Search results

The zero-waste term in municipal solid waste management has been the utopian objective of every waste management authority in the cities in developing countries, even though it comes with different perceptions, which are sometimes misguided. People can produce no waste unless they live with no consumption. The zero-waste term does not mean that we produce no waste, rather we dump no waste at the landfill site. It means we dispose of nothing at a landfill site since the issue of landfill site can be a culprit of waste management, for its reiterating city land demands that generate “headaches” to city authority because of NIMBYism (Not In My Back Yard issue). No one accepts living voluntarily next to a landfill site as it creates more harm than harmless. With zero waste at the landfill site in mind, the waste management authority attempts to deal with the complexity of municipal solid waste management, by reviving each element of the waste management stakeholders to concertedly move on to deal with waste. Individual households and communities, without which waste management will not be successful, were positioned as the main thrust of waste management. A multipronged approach was implemented with all stakeholders, i.e., lawmakers, regulators, waste producers, implementers, and pressure groups, appearing with different functions but a common point: zero waste at the landfill site. A stakeholder with a large capacity, i.e., local government focuses on creating a large project that has a large impact on overall waste management; private sectors may contribute to establishing recycling centers, and waste-to-energy projects. Meanwhile, the individual households, which are large in number but have a small capacity, establish community-based activities, i.e., waste banks. This chapter attempts to provide the overall picture of municipal solid waste management in 14 cities in developing countries toward their goal of zero waste at landfill sites.

This is a case study about the green agenda of Urban Hijau, a social enterprise which promotes urban farming as a way to a foster sustainability. It narrates how it started and progressed through the introduction of various sustainable farming systems. The landscape of farming with its opportunities and challenges such as embracing permaculture as a farming philosophy, and food security are presented. The case ends with questions which Urban Hijau has to address in order to sustain its social enterprise. Can a small urban farm contribute significantly to the food industry? If so, how? Is Urban Hijau on the right track?

This chapter provides an overview of waste management across Europe. It offers an outlook of evolution of waste generation and how European Union (EU) countries treat waste, by providing historical and current data as well as by describing a few best practices of waste management companies and municipalities throughout Europe. The circular economy framework applied to urban waste management and the zero waste strategy are described.

With the rapid development of China’s urbanisation and market economy, municipal solid waste (MSW) generation is increasing dramatically. In response to the threat of environmental pollution and the potential value of converting waste into energy, both the government and the public are now paying more attention to MSW treatment and disposal methods. In 2014, 178.6 million tonnes of MSW was collected at a safe treatment rate of 84.8%. However, the treatment methods and the composition of MSW are influenced by the collection area, its gross domestic product, population, rainfall and living conditions. This chapter analysed the MSW composition properties of Lhasa, Tibet, compared with other cities, such as Beijing, Guangzhou and so forth. The research showed that the moisture content of MSW in Lhasa approaches 31%, which is much lower than the other cities mentioned previously. The proportion of paper and plastics (rubbers) collected was 25.67% and 19.1%, respectively. This was 1.00–3.17 times and 0.75–2.44 times more than those found in Beijing and Guangzhou, respectively. Non-combustibles can reach up to 22.5%, which was 4.03–9.11 times that of Beijing and Guangzhou, respectively. The net heating values could reach up to 6,616 kilojoule/kilogram. The food residue was only half the proportion found in other cities. Moreover, the disposal method applied in each city has also been studied and compared.

Environment Management, Solid Waste Management.

This case is suitable to be used in advanced undergraduate and MBA/MSc level.

This case revolves around the challenges pertaining to waste management in Iran. Poor waste management practices can result in soil contamination, water pollution, and air pollution, can cause respiratory problem, and can create permanent adverse health effect. Thus, a solid waste management system is needed for safeguarding the public health, safety, and welfare. However, it seems not an easy task for the developing countries, and Iran is not an exception to this. Recycling has three particular steps: collection and processing, manufacturing, and purchasing new products which made from recycled materials which require heavy investment. Lack of investment in the Iranian recycling sector has made this issue more complicated and lagging behind. This case highlights the challenges faced by the Iranian Municipality in this regard.

The learning objectives are as follows:

• to expose students to an actual situation where they will be aware of the necessity to care for the environment and reduce and reuse the products that they are utilizing in their every days’ life;

• to highlight the need of a municipal waste management system to make route optimization for waste collection and transport system, storage, recycling plan, compost and incineration facility, proper site for landfill, etc.; and

• to emphasize the required support from all stake holders in managing waste.

to expose students to an actual situation where they will be aware of the necessity to care for the environment and reduce and reuse the products that they are utilizing in their every days’ life;

to highlight the need of a municipal waste management system to make route optimization for waste collection and transport system, storage, recycling plan, compost and incineration facility, proper site for landfill, etc.; and

to emphasize the required support from all stake holders in managing waste.

In 2004, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in Bangkok, Thailand, and UN-HABITAT collaborated on an eco-housing project in the Asian region (UNEP, 2010). The aim was to promote eco-housing as a key disaster preventive measure in the Asia-Pacific region. Eco-housing is an evolving concept that applies sustainability principles into the entire lifecycle of a housing project: from design, through construction and maintenance to the “end of life” activities. The concept applies environmentally friendly and sustainable approaches to the design, site assessment, material selection, energy management, water management, and waste management to the household and community level. The project addressed four key areas: (1) knowledge building, (2) educational initiative, (3) networking, and (4) implementation. The eco-housing project involved countries such as Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Thailand, and Sri Lanka. It was implemented in the 2004 tsunami-affected areas in Banda Aceh and Calang, Indonesia. As part of the tsunami recovery projects, an “eco-village” was established in Lagoswatta, located in the Kalutara district near Colombo in Sri Lanka. It was supported by Sarvodaya, one of the local NGOs. UNEP and UN-HABITAT initiated the eco-housing project in 2004 to build capacity and to increase awareness on this issue. A Regional Expert Group on eco-housing was established to provide technical input and train national architects on this concept. This study was focused on the eco-village project in disaster recovery from the Indian Ocean Tsunami in 2004. In particular, it focused on the case study in Sri Lanka: “The project has implemented passive cooling techniques, solar panels on houses, segregation of waste, composting of bio-degradable waste, recycling of inorganic waste, sub-terra system for recycling waste water, and roof top water harvesting. Site layout and landscaping has been done to minimize disturbances to site, provide shading and improve indoor ventilation” (UNEP, 2010).

The chapter illustrates the relationships between concepts, theories, and processes presented so far in the book.

The cases explored show how this model can be recognized first and foremost in publicly owned waste operators linked to the territory where the service is provided. The content that justifies and legitimizes their presence is that of the integral recovery of materials through the zero waste strategy.

Innovation, responsibility, stakeholder engagement, and knowledge sharing have been highlighted as the four key drivers of sustainable urban waste management. These drivers reciprocally reinforce each other in a virtuous exploitation system that generates a positive circular path of new managerial and technical resources and competencies, and new responsibility schemes shared among managers, policymakers, employees, and users.

Further, each key driver impacts the economic, environmental, and social performance of urban waste operators, increasing the overall impact and strengthening the effect of the other drivers in a virtuous exploitation of benefits for waste operators and stakeholders beyond the served territory.

The chapter will describe the genealogy of the international social movement “Zero Waste (ZW)” and highlights its role of cultural, organizational, and scientific reference point for the waste management, in particular the public one in Italy. The chapter proposes to interpret ZW as a part of a wider social movement on “common goods” that in Italy proposed a radical critics of the neoliberal governance of local public services. The climax of this movement was the referendum of 2011, when 27 millions of Italian citizens voted against the privatization of waste, water, and transport management at an urban level. By door-to-door recycling, composting of community, pay as you throw system (PAYT), reuse centers, and environmental communication, ZW movement succeeded to create an apparatus of driver concepts for the management of waste. In particular, some of the proposed case studies were the actors that implemented the ZW strategy findings on the territory, experimenting new organizational and social practices aimed at increasing recycle and at converting the local economy into a circular one.

Chapter 5 deals with key drivers allowing waste management systems to meet circular economy goals, targeting a zero waste approach aimed at eliminating waste and changing the concept of waste into secondary materials. Case studies around Europe highlighted conditions and drivers of sustainable urban solid waste management systems; innovation, responsibility, stakeholder engagement, and knowledge sharing are factors enabling effective and viable urban waste management.