured by the Gini and Human Development indexes
(UNDP, 2010).
In recent years, a variety of factors have caused the volume of household solid waste
in developing countries to increase, and to change in composition from primarily
organics to a mixture of organics and synthetic materials (Yousif & Scott, 2007).
These changes have contributed significantly to the technical and non-‐technical
SWM difficulties that have been experienced in many developing countries;
management and decision-‐making, in particular, have become increasingly complex
(Seadon, 2010).
2
1.1 Solid waste management in Todos Santos Cuchumatán, Guatemala Guatemala has one of Central America’s largest economies (World Bank, 2011), and
solid waste generation per capita is continuously increasing in the country (Yousif &
Scott, 2007). Extremely weak SWM systems have lead to a proliferation of waste
burning and open, unregulated dumping, often near or in water bodies (Mantilla,
2007; Yousif & Scott, 2007). This is especially true in small cities and rural regions,
where the added burdens of geographic isolation, poverty, and limited local
government resources hinder the ability of municipal authorities to cope with
turbulent SWM challenges (Stokoe & Teague, 1995).
In Guatemala, poverty is greatest among the mostly rural indigenous communities,
which constitute nearly half of the population (Cook et al., 2009; Yousif and Scott,
2007). Accordingly, waste management is extremely limited in many of these
communities. The remote Mayan (Mam) village of Todos Santos, tucked in the
Cuchumatanes mountain range in northwestern Guatemala, is no exception. Waste
collection occurs only in the center of town where the wealthiest residents live.
Waste is deposited in an open, unregulated dump that sits directly on the bank of
the Limon River in the center of town. A plethora of vectors (including household
pets) feed at the dump and track waste and contamination through the streets, the
fresh vegetable and meat market, and residents’ homes. Connections between solid
waste mismanagement and community wellbeing are increasingly being recognized.
In 2008, Vets Without Borders identified a need to further investigate waste
management issues in Todos Santos through a program to control the local canine
population (VWB, 2009a). This program brought to light the pivotal need for proper
waste management in the community (VWB, 2009b).
The Guatemalan government has recognized the severity of waste management
issues in the country at large. In 2006, the Guatemalan government signed a
trilateral agreement with the governments of Mexico and Germany to implement an
integrated waste management program in the country (TTSSC, 2010). The program
aimed to create technical capacity in waste management by forming a network of
environmental promoters who could provide technical and advisory assistance to
3
the country’s 2,500 municipalities (TTSSC, 2010). While the program supported the
training and recognition of 70 “experts” offering advisory services to municipalities
by 2009 (TTSSC, 2010), a lack of integrated waste management continues to plague
less fortunate communities throughout the country. Project funding terminated in
2009 (TTSSC, 2010) and further results have not been reported. More recently, the
Inter-‐American Development Bank (IDB) signed a contract to finance the
development of a national plan for solid waste management in the country. The plan
aims to establish concrete goals and objectives for institutional, regulatory,
financing, and legal change in the short-‐ and long-‐term (IDB, 2012).
It becomes rapidly evident that SWM has been recognized as a critical issue of
concern in Guatemala. However, remote communities’ perspectives on the systemic
causes and consequences of waste mismanagement have not been recognized; nor
have means for the community to respond to these concerns themselves. To this
end, this study aims to address Todos Santos’ waste management challenges in an
integrated manner.
1.2 A systems approach to solid waste management The technical, social, economic, and environmental elements and processes that
make up SWM services and activities are part of an interconnected, complex SWM
system. This system interacts and overlaps with several larger social, cultural,
economic, political, and environmental systems. Managing a complex system
requires an understanding of how the system works. However, many SWM
decisions are made without considering the system as an interconnected whole,
increasing the risk of making poor managerial choices and systemic oversights
(Kollikkathara, Feng, & Yu, 2010). Strategies that will function properly within a
complex socio-‐ecological system must be locally appropriate and therefore tailored
to the specific contexts that frame such a system. This necessitates the inclusion of
local stakeholders in not only decision-‐making and strategy building processes, but
also in defining the current structure and functioning of the system, and what a ‘best
fit’ future scenario of that system might look like.
4
In Todos Santos, strategies lacking a locally appropriate systems approach have
failed in the past. In 2007, the European Union funded a project to construct a
wastewater treatment plant in one of the neighbourhoods of Todos Santos. The
plant was subsequently built, but due to a lack of cultural acceptability and
community ownership, it was immediately abandoned.
Clearly, new, locally appropriate approaches that consider the SWM system as the
whole that it is are needed.
1.3 Problem statement The largely indigenous community of Todos Santos Cuchumatán faces severe solid
waste management issues. The community’s perspective of the structure and
functioning of the current SWM system and its impact on the wellbeing of the
community and the surrounding ecosystems is unknown. Standardized ‘cookbook’
solutions, implemented by external entities, have not addressed underlying root
causes in the past. Action-‐oriented change is needed, and thus so is a local
understanding of the structure and functioning of the SWM system in order to
identify key places to intervene in the system. The community needs to be able to
move itself forward with realistic, locally appropriate strategies that confront the
local waste crisis that threatens human health, community wellbeing, and the fragile
ecosystems the residents depend on.
1.4 Research goal and objectives The goal of this study was to use a participatory systems approach to stimulate
‘ground-‐level’ discussions and innovation strategies in the community of Todos
Santos Cuchumatán. The intent was to aid in the creation of an inclusive vision for
solid waste management in the community, and to provide tangible means and
examples to achieve elements of this vision.
The specific objectives of this study were:
1. To identify, from the perspective of the community, the key places to
intervene in the SWM system for long-‐term, successful, and systemically
integrated SWM in Todos Santos.
5
2. To match the perspective of the community to known engineering solutions
for solid waste management systems.
3. To develop a system intervention plan to assist the community to move into
self-‐directed action.
1.5 Interdisciplinary approach The complex solid waste situation in which Todos Santos sits called for a
methodology strongly considerate of context and capable of dealing with
complexity. Such a methodology must consider a wide variety of complex contextual
influences, including social, cultural, political, economic, and ecological. While
conventional SWM approaches tend to be reductionist in nature (Seadon, 2010),
such methods were deemed unfit for this study. Purely technical solutions have
proven to be locally inappropriate in the past. An approach was needed that could
move forward despite high levels of uncertainty and high decision stakes. Therefore,
the approach that was chosen blended quantitative and qualitative methods;
traditional engineering inquiry meets the open-‐ended subjectivity of narrative and
multiple legitimate perspectives. An engineering approach brought a traditional
problem-‐solving mindset, concrete technical solid waste data, and known
engineering solutions to the table, while the subjective system narratives of local
stakeholders brought a particular depth of understanding of the context, structure,
and functioning of the SWM system that could not have been achieved otherwise.
The legitimate perspectives of participants also helped the researcher shape and sift
through known engineering solutions to find those that have a high potential to be
locally appropriate and successful in positively altering the SWM system in the long-‐
term.
1.6 Thesis organization This thesis follows a manuscript style format, and consists of 6 chapters:
1.6.1 Chapter 1: Introduction
The first chapter introduces the rationale and structure of the study.
6
1.6.2 Chapter 2: A systems approach to integrated solid waste management in
developing countries – A review
The second chapter provides a literature review on the historical development of
SWM in industrialized countries, followed by a review of the current SWM
challenges in developing countries. Finally, it examines the need for a systemic
approach by exploring the beneficial perspectives of post-‐normal science and
complex, adaptive systems thinking.
1.6.3 Chapter 3: Narrative-‐based participatory model building as a systems
approach to integrated solid waste management in Todos Santos Cuchumatán,
Guatemala
The third chapter presents the findings of a field study that examines the SWM
challenges in one of Guatemala’s politically and geographically disadvantaged
communities through narrative-‐based participatory model building. Specifically,
local stakeholders conducted causal mapping to depict the system structure from
their perspectives.
1.6.4 Chapter 4: Developing locally appropriate leverage for change: Integrated
solid waste management in rapidly developing rural Guatemala
The fourth chapter presents the findings of a study that explores approaches to
SWM used by a wide variety of communities in Central America and elsewhere that
have the potential to be locally appropriate in rapidly developing rural Todos
Santos. These approaches are tested for local appropriateness with specifically
tailored criteria and constraints in a case study of Todos Santos Cucuchumatán,
Guatemala. Chosen approaches are then assembled into four SWM scenarios that
represent increasingly integrated and effective SWM systems.
1.6.5 Chapter 5: Local innovation, ownership, and action: Evaluating the systemic
impacts of four future scenarios for integrated solid waste management in
Todos Santos Cuchumatán, Guatemala
The fifth chapter presents the findings of a study that examines the impacts of the
four scenarios established in Chapter 4 on the SWM system. Each project within a
given scenario is introduced into the community-‐wide causal map, and the resulting
7
structural impacts are analysed. Recommendations are given about scenario choice
and the initial “momentum-‐building” implementation phase.
1.6.6 Chapter 6: Conclusions and recommendations
The final chapter brings together the findings of the research and provides
recommendations for building action momentum and for future research.
8
1.7 References Coffey, M., & Coad, A. (2010). Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing
Countries. Malta: UN-‐HABITAT. Dijkema, G. P. J., Reuter, M. A., & Verhoef, E. V. (2000). A new paradigm for waste
management. Waste Management, 20(8), 633-‐638. Duru, R. C. (1981). Technological growth and ecological crisis: the Nigerian example.
The Science of the Total Environment, 17(3), 243-‐256. IDB. (2012). GU-‐T1177: National Plan for Solid Waste Management in Guatemala
Retrieved November 2, 2012, from http://www.iadb.org/en/projects/project-‐description-‐title,1303.html?id=GU-‐T1177
Kollikkathara, N., Feng, H., & Yu, D. (2010). A system dynamic modeling approach for evaluating municipal solid waste generation, landfill capacity and related cost management issues. Waste Management, 30(11), 2194-‐2203.
Konteh, F. H. (2009). Urban sanitation and health in the developing world: reminiscing the nineteenth century industrial nations. Health & Place, 15(1), 69-‐78.
Mantilla, J. E. V. (2007). Proyecto cuente con ambiente primer informe sobre desechos solidos (1 ed.): MARN, Universidad Rafael Landivar.
Seadon, J. K. (2010). Sustainable waste management systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(16-‐17), 1639-‐1651.
Stokoe, J., & Teague, E. (1995). Integrated solid waste management for rural areas: A planning tool kit for solid waste managers. Washington, D.C.: USDA Rural Utilities Service.
UNDP. (2010). Regional Human Development Report for Latin America and the Caribbean 2010. Costa Rica: United Nations Development Programme.
UNEP. (2009). Developing Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan: Training Manual (Vol. 1: Waste Characterization and Quantification within Projections for Future). Osaka/Shiga, Japan: United Nations Environment Programme.
VWB. (2009a). Guatemala: Companion animals and community health: Veterinarians Without Borders.
VWB. (2009b). Todos Santos, Guatemala interim report: Implemenation Phase I, January 2009: Veterinarians Without Borders.
World Bank. (2011). Guatemala Overview Retrieved April 6, 2011, from http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/guatemala/overview
Yousif, D. F., & Scott, S. (2007). Governing solid waste management in Mazatenango, Guatemala. International Development Planning Review, 29(4), 433-‐450.
9
2 Literature review
2.1 Introduction The primary purposes of solid waste management (SWM) strategies are to address
the health, environmental, aesthetic, land-‐use, resource, and economic concerns
associated with the improper disposal of waste (Henry, Yongsheng, & Jun, 2006a;
Nemerow, 2009; Wilson, 2007). These issues are an ongoing concern for nations,
municipalities, corporations, and individuals around the world (Nemerow, 2009),
and the global community at large (Wilson, 2007). As Wilson (2007) points out,
developing an understanding about what has driven SWM in the past can provide
much needed context and insight for how best to move forward in the future. Thus,
this review begins by examining the historical development of SWM in high-‐income
countries. It then explores the state of SWM systems in developing countries by
examining the challenges presented by economic, social, cultural, political, and
international influences. Finally, it explores the need for a systemic approach by
examining the beneficial perspectives of post-‐normal science and complex, adaptive
systems (CAS) thinking.
It should be noted that the author recognizes that stark situational differences exist
at all levels: between nations, regions, cities, communities, households, and even
individuals. While this paper makes reference to categories of countries (i.e.
developing, developed, industrialized, high-‐, medium-‐, and low-‐income), by no
means does it imply that the problems are the same amongst these groups. Indeed,
“we always pay for generality by sacrificing content, and all we can say about
practically everything is almost nothing” (Boulding, 1956, p. 197); it is for this
reason that systems approaches, which are founded upon specific, locally
appropriate methodologies, are so crucial to the future of SWM practices.
2.2 Solid waste management in high-‐income countries The historical forces and mechanisms that have driven the evolution of solid waste
management (SWM) in high-‐income countries can provide insight about “how best
to move forward in developing sustainable waste management systems around the
10
world” (Wilson, 2007, p. 205). The following sections explore the origins and
principal drivers of SWM development in industrialized countries in order to
provide some context for the changes that are currently taking place in developing
countries.
2.2.1 Historical origins of solid waste management
Humans have been mass-‐producing solid waste since they first formed non-‐nomadic
societies around 10,000 BC (Worrell & Vesilind, 2012). Historically, public health
concerns, security, scarcity of resources, and aesthetics acted as central drivers for
waste management systems (Louis, 2004; Melosi, 1981; Ponting, 1991; Wilson,
2007; Worrell & Vesilind, 2012). Small communities managed to bury solid waste
just outside their settlements or dispose of it in nearby rivers or water bodies, but as
population densities increased, these practices no longer prevented the spread of
foul odours or disease (Seadon, 2006). As waste accumulated in these growing
communities, people simply lived amongst the filth. There were exceptions:
organized SWM processes were implemented in the ancient city of Mahenjo-‐Daro in
the Indus Valley by 2000 BC (Worrell & Vesilind, 2012); the Greeks had both issued
a decree banning waste disposal in the streets and organized the Western world’s
first acknowledged ‘municipal dumps’ by 500 BC (Melosi, 1981); and Chinese cities
had “disposal police” responsible for enforcing disposal laws by 200 BC. However, as
Worrell and Vesilind (2012, p. 1) so aptly describe, “for the most part, people in
cities lived among waste and squalor” (p. 1). In both Athens and Rome, waste was
only relocated well outside city boundaries when defenses were threatened because
opponents could scale up the refuse piles and over the city walls (Worrell &
Vesilind, 2012).
City streets in the Middle Ages were plastered in an odorous mud composed of soil,
stagnant water, household waste, and animal and human excrement (Louis, 2004).
This created very favourable conditions for vectors of disease. Indeed, the Black
Death, which struck Europe in the early 1300s, may have been partially caused by
the littering of organic wastes in the streets (Louis, 2004; Tchobanoglous, Theisen, &
Eliassen, 1977; Worrell & Vesilind, 2012). In colonial America, the urban population
11
lived in similar putrid conditions. Indeed, Melosi (1981) paints an odorous portrait
of early American living conditions:
In Eastern cities, where crowding became a chronic problem as early
as the 1770s, the streets reeked with waste, wells were polluted, and
deaths from epidemic disease mounted rapidly... As late as the 1860s,
Washingtonians dumped garbage and slop into alleys and streets, pigs
roamed freely, slaughterhouses spewed nauseating fumes, and rats
and cockroaches infested most dwellings – including the White House.
No wonder the infant mortality rate was very high in the capital city
(p. 11).
Many initiatives were implemented to clean up the streets, but all were short-‐lived
because the poor were focused on feeding themselves and the rich were opposed to
paying to clean up for the poor (Wilson, 2007). However, scarcity of resources
ensured many items were repaired and reused, and the waste stream was
thoroughly scavenged (Woodward, 1985).
When SWM progress finally began, it was driven by 5 principal factors: public
health, the environment, resource scarcity and the value of waste, climate change,
and public awareness and participation. These driving forces and the progress they
instigated are depicted in Figure 1.
12
Figure 1. SWM Drivers and Progress
2.2.2 Driver 1: Public health – the sanitary revolution
The industrial revolution brought rapid expansion to both European and American
cities. A new era in sanitation began to take shape between 1790 and 1850 in
London, where the high ash content of household waste caused by heating and
Drivers
Relationships dfgdgfdgdfdgf
Progress
Legend
Events
Driver 1:Public Health
EpidemicDiseases
Quality of SWM DuringIndustrialization
Public HealthLegislation
Push forinstitutional
change Collection andRemoval fromMunicipality
++
+
+
+
Poor Sanitation+
+
World Wars
Driver 3:Resourcescarcity
Recycling andReuse
Post-WWIIIncrease in
Consumptionand Waste
Quantity ofMunicipal
Solid Waste
+
TechnologicalInnovation
+
++
-
IndustrialRevolution
Driver 2:EnvironmentalMovement on
Public and PoliticalAgendas
Quality of SWM Post-WWII
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
+
EnvironmentalPolicy andLegislation
+
WasteHierarchy+
+
Shift Awayfrom
Landfilling
+
Driver 4:ClimateChange
+
NIMBY
UnsustainableBehaviour
Driver 5:Public
Awareness andParticipation
+-
-
-
-
Density ofUrban Areas
+
-
Current Quality of SWM
Integrated SWMParadigm
+
+
-
+
13
cooking with coal created a flourishing market for waste collection and use as a raw
material to meet the excess demand for bricks (Wilson, 2007). In the late 1830s the
sanitation revolution began in London with the appointment of the Sanitation
Commission, which established the first clear linkages between disease and poor
sanitary conditions. In 1848 and 1875 Public Health Acts were established, the
latter of which required households to dispose of their waste in a moveable
receptacle, which local authorities were responsible for emptying weekly (see Figure
1). Similar legislation was implemented in other European countries (Wilson, 2007).
In American cities, population density and the reliance on imported goods increased
dramatically between 1790 and 1920 (Louis, 2004). Likewise, the need to export the
waste products of their burgeoning growth beyond immediate city limits increased.
Public concern about sanitation rose as epidemic diseases continued to sweep
through cities regularly. It was during this time that infrastructure for drinking and
wastewater was constructed and institutional measures for public health and solid
waste management developed (Louis, 2004).
Public health legislation continued to drive waste management forward in the
following century. Once personal health issues had been steadied, the proliferation
of landfills, the health-‐impacting air emissions from domestic and industrial
activities, the stench of wastewater treatment plants, and other issues impacting the
health of the larger community gained attention (Seadon, 2006). In the first half of
the century, collection and removal were the primary focus of municipal waste
management practices (Wilson, 2007). During the two world wars, technological
innovation and resource scarcity, which generated a culture of recycling, impacted
waste management practices (see Figure 1). However, disposal by dumping and
burning was largely unregulated and uncontrolled (Wilson, 2007). The focus
remained on waste collection and transportation out of the city (UN-‐HABITAT,
2010).
2.2.3 Driver 2: Environment – The ‘modernization’ of SWM After the Second World War landfilling was still the principal waste disposal
method, and rapid growth in consumption from 1960 onwards resulted in a larger
14
municipal waste stream with a higher plastics content (Wolsink, 2010). The
environmental movement of the 1960s and 1970s moved waste disposal onto the
political agenda in industrialized countries (Wilson, 2007; Wolsink, 2010), which
created a significant shift in policymakers’ perspectives on how to approach waste
management (Wolsink, 2010). New legislation addressing water pollution and solid
waste management emerged, initially targeting the elimination of uncontrolled
disposal (see Figure 1). Subsequent SWM legislation increasingly raised
environmental standards to reduce the contamination of land, air, and water (UN-‐
HABITAT, 2010; Wilson, 2007). The environmental movement acted as a primary
driver of the policy stages from the 1970s onwards, depicted in Error! Reference
ource not found. from Wilson (2007).
Figure 2. Stages in the development of modern SWM policy (from Wilson, (2007))
The ‘control’ stage focused on phasing out uncontrolled disposal, and was therefore
characterized by measures such as the daily covering and compacting of landfills,
retrofitting incinerators for dust control, etc. (Wilson, 2007). The ‘technical fix’ stage
that emerged in the 1980s and continues today is characterized by an emphasis on
gradually increasing technical standards, which began with landfill gas and leachate
control, incinerator gas and dioxin reduction, and now spans to odour control for
composting facilities and anaerobic digesters (Wilson, 2007). The ‘integrated policy’
stage came forth in the 1990s when it became evident that advocating for ever-‐
15
increasing environmental protection was not enough; an integrative regulatory
approach was needed that encompassed not only the technical and environmental
but also the political, social, financial, economic, and institutional elements of waste
management if environmental protection were to be realized (McDougall, White,
Franke, & Hindle, 2001; van de Klundert & Anschutz, 2001; Wilson, 2007). The final
policy stage depicted in Figure 2 ‘targets/prevention’, has been characterized by a
series of preventative policy measures, including laws and targets for compost and
recycling goals, diversion from landfill, extended producer responsibility, and
landfill bans for recyclable materials (UN-‐HABITAT, 2010; Wilson, 2007).
2.2.4 Driver 3: The resource scarcity and value of waste
In pre-‐industrial times, resources were relatively scarce. Anything vendible was
scavenged and consumer goods were reused and repaired rather than tossed into
the waste stream (UN-‐HABITAT, 2010; Wilson, 2007). As cities grew in size after the
industrial revolution, the resource value of waste rose again, and ‘rag pickers’ or
‘street buyers’ collected, used, and sold materials from the waste stream; an activity
that continues today in many developing (and developed) countries (see Figure 1)
(UN-‐HABITAT, 2010). The resource value of waste had escalated to such levels by
the 1970s that it sparked the European concept
of the ‘waste hierarchy’, on which current waste
policy in the EU is based (Wilson, 2007; Wolsink,
2010). First introduced in the European Union’s
Second Environment Action Programme in 1977
(CEC, 1977), the waste hierarchy is a model of
waste management priorities based on the
“Ladder of Lansink”, a hierarchy of waste
handling techniques going in order from
prevention to reuse, reduction, recycling, energy
recovery, treatment (such as incineration), and
finally landfill disposal (see Figure 3) (Price &
Joseph, 2000; Wilson, 2007; Wolsink, 2010).
Figure 3. The Waste Hierarchy (Zero Waste SA, 2011)
16
The availability of land and its value as a resource also acted as a driver for the move
away from landfilling. The concept of Landsink’s Ladder originally emerged when
the Dutch government faced a shortage of landfill sites in the 1970s. By 1981 it had
become part of official Dutch policy and appeared in the Environmental
Management Act of 1989 (Wolsink, 2010).
The waste hierarchy sparked a massive transition from end-‐of-‐pipe to preventative
thinking, which emerged with a multitude of new terms and phrases – pollution
prevention, source reduction, waste minimization, waste reduction, toxics use
reduction, clean or cleaner technology, etc. – to replace the old terms that focused
on reaction and control instead of prevention
(Hirschhorn, Jackson, & Baas, 1993).
This policy shift away from landfilling has significantly increased the use of medium
priority waste handling methods, which were historically more prominent due to
resource scarcity but dropped to single digit percentages in Europe during the first
half of the 20th century. Recycling, for example, has risen to 25% or higher in
Europe (Wilson, 2007), reaching rates as high as 60% in Austria and the
Netherlands (Kollikkathara, Feng, & Stern, 2009). However, Wilson (2007) points
out that this is “often driven by statutory targets rather than by the resource value
per se ... recycling is practiced because it is the right thing to do, not because the
value of the recovered materials covers the costs” (p. 200).
Many governments, industry members, educators, environment groups, and
programs have adopted and endorsed the waste management hierarchy (Gertsakis
& Lewis, 2003; Seadon, 2006), which, along with what Seadon (2006) describes as
“an almost mantra-‐like acceptance among waste professionals” (p. 1328), has
sparked a flurry of criticisms. According to Gertsakis and Lewis (2003), the
hierarchy is difficult to implement because solid waste managers in industry and
government have little control over production decisions that could influence
higher-‐level priorities, such as waste prevention and minimization. Additionally,
McDougall et al. (2001) point out that the waste hierarchy does not make room for
17
combinations of techniques, account for costs or specific constraints, lacks scientific
or technical basis, and cannot provide what is fundamentally needed – an
assessment of the context-‐specific system as a whole.
2.2.5 Driver 4: Climate change
Climate change has acted as an environmental driver since the early 1990s, leading
to a shift away from landfilling biodegradable wastes, which is a major source of
methane emissions, and a strengthened focus on energy recovery from waste (see
Figure 1) (UN-‐HABITAT, 2010; Wilson, 2007). The policy stage ‘targets/prevention’,
was driven by both the resource value of waste and concern for climate change
(Wilson, 2007). Policies such as the EU Landfill Directive require reductions in
levels of biodegradable material sent to landfill as a method to recover valuable
materials and reduce methane emissions (Wilson, 2007). This has further increased
recycling and composting rates, which have been on the rise in cities modernizing
their waste systems (UN-‐HABITAT, 2010).
2.2.6 Driver 5: Public Awareness and Participation – NIMBY and Behavioural
Change
Public awareness and participation have also acted as SWM drivers in high-‐income
countries (see Figure 1). Poor practices in the past, such as burning dumps and
polluting incinerators, have left the public with negative perceptions of new SWM
strategies (Wilson, 2007). While the public may recognize the need for SWM
facilities, the common “Not In My Backyard”, or NIMBY, attitude means they would
rather have them located elsewhere (Schübeler, 1996). Wilson (2007, p. 201)
describes how negative perceptions of past facilities “have led to the almost
inevitable NIMBY reaction to proposals for any new waste management facility, no
matter how clean or sustainable that may be”. Unsustainable behaviour also inhibits
movement towards better SWM. Therefore, strategies that include more recycling,
repair, reuse, home composting, sustainable consumption, etc. require behavioural
change (Wilson, 2007). The systems that shape patterns of the public’s activities
create complex barriers to sustainable behaviour. Many people are unable to
exercise deliberate choice because they find themselves locked into unsustainable
18
patterns caused by habits, routines, a lack of knowledge, institutional structures,
inequalities in access, social expectations, and cultural values (Jackson, 2005;
McKenzie-‐Mohr & Smith, 1999). Additionally, each form of sustainable behaviour
has a unique and complex set of barriers that vary amongst social groups
(McKenzie-‐Mohr and Smith, 2008). Even seemingly closely associated sustainable
behaviour, such as composting and recycling, can be prevented by different sets of
obstacles (McKenzie-‐Mohr and Smith, 2008). Therefore, transferring initiatives that
appear successful in a specific context is unlikely to be effective (Southerton,
McMeekin, & Evans, 2011). (Overcoming public attitudes and unsustainable
behaviour requires effective communication, a broad public understanding of the
requirements of SWM, and active participation of all relevant stakeholders
throughout all project stages (Schübeler, 1996). Thus, building public awareness
and participation act as drivers in their own right.
2.2.7 Integrated solid waste management – the current paradigm
Integrated solid waste management (ISWM), the current SWM paradigm that has
been widely accepted throughout the developed world, emerged from the policy
shift away from landfilling and the push for a broader perspective that began in the
1990s. While the ‘modern’ SWM practices that began in the 1970s were defined in
engineering terms – technical problems with technical solutions (van de Klundert &
Anschutz, 2001), the concept of ISWM strives to strike a balance between three
dimensions of waste management: environmental effectiveness, social acceptability,
and economic affordability (see Figure 4) (McDougall et al., 2001; Morrissey &
Browne, 2004; Petts, 2000; Thomas & McDougall, 2005; van de Klundert &
Anschutz, 2001). ISWM also focuses on the integration of the many inter-‐related
processes and entities that make up a waste management system (McDougall et al.,
2001). To reduce environmental impacts and drive costs down, a system should be
integrated (in waste materials, sources of waste, and treatment methods), market
oriented (i.e. energy and materials have end uses), and flexible, allowing for
continual improvement (McDougall et al., 2001). ISWM systems are tailored to
specific community goals by incorporating stakeholders’ perspectives and needs;
19
the local context (from the technical, such as waste characteristics, to the cultural,
political, social, environmental, economic and institutional); and the optimal
combination of available, appropriate methods of prevention, reduction, recovery
and disposal (Kollikkathara et al., 2009; McDougall et al., 2001; van de Klundert &
Anschutz, 2001).
Figure 4. Integrated Solid Waste Management
It has been widely recognized that waste management systems that ignore social
components and priorities are doomed to failure (Carabias, Winistoerfer, &
Integrated Solid Waste Management Paradigm
SocialAcceptability
EnvironmentalEffectiveness
EconomicAffordability
Wastematerials
Sourcesof Waste
OverallContext
PreventionMethods
ReductionMethods
RecoveryMethods
DisposalMethods
SpecificStakeholder
GoalsExternalExpertise
-
Integrated Solid WasteManagement Strategy
Mon
itori
ng
Decisional Arena: Planning, Design, Implementation, Reassessment
EnvironmentalContext
PoliticalContext
InstitutionalContext
Social Context
CulturalContext
TechnicalContext
EconomicContext
20
Stuecheli, 1999; Dijkema et al., 2000; Henry et al., 2006a; Morrissey & Browne,
2004; Petts, 2000). The issues of public acceptance, changing value systems, public
participation in planning and implementation stages, and consumer behaviour are
equally as important as the technical and economic aspects of waste management
(Carabias et al., 1999). Effective waste management must be fully embraced by local
authorities and the public sphere, and go beyond traditional consultative methods
that require the ‘expert’ to outline a solution prior to public involvement (Henry et
al., 2006a; Morrissey & Browne, 2004). Key elements to the success of these
programs are public participation and empowerment, decision transparency,
networking, co-‐operation and collective action, communication, and accessibility of
information (Carabias et al., 1999; Zarate, Slotnick, & Ramos, 2008).
Traditionally, the term ‘waste’ has assumed a negative connotation, but it is a
subjective concept – a label applied to something unwanted by the person
discarding it (Dijkema et al., 2000; van de Klundert & Anschutz, 2001). In the
context of ISWM, ‘waste’ bears a negative connotation only if it cannot be regarded
as a resource that that has not been used to its full potential and can subsequently
be processed to produce useful energy or goods (Dijkema et al., 2000; van de
Klundert & Anschutz, 2001). In this sense, ISWM incorporates elements of the
waste hierarchy “by considering direct impacts (transportation, collection,
treatment and disposal of waste) and indirect impacts (use of waste materials and
energy outside the waste management system)” (Seadon, 2006, p. 1328). However,
unlike the hierarchy, ISWM does not define the ‘best’ system, as there is no universal
best system (McDougall et al., 2001). In reality, ISWM is a theoretical, optimal
outcome – a framework from which new systems can be designed and implemented
and existing ones can be optimized (UNEP, 1996). However, the integrated nature of
ISWM creates a host of variables that may pull a system in different directions.
Clearly, it is difficult to optimize more than one variable, and for this reason there
will always be trade-‐offs (McDougall et al., 2001). No ISWM system design will
achieve either environmental or economic sustainability because “[t]his is a total
quality objective ... it can never be reached, since it will always be possible to reduce
21
environmental impacts further, but it will lead to continual improvements”
(McDougall et al., 2001, p. 19).
Despite the fact that ISWM is a holistic ideal, it has become somewhat of a buzzword
with a different meaning in practice. Often much of what is termed ‘integrated waste
management’ simply incorporates the waste hierarchy and may attempt to engage
with stakeholders early on, but lacks actual integration. Thornloe et al. (1997), for
example, observed that in the United States many ‘ISWM’ programs focused on
individual components making up the system instead of the system as a whole. This
kind of compartmentalization is prevalent throughout all aspects of municipal waste
management. Collection and disposal may be the duty of separate local authorities,
and may be contracted out to different private waste management companies.
Likewise, different operating companies may control recycling, incineration,
composting, and landfill operations (McDougall et al., 2001). Therefore, no one has
control over the whole system, making it difficult to manage on a more holistic level.
Consequentially, the bulk of the effort remains focused on lower-‐level priorities
such as recycling, which are important, but not sufficient (Gertsakis & Lewis, 2003;
UNEP, 2010).
Managing waste on a systemic level is particularly difficult in the absence of
regulation (Gertsakis & Lewis, 2003). This has been recognized by many
governments and other entities, and has sparked a move towards programs and
regulations that encourage closing the loop; “moving from the concept of ‘end-‐of-‐
pipe’ waste management towards a more holistic resource management” (Wilson,
2007, p. 205). Examples of this shift in focus include:
• the push for more ‘sustainable consumption and production’ initiatives and
regulations like the European Ecolabel and the Eco-‐Management and Audit
Scheme (European Commission, 2010);
• European National Waste Prevention Programmes through the Waste
Framework Directive, which extends producer responsibility for waste
generation (BIO Intelligence Service, 2011);
22
• Eco-‐innovation through the Environmental Technologies Action Plan and the
Innovation Union Flagship Initiative (European Commission, 2010); and
• the 2004 Packaging Directive, which requires reductions in packaging waste,
sets targets on recycling and recovery, and aims to prevent and minimize
environmental impacts of packaging waste (BIO Intelligence Service, 2011).
Shifting focus upstream to product design and to ‘decoupling’ waste growth from
economic growth are a step in the right direction, but waste management systems in
developed countries are still far from integrated (Wilson, 2007). Progress is slowed
by barriers to policy and program implementation, such as a lack of infrastructure
and/or capacity to comply; unequal market development (costs, levies, incentives,
etc.) between countries; administrative competency and capacity; enforcement
measures; knowledge barriers (gaps, knowledge-‐sharing, awareness-‐raising); lack
of quantitative targets; and economic ability to comply with targets (BIO
Intelligence Service, 2011). Although considerable efforts are being made by many
governments and entities to confront waste-‐related problems head-‐on, major gaps
still exist in SWM practices in high-‐income countries. A lack of ‘systems thinking’ has
been pinpointed as a major contributor to the inadequacy of these approaches
(McDougall et al., 2001; Seadon, 2010; Turner & Powell, 1991).
2.3 Solid waste management in developing countries For a variety of reasons, poor waste management practices and associated public
health implications remain severely problematic in many developing countries a
century and a half after the European sanitary revolution, despite increasing
globalization (Konteh, 2009). In industrialized nations, the health benefits from
solid waste and sanitation systems are largely taken for granted, and the focus has
moved from sanitation-‐related communicable diseases to ‘diseases of affluence’
(cancer, cardiovascular disease, drug and alcohol abuse) and “sustainability”
(Konteh, 2009; Langeweg, Hilderink, & Maas, 2000; McGranahan, 2001). Meanwhile,
many low-‐income countries are currently affected by the ‘double burden’ of the
combined effects of the diseases of affluence and communicable diseases (Boadi,
23
Kuitunen, Raheem, & Hanninen, 2005; Konteh, 2009). Wilson (2007, p. 204) points
out that “[i]n some countries, simple survival is such a predominant concern, that
waste management does not feature strongly on the list of public concerns”. When
SWM is on the public agenda in lower income countries, it tends to be driven most
strongly by public health; the key priority is still getting the waste out from
underfoot, as it was for the Europe and the US up until the 1960s (Coffey & Coad,
2010; Memon, 2010; Rodic, Scheinberg, & Wilson, 2010; Wilson, 2007).
Environmental protection is still relatively low on the political and public agendas,
although this is starting to change (Wilson, 2007). Though legislation is often in
place requiring closure and phasing out of unregulated disposal, enforcement tends
to be weak (Wilson, 2007). The resource value of waste is an important driver in
many developing countries today; informal recycling provides a livelihood for the
urban poor in many parts of the world (UN-‐HABITAT, 2010; Wilson, 2007). Climate
change is an important driver worldwide – the clean development mechanism under
the Kyoto protocol, in which developed countries can buy ‘carbon credits’ from
developing nations, can provide a key source of income to encourage cities in
developing countries to improve waste management systems (Wilson, 2007).
Many similarities exist between the historical SWM development trajectories of
industrialized countries and the current trajectories of developing countries. Many
cities in lower income nations are experiencing similar conditions to those of the
19th century in high income countries: “high levels of urbanization, degrading
sanitary conditions and unprecedented levels of morbidity and mortality, which
affected mostly the working class population” (Konteh, 2009, p. 70). Indeed,
increasing urbanization and socioeconomic disparities, inadequate provision of
sanitary and environmental amenities, social exclusion and inequalities related to
existing SWM systems, and high levels of morbidity and mortality linked to
inadequate sanitation, waste disposal, and water supply provision were as common
then as they are today, particularly in poorer urban neighbourhoods in lower
income countries (Konteh, 2009).
In spite of the apparent parallels, the contexts in which developing nations are
24
situated are starkly different from the historical contexts of developed countries.
Rapid urbanization, soaring inequality, and the struggle for economic growth;
varying economic, cultural, socio-‐economic, and political landscapes; governance,
institutional, and responsibility issues; and international influences have created
locally specific, technical and non-‐technical challenges of immense complexity (see
Figure 5).
Figure 5. Developing Country SWM Contexts
Urbanization
EconomicGrowth
Inequalities(Income and
Quality of Life)
Concentrationof Resources
Social andJob
OpportunitiesServices andAmenities
Higher LifeExpectancyand Literacy
Solid Waste,Water,
Sanitation,and OtherServices
EconomicActivity
+
High-Income
Low-Income
?
Lack of SWM
Lack ofBasic
Infrastructure
IncreasingFood Prices
Number ofUrban Poor
LandAvailability
Reliance onPurchased
Food-
EconomicCapacity
-
GlobalEconomic
Crisis
+
Vulnerabilityto Shocks
+
+
-
-
Inability toPay Taxes
- +
+
Quality ofSWM
+
+
Ability to Dealwith Waste(Compost,
Recycle, etc.)
Dumping inlanes and
waterways+
+
-
NegativeHealthImpacts
EnvironmentalDegradation
Tourism
+
-
+
+
UnsuitableRoads
-
+
HighConsumption
and WasteProduction
Willingnessto Pay for
SWMServices
+
+
+
Rural-UrbanMigration
NaturalIncrease
++ +
++
+
Civil Unrestand PoliticalInstability
Political Priorities
InadequatePolicy
Formulation andImplementation
+
PoliticalInfluence
+
+
+
PoliticalContext
Government
NGOs
Private Sector
Public Sector
Governance
InstitutionalCapacity
Policy
Degree ofDecentralization
Regulations andEnforcement
InstitutionalStructure
FundingAllocation
Cultural andSocio-Economic
Context
IFIs andMulti/Bi-Lateral
DevelopmentAgencies
-
InappropriateTechnology
DonorBiases
ApproachesLacking
Specificity
FundedProjects
Lack ofhuman
resources
Short-termFunding
--
--
+
-
Poverty ReductionStrategies
International Influence
GreenAgenda
Focu
s on
Gov
erna
nce,
In
stitu
tiona
l Cap
acity
and
Priv
ate
Sect
or
25
The following sections will explore these contextual aspects and the challenges they
present for SWM systems in the developing world.
2.3.1 Developing country contexts
2.3.1.1 Urbanization, inequality, and economic growth
Urbanization has exploded with great speed and scale in recent decades with “more
than half the world’s population now living in urban centres” (Tacoli, 2012, p. 4), as
countries and even individual cities struggle to be competitive in the global
marketplace (Cohen, 2004). While just 16 cities contained at least a million people
at the start of the 20th century – the vast majority of which were in industrial nations
– at the start of the 21st century 400 cities contained over a million people, and
approximately three-‐quarters of these urban centers were in low-‐ and middle-‐
income countries (Cohen, 2004).
The expanding population of urbanites often reflects transformations in national
economies as the city environment provides a disproportionate concentration of
resources, social and job opportunities, and services and amenities, propelling the
rural population to migrate from agriculture towards industry and service sectors,
and natural population increase (see Figure 5) (Boadi et al., 2005; Cohen, 2004;
Tacoli, 2012). In many cases, urbanization is associated with higher life expectancy
and levels of literacy, better provision of water, sanitation, and essential services,
and the promotion of economic activities due to the density of urban settlements
(Tacoli, 2012). It has been seen to go hand in hand with economic development
(Konteh, 2009; Tacoli, 2012). Indeed, in the past half-‐century the countries in which
urbanization has increased the most have also had the best economic performance
(Tacoli, 2012). However, many low-‐income countries have seen an increase in
urbanization over the last few decades with little economic development (Boadi et
al., 2005; Halla & Majani, 1999; Konteh, 2009). Urbanization also does not go hand
in hand with equal wealth distribution; inequalities in income and quality of life are
indeed growing (Tacoli, 2012). Regions like Asia and Latin America, where cities
have experienced growth in gross domestic product (GDP) over previous years, are
26
still experiencing an increase in inequality and in the number of people suffering
from a lack of adequate infrastructure and basic sanitation amenities (Cohen, 2004;
Konteh, 2009; UNDP, 2010). Urban poverty and inequality are likely to be
exacerbated by the recent economic crisis, as the urban poor have little opportunity
to produce their own food, and therefore rely on purchased goods (see Figure 5)
(Tacoli, 2012). Additionally, declines in food prices since the spikes in 2007 and
2008 are unlikely to return to the levels of the early 2000s due to competing
demands for land and water (Tacoli, 2012). These conditions will push more people
into slums, where sanitary conditions are appalling and waste amenities are non-‐
existent; the number of people living in slums is now estimated at some 828 million
and growing in actual numbers even though 200 million slum-‐dwellers have moved
out of slum quality conditions (see Figure 6) (UNFPA, 2011).
Figure 6. Population Living in Slums and Proportion of Urban Population Living in Slums, Developing Regions, 1990-‐2010 (UNFPA, 2011)
Many of these squatter settlements are constructed on floodplains, marshes, or
actual dumpsites at city peripheries (Boadi et al., 2005), because the urban centers
are becoming increasingly expensive as economic growth progresses. The ever-‐
increasing number and proportion of urbanites living in abject poverty in Latin
27
America, South and East Asia, and sub-‐Saharan Africa suffer the most in the areas of
sanitation and health as they live in poorly planned expanding settlements without
access to social, sanitation, and health services (Boadi et al., 2005; Konteh, 2009;
McGranahan, 2001; Shimura, Yokota, & Nitta, 2001; UNFPA, 2011; Zurbruegg,
2003).
The level of economic development of a country, city, or particular neighbourhood
greatly influences the SWM needs and resulting SWM systems. Likewise, the quality
of waste management services can impact the productivity and development of the
urban economy (Schübeler, 1996). The fact that nearly all of the world’s population
growth is projected to occur in urban areas (Cohen, 2004) from now until 2050 –
much of which will take place in the world’s poorer regions – has raised “concerns
about growing urban poverty and the inability of national and city governments to
provide services to the residents of their burgeoning cities” (Tacoli, 2012, p. 5).
Almost invariably, the SWM demands of high-‐density, low-‐income settlements are
inadequately served or neglected altogether even though these areas have the
greatest need for these services since there is no space among the densely packed
housing for waste burial or composting and they are less able to make alternate
arrangements to dispose of waste (Coffey & Coad, 2010). Therefore, waste is
dumped into open spaces, on access roads and in waterways where disease vectors
breed (see Figure 5) (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Konteh, 2009). Waste clogs drains,
creating flooded, stagnant nurseries for mosquitos carrying malaria and dengue
fever. Animals and waste pickers scatter the waste, and leachate from garbage heaps
percolates into soil and waterways. This results in contaminated food, water, and
soil, and serious environmental and health implications, particularly for the most
vulnerable, such as children and the elderly (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Tacoli, 2012).
This kind of environmental degradation can also negatively impact the (sometimes
fragile) economies of those countries that rely heavily on tourism (Henry et al.,
2006a).
Such poor levels of service exist in high-‐density, low-‐income areas because the
28
majority of these communities do not pay municipal taxes, and municipal
authorities allocate their limited resources to the wealthier areas with higher tax
yields where citizens with more political pressure dwell (Coffey & Coad, 2010;
Henry et al., 2006a; Jha, Singh, Singh, & Gupta, 2011; Zurbruegg, 2003). Collection
may not be carried out in these unplanned settlements due to a lack of space for
refuse containers, narrow roadways, steep gradients, and unsurfaced roads that
standard collection vehicles cannot manage (see Figure 5) (Coffey & Coad, 2010;
Henry et al., 2006a). While wealthier residents use part of their income to avoid
direct exposure to wastes close to home, they also produce more waste, meaning
that the associated environmental problems may recede at the household or
neighbourhood level, but remain present or increase city-‐wide (Jha et al., 2011;
Zurbruegg, 2003).
2.3.1.2 Cultural and socio-‐economic aspects
The structure and functioning of SWM systems are founded on the behaviour
patterns and underlying attitudes of the population – factors that are shaped by the
local cultural and social context (Schübeler, 1996). The substantial diversity of
social and ethnic groups that often exists within rapidly expanding cities, even
within individual residential communities, greatly influences municipalities’
capacities to implement SWM strategies (Schübeler, 1996). Public awareness and
attitudes towards waste can impact the entire SWM system, from household storage
to separation, interest in waste reduction, recycling, demand for collection services,
willingness to pay for SWM services, opposition to proposed locations of waste
facilities, the amount of waste in the streets, and ultimately the success or failure of
a SWM system (Henry et al., 2006a; Schübeler, 1996; Yousif & Scott, 2007;
Zurbruegg, 2003). In parts of the Arab world and Latin America, for example,
opportunities to strengthen waste institutions may be limited by the fact that SWM
is not seen as an honourable profession, because waste is viewed as “dirty” (Wilson,
2007).
The cultural and socio-‐economic context also influences the waste composition
generated by a population (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Schübeler, 1996). In some cases,
29
shops sell food that is largely pre-‐prepared, while in others, fresh meat or large
quantities of fresh vegetables and fruit drastically alter the waste composition.
Cooking and heating with solid fuel affects the waste composition by eliminating
items that would otherwise be discarded, such as paper, and contributing hot,
abrasive ashes to the waste stream (Coffey & Coad, 2010). Local architecture, such
as mud brick housing and unpaved floors can mean large quantities of dust and soil
enter the waste stream, while sanitary practices can influence the quantity of
excreta in the waste (Coffey & Coad, 2010). Socio-‐economic status at the
neighbourhood and household level affect waste composition: higher literacy
increases the paper content of waste, and wealthier groups often choose to discard
durable items instead of repairing them (Coffey & Coad, 2010). Recycling and reuse
is affected by differences in how social groups value items that would otherwise
enter the waste stream. Often much of the organic waste is fed to livestock, and
items like food and drink containers are reused in the household (Coffey & Coad,
2010). Informal recycling is carried out by waste pickers, who value much of what
might otherwise enter the waste stream (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Schübeler, 1996; UN-‐
HABITAT, 2010; Wilson, 2007).
Social expectations of waste collection are also dependent on waste composition,
and therefore on cooking and eating habits. If large quantities of odour-‐generating
food (e.g. fish) are consumed, waste collection rates are expected to be more
frequent, particularly in warmer climates (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Jha et al., 2011).
Disposal is also greatly influenced by social attitudes. Some social groups always
dispose of waste in the appropriate containers, while others view the street as an
appropriate disposal location. Householders and city officials alike may have no
interest in whether waste is dumped illegally or sent to a proper disposal facility, as
long as it is removed from the urban zone (Coffey & Coad, 2010). In some urban
areas, the primary focus is still on food, shelter, security and livelihoods; waste will
become a priority only when these more basic needs have been met (Konteh, 2009),
and only becomes an issue when public health or environmental damage impact
these priorities (Wilson, 2007).
30
2.3.1.3 Political landscapes: Policy, governance, institutional issues
Politics inevitably play a large role in SWM systems. The structure, functioning, and
governance of SWM systems are affected by the relationship between central and
local governments, the role of party politics in local government administration, and
the extent that citizens participate democratically in policy making processes
(Schübeler, 1996). In low-‐income countries, the greatest challenge “is to strike the
right balance between policy, governance, institutional mechanisms and resource
provision and allocation” (Konteh, 2009, p. 74).
2.3.1.3.1 Policy
A democratic, public process of SWM goal formulation is essential to determine the
actual needs of the citizens, and therefore to be able to prioritize limited municipal
resources in a just manner. Policy weaknesses are consequently some of the critical
causes of failed SWM systems in many low-‐income countries, as inadequate
formulation and implementation of realistic policies is common (see Figure 5)
(Konteh, 2009). While developed countries addressed their SWM needs by putting
in place effective, functioning policy measures, “[i]n many cities of the developing
world remedial measures have been elusive; efforts are uncoordinated or ad hoc,
and the resources invested in the sector inadequate” (Konteh, 2009, p. 72).
Additionally, civil unrest and political instability has contributed to the growing
SWM problem in low-‐income urban areas by forcing millions of displaced people to
seek refuge in major cities (Boadi et al., 2005; Konteh, 2009).
SWM is also not always a high priority for local and national policy makers and
planners. Other issues with more social and political urgency may take precedence
and leave little budget for waste issues (Memon, 2010; Yousif & Scott, 2007). In
some countries, such as Guatemala, serious SWM project continuity problems arise
because all municipal office workers – including those not involved in elections – are
replaced during any change in government (Yousif & Scott, 2007). This lack of long-‐
term commitment results in the abandonment of work completed in previous terms
(Zarate et al., 2008). Projects can also be shelved due to political fallout between
different political parties and local authorities (Henry et al., 2006a).
31
2.3.1.3.2 Governance
In all urban centres around the world, any form of environmental management “is
an intensely political task, as different interests (including very powerful interests)
compete for the most advantageous locations, for the ownership or use of resources
and waste sinks, and for publicly provided infrastructure and services” (Hardoy,
Mitlin, Satterthwaite, & Hardoy, 2001, p. 19). Many of these conflicting interests
contribute to the degradation of essential resources and urban environmental
health if good environmental management is absent (Hardoy et al., 2001; Konteh,
2009). As these factors have gained recognition, there has been a shift in the urban
development literature from ‘government’, which focuses on the role,
responsibilities and performance of government bodies, to ‘governance’, which
additionally considers the relationship between government and civil society
(Hardoy et al., 2001). Good governance requires the participation and collaboration
of all relevant parties, including government, non-‐governmental organizations
(NGOs), community groups and the private sector (see Figure 5) (Konteh, 2009).
According to the Asian Development Bank, the four principle elements of good
governance are accountability, participation, predictability, and transparency
(Bhuiyan, 2010). OECD identifies the features of good governance as follows
(Bhuiyan, 2010):
• The promotion of democratic and open pluralistic societies;
• The strengthening of efficient, accountable, transparent, and effective
national government;
• The reinforcement of the rule of law, which includes an accessible and just
legal and judicial system;
• The promotion of dissemination of information, including an independent
media; and
• The promotion of anti-‐corruption initiatives and the reduction of excessive
military expenditure.
Good governance allows low-‐income groups to influence policy and resource
allocation (Hardoy et al., 2001), and therefore it is essential for equitable and
32
effective SWM. Indeed, “the effectiveness of SWM in a city is one of the indices for
assessing good governance” (Bhuiyan, 2010, p. 126). Low-‐income countries tend to
lack the appropriate governance institutions and structures typically found in high-‐
income countries, such as public policy research institutions, freedom of
information laws, judicial autonomy, auditors general, police academies, etc.
(Bhuiyan, 2010). This lack of democratic structures and competent, representative
local government creates barriers to proper SWM. Political jostling for power means
that local authorities base decision-‐making on the interests of their parties (Henry
et al., 2006a; Zurbruegg, 2003). Henry describes how “the upgrading of Nairobi
slums has not been implemented because some councilors incite their constituents
to reject such a move out of an unfounded fear of voters who might be moved out
once slum upgrading efforts get underway. There are instances when some
councilors hinder particular projects for political reasons only” (Henry et al., 2006a,
p. 97). Government bodies maintain inflated workforces for political reasons, which
consume much-‐needed funds (Henry et al., 2006a). Petty and high profile corruption
are also rampant in many countries. While “it has been widely recognized that
corruption retards economic growth, distorts the political system, debilitates
administration and undermines the interests and welfare of the community”,
corruption remains one of the most pervasive and least confronted challenges facing
public institutions in developing countries (Bhuiyan, 2010, p. 131).
2.3.1.3.3 Institutions
Effective SWM requires the definition of clear roles and legal responsibilities of
institutions and government bodies to avoid controversies, ineffectiveness, inaction,
and making SWM systems politically unstable (Schübeler, 1996). Even when
regulatory and legislative frameworks exist, governments with weak institutional
structures are easily overwhelmed by increasing demands for SWM as urban
populations explode (Halla & Majani, 1999; Hardoy et al., 2001; Konteh, 2009).
Institutional aspects of SWM include:
33
• the degree of decentralization, i.e. distribution of authority, functions, and
responsibilities between central and local governmental institutions;
• the structure of institutional systems responsible for SWM and how they
interact with other urban management sectors;
• organizational procedures, for planning and management;
• the capacity of responsible institutions; and
• involvement of other sectors, including the private sector and community
groups (Schübeler, 1996).
Institutional aspects also include the current and future legislation, and the extent to
which it is enforced (Zurbruegg, 2003). A straightforward, transparent,
unambiguous legal and regulatory framework, including functioning inspection and
enforcement procedures at the national, provincial, and local levels, is essential to
the proper functioning of a SWM strategy (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Schübeler, 1996).
According to Wilson (2007, p. 203), “there seems to be general consensus that weak
institutions are a major issue in emerging and developing countries (e.g. Asia, Africa,
Latin America, Russia), so that institutional strengthening and capacity building
becomes a major driver” for SWM (see Figure 5). Enforcement of laws governing
regular SWM activities and new project implementation is often poor, resulting in
improperly functioning SWM systems (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Henry et al., 2006a).
For example, the “polluter pays” policy is inappropriate for many countries because
the lack of enforcement causes large waste generators to simply dump illegally
(Coffey & Coad, 2010). Developing effective, efficient municipal SWM plans is
difficult in developing countries because data on waste generation and composition
is largely unreliable and insufficient, seldom capturing system losses or informal
activities (Jha et al., 2011; Shimura et al., 2001; UN-‐HABITAT, 2010).
In developing countries, SWM is often under-‐funded due to a combination of
inadequate resources from municipal tax revenues, insufficient user fees, and the
mismanagement of funds (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Zurbruegg, 2003). This persistent
lack of funds prevents capacity building and the improvement and expansion of
34
SWM handling capacities (Henry et al., 2006a). According to the World Bank and
USAID, it is therefore common for municipalities in developing countries to spend
20 to 50 per cent of their available municipal budget on SWM, which often can only
stretch to serve less than 50 per cent of the population (Henry et al., 2006a; Memon,
2010). In low-‐income countries, 80 to 90 per cent of this budget is spent on
collection while in in high-‐income countries less than 10 per cent is spent on
collection services (Memon, 2010). As the price of land increases, it becomes
increasingly difficult to for municipalities to site landfills close to urban areas, while
transportation costs become a major constraint to constructing landfills at a distant
location (Memon, 2010), exacerbating the problem. Much-‐needed resources are
consumed by inefficiencies, frequently caused by inefficient institutional structures
and organizational procedures, and poor management capacity (Zurbruegg, 2003).
Structural problems often arise when revenue collection and investment decisions
happen at the central government level while operation and maintenance occur at
the local level. Capacity issues are also common. Schübeler (1996, p. 32) states that
“large discrepancies often exist between the job requirements and the actual
qualification of the staff at the managerial and operational levels”. Overstaffed local
authorities find it difficult to meet the large wage payments of poorly trained
workers (Henry et al., 2006a).
One substantial way that funds are mismanaged in developing countries is through
the use of techniques from the “conventional” SWM approach of industrialized
countries (Henry et al., 2006a). Imported, sophisticated vehicles and equipment for
collection, treatment, and disposal are expensive and difficult to maintain and
operate (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Zurbruegg, 2003). Frequently, the waste composition
in developing countries is very different from the waste characteristics they are
designed to handle, causing them to break down rapidly or be of little use in the first
place (Memon, 2010; Zurbruegg, 2003). Typically, within a short period of time only
a small percentage of the vehicle fleet remains in operation (Coffey & Coad, 2010).
These managerial challenges are compounded by the fact that waste quantities are
increasing rapidly in most cities at a greater rate than in high-‐income countries due
35
to increases in wealth and in quantities of waste produced per person, an increase in
the number of people living and working in the city, and rising quantities of waste
produced by businesses (UN-‐HABITAT, 2010).
2.3.1.3.4 International influences
In the absence of strong political or cultural drivers, international financial
institutions (IFIs), such as the World Bank, act as key drivers for SWM development.
IFIs generally have a strong focus on environmental policies (including those related
to climate change), poverty reduction, institutional capacity building, good
governance, and private sector participation (see Figure 5) (Wilson, 2007). While
most of these focus areas are indeed crucial to properly functioning solid waste
systems, the approaches used by IFIs are not always appropriate for the particular
context of their clientele. The World Bank had several unsuccessful SWM projects in
the 1990s (e.g. Philippines, Mexico, Sri Lanka) due in part to weak institutions and
governance issues, but also due to a lack of financial capacity in the receiving
country to sustain the expensive facilities when Bank funding ran out (Wilson,
2007). Unequal funding opportunities within regions but pressure to meet the same
high environmental standards creates affordability issues (Wilson, 2007).
Investments in the social sectors are often made in areas of global concern over
local environmental health problems (Hardoy et al., 2001; Konteh, 2009;
McGranahan, 2001). At the global arena, preoccupation with the ‘green agenda’,
which focuses on reducing human impacts on ecosystems and their natural
resources, is thought to be at the expense of the ‘brown agenda’, which focuses on
environmental threats to health in poor regions, and is therefore undermining SWM
efforts in low-‐income countries (Konteh, 2009). Konteh (2009, p. 72) points out that
“when sanitation and communicable diseases were a serious problem in Europe and
North America, the public health focus was exclusively on those same issues which
today fail to receive adequate attention in the developing world in spite of being a
major threat to public health; green environmental issues were not on the agenda
then”.
36
The rising urgency of urban environmental problems and need for capacity building
at the municipal level has directed the attention of numerous bilateral and
multilateral development agencies to SWM in recent years (Schübeler, 1996; Zarate
et al., 2008). However, these donors may be motivated by bureaucratic procedures
or goals of their home offices rather than an understanding of the local situation.
van de Klundert (1995) makes several observations about this:
• Donor biases exist towards certain technical approaches or insistence on the
use of equipment that supports their own export industries;
• The scale at which donors work is often inappropriate for local conditions;
either too small, without sufficient consideration for various larger contexts,
or too large for a particular situation;
• Coordination issues arise between donors from different countries, which
may be competing for contracts, and within countries as development
agencies work at cross-‐purposes; and
• Donors without the time or political will to produce locally appropriate
results opt for large, technical interventions rather than small-‐scale, context
appropriate approaches, since they are easier to understand, finance, and
monitor.
Coffey and Coad (2010) report that the objective of many foreign aid programs for
SWM in developing countries is to capture markets for supplying sophisticated
machinery and related spare parts, which are more often than not completely
inappropriate for local conditions. Additionally, municipal SWM is often a
component within a wider development program aimed at improving urban
environmental projection and/or urban management capacity, meaning many
bilateral and multilateral development agencies lack the considerable expertise
needed to implement successful SWM programs (Schübeler, 1996).
Such issues have a detrimental effect on the evolution of SWM practices in many
developing countries. Zarate et al. (2008, p. 2543) point out that “in spite of the
million-‐dollar loans and grants that developing countries have received to improve
37
the basic services sector, including SWM, the lack of suitable qualified human
resources contributed to the inability of municipalities and communities to
implement new projects”. Grants or loans for sanitary landfill construction do not
always result in the actual use of this method of disposal; well-‐trained personnel
and sufficient financial support for a reasonable standard of operation are also
necessary (Zurbruegg, 2003). Many SWM projects initially funded through grants or
loans have had problems obtaining continued external funding to operate and
maintain SWM systems (Coffey & Coad, 2010). Overseas consultants often
recommend techniques and equipment developed in counties with extremely
different social and economic conditions, and entirely different waste characteristics
(Coffey & Coad, 2010). For example, numerous cases have been documented in
which expensive, sophisticated composting and recycling plants have failed for a
wide range of reasons: the use of imported, inappropriate technology that is too
expensive or difficult to maintain; limited development of a market for recyclable
materials; absence of technical personnel to with operational or management
capacity; failure to complete the necessary financial and economic appraisals; and
failure to adequately consult significant stakeholders and the public (Yousif & Scott,
2007).
Researchers are calling for multifaceted SWM methods that are considered on a
case-‐to-‐case basis and tailored to each community’s individual needs (Jha et al.,
2011; Yousif & Scott, 2007). Schübeler (1996, p. 19) aptly summarizes the need for a
different approach:
The essential condition of sustainability implies that waste
management systems must be absorbed and carried by the society and
its local communities. These systems must, in other words, be
appropriate to the particular circumstances and problems of the city
and locality, employing and developing the capacities of all
stakeholders, including the households and communities requiring
service, private sector enterprises and workers (both formal and
informal), and government agencies at the local, regional and national
38
levels [original emphasis].
2.4 The need for a systems approach Managing waste is a complex task that requires appropriate technical solutions,
sufficient organizational capacity, and co-‐operation between a wide range of
stakeholders (Zarate et al., 2008). According to Seadon (2010), the interdisciplinary
and multi-‐sectoral considerations needed for the proper management of solid waste
– manufacturing, transportation, urban growth and development, land use patterns,
public health, etc. – highlights “the interaction and complexity between the physical
components of the system and the conceptual components that include the social
and environmental spheres. When waste is seen as part of a ... system, the
relationship of waste to other parts of the system is revealed and thus the potential
for greater sustainability of the operation increases. Conceptually, this broader view
increases the difficulty of managing waste requiring an approach that handles
complexity” (Seadon, 2010, p. 1641). However, the conventional SWM approach is
reductionist, not tailored to handle complexity; interacting systems and their
elements are divided into ever-‐smaller parts. System processes, such as waste
generation, collection, and disposal operations, are considered independently,
though each is interlinked and influenced by the others (Seadon, 2010). This
reductionist approach is even applied to waste, as it is not a single entity that can be
easily managed (Dijkema et al., 2000). It is typically separated into many primary
and many more secondary classifications, and waste streams from different sectors,
such as residential and commercial, are often considered separately (Seadon, 2010).
Techniques therefore tend to focus on dealing with one type of waste at a time,
leading to a focus on single technologies instead of waste management systems.
Consequentially, one waste problem can be solved, but other waste problems are
often generated with each compartmentalized ‘solution’ (Dijkema et al., 2000). This
tendency to analyze things in small, understandable pieces, to trace straight paths
from cause to effect, and to problem solve by attempting to control the system of
concern is increasingly being recognized as problematic (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993;
Meadows, 2008). This is evidenced in the SWM sector by the growing demand for
39
SWM approaches that recognize the social, cultural, political, and environmental
spheres; that engage with a broad community of stakeholders; and that consider the
larger system through a holistic, integrating methodology (Carabias et al., 1999;
Dijkema et al., 2000; Henry et al., 2006a; McDougall et al., 2001; Morrissey &
Browne, 2004; Petts, 2000; Seadon, 2006, 2010; Turner & Powell, 1991; Wilson,
2007; Zarate et al., 2008). Two schools of thought of particular relevance to the
challenges faced in the SWM sector are those of post-‐normal science, and complex,
adaptive, eco-‐social systems. The following sections will explore these areas and
their relevance to future SWM practices.
2.4.1 Post-‐Normal Science
By the mid-‐1980s, there was a growing community of scientists and social scientists interested in major social and environmental concerns characterized by complexity, uncertainty, and high socio-‐ecological risks, such as acid rain, ozone depletion, and climate change (Turnpenny, Jones, & Lorenzoni, 2011). Frustrations were growing with the “normal science” of Kuhn (1962), described by Funtowicz and Ravetz (1993, p. 740) to be the “unexciting, indeed anti-‐intellectual routine puzzle solving by which science advances steadily between its conceptual revolutions”. In response to the increasing challenges at the intersection of policy, risk, and environment, Funtowicz and Ravetz (1993) developed a problem-‐solving framework called “post-‐normal science” based on the assumptions of incomplete control, unpredictability, and multiple legitimate perspectives. The post-‐normal science paradigm recognizes the relevance of both process and location, in place and time, and is ‘issue-‐driven’ as opposed to the ‘curiosity-‐motivated’, ‘mission-‐oriented’, or ‘client-‐serving’ goals of core science, applied science, and professional consultancy, respectively (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993). The authors viewed this emerging science as a platform from which issues that traditional scientific methodologies fail to handle can be approached. Such issues have either high uncertainties (i.e. the scientific, technical, and managerial complexities of the system being considered, and the array of potential results) or high decision-‐making stakes (possible costs, benefits, and value commitments for stakeholders) (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1991, 1993; Turnpenny et al.,
40
2011). This is demonstrated in the authors’ iconic diagram (see
Figure 7), which provides a zoning system to identify which problem-‐solving
paradigm is appropriate for a particular issue, depending on the level of interaction
of knowledge (uncertainties) and values (decision-‐making stakes) (Funtowicz &
Ravetz, 1993).
Figure 7. Problem Solving Strategies (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993)
41
Post-‐normal science explicitly challenges traditional approaches to science,
recognizing its limitations and the need for unconventional approaches “when
uncertainties are either of the epistemological or the ethical kind, or when decision
stakes reflect conflicting purposes among stakeholders” (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993,
p. 750). It calls for the inclusion of extended peer communities – groups of
legitimate participants – in the process of quality assurance, policy debate, and
participation in research. The extension of legitimate peers is not only founded on
ethical or political reasons; it also enriches the practice of scientific investigation
(Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993). Post-‐normal science also recognizes the value of
history and context as essential elements of the scientific process.
SWM systems could benefit from a post-‐normal scientific approach; highly complex
technical, scientific, and especially managerial aspects (and therefore high
uncertainties), and conflicting, often immense costs, benefits, and value
commitments for various stakeholders (i.e. high decision stakes) make SWM
systems ideal for alternative, post-‐normal problem-‐solving approaches. “Indeed, any
of the problems of major technological hazards or large-‐scale pollution belongs to
this class” (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993, p. 750).
2.4.1 Systems thinking: the foundations of systems approaches
‘Systems thinking’, a term in good currency in research across many fields, has only
been explicitly recognized since the 1950s. The concept was borne out of von
Bertalanffy’s mathematical field of a ‘general theory of systems’, which was first
presented in Chicago in 1937 and published in a German journal in 1949 (Drack &
Schwarz, 2010). Von Bertalanffy’s General System Theory (GST) aimed to promote
the ‘Unity of Science’ by providing a language and theory for systemic problem
solving in many different disciplines, which were independently stumbling upon
general system characteristics and principles (von Bertalanffy, 1950). GST struck a
strong chord with researchers ready to part with reductionism across the
disciplines, as it was originally intended to do. In 1956, Kenneth Boulding wrote,
“General System Theory is the skeleton of science in the sense that it aims to provide
a framework or structure of systems on which to hang the flesh and blood of
42
particular disciplines and particular subject matters in an orderly and coherent
corpus of knowledge. It is also, however, something of a skeleton in a cupboard – the
cupboard in this case being the unwillingness of science to admit the very low level
of its successes in systematization, and its tendency to shut the door on problems
and subject matters which do not fit easily into simple mechanical schemes”
(Boulding, 1956, p. 208). While interest in GST peaked during the two decades
before von Bertalanffy’s death in 1972 and the quest for a general theory of systems
subsequently subsided (Drack & Schwarz, 2010), it spawned a plethora of
derivatives and sparked a widespread interest in systemic approaches. New systems
concepts have emerged, and previously existing ones have since been applied in
many subject areas (everything from health care, organizational development, and
family research to international development, physical geography, policy, economic
analysis, and management science (Chai & Yeo, 2012; Checkland, 2000; Patton,
2002)).
According to Checkland (1981), systems thinking is an attempt to escape the
reductionism of normal science (which is, however, highly successful at
investigating natural phenomena). Indeed, a holistic perspective is crucial to
systems thinking (Patton, 2002). Checkland (2000, p. S29) describes “the core
systems image [as] that of the whole entity which can adapt and survive in a
changing environment”. The function and meaning of both a system and its parts are
lost when it is taken apart. A disassembled automobile does not drive and a
disassembled person does not live (Patton, 2002), nor would such a person be
“human” in the usual sense if they were truly isolated from others (Boulding, 1956).
Any system is dependent on its own internal interdependencies. Therefore, systems
thinking is intrinsically focused on relationships (Checkland, 2000), along with
patterns, processes and context (Capra, 2005). It also ensures in any given situation
(at least) three levels are considered: the system (what?), the sub-‐system (how?),
and the wider system (why?) (Checkland, 2000).
Several perspectives on the meaning of a ‘systems approach’ exist among
researchers. While a vast literature about systems theory and applied systems
43
research has developed since von Bertalanffy’s original publication, much of it has
been highly technical and quantitative, involving computer simulations of
specifically defined, “engineered” systems whose goals and objectives have been
made explicit by external ‘experts’ (Checkland, 2000; Patton, 2002). However,
according to Patton (2002, p. 120), “(1) a systems perspective is becoming
increasingly important in dealing with and understanding real-‐world complexities,
viewing things as whole entities embedded in context and still larger wholes; (2)
some approaches to systems research lead directly to and depend heavily on
qualitative inquiry; and (3) a systems orientation can be very helpful in framing
questions and, later, making sense out of qualitative data”. While systems thinking
originated from the ‘hard’ sciences of mathematics and engineering, many
researchers felt that a ‘hard’ systems approach was insufficient to handle complex,
messy, real world problems (i.e. not the technical problems for which it was
developed), and a ‘soft’ systems methodology quickly developed (Checkland, 2000).
This initiated a debate between ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ systems methodologies. Essentially,
‘hard’ systems thinking assumes the world is a set of systems that can be engineered
to reach easy-‐to-‐define goals and objectives, and performance can be measured
quantitatively (Chai & Yeo, 2012; Checkland, 2000). On the other hand, ‘soft’
systems thinking uses systems not as representations of the real world but as
intellectual devices, based on declared world-‐views, to explore problematic
situations and desirable changes to them; the entire approach is used as an
organized ‘learning system’ (Checkland, 2000). Therefore, ‘hard’ systems thinking is
ideal for well-‐defined, technical problems, and ‘soft’ systems thinking is appropriate
for poorly defined, messy situations involving social and cultural considerations
(Chai & Yeo, 2012; Checkland, 2000).
2.4.2 Complex, adaptive, eco-‐social systems
Systems theory has provided a baseline from which other innovative perspectives of
the world have drawn upon, including cybernetics, catastrophe theory, chaos
theory, non-‐equilibrium thermodynamics, self-‐organization, and complexity theory
(Kay, Regier, Boyle, & Francis, 1999). Complexity can be defined as the domain
44
between linearly determined order and indeterminate chaos (D. S. Byrne, 1998).
Complexity theory, technically known as nonlinear dynamics, is concerned with
modeling and describing complex, non-‐linear systems and “developing a unified
view of life by integrating life’s biological, cognitive and social dimensions” (Capra,
2005, p. 33). Reality is understood to be composed of complex open systems with
emergent properties and transformational potential (D. Byrne, 2005). These
characteristics are typical of complex, adaptive systems (CAS), of which eco-‐social
systems are a part. Crucial to these systems is the concept of multiple scales, both
spatially and temporally (see Figure 8).
Figure 8. Complex Adaptive Systems: Nested Sets of Four Phase Adaptive Cycles (adapted from Holling (2001))
Large, Slow Level
Intermediate Speed and Size (e.g. Forest System)
Small, Fast Level (e.g. Insect Colony in a Forest)
Reorganization Conservation
Exploitation Release
ConservationReorganization
Exploitation Release
ConservationReorganization
Exploitation Release
RE
VO
LT
RE
ME
MB
ER
Large, Slow Levels(e.g. Geological Scale)
Intermediate Levels(e.g. Forest Scale)
Small, Fast Levels(e.g. Insect Colony
Scale)
To a New Attractor...
To a New Attractor...
To a New Attractor...
Impact on NextLarger, Slower
Level...
Impact on Next Smaller,Faster Level...
45
While systems are composed of elements, these elements are themselves wholes,
composed of units at a smaller scale. Arthur Koestler (1978) defined this abstract
concept of an entity which is both a whole and a part as a ‘holon’, which exists in a
nested network of other holons called a ‘holarchy’. Holling (2001) described these
‘hierarchical’ structures as semi-‐autonomous levels of similar variables that
communicate information or material to the next higher, slower, and coarser level.
Each level serves two functions: (1) preserving and stabilizing conditions for the
quicker, smaller levels; and (2) functioning as an “adaptive cycle” by producing and
testing innovations (Holling, 2001). Holling’s representation of an adaptive cycle
demonstrates a figure-‐eight movement between four system functions: from
exploitation to conservation, release, and finally reorganization. There are
potentially multiple connections between nested sets of adaptive cycles. The
connection Holling labeled ‘revolt’ occurs when a smaller, faster level causes a
larger, slower level to collapse, demonstrating that changes in quicker, smaller
cycles have the ability to influence the behaviour of slower, larger ones. Holling
labeled another key connection ‘remember’, which demonstrates that slower, larger
levels can buffer smaller, faster ones from disturbances (Holling, 2001).
Self-‐organization is another key attribute of CAS (Kay et al., 1999; Patton, 2002).
Such systems contain a web of positive and negative feedback loops operating over
a range of spatial and temporal scales that “lead both to stable states of self-‐
organization and, in some instances, to surprising outcomes from apparently
straightforward interventions” (Waltner-‐Toews, Kay, Neudoerffer, & Gitau, 2003, p.
25). Kay et al. (1999) describe self-‐organization as a dissipative process that CAS
undergo when high quality energy, known as “exergy”, attempts to push the system
beyond a critical distance from equilibrium. CAS resist the push away from
equilibrium through the spontaneous emergence of new behaviour, which uses the
exergy to organize and maintain the system’s new structure (see Figure 9).
46
Figure 9. Conceptual Model of the Dissipative Nature of a Self-‐Organizing System (adapted from Kay et al. (1999))
Therefore, the more exergy put into the system to shift it from equilibrium, the more
organized structures emerge, in a step-‐wise manner (Kay et al., 1999). The
particular manifestation of these structures is dependent upon the context (i.e. the
history and environment in which the system is embedded), the available exergy
and materials, and information (i.e. the factors within the system that restrict and
guide its self-‐organization). Newly emerging structures provide a new context, in
which new processes manifest, in which new structures emerge yet again (Kay et al.,
1999). Therefore, the contents of the system are the product of the history of the
system itself (Checkland, 2000). Kay et al. (1999) define these systems as self-‐
organizing holarchic open (SOHO) systems: “a nested constellation of self-‐
organizing dissipative process/structures, organized about a particular set of
sources of exergy, materials, and information, embedded in a physical environment,
that give rise to coherent self-‐perpetuating behaviours” (Kay et al., 1999, p. 724).
DissipativeProcess
DissipativeStructure
CONTEXT: History and Environment
ExergyMaterials
Information
COMPLEX,SELF-ORGANIZING
SYSTEM
47
The self-‐organizing tendencies of CAS highlight the challenges humans face in
attempting to ‘manage’ them (or our outright inability to do so). It also highlights
the potential for surprising outcomes due to “time lags, cross-‐scale effects, and what
might have been left out [of a system model]. These types of feedback mean that
prediction of individual outcomes is limited; prediction of overall system behavior is
only possible in broad outline, and then only if we have historical data to suggest the
canon of states available to that system... Such data are rarely available” (Waltner-‐
Toews et al., 2003, p. 25).
Both ecological and human systems exhibit strongly developed self-‐organized
patterns, meaning that linear policies are more likely to produce temporary
solutions and many worsening problems in the future (Holling, 2001). Waltner-‐
Toews, Neudoerffer, Joshi, and Tamang (2005) hold the view that ecological and
social systems are intertwined, and the separation of these systems is both artificial
and arbitrary. ‘Social systems’ encompass a variety of knowledge systems
concerning the dynamics of resource use and the environment, a plethora of
perspectives on the ethics of relationships between humans and the natural world,
and many socio-‐ecological challenges (e.g. property rights and resource access).
‘Ecological systems’ consist of self-‐regulating communities of organisms that
interact with their external environment and with each other (Waltner-‐Toews et al.,
2005); humans clearly fall within this definition. The term ‘eco-‐social systems’
acknowledges these connections. Limits for the possible alternative states of such
systems are set by the accumulated social, cultural, ecological, and economic capital,
in addition to chance innovations (Holling, 2001). As awareness of the complexity of
eco-‐social systems grows, the traditional approach to environmental management
that has considered humans to be external to completely untouched ecological
systems is increasingly being considered unrealistic; both better understanding and
decision-‐making can be achieved by recognizing humans have been and still are an
integral part of the evolution of ecological systems (Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2003).
Central to a systems approach is the essential need to include multiple perspectives.
48
Kay et al. (1999) consider human values and a diversity of views to be crucial to the
process of identifying appropriate methods of investigation necessary to deal with
issues in a systemic context. Issues of social reality, which are “continuously socially
constructed and reconstructed by individuals and groups” (Checkland, 2000, p.
S24), are relevant, as are issues of inclusiveness, mutual trust in the investigation
process, and relative power among stakeholders (Kay et al., 1999). Any action taken
must be feasible in the context of the local history, relationships, culture, and
aspirations of all concerned parties (Checkland, 2000). Waltner-‐Toews et al. (2005)
consider cultural context and historical narratives to be strongly influential on how
public decisions about environment and health are both framed and managed.
2.5 Conclusion While the need for a systems approach to SWM has been both explicitly recognized
(e.g. see Seadon (2010)) and inexplicitly recognized through the many calls for
‘integrated’ methodologies, there is a lack of literature exploring the actual
application of systems thinking to SWM systems in many developing country
contexts. While not a cure-‐all ‘solution’, systems thinking can provide some
understanding and approaches for coping with complexity (Waltner-‐Toews, Kay, &
Lister, 2008). Above all, the next appropriate steps for SWM will need to be
determined for each individual context (Wilson, 2007). Investigation and
management of complex systems demands specificity, meaning there cannot be a
straightforward, standard ‘cook-‐book’ system description (Waltner-‐Toews et al.,
2008). Holling suggests beginning an analysis “of a specific problem with a
historical reconstruction of the events that have occurred, focusing on the surprises
and crises that have arisen as a result of both external influences and internal
instabilities”, in the ecological, social, political, and economic systems, and the
management institutions (Holling, 2001, p. 402). The need for this kind of specificity
certainly applies to SWM systems. It has been widely recognized that it is
counterproductive for developing countries to use strategies and policies developed
for high-‐income countries; approaches should be locally sensitive, critical, creative,
and ‘owned’ by the community of concern (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Henry et al., 2006a;
49
Konteh, 2009; Schübeler, 1996; UN-‐HABITAT, 2010).
It should be noted that while systems thinking is concerned with how patterns of
relationships translate into emergent behaviors (Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2008), these
translations take time and so will any system alterations; delays are inherent in
complex systems (Meadows, 2008). It has taken decades for the management,
efficiency, and reliability of SWM systems in high-‐income countries to evolve to the
far from ideal states they are currently in (Coffey & Coad, 2010). Wilson (2007)
describes the impracticality of current expectations for developing country SWM
systems:
If there is one key lesson that I have learned from 30 years in waste
management, it is that there are no ‘quick fixes’. All developed
countries have evolved their current systems in a series of steps;
developing countries can benefit from that experience, but to expect to
move from uncontrolled dumping to a ‘modern’ waste management
system in one great leap is just not realistic (Wilson, 2007, p. 205).
There is a need for a different approach as the bleak state of SWM systems in the
developing world continues to threaten and degrade the health of the most
vulnerable human populations and the ecosystems they are a part of. While systems
thinking is currently playing a major role in approaches for computer networks, the
organization of global corporations, and some environmental issues (Waltner-‐
Toews et al., 2008), solid waste researchers and decision-‐makers will need to adopt
such a systemic perspective if any real progress is to be made in the SWM practices
of the developing world.
50
2.6 References Bhuiyan, S. H. (2010). A crisis in governance: Urban solid waste management in
Bangladesh. Habitat international, 34(1), 125-‐133.
BIO Intelligence Service. (2011). Implementing EU Waste Legislation for Green Growth Final Report prepared for European Commission DG ENV.
Boadi, K., Kuitunen, M., Raheem, K., & Hanninen, K. (2005). Urbanisation Without Development: Environmental and Health Implications in African Cities. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 7(4), 465-‐500.
Boulding, K. E. (1956). General Systems Theory -‐ The Skeleton of Science. Management Science, 2(3), 197-‐208.
Byrne, D. (2005). Complexity, Configurations and Cases. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(5), 95-‐111.
Byrne, D. S. (1998). Complexity theory and the social sciences : an introduction. London; New York: Routledge.
Capra, F. (2005). Complexity and Life. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(5), 33-‐44.
Carabias, W. J. V., Winistoerfer, H., & Stuecheli, A. (1999). Social aspects of public waste management in Switzerland. Waste Management, 19(6), 417-‐425.
CEC. (1977). Second EC Environment Action Programme. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
Chai, K.-‐H., & Yeo, C. (2012). Overcoming energy efficiency barriers through systems approach—A conceptual framework. Energy Policy, 46, 460-‐472.
Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester, England; Toronto: J. Wiley.
Checkland, P. (2000). Soft Systems Methodology: A Thirty Year Retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17(S1), S11-‐S58.
Coffey, M., & Coad, A. (2010). Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing Countries. Malta: UN-‐HABITAT.
Cohen, B. (2004). Urban Growth in Developing Countries: A Review of Current Trends and a Caution Regarding Existing Forecasts. World Development, 32(1), 23-‐51.
Dijkema, G. P. J., Reuter, M. A., & Verhoef, E. V. (2000). A new paradigm for waste management. Waste Management, 20(8), 633-‐638.
Drack, M., & Schwarz, G. (2010). Recent developments in general system theory. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 27(6), 601-‐610.
51
European Commission. (2010). 2009 Environment Policy Review. Brussels.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for the post-‐normal age. Futures, 25(7), 739-‐755.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1991). A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues. In R. Costanza (Ed.), Ecological economics: The sience and management of sustainability (pp. 137-‐152). New York: Columbia University Press.
Gertsakis, J., & Lewis, H. (2003). Sustainability and the Waste Management Hierarchy: A discussion paper on the waste management hierarchy and its relationship to sustainability (pp. 1-‐15). Melbourne: RMIT University.
Halla, F., & Majani, B. (1999). Innovative Ways for Solid Waste Management in Dar-‐Es-‐Salaam: Toward Stakeholder Partnerships. Habitat international, 23(3), 351-‐361.
Hardoy, J. E., Mitlin, D., Satterthwaite, D., & Hardoy, J. E. (2001). Environmental problems in an urbanizing world : finding solutions for cities in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan Publications.
Henry, R. K., Yongsheng, Z., & Jun, D. (2006). Municipal solid waste management challenges in developing countries -‐ Kenyan case study. Waste Management, 26(1), 92-‐100.
Hirschhorn, J., Jackson, T., & Baas, L. (1993). Towards Prevention: the emerging environmental management paradigm. In T. Jackson (Ed.), Clean Production Strategies: developing preventative environmental management in the industrial economy. Chelsea, MI: Lewis.
Holling, C. S. (2001). Understanding the Complexity of Economic, Ecological, and Social Systems. Ecosystems, 4(5), 390-‐405.
Jha, A. K., Singh, G. P., Singh, G. P., & Gupta, P. K. (2011). Sustainable municipal solid waste management in low income group of cities: a review. Tropical Ecology, 52(1), 123-‐131.
Kay, J. J., Regier, H. A., Boyle, M., & Francis, G. (1999). An ecosystem approach for sustainability: addressing the challenge of complexity. Futures, 31(7), 721-‐742.
Koestler, A. (1978). Janus: a Summing Up (1St American Ed ed.). New York: Random House.
Kollikkathara, N., Feng, H., & Stern, E. (2009). A purview of waste management evolution: special emphasis on USA. Waste Management, 29(2), 974-‐985.
52
Konteh, F. H. (2009). Urban sanitation and health in the developing world: reminiscing the nineteenth century industrial nations. Health & Place, 15(1), 69-‐78.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langeweg, F., Hilderink, H., & Maas, R. (2000). Urbanisation, industrialisation and sustainable development Globo Report Series No. 27: RIVM.
Louis, G. E. (2004). A Historical Context of Municipal Solid Waste Management in the United States. Waste Management & Research, 22(4), 306-‐322.
McDougall, F., White, P. R., Franke, M., & Hindle, P. (2001). Integrated solid waste management: a lifecycle inventory (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.
McGranahan, G. (2001). The citizens at risk: from urban sanitation to sustainable cities. London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan: Stockholm Environment Institute.
McKenzie-‐Mohr, D., & Smith, W. (2008). Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-‐Based Social Marketing. Gabriola Island (B.C.): New Society Publishers.
Meadows, D. H., & Wright, D. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan.
Melosi, M. V. (1981). Garbage in the cities: refuse, reform, and the environment, 1880-‐1980 (1st ed.). College Station, Tex.: Texas A&M University Press.
Memon, M. A. (2010). Integrated solid waste management based on the 3R approach. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 12(1), 30-‐40.
Morrissey, A. J., & Browne, J. (2004). Waste management models and their application to sustainable waste management. Waste Management, 24(3), 297-‐308.
Nemerow, N. L. (2009). Environmental engineering: Environmental health and safety for municipal infrastructure, land use and planning, and industry (6th ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Petts, J. (2000). Municipal waste management: inequities and the role of deliberation. Risk Analysis, 20(6), 821-‐832.
Ponting, C. (1991). A green history of the world: the environment and the collapse of great civilizations. New York: St. Martin's Press.
53
Price, J. L., & Joseph, J. B. (2000). Demand management — a basis for waste policy: a critical review of the applicability of the waste hierarchy in terms of achieving sustainable waste management. Sustainable Development, 8(2), 96-‐105.
Rodic, L., Scheinberg, A., & Wilson, D. C. (2010). Comparing Solid Waste Management in the World’s Cities. Paper presented at the ISWA World Congress 2010, Urban Development and Sustainability -‐ a Major Challenge for Waste Management in the 21st Century, Hamburg, Germany.
Schübeler, P. (1996). Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management. In Low-‐Income Countries. In K. Wehrle & J. Christen (Eds.). St. Gallen Switzerland: UNDP/UNCHS/World Bank/SDC Collaborative Programme on Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-‐Income Countries.
Seadon, J. K. (2006). Integrated waste management -‐ looking beyond the solid waste horizon. [Review]. Waste Management 26(12), 1327-‐1336.
Seadon, J. K. (2010). Sustainable waste management systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(16-‐17), 1639-‐1651.
Shimura, S., Yokota, I., & Nitta, Y. (2001). Research for MSW flow analysis in developing nations. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 3(1), 48-‐59.
Southerton, D., McMeekin, A., & Evans, D. (2011). International Review of Behaviour Change Initiatives: Scottish Government Social Research.
Tacoli, C. (2012). Urbanization, gender and urban poverty: paid work and unpaid carework in the city. London, UK: International Institute for Environment and Development, United Nations Population Fund.
Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H., & Eliassen, R. (1977). Solid Wastes: Engineering Principles and Management Issues. New York; Toronto: Mcgraw-‐Hill.
Thomas, B., & McDougall, F. (2005). International expert group on life cycle assessment for integrated waste management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(3), 321-‐326.
Thornloe, S. A., Weitz, K., Nishtala, S., Barlaz, M., Ranjithan, R., & Ham, R. K. (1997). Update on the US study applying life-‐cycle management to compare integrated waste management strategies. In T. H. Christensen, R. Cossu & R. Stegmann (Eds.), International Landfill Symposium. Sardinia, Italy: Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre.
Turner, R. K., & Powell, J. (1991). Towards an integrated waste management strategy. Environmental Management and Health, 2(1), 6-‐12.
54
Turnpenny, J., Jones, M., & Lorenzoni, I. (2011). Where Now for Post-‐Normal Science?: A Critical Review of its Development, Definitions, and Uses. Science, Technology & Human Values, 36(3), 287-‐306.
UN-‐HABITAT. (2010). Solid Waste Management in the World’s Cities: Water and Sanitation in the World's Cities 2010. In Earthscan (Series Ed.)
UNDP. (2010). Regional Human Development Report for Latin America and the Caribbean 2010. Costa Rica: United Nations Development Programme.
UNEP. (1996). International Source Book on Environmentally Sound Technologies for Municipal Solid Waste Management. International Environmental Technology Centre Technical Publication Series: United Nations Environmental Programme.
UNEP. (2010). Waste and Climate Change: Global Trends and Strategy Framework. Osaka; Shiga: United Nations Environmental Programme.
UNFPA. (2011). State of world population 2011: United Nations Population Fund.
van de Klundert, A. (1995). Community And Private (Formal And Informal) Sector Involvement In Municipal Solid Waste Management In Developing Countries. Paper presented at the UMP workshop, Ittingen.
van de Klundert, A., & Anschutz, J. (2001). Integrated Sustainable Waste Management -‐ the Concept: Tools for Decision-‐makers. Experiences from the Urban Waste Expertise Programme (1995-‐2001). In A. Scheinberg (Ed.). Gouda, Netherlands: Urban Waste Expertise Programme.
von Bertalanffy, L. (1950). An Outline of General System Theory. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 1(2), 134-‐165.
Waltner-‐Toews, D., Kay, J., & Lister, N.-‐M. E. (2008). The ecosystem approach: complexity, uncertainty, and managing for sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press.
Waltner-‐Toews, D., Kay, J., Neudoerffer, C., & Gitau, T. (2003). Perspective changes everything: managing ecosystems from the inside out. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1(1), 23-‐30.
Waltner-‐Toews, D., Neudoerffer, C., Joshi, D. D., & Tamang, M. S. (2005). Agro-‐urban Ecosystem Health Assessment in Kathmandu, Nepal: Epidemiology, Systems, Narratives. EcoHealth, 2(2), 155-‐164.
Wilson, D. C. (2007). Development drivers for waste management. Waste Management & Research, 25(3), 198-‐207.
55
Wolsink, M. (2010). Contested environmental policy infrastructure: Socio-‐political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30(5), 302-‐311.
Woodward, D. (1985). Swords into ploughshares: Recycling in Pre-‐Industrial England. The Economic History Review, 38(2), 175-‐191.
Worrell, W. A., & Vesilind, P. A. (2012). Solid waste engineering (2nd ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Yousif, D. F., & Scott, S. (2007). Governing solid waste management in Mazatenango, Guatemala. International Development Planning Review, 29(4), 433-‐450.
Zarate, M. A., Slotnick, J., & Ramos, M. (2008). Capacity building in rural Guatemala by implementing a solid waste management program. Waste Management, 28(12), 2542-‐2551.
Zero Waste SA. (2011). Waste Management Hierarchy Retrieved May 18, 2012, from http://www.zerowaste.sa.gov.au/About-‐Us/waste-‐management-‐hierarchy
Zurbrugg, C. (2003). Solid waste management in developing countries: A sourcebook for policy makers and practitioners: EAWAG /SANDEC.
56
3 Narrative-‐based participatory model building as a systems approach to solid waste management in Todos Santos, Guatemala
3.1 Introduction Solid waste management (SWM) is critical to the protection of public health, safety,
and the environment (Bhuiyan, 2010). It is therefore no surprise that the impacts
SWM has on health and the environment are issues of global concern: from climate
change to illegal dumping; limiting economic potential; environmental injustice;
inequalities; and health effects associated with mortality, the health and
environmental implications associated with SWM are mounting in urgency,
particularly in the context of developing countries (Ancona et al., 2010; Martuzzi,
Mitis, & Forastiere, 2010; Schübeler, 1996; Wilson, 2007). Rising urbanization levels
are leaving national and regional governments unable to cope with the waste
demands of the world’s burgeoning cities (Tacoli, 2012). As developing countries in
South and Central America follow the historical, unsustainable model developed by
(and for) high-‐income countries that emphasizes high production and high
consumption, solid waste is inevitably produced at a rising rate (Dijkema et al.,
2000; Duru, 1981; UNEP, 2009). Indeed, severe SWM implications are most common
in the developing world, where SWM is inadequate in most cities, and outright
lacking in rural areas (Schübeler, 1996; Zarate et al., 2008). Only a small fraction of
the total waste generated is collected, and even then it commonly ends up in open
dumpsites instead of in technically managed sanitary landfills that contain leachate
and methane gas collection systems (Yousif & Scott, 2007; Zarate et al., 2008).
Unrestrained dumping and the spread of waste in waterways and the streets has
serious health implications, often propagated by pests such as insects and rats
(Bhuiyan, 2010; Yousif & Scott, 2007). It is increasingly evident that the costs of
poor SWM do not impact everyone equally; they are borne by fragile natural
ecosystems and the most susceptible of their dependent communities. The poor, the
geographically vulnerable, the politically weak, and other disadvantaged groups are
most affected by such environmental changes (Parkes et al., 2010).
57
3.1.1 Solid Waste Management: Developing Country Trends
Many SWM strategies that are appropriate in developed countries are unsuitable in
developing regions of the world. Indeed, a plethora of reasons why traditional SWM
systems fail in low-‐ and middle-‐income countries are identified in the literature. A
compilation of such challenges, categorized by traditional sector, is provided in
Table 1.
Table 1. Common solid waste management challenges in developing countries, categorized by sector
Waste Reduction
• Regulatory and legislative measures are low priority1 • Lack of regulatory and legislative enforcement5,6 • Users unable/unwilling to pay collection fees2 • Lack of institutional capacity 3 •
Collection and Transport
• Poorly planned (e.g. narrow, poorly drained, unpaved) roads 4,5,6 • Poor vehicle access to homes, especially in low-‐income areas4,5 • Large distances from homes to communal waste storage7 • Use of expensive, foreign equipment and parts 5,8,9 • Frequent truck breakdowns, parts shortages 5,8,9 • Lowest income groups receive lowest collection priorities5,8,10
Recycling
• Difficulty incorporating informal recyclers into SWM plans8,11 • Lack of public awareness or motivation12 • Lack of local or national markets for recycled materials12 • Lack of financial capital/technical know-‐how to implement large-‐scale centers13 • Unavailability of appropriate land 3 • Lack of institutional capacity 3
Composting • Financially difficult to implement at a centralized, large-‐scale level13 • Lack of understanding or maintenance of biological conditions14 • Poor pre-‐sorting of incoming waste14 • Failure to understand market conditions 13,14 • Lack of institutional capacity 3
1 (UNEP, 1996) 2 (Shukla et al., 2000) 3 (Da Zhu, Asnani, Zurbrugg, Anapolsky, & Mani, 2008) 4 (Konteh, 2009) 5 (Coffey & Coad, 2010) 6 (Henry, Yongsheng, & Jun, 2006b) 7 (Pfammater & Schertenleib, 1996) 8 (Zurbruegg, 2003) 9 (Memon, 2010) 10 (Jha et al., 2011) 11 (Schübeler, 1996) 12 (Wilson, Velis, & Cheeseman, 2006) 13 (Yousif & Scott, 2007) 14 (Zerbock, 2003)
58
Waste Transformation (incineration and burning)
• Most mechanical, thermal, and chemical techniques are out of scope 2 • High moisture content of waste prevents self-‐sustaining combustion2 • High financial start-‐up and operating costs for incineration111 • Lack of technical expertise and skilled personnel1,3 • Slow burning is common in the home, backyard, open spaces, and dumpsites15
Disposal
• Uncontrolled, open dumping is the most common disposal method16 • Dumps use precious space ineffectively 3 • Food sources for vectors of disease4 • Dumps are unlined and have no leachate collection system1 • Waste burial leads to forgotten dumpsites, continually leaching toxins17
Landfilling
• Lack of technical expertise and skilled personnel 3 • Lack of long-‐term financial and physical resources14 • Lack of institutional capacity 3 • Unavailability of appropriate land 3 • Lack of appropriate guidelines for new landfills and dump upgrades8
Environmental and human health risks
• Dumps contain infectious medical and other hazardous wastes11,16 • Toxic decomposition products in water, soil, and air16 • Presence of human and animal fecal matter at dumpsites16 • Explosive methane gas causes toxic smoke, can burn for years at dumpsites16 • Slow burning volatilizes heavy metals, dioxins, acid gases, nitrogen oxides, etc. 1 • High health risks for waste workers and scavengers11,16 • Socio-‐economic damage, threatened livelihoods18 • Waste in streets clogs drains, breeding ground for malarial mosquitos 16
3.1.2 SWM in Guatemala
Many of the aforementioned SWM issues are prevalent in Guatemala. Figure 10
depicts the context for these SWM issues in the country and more specifically in
Todos Santos, the area of study.
15 (Simon, 2008) 16 (Cointreau, 1982) 17 (Halla & Majani, 1999) 18 (Muttamara & Leong, 1997)
59
Figure 10.Guatemala's SWM Context
Guatemala's Socio-Economic Conditions: Lower-Middle Income Transitional Democracy
National and International Attention
Area of Study: Todos Santos Cuchumatán
Guatemala'sSWM
SWM in TodosSantos
TrilateralAgreement
withMexico andGermany
1990sNationalPolicies
Weak PoliticalParties
Weak Authorityof Law
Corruption
ExtremePoverty
IncomeDisparity
Racism
Naturaldisasters
Civil War
90%IllegalDumps
EnvironmentalDegradation
Danger toPublic Health
WasteBurning
Lack ofReporting
/ Data
Increase inSW
Generationper Capita
InappropriateLocation and
InefficientOperation of
LandfillsDistrust in
Institutions
LimitedSWM
Funding
Lack ofPublic
Awareness
Increasein
Littering
2011Integrated
SWMStrategy
PAHO Reports
90% IndigenousPopulation
Rural,RemoteLocation
HighPovertyRates
Wage-LabourMigration to
US
LowTechnicalExpertise
PoorEducation
System
Deeply Scarred byCivil War
Headwatersof Limon
River
HighIlliteracy
Low Confidence inPolitical Institutions
No LocalRecyclingFacilities
Open IllegalDump in
TownCenter
Wastein the
Streets
Dump onRiverbank
Weekly WasteCollection
HouseholdPets Eat at
Dump
EnvironmentalEducation has
Begun
UnsanitaryAbattoir in
TownCenter
NegativeImpacts on
Health
LowPoliticalPriority
CorruptionLimitsSWM
Funding
EnvironmentalDegradation
Invisible
60
Guatemala is a lower middle income (World Bank, 2011), post-‐conflict independent
republic undergoing democratic transition and thus, it faces many difficulties
common to Latin American transitional democracies, including weak political
parties and authority of the law, corruption and organized crime, extreme poverty
and severe income disparity (Guinea, 2009). In 1996, the government and the
Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity (URNG) signed Peace Accords, ending a
36-‐year period of internal conflict that had dramatically affected the economy and
infrastructure of the country (Sundberg, 2002). Guatamala now has one of Central
America’s largest economies, and has maintained relatively stable economic growth
over the last few decades (World Bank, 2011). However, despite these factors, little
progression towards the elimination of inequality has been made (Sundberg, 2002).
Indeed, the World Bank (2011) states that, “Guatemala's social indicators often fall
below those of countries with lower per capita incomes. According to the Human
Development Index [a combination of income, education and health indicators]
(2010), Guatemala ranks 116 among 169 ranked countries and in Latin America is
only ahead of Haiti”. The population has grown from 3 million in 1950 to 14 million
in 2010, but remained poor, young, and predominantly rural and indigenous
(Guinea, 2009). Income disparity is severe, as 49% of the 2010 population is rural,
70.5% of the rural population is below the poverty line (World Bank, 2011), and
93% of the country’s extreme poor are rural (Cook et al., 2009). Indigenous peoples,
composed of Mayas, Xincas, and Garífunas, make up 41% of the population (Guinea,
2009). This percentage varies drastically by region, as indigenous peoples are
predominantly rural (and therefore poor) (Cook et al., 2009). Such inequalities have
caused Guatemala to be fraught with corruption, racism, violence, and a deeply
rooted mistrust of judicial systems and political institutions (Sundberg, 2002).
Additionally, natural disasters have recently rocked the country; in 2010, Tropical
Storm Agatha and the eruption of the volcano Pacaya, caused an estimated US$982
million in damages and losses. During the rainy season of 2010, which was one of
the heaviest the country has seen in six decades, landslides and flooding caused
serious damage to the country’s productive and physical infrastructure (World
Bank, 2011), which was already deficient and hindering foreign investment (Guinea,
61
2009). Many of these issues have led to severely weakened solid waste management
systems throughout the country (Zarate et al., 2008), which has in turn caused a
proliferation of illegal dumping and burning of solid wastes. As of 2005, roughly 7.1
million Guatemalans, or 68 percent of all households, bury, burn, or dispose of their
waste inappropriately, particularly in rivers or streams, causing serious
environmental degradation and threatening public health (Yousif and Scott, 2007).
Nearly 90 percent of the country’s landfills are illegal dumps, and approximately 40
percent of them are in close proximity to a water body or aquifer (Mantilla, 2007).
These issues are difficult to address for a variety of reasons, including a lack of data
and reporting. The Ministry of Health reports on very few diseases related to water
source contamination or waste simply because little data is available, and what data
does exist is often outdated (Mantilla, 2007). Illegal dumping is exacerbated by the
fact that solid waste generation per capita, and particularly the percentage of non-‐
biodegradable solid waste, is continually increasing (Yousif and Scott, 2007). Waste
generation is predicted to increase dramatically not only in the large cities but also
in rural areas, as decentralization of the public sector and growth of the private
sector promote the development of the country’s interior.
Where officially recognized landfills do exist, they are inappropriately located and
inefficiently operated. SWM employees are exposed to substandard working
conditions, including a lack of adequate safety equipment and frequently coming
into contact with hazardous materials such as sharp, medical, chemical, and toxic
wastes (Yousif and Scott, 2007). These working conditions expose workers to a host
of physical, psychological, and social hazards (Yousif and Scott, 2007).
As in many other developing countries, urban planning in Guatemala is somewhat
arbitrary, leading to mazes of steep, narrow streets that are inaccessible for
conventional waste collection vehicles (Yousif and Scott, 2007). Many residents are
unable to afford collection fees, or are unwilling to pay for them due to distrust in
the quality of service (Yousif and Scott, 2007). This encourages illegal dumping and
disposal practices in waterways, by roadsides, and in urban areas. Many
neighbourhoods house bodies of stagnant water, especially in the wet season, due to
62
drains clogged with municipal refuse (Yousif and Scott, 2007). This creates breeding
grounds for disease-‐transimitting mosquitos (Cointreau, 1982). These issues are
depicted in a conceptual diagram below (see Figure 11).
Figure 11. Environmental and health related SWM impacts in Guatemala
The literature has identified six principal SWM challenges that plague Guatemala:
• Limited funding for SWM services due to a lack of authoritative interest and
the high cost of such services (Yousif and Scott, 2007);
• The absence of large-‐scale formal recycling programmes (Zarate et al., 2008;
Yousif and Scott, 2007), as the only recycling facilities in the country are
located in Xela and Guatemala city (Zarate et al., 2008);
• A lack of proper sanitary landfills and the inappropriate location of current
dumpsites, which are often too close to residential areas or a considerable
distance from municipal boundaries (Manilla, 2007; Yousif and Scott, 2007;
Environmental Impacts Health Impacts
Unwillingness to pay
Political andinstitutional issues
Weakened SWMsystems
Natural disasters
Steep, narrow streets
Rising solid wastegeneration per capita
Burning, burying,unregulated dumping
Rise innon-biodegradable
solid waste
Unregulated, opendumps near water
bodies
Standing water
Contaminated groundand surface water
Inappropriatelylocated landfills
Sub-standard workingconditions for waste
workers
Zoonoses fromrodents, mosquitos,
etc.
Gastrointestinal illness
Intoxification
Injury and infection
Respiratory illness
Infectious andchronic diseases
Waste inpublic/accessible areas
Contaminated air
Environmental Impacts
Lack of knowledgeabout hygiene
63
Zarate et al, 2008);
• A lack of public awareness about proper SWM (Yousif and Scott, 2007);
• An increase in illegal dumping (Manilla, 2007; Yousif and Scott, 2007); and
• An increase in littering, which is causing considerable drainage and sewer
problems (Yousif and Scott, 2007).
SWM is low on the municipal priority list due to its inability to generate ample
public and private approval when compared with other projects such as housing,
business, and the development of recreational facilities (Yousif and Scott, 2007). In
addition, frequent changes in municipal government and technical managers are a
significant barrier to improved SWM systems in Guatemala (GTZ, 2009). When a
political term comes to close and a new government is elected, all municipal office
workers, even those not involved in elections, are replaced, which generates a lack
in continuity. Any projects started during the tenure of one office that require time
and planning run the risk of being subsequently abandoned in the next term (Yousif
and Scott, 2007). This lack of long-‐term commitment from local authorities,
technical experts and the regional and national government are central challenges
to SMW projects throughout the country (Zarate et al., 2008). Guatemala has been
plagued by a lack of coordination between environmental authorities, limited
technical knowledge, and a lack of homogenous and reliable information on proper
SWM (GTZ, 2009).
3.1.2.1 National and international attention
The Guatemalan government has recognized the severity of SWM issues for some
time. In the 1990s, the government implemented a series of new policies aimed to
promote the protection of the environment and fund natural resource management
projects. Projects to be funded were to focus on pollution problems and on
ameliorating the provision of basic services, including environmental education in
schools and solid waste management (Zarate et al., 2008). The government also
aimed to strengthen institutions and increase citizen participation by decentralizing
administrative, economic and political power to municipalities. However, many
rural municipalities lacked the human and financial resources to implement such
64
policies, and the policy resulted in increased illegal dumping and burning of solid
wastes (Zarate et al., 2008). In 2004, the Ministry of Environmental Protection of
Guatemala, recognizing the need for decentralization and the involvement of
municipal-‐level actors in SWM, signed a trilateral agreement with the governments
of Mexico and Germany to implement an integrated waste management program in
the country similar to that of Mexico’s (UNDP, 2009). The program aimed to create
technical capacity in waste management by forming a network of environmental
promoters who could provide technical and advisory assistance to the country’s 332
municipalities (TTSSC, 2010). By 2008, 42 promoters had been trained through
three sessions over a period of 6 months. These promoters then trained 136
department delegates, 122 environmental inspectors, and 543 municipal employees
throughout the country (GTZ, 2009). However, a lack of integrated waste
management continues to plague less fortunate communities throughout the
country. Despite million-‐dollar loans and grants from bilateral and multilateral
development agencies to build capacity at the municipal level, municipalities lack
the human and financial resources to implement such SWM projects (Zarate et al.,
2008), such as those proposed by RED GIRESOL Guatemala. Project funding from
the German government terminated in 2009 (TTSSC, 2010), and further results have
not been reported. In addition, one of the main Guatemalan organizations involved
in RED GIRESOL Guatemala has been known for non-‐participatory enforcement of
environmental protection that has caused harm to poor, politically disadvantaged
groups in the past (Sundberg, 2002). Sundberg (2002) observes that environmental
decision-‐making is performed at a centralized level in Guatemala, and democratic,
participatory methods are rarely implemented. Authorities feel participatory
methods are too time consuming, or that stakeholders would not agree to proposed
projects. Though local SWM authorities often express support for public and
stakeholder participation, projects have repeatedly failed to allow stakeholder
involvement in decision-‐making processes. If stakeholders do become involved,
SWM authorities often fail to incorporate stakeholder expertise (Yousif and Scott,
2007). But SWM is a complex task that requires not only technical solutions, but the
participation of both the public and the private spheres (Zarate et al., 2008). Indeed,
65
in Guatemala, “the problems of appropriate solid waste management are issues of
governance rather than technical problems” (Yousif and Scott, 2007, p. 441).
More recently, the Guatemalan government collaborated with academics, waste
management businesses and civic organizations to create an ‘integrated waste
management strategy’ in an attempt to manage the 14.5 million tons of waste
produced annually (BNAmericas, 2011). While only 12 of the 332 municipalities
across the country currently have any form of SWM program (Yousif and Scott,
2007; BNAmericas, 2011), the new national strategy calls for SWM service
implementation within each one (BNAmericas, 2011).
The waste crisis has also been recognized by the international community for some
time. In 1998, the Pan American Health Organization (1998, pp. 299-‐300) reported
that “nowhere in Guatemala is there a system for the final disposal of solid waste. In
the urban areas it is estimated that 47% of the population has the benefit of solid
waste collection. The rest of the people burn, bury, or toss out their trash. In rural
areas only 4% of the population has the benefit of trash collection services. The
waste that is collected, in both urban and rural areas, is deposited in dumps with no
further treatment”. By 2007, these numbers had only changed to 58.3% and 4.5%
for urban and rural collection services, respectively (Pan American Health
Organization, 2007). In 2006, a documentary short film produced by Leslie Iwerks
and Mike Glad entitled Recycled Life explored Guatemala City’s 40-‐acre garbage
dump – the largest in Central America – and the community living within it (Iwerks,
2006). The film captured the dire state of the country’s waste crisis and drew
international attention to the issue, winning several international film festival
awards (Iwerks, 2006).
It becomes rapidly evident that SWM has been recognized by the national
government and the outside world as a critical issue of concern in Guatemala,
particularly for the politically and geographically disadvantaged, yet little attention
is paid to these communities’ perspectives on exactly what issues poor SWM creates,
influences, and exacerbates, and what structures prevent change within the
66
communities. To this end, this study aims to examine these SWM challenges in one
of the country’s politically and geographically disadvantaged communities in a
systemic, inclusive manner built on local perspectives.
This chapter is organized as follows: the first section introduces the area of study –
Todos Santos Cuchumatán – emphasizing the complex context in which the town
sits, and why it was chosen for the study. The second section details the
methodology used, which focuses principally on causal mapping through the use of
narratives. The third section examines the resulting causal maps and grids, looking
in particular at the structural elements and feedback loops that arose from the
mapping process. Finally, the fourth section discusses the significance of the
findings and proposes strategies to improve the solid waste situation in Todos
Santos and elsewhere.
3.1.3 Area of Study: Todos Santos Cuchumatán
In Guatemala, poverty is the greatest among the mostly rural indigenous
communities, which constitute nearly half of the population (Cook, Swanson, Eggett,
& Booth, 2009; World Bank, 2005a; Yousif & Scott, 2007). Accordingly, waste
management is extremely limited in many of these communities (Pan American
Health Organization, 1998). One such community is the remote Mam Mayan village
of Todos Santos, tucked in a valley of northwestern Guatemala’s Cuchumatanes
mountain range (Burrell, 2005; Mcclatchie Andrews, 1999). Located at 2,500 m.a.s.l.
on an ancient trade route connecting Mexico to the city of Huehuetenango, Todos
Santos is relatively isolated(Mcclatchie Andrews, 1999). As of 1999, the immediate
population in the village center was only 3,000, but this number escalates to 32,000
if the populations of the surrounding aldeas (hamlets) that line the mountain slopes
are included (Mcclatchie Andrews, 1999). A recent estimate puts the center at a
population of 7,000, and the greater region at a population of 34,000 (Chauvin,
2012). Approximately ninety percent of the population is of Mam Mayan descent
(Chauvin, 2012).
The majority of Todos Santeros are farmers. Poverty is high in this indigenous
community; the average monthly income is 800 Quetzales (approximately 100 USD),
67
and alcoholism and violence are prevalent (Mcclatchie Andrews, 1999). These
modest salaries, in combination with a lack of jobs and increased prices for land and
for construction of new houses, have led to a staggering increase in wage-‐labour
migration to the United States in recent years (Burrell, 2005). Each family has at
least one member living in the United States, approximately one third of the
population (Burrell, 2005). Young men and increasingly, young women, feel the only
way they can secure their family’s future is through work abroad. This large-‐scale
migration puts several socio-‐economic pressures on those who remain in the
village: Increased social differentiation and class stratification between those who
remain and those who migrate; increased prices for land and new houses; increased
local crime; and less technical expertise as these factors encourage the best
educated and most productive members of the community to migrate (Burrell,
2005). In addition, the education system is deteriorating not only at the national
level due to excruciatingly low salaries, a lack of government support, and massive
teachers’ strikes, but also at the local level as the majority of bilingual Mam/Spanish
teachers have gone to the United States and monolingual teachers from
Huehuetenango are replacing them (Burrell, 2005). Therefore, illiteracy rates are
high (Chauvin, 2011).
Todos Santeros were caught in one of the worst locations during the civil war –
between the guerrillas who sought refuge in the mountains and the army
determined to eradicate them (Mcclatchie Andrews, 1999). By 1982, each Todos
Santeros family had been impacted by the war. Those remaining took up arms and
created civil patrol groups to police and protect their own people (Mcclatchie
Andrews, 1999). Clearly, the impacts of the civil war on human resources,
infrastructure (Zarate et al, 2008), and confidence in judicial systems and political
institutions experienced in other parts of the country (Sundberg, 2002) are
prevalent in Todos Santos. These issues lead to severely weakened SWM systems
(Zarate et al., 2008), which subsequently impact local human health and
environmental wellbeing.
68
3.1.3.1 Solid Waste Management in Todos Santos
Connections between waste mismanagement and community wellbeing are
increasingly being recognized. In 2008, Vets Without Borders identified a need to
further investigate waste management issues in Todos Santos through a program to
control the local canine population and prevent the spread of rabies (VWB, 2009b).
This program brought to light the pivotal links between waste management, dog
overpopulation, and the wellbeing of the community (VWB, 2009a).
A field trip to Todos Santos was conducted from August 17, 2011 to September 7,
2011 to further investigate local SWM practices. Preliminary field observations
brought to light the following:
• Todos Santos is one of the municipalities with the highest altitude in the
region and is situated on the banks of the Limon River. Therefore, any
contamination to the Rio Limon affects many communities downstream,
including:
o Union Cantinil, Concepcion Huista, Jacaltenango, Santa Ana Huista,
San Antonio Huista, La Democracia and Nenton in the province of
Huehuetenango; and
o The south of the Mexican state Chiapas (Chauvin, 2011);
• The nearest city with recycling facilities (Xela) is 130km away but due to the
sinuous route through the Cuchamatanes mountain range, the trip takes a
vehicle approximately 5 hours;
• In the town center, solid waste (including animal fecal matter) is present in
the streets, and final disposal takes place in an open dumpsite near the
centre of the town;
• The unregulated dumpsite is located on a steep embankment of the Rio
Limon, directly adjacent to a residential property where household pigs
graze on waste, and directly above a field of corn that grows on the bank of
the river;
• Two street sweepers are employed by the municipality to collect garbage
thrown in the streets and transport it to the dump;
69
• Garbage receptacles exist in the town square and there has been a push to
educate the population to dispose of garbage “where it belongs” (in these
receptacles) but there is no mechanism in place to empty them;
• During the spring of 2011 the municipality hired a bulldozer to bury the
dump site, but the machinery nearly fell into the river and the task could not
be completed (Chauvin, 2011);
• Door-‐to-‐door solid waste collection occurs weekly in the town centre, where
roads are wide enough for trucks, but no collection occurs in communities
outside of the village center;
• Vectors including dogs, cats (some of which are household pets), vultures,
flies, cockroaches and other insects scavenge at the dump;
• Educational programs focusing on environmental issues and recycling have
begun to take place in the local schools;
• Peace Corps has had several volunteers working in the community for a
number of years. One recently initiated the construction of a school that used
water bottles stuffed with waste as bricks. However, no further construction
of this type has occurred;
• The town’s abattoir, located near the center of town, consists of a holding pen
with a dirt floor and a concrete building with a sink and running water. It is a
very unclean facility: garbage and waste litters the pen, and animal remains
from previous slaughters cover the sink, doors, walls, and floor. Animal
remains are disposed of in the drain, which leads directly to the river, and
other scraps are thrown to a large crowd of dogs. Animals are quartered
directly on the floor and meat is thrown into a truck for sale at the market;
• A health survey conducted by the local doctor, identified thousands of health
cases potentially associated with poor SWM. Infections, inflammations, and
gastrointestinal issues may be directly related to contamination brought into
the home and workplace by vectors of disease that breed and live in the town
dump. Certain infections may be related to poor air quality due to waste
burning practices and fires in the dump. Such cases include:
70
o Intestinal bacterial infection: 1,272 cases
o Intestinal parasite: 1,221
o Acute respiratory infection: 721
o Urinary tract infection: 579
o Amebic dysentery: 574
o Diarrhea: 524
o Eye inflammation: 422
o General skin inflammation: 39 (Pablo, 2011);
• Many illnesses go unreported or cannot be properly diagnosed due to a lack
of financial and human medical resources. One doctor in an extremely limited
clinic services approximately 34,000 people (Pablo, 2011), many of whom
live a considerable distance from the town center;
• Local authorities show some interest in waste management issues, but other
projects, such as education or road construction receive priority;
• The national push for SWM in every municipality has resulted in the
allocation of a modest amount of funds for 2012, expanding somewhat in
2013, for SWM in Todos Santos; and
• Corruption limits the success of waste projects in the municipality. Many
projects that are “funded” by the local authorities receive from half to none of
the funding they are initially allotted (Chauvin, 2011).
These issues illustrate some of the ‘symptoms’ that have arisen as a result of the
nature of the SWM system in Todos Santos. The following sections explore these and
other ‘symptoms’, and – more importantly – the structure of the system creating
them from the many perspectives of the local community in order to develop a
better understanding of how best to move forward.
3.2 Methodology Traditional engineering approaches are centered on quantitative analysis and
technology. The ‘traditional engineer’ has been said to hold “a belief in an ability to
lead, based on qualities of technical expertise and rational decision-‐making not held
by the public at large” (Robbins, 2007, p. 99). This elitist perception of mental
71
superiority has lead traditional engineering approaches to become one-‐way
interactions focused on information transfer to the ‘idealistic, imprecise thinkers’ of
the general populace (Robbins, 2007). Such ‘top-‐down’ approaches, from the
government or international entities, have clearly failed to address the SWM issues
in Todos Santos in the past. It becomes increasingly evident that a methodological
approach centered on inclusivity, local ownership, and multiple legitimate
perspectives is essential to initiate change in the community. Qualitative methods
must complement traditional problem-‐solving, and expertise must be recognized as
collective; the knowledge of the engineer or scientist “is no longer the sole arbiter of
some eternal truth” (Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2003, p. 29). It is for these reasons that
this study uses a methodology grounded in complex, adaptive systems theory and
post-‐normal science; both schools of thought are driven by the need to deal with
complexity, and thus require the merging of qualitative methods with traditional
problem solving (see Figure 12 for a graphical representation of the methodology).
72
Figure 12. Methodology
3.2.1 Theoretical approach
This study is first framed by systems thinking, and in particular, complex adaptive
systems theory. It is in cases like that of the waste crisis in Todos Santos that it
becomes so evident that human systems – including political, social, financial, and
cultural – have a profound influence on natural systems. In turn, the degradation of
natural resources, which threatens human health and wellbeing in a number of
Theoretical Approach
Complex,AdaptiveSystems
Methodological Approach
Data Collection
SamplingMethods
Data Analysis
Community -Scale Maps
LeveragePoint
Analysis
Post-NormalScience
CausalMapping
Semi-StructuredInterviews
Quantitativeand
QualitativeAssessment
Case Study
QualitativeMethods
73
ways, makes it unmistakably apparent that ecological systems have enormous
impacts on human health. It is through such observations that researchers have
recognized human and ecological systems as elements of the same system (Berkes &
Folke, 1998; Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2005); any “delineation between them is
arbitrary and artificial” (Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2005, p. 158). It has also been
recognized that sustainable management of these complex, adaptive eco-‐social
systems must incorporate a wide variety of information from multiple, legitimate
perspectives (Checkland, 2000; Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993; Kay et al., 1999; Waltner-‐
Toews et al., 2003). The resulting data multiple perspectives provide are
quantitative and qualitative, subjective and complex.
It is this complexity, generated by a systems perspective, that caused this study to
be founded in the broader theory of ‘post-‐normal’ science. Post-‐normal science,
developed by Funtowics and Ravetz, is a new approach brought about by the
complexity of risk and environment policy issues (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993). It
moves away from the reductionism of the traditional problem-‐solving strategies of
classical science, applied science, and professional consultancy, which fail when
systems uncertainties or decision stakes are high. In post-‐normal science, an
“extended peer community” – a plurality of legitimate perspectives – share expert
knowledge (Funtowics & Ravets, 1993). Management is conducted collectively,
through anticipation, action, and adaptation (Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2003). In post-‐
normal science, “the criteria for good quality work do not merely reside in a
particular set of methods and tools, or even in particular successes or failures, but in
the collective learning and improved management that results” (Waltner-‐Toews et
al., 2003, p. 29). Post-‐normal approaches thus require a thorough understanding of
the context, and suggest that the role of the researcher is not to present decision-‐
makers with one single solution but a set of probable scenarios or narratives about
how the future might unfold. The SWM issues in Todos Santos are certainly post-‐
normal: the high complexity of managerial and technical aspects make uncertainties
high, and conflicting costs and benefits for a wide variety of stakeholders elevate
decision stakes.
74
3.2.2 Methodological Approach
3.2.2.1 Case Study Approach
Case studies have been used for decades as teaching and research tools in a variety
of disciplines. The more complex and contextualized the subject of research, the
more valuable this approach can be (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Thus it has gained
ground in disciplines that must consider historic dynamics and multiple
perspectives of natural and social systems, such as management studies,
engineering, community sociology, environmental sciences and planning sciences
(Scholz & Tietje, 2002). The approach is an empirical enquiry that investigates a
problem within its real-‐life context. Multiple mutually dependent variables must be
synthesized in order to understand the problem or investigate potential solutions.
(Scholz & Tietje, 2002). The approach entails three principal steps (Patton, 2002):
1. Assembling the raw case data, which consists of all the contextual
information specific to the case (interviews, observations, records or files,
media sources, etc.);
2. Constructing a case record, which involves condensing the raw data into an
organized, manageable, and accessible file; and
3. Composing a final case study narrative, which is a holistic, descriptive picture
or story that ensures all the information necessary to develop a thorough
understanding of the uniqueness of the case is accessible to the
reader/viewer.
A case study approach is an appropriate method to examine the SWM issues faced
by rapidly developing communities in Guatemala for a variety of reasons: case
studies aid in understanding real, complex problems that cannot be handled with
known analytical methods; support decision-‐making; and help to organize different
types of knowledge from different disciplinary or stakeholder perspectives (Scholz
& Tietje, 2002).
3.2.2.2 Qualitative Methods: Understanding complexity through narrative
Due to the complex nature of systems research, systems approaches often lead to
75
and rely heavily upon qualitative methods of inquiry. Additionally, having a systems
perspective can aid in both framing qualitative questions and making sense out of
qualitative data (Patton, 2002). Waltner-‐Toews et al. (2008, p. 38) point out that
“one cannot model complexity, but one can approach it using analogy and
narrative”. In the post-‐normal paradigm developed by Funtowicz and Ravetz
(1993), a new role been proposed for the scientist in decision making: no longer
does the scientist make “objective” predictions as the basis of decisions; the new
role requires the scientist to provide the community and decision makers alike with
“an appreciation, through narrative descriptions, of how the future might unfold”
(Kay et al., 1999, p. 728). Thus, researchers using systems approaches have
synthesized locally relevant information into context specific, coherent, collective
narratives, which are better able to capture the richness of possibilities than
traditional, reductionist approaches (see, for example, Kay et al. (1999); Waltner-‐
Toews et al. (2003); Waltner-‐Toews et al. (2005); Waltner-‐Toews et al. (2008)).
According to Zellmer, Allen, and Kesseboehmer (2006, p. 171), “narrative is the key
to dealing with complexity without compromise”. Waltner-‐Toews et al (2008)
believe constructing narratives is crucial to developing a “best understanding” of
complex systems.
Narratives are not concerned with identifying the objective “truth” of a situation.
They are displays of subjectivity; stories that explicitly state what the narrator
views as important (Zellmer et al., 2006). Narratives can provide qualitative and
quantitative understanding of many systemic aspects including the human context;
the structure of the system; feedback and autocatalytic loops; and what might
enable or disable such loops (Kay et al., 1999). In turn, this knowledge can inform
the community and decision makers about the system’s possible future states of
organization; the conditions under which these states might occur; the tradeoffs
that come with each state; suitable approaches that will allow the community to
adapt to new situations; and, “perhaps most importantly, the appropriate level of
confidence that the narrative deserves; that is our degree of uncertainty” (Kay et al.,
1999, p. 729). Essentially, narrative is used as the basis of management and
76
governance to learn, readjust, and adapt human activities while the eco-‐social
system evolves as one self-‐organizing entity (Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2008).
The complex context in which Todos Santos sits demands a methodology both
capable of dealing with complexity and strongly considerate of context and history
in all forms: social, cultural, political, economic, and ecological. The beauty of
narrative is its ability to capture the context of complex situations, often overlooked
in reductionist approaches, through an exploration of history. Many systems
thinkers have identified the importance of history when working with systems (see
Checkland (2000); Funtowicz and Ravetz (1993); Kay et al. (1999); Waltner-‐Toews
et al. (2005)). Indeed, Checkland (2000) has noted that the contents of the system
are the product of the history of the system itself.
The methodology used in this study takes advantage of the flexible nature of
narratives by developing them in semi-‐structured interviews to create a multi-‐
perspective system ‘meta-‐narrative’ rooted in local context and history.
3.2.2.3 Blended Assessment Methods and Problem-‐Solving Approach
While qualitative data is collected through narrative, this study employs an analysis
technique that blends quantitative and qualitative assessment and is founded in the
problem-‐solving approach of classical engineering. Qualitative analysis is used in
the amalgamation of individual participant narratives, and relationships identified
through qualitative data collection are quantified in order to determine key points
to intervene in the overarching system. The use of quantitative analysis was
employed to ensure leverage points that may be counterintuitive to the study
participants and the researcher are identified (see section 3.2.4.1 for details).
3.2.3 Data collection
3.2.3.1 Snowball and random purposeful sampling methods
A field trip to Todos Santos Cuchumatán was conducted in late August, 2011. The
recruitment of community members and waste management employees was
performed through a combination of the snowball method and random purposeful
77
sampling on an open invitation and volunteer basis. Recruitment took place over a
period of one month. A snowball process was initiated through academic and civil
society contacts with existing connections to the community. Random purposeful
sampling recruitment was carried out over the local radio and in the town center
through conversation. The radio announcement and verbal open invitations
informed all potential participants of the purpose of the study and the roles and
responsibilities involved with participation (e.g., participants’ rights, time
commitment, explanation of interview process, project outline). All interested
community members were contacted to arrange an interview. The recruited
participants comprised a geographically and demographically diverse array of
community members working in many areas, including waste management, local
business, municipal government, education, and homemaking. Sixty percent of the
participants were male and forty percent were female. Twenty percent were
considered ‘youth’ (i.e. age sixteen to nineteen). In total, twenty participants were
recruited.
3.2.3.2 Causal mapping
Waltner-‐Toews et al. (2003) have expanded the notion of narrative to include
diagrams and models. Each narrative must have a context in which it is told, and
such a context is provided by models that identify human systems as subsystems
nested within ecological systems (Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2003). Models can be useful
for integrating systemic depictions by local people with other kinds of knowledge
derived in other ways (Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2003). Checkland (2000) has found
that creating systems models as devices to explore a given situation has lead to
insights time after time. This study follows suit by exploring systemic SWM issues in
Todos Santos through narrative model building. Specifically, the main tools used in
this study are causal maps constructed at the individual and community levels.
Causal maps, also known as cognitive maps, are qualitative models of how a given
system functions (Fairweather, 2010; Özesmi & Özesmi, 2004). These maps consist
of variables defined by the mapper as important, which can be physical quantities or
abstract ideas, and the causal relationships between them (Özesmi & Özesmi, 2004).
78
Thus, causal maps visually explore complex cause-‐effect relationships through
discussion of principal issues of concern, in-‐depth brainstorming, and the pursuit of
connections between issues along multiple cause-‐effect chains. The outcome results
in two benefits: the complex relationships in waste management are demonstrated,
and root causes are brought to light. Once identified, root causes can offer potential
leverage points that can act as local action entry points. Actions based on a fuller
understanding of systemic relationships and root causes increase the likelihood of a
sustainable, long-‐term systemic improvement.
The flexible, user-‐defined nature of the causal maps also prohibits a standard
‘cookbook’ approach from developing. Each causal map is a unique representation
of perspective; information is presented as the collaborator prefers. The flexible
nature of the causal map is critical, as no single tool or approach can adequately
accommodate the large diversity of perspectives between individuals or cases. The
causal map approach provides a robust initiating framework while allowing for
adaptation in the field to accommodate ground-‐level realities.
Participatory causal mapping – i.e., cognitive mapping that shows variables and
causal relationships as defined by stakeholders, not the researcher – was first used
by Axelrod in 1976 (Axelrod, 1976). A wide variety of studies have used the
technique since to examine decision-‐making and perceptions of complex social
systems (see Özesmi & Özesmi, (2004) for a review of such studies). Two categories
of causal maps exist: the first depicts relationships in an entirely qualitative manner,
and the second numerically assesses the strength of relationships between variables
(Fairweather, 2010). The former is widely used in group mapping exercises where
numerous people work together to create one large map for problem-‐solving and
goal achievement purposes (Fairweather, 2010). The latter is more commonly
employed in approaches that compare or amalgamate multiple individual causal
maps for decision-‐making purposes and to ensure solutions are acceptable to the
public (Fairweather, 2010; Özesmi & Özesmi, 2004). This study employs the latter
form in order to identify the similarities and differences among the perspectives of
different stakeholder groups, and to obtain the insights of those who might be
79
unable to attend a group meeting or may be less likely to voice an opinion in a larger
group due to power relationships among group members.
3.2.3.3 Semi-‐structured interview process
A narrative style, semi-‐structured interview process was used, which was outlined
in an interview procedure document prior to data collection (see Appendix A).
Interview prompts were based on the themes presented in this document, but
varied in order and wording. The semi-‐structured, narrative style of the interview
targeted SWM issues in Todos Santos, but allowed conversation to flow freely and
be directed by participants to areas within their own comfort zone and interests.
During the interview process, participants constructed individual causal maps from
the discussion. Following the methodology laid out by Özesmi & Özesmi (2004), the
causal mapping process began with participants describing all the variables in the
SWM system, and then identifying the causal connections between variables. This
construction process was conducted roughly according to the methodology laid out
by Vennix (1996) (see Figure 13). Throughout this process, the strength of
relationships between variables was discussed as being weak, medium, or strong.
These qualitative perspectives were then translated into numerical ratings of 1, 2,
and 3, respectively. Causal maps were reviewed with each participant at the end of
the interview process to ensure the information they shared was graphically
depicted according to their perspective. Interviews ranged in length from 30
minutes to 2 hours. With the consent of the individual participants, each interview
was audio-‐recorded for reviewing purposes.
80
Figure 13. Participatory Model Building (adapted from Vennix, 1996)
3.2.4 Data analysis
3.2.4.1 Group maps
Individual causal maps can be augmented and additively superimposed to yield a
group causal map that may be a better representation of the system in question
(Kosko, 1988; Özesmi & Özesmi, 2004). Larger groups of experts provide more
reliable and accurate information, and stakeholder maps can provide information
not captured at the individual scale (Özesmi & Özesmi, 2004); in this case the whole
is greater than the sum of its parts. In addition, a variety of multi-‐stakeholder maps,
amalgamated according to existing social groups, can provide informative
comparative data. Indeed, Özesmi & Özesmi (2004, p. 50) have found that “by
examining the structure of maps we can determine how stakeholders view the
Causes Problem Variable Consequences
Step 1: Identify Problem Variable
Step 2: Adding Causes
Step 3: Adding Consequences
Step 4: Identify feedback loops
X
X
X
OO
OO
OO
OO
O O
O O
O
O O
O O
O
X
OO
OO
O O
O O
O
O O
O O
O
81
system, for example whether they perceive a lot of forcing functions affecting the
system which are out of their control, or whether they see the system as hierarchical
or more democratic... If some groups perceive more relationships, they will have
more options available to change things. Thus these groups may be a catalyst for
change”.
In Todos Santos, women and youth generally play little-‐to-‐no role in SWM affairs,
and it became clear throughout the interview process that the voices of these
marginalized groups could contribute to SWM developments, and should thus be
explicitly heard. Therefore, four synthesized group causal maps depicting the
perspectives of men, women, youth, and the community at large were constructed
after all individual causal maps were completed and reviewed by participants.
These group maps allow for a broader, synthesized perspective of the SWM issues in
Todos Santos, and for differentiation of perceptions of SWM problems, causes,
consequences, system structures, and community needs across existing social
groups.
3.2.4.2 Leverage point analysis
Leverage points are key places to intervene in a system where a small change can
lead to a large shift in system behaviour (Meadows, 2008). The complexity of
systems leads to surprising behaviour, meaning leverage points are often
counterintuitive. Meadows (2008) compiled a ‘work-‐in-‐progress’ list of leverage
points, from the least to the most effective at instigating systemic change:
• Constants and parameters (e.g. subsidies, taxes)
• Buffers
• Stock-‐and-‐flow structures (i.e. physical arrangement of systems)
• Delays
• Balancing feedback loops
• Reinforcing feedback loops
• Information flows (i.e. who does and does not have access to information)
• System rules (e.g. constraints, incentives, punishments)
82
• Self-‐organization (i.e. the power to add or change system structure)
• Goals (i.e. the purpose or function of the system)
• Paradigms
• Transcending paradigms
From first to last, these leverage points are also increasingly difficult to access
(Meadows, 2008).
In this study, the system structure is examined in order to identify key points to
intervene in the system. This examination is carried out by assessing the visual
representation of the system structure depicted in the group maps, and by
numerically categorizing the connectedness of variables in causal matrices.
Additionally, relative importance of variables, identified qualitatively in the
interview process, is quantified in the four group maps by sizing the variables
according to the number of participants that expressed them. This was done in
order to provide the reader with a visual representation of dominant themes of
concern in the community, and in order to aid the researcher in identifying leverage
points that may be able to impact issues affecting a broad spectrum of community
members.
3.2.4.2.1 Causal Matrices
Building a causal matrix, also known as an impact matrix, is a technique that has
been used by a variety of researchers to quantify and synthesize causal mapping
data (see Fairweather, 2010; Özesmi & Özesmi, 2004; Scholz & Tietje, 2002). In this
technique, as described by Scholz and Tietje (2002), the strength of causal
relationships between variables is coded with a number and entered into a variable
matrix. Only direct impacts of one variable on another are considered; indirect
causes are excluded. The impact of each variable on the others is entered and
summed in the last column and row, producing a number that represents the
variable’s activity, (i.e. impact on all other variables), and passivity or sensitivity (i.e.
how much other variables impact it) (Scholz & Tietje, 2002). Table 2 demonstrates
this concept.
83
Table 2. Example of a causal matrix (adapted from Scholz & Tieje, 2002)
Variable A
Variable B
Variable C
Variable D
Activity
Variable A
0 3 0 3
Variable B 0
2 2 4
Variable C 1 0
0 1
Variable D 0 2 0
2
Passivity 1 2 5 2
In this study, the strength of causal relationships, described by participants
qualitatively throughout the interview process, was quantified into three categories:
1 = low strength, 2 = medium strength, and 3 = high strength. Fairweather (2010)
indicates that using a score of three is effective at demonstrating the importance of
variables and connections without overwhelming the reader. Qualitative analysis
was used to determine the strength of each relationship based on importance as
indicated by study participants, and based on the number of participants that
discussed them. Each variable was entered into a matrix whereby the row variable
was assigned to impact the column variable. Activity and passivity values were
calculated for each variable in each of the four group maps.
3.2.4.2.2 Causal Grid
These activity and passivity values are then plotted on a causal grid, which identifies
the variables as active, ambivalent, buffering, or passive (see Figure 14) (Scholz &
Tietje, 2002).
84
Figure 14. Example of a causal grid (adapted from Scholz & Tietje, 2002)
Active variables have a strong influence on the system, receive a low influence from
the system, and therefore act as context or control factors (e.g. Variable A in Figure
14). Ambivalent variables have a strong influence on the system, receive a strong
influence from the system, and are therefore highly embedded and considered
critical or sensitive factors (e.g. Variable B). Buffering variables have a low influence
on the system, receive a low influence from the system, and thus are insignificant
factors (e.g. Variable D). Finally, passive variables have a low influence on the
system, receive a high influence from the system, and are therefore considered
indicator factors (e.g. Variable C). The lines separating the quadrants fall on the
mean activity and passivity values (Scholz & Tietje, 2002).
3.3 Results The group maps represent the SWM system from the perspectives of each group
sampled (men, women, and youth) and from the perspective of the community at
large. The main focus was on the importance of variables, indicated by the number
Active Ambivalent
Buffer Passive
Activity
Sensitivity/Passivity
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
Variable A
Variable B
Variable CVariable D
0
Mean Activity
Mea
n Pa
ssiv
ity
85
of participants considering them to be critical and by the sum of the average weights
given to arrows entering and leaving the variables, and the balancing and
reinforcing feedback loops that make up the system structure. A group map
depicting all variables discussed would be difficult to display and interpret, as many
variables and connections would have a very low importance after the averaging
process. Therefore, variables with very low importance and relationships that
received very low average scores were eliminated. However, some variables and
relationships on the group maps were mentioned by only one participant, yet were
not eliminated in the amalgamation process due to the importance of the variable or
relationship, as described by the participant, or the critical insight they supplied, as
interpreted by the researcher. Inevitably, these system components do not feature
strongly in the system structure, but provide a contextual richness that would
otherwise be lost. Variables depicted on participants’ maps that were worded
slightly differently but represented the same concept were amalgamated. For ease
of interpretation, variables were organized to have the minimum number of
crossing arrows.
3.3.1 Group map 1: Men’s perspectives
Figure 15 shows the SWM system from the perspective of the adult male
participants. This causal map demonstrates the importance of each variable and the
strength of the connections between variables by size. At the core of the map is the
problem variable: the adequacy of SWM. This variable was considered critical by all
participants, and has the strongest connections with other factors.
86
Figure 15. Group map 1: Men's perspectives
Other top variables include health and illness, economic income and economic
capital, environmental systems and degradation, and interest or understanding
about the waste issue. Secondary variables include population growth, land
availability, education, funding for SWM, municipal interest in other things,
preoccupation with other community needs, life support systems, and people
throwing waste in the streets.
Health
EnvironmentalSystems
Funding forSWM
Plastic Quantity
EconomicCapital
Waste Quantity
Health and Interest in SWM Loop
Waste in the Streets Loop
Environment and Population Loop
Waste Quantity Loop
Mexican Contraband
Need to Rely onPre-Packaged GoodsDiabetes
Influx of JunkFood
Plastic is Cheap
Alcoholism andDomestic Violence
Preoccupation withOther Community
Needs
Generation Rate
Preservation ofCulture and Language
PopulationGrowth
Remittances
Tourism
Proximity ofDump andAbattoir to
Town Center
Locations for People toResponsibly Dispose of
Waste
Understanding of Howto Manage Waste
Time Passing withNo Change
Interest in Cultureand Language
Desire forModern Culture
Increase inConsumption
People ThrowWaste in the
Streets
Well-PreparedPolitical Figures
Municipal (andNational) Organization
Coordination withLocal Businesses
WidespreadParticipation
Accessibility ofEducation
Education
Valuing Womenand Youth
Inclusion of Youth inIdea or Solution
Generation
Generations ofSubsistenceFarmers withLittle Money
Projects that are"Owned" By the
Community
People areMaterialistic
Desire to GetAbove the
Poverty Line
Interest in Projects thatdo not Generate Money
Interest/ Understandingabout the Waste Issue
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
-
+
-
Municipal Interestin Other Things
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
LandAvailability
Market forRecyclable Material
Adequacy ofSWM
+
-
+
Expenditures
Degradation
Illness +
+
+
-
+
Life SupportSystems
+
-
Recycling
Proper Location toConstruct SWM
Facilities+
-
-
+
-
MunicipalExpenditures
Municipal BudgetContribution
+
+
+
-
-
+
Influx of Plastic
+
+ +
EconomicIncome
+
+
+
+
-
Reduction Rate
+
+
LEGEND
B
B
B
1 participant
2 participants
3-4 participants5-6 participants
Low
RelationshipStrengths:
Medium
High
Variable Sizing:
7-8 participants
9-10 participants
+
STOCKFlow Rate
Reinforcing Feedback Loop
Balancing Feedback Loop
Other Elements:
87
The structure of the system is founded upon one balancing and three reinforcing
feedback loops. The Health and Interest in SWM Loop is strong, while the other
three loops are of medium strength.
While the education variable does not participate in a feedback loop, it greatly
influences several of them. Education influences the variable
‘Interest/Understanding about the Waste Issue’ through a lack of waste education,
and a lack of education about cleanliness and the importance of focusing on health.
It also influences this variable through a string of other variables that impact how
much projects are “owned” by the community. Concerns about saving for an
education preoccupy the community and draw away from the waste issue through
‘Preoccupations with Other Community Needs’. Education about the community’s
traditions impacts the level of interest in the traditional language and practices. As
knowledge of and interest in traditions decreases, the community, and particularly
the youth, are more strongly influenced by and interested in modern culture and
consumerism. This in turn decreases the community’s interest in preserving
traditions and culture, which are large attractions for tourists.
3.3.2 Men’s Causal Grid
Conducting a causal grid analysis resulted in the identification of four variables that may act as critical leverage points or depict the context (active), four variables that may act as indicators (passive), twenty highly sensitive variables (ambivalent), and eighteen negligible factors (buffer) (see
Figure 16 and Table 3).
88
Figure 16. Causal Grid 1: Men's perspectives
Table 3. Men's causal grid results
Active Ambivalent
Buffer Passive
Activity
Sensitivity/Passivity
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7 8 9 10 16 17
8
9
10
11
12
Accessibility ofEducation
Adequacy of SWM
Alcoholism andDomestic Violence
Coordination withLocal Business
Degradation
Desire forModernCulture
Desire to Get AbovePoverty Line
Diabetes
EconomicCapital
Economic Income
Education
EnvironmentalSystems
Funding forSWM
Generations ofSubsistence Farmers
Health
Illness
Inclusion ofYouth
Influx ofJunk Food
Influx of Plastic
Interest in Culture/Language
Interest inProjects that
do no GenerateMoney
Interest/Understanding about the
Waste Issue
Life SupportSystems
Market forRecycled Goods
Mexican Contraband
MunicipalExpenditures
MunicipalOrganization
Need to Rely onPre-Packaged Goods
People are Materialistic
People Throw Wastein the Streets
Plastic is Cheap
Plastic Quantity
Population Growth
Preoccupationwith OtherCommunity
Needs
Preservation of Culture
Projects that are"Owned" by the
Community
Proper Location toConstruct SWM
Facilities Recycling
Remittances
Time Passing withNo Change
Tourism
UnderstandingHow to Manage
Waste
Valuing Womenand Youth
Waste Generation Rate
Waste Quantity
Waste Reduction Rate
Well-Prepared Leaders
WidespreadParticipation
\/\/\/\/
89
Active Variables Passive Variables Ambivalent Variables
• Education • Remittances • Market for
Recyclable Material
• Projects that are “Owned” by the Community
• Widespread Participation
• Desire for Modern Culture
• Tourism • Plastic Quantity
• Adequacy of SWM • Environmental Systems • Environmental
Degradation • Recycling • Population Growth • Proper Location to
Construct SWM Facilities • Municipal Expenditures • Life Support Systems • Economic Income • Waste Generation Rate • Influx of Plastic • People Throw Waste in the
Streets • Interest in Projects that Do
Not Generate Money • Illness • Funding for SWM • Economic Capital • Waste Quantity • Preoccupation with Other
Community Needs • Health • Interest/Understanding
about the Waste Issue
3.3.3 Group map 2: Women’s perspectives
At the core of the map representing the adult female perspectives of the SWM
system (see Figure 17) is again the problem variable, adequacy of SWM. This variable
was also considered critical by all participants, and has the strongest relationships
with other variables. The other top variables on the women’s map are health and
education, followed by resource access, illness, environmental systems and
degradation, and proximity of the dump and abattoir to the town center. Secondary
variables include other decreases in wellbeing, economic income and capital,
women’s issues, women’s participation, women have to work many jobs and have
little time, plastic influx and quantity, and people throw waste in the streets.
90
Figure 17. Group map 2: Women's perspectives
3.3.4 Women’s Causal Grid
Six reinforcing feedback loops make up the foundation of the system structure, all of
which are of medium strength except the Environment and Health Loop and the
Contamination and Health Loop. Women’s Causal Grid
The results of the women’s causal grid analysis identifies variables that may act as critical leverage points or depict the context (active), six variables that may act as indicators (passive), sixteen variables that are highly sensitive
EconomicCapital
PlasticQuantity
EnvironmentalSystems
Health
Quantity ofWaste
Youth and Tradition Loop
Education and Poverty Loop
Contamination and Health Loop
Waste in the Streets Loop Proximity ofDump to theTown Center Environment and Health Loop
Economic Income Loop
Adequacy ofSWM
+
-
Town Aesthetics
Tourism
Preoccupation withOther Issues
++
EconomicIncome
Expenditure
+
Illness
ResourceAccess
+
Other Decreases inWellbeing
-
-
Youth DiscussingAnything of Value
Youth are a DifferentGeneration: Interest in
Consumerism andModernization
Location for People toResponsibly Put Waste
People ThrowWaste in the
Streets
Educated Youth
Poverty
Education
MaintainingTraditions
-
+
-
Generation Rate
Influx ofPlastic
Recycling
-
+
-
+
-
-
Degradation+
+
+
Increasein JunkFood
+
Population Growth
Land Availability
Ability to Survive asSubsistence Farmers
Women Have to WorkMany Jobs and Have
Little Time
-
-
+
+
+
Female Leaders
Patriarchal Society
Women's Issues
Waste as aPolitical Priority
Women'sParticipation
Culture of WasteBurning
-
+
++
+
-
-
-
+
-
-
++
Men Leaving forOther Countries
+
+
+
Preserving Respect
+
-
Increasing Attitudesof "Disposable"
Self-Centeredness
+
+
Contaminationin Schools and
the Home
+
-
LocalBusinessSuccess
The Dumpis Full
+
-
+
+
-
+
LEGEND
B
B
B
1 participant
2 participants
3 participants
4 participants
Low
RelationshipStrengths:
Medium
High
Variable Sizing:
5 participants
6 participants
Corruption
-
STOCK
Reinforcing Feedback Loop
Balancing Feedback Loop
Other Elements:
Flow RateReduction Rate
+
91
(ambivalent), and sixteen variables that are negligible (buffer) (see Figure 18 and
Table 4).
Figure 18. Causal grid 2: Women’s perspectives
Active Ambivalent
Buffer Passive
Activity
Sensitivity/Passivity
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7 8 9 10 15 16
8
9
10
11
\/\/\/\/
11
Ability to Survive asSubsistence Farmers
Adequacy of SWM
Contamination inSchools and the Home
Culture ofBurning Waste
Degradation
Economic Capital
Economic Income
Educated Youth
Education
Environmental Systems
FemaleLeaders
Waste Generation Rate
Health
Illness
Increase in Junk Food
Increasing"Disposable" Attitude
Influx of Plastic
Land AvailabilityLocal Business Success
Location for People toResponsibly Put Waste
Maintaining TraditionsMen Leaving forOther Countries
Other Decreases inWellbeing
Patriarchal Society
People ThrowWaste in the
Streets
Plastic Quantity
Population Growth
Poverty
Preoccupationwith Other
Issues
Preserving Respect
Proximity of Dump andAbattoir to Town Center
Quantity ofWaste
Recycling
Resource Access
Self-Centeredness
The Dump is Full
Tourism
TownAesthetics
Waste as aPolitical Priority
Women Work ManyJobs, Have Little Time
Women's Issues
Women'sParticipation
Youth's Interest inConsumerism/ Modern
Culture
Youth DiscussingAnything of Value
Corruption
92
Table 4. Women's causal grid results
Active Variables Passive Variables Ambivalent Variables
• Patriarchal Society
• Educated Youth • Youth’s Interest
in Consumerism/ Modern Culture
• Maintaining traditions
• Women’s Issues • Men Leaving for
Other Countries
• Women’s Participation
• Female Leaders • Tourism • Quantity of
Waste • Influx of Plastic • Plastic Quantity
• Adequacy of SWM • Education • Environmental Systems • Environmental
Degradation • Women Work Many Jobs,
Have Little Time • Population Growth • Economic Income • Waste Generation Rate • People Throw Waste in the
Streets • Illness • Economic Capital • Preoccupation with Other
Community Needs • Health • Town Aesthetics • Resource Access • Contamination in Schools
and the Home
3.3.5 Group map 3: Youth’s perspectives
The causal map depicting the perspectives of the youth participants (see Figure 19)
is centered on the adequacy of SWM, which was discussed by all participants and
has the strongest relationships with other variables. The youth identified 4 other
top variables: environmental systems, degradation, family wellbeing, and education.
Secondary variables include health and illness; issues of women and youth;
contamination; youth involvement; predominantly youth throw waste in the streets;
an appropriately located sanitary landfill; and economic income and capital.
93
Figure 19. Group map 3: Youth's perspectives
The SWM system as depicted from the perspectives of youth contains three
reinforcing feedback loops and two balancing feedback loops. The Youth and
Culture Loop and Waste Generation Loop are of low strength, while all other loops
are of medium strength.
Waste Quantity
Adequacy ofSWM
-
Generation
Preservation ofCulture and Language
Youth Valuingthe Town
+
+
-
Predominantly YouthThrow Waste in the
Streets
Youth that are Concernedwith Waste or Conscious of
their Impact
YouthInvolvement
Education
Town Aesthetics(Sight and Smell)
EnvironmentalSystems
Degradation
Tourism
FamilyWellbeing
Community Wellbeing
AuthoritiesRegulating Waste
Professional,Educated Leaders
Opportunities forChildren/Youth to Study
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
-
Youth and Culture Loop
+
+
+
Tourism Loop 1
Health and Education Loop
Waste Generation Loop
Contamination-
+
HealthResource Access
Illness+
+
AuthoritiesValuing Youth
+
Corruption
-
EconomicCapital
EconomicIncome
Expenditure
+
+
Youth/Women'sIssues
Alcoholism andDomestic Violence
+
-
Interest in OtherProjects
-
Distant, SanitaryLandfill
LandAvailability
+
+
RecyclingProgram
+
LEGEND
B
B
B
1 participant
2 participants
3 participants
4 participants
Low
RelationshipStrengths:
Medium
High
Variable Sizing:+
STOCK
Reinforcing Feedback Loop
Balancing Feedback Loop
Other Elements:
Flow Rate
Tourism Loop 2
94
3.3.6 Youth’s Causal Grid
The results of the leverage point analysis produced a causal grid from the
perspective of youth. This grid identifies six variables the youth participants believe
may act as critical leverage points or depict the context (active), one variable that
may act as an indicator (passive), fourteen that are highly sensitive (ambivalent),
and twelve that are negligible (buffer) (see Figure 20 and Table 5).
Figure 20. Causal grid 3: Youth's Perspectives
Table 5. Youth's causal grid results
Active Ambivalent
Buffer Passive
Activity
Sensitivity/Passivity
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7
Town Aesthetics EnvironmentalSystems
Degradation
Tourism
Corruption
AuthoritiesRegulating
Waste
ProfessionalEducated Leaders
Predominantly YouthThrow Waste in the Streets
Youth That areConcerned with
Waste or Consciousof their Impact
YouthInvolvement
AuthoritiesValuing Youth
Waste QuantityWaste Generation
Contamination
Illness
Economic Income
Economic Capital
Expenditure
Education
Youth Valuing The Town
Health
Resource Access
FamilyWellbeing
CommunityWellbeing
Preservation ofCulture andLanguageOpportunities for
Children to Study
\/\/\/
13
Adequacy ofSWM
Interest in OtherProjects
Land Availability
RecyclingProgram
Distant Landfill
8 9 14
Issues of Youth/Women
95
Active Variables Passive Variables Ambivalent Variables
• Education • Issues of
Youth/Women • Land Availability • Opportunities for
Children to Study • Economic Capital
• Family Wellbeing
• Adequacy of SWM • Environmental Systems • Environmental
Degradation • Contamination • Youth that are Concerned
with Waste or Conscious of their Impact
• Tourism • Preservation of Culture
and Language • Resource Access • Town Aesthetics • Waste Quantity • Youth Involvement • Authorities Regulating
Waste • Illness • Health
3.3.7 Group map 4: Community perspectives
The three causal maps representing the perspectives of men, women and youth
were amalgamated into an integrated community causal map (see Figure 21).
Adequacy of SWM falls in the center as the most connected variable. The other top
variables are health, environmental systems and degradation, illness/other
decreases in wellbeing, and education. Secondary variables include economic
income and capital, the proximity of the unregulated dump and abattoir to the town
center, interest/understanding about the waste issue, land availability, plastic
quantity, recycling, funding for SWM, tourism, and resource access. The
amalgamated map has five reinforcing and two balancing feedback loops. The
strength of relationships between variables was determined by using weighted
averages of connections depicted by the three perspective groups. Therefore, the
four youth participants had less of an impact on relationship strengths than the six
adult female or ten adult male participants. However, many variables mentioned
specifically in discussions with youth (and women) were maintained in the
amalgamated community-‐wide map to maintain a full spectrum of perspectives.
96
Figure 21. Group map 4: Integrated community causal map
3.3.8 Community Causal Grid
The Tourism; Education and Poverty; Youth and Tradition; and Environment and
Population loops are of low strength. Targeting these loops will have a fairly low
Health
EnvironmentalSystems
Funding forSWM
PlasticQuantity
EconomicCapital
WasteQuantity
Health and Interest in SWM Loop
Waste in the Streets Loop
Environment and Population Loop
Waste Quantity Loop
Reliance onPre-Packaged Goods
Influx of JunkFood
Alcoholism andDomestic Violence
Preoccupation withOther Community
Needs
Generation Rate
PopulationGrowth
Remittances
Tourism
Proximity ofUnregulatedDump andAbattoir to
Town Center
Locations for People toResponsibly Dispose of
WasteKnowledge of
How to ManageWaste
Interest in Cultureand Language
Desire forModern Culture
Increase inConsumption
People ThrowWaste in the
Streets
Well-PreparedLeaders
Municipal (andNational) Organization
Coordination withLocal Businesses
Education
Participation ofWomen and Youth
Projects that are"Owned" By the Whole
Community
Interest in Projects thatdo not Generate Money
Interest/ Understandingabout the Waste Issue
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
Municipal Interestin Other Things
-
-
+
+
LandAvailability
Market forRecyclable Material
Adequacy ofSWM
+
-
+
Expenditures
Degradation
Illness/Decrease inWellbeing
+
+
+
-
+
Life SupportSystems
+
Recycling
Proper Location toConstruct SWM
Facilities
+
-
-
+
-
MunicipalExpenditures
Municipal BudgetContribution
+
+
+
-
-
+
Influx of Plastic
+ +
EconomicIncome
+
+
+
+
Reduction Rate
+
Maintaining Traditions,Culture, and Language
Youth are a DifferentGeneration: Interest in
Consumerism and ModernCulture
Youth DiscussingAnything of Value
-
-
+
Youth and Tradition Loop
Educated Youth
Poverty
-Education and Poverty Loop
Women Have to WorkMany Jobs and Have
Little Time
Female Leaders
Issues of Womenand Youth
-
+
-
-
+
+
+
-
ResourceAccess +
Increasing Attitudesof "disposable"
+
+
+ +
Corruption
-
+
+ +
+
LEGEND
B
B
B
1-3 participants4-6 participants7-9 participants
10-12 participants
Low
RelationshipStrengths:
Medium
High
Variable Sizing:
13-15 participants16-18 participants19-20 participants
TownAesthetics
+-
+
Valuing Womenand Youth
-
+
+
+
+
STOCK
Reinforcing Feedback LoopBalancing Feedback Loop
Other Elements:
FlowRate
Tourism Loop
97
impact on the system. On the other hand, the Waste Quantity; Waste in the Streets;
and Health and Interest in SWM loops are of medium strength. Targeting variables
within these loops will have a larger impact on the system. The leverage point
analysis of the community-‐wide map revealed the aggregated community
perspective on which variables can act as context or critical leverage factors
(active), which can act as indicator factors (passive), which will likely act as
sensitive factors (ambivalent), and which variables are negligible (buffer) (see
Figure 22 and Table 6).
98
Figure 22. Causal grid 4: Integrated community perspectives
Active Ambivalent
Buffer Passive
Activity
Sensitivity/Passivity
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7 8 9 10 11
8
9
Adequacy of SWM
12 13
Plastic is Cheap
Female Leaders
Increasing Attitudesof "Disposable"
PovertyCorruption
Alcoholism andDomestic Violence
Increase inConsumption
Influx of Junk Food Interest in Cultureand Language
Knowledge of Howto Manage Waste
Need to Rely onPre-Packaged Goods
Waste Reduction Rate
Youth DiscussingAnything of Value
Interest in Projects thatdo not Generate Money
Life Support SystemsMunicipal Expenditures
Projects that are"Owned" By the
Community
Resource Access
Locations for People toResponsibly Dispose of Waste
Desire for Modern Culture
Economic Capital
Educated Youth
Funding forSWM
Market forRecyclable Material
Municipal Organization
PlasticQuantity
Preoccupation withOther Community
Needs
Remittances
Well-Prepared Leaders
Women have to WorkMany Jobs and Have
Little Time
Town Aesthetics
Tourism
Economic IncomeHealth
Issues of Womenand Youth Land Availability
Maintaining Traditions,Culture, and Language Municipal Budget Contribuiton
People ThrowWaste in the
Streets
Proper Location toConstruct SWM Facilities
Proximity of Dumpand Abattoir toTown Center
RecyclingWaste Quantity
Youth are a DifferentGeneration: Interest in
Consumerism and ModernCulture
Valuing Womenand Youth
Participation ofWomen and
Youth
Influx of Plastic
Interest/Understandingabout the Waste
IssueMunicipal Interest in
Other Things
Population Growth
EnvironmentalSystems
WasteGeneration Rate
Illness/ Decrease inWellbeing
EnvironmentalDegradation
Coordination withLocal Businesses
Education
10
99
Table 6. Community-‐wide causal grid results
Active Variables Passive Variables Ambivalent Variables
• Education • Population
Growth • Municipal
Interest in Other Things
• Maintaining Traditions, Culture, and Language
• Issues of Women and Youth
• Youth are a Different Generation: Interest in Consumerism and Modern Culture
• Valuing Women and Youth
• Youth Discussing Anything of Value
• Tourism • Funding for SWM • Plastic Quantity • Preoccupation
with Other Community Needs
• Adequacy of SWM • Health • Environmental Systems • Environmental
Degradation • Economic Capital • Interest/Understanding
about the Waste Issue • Influx of Plastic • Participation of Women
and Youth • Proximity of Dump and
Abattoir to Town Center • Proper Location to
Construct SWM Facilities • Municipal Budget
Contribution • Recycling Land Availability • Economic Income • People Throw Waste in the
Streets • Waste Quantity
3.4 Discussion The group causal maps are local representations of a complex, adaptive eco-‐social
system that depict a variety of environmental, economic, and social factors. It is
important to note that these representations do no depict absolute characteristics
and conditions, but rather those that have been experienced or observed by
participants at some point. Therefore, the reader should be aware that these causal
maps act as tools to better understand the functioning of the SWM system, not as
representations of the definitive, “true” structure and inner workings of the system.
In this light, the following sections explore the significance of the systemic aspects
identified through narrative-‐based causal mapping, including the human context;
the functioning of balancing and reinforcing feedback loops; the overall structure of
the system; and what might dampen or disable reinforcing feedback loops and
100
therefore encourage change. For brevity’s sake, only the feedback loops of particular
importance are discussed; see Appendix B for a full discussion of all feedback loops
in each causal map.
3.4.1 Men’s causal map and grid
The adult male participants were primarily focused on economic aspects of the
SWM system, and much less focused on family wellbeing than other groups. This
result is fairly unsurprising as traditional gender roles that place men in the
workplace and women in the home are prevalent in Todos Santos. This result did,
however, provide information on the human context in which these participants
placed themselves.
In the men’s causal map, the feedback loop with the most potential for instigating
change is the reinforcing Health and Interest in SWM Loop, which is fairly strong,
containing strength 3 relationships all along its length. Leverage points impacting
this area of the system may have a greater impact on improving the adequacy of
SWM than leverage points targeting other feedback loops. This loop demonstrates
the reinforcing effects of poor health on poor SWM. Inadequate SWM has caused the
dump and abattoir to be located in close proximity to the center of town. This has
created a contaminated environment in which vectors, including household pets,
can live in the dump and access human spaces. These spaces include not only
households and businesses but also the local market where fresh meat and produce
are sold to people living within a wide radius of town. Resulting poor health causes
inhabitants to be too preoccupied to deal with other problems. Due to a poor health
system, medical attention comes at a cost. Therefore, obtaining funds to pay medical
bills becomes a greater priority, meaning poor health decreases people’s interest in
projects that will not generate a source of income. Since dealing with waste is not
seen as a profitable venture, people have little interest in the issue. Low
understanding of what causes the waste issue and what effects it has on the
population make it a low priority for inhabitants, who then put little pressure on the
municipality to deal with it relative to other issues such as health, education, and
101
construction projects that will increase income. Therefore the municipality has little
budget left to contribute to SWM funding, which decreases the adequacy of SWM.
The adult male participants constructed a system structure containing only one
balancing loop, the Environment and Population Loop, to counteract three
reinforcing ones. While this loop promisingly appears to dampen the ill effects of
population growth on SWM adequacy, its strength is fairly low due to the medium
strength connection between tourism and economic income. In reality, regardless of
increasing environmental degradation, the population has been increasing as a
result of economic income from other sources, such as remittances from migrant
workers in the United States. It therefore can only act as a true balancing loop if
tourism becomes a larger source of local economic income.
Since the only balancing loop is considerably weak, the overall structure of the SWM
system as depicted by the adult male participants is dominated by self-‐enhancing
reinforcing loops that are leading to exponential deterioration and could lead to
runaway collapse over time. Missing or very weak information flows, such as the
effects of throwing waste in the streets or low concern about the waste issue on
commonly shared resources and human health, are negatively impacting the system.
The men’s causal grid identified four active variables that may be points to
intervene or simply contextual factors: education, remittances, market for
recyclable material, and projects that are “owned” by the community. The large
economic contribution to the community in the form of remittances is certainly a
context factor in which the system sits. The lack of a market for recyclable material
is also considered a context factor, as it would be quite challenging to target. The
remaining two active variables, education and projects that are “owned” by the
community, were regarded as “solution” variables by participants, indicating they
may indeed prove to be excellent areas to target for change.
From the men’s perspectives, variables that are likely to act as indicator variables
include widespread participation (i.e. women, youth, and local businesses) in SWM
102
strategies, a decreased desire for modern culture, increased tourism, and a
decreased plastic quantity entering the waste stream.
The majority of variables that were identified as highly embedded in the system and
therefore difficult to target directly were unsurprising, such as environmental
degradation, health, and of course the adequacy of SWM. However, a few variables
that many male participants felt should be targeted directly ended up being too
entwined in the system to truly act as active variables once the system structure
emerged. These variables included funding for SWM, economic capital, and
interest/understanding about the SWM issue.
3.4.2 Women’s causal map and grid
The adult female participants were primarily focused on health, cleanliness, and
family wellbeing. Again, traditional gender roles likely play a part in these concerns.
Women are expected to be the “cleaners” of their realms (homes, workspaces, etc.),
and were therefore more concerned about contamination in the community than
the majority of the male participants. Women also expressed more concern about
other forms of wellbeing, such as spirituality and positive relationships, than the
male participants, and about the wellbeing of younger generations.
The adult female participants constructed a system structure containing only
reinforcing loops, indicating they also perceive the overall structure of the system to
be on a deteriorating spiral that may lead to runaway collapse.
Three feedback loops can potentially be targeted for interventions from the
women’s perspectives. The first is the Environment and Health Loop, which is a
reinforcing feedback loop that demonstrates how environmental degradation, such
as the pollution of water, soil, and air, impacts health by increasing illness and
decreasing other forms of wellbeing. This includes spiritual wellbeing, which is
founded on a strong connection to nature for many Todos Santeros, and a sense of
community wellbeing. As inhabitants become preoccupied with their own health or
the health of their families, they have less time and resources to tackle the adequacy
of SWM. This loop is connected by high-‐strength relationships all along its length.
103
However, all variables within this feedback loop are highly embedded in the system,
and would be difficult to target directly. This loop should therefore be dampened
indirectly by targeting variables that are not in the loop but have a strong influence
on it.
The second loop that can be targeted for systemic interventions is the
Contamination and Health Loop, which shows how the proximity of the dump and
abattoir to the town center causes contamination in the home and in schools, which
increases illness, and has a similar detracting effect on the adequacy of SWM. This
loop shares many variables with the Environment and Health Loop, and must
therefore also be targeted indirectly.
The medium strength Education and Poverty Loop is the third loop ideal for
interventions. While it is not as strong as the others, it feeds into another reinforcing
loop and also directly impacts the adequacy of SWM through education.
It is interesting to note that while the male participants saw the preservation of
culture as something of emotional value and as a means to generate income via
tourism, the female participants perceived it to impact the consumption of items
resulting in plastic waste, which the adult female participants felt was a variable of
relatively high concern. Female participants may have identified more connections
with the behaviour of youth due to the fact that women act as caregivers and
therefore interact more with youth. The women’s causal grid identified two
variables that are distinctly contextual – a patriarchal society, and men leaving for
other countries for work. Youth’s interest in consumerism and modern culture and
women’s issues may be potential leverage points, although likely difficult to target,
and may be contextual elements rather than action entry points. Educated youth
and maintaining traditions, however, seem easier to access as leverage points.
Interestingly enough, education is classified as an ambivalent variable, yet educated
youth falls in the active category. Again, female participants believe youth to be
more strongly connected to the SWM system than male participants, viewing them
as agents of change.
104
It is also interesting that women’s participation, along with female leaders, who
women believe would focus more on SWM due to their concerns about cleanliness
and health, fall into the indicator category instead of the active category. Tourism
and the quantity of plastic in the waste stream fall into the passive category, as they
did in the men’s analysis. Women also perceive the quantity of waste overall to be
an indicator variable. Variables identified as ambivalent by the female group were
similar to those identified as such by the male group. However, plastic influx was
seen to have less influence on the system in the women’s causal map than it did in
the men’s.
3.4.3 Youth’s causal map and grid
The youth perspective differed the most from the other two sampled perspectives.
The youth participants were primarily focused on family wellbeing. Surprisingly,
more participants identified this as a priority than health. New insights were
predominantly about youth behaviour. Particularly, the strong connection between
education and youth behaviour was of particular value. Participants expressed that
youth without education act in ways that negatively impact the system, such as by
throwing waste in the streets or being strongly focused on consumerism, and those
with education positively impact the system by avoiding these behaviours and often
by planning for higher education to return to help the town. However, all youth
participants had been fortunate enough to attend school, and therefore this
perspective may be biased.
The loop with the most potential for instigating changes in the SWM system is the
reinforcing Health and Education Loop, which depicts how decreases in health
caused by poor SWM decrease education rates, which negatively impacts SWM.
Contamination caused by poor SWM increases illness, which prevents children from
going to school due to their own illness or because more economic resources must
be spent on health. This decreases the number of educated children and youth,
preventing them from learning about the waste issue, and therefore developing
concern about it and realizing the impacts of their actions. This decreases youth
involvement in the waste issue and increases the number of people, predominantly
105
youth, who throw waste in the streets, further decreasing the adequacy of SWM.
This loop is of medium strength due to the connections between health,
opportunities for children to study, and education. However, not all variables within
the loop are ambivalent, and therefore it has some promising places for
intervention. The focus of this loop is on the role of youth in SWM practices, which
indicates that the youth participant group, just like the women participant group,
views youth as agents of change. Youth similarly believe the preservation of culture
and language has an impact on waste generation rates, just like the adult female
participants.
While the overall system structure as depicted by the youth participant group
contains two balancing loops and three reinforcing loops, both balancing loops have
less strength and therefore the system is perceived to be dominated by reinforcing
feedback loops that are causing system deterioration, as perceived by the other two
participant groups.
The causal grid analysis identified land availability as a distinct contextual factor.
Economic capital within the community and issues of women and youth may be
action entry points but are most likely too difficult to access. Education and
opportunities for children to study are more likely to be potential action entry
points. Interestingly, the only indicator variable identified by the youth participants
was family wellbeing. Youth may have identified less variables, found more
variables to be negligible, or found variables identified as passive by other groups to
have a stronger impact on the system. Variables identified as passive by other
groups yet ambivalent by youth include: widespread participation (of youth,
women, etc.), tourism, and waste quantity (this variable was only identified as
passive by the female participants).
3.4.4 Community-‐wide causal map and grid
The overall structure of the community-‐wide map is dominated by reinforcing
feedback loops that cause the SWM system to deteriorate. While the community-‐
wide map identified the weighted average perspectives on system structure and on
106
which variables can be considered active, passive, ambivalent, and buffering, it is
important to note that common ground can be a good starting place for action.
Conflicting perspectives on aggregated potential leverage points may cause them to
fail at intervening in the system successfully. Therefore, it is important to consider
the leverage points that are common amongst at least two groups. A Venn Diagram
representing the overlapping group perspectives is depicted in Figure 23. Active
variables are represented in yellow, passive in green, and ambivalent in blue.
Variables that are considered context factors or fall in conflicting causal grid
quadrants amongst all three perspectives are not included.
107
Figure 23. Overlapping perspectives
It appears that education may be a readily targetable leverage point with potential
to make significant changes in the system.
Returning to the twelve places to intervene in a system outlined by Meadows
(2008), leverage points that can have a fairly significant impact on a system yet are
more accessible than some of the upper level leverage points include:
• Balancing feedback loops
• Reinforcing feedback loops
Women Youth
Men
Education
Issues of Womenand Youth
Opportunities forChildren to Study
Family Wellbeing
Adequacy of SWM
AuthoritiesRegulating Waste
EnvironmentalDegradation
EnvironmentalSystems
Health
Illness
ResourceAccess
Town Aesthetics
Waste Quantity
Youth's Interest inConsumerism andModern Culture
Female Leaders
PlasticQuantity Widespread
Participation
Youth Participation
Youth Interested inWaste/Concerned with
Impact
Contaminationin Schools and
the Home
EconomicCapital
EconomicIncome
PopulationGrowth
Preoccupation withOther Issues
WasteGeneration Rate
Women Work ManyJobs, Have Little Time
Projects that are"Owned' by the
Community
Market forRecyclable Material
Desire forModern Culture Funding for SWM
Interest in Projects thatDo Not Generate Money
Interest/Understandingabout the Waste IssueMunicipal
Expenditures
People ThrowWaste in the
Streets
Recycling
Tourism
Active Variables
Passive variables
Ambivalent variables
Legend
108
• Information flows
It is clear that interfering in the balancing feedback loops of the SWM system, which
are relatively weak as it is, will have less impact than attempting to slow down or
alter the reinforcing feedback loops that dominate the system. Education, the least
conflicting active variable, is part of a medium-‐strength reinforcing loop in the
community-‐wide map. However, it also directly influences factors in two other
reinforcing loops, and influences one other reinforcing loop indirectly through the
variable Educated Youth. Solid waste education can also strengthen weak
information flows. In particular, targeting the education of youth may address other
issues raised in the causal mapping process, as two groups identified this group to
be agents of change. Other active variables identified in the mapping process should
also be further investigated as potential points of entry for local action.
Campaigns focused on educational measures have often been criticized for raising
awareness but triggering little or no action (Galli et al., 2011; Mayo et al., 2006;
McKenzie-‐Mohr & Smith, 1999). SWM projects have specifically been criticized for
lacking educational measures before and during the operation of the service, and for
lacking educational material that is suited to the interests or priorities of the
community (Anschütz, 1996). Even when public education is properly targeted and
conducted, on its own it is not enough; in many cases the larger system does not
support the application of knowledge taught in public education programs. While
public education can play a critical role in facilitating action, it cannot spark change
unless the barriers to applying new knowledge are removed and the benefits of its
application outweigh the benefits of other activities (McKenzie-‐Mohr & Smith,
1999). It is in such instances that a systemic perspective is critical; perceived
barriers to successful waste management may lead to projects that exacerbate
current problems or create new ones if the structure of the wider system is not
taken into account. This has already been experienced in Todos Santos, where the
European Union funded the construction of a wastewater treatment plant in 2007
because households had begun installing flush toilets with tubing leading directly to
the Limon River over the previous five years. However, the established system of
109
wastewater management in the community (and likely others) did not support the
use of such a plant, and it was never used. Additionally, the construction of the plant
encouraged further installation of flush toilets, exacerbating the current situation
and contributing to the creation of a public health issue. Without a systemic
approach, the European Union’s wastewater project failed to address the root
causes of poor wastewater management in the community.
It is for such reasons that education, which has been identified through a systems
analysis as the most readily targetable leverage point, should still be a strong focus
in potential SWM solutions despite its inability to foster action on its own. However,
while solid waste education is a necessary element of all SWM programs, the poor
state of the local public education system plays a strong role in the SWM system and
is a central concern for the community. Indeed, education is a much higher priority
than waste management for the municipal authorities and the majority of the
community. Therefore, solutions targeting education must not only focus on solid
waste awareness, but on long-‐term improvements to the public education system.
Solutions should also take on a ‘learning by doing’ approach, targeting other aspects
of the solid waste system as a means for learning, and ensuring that the capacity of
the system to support new SWM activities is developed as they are learned. Other
leverage points identified in this study must also be targeted directly to further
ensure that the application of solid waste knowledge is supported by the larger
system.
3.4.5 Successes and limitations
On the whole, the causal mapping approach was successful. Participants were open-‐
minded to the mapping format of the interviews, even though none were familiar
with it. Even illiterate participants, while not able to write down their own variables,
still generated them and actively participated in organizing and structuring the
system, and drawing in relationships between variables. The technique was also
successful because of the flexible nature of the causal mapping concept. While some
participants wished to arrange their maps according to the general guidelines
suggested by the researcher, most preferred to arrange them in their own individual
110
manners. These arrangements included groupings according to themes, placing
variables vertically from most to least important, structuring them into categories,
such as ‘problems’, ‘solutions’, ‘desired outcomes’, etc. This allowed participants to
explore ideas and display information in a way that made sense to them. While this
meant that virtually no individual maps resembled one another, the information
they provided allowed them to be merged easily.
The limitations of the technique were predominantly related to time. Additional
information would surely have surfaced if the participants had had more time to
develop their models. Additionally, the remoteness of the community meant it was
essentially impossible to re-‐contact these individuals to further explore certain
elements without returning to Todos Santos and knocking on their doors. The fact
that the majority of participants were illiterate was a minor limitation, but the
flexible, visual nature of the causal map allowed this challenge to be overcome quite
readily. Due to the fact that this is an indigenous community that has had plenty of
exposure to racism and has developed a general mistrust in outsiders due to its
tumultuous past, working as a researcher from another country, particularly as a
Caucasian researcher, was certainly a limitation. While the causal mapping process
did indeed produce some insightful results, having time to develop as much of sense
of trust as would be possible with the participants could have improved the results
and exposed new insights about the SWM system.
It should be noted that while other researchers have identified a lack of accuracy in
“lay person” causal maps (e.g. see Fairweather (2010)), this is not considered a
limitation here. The purpose of the narrative-‐based participatory mapping approach
was as much about the process as the results; it was not simply to glean information
from the participants in a one-‐way interaction. Indeed, the mapping approach was a
process of two-‐way learning and sharing in which the participant was encouraged to
explore connections they already knew but hadn’t yet mentally solidified or
synthesized, and the researcher developed new perspectives and a better
understanding of the local SWM system. This exploration process initiated new
thinking and discussion among community members. While the analyses have led to
111
insights that may not have been evident at the individual mapping scale, engaging a
wide range of participants, particularly those who do not currently participate in
SWM decision-‐making, acted as a first-‐step in initiating inclusive local action.
This study demonstrated how a narrative-‐based participatory mapping approach
can lay the groundwork for the exploration of locally appropriate solutions. While
the literature previously identified limited SWM funding, a lack of sanitary landfills,
a lack of public awareness, an increase in illegal dumping, and an increase in
littering as the principal SWM challenges in Guatemala, the causal mapping process
in Todos Santos identified these factors as ambivalent or negligible outputs of
system behaviour, not as root causes or key points to intervene in the system. For
example, simply pumping more funding into SWM, an idea that was considered a
‘solution’ even by study participants prior to the emergence of the system structure,
cannot address the plethora of social and environmental factors that deeply impact
the system. Therefore, it is easy to see how ‘solutions’ are more likely to fail without
an assessment of the system structure and behaviour, and the careful identification
of indicators and goals. Indeed, Meadows (2008, p. 193) points out that “if the
goals... are defined inaccurately or incompletely, the system may obediently work to
produce a result that is not really intended or wanted... Specify indicators and goals
that reflect the real welfare of the system. Be especially careful not to confuse effort
with result or you will end up with a system that is producing effort, not result.” The
methodology used in this study can also provide insight about potential areas in
conflict, an important element to consider in any management process.
3.5 Conclusion SWM in Guatemala is an issue of critical concern, threatening everything from
fragile environmental systems, essential natural resources and human health to
economic potential. In Todos Santos Cuchumatán, poor SWM has put complex
strains on the community that call for a context-‐specific approach that sits within
the jurisdiction of post-‐normal science and is founded upon systems thinking.
Narrative-‐based participatory mapping identified principal areas of concern within
the community from the perspectives of men, women, and youth. The causal
112
mapping approach provided information on the system structure, feedback loops,
potential leverage points at which to intervene in the system, potential indicators of
success, and critically sensitive factors to be aware of. This laid the groundwork
needed to identify ‘best’ solutions that are locally appropriate. This narrative-‐based
participatory mapping approach has the potential to make important contributions
to approaches addressing the challenges of implementing and organizing SWM
processes, and their long-‐term success.
113
3.6 References Ancona, C. et al. (2010). Integrated environmental and health impact assessment of
waste management in Lazio (Italy): INTARESE.
Axelrod. (1976). Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Berkes, F., & Folke, C. (1998). Linking social and ecological systems: Management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Bhuiyan, S. H. (2010). A crisis in governance: Urban solid waste management in Bangladesh. Habitat international, 34(1), 125-‐133.
BNAmericas. (2011). Govt creates national waste management strategy, Online report, Business News Americas.
Checkland, P. (2000). Soft Systems Methodology: A Thirty Year Retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17(S1), S11-‐S58.
Coffey, M., & Coad, A. (2010). Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing Countries. Malta: UN-‐HABITAT.
Cointreau, S. (1982). Environmental management of urban solid wastes in developing countries: A project guide Urban Development Technical Paper Number 5. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Cook, D. M., Swanson, R. C., Eggett, D. L., & Booth, G. M. (2009). A retrospective analysis of prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites among school children in the Palajunoj Valley of Guatemala. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 27(1), 31-‐40.
Da Zhu, P., Asnani, H., Zurbrugg, C., Anapolsky, S., & Mani, S. (2008). Improving municipal solid waste management in India: A source book for Policy Makers and Practitioners. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Dijkema, G. P. J., Reuter, M. A., & Verhoef, E. V. (2000). A new paradigm for waste management. Waste Management, 20(8), 633-‐638.
Duru, R. C. (1981). Technological growth and ecological crisis: the Nigerian example. The Science of the Total Environment, 17(3), 243-‐256.
Fairweather, J. (2010). Farmer models of socio-‐ecologic systems: Application of causal mapping across multiple locations. Ecological Modelling, 221(3), 555-‐562.
Funtowics, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for the post-‐normal age. Futures, 25(7), 739-‐755.
114
Galli, A., Wiedmann, T., Ercin, E., Knoblauch, D., Ewing, B., & Giljum, S. (2011). Integrating ecological, carbon, and water footprint: Defining the "Footprint Family" and its application in tracking human pressure on the planet: One Planet Economy Network.
Halla, F., & Majani, B. (1999). Innovative Ways for Solid Waste Management in Dar-‐Es-‐Salaam: Toward Stakeholder Partnerships. Habitat international, 23(3), 351-‐361.
Henry, R. K., Yongsheng, Z., & Jun, D. (2006). Municipal solid waste management challenges in developing countries-‐-‐Kenyan case study. Waste Management, 26(1), 92-‐100. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2005.03.007
Iwerks, L. (Writer). (2006). Recycled Life. In M. Glad (Producer): Leslie-‐Glad.
Jha, A. K., Singh, G. P., Singh, G. P., & Gupta, P. K. (2011). Sustainable municipal solid waste management in low income group of cities: a review. Tropical Ecology, 52(1), 123-‐131.
Kay, J. J., Regier, H. A., Boyle, M., & Francis, G. (1999). An ecosystem approach for sustainability: addressing the challenge of complexity. Futures, 31(7), 721-‐742.
Konteh, F. H. (2009). Urban sanitation and health in the developing world: reminiscing the nineteenth century industrial nations. Health & Place, 15(1), 69-‐78.
Kosko, B. (1988). Hidden patterns in combined and adaptive knowledge networks. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 2(4), 377-‐393.
Mantilla, J. E. V. (2007). Proyecto cuente con ambiente primer informe sobre desechos solidos (1 ed.): MARN, Universidad Rafael Landivar.
Martuzzi, M., Mitis, F., & Forastiere, F. (2010). Inequalities, inequities, environmental justice in waste management and health. European Journal of Public Health, 20(1), 21-‐26.
Mayo, E. et al. (2006). I will if you will: Towards sustainable consumption.: National Consumption Roundtable Sustainable Development Commission.
McKenzie-‐Mohr, D., & Smith, W. (1999). Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-‐Based Social Marketing. Gabriola Island (B.C.): New Society Publishers.
Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan.
Memon, M. A. (2010). Integrated solid waste management based on the 3R approach. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 12(1), 30-‐40.
115
Muttamara, S., & Leong, S. T. (1997). Environmental Monitoring and Impact Assessment of a Solid Waste Disposal Site. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 48(1), 1-‐24.
Özesmi, U., & Özesmi, S. L. (2004). Ecological models based on people’s knowledge: a multi-‐step fuzzy cognitive mapping approach. Ecological Modelling, 176(1-‐2), 43-‐64.
Pan American Health Organization. (1998). Health in the Americas (Vol. 2): World Health Organization.
Pan American Health Organization. (2007). Health in the Americas (Vol. 2): World Health Organization.
Parkes, M. W., Morrison, K. E., Bunch, M. J., Hallström, L. K., Neudoerffer, C., Venema, H. D., & Waltner-‐Toews, D. (2010). Towards integrated governance for water, health and social-‐ecological systems: The watershed governance prism. Global Environmental Change, 20, 693-‐704.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Pfammater, R., & Schertenleib, R. (1996). Non-‐Governmental Refuse Collection in Low-‐ Income Urban Areas: Lessons Learned from Selected Schemes in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Duebendorf, Switzerland.
Robbins, P. T. (2007). The reflexive engineer: perceptions of integrated development. Journal of International Development, 19(1), 99-‐110.
Scholz, R. W., & Tietje, O. (2002). Embedded case study methods : integrating quantitative and qualitative knowledge. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Schübeler, P. (1996). Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-‐Income Countries. In K. Wehrle & J. Christen (Eds.). St. Gallen Switzerland: UNDP/UNCHS/World Bank/SDC Collaborative Programme on Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-‐Income Countries.
Shukla, S. R., Akolkar, A. B., Bhide, A. D., Dhussa, A. K., Varshney, A. K., Acharya, D. B., . . . Mazumdar, N. B. (2000). Solid Waste Management Manual. New Delhi: Government of India.
Simon, A. M. (2008). Analysis Of Activities Of Community Based Organizations Involved in Solid Waste Management, Investigating Modernized Mixtures Approach: The case of Kinondoni Municipality, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. (MSc), Wageningen University.
116
Tacoli, C. (2012). Urbanization, gender and urban poverty: paid work and unpaid carework in the city. London, UK: International Institute for Environment and Development
United Nations Population Fund.
TTSSC. (2010). SSC in the context of aid effectiveness: Telling the story of partners in south-‐south and triangular cooperation: Task Team on South-‐South Cooperation.
UNEP. (1996). International Source Book on Environmentally Sound Technologies for Municipal
Solid Waste Management International Environmental Technology Centre Technical Publication Series: United Nations Environmental Programme.
UNEP. (2009). Developing Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan: Training Manual (Vol. 1: Waste Characterization and Quantification within Projections for Future). Osaka/Shiga, Japan: United Nations Environment Programme.
Vennix, J. A. M. (1996). Group model building: facilitating team learning using system dynamics. Chichester: Wiley.
VWB. (2009a). Guatemala: Companion animals and community health: Veterinarians Without Borders.
VWB. (2009b). Todos Santos, Guatemala interim report: Implemenation Phase I, January 2009: Veterinarians Without Borders.
Waltner-‐Toews, D., Kay, J., & Lister, N.-‐M. E. (2008). The ecosystem approach: complexity, uncertainty, and managing for sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press.
Waltner-‐Toews, D., Kay, J., Neudoerffer, C., & Gitau, T. (2003). Perspective changes everything: managing ecosystems from the inside out. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1(1), 23-‐30.
Waltner-‐Toews, D., Neudoerffer, C., Joshi, D. D., & Tamang, M. S. (2005). Agro-‐urban Ecosystem Health Assessment in Kathmandu, Nepal: Epidemiology, Systems, Narratives. EcoHealth, 2(2), 155-‐164.
Wilson, D. C. (2007). Development drivers for waste management. Waste Management & Research, 25(3), 198-‐207.
Wilson, D. C., Velis, C., & Cheeseman, C. (2006). Role of informal sector recycling in waste management in developing countries. Habitat international, 30(4), 797-‐808. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2005.09.005
World Bank. (2005). Guatemala: Country Economic Memorandum. (Report No. 29145-‐GT). Washington, DC: World Bank.
117
World Bank. (2011). Guatemala Overview. Retrieved April 6, 2011, from http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/guatemala/overview
Yousif, D. F., & Scott, S. (2007). Governing solid waste management in Mazatenango, Guatemala. International Development Planning Review, 29(4), 433-‐450.
Zarate, M. A., Slotnick, J., & Ramos, M. (2008). Capacity building in rural Guatemala by implementing a solid waste management program. Waste Management, 28(12), 2542-‐2551.
Zellmer, A. J., Allen, T. F. H., & Kesseboehmer, K. (2006). The nature of ecological complexity: A protocol for building the narrative. Ecological Complexity, 3(3), 171-‐182.
Zerbock, O. (2003). Urban Solid Waste Management: Waste Reduction in Developing Nations Written for the Requirements of CE 5993 Field Engineering in the Developing World: Michigan Technological University.
Zurbruegg, C. (2003). Solid waste management in developing countries: A sourcebook for policy makers and practitioners: EAWAG /SANDEC. Retrieved from http://www.eawag.ch/forschung/sandec/publikationen/swm/dl/Zurbruegg_2002_SWM_DC.pdf.
118
4 Developing locally appropriate leverage for change: Integrated
solid waste management in rapidly developing rural Guatemala
4.1 Introduction Solid waste management (SWM) is gaining an increasing amount of attention
globally as environmental degradation, climate change, population growth, and poor
human health continue to cause international concern. In developing countries, the
waste produced by burgeoning cities and rapidly developing rural areas is
overwhelming local authorities and national governments alike (Tacoli, 2012; Yousif
& Scott, 2007). Limited resources result in the perpetuation and aggravation of
inequalities already being experienced by the most vulnerable populations (Konteh,
2009; UNDP, 2010). Such is the case in Latin America, which ranks first in the world
for inequality (UNDP, 2010). Within Latin America, Central America contains some
of the highest rates of inequality as measured by the Gini Index (income inequality),
and even higher rates in terms of the Human Development Index (health and
education inequality) (UNDP, 2010). Inadequate SWM practices plague the region,
severely impacting ecosystems and human health.
Recently, there have been two major changes in the structure of household solid
waste in developing countries: the volume of waste has increased significantly, and
the composition has changed from primarily organics to a mix of both organic and
synthetic materials (Yousif and Scott, 2007). These changes may be attributed to
any number of the following factors: rapid population and economic growth and a
subsequent lack of infrastructure capable of supporting it; a lack of community
participation and/or communication; limited resources for proper planning and
operation; a lack of political will and legal framework for implementation and
enforcement; and a lack of education and/or technical expertise to manage or
prevent these changes (Yousif and Scott, 2007). These changes, and the often non-‐
technical factors they are associated with, play an important role in current SWM
difficulties in many developing regions. Decision-‐making and management are
119
becoming increasingly complex due to these kinds of factors, coupled with the rising
internationality of waste (Seadon, 2010).
Though addressing SWM issues in major city centers is a critical issue of concern,
particularly as the number and size of major urban centers is rapidly growing. Most
urban growth over the next 25 years will occur not in mega cities but in small cities
and towns (Cohen, 2004). Indeed, as of 2009, small to medium sized cities housed
over 60 percent of the world’s population (Matuschke, 2009). In developing
countries, these smaller urban centers often lack basic infrastructure and services to
absorb the increasing number of people they house (Matuschke, 2009). While urban
areas receive some SWM services, in smaller rural communities, SWM is outright
lacking, limited to collection and deposition in open dumps at best (Schübeler,
1996). Rapid growth and development leaves smaller urban centers easily
overwhelmed in the areas of waste management, health services, water, electricity,
and sanitation (Matuschke, 2009). Small cities and towns are less likely to receive
economic support, as mega-‐cities and large urban areas are primary investment
targets. Added burdens of geographic isolation, poverty, limited finances and local
government resources, and other constraints limit the capacity of small cities and
towns to cope with turbulent SWM challenges (Stokoe & Teague, 1995).
While poor Central American SWM practices have been widely recognized (see, for
example, Mantilla (2007); VWB (2009b); Yousif & Scott (2007); Zarate et al. (2008)),
the literature lacks examples of successful approaches for dealing with the solid
waste crisis currently experienced by rapidly developing rural Central American
communities. In this light, this study explores approaches used by a wide variety of
communities in Central America and elsewhere that demonstrate the potential to be
successful and locally appropriate in a rapidly developing rural Central American
town. Considering the extremely context-‐specific nature of a given community’s
SWM challenges and needs, these approaches can only be deemed appropriate on a
case-‐by-‐case basis. Thus, these approaches are tested for local appropriateness with
specifically tailored criteria in a case study of the Guatemalan community of Todos
Santos Cuchumatán.
120
4.2 Appropriate Technology The concept of appropriate technology (AT) was borne out of Schumacher’s
influential book, Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if People Mattered, in
which he stressed that large-‐scale industry has detrimental effects on rural
unemployment rates in low-‐income countries. Schumacher suggested low-‐income
countries employ what he called an ‘intermediate technology’ – one that lies
between the traditional and the sophisticated, highly capital-‐intensive technologies
designed for use in high-‐income countries – in order to provide jobs, relieve
poverty, and be successfully adopted (Schumacher, 1973). The term ‘intermediate
technology’ was later replaced with the expression ‘appropriate technology’ in order
to include the social and cultural dimensions of innovation (Pellegrini, 1979), and to
avoid the suggestions of inferiority associated with the former term. The concept of
AT created division among economists and practitioners; many argued AT are
inefficient, do not create growth, and do not improve the standards of living of the
poor (Rybczynski, 1980). It was not until the 1980s and 1990s with the rise of non-‐
governmental organizations (NGOs) that AT truly took off; indeed, Smillie (2000, p.
48) reports that “the concepts of intermediate and appropriate technology grew
entirely from the non-‐governmental sector”.
While the concept of AT created dichotomy between those who firmly believed in
the necessity of large-‐scale industry and those who called for a new approach, it also
became part of the division between those who see technology as the solution, and
those who see it as a problem. The latter argue that the benefits of technology are
exaggerated, and the focus on technology is diverting much needed attention away
from very real social, economic, and cultural inequalities (Moodley, 2005). Wajcman
(2002, p. 348) argues that “governments everywhere legitimize much of their policy
in terms of a technological imperative”. However, at large, technology is still
considered to play a strong role in development. Dr. Laksiri Fernando, Director of
the Sri Lankan National Centre for Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social
Sciences summarized this well in his address at the 6th Diploma Award Ceremony of
the Sri Lanka Institute of Advanced Technological Education (Asian Tribune, 2009):
121
Whatever the development theory one is employing, neo-‐classical,
Marxist, neo-‐liberal, exogenous or endogenous, there is almost an
agreement that the level of development of a country is related to
the level of technological use... Even for an average person, “the
importance of technology for development” might be common
sense today. We acquire this common sense through experience. If
groundwater is not easily accessible, we know the benefit of an
Artesian-‐Well.
4.2.1 Defining and redefining appropriate technology
While technology remains a strong focus of development strategies, it is agreed that
AT must function within social, cultural, and economic spheres. AT has evolved to be
defined not simply as small-‐scale, low-‐tech devices, but as a body of knowledge and
set of techniques for coping with community development issues. It incorporates
“hard” and “soft” technologies; not only physical tools but also capacity building and
communication methods, knowledge transfer mechanisms, and cultural, social, and
gender considerations (Murphy et al., 2009). Pellegrini (1979, p. 2) defined AT as a
technique that when introduced to a community, “creates a self-‐reinforcing process
internal to the same community, which supports the growth of the local activities
and the development of indigenous capabilities as decided by the community itself".
This adaptable, dynamic nature of AT has been recognized by other AT supporters.
Indeed, Peter Dunn, in his book Appropriate Technology: Technology with a Human
Face, went so far as to call AT “a complete systems approach to development”
(Dunn, 1978, p. 4). While Dunn’s perception of AT’s self-‐adaptive and dynamic
nature is focused on increasing wealth for the eventual use of more expensive
equipment, this study focuses on the philosophy of AT as a catalyst for initiating a
process of development of the capabilities, as defined by a community, that the same
community wishes to develop. In this light, the ‘appropriateness’ of AT is defined by
its ability to impact the structure of local systems (social, cultural, environmental,
political, economic, etc.) in a manner that creates a ‘best fit’ future scenario for a
community, as judged by that community. Thus, a more fitting term for the body of
122
knowledge and techniques that might accomplish these goals is ‘appropriate system
lever’ (ASL).
When it comes to SWM issues, longtime practitioners in the field have made it clear
that the selection of appropriate techniques and the design of sustainable systems is
not only a technical issue (van de Klundert & Anschutz, 1999). However, SWM is
often considered to be a technical issue, which has resulted in many unsustainable,
failed techniques. Examples range from crippling debt incurred by the use of
expensive, imported, poorly suited equipment to locals valuing garbage bins too
much to use them for waste (van de Klundert & Anschutz, 1999). Other systemic
aspects, including social, political, cultural, and financial components, should be
considered in order to ensure the ‘best-‐fit’ SWM scenario can be implemented. This
is particularly true in Central American countries, such as Guatemala, where Yousif
and Scott (2007) observe SWM problems are issues of governance rather than
technological choice.
4.2.2 Appropriate technology criteria
Just as the definition of AT has transformed many times since its emergence in the 1960s, the criteria that deem a given technology or technique as “appropriate” have evolved significantly over time. Many criteria have been extensively criticized for being unachievable, contradictory, and locally inapplicable, including such requirements as low investment cost per workplace, low capital investment per unit of output, use of locally available resources, very low cost of final product, and small-‐scale operations (Ntim, 1988). Criteria have thus ranged from net output maximization or cost minimization (Eckaus, 1977) to cultural and social acceptability (Murphy et al., 2009). A summary of common AT criteria found in the literature is presented in
123
Table 7, which lists these criteria vertically according to economic, cultural/social,
sustainability, and technical considerations.
124
Table 7. Common Appropriate Technology criteria Economic considerations Cultural/Social considerations Sustainability considerations Technical considerations
Criteria Description Criteria Description Criteria Description Criteria Description
Affordability19 20 21 22
Costs match users’ ability and willingness to pay1 2 3 4
Social and cultural viability1 2
Tailored to social and cultural practices and needs1 2
Environmentally sustainable1 3
Innovations do not cause significant harm to long-‐ and short-‐term ecological processes1 3
Soundness of design 3
Functions properly in local conditions, meets local technical needs1 3
Use of local materials/ resources1 3 4
Reduces external economic dependence, locally repairable1 3 4
Meets users’ basic needs1 3
User-‐ identified needs are met1 3
Locally sustainable1 3
Maintenance, reproduction and repair can be conducted at the local level1 3
Risk factor2
Reasonable level of risk of failure within the local system2
Systems independence2
Ability to stand alone without multiple supporting devices2
Appropriate technology transfer mechanisms1
Two-‐way process structured on input of local users in all project stages1
Local participation and ownership1 3
Active involvement of stakeholders in all stages of project1 3
Relatively labour-‐intensive3 4
Extends human labour and skills instead of replacing them3 4
Gender considerations1
Incorporation of women in technology development processes1
Flexibility1 2 3 23 Ability to adapt across scales, locales, and changing circumstances1 2 3 5
Small-‐scale3 Affordable to families or small groups of families3
Single-‐ vs. multi-‐ purpose2
Single or multiple specific purposes and abilities, depending on local needs2
Evolutionary capacity2
Capability to expand in sophistication and ability to accomplish a higher volume of work2
19 Murphy, McBean, and Farahbakhsh (2009) 20 Wicklein (1998) 21 Darrow and Saxenian (1993) 22 Conteh (2003) 23 Vanek (2003)
125
Economic considerations Cultural/Social considerations Sustainability considerations Technical considerations
Not capital-‐intensive3 4
Requires only small amounts of capital to develop, employ, and maintain3 4
Image of modernity2
Socially appealing image, positively impacts social status 2
Capacity building3
Builds on local skills to establish self-‐sustaining/ expanding community capacity3
Economic sustainability3
Has the potential to cushion against external economic change3
While many criteria have been suggested for ensuring technological
appropriateness, they are often competitive as well as complementary, meaning the
pursuit of any one will not necessarily satisfy any of the others (Eckaus, 1977).
Therefore, there is no straightforward means for identifying AT (Murphy et al.,
2009); determining which criteria are appropriate for a given community is
dependent upon that community’s objectives, capabilities, and context. Additionally,
technological choices are made by a host of decision makers with unique objectives
and perspectives on what classifies a technology or technique as ‘appropriate’
(Eckaus, 1977). Decisions must be made under a variety of sources of influence that
often act at cross-‐purposes. It is particularly difficult to establish consistent goals
when considering AT, because the knowledge, interests, and operating methods of
stakeholders is often conflicting (Eckaus, 1977). Therefore, it is important to
establish a baseline of stakeholder concerns, needs, and goals before developing a
set of criteria that will function for a given community.
4.2.3 Appropriate solid waste technologies
Most appropriate solid waste technologies discussed in the literature are focused on
larger cities in developing countries. Many of these cities have extensive informal
“waste economies” comprised of waste pickers, dealers, buyers, transporters, shops,
second-‐hand markets, and recycling industries (Furedy, 1992). As cities develop and
126
waste practices become better regulated, these informal recovery and recycling
systems suffer. Tensions grow as modern consumption by more affluent households
and increased quantities of recyclables in the waste stream makes waste picking
more profitable, but waste picking becomes increasingly hazardous and regulations
discourage informal activities (Furedy, 1992). Therefore, many non-‐conventional
approaches to SWM focus on informal waste economies by, for example, assisting
people whose livelihoods depend on waste to do safer, more acceptable work or
accommodating informal activities in formal waste recovery or recycling systems
(Furedy, 1992; IDB, 2011). Other non-‐conventional technologies and techniques
have ranged from capacity building and education to developing partnerships
between communities, municipalities, and the private sector for waste-‐to-‐energy
plants, waste removal, and methane gas recovery (Furedy, 1992; Joseph, Rajendiran,
Senthilnathan, & Rakesh, 2012; Kojima, 2011). Alternative instruments have been
used to improve formal solid waste systems such as collection and disposal levies,
deposit refund schemes, and product levies (Kgathi & Bolaane, 2001).
Vermicomposting, industrial symbiosis, and community-‐led collection services have
also been employed in larger urban centers (Geng, Tsuyoshi, & Chen, 2010; R. P.
Singh, Singh, & Ibrahim, 2011).
Solid waste AT for use in small urban centers has included such projects as poorly-‐
employed composting facilities funded through carbon credit sales, small-‐scale
anaerobic digesters, community engagement and education, and partnerships
between municipal authorities and representatives of national and international
organizations (R. Singh, Tyagi, Allen, Ibrahim, & Kothari, 2011; United Nations
ESCAP, 2010; Yousif & Scott, 2007; Zarate et al., 2008). While alternative approaches
and technologies have been employed in smaller urban settings, the literature
provides few successful approaches for dealing with the solid waste crisis in rapidly
developing rural Central American communities. With few known options suited to
small, rapidly developing Central American towns and cities, communities are far
less likely to implement appropriate technologies or system levers for far-‐reaching,
positive long-‐term change in SWM practices.
127
4.3 Methodology
4.3.1 Defining the local context
The local context of a community must be explored, particularly from the
perspective of that community, in order to define criteria that can specify local SWM
system levers that are likely to be accepted by the community as appropriate. This
study bases criteria on the socioeconomic, environmental, political, and cultural
SWM contexts of Todos Santos by drawing on key contextual elements identified in
the previous chapter.
4.3.2 Solid waste audit
Certain technical requirements and needs were also identified in the previous
chapter. This chapter supplements these findings with a residential solid waste
audit, which was conducted in the six neighbourhoods of Todos Santos.
4.3.2.1 Snowball and random purposeful sampling methods
A residential solid waste audit was conducted in Todos Santos Cuchumatán during
the month of March, 2012. Participants were recruited through a combination of
snowball sampling method and random purposeful sampling on an open invitation
and volunteer basis. Recruitment took place over a period of one and a half months.
A snowball process was initiated through civil society contacts with existing
connections in the community. Recruitment through random purposeful sampling
was carried out over the local radio and through presentations given at
neighbourhood community meetings. The radio announcement and verbal open
invitations informed all potential participants of the purpose of the study and the
roles and responsibilities participants would have (e.g., participants’ rights, time
commitment, explanation of waste audit process, etc.). In total, 137 geographically
and demographically diverse community members were recruited.
4.3.2.2 Data collection
A meeting was set up with each participating home to carefully review the auditing
process. Six potato bags were given to each family for waste separation, which were
carefully labeled with the following categories: bathroom paper, organics, plastic,
128
paper, metal, and other. While most organics are generally fed to a household pig,
participants were instructed to put any remaining scraps in the organics bag.
Families were informed that they must continue with their regular waste practices,
and no changes whatsoever should be made to their regular routine. This was done
to ensure the samples were representative of regular activity and waste production
in town. Additionally, it was emphasized that all waste must be collected, including
all the paper in the bathroom and waste that is usually burned, buried, or thrown in
the street. This was made very clear to avoid any misunderstandings about what the
auditor wanted to collect, and what was classified as ‘waste’.
Empty sample bags were weighed in order to subtract their weight from the final
sample weight. Families were instructed to place all waste in the separate bags for a
period of one week. The auditor returned to collect and measure the samples at that
time. Between five to eight audits were initiated each day for a period of one month.
The potato bags were compressed as much as possible into rough cylinders, and the
height, circumference and diameter of each one were measured. Sample bags were
weighed using a local scale. Observations about waste practices were made at each
visit. Participants were allowed to keep the sample bags as payment for
participating in the audit.
4.3.3 Building a ‘Bank of Ideas’
The researcher compiled a bank of potentially locally appropriate SWM ideas that
provides useful examples of SWM techniques that have been implemented in other
rural or rapidly developing communities in Latin America and elsewhere. This ‘Bank
of Ideas’ acts as a regional knowledge base, while the community-‐wide causal maps
from the previous chapter act as a local knowledge base, and each can contribute to
and build upon the other. The dynamic relationship between these components will
allow the community to act as knowledge generator, as the causal maps and bank of
ideas provide a solid base for local innovation.
129
4.3.3.1 Data collection
The ‘Bank of Ideas’ was generated and validated using the triangulation method. A
literature review, case study review (including literature, unpublished, civil society,
and media sources) and interviews with experts were conducted.
Expert interviews took place during the months of January to May, 2012. A snowball
recruitment process was initiated through existing connections with academic and
civil society contacts. Experts ranged from academic researchers, students, and
members of local NGOs to Central American community members. Nineteen experts
were interviewed in total.
4.3.4 Developing criteria for locally appropriate system levers
While the ‘Bank of Ideas’ provides useful examples for fostering local innovation and
change, the cultural context must act as a filter in order for locally acceptable,
functioning strategies to be generated. The ‘Bank of Ideas’ must therefore be filtered
with locally tailored criteria, resulting in a set of potentially successful, locally
appropriate system levers. These criteria were developed by triangulating the
contextual results from the previous chapter with data from the waste audit and
criteria cited as important in the literature. Criteria from the literature were cross-‐
examined using results from the causal maps and only included if they matched
local perspectives. This process corroborated findings and developed a set of
criteria tailored specifically to the community of Todos Santos in order to eliminate
SWM examples that are simply not feasible from a technical or economic
perspective, or are environmentally, socially, or culturally inappropriate.
4.3.5 System lever assessment
The criteria were applied to the ‘Bank of Ideas’ in order to generate a set of system
levers that are both locally appropriate and have a strong potential for success in
the community. Each criterion was applied independently of the others, and
examples meeting all or nearly all criteria were included for community
consideration. Three potential SWM ‘scenarios’ were compiled, which contain a
130
system of locally appropriate SWM system levers that act together to meet all
critical criteria.
4.4 Results
4.4.1 Local context: Solid waste in Todos Santos Cuchumatán
The remote Guatemalan Mam Mayan village of Todos Santos is experiencing rapid
development and population growth and cannot cope with burgeoning demands for
SWM services. Thus, the town faces serious environmental and health related
consequences. The previous chapter investigated the community’s perspective on
what issues poor SWM creates, influences, and exacerbates in the community, and
what system structures perpetuate this behaviour and prevent change. The results
of that study provide significant insight into the socio-‐economic, cultural,
environmental and political SWM contexts of Todos Santos. The following sections
summarize these findings, and supplement them with the results of a solid waste
audit, which helps to define the technical context.
4.4.1.1 Socio-‐economic, cultural, environmental, and political contexts
The primary issues caused by poor SWM practices were found to be: poor health
(including death, illness, and decreased overall wellbeing), environmental
degradation (including degradation and contamination of essential common
resources), and negative economic impacts (including decreased opportunities for
tourism). These problems stem predominantly from changes in waste
characteristics, increasing waste quantities due to population growth and the
influence of foreign consumer cultures, a lack of land, behavioural issues, limited
resources, and a poor education system. However, the majority of these issues are
structurally connected through reinforcing feedback loops that exponentially
degrade the adequacy of SWM and also exponentially decrease the local authorities’
ability to improve the SWM system – an issue of critical importance. A systemic
analysis of the narrative-‐based causal maps produced by the community identified
the following potential action entry points:
• Education, particularly that of youth;
131
• Municipal interest in SWM;
• Youth’s interest in consumerism and modern culture;
• Recognizing the value of women and youth, thus ensuring their participation
in the SWM process; and
• Projects that are “owned” by the community.
Establishing the systemic context in which a community sits provides a crucial
foundation for the exploration of locally appropriate, successful approaches. Thus,
these findings should inform and act as the basis for any approach to SWM
improvement employed in this community.
4.4.1.2 Technical context: Waste audit results
The results of the residential solid waste audit can be seen in Table 8, Figure 24, and
Figure 25. Recyclable materials including plastic, metal, paper, and glass make up the
largest portion by weight and volume of solid waste sent to landfill. For comparison
purposes, Table 9 displays the waste generation averages in the whole region of
Latin America and the Caribbean, and in the OECD member countries24.
Table 8. Weight and volume of residential solid waste components per capita per day
Category Weight (kg/capita/day)
Volume (cm3/capita/day)
Paper 0.02 1,540
Plastic 0.03 3,290
Metal 0.04 1,750
Organic 0.01 110
Glass 0.03 530
Other 0.01 220
TOTAL 0.14 7,430
Table 9. Average regional waste composition in Latin America and the Caribbean, and OECD member countries (adapted from Hoornweg and Bhada-‐Tata (2012))
132
Category
Waste Composition in Other Countries
Latin America and the Caribbean average waste weight (kg/capita/day)
OECD member countries24 average waste weight (kg/capita/day)
Paper 0.18 0.70
Plastic 0.13 0.24
Metal 0.02 0.13
Organic 0.59 0.59
Glass 0.04 0.15
Other 0.13 0.37
TOTAL 1.1 2.2
The per capita values range from 0.1 to 14 kg/capita/day in Latin America and the
Caribbean, and 1.1 to 3.7 kg/capita/day in the OECD member countries (Hoornweg
& Bhada-‐Tata, 2012).
Figure 24. Residential solid waste distribution by weight in Todos Santos 24 OECD refers to the countries that are members of the Organization for Economic Co-‐0peration and Development, which includes Canada and the United States, many European countries, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Korea, and others. For a full list of the 34 member countries refer to OECD (2012).
Paper
Plastic
Metal
Organic
Glass
Other
133
Figure 25. Residential solid waste distribution by volume in Todos Santos
The ‘paper’ category included notebooks, school papers, magazines, newspapers,
and cardboard. The ‘plastic’ category was predominantly composed of plastic bags
and bottles. ‘Metal’ included predominantly aluminum drink cans, rusted metal
parts, and paint cans. The ‘organic’ category was composed of kitchen scraps. The
‘glass’ category was predominantly composed of alcohol bottles, and the category
labeled as ‘other’ included broken household items, such as old appliances, brooms,
accessories, fabric items, etc. While organic materials do not make up a large portion
of the residential waste sent to landfill, the previous chapter identified several
health and environmental concerns instigated by organic material in the dump.
Therefore, in addition to targeting the recyclable materials that make up the largest
percentage of the waste composition, targeting organic material is considered a
technical priority.
The waste practices of different neighbourhoods were brought to light through
discussions with the participants during the waste audit process (see Table 10).
Paper
Plastic
Metal
Organic
Glass
Other
134
Table 10. Waste practices by neighbourhood
Neighbourhood Number of participants
Frequency of collection
Waste practices
Los Pablo 25 Every week, or participants bring waste to the dump every two weeks or monthly (no fee is associated with this activity – dumping is open and unregulated)
• Participants burn what will burn; • Metal is sold; • One participant buries paper but others do
not bury any waste; • Everything else goes to the dump; and • Three participants compost organics.
Los Mendoza 13 Every week • Participants burn what will burn; • Metal is sold; • No waste is buried; and • Everything else goes to the dump.
Anglé 23 Every week, every two weeks, or participants bring it to the dump every 3 months, every 6 months, or once a year
• Participants burn what will burn; • Metal is sold; • One participant composts organics; • No waste is buried; and • Everything else goes to the dump.
Che Cruz 32 Every week, or participants bring it to the dump every two weeks to once every 6 months
• Participants burn what will burn; • Metal is sold; • No waste is buried; • Three participants compost organics; • Two participants bury waste that will not
burn; • Everything else goes to the dump; and • One participant sells metal and sends
everything else to the dump. El Centro 33 Every week or
every two weeks • Participants burn what will burn; • Five participants do not burn waste; • Two participants send everything to the
dump; • Metal is sold; • No waste is buried; and • Everything else goes to the dump.
Tuj Manchun 11 Participants bring waste to the dump once a week to once a month
• Participants burn what will burn; • Metal is sold; • Three participants compost organics; • One participant buries organic waste; • One participant buries what will not burn,
but all others do not bury waste; and • Everything else goes to the dump.
135
4.4.2 A ‘Bank of Ideas’ for Solid Waste Management
The SWM ‘Bank of Ideas’ for use in rapidly developing rural Central American
communities is composed of 55 example projects. There are 6 options for overall
system management; 3 options for waste characterization; 14 for waste reduction;
10 for collection, transportation, and financing; 17 for resource recovery; 1 for
waste transformation; and 4 for disposal. These projects are listed vertically
according to waste management categories in Table 11.
Table 11. Bank of Ideas summary of options
Overall system management options
Waste characterization options
Waste reduction options
Collection, transport, and financing options
Resource recovery options
Waste transformation options
Disposal options
Public-‐private partnerships25, 26
Further waste auditing27
Community-‐wide waste education program28, 29, 30, 31
Mini collection centers34, 35
Women's vermiculture initiative32, 33
Small-‐scale incinerator34
Manual landfill35
Creation of a non-‐profit community-‐based organization: Clean Todos Santos Foundation36, 37
Determine energy potential of solid waste27
Waste separation28 Separate collection days38
Women's recycled craft initiative32
Hazardous waste disposal pit29
Development of SWM micro-‐enterprises39, 40, 26
Hands-‐on waste characterization workshops41
Youth waste education program 42, 28
Secondary and tertiary sorting at Recycling center35
Recycled materials as construction materials28 ,35
Transporting hazardous waste to Huehuetenango
25 Gonzalez and Taborga (2001) 26 Hoornweg and Giannelli (2007) 27 Dubey, B. Personal Communication, February 7, 2012 28 Pacheco, A. Personal Communication, April 19,2012 29 Arguedas, M. Personal Communication, April 24, 2012 30 Kruz, C. Personal Communication, April 27, 2012 31 Coc and Zonso (2011) 32 Rodriguez, M. Personal Communication, May 4, 2012 33 Nesbitt, C. Personal Communication, January 28, 2012 34 Jimenez (2000) 35 Yeomans, J. Personal Communication, April 18, 2012 36 Mendonca (2007) 37 Anschütz (1996) 38 Carmona and Giraldo (1997) 39 Badilla and Suarez (2002) 40 Yousif and Scott (2007) 41 Zarate et al. (2008) 42 Montoya Álvarez, C. Personal Communication, April 26, 2012
136
Overall system management options
Waste characterization options
Waste reduction options
Collection, transport, and financing options
Resource recovery options
Waste transformation options
Disposal options
Coordination with local NGOs for capacity building40
‘Teach the teachers’ program28 30
Tax-‐based collection fee system40, 43
Agricultural uses for recycled materials (substrate, etc.)28
Integrating informal waste pickers26 ,44, 45
Community clean streets initiative35
Collection fee community education program43
Biodigesters for methane use as a cooking fuel28, 46
Motivational training and/or exchange visits for managers and operators37
Youth waste entrepreneurship program35
User pays fee system37
Waste-‐to-‐electricity28, 47
Community SWM committees35
Change in method of payment37
Sustainable alliances between agroindustry, communities, and ecological schools47
SWM planning workshops for local businesses48
Relate operator salaries to performance 37
Organics to paper production28
Pre-‐cycle campaign49
Door-‐to-‐door collection with smaller vehicles in hard-‐to-‐reach neighbourhoods50
Roofing from recycled materials35
Fostering constructive neighbourhood/ household competition37
Installation of waste bins in public areas and incorporation into collection route
Waste crops for livestock production during flooded market51
43 World Bank (2005b) 44 Furedy (1992) 45 World Bank (2009) 46 Echeverria (2009) 47 Sierra and Matute (2010) 48 Calderon and Ventura (2008) 49 UMA Environmental (1995) 50 UN Habitat (1989) 51 Moyaz and Reyes (2002)
137
Overall system management options
Waste characterization options
Waste reduction options
Collection, transport, and financing options
Resource recovery options
Waste transformation options
Disposal options
Compensation for proper separation/ system compliance37
Small-‐scale composting28, 35, 52
Increasing respect for public spaces to keep them clean37
Substrate and fertilizer produced from soap and sugar cane waste53
Religious partnerships54
Waste food products55
Ecotourism Compost pile with aeration tube and fan56
Town beautification project49
Return to point of sale program49
Medium-‐scale composting26
See Appendix C for complete descriptions of each option in the bank. The bank of
ideas will be used to generate four improved SWM scenarios that target key places
to intervene in the current SWM system.
4.4.3 Selection criteria for Todos Santos Cuchumatán
The selection criteria specific to Todos Santos are primarily founded upon results from the
previous chapter, and supplemented with technical data from the waste audit and literature
findings. The complete list of locally sensitive constraints and criteria can be found in Table
12 and Table 13.
Table 12. Constraints for locally appropriate system levers for use in Todos Santos
52 Bigoth (2001) 53 Jacome and Romero (2003) 54 Mohamad, Idris, and Mamat (2012) 55 Chan Blanco, Y. Personal Communication, April 19, 2012 56 Robles and Orejuela (2002)
138
Economic considerations Sustainability considerations Technical considerations
Criteria Description Criteria Description Criteria Description
Affordability19 20 21 22
Costs match users’ ability and willingness to pay19 20 21 22
Environmentally sustainable19 21
Innovations do not cause significant harm to long-‐ and short-‐term ecological processes19 21
Soundness of conceptual/ technological design19 21
Functions properly in local conditions, meets local technical needs 19 21
Low capital cost21 22
Requires only small amounts of capital to develop, employ, and maintain21 22
Locally sustainable19 21
Maintenance, reproduction and repair can be conducted at the local level19 21
Table 13. Criteria for locally appropriate system levers for use in Todos Santos
Economic considerations Cultural/Social/Political
considerations Sustainability considerations Technical considerations
Criteria Description Criteria Description Criteria Description Criteria Description
Use of local materials/ resources19 21 22
Reduces external economic dependence, locally repairable19 21 22
Education-‐centered
Targets education, particularly for youth
Flexibility19 20 21 57
Ability to adapt across scales, users, sites, and changing circumstances19 20 21 57
Targets recyclables
Targets materials that make up the majority of the waste composition: plastic, metal, and paper
Relatively labour-‐intensive21 22
Extends human labour and skills instead of replacing them21 22
Targets youth culture
Targets youth’s interest in consumerism and modern culture
Capacity building21
Builds on local skills to establish self-‐sustaining/ expanding community capacity21
Targets organics
Targets organic material to alleviate community health issues
Socially appealing20
Socially appealing image,
Targets waste reduction
Options considerably reduce waste
57 Vanek (2003)
139
positively impacts social status20
being sent to landfill
Targets remaining waste
Options deal with remaining waste that must be sent to landfill
Certain criteria identified in the literature and by the community can be met
by a wide variety of project options if projects are structured specifically to meet
these goals. Therefore, these project framework criteria will not greatly refine the
‘Bank of Ideas’, but must play a strong role in project planning, development,
implementation and upkeep. These criteria are equally as important as those listed
in Table 13; indeed, the community has considered some as crucial to the functioning
of the SWM system (see Table 14). Each system lever can and should be framed by
such measures.
Table 14. Framework criteria
Cultural/Social/Political considerations Sustainability considerations
Criteria Description Criteria Description
Inclusive of women and youth19
Recognizing the value of women and youth, incorporating them in SWM processes19
Project ownership19 21
Ensuring SWM projects are “owned” by the community, involvement of stakeholders in all project stages19 21
Appropriate technology and information transfer mechanisms19
Information and technology transfer is two-‐way process structured on the input of local users in all project stages19
Municipal buy-‐in Interests/benefits municipal authorities
4.4.4 Refining the ‘Bank of Ideas’: System lever assessment
Each system lever option was assessed with each criterion from Table 13 (see
140
Appendix D for the full analysis). Selected options were assembled into four SWM
scenarios, each complete with several system levers that act together to meet the
locally tailored criteria (see Figure 26, Figure 27, Figure 28, and Figure 29). These
scenarios represent a step-‐wise gradient of improving SWM practices. The
Foundations Scenario represents the most basic SWM scenario, meeting all criteria
but some only to a small degree. The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario lies at the
other end of the spectrum, representing the most integrated SWM scenario in which
all criteria are thoroughly met. The Religious Partnerships Scenario and the Private
Sector Involvement Scenario lie between these extremes. Eighteen system levers are
considered critical to the success of each scenario, and therefore form the base of
each one. Options that are unique to or introduced in a particular scenario are
highlighted in a yellow border. The benefits and drawbacks of each scenario are
summarized below in Table 15.
Table 15. Scenario Summary
The Foundations Scenario The Religious Partnerships Scenario
The Private Sector Involvement Scenario
The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario
Benefits Drawbacks Benefits Drawbacks Benefits Drawbacks Benefits Drawbacks
• All leverage points are targeted
• Easy to implement
• Builds upon current waste practices
• Many “learn-‐by-‐doing” approaches
• “End-‐of-‐pipe” fixes
• Unsustainable in the long-‐term
• Minimal influence on most system levers
• Minimal reuse and recycling
• Further targets youth’s interest in consumerism and modern culture and project ownership
• Easy to implement
• Private sector involvement
• Support from religious partnerships
• Predominantly “end-‐of-‐pipe” fixes
• Minimal influence on most system levers
• Decreased likelihood of success due to lack of compensation for waste practices
• Increased private sector involvement
• Increased project ownership
• Increased reuse and recycling
• Biodigester provides methane as cooking fuel and decreases organics sent to landfill
• More costly to implement
• Decreased organics available for animal consumption
• High level of reuse, recycling, waste prevention
• System is highly integrated
• Innovation and micro-‐enterprise are strongly supported
• Most costly to implement
• Difficult/time consuming to implement
• Too much eco-‐tourism and population growth can damage local systems
141
4.4.4.1 The Foundations Scenario
Figure 26 is a conceptual representation of the SWM system in The Foundations
Scenario. The stakeholder groups involved in SWM practices in this scenario include
a community SWM committee; women’s groups; one or more NGOs; the
municipality; and the private sector in the form of micro-‐enterprises. These groups
are responsible for the implementation and upkeep of several system levers, which
are grouped according to type (education and training programs, entrepreneurial
activities, municipal projects, etc.). The category labeled ‘municipal projects OR
micro-‐enterprise business development’ spans across the municipal and private
sector groups because local micro-‐enterprises can begin to take on a few of the
projects in this area and those that remain can be carried out by the municipality.
While the municipality would have to oversee and coordinate these micro-‐
enterprises, forming some private sector partnerships would remove a significant
financial burden from the municipal SWM budget.
142
Figure 26. Conceptual diagram of SWM tasks and stakeholder groups in The Foundations Scenario
System levers that are newly introduced in The Foundations Scenario include the
formation of a SWM committee; small-‐scale composting; organics-‐to-‐paper
production; a small-‐scale incinerator; and user compensation (monetary or in-‐kind)
for proper waste practices, such as separation, waste minimization, and cleaning
recycled materials before setting them out to be collected.
4.4.4.2 The Religious Partnerships Scenario
Figure 27 is a conceptual model of the SWM system in The Religious Partnerships
Scenario. This scenario also includes a community SWM committee; women’s
groups; one or more NGOs; the municipality; and the private sector in the form of
micro-‐enterprises, but additionally includes religious groups as stakeholders. These
groups would be brought on to initiate and manage a community clean streets
initiative, and to increase community respect for public places. Newly introduced
Community Solid Waste Management Committee(s)Education and training programs Community-wide planning
Wastecharacterization
workshops
Solid wasteauditing
Fee collectioncommunityeducationprogram
'Teach theteachers'program
NGOpartnerships
Municipal government solid waste division Private sector
Developmentof an overallSWM plan
Education and training programsMunicipal Projects OR Micro-Enterprise Business DevelopmentEducation and training programs
Manual Landfill
Motivationaltraining/exchange
visits formanagers and
operators Wasteseparationprogram
Tax-basedcollection fee
system
Collection bysmall vehicles in
outerneighbourhoods
Installation andemptying ofwaste bins inpublic areas
Hazardouswaste
transportationto
Huehuetanango
Women's groups
Community-wide wasteeducationprogram
Youth wasteentrepreneurship
program
Entrepreneurship
Women'srecycled crafts
initiative
Women'svermiculture
initiative
Compensationfor proper
waste practices
Organics topaper
production
Small-scalecomposting
sds
Small-scaleincinerator
sssss
143
system levers in this scenario include a town beautification project; agricultural
uses for recycled materials; and SWM planning workshops for local businesses.
These workshops can allow the private sector to play a stronger role in SWM by
identifying ways to minimize and properly dispose of waste, recover resources, and
share waste materials that could be used as resources by other businesses.
Figure 27. Conceptual diagram of SWM tasks and stakeholder groups in The Religious Partnerships Scenario
4.4.4.3 The Private Sector Involvement Scenario
Figure 28 is a conceptual model of the SWM system in The Private Sector
Involvement Scenario. The stakeholder groups involved in SWM practices in this
scenario are the same as those involved in The Religious Partnerships Scenario: a
Community Solid Waste Management Committee(s)Education and training programs Community-wide planning
Wastecharacterization
workshops
Solid wasteauditing
Fee collectioncommunityeducationprogram
'Teach theteachers'program
NGOpartnerships
Municipal government solid waste division Private sector
Development ofan overall SWM
plan
Education and training programsMunicipal Projects OR Micro-Enterprise Business DevelopmentEducation and training programs
SWM planningworkshops for
local businesses
ManualLandfill
Motivationaltraining/exchange
visits formanagers and
operators Wasteseparationprogram
Tax-basedcollection fee
system
Collection bysmall vehicles
in outerneighbourhoods
Installation andemptying ofwaste bins inpublic areas
Hazardous wastetransportation toHuehuetanango
Women's groups
Youth wasteentrepreneurship
program
Entrepreneurship
Women'srecycled crafts
initiative
Women'svermiculture
initiative
Townbeautification
project
Small-scalecomposting
Community-wide wasteeducationprogram
Agriculturaluse for recycled
materials
Organics topaper
production
sdfsd
Religious partnershipsEducation and training programs
Communityclean streets
initiative
Increasingrespect for
public places tokeep them clean
dsdsd
144
community SWM committee; women’s groups; one or more NGOs; the municipality;
the private sector in the form of micro-‐enterprises; and religious groups.
Figure 28. Conceptual diagram of SWM tasks and stakeholder groups in The Private Sector Involvement Scenario
Newly introduced system levers in this scenario include an education program for
youth that are not attending school; fostering constructive neighbourhood or
household competition; using recycled materials as construction materials; creating
roofing from recycled materials; initiating a return to point of sale program;
conducting secondary and tertiary separation at a centralized recycling center; and
installing a biodigester for methane use as a cooking fuel in homes and/or
restaurants.
NGOPartnerships
Municipal government solid waste division Private sectorEducation and training programsMunicipal Projects OR Micro-Enterprise Business DevelopmentEducation and training programs
SWM planningworkshops for
local businesses
Manual Landfill
Motivationaltraining/exchange
visits formanagers and
operators
Wasteseparationprogram
Tax-basedcollection fee
system
Collection bysmall vehicles
in outerneighbourhoods
Installation andemptying ofwaste bins inpublic areas
Hazardouswaste
transportationto
Huehuetanango
Women's groups
Youth wasteentrepreneurship
program
Entrepreneurship
Women'srecycled crafts
initiative
Women'svermiculture
initiative
Fosteringneighbourhood/
householdcompetition
Biodigester formethane use as a
cooking fuel
Secondary andtertiary
separation atrecycling center
Roofing fromrecycledmaterials
d
Religious partnershipsEducation and training programs
Communityclean streets
initiative
Increasingrespect for
public places tokeep them clean
Community Solid Waste Management Committee(s)Education and training programs Community-wide planning
Wastecharacterization
workshops Solid wasteauditing
Fee collectioncommunityeducationprogram
'Teach theteachers'program Development of
an overall SWMplan
Townbeautification
projectCommunity-wide wasteeducationprogram
Agriculturaluse for recycled
materials
sdfsd
Youth wasteeducationprogram
Recycledmaterials asconstruction
materials
Return to pointof sale program
dfdfdf
145
4.4.4.4 The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario
Figure 29 is a conceptual model of the SWM system in The Integrated SWM Vision
Scenario. The stakeholder groups involved in this scenario also include women’s
groups; one or more NGOs; the municipality; the private sector in the form of micro-‐
enterprises; and religious groups; however, a non-‐profit SWM organization labeled
here as the Clean Todos Santos Foundation replaces the community SWM
committee present in the previous scenarios. This organization would take on
similar roles to that of the SWM committee, but would additionally be responsible
for securing national and/or international support for SWM activities, integrating
the small number of informal waste workers in the community, and managing
ecotourism activities.
146
Figure 29. Conceptual diagram of SWM tasks and stakeholder groups in The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario
The private sector continues to be more involved in SWM activities through a pre-‐
cycle campaign and the development of value-‐added food products from food
wastes. The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario also includes separate collection days
for waste and recyclable materials in order to promote waste
4.5 Discussion
4.5.1 Residential solid waste audit
The level of participation in the residential solid waste audit in each neighbourhood
was dependent on the amount of time each community leader gave the auditor to
Non-profit Clean Todos Santos FoundationEducation and training programs Community-wide planning
Wastecharacterization
workshops
Solid wasteauditing
Fee collectioncommunityeducationprogram
'Teach theteachers'program
NGOPartnerships
Municipal government solid waste division Private sector
Developmentof an overallSWM plan
Ongoingprogram
monitoring
Education and training programsMunicipal Projects OR Micro-Enterprise Business DevelopmentEducation and training programs
SWM planningworkshops for
local businesses
Manual Landfill
Motivationaltraining/exchange
visits formanagers and
operators
Wasteseparationprogram
Tax-basedcollection fee
system
Collection bysmall vehicles
in outerneighbourhoods
Installation andemptying ofwaste bins inpublic areas
Hazardouswaste
transportationto
Huehuetanango
Women's groups
Youth wasteeducationprogram
Youth wasteentrepreneurship
program
Entrepreneurship
Women'srecycled crafts
initiative
Women'svermiculture
initiative
Fosteringneighbourhood/
householdcompetition
Pre-cyclecampaign
Biodigester formethane use asa cooking fuel
Secondary andtertiary
separation atrecycling center
Roofing fromrecycledmaterials
d
d
Securingnational/
internationalsupport
Religious partnershipsEducation and training programs
Communityclean streets
initiative
Increasingrespect for
public places tokeep them clean
Integratinginformal waste
workers
Community-wide wasteeducationprogram
Separatecollection days
Recycledmaterials asconstruction
materials
Agriculturaluse for recycled
materials
Sustainablealliances betweencommunities and
ecologicaluniversities
Return to pointof sale program
Waste foodproducts
dfdfdfd
Ecotourism
147
present to the community, which ranged from five minutes to half an hour, and how
much support each community leader gave the project. The women were more
supportive of and interested in the project on the whole. Proper separation and
participation was inversely proportional to the socio-‐economic status of the
participants. Wealthier households generated more waste than poorer households,
yet tended to do a poorer job at separation, or did not separate their waste at all. No
participants admitted to throwing waste in the streets, which at a minimum
indicates that those who do are aware that it is frowned upon, or those who chose to
participate in the audit are already somewhat waste-‐conscious.
The previous municipal administration issued a solid waste policy to all
neighboorhoods outside of El Centro that required them to burn everything that will
burn, sell anything that will sell, compost organic materials, and to send any
remaining items to the dump. The municipality has also lit fires within the landfill
itself to make room for more waste. Waste collection is sparse and in some cases
unreliable. Due to the fact that the dump is situated in the center of town and is
completely unregulated, community members can access it themselves. Clearly,
collection areas need to expand to include the whole community, and pick up should
be conducted on a more reliable schedule.
The results of the residential solid waste audit demonstrated the community’s
strong need of waste reduction and resource recovery strategies. Large quantities of
recyclable materials, including plastic, metal, and paper, are found in the waste
stream. The residents of Todos Santos produce far less waste than the average value
for Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) or the OECD member countries. This is
largely due to the fact that the waste audit only represents residential waste
generated, which typically makes up between 50 to 70% of municipal solid waste.
However, even if the waste audit figures were doubled, waste generation would be
much lower than the average value for the LAC region. This is particularly true for
the organic waste values; however, much of this waste is fed to household pigs, and
the actual amount of organic waste produced is much higher that reported in the
waste audit. Although organics make up a fairly small portion of the residential
148
waste sent to the dump, they are a concern in the community as they attract vectors
of disease and propagate the local dog overpopulation problem. Waste audits of
other sources that contribute organic waste to the dump should be investigated,
such as local restaurants, schools, and businesses.
The waste audit also highlighted waste practices that are habitual in the community,
such as waste burning. All neighbourhoods audited demonstrated a strong culture
of waste burning; therefore, a small-‐scale incinerator to generate electricity or hot
water is likely to have a good chance of adoption. Similarly, several community
members in various neighbourhoods have already adopted composting. Therefore,
small-‐scale composting or vermiculture projects have a better chance of adoption.
These community members can act as ‘technology ambassadors’ in their respective
neighbourhoods, helping other families and small businesses to set up and manage
their composting piles.
4.5.2 Bank of Ideas
The ‘Bank of Ideas’ was assembled with several community-‐identified priorities in
mind. Targeting the inclusion of women and youth and the improvement of local
education were community priorities, so a variety of examples for targeting these
areas were sought. Several successful projects targeting women were identified,
because women’s cooperation has been recognized as essential for the long-‐term
success of any urban service project. Women are the first and foremost users of
urban services, including waste collection. Waste disposal is often part of their daily
routine because they tend to be responsible for keeping the home and its immediate
environment clean (Anschütz, 1996). Women are also the first educators of children,
and their involvement can indirectly facilitate better education for children and
youth. Women tend to consider the improvement of urban services a higher priority
than men, yet their participation in SWM decision-‐making is marginal and their
‘voice’ is rarely heard. However, several projects demonstrated women’s crucial role
in SWM (Anschütz, 1996):
• Women act as SWM project initiators;
149
• Women are skilled at carrying out education campaigns on such topics as
preventative health, environmental issues, and sanitation behaviour;
• Women have worked together to put political pressure on local governments
for the implementation of services in their neighbourhood;
• They have acted as managers and operators of solid waste micro-‐enterprises;
and
• Women often act as watchdogs in the community, ensuring that other
households keep to the agreed rules of behaviour.
Therefore, while many projects listed in the bank may not explicitly call for the
participation of women, they should be targeted as ideal candidates for initiation,
management, and operation of solid waste system levers. However, special
consideration should be given to the challenges that women face, such as lacking
time to take on external projects when they must also manage the home and
sometimes also work the farm, or hostility and/or lack of support from male
community members. These issues can lower women’s participation rates, and limit
project funding because monthly fees are often too high to be paid by women alone.
Youth can be included in many similar ways; however, they lack the same interest in
health and sanitation, and tend to be only interested in participating if it will yield a
material reward (Anschütz, 1996). Therefore, examples targeting the inclusion of
youth generally consist of micro-‐enterprises in which youth act as operators,
managers, collectors, or environmental educators, and receive direct pay for their
work.
Campaigns focused on educational measures have often been criticized for raising
awareness but triggering little or no action (Galli et al., 2011; Mayo et al., 2006;
McKenzie-‐Mohr & Smith, 1999). SWM projects often lack educational measures
before and during the operation of the service, or the educational material provided
is not suited to the interests or priorities of the community, and therefore does not
trigger action (Anschütz, 1996). However, education plays a critical role in project
initiation. The benefits of behavioural change must first be advertised for action to
150
occur. The barriers to its use must then be removed and the benefits of its use must
outweigh the benefits of its non-‐use (McKenzie-‐Mohr & Smith, 2008). Education,
coupled with appropriate incentives, can therefore lead to much-‐needed
behavioural change. Anschütz (1996) reports that in a Guatemalan case study,
educational campaigns helped to establish a ‘spirit of responsibility’ towards
environmental problems and the most appropriate ways of confronting them.
While informing households about their solid waste tasks and responsibilities and
the benefits of proper SWM practices is a necessary element of all SWM programs,
focusing on improving the local education system and targeting the education of
youth and the community at large is a central concern in the community. Indeed,
education is a much higher priority than waste management for the municipal
authorities and the majority of the community. Therefore, example projects
targeting long-‐term educational improvements were sought after and included in
the bank. Projects that target the education system, such as the ‘teach the teachers’
campaign, are particularly critical.
It should also be noted that willingness to pay for SWM services is a crucial issue in
Todos Santos. The municipality cannot get the community to pay for SWM services;
community members believe it is the duty of the government to provide these
services for free. However, the municipal budget cannot support a proper collection
and disposal service without incoming funds in the form of taxes or fees. Willingness
to pay is related to the success of many elements of the SWM system (Anschütz,
1996): the motivation of operators and households; the reliability of the services;
the breadth of collection areas; the quality of services; and the ability to conduct
environmental monitoring and environmentally conscious SWM practices. It is
essential to establish appropriate cost recovery mechanisms, as the economic costs
of SWM tend to be concentrated in the maintenance, not the construction, of
disposal sites (World Bank, 2009). Therefore, projects that tackle willingness to pay
were targeted for inclusion in the bank.
151
4.5.3 System lever assessment
Several considerations were made during the system lever assessment that should
be noted, including the lack of markets for recyclable materials; the participation of
women and youth; and public distrust of the private sector.
• One of the principal barriers to conducting thorough resource recovery in
Todos Santos is the lack of markets for recycled materials. The only recycling
facilities in the country are in Xela and Guatemala City (Zarate et al., 2008),
which are both a considerable distance from Todos Santos; it would not be
cost effective to transport recyclable material to these locations. While
looking for and establishing new markets is an activity that must be done,
the community requires resource recovery and waste reduction methods
that do not depend on these markets in the mean time. Therefore, each
scenario presents resource recovery options that can function in the absence
of recycling markets;
• It should be noted that while certain system levers are directly assigned to
women’s groups or directly concern youth in the conceptual SWM scenario
diagrams, other groups, such as the SWM committee, the Clean Todos Santos
Foundation, and micro-‐enterprises are assumed to be inclusive of female
community members and youth; and
• Public skepticism about privatization and its association with lack of
transparency and corruption are common in Latin America (Hoornweg and
Giannelli, 2007); Todos Santos is no exception. Therefore, privatization
options, other than locally based micro-‐enterprises, were eliminated due to
the longstanding community distrust of the private sector.
Several options in the ‘Bank of Ideas’ were considered critical to the success of any
SWM plan in Todos Santos, and therefore they form the base of each of the three
scenarios. The subsequent sections explore these foundational system levers,
followed by a discussion of each of the four SWM system scenarios.
152
4.5.3.1 Foundational system management options
In the overall system management options, partnerships with local NGOs, micro-‐
enterprise development, and motivational training and exchange visits for managers
and operators are considered foundational for each scenario. The community is
already familiar with civil society projects, as several NGOs have worked in Todos
Santos in the past, and some have already expressed interest in working with waste
management issues in the community. Micro-‐enterprises are considered
foundational because they can accomplish smaller scale tasks within the SWM
system that the municipality cannot manage; they require low capital investment,
are relatively labour intensive, and contribute to the local economy; and they are
“owned” by community members, which may encourage better waste practices.
Training workshops, or charlas, are considered foundational for several reasons.
They are favoured by community members in Todos Santos; those who are invited
take pride in their training and consider the invitation a special occasion.
Workshops can be organized to fit a range of budgets, are education-‐centered, and
can foster a strong sense of project ownership among SWM employees. They can
foster a sense of pride in waste work, and help waste workers gain respect in the
community. Workshops can be tailored to changing circumstances, can build
capacity, and can increase the environmental sustainability of projects and worker
practices. Workshops and visits to other locations with successful waste
management practices can be organized through local NGOs.
4.5.3.2 Foundational waste characterization options
In the waste characterization options, further waste auditing and hands-‐on waste
characterization workshops are considered essential. While the residential waste
audit provided important information on residential waste disposal practices and
waste types and quantities, more information is needed to design a manual landfill
that will have the capacity to remain open for a minimum of 15 years. Waste audits
of local businesses, municipal offices, schools, and restaurants should be conducted
to gain a fuller understanding of the solid waste situation in Todos Santos. An
estimation of the overall waste produced each week should also be carried out.
153
Conducting hands-‐on waste characterization workshops will allow community
members and waste workers to take ownership of waste characterization and
landfill design. Zarate et al. (2008) discuss how these workshops can provide
participants with an understanding of the importance of volume minimization and
waste reduction schemes.
4.5.3.3 Foundational waste reduction options
In the waste reduction options, waste separation; community-‐wide waste education
programs; ‘teach the teachers’ programs; and youth waste entrepreneurship
programs; are considered foundational. Waste separation targets recyclable
materials that make up the largest portion of waste sent to the dump, and also
targets organics, which contribute to serious health issues in the community.
Community education programs are necessary to inform households about their
solid waste tasks and responsibilities, the benefits and tasks associated with waste
separation, collection schedules, and payment methods. These programs should
target women, as they are the main handlers of waste in the home. ‘Teach the
teachers’ programs can act as the foundation of an education system improvement
initiative. These workshops can foster local capacity, and allow the teachers to be
able to pass down important technical, social, economic, and entrepreneurial
information to students. Teacher training can be orchestrated in coordination with a
local NGO. Youth waste entrepreneurship programs can target youth in and out of
school who are interested in starting their own businesses. Teaching
entrepreneurial skills and innovative reuse and resource recovery projects can
foster capacity, environmental and local sustainability, and can provide youth with a
means to gain material rewards for SWM work.
4.5.3.4 Foundational collection, transport, and financing options
In the collection, transport, and financing options, a tax-‐based collection fee system;
collection fee community education programs; collection by small vehicles or
pushcarts in outer neighbourhoods; and the installation and emptying of waste bins
in public areas are considered essential to the proper functioning of the SWM
system. Implementing a tax-‐based collection fee system is crucial to the
154
performance of the overall SWM system. The alternative, which is based on the user
pays principle, would likely lead to illegal dumping and waste burning. A taxation
system should therefore be implemented that charges based on income bracket.
Community collection fee education programs will be essential to get community
members on board for the taxation system. The value and importance of paying for
SWM services and therefore having a functioning SWM system, such as the financial
benefits derived from reductions in expenses associated with health and
environmental services, can be relayed to community members during these
programs. It is essential that the collection area be expanded to include
neighbourhoods outside of El Centro. Smaller motorized vehicles or manual
pushcarts should be used to access steep and narrow streets. The collection route
should also include waste bins in public places, and more of these bins should be
installed to discourage littering.
4.5.3.5 Foundational resource recovery options
In resource recovery options, women’s recycled craft initiatives and a women’s
vermiculture initiative are recommended as foundational elements. These options
directly target resource reduction and the inclusion of women. They also build
capacity and foster entrepreneurial skills among women who may otherwise have
no available source of income. While the largest setback with composting initiatives
is often a lack of markets, a partnership with an NGO, such as Byoearth whose
founder participated in the expert interview process, would ensure that markets
could be reached for the compost produced by the women.
4.5.3.6 Foundational disposal options
Finally, in disposal options, a manual landfill and transporting hazardous waste to
the city of Huehuetenango are considered essential to meet all the technical needs of
the community. Although waste reduction and resource recovery options are highly
emphasized, the construction of a landfill for items that cannot be recovered
remains necessary. This particular landfill design is relatively labour intensive,
inexpensive to build and maintain, and will greatly minimize many of the main
community concerns about the current open dump (odor, aesthetics, attraction of
155
vectors of disease, and environmental contamination). One of the primary barriers
to constructing a new landfill for the community has been a lack of suitable land.
The mountainous terrain that surrounds the town leaves few locations flat enough
for a standard landfill design, particularly since such land is prized for agricultural
use. However, this particular landfill design is flexible in that it consists of a series of
long, narrow trenches that can curve to fit the local shape of the land. Therefore,
locations that were previously deemed inappropriate for landfill construction may
be suitable for this trench style, manual design. Transporting hazardous waste to a
facility in the city of Huehuetenango is an appropriate disposal method because
medical waste is already transported to Huehuetenango; other hazardous wastes
could be included on the truck, minimizing extra transportation costs.
4.5.4 The Foundations Scenario
The Foundations Scenario is the most basic of the four SWM scenarios and requires
the least number of changes to the current system. Organic material is targeted
through:
• Small-‐scale composting;
• A women’s vermiculture initiative; and
• Organics to paper production: Paper made from fruit peels (e.g. banana) and
other fibrous material can be used locally or sold to tourists. Women’s
groups already make and sell woven and other crafted items to tourists;
paper production could easily be added to their established crafting
activities.
Recyclable materials are diverted from landfill through:
• A women’s recycled craft initiative; and
• A small-‐scale incinerator. While incineration is not ideal, particularly since
the suggested small-‐scale, affordable incinerator cannot reach high enough
temperatures for full combustion to occur, a strong culture of waste burning
exists in the community. Therefore, incineration is an easy first step for
volume reduction. Depending on the community’s preference, either a filter
156
can be installed, or plastics and bleached items should not be incinerated to
avoid dioxin production.
The formation of a community SWM committee supports the initiation of many of
the proposed projects in this scenario. A community SWM committee can act as a
space for the development of an overall SWM plan, motivational workshops,
training, project initiation, and progress assessment. The committee should be
composed of a wide range of community members, including citizens; workers from
the ministries of health, environment, and agriculture; municipal authorities; local
businesses; restaurants; local schools; members of the police force, etc. In The
Foundations Scenario, the SWM committee is responsible for carrying out four SWM
education and training programs:
• Waste characterization workshops;
• A ‘teach the teachers’ program;
• A fee collection education program; and
• A general SWM education program for the community at large.
The committee will also be responsible for conducting solid waste auditing and
initiating small-‐scale composting with families or groups of families in the
community.
The municipality is responsible for implementing a tax-‐based fee collection system,
a waste separation program, and for conducting motivational training for waste
managers and operators. If feasible, low-‐cost exchange visits may be coordinated
with a local NGO (such as Byoearth) to spark local innovation. The municipality
should also provide compensation or incentives for proper waste practices, such as
separation, waste minimization, and cleaning recycled materials before setting them
out to be collected. Incentives that will be effective may vary from neighbourhood to
neighbourhood, and should be chosen on a context-‐specific basis.
The private sector is responsible for taking on a few basic SWM tasks for the
municipality, and for implementing a youth waste entrepreneurship program in
conjunction with a local NGO.
157
4.5.5 The Religious Partnerships Scenario
The Religious Partnerships Scenario is a step further towards an integrated SWM
system due to the addition of several SWM tasks and the development partnerships
with religious groups. Religion plays a strong role in the lives of most Todos
Santeros, and religious groups are very active in the community. While a distinct
divide exists between the evangelical Protestants and the Costumbre, a religious
assimilation of Catholicism and ancient Mayan customs into syncretic beliefs and
associated rituals (Wall, 1993), religious respect for the environment is deeply
rooted in the history of the community. Nature and the environment are a part of
spirituality and religion for many Todos Santeros, and several study participants
expressed that the environmental damage caused by poor SWM is a spiritual
concern. Therefore, involving religious groups through projects such as a
community clean streets program and an initiative to increase respect for public
spaces would be an acceptable way to increase community waste involvement and
education. A clean streets program can encourage community members to dispose
of waste in bins instead of throwing it in the streets by fostering a sense of
commitment to the communal good. It can also focus on informing community
members of their buying power, and encouraging them to make purchases that
come with less packaging. An initiative to increase respect for public places can
entail a campaign about the financial, health, and environmental repercussions of
littering (less municipal resources for education, health, etc. and unclean spaces
cause health and environmental issues). Such an initiative can also include the
installation of religious shrines or other symbols of respect in public spaces, for
which public inaugurations are held. This should decrease the likelihood of littering
in public spaces.
The newly introduced system levers that target recyclable materials include:
• Using recycled materials in agriculture: The SWM committee is responsible
for coordinating with local farmers to include recyclable materials as
barriers around beds, as other structures, and as substrate in the soil. When
158
these materials are used as substrate they must be accompanied by activated
charcoal or biochar to prevent contamination; and
• A town beautification project that uses recycled materials to create
structures (fountains, sculptures, garden walls, etc.) that represent the
culture and identity of the community. It is to be initiated by the community
SWM committee, but can be undertaken in partnerships with local schools
and community groups. While the town beautification project is not a
permanent resource recovery strategy in itself, it can act as a demonstration
project for the youth waste entrepreneurship program and the community
waste education programs. If properly partnered with civil society and the
private sector, it can act as an instrument for launching several longer-‐term
resource recovery micro-‐enterprises in the community.
The Religious Partnerships Scenario targets organic material through the same
means as The Foundations Scenario: a women’s vermiculture initiative; organics to
paper production; and small-‐scale composting.
The private sector plays a larger role in SWM tasks in The Religious Partnerships
Scenario. Workshops for SWM planning for local businesses can provide specific
SWM training tailored to the waste types each business or group of businesses
produce. These workshops can increase environmentally friendly practices, foster
local ownership, and in many cases have the potential to save money or generate
new forms of income for the business of concern. These workshops can also allow
businesses to develop partnerships for sharing waste resources. Micro-‐enterprises
focused specifically on solid waste are encouraged to take on some of the SWM
projects for the municipality, just as they are in The Foundations Scenario.
4.5.6 The Private Sector Involvement Scenario
In this scenario, the structure of participating stakeholder groups is the same as in
The Religious Partnerships Scenario, but some of these groups take on additional
system levers to create a more integrated SWM system. The SWM committee is
responsible for implementing an additional waste education program for youth that
cannot benefit from in-‐school programs. The growing interest in consumerism and
159
modern culture among youth is a community concern; these workshops can help
youth to make smarter consumer choices and preserve local culture by focusing on
fostering ethical values, ecological awareness, entrepreneurial thinking, and social
responsibility. The municipality is responsible for fostering constructive
neighbourhood or household competition about having the best waste practices and
maintaining the cleanest streets. Competition can be based on the most reuse
around the house, waste reduction by volume, or simply on following the waste
separation guidelines. An appropriate incentive can be used to start this competition
(e.g. a prize, ‘clean street of the month’ award, etc.), and a celebration or competition
day can be held to encourage families and neighbourhoods to participate.
Other newly introduced system levers are to be taken on by either the municipality
or the private sector, which has the opportunity to play a larger role in SWM tasks
than it did in The Religious Partnerships Scenario. Newly introduced system levers
that target recyclable material include:
• Making roofing out of recycled materials;
• Through the implementation of a return to point of sale program, which
enlists local businesses to accept broken products or empty containers for
repair, reuse, and re-‐sale;
• The construction of a centralized recycling center, where re-‐sorting of waste
that was previously separated in the home can occur. Materials can be
organized for sale or free pick-‐up, depending on demand; and
• Using recycled materials in construction: Community members are quite
familiar with using recyclable material for construction, as an NGO recently
built a school in the community using plastic bottles stuffed with waste as
bricks. Therefore, other similar uses for recyclable materials are likely to be
well accepted in the community.
The newly introduced system lever that targets organic material is a biodigester
that captures methane for use as a cooking fuel in homes and restaurants. The
biodigester is simple and inexpensive to construct. If successfully adopted by the
160
community, these biodigesters can be used to digest wastewater in the future, which
is currently untreated and released directly into the Limon River. Thus, the
biodigesters have evolutionary capacity; they can act as a stepping-‐stone to further
system integration and have the capacity to accomplish more work as the
community progresses.
4.5.7 The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario
The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario represents the most integrated SWM system
option. Recyclable materials are targeted through a women’s recycled crafts
initiative, a pre-‐cycle campaign, using recyclable materials in agriculture and
construction, a return to point of sale program, and making roofing from recycled
materials. Organics are targeted through a women’s vermiculture initiative, waste
food products, and a biodigester for methane use as a cooking fuel in homes or
restaurants.
The most fundamental change to the system’s structure is the introduction of a non-‐
profit organization, labeled in Figure 29 as the ‘Clean Todos Santos Foundation’. The
organization should be founded on the vision of the community at large, and should
include a broad range of stakeholders. An agreement should be signed between the
organization and the municipality on solid waste objectives, targets, and a
comprehensive SWM plan for the town of Todos Santos. The organization conducts
certain SWM tasks (e.g. conducts a thorough waste audit, conducting ongoing
monitoring, etc.) and oversees and manages certain SWM aspects in the community
in conjunction with the municipality (e.g. coordinates with/oversees micro-‐
enterprises). It is responsible for all of the educational and planning tasks that the
SWM committee conducts in the other scenarios, but is also responsible for the
following:
• Searching for and securing national and potentially international support.
• Integrating informal waste workers in to SWM tasks: While Todos Santos is
too small to have a booming waste economy with many informal waste
workers or pickers, a small handful of community members do resort to
161
scavenging at the dump. This activity is likely to increase as the town
expands and the population grows. Therefore, including waste scavengers in
formal SWM activities at this early stage is important.
• Increasing ecotourism in the community: Encouraging ecotourism activities
will provide a local drive to shift to more ecological practices. It will also
bring in revenue that will directly benefit community members and can also
be used to fund SWM services. Innovative waste practices in the community
can act as one of the central pulls for ecotourism. As waste practices improve,
Todos Santos can represent a community on the path to sustainability.
• Developing sustainable alliances between the community and ecological
universities: Creating a three-‐way alliance between the community, a
university and agroindustry was originally considered as a potential
resource recovery option, but there is little agroindustry in the immediate
area. However, an alliance with a university, such as Universidad Rural de
Guatemala or Universidad EARTH in Costa Rica, is still recommended
because it can greatly help the community to improve its waste practices,
foster local innovation, and achieve long-‐term project success.
The private sector is expected to play an even larger role in The Integrated SWM
Vision Scenario. More opportunities exist for micro-‐enterprises to participate in
waste reduction and recycling, including making value-‐added products from
unwanted food waste (e.g. whey can be made into a cream-‐free “cream cheese”;
burnt coffee can be used to make iced coffees or coffee ice-‐cream; etc.). Existing local
businesses can also encourage waste reduction through the ‘pre-‐cycle’ campaign,
which proactively reduces waste by reducing the initial sale of heavily packaged
products. Either the private sector or the municipality is recommended to carry out
separate collection days for waste and recyclable material in The Integrated SWM
Vision Scenario. This strategy aims to reduce waste production or the amount of
recyclable material found in the waste stream by increasing the frequency of
collection for recyclable materials or decreasing the frequency of waste collection.
162
4.5.8 Scenario selection
The scenarios represent an incremental gradient of integration in the SWM system.
While each scenario can stand on its own, one scenario may not be appropriate for
the entire town. Different neighbourhoods may require different, context-‐specific
scenarios. Currently, SWM services are not provided uniformly to all
neighbourhoods. For example, El Centro is the only neighbourhood that receives
consistent waste collection; it is also the wealthiest neighbourhood with the greatest
access to education and health services. The study participants from El Centro
showed less interest in waste separation, and the majority did not separate their
waste during the waste audit. This contrasted with the avid cooperation of
participants living in the surrounding neighbourhoods. Even within each
surrounding neighbourhood, current waste practices and services differ
considerably. Residents living closer to the center of town are more likely to receive
waste collection services and demonstrate similar interests and needs to those
living in El Centro (see Figure 30 for a conceptual representation of SWM service
provision).
= SWM service coverage
Figure 30. Conceptual diagram of current SWM service provision in Todos Santos
Therefore, it is recommended that at a minimum, the surrounding neighbourhoods
implement a different scenario from that implemented in El Centro. Due to the
163
lower socio-‐economic status of the residents and the lack of current SWM services
in the surrounding neighbourhoods, Scenarios 1 or 2 may be better starting points
for these areas, while The Private Sector Involvement Scenario would be better
tailored to El Centro. Of course, the researcher cannot make such a decision; only
the community can make these choices.
It should be noted that the incremental nature of the scenarios allows for easy
transition from one to the next; this evolutionary capacity will allow the community
to continually adjust and improve its solid waste practices, achieving higher and
higher levels of system integration. A strong focus on project ownership and on
developing entrepreneurial skills within the community will help build local
capacity and foster local innovation in the long-‐term.
4.5.9 Challenges and setbacks
Several setbacks and challenges were experienced over the course of the solid waste
audit. Multiple schools were approached to participate in the waste audit process,
but none were interested, and all refused to participate. Additionally, the overall
quantity of waste sent to the dump each week could not be estimated due to
operator coordination issues. The auditor attempted to assess the average quantity
of waste coming in on each truck and the number of trucks entering the site, but was
told to leave the site by the truck operators halfway through the process. Limited
time and resources prohibited this task from being conducted at a later date. Clearly,
communication, trust, and understanding were not successfully established with
these individuals. A third challenge of this nature was encountered during the
participant recruitment phase. Initial recruitment through radio advertisement
brought in very few participants, so the auditor requested to attend the monthly
community meetings of each neighbourhood to ask for study volunteers. Initially, it
was difficult to gain the understanding and cooperation with the community
leaders, and the auditor was generally rejected. However, the auditor responded by
hiring a local translator so the information could be relayed in Mam, the native
tongue of the community at large. The interpreter was carefully briefed before the
leaders were approached for a second time. The presentation was made again in
164
Mam, this time emphasizing the negative health effects that poor waste
management has caused in Todos Santos. The Mam rendition proved to be much
more successful, and the auditor was permitted to present, with the aid of the
translator, at each neighbourhood’s community meeting.
These issues demonstrate the pivotal importance of project ownership, which was
previously identified as a key factor for instigating positive changes in the SWM
system. Clearly, communication, trust, and understanding are extremely pertinent
to project ownership success. These factors form the foundation of what Murphy et
al. (2009) refer to as appropriate technology transfer mechanisms. The challenges
faced in the field demonstrate the absolutely critical nature of appropriate
information and technology transfer mechanisms for any community project.
Identifying and developing local solutions must be a two-‐way process, structured on
the input of local users in all project stages. While time and resource barriers
prevented the auditor from pursuing the participation of schools or the assessment
of the weekly quantity of waste sent to the dump, future work can target these
elements with approaches that focus on clear communication, understanding, and
community project ownership. This study provides the community of Todos Santos
with a strong platform from which context-‐specific SWM choices can be made that
have the potential to build capacity and help the community progress towards an
integrated, appropriate SWM system.
4.6 Conclusion Community identified concerns formed the base of this study. Education; municipal
interest in SWM; youth’s interest in consumerism and modern culture; the
participation of women and youth in the SWM process; and community project
ownership were previously identified as key areas to intervene in the solid waste
system. These targets, supplemented with technical data from the residential waste
audit, helped guide the compilation of 55 potential system levers in the ‘Bank of
Ideas’. Sixteen criteria spanning economic; social, cultural, and political;
sustainability; and technical considerations were used to produce four scenarios,
ranging from low to high SWM system integration. It is recommended that The
165
Private Sector Involvement Scenario be implemented in the neighbourhood of El
Centro, and The Foundations Scenario or 2 be implemented in the surrounding
neighbourhoods. However, the community must judge which SWM scenarios are
most appropriate for local use. This study can aid in guiding this process and in
ensuring the community is able to choose from a broad selection of innovative
approaches with high potential to be locally appropriate.
166
4.7 References Anschütz, J. (1996). Community-‐based solid waste management and water supply
projects: Problems and solutions compared: A survey of the literature. Gouda, The Netherlands: WASTE
Asian Tribune. (2009). The importance of technology for development: A political economy perspective, Asian Tribune.
Badilla, R. A., & Suarez, A. S. (2002). Viabilidad de implementar un sistema integrado de manejo de desechos para pequenas comunidades de la zona Atlantica de Costa Rica a traves de microempresas. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Bigoth, K. S. (2001). Auditoria del manejo de los desechos en la empresa Linda Vista, Cartago, Costa Rica. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Calderon, J. C. S., & Ventura, J. F. Q. (2008). Plan de gestion para el manejo de los residuos solidos en empresas del distrito de guapiles. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Carmona, C., & Giraldo, E. (1997). Analysis del sistema de recoleccion de desechos solidos municipales con previa separacion en al fuente. Bogota, Colombia.
Coc, E. M., & Zonso, J. J. (2011). Elaboracion de una guia basica para la manejo de desechos solidos en una comunidad rural. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Cohen, B. (2004). Urban Growth in Developing Countries: A Review of Current Trends and a Caution Regarding Existing Forecasts. World Development, 32(1), 23-‐51.
Conteh, A. (2003). Culture and the transfer of technology. In B. Hazeltine & C. Bull (Eds.), Field guide of appropriate technology. San Diego, CA: Elsevier Science.
Darrow, K., & Saxenian, M. (1993). Appropriate technology sourcebook: A guide to practical books for village and small community technology. Stanford, CA: Village Earth.
Dunn, P. (1978). Appropriate technology: Technology with a human face. London: Macmillan.
Echeverria, F. O. (2009). Evaluacion del sistema de tratamiento de aguas residuales del sector central de la Universidad EARTH. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Eckaus, R. S. (1977). Appropriate technologies for developing countries. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences.
167
Furedy, C. (1992). Garbage: Exploring non-‐conventional options in Asian cities. Environment and Urbanization, 4(2), 42-‐61.
Galli, A., Wiedmann, T., Ercin, E., Knoblauch, D., Ewing, B., & Giljum, S. (2011). Integrating ecological, carbon, and water footprint: Defining the “Footprint Family" and its application in tracking human pressure on the planet: One Planet Economy Network.
Geng, Y., Tsuyoshi, F., & Chen, X. (2010). Evaluation of innovative municipal solid waste management through urban symbiosis: A case study of Kawasaki. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(10-‐11), 993-‐1000.
Gonzalez, G. P. B., & Taborga, S. A. T. (2001). Evaluacion economica de la contaminacion por desechos en la zona urbana de Guapiles. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Hoornweg, D., & Bhada-‐Tata, P. (2012). What a waste: A global review of solid waste management. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Hoornweg, D., & Giannelli, N. (2007). Managing municipal solid waste in Latin America and the Caribbean: Integrating the private sector, harnessing incentives: PPIAF World Bank.
IDB. (2011). Strategic guidelines for the municipal solid waste sector (MSW). Paper presented at the CSD intersessional conference on building partnerships for moving towards zero waste, Tokyo, Japan.
Jacome, A. C., & Romero, F. F. V. (2003). Elaboracion de sustratos y enmiendas agricolas a partir de desechos de la agroindustria azucarera y la industria del jabon. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Jimenez, E. D. S. (2000). Analysis del sistem a de manejo integrado de desechos solidos domesticos de EARTH y su evaluacion desde el punto de vista social interno. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Joseph, K., Rajendiran, S., Senthilnathan, R., & Rakesh, M. (2012). Integrated approach to solid waste management in Chennai: an Indian metro city. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 14(2), 75-‐84.
Kgathi, D., & Bolaane, B. (2001). Instruments for sustainable solid waste management in Botswana. Waste Management and Research, 19(4), 342-‐353.
Kojima, M. (2011, February 16-‐18, 2011). Case from Asia: Expanding role of private sectors in waste management and recycling business towards realizing sound material cycle society. Paper presented at the CSD intersessional conference on building partnerships for moving towards zero waste, Tokyo, Japan.
168
Konteh, F. H. (2009). Urban sanitation and health in the developing world: reminiscing the nineteenth century industrial nations. Health & Place, 15(1), 69-‐78.
Mantilla, J. E. V. (2007). Proyecto cuente con ambiente primer informe sobre desechos solidos (1 ed.): MARN, Universidad Rafael Landivar.
Matuschke, I. (2009). Rapid urbanization and food security: Using food density maps to identify future food security hotspots. Paper presented at the International Association of Agricultural Economists Conference, Beijing, China.
Mayo, E., et al. (2006). I will if you will: Towards sustainable consumption: National Consumption Roundtable Sustainable Development Commission.
McKenzie-‐Mohr, D., & Smith, W. (1999). Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-‐Based Social Marketing. Gabriola Island (B.C.): New Society Publishers.
Mendonca, A. E. A. (2007). Propuesta de modelo para la gestion de los residuos solidos en el canton de Pococi. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Mohamad, Z. F., Idris, N., & Mamat, Z. (2012). Role of religious communities in enhancing transition experiments: a localised strategy for sustainable solid waste management in Malaysia. Sustainability Science, 7(2), 237-‐251.
Moodley, S. (2005). Deconstructing the South African Government's ICT for Development Discourse. Africa Insight, 35(3), 3-‐11.
Moyaz, M. V., & Reyes, M. F. (2002). Analisis de factibilidad technico-‐economica del engorde de bovinos en semiconfinamiento suplementados con desechos de palmito. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Murphy, H. M., McBean, E. A., & Farahbakhsh, K. (2009). Appropriate technology – A comprehensive approach for water and sanitation in the developing world. Technology in Society, 31(2), 158-‐167.
Ntim, B. (1988). Introduction. In S. Buatsi (Ed.), Technology Transfer -‐ nine case studies. London, UK: IT Publications.
OECD. (2012). Members and partners Retrieved October 2, 2012, from http://www.oecd.org/about/membersandpartners/
Pellegrini, U. (1979). The problem of appropriate technology. . In A. De Giorgio & C. Roveda (Eds.), Criteria for selecting appropriate technologies under different cultural, technical, and social conditions (pp. 1-‐5). New York: Pergamon Press.
169
Robles, M. B., & Orejuela, F. S. (2002). Evaluacion de manejo dedesechos organicos domesticos en la EARTH. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Rybczynski, W. (1980). Paper Tigers. Charlmington: Prism.
Schübeler, P. (1996). Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-‐Income Countries. In K. Wehrle & J. Christen (Eds.). St. Gallen Switzerland: UNDP/UNCHS/World Bank/SDC Collaborative Programme on Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-‐Income Countries.
Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is beautiful: A study of economics as if people mattered. London: Blond and Briggs, 1974.
Seadon, J. K. (2010). Sustainable waste management systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(16-‐17), 1639-‐1651.
Sierra, J. A. P., & Matute, T. D. S. P. (2010). La biodigestion como estrategia en el manejo sostenible de desechos organicos, y para el fomento de alianzas entre la agroindustria, las comunidaded, y redes de escuelas ecologicas. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH.
Singh, R., Tyagi, V. V., Allen, T., Ibrahim, M. H., & Kothari, R. (2011). An overview for exploring the possibilities of energy generation from municipal solid waste (MSW) in Indian scenario. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(9), 4797-‐4808.
Singh, R. P., Singh, P., Araujo, A. S. F., & Ibrahim, M. H. (2011). Management of urban solid waste: Vermicomposting a sustainable option. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 55(7), 719-‐729.
Smillie, I. (2000). Mastering the Machine Revisited: Poverty, Aid and Technology. London: ITDG Publishing.
170
5 Local innovation, ownership, and action: A systems approach to context-‐specific ‘best’ options for integrated solid waste management in Todos Santos, Guatemala
5.1 Introduction The study and management of complex systems, such as SWM systems, requires an
understanding of feedback loops, information flows, and other complex interactions
among system components. However, many policy and planning decisions are made
without consideration of the SWM system as a complex, interconnected whole; this
heightens the risk of making poor choices, errors, and oversights in managerial
activities (Kollikkathara et al., 2010). For these reasons, many researchers have
begun to explore SWM from a systemic perspective. System models, including causal
mapping/loop diagrams and system dynamics models, have been used by a number
of researchers to gain a fuller understanding of SWM systems and sub-‐systems. Such
models have been used to predict municipal solid waste generation and landfill
capacity (Dyson & Chang, 2005; Kollikkathara et al., 2010); as a decision support
tool for SWM financial planning (Kum, Sharp, & Harnpornchai, 2004); to simulate
the composting process (Neves, Gomes, Tarelho, & Matos, 2007); to forecast the
development of SWM systems that include qualitative variables such as voluntary
recycling (Karavezyris, Timpe, & Marzi, 2002); to explore transitioning from
landfilling to other forms of disposal (Mashayekhi, 1993); to explore the
interactions among solid waste system components in a developing country context,
ensuring to include the informal sector (Sudhir, Srinivasan, & Muraleedharan,
1997); to manage healthcare waste (Clipak & Barton, 2012); and to evaluate the
social performance of construction waste management (Yuan, 2012).
While taking a systems approach is crucial for achieving a more integrated solid
waste system, developing a SWM system that is locally appropriate and sustainable
cannot be achieved without the involvement of local stakeholders. However, though
participatory model building has become increasingly popular as a means to
facilitate inclusive decision-‐making and effective community participation in the
management of other resources (e.g. see Mirchi, Madani, Watkins Jr., and Ahmad
171
(2012); Campo, Bousquet, and Villanueva (2010); and Suwarno, Nawir, Julmansyah,
and Kurniawan (2009)), such approaches have received little attention in the field of
SWM. This has limited the success of systems approaches in SWM because locally
appropriate systemic change is dependent upon stakeholder participation; actual
systemic change occurs at multiple levels, “beginning with people’s initial intent to
address a complex problem systemically and by clarifying the end result around
which they are aligned” (Stroh, 2003, p. 7). Locally appropriate change proceeds if
stakeholders are engaged in understanding, building commitment to, and
contributing to the systemic approach (Stroh, 2003). Only then can the system
structure be examined for places to intervene in a locally appropriate, sustainable
manner. The previous chapters lay the groundwork for the development of an
action-‐oriented plan for change through systemic intervention. Such ‘action
planning’ is based on the use of leverage effects, or as Vermaak (2007, p. 184)
describes, “the use of a charming and deep-‐seated notion in systems thinking: the
ability to achieve as much impact as possible with as little effort as possible by
focusing on the right factors”. These leverage points can be identified by examining
causal maps or loop diagrams of the system in question, and, once found, can point
to successful strategies for change (Vermaak, 2007). Such strategies can form the
foundation of a locally tailored system intervention plan.
In order to ensure stakeholders can make an educated decision about which
strategies are “best fit” for their particular system, it is important to understand
how each project or strategy affects the structure of the system: Which leverage
points are targeted, how strongly are they influenced, and how might these changes
affect the structure and behaviour of the system? This chapter explores these
questions through a scenario implementation analysis.
5.2 Methodology Founded on the results of previous chapters, this study explores the impacts of each
of the four SWM scenarios established in Chapter 4 on the structure of the SWM
system, as depicted through the participatory causal mapping process described in
Chapter 3. A simplified version of the community-‐wide causal map depicting only
172
the feedback loops, elements, and relationships that are ideal places to intervene in
the system was used for the scenario impact analysis (see Figure 31). The system
levers identified in chapter 4 are labeled in green.
Figure 31. Key places to intervene in the Todos Santos SWM system
The following sections describe the methodology used to determine the impact of all
four scenarios on the SWM system in Todos Santos.
Health
EnvironmentalSystems
Funding forSWM
RecyclableMaterialQuantity
EconomicCapital
WasteQuantity
Health and Interest in SWM Loop
Waste in the Streets Loop
Preoccupation withOther Community
Needs
Generation Rate
Tourism
Locations for People toResponsibly Dispose of
Waste
People ThrowWaste in the
Streets
Coordination withLocal Businesses
Education
Participation ofWomen and Youth
Projects that are"Owned" By the
WholeCommunity
Interest/ Understandingabout the Waste Issue
-
+
+
MunicipalInterest in SWM
-
-
Adequacy ofSWM-
+
Degradation
Illness/Decrease inWellbeing
+
Life SupportSystems
+
-
-
Municipal BudgetContribution
+
+
Influx ofPlastic
EconomicIncome
+
ReductionRate
Maintaining Traditions,Culture, and Language
Youth are a DifferentGeneration: Interest in
Consumerism and ModernCulture-
Educated Youth
+
-
ResourceAccess
+
+
+ ++
TownAesthetics
+
Valuing Womenand Youth
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
Recycled andReused
Materials
RecyclableMaterial
Entering theWaste Stream
Recycled MaterialDiversion
173
5.2.1 Scenario implementation
The four SWM scenarios established in Chapter 4 are implemented separately to
display the differing impacts each one would have on the SWM system. Scenarios
are “implemented” by introducing the components that make up each one into the
system structure. New system elements – including relationships, variables, stocks,
and flows – are established to connect the scenario components to the existing
system structure in a logical manner. The strengths of new relationships are rated in
the same way they are in the original causal maps (see Chapter 3): a thin arrow
represents low strength, and is assigned a numerical value of 1; an arrow with
medium thickness has a medium strength and is assigned a numerical value of 2;
and a thick arrow represents a strong relationship with a value of 3. All new system
elements are represented in purple, and newly introduced scenario components are
represented in red to distinguish each one from the existing system structure.
5.2.2 Implementation analysis
The implementation analysis consists of three parts:
• Determining the individual and collective impacts of all projects within a
given scenario. This includes determining which variables are increased or
decreased, which relationships are strengthened, and which system levers,
such as action-‐entry points and reinforcing feedback loops, are altered;
• Verifying which scenarios are most likely to be well-‐suited for immediate
implementation within each neighbourhood of Todos Santos; and
• Identifying which projects within these suggested scenarios should be
implemented during the first “momentum-‐building” phase of the system
intervention plan. It is important to ensure a system intervention plan gains
momentum by identifying a few key changes in processes, procedures, and
perceptions that should be made (Stroh, 2003). The success of this initial
stage is also dependent upon deepening stakeholders’ understanding of the
system as changes are made (Stroh, 2003).
174
It should be noted that implementing a chosen scenario in a series of stages ensures
that change is introduced in small, natural steps, and that the system does not resist
these changes to the extent that implementation fails altogether.
5.3 Results
5.3.1 The Foundations Scenario
The systemic impacts of The Foundations Scenario can be seen in Figure 32. System
levers that are newly introduced in this scenario are depicted in red, and newly
added system components are depicted in purple. Grey components receive little to
no impact in this scenario. Blue arrows and black variables, stocks, and flows
represent components that are influenced by the added system levers.
175
Figure 32. Impacts of The Foundations Scenario system levers on the community-‐wide causal map
5.3.1.1 Targeting the five action entry points
The Foundations Scenario targets each of the five primary action entry points
identified in Chapter 3, although some more weakly than others.
• Education, particularly that of youth, is directly targeted through the Teach
the Teachers’ Program, the Youth Waste Entrepreneurship Program, and
other waste education measures;
Health
EnvironmentalSystems
Funding forSWM
RecyclableMaterialQuantity
EconomicCapital
WasteQuantity
Health and Interest in SWM Loop
Waste in the Streets Loop
Preoccupation withOther Community
Needs
Generation Rate
Tourism
Locations for People toResponsibly Dispose of
Waste
People ThrowWaste in the Streets
PublicEducation
Participationof Womenand Youth
Projects that are"Owned" By the
Whole Community
Interest/Understanding about
the Waste Issue
-
-
+
MunicipalInterest in SWM
-
-
Adequacy ofSWM-
+
Illness/Decrease inWellbeing
+
Life SupportSystems
+
-
MunicipalExpenditures
Municipal BudgetContribution
+
+
Influxof
Plastic
EconomicIncome
+
ReductionRate
MaintainingTraditions, Culture,
and Language Youth are a DifferentGeneration: Interest in
Consumerism and ModernCulture
-
Educated Youth
+
-
+
+
Town Aesthetics
+
Installation andemptying of waste bins
in public areas
Quantity oforganics in
dump
WasteEducation
+
Vectors ofdisease
Dumpingrate
+
Organicsconsumption
+
RecyclableMaterialsEntering
WasteStream
+
Need fordisposal
Degradation
+
poor wastedisposal
(dumping,burying, slow
burning)
+
-
+
+
methane gasDecomposition
+
Development ofEffective SWM
Plan
RecyclableMaterial
Diverted fromLandfill
LEGEND
<FeeCollectionEducationProgram>
+
+
WasteCharacterization
Workshops
Youth WasteEntrepreneurship
Program
Micro-Enterprise
Development
Compensationfor Proper Waste
Practices
MotivationalTraining forManagers
andOperators
Community- wideWaste Education
Program
CommunitySWM
Committee(s)
'Teach theTeachers'Program
Hazardous WasteTransportation toHuehuetenango
Small-ScaleIncinerator
Manual Landfill
Solid WasteAuditing
Waste SeparationProgram
Women's RecycledCrafts Initiative
FeeCollectionEducationProgram
Tax-basedFee
System
Collection by SmallVehicles in OuterNeighbourhoods
Small-ScaleComposting
Organics to PaperProduction
Women'sVermiculture
Initiative
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
++
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
++
Valuing Womenand Youth
++
+
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
+Resource Access
RecyclableMaterial Diversion
+++
+
-
<Compensation forproper waste practices>
+
176
• Municipal interest in SWM is directly targeted by the tax-‐based fee system,
which will ensure the municipal authorities have enough money to run SWM
programs. It is targeted indirectly through increased citizen interest in SWM,
which will make SWM a higher priority for the municipality;
• Youth’s interest in consumerism and modern culture is indirectly targeted
through increased participation of youth in SWM activities;
• Valuing women and youth is targeted by activities carried out by the
women’s groups. Increasing the participation of women in the SWM process
is directly accomplished through their participation in the community SWM
committee(s); and
• Project ownership is directly targeted through micro-‐enterprise
development, the community SWM committee(s), waste education,
motivational training for managers and operators, and indirectly through
increased participation of women and youth.
5.3.2 The Religious Partnerships Scenario
The systemic impacts of The Religious Partnerships Scenario can be seen in Figure
33.
177
Figure 33. Impacts of The Religious Partnerships Scenario system levers on the community-‐wide causal map
5.3.2.1 Targeting the five action entry points
Newly introduced variables in The Religious Partnerships Scenario further target
two of the five primary action entry points identified in Chapter 3: youth’s interest
Health
EnvironmentalSystems
Funding forSWM
RecyclableMaterialQuantity
EconomicCapital
WasteQuantity
Health and Interest in SWM Loop
Waste in the Streets Loop
Preoccupation withOther Community
Needs
GenerationRate
Tourism
Locations for People toResponsibly Dispose of
Waste
People ThrowWaste in the Streets
PublicEducation
Participationof Womenand Youth
Projects that are"Owned" By the Whole
Community
Interest/Understanding about
the Waste Issue
-
-
+
MunicipalInterest in SWM
-
-
Adequacy ofSWM-
+
Illness/Decrease
inWellbeing
+
Life SupportSystems
+-
MunicipalExpenditures
Municipal BudgetContribution
+
+
Influxof
Plastic
EconomicIncome+
Reduction Rate
MaintainingTraditions, Culture,
and Language
Youth are a DifferentGeneration: Interest in
Consumerism and ModernCulture
Youth DiscussingAnything of Value
-+
Educated Youth
+
-
+
+
+
Town Aesthetics
+
Valuing Womenand Youth
+
CommunitySWM
Committee(s)
Wastecharacterization
workshops
Solid wasteauditing
Fee collectioneducationprogram
'Teach theteachers' program
Micro-enterprisedevelopment
Manual Landfill
Motivationaltraining for
managers andoperators
Waste separationprogram
Tax-basedcollection fee
system
Collection by smallvehicles in outerneighbourhoods
Installation andemptying ofwaste bins inpublic areas
Hazardous wastetransportation toHuehuetanango
Community-wide wasteeducationprogram
Youth wasteentrepreneurship
program
Women's recycledcrafts initiative
Women'svermiculture
initiative
Organics to paperproduction
Small-scalecomposting
+
Quantity oforganics in
dump
WasteEducation
+
+
+
Vectors ofdisease
Dumpingrate
+ Organicsconsumption
+
-
+
+
++
++
+
RecyclableMaterialsEntering
WasteStream
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
Need fordisposal
Degradation
+
-
+
-
poor wastedisposal
(dumping,burying, slow
burning)
+
+
-
+
+ Developmentof EffectiveSWM Plan
+
methane gasDecomposition
+
Coordination withlocal businesses
+
SWMworkshops for
localbusinesses
+
+
Agricultural usesfor recyclable
materials
Recycled andReused
Materials
+++
Town BeautificationProject
+ +
ReligiousPartnerships
Community CleanStreets Program
IncreasingRespect for
Public Places
+
+
--
+
+
+
+
+
<FeeCollectionEducationProgram>
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
+
Resource Access+
RecyclableMaterial Diversion
178
in consumerism and modern culture, and projects that are owned by the
community.
• The former is targeted by religious partnerships, which will predominantly
target the Waste in the Streets Loop, and will encourage maintaining the
deeply rooted respect for the environment that has been part of the Mayan
culture and traditions for centuries; and
• The SWM workshops for local businesses and a town beautification project
indirectly increase local ownership of SWM projects by increasing
coordination with local businesses and helping solid waste micro-‐enterprises
get off the ground.
5.3.3 The Private Sector Involvement Scenario
The systemic impacts of The Private Sector Involvement Scenario can be seen in Figure 34.
179
Figure 34. Impacts of The Private Sector Involvement Scenario system levers on the community-‐wide causal map
5.3.3.1 Targeting the five action entry points
In The Private Sector Involvement Scenario, additional system levers further target
four of the five action entry points: The education of youth; the participation of
youth; project ownership; and youth’s interest in modern culture and consumerism.
Health
EnvironmentalSystems
Funding forSWM
RecyclableMaterialQuantity
EconomicCapital
WasteQuantity
Health and Interest in SWM Loop
Waste in the Streets Loop
Preoccupation withOther Community
Needs
GenerationRate
Tourism
Locations for People toResponsibly Dispose of
Waste
People ThrowWaste in the Streets
PublicEducation
Participation ofWomen and Youth
Projects that are"Owned" By the Whole
Community
Interest/Understanding about
the Waste Issue
-
-
+
MunicipalInterest in SWM
-
-
Adequacy ofSWM-
+
Illness/Decrease
inWellbeing
+
Life SupportSystems
+
-
MunicipalExpenditures
Municipal BudgetContribution
+
+
Influxof
Plastic
EconomicIncome
+
ReductionRate
MaintainingTraditions, Culture,
and Language
Youth are a DifferentGeneration: Interest in
Consumerism and ModernCulture
Youth DiscussingAnything of Value
-+
Educated Youth
+
-+
+
+
Town Aesthetics
+
Valuing Womenand Youth
+
CommunitySWM
Committee(s)
Wastecharacterization
workshops
Solid wasteauditing
Fee collectioneducationprogram
'Teach theteachers'program
Micro-enterprisedevelopment
Manual Landfill
Motivationaltraining formanagers
andoperators
Waste separationprogram
Tax-basedcollectionfee system
Collection by smallvehicles in outerneighbourhoods
Installation andemptying of waste
bins in publicareas
Hazardous wastetransportation toHuehuetanango
Community-wide wasteeducationprogram
Youth wasteentrepreneurship
program
Women's recycledcrafts initiative
Women'svermiculture
initiative
+
Quantity oforganics in
dump
WasteEducation
+
++
Vectors ofdisease
Dumpingrate
+
Organicsconsumption
+
+
+
+
+
+
RecyclableMaterialsEntering
WasteStream
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
Need fordisposal
Degradation
+
-
+
-
poor wastedisposal
(dumping,burying, slow
burning)
+
+
-
+
+
Developmentof EffectiveSWM Plan
+
methane gasDecomposition
+
Coordination withlocal businesses
SWMworkshops for
localbusinesses
+
+
Agricultural usesfor recyclable
materials
Recycled andReused
Materials
+ +
+
Town BeautificationProject
+
+
ReligiousPartnerships
Community CleanStreets Program
IncreasingRespect for
Public Places
+
+
--
+
FosteringNeighbourhood/
HouseholdCompetition
Recycled MaterialsUsed in Construction
Roofing fromRecycled Materials
Biodigester forMethane Use as a
Cooking Fuel
Secondary and TertiarySeparation at Recycling
Center
Return to Point ofSale Progam
Youth WasteEducationProgram
-
+
+
+ ++
+
+
+
+
dgf
<FeeCollectionEducationProgram>
+
+
+
+
<Return toPoint of
SaleProgram>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
Resource Access +
+Recyclable
Material Diversion
180
• Education of youth is targeted through a youth waste education program that
ensures youth not attending school have the opportunity to receive training
and waste education;
• The participation of youth is also targeted through the youth waste education
program;
• Project ownership is targeted by fostering constructive neighbourhood or
household competition and through a return to point of sale program that
increases the participation of local businesses in waste issues; and
• Youth’s interest in modern culture and consumerism is indirectly targeted
through the youth waste education program. The program encourages
ecological awareness; ethical values; entrepreneurial thinking; and social
responsibility, and therefore may foster sustainable behaviour and interest
in preserving the local culture.
5.3.4 The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario
The systemic impacts of The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario can be seen in Figure
35.
181
Figure 35. Impacts of The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario system levers on the community-‐wide causal map
5.3.4.1 Targeting the five action entry points
In this scenario, newly added system levers further target education and project
ownership.
• Education is targeted by establishing sustainable alliances with ecological
universities, which can foster environmental education through engaged,
hands-‐on SWM projects in the community, and by helping schools develop
Health
EnvironmentalSystems
Funding forSWM
RecyclableMaterialQuantity
EconomicCapital
WasteQuantity
Health and Interest in SWM Loop
Waste in the Streets Loop
Preoccupation withOther Community
Needs
GenerationRate
Tourism
Locations for People toResponsibly Dispose of
Waste
People ThrowWaste in the Streets
PublicEducation
Participationof Womenand Youth
Projects that are"Owned" By the
Whole Community
Interest/Understandingabout the Waste
Issue
-
-
+
MunicipalInterest in SWM
-
-
Adequacy ofSWM
-
+
Illness/Decrease
inWellbeing
+
Life SupportSystems
+
-
MunicipalExpenditures
MunicipalBudget
Contribution
+
+
Influxof
Plastic
EconomicIncome
+
Reduction Rate
MaintainingTraditions, Culture,
and Language
Youth are a DifferentGeneration: Interest in
Consumerism and ModernCulture
Youth DiscussingAnything of Value
-
+
Educated Youth
+
-+
+
+
Town Aesthetics
+
Valuing Womenand Youth
+
Wastecharacterization
workshops
Solid wasteauditing
Fee collectioneducationprogram
'Teachthe
teachers'program
Micro-enterprisedevelopment
Manual Landfill
Motivationaltrainingformanagers
andoperators
Waste separationprogram
Tax-basedcollectionfee system
Collection by smallvehicles in outerneighbourhoods
Installationand
emptying ofwaste bins inpublic areas
Hazardous wastetransportation toHuehuetanango
Youth wasteentrepreneurship
program
Women's recycledcrafts initiative
Women'svermiculture
initiative
+
Quantity oforganics in
dump
WasteEducation
+
+
Vectors ofdisease
Dumping rate
+ Organicsconsumption
+
+
+
+
RecyclableMaterialsEntering
WasteStream
+
++
+
+
+
+
Need fordisposal
Degradation
+
-
+
-
poor wastedisposal
(dumping,burying, slow
burning)
+
+
-
+
+
Developmentof EffectiveSWM Plan
+
methane gasDecomposition
+
dgf
Coordination withlocal businesses
SWMworkshops for
localbusinesses
+
+
Agricultural usesfor recyclable
materials
Recycled andReused
Materials
++
+
ReligiousPartnerships
Community CleanStreets Program Increasing
Respect forPublic Places
+
+
--
+
FosteringNeighbourhood/
HouseholdCompetition
Recycled MaterialsUsed in Construction
Roofing fromRecycled Materials
Biodigester forMethane Use as a
Cooking Fuel
Secondary and TertiarySeparation at Recycling
Center
Return to Point ofSale Progam
Youth WasteEducationProgram
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
SeparateCollection Days
Pre-cycleCampaign
Waste FoodProducts
SustainableAlliances with
EcologicalUniversities
SecuringNational/
InternationalSupport
Ecotourism
IntegratingInformal Waste
Workers
Non-ProfitClean Todos
SantosFoundation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
<Pre-cycleCampaign>
+
+
+
+
<FeeCollectionEducationProgram>
<Return toPoint of
SaleProgram>
+
+
+
+
+ +
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
+
RecyclableMaterial Diversion
Resource Access+
182
programs and curriculums. The relationship between these variables has a
strength of 2. University partnerships can also play a strong role in the youth
entrepreneurship program, ensuring youth both in and out of the public
education system have the opportunity to improve their education; and
• Project ownership is targeted by increased coordination with local
businesses in the form of a pre-‐cycle campaign and waste food products. The
pre-‐cycle campaign will engage local businesses in positive waste practices.
5.3.5 New influential relationships
The sum of the strengths of new relationships supporting the five action entry
points in each scenario is summarized in Table 16. These figures quantitatively
represent the cumulative influence of system levers on existing variables that have
the ability to significantly impact the structure of the local SWM system. Numbers
that have been added to in a given scenario are marked in red.
Table 16. Sum of strengths of new relationships influencing action entry points
Action entry point
The Foundations Scenario The Religious Partnerships Scenario
The Private Sector Involvement Scenario
The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario
Sum of strengths of direct
relationships
Sum of strengths of indirect
relationships
Sum of strengths of direct
relationships
Sum of strengths of indirect
relationships
Sum of strengths of direct
relationships
Sum of strengths of indirect
relationships
Sum of strengths of direct
relationships
Sum of strengths of indirect
relationships
Education 4 1 4 1 4 2 6 3
Municipal interest in SWM
2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4
Youth’s interest in consumerism and modern culture
0 3 0 4 0 5 0 5
Participation of/Valuing women and youth
5 0 5 0 7 0 7 0
Projects that are “owned” by the whole community
7 3 7 5 9 5 11 5
TOTAL 16 11 16 14 22 16 26 17
183
5.4 Discussion
5.4.1 The Foundations Scenario
The Foundations Scenario has the least impact on the SWM system. This basic SWM
scenario targets both key reinforcing feedback loops, with most projects targeting
the Health and Interest in SWM Loop. Project ownership and the participation of
women and youth are the most strongly targeted action entry points. This scenario
represents the first step in a series of increasingly improved SWM system scenarios,
and has some benefits and drawbacks, accordingly.
5.4.1.1 Benefits
The benefits of this scenario are primarily associated with its ease of
implementation. Most measures are simple, require little capital to start up, and
build off of current SWM practices in Todos Santos. For example, there is a strong
culture of waste burning in Todos Santos, which occurs in the home or the backyard,
releasing toxins into the air. The installation of a simple, small-‐scale incinerator
would minimize these environmental and health threats while also having a high
chance of adoption. Likewise, community committees already exist in each
neighbourhood in town; SWM can either become part of the responsibility of these
committees, or they can act as a launching platform for stand-‐alone SWM
committees. The SWM committees are vital to the functioning of this scenario,
because they are in charge of running most of the waste education measures,
strongly contributing to project ownership, and increasing the overall participation
of women and youth by including them on the committee and in waste projects. The
existing social structure makes it likely that these committees will be adopted.
Another benefit of this scenario is the number of projects based on “learning by
doing” principles, which will help to ensure new solid waste knowledge can be
applied outside the classroom. Projects like the waste characterization workshops,
motivational training workshops for waste workers, and the youth waste
entrepreneurship program help build the SWM system as community members
learn, promoting the SWM system’s ability to support knew waste knowledge once
184
it has been learned. Waste education also contributes to project ownership –
community members can gain skills, take on projects themselves, and take pride in
their work.
5.4.1.2 Drawbacks
The primary drawbacks that come with The Foundations Scenario are associated
with its minimalistic nature; most projects are “end-‐of-‐pipe” type fixes, which may
be easier to implement but will not be sustainable in the long-‐term as the
population continues to grow. Reducing waste generation is only minimally targeted
through indirect measures. Additionally, few The Foundations Scenario projects
promote reuse and recycling. Due to the lack of a market for recyclable materials,
this may mean that a large portion of recyclables will still be sent to the landfill,
reducing its lifespan. There is also very little private sector involvement in this
scenario, and few opportunities to create value-‐added products. The lack of
opportunities to turn a profit from waste reclamation may make it difficult to raise
interest in SWM and establish other projects within this scenario.
Financially, the primary drawback with The Foundations Scenario is the need to
provide community members with compensation for proper waste practices.
Depending on what kind of compensation is needed to bolster proper participation,
this measure could get costly. More projects with the potential to generate financial
gains for community members are required to avoid the need for such measures.
This scenario contributes minimally to the improvement of the public education
system, which is one of the community’s largest concerns. The ‘Teach the Teachers’
program is the only program that directly targets it. All other educational measures
are concerned with waste education (see Figure 36).
185
Figure 36. Waste Education causes tree
These measures may increase the community’s understanding of SWM, but not
necessarily their interest in it. As previously discussed in Chapter 3, education
cannot bring about behavioural change on its own. Therefore, the causal
relationship between Waste Education and Interest/Understanding about the Waste
Issue is weak. These measures are certainly needed, but their impact on the system
may prove to be minimal without the support of other systemic elements.
5.4.2 The Religious Partnerships Scenario
The Religious Partnerships Scenario is a relatively small step up from The
Foundations Scenario. Of the five action entry points, youth’s interest in
consumerism and modern culture and project ownership are targeted slightly more
than in the previous scenario. Two new projects directly target the Waste in the
Streets Loop, and two indirectly target the Health and Interest in SWM Loop. The
benefits and drawbacks of this scenario are discussed below.
5.4.2.1 Benefits
The Religious Partnerships Scenario improves the SWM system more than The
Foundations Scenario, yet the gap that exists between current waste practices in
Todos Santos and this scenario is not so large that a simpler scenario – The
Foundations Scenario – is needed to act as a stepping-‐stone between them. The
Religious Partnerships Scenario can thus be directly implemented, providing more
benefits in terms of project ownership and waste minimization while still consisting
of simple, low-‐cost measures.
186
In this scenario, the private sector begins to participate more substantially, and
opportunities for turning a profit from waste by creating value-‐added products and
services are introduced. This scenario also includes the participation of local
farmers in waste minimization efforts, introducing money-‐saving reuse practices
into the most common occupation in town.
The potential financial drawbacks associated with providing compensation for
proper waste practices are eliminated in The Religious Partnerships Scenario.
Proper participation is expected to grow as project ownership increases and the
community’s interest in SWM improves due to the ability to make a profit from
recycled materials.
Religious partnerships are introduced in this scenario, which bring several benefits
to the SWM system: these partnerships may spread SWM awareness; increase the
community’s sense of responsibility to keep the public environment clean;
strengthen interest in maintaining traditions; and potentially reduce waste
generation.
5.4.2.2 Drawbacks
The drawbacks of this scenario are similar to those associated with The Foundations
Scenario. This scenario provides only a small increase in projects for recycling and
reuse; the central focus is still on measures for final disposal. Similarly, no new
measures are implemented to further improve the public education system, and
therefore it is only minimally targeted.
The lack of compensation for proper waste practices may make certain measures
more difficult to implement. It may take longer to get certain groups to adopt proper
waste practices, and some may not be interested in adopting them at all. More
project ownership and interest in SWM is needed to get the whole community on
board.
187
5.4.3 The Private Sector Involvement Scenario
The Private Sector Involvement Scenario’s impact on the SWM system is much more
substantial than that of The Religious Partnerships Scenario. Project ownership and
the participation of women and youth are increased, and new measures indirectly
target education and youth’s interest in consumerism and modern culture. The
Health and Interest in SWM Loop is also directly strengthened.
This scenario has more benefits than the previous two; however, it also has unique
drawbacks. These are discussed below.
5.4.3.1 Benefits
The new measures implemented in this scenario bring many benefits. The
biodigester will greatly minimize the amount of organics ending up in the waste
stream, and therefore prevent contamination through disease vectors that feed on
organics. The biodigester can also provide methane as a cooking fuel to homes or
restaurants. Since wood is the primary fuel source used for cooking in the
community, the biodigester may eventually decrease the amount of deforestation in
the area. Wood is also extremely expensive, and families receiving methane from a
biodigester will receive significant savings. Additionally, wood may be used for
making higher value products than heat.
This scenario includes measures that promote the involvement of the private sector,
more local ownership, and much more reuse and recycling. The implementation of a
recycling center will generate new employment opportunities in the area. The youth
waste education program targets the community’s concern about the public
education system and also has the potential to reduce waste generation.
5.4.3.2 Drawbacks
The Private Sector Involvement Scenario is more costly to implement than the
Religious Partnerships Scenario. Particularly, the biodigester and the secondary
separation program at a recycling center will increase the cost of implementation
and maintenance. The construction of the recycling center will decrease the
municipal waste budget (even if the majority of the materials used for construction
188
are recycled or reused), and the center will incur an annual cost associated with
paying employees to do the sorting.
There are two drawbacks associated with the biodigester. If this technology is
widely adopted within the community, the use of methane as a cooking fuel may put
loggers out of work. However, some could be employed to run the biodigester or to
sort waste at the recycling center. Additionally, a large number of animals, many of
which are household pets, rely on a steady supply of organic material deposited in
the dump as a food source. A significant reduction in the amount of organic material
sent to the dump will leave these animals hungry. This will not only be extremely
detrimental to the wellbeing of the animals but may also cause them to become
dangerous to community members. This issue will be difficult to resolve, as it would
be beneficial to control the dog population, and thus the number of disease vectors,
through their food source, yet many of these animals are highly valued household
pets that may not be provided for if this food source is removed.
5.4.4 The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario
The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario is the most highly integrated, involved, and
systemically impacting scenario. New measures are introduced that target
education and project ownership, and have the potential to reduce waste
generation. Several measures increase the strength of the Health and Interest in
SWM Loop, both directly and indirectly. As is to be expected, this scenario provides
the most benefits of the four, but also carries its own unique drawbacks; these
issues are discussed below.
5.4.4.1 Benefits
The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario includes many measures that will increase
reuse and recycling. It also contains several strategies for minimizing waste
generation, including separate collection days, the pre-‐cycle campaign, and the
previously introduced return to point of sale program. The pre-‐cycle campaign,
which is an in-‐store, point of purchase educational program, can help minimize
waste by encouraging store owners to provide products with minimal packaging,
189
and having store owners instruct buyers about which items come with the least
amount of packaging. The return to point of sale program will enlist local businesses
to accept broken products or empty contains for repair and resale, minimizing the
number of such items that are sent to landfill. Therefore, The Integrated SWM Vision
Scenario promotes more private sector participation in waste minimization efforts.
The private sector is also further encouraged to play a role in carrying out SWM
tasks.
Innovative waste practices and microenterprise development is promoted and
supported in this scenario through the establishment of an alliance with an
ecological university. Such an alliance has the potential to greatly impact the public
education system by providing expert help with relevant program and curriculum
development.
The establishment of a non-‐profit SWM organization has the potential to bring in
more financial support and more support from the NGO and governmental sectors.
The foundation may also draw in a more established eco-‐tourism sector as Todos
Santos continues to develop into a center for waste innovation in the region.
The scenario also proactively includes the few waste pickers that currently exist in
Todos Santos. This ensures that as the population grows and the allure of this
activity increases, these community members are not exposed to ever-‐increasing
health risks and poor working conditions.
5.4.4.2 Drawbacks
The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario is the most costly scenario to implement and
maintain. Certain measures may also be difficult and/or time consuming to get off
the ground, such as securing a partnership with an ecological university, or starting
up a successful non-‐profit organization that can bring in all the benefits previously
discussed. Other measures may encounter backlash from the community, such as
the implementation of separate collection days for recyclables and waste. If a
culture of waste responsibility is not firmly established at the time when this
190
measure is implemented, residents may turn to waste burning in backyards and the
home when collection is not as frequent as they would like.
If this scenario brings about a substantial increase in eco-‐tourism, the two weak
balancing loops that were left out of the systemic depiction in this chapter for
simplicity’s sake might become medium strength loops and have some detrimental
effects on the environment or cause further population growth. This would result in
the need for a larger landfill, and/or more aggressive waste minimization measures.
Population growth should be closely examined in order to predict the amount of
landfill space needed in the future, and land should be set aside now while it is
available.
5.5 Recommendations It is recommended that The Foundations Scenario or the Religious Partnerships
Scenario be implemented in outer neighbourhoods that currently receive little-‐to-‐no
SWM services. Neighbourhoods that are further away from the center may find that
The Foundations Scenario is a better fit due to its simplicity, its incineration option,
and its low cost. Neighbourhoods that are closer to the center but still not quite as
wealthy as El Centro are recommended to start with The Religious Partnerships
Scenario, which provides more benefits than The Foundations Scenario while still
being fairly low-‐cost and easy to implement. The wealthy neighbourhood of El
Centro is recommended to implement The Private Sector Involvement Scenario.
This scenario provides many more opportunities for SWM improvement and is
better tailored to the residents living in this area. As new waste practices become
well established in each neighbourhood, plans to upgrade to the next higher
scenario can be made. Even if The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario is eventually
established within the community, new opportunities for innovation and
improvement can be taken. For example, wastewater that is currently piped directly
to the Limon River could act as part of the feed source for the biodigesters,
providing more community members and businesses with methane and preventing
further environmental damage.
191
It is recommended that all scenarios be implemented in a series of stages. The
implementation of any system-‐wide change brings about what Vermaak (2007)
refers to as ‘intervention paradoxes’: changes that help to deal with a systemic issue
are also resisted and/or rejected by the system in question. Like the strong
homeostatic internal regulation systems in “warm-‐blooded” organisms that
maintain body temperature despite drastic external temperature changes, systems
will use all available means to resist external disturbances as they are moved away
from equilibrium (Schneider & Kay, 1994). Thus, while strongly deviating
approaches are more effective at transforming a given system’s structure, they also
trigger stronger systemic defenses (Vermaak, 2007). This is as true for social
systems as it is for biological systems. Take Galbraith’s ‘conventional wisdom’, for
example – defined as concepts that are valued at any time for their acceptability
(Galbraith, 2001). These concepts are stable, predictable, and safe, and people will
fight to maintain them, particularly when confronted with extreme change. Any
measures that are implemented in these cases tend to be diluted, proving “that
‘those novelties do not work here’” (Vermaak, 2007, p. 188). Therefore, it is
important to work from within the current system structure, using the existing
dynamics of dominant practices to implement change in manageable steps
(Vermaak, 2007). Change must be implemented in small steps; extreme measures
will not work. It is for these reasons that scenarios should be implemented in a
series of stages. Regardless if a neighbourhood is employing the simple The
Foundations Scenario, or the more advanced The Private Sector Involvement
Scenario, implementation should be carried out in manageable steps.
For brevity’s sake, this chapter will only recommend which projects should be
included in the initial, momentum-‐building implementation stage. The projects
suggested as momentum-‐building starting points for each scenario are listed in
Table 17.
Table 17. Implementation Stage 1: Momentum-‐building projects
The Foundations Scenario The Religious Partnerships The Private Sector Involvement Scenario initial
192
initial projects Scenario initial projects projects
Solid waste auditing Solid waste auditing Solid waste auditing
Development of an effective SWM plan
Development of an effective SWM plan
Development of an effective SWM plan
Community SWM Committees Community SWM Committees Community SWM Committees
Waste education measures Waste education measures Waste education measures
Compensation for proper waste practices
Manually operated landfill Manually operated landfill
Manually operated landfill Tax-‐based fee collection/education program
Tax-‐based fee collection/education program
Tax-‐based fee collection/ education program
Agricultural uses for recyclable materials
Agricultural uses for recyclable materials
Small-‐scale incinerator SWM workshops for local businesses
SWM workshops for local businesses
Biodigester for methane used as a cooking fuel
5.6 Conclusion Systems thinking is a valuable tool for the improvement of SWM systems. A systems
perspective can change both how community members think about the SWM
system, and how they interact with it. It can help to maximize effectiveness and the
benefits they receive from it. This study used the results of a participatory causal
mapping process as a means to represent the SWM system in Todos Santos, and to
hypothesize about the systemic impacts of potential SWM changes in the future.
While working with causal mapping by no means guarantees results or a successful
change process, it can be an effective tool for conveying systemic concepts, for
demonstrating the potential for widespread change, and for minimizing actions that
might have a detrimental impact on the system in the future.
Upon examining the systemic impacts of the four scenarios established in Chapter 4
on a simplified version of the community-‐wide causal map, this study recommends
scenarios 1, 2, and 3 be implemented in different neighbourhoods according to
193
socio-‐economic capacity. Scenarios should be implemented in a series of stages to
avoid triggering major system defenses.
This chapter has laid the groundwork for the implementation of a system
intervention plan that is action-‐oriented and strongly founded upon stakeholder
participation. The measures within this plan set the foundations for the continued
development and support of local SWM innovation, preparing Todos Santos for
continued growth and change well into the future.
5.7 References Campo, P. C., Bousquet, F., & Villanueva, T. R. (2010). Modelling with stakeholders
within a development project. Environmental Modelling & Software, 25(11), 1302-‐1321.
Clipak, N., & Barton, J. R. (2012). A system dynamics approach for healthcare waste management: A case study in Istanbul Metropolitan City, Turkey. Waste Management & Research, 30(6), 576-‐586.
Dyson, B., & Chang, N.-‐B. (2005). Forecasting municipal solid waste generation in fast-‐growing urban region with system dynamics modeling. Waste Management, 25(7), 669-‐679.
Galbraith, J. (2001). The concept of the conventional wisdom The Essential Galbraith. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Karavezyris, V., Timpe, K.-‐P., & Marzi, R. (2002). Application of system dynamics and fuzzy logic to forecasting of municipal solid waste. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 60(3), 149-‐158.
Kollikkathara, N., Feng, H., & Yu, D. (2010). A system dynamic modeling approach for evaluating municipal solid waste generation, landfill capacity and related cost management issues. Waste Management, 30(11), 2194-‐2203.
Kum, V., Sharp, A., & Harnpornchai, N. (2004). A system dynamic approach for financial planning in solid waste management: A case study in Phnom Penh city. International Journal of Science and Technology, 9(2), 27-‐34.
Mashayekhi, A. N. (1993). Transition in the New York State solid waste system: A dynamic analysis. System Dynamics Review, 9(1), 23-‐47.
Mirchi, A., Madani, K., Watkins Jr., D., & Ahmad, S. (2012). Synthesis of system dynamics tools for holistic conceptualization of water resources problems. water resource management, 26(9), 2421-‐2442.
194
Neves, D. S. F., Gomes, A. P. D., Tarelho, L. A. C., & Matos, M. A. A. (2007). Application of a dynamic model to the simulation of the composting process. Paper presented at the Eleventh International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Cagliari, Italy.
Schneider, E. D., & Kay, J. (1994). Life as a manifestation of the second law of thermodynamics. Mathematical Computer Modelling, 19(6-‐8), 25-‐48.
Stroh, D. P. (2003). Leveraging change: The power of systems thinking in action. In P. Kumar (Ed.), Organisational learning for all seasons: Building internal capabilities for competitive advantage. Buona Vista, Singapore: National Community Leadership Institute.
Sudhir, V., Srinivasan, G., & Muraleedharan, V. R. (1997). Planning for sustainable solid waste management in urban India. System Dynamics Review, 13(3), 223-‐246.
Suwarno, A., Nawir, A. A., Julmansyah, & Kurniawan. (2009). Participatory modelling to improve partnership schemes for future Community-‐
Based Forest Management in Sumbawa District, Indonesia. Environmental Modelling & Software, 24(12), 1402-‐1410.
Vermaak, H. (2007). Working interactively with causal loop diagrams: Intervention choices and paradoxes in practical applications. In J. Boonstra & L. De Caluwé (Eds.), Intervening and changing: Looking for meaning in interactions. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Yuan, H. (2012). A model for evaluating the social performance of construction waste management. Waste Management, 32(6), 1218-‐1228.
195
6 Conclusions and recommendations
6.1 Research synthesis The following sections provide a summary that reformulates the central literature
and original research findings of this thesis.
6.1.1 Literature review key findings
SWM in high-‐income countries has been historically driven by public health, the
environment, resource scarcity, climate change, and public awareness and
participation (Wilson, 2007). Integrated solid waste management, the current
paradigm industrialized countries are striving for, aims to strike a balance between
the environmental effectiveness, social acceptability, and economic affordability of
SWM (McDougall et al., 2001; Morrissey & Browne, 2004; Petts, 2000; Thomas &
McDougall, 2005; van de Klundert & Anschutz, 2001). However, SWM systems in
industrialized countries are still far from integrated (Wilson, 2007), and a lack of a
systems thinking has been identified as a prominent contributor to this shortcoming
(McDougall et al., 2001; Seadon, 2010; Turner & Powell, 1991).
In developing countries, poor SWM practices remain severely problematic for a
variety of reasons, resulting in severe human health and environmental issues
(Boadi et al., 2005; Konteh, 2009). While parallels exist between the development
trajectories of SWM practices in industrialized and developing countries, the
contexts of developing nations, and thus the problems they face, are unique (Konteh,
2009): rapid urbanization, soaring inequality, and the struggle for economic growth;
varying economic, cultural, socio-‐economic, and political landscapes; governance,
institutional, and responsibility issues; and international influences have created
SWM challenges of immense complexity (Boadi et al., 2005; Coffey & Coad, 2010;
Cohen, 2004; Henry et al., 2006; Jha et al., 2011; Konteh, 2009; Tacoli, 2012; UN-‐
HABITAT, 2010; Zurbruegg, 2003). Researchers are calling for case-‐specific, locally
appropriate SWM methods that can be absorbed and carried by a given society (Jha
et al., 2011; Schübeler, 1996; Yousif & Scott, 2007).
196
Systems approaches to SWM have the potential to meet these demands, though
taking such a perspective increases management difficulties (Seadon, 2010).
Particularly, SWM approaches can benefit from being founded in two schools of
thought: post-‐normal science, and complex, adaptive systems theory. Post-‐normal
science embraces incomplete control, unpredictability, and multiple legitimate
perspectives, and is structured to handle problems in which uncertainties and
decision stakes are high (Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1993). Thus, it is appropriate for
SWM, which is fraught with uncertainty and strongly impacts the lives of millions of
people. Taking a post-‐normal science approach calls for the inclusion of extended
peer communities in the processes of SWM quality assurance, policy, research, and
project implementation (Funtowics & Ravetz, 1993). Complex, adaptive systems
theory has the potential to provide significant insight into the structure and
functioning of SWM systems, and how to begin going about “managing” them in a
successful manner. Sometimes, outcomes from seemingly direct interventions are
extremely surprising due to time lags, cross-‐scale effects, and incomplete system
models (Waltner-‐Toews et al., 2003). With an understanding of how CAS work,
approaches to SWM may help avoid or at least prepare for unwanted system
behaviour.
Ultimately, the next steps for SWM must be tailored to the context of the local
history, relationships, culture, and aspirations of stakeholders (Checkland, 2000;
Wilson, 2007). Approaches must be locally sensitive, critical, creative, and ‘owned’
by the community of concern (Coffey & Coad, 2010; Henry et al., 2006a; Konteh,
2009; Schübeler, 1996; UN-‐HABITAT, 2010).
6.1.2 Key study findings
The Guatemalan town of Todos Santos Cuchumatán is experiencing a solid waste
crisis that threatens fragile environmental systems, essential natural resources,
economic potential, and human health. Poor SWM has created complex problems
within the community that call for new, innovative, and highly context-‐specific
approaches capable of dealing with complexity, uncertainty, and high decision
stakes. This thesis presents three research studies that aim to address this need.
197
The first, a participatory research study of the current SWM system in Todos Santos
Cuchumatán, generated three distinct perspectives on the structure and functioning
of the complex, eco-‐social SWM system. The primary barriers to successful SWM in
the community were identified as follows:
• A disposal system incapable of handling the change in composition and
increase in quantity of solid waste;
• Little interest, understanding or concern about the waste issue due to
preoccupations with:
o Poor health
o A failing education system
o Poverty
o Domestic violence and alcoholism
• A male-‐dominated SWM decisional arena that limits the inclusion of women
and youth; and
• A lack of municipal government interest in SWM because it is not a priority
for voters, and it does not bring in funds.
When amalgamated, the perspectives of male, female, and youth participants
provided significant insight into what kinds of projects have the potential to
strongly impact the structure and behaviour of the system, potential indicators of
success, and critically sensitive factors to be aware of. Identified leverage points
included two feedback loops – the Health and Interest in SWM Loop and the Waste
in the Streets Loop – and five system elements: public education, particularly that of
youth; project ownership; participation of women and youth; municipal interest in
SWM; and youth’s interest in consumerism and modern culture. This study laid the
groundwork needed to identify ‘best fit’, locally appropriate solutions.
The second study employed a residential waste audit to further determine the
issues plaguing the current SWM system. New insights gathered include:
• Limited SWM funding due to a general lack of willingness to pay for SWM
services;
198
• Waste collection is sparse and irregular, predominantly occurring in the rich
neighbourhood of El Centro;
• Large quantities of recyclable materials, including plastic, metal, and paper,
are found in the waste stream; and
• Existing waste practices include waste burning and a small amount of
composting.
With a more complete picture of the waste issues and needs in the community, the
second study compiled a wide range of locally appropriate projects with the
potential to act as system levers into four SWM scenarios. These scenarios represent
increasingly integrated and improved SWM systems; each builds upon the previous
scenario, allowing the community to gradually work towards a locally sustainable,
integrated vision of SWM.
The third study examines the impact of each of the four SWM scenarios on the
community-‐wide representation of the SWM system.
In keeping with the need for context specificity, scenarios 1, 2, and 3 were
recommended as starting points for neighbourhoods with relatively low, medium,
and high levels of socio-‐economic capacity.
6.2 Outstanding issues While the methodology used in this thesis aimed to capture the “big picture” of SWM
in Todos Santos, an issue of particular importance to the health and wellbeing of the
community was left out of the research scope – the need to remediate the existing
open dump. The dump, which sits directly on a riverbank of the Limon River in the
center of town, is a threat to local environmental systems and human health.
Nothing is known about the kind of soil it sits on, meaning that toxic leachate may
well be entering the ground and surface water systems. Todos Santos sits near the
headwaters of the Limon River, which flows past many communities on its way into
Mexico. Clearly, there is a strong need to remediate the site. However, due to the
quantity of waste in the dump and the steep grade of the bank, digging out the waste
and contaminated soil is both a dangerous and unmanageable task for the
199
community. While covering the dump with soil and certain varieties of plants may
help somewhat, leachate will likely continue to contaminate ground and surface
water. Unfortunately, no easy solution presents itself for this situation. Like in so
many places around the world, this kind of intractable environmental destruction
will remain as part of our legacy of mass consumption, haunting us for decades to
come. It is the author’s hope that further research and innovative measures may
help to alleviate this tragic situation.
6.3 Recommendations Based on the research presented in this thesis, the following recommendations are
made:
• A thorough examination should be made of how much waste is produced
daily in Todos Santos;
• An environmental impact assessment study of the influence of the current
open dump on the Rio Limon (water quality, species/ecosystem effects) and
subsequent health risks should be conducted;
• Waste audits of schools, businesses, and restaurants should be conducted;
• The amalgamated system structure and functioning should be verified with
community members;
• A long-‐term (5+ years) study of population growth patterns and waste
generation rates in Todos Santos should be conducted for planning purposes;
• A wider range of stakeholders should be included in SWM decision-‐making
processes; and
• Finally, local decision makers should use the results from this thesis to
consider the implementation of one or more SWM scenarios for the effective
management of solid waste in Todos Santos.
6.3.1 Building action momentum
If a neighbourhood chooses to implement a given scenario, it is recommended that
the implementation process be carried out in a series of stages. Staged
implementation will support the creation of immediate momentum for initiating
200
ongoing action, and help to avoid triggering strong systemic defenses. It can also
allow time and space for reviewing small projects that have been implemented,
assessing their effectiveness, and adjusting accordingly. Thus, a step-‐wise
implementation process brings flexibility, momentum, continuous learning, and
ongoing innovation to the SWM system (see Figure 37).
Figure 37. The staged implementation process
Implementation
ReassessmentAdjustment
Innovation Learning-by-doing
New projectgeneration
Onto the nextstage/scenario...
Implementation
Reassessment
Adjustment
Innovation
Learning-by-doing
New projectgeneration
Implementation
Reassessment
Adjustment
Innovation
Learning-by-doing
New projectgeneration
Act
ion
Mom
entu
m
Stage 1: BuildingMomentum
Stage 2: Buildingon Foundations
201
6.3.1.1 Short-‐term stage: Capacity development and foundational system elements
Chapter 5 identified the immediate local action initiatives that can be implemented
to build action momentum. These projects are focused on developing local capacity
and foundational system elements that future initiatives can build upon.
Fundamental planning, financial, social, educational, and structural elements make
up this stage of implementation. As the dominant waste practices and the behaviour
of the system shift, new projects within the chosen scenario can be implemented.
This secondary wave of projects includes those that require some level of
foundational knowledge, commitment, relationships, or physical structure to be
adopted by a given neighbourhood.
6.3.1.2 Long-‐term stage: Transitioning to a community-‐owned vision of SWM
In the long-‐term, the town of Todos Santos can work towards transitioning to a
vision of SWM focused on community-‐wide ownership, widespread participation,
education improvement, business development, and environmental protection. Each
neighbourhood can make this transition gradually, evolving through each scenario
up to The Integrated SWM Vision Scenario and beyond. The community living in the
town center, called El Centro, is recommended to begin with The Private Sector
Involvement Scenario, while outer neighbourhoods are recommended to begin with
The Religious Partnerships Scenario. Those neighbourhoods on the outskirts of
Todos Santos may find The Foundations Scenario to be the most appropriate
starting point (see Figure 38).
202
Figure 38. Long-‐term stage: Community-‐wide transition through the scenarios
6.4 “Situatedness” and local ownership While recommendations were given for the community of Todos Santos throughout
this thesis, the researcher recognizes that no projects or approaches can be deemed
appropriate by anyone but the community itself. The fundamental imperative
behind each study conducted is the necessity of local validation of research
methods, results, and recommendations. Todos Santos, like many other indigenous
communities in Guatemala, has a history filled with racism, violence, and abuse or
complete disregard of indigenous rights, control, and authority. ‘Top-‐down’,
imposed solutions to waste management have failed in the past; approaches not
structured around local control and authority perpetuate the hegemonic,
imperialistic imposition of knowledge that has only succeeded in creating a deep
sense of distrust in the community. It is here that post-‐normal, participatory
systems approaches are most needed – approaches founded on the inclusion of
extended peer communities with multiple legitimate perspectives, and a strong
consideration and profound respect for history, narrative, and context. Even more,
Scenario 1 Scenario 2Scenario 3Scenario 2 Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
Scenario 3 Scenario 3
Scenario 3
Scenario 2
Scenario 4
Neighbourhood ofEl Centro
OuterNeighbourhoods
OutskirtNeighbourhoods
OuterNeighbourhoods
OutskirtNeighbourhoods
Community vision of SWM
203
what is needed is an approach that embraces the sociocultural “situatedness” of the
community, defined as “the way(s) in which individual minds and cognitive
processes are shaped by... their interaction with social and cultural structures, such
as other agents, artifacts, conventions, etc.” (Frank, 2008, p. 1). An individual’s
situatedness defines “where [they are] coming from” – not just a place or a culture,
but somewhere between where one stands with intention and where one is
concretely embedded without choice (e.g. in culture or race) (Simpson, 2002, pp. 7-‐
8). Imposed approaches can be disembedding, delegitimizing local systems and
resulting in the rise of new systemic problems whose root causes are unlikely to be
addressed.
In response to such issues, community capacity building and empowerment have
emerged as mainstream strategies in indigenous research. However, these models
often have limited ability to meet the real needs of indigenous populations (Chino &
DeBruyn, 2006). While Chino and DeBruyn (2006, p. 596) argue that indigenous
people need “not only to develop tribal programs but also to define and integrate
the underlying theoretical and cultural frameworks” for application in the public
health sector, this is also a serious need in other sectors, such as SWM. Indeed, local
project ownership was identified as one of the primary community concerns in
Todos Santos, and one of the key places to intervene in the SWM system.
This study was therefore strongly considerate of and built upon the worldviews of
local stakeholders, many of whom do not traditionally participate in SWM decision-‐
making processes. Ultimately, recommendations given in this thesis are founded on
multiple legitimate perspectives of participating stakeholders. These suggestions
are meant to spark ground-‐level discussion amongst a wide range of stakeholders,
and provide concrete examples to stimulate local innovation and work towards a
community-‐defined SWM vision.
6.5 A new methodology for SWM and engineering inquiry The methodology used in this study may benefit future solid waste management and
engineering research. Engineering, as a discipline with a history of development
204
projects fraught with inappropriate approaches and subsequent failures, may gain
assurance in its ability to carry out development work through appropriate means
that also follow a structured study approach. As an area of study traditionally
focused on the technical sphere, SWM research may gain significant insight into how
to address SWM in a locally appropriate manner, and how to successfully instigate
desired systemic change. The causal mapping process can help to identify principal
barriers, challenges, and key places to intervene in the system for positive change
where simple observation might lead to other conclusions. The methodology used in
this study can also provide insight about potential areas in conflict among
stakeholders, an important element to consider in any management process.
Participatory systems approaches may be able to help these disciplines move
towards capacity development in cases where mainstream models have failed.
Participatory system modeling can identify key barriers to local ownership, and
initiate discussion and local innovation for removing them. Systems approaches may
also be able to address systemic misrepresentations that lead to project collapse.
For example, too often, consideration is not given to the amount of time needed to
fully establish capacity building processes. Socio-‐cultural, economic, historical, and
political contexts can prevent communities from being able to immediately resolve a
given issue (Chino & DeBruyn, 2006). Here, a systems perspective can make all the
difference, as time lags and delays are inherent in systems. Ultimately, local
ownership and a strong consideration for sociocultural ‘situatedness’ will define the
success of future SWM developments.
6.6 Final remarks The systems approaches used in this study are immensely important for the
improvement of SWM, the care of the environment, and health in its broadest sense.
Todos Santos’ SWM system, like the SWM systems impacting many vulnerable
populations, is a mess of disparities on its way to collapse. To begin the process of
“righting” it, close attention must be paid to what is important as defined by the
people it impacts, not just what is quantifiable. To tackle these issues, decision-‐
makers will need flexibility of mind and the ability to throw off their own paradigms
205
about whose perspectives are legitimate. Careful observation of behavioural
patterns, not theories, is important. More questions must be asked.
The words of the late Donella Meadows (2008, p. 170) best wrap up this viewpoint:
Systems thinking leads to another conclusion, however, waiting, shining,
obvious, as soon as we stop being blinded by the illusion of control... The
future can’t be predicted, but it can be envisioned and brought lovingly into
being. Systems can’t be controlled, but they can be designed and redesigned.
We can’t surge forward with certainty into a world of no surprises, but we
can expect surprises and learn from them and even profit from them. We
can’t impose our will on a system. We can listen to what the system tells us,
and discover how its properties and our values can work together to bring
forth something much better than could ever be produced by our will alone.
My analyses are by no means exhaustive, or even thorough; indeed, I have barely
skimmed the surface of an incredibly complex topic. A SWM system is a complex
system, composed of complex sub-‐systems, which are composed of more complex
sub-‐systems still. Yet in Todos Santos, its detrimental, distorted tendencies must be
rebalanced. It is the sincerest hope of the author that this thesis might act as a place
to begin this rebalancing through local innovation, ownership, and action for
continued, long-‐term positive change. If the health of those most lacking it is to be
achieved on any level, the SWM system must be seen and treated as the whole that it
is.
206
6.7 References Boadi, K., Kuitunen, M., Raheem, K., & Hanninen, K. (2005). Urbanisation Without
Development: Environmental and Health Implications in African Cities. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 7(4), 465-‐500.
Checkland, P. (2000). Soft Systems Methodology: A Thirty Year Retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17(S1), S11-‐S58.
Chino, M., & DeBruyn, L. (2006). Building true capacity: Indigenous models for indigenous communities. American Journal of Public Health, 96(4), 596-‐599.
Coffey, M., & Coad, A. (2010). Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing Countries. Malta: UN-‐HABITAT.
Frank, R. (2008). Cognitive Linguistics Research: Body, Language and Mind (Vol. 2: Sociocultural Situatedness). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co.
Funtowics, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for the post-‐normal age. Futures, 25(7), 739-‐755.
Henry, R. K., Yongsheng, Z., & Jun, D. (2006). Municipal solid waste management challenges in developing countries -‐ Kenyan case study. Waste Management, 26(1), 92-‐100.
Jha, A. K., Singh, G. P., Singh, G. P., & Gupta, P. K. (2011). Sustainable municipal solid waste management in low income group of cities: a review. Tropical Ecology, 52(1), 123-‐131.
Konteh, F. H. (2009). Urban sanitation and health in the developing world: reminiscing the nineteenth century industrial nations. Health & Place, 15(1), 69-‐78.
McDougall, F., White, P. R., Franke, M., & Hindle, P. (2001). Integrated solid waste management: a lifecycle inventory (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.
Morrissey, A. J., & Browne, J. (2004). Waste management models and their application to sustainable waste management. Waste Management, 24(3), 297-‐308.
Petts, J. (2000). Municipal waste management: inequities and the role of deliberation. Risk Analysis, 20(6), 821-‐832.
Schübeler, P. (1996). Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-‐Income Countries. In K. Wehrle & J. Christen (Eds.). St. Gallen Switzerland: UNDP/UNCHS/World Bank/SDC Collaborative Programme on Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-‐Income Countries.
Seadon, J. K. (2010). Sustainable waste management systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(16-‐17), 1639-‐1651.
Simpson, D. (2002). Situatedness, or why we keep saying where we're coming from. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Thomas, B., & McDougall, F. (2005). International expert group on life cycle assessment for integrated waste management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(3), 321-‐326.
Turner, R. K., & Powell, J. (1991). Towards an integrated waste management strategy. Environmental Management and Health, 2(1), 6-‐12.
207
UN-‐HABITAT. (2010). Solid Waste Management in the World’s Cities: Water and Sanitation in the World's Cities 2010. In Earthscan (Series Ed.)
van de Klundert, A., & Anschutz, J. (2001). Integrated Sustainable Waste Management -‐ the Concept: Tools for Decision-‐makers. Experiences from the Urban Waste Expertise Programme (1995-‐2001). In A. Scheinberg (Ed.). Gouda, Netherlands: Urban Waste Expertise Programme.
Wilson, D. C. (2007). Development drivers for waste management. Waste Management & Research, 25(3), 198-‐207.
Yousif, D. F., & Scott, S. (2007). Governing solid waste management in Mazatenango, Guatemala. International Development Planning Review, 29(4), 433-‐450.
208
Complete Reference list Ancona, C., et al. (2010). Integrated environmental and health impact assessment of
waste management in Lazio (Italy): INTARESE. Anschütz, J. (1996). Community-‐based solid waste management and water supply
projects: Problems and solutions compared: A survey of the literature. Gouda, The Netherlands: WASTE
Asian Tribune. (2009). The importance of technology for development: A political economy perspective, Asian Tribune.
Axelrod. (1976). Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of
Political Elites. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Badilla, R. A., & Suarez, A. S. (2002). Viabilidad de implementar un sistema integrado
de manejo de desechos para pequenas comunidades de la zona Atlantica de Costa Rica a traves de microempresas. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Berkes, F., & Folke, C. (1998). Linking social and ecological systems: Management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Bhuiyan, S. H. (2010). A crisis in governance: Urban solid waste management in Bangladesh. Habitat international, 34(1), 125-‐133.
Bigoth, K. S. (2001). Auditoria del manejo de los desechos en la empresa Linda Vista, Cartago, Costa Rica. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
BIO Intelligence Service. (2011). Implementing EU Waste Legislation for Green Growth Final Report prepared for European Commission DG ENV.
BNAmericas. (2011). Govt creates national waste management strategy, Online report, Business News Americas.
Boadi, K., Kuitunen, M., Raheem, K., & Hanninen, K. (2005). Urbanisation Without Development: Environmental and Health Implications in African Cities. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 7(4), 465-‐500.
Boulding, K. E. (1956). General Systems Theory -‐ The Skeleton of Science. Management Science, 2(3), 197-‐208.
Byrne, D. (2005). Complexity, Configurations and Cases. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(5), 95-‐111.
Byrne, D. S. (1998). Complexity theory and the social sciences : an introduction. London; New York: Routledge.
Calderon, J. C. S., & Ventura, J. F. Q. (2008). Plan de gestion para el manejo de los residuos solidos en empresas del distrito de guapiles. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Campo, P. C., Bousquet, F., & Villanueva, T. R. (2010). Modelling with stakeholders within a development project. Environmental Modelling & Software, 25(11), 1302-‐1321.
Capra, F. (2005). Complexity and Life. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(5), 33-‐44. Carabias, W. J. V., Winistoerfer, H., & Stuecheli, A. (1999). Social aspects of public
waste management in Switzerland. Waste Management, 19(6), 417-‐425.
209
Carmona, C., & Giraldo, E. (1997). Analysis del sistema de recoleccion de desechos solidos municipales con previa separacion en al fuente. Bogota, Colombia.
CEC. (1977). Second EC Environment Action Programme. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
Chai, K.-‐H., & Yeo, C. (2012). Overcoming energy efficiency barriers through systems approach—A conceptual framework. Energy Policy, 46, 460-‐472.
Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester, England; Toronto: J. Wiley.
Checkland, P. (2000). Soft Systems Methodology: A Thirty Year Retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17(S1), S11-‐S58.
Chino, M., & DeBruyn, L. (2006). Building true capacity: Indigenous models for indigenous communities. American Journal of Public Health, 96(4), 596-‐599.
Clipak, N., & Barton, J. R. (2012). A system dynamics approach for healthcare waste management: A case study in Istanbul Metropolitan City, Turkey. Waste Management & Research, 30(6), 576-‐586.
Coc, E. M., & Zonso, J. J. (2011). Elaboracion de una guia basica para la manejo de desechos solidos en una comunidad rural. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Coffey, M., & Coad, A. (2010). Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing Countries. Malta: UN-‐HABITAT.
Cohen, B. (2004). Urban Growth in Developing Countries: A Review of Current Trends and a Caution Regarding Existing Forecasts. World Development, 32(1), 23-‐51.
Cointreau, S. (1982). Environmental management of urban solid wastes in developing countries: A project guide Urban Development Technical Paper Number 5. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Conteh, A. (2003). Culture and the transfer of technology. In B. Hazeltine & C. Bull (Eds.), Field guide of appropriate technology. San Diego, CA: Elsevier Science.
Cook, D. M., Swanson, R. C., Eggett, D. L., & Booth, G. M. (2009). A retrospective analysis of prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites among school children in the Palajunoj Valley of Guatemala. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 27(1), 31-‐40.
Da Zhu, P., Asnani, H., Zurbrugg, C., Anapolsky, S., & Mani, S. (2008). Improving municipal solid waste management in India: A source book for Policy Makers and Practitioners. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Darrow, K., & Saxenian, M. (1993). Appropriate technology sourcebook: A guide to practical books for village and small community technology. Stanford, CA: Village Earth.
Dijkema, G. P. J., Reuter, M. A., & Verhoef, E. V. (2000). A new paradigm for waste management. Waste Management, 20(8), 633-‐638.
Drack, M., & Schwarz, G. (2010). Recent developments in general system theory. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 27(6), 601-‐610.
Dunn, P. (1978). Appropriate technology: Technology with a human face. London: Macmillan.
Duru, R. C. (1981). Technological growth and ecological crisis: the Nigerian example. The Science of the Total Environment, 17(3), 243-‐256.
210
Dyson, B., & Chang, N.-‐B. (2005). Forecasting municipal solid waste generation in fast-‐growing urban region with system dynamics modeling. Waste Management, 25(7), 669-‐679.
Echeverria, F. O. (2009). Evaluacion del sistema de tratamiento de aguas residuales del sector central de la Universidad EARTH. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Eckaus, R. S. (1977). Appropriate technologies for developing countries. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences.
European Commission. (2010). 2009 Environment Policy Review. Brussels: EC. Fairweather, J. (2010). Farmer models of socio-‐ecologic systems: Application of
causal mapping across multiple locations. Ecological Modelling, 221(3), 555-‐562.
Frank, R. (2008). Cognitive Linguistics Research: Body, Language and Mind (Vol. 2: Sociocultural Situatedness). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1991). A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues. In R. Costanza (Ed.), Ecological economics: The science and management of sustainability (pp. 137-‐152). New York: Columbia University Press.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for the post-‐normal age. Futures, 25(7), 739-‐755.
Furedy, C. (1992). Garbage: Exploring non-‐conventional options in Asian cities. Environment and Urbanization, 4(2), 42-‐61.
Galbraith, J. (2001). The concept of the conventional wisdom The Essential Galbraith. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Galli, A., Wiedmann, T., Ercin, E., Knoblauch, D., Ewing, B., & Giljum, S. (2011). Integrating ecological, carbon, and water footprint: Defining the "Footprint Family" and its application in tracking human pressure on the planet: One Planet Economy Network.
Geng, Y., Tsuyoshi, F., & Chen, X. (2010). Evaluation of innovative municipal solid waste management through urban symbiosis: A case study of Kawasaki. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(10-‐11), 993-‐1000.
Gertsakis, J., & Lewis, H. (2003). Sustainability and the Waste Management Hierarchy: A discussion paper on the waste management hierarchy and its relationship to sustainability (pp. 1-‐15). Melbourne: RMIT University.
Gonzalez, G. P. B., & Taborga, S. A. T. (2001). Evaluacion economica de la contaminacion por desechos en la zona urbana de Guapiles. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Halla, F., & Majani, B. (1999). Innovative Ways for Solid Waste Management in Dar-‐Es-‐Salaam: Toward Stakeholder Partnerships. Habitat international, 23(3), 351-‐361.
Hardoy, J. E., Mitlin, D., Satterthwaite, D., & Hardoy, J. E. (2001). Environmental problems in an urbanizing world : finding solutions for cities in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan Publications.
Henry, R. K., Yongsheng, Z., & Jun, D. (2006a). Municipal solid waste management challenges in developing countries -‐ Kenyan case study. Waste Management, 26(1), 92-‐100.
211
Henry, R. K., Yongsheng, Z., & Jun, D. (2006b). Municipal solid waste management challenges in developing countries-‐-‐Kenyan case study. Waste Management, 26(1), 92-‐100.
Hirschhorn, J., Jackson, T., & Baas, L. (1993). Towards Prevention: the emerging environmental management paradigm. In T. Jackson (Ed.), Clean Production Strategies: developing preventative environmental management in the industrial economy. Chelsea, MI: Lewis.
Holling, C. S. (2001). Understanding the Complexity of Economic, Ecological, and Social Systems. Ecosystems, 4(5), 390-‐405.
Hoornweg, D., & Bhada-‐Tata, P. (2012). What a waste: A global review of solid waste management. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Hoornweg, D., & Giannelli, N. (2007). Managing municipal solid waste in Latin America and the Caribbean: Integrating the private sector, harnessing incentives: PPIAF World Bank.
IDB. (2011). Strategic guidelines for the municipal solid waste sector (MSW). Paper presented at the CSD intersessional conference on building partnerships for moving towards zero waste, Tokyo, Japan.
IDB. (2012). GU-‐T1177: National Plan for Solid Waste Management in Guatemala. Retrieved November 2, 2012, from http://www.iadb.org/en/projects/project-‐description-‐title,1303.html?id=GU-‐T1177.
Iwerks, L. (Writer). (2006). Recycled Life. In M. Glad (Producer): Leslie-‐Glad. Jacome, A. C., & Romero, F. F. V. (2003). Elaboracion de sustratos y enmiendas
agricolas a partir de desechos de la agroindustria azucarera y la industria del jabon. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Jha, A. K., Singh, G. P., Singh, G. P., & Gupta, P. K. (2011). Sustainable municipal solid waste management in low income group of cities: a review. Tropical Ecology, 52(1), 123-‐131.
Jimenez, E. D. S. (2000). Analysis del sistem a de manejo integrado de desechos solidos domesticos de EARTH y su evaluacion desde el punto de vista social interno. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Joseph, K., Rajendiran, S., Senthilnathan, R., & Rakesh, M. (2012). Integrated approach to solid waste management in Chennai: an Indian metro city. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 14(2), 75-‐84.
Karavezyris, V., Timpe, K.-‐P., & Marzi, R. (2002). Application of system dynamics and fuzzy logic to forecasting of municipal solid waste. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 60(3), 149-‐158.
Kay, J. J., Regier, H. A., Boyle, M., & Francis, G. (1999). An ecosystem approach for sustainability: addressing the challenge of complexity. Futures, 31(7), 721-‐742.
Kgathi, D., & Bolaane, B. (2001). Instruments for sustainable solid waste management in Botswana. Waste Management and Research, 19(4), 342-‐353.
Koestler, A. (1978). Janus: a Summing Up (1St American Ed ed.). New York: Random House.
212
Kojima, M. (2011, February 16-‐18, 2011). Case from Asia: Expanding role of private sectors in waste management and recycling business towards realizing sound material cycle society. Paper presented at the CSD intersessional conference on building partnerships for moving towards zero waste, Tokyo, Japan.
Kollikkathara, N., Feng, H., & Stern, E. (2009). A purview of waste management evolution: special emphasis on USA. Waste Management, 29(2), 974-‐985.
Kollikkathara, N., Feng, H., & Yu, D. (2010). A system dynamic modeling approach for evaluating municipal solid waste generation, landfill capacity and related cost management issues. Waste Management, 30(11), 2194-‐2203.
Konteh, F. H. (2009). Urban sanitation and health in the developing world: reminiscing the nineteenth century industrial nations. Health & Place, 15(1), 69-‐78.
Kosko, B. (1988). Hidden patterns in combined and adaptive knowledge networks. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 2(4), 377-‐393.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kum, V., Sharp, A., & Harnpornchai, N. (2004). A system dynamic approach for financial planning in solid waste management: A case study in Phnom Penh city. International Journal of Science and Technology, 9(2), 27-‐34.
Langeweg, F., Hilderink, H., & Maas, R. (2000). Urbanisation, industrialisation and sustainable development Globo Report Series No. 27: RIVM.
Louis, G. E. (2004). A Historical Context of Municipal Solid Waste Management in the United States. Waste Management & Research, 22(4), 306-‐322.
Mantilla, J. E. V. (2007). Proyecto cuente con ambiente primer informe sobre desechos solidos (1 ed.): MARN Universidad Rafael Landivar.
Martuzzi, M., Mitis, F., & Forastiere, F. (2010). Inequalities, inequities, environmental justice in waste management and health. European Journal of Public Health, 20(1), 21-‐26.
Mashayekhi, A. N. (1993). Transition in the New York State solid waste system: A dynamic analysis. System Dynamics Review, 9(1), 23-‐47.
Matuschke, I. (2009). Rapid urbanization and food security: Using food density maps to identify future food security hotspots. Paper presented at the International Association of Agricultural Economists Conference, Beijing, China.
Mayo, E., Knight, A., Clifton, R., Jackson, T., Johnstone, J., Furey, S., . . . Pomfret, C. (2006). I will if you will: Towards sustainable consumption.: National Consumption Roundtable Sustainable Development Commission.
McDougall, F., White, P. R., Franke, M., & Hindle, P. (2001). Integrated solid waste management: a lifecycle inventory (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.
McGranahan, G. (2001). The citizens at risk: from urban sanitation to sustainable cities. London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan: Stockholm Environment Institute.
McKenzie-‐Mohr, D., & Smith, W. (1999). Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-‐Based Social Marketing. Gabriola Island (B.C.): New Society Publishers.
213
Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan.
Melosi, M. V. (1981). Garbage in the cities: refuse, reform, and the environment, 1880-‐1980 (1st ed.). College Station, Tex.: Texas A&M University Press.
Memon, M. A. (2010). Integrated solid waste management based on the 3R approach. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 12(1), 30-‐40.
Mendonca, A. E. A. (2007). Propuesta de modelo para la gestion de los residuos solidos en el canton de Pococi. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Mirchi, A., Madani, K., Watkins Jr., D., & Ahmad, S. (2012). Synthesis of system dynamics tools for holistic conceptualization of water resources problems. Water Resource Management, 26(9), 2421-‐2442.
Mohamad, Z. F., Idris, N., & Mamat, Z. (2012). Role of religious communities in enhancing transition experiments: a localised strategy for sustainable solid waste management in Malaysia. Sustainability Science, 7(2), 237-‐251.
Moodley, S. (2005). Deconstructing the South African Government's ICT for Development Discourse. Africa Insight, 35(3), 3-‐11.
Morrissey, A. J., & Browne, J. (2004). Waste management models and their application to sustainable waste management. Waste Management, 24(3), 297-‐308.
Moyaz, M. V., & Reyes, M. F. (2002). Analisis de factibilidad technico-‐economica del engorde de bovinos en semiconfinamiento suplementados con desechos de palmito. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Murphy, H. M., McBean, E. A., & Farahbakhsh, K. (2009). Appropriate technology – A comprehensive approach for water and sanitation in the developing world. Technology in Society, 31(2), 158-‐167.
Muttamara, S., & Leong, S. T. (1997). Environmental Monitoring and Impact Assessment of a Solid Waste Disposal Site. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 48(1), 1-‐24.
Nemerow, N. L. (2009). Environmental engineering: Environmental health and safety for municipal infrastructure, land use and planning, and industry (6th ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.
Neves, D. S. F., Gomes, A. P. D., Tarelho, L. A. C., & Matos, M. A. A. (2007). Application of a dynamic model to the simulation of the composting process. Paper presented at the Eleventh International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Cagliari, Italy.
Ntim, B. (1988). Introduction. In S. Buatsi (Ed.), Technology Transfer -‐ nine case studies. London, UK: IT Publications.
OECD. (2012). Members and partners. Retrieved October 2, 2012, from http://www.oecd.org/about/membersandpartners/
Özesmi, U., & Özesmi, S. L. (2004). Ecological models based on people’s knowledge: a multi-‐step fuzzy cognitive mapping approach. Ecological Modelling, 176(1-‐2), 43-‐64.
Pan American Health Organization. (1998). Health in the Americas. (Vol. 2): World Health Organization.
214
Parkes, M. W., Morrison, K. E., Bunch, M. J., Hallström, L. K., Neudoerffer, C., Venema, H. D., & Waltner-‐Toews, D. (2010). Towards integrated governance for water, health and social-‐ecological systems: The watershed governance prism. Global Environmental Change, 20, 693-‐704.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Pellegrini, U. (1979). The problem of appropriate technology. . In A. De Giorgio & C. Roveda (Eds.), Criteria for selecting appropriate technologies under different cultural, technical, and social conditions (pp. 1-‐5). New York: Pergamon Press.
Petts, J. (2000). Municipal waste management: inequities and the role of deliberation. Risk Analysis, 20(6), 821-‐832.
Pfammater, R., & Schertenleib, R. (1996). Non-‐Governmental Refuse Collection in Low-‐ Income Urban Areas: Lessons Learned from Selected Schemes in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Duebendorf, Switzerland.
Ponting, C. (1991). A green history of the world: the environment and the collapse of great civilizations. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Price, J. L., & Joseph, J. B. (2000). Demand management — a basis for waste policy: a critical review of the applicability of the waste hierarchy in terms of achieving sustainable waste management. Sustainable Development, 8(2), 96-‐105.
Robbins, P. T. (2007). The reflexive engineer: perceptions of integrated development. Journal of International Development, 19(1), 99-‐110.
Robles, M. B., & Orejuela, F. S. (2002). Evaluacion de manejo dedesechos organicos domesticos en la EARTH. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH. Guacimo, Costa Rica.
Rodic, L., Scheinberg, A., & Wilson, D. C. (2010). Comparing Solid Waste Management in the World’s Cities. Paper presented at the ISWA World Congress 2010, Urban Development and Sustainability -‐ a Major Challenge for Waste Management in the 21st Century, Hamburg, Germany.
Rybczynski, W. (1980). Paper Tigers. Charlmington: Prism. Schneider, E. D., & Kay, J. (1994). Life as a manifestation of the second law of
thermodynamics. Mathematical Computer Modelling, 19(6-‐8), 25-‐48. Scholz, R. W., & Tietje, O. (2002). Embedded case study methods : integrating
quantitative and qualitative knowledge. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Schübeler, P. (1996). Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-‐Income Countries. In K. Wehrle & J. Christen (Eds.). St. Gallen Switzerland: UNDP/UNCHS/World Bank/SDC Collaborative Programme on Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-‐Income Countries.
Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is beautiful: A study of economics as if people mattered. London: Blond and Briggs, 1974.
Seadon, J. K. (2006). Integrated waste management -‐ looking beyond the solid waste horizon. [Review]. Waste Management 26(12), 1327-‐1336.
Seadon, J. K. (2010). Sustainable waste management systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(16-‐17), 1639-‐1651.
215
Shimura, S., Yokota, I., & Nitta, Y. (2001). Research for MSW flow analysis in developing nations Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 3(1), 48-‐59.
Shukla, S. R., et al. (2000). Solid Waste Management Manual. New Delhi: Government of India.
Sierra, J. A. P., & Matute, T. D. S. P. (2010). La biodigestion como estrategia en el manejo sostenible de desechos organicos, y para el fomento de alianzas entre la agroindustria, las comunidaded, y redes de escuelas ecologicas. Undergraduate thesis. Universidad EARTH.
Simon, A. M. (2008). Analysis Of Activities Of Community Based Organizations Involved in Solid Waste Management, Investigating Modernized Mixtures Approach: The case of Kinondoni Municipality, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. (MSc), Wageningen University.
Simpson, D. (2002). Situatedness, or why we keep saying where we're coming from. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Singh, R., Tyagi, V. V., Allen, T., Ibrahim, M. H., & Kothari, R. (2011). An overview for exploring the possibilities of energy generation from municipal solid waste (MSW) in Indian scenario. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(9), 4797-‐4808.
Singh, R. P., Singh, P., Araujo, A. S. F., & Ibrahim, M. H. (2011). Management of urban solid waste: Vermicomposting a sustainable option. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 55(7), 719-‐729.
Smillie, I. (2000). Mastering the Machine Revisited: Poverty, Aid and Technology. London: ITDG Publishing.
Southerton, D., McMeekin, A., & Evans, D. (2011). International Review of Behaviour Change Initiatives: Scottish Government Social Research.
Stokoe, J., & Teague, E. (1995). Integrated solid waste management for rural areas: A planning tool kit for solid waste managers. Washington, D.C.: USDA Rural Utilities Service.
Stroh, D. P. (2003). Leveraging change: The power of systems thinking in action. In P. Kumar (Ed.), Organisational learning for all seasons: Building internal capabilities for competitive advantage. Buona Vista, Singapore: National Community Leadership Institute.
Sudhir, V., Srinivasan, G., & Muraleedharan, V. R. (1997). Planning for sustainable solid waste management in urban India. System Dynamics Review, 13(3), 223-‐246.
Suwarno, A., Nawir, A. A., Julmansyah, & Kurniawan. (2009). Participatory modelling to improve partnership schemes for future Community-‐
Based Forest Management in Sumbawa District, Indonesia. Environmental Modelling & Software, 24(12), 1402-‐1410.
Tacoli, C. (2012). Urbanization, gender and urban poverty: paid work and unpaid carework in the city. London, UK: International Institute for Environment and Development United Nations Population Fund.
216
Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H., & Eliassen, R. (1977). Solid Wastes: Engineering Principles and Management Issues. New York; Toronto: Mcgraw-‐Hill.
Thomas, B., & McDougall, F. (2005). International expert group on life cycle assessment for integrated waste management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(3), 321-‐326.
Thornloe, S. A., Weitz, K., Nishtala, S., Barlaz, M., Ranjithan, R., & Ham, R. K. (1997). Update on the US study applying life-‐cycle management to compare integrated waste management strategies. In T. H. Christensen, R. Cossu & R. Stegmann (Eds.), International Landfill Symposium. Sardinia, Italy: Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre.
TTSSC. (2010). SSC in the context of aid effectiveness: Telling the story of partners in south-‐south and triangular cooperation: Task Team on South-‐South Cooperation.
Turner, R. K., & Powell, J. (1991). Towards an integrated waste management strategy. Environmental Management and Health, 2(1), 6-‐12.
Turnpenny, J., Jones, M., & Lorenzoni, I. (2011). Where Now for Post-‐Normal Science?: A Critical Review of its Development, Definitions, and Uses. Science, Technology & Human Values, 36(3), 287-‐306.
UMA Environmental. (1995). Small scale waste management models for rural, remote and isolated communities in Canada. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan: Prepared for the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment.
UN Habitat. (1989). Community participation -‐ Solid waste management in low income housing projects: The scope of community participation. Nairobi, Kenya.
UN-‐HABITAT. (2010). Solid Waste Management in the World’s Cities: Water and Sanitation in the World's Cities 2010. In Earthscan (Series Ed.)
UNDP. (2010). Regional Human Development Report for Latin America and the Caribbean 2010. Costa Rica: United Nations Development Programme.
UNEP. (1996). International Source Book on Environmentally Sound Technologies for Municipal Solid Waste Management International Environmental Technology Centre Technical Publication Series: United Nations Environmental Programme.
UNEP. (2009). Developing Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan: Training Manual (Vol. 1: Waste Characterization and Quantification within Projections for Future). Osaka/Shiga, Japan: United Nations Environment Programme.
UNEP. (2010). Waste and Climate Change: Global Trends and Strategy Framework. Osaka; Shiga: United Nations Environmental Programme
UNFPA. (2011). State of world population 2011: United Nations Population Fund. United Nations ESCAP. (2010, 22-‐24 February, 2010). Regional exposure workshop
on pro-‐poor and sustainable solid waste management in secondary cities and small towns: Dhaka, Bangladesh. Paper presented at the Regional exposure workshop on pro-‐poor and sustainable solid waste management in secondary cities and small towns, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
217
van de Klundert, A. (1995). Community And Private (Formal And Informal) Sector Involvement In Municipal Solid Waste Management In Developing Countries. Paper presented at the UMP workshop, Ittingen.
van de Klundert, A., & Anschutz, J. (1999). Integrated Sustainable Waste Management: the selection of appropriate technologies and the design of sustainable systems is not (only) a technical issue. Paper presented at the CEDARE/IETC Inter-‐Regional Workshop on Technologies for Sustainable Waste Management, Alexandria, Egypt.
van de Klundert, A., & Anschutz, J. (2001). Integrated Sustainable Waste Management -‐ the Concept: Tools for Decision-‐makers. Experiences from the Urban Waste Expertise Programme (1995-‐2001). In A. Scheinberg (Ed.). Gouda, Netherlands: Urban Waste Expertise Programme.
Vanek, F. (2003). Design philosophies for appropriate technology. In B. Hazeltine & C. Bull (Eds.), Field guide of appropriate technology. San Diego, CA: Elsevier Science.
Vennix, J. A. M. (1996). Group model building: facilitating team learning using system dynamics. Chichester: Wiley.
Vermaak, H. (2007). Working interactively with causal loop diagrams: Intervention choices and paradoxes in practical applications. In J. Boonstra & L. De Caluwé (Eds.), Intervening and changing: Looking for meaning in interactions. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
von Bertalanffy, L. (1950). An Outline of General System Theory. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 1(2), 134-‐165.
VWB. (2009a). Guatemala: Companion animals and community health: Veterinarians Without Borders.
VWB. (2009b). Todos Santos, Guatemala interim report: Implemenation Phase I, January 2009: Veterinarians Without Borders.
Wajcman, J. (2002). Addressing Technological Change: The Challenge to Social Theory. Current Sociology, 50(3), 347-‐363.
Wall, J. M. (1993). With the Mayans: In Guatemala. The Christian Century, 110(36), 1259.
Waltner-‐Toews, D., Kay, J., & Lister, N.-‐M. E. (2008). The ecosystem approach: complexity, uncertainty, and managing for sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press.
Waltner-‐Toews, D., Kay, J., Neudoerffer, C., & Gitau, T. (2003). Perspective changes everything: managing ecosystems from the inside out. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1(1), 23-‐30.
Waltner-‐Toews, D., Neudoerffer, C., Joshi, D. D., & Tamang, M. S. (2005). Agro-‐urban Ecosystem Health Assessment in Kathmandu, Nepal: Epidemiology, Systems, Narratives. EcoHealth, 2(2), 155-‐164.
Wicklein, R. C. (1998). <Designing for appropriate technology in developing countries.pdf>. Technology in Society, 20(3), 371-‐375.
Wilson, D. C. (2007). Development drivers for waste management. Waste Management & Research, 25(3), 198-‐207.
218
Wilson, D. C., Velis, C., & Cheeseman, C. (2006). Role of informal sector recycling in waste management in developing countries. Habitat international, 30(4), 797-‐808. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2005.09.005
Wolsink, M. (2010). Contested environmental policy infrastructure: Socio-‐political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30(5), 302-‐311.
Woodward, D. (1985). "Swords into ploughshares": Recycling in Pre-‐Industrial England. The Economic History Review, 38(2), 175-‐191.
World Bank. (2005a). Guatemala: Country Economic Memorandum (Report No. 29145-‐GT). Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. (2005b). Tunisia integrated solid waste management project: World Bank.
World Bank. (2009). Integrated solid waste management and carbon finance project: World Bank.
World Bank. (2011). Guatemala Overview Retrieved April 6, 2011, from http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/guatemala/overview
Worrell, W. A., & Vesilind, P. A. (2012). Solid waste engineering (2nd ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Yousif, D. F., & Scott, S. (2007). Governing solid waste management in Mazatenango, Guatemala. International Development Planning Review, 29(4), 433-‐450.
Yuan, H. (2012). A model for evaluating the social performance of construction waste management. Waste Management, 32(6), 1218-‐1228.
Zarate, M. A., Slotnick, J., & Ramos, M. (2008). Capacity building in rural Guatemala by implementing a solid waste management program. Waste Management, 28(12), 2542-‐2551.
Zellmer, A. J., Allen, T. F. H., & Kesseboehmer, K. (2006). The nature of ecological complexity: A protocol for building the narrative. Ecological Complexity, 3(3), 171-‐182.
Zerbock, O. (2003). Urban Solid Waste Management: Waste Reduction in Developing Nations Written for the Requirements of CE 5993 Field Engineering in the Developing World: Michigan Technological University.
Zero Waste SA. (2011). Waste Management Hierarchy Retrieved May 18, 2012, from http://www.zerowaste.sa.gov.au/About-‐Us/waste-‐management-‐hierarchy
Zurbruegg, C. (2003). Solid waste management in developing countries: A sourcebook for policy makers and practitioners: EAWAG /SANDEC.
219
Appendix A: Interview guide
INTERVIEW GUIDE – COMMUNITY MEMBERS
A systems approach to community engaged integrated waste management in Todos Santos Cuchumatán, Guatemala
Pre-‐Interview Script Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. My name is Rachael Marshall from the University of Guelph in Canada and I would like to talk to you about your experiences with solid waste and wastewater management in Todos Santos. As a member of the community here we believe that your day-‐to-‐day activities and experiences will provide some useful insight into not only identifying waste management problems, but also help with developing solutions to improve the waste management of the community. This interview process is meant to be like a conversation, allowing you to share your experiences and expertise as community member. The interview should take approximately 30 to 60 minutes of your time. All responses will be kept confidential. This means that any information that is collected during this session will only be shared amongst the University of Guelph research team. The information gathered here today will be combined with information from other interviews and will be presented in a meeting with other participants with the intention of developing solutions to improve the waste management in Todos Santos. Any information that you provide during this session that will be used in these meetings will be amalgamated in such a way as to avoid making individual information recognizable as much as possible. However, some waste management staff may provide information that will be recognizable due to their specific function/job, and therefore it is important to note that in this case their identity may be known to other focus group members. In addition to this interview, I welcome you to participate in these meetings. I would like to remind you that you do not have to talk about anything that you do not want to talk about and you may end the interview at any time. Now I would like to review the consent form in front of you orally. This form outlines what I have just talked about in more detail including:
220
a) the purpose of this research b) the method for conducting this interview session c) potential risks and how the information you present here will be used in
ways that will keep you safe and comfortable d) the benefits to you as a participant e) methods for ensuring the confidentiality of the information you present
during the interview, and, f) your rights as a participant
[Consent form will be reviewed orally with participant in the language they prefer] Are there any questions about this form or anything else that I have explained so far?
Are you willing to participate in this interview? I would also like to record this session on audiotape because I do not want to miss any of your comments. Although I will be taking some notes during this session, I cannot possibly write fast enough to get all of the information down. Recording this interview on audiotape will only be done if you feel comfortable and consent to the process. It will be used to clear up any missed information and will remain confidential. How would you like to proceed with this interview? On audiotape or without audio-‐
recording?
Interview The following describes the anticipated themes to be discussed with community members.
INTERVIEW QUESTION THEMES (not for public distribution)
1. Title / Job Description.
2. Duration of position within waste management (if applicable).
3. Personal experiences with solid waste and wastewater management practices and projects in Todos Santos. (Possible areas include):
221
a. [waste system description – boundaries, inputs and outputs, information flow, delays, etc]
b. [how waste affects participant’s needs and activities] c. [participant’s concerns – issues, causes, consequences] d. [how waste affects resource states] e. [project planning] f. [preliminary or detailed project design] g. [approvals] h. [construction] i. [operation]
4. Anticipated themes for further discussion:
a. Capacity issues b. Self-‐governance issues c. Funding issues d. Resource issues e. Staff/ Human Resources turnover issues f. Participant’s vision/possible solutions for the future
Post-‐interview Script I have no further questions for this interview session.
Is there anything more that you would like to add? I will be analyzing the information I have received from you today as well as information I have gathered from conducting interviews with other community members. I would like to remind you again that the use of this information will not identify you as the respondent and will remain confidential. Because this interview session was recorded on audiotape, I will be transcribing what has been said here into a written document. I would be more than happy to send you a copy of this document if you wish to review it. In addition, I may contact you (by email or telephone through the main community contact, Kelly Chauvin) to clarify some of the information you have provided to ensure that my interpretation of what you have said is correct. It is important to note that participants’ identity will not be confidential, but known to this main community contact. However, the main community contact has signed a confidentiality agreement. Would you be interested in participating in the group meetings as the next step in this
process?
222
Are there any other questions you have at this time? Thank you for your time and I hope you have a great day.
223
Appendix B: Feedback loop descriptions
A. Men’s feedback loops
The Waste in the Streets Loop demonstrates how poor SWM has lead to a lack of
locations, such as waste receptacles, for people to properly dispose of their waste
throughout town. This encourages people to throw their waste in the streets, which
then creates more cleaning up work for the municipality, decreasing SWM funds
that could be used to ameliorate SWM. This loop is of low to medium strength, as
people throw waste in the streets not only because there is a lack of receptacles in
which to place it. The habit of throwing waste in the streets is also greatly
influenced by a lack of interest or understanding about the waste issue (see Figure
15). The majority of the population is accustomed to throwing organic waste on
fields with no consequence due to the fact that plastic has only entered the waste
stream within approximately the last 20 years. Therefore, it has developed into a
habit that is reinforced by the Waste in the Streets feedback loop. Intervening in this
loop by providing receptacles may not create much change in behaviour or improve
the SWM situation, as receptacles must first be emptied, and without other system
changes, would simply be emptied into the full, unregulated dump in the center of
town.
The Environment and Population Loop shows the balancing effects of
environmental degradation on population growth and thus on the adequacy of
SWM. Population growth is a stressor on the SWM system not only by increasing the
quantity of waste but, as this particular loops shows, by limiting the availability of
land, preventing proper facilities from being constructed. The lack of a properly
located landfill and recycling facility due to land constraints was strongly identified
as a major cause of inadequate SWM in Todos Santos by this sample group. This
balancing loop demonstrates how environmental degradation decreases tourism,
limits the economy and decreases population growth.
The Waste Quantity Loop demonstrates how the degradation of environmental
systems increases the waste quantity, reinforcing inadequate SWM by creating more
224
waste that must be dealt with. Degradation impacts waste quantity through
population growth, which increases consumption and limits land availability to
construct recycling facilities, but also through the need to consume pre-‐packaged
goods, such as bottled water or pre-‐wrapped food due to health concerns about
contamination. This loop also relies on the weak-‐to-‐medium connection between
environmental degradation, tourism, economic income and population growth.
However, it is supplemented by the need to rely on pre-‐packaged goods because
environmental services, such as clean water, are lacking. Thus, this loop has a higher
strength than the Environment and Population Loop, and could contain leverage
points with medium impacts.
B. Women’s feedback loops
The Education and Poverty Loop is a reinforcing feedback loop that demonstrates
how the poor education system decreases the number of educated youth in the
town, which in turn prevents them from attaining high paying jobs, and therefore
prevents them from being able to afford education fees for their children. The lack of
opportunities for youth to gain an education decreases their interest in waste issues
and increases the amount of waste thrown in the street, as youth are perceived as
the primary culprits of littering.
The Youth and Tradition Loop shows the reinforcing effects of youth’s interest in
modern culture and consumerism on loss of culture and traditions. As traditions are
lost, youth do not know how to maintain them and lose interest in doing so because
they have less connection to them. Thus they grow increasingly interested in
modern culture and consumerism, which draws their time away from maintaining
traditions. With a focus on consumerism, youth become a driving force for
consumption and thus waste production – particularly the production of plastic
waste in the form of highly packaged goods and other items that were not
previously available in the local economy.
The Economic Income Loop demonstrates how inadequate SWM has a negative
effect on the local economy, which reinforces the inadequacy of SWM. Inadequate
225
SWM has lead to the placement of the dump and abattoir in close proximity to the
town center, and has allowed it to fill to the brim. This has a negative effect on the
aesthetics of the town. Aesthetics impact tourism and local businesses, which need
to maintain a clean storefront in order to attract customers. Tourism is also
impacted by environmental degradation. Tourism and local business contribute to
the local economy, which provides resources to the community. These resources
allow community members to maintain their good health, or pay for medical
services. Therefore, a decrease in tourism has a negative impact on health, which
increases inhabitants’ preoccupation with other issues and draws time and
resources away from dealing with the adequacy of SWM. While the Economic
Income Loop has strong connections all along its length, economic capital made
through tourism or local business may not always be spent on maintaining good
health. Additionally, local business brings in more economic capital than tourism,
yet the connection between aesthetics and local business success is fairly weak.
Therefore, this loop is likely of low strength. However, the proximity of the dump to
the town center also has a direct impact on health through the Contamination and
Health Loop, as vectors move from the dump into human spaces, including dogs and
cats that are allowed into kitchens and the market. Again, this loop is difficult to
target because all factors within it are highly embedded in the system.
The female participants identified the same Waste in the Streets Loop that was
identified by the male participants, and it functions in the same way. This loop is
again limited in terms of interventions due to other variables impacting the main
problem of people throwing waste in the streets.
C. Youth’s feedback loops
The reinforcing Waste Generation Loop demonstrates how SWM impacts on health
impact waste generation rates, which put more pressure on the SWM system.
Contamination from the local dump and abattoir and waste left in the streets
increases illness, which has a negative impact on family wellbeing. Family wellbeing
is directly tied to community wellbeing. If many families in the community are
226
preoccupied with poor health, they are less focused on the preservation of culture,
language, and the traditional way of life. As traditions and culture are lost, a high
consumption culture replaces them, which leads to more waste generation. This in
turn creates a larger volume of waste that must be dealt with by an already
overloaded SWM system.
The reinforcing Youth and Culture Loop shows how the more youth value the town,
the more interest they have in preserving the culture, which in turn increases its
value to them.
The reinforcing Waste Generation Loop is a fairly weak loop due to the low strength
relationship between community wellbeing and preservation of culture and
language. Likewise, the Youth and Culture Loop is of low strength.
The two balancing feedback loops, Tourism 1 and Tourism 2, are of medium
strength due to the connections from tourism to degradation and to economic
income. Like the balancing loop in the men’s causal map, these loops would only be
effective if tourism became a larger focus in the local economy. The balancing
Tourism Loop 1, shows how environmental systems have a balancing effect on
tourism. While many tourists are attracted to the surrounding area for its ecological
beauty, they cause some environmental degradation directly by creating traffic
through sensitive ecological zones, and through the increase in consumption they
bring as the town caters to their needs. This decreases the ‘pristineness’ of the very
ecological systems tourists are attracted to. The balancing Tourism Loop 2
demonstrates how environmental degradation caused by poor SWM decreases
tourism, which puts less pressure on the waste system. Tourism contributes the
economy, which provides resources to maintain good health or pay for medical
services. This in turn promotes the preservation of traditions and culture, which
decreases waste generation. Waste generation contributes to the inadequacy of
SWM by adding more waste to the full dump that must be dealt with.
227
Appendix C: Bank of Ideas
Table 18. Overall system management options
Overall system management options
Description and details
Public-‐private partnerships25 26
Semi-‐privatization of the waste management system:
• Has high potential to improve the quality/efficiency of SWM services; • Municipality must maintain financial and managerial autonomy; and • Competition, transparence, and accountability are necessary for private
sector success. Creation of a non-‐profit community-‐based organization: Clean Todos Santos Foundation36
A community-‐based SWM organization:
• Founded on the vision of the community at large; • Signs an agreement with the municipality on solid waste objectives,
targets and a comprehensive SWM plan for the town of Todos Santos; • Conducts ‘learning-‐by-‐doing’ educative workshops and sessions in the
community; • Searches for and secures national and international support; • Conducts certain SWM tasks (e.g. establishes collection centers,
conducts a thorough waste audit, conducting ongoing monitoring, etc.); • Oversees and manages certain SWM aspects in the community (e.g.
coordinates with/oversees micro-‐enterprises); and • Must be composed of a group that is representative of the population.
Development of SWM micro-‐enterprises39 40 26
Micro-‐enterprises:
• Can accomplish smaller scale tasks within the SWM system that the municipality cannot manage;
• Municipality can remain the governing body, delegating tasks to each community-‐based micro-‐enterprise and coordinating their efforts;
• Micro-‐enterprises contribute to the local economy; • Low-‐cost, labor-‐intensive approaches; • Greater community participation, which encourages better collection
and source separation; and • Requires more extensive municipal monitoring than larger scale public-‐
private partnerships. Coordination with local NGOs for capacity building40
Coordinating with existing local NGOs:
• Can build capacity, coordinate waste education, training, workshops, etc.;
• NGOs can help tackle governance issues; and • Community capacity building and good governance can greatly ease
management responsibilities and tasks. Motivational training and/or exchange visits for managers and
To maintain high motivation among managers and operators:
• Training and exchange visits to areas with successful SWM systems; • Potential locations for exchange visits could be coordinated with NGO
contacts.
228
operators37
Integrating informal waste pickers26
Waste picker integration program:
• Aimed at eliminating counterproductive competition between informal and formal sectors; and
• Upgrading informal pickers into community-‐based recycling cooperatives.
Table 19. Waste characterization options
Waste Characterization
Options Description and details
Further waste auditing27
Conducting a waste audit:
• Of local businesses, restaurants, and schools; • That determines how much waste is construction debris, street
sweepings, etc. is in the overall waste; and • That provides an overall estimate of how much waste is brought to
landfill each month. Determine energy potential of solid waste27
Conducting a moisture content study:
• Monthly data allow waste-‐to-‐energy technologies to be considered in greater detail.
Hands-‐on waste characterization workshops41
Hands-‐on solid waste workshops:
• For conducting waste characterization and quantification; • Capacity building and education-‐centered; and • Workshop participants ranging from solid waste workers to local
schools.
Table 20. Waste Reduction Options
Waste Reduction Options
Description and details
Community-‐wide waste education program28 29 30 31
An education program that explores:
• The profitability of waste; • The usefulness of waste; and • The environmental and health benefits of recycling.
Waste separation28 Promoting waste separation through:
• Education programs; and Waste bins for separate solid waste types, divided by colour.
Youth waste education program42
A waste education program founded on:
• Ecological awareness;
229
28 • Ethical values; • Entrepreneurial thinking; and • Social responsibility.
‘Teach the teachers’ program28 30
A waste education program for teachers that explores:
• Environmental education; • Entrepreneurship; • The solid waste system; and • Solid waste management activities.
The program should include:
• Seminars and workshops to allow teachers to network, present their successes/failures, and share experiences;
• A final workshop for the teachers to assemble a solid waste education manual; and
• A final goal for basing each class taught in school on the pillars of ecological awareness, ethic values, entrepreneurial thinking, and social responsibility
Community clean streets initiative35
An education program focused on:
• Preventing waste from being thrown in the streets by making it the community’s responsibility;
• Consumer buying power awareness; and • Encouraging purchases that have less packaging
Youth waste entrepreneurship program35
A program focused on:
• Getting the youth involved in instructing the municipality about innovative SWM practices; and
• Marketing SWM skills for work in the community or other towns. Community SWM committees35
Committees composed of:
• Community members; workers from the ministries of health, environment, and agriculture; municipal authorities; local businesses; restaurants; local schools; the police force, etc.
Committee purposes include:
• Providing a place for community-‐wide motivational speeches, workshops, and training;
• Determining what kind of solid wastes are being produced by each group;
• Determining what can be reused and how; • Ensuring the municipal authorities take responsibility for implementing
planned SWM measures; and • Conducting ongoing monitoring.
SWM planning workshops for local businesses48
Group and personalized workshops for local businesses:
• Initiating solid waste audits on a business by business basis; • Identifying ways to minimize wastes, recover resources; • Potential for sharing waste materials as resources among local
businesses; and • Developing personalized SWM plans;
Pre-‐cycle In-‐store, point of purchase educational campaign:
230
campaign49 • Encourages store owners to provide products with minimal packaging; • Store owners can instruct buyers about which items have the least
packaging; and • Shelves can indicate which items are the most environmentally friendly.
Fostering constructive neighbourhood/ household competition37
Fostering competition:
• Among households or neighbourhoods for the cleanest streets/environment;
• Most waste reduction by weight; • Most reuse around the house, etc.; • An appropriate incentive can be given out as a prize; and • A competition/celebration day can be held.
Compensation for proper separation/ system compliance37
Households receive monetary benefits:
• Through a small stipend; • Through discounts on valued items, targeted at those who are in charge
of solid waste activities (such as vegetable discounts for women); and • Stipend/discount amount depends on the degree of participation.
Increasing respect for public spaces to keep them clean37
Program for streets and public spaces that are frequently littered with waste:
• Education campaign about the financial repercussions of littering (less municipal resources for education, health, etc., unclean spaces causes health and environmental issues); and
• Installing religious shrines, symbols of respect, etc. in public spaces and holding a public inauguration for them.
Religious partnerships54
Establishing interest among the churches, religious leaders and organizations:
• Partnerships that demonstrate how waste reduction, recycling, reuse, and proper SWM is in line with religious teachings and beliefs;
• Religious groups can be very effective at motivating the community; and
• Recycling and reuse activities can be based on the concepts of charity and communal good
Ecotourism Encouraging ecotourism activities within the community:
• Will provide a local drive to shift to more ecological practices; • Will help the economy; and • Can be based on innovative waste practices in the community – as
waste practices improve, Todos Santos can represent a “sustainable community”
Table 21. Collection and transport options
Collection, Transport, and
Financing Options Description and details
Mini collection centers34 35
Mini solid waste collection centers:
• Located in areas where pick-‐up is not occurring weekly; • Located in an areas that is accessible to large trucks; • Have drop-‐off zones for different kinds of wastes; and
231
• Can be used as an education tool for local schools and the community. Citizens must understand that they have to clean all items going to recyclable material bins.
Separate collection days38
Collecting recyclables on one day and other waste on a second day:
• Encourages separation at the source; • Only an option in areas with weekly collection; and • May initially increase costs or lack collaboration from citizens.
Secondary and tertiary sorting at Recycling center35
Constructing a centralized recycling center where:
• Re-‐sorting all waste that was previously separated in the home or in mini collection center bins occurs;
• Re-‐sorting occurs by glass colour, plastic type, etc.; and • Materials are organized for sale or free pick-‐up.
Collection by small vehicle/pushcart in outer neighbourhoods50
Due to limited collection outside of El Centro:
• Small motorized vehicles or manual pushcarts can be used for waste collection;
• Smaller vehicles can fit into narrow, steep roadways that are unfit for municipal trucks; and
• Vehicles must be able to handle the wet season and unpaved, rocky roads.
Tax-‐based collection fee system40 43
Collection fee system:
• Based on taxation; • Will require solid waste education in the community; and • Will require municipality to demonstrate to the community that it is
capable of making substantial long-‐term SWM improvements. Collection fee community education program43
Education program:
• To inform the community on the value and importance of paying for SWM services;
• Primary goal to get the public on board with a taxation system for SWM funding;
• Founded on transparency, fully explaining the taxation process; • Demonstrates the financial benefits of having a proper SWM system
(savings in terms of health and environmental services expenses). User pays fee system37
Payment is made upon service achievement:
• To increase willingness to pay in cases where services are seen as unreliable; and
• User pays per collection round. Change in method of payment37
Discuss with the community:
• Which way they would like to pay for SWM services; • Lump sum, with water bills, etc.
Relate collector/
transporter salaries to performance37
If collection or other services are unreliable:
• Operators may need new incentive to perform better; • This is particularly true for new operators that are former waste
pickers;
232
If paid according to achievement, reliability and quality of services will improve.
Installation of more waste bins in public areas and incorporation into collection route
Installation of more waste bins:
• In public places where people tend to throw waste on the ground; • Waste bins should be regularly emptied by collection operators on the
weekly route; and • Separate bins for waste, recyclables, and organics should be provided.
Table 22. Resource recovery options
Resource Recovery Options
Description and details
Women's vermiculture initiative32
Develop a partnership with the NGO Byoearth to transfer knowledge on:
• Vermiculture; and • Entrepreneurship for women’s groups.
Women's recycled craft initiative32
Partnership with Byoearth:
• Can help local women develop entrepreneurship skills to make and sell recycled crafts
Recycled materials as construction materials28 35
Recycled plastic and metal can act as:
• Barriers around garden beds, etc. to beautify work/community spaces; and
• Can decorate community gardens on top of old covered landfill trenches.
Agricultural uses for recycled materials (substrate, etc.)28
Recyclable materials can be used as:
• Substrate in soil; • Barriers around beds, for dirt walls, etc.; and • Must accompanied by activated charcoal.
Biodigesters for methane use as a cooking fuel 28 46
Biodigesters can be used for:
• Methane production for cooking use; • Fertilizer (biodigester by-‐product); and • Can also run on wastewater for future projects.
Waste-‐to-‐electricity28 47
Biodigesters that create electricity:
• Can run on pig manure or other organic materials; and • Effluent must go to organic deposition and oxygenation ponds.
Sustainable alliances between agroindustry, communities, and ecological universities47
An alliance between agroindustry, ecological universities, and communities:
• Agroindustry waste can act as the nutrient source; • Communities and ecological universities can participate in setting up
and running the biodigesters; • Communities can benefit from electricity/methane production; and • Universities can foster environmental education through engaged,
hands-‐on SWM learning.
233
Organics to paper production28
Paper can be made out of fruit peels (e.g. banana) and sold to tourists, etc.
Roofing from recycled materials35
Tetra paks or plastic/metal combinations used to make roofing.
Waste crops for livestock production during flooded market51
If a particular crop has flooded the market:
• Waste crops can be used to fatten livestock for meat, depending on the crop;
• Diversification of production can help to support farmers through a period when the market is flooded; and
• Minimum conditions for such a venture to be profitable must be calculated on a case-‐by-‐case basis.
Small-‐scale composting28 35 52
Composting organic material can be used for:
• Creating organic fertilizer for sale or use in agricultural practices; • Can be done on a house-‐by-‐house basis, or in groups of families; • Can be sold for a profit or used for crops; and • Uses manual labour.
Substrate and fertilizer produced from soap and sugar cane waste53
Highly marketable agricultural products:
• Made from soap waste, cane/palm sugar waste (mill mud, bagasse), ashes, and silica sand; and
• Agroindustry and community alliances can be established for the production of these products.
Waste food products55
Waste from food products on farms can be used for:
• Making value-‐added products; • E.g. whey from cheese-‐making, burnt coffee beans, etc.
Compost pile with aeration tube and fan56
Composting technique:
• Uses a perforated aeration btube, placed in the center of the pile; • Pile is continually aerated by directing a fan into the aeration tube; • Time-‐efficient, volume-‐reducing technique • Easy to implement/operate, low capital cost, produces high quality
compost Town beautification project49
Competition to design a beautification project:
• That uses recycled materials only; and • That represents the culture/identity of the town; • Can be open to schools, community members, etc.
Return to point of sale program49
Reuse program:
• Enlisting local businesses that would accept broken products or empty containers etc. for repair and re-‐sale;
• E.g. old paint to paint stores, used oil and car batteries to gas stations/garages, etc.; and
• Program can be advertised on the radio, in the storefront, etc. Medium-‐scale composting26
Composting facilities can be set up for:
• Can be done in mini composting centers in each community; • Can establish centers for agricultural waste; and
234
• Can be used for market waste.
Table 23. Waste transformation options
Waste Transformation
Options Description and details
Small-‐scale incinerator34
Small-‐scale incinerator:
• Employs simple combustion; • Requires easily found materials, including a concrete/metal cylinder,
large equally sized rocks or a concrete slab for the base, and a metal grate;
• Does not fully combust waste, only reduces volume; • Ashes must be deposited in the landfill; and • Either a filter must be installed or plastics and bleached items should
not be incinerated to avoid dioxin production.
Table 24. Disposal options
Disposal Options Description and details
Manual landfill35 Small-‐scale manual labour landfill:
• Located on clay or geotextile; • Composed of rows of 4.5 m trenches dug out with a back-‐hoe/by hand; • Covered with soil every day to prevent open exposure; • Requires 10 years of leachate monitoring, so monthly fees must be
charged for a minimum of 15 years (this is the minimum lifespan of the landfill);
• Nearly no organic materials should be deposited in the landfill to minimize methane production and vectors; and
• This design results in no odors. Hazardous waste disposal pit29
A hazardous waste disposal pit can be constructed:
• Located on clay; • Lined with concrete; • Pit can act as a disposal site for fluorescent light bulbs, batteries,
medical waste, etc.; and • Hazardous waste should be treated with sulfur before being disposed of
in the pit. Transporting hazardous waste to Huehuetenango
Transporting hazardous waste:
• Medical waste is already transported to the city of Huehuetenango, which is 2.5 hours away;
• Transporting other hazardous wastes along with medical waste would not significantly increase costs; and
• Residents would have to separate these wastes from regular municipal waste and safely deposit them at a hazardous waste drop-‐off site.
235
Appendix D: System lever assessment Table 25. System lever assessment
= YES
= MAYBE
= NO
System Lever Options
Selection Criteria
User Affordability
Use of local m
aterials/ resources
Relatively labour-‐intensive
Low capital cost
Education-‐centered
Targets youth culture
Socially appealing
Environm
entally sustainable
Locally sustainable
Flexibility
Capacity building
Soundness of conceptual/ technological
design
Targets recyclables
Targets organics
Targets w
aste reduction
Targets rem
aining waste
Privatization
Clean Todos Santos Foundation
Development of SWM micro-‐enterprises
Coordination with local NGOs
Integrating informal waste pickers
Motivational training/exchange visits for managers and operators
Further waste auditing
Determine energy potential of solid waste
Hands-‐on waste characterization workshops
Community-‐wide waste education program
Youth waste education program
Teach the teachers program
Community clean streets initiative
Youth waste entrepreneurship program
Community SWM committees
SWM planning workshops for local businesses
Pre-‐cycle campaign
Waste separation
Fostering constructive competition
236
Compensation for proper system compliance
Increasing respect for public spaces
Religious partnerships
Mini collection centers
Separate collection days
Secondary and tertiary sorting at Recycling center
Collection by small vehicle in outer neighbourhoods
Tax-‐based collection fee system
Collection fee community education program
User pays fee system
Change in method of payment
Relate operator salaries to performance
Women's vermiculture initiative
Women's recycled craft initiative
Recycled materials as decorative construction materials
Agricultural uses for recycled materials
Biodigesters for methane use as a cooking fuel
Waste-‐to-‐electricity
Organics to paper production
Roofing from recycled materials
Sustainable alliances between agroindustry, communities, and ecological schools
Waste crops for livestock production during flooded market
Small-‐scale composting
Substrate and fertilizer produced from soap and sugar cane waste
Waste food products
237
Compost pile with aeration tube and fan
Town beautification project
Return to point of sale program
Medium-‐scale composting
Small-‐scale incinerator
Methane tester
Hazardous waste disposal pit
Transporting hazardous waste to Huehuetenango