Box 5.2: Case study – Encouraging the reduction, reuse and recycling of waste through decentralized waste management in Alappuzha, India
Alappuzha, a city of approximately 174,000 people in Kerala, India, was one of five cities recently recognized by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) for building an effective solid waste management system (UNEP 2017). Instead of relying on expensive formal solid waste management systems that would have been beyond the reach of most citizens, the city adopted a highly successful decentralized waste management system under the “Clean City, Clean Home” campaign. Although this case study focuses on material reuse, the city’s transformative change extends beyond the state of current outcomes and represents more fundamental shifts towards transformative processes of decentralization, citizen engagement and local and appropriate technological development.
A centralized waste management model was tried first in the city, but the decentralized model proved more viable and was therefore subsidized and supported by government agencies. Individual households were encouraged to set up an aerobic pipe composting units or portable biogas plants. Innovations such as kitchen bins (developed by the Kerala Agricultural University) (Simon 2015) – which are able to treat up to 2,000 kg of organic waste and produce high-quality compost in three months – complemented individual household efforts and local community workers stepped in to monitor dumping and encourage good practices.
Overall, the project has led to the installation of about 5,000 kitchen bins, 3,000 biogas plants and 2,800 composting units, which together handle about 80 per cent of the city’s organic waste. The sale of biogas and manure fetches approximately $80,500 and $40,200, respectively. Waste management-related transport costs have also decreased by almost $69,000, as the decentralized system does not rely on door-to-door waste collection. The Alappuzha case offers the following key lessons on the process of urban systems transformation: v Individual incentives attract participation and build long-term commitment: The programme focused heavily on raising awareness of the benefits of and building responsibility and participation in waste management. Empowering individuals to take responsibility for their own waste kept government costs low and promoted innovative and customizable solutions. In schools, students were incentivized to participate in cleanliness and waste segregation programmes. Ownership and control over biogas plants and composting units provided a strong incentive for household participation and promoted long-term engagement and commitment to the project.
v Strong political commitment and support aids the waste management sector’s transition: The Kerala state government’s desire to transform the waste management sector and encourage long-term, sustainable solutions was a key success factor. The government worked to identify problems, secured collaborations with different agencies, subsidized the campaign and actively promoted decentralization. The knowledge that household waste management would reduce social disparities by opening up other opportunities to waste workers and encouraging a positive attitude towards waste collection was a motivating factor in the government’s implementation of the programme.
Gaps in the circular waste management chain can be filled through multiple strategic partnerships. For example, for this project, technical and research institutions developed localized and creative solutions; the Agency for New and Renewable Energy Research and Technology (ANERT), which is the nodal agency for the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy Sources in Kerala, and the Integrated Rural Technology Centre (IRTC) were instrumental in setting up household biogas plants and composting units; the Kerala Agricultural University developed innovative measures that addressed important gaps in consumer needs; and the government partnered with local contractors to collect plastic waste from households.
5.2.2 Nutrient circulation
One of the key dimensions of building circular cities is the development of resilient, inclusive, equitable and environmentally sustainable urban food systems. Food is a strategic entry point to eradicating poverty, strengthening gender equality and reducing vulnerability in a multidimensional manner (van Veenhuizen and Danso 2007) and relates to all three dimensions in chapter 4. In order to address the social and environmental consequences of the predominantly private sector-driven food system, many cities across the Global North and Global South have implemented local or regional food strategies, food charters and other food system-related policies and initiatives to regionalize and close nutrient cycles (Tartiu and Morone 2017).
102 GEO for Cities
It is estimated that at least one third of global food is wasted before consumption (O’Donnell et al. 2015). A key and growing challenge in creating more sustainable urban food systems is therefore to cut food waste by diverting surplus edible food from disposal to those in need in a safe and timely manner. This is particularly important in cities with high levels of poverty, where inadequate nutrition has devastating impacts on the development potential of low-income communities. Developing countries account for 44 per cent of global food loss and waste (Lipinski et al. 2013), though food loss differs significantly among countries (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO] 2011).
Given the amount of water, energy, nutrients and other inputs that are used for food production, reducing food waste has a significant role to play in reducing a city’s ecological footprint.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146
