rethinking waste in india - sciences po · ashish kothari academic year 2013/2014 ... 2 as a result...

Abazeri, Mariam -“Rethinking Waste in India: Innovative Initiatives in Waste Management”- Sciences Po, PSIA - 2014 1

Sciences Po

PSIA – Paris School of International Affairs

Master in Environmental Policy

Rethinking Waste in India:

Innovative Initiatives in Waste Management

Mariam Abazeri

Master's thesis supervised by Dr. Charlotte Halpern with special help from Ashish Kothari

Academic Year 2013/2014

The copyright of this Master's thesis remains the property of its author. No part of the content may be reproduced, published, distributed, copied or stored for public or private use without written permission of the author. All

authorisation requests should be sent to [email protected]


Contents

Abstract 3

Map of India 4

Introduction 5

Chapter I: Addressing the Problems 10

Chapter II: Reforming Waste Management in India 24

Chapter III: Case Studies 35

Chapter IV: Conclusion 68

Annexe 70

Abbreviations 78

References 79


Abstract

In the past few decades, solid waste management (SWM) has become a global concern due to

growing urbanisation and changing lifestyles. In both urban areas and newly developing townships

in India, many of the existing centralised waste management schemes have proven both ineffective

and unsustainable; the evidence overflowing streets and uncollected waste bins. This study will

focus on initiatives undertaken by local communities throughout India in which the management

of waste has been approached in a sagacious ecologically-conscious manner with a vision of

reducing and recovering waste material. This study will be looking at how these communities and

actively participating stakeholders reform waste management in their locality through various

means including: addressing individual consumption and disposal habits, decentralising segregation

and collection processes, integrating the informal waste sector, developing a participatory planning

structure,and demanding more social, legal, and institutional provisions to enable sustainable waste

management plans. Because these activities are essentially dependant on social and political

participation, this study argues that a paradigmatic shift in waste management begins by

empowering a participatory, decentralised, and recovery-oriented approach that integrates

appropriate and locally-relevant social, political, and environmental processes. Rethinking the

manner waste is generated and approached will be the first step in transforming the waste

management process and facilitating a more sustainable and inclusive environment.


Political Map of India

Source: MapsofIndia.com., 2012


Introduction

India contains more than a sixth of the world’s population— over 1.21 billion people— and is

expected to become the world’s most populous country by 2025.1 Of this figure, over 377 million

people live in urban areas, accounting for more than 31% of India’s total population. Despite the

recent fall of the rupee and a slower stagnating growth, the country is still the third largest

economy in the world in terms of Purchasing Power Parity, PPP.2 As a result of these population

and economic explosions as well as behavioural changes in consumption and the introduction of

non-organic material into the quotidian lifestyle, communities throughout the country are facing

challenges in managing their waste.

About 188,500 tonnes of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) are generated in urban India every day,

compared to 100,000 tonnes per day in 2000.3 Figure 1 illustrates how the current amount of MSW

generated in urban India has nearly doubled since 2000 and is expected to reach 221 million tonnes

per year by 2030.4

Figure 1: Projected MSW Generations in Urban India

Source: Kumar Kaushal and Varghese et al., 2012

India is among the top ten countries generating the highest amount of MSW in the world, partly

1 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2013). World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables. Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP.227. p.15,20. 2 World Development Indicators, The World Bank, 2012 3 Hanrahan, David; Srivastava, Sanjay; Ramakrishna, A. Sita. 2006. Improving management of municipal solid waste in India: overview and challenges. Washington, DC: World Bank, p.16. 4 Kumar Kaushal, R., Varghese, G. K., & Chabukdhara, M. (2012). Municipal Solid Waste Management in India-Current State and Future Challenges: A Review. International Journal of Engineering Science & Technology, 4(4), p.3.


due to the sheer size of its urban population and partly to the high-consumption lifestyle urban

residents have recently adopted. In contrast, the average amount of waste generated per capita per

day is far below the world average; the urban average in India is about .44 kg per day compared to

the world's urban average of 1.2 kg per day and the United States’ urban average of 2.58 kg per

day.5

Figure 2: A Global Comparison of MSW Generation Per Capita Per Day

Source: The Economist, 2012.

Municipal officials have generally managed waste in India in a centralised manner, searching for

solutions that attempt to quickly remove and destroy the material. Technologies that build on

traditional methods of waste disposal— dumping, burying, and burning— have been scaled up to

dispose of larger quantities of waste in the face of a growing supply. The result has been the

development of a centralised waste management system that depends on large-scale disposal

facilities such as landfills, dumping yards, and incinerators to manage waste accumulation in cities

and developing townships. Landfilling, open dumping, and incinerating unfortunately remain

among the most common methods of MSW disposal not only in India but around the world,

5 Center.sustainability.duke.edu. 2014. Center for Sustainability & Commerce at the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. [online] Available at: http://center.sustainability.duke.edu/ [Accessed: 27 Mar 2014]. ; The Economist. 2012. A Rubbish Map. [image online] Available at: http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/06/daily-chart-3 [Accessed: 27 Mar 2014].


including high-income countries.

Figure 3: Total MSW Disposed by Region

Source: Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012

These methods however pose serious problems to public health and the environment, are highly

unsustainable and resourcefully inefficient, and undermine the local economy and society, e.g. the

informal waste sector. For these reasons, the mainstream waste management vision found in India,

and surely in other contextually-relevant countries, needs immediate revision from a disposal-

centric framework towards a recovery-centric one that builds on more sustainable, equitable, and

environmentally-conscious practices.

Many of the changes required for a more sustainable and ecologically-conscious waste management

approach in India need to be both personal as well as institutional. New responsibilities on

individuals, communities, governments, and other actors will require active participation by all

stakeholders and set forth modifications in behaviour, social norms, governance structures,

industrial practices, and education. Examples in this study illustrate these personal and institutional

modifications; the cases later presented focus on current initiatives in both urban and rural settings

that challenge the centralised disposal-centric waste management framework. These initiatives

include strengthening and supporting the informal waste sector, harnessing the knowledge and

resources of community-based organizations, generating awareness among tourists as well as

residents, limiting the flow of plastic and other inorganic material from entering the waste stream,


and engaging members of the community to actively participate in waste management plans. These

cases have been chosen to represent community initiatives in both urban and rural locations, facing

different external pressures, involving locally-relevant stakeholders, and pursuing various means to

enable a more inclusive recovery-centred management scheme. A common feature of the examples

chosen has been the adaptability of the communities in experimenting with both innovative and

traditional approaches of waste management to achieve a more sustainable and equitable model.

The first case study will look at Pune city and the efforts taken by the community and activists to

create the first waste picker's union and co-op in India. This case will focus on the successes and

challenges of the integration process of the informal waste sector and also briefly review Pune's

zero waste ward in Katraj. The second case study will focus on the work undertaken by the Tibetan

government in exile in upper Dharamshala and the mobilization of the community as well tourists

that frequent the area to develop an inclusive waste management system. The third case study will

highlight the efforts of the Zero Waste program coordinated by the Deer Park Institute in Bir and

how progressive state policies and community engagement have planted the seeds for a sustainable

waste future. The communities presented in the case studies vary in size, culture, economy, politics,

and environment; however, they have all divagated from the mainstream centralised waste

management model and have begun searching for alternatives, making changes within the

community to address their waste management issues and ultimately improve their environment

and quality of lives.

Methodology and Features of the Study

The research for this study has been conducted over a four-month period across India through

various means including interviews, on-site observations, literature reviews, and shared notes from

waste experts in the field. The study explores alternative paradigms for a sustainable waste

management scheme in India and looks at different programs around the country that have

adopted innovative measures to diminish the amount of waste produced and increase the amount

recovered. From these findings, this study argues that a decentralised participatory approach in

recovery-oriented waste management through community empowerment and the integration of

social, political, and environmental processes can lead to a sustainable waste management system.

The study is broken down into several chapters: the first chapter gives an overview of the various

global concepts in waste management that will be discussed throughout the study. This first chapter

also introduces what a circular economic system looks like and how it would be achieved and


discusses alternative models to development that support and emphasize sustainability and local

community action. Chapter two discusses the current waste situation in India— strengths,

weaknesses, and constraints— and highlights the major issues throughout the country that have

derived from its waste problem. This chapter provides a foundation for the following chapter (III)

which focuses in more depth on initiatives across the country that have been engaging in alternative

approaches to address their waste management needs. Each case highlights important features of

the community and the different initiatives undertaken, the processes that led them to such

alternatives, the actors involved, and factors that aided or impaired the implementation of their

approach. The final chapter reviews the findings and the lessons learnt from the case studies above

and concludes with some closing remarks.


Chapter I: Addressing the Problems

“Recycling is an aspirin, alleviating a rather large collective hangover...overconsumption”

-Robert Lilienfeld and William Rathje

This chapter gives an overview of the issues revolving around waste management in a developing

country such as India and examines the underlying causes of a waste crisis. The relationship

between economic growth and unsustainable waste management is discussed and alternative

models to development are analysed and reviewed for applicability in an Indian context. This

chapter concludes with a call for a paradigmatic shift in growth and consumption behaviour, a

fundamental prerequisite for a sustainable waste management system.

What is Waste?

Municipal solid waste is broadly defined as solid waste generated in a community excluding

industrial and agricultural waste.6 In urban India, around 60% of MSW is organic material, 30% is

recyclable (i.e. plastic, paper, glass, metal), and 10% is inert.7 A table of physical characteristics of

Indian solid waste in relation to population density can be found below. Management of waste in

India is the primary responsibility of the local self-government body (LSGB), such as panchayats,

municipalities, and civic corporations. A typical waste management system may include: waste

storage, source segregation, primary waste collection to a communal waste bin or transfer station,

street sweeping, communal waste bin management, secondary collection and transfer to a landfill

or disposal site, and recyclables management.

Figure 4: Physical Characteristics of Indian Solid Waste (Represented in Percentages)

6 Sinha, Chhabi, 1997. Open Burning of Urban Municipal Solid Waste: A State Level Analysis. New Delhi: TERI, p.71.

7 Agarwal, R., Sinha, S. and Gupta, S. K. 2004. Upscaling people’s participation in urban solid waste management: Constraints and Prospects. [report], p.8


Source: Manual on Municipal Solid Waste Management, 2009; Agarwarl and Sinha et al., 2004

In India, solid waste management is considered an urban issue; rural areas tend to generate much

lower quantities of waste due to lower income and consumption levels and higher reusing and

recycling rates. In the past few decades, rapid urbanisation8 along with changes in consumption

behaviour and material have resulted in soaring levels of waste generated daily, making the waste

management systems in place inadequate to handle the overwhelming quantity. Because of

insufficient infrastructure, inadequate financial resources, poorly designed collection systems, e.g.

lack of mass door-to-door collection services, and improper selection of technologies, LSGBs have

faced serious problems in managing waste; up to two-thirds of solid waste generated in Indian

urban areas goes uncollected.9

Improving waste management has been frequently and incorrectly presumed to mean upgrading,

usually technologically, the waste collection, transport, processing, and disposal system in place.

However, ameliorating these processes does little to address the underlying issue— unsustainable

waste generation. The first step in reforming a waste management system is, instead, understanding

the sources of waste generation and searching for alternatives that challenge these conditions. The

next section will discuss how the current economic growth model and the political pursuit of

development have led to reckless and indulgent production and consumption behaviour that have

increased the amount of waste generated and altered its character from organic to a mixture of

organic, non-organic, and toxic. These changes have made waste processing difficult and

unmanageable, resulting in an accumulation of waste material that continues to grow at

unprecedented rates.

◊

8 According to the 2011 census, the rate of urbanisation in India is currently 31.17% and is expected to reach 40% by 2030. 9 Zhu, D., Asnani, P., Zurbrugg, C., Anapolsky, S. and Mani, S. 2008. Improving Municipal Solid Waste Management in India: A Sourcebook for Policy Makers and Practitioners. Washington, D.C: The World Bank, p.1.


The Paradox of Development

“If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change”

-Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa, “The Leopard”

It is commonly assumed that changing consumption patterns means taking a step backwards away

from growth and development. The assumption goes that imposing limitations on the materials we

consume and the manner we consume them reverts us back to a time of struggle and

underdevelopment in which personal freedoms and pleasures were limited. Likewise, the possibility

of unlimited consumption of goods and services is associated with progress and modernity. From

this notion, we have not only formed the basis for our increasingly consumptive lifestyles but have

also justified these changes as an essential element of any developing society. Although social and

behavioural changes have always been a constant component of our human history, the belief in

“developmental” change has been one completely unique to our current society.

I will be using Gilbert Rist's definition of development to argue that the notion of development,

and more specifically sustainable development, has actually propagated the irresponsible

consumption of material goods and is therefore inextricably linked with unsustainable waste

management. Any reform in waste management must therefore address the development paradigm

and apply alternatives to this model.

According to Rist, “Development consists of a set of practices, sometimes appearing to conflict

with one another, which require— for the reproduction of society— the general transformation

and destruction of the natural environment and of social relations. Its aim is to increase the

production of commodities (goods and services) geared, by way of exchange, to effective

demand.”10 This definition is the most realistic for the results that have come about since the

adoption of the development paradigm, especially in the last fifty years. I have chosen this

definition above others because it addresses a historical phenomenon that maintains a distance

from the moral justifications that create the impression that development is based on philanthropic

principles rather than economic goals. I am not arguing there is no moral connection between

development and humanitarianism but as the Human Development Report 1991 asserts: “Just as

economic growth is necessary for human development, human development is critical to economic

10 The economic assumption in this definition is that by increasing production, “more” is “better” without considering the externality costs. Although some economists are trying to include these costs into the current model e.g. the polluter pays principle, these efforts are only sustaining the current economic structure, therefore prolonging the issues within the model. Rist, G. 1997. The History of Development. London: Zed Books, p.13.


growth.”11 Bluntly stated, the goal for most countries is economic growth under the name of

development.

As Rist points out, this model is grounded upon production to the maximum rather than the

optimum— only intensive and extensive growth can lead to more jobs, less inequality, and

ultimately, higher standards of living. However, endless growth as a necessity for all countries is not

an attainable objective. Already, humans have extracted and consumed around fifty percent more

natural resources than three decades ago—currently about sixty billion tonnes a year—with the

wealthiest countries consuming almost ten times more natural resources than the poorest. 12

Limitless growth is simply environmentally unsustainable. Regardless of improved efficiency and

technological advances, we cannot shy away from the more indirect consequences of an upward

bound economic curve: climatic changes, shrinking biodiversity, increasing pollution, deforestation,

soil erosion, exploited mineral deposits, etc.

The expansion of local markets for international trade has also contributed to the deterioration of

local resources by disassociating production from consumption and consumption from disposal.13

Saved from confronting the amount of resources being exhausted and waste being accumulated,

individuals can continue to consume in a mindless manner as long as the production and disposal

processes are expanded and shifted elsewhere. Expansion of the markets has relieved our

responsibility to respond to these consequences in a timely and locally-relevant manner and reliance

on market price and demand has maintained these issues pertinent only for the short-term.

In 1987, the World Commission in Environment and Development published the report Our

Common Future detailing the threats of development on the Earth's ecosystems. Named after Dr.

Gro Harlem Brundtland, appointed chair to the Commission, the Brundtland Commission was

faced with the daunting task of linking two very contradictory concepts: increasing industrial

production i.e. development, while limiting human activities—stemming from industrial

production—that were deteriorating the environment. From this predicament came the proposed

concept of sustainable development.

11 Human Development Report, 1990 et seq., Oxford University Press, 1991 et seq, p.2. 12 Polzin, C., Giljum, S., Hinterberger, F., Bruckner, M. and Burger, E. 2009. Overconsumption? Our use of the world’s natural resources. [report] Vienna: SERI, GLOBAL 2000, Friends of the Earth Europe, p.9. 13 Rist, G. 1997. The History of Development. London: Zed Books, p.186.


“Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable— to ensure that it meets the needs of the present

without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The concept of sustainable

development does imply limits— not absolute limits but limitations imposed by the present state of technology

and social organisation on environmental resources and by the ability of the biosphere to absorb the effects of

human activities. But technology and social organisation can be both managed and improved to make way for a

new era of economic growth.”14

Whereas the Commission claimed that the problems created by this unlimited growth needed to be

dealt with at the source, they suggested rather limited measures that conformed to the economic

development model e.g. recycling and rationalisation, than any radical adjustments that challenged

this paradigm.

Deliberate ambiguity in the Brundtland Report and all subsequent reports in sustainable

development has led to different interpretations of the term and has resulted in little to no

fundamental changes to the dominant development agenda. For ecologists, sustainable

development requires that production be at a level that can be borne by the ecosystem maintaining

development at a pace based on ecological limitations. Yet the mainstream interpretation is far from

this understanding. What is currently prevailing is the view that sustainable development means

maintaining positive growth rates at a long-term, constant pace. In this interpretation, the force

meant to be sustained is development itself, not the resilience of the environment or of human

societies. It is therefore from this social construct of development that we find the problem played

out to appear as the solution.

If we are to address any of the long-standing environmental and social issues, including waste

management, that are pushing us to an increasingly unsustainable future— in spite of or directly

resulting from this sustainable developmental paradigm— we must step away from this framework

and its assumptions that devoutly relate universal well-being and sustainability with economic

growth. A new set of tools15 that unlinks these premises and moves towards a more dynamic

perspective of well-being will be necessary if we are to challenge the model of development and

reform waste management. A number of alternatives denouncing the current economic framework

have been proposed across the world, resulting in citizen-led movements, localised initiatives, policy

14 Bruntland, G. (1987). Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and Development, p.8.

15 Though “new” is hardly to mean novel as it is to mean different. These “new tools” cannot be one-size-fits-all and must be relevant to the localised definition of well-being, which differs from place to place. This variation of well-being has often been disregarded in place for an economically-dominant definition.


changes, and social reforms. In the following section, I will be taking a look at the differences of

these models to the developmental framework in place, the likelihood these models can sustain

their goals, and the applicability of these alternatives in an Indian context.

Alternative Models in Sustainability

The marketing of “increased efficiency” in the past few decades has led the public to believe that

improving technology is the most significant factor for achieving sustainability. Although increasing

the efficiency of any system or product16 may delay the depletion of natural resources in the short-

term, it does not change the nature of the exploitation, therefore allowing usage to continue as

usual. The current linear economic model operates under a framework where resources and energy

are abundant and easily accessible with the assumption that, even if they are not, technology will

allow us to continue operating as if they are. However, as we continue to consume and dispose at

unsustainable levels, it is evident that this model could never be sustainable and is not a model we

should rely on in the future. In this section, I will be analysing different frameworks of resource

management and governance that attempt to address the contradictions within our current

paradigm and offer an alternative world vision.

The Circular Economic Model

“If humans are truly going to prosper, we will have to learn to imitate nature's highly effective cradle-to-cradle system

of nutrient flow and metabolism, in which the very concept of waste does not exist. To eliminate the concept of waste

means to design things—products, packaging, and systems—from the very beginning on the understanding that waste

does not exist.” - Braungart and McDonough in Cradle to

Cradle

A circular economy refers to a non-linear industrial system where resources are restored back into

use, limiting waste through superior design of materials, products, and management systems17. The

principles of a circular economic model are based on the production and design of products for a

life cycle of disassembly and reuse. This becomes the foundation of eliminating waste in the long-

term, according to McDonough and Braungart, authors of Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We

Make Things, from which the model is partially based18. This is distinct from simply enhancing

16 By reducing the amount of resources and energy consumer per unit of manufacturing output; definition of efficiency provided by Ellen MacArthur Foundation. 2013. Towards the Circular Economy. [report], p.27. 17 Ibid., p.26. 18 The cradle-to-cradle industrial systems was first introduced and formalised into an alternative business model in the


disposal systems or recycling, which tend to lose both energy and labour in the process.

Figure 5: A Circular Economy

Source: The Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013

Distinction of Material Streams

According to the report, a circular economy is based on closing open loops by designing out waste;

that is, designing products for a cycle of reprocessing and reusing.19 Consequently, such a system

imposes a strict differentiation between consumable and durable components of a product.

Consumables in a circular economy would be made of biological elements that could be directly

returned to the natural biosphere; the durables, made of material such as metal and plastic which

are unsuitable for the biosphere, would be designed for reuse. The energy required to manufacture

and reprocess these materials would ideally be coming from renewable sources to lessen the

mid-1970s by Walter Stahel. 19 Rather than simply recycling where, as mentioned above, materials are usually down-cycled, losing large amounts of

energy and quality in the process


dependency on fossil fuels and increase system adaptability.

For the durable material, people on the demand side would be transformed from consumers to

users. Durable products would be rented or leased out to users when possible and if sold, an

agreement would ensure the product be returned to the manufacturer at the end of its usage—in

order to ensure that these non-organic components be reused and reintegrated into the system

after their primary life cycle. This would help maintain the material streams as pure as possible in

order to extend the reusable product's longevity and productivity.

Products would also be designed for a maximised number of life cycles, diversifying their reuse

across a wide range of value chains in order to substitute the use of virgin material and again, build

resilience. For example, cotton cloths would be reused first as second-hand clothing, then as fibre-

fill in furniture, and later as insulation for construction before being returned to the biosphere. In

each reuse, the idea would be to minimise the degree of change the product has to undergo when

being reused or recycled in order to minimise the amount of time, energy, material, labour, and

negative externalities when refurbishing a product.

Therefore, a circular economy is grounded on the following four principles: minimising the amount

of change a product has to undergo in reuse, refurbishment, and remanufacturing in order to

return to usage; maximising the number and time of a product's life cycle; diversifying reuse across

the value chain with a holistic approach to the entity under usage20; and maintaining material

streams separated and uncontaminated in order to extend product longevity and increase material

productivity.

A transition into a circular economy would require some sort of government intervention; policies

that enforce producer responsibility thereby leaving material and recovery problems for businesses

to solve 21, encourage or require alterations to product design thereby facilitating easier disassembly,

reuse, reprocessing, or recycling, and prevent toxic material from entering the market streams

would help establish a necessary foundation for a circular economy that would be otherwise

20 This means using all parts of the resource or material rather than just the immediate demanded components. For example, in the production of coffee, 12 million tonnes of agricultural waste are produced each year. This waste could instead be used to replace hardwoods typically used for farming high-value mushrooms which in turn, would shorten their production period. After its use as a growth medium, the residue could be reused as livestock feed which would not only contain rich nutrients and enzymes but could also be easily returned to the soil in the form of manure. 21 In the case of Japan, the government has standardised and publicly funded collection infrastructure, requiring manufacturers to jointly own them. See Benton, D. and Hazell, J. 2013. Resource resilient UK: A report from the Circular Economy Task Force. [report] London: Green Alliance, p.31.


unattainable by simply market-based approaches.

Criticisms of the Circular Model

The circular economic model has sparked major criticism in the sustainability circles, many

questioning whether it can even be regarded as an alternative model for a sustainable society. To

begin with, although the model briefly mentions production based on decreased energy input and

renewable sources, it does not directly address the fundamental energy problems. Instead, the

paradigm is mostly focused on altering material design and connecting industrial production flows

rather than restructuring energy consumption or extraction. The model also does little to address

the role of consumers in reusing, segregating, and returning materials back into their distinct

stream. This will also require a paradigm shift at the consumer level, which the model does not

elaborate on or stress. In a circular economy, there are also no distinct limits to consumption, based

on the notion that the issues with our economic model are flaws in the production and disposal of

resources, not on the consumption behaviour itself. Implying endless consumption can be

integrated into a sustainable economy is deceiving and can send a fallacious message to both

industries and consumers. The circular economy is also grounded on the argument that though

demand can increase, resources, because they will be reused and returned to the production stream,

can limit the amount of virgin material extracted. However, this is based on the idea that the quality

of the material returned can be upcycled—converting waste into new products of better quality or

for better environmental value—endlessly rather than the reality of downcycling—converting

waste into new products of lesser quality and reduced functionality. In theory, upcycling may be

sustainable but in practice, it is a rare and limited process as quality naturally degrades over time.

Returning these material flows back to the producers will also require a lot of transportation,

especially in a globalised economy, which again, will consume more energy resources and lead us

away from attaining sustainability.

Despite these setbacks, circular economics has begun stimulating discussion between industries,

governments, and even communities that are keen on reducing waste accumulation and ensuring a

healthier environment. However, this vision remains limited mostly to corporate and government

responsibility within a society with a centralised governance authority, a highly formalised economy,

and a mostly urban population that would allow for easy accessibility to industrial recovery centres.

In an Indian context, a circular economic model can be a point of reference for better waste

management though it requires/lacks certain elements22 that limit its replicability. Fundamental

22 The most important being the lack of acknowledgment of India's large informal economic sector


changes in market behaviour and waste generation require a broader more holistic paradigm shift in

which social, environmental, ethical, and economic issues are interconnected. For this, we must ask

ourselves what kind of changes are we searching for when we discuss resource management and

sustainability, whether economic growth and sustainability can even coincide, and what is the role

of the individual and the community in assuring citizen action and social well-being?

Degrowth and Alternative Models to Development

In the mid-1970s, Fred Hirsch (1976) concluded that individual preferences for positional

consumption— that is, products that increased status or utility not by their functionality but by

their distinction and rarity— increased in relation to average yield, creating a superficial impression

of individual prosperity. However, Hirsch noted this satisfaction achieved from the consumption

of these positional products was sensitive to interactions within society; when the number of

people owning a positional object or visiting a location crossed a certain threshold, social ties

deteriorated along with individual well-being, prompting people to pursue other objects or places.

Limitless positional competitiveness became one of the foundational factors for the coveted

prestige propagated by increased economic growth.

Although positional consumption has been a prominent element of social status throughout

human history, it is with the advent of the market economy that consumption of these positional

products has risen to a massive scale and become ecologically unsustainable. Considering that 20

percent of the world's population already consumes more than 82 percent of world production

while 60 percent consume only 16 percent of production23— the remaining 20 percent only 1.4

percent of global production— the aspiration of advancing or prolonging the lifestyle of the top

twenty percent and the middle sixty percent is already exceeding and will further outpace the

regenerative capacity of the planet. It is from this reality that Bonaiuti (2012) argues that the

breakdown of social relationships via the build-up of positional consumption is fuelling the

ecological crisis; as these elements are all interlinked, one cannot be mended without considering

the other. For these reasons, the pursuit of free trade and economic growth to increase

promotional consumption as a means to achieve well-being is a paradox; as the scale of

consumption, population, and industrialisation crosses a threshold, the “growth of the economy

and the population pressures on ecosystems reduce their ability to support life and economic

as well as its significant rural population. 23 Figures taken from Bonaiuti, M. 2012. Degrowth: Tools for a complex analysis of the multidimensional crisis. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 23 (1), p.43.


activities, the dissolution of social ties advances, and positional competition becomes more

intense.”24

The current paradigm of economic development does not recognize well-being as a result of

complex interactions between economic, ecological, and social factors but rather the result of an

increased ability to consume goods and services. If we are to address resource management and

responsible market behaviour within a sustainable paradigm, we must look towards alternative

models to development that focus not on the promotion of limitless production and consumption

but on the advancement of well-being rooted in ecological sustainability and improved social

relationships in addition to financial stability.

Radical Ecological Democracy

Radical Ecological Democracy (RED) is an alternative vision that relies on reforming the structures

of governance, society, and the economy to be more inclusive and grounded on ecological

sustainability and social equity in order to achieve greater human well-being25. According to the

RED Treaty, the pillars of this alternative paradigm are founded on the following:

• Maintaining the integrity of ecological processes, systems, and diversity

• Ensuring deep social, economic, and environmental justice

• Meaningfully participating citizens and communities in the decision-making process

concerning issues relevant to their lives

• Ensuring that the decisions made are responsibly grounded in ecological sustainability and

socio-economic equity

• Respecting the diversity of environments, ecologies, cultures, values, modes of living,

knowledge systems, polities, and livelihoods as long as sustainability and equity are

addressed

• Promoting collective and co-operative thinking and working as well as individual freedoms

and innovations based on inter-personal and inter-community solidarity

• Respecting the right of nature and communities to survive and thrive in the conditions

from which they have evolved

24 Ibid., p.44. 25 See People's Sustainability Treaty on Radical Ecological Democracy. 2012. Available through: http://radicalecologicaldemocracy.wordpress.com/red-treaty/.


• Encouraging the resilience and adaptability of communities and humanity to maintain

ecological sustainability and social equity in the face of internal and external pressures

• Establishing and empowering small-scale communities26 as the fundamental unit of

governance and enabling correspondence with other related communities and institutions at

the bioregional and ecoregional levels27

• Respecting the interconnectedness between the environment, economy, society, culture, and

politics in the promotion of human well-being.

With these principles in mind, RED asserts a paradigm not focused on one model or aspect of

well-being but on a collective framework that considers the promotion of alternative activities and

decentralisation of governance systems to inspire greater ecological and social satisfaction. These

activities can range from developing subsistence economies that sustainably manage local resources

to reforming secondary education to include local social and environmental knowledge, and are an

attempt to learn from the past, building on traditions that promote the maintenance of this social

and ecological equilibrium.

Commitments to Ensure RED

According to the RED Treaty, governments are urged to reconsider the current development

paradigm and look towards alternative models that offer genuine well-being with ecological

sustainability and socio-economic equity in mind. This means, for example, leaving behind GDP as

an indicator of development and replacing it with indicators of well-being that reflect aspects of

the human condition that are currently not measured nor considered. The treaty also urges

governments to ensure legal recognition of indigenous and local communities and decentralise

political and economic governance in order to facilitate better management of local affairs.

However, governments should use their state power to ensure the needs of the socially exploited

and disadvantaged, regulate activities of the corporate sector, and facilitate more exploration in

alternatives for long-term ecological and socio-economic well-being. Realising the potential the

government carries to create a tipping point within society can also create opportunities to

influence individual behaviour. Policy instruments such as penalties, regulations, and incentives in

26 Small enough for all members to partake in the decision-making process 27 An ecoregion is a "recurring pattern of ecosystems associated with characteristic combinations of soil and landform that characterise that region,” An ecoregion is smaller than a bioregion. Brunckhorst, D. 2000. Bioregional planning: resource management beyond the new millennium. Harwood Academic Publishers: Sydney, Australia, p.25.


consumption and production processes may be needed in order to achieve significant behaviour

modification that could in the long-term, change social norms.28 The treaty also calls for civil

society organisations to take action in promoting changes to the current development model and

advocate the rights and responsibilities of communities to collectively govern and ensure

sustainability and well-being.

This evolving framework implies a redefinition of well-being, turning away from the common

interpretation associated with increased material living standards29 and evolving more towards a

holistic understanding that stresses human equity and ecological sustainability as essential factors.

Unlike the circular economy which targets mostly industries with some government intervention,

this model targets governments and local communities as well as civil societies to reshape long-

term demands and search for local and diverse methods to attain social and ecological welfare.

Although both argue the current economic paradigm is unsustainable, the circular economic model

maintains that supply and demand can still grow as long as the economic curve is redesigned to

reintegrate materials back into the economy. It does not question however the sustainability of

uncurbed demand and relies on the idea that consumption can continue to grow and provide well-

being as long as the manner in which the materials are produced and disposed of are altered.

Challenging the very relationship of increased consumption to well-being is at the core of RED

and therefore offers an alternative framework based not on altering the model in place but creating

a genuine vision of sustainability where economic growth is not at the essence of human well-

being.

An alternative framework that confronts the economic growth model and redefines the relationship

between the environment, society, culture, the economy, and the governance structure is one that

can address waste management in a long-term and responsible manner. This can be achieved

directly and indirectly through greater democratisation of the management structure, awareness-

raising of communal initiatives, reforms in individual and social behaviour, progressive and socially-

inclusive policy changes, and even private and social partnerships that promote this vision of well-

being.

28 Kinzig, A. P., Ehrlich, P. R., Alston, L. J., Arrow, K., Barrett, S., Buchman, T. G., Daily, G. C., Levin, B., Levin, S., Oppenheimer, M. and Others. 2013. Social norms and global environmental challenges: the complex interaction of behaviors, values, and policy. BioScience, 63 (3), pp. 164--175. 29 The ICW Framework presented by the OECD, 2013 Report argues that economic well-being is essentially at the core of overall well-being. See OECD (2013), OECD Framework for Statistics on the Distribution of Household Income, Consumption and Wealth, OECD Publishing.http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264194830-en, p.3-5.


Understanding the correlation between promotional consumption, social and ecological welfare,

and waste generation helps prepare the foundation for an alternate vision of waste management

that addresses these elements to resolve the waste crisis at its source. This chapter has outlined the

origins of the global waste management problem and reviewed how the development paradigm has

contributed to the current waste crisis by equating material indulgence with personal well-being.

Correcting this logic remains at the root of any solution to the waste management problems; any

sustainable structure must address the consumption behaviour of the society under examination

and in turn, question the paradigm under which they live in that promotes such behaviour.

Proposing alternatives to this paradigm is therefore not just an exercise to consider but an essential

aspect of a holistic approach to limiting and eventually phasing out waste. With these models in

mind, I now turn to the waste problems in India, examining how it became the daunting issue it is

today, how it differs from the waste situation in other countries, and what types of proposals are

conducive towards a sustainable future.


Chapter II: Reforming Waste Management in India

This chapter reviews the dominant waste collection and disposal trends and policies that pertain to

the waste sector in India and examines the consequences of this management system on society,

public health, climate change, and the environment. An alternative waste management vision is

proposed based on decentralised recovery-centric interventions that aim to integrate public

participation in the shift towards community-based resource recovery management. It is from this

alternate framework that the case studies in Chapter III will be analysed.

Current Waste Structures

In India, solid waste management is considered a basic public necessity and is provided by the

respective municipalities. The extent of responsibility from the municipalities requires the provision

of public containers for discarding waste as well as the transportation and disposal of waste

material, be it segregated or not. Although the municipality does not formally recognise the

informal waste sector in many cases, they depend greatly on these workers to facilitate municipal

waste management. Before municipal waste has been collected or after it has been disposed, many

recyclables are recovered and processed through the informal sector; waste pickers collect and

segregate recyclables which are then sold to a series of waste dealers and recycling facilities. The

high recovery rates of recyclable material in India can be attributed to these workers' activities.

Once waste has been collected, the majority of MSW is sent to unsanitary landfills or open dumps

where waste is disposed of and bulldozed over or covered with debris. Most of these sites are free

of environmental controls where waste is left untreated and unsegregated. Incinerating

unsegregated waste is also a common practice at both large and small scales, despite the Schedule

II-I (vii) provision in the MSW Rules ordering that “waste (garbage, dry leaves) shall not be burnt.”

The consequences of these disposal methods have severe implications on public health and the


environment as well as economic efficiency and overall effectiveness.

Source: Information from Djemacim 2009

Figure 6: MSW Disposal Trends in India

Source: Kumar Kaushal and Varghese et al., 2012

Consequences of Landfilling, Open Dumping, and Burning

Waste Management Comparison: France In France, the State monitors the public waste services and ensures compliance of applicable

environmental standards while the local authorities retain the power to delegate municipal waste collection, disposal, and processing tasks. Service provision can rest in the hands of the local

authorities or be transferred to a state agency, a private entity contracted out by the municipality, or a private entity contracted directly by the user. The majority of municipalities

contract out services to industrial and commercial agencies who collect and treat waste in either composting and segregation centers, landfills, and/or incineration plants. About 98 percent of the French population is served by door-to-door collection, once to three times a week. Private

contractors are obliged to comply with local, state, and European standards; the European Packaging Waste Directive, 2004 sets targets for material and energy recovery including: a

minimum of 60 percent energy and material recovery and a minimum rate of 55 percent total recycling. Local authorities can choose how to finance waste collection and treatment. The majority of municipalities opt to finance management byway of sanitation taxes collected by industrial and commercial agencies that manage over 90 percent of the population's waste in

France.


One of the greatest consequences of landfills and open dumps is the contamination of ground and

surface water due to leachate. Leachate is liquid that moves through or drains from a landfill or

dump site often containing nutrients, metals, salts, and other soluble or suspended components and

products from the decomposition of waste.30 The presence of heavy metals and pesticides in

groundwater samples near landfill and open dump sites has become fairly common not only in

India but throughout the world; this percolation often renders the associated aquifer unreliable for

domestic use.31 The continued usage of landfills, both sanitary32 and unsanitary, and open dumps

therefore perpetuates considerable contamination of groundwater sources neighbouring these sites.

The presence of heavy metals in compost from mixed waste has also led to the transference of

these toxic elements into the food chain. Heavy metals such as Nickel, Cadmium, Zinc, and Copper

have been found in mixed waste compost, further contaminating agricultural fields.33 Exposure to

these heavy metals through food can cause severe damage to the nervous, circulatory, and

reproductive systems, liver and kidney damage, and psychological disorders among other

problems.34

Landfilling also occupies a great deal of land resources, especially near urban areas. The Ministry of

Finance (2009) estimates more than 1400 sq. km of land for waste disposal would be needed by

2047 if landfilling continues at 91%. As a result, limited land resources has led to land grabbing and

further displacement of villagers in proposed landfill sites. In February 2014, the Mira-Bhayandar

Municipal Corporation (MBMC) shortlisted thirteen hectares of land in the Sakhwar tribal village

in Vasai for the dumping of waste as a result of mounting garbage in Uttan35; this will most likely

30 Australian Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Waste Guidelines: Waste Definitions. Adelaide: Government of Australia, p. 6. 1.31 United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1984. A Ground Water Protection Strategy for the Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Drinking Water, p.11. 32 Groundwater contamination due to leachate has been detected even near sanitary landfills, regardless of the presence of a liner. Murray, J. P., Rouse, J. V. and Carpenter, A. B. 1981. Groundwater contamination by sanitary landfill leachate and domestic wastewater in carbonate terrain: principal source diagnosis, chemical transport characteristics and design implications. Water Research, 15 (6), pp. 745--757. 33 Giusquiani, P. L., Pagliai, M., Gigliotti, G., Businelli, D., & Benetti, A. (1995). Urban waste compost: effects on physical, chemical, and biochemical soil properties. Journal of Environmental Quality, 24(1), 175-182.

34 See Giusquiani, P. L., Pagliai, M., Gigliotti, G., Businelli, D., & Benetti, A. (1995). Urban waste compost: effects on physical, chemical, and biochemical soil properties. Journal of Environmental Quality, 24(1), 175-182.; National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, NEERI. 2010. Air Quality Assessment, Emissions Inventory and Source Apportionment Studies: Mumbai. New Delhi : Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) 35 Mira Bhayander is located north of Mumbai in the northern part of Salsette Island. Nair, S. 2014. Mira Bhayander waste may be dumped in Vasai. The Times of India, 11 February.


result in the displacement of the Sakhwar villagers and the transformation of the land into a

dumping site. Consequently, not only do landfills occupy land resources, the presence of plastics

and heavy metals also contributes to the degradation of the quality of soil in the area, making the

land unfit for future agriculture or construction activities.

The consequences of incinerating waste also pose a severe threat to air quality and public health.

Inhalation of smoke and fumes from open burning and incinerators as well as exposure to air-

borne bacteria and toxic material in fine particulate matter can cause respiratory damage and

decrease overall life expectancy.36 A study by NEERI (2010) found that that burning waste and

landfill fires emit 10,000 grams of dioxins and furans into Mumbai's lower atmosphere every

year.37 Even from an efficiency perspective, incineration is a capital-intensive process, non-viable

for the low calorific nature of Indian waste. Mixed waste incineration also discourages source

segregation and resource recovery options.

Figure 7: Dangers of Dioxins and Furans

Source: Information found in Becher, H., & Flesch-Janys, D.,1998

Diseases from stray animals and insects living off these waste sites have also become a growing

public health concern. Mosquitoes breeding in waste-clogged sewers and drains may become

vectors of viral diseases like dengue and encephalitis and rabies-infected stray dogs, who live off

waste found on the streets, have been responsible for over 20,000 deaths in India each year.38 In

1994, improper SWM caused a bubonic plaque epidemic in Surat, pushing city officials to reform

waste management and clean the city. Recently, in January 2014, a case was brought to the Supreme

Court over milk contamination from cows who had been living off of waste on the streets. 36 Allsopp, M., Costner, P. and Johnston, P. 2001. Incineration and Human Health. [report] Greenpeace Research

Laboratories, University of Exeter, UK, p.24-39. . 37 National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, NEERI. 2010. Air Quality Assessment, Emissions Inventory

and Source Apportionment Studies: Mumbai. New Delhi : Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), p.62, 129. 38 Sudarshan, M. K., Mahendra, B. J., Madhusudana, S. N., Narayana, D. A., Rahman, A., Rao, N. S. N., ... & Ravikumar, K. (2006). An epidemiological study of animal bites in India: results of a WHO sponsored national multi-centric rabies survey. Journal of Communicable Diseases, 38(1), p.32.

Dioxins and furans refer to a group of persistent, organic pollutants that

are highly carcinogenic. They can be produced when certain products are

incinerated, such as polyvinyl chloride, and can build up over time in the

fatty tissues of living organisms. They have been shown to alter hormone

levels, affect fetus development, and decrease/suppress reproductive and

immune systems.


Doctors at a Tamil Nadu vet school reported cases where cows had swallowed over 25 kilograms

of plastic, resulting in severe gastrointestinal problems for the animals and contaminated milk that

carried high levels of plastic residue and dioxins.39

Figure 8: Cows Feeding off Waste on Streets

Source: Author, 2013

In addition to public health issues, current solid waste management in India is a large contributor

of greenhouse gas emissions, especially methane. Methane is released into the atmosphere when

anaerobic processes digest organic waste accumulated inside landfills. One tonne of methane is

roughly equivalent to 21 tonnes of CO2 and being that it is a more potent greenhouse gas,

methane has a greater climatic impact in the long term. Landfill fires are also common due to

trapped heat from decomposing organic matter and are a significant source of air pollution in

Mumbai; the NEERI study (2010) found that open burning and landfill fires contributes to 19

39 The National Survey on Milk Adulteration by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India in 2012 found that 70% of milk urban Indians were drinking was contaminated traces of starch, detergents, bleaching agents, fertilizers, and even dioxin. Datta, D. 2014. India's toxic milk and plastic cows. Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/india-toxic-milk-and-plastic-cows/1/341455.html. India Today, 3 February.


percent of air pollution due to carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and hydrocarbons in the city.40

National Policy Structure

The Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000 were published under the

notification of the Ministry of Environment and Forests and passed by the Central Government in

order to regulate the collection, transportation, treatment, and disposal of municipal solid waste. As

outlined by the Rules, each municipality is responsible for providing waste management services

and infrastructure within its jurisdiction. The Rules specifically outline responsibilities and

procedures the municipalities can undertake, from segregating collection, to transporting and safely

processing waste in an inoffensive manner. The Rules also recommend adoption of different

technologies including biomethanation, gasification, waste-to-energy combustion, and sanitary

landfills for sustainable waste management41. Unfortunately, over a decade has passed since the

Rules were first issued and yet city compliance rates are still very low.

Figure 9: Status of Compliance with MSW Rules 2000 in 2004

Source: Asnani, 2004

The Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 requires carry bag manufacturers and

distributors to abide by certain regulations including:

• Manufacturing thickness at no less than 40 microns

• Tinting without added pigments or with colorants in conformity with Indian standards

• Labelling with the registered manufacturer number

40 National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, NEERI. 2010. Air Quality Assessment, Emissions Inventory and Source Apportionment Studies: Mumbai. New Delhi : Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), p.62, 129. 41 Ministry of Environment and Forests. 2000. Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000 Notification. [online] Available at: http://www.moef.nic.in/legis/hsm/mswmhr.html.


• Prohibiting free distribution

The Plastic Rules also require the municipalities to be responsible for the safe management of

plastic waste and demand the creation of a State Level Advisory Board to monitor the

implementation of these Rules.42

Other policies that have outlined the federal government's intentions and priorities in addressing

waste include The National Action Plan for Climate Change, 2008, and The National

Environmental Policy, 2006. The former launches a national mission to make habitats sustainable

by “improving management of solid waste”; the Plan stresses municipalities to remove barriers for

better utilization of non-hazardous materials, implement viable PPPs while taking into account the

concerns of the local community, survey and prepare national inventories of toxic waste sites, and

grant legal recognition and strengthen the informal waste sector by enhancing their financial and

technological access43. The National Environmental Policy, 2006, offers similar recommendations

as well as promoting organic farming of traditional crop varieties, promoting biodegradable and

recyclable substitutes for non-biodegradable materials, and developing strategies for recycling,

reusing, and environmentally-benign disposing of waste.

Overall conformance to these recommendations has been limited due to lack of managerial

receptiveness and financial resources as well as limited public awareness. Over a decade has passed

since the MSW Rules 2000 were first issued and many cities have yet to initiate measures; Mumbai

began reforming MSW management only after severe flooding in 2006 due to waste-clogged drains

threatened city infrastructure. Many municipalities have been transferring responsibilities to

centralised private waste management contractors in an effort to shoulder off the burden of waste

management. The greatest implication of privatisation has been the exclusion and loss of

livelihoods of the informal waste sector, a work force of over 1.5 million Indians44. Privatisation

has also led to increasing cases of waste mismanagement and misappropriation of funds; in

Bangalore, Hanjer Biotech Energies Pvt Ltd, one of the country's largest solid waste management

companies, was revoked permission to set up a solid waste management unit in January 2014 after

the company, despite receiving a performance security guarantee of Rs 3.95 crores from the

municipality nine months earlier, neglected their construction responsibilities. The same company

42 Ministry of Environment and Forests. 2011. Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2011. New Delhi: Government of India, p.3-8. 43 The Plan stresses this last recommendation,calling the informal waste sector “the backbone of India's highly effective recycling system.” Prime Minister's Council on Climate Change. 2008. National Action Plan on Climate Change. New Delhi: Government of India, p.30. 44 Chaturvedi, B. 2010. Mainstreaming Waste Pickers and the Informal Recycling Sector in the Municipal Solid Waste.


was also found running their garbage processing units in Pune at fifty percent capacity under

expired production licenses.45

Solid waste management in India will need drastic reform measures if it is to address waste issues

for the long-term. Transitory short-term changes— such as the development of more landfill gas

recovery centres or sanitary landfill facilities— can only temper the immediate problems but should

not be considered as solutions for sustainable waste management. Instead, a profound overhaul of

the current cradle-to-grave framework that encourages negligent production, consumption, and

disposal behaviour needs to take place in order to fully address the situation. Developing more

community-oriented initiatives in the decentralisation of disposal responsibilities, raising public

awareness on responsible consumption and disposal practices, creating policies that limit the

production of unrecyclable material, incentivizing the separation and reutilisation of waste

material, promoting localised environmentally-benign and socially inclusive waste handling, and

most importantly, recognizing and integrating the informal waste sector into management plans are

a few steps that can be taken to confront the severe waste situation in India.

Participatory Recovery-Based Interventions

Decentralisation is the process of devolution of resources and of decision-making powers to local

bodies46. In India, it has become associated with the 73rd

and 74th Constitutional Amendments

that recognise the constitutional power and role of local bodies; certain functions, including waste

management, which can be performed more efficiently at a local level, are therefore constitutionally

devolved to local bodies and municipalities.

The failure of local authorities to provide proper waste management services has led to a greater

number of community initiatives taking waste management into their own hands. Although such

initiatives provide an alternative to the oftentimes poorly-functioning centralised waste

management system in place, they are usually under great economic and social strain and are rarely

recognised or supported by the involved stakeholders. Ideally, governments should support these

initiatives that are community-based and address waste management in an environmentally safe and

socially inclusive manner. However because they still remain marginalized or undermined by

45 Malusare, Nikita. 2014. BBMP boots out waste disposal firm that never started work. Citizen Matters. http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/bbmp-hbepl-contract-terminated-hanjer

46 Agarwal, R., Sinha, S. and Gupta, S. K. 2004. Upscaling people’s participation in urban solid waste management: Constraints and Prospects. [report], p. 28.


formalised municipal institutions, it is necessary to bring these initiatives to light in order to stress

the benefits they offer and the advantages of a decentralised waste management system.

There are five basic models of waste management in a decentralised management system:

• Partnership between Municipality and NGOs

• NGOs/CBOs on their own

• Municipalities on their own

• Private Operators

• Institutions/industrial complexes on their own47

The initiatives examined in this report offer examples of how different models can manifest in

different waste management strategies with a decentralised and participatory vision in mind.

Although many of these initiatives have been in place and running for a while, it is difficult to tell

whether they could be up-scaled successfully, especially without the support of the larger

municipalities and greater communities. However, there is a strong case for intervention in both

up-scaling the community projects as well as in making suitable policy interventions to ensure they

remain economically and environmentally sustainable.

In order to be ecologically sustainable, a participatory recovery-based waste management

intervention must work towards:

• Minimisation of waste generation

• Maximisation of recovery options including reusing, recycling, composting, biogas

processing

• Inorganic material replaced and phased out

• Biodegradable waste separated and treated separately

Figure 10: Treating Biodegradable Waste

47 For example, a university may decide to manage the disposal of the waste they generate themselves without relying

on the management system of their area. Ibid.


Source: Nair and Jayakumar, 2008

To fulfil the majority of these conditions, waste needs to be segregated at the source. Source

segregation is the minimal condition to treat biodegradable waste and maximise material recovery.

However, promoting source segregation is one of the most difficult aspects of sustainable waste

management. This is why social awareness campaigns are usually necessary in community waste

initiatives as the majority of households in India do not segregate their waste.

Monetary contributions for source segregation in the form of user fees lends to the initiatives

remaining not only ecologically sustainable but financially sustainable as well. In a study done by

Toxics Link on door-to-door collection, about 91% of households surveyed felt comfortable

paying user fees and 85% felt they were be reasonably charged.48 In other words, there was a

willingness to pay for the waste services through the user fee. In many communities, the services

provided in the user fee include: door-to-door collection of waste, road sweeping, drainage

cleaning, tree pruning, etc. which are typically carried out by waste pickers or local organisations.

Any community intervention must also involve some sort of formal or semi-formal arrangement

which brings stakeholders and their responsibilities together. The two most important stakeholders

that need to be involved for sustainable interventions are the local political leadership and the

concerned municipality. Opposition of the political leadership is not only troublesome but can lead

to disempowerment of the intervening communities; in the case of Chennai, the government

deliberately contracted out its municipal services to Onyx, a private company, in areas where a

community based organisation, Exnora, was working because the CBO was considered too close to

a particular political party.49 The support of municipalities is equally critical to the success of any

intervention. For example, municipalities can help issue identity cards to waste pickers to help

formalise their role and status, allocate land for composting, and help perform services such as

street sweeping and tree-trimming.

Common Themes in Community-Based Initiatives

The identification of involved stakeholders is a crucial step in participatory decision-making. This

is why the first principle in any community-based initiative is including all stakeholders affected by

48 Agarwal, R., Sinha, S. and Gupta, S. K. 2004. Upscaling people’s participation in urban solid waste management: Constraints and Prospects. [report], p.31.

49 Ibid., p.39.


the decisions and project into the planning and implementation process. Households excluded

from the initiatives may challenge the changes being put in place e.g. dumping unsegregated waste

publicly in light of door-to-door collection efforts, or instigate dismotivation for the project within

the community. Other common themes include generating initiatives that are self-sustaining,

respecting local cultural and historic contexts, and working with involved stakeholders on the basis

of equality and respect.50

The most difficult aspect of any participative initiative is building and sustaining momentum; this

usually depends on the level of ownership felt by members of the community. Normally initiatives,

regardless of whether they are community-led or not, tend to be managed by a limited group of

people; sustaining momentum means the cooperation of all people and organisations at all levels is

required. Generating awareness among the community can help develop this cooperation and lead

to more active participation from stakeholders. Another manner to promote the sustainability of a

community initiative is to ensure a balance at the community level between economic well-being

and environmental protection.

Initiating a community-based participative model as an alternative to the current waste

management structure can promote a more sustainable approach to waste disposal. This however

remains only one aspect of a profound waste management reformation; waste generation must be

controlled simultaneously to effectively manage waste in the long-term. This chapter has reviewed

the problems with the current management system and examined the conditions and process for

creating a more inclusive and decentralised management structure. The following chapter will

present current initiatives that are advancing a more community-based and participative

management system and analyse their results thus far.

50 Velasquez, J., Yashiro, M., Yoshimura, S., Ono, I. 2005. Innovative Communities: People-centered Approaches to Environmental Management in the Asia-Pacific Region. Tokyo: United Nations University Press, p.65-74.


Chapter III: Case Studies

This chapter presents three cases that illustrate alternatives to current local waste management

schemes; these alternative initiatives have been undertaken by stakeholders that have previously

been excluded from the decision-making process and involve reforms that seek to reduce and

recover waste in a long-term and environmentally-friendly manner. The first case study presents an

urban scenario where reforming waste management involves recognising and integrating waste

pickers into an altered collection and disposal process and experimenting with zero waste wards.

The second case study presents a growing township with increasing tourist activity where reforms

have been initiated by the Tibetan government in exile and have involved engaging both local

residents and tourists into waste management plans. The last case study presents a smaller more

rural area where altering waste generation and collection activities have been undertaken by a local

religious and cultural institute that has become one of the most ardent actors of waste

management reform in its state. These case studies highlight some of the social, political, and

environmental changes that can when waste management is reformed to be more inclusive and

recovery-based and the challenges that lay ahead. These examples are still far from an ideal zero

waste world; however, the initiatives that have been implemented are indicators that waste

management can be reformed to be more sustainable and socially equitable.


Pune: Waste Picker Movement and Zero Waste Ward

Pune is a burgeoning city located about 150 kilometres from Mumbai in the state of Maharashtra.

With a population of 5 million inhabitants in an area of 450 km squared, it is among the fastest

growing cities in India51. Pune is considered the cultural centre of Maharashtra and is quickly

developing as a manufacturing, automobile, IT, and higher education hub, attracting migrants,

students, and professionals from around the world.

Figure 11: Location of Pune

Source: Symbiosis International University, 2011

Waste Picker Movement

A significant part of Pune's waste management system thrives off the largely unaccounted for

informal waste sector, e.g. waste pickers, scrap dealers, kabaris, etc. In many cities in India, these

workers make a living segregating waste material or buying/selling recyclables though they are not

formally recognized nor contracted by the municipality and are excluded from local and state level

51 Censusindia.gov.in. 2011. Census of India Website : Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India.

[online] Available at: http://censusindia.gov.in/ [Accessed: 27 Mar 2014].


discussions, budgets, and policies pertaining to waste management. In Pune, about 92 percent of

waste pickers are women, mostly dalits52, who earn a livelihood sifting through garbage for

recyclable material53. This material is then segregated and sold off to itinerant scrap dealers or

kabariwalas until it is finally sent off for reprocessing. About thirty percent of the female waste

pickers in Pune are widowed or deserted and about fifty percent are the primary earners of their

household54.

Figure 12: Structure of Informal Recycling Sector

Source: Chikarmane, 2013

Waste pickers have generally been a group of people at the bottom of the domestic worker

hierarchy, frequently mistreated and abused while working under poor physical and social

conditions. On average, waste pickers walk up to twelve kilometres a day by foot with head loads of

up to 40 kilograms, working from sunrise to sunset. In areas without door-to-door collection, those

who are not picking from the dumpsters are working at the landfills, recovering recyclables for

eventual trading and reprocessing. Without rights to the waste they segregate, waste pickers are

often accused of theft and are confronted by the police and municipal workers on a daily basis. The

majority earn a daily wage of 60 rupees (US $1)55, rummaging through waste that often contains

used medical supplies, glass shards, dead animals, and toxic chemicals. As a result, many pickers

suffer from recurring illnesses including animal bites, tuberculosis, infections from cuts, asthma,

52 More specifically, Mahars, Matangs, and Neo-Buddhists 53 Tangri, N. 2012. On the Road to Zero Waste: Waste Pickers Lead the Way to Zero Waste:. [Report] GAIA. pp. 10-17. http://no-burn.org/downloads/On%20the%20Road%20to%20Zero%20Waste.pdf.

54 Ibid., p.11

55 Ibid.


and scabies.

Figure 13: Dead Dog in Uruli Dump

Source: KKPKP, 2010

Figure 14: Waste Picker Sifting Through Trash


Source: Ibid

The Beginnings of KKPKP

Unlike other urban areas in India, the waste pickers in Pune became the first to organise and form

a union to improve their working conditions and livelihoods. In the early nineties, the Department

of Adult Education at the Shreemati Nathibai Damodar Thackersey (SNDT) Women's University

began working in the slums, launching livelihood workshops and activities for the female slum

dwellers; despite their efforts, the programmes were unsuccessful. This was partly due to poor

marketing of these activities. However, the greater issue was the unavailability of their target

audience; the poorest females they were attempting to reach out to were often out working most of

the day. The department consequently shifted its focus from slum-dwellers to waste pickers— the

majority of whom were among the poorest slum-dwellers anyhow— and began launching

workshops to raise education levels among the waste pickers and their children as a means to

improve their status. Over time, however, the activists realized the key to significantly improving

the waste pickers' lives was securing better access to waste and recyclable goods.

In 1993, with the help of a few organized waste pickers and allied groups, over 2000 waste pickers

attended a collective meeting to discuss their work conditions and bring light to their struggles. The

results led to a collaborative initiative which they named Kagad Kach Patra Kashtakari Panchayat

(KKPKP) in the hopes that by working together, they could fight for social justice and improve

their economic standing. Through their coordinated efforts, they created the first waste picker's

union in India.

KKPKP's membership went up to 7000 in the first few years as waste pickers around Pune became

more active and involved in the union. Tackling a variety of issues including labour, gender, and

class affairs—one of the first cases KKPKP worked on was confronting police officers who had

been taking bribes and sexually harassing many of the waste pickers— the union became officially

recognised by the municipality in 1996. With this recognition, they were able to obtain

identification cards, which laid the groundwork for improving their social status and protecting

them from police harassment.

Of the work that KKPKP has accomplished, one of their greatest achievements was in December

2002 when KKPKP was able to secure medical insurance for its members; the Pune Municipal

Corporation (PMC) became the first and only municipality in the country to pay the health


insurance premiums from the annual budget for self-employed waste pickers as a gesture of

recognition for their financial and environmental contributions to the city.56 The union is now

exploring social security options for its members and has created interest-free loan schemes as well

as scrap shops that buy recyclable material directly from the waste pickers. They have also set-up an

education centre for their members and their families that is sustained by the interest accrued from

their savings schemes.57

There have been marked shifts in perception and rights towards waste pickers in Pune ever since

they formed a collective identity. More active participation in programme planning and advocacy of

crucial issues such as harassment and child labour, changes in personal and public perceptions,

educational benefits, access to credit and bargaining power, and above all, increased access to

source segregated material are among the positive changes that have been promoted since the

founding of KKPKP.

Governance Structure of KKPKP

The President and head of the union is Mohan Nanavre, the son of a waste-picker and leader of

the Dalit rights organisation, Dalit Swayamsevak Sangh. There is also a General Secretary, a Joint

Secretary, and a Treasurer that make up the core office holders. In addition, there is a Governing

Board comprised of eleven members, eight of whom are scrap collectors. Although the Board is

the legal centre of power, the decision-making remains among the members and the

Representatives Council, made up of eighty elected representatives. The Council meets once a

month to discuss issues and plan for the upcoming period. Representatives can be replaced if

considered ineffective and do not receive financial compensation from the Union for their title.

The Union employs four staff members and one part-time accountant, all of whom belong to the

same social and economic class as the members. The Union also has three activists involved in the

governance processes, none of whom are paid salaries by the Union58.

56 Chikarmane, P. 2013. Interview on KKPKP and SWaCH. Interviewed by Mariam Abazeri [in person] Pune, 20 August. 57 Narayan, L. 2012.Interview on KKPKP. Interviewed by Ashish Kothari [in person] Pune, 7 July. 58 Chikarmane, Poornima and Narayan, Laxmi. Organising the Unorganised: A Case Study of the Kagad Kach Patra Kashtakari Panchayat (Trade Union of Waste-pickers), p.7-8.


Profile of a SWaCH Waste Picker: Name: Maryam Age: ~ late 20s, early 30s I met Maryam and two of her colleagues in a housing society in West Pune early one morning. The following information was gathered from our conversation while accompanying them during their door-to-door collection. Maryam was born and raised in an area in Pune not far from where she now works. Maryam has been

waste picking for eight years and as an orphan and a widow, she is the sole provider for her two young children.

Prior to SWaCH, she and her colleagues picked in community collection bins, working ten hours days, seven days

a week, in dirty and demeaning conditions. After the establishment of SWaCH in 2007, she says door-to-door

collection has drastically improved her working environment and source segregation has helped her earn more

through the sales of recyclables than before. She now works six days a week and her daily schedule is less

intensive, working mornings to early afternoons, thereby allowing her to spend more time with her kids. Maryam

earns about 30 INR ($0.50) per apartment for her collection service, averaging ten apartments per building,

working five to six buildings. Most of her earnings come from the sale of recyclables; Maryam earns about

1000INR ($16.66) per kg of recyclable material per week.

The composting at the housing societies where she works and all society buildings constructed post-2000

is processed on-site, near the back storage units. Two main composting structures line the back walls, one on each

side of the society, with seven boxes in each structure. Each box contains wet waste material based on what day

of the week the organic matter was dumped, allowing for better decomposition of the waste material. Maryam

sprays each box with a special solution used to diminish odours after she pours in the recently collected wet waste.

Occasionally, she and the other waste pickers add live cultures to the boxes to assist the organic breakdown of the

organic waste. The rest of the waste that is neither composted nor segregated off for selling i.e. non-recyclable

material such as snack wrappers, Styrofoam, and tetrapak, is left for the garbage truck to collect and dump to the

nearest landfill.

While Maryam goes door-to-door, residents hand her two small waste bags: one for dry waste, the other

for wet. She often has to pluck out material and further segregate the waste before dumping the bags into the bins

she carries with her up and down the buildings. On one of the floors, I meet a resident that asks me in English

why Pune is still dealing with waste pickers and not mechanising trash collection as they do in developed

countries. I tell her employing waste pickers for door-to-door collection and segregation services ensures a decent

livelihood for a large number of people and is actually more effective than mechanised segregation. She grimaces

and shuts the door.

Maryam tells me she has noticed a difference in the way people treat her before and after the instituting

of door-to-door services. She feels cleaner, for one, now that she does not have to sift through garbage in

community collection bins. She also feels more respected and says the residents generally treat her well; she has

even developed a few amicable relationships with her clients, something she never would have imagined before.

She is also much happier she has more free time to spend with her children and says the hours and distances she

used to work and cover have reduced significantly from before. She still awaits the gloves and uniforms the PMC

has promised to provide; she says they have been promising for a long time.


Formation of SWaCH

In 2007, KKPKP created India's first wholly-owned waste picker cooperative, Solid Waste

Collection and Handling (SWaCH) to standardise collection services and improve members'

working conditions. The co-op is authorised and compensated by the PMC to provide door-to-

door waste collection and other waste management services. Currently with a membership of 2300

waste pickers, the co-op services over 330,000 households in 15 municipal wards of the PMC

(about 47% of the city) on a contract basis, integrating member waste pickers into the waste

collection and disposal system.59

Sources of Income in SWaCH

Most of the waste pickers' income comes from the sale of recyclable materials from door-to-door

collection. The other source of income for SWaCH members comes from the service fees they

charge residents. These service fees usually range from 10 to 30 rupees per month ($0.16-$0.48

USD) depending on the income level of the neighbourhood.60 Private households tend to pay

waste pickers directly while housing societies and institutions pay SWaCH who then distribute the

money to its members. From these fees, SWaCH takes five percent for administrative costs; the rest

of SWaCH's financial support comes from the municipality that funds professional staff salaries

and waste research. SWaCH members usually earn between 4,500 rupees and 6,000 rupees per

month ($72-$96 USD), about two to three times more than what most waste pickers were earning

before the co-op.61 Because the value of the recyclable material being sold off is greater than the

wage collected from the service fees, most of the increase in salary is a result of better access to

these materials.

What happens to the Waste?

After the waste material has been segregated by the waste pickers, recyclables are sold off to

itinerant scrap dealers or to KKPKP's scrap shop. The non-recyclable dry waste is left in a waste

bin which is then collected by the municipality; however, since the initiation of SWaCH, fewer

waste bins have been needed as recovery rates continue increasing, diminishing the amount of dry

waste that is thrown out.

Organic or “wet” waste comprises more than 70 percent of Pune's waste stream. Pune has 15

59 Swachcoop.com. 2013. Solid Waste Collection and Handling or officially the SWaCH Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Pune. [online] Available at: http://www.swachcoop.com/index.html. Retrieved 13/12/13. 60 Tangri, N. 2012. On the Road to Zero Waste: Waste Pickers Lead the Way to Zero Waste:. [Report] GAIA. http://no-burn.org/downloads/On%20the%20Road%20to%20Zero%20Waste.pdf, p.15.

61 Ibid.


biogas plants in the city where over 75 tonnes of organic material are processed every day.62 From

these plants, the city is able to generate power in the form of methane currently fuelling the city’s

street lights. However, since there are certain organic materials that cannot be processed in the

plants and are usually common in household waste, such as coconut shells and fibrous material,

most of the organic matter fuelling these biogas plants comes from restaurants, not households.

Some of the household wet waste that SWaCH collects is taken to centralised composting plants

run by either the municipality or Disha, a local NGO. Yet because much of the wet waste the city

generates is not adequately separated, the compost or fuel that is produced at these centralised sites

is of poor quality, contaminated with plastics and other toxic material that when burned or used,

release contaminants into the biosphere.

Since 2000, apartment buildings and institutional campuses are required to construct on-site

composting facilities that allow SWaCH members to separate and compost wet waste directly at the

housing society or facility. These compost pits may separate compost by date of disposal and use

bacteria additives to accelerate the decomposition process. The produced compost can then be

utilised by households or members of the institutions; the ownership and utilization of localized

compost has encouraged residents to better segregate their wet waste thereby improving the quality

of their compost. In addition, apartment complexes that operate on-site composting facilities

receive a five percent rebate on real estate taxes as an incentive63. The compliance of constructing

composting sites however remains low; a sample survey in 2009 revealed only 40 percent of

housing societies constructed post-2000 have functional composting sites.64

SWaCH: Benefits and Setbacks

In the past six years, the co-op continues to maintain a strong presence in the city and among the

waste picker community due to the grass-root management led by other waste pickers. Because it is

worker-controlled, the co-op has been able to remain relevant and receptive to workers' needs; this

has also helped maintain overhead costs low as much of the staff still waste picks during the day.

Most importantly, the co-op has improved the livelihoods of many of its members by normalising

door-to-door collection, which both saves its members from picking in dumpster sites and

improves the quality of recovered recyclables, thereby increasing its members' earnings. The co-op

has also worked to bring more dignity to the work itself by standardising service provision among

62 Ibid., p.14. 63 Ibid., p.15.

64 Only 40 per cent societies have compost pits: Survey. 2009. The Times of India, 6 October.


its members and carrying out trainings that help improve and expand the services provided.

However, SWaCH still confronts many setbacks from the municipality, local corporations,

households, and even members. One of the greatest challenges for the co-op remains the negligent

disposal behaviour of residents. Although the door-to-door collection has resulted in a higher

recovery rate from increased and cleaner segregation, residents are still not fully compliant of the

segregation rules— only 30 percent fully separate organic and non-organic waste while 60 percent

only partially segregate waste65. As a result, the waste pickers must usually further segregate waste

material post-collection.

Other challenges include maintaining a standardised work ethic among members when working

with households; untimeliness for door-to-door collection and rudeness are among the most cited

complaints from residents.66 Growing tension between the supervisory staff and the waste pickers

has also become a challenge in maintaining cohesiveness and membership within the co-op. The

majority of the staff are educated younger generation members who oversee fifteen to twenty

waste pickers per supervisor. Because they receive SWaCH salaries, which end up being higher than

most waste pickers' earnings, there is growing resentment between the supervisory cadre and the

waste pickers.

Another challenge is the conflict of household coverage between the co-op and the PMC. Because

part of the city is still receiving free services from the PMC while others are paying user fees to

SWaCH waste pickers who are also under the PMC's jurisdiction, there are many residents who

have complained about the unfair service coverage provided by the PMC and the user fees

collected by SWaCH. As long as the PMC continues to offer waste collection free of charge to

certain residents, the services and fees proposed by SWaCH will continue to be undermined.

The limited coverage of the city also puts the sustainability of SWaCH into question; with 45

percent of the city receiving their services, the 5 percent waste pickers pay from user fees for

overhead costs is high for the workers but not enough to keep the co-op running. Expansion to

cover the entire city has been a challenge for SWaCH members as prior to the contract with the

PMC, services were only provided to households that cooperated and abided by the segregation

rules. The most resistant and defiant groups have been middle and low-income residential areas and

vendors in commercial compounds. According to Anjor Bhaskar and Poornima Chikarmane, “In 65 Ibid., p.13. 66 Narayan, L. 2012. Interview on KKPKP. Interviewed by Ashish Kothari [in person] Pune, 7 July.


order to expand coverage and convince people to pay for the door-to-door waste collection service

in these areas, SWaCH staff and members would need to convince citizens about paying over and

above the taxes that they were paying to the Municipal Corporation, why they should not dump

mixed waste in the municipal container, and why they should not burn it or throw their waste out

in the open spaces.”67

Composting has also been an issue as most of the organic material is processed by the PMC and

not the waste pickers themselves; local composting at the society building is still rare. In addition,

not all recyclable waste is being segregated as some material such as low-grade plastic is considered

unprofitable to recycle in that they are low-earning scraps.

Pressures of Privatisation

As a result of years of pressure from urbanisation, lobbying, and poorly municipally-run waste

management systems, there has been a growing tendency to contract out waste collection services

and disposal to private companies. However, privatisation oftentimes prohibits waste pickers' access

to waste thereby threatening their livelihoods. In Pune, the unionisation of waste pickers has helped

retain their access to municipal waste; however, contractors and other private waste management

companies have increasingly viewed waste pickers as an obstacle into the waste market. Companies

such as Hanjer Biotech Ltd and BVG Pvt. Ltd have tried to secure the city waste management

market with PMC contracts and support, in competition to SWaCH's door-to-door segregation

services.

Alongside private companies, some civil groups believe the union has promoted the wrong ideals

by supporting waste picking as a livelihood. The National Society for Clean Cities (NSCC) Pune, an

organisation consisting mostly of middle-class residents, claims that the union has encouraged

waste pickers to continue working under squalid conditions rather than shifting them into another

field of service and allowing waste collection and disposal to become mechanised68. The

organisation has campaigned to ban waste picking on several occasions, citing:

“In rural India, no amount of arguments in support of livelihood and employment could justify

the evil of a caste having to carry the night soil. Neither has child labour been condoned in urban

India. Today, both evils are banned by law. It is now time when we must phase out the social evil of

ragpicking; it is time to look for alternative ways of dealing with the increasing urban garbage in

67 Bhaskar, A. and Chikarmane, P. 2012. The Story of Waste and its Reclaimers: Organising Waste Collectors for Better Lives and Livelihoods. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 55 (4). p.10



our Indian cities and towns.”69

This notion of waste picking as an “evil in society” has promoted the view that waste pickers can

never live in dignity and that displacing them with machines will help them and the community in

the long-run. However, KKPKP has proven that waste picking can be a dignified source of income

if it is treated as such; formalising waste pickers into the waste management system and having

residents interact with the people collecting their waste develops sensitivity from society that can

change the perception of these citizens and their occupation. Waste picking in most of India is

carried out under unsanitary conditions because of the lack of place and status society gives these

workers, despite the work being financially, environmentally, and resourcefully productive. In Pune,

displacing thousands of ragpickers for more expensive and often inefficient technology is also

neither a preferred option for the waste pickers that depend on their job for a livelihood and the

union for social and financial opportunities nor for the municipality that benefits from the services

KKPKP and SwaCH provide members. The Planning Commission has confirmed this view,

reporting: “In the long run, it might be worthwhile to organise ragpickers' cooperatives, so that

besides getting a fair wage for their work, they can benefit from the non-formal education and

learn skills that will be of use as they grow older.”70 The displacement of these workers for

mechanic operators also neither eases environmental nor waste concerns. Most mechanised

collection services disregard or inadequately segregate recyclable waste, opting for the most

convenient and less costly operation that oftentimes involves dumping or burning unsegregated

waste in landfills or incinerators. Changing the way waste is recovered from landfills to door-to-

door collection and elevating the status of these workers through integration into the waste

management system and increased interaction with residents will transform society's perception of

waste pickers from one of undignified to one of essential.

For these reasons and more, KKPKP continues challenging the NSCC as well as private companies

and contractors by creating a model of waste management that incorporates waste pickers into the

waste management system as a means to ensure and enhance the livelihoods of these informal

waste workers. As a competitor in the waste market, this model not only integrates waste workers

from the informal into the formal sector, enhancing their social and economic well-being, but also

offers cheaper and more recovery-efficient services at a lower environmental cost.

69 Maria, D. 2010. RAGPICKING WASTES LIVES. NSCC Pune, 30 May, p. 1. 70 Bhaskar, A. and Chikarmane, P. 2012. The Story of Waste and its Reclaimers: Organising Waste Collectors for Better Lives and Livelihoods. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 55 (4). p.5


SWaCH and the PMC: A Relationship under Construction

A large part of SWaCH’s success is due to their working relationship with the municipal

government and other related stakeholders. Because of the services SWaCH provides local

residents and taxpayers and the sheer number of waste pickers and allied groups that belong or are

related to the co-op, the PMC has an interest in maintaining a positive relationship with the group.

Altogether, waste pickers recover over 144 tonnes of recyclable material prior to its transportation,

saving the PMC and PCMC Rs. 16 million per annum in transportation costs alone71. This

dependency is also reciprocated as the PMC is providing SWaCH temporary monetary support

with the condition the co-op become self-sustainable within a bound time period.

This relationship is not without its weaknesses; the PMC has a history of providing collection

services in some areas free of cost as a result of pressure from influential council members and

residents. This has made it difficult for waste pickers to collect service fees from residents in the

surrounding areas and has created some resentment towards the PMC as a service provider. The

PMC has also continued investing more on waste-to-energy plants run by private companies rather

than on recycling and processing factories. The result has made segregating and recovering waste

material more costly than incinerating it in waste-to-energy plants72 and has increased the

competition between private actors, also operating with PMC subsidies, and SWaCH for waste

contracts.

Discussion

The unionisation of waste pickers into KKPKP and the creation of SWaCH have created a voice

for waste pickers in Pune where none was before. These initiatives have improved their conditions

and the respectability of their work by increasing their rights, developing relations with the

municipality and other stakeholders, involving them in the formal waste management strategy, and

increasing their earnings by securing better access to waste material. The promotion of door-to-

door collection and segregation by SWaCH waste pickers and the drive for more waste recovery

facilities has created an alternative inclusive model of waste management that depends on the

empowerment of informal waste workers and stresses traditional methods of waste disposal with

more effective practices of waste collection. This model has enabled a slow but crucial shift in

71 Chikarmane, P. and Narayan, L. n.d. Organising the Unorganised: A Case Study of the Kagad Kach Patra Kashtakari Panchayat (Trade Union of Waste-pickers). Pune: Available through: Wiego.org http://wiego.org/sites/wiego.org/files/resources/files/Chikarmane_Narayan_case-kkpkp.pdf, p.14.

72 Waste-to-energy has become a very disputed method for dealing with waste as more research proves it to be highly polluting and resourcefully inefficient; much of the energy produced is of poor quality and at low quantities.


perception of waste pickers, disposal behaviour, and waste itself from the municipality and the

public.

Although participation of waste pickers in waste planning and servicing has increased, there is still

a lack of decentralisation within decision-making and processing that hinders the progress towards

more sustainable waste management. Decentralisation of planning and recovery processes not only

enables more participation of different stakeholders but also increases the demand for segregated

waste by decentralising the recovery facilities and increases the demand for labour. Examples of

such decentralisation schemes include: processing of degradable waste in decentralised locations

including respective housing society/community, planning for sustainable waste management at the

ward and housing-association levels, and more decentralised collection of segregated waste.

Decentralisation however requires more coordinating and overseeing efforts by the municipality

among the different facilities and stakeholders, an intensive task that may be a deterrent for many

communities that still rely on centralised processing.

The City Development Plan for Pune emphasised promoting decentralisation by delegating the

management of waste to the wards—lower administrative units— within the PMC. According to

the Plan, the municipality would take the role of a coordinating figure, overseeing the activities of

the different wards. The reality unsurprisingly has been quite different. The PMC has continued

espousing centralised management by signing contracts with private companies to collect and

process municipal waste at centralised facilities; the PMC recently signed a contract with Hanjer

Biotech Ltd, granting them rights to nearly two-thirds of the city's waste for waste-to-energy

processing.73

Pune is in the midst of a waste management reform, largely due to the bold efforts of KKPKP

and SWaCH and the activists and officials that have supported them. However there is still much

work to be done if Pune is to manage its waste in an effective and sustainable manner. More

decentralisation of the decision-making and primary disposal processes will be necessary as well as

more accountability in decision-making, more governmental effort to subsidise recovery-centric

facilities and limit the amount of non-biodegradable material entering the waste stream, more

compliance of these restrictions and orders from all members of society, and more awareness-

raising among citizens on proper waste segregation and disposal methods in order to develop a



long-term inclusive waste management model.

This section has looked at the importance of inclusion and empowerment of the informal sector

within the greater municipal strategy as it remains. The following section will consider how these

factors can relate to a larger recovery-centric SWM vision specifically in Katraj, a ward in Pune

attempting to launch a zero waste strategy.

Katraj Zero Ward Waste

In February 2011, a local NGO, Janwani, partnered with the PMC, SWaCH, Cummins India, an

engine and generator manufacturer, MITCON, a consultancy and engineering firm, Kirloskar,

India's largest manufacturer of pumps and valves, and the Maharashtra Plastic Manufacturers

Association (MPMA) to develop a Zero Waste Ward in Pune. Local authorities chose Katraj as the

test ward for its diverse population and size, allowing for possible future replicability; over 11,000

properties and 55,000 residents are situated in Katraj, ranging from households, slums, and flat

complexes, to industrial estates, hotels, and small businesses.74 The model would require 100 per

cent segregation of waste between organic and inorganic material, 100 per cent door-to-door

collection, and local separation and disposal of waste. It would also rely heavily on the waste

pickers organised by SWaCH who would collect the waste door-to-door daily and deliver the

organic material to the biogas plants. Cooperative ward officers and existing waste management

infrastructure— two biogas plants, a wet waste pelletization plant, a composting unit, and sufficient

space for sorting sheds— were expected to facilitate the project.

Developing Awareness

In order for the project to thrive, the staff and volunteers had to focus much of their time

developing awareness among the residents, business owners, and waste pickers on proper waste

handling. This was done through monthly meetings, professional puppet shows, flyers, and public

events. The PMC and Janwani also collaborated on developing a Quality Manual indicating the

procedures for the proposal; this manual was later approved for ISO certification, the first in its

kind.

The Results

Since the project's initiation, there has been a marked difference noted by the locals in improved

74 Bhaskar, A. 2011. Zero Waste Electoral Ward Initiative at Katraj Gaon, Pune. [online] 24 June. Available at: http://www.thebetterindia.com/3531/zero-waste-electoral-ward-initiative-at-katraj-gaon-pune/.


cleanliness and hygiene in the ward, many citing the diminishing frequency of overflowing

community bins as an indicator of progress75. Burning and dumping waste on open fields has also

substantially reduced and as a result of increased segregation, much more dry waste is being sold

off for recycling and reprocessing. The financial support from corporate sponsors such as

Cummins has also helped empower the waste pickers, allowing for better organisation for

collection and segregation of waste material. The greatest benefit of this initiative has been the

sensitivity and momentum the project has generated among the residents and locals towards waste

segregation and waste pickers; citizens have generally responded interested in adapting waste

disposal behaviours and have welcomed door-to-door collection by waste pickers.

Despite these advancements, recycling is still not up to the expected level; one hundred per cent

segregation has not been attained. According to Anjor Bhaskar, leading coordinator of the Katraj

zero waste project, although more recycling has been achieved—almost twenty times more than

before— it is still not at Zero Waste levels. He believes full segregation may not have been a

realistic goal for the ward and may have never been the actual focus of the other partners.76

Bhaskar notes that a large portion of both organic and dry waste within the ward are neither being

recovered nor processed as required and are instead being sent to landfills as mixed waste in a

business-as-usual manner. He attributes these shortcomings to the shortage of waste pickers,

political issues, negligence of responsibilities from the MPMA, and insufficient segregation from

residents and citizens.

Setbacks

There have been several setbacks that have hindered the project's success and compromised its

sustainability. Foremost, the lack of sufficient recovery facilities has led to excess wet waste being

sent back to the landfills, negating much of the progress the project has achieved from segregating

waste material. Secondly, because no policy changes have been created to limit certain material

from entering the ward or incentivize waste reintegration into the local market, the feasibility and

sustainability of the project remain restricted. Thirdly, despite the improved status of waste pickers,

the workers have still not been fully empowered to regulate collection services; because no

consequences for households who do not segregate have been put in place—the waste pickers are

not allowed to deny door-to-door services to defaulters— full compliance has not been attained.

Fourthly, the involvement of the MPMA in the initiative has compromised the project from the

start due to their interest in keeping plastic unregulated within the ward. Although the MPMA

75 Bhaskar, A. 2013. Interview on Katraj. Interviewed by Mariam Abazeri [in person] Pune, 30 August. 76 Ibid.


initially promised to locally reprocess plastic material post-segregation, the association has

neglected their responsibilities and sent the majority of plastic waste to the landfill. For lack of

interest or ambition, the local authorities have not reacted nor reprimanded the MPMA's

negligence.

Replicability

According to Bhaskar, the project has strong potential for replicability elsewhere, though given the

circumstances faced in Katraj, one hundred percent segregation and reintegration of local waste

material cannot be an attainable goal without more infrastructure development, local enforcement

policies, and government intervention in the form of material bans, reusing and recycling

incentives, and waste picker empowerment. As long as individual behaviour remains inconsistent to

the proposed waste goals, stakeholders are excluded or disempowered from the decision-making

process, industrial reforms are overlooked, and sustainable consumptive and disposal handling

methods are neglected, apathy will be the greatest obstacle for a zero waste future.

Since the initiation of the project, segregation rates within the ward have drastically increased and

waste carted off for landfilling has diminished; these advancements however have not been

significant enough to consider the ward a zero waste community. Municipal authorities have yet to

implement any fundamental systemic changes for the goals to be viable; nonetheless, it has created

awareness within the community of more sustainable waste handling methods, laying down the

groundwork for future improvement.


Himachal Pradesh: Upper Dharamshala and Bir

The following two case studies take place in North India in the state of Himachal Pradesh. These

cases have been selected to present how areas with lower population densities and factors such as

tourism, permanent migration, and religious and cultural identity can influence waste management

and contribute towards a more decentralised recovery-centric SWM model. While the initiatives

launched in the following communities have greatly contributed to this alternative waste

management model, the state's role has been pivotal in establishing a foundation for a sustainable

waste management vision. The next section will briefly discuss the policies the state of Himachal

Pradesh has affected in managing waste generation and the outcomes of these efforts in order to

better understand the context in which the initiatives that follow have been undertaken.

Figure 15: Map of Himachal Pradesh

Source: CC-by-sa PlaneMad/Wikimedia, 2008


Progressive Waste Policies in Himachal Pradesh

Himachal Pradesh has been at the forefront of progressive waste management action since the late

1990s. In 1999, it became the first state in India to ban the use of coloured polythene carry bags

and in 2004, a further ban was imposed on the use of polythene bags with a thickness less than 70

microns and 12”x18” size. In October 2009, a complete ban on the use of polythene carry bags

and littering of plastic waste was adopted, two years prior to a following ban on the sale of plastic

cups, plates, and, glasses. The bans are being actively enforced—violators must pay a fine and face

possible prosecution.77 This has resulted in the widespread adoption of woven fabric bags. On June

26th 2013, the government issued a notification banning the sale, entry, manufacturing, and

stocking of twenty-five different non-essential food items packaged in plastic or non-biodegradable

material. The list includes items such as potato chips, biscuits, candy, chocolate, and noodles, all of

which would no longer be available in polythene packaging upon its implementation. This ban is

the first of its kind in the country and is expected to have significant ramifications for large snack

industries as well as small-scale food vendors78.

Despite the begrudging attitude of the bigger players in the snack industry, the implementation of

the ban by the High Court means communities across the State will be moving towards a zero

waste future regardless of intrinsic motivations. This ban is only the latest step of a series of bans

on non-biodegradable material; the court has added that if the experiment is successful in

diminishing the amount of plastic and non-biodegradable waste, the ban may be expanded to

include other non-essential items as well. Although the ban is only applicable to Himachal Pradesh,

the success of its implementation and effects may appeal to neighbouring states and eventually the

country as a whole.

77 The fine is directed towards vendors and producers, individual customers are not to be proceeded against; the fine is fixed at a minimum of IRS 1000 and can increase up to IRS 100,000 and seven years of imprisonment for repeated offenses. The Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No.STE-A(3)-4/2003 dated 04.06.2004 78 The notification has ordered all vendors obtain a license by the state to carry on any food business. Giants in the snack industry have not surprisingly openly criticised the ban and have shown unwillingness to launch biodegradable packaging for Himachal Pradesh which they say only constitutes five percent of the national market. Many small businesses are also complaining saying the change in material will cause a sharp increase in price, limiting their clientèle. The Court has supposedly taken this into account and hopes the price rise will be a deterrent for the consumption of these snacks and sweets. The ban still awaits implementation.


Upper Dharamshala: Tibetan Government Initiative in Tourist

Figure 16: Map of Dharamshala in Himachal Pradesh

Dharamshala lies at the foothills of the

Dhauladhar range and is one of the most

frequented tourist destinations in northern India.

The town is known for its scenic mountain views,

Buddhist monasteries, and current seat of His

Holiness the Dalai Lama and the Central Tibetan

Administration, the Tibetan government in exile.

Upper Dharamshala became the temporary

headquarters of the Dalai Lama and Tibetan

government in 1959 and later the main relocation

site of Tibetans in exile. This has resulted in a

Source: CC-by-sa PlaneMad/Wikimedia, 2008 strong Tibetan and Buddhist presence and made

the town a popular destination for Indian and foreign tourists.

Prior to the 1980s, much of the waste produced in upper Dharamshala was entirely organic. As in

many small towns and villages in rural India, food waste was either given to cattle or composted;

dry waste was reused or burned. The increased number of refugees and tourists as well as the

introduction of plastics and other non-biodegradable material throughout the '80s began to place a

strain on the local waste disposal habits. This led to a higher waste volume and consumption rate

of disposable products, exceeding the town's sustainable waste limits and increasing the amount of

non-biodegradable material in the waste stream. Lack of a functional waste management system

led to accumulated waste and pollution in Dharamshala, escalating into a widespread crisis by the

late 1980s.

Beginnings of the TSO Initiative

In the early 1990s, the Central Tibetan Administration decided to look after its waste and sanitation

problems despite having no formal jurisdiction over the area. In 1994, the Tibetan Settlement

Office (TSO) in Dharamshala launched the Clean Upper Dharamshala Programme (CUDP) in an


effort to put in place a solid waste management system. The objectives of the CUDP included:

• Ensure a healthy and clean environment

• Promote sustainable social and ecological development

• Increase environmental awareness in the community

• Establish segregation of recyclable and non-recyclable wastes at household, business, and

institutional levels

• Maximize the level of waste recycling

• Involve all stakeholders in project planning and implementation and remain transparent

• Serve as a model for other Tibetan settlements and interested communities79

In cooperation with local NGOs, residents, and tourists, several awareness-raising events were

launched including mass clean-ups and festivals and an environmental education centre was

established to host workshops and engage the public on issues such as waste habits, public health,

and ecology.

In 2002, the CUDP was granted a contract with the local municipality to take responsibility for the

management of waste in three of their presiding thirteen wards, still with no formal jurisdictive

power; in other words, any decisions taken by the CUDP were still to be consulted and approved

by the Municipality, the Forest Department, or private landowners80. As a result of the contract, the

CUDP was able to employ fifteen street sweepers and twelve Green Workers to carry out waste

management services; all Tibetan residents were also issued a waste collection card that served not

only as a service card but also as a proof-of-residence that allowed refugees to participate and

request services from the TSO. In this manner, the TSO was able to maintain and enforce

membership from all Tibetan residents into the CUDP waste management programme.

The Waste Management Framework

Directly contracted by the TSO, Green Workers are responsible for providing door-to-door

79 Mcleod Ganj Environmental Office. 2012. CUDP Waste Handbook. Mcleod Ganj: Tibetan Settlement Office. 80 Almost none of the landowners are Tibetan as Dharamshala is not a legal Tibetan settlement; this means the Indian government does not recognize any rights over land for refugees who are not Indian citizens, regardless of the years spent in the country. Because many of the landowners are non-residential Indians (many living in Delhi), having landowners follow up on work requested in waste management has proven difficult.


collection for houses, restaurants, hotels, schools, monasteries, and shops as well as educating

residents on waste segregation. Green Workers are able to enforce segregation rules by restricting

waste visits to non-abiding residents, thereby empowering their role in the management process

and raising segregation compliance within the community. Consequently, Green Workers have

become the backbone of the CUDP waste awareness-raising and education programme

Once the waste has been collected, recyclable material is taken to the segregation centres where it is

further segregated before being sold off to traders; recycled paper is brought and reused at the

TSO's Paper-Recycling Shop81. Non-recyclable waste is sent to the dumping site in Lower

Dharamshala. Aside from door-to-door collection, public waste bins have been placed throughout

the area and are maintained by the Green Workers on a regular basis. Income to sustain the

CUDP's projects and services –including transportation costs and educational and social services—

are generated through four major inputs: the Municipal Council, sales funds from the Green Shop,

household fees, and donor organizations82

Figure 17: Tibetan Artisan Working in Handmade Paper Workshop

Source: CUDP, 2012

Large-scale composting is still however in its planning phase; previous composting projects have

run into problems due to land scarcity and stray animals; the sites have frequently been changed as

81 The Paper-Recycling Workshop takes waste paper, cardboard, and cotton previously collected to produce handmade recycled paper which is then cut to make a variety of products ranging from notebooks to greeting cards to lamp shades. The products are sold at the CUDP Green Shop and provide an income to the artisans, all of whom are Tibetan refugees. The shop is currently self-sufficient yet its demand and income-generation still fluctuates due to a number of one-time bulk orders.

82 Household fees average to about 240 rupees a year for waste services. The main funders to the CUDP include SOIR-IM/IMEX Fair Trade and the Shelly and Rubin Foundation.


a result of bears. Because public land in Upper Dharamshala is still under the Forest Department

and Municipality’s jurisdiction, the CUDP has also had a hard time receiving permission for new

composting sites; according to Mewang, the Environmental Coordinator for the TSO, the Forest

Department and Municipality fear the composting requests are an excuse from the TSO to obtain

land for development.83 Unfortunately this means that whatever organic waste is not being given to

cattle and other domesticated animals is being disposed of at the Lower Dharamshala dumping

site.

In wards where the Forest Department is still in charge of carrying out waste management

services, there has been little to no action taken towards reforming waste management84. In these

neighbouring wards, residents have cited that most of the waste is either dumped to the boundary

lines of the CUDP's area or burned. When waste is found within these boundary areas, TSO

workers have been called for clean-up by the Forest Department, regardless of the waste's origins.

Green Workers have often cited abuse from the Forest Department during these clean-ups,

resulting in a very tenuous relationship between the TSO and the Forest Department85.

Impact of Tourism

In the past few years, the number of tourists visiting Himachal Pradesh and more specifically,

Dharamshala, has been rising. Currently over 47,000 tourists visit Upper Dharamshala every year,

over three times the local population.86

Figure 18: Total Tourists in Himachal Pradesh 2006-2011

83 Mewang. 2013. Interview on CUDP. Interviewed by Mariam Abazeri [in person] Dharamshala, 25 October. 84 According to local residents living outside Mcleod Ganj and the TSO Environmental Office 85 There is a long history of tension between the TSO and the Forest Department as well as tension between the Tibetan community and the indigenous Gaddis. 86 Mcleod Ganj Environmental Office. 2012. CUDP Waste Handbook. Mcleod Ganj: Tibetan Settlement Office.


Source: Department of Tourism, Himachal Pradesh, 2012

As a result, much of the waste generated in the area comes from hotels, restaurants, and travellers

that generate large quantities of plastics and non-biodegradable waste. Poor waste disposal

behaviour among tourists has led to public campaigns by the CUDP and local NGOs to generate

awareness on maintaining the area litter-free. Public murals promoting mass clean-ups and advising

against littering can be found near trekking paths and hotels. In conjunction with the efforts of the

CUDP, a local NGO by the name of Waste Warriors has been working on collecting garbage from

trekking paths and local chai shops along notorious hiking routes and surrounding villages. At least

once a week, waste is collected by mules and later segregated in Dharamshala.

Figure 19: Public Mural Promoting Clean-Up Hikes


Construction of tourist infrastructure such as guest houses and private villas has drastically

expanded as a result of increased tourist activity. Poorly planned and ultra-congested development

has led to increased deforestation and degradation of the local environment and has begun to

undermine the aesthetic appeal of the area; the hill station now faces similar issues of an urbanized

area such as high pollution levels, high real estate prices, traffic jams, and strained public

infrastructure87. Dumping of construction material on neighbouring farmlands and hillsides has

also become a common practice and is not only causing further degradation of the area but is

creating resentment among the local population.

87 Jreat, M. 2004. Tourism in Himachal Pradesh. New Delhi: Indus Pub. Co. p.186


Figure 20: Waste on Hill Side


Results of CUDP

Since the initiation of the CUDP, waste disposal in Upper Dharamshala has become more

organised with more commercial, residential, and tourist involvement. With the waste identification

cards, every Tibetan household in Upper Dharamshala is expected to participate in the waste

management program and segregate any collected waste. The Green Workers have also become an

enforcement team that ensure compliance and understanding of segregation rules during waste

collection. The creation of the Paper Workshop has also helped engage the community by

providing a livelihood for Tibetan refugees as well as generating a market for recycled used paper.

Strong leadership from the local government as well as the active participation of community-

based organisations has helped carry forth this initiative, instigating change within the community.

Still, several challenges remain unaddressed that limit the project's viability. Maintaining the support

from the Municipality and non-residential landowners continues to be one of the greatest setbacks

for the CUDP. With reoccurring conflicts in border areas, developing rental properties, and

composting sites, the lack of support from these actors stunts the progress of a struggling multi-

stakeholder community initiative. Second, reaching and engaging the tourists that visit Upper

Dharamshala in proper waste habits and limiting the amount of waste generated in hotels and

restaurants remains a task for the entire community. Especially along the hiking paths, many


mountain shopkeepers complain that despite the nature of the activity, tourist hikers often lack the

environmental sensitivity to not throw their plastic bottles or wrappers along the pathways. Third,

covering the transportation costs for disposing of the waste, especially to the recycling centres that

lie outside the town and even outside of the district continues to be a challenge. Due to the

increasing cost of fuel, both segregated and unsegregated waste are oftentimes taken to the nearby

landfill which is closer in distance than the recycling centre. As a result, the sustainability and

viability of the waste management structure in place is highly questionable. Fourth, although the

TSO efforts have created a waste management plan that engages the community, benefits are often

directed to only Tibetan residents, excluding the local Indian population. Green workers and the

Paper Workshop craftspeople are jobs designated for Tibetans and benefits from the waste

identification card are directed to the Tibetan population. Involving more participation from

different stakeholders, including non-Tibetans, in waste planning and managing and building a

better rapport with the Municipality and the Forest Department, and will be crucial if waste

management is to improve.

Despite these setbacks, the programme remains in control of the management system in the area

and has initiated an output for upcycling paper refuse. The major source of success of this

community initiative has been the existing authority from the TSO and the engagement of the

Tibetan community. Overall, the initiative has helped generate awareness among the locals on waste

generation and segregation behaviour; however it remains stunted as a result of its lack of

recovery-centric options for materials other than paper and poor relations with the local Indian

authorities. Because the area is highly visited by tourists year-round, educating and engaging the

visitors in waste management also remains a challenge.


Bir: Local Cultural and Religious Institute's Waste Initiatives

Figure 21: Map of Bir

Bir, a village situated on the

Western edge of the Kangra

District about sixty kilometres away

from Dharamshala, is notorious for

its paragliding and its monasteries.

It is also the home of the Deer

Park Institute, a centre for Indian

Traditional Wisdom and Buddhist

teachings that has been

spearheading a waste management

campaign not only on the campus but in the community. Source: Google Maps, 2014

With the help of an active team of staff members and volunteers, the Institute has been reaching

out to community members and local authorities, hosting waste management workshops as well as

handicraft workshops that reuse and recycle local waste. The Institute has also been involved in

environmental education, visiting the surrounding schools to raise awareness of sustainable waste

practices among the children; visits have included art projects using waste material and

presentations that emphasize local environmental appreciation.

Waste Initiatives

The Deer Park Institute initially became involved in waste segregation a few years ago when the

levels of accumulated waste within the Institute alarmed the staff members88. With the help of a

few volunteers, the staff began outlining the processes for converting the institute into a Zero

Waste Centre with hopes of expanding these goals to the community in the future. Segregation

bins and a storage room for the scrap dealers to collect recyclable material were installed on

campus and a campaign to limit the amount of non-recyclable material coming into the facility was

launched by the staff. In 2007, the Deer Park Institute teamed up with members of the local

community and created the “Himalayan Eco Club” as a space to learn about and promote

environmental awareness. The organisation became involved in a number of initiatives including

88 Shakya, P. 2013. Interview on Deer Park Zero Waste. Interviewed by Mariam Abazeri [in person] Bir, 22 October.


community clean-ups, public events such as street plays and environmental film festivals, and waste

management surveys. Since then, the institute has also hosted a number of ecology workshops in

local schools, the nearby army cantonment, and NGO offices in Kangra valley. In addition, Deer

Park has been working closely with the Bir Tibetan Society (BTS), the local Tibetan settlement,

coordinating waste management activities in the area. In 2009, with the guidance of Deer Park, the

BTS instituted a segregation zone near the main square to better facilitate waste segregation.

Figure 22: The Dry Waste Segregation Centre


The Institute has also branched out to involve the Indian government officials at the village and

intermediate level (the Gram and Samiti Panchayats) in reforming waste management. Both the

head of the Gram Panchayat and the Development Officer of the Samiti Panchayat have attended

Deer Park workshops and in 2009, Deer Park was invited by the Himachal Pradesh Environment

Department's State Pollution Control Board and the Himalayan Chief Ministers to present their

Zero Waste Initiatives to state-wide municipal and district officials. Many of the recommendations

made by the Institute on waste management were then incorporated into district action plans

around the state and adopted into the Chief Minister's policy formulation. In 2010, Deer Park

received an Appreciation Award from the Himachal Government for their effort in bringing

awareness of waste management to the local communities.

Deer Park has also set out to create an environmental resource centre not only for the local

community but the entire Kangra region. In doing so, it is building a library covering a range of

environmental issues and traditional wisdom in Hindi, English, and Tibetan. The Institute is also

collaborating on filming an ongoing series of interviews with activists on local environmental


issues; the film team is currently working on a documentary on local waste management in Hindi

and English.

In 2008 Deer Park began developing an ecology education curriculum for local primary and

secondary teachers. The curriculum touches on issues such as climate change, waste management,

water conservation, and organic agriculture. The Institute has also visited several schools, carrying

out lessons plans crafted to include ecological awareness and local traditions. Based on the

development of this alternative curriculum, Deer Park intends to host more school workshops and

teacher trainings to promote local and environmental values.

Figure 23: Waste Reutilisation Lesson


In an effort to advocate the reintegration of waste material into the production process as well

support the local economy, Deer Park initiated a sustainable livelihood training programme in the

summer of 2008. This programme helped teach a group of local villagers how to make handicrafts

such as paper, cards, bags, wallets, and stuffed figures out of recycled material. These items are now

being sold in small shops in the local market and at the Institute. Some of the women from the

handicraft programme have also continued training at Deer Park in IT, office work, and other

technical skills.


Figure 24: Handicrafts Made From Waste


Ripple Effects in Community

As an area heavily influenced by the local Buddhist monasteries and eco-tourist industry, Bir is an

ideal setting for expanding a waste management and environmental awareness campaign. Refilling

filtered water stations have been installed around the community by the Institute to diminish the

demand for plastic bottles; these stations have been successful in attracting foreign tourists who

generally depend on disposable bottles for filtered water. The Zero Waste initiative Deer Park has

promoted has inspired several local monasteries to launch their own Zero Waste movements within

their own campuses. The workshops on Zero Waste hosted at the Institute and elsewhere have also

taught many local residents and government officials about responsible waste handling and

behaviour for waste management.

Though despite Deer Park's efforts, limited community awareness of proper disposal methods and

lack of infrastructure for recovery-centric disposal have proven to be great hindrances in reforming

waste management. Burning and dumping of plastic waste is still a common disposal method of

households. This behaviour can be combated by educating the community on the harmful effects

of burning and dumping plastic and by having more collection sites available. One of the most

crucial and yet lacking municipal actions remains installing and handling proper segregation bins

around the village in strategic locations that are accessible to a large part of the community.

Composting has generally been done by individuals as Bir is largely an agricultural area; however in


recent years, there has been a growing number of Tibetan and international residents that have

settled in the village and do not own agricultural land. Therefore, accessible composting sites where

residents, mostly residing in the commercial area, can dump organic waste should also be created as

more visitors frequent the village.

Factors Affecting a Zero Waste Vision

An interesting factor to consider is the effect tourism has on a potential Zero Waste community.

Because Bir is a renowned international destination for Paragliding, the village is in constant

contact with tourists from across India and the world. As in the case of Upper Dharamshala, there

remain a number of tourists that have not been exposed to segregation or proper disposal

behaviour. Since many of the tourists visiting Bir come from outside of Himachal Pradesh, another

problem is the introduction of plastics and packaging into the community's waste stream that have

been banned within the State. In order to cope with these factors, it is necessary the municipality

and the community, including Deer Park, continue its waste management campaign in public spaces

that can be accessible to both residents and tourists and develop proper infrastructure and

enforcement measures that enable waste recovery.

Another factor is the population spread across the village; though there are a number of residents

living off the main road, the majority of people in the community are living in houses spread

widely apart from each other. This makes monitoring waste management difficult as most residents

handle waste themselves, oftentimes burning or dumping inorganic material elsewhere. This is why

effective policy and proper enforcement are the most important aspects of ensuring a sustainable

community; although civil society has an impact on educating and influencing individual

behaviours, the manner in which the waste is handled will be based on how effective the bans are

on certain products entering the waste stream and how they are enforced once they are there.

Does a Village Make a Community?

Despite the ongoing movement from the Institute and several local residents and volunteers, an

effective Zero Waste campaign needs the full support of the community and municipality as well as

other stakeholders in the area. The instruments—education campaigns, policy measures,

segregation centres—are slowly taking effect, but it is questionable whether they are enough to

capture an entire community's commitment. To reiterate, community in this paper is defined as a


group of people who are involved in collective action in a specific geographical area89. Therefore

what binds the community together is their awareness in the waste issue and their collective action

in addressing the problem.

In the case of Bir, the community has an active civil organisation that is promoting education

campaigns and developing limited infrastructure for the development of a zero waste initiative. It

also has active community members that are hosting workshops and visiting schools around the

area to advocate the benefits of reducing and segregating waste material. However, local activists

cite convincing people to stop burning plastic or throwing it down streams has proven difficult.

Educating residents that are not in school nor frequent the Institute has also remained a challenge

for the Institute, not only for the limited contact with other villagers but also for the insufficient

number of activists working in the education programme. Developing more awareness campaigns

targeting adults in the community on the harmful effects of improper waste disposal will help

bridge the information gap among villagers. Although the municipality has been quite absent in

89 Velasquez, J. 2005. Innovative Communities: People-centered Approaches to Environmental Management in the Asia-Pacific Region. Tokyo: United Nations University Press. p. 3

Is Zero Waste Possible?

Since the introduction of materials with little to no biodegradable properties, especially petroleum-based products, waste has become a growing dilemma that governments have applied quick-fixes to but have rarely addressed in the long-run. With consumption levels increasing in every corner of the country, it is understandable to question whether a zero waste future is even possible.

There are certain preconditions that must be in place for a community to thrive with a zero waste model. First, there must be a shared community recognition of the waste challenge in which members acknowledge the need for individual and systemic reform. Second, there must be strong community leadership that maintains the momentum going even when faced with challenges or stagnant outcomes. Third, the local government structure must support, promote, and enforce policies that reduce waste material and accumulation and manage handling and segregation. Finally, incorporating local practices, knowledge, and culture into the model while still being receptive to new ideas and technologies will maintain the goals relevant and help generate acceptance of the initiative within the community.

Zero waste is a multi-dimensional process that involves action from a variety of stakeholders including the community, the municipal government as well policy makers at the regional level, industrial actors, and relevant civil organisations that can provide support and experience to the community. Education campaigns, policy regulations, and municipal infrastructure are a few essential features of any zero waste initiative.


providing proper waste management infrastructure for the village, the state government has been

very progressive in passing bans on polythene packaging and disposable plastic bags across the

state. This has and will make a significant impact on the amount of inorganic waste that will need

processing, if the bans are enforced.

The hardest element for this community and for most communities in general is maintaining the

momentum for a zero waste vision in the long-run. With the lack of support from the municipality,

it is easy for residents to wane in motivation and continue business-as-usual, burning or dumping

consumables with little regard for segregation or alternatives. Especially with the flow of tourists

frequenting the area, if public campaigns diminish or fail to engage tourists in proper waste

disposal, the community may abandon the project and revert to old waste habits.

A zero waste future will require strong leadership, extensive awareness-raising among community

members on waste disposal behaviour, engagement of the stakeholders involved, including the

municipality, civil organisations, and community members, and active enforcement of policies and

bans that contribute to limiting and properly handling waste material. Bir, along with many other

villages across India, has the potential to limit and sustainably handle the waste it generates;

however, unlearning and relearning how to effectively and sanitarily limit and dispose of waste

within the community remains its greatest challenge.


Chapter IV: Conclusion

The following chapter draws out key elements from the case studies, combing insights provided in

the earlier, more conceptual chapters to highlight the vital prerequisites that enable a more

sustainable waste management programme. It concludes with a review of why such conditions can

convert the focus of the current vision from waste management to resource conservation.

The variance between these community initiatives displays how there is no one-size-fits-all

framework for sustainable waste management. However common themes resound throughout the

case studies which can be a basis for further sustainable decentralised recovery-centric waste

management initiatives. These themes include:

• Source segregation of waste

• Decentralised collection and disposal

• Limited mechanised transportation

• Composting or bio-processing of organic waste

• Active stakeholder participation in decision-making and implementation

• Appropriate infrastructure to enable recovery process

• Awareness generation among stakeholders and community on waste behaviour

• Relevant policy-making that limits materials from entering the waste stream and promotes

decentralised waste recovery

• Coordinated activities of the various stakeholders

Foundations for a Successful Decentralised Model

In order to maintain a successful decentralised waste management model, the initiative must adapt

to its environment, including its cultural and historic context, and share a sense of collective

responsibility among all its stakeholders. The role of community participation is a crucial aspect in

waste and therefore decentralising waste management to the community level not only maintains

the waste in “the backyard” but holds everyone accountable for individual behaviour.


This is not to disregard the necessity of government intervention and participation as well as

business model reforms. At the larger-scale, governments will need to change policies that

discourage unsustainable waste practices, such as mixed waste incineration or unsanitary landfilling,

prohibit certain inorganic materials from entering the waste streams, create incentives or

restrictions for businesses that promote or discourage sustainable waste practices accordingly,

encourage more practices that lend to responsible waste management such as composting, source

segregation, and reutilisation, support the development of local infrastructure for recycling, biogas,

and composting sites, and formally incorporate waste pickers into the management framework.

Also the participation of municipal authorities in these community initiatives lends to the

credibility of these projects, helps enforcement issues, provides financial sustainability, and helps

maintain the momentum even after the initial excitement has passed. Government intervention is

an essential aspect of any community waste initiative that makes these projects viable in the long-

term.

A combination of large-scale policy changes and business model reforms with smaller-scale

governance and community initiatives can provide an alternative to a number of failing waste

management systems across the country that are both exclusive and ineffective. Because this model

is labour intensive, rather than capital intensive, it has the potential to secure the livelihoods of the

informal waste sector and increase their profit margin on recyclable material. Increased segregation

and composting reduces the amount of waste that is currently landfilled, decreasing the need for

more land resources, limiting the transportation costs, and creating a market for compost that

could substitute harmful chemical fertilisers. If effective policies are put in place which limit the

amount of unrecyclable material produced, waste generation can be reduced to negligible levels,

lending towards a healthier environment and population. Finally, the participatory nature of a

decentralised waste management system would result in the strengthening and empowerment of

the local community and create awareness on the holistic nature of consumption behaviour, waste

accumulation, livelihoods, public health, and environmental protection.


Annexe

A. Location of Case Studies

Source: Google Maps


B. The Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000

SL.NO PARAMETERS COMPLIANCE CRITERIA

1 Collection of Municipal Solid Wastes

1.Littering of municipal solid waste shall be prohibited in cities, towns and in urban areas notified by the State Governments. To prohibit littering and facilitate compliance, the following steps shall be taken by the municipal authority namely:-

(i) Organizing house-to-house collection of municipal solid wastes through any of the methods, like community bin collection (central bin), house-to-house collection, collection on regular pre-informed timings and scheduling by using bell ringing of municipal vehicle (without exceeding permissible noise levels);

(ii) Devising collection of waste from slums and squatter areas or localities including hotels, restaurants, office complexes and commercial areas;

iii) Wastes from slaughter houses, meat and fish markets, fruits and vegetable markets, which are biodegradable in nature, shall be managed to make use of such wastes;

(iv) Bio-medical wastes and industrial wastes shall not be mixed with municipal solid wastes and such wastes shall follow the rules separately specified for the purpose;

(v) Collected waste from residential and other areas shall be transferred to community bin by hand-driven containerized carts or other small vehicles;

(vi)Horticultural and construction or demolition wastes or debris shall be separately collected and disposed off following proper norms. Similarly, waste generated at dairies shall be regulated in accordance with the state laws;

vii) Waste (garbage, dry leaves) shall not be burnt;

(viii) Stray animals shall not be allowed to move


around waste storage facilities or at any other place in the city or town and shall be managed in accordance with the state laws.

2. The municipal authority shall notify waste collection schedule and the likely method to be adopted for public benefit in a city or town.

3. It shall be the responsibility of generator of wastes to avoid littering and ensure delivery of wastes in accordance with the collection and segregation system to be notified by the municipal authority.

2 Segregation of municipal solid waste

In order to encourage the citizens, municipal authority shall organize awareness programmes for segregation wastes and shall promote recycling or reuse of segregated materials. The municipal authority shall under take phased programme to ensure community participation in waste segregation. Foe this regular meetings at quarterly intervals shall be arranged by the municipal authorities with representatives of local resident welfare associations and non-governmental organizations.

3 Storage of municipal solid wastes

Municipal authorities shall establish and maintain storage facilities in such a manner as they do not create unhygienic and unsanitary conditions around it. Following criteria shall be taken into account while establishing and maintaining storage facilities, namely:-

(i) Storage facilities shall be created and established by taking into account quantities of waste generation in a given area and population densities. A storage facility shall be so placed that it is accessible to users.

(ii) Storage facilities to be set up by municipal authorities or any other agency shall be so designed that wastes stored are not exposed to open atmosphere and shall be aesthetically acceptable and user-friendly.

(iii) Storage facilities or ‘bins’ shall have ‘easy to operate’ design for handling, transfer and transportation of waste. Bins for storage of bio-degradable wastes shall be painted green, those for storage of recyclable wastes shall be painted white and those for storage of other wastes shall be painted black.


(iv)Manual handling of waste shall be prohibited. If unavoidable due to constraints, manual handling shall be carried out under proper precaution with due care for safety of workers.

4 Transportation of municipal solid waste

i. Vehicles used for transportation of wastes shall be covered. Waste should not be visible to public, nor exposed to open environment preventing their scattering.

ii. The storage facilities setup by municipal authorities shall be daily attended for clearing of wastes. The bins or containers wherever placed shall be cleaned before they start overflowing.

iii. Transportation vehicles shall be so designed that multiple handling of wastes, prior to final disposal, is avoid.

5 Processing of municipal solid wastes

Municipal authorities shall adopt suitable technology or combination of such technologies to make use of wastes so as to minimize burden on landfill.


C. The Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011

The draft rules namely the Plastics (Manufacture, Usage and Waste Management) Rules, 2009 were

published by the Government of India on 17th September, 2009 in the Gazette of India. The

objections and suggestions made by the public had been duly considered by the Central

Government and starting from 4th February, 2011 the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling)

Rules, 2011 have come into effect.

Application: The rules will not apply to the manufacture of carry bags exclusively for export

purposes by export oriented manufacturing units against an order for export received by the owner

or occupier of the concerned manufacturing unit. This exemption does not apply to any surplus or

rejects, left over and the like.

Definitions: The important definitions as per the Act are mentioned as follows:

(i.) Act– Means the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

(ii.) Commodities – Means articles; including but not limited to vegetables, fruits,

pharmaceuticals, food grains and the like.

(iii.) Compostable plastics– Means plastic that undergoes degradation by biological processes

during composting to yield CO2, water, inorganic compounds and biomass at a rate

consistent with other known compostable materials and does not leave visible,

distinguishable or toxic residue.

(iv.) Extended Producers Responsibility ‐ means the responsibility of a manufacturer of plastic

carry bags, and multi‐layered plastic pouches and sachets and the brand owners using


such carry bags and multi‐layered plastic pouches and sachets for the environmentally

sound management of the product until the end of its life.

(v.) Manufacture - means any person who manufactures plastic carry bags or multi-layered

plastic pouches or sachets or like.

(vi.) Municipal Authority – Means Municipal Corporation, Municipality, Nagar Palika, Nagar

Nigam, Nagar Panchayat, and Municipal Council including Notified Area Committee

(NAC) or any other local body constituted under the relevant statutes and, where the

management and handling of the municipal solid waste is entrusted to such agency.

(vii.) Virgin Plastic – Means plastic material which has not been subjected to use earlier and

has also not blended with scrap or waste.

(viii.) Multi‐layered Plastics – Means any material having a combination of more than one

layers of packaging material such as paper, paper board, polymeric materials, metalized

layers or aluminium foil, either in the form of a laminate or co‐extruded structure.

Prescribed Authority –

(i.) The authority for the provisions of these rules related to authorization, manufacture,

recycling and disposal shall be State Pollution Control Board and Pollution Control

Committee in respect of Union Territory.

(ii.) For enforcement of the provisions of these rules relating to use, collection, segregation,

transportation and disposal of post‐consumer plastic waste shall be concerned municipal


authority.

Conditions –

(i.) Carry bags shall either be in natural shade which is without any added pigments or made

using only those pigments and colorants which are in conformity with Indian standards.

(ii.) No person shall use carry bags made of recycled plastics or compostable plastics for storing,

carrying, dispensing or packaging food stuffs.

(iii.) No person shall manufacture, stock, distribute or sell any carry bag made of virgin or recycled

or compostable plastic, which is less than 40 microns in thickness.

(iv.) Sachets using plastic material shall not be used for storing, packing or selling gutkha, tobacco

and pan masala.

(v.) Recycled carry bags shall conform to the Indian standard IS 14534:1998 titled as Guidelines for

Recycling of Plastic, as amended from time to time.

(vi.) Carry bags made from compostable plastics shall conform to the Indian Standard: IS/ISO

17088:2008 titled as specifications for Compostable plastics, as amended from time to

time.

(vii.) Plastic material, in any form, shall not be used in any package for packing gutkha, pan masala

and tobacco in all forms.

Plastic Waste Management:

(i.) Recycling of plastic wastes will be carried out as per rules and regulations stipulated by the

Central Government.

(ii.) The municipal authority shall be responsible for operationalization and coordination of the

waste management system and for performing the associated functions:

(a.) To ensure safe collection, storage, segregation, transportation, processing and disposal of

plastic waste.

(b.) To ensure that no damage is caused to the environment during this process.

(c.) To ensure setting up of collection centres for plastic waste involving manufacturers.

(d.) To ensure its channelization to recyclers

(e.) To create awareness amongst all stakeholders about their responsibilities

(f.) To engage agencies or groups working in waste management including waste pickers.

(g.) To ensure that open burning of plastic waste is not permitted.

(iii.) For setting up plastic waste collection centres, the municipal authority may ask

manufactures, either collectively or individually in line with the principle of Extended Producer’s


Responsibility (EPR) to provide the required finance to establish such collection centre.

(iv.) The Municipal Authority shall encourage the use of plastic waste by adopting suitable

technology such as in road construction, co‐incineration, etc. The municipal authority or the

operator intending to use such technology shall ensure the compliance with the prescribed

standards including pollution norms prescribed by the competent authority in this regard.

Protocols for Compostable Plastic Materials –

Determination of the degree of degradability and degree of disintegration of plastic material shall

be as per the protocols of the Indian Standards.

Marking/ Labelling –

i. Each plastic carry bag and mulitilayered packaging shall have the following information printed

in English or in the local language:

a. Name, registration number of the manufacturer and thickness of each bag.

b. Name and registration number of the manufacturer in case of multi‐layered packaging.

ii. Each recycled bag shall bear a label or a mark “recycled” and shall conform to the Guidelines

for Recycling of Plastics.

iii. Each carry bag made from compostable plastics shall bear a label ‘compostable’ and shall

conform to the Specifications for Compostable Plastics.

iv. Retailers shall ensure that plastic bags and multi‐layered packaging sold by them are properly

labelled.

Registration of Manufacturers and Recyclers –


i. Any person manufacturing or proposing to manufacture carry bags and multi‐layered plastics

shall apply to the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) and Pollution Control Committee (PCC)

for the grant of registration or the renewal of registration.

ii. And person recycling or proposing to recycle carry bags or multi‐layered plastics or any

plastic waste shall apply to SPCB or PCC for the grant or renewal of registration.

iii. No person shall manufacture carry bags or recycle plastic bags or multi‐layered plastics

unless without obtaining the registration certificate from SPCB or PCC, prior to production.

iv. The SPCB or PCC shall not issue or renew a registration for manufacturing or recycling units

unless the unit possesses a valid consent under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)

Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.

v. Every SPCB or PCC shall take a decision on the grant of the registration within ninety days of

receipt of an application that is complete is all respects.

vi. The registration granted under this rule shall be valid for a period of three years, unless

revoked, suspended or cancelled; and registration shall not be revoked, suspended or cancelled

without providing the manufacturer an opportunity for hearing.

vii. Every application for renewal of registration shall be made at least ninety days before the

expiry of the validity of the registration certificate.

Explicit Pricing of Carry Bags:

No carry bags will be made available free of cost to the consumers by the retailers. The

concernedmunicipal authority may determine the minimum price of the carry bags.

State Level Advisory Body:


i. There shall be a State Level Advisory Body (SLAB) to monitor the implementation of these

Rules.

ii. The SLAB shall meet at least once in a year and may invite experts, if necessary.

iii. The SLAB shall consist of one Chairman and six Members (experts in their respective fields).

Annual Reports:

i. Each SPCB or PCC shall prepare and submit the annual report to the Central Pollution Control

Board by 30th September each year.

ii. The Central Pollution Control Board shall prepare a consolidated annual report and submit it

to the Central Government by 30th December each year

List of Abbreviations

SWM: Solid Waste Management

PPP: Public Private Partnership

MSW: Municipal Solid Waste

LSGB: Local Self-Governing Body

RED: Radical Ecological Democracy

USD: United States Dollar

MBMC: Mira-Bhayandar Municipal Corporation

NEERI: National Environmental Engineering Research Institute

NGO: Non-Governmental Organisation

CBO: Community-Based Organisation

UNDP: United Nations Development Programme

SNDT: Shreemati Nathibai Damodar Thackersey

KKPKP: Kagad Kach Patra Kashtakari Panchayat

PMC: Pune Municipal Corporation

PCMC: Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation

SWaCH: Solid Waste Collection and Handling


INR: Indian Rupee

NSCC: National Society for Clean Cities

MPMA: Maharashtra Plastic Manufacturers Association

ISO: International Organisation for Standardisation

TSO: Tibetan Settlement Office

CUDP: Clean Upper Dharamshala Programme

BTS: Bir Tibetan Settlement

References

Abazeri, M. 2013. Photos of India. [images].

Agarwal, R., Sinha, S. and Gupta, S. K. 2004. Upscaling people’s participation in urban solid waste management: Constraints and

Prospects. [report].

Allsopp, M., Costner, P. and Johnston, P. 2001. Incineration and Human Health. [report] Greenpeace Research Laboratories,

University of Exeter, UK, p.24-39.

Annepu, R. K. 2012. Sustainable Solid Waste Management in India. M.S. Columbia University.

Asnani, P. U. 2004. Status of Compliance of Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2000 in 127 Class 1 Cities in

India as on 1-4-04. Paper presented at the National Training Programme on Design, Construction, and Operation of

Sanitary Landfills, jointly organised by the Government of India, the Central Pollution Control Board, the United

States-Asia Environmental Program, and the Water and Sanitation Programme of the World Bank, at Panaji, Goa,

India, May 24-28.

Australian Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Waste Guidelines: Waste Definitions. Adelaide: Government of Australia, p.

6.

Becher, H., & Flesch-Janys, D. (1998). Dioxins and furans: epidemiologic assessment of cancer risks and other human

health effects. Environmental health perspectives,106(Suppl 2), 623.

Benton, D. and Hazell, J. 2013. Resource resilient UK: A report from the Circular Economy Task Force. [report] London: Green

Alliance.


Bhaskar, A. 2013. Interview on Katraj. Interviewed by Mariam Abazeri [in person] Pune, 30 August.

Bhaskar, A. 2011. Zero Waste Electoral Ward Initiative at Katraj Gaon, Pune. [online] 24 June. Available at:

http://www.thebetterindia.com/3531/zero-waste-electoral-ward-initiative-at-katraj-gaon-pune/.

Bhaskar, A. and Chikarmane, P. 2012. The Story of Waste and its Reclaimers: Organising Waste Collectors for Better Lives

and Livelihoods. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 55 (4).

Bonaiuti, M. 2012. Degrowth: Tools for a complex analysis of the multidimensional crisis. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 23 (1),

pp. 30--50.

Bristow, R. 2011. Talk Point: The Circular Economy. The Guardian, 30 August.

Brunckhorst, D. 2000. Bioregional planning: resource management beyond the new millennium. Harwood

Academic Publishers: Sydney, Australia.

Bruntland, G. (1987). Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and Development.

CC-by-sa PlaneMad/Wikimedia. 2008. Maps of Himachal Pradesh. [image online] Available at:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:India_Himachal_Pradesh_locator_map.svg

Censusindia.gov.in. 2011. Census of India Website : Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India. [online] Available

at: http://censusindia.gov.in/ [Accessed: 27 Mar 2014].

Center.sustainability.duke.edu. 2014. Center for Sustainability & Commerce at the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.

[online] Available at: http://center.sustainability.duke.edu/ [Accessed: 27 Mar 2014].

Central Pollution Control Board. 2012. Status Report on Municipal Solid Waste Management. [report] Delhi: Ministry of

Environment and Forests.

Chaturvedi, B. 2010. Mainstreaming Waste Pickers and the Informal Recycling Sector in the Municipal Solid Waste.

Chikarmane, P. 2013. Interview on KKPKP and SWaCH. Interviewed by Mariam Abazeri [in person] Pune, 20 August.

Chikarmane, P. and Narayan, L. n.d. Organising the Unorganised: A Case Study of the Kagad Kach Patra Kashtakari Panchayat (Trade

Union of Waste-pickers). Pune: Available through: Wiego.org

http://wiego.org/sites/wiego.org/files/resources/files/Chikarmane_Narayan_case-kkpkp.pdf.

Chikarmane, P., Deshpande, M. and Narayan, L. 2001. Study of Scrap Collectors, Scrap Traders, and Recycling Enterprises in Pune.

[report] Pune: ILO-SNDT.

Chintan Environmental Research and Action Group. 2011. Failing the Grade: How Cities Across India are Breaking the Rules,

Ignoring the Informal Recycling Sector and Unable to Make the Grade. [report] New Delhi.

Clark-Proffitt, A., Badgujar, S. and Agarwal, S. 2013. Pune Civic Ward Sets an Example. [online] 16 July. Available at:

http://www.indiatogether.org/waste-environment.

Datta, D. 2014. India's toxic milk and plastic cows Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/india-toxic-milk-and-


plastic-cows/1/341455.html. India Today, 3 February.

Dayal, S. 2013. High Court bans junk food in plastic in Himachal Pradesh; industry calls it 'harsh' - Knowledge & News Network (KNN).

[online] Available at: http://www.knnindia.co.in/states/high-court-bans-junk-food-in-plastic-in-himachal-pradesh-

industry-calls-it-'harsh'/32-4274.go.

Deerpark.in. 2012. Deer Park Institute. [online] Available at: http://deerpark.in/.

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs. 2013. Energy from Waste A guide to the debate. [report] London: DEFRA

UK.

Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India. 2009. Position Paper on the Solid Waste

Management Sector in India. Public Private Partnerships in India. [online].

Department of Tourism Himachal Pradesh. 2012. Total Tourists in Himachal Pradesh. [image online] [Accessed: 28 Mar 2014].

Djemaci, B. 2009. Public waste management services in France. National analysis and case studies of Paris, Rouen, and

Besançon. CIRIEC, pp. 4-27.

Ellen MacArthur Foundation. 2013. Towards the Circular Economy. [report].

Environmental Services Association. 2013. Going for Growth: A Practical Route to a Circular Economy. [report] London.

Giusquiani, P. L., Pagliai, M., Gigliotti, G., Businelli, D., & Benetti, A. (1995). Urban waste compost: effects on physical,

chemical, and biochemical soil properties. Journal of Environmental Quality, 24(1), 175-182.

Hanrahan, David; Srivastava, Sanjay; Ramakrishna, A. Sita. 2006. Improving management of municipal solid waste in India: overview

and challenges. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2006/05/7011271/india-

improving-management-municipal-solid-waste-india-overview-challenges-improving-management-municipal-solid-

waste-india-overview-challenges

Hindustan Times. 2013. Himachal to ban potato chips, candies packaged in polythene - Hindustan Times. [online] Available at:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/himachal-to-ban-potato-chips-candies-packaged-in-polythene/article1-

1084777.aspx.

Hoornweg, Daniel; Bhada-Tata, Perinaz. 2012. What a waste : a global review of solid waste management. Urban development

series; knowledge papers no. 15. Washington, DC: World Bank.

http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2012/03/16537275/waste-global-review-solid-waste-management

Human Development Report, 1990 et seq., Oxford University Press, 1991 et seq.

International Survey of Mayors. 1997. paper presented at International Colloquium of Mayors: International Conference on

Governance for Sustainable Growth and Equity, Geneva, 28-31 July. Geneva: UNDP.

Jagran Josh. 2013. Himachal Pradesh High Court banned plastic packing of junk food. [online] Available at:

http://www.jagranjosh.com/current-affairs/himachal-pradesh-high-court-banned-plastic-packing-of-junk-food-

1388131283-1.


Jain, A., Dhawan, S., Chaudhuri, N., Shannigrahi, A. and Ramanpreet. 2000. "Solid Waste Management in Manali", paper

presented at 26th WEDC Conference, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp. 179-182.

Jreat, M. 2004. Tourism in Himachal Pradesh. New Delhi: Indus Pub. Co.

Kinzig, A. P., Ehrlich, P. R., Alston, L. J., Arrow, K., Barrett, S., Buchman, T. G., Daily, G. C., Levin, B., Levin, S.,

Oppenheimer, M. and Others. 2013. Social norms and global environmental challenges: the complex interaction of

behaviors, values, and policy. BioScience, 63 (3), pp. 164—175.

KKPKP. 2010. Uruli Dump: Waste Pickers in a Landfill. [image online] Available at:

http://www.wastepickerscollective.org/index.php?mod=item&com=gallery&cID=1105

Koren, G. 2009. Cradle to Cradle. Design, Strategy, and Innovation, 3 April, Available at:

http://gijsbertkoren.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/cradle-to-cradle/.

Kovacs, B. 2014. Plastic: Health and Disease Prevention - What is polyethylene terephthalate (PET, PETE)? - MedicineNet. [online]

Available at: http://www.medicinenet.com/plastic/page2.htm.

Kumar Kaushal, R., Varghese, G. K. and Chabukdhara, M. 2012. Municipal Solid Waste Management in India-Current State

and Future Challenges: A Review. International Journal of Engineering Science \& Technology, 4 (4).

Leroux, K. 2001. Is Zero Waste Possible?. [online] 1 March. Available at:

http://waste360.com/mag/waste_zero_waste_possible.

Malusare, Nikita. 2014. BBMP boots out waste disposal firm that never started work. Citizen Matters.

http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/bbmp-hbepl-contract-terminated-hanjer

Manual on Municipal Solid Waste Management. 2009. University of Michigan: Central Public Health and Environmental

Engineering Organisation, Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India, 2000.

Map of India. 2012. [image online] Available at: mapsofindia.com.

Maria, D. 2010. Ragpicking Wastes Lives. NSCC Pune, 30 May, p. 1.

Mcdonough, W. and Braungart, M. 2002. Cradle to cradle. New York: North Point Press.

Mcleod Ganj Environmental Office. 2012. CUDP Waste Handbook. Mcleod Ganj: Tibetan Settlement Office.

Mewang. 2013. Interview on CUDP. Interviewed by Mariam Abazeri [in person] Dharamshala, 25 October.

Ministry of Environment and Forests. 2000. Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000 Notification. [online]

Available at: http://www.moef.nic.in/legis/hsm/mswmhr.html.

Ministry of Environment and Forests. 2011. Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2011. New Delhi: Government of

India. Available at: http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/DOC070211-005.pdf

Murray, J. P., Rouse, J. V. and Carpenter, A. B. 1981. Groundwater contamination by sanitary landfill leachate and domestic

wastewater in carbonate terrain: principal source diagnosis, chemical transport characteristics and design implications.


Water Research, 15 (6), pp. 745--757.

Nair, S. 2014. Mira Bhayander waste may be dumped in Vasai. The Times of India, 11 February.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Mira-Bhayander-waste-may-be-dumped-in-

Vasai/articleshow/30191566.cms

Nair, S. K. and Jayakumar, C. 2008. A Handbook on Waste Management in Rural Tourism Areas- A Zero Waste Approach. [report]

Thiruvananthapuram: UNDP India.

Narayan, L. 2012. Interview on KKPKP. Interviewed by Ashish Kothari [in person] Pune, 7 July.

National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, NEERI. 2010. Air Quality Assessment, Emissions Inventory and

Source Apportionment Studies: Mumbai. New Delhi : Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB)

Nema, A. n.d. MSW (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000-- A Critique. New Delhi: Foundation for Greentech

Environmental Systems. http://www.green-ensys.org/site/publications/MSW_Rules_%20A_critique.pdf.

OECD. 2013. OECD Framework for Statistics on the Distribution of Household Income,

Consumption and Wealth. OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264194830-en, pp.3-5.

Only 40 per cent societies have compost pits: Survey. 2009. The Times of India, 6 October.

Ostrom, E. 2000. Collective action and the evolution of social norms. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, p. 137-158.

People's Sustainability Treaty on Radical Ecological Democracy. 2012. Available through:

http://radicalecologicaldemocracy.wordpress.com/red-treaty/.

Polzin, C., Giljum, S., Hinterberger, F., Bruckner, M. and Burger, E. 2009. Overconsumption? Our use of the world’s natural

resources. [report] Vienna: SERI, GLOBAL 2000, Friends of the Earth Europe.

Prime Minister's Council on Climate Change. 2008. National Action Plan on Climate Change. New Delhi: Government of India.

Radical Ecological Democracy - RED. 2013. [online] Available at: http://radicalecologicaldemocracy.wordpress.com/.

Rist, G. 1997. The History of Development. London: Zed Books.

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. 2010. Global Biodiversity Outlook 3. [report] Montreal.

Schoot Uiterkamp, B. J., Azadi, H. and Ho, P. 2011. Sustainable recycling model: A comparative analysis between India and

Tanzania. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55 (3), pp. 344--355.

Shakya, P. 2013. Interview on Deer Park Zero Waste. Interviewed by Mariam Abazeri [in person] Bir, 22 October.

Sharholy, M., Ahmad, K., Mahmood, G. and Trivedi, R. 2008. Municipal solid waste management in Indian cities--A review.

Waste management, 28 (2), pp. 459--467.

Singh, D. 2013. Delhi May Drown in its Own Waste. Hindustan Times, 29 April.

Sinha, C. 1997. Open Burning of Urban Municipal Solid Waste: A State Level Analysis. New Delhi: TERI, p.71-77.


Sudarshan, M. K., Mahendra, B. J., Madhusudana, S. N., Narayana, D. A., Rahman, A., Rao, N. S. N., & Ravikumar, K.

(2006). An epidemiological study of animal bites in India: results of a WHO sponsored national multi-centric rabies

survey. Journal of Communicable Diseases, 38(1), p.32.

Sustainable Plastic Waste Management in Himachal Pradesh (2009-10) From Concept to Policy. 2010. Government of

Himachal Pradesh. http://gad.bih.nic.in/Gallery/HP-PM-Award-1.pdf.

Swachcoop.com. 2013. Solid Waste Collection and Handling or officially the SWaCH Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Pune. [online]

Available at: http://www.swachcoop.com/index.html. Retrieved 13/12/13.

Symbiosis International University. 2011. Location of Pune. [image online] [Accessed: 27 Mar 2014].

Tangri, N. 2012. On the Road to Zero Waste: Waste Pickers Lead the Way to Zero Waste:. [e-book] GAIA. pp. 10-17. http://no-

burn.org/downloads/On%20the%20Road%20to%20Zero%20Waste.pdf.

The Economist. 2012. A Rubbish Map. [image online] Available at:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/06/daily-chart-3 [Accessed: 27 Mar 2014].

UNEP. 2004. State of Waste Management in South East Asia. [report] UNEP IETC and ASEAN Secretariat.

United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2013). World

Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables. Working Paper No.

ESA/P/WP.227. p.15,20.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 1984. Office of Drinking Water, A Ground Water Protection Strategy

for the Environmental Protection Agency, p.11.

Velasquez, J., Yashiro, M., Yoshimura, S., Ono, I. 2005. Innovative Communities: People-centered Approaches to Environmental

Management in the Asia-Pacific Region. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.

Website Material on Plastic Waste Management. 2013. Delhi: Central Pollution Control Board.

http://www.cpcb.nic.in/divisionsofheadoffice/pcp/management_plasticwaste.pdf.

World Development Indicators, The World Bank, 2012. Gross Domestic Product 2012, PPP.

Zhu, D., Asnani, P., Zurbrugg, C., Anapolsky, S. and Mani, S. 2008. Improving Municipal Solid Waste Management in India: A

Sourcebook for Policy Makers and Practitioners. Washington, D.C: The World Bank.

rethinking waste in india - sciences po · ashish kothari academic year 2013/2014 ... 2 as a result...

Documents