i

An integrated waste management approach as an alternative solid waste management strategy for Mbare Township, Zimbabwe.

By

Maxwell Saungweme (Student ID Number: 2009126893)

A mini-dissertation

presented to the University of the Free State,

Bloemfontein, South Africa,

in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

Masters in

Development Studies

Supervisors: Ms Anita Venter and Professor Lochner Marais Version: Final Draft

Date submitted: 9 February 2012.

© February 2012

ii

Author’s Declaration

I declare that the mini-dissertation hereby submitted for the Masters in Development

Studies at the Centre for Development Support, University of the Free State, is my own

independent work and that I have not previously submitted this work for a qualification

at/in another university/faculty.

In addition I cede copyright of this mini-dissertation to the University of the Free State.

Signed:

Name: Maxwell Saungweme

Student ID Number: 2009126893

Date: 9 February 2012

Place: Harare, Zimbabwe

iii

Abstract

This dissertation considers the possibility of adopting an integrated solid waste

management system as an alternative to the current solid waste management system in

Mbare Township in Zimbabwe. The study analysed literature on solid waste

management and established that there are three paradigms in solid waste

management which include early practices, contemporary practices and the integrated

sustainable solid waste management model. Analysis of key policy documents and laws

governing waste management in Zimbabwe was done. The study established that

Zimbabwe has a comprehensive set of laws capable of making waste management

sustainable and effective. However, there is poor implementation and lack of

enforcement of these laws. Zimbabwe as a country has no national level waste

management policy and the study found this as a major weakness that militated against

adequate and environmentally sound solid waste management in the country’s towns

and cities.

The study analysed and documented the solid waste management system of Mbare. A

household survey using a pretested questionnaire was done in Mbare. A sample of 80

households participated in the household survey. The household survey was

triangulated with field observations, key informant interviews, and secondary data

sources. The solid waste management system in Mbare was found to be leaning more

towards the early approaches in solid waste management where the system was mainly

comprised of waste generation, collection, transportation, transfer and disposal while

little attention was given to waste reduction, recycling and reuse. The study found this

system to be unsustainable. Other findings of the study include that there is very little

involvement and participation of residents and stakeholders in solid waste management

in Mbare and the municipal authorities viewed residents as mere consumers of a

service that they had to pay for. The Mbare solid waste management system was found

to be fraught with many problems that included inconsistencies and irregular collection

iv

of waste, proliferation of illegal dumping sites, overflowing waste receptacles and

dumping of waste on roadsides and in Mukuwisi River.

In the light of the challenges of the Mbare solid waste management system, the study

recommended the adoption of waste reduction methods at household level, adoption of

a three way waste segregation system at source, adoption of 3R (reduce, recycle and

reuse) practices and principles, community education campaigns, greater community

and private sector involvement in waste management and the development of a long

term integrated sustainable solid waste management plan for Mbare. At a national level

the study recommended better enforcement of existing laws on waste management and

the formulation of a national level waste management policy in Zimbabwe.

v

Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge God and all the blessings he gave me including the ability

to conceive and complete this dissertation. My gratitude goes to Ms Anita Venter and

Professor Lochner Marais, my supervisors, who were so patient with me and guided me

throughout the process of coming up with this dissertation. My sincerest gratitude also

goes to Professor Lucius Botes for the help in reading through my second draft and

giving me advice on further changes that were required in my dissertation.

Sincerest gratitude to Professor Lovemore Madhuku and Mrs. Noreen Gumbo, who

provided the required references for me to enroll in the Masters in Development Studies

Degree Programme with the University of the Free State.

Many thanks to Tamuka Chorimambowa, who helped with logistics in the data collection

phase of the study. Tribute is due to the data gathering assistants for the household

survey without whom this study would have been impossible: Martha Chimene, Admire

Mutize, Tinashe Chirimambowa, Olivia Chimwai and Angeline Makande. My gratitude is

also due to the Matapi Police Station officers who helped me get permission to do the

household survey. I also thank all the City of Harare Waste Management staff who

participated in the key informant interviews and gave me very useful data and

documents for this study. Thank you all the household survey respondents for your

priceless responses. To Tabani Moyo, Takura Zhangazha, Takesure Mugari, Oliver

Mutanga, Shamiso Makande, Phillan Zamchiya, Blessing Mutsaka, Memory Maphosa-

Mutsaka, Caroline Takawira, Margaret Masanga, and Rumbidzai Mupahlo, thank you

for your advice and support during this study.

Sincere thanks to my work colleagues who kept encouraging me to do and finish the

dissertation: John Templeton, Rachel Shue, Daniel O’Brien, Angel Pesevski, Janee

Crane, and Gabriel Kroes. To my Afghan national team members, Madina Mahboobi,

Sadia Haya, Shoaib Shija, Kamran Samady, Fardin Samadi, and Dr. Khushal Moradzai:

you were a great team and were with me throughout this process- thank you.

vi

Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to my mother, Mary, Otillia, Manyara who inculcated a

belief in me that education opens gates to unlimited opportunities at a very tender age.

She toiled to send me to school during hard times, but my education and that of my

siblings remained her priority. Her unwavering support and asking for updates during

the penning of this dissertation were ever encouraging.

This piece is also dedicated to my son, Divinepanacea, Tinotenda, who would

begrudgingly allow me to get lost into drafting this dissertation at a huge opportunity

cost of not spending quality time with him. Just at grade 2, he understood that dad

needed no distraction when writing his “book”. Dee, I hope this work will encourage you

to do the same in the world of education in the future.

vii

Table of contents Author’s Declaration ..................................................................................................... ii Abstract......................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements....................................................................................................... v

Dedication ..................................................................................................................... vi Table of contents ........................................................................................................ vii Table of figures ........................................................................................................... xii List of tables ............................................................................................................... xiii List of acronyms ........................................................................................................ xiv

CHAPTER 1 : BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION OF STUDY ................................... 1

1.1 Background of the study ................................................................................................1

1.2 Statement of the problem ..............................................................................................2

1.2.1 Research questions .................................................................................................2

1.3 Aim and objectives of the study ....................................................................................3

1.3.1 Aim ............................................................................................................................3

1.3.2 Objectives .................................................................................................................3

1.4 Brief background of study area .....................................................................................4

1.5 Research methodology ..................................................................................................4

1.5.1 Research design ......................................................................................................4

1.5.2 Population .................................................................................................................5

1.5.3 Respondents ............................................................................................................5

1.5.4 Sampling procedures ..............................................................................................6

1.5.5 Data collection..........................................................................................................7

1.5.6 Data analysis and presentation ............................................................................13

1.6 Research ethics ............................................................................................................14

1.6.1 Objectivity and integrity .........................................................................................14

1.6.2 Privacy, confidentiality and anonymity .................................................................14

1.6.3 Informed consent and voluntary participation ....................................................15

1.7 Chapter organisation ....................................................................................................15

1.8 Fieldwork .......................................................................................................................15

viii

1.9 Limitations of the study ................................................................................................16

1.10 Summary .....................................................................................................................17

CHAPTER 2 : LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................... 18

2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................18

2.2 Waste .............................................................................................................................18

2.2.1 Solid waste .............................................................................................................19

2.2.2 Sources and types of solid waste.........................................................................19

2.2.3. Components of solid waste..................................................................................21

2.3 Solid waste management ............................................................................................22

2.3.1 Solid waste management processes ...................................................................22

2.4 Early solid waste management practices ...................................................................25

2.5 Contemporary solid waste management methodologies .........................................26

2.5.1 Source reduction ....................................................................................................26

2.5.2 Sanitary landfill .......................................................................................................26

2.5.3 Recycling ................................................................................................................27

2.5.4 Composting ............................................................................................................28

2.5.5 Incineration .............................................................................................................28

2.6 Integrated solid waste management ...........................................................................29

2.7 Impact of solid waste on human health and environment ........................................33

2.8 Challenges in solid waste management .....................................................................34

2.9 Summary .......................................................................................................................35

CHAPTER 3 : POLICY FRAMEWORK ON WASTE MANAGEMENT IN ZIMBABWE 37

3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................37

3.2 Waste management policies in Zimbabwe ................................................................37

3.2.1 The Environmental Impact Assessment Policy of 1994 .....................................38

3.2.2 The National Sustainable Development Strategy of 2004 .................................39

3.2.3 The Draft Strategic Document on Waste Management of 2004 .......................41

3.2.4 The Science and Technology Policy of 2002 ......................................................42

3.2.5 The Draft National Environmental Policy of 2003 ...............................................42

3.2.6 Gaps and challenges of national policies ............................................................43

ix

3.3 National legislation on waste management in Zimbabwe ........................................43

3.3.1 The Environmental Management Act (EMA) (Chapter 20:27) of 2002.............44

3.3.2 Rural District Councils Act (Chapter 29:13) of 1988 ..........................................47

3.3.3 The Urban Councils Act (Chapter 29:15) of 1997 ..............................................48

3.3.4 Regional, Town And Country Planning Act (Chapter 29:12) of 1976 ...............49

3.3.5 Water Act (Chapter 20:24) of 1998 ......................................................................50

3.3.6 The Public Health Act (Chapter 15:09) of 1924 ..................................................50

3.3.7 Harare municipality by-laws on waste management ..........................................51

3.3.8 Gaps between legislative requirements and practice.........................................52

3.4 Summary .......................................................................................................................52

CHAPTER 4 : RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DATA ANALYSIS .................................. 55

4.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................55

4.2 Waste management and waste profile in Harare and the Mbare neighborhood .55

4.2.1.1 Solid waste management in Harare and Mbare ..............................................56

4.2.1.2 Mbare’s Solid waste management system ......................................................57

4.2.1.3 Residents and stakeholder participation in waste management processes .59

4.2.1.4 Waste management challenges in Mbare and Harare ...................................61

4.2.1.5 Effects of poor solid waste management in Mbare and Harare ...................62

4.2.2 Waste composition and profile in Harare and Mbare ........................................62

4.2.2.1 Solid waste profile of Harare .............................................................................63

4.2.2.2 Solid waste profile of Mbare ..............................................................................63

4.2.3 Comparison of solid waste composition between Mbare and Harare .................64

4.2.3.1 Mbare generates less waste percentage wise compared to Harare .............65

4.2.3.2 Mbare generates more agricultural waste than Harare ..................................66

4.2.3.3 Mbare generates more construction waste than Harare ................................66

4.2.3.4 Mbare generates more metal and textile waste than Harare .........................67

4.3. Waste management strategies and awareness of policies among Mbare households: Survey results ................................................................................................67

4.3.1 Socio-economic profile of respondents ...........................................................67

4.3.2 Solid waste management strategies of household survey respondents ......70

x

4.3.3 Solid waste handling .............................................................................................70

4.3.4 Solid waste separation ..........................................................................................72

4.3.5 Solid waste collection ............................................................................................73

4.3.6 Solid waste collection, transfer and transportation .............................................74

4.3.7 Solid waste disposal ..............................................................................................76

4.3.9 Extent of household 3R practices ............................................................................79

4.3.9.1 Waste reduction .................................................................................................79

4.3.9.2 Composting ........................................................................................................80

4.3.9.3 Recycling and reuse ...........................................................................................80

4.3.10 Residents awareness of waste management policies.........................................82

4.4 Summary .......................................................................................................................82

CHAPTER 5 : OVERVIEW OF MAIN RESEARCH FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 84

5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................84

5.2 OVERVIEW OF THE MAIN FINDINGS OF THE RESEARCH ................................85

5.2.1 Unsustainable solid waste management system................................................85

5.2.2 Inadequate resources............................................................................................86

5.2.3 Factors influencing solid waste management .....................................................86

5.2.4 Little practice of reduce, recycle and re-use principles ......................................87

5.2.5 Lack of private actors and stakeholders participation ........................................88

5.2.6 Policies and implementation .................................................................................89

5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................91

5.3.1 Reducing waste .....................................................................................................91

5.3.2 Promotion of 3R practices.....................................................................................92

5.3.3 Communal composting .........................................................................................93

5.3.4 Regular collection of waste ...................................................................................94

5.3.5 Waste disposal .......................................................................................................94

5.3.6 More involvement of the private sector................................................................94

5.3.7 Greater involvement of community ......................................................................95

5.3.8 Public campaigns and education .........................................................................95

xi

5.3.9 Develop a long term integrated solid waste management plan ........................95

5.3.10 Review existing laws and policies ......................................................................96

5.4 THE VALUE OF THE RESEARCH AND FUTURE POSSIBILITIES ......................96

List of references ........................................................................................................ 98

Appendices ................................................................................................................ 110

Appendix A: Semi-structured interview guide for Mbare solid waste management household survey. ............................................................................................................. 110

Appendix B: Semi-structured key-informant interview guide for Mbare solid waste management service provider interviews. ...................................................................... 125

Appendix C: Observation guide for Mbare for solid waste management study .......... 141

Appendix D: Centre for Development Support field work support letter ...................... 142

xii

Table of figures Figure 2.1: Integrated solid waste management model ................................................. 32

Figure 4.1: Comparison of solid waste composition between Mbare Township and greater Harare city......................................................................................................... 65

Figure 4.2: Waste handling methods in Mbare .............................................................. 71

Figure 4.3: Mixing of solid waste ................................................................................... 72

Figure 4.4: Types of receptacles used by households in Mbare ................................... 73

Figure 4.5: Overflowing skip bins in Matapi area ........................................................... 74

Figure 4.6: Other methods of waste disposal in Mbare ................................................. 77

Figure 4.7: Illegal disposal of waste in Mbare ............................................................... 78

Figure 4.8: Reuse of metal waste in Mbare ................................................................... 81

Figure 4.9: Elements of Mbare’s solid waste system..................................................... 83

xiii

List of tables Table 1.1: Participant response rate................................................................................ 5

Table 1.2 Summary of research methods used ............................................................. 13

Table 2.1 Sources and types of solid waste .................................................................. 20

Table 3.1: Action plan for waste disposal systems rehabilitation ................................... 41

Table 3.2: Summary of shortcomings of policies and laws on waste management ....... 53

Table 4.1 Socio-economic profile of survey respondents .............................................. 68

Table 4.2 Residents ability to pay for refuse ................................................................. 76

Table 4.3 Respondent feelings about recycling of waste .............................................. 81

xiv

List of acronyms CED Centre for Environment and Development

CZI Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries

DNR Department of Natural Resources

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EMA Environmental Management Act

EMB Environment Management Board

GIM Ghana Innovation Marketplace

HIV/AIDS Human Immune Virus/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

LEAP Local Environmental Action Plan

MDC Movement for Democratic Change

MET Ministry of Environment and Tourism

NAC Neighborhood Advisory Committee

NGOs Non Governmental Organisations

NSDS National Sustainable Development Strategy

NWPCC National Waste Paper Collection Company

ORO Operation Restore Order

SIRDC Scientific and Industrial Research and Development Centre

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences

UN United Nations

UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

USA United States of America

US United States

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

USPS Urban Sector Programme Support Secretariat

WHO World Health Organisation

ZANU PF Zimbabwe African National Union (Patriotic Front)

ZELA Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association

ZINWA Zimbabwe National Water Authority

ZPS Zimbabwe Population Services

1

CHAPTER 1 : BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION OF STUDY 1.1 Background of the study

Solid waste management is one of the major problems confronting Zimbabwe’s towns

and cities and the problem is increasing with rapid urbanisation, increasing population,

industries and increased use of non-biodegradable plastics and bottles (Maseva, 2005:

9; Kaseke, 2005:1). Solid waste management can be defined as activities to handle,

process, transport and dispose of waste regarded as non-liquid waste, in order to

reduce or avoid the human health and environmental negative impacts of solid waste.

Yedla (2005:93) adds that solid waste management is one of the most important

aspects of urban development, and is gaining importance among developing nations.

Solid waste management has emerged as a dominant urban environmental issue that

has attracted academic, economic and media debates, and has over the years

developed into an independent discipline (Manyanhaire et al., 2009: 127; and Yedla,

2005:94). However, this growth in content and general awareness is faced with

crumbling solid waste management systems in the cities and towns (Manyanhaire et al.,

2009:127).

Yedla (2005:94) ascribes the increase in solid waste problems in cities to changes in

living conditions and influence of western throw away culture. This increase in solid

waste generation results in environmental degradation and huge loss of natural

resources (Parikh and Parikh, 1997). Zurbrügg (2002:1) revealed that inadequate waste

disposal creates serious environmental problems that affect human health.

Environmental degradation caused by inadequate disposal of waste is evident through

the contamination of surface and ground water via leachate, soil contamination through

direct waste contact or leachate, air pollution from waste burning, spreading of diseases

via vectors that include birds, insects and rodents, and uncontrolled release of methane

by anaerobic decomposition of waste (Zurbrügg, 2002:1).

Given the magnitude of the challenge of solid waste management in developing

countries, Zimbabwe and its towns and cities and the apparent lack of integrated

2

sustainable solid waste management systems, it is important that more is done to

advocate for solid waste management systems that are sustainable. This study will add

to the body of knowledge on solid waste management and looks at the possibility of

adopting and integrated solid waste management system in Mbare Township.

1.2 Statement of the problem Poor solid waste management is one of the environmental problems facing urban areas

in the third world (Hope and Lekorwe, 1999:837; and Manyanhaire et al., 2009:129).

Very few urban areas in the developing world have adequate and sustainable waste

disposal systems and litter is a growing problem which has not received much attention

in Southern Africa and the problem of litter is mainly attributable to the increase in

packaging and plastics (Jansson, 1997).

Accumulated waste threatens health, damages the environment and adversely affects

the quality of urban life (Agunwamba, 1998:850; and Hardoy, 2001). Given these

adverse consequences of poor solid waste management, sustainable solid waste

management is of great importance (Jin et al., 2006:1047; and Turan et al., 2009).

In Mbare, health problems are compounded by a combination of overcrowding,

uncollected accumulated solid waste from the main market, residential areas and

industrial sites (Sachiti, 2010). The solid waste management system used in Mbare is

failing to address the challenge of accumulated solid waste in the Township.

Uncollected accumulated waste, disposal of waste on the illegal dumps, in Manyame

River and on the roadside characterise the current system. Due to the inadequacy of

the current system this study will put forward the need of pursuing an integrated solid

waste management system as an alternative to the existing Mbare solid waste

management system.

1.2.1 Research questions Given the background above, the study seeks to answer the following questions:

What are the composition and profile of solid waste in Mbare and Harare?

3

What are the solid waste management strategies in Mbare?

What is the current solid waste management system in Mbare and is it

sustainable?

What are the current 3R (reduce, recycle, reuse) practices done by Mbare

residents?

What are the gaps in policies on waste management in Zimbabwe?

How can an integrated sustainable solid waste management system be

established in Mbare?

1.3 Aim and objectives of the study 1.3.1 Aim

To do an analysis of the current solid waste management system of Mbare Township

and provide recommendations on the need to adopt an integrated solid waste

management system in the Township.

1.3.2 Objectives

The research objectives include:

To study the magnitude and dimensions of solid waste generated by Mbare

township;

To document the current Mbare Township solid waste management system;

To map stakeholders in the Mbare solid waste management system and

establish their role and influence in an integrated solid waste management

system;

To analyse the various sustainability aspects of the Mbare solid waste

management system;

To determine the effectiveness of policies and laws on solid waste management

in Zimbabwe that have a bearing on Mbare Township waste management; and

To determine the feasibility of establishing an integrated solid waste

management system in Mbare.

4

1.4 Brief background of study area Mbare is one of Zimbabwe’s oldest townships and was created in 1907. It is located on

the south eastern part of Harare. Mbare is home to about 120,000 people. Mbare hosts

the main bus terminus in Harare and the biggest agricultural produce market (Mbare

Musika). Mbare is one of the townships that were heavily affected by the government’s

Operation Restore Order (ORO) campaign which saw many houses and slums being

destroyed in many towns in Zimbabwe in May 2005. Mbare is also one of the townships

where the poorest residents of Harare stay. Housing units in Mbare are generally

overcrowded.

1.5 Research methodology 1.5.1 Research design The research design for this study can be described as represented by Mouton

(2001:146), under his “classification frameworks of research design types” as being:

Primarily empirical but with some components that are non-empirical. Conceptual

and theoretical work informed and guided primary data collection in the field and

the primary data was also employed to develop and refine the theory and

concepts in the study;

Hybrid use of primary and relevant secondary data. This involved the analysis of

primary data vs existing data;

A combination of numeric and textual data; and

Medium control – the researcher had some degree of control over the information

collected and the methods of collection, nevertheless control over responses

from study participants and the availability of secondary data used in the

research was low.

The research design for the study is mixed and a mixed method research design can

help bridge the schism between quantitative and qualitative research (Johnson and

Onwuegbuzie, 2004:15). White (2009:280) states that mixed methods are combinations

5

of qualitative and quantitative approaches, and that all quantitative studies have some

measure of qualitative analysis.

The study also employed a cross-sectional survey study design i.e. collecting of data

from respondents at one point in time and from more than one case or respondent

(Bryman and Bell, 2007:55). According to Bryman and Bell (2007:55) a cross sectional

design will also include collecting data on two or more variables and data in this study

was collected from many households and key informants. Data was collected on refuse

disposal methods, refuse collection methods, perceptions on waste management and

effects and challenges of poor solid waste management.

1.5.2 Population A study population is the universe of units from where a sample is drawn (Bryman,

2004:87). Sampling according to Seale (2004:510) is an attempt to statistically

represent a population. The study population included households in Mbare. Mbare’s

population is roughly estimated at 120,000 according to Zimbabwe Population Services

(ZPS). Mbare has roughly 15000 households.

1.5.3 Respondents

A variety of research instruments were used in this study, mainly household survey

questionnaires, self-administered key informant interview questionnaires and a field

observations guide.

Table 1.1: Participant response rate Respondents and type of instrument Responded and

returned Total sent/ administered

Response rate (%)

Household survey (questionnaire) 80 80 100

Key informant interviews 2 5 40

Total 82 85 96.4

Sources: Household Survey and Key Informant Interviews.

6

From the table above the study participant response rate for the household survey and

the key informant interviews was 96.4 percent. All 80 households (100%) responded to

the survey as the questionnaires were physically administered. If a respondent refused

to participate the researcher would move to the next household or interview a willing

participant at the same household. The survey questionnaires were administered face-

to-face to ensure that all the required 80 responses were obtained. Only 2 out of the 5

respondents who received the self-administered key informant interview questionnaires

responded. Telephone follow ups with the respondents who did not respond revealed

that they were not comfortable responding to the study questions for political reasons.

Most of the key informants were supposed to be municipal workers of the City of

Harare. One of the respondents who could not participate in the study revealed that

there was a lot of political polarisation within the municipality structures and no one was

willing to give out much information. Instead two of the respondents opted to give the

researcher documents with statistics and reports rather than responding to the survey

questionnaires in spite of the researcher’s assurances that they would not be identified

in the study report.

1.5.4 Sampling procedures A sample can be viewed as part or segment of a population which is selected for the

study. This study largely used non-probability sampling in which according to Bell

(2004:543) and Bryman and Bell (2007:197) some people have unknown chance of

being selected. Non-probability sampling was used to purposely identify respondents to

the household survey who would provide required information. As noted by Trochim

(2006) in applied social science research it is permissible to consider varieties of non-

probability sampling alternatives where it is not practical or theoretically sensible to do

random sampling.

Sampling techniques that included cluster, purposive and convenient samplings were

used. Firstly, the study area was zoned into the administrative wards of Mbare

Township, Ward 3 and 4. Then, based on initial field observations, four areas within

these wards were identified for the purpose of conducting the household survey. The

7

areas were Mbare National, Matapi, Matererini and part of Ward 3. Twenty household

survey questionnaires were then administered face-to-face in each of these four areas

to resemble geographical spread and increase representativeness.

Purposive sampling can be defined as a qualitative research based sampling method

which entails attempts to establish a good connection between research questions and

sampling (Bryman, 2004:333). Participants in purposive sampling are selected based on

their significance to the research questions (Seale, 2004:199). The initial field

observations helped the researcher to identify the four areas to focus on. Observations

like heaps of solid waste, overflowing skip bins, signs of over crowdedness, waste in

open spaces and alleys helped the researcher to purposely select the four areas as

areas where the household survey was to be conducted.

According to Bryman (2004:100) convenient sampling includes samples selected by a

researcher on the basis of ease of accessibility of the sample objects to the researcher.

The method was used in both the household survey and the key informant interviews. In

the household survey if a respondent was unwilling to participate, the researcher would

interview the next accessible and willing participants. This was also the same for the

key informant interviews where waste management staffs of the City of Harare were

interviewed.

1.5.5 Data collection This study used mixed methods data collection strategies. Mixed method data

collection strategies are those that are explicitly designed to combine elements of one

method with elements of other methods, in either a sequential or a simultaneous

manner (Axinn and Pearce, 2006:1).The selection of mixed methods for data collection

for this study enabled the researcher to gain special opportunities to use of multiple

sources of information from multiple approaches to gain new insights (Axinn and

Pearce, 2006:2) into the solid waste management dynamics in Mbare.

8

Varying the data collection approaches in this study reduced non-sampling error by

providing redundant information from multiple sources; and ensured that a potential bias

coming from one particular approach is not replicated in alternative approaches (Axinn

and Pearce, 2006:2).Using different sources of information gathering is also called

triangulation and it helped in minimising biases coming from use of a single method.

Data in the study was collected from households in Mbare, employees of the City of

Harare Waste management department, and informal business operators in Mbare. In

addition to this, relevant secondary data was also used in the study. The data collection

stage of the study had three phases namely, literature review and secondary data

analysis; analysis of waste management policy and legal documents in Zimbabwe; and

primary data collection which included, field observations, a household survey, and key

informant interviews. The data obtained from literature review gave the researcher an

overview of the extent of solid waste challenges in third world countries and the study

area. The literature helped the researcher in understanding the key concepts in solid

waste management. The literature review gave a lot of direction on areas to focus on

during the policy analysis phase. After a clear understanding of concepts and

challenges of solid waste management in Mbare and elsewhere and an understanding

of the limitations in policies on waste management in Zimbabwe the researcher was

able to have strong pointers on what to look for during the field observations. The

information gathered from the literature review helped a lot in the design of the field

observation guide the researcher used. The data gathered during field observations

informed the selection of study areas where the household survey was conducted and

the design of the of the household survey questionnaire. The data gathered in field

observations and household survey was also very helpful in the design of the key

informant interview questionnaire as well as noting down of questions to follow up with

key informants regarding solid waste collection services.

1.5.5.1 Literature review and secondary data collection In this phase the researcher sought to construct a picture of the magnitude, extent,

views, nature of, and paradigms in the problem of solid waste management through

9

reading books, journal articles, dissertations, and newspaper articles. The researcher

also read through reports of other players working in the area of waste management

and public health in Mbare and in Harare in general that included NGOs. The

researcher also looked at local authority reports, archived data and other sources of

information on solid waste management.

The use of written records and previous studies provided useful information for research

on contemporary problems related to solid waste management (Axinn and Pearce,

2006:2). Bryman and Bell (2007:328) assert that the use of secondary data offers the

prospect of having access to good quality information with very little resources (time and

money) used in the process. However, secondary data may have content problem; low

ecological and temporary validity; and low impetrative validity (Johnson and Turner,

2003).

The secondary data and literature review phase helped in guiding the researcher on

issues worth analysing in the policy documents analysis phase and development of

primary data collection tools that were used in the primary data collection stage.

1.5.5.2 Analysis of policy documents Analysis of key policy documents, Acts and City of Harare by-laws that had a bearing on

solid waste management in Zimbabwe and Harare was done.

The following policy documents were reviewed:

Environmental Impact Assessment Policy of 1994;

National Sustainable Development Strategy of 2004;

Draft Waste Management Strategy of 2006;

Science and Technology Policy of 2002; and the

Draft National Environmental Policy of 2003.

The following laws were reviewed:

The Environmental Management Act (Chapter 20:27);

10

The Urban Councils Act (Chapter 29:15);

The Rural District Councils Act (Chapter 29:13);

The Regional Town and Country Planning Act (Chapter 29:12);

The Water Act (Chapter 20:22);

The Public Health Act (Chapter 15:09); and

City of Harare by-laws.

1.5.5.3 Primary data collection In the primary data collection phase data was collected through preliminary field

observations, household survey and key informant interviews. These data collection

methods are discussed below.

1.5.5.3.1 Preliminary field observations

The field observations involved scouting through the research area to assess the

following among other issues:

Individual household waste collection receptacles;

Communal waste collection skip bins;

Presence of waste in alleys;

Illegal dumpsites;

Landfill sites;

Presence of children, scavengers and pets at waste heaps and illegal dumpsites;

and

Types of waste found at disposals sites.

During this process which involved intensive walking and driving around the Mbare

district, photographs were taken of waste heaps on illegal dumpsites and open spaces,

overflowing skip bins, pictures of people reusing waste, and scattered waste around

houses and along the roads (see figures 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8).

The findings in the field observations were included in the analysis of data gathered.

This process was very helpful in informing the design of the data gathering tools used in

11

both the household survey and key informant interviews as well as sampling the areas

where the household survey questionnaires were to be administered.

1.5.5.3.2 Household survey

A semi-structured survey instrument/questionnaire with closed and open-ended

questions was used in the survey. The design of the instrument was based on findings

from literature review, analysis of policy documents and field observations. The use of

open-ended questions in the instrument helped in eliciting participant views on the solid

waste management system in Mbare that may not necessary have come out from the

exclusive use of closed questions. Bryman and Bell (2007:261) noted that the use of

closed questions lead to: ease of processing answers; enhanced comparability of

answers, making it easier to show relationships between variables, to make

comparisons between variables and to make comparisons between respondents;

closed questions may clarify the meaning of questions to respondents and are easy for

interviewers and for respondents to complete; and in interviews they reduce the

variability in recording answers. However, closed questions have the following setbacks:

loss of spontaneity in respondents’ answers; difficulty of making forced-choice answers

mutually exclusive and exhaustive; variation of answers among respondents to force –

choice answers; irritate respondents if they feel the category of questions does not

apply to them; when dealing with large numbers of respondents it may be difficult for

interviewer and respondent to establish rapport (Bryman and Bell, 2007:261-2).

Open-ended questions lead to: respondents answering their own questions; allowing

unusual responses to be derived; questions were not suggestive; and were useful to

exploration of new areas; and generation of fixed-choice format answers (Bryman and

Bell, 2007: 258-9). The following were some of the disadvantages of using open ended

questions in the study as also confirmed by Bryman and Bell (2007:259) time

consuming to administer interviews; answers had to be coded; and required great effort

from respondents.

12

The household survey instrument was pretested in the study areas before the full study

was done. The questionnaires were administered on 80 respondents in National,

Matapi, Matererini and part of Ward 3 during the actual survey. A face-to-face interview

approach was used in administering the 80 survey questionnaires. The advantage of

using this type of interviews in this study in Mbare Township where the literacy levels

are low included ease and usefulness in interviewing less literate people, high response

rate, ability of interviewer to explain and clarify issues; (Johnson and Turner, 2003). A

response rate of 100% was recorded as a convenient sampling method was used and

where a respondent was unwilling to participate in the survey the researcher would

move to the next available and willing household respondent. However, the household

survey took longer than planned to be completed as some people who claimed to be

local Zimbabwe African National Union (Patriotic Front) (ZANU PF) members harassed

the researcher and the data gathering assistants because they had not sought their

permission to do the household survey. The researcher had sought permission from

district administrator’s office and the local police to access the study areas and had

avoided going to different political parties with a presence in Mbare as this would have

politicised the study.

1.5.5.3.2 Key informant interviews

Due to constraints of time and money the key informant interviews were done using a

self-administered questionnaire sent to the will-be respondents by email. The

questionnaire was sent to 3 waste management department staff at the local office in

Granitesite near Mbare and 2 staff in the waste management head office in the city

centre. These respondents had been identified as key during the preliminary

investigations and the researcher had established contact with them prior to sending the

semi-structured questionnaires by email. Only 2 of the key informant interview

respondents returned the questionnaires. Telephone calls were done to follow up on

clarifications on some responses by the two who responded. Telephone follow ups were

also done to the three who did not return their questionnaires and one of these

respondents informed the researcher that there was a lot of politically related

polarisation in the city council structures and it was risky to give out information. The

13

respondent opted instead to give the researcher internal reports with statistics and other

information on waste management than responding to the questionnaire. The fear within

the municipality structures was understandable given that Zimbabwe is currently having

a shaky inclusive government with officials in municipalities being employed on a

political basis from the three political parties in government. The timing of the study also

coincided with the exposure of United States (US) diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks

where a lot of government officials were exposed to have been talking in secrecy with

US diplomats in the country about the political future of Zimbabwe. So regardless of the

assurances given by the researcher including the Center for Development Support letter

showing that the data the researcher was gathering was to be used for academic

purposes only, the key informants were very uncomfortable to give any responses

through both email or telephone interviews.

Table 1.2 below summarises the data collection processes used in this study. It shows

the data collection methods used to gather for each of the chapters;

Table 1.2 Summary of research methods used

Chapter Literature review

Analysis of policy

documents

Household survey

Observations Key informant interviews

Photography

Chapter 1 XXX XX XX XX XX

Chapter 2 XXX XX

Chapter 3 XX XXX

Chapter 4 XX XX XXX XXX XXX XXX

Chapter 5 XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XX

Legend: XXX: Very relevant method; XX: Relevant method; X: Lower relevance

1.5.6 Data analysis and presentation

Questionnaires administered during the household survey and the key informant

interviews were examined and checked for completeness, accuracy and consistency to

minimise errors. The questions were then coded based on responses before the

responses were captured in the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)

database created for the study for easy of analysis of the quantitative data. The data

14

was processed to produce statistical tables and charts for interpretation and

discussions. The data was analysed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Data was also

disaggregated according to the four study locations (Matapi, Matererini, National and

part of Ward 3) to determine localised trends in the responses.

1.6 Research ethics Scientific research is a form of human conduct and should adhere to acceptable values

and norms (Mouton, 2001:238). Bryman and Bell (2003:132) add that ethical issues in

research should look at the four principles: whether there is harm to participants; lack of

informed consent; invasion of privacy; and deception is involved. Following are some of

the ethical issues that were considered in this study:

1.6.1 Objectivity and integrity The researcher strove to maintain objectivity and integrity in conducting research

Mouton (2001:240). In line with Mouton’s (2001:240) recommendations, the researcher

ensured that this study adhered to the highest possible technical standards consistent in

conducting scientific researches. These included ensuring that the findings of the

research study are represented fully without falsifying data and acknowledging sources

of information for the study. By doing so the researcher achieved objectivity in a highly

subjective study. 1.6.2 Privacy, confidentiality and anonymity This study strove to protect the rights of the subjects including their interests,

psychological, physical well-being and sensitivities (Mouton, 2001:243). Where

respondents explicitly stated that they wanted to remain anonymous, the researcher

kept their identities private. The research also respected subjects’ right to privacy

particularly those that refused to participate in the study through not forcing them to

participate.

15

1.6.3 Informed consent and voluntary participation The aims of the investigation were disclosed to the participants in clear, unambiguous

and simple manner (Mouton, 2001:244). The researcher and the data collection

assistants informed participants fully on the elements of the research and the possible

consequences. The researcher assured the participants that any information they

provided for the study was to be confidential, including their identities.

1.7 Chapter organisation This dissertation has 5 chapters. Chapter 1 gives the motivation and background to the

study covering the research purpose, methodology, background of study area, field

work, ethical considerations of the study and limitations. Chapter 2 looks at literature

review where an exploration and analysis of various literatures on solid waste

management was done to set the tone for the study and provide guidance to

subsequent chapters. Chapter 3 looks at current policies in Zimbabwe with regards to

waste management. An analysis of the gaps in policies and legislation that have a

bearing on waste management in the country was done. Chapter 4 presents the

empirical findings from the research and field work. Chapter 5, the last chapter, looks at

main conclusions and recommendations.

1.8 Fieldwork Before carrying out the household survey meetings were arranged with ward councilors

of the two wards in Mbare and officials from the district administrator’s office where

negotiations for access into Mbare to do the survey were done. The officials from the

district administrator’s offices agreed to the study and offered to help where they can.

They however advised the researcher to inform the local police at Matapi Police Station

as Mbare Township is known to be very polarised politically with councilors from the

former opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party in place but the other

political party, ZANU PF, does not recognise them and the ZANU PF supporters keep a

close look at what happens in the whole of Mbare. To avoid any political problems and

violence against the researcher and the data collection assistants the police at Matapi

16

station asked the researcher to bring to them all the data collection tools to be used in

the household survey for them to put the official police stamp on them in case some

people doubted the motive of the household survey. All the questionnaires that were

used in the survey were police stamped. However, during the survey some alleged

ZANU PF youths tried to bar the researcher and the data collection assistants from

collecting data in Mbare as they said the survey was not cleared by their party

chairman. This problem led to a temporary stoppage in collecting data during the

survey. The problem was resolved after the intervention of police officers at Matapi

police station who explained to the suspected ZANU PF officials that the data was being

collected for an academic study and not for political reasons and the police had cleared

the process to go on.

For the household survey 5 data collection assistants who included 3 females and 2

males among them 3 recent graduates from a local university and 2 university students

were recruited and trained in administering the questionnaires. The data collection

assistants helped in both the pre-testing of the questionnaire and the actual survey. A

data capturing assistant was later hired to help in entering data into the SPSS package

database after coding of responses.

1.9 Limitations of the study Firstly, the empirical findings for this study were based on a small sample of 80

households due to constraints of time and monetary resources that made it impossible

to have a bigger sample. This fact may make generalisation of some of the findings

problematic.

Secondly, due to a lot of political polarisation in Mbare some of the respondents may

have not been so free to air their views on matters like the challenges the authorities

were facing with waste management and this may have influenced them to answer

these questions in a particular way.

17

Thirdly, some independent and useful views of the waste management staff who

participated in the key informant interviews may not have come out clearly as the study

coincided with the WikiLeaks exposures that were “implicating” some government

officials in saying out state secrets to American diplomats. This challenge also

accounted for the low response rate among the key informant interview participants.

Furthermore, the study did not look at issues like technological design, ecological and

economic analysis as well as gender analysis in an integrated sustainable waste

management system. These are very important issues in establishing an integrated

sustainable waste management system but they fell outside the scope of this study.

Finally, as noted in literature review, Chapter 2, there are different sources of solid

waste that include domestic, agricultural and industrial waste. This study concentrated

more on domestic solid waste due to scope of the study and resource constraints.

1.10 Summary

This chapter gave a brief overview of the study background and motivation. It also

looked at the problem statement for the study, the scope, purpose and objectives of the

study and methodology used in the study. The chapter also looked at some challenges

encountered during the research, the ethical considerations for the study and the

possible limitations of the study. The next chapter will look at the analysis of literature

on solid waste management.

18

CHAPTER 2 : LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction Rapid urbanisation and the resultant solid waste generation have rendered the

traditional solid waste management system whose main elements are collecting,

transporting and disposing of solid waste unsustainable and inefficient as urban centres

continue to grapple with the challenges of huge volumes of uncollected solid waste

(Puorideme, 2010:7). Changes in living conditions and influences of western throw

away culture have also exacerbated the challenge of solid waste management in

developing countries (Yedla, 2005:94). With the increased worldwide calls for the

promotion of environmental sustainability, many scholars have developed interest in the

concept of integrated sustainable waste management as opposed to the traditional

waste management practices that did not pay much attention to environmental

sustainability issues.

This chapter explores various literatures on solid waste management. It examines key

concepts in solid waste management, early and contemporary methods of managing

solid waste, and a discussion on integrated solid waste management. The chapter also

looks briefly on health problems caused by poorly managed solid waste and challenges

in solid waste management in developing countries.

2.2 Waste It is easy to recognise or call something as waste but very often it is difficult to define

waste. Puopiel (2010:8) notes that waste is easily recognised than defined and that

there are basically two types of waste namely solid and liquid waste. Scholars in waste

management broadly define waste as materials that are no longer wanted by the owner

(Mader, 2011:5) or “…material discharged and discarded as unnecessary from each

stage of daily human life activities, which leads to adverse impacts on human health

and the environment” (Dev, 2007:3). Dev (2007:3) concludes that waste is “useless,

unused, unwanted, or discarded materials”. However, Rimberg (1975:5) contends that

discarded materials that are recyclable cannot be termed waste as the word waste

connotes negative economic value yet discarded recyclable material will still have

19

economic value. As will be seen in the next section and chapters 4 and 5, the author

takes waste to be any discarded materials that may have value or not. The study will

advocate for measures like recycling and reuse of some waste as measures that will

lead to recovery of some value from waste and reduction of the waste that is finally

discarded. This study will focus on solid waste and therefore what follows is a brief

discussion on the concept of solid waste.

2.2.1 Solid waste Solid waste is a term that has been defined variably by many scholars. Solid waste can

be defined as materials, “…discarded from industrial, commercial, mining or agricultural

operations, and from community activities” (Kemal, 2007:17). It can be distinguished

from liquid waste, a term often used to refer to sewerage or waste water (Mader,

2011:5). Tchobanoglous et al. (1993) view solid waste as any material that come out

from human and animal activities and are normally discarded as useless or unwanted.

Solid waste includes non-hazardous industrial, commercial and domestic waste

including: household organic trash; street sweepings; institutional garbage; and

construction wastes (Zerbock, 2003). GIM (2009) define solid waste as neither

wastewater discharges nor atmospheric emissions emanating from domestic,

commercial, industrial, and institutional activities in urban areas.

For the purpose of this study, solid waste will be defined as non-wastewater and non-

atmospheric discarded waste materials emanating from human activity. The materials

can have economic value or may not have any economic value. The study will focus on

residential solid waste, and some commercial solid waste from business activities in

Mbare.

2.2.2 Sources and types of solid waste

Solid waste can be classified into many types depending on source: house hold waste

(municipal/domestic waste), industrial waste, agricultural waste, bio-medical waste;

hazardous waste, non-hazardous waste, bio-degradable waste, and non-bio degradable

waste (Kemal, 2007:17; and Mader, 2011:5). Tchobanoglous et al. (1993) classify types

20

of solid waste in terms of the relationship of solid waste to sources and generation

facilities, activities, or locations associated with each type.

Table 2.1 Sources and types of solid waste

Source Typical location Type of solid waste

Residential

Household dwellings: low, medium,

and high-rise apartments.

Food waste, rubbish, ashes, special

wastes

Commercial/

Municipal

Stores, restaurants, markets, offices,

hotels, shops, medical facilities and

institutions.

Food waste, rubbish, ashes, demolition

/construction waste, special wastes,

occasionally hazardous wastes

Industrial

Construction, fabrication, light and

heavy manufacturing, refineries,

chemical plants, lumbering, mining,

demolition.

Food waste, rubbish, ashes, demolition

/construction wastes, special wastes,

occasionally hazardous wastes.

Open areas

Streets, alleys, parks, vacant plots,

playgrounds, beaches, highway and

recreational areas.

Special wastes, rubbish

Treatment plant sites

Water, wastes water, and industrial

treatment processes.

Treatment plant wastes, residual sludge

Agricultural

Field and row crops, orchards,

vineyards, dairies, feedlots and farms.

Spoiled food wastes, agricultural wastes,

rubbish, hazardous wastes

Sources: Dev (2007:6-8); Madewe and Madewe (2006); Tchobanoglous et al. (1993:52-53) and Puopiel

(2010:9).

The types of waste identified in table 2.1 above are further explained below:

Food waste: also known as garbage includes all the animal, vegetable and plant

residue emanating from handling, preparation, cooking and eating of foods. Food waste

is highly putrescible and decomposes rapidly in warmer temperatures and often

decomposes leaving behind bad odor. In most residential areas the putrescible nature

of this type of waste has a great influence on design and operation of solid waste

collection systems (Puopiel, 2010:10).

21

Rubbish: Rubbish or trash on the other hand includes paper, plastics, cans, bottles,

glass, metals, ceramics, dust, garden waste. With the exclusion of garden waste, these

are materials regarded non-putrescible (Dev, 2007:8). This type of solid waste also

includes combustible material like paper, cardboard, plastics, textiles, rubber, leather,

wood, furniture, and trimmings and non-combustible materials like glass, tin cans,

aluminum cans, ferrous and non-ferrous metals(Puopiel, 2010:10).

Ashes: this is also a form of waste resulting from combustion processes in households.

These are remains from burning of wood, coal, coke and other materials from domestic,

store, institutional, industrial and municipal facilitates (Dev, 2007:8 and Puopiel,

2010:10).

Special waste: these include street sweepings, roadside litter, municipal container litter,

catch basin debris, dead animals and abandoned vehicles (Puopiel, 2010:10 and

Tchobanoglous et al., 1993)

Types of solid waste can also be classified according to origin (i.e. food waste, rubbish,

ashes, residues, demolition and construction waste, and agricultural waste (CED, 2003;

Madewe and Madewe, 2006; Kutiwa et al., 2010). Waste can also be classified based

on its characteristics (biodegradable and non-biodegradable) or based on risk potential

(i.e. hazardous waste) (Puopiel, 2010:10). CED (2003), Cointreau-Levine (1982), Dev

(2007), Mader (2011), and Kemal (2007) all note the sources of solid waste as

residential, shops, commercial establishments, hotels and restaurants, open areas, and

agricultural activities. These scholars do confirm the sources and types of solid waste

enumerated by Tchobanoglous et al. (1993). From this discussion one would conclude

that types of solid waste include: food waste, rubbish, ashes, demolition waste,

agricultural waste, special waste and treatment plant waste.

2.2.3. Components of solid waste Since solid waste does include a lot of materials some which are combustible and some

noncombustible, some biodegradable and some non biodegradable a clear

22

understanding of the composition of solid waste would greatly influence the proposed

solid waste management methods for any given community. Combustible materials

include paper, plastics, yard debris, food waste, wood, textiles, disposable diapers and

other organic materials (Puopiel, 2010:11). Glass, metal, bones, leather and aluminum

are some of the non-combustible materials forming solid waste (Dension and Ruston,

1990; Kreith, 1994; and Zerbock, 2003).

2.3 Solid waste management Solid waste management can be defined as the administration of activities that include

collection, sources separation, storage, transportation, transfer, processing, treatment

and disposal (Kumah, 2007:2). Tchobanoglous et al. (1993:7) defined solid waste

management as a discipline that is associated with, “…control of generation, storage,

collection, transfer and transport, processing and disposal of solid waste in a manner

that is in accordance with the best principles of public health, economics, engineering,

conservation, aesthetics and other environmental considerations and that is also

responsive to public attitudes”.

From the definitions propounded above it can be seen that it is imperative to understand

the important aspects and relationships involved in a solid waste management system.

For the purpose of this study solid waste management will therefore be taken to

incorporate elements of: generation, source separation, storage, collection,

transportation and transfer, processing, recovery, and disposal in a manner that is

environmentally sustainable.

2.3.1 Solid waste management processes As noted in the previous section elements of solid waste management include:

generation, source separation, storage, collection, transportation and transfer,

processing, recovery, and disposal. These elements are further described below.

23

2.3.1.1 Generation

Waste generation includes activities and processes where materials are deemed to be

no longer of use and no longer have value and are thrown away or gathered pending

disposal (Dev, 2007:11; Momoh and Oladebeye, 2010). In 2006 the global amount of

municipal solid waste generated was 2.02 billion tones, representing 7% annual

increase since year 2003 (UNEP, 2009). Between 2007 and end of 2011 global

generation of municipal solid waste was expected to rise by 37.3% , a figure equivalent

to around 8 % increase per year (UNEP, 2009). The assertion by UNEP (2009) that at a

global scale waste generation is increasing at a faster rate is confirmed by Menshah

and Larbi (2005) in their study of solid waste in Ghana, Monahan (2004) on his study of

solid waste in New Hampshire and Manyanhaire et al. (2009) in their study of solid

waste in Sakubva.

Waste generation forms differ from different towns and cities. Manyanhaire et al.

(2009:127) found out that a number of determinants account for the type of waste

generated and these include consumption patterns and lifestyles. In India’s low income

cities, it is estimated that around 15.62% of household solid waste is vegetable matter,

4.35% is paper, 0.55% is rubber and leather, 0.62% are plastics, 4.00% are rags, 0.40

% wooden paper, and 0.62% are metals (Bhatia, 2003). While in Africa, 10% of

household waste is paper, 7% plastic, 6% metal, and 72% food waste (Masundire and

Sanyanga, 1999). These differences are attributable to varying lifestyles and

consumption patterns between towns and cities of different countries and regions.

2.3.1.2 Storage

Solid waste storage is a place where solid waste is stored before it is collected

(Tchobanoglous et al., 1977). Solid waste storage facilities can be categorised as

primary (or individual) and secondary (or communal) storage facilities (Dev, 2007:12).

Solid waste can be stored in dustbins, big community bins or thrown away

indiscriminately.

24

2.3.1.3 Collection

Collection of solid waste includes the gathering, picking and hauling of waste to places

where the contents of hauling vehicles are emptied (Dev, 2007:12 and Kreith, 1994).

Collection of waste may be done using concrete receptacles placed at strategic points

and conveyed by trucks (Kreith, 1994) or bins and containers provided at various

points placed alongside shops or residential areas (Puopiel, 2010:13).

2.3.1.4 Transfer and transportation

Transfer and transportation of solid waste include two steps: the transfer of waste

from smaller collection vehicle to bigger transportation equipment; and final

transportation of the waste over long distance to final disposal site (Kreith, 1994 and

Puopiel, 2010:13)

2.3.1.5 Processing and recovery

The processing and recovery in the solid waste management system includes elements

of technologies, equipment and facilities meant to improve efficiency of other functional

elements to recover usable materials, and covert some solid waste into energy

(Tchobanoglous et al., 1977). Resource recovery includes the extraction of

economically usable material or energy from solid wastes (Dev, 2007:13). Recovery or

recycling of resources differs between developed and developing countries. In the

former the recovery and recycling processes are institutionalised and supported by

government while in the latter most of the recovery and recycling is done by waste

scavengers (Fudery, 1990).

2.3.2.6 Disposal

Disposal is the final stage in most solid waste management processes. This is when

waste is finally disposed of in landfills or other places. Having looked at the key

elements of the solid waste management processes, the next section looks at practices

in solid waste management. The section is divided into two: early practices in solid

waste management and contemporary methods of solid waste management.

25

2.4 Early solid waste management practices The early solid waste management practices include waste management practices used

in the 1950s which were limited in scope to storage, collection and disposal. Disposal

was normally via combustion or dumping on land or water bodies (Gotoh, 1989). The

early approaches looked at waste as a problem to be dealt with through disposal and

does not pay attention to preventive strategies to reduce waste (Buclet, 2002), while

recovery and stakeholder participation are not regarded (Mader, 2011:7). The problem

of waste was viewed as an engineering challenge to be addressed by technologically-

heavy solutions (Buclet, 2002) and the problem was looked at in similar ways

irrespective of local context (Mader, 2011:7).

The early approaches to waste management that were technology-oriented failed in

developing countries due to a multiplicity of factors that included the use of

inappropriate and heavy technologies that cannot be maintained locally, poor

governance, poor economic capacity, lack of recognition of varying social, physical and

climatic differences between countries among other factors (Arlosoroff, 1991; Van de

Klundert and Anschutz, 1999).

The common methods of solid waste disposal used in the early practices in solid waste

management included, dumping on land, canyons and mining pits, dumping in water,

ploughing waste into the soil, and feeding to hogs. (Tchobanoglous et al., 1993:17).

Some of these early methods in solid waste disposal used in the 1950s still exist today

for instance indiscriminate dumping of waste on open land and in gutters is still evident

in many towns in developing countries as well as dumping of waste in water in coastal

areas (Puopiel, 2010: 14). Burning of waste is also common in towns in Africa including

dumping of waste in gutters, drains, dumping of waste by the roadside, and on

unauthorised dumping sites (Momoh and Oladebeye, 2010).

Having looked at some of the early practices in solid waste management, the next

section looks at the contemporary methods used in solid waste management.

26

2.5 Contemporary solid waste management methodologies In this section attention is given to the contemporary methods of solid waste

management that include source reduction, sanitary landfills, composting, recycling and

incineration. These are solid waste management methods that were mainly used from

around 1980 to present day. Denison and Ruston (1990) noted that the contemporary

methods in management of solid waste include, source reduction, sanitary landfills,

composting, recycling, and incineration.

2.5.1 Source reduction Source reduction includes actions that are performed to reduce the volumes and toxicity

of solid waste before its processing and disposal in incinerators and landfills (Denison

and Ruston, 1990; Kreith, 1994). Source reduction also includes reclaiming reusable

products and packages like returnable bottles (Puopiel, 2010:15). USPS (2000)

contends that in order to sustainably reduce waste problems in the future, reduction of

waste generation plays a very important role. At a consumption level reduction can

include reuse of containers and bags, changing buying habits, reducing the use of

disposable products, and packaging among other ways (USPS, 2000). Source

separation makes collection, recovery and reuse of solid waste easy. Tsiboe and

Marbel (2004) note source separation as a very important factor in achieving source

reduction of solid waste.

2.5.2 Sanitary landfill

Use of sanitary landfills in waste management includes the confining of waste through

compacting and covering with soil. Sanitary landfill is one of the oldest but common

ways of disposal of solid waste that can neither be reclaimed nor reused. CED (2003)

note that sanitary landfills prevent burning of solid waste and help the reclamation of

land for other valuable uses. Landfills can be looked at as open and controlled dumps

and their difference from ordinary dumps is their level of engineering, planning and

management involved (Zerbock, 2003). Dumps are differentiated from landfills because

dumps are characterised by lack of engineering measures, lack of leachate

27

management, non-consideration for landfill gas management, non-registration of users,

no control of tipping fronts and no control of waste composition (Zerbock, 2003).

While there is some criticism for landfills and also that the landfill is the most unlikeable

method of waste management, there is evidence that landfills are a necessary and very

important component of most solid waste management approaches. Kreith (1994)

argues that there are simply no combinations of solid waste management techniques

that do not need land filling for them to work and he adds that landfills are the only solid

waste management technique that is necessary and sufficient among the basic solid

waste management techniques. Some solid wastes cannot be recovered or recycled,

and recycling itself produces residuals and furthermore recyclable wastes eventually

reach points where their intrinsic value is entirely dissipated and these cases justify the

eventual need of land filling (Kreith, 1994). Kreith (1994) further notes that with

improved technology and operation of modern land filling, protection of human health

and the environment can be achieved.

While many authors have concentrated on justifying the need and advantages of

sanitary landfills, little attention has been given to the negative side of sanitary landfills.

Some of the disadvantages of landfills are that, they are costly to construct and maintain

and landfills may pollute ground water through leaching. Furthermore, their location in

terms of land availability in cities is always problematic (Puopiel, 2010:16).

2.5.3 Recycling

Most scholars argue for more use of recycling in the solid waste management equation

and assert that recycling is the most efficient and effective method of solid waste

management. However, many authors ignore the cost element of recycling which limits

its use in both developing and developed nations.

Momoh and Oladebeye (2010) view recycling as an efficacious methodology in reducing

the amount of household waste that enters into dumpsites and landfills. They also add

that recycling provides raw materials for industries. USEPA (1999) also recommended

28

recycling as one of the most effective ways of solid waste management in developing

countries. Recycling turns materials that would otherwise be waste into valuable

resources, yields environmental, financial, and social returns, helps in energy

conservation, pollution reduction, and economic expansion and competitiveness

(Puopiel, 2010 and USEPA, 2009). Kreith (1994) also adds that recycling presents

many advantages including returning of raw materials back to the market by separating

reusable products from municipal solid waste, saves finite resources, and reduces the

need for mining of virgin materials thereby curtailing environmental degradation.

In spite of the support for recycling, many authors ignore the fact that recycling faces

low adoption due to among other factors its inhibiting cost and even developed

countries are not able to successfully do recycling (Puopiel, 2010:17). The United

Kingdom only recycles 11% of its household solid waste; Italy and Spain only recycle 3

%, Netherlands 43%, Denmark 29%, and Austria 50% (Tsiboe and Marbel, 2004).

2.5.4 Composting Composting is the biological decomposition of biodegradable solid waste under

controlled aerobic conditions to a state that is sufficiently stable for handling and

nuisance free storage of waste for agricultural and other uses (UNEP, 2009).

Composting at best is an option suited to contexts of limited resources in developing

countries and its highly adaptable (Puopiel, 2010:17-18). Composting is a low-

technology approach of solid waste reduction and suited for developing countries since

over 50% of solid waste in developing countries is organic material (Zerbock, 2003).

2.5.5 Incineration Incineration is the controlled combustion process for burning combustible solid waste to

gases and reducing to residues of noncombustible substances (CED, 2003). During the

process of incineration moisture in the solid waste gets vaporised and the combustible

elements of the waste are oxidised, carbon dioxide, water vapour, ash, and non-

combustible residues form the end products of the incineration process (CED, 2003).

29

Incineration can reduce the amount of solid waste by 90% and incineration can recover

useful energy in the form of steam or electricity (Kreith, 1994).

The main constraints of incineration are relatively high costs of set up, maintenance and

operation, high degree of sophistication required for safe and economic operation as

well as the tendency to emit carbon dioxide that pollutes the environment (Kreith, 1994;

Puopiel, 2010:18). After looking at the various contemporary methods is solid waste

management documented in literature, literature also uncovers an alternative method

that exists which is the main focus of this study, the integrated solid waste management

approach. This forms the discussion in the next section.

2.6 Integrated solid waste management In spite of talks and efforts by many governments to deal with the problem of solid

waste management, major gaps still exist that are evidenced by many waste related

problems in many countries (UNEP, 2009). While municipalities in many developing

countries spend 20-30% of their budgets in solid waste management 30-60% of solid

waste remains uncollected and less than 50% of the population gets waste collection

services (UNEP, 2009). UNEP (2009) recommends that one of the ways to get around

the problem of solid waste management in developing countries is implementing an

integrated solid waste management system where waste is diverted for materials and

resource recovery and substantial volumes of waste are reduced while recovered

materials can be used to generate income that can fund solid waste management.

Integrated solid waste management systems based on 3R principles of reduce; reuse

and recycle have been piloted with high levels of acceptance and success in Wuxi in

China, Pune in India, and Maseru in Lesotho (Puopiel, 2010:19). With appropriate

segregation and recycling systems in place great amounts of solid waste can be

diverted from landfills and turned into useful resources and it is therefore paramount

that when considering an integrated solid waste management system consideration is

given to the hierarchy of methods which are reduce, recycle, incineration and landfill

(Baud and Schenk, 1994; UNEP, 2009; USEPA, 1999).

30

Integrated solid waste management system recognises that solid waste management

methods cannot be similar or universal across communities but should be tailor made to

the communities served (Kollikkathara et al., 2009; Korfmacher, 1997). Unique factors

across communities like fuel costs, capital costs, waste quantities and composition as

well as socio-cultural attitudes demand that solid waste management modalities be

customised to communities served (Cointreau, 1984). Zuilen (2006) summarises

integrated solid waste management as a “…waste management system that best suits

the society, economy and environment in a given location, a city in most cases”.

Tanskanen (2000) defines integrated solid waste management as the “…selection and

application of suitable techniques, technologies and management programs to achieve

waste management objectives and goals”. The integrated solid waste management

approach views waste management as an equity and public health issue and this

means that all people have a right to a regular waste collection and proper sanitation

(Anschiitz and Van de Klundert, 2000).

Puorideme (2010:8) defines integrated solid waste management as a comprehensive

solid waste model that combines “elements of waste prevention, recycling, composting,

and disposal with active stakeholders’ participation which ensures efficient and

sustainable waste management”. Integrated solid waste management looks at

managing solid waste in ways that protect the health of the humans and the

environment and takes into account an evaluation of local needs (USEPA, 2002).

In their study Mangkoedihardjo et al. (2007:33) note that in order to make waste

management sustainable in low income urban areas the provision of neighborhood

advisory committee (NAC) for solid waste management, which is a key component in

the integrated solid waste management process, should be part of each management

scheme. Integrated solid waste management differs from the conventional approach

towards waste management by seeking stakeholder participation, covering waste

prevention and resource recovery, including interactions with other systems and

31

promoting an integration of different habitat scales (Van de Klundert and Anschutz,

1999). The integrated solid waste management approach to solid waste management is

a multi-faceted approach, which will make technology choices easier and more

sustainable.

Bartone (2000) suggest that the anticipated benefits of an integrated solid waste

management approach include: lower costs, better cost management and cost

recovery, fewer health hazards, less environmental pollution, conservation of natural

resources, better coordination and performance, and improved public participation.

Various scholars look at aspects, sustainability factors, principles and objectives of

integrated solid waste management differently. Rosario and Scheinberg (2004) contend

that sustainability aspects in integrated solid waste management are aspects through

which the existing waste system can be assessed and they include; policy or legal;

institutional and organisational; cultural and social; financial and economic;

technological and technical; and environmental aspects. Van de Klundert and Anschutz

(1999) and Lardinois (1996) view aspects of integrated solid waste management as

technical or operational, environmental, financial, socio-economic and institutional or

administrative and policy or legal. Kollikkathara et al. (2009) argue that the aim of

integrated sustainable solid waste management is “…achieving environmental benefits,

economic optimization and societal acceptability”. For the purpose of this study the

sustainability aspects of the integrated solid waste management system will be social,

environmental, economic and management. The four main principles on a solid waste

management system for Mbare used in this study will then be social acceptability,

environmental sustainability, economic affordability and management effectiveness.

Thus, the integrated solid waste management system that will be recommended for

Mbare will be one that is acceptable to the community, which is economically viable and

brings economic gains to the community, and can easily be managed and has minimal

damage to the environment.

32

In order to realise success in solid waste management it is important that other

stakeholders like NGOs, private and the informal sector be involved in solid waste

management processes. The success of an integrated solid waste management model

in India hinges on the innovative waste management activities that consider the

participation of both local government and non-governmental players (Adarsh, 1996)

and these “innovative practices are location-specific viable options in response to

analyses of the local needs and are successful in ensuring efficient solid waste

management in Indian urban centres particularly Bangalore and Madras” (Puorideme,

2010). From the foregoing review of literate on integrated solid waste management I

propose a model for integrated solid waste management below (Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1: Integrated solid waste management model

Adapted from Bartone (2000) and Puopiel (2010:19).

1. Reduce the amount of solid waste generated

2. Recycle as much materials as possible

4. Incinerate/landfill remaining portion of waste stream

Benefits lower costs better cost

management and cost recovery

fewer health hazards

less environmental pollution

conservation of natural resources

better coordination and performance

improved public participation

Improved public health

Stakeholder Participation

3. Composite biodegradable waste that can be reused in gardens

Sustainability aspects

Social acceptability, environmental sustainability, economic affordability, management effectiveness

33

The model represented schematically above looks at a hierarchy of methods of reduce,

recycle, composting and incineration/landfill with stakeholder participation playing a role

on all methods. The model also presents some of the benefits of integrated solid waste

management as the outcomes. As noted earlier, social acceptability, environmental

sustainability, economic affordability and management effectiveness were noted as key

principles that will guide the establishment of a sustainable integrated solid waste

management system in a low income area like Mbare. This model takes these four

principles as crosscutting issues in the proposed integrated sustainable solid waste

management system. The four sustainability principles have a bearing on the hierarchy

of methods used, the stakeholder participation and the benefits the benefits that will

come out of the integrated solid waste management model proposed in this study.

2.7 Impact of solid waste on human health and environment Poorly managed solid waste affects human health adversely (Mader, 2011:6). Medical

solid waste can cause transmission of infectious diseases including HIV/AIDS and

hepatitis B and C (Ramokate and Basu, 2009:444), and other solid wastes may cause

other infectious diseases like dysentery, enteritis, typhoid fever and cholera, while dust

from the waste causes lung diseases (Holmes, 1984; Taru and Kuvarega, 2005:155).

Solid waste that is not collected or improperly stored or placed in unclosed dumps

encourages the reproduction of flies and rats and these can be vectors of diseases

(Tchobanoglous, et al., 1993). Warm climates that provide conducive environments for

speedy reproduction of disease vectors in most developing countries further compound

the negative health consequences from improperly managed solid waste (Boadi and

Kuitunen, 2005; Korfmacher, 1997).

Solid waste also blocks storm drains leading to the creation of pools of water where

insects breed including malaria carrying mosquitoes, and if the contaminated water is

used by humans it will cause diseases (Galishoff, 1998). Environmental impacts of

uncollected waste include soil, water and air pollution (Mader, 2011:6). Decomposing

organic matter accounts for 3.6% of methane and other green house gas emissions in

34

the world (Kollikkathara et al., 2009), while uncontrolled dumps leach into soil

contaminating both surface and ground water (Mader, 201:6).

Rapid urbanisation brings with it increased consumption levels and increased

generation of solid waste and use of toxic materials and raw materials that lead to

deletion of natural resources and environmental degradation (Clagget, et al., 1998,

Maseva, 2005; and Kollikkathara et al., 2009).

2.8 Challenges in solid waste management Solid waste management systems in developing countries in general face many

problems that include low collection coverage, irregular, inconsistent and inadequate,

collection services, crude open dumping, and burning without air and water pollution

control (Ogawa, 2005; Manyanhaire et al., 2009:129; Masocha and Tevera, 2003;

Zurbrügg, 2002). The problems of solid waste management in developing countries can

be grouped into technical, institutional, financial and social constraints (Ogawa, 2005).

What follows is a brief discussion of these problems.

2.8.1 Human resources challenges

Ogawa (2005) contends that in developing countries there are inadequate human

resources at national and local levels with relevant technical expertise required for solid

waste management, planning and operations. He adds that most of the personnel

responsible for solid waste management have limited technical know-how and little

engineering and management training relevant for the effective management of a solid

waste system. UNEP (2007:4) confirms this view by noting that problems in waste

management systems in developing countries are also caused by extremely weak

technical and human capacity within the government sector. Chenje (2000); Komani

(2008), LEAP (2008); Rathana (2009) and Segosebe and Van der Post (1991), all

attribute lack of appropriate human resources in terms of capacity and numbers as one

of the key problems in solid waste management in developing countries.

35

2.8.2 Financial challenges

Solid waste management is often given low attention by governments except in capital

cities or in low density high income areas (Ogawa, 2005; Puopiel, 2010). The effects of

inadequate waste disposal systems impact the poor more than the rich. Throughout the

cities it is the urban poor that suffer most from the life-threatening conditions deriving

from deficient solid waste management, as municipal authorities tend to allocate their

limited financial resources to the richer areas of higher tax yields where citizens with

more political power reside. The challenge for poor cities is on how to extend waste

disposal services to the urban poor (Hope and Lekorwe, 1999; and Zurbrügg, 2002).

Ogawa (2005) suggests that local governments may supplement their financial

resources for waste management through collection of user charges. However, he also

quickly points out that in poorer developing countries the ability of many to pay for waste

management service may be limited.

2.8.3 Institutional challenges

Generally in developing countries several agencies at a national level are usually

involved in solid waste management but their efforts are rarely coordinated properly

leading to duplication of efforts and lack of extension of services to areas of most dire

need (Buenrostro and Bocco, 2003; Ogawa, 2005; Zurbrügg, 2009: Mangizo, 2010).

Arlosoroff (1991) confirms these views by pointing out that lack of proper governance

structures and policy frameworks also create problems in effective solid waste

management in developing countries. Policy and legal frameworks as well as

institutional and organisational capacity are key factors in the sustainability of a solid

waste management system and weaknesses in these aspects create huge challenges

for solid waste management in developing countries (Klundert and Anschutz, 1999;

Kollikkathara et al., 2009; Rosario and Scheinberg, 2004; Van de Lardinois, 1996).

2.9 Summary This chapter looked at various literatures on solid waste. Conceptual issues on waste

and solid waste were explored followed by a discussion on solid waste management

processes, early solid waste management practices, contemporary solid waste

36

management practices and a discussion on integrated solid waste management.

Definitions of solid waste and types of solid waste were explored. A solid waste

management system was seen as including waste generation; storage; collection;

transfer and transportation; reduce, reuse, recycling and recovery; and disposal

processes(Dev, 2007 and Manyanhaire et al., 2009).

The effects of poor solid waste management on human health and the environment

were reviewed. Uncollected solid waste leads to the multiplication of disease vectors

and spread of diseases like cholera. Uncollected waste also cause unsightly scenes

and may contaminate water bodies. The chapter closed by looking at key challenges in

solid waste management in developing countries. Some of the key challenges

discussed include human resources, financial, and institutional challenges that

municipalities in developing countries face when managing solid waste.

37

CHAPTER 3 : POLICY FRAMEWORK ON WASTE MANAGEMENT IN ZIMBABWE 3.1 Introduction This chapter explores and analyses the main policies, laws and by-laws that exist in

Zimbabwe and Harare that are relevant to waste management. Brief discussions on the

motivation of the origin of the laws and policies were done followed by an analysis of

some of the gaps that exist within the policies and laws. The major gaps that are found

in the current regime of policies and laws on waste management in Zimbabwe are lack

of enforcement and lack of public awareness on the existence of these policies and

laws. Funding is also one of the factors that limit enforcement of these laws and

policies.

Maseva (2005:13) defined policy broadly as action outlining goals, aims and ideals of an

organisation in pursuit of its ends. Maseva (2005:13) looks at policy as a framework of

guidelines packaged in a document in order to direct how waste management activities

should be executed. For the purposes of this study I will define policy as a document

drafted by a government or local authority outlining the goals, aims, ideals, activities and

responsibilities pertaining to waste management in a given municipality, suburb, town,

or country. Legislation on the other hand can be defined as laws or set of rules

applicable in a country (Maseva, 2005:13) and exist in the form of Acts passed by

parliament and signed off by a country’s President into law. Policies are not legally

binding and organisations formulating them may choose which provisions to follow and

which ones not to follow whereas, Acts of parliament have legal force and have to be

followed. This chapter begins by looking at waste management policies in Zimbabwe,

then some of the key pieces of legislation that govern waste management in the

country. A brief look at by-laws on waste management in the city of Harare will conclude

the chapter.

3.2 Waste management policies in Zimbabwe Zimbabwe as a country does not have a national level waste management policy and

this has been widely criticised as the main driver of the waste management crisis in

that country (Maseva, 2005:13 and Government of Zimbabwe, 2004).The fact that

38

there is absence in the country of policy directives from the central government

demanding local authorities to implement waste management in a particular way leaves

local authorities with leeway to implement waste management programmes that suit

them rather than promote environmental integrity and the health of the residents.

Nevertheless, a plethora of policy documents that recognise the significance of

developing workable and efficient waste management systems for the protection of

human and environmental health do exist and the discussion that follows will touch on

these policies. Practical Action Southern Africa (2006:13) indentified the following

policies as having a bearing on waste management in Zimbabwe:

Environmental Impact Assessment Policy (1994);

National Sustainable Development Strategy (2004);

Draft Waste Management Strategy (2006);

Science and Technology Policy (2002); and the

Draft National Environmental Policy (2003).

The next sections analyses each of these policy documents in detail.

3.2.1 The Environmental Impact Assessment Policy of 1994 This policy, developed in 1994, was inspired by proceedings of United Nations

Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) done in 1992 in Rio de

Jeneioro. The 17th principle of the Rio Declaration states that:

“Environmental impact assessment as a national instrument shall be undertaken for

proposed activities that are likely to have a significance adverse impact on the

environment and are subject to the decision of a competent notional authority” (UN,

1992:7).

The EIA sets out that development projects that fall in the category of prescribed

activities do go through the EIA process where their benefits and costs are measured

and evaluated to enable mitigation strategies to be built in their implementation from the

onset. Under the EIA, waste management infrastructure like dumps and incinerators are

required to be subjected to EIA before their implementation.

39

UN (1992) notes the following activities as prescribed activities in the EIA policy:

Toxic and hazardous waste: incineration plants, offsite recovery plants, offsite

waste water treatment plants landfills, and offsite storage facilities;

Municipal solid waste: incineration, composting and recovery and recycling

plants, landfill facilities; and

Municipal sewage: treatment plants, outfalls of aquatic systems, and effluent

water irrigation schemes (Maseva 2005: 14).

The EIA policy package has a comprehensive set of guidelines on how EIA studies

should be conducted. Volumes 8 and 10 of the guidelines for example, deal with urban

infrastructure and waste management respectively. Volume 8 places a lot of emphasis

on the following two key issues when conducting EIA for urban waste management

infrastructures:

Waste handling, storage and treatment for both solid and waterborne waste; and

Influx of solid waste and waste water volumes during the inception and

operational stages of the project (Government of Zimbabwe, 1994).

Volume 10 on the other hand provides a long checklist of issues to pay attention to

during planning, construction and operational stages of a waste management facility

(Government of Zimbabwe, 1994). This volume directly addresses issues related to

environmental impacts arising from waste management and how they can be mitigated.

The EIA policy now carries legal force since its enactment into an Act of parliament in

2002. Prior to 2002 it carried no legal force and hence municipalities and private sector

practitioners in waste management were implementing waste management facilities

without applying precautionary procedures stipulated by this policy (Practical Action

Southern Africa, 2006:16).

3.2.2 The National Sustainable Development Strategy of 2004 This policy was motivated by proceeding of the Johannesburg 2002 World Summit on

Sustainable Development. Following these proceedings the Ministry of Environment

40

and Tourism set up a National Sustainable Development Committee which then worked

to draft this policy. The committee’s mandate was to ensure that actions noted in the

Agenda 21 are implemented in Zimbabwe and the committee consists of government

representatives, ministries, departments, representatives of industry, NGOs, and civil

society (Government of Zimbabwe, 2004).

The National Sustainable Development Strategy (NSDS) summarises the various

actions the country is implementing to fulfill its pronouncements and commitments made

at the 1992 Rio Deceleration. The policy also represents a national programme of action

for each of the three pillars of sustainable development namely, the social,

environmental and economic pillars, with clear indicators to measure progress. The

NSDS aptly notes that the urban environment is threatened by poverty and highlights

the close link between poverty and environmental degradation (Maseve, 2005:15 and

Practical Action Southern Africa, 2006:18).

The NSDS notes poor domestic and hazardous industrial waste management as key

problems in urban areas and recommends the adoption of cleaner production

technologies as the only viable solution to tackle the problem of industrial waste

management. It also recommends the need to promote safe disposal of waste and

chemicals through the provision of support in construction and rehabilitation of waste

disposal systems (Government of Zimbabwe, 2004:13 and Maseva, 2005:15).

Table 3.1 below summarises the action plan, indicators and division of responsibilities

related to the NSDS policy.

41

Table 3.1: Action plan for waste disposal systems rehabilitation Action Indicators Responsibility

Development of guidelines for

waste management

Putting in place by end of 2006 of

Waste management guidelines

and policy.

Ministry of Environment and

Tourism(MET), Ministry of local

Government, Zimbabwe National

Water Authority (ZINWA),

Department of Water

Lobby and advocacy on

development of waste

management policy

Advocacy plan designed by end

of 2004

MET, local authorities, civil

society

Integration into scientific waste

management approaches of

researched and documented

waste management good

practices.

Documenting and publishing of

best case management

ZINWA, Department of Natural

Resources( DNR)

Sources: Government of Zimbabwe (2004:13) and Maseva(2005:15).

While the NSDS policy document clearly states that poor waste management practices

are a threat, there is need to sell its vision by widely publicising it and secure donor and

other funding to fully implement its action plans (Practical Action Southern Africa, 2006).

3.2.3 The Draft Strategic Document on Waste Management of 2004 The Draft Strategic Document on Waste Management was drafted in 2004 and sets out

a programme code named “A Clean Environment Everyone’s Duty” which is being

spearheaded by a taskforce comprising representatives from the health department of

the City of Harare, MET and Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries (CZI) (Government

of Zimbabwe, 2004).

The overall objective of this ambitious programme is to restore Zimbabwe’s cities to

their former status of cleanliness. The programme also identifies the problem of

vagrants and street kids as one of the major challenges Zimbabwe cities face in their

pursuit of adequate waste management systems (Maseva, 2005:16).

42

Defective sewer systems; improper waste disposal practices; dumping; littering; high

numbers of vagrants and street kids; and uncontrolled vending are the key issues the

programme identified that need urgent resolution (Government of Zimbabwe, 2004).

Maseva (2005:16) contends that albeit responsibilities for this ambitious programme are

shared among various institutions, little progress has been done yet on a programme

that was initially intended to start in March 2004.

3.2.4 The Science and Technology Policy of 2002 The Science and Technology Policy was launched in 2002 and its main objective is

promotion of self-reliance in national science and technology including having

environmentally sustainable projects and good health systems (Government of

Zimbabwe, 2002).

The policy notes that water, air and general environmental pollution are increasing

problems in Zimbabwe that need urgent action and points to industrial waste as one of

the greatest problems adversely affecting the environment. The policy just as the NSDS

recommends the adoption of cleaner production technologies as the panacea to

industrial waste challenges (Practical Action Southern Africa, 2006:18).

3.2.5 The Draft National Environmental Policy of 2003 This policy focuses on preserving the broad spectrum of biodiversity in order to sustain

the ability of natural resources to meet the basic needs of the people, enhance food

security, raise economic growth, reduce poverty and uplift the welfare of the people of

Zimbabwe. Its main goal is to avoid irreversible damage to the environment so as to

maintain essential environmental processes to continue to work to the benefit of the

people. The policy also recognises the fact that while economic development is

important it also brings with it negative impacts on the environment. The policy notes

also the environment and poverty nexus and clearly illustrate that poverty is a threat to

environmental quality as the poor engage in environmentally damaging activities in their

pursuit of better livelihoods (Government of Zimbabwe, 2003).

43

The policy focuses on strengthening of livelihoods of the poor by preventing, mitigation

and remedying negative impacts on their right to a clean, healthy and productive

environment (Maseva, 2005:16 and Practical Action Southern Africa, 2006:18). The

policy like the Environmental Management Act places emphasis on a healthy

environment as a right of every citizen and calls for the adoption of sustainable

integrated waste managed strategies.

3.2.6 Gaps and challenges of national policies The various policies discussed above are national and are supposed to give guidance

to stakeholders and local authorities on waste management. However their major

weaknesses and challenges as noted by Maseva (2005:17) and Practical Action

Southern Africa (2006:18) include that:

the policies fall short of providing practical steps needed to achieve their desired

goals;

funding to implement steps outlined in the policies is difficult to get given the

economic challenges faced by local authorities and country at large;

the policies largely fail to consider communities as a resource as they ignore

communities’ potential role in the waste management;

the policies do not take the interests of small community enterprises into

consideration as they are biased more towards industrial development;

there have been poor and inadequate communication of the policies to local

authorities, hence lack of programmes of action geared at raising public

awareness among residents on the existence of these policies; and

there is no legal obligation on the part of local authorities to adhere to of these

policies.

3.3 National legislation on waste management in Zimbabwe Zimbabwe has a comprehensive legislative framework for dealing with waste

management and environmental pollution. Several Acts exist and the administration of

these Acts is spread across three ministries with the MET taking the overall

accountability and responsibility for the administration of these Acts. To add to the Acts

44

most of the city councils do have by-laws used to regulate waste management activities

done in these towns and cities. A discussion of the by-laws used in Harare was done as

this study focuses on Mbare, a township in Harare.

The following are the Acts that deal with waste management which this section will

analyse:

The Environmental Management Act (Chapter 20:27);

The Urban Councils Act (Chapter 29:15);

The Rural District Councils Act (Chapter 29:13);

The Regional Town and Country Planning Act (Chapter 29:12);

The Water Act (Chapter 20:22); and

The Public Health Act (Chapter 15:09) (Practical Action Southern Africa, 2006).

The next section will focus on each of the Acts looking at their key aspects and their

strengths and weaknesses as legislation governing waste management.

3.3.1 The Environmental Management Act (EMA) (Chapter 20:27) of 2002 This piece of legislation was enacted in 2002 and it provides for sustainable

management of natural resources, protection of the environment and prevention of

pollution and environmental degradation (Parliament of Zimbabwe, 2002). EMA is the

principal law governing waste management in Zimbabwe and provides for the

preparation of the National Environmental Plans and other plans.

Section 4 of EMA provides for environmental rights and principles that have strong

bearing on waste management. The environmental rights that accrue to every person

stipulated in this law include the following:

The right to live in a clean environment that is not harmful to peoples’ health;

Equal access to environmental information;

Right to protect the environment for the benefit of present and future generations;

and

Right for everyone to participate in the implementation of legislation and policies

that prevent pollution, environmental degradation and promote sustainable

45

management and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic

and social development (ZELA, 2003:3 and Parliament of Zimbabwe, 2002).

EMA also stipulates principles of environmental management that are pivotal in waste

management and Maseva (2005:18) contends that EMA embraces the polluter-pays

principles that are widely used as tools for environmental management globally. While

EMA stipulates clear rights that every person has with regards to a safe environment to

human health, these rights are however not enshrined in the country’s supreme law, the

Constitution of Zimbabwe (Maseva, 2005:18-9 and ZELA, 2003:3).

Section 9 of EMA read with Section 10(1) (b) (ii), (vii), (viii), (xii), (xiii) and (xiv) provides

for the setting up of a Environmental Management Agency whose functions and powers

are as follows:

To formulate quality standards on air, water, soil, noise, vibration, radiation and

waste management;

To assist and participate in any matters concerning the management of the

environment, and in particular;

To regulate and monitor the collection, disposal, treatment and recycling of

waste;

To regulate and monitor the management and utilisation of ecologically fragile

ecosystems;

To make model by-laws to establish measures for the management of the

environment within the jurisdiction of the local authorities;

To undertake any works deemed necessary or desirable by councils for the

protection and management of the environment;

To serve written orders on any suspected breaches of the Act and/or adopt such

measures specified in the orders to protect the environment;

To carry out periodic environmental audits of projects including projects whose

implementation started before this Act in order to ensure the projects

implementation complies with the requirements of this Act (Maseva, 2005;

Parliament of Zimbabwe, 2002 and ZELA, 2003:12).

46

The Act provides for a clear framework for monitoring waste management and

empowers the staff and inspectors of Environmental Management Agency to enter

premises or serve written orders for the protection of the environment. The Act also

provides for ministerial orders to be given for the purpose of removing or disposing of

waste from premises (Parliament of Zimbabwe, 2002).

A key aspect of EMA pertaining to waste management lies in the Act’s key provisions

for the formulation of waste standards (section 69 (1), prohibition against discharge of

wastes (section 70), minimisation of waste through treatment, reclamation and recycling

(Section 70 (3)), classification of hazardous waste (section 72 (1-2)); and prohibition

against littering covered in (section 83 (1-4)) (Parliament of Zimbabwe, 2002).

Section 72 of the EMA caters for the control of imports/exports of toxic and hazardous

chemicals, distribution, storage, transportation and handling of chemicals and materials

in line with the Bamako Convention which banished the trans-boundary and

transnational movement of waste (Maseva, 2005:20-1).

One of the key weaknesses of the Act as mentioned earlier is the lack of enshrinement

in the Constitution of Zimbabwe of the environmental rights that accrue to all persons as

stipulated in the Act. Furthermore, weak implementation of the Act as noted earlier is a

major concern.

Maseva (2005:21) noted that one of the key weaknesses of the ACT was its failure to

clearly stipulate waste management standards that have to be adopted. Even though

some useful provisions do exist in the Act, the overall enforcement of the Act is still very

weak.

Section 70(4) of the Act stipulates fines for illegal disposal of waste and pollution in

monetary terms(Parliament of Zimbabwe, 2002) and with the hyperinflationary history of

the country’s currency some of the fines that had been charged in the past had little

47

monetary value and hence failed to act as deterrents to the would-be polluters (Maseva,

2005:21).

Finally, the Act also leaves out important aspects of waste management such as the

sorting and separation of waste at source. From Chapter 2 we noted that separation of

waste at source helps in reduction in the amount of waste disposed of at landfills, hence

ensuring that landfills last longer; and creates opportunities for income generation

through the recovery and sale of paper and other non-biodegradable material.

3.3.2 Rural District Councils Act (Chapter 29:13) of 1988 Enacted in 1988, the Rural District Councils Act gives mandate to rural district councils

to regulate activities in their jurisdiction areas. Section 88 of the Act empowers rural

district councils to make and enforce by-laws covering among other issues sewerage,

effluent, killing of insects and vermin, and refuse and vegetation removal (Parliament of

Zimbabwe, 1988).

The Second Schedule, Part VII, of the Act specifies the making of the by-laws on the

following related to waste management: removal and disposal of human waste, effluent,

water waste, and decaying and unhealthy matter (Parliament of Zimbabwe, 1988).

The Second Schedule also provides for provisions on the following:

The specifications of containers used by owners of premises for refuse collection

purposes and places they should be located;

Regulation of places where the containers above should be placed for collection;

and

The regulation of arrangements and placing of refuse collection facilities and

affluent conveyance facilities in premises.

Section 75 of this Act provides for councils to levy or charge for refuse removal to

owners of properties, stands, lots or premises whose refuse is collected. Maseva

(2005:21-2) notes the strength of this Act is that it does not mention the monetary value

48

of the charges; hence it provides room for councils to make adjustments to the charges

whenever they are uneconomic. However, a possible weakness of this provision in the

Act is that the charges are not given as percentages of the costs of the refuse collection

and at times rural councils charge very low amounts for refuse collection or abuse this

provision by overcharging.

Maseva (2005:22) also observed that the money levied for refuse collection is often not

ploughed back to support refuse collection but used for other purposes unrelated to

refuse collection. He recommends that the Act needs to be amended and provisions for

ensuring that this money charged is ploughed back to refuse collection to make the

refuse collection system self sustainable and this could greatly improve the waste

management services delivery in rural councils.

3.3.3 The Urban Councils Act (Chapter 29:15) of 1997 This Act, first enacted in 1997, bears many similarities with the Rural District Councils

Act and their major difference is that the former is for urban areas and the latter is for

rural areas.

Section 218 (b) of this Act like Section 75 of the Rural District Councils Act provides for

urban councils to levy fees for refuse collection and the Act does not stipulate the

amount to be levied. The major difference however is that under this Act urban councils

have to put their fees for the year in their annual budgets that have to be approved by

the resident associations and then the Minister of local government and this maybe be a

problem for urban councils as their proposed fees may be rejected by residents or fail to

be approved by the Minister (Parliament of Zimbabwe, 1997 and Maseva, 2005:22).

The Act like the Rural District Councils Act is also silent about how the money charged

for refuse collections should be used and this money is often not ploughed back to

refuse collection services.

49

The Third schedule of the Act mandates the urban council to put in place by-laws for

sewerage, sanitary fittings, and effluent and refuse removal, cleansing of private

sewers, streets and yards as well as crops, vegetation, rubbish and waste material

(Parliament of Zimbabwe, 1997).

The Urban Councils Act just like the Rural District Councils Act gives the councils power

to provide and operate services for removing and treating trade and other effluent,

refuse and human waste for the council area and to make use of the service

compulsory. These provisions ensure that councils provide the required waste

management services in their areas of jurisdiction (Maseva, 2005:23-4).

The following are the major gaps and weaknesses found in the Urban Councils and

Rural district Acts:

Both Acts are silent on important integrated sustainable waste management

practices like 3Rs (reduce, recycle and reuse);

Both Acts are silent on what councils should do with the waste they collect;

Both Acts are silent on what should be done if councils fail to put waste

management systems in place or fail to collect refuse as is the case with most

councils in Zimbabwe at present;

Both Acts do not have provisions requiring that money levied for refuse collection

services be ploughed back to waste management systems for them to be self

sustainable

3.3.4 Regional, Town And Country Planning Act (Chapter 29:12) of 1976 The Regional, Town and Country Planning Act provides for planning and controlling of

the development at a local level. It outlines planning methods and tools for the

management of physical environment, public health, welfare including residents’ safety.

It provides for regional, master and local plans and local councils are empowered to

acquire land for development purposes in the Act (Parliament of Zimbabwe, 1976).

However, this Act is surprisingly silent on the issue of waste management and it does

not even mention anything to do with design and selection of waste disposal sites

50

notwithstanding that the planning stages of site selection and design of waste disposal

facilities determine the impact that the facilities will have on the environment and on

public health (Maseva, 2005:24).

3.3.5 Water Act (Chapter 20:24) of 1998 The Water Act addresses the issue of waste management in Section 68 (1) where it

prohibits the discharge or disposal of any organic and inorganic matter into any surface

or groundwater, either directly or indirectly so as to cause pollution of the water

(Parliament of Zimbabwe, 1998). This is important, as it ensures that whoever disposes

of waste, including local authorities, should do so in a manner that does not cause

pollution to surface and groundwater resources. Local authorities are required to

construct and manage waste disposal sites so as to avoid causing pollution. The Act

requires polluters to pay the costs of cleaning up polluted water resources. Some local

authorities in the country have already been fined for contravening sections of this Act;

while others have pending court cases (Practical Action Southern Africa, 2006:17).

3.3.6 The Public Health Act (Chapter 15:09) of 1924 This Act, a remnant of the colonial era, was first enacted in 1924 and subsequently

amended many times after independence. Section 68 (1) (b), of the Act provides that

the Minister of Health and Child Welfare should regulate the construction of dwellings,

sanitary conveniences, stables, cattle kraals, pig sties, ostrich pens, dipping tanks,

factories or other works likely to engender risk of harmful pollution of water supplies

(Parliament of Zimbabwe, 1924).The Act addresses the issue of waste coming from

livestock. The Act also prohibits nuisances potentially hazardous to human health.

Section 82 of the Act mentions that:

“No person shall cause a nuisance or shall suffer to exist on any land owned or

occupied by him, or of which he is in charge, any nuisance or other condition that is

likely to be dangerous or injurious to health.” The word nuisance is elucidated in

Section 85 paragraphing (e) as: “Any accumulation or deposit of refuse, offal, manure,

or other matter whatsoever which is injurious or dangerous to health”.

51

The Act has a couple of weakness. Firstly, the Act prohibits people from causing

nuisances on land and places they own and occupy but is silent on land or places

people do not own, and this may be a grey area that may be interpreted to mean that

the Act does not cover for people causing nuisances on land and places they do not

own (Practical Action Southern Africa, 2006:17).

Furthermore, Section 87 and 88 of the Act stipulates fines for failure to comply with a

notice to remove nuisances as $100 and $20 Zimbabwean dollars. The Zimbabwean

currency is valueless at present and such ridiculous fines will certainly not deter would-

be offenders. Pegging such finds in the US dollar will help deter would be offenders.

3.3.7 Harare municipality by-laws on waste management Section 227(1) of the Urban Councils Act mandates local municipalities to make their

own by-laws to help them oparationalise the main national Acts within their areas of

jurisdiction. By-laws are formulated out of existing national laws (Practical Action

Southern Africa, 2006:19).

Maseva (2005:28) contends that the city of Harare has a comprehensive set of by laws

covering virtually all urban functions and activities and city’s by-laws on waste

management date back to 1948, during the colonial era. The by-laws on waste

management together with the Anti-litter by-laws of 1981 are the two most important

sets of by-laws on related to waste management currently in use in Harare. The Control

of Vegetation and Waste by-laws of 1982 complement these main waste management

by-laws.

The set of by-laws used in Harare has provisions on the following:

Only the council or its contractors have the responsibility for removing all

domestic waste from premises(City of Harare, 1979);

Council may demand that the owner of a premise removes all domestic waste

and deposit it at a waste disposal site(City of Harare, 1979);

52

Council supplies standard waste receptacle to residents(City of Harare, 198a);

Domestic waste is collected at least once a week(City of Harare, 1981a);

No person shall deposit waste on any vacant land, public place or premises other

than waste- disposal site(City of Harare, 1981b);

Access to waste is restricted once the waste is deposited at disposal sites (City

of Harare, 1981b).

3.3.8 Gaps between legislative requirements and practice Maseva (2005:25-26) and Practical Action Southern Africa (2006:18) note that

Zimbabwe as a country has comprehensive laws that can ensure sustainable waste

management and that the city of Harare does have relevant by-laws, but waste

management remains a major problem. The main weaknesses in the laws governing

waste management include:

Lack of enforcement of otherwise good laws that are capable of effectively

dealing with the waste management problem;

Lack of public awareness on the existence of the laws and by-laws on solid

waste management; and

Gaps in provisions within the laws that limit obligations on enforcement and these

necessitate the need to amend some of the key laws on waste management.

3.4 Summary

This chapter explored the various policies and laws Zimbabwe has on waste

management. While the country has a comprehensive set of laws and policies on waste

management, the country continues to face significant waste management problems.

Table 3 below presents a summary of the gaps and shortcomings in polices and laws

that govern waste management discussed in this chapter and in Chapter 2.

53

Table 3.2: Summary of shortcomings of policies and laws on waste management Main policies and laws Shortcomings revealed in literature review Other shortcomings indentified

Environmental Impact

Assessment Policy

National Sustainable

Development Strategy

Draft Waste

Management Strategy

Science and

Technology Policy

Draft National

Environmental Policy

The Environmental

Management Act

(Chapter 20:27)

The Urban Councils Act

(Chapter 29:15)

The Rural District

Councils Act (Chapter

29:13)

The Regional Town and

Country Planning Act

(Chapter 29:12)

The Water Act (Chapter

20:22)

The Public Health Act

(Chapter 15:09)

Lack of clear policy direction on

recovery and recycling and leaving

these to scavengers than

instutionalising recovery and recycling

(Fudery, 1990).

Policies looking at waste as a problem

to be dealt with through disposal and

without paying attention to preventive

and waste reduction strategies (Buclet,

2002).

Recovery and stakeholder participation

not regarded in policies (Mader, 2011).

Policies viewing waste as an

engineering problem to be addressed

by technologically heavy solutions

(Buclet, 2002).

Waste problem looked at in similar

ways irrespective of local context

(Mader, 2011: Kollikkathara et al.,

2009: Korfmacher, 1997)

Poor policy governance (Arlosorff,

1991 and Van de Klundert and

Anschutz, 1999).

Policies silent on source separation, a

very important factor in source

reduction of solid waste (Tsiboe and

Marbel, 2004).

Policies do not mention composting, a

low-cost technology suited to

developing countries (Zerbock, 2003).

Policies falling short of

providing practical steps

needed to achieve their

desired goals.

Funding to implement steps

outlined in the policies is

difficult to get given the

economic challenges faced

by local authorities and

country at large.

Policies largely fail to

consider communities as a

resource as they ignore

communities’ potential role in

the waste management.

Policies do not take the

interests of small community

enterprises into consideration

as they are biased more

towards industrial

development.

Poor and inadequate

communication of national

policies to local authorities,

hence lack of programmes of

action geared at raising public

awareness among residents

on the existence of these

policies.

Lack of legal obligation on the

part of local authorities to

adhere to of policies.

Lack of enforcement of laws.

Lack of public awareness on

54

Policies do not address energy

recovery from incineration (Kreith,

1994).

Policies silent on implementation of

integrated solid waste management

(UNEP, 2009).

Policies do not address the mismatch

between big waste management

budgets and the low level of waste

collection services (UNEP, 2009).

Policies and laws failing to adequately

address waste management as an

equity and public health issue

(Anschiitz and Van de Klundert, 2000).

Policies do not adequately address the

evaluation of local needs (USEPA,

2002).

Policies do not clearly spell out the

need for neighborhood advisory

committees for solid waste

management and stakeholder

participation (Mangkoedihardjo, 2007).

Policies not addressing the issue of

lack of appropriately skilled waste

management personnel (Chenje, 2000:

LEAP, 2008: Ogawa, 2005).

Policies not addressing coordination

problems at both local and national

level (Buenrostro and Bocco, 2003:

Ogawa, 2005: Mangizo, 2010).

the existence of the laws and

by-laws on solid waste

management.

Gaps in provisions within the

laws that limit obligations on

enforcement.

55

CHAPTER 4 : RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DATA ANALYSIS 4.1 Introduction

Chapter 2 and 3 looked at literature review and policy analysis with regards to solid

waste management respectively. Chapter 2 noted that solid waste management was a

growing problem in most towns and cities in developing countries and that most of the

approaches used in managing solid waste were unsustainable leading to many

challenges and adverse affects on human health and the environment. The integrated

sustainable waste management approach was put forward as a viable waste

management strategy in low income areas in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 looked at the

policies and laws that have a bearing on solid waste management in Zimbabwe. It was

noted that Zimbabwe has no clear national waste management policy and there are

major schisms between the content of existing policy documents and practice.

This chapter will present a discussion on empirical findings regarding Mbare’s solid

waste management. This chapter will look at waste management and waste profile for

Harare and Mbare; and waste management strategies for Mbare residents based on

empirical study results.

4.2 Waste management and waste profile in Harare and the Mbare neighborhood Understanding of the components of solid waste in a community is important as was

noted in Chapter 2, as the composition of solid waste greatly influences proposed waste

management methods (Puopiel, 2010). This section summarises a discussion on

findings regarding the main components of solid waste of Harare city and Mbare. A

comparison of waste composition is also done which shows that there are some

differences in waste composition for the Harare city and Mbare Township. However, the

waste management system used in Mbare Township mirrors that used in Harare city as

the city’s waste management approach is similar across townships.

56

4.2.1.1 Solid waste management in Harare and Mbare Harare municipality uses the same approach to solid waste management in the whole

city in spite of peculiarities in the waste composition of different suburbs in the city. The

use of similar or universal solid waste management methods across communities

makes the solid waste management processes unsustainable as noted in literature

review, Chapter 2, where Cointreau (1984), Kollikkathara et al. (2009), Korfmacher

(1997), and Zuilen (2006) asserted that unique factors across residential areas like fuel

costs, waste quantities, waste compositions, capital costs and social-economic attitudes

require that solid waste management approaches be customised to local conditions to

ensure sustainability and efficaciousness of the waste management methods.

Based on review of internal documents from the city’s waste department, observations

and the household survey, the current waste management approach used in Mbare can

be described as a mix of the early solid waste management approach noted in Chapter

2 which focused on the limited scope of storage, collection and disposal (Gotoh, 1989)

and contemporary approaches that included sanitary landfills, composting, recycling

and incineration (Denison and Ruston, 1990). The approach used in Harare and Mbare

is where solid waste generated by households is temporarily collected into receptacles,

skip bins or dumped on the roadside and occasionally refuse trucks come to collect the

waste for final disposal at two “landfill” disposal sites in Harare, Pomona and Golden

Quarry. Waste disposal at these “landfill” sites is done using the principles of “spread

and compacting” (City of Harare Department of Waste Management, 2011:14). It is also

important to note that the Pomona and Golden Query sites, though they are called

landfills in Zimbabwe, they do not meet engineering standards for landfills hence, the

use of “landfills” when referring to them in this dissertation.

The approach to waste management in Mbare has a lot of characteristics noted in

Chapter 2 as resembling early solid waste management practices. Solid waste is

viewed as a problem to be dealt with through disposal while little attention is given to

preventive strategies to reduce waste (Buclet, 2002); recovery and stakeholder

57

participation are not given attention (Mader, 2011); the authorities still view waste as an

engineering challenge requiring technologically heavy solutions and their view at the

waste problem is similar in all suburbs regardless of local context (Buclet, 2002 and

Mader, 2011). Dumping solid waste on land, pits, in water, burying waste underground

and incineration are some disposal methods of early solid waste management practices

according to Tchobanolglous et al. (1993) noted in Chapter 2, and these methods are

used in the Mbare solid waste management system. Dumping of waste in gutters,

drains, by the roadside and illegal sites (Oladebeye, 2010) are early waste disposal

methods noted in Chapter 2, which are also evident in Mbare.

Elements of contemporary methods noted in Chapter 2 like source reduction (Denison

and Ruston, 1990: Kreith, 1994; Puopiel, 2010; USPS, 2000; and Tsiboe and Marbel

2004); sanitary landfill (CED, 2003; and Zebock, 2003); recycling ( Momoh and

Oladebeye, 2010; and USEPA, 1999); composting ( UNEP, 2009; Puopiel, 2010; and

Zerbock, 203); and incineration (CED, 2003; Kreith, 1994) are also evident in the

Mbare solid waste management system. The next section is built on the foregoing

discussion on methods of solid waste disposal and handling and looks at findings with

regard to the elements of the Mbare solid waste management system

4.2.1.2 Mbare’s Solid waste management system

As noted in Chapter 2, a solid waste management system may include the following

elements: generation, source separation, storage, collection, transportation and

transfer, processing, recovery and disposal (Dev, 2007; Manyanhaire et al., 2009 and

Tchobanoglous et al., 1993). From the study findings, the Mbare waste management

system has all these elements that are found in various literatures but the emphasis of

these elements vary. The Mbare solid waste management system as noted in the

section above leans more towards the early approach to solid waste management

though with some elements of contemporary and integrated sustainable solid waste

practices like source reduction, separation, recycling albeit at a very low scale. Figure

4.9 is the author’s schematic representation of the Mbare solid waste management

system based on research findings.

58

From the study findings the Mbare solid waste management system like revealed with

the Sakuva Township solid waste management system by Manyanhaire et al., (2009)

has two streams: the legal and the illegal. The legal stream is where waste is stored in

receptacles and then transferred and transported to legal landfill sites by the municipal

workers. The legal stream also includes activities by private players sanctioned by the

city authorities like clean up campaigns by NGOs and volunteers and collection of waste

by private companies that do recycling.

The illegal stream on the other hand is mainly caused by the inadequacy of services

provided by the municipality which sees huge waste accumulations in residential areas

and open spaces. The illegal stream accounts for all the waste that is not collected by

the municipal workers or private companies. Some of the waste is dumped by the street

side, some buried underground, and some is deposited in Mkuwisi River, while some is

just dumped at open spaces and in alleys. The Mbare solid waste management system

has the following elements: generation, storage, source separation, reuse/recycling,

collection, transportation, disposal and recovery.

Solid waste collected in Mbare by the municipality is disposed of at the Pomona

“landfill”. The “landfills” in Harare do not meet the engineering standards of landfills as

they face problems of seepage. The City of Harare has only two “landfill” sites, Pomona

and Golden Quarry. The methods used to dispose of the waste at the Pomona site is

the “spread and compact” method. The Golden Quarry “landfill” was closed for all solid

waste disposal and is only being used for disposal of liquid waste and “natural

decomposition and evaporation are the main drivers of the system” used at Golden

Quarry (City of Harare Department of Waste Management, 2011:14). As noted in

Chapter 2 sanitary landfills are one of the common ways of disposal of solid waste that

cannot be reclaimed or reused and as CED (2003) contended, sanitary landfills prevent

burning of solid waste and help reclamation of land for other valuable uses. Zerbock

(2003) as noted in literature review asserted that sanitary landfills are different from

illegal dump sites due to the level of planning and engineering as well as their

59

management. However, the problem with the two “landfills” in Harare is that they do not

meet the required international standards of engineering stipulated by EMA.

The problem of seepage and leachates in the “landfills” is high and City of Harare

cannot at present afford to erect “engineered landfills” that comply with modern

standards as required by EMA (City of Harare Department of Waste Management,

2011:14). As noted in the Chapter 3, EMA is not enshrined in the Constitution of

Zimbabwe and this makes it difficult for legal action to be taken against the City of

Harare with regards to their failure to ensure the set engineering standards for landfills.

4.2.1.3 Residents and stakeholder participation in waste management processes

A stakeholder is important in an integrated solid waste management system. From

literature review in Chapter 2, stakeholder participation was noted as a key aspect of a

sustainable integrated solid waste management system. Mangkoedihardjo et al. (2007)

noted that in order for solid waste management to be sustainable in low income areas

there was need to form what they termed neighbourhood advisory committees (NAC)

which are groupings of residents and other key players in waste management in an

area. The NAC will be part of each management scheme. Adardsh (1996) as noted in

Chapter 2 pointed out that the success stories of various integrated solid waste

management schemes in India hinged on the participation and acceptance of the

schemes by stakeholders.

The Mbare solid waste management system does not take stakeholder participation

seriously. Residents are treated as service users who pay for a service that is provided

by the municipality and no consultations are done with residents and other

stakeholders. Companies and NGOs are only approached to help with clean up

campaigns as part of their social corporate responsibility but are not really involved in

key decisions regarding planning, implementing and management of the solid waste

system.

60

The policies that have a bearing on solid waste management in Zimbabwe do not really

emphasise the important role of stakeholders in solid waste management systems. The

NSDS policy document only mention of stakeholders at national level that form the

National Sustainable Development Committee but do not take this committee approach

to local levels. Some of the major weaknesses of national level policies on waste

management as documented by Maseva (2005) and Practical Action Southern Africa

(2006) and reflected in Chapter 3 include the fact that the national level policies fail to

consider communities as resources as they ignore communities’ potential roles in waste

management. The national policies also ignore the interest of small communities and

are biased towards the interest of big industrialists.

The study established that in Mbare the stakeholders in solid waste management

include: the municipality, National Waste Paper Collection Company, Delta Beverages,

Informal traders, residents, informal waste collectors, scrap metal dealers and NGOs.

The municipality lacks capacity to collect solid waste in Harare’s suburbs including

Mbare but at the same time it is not opening up to private players to work in waste

collection. From key informant feedback it emerged that the role of waste management

under the City of Harare had changed hands 5 times since 1998. Before 1998 the

responsibility for waste management fell in the city’s department of works in amenities

division. In 1999, it was transferred to the city health department. In 2005 it became a

standalone department of waste management. For some time in 2005, 56% of the city

waste collections were covered by three private refuse contractors. However, due to

political problems regarding the tendering of these contractors their services were

terminated in May 2005. According to City of Harare Department of Waste Management

(undated) refuse collection problems increased after the termination of these private

contractors. To date in spite of the city council admitting that it has not enough capacity

to collect waste and manage waste, no private players are being contracted to do waste

collections. The few private players doing some work on waste management and waste

collection are doing so on voluntary bases or as part of their corporate social

responsibility which at times is not regular or systematic. Informal waste collectors who

61

include waste scavengers collect reusable waste like plastic bottles, glass bottles,

plastic containers which they clean up in nearby Mukuwisi River and resale to vendors

at Mbare Musika. Collected plastics and plastic containers are also used to package

products like vegetables and peanut butter at Mbare Musika. Other informal waste

collectors are those hired by wealthier families to collect and dispose their accumulated

solid waste at illegal dumpsites sites and open areas.

4.2.1.4 Waste management challenges in Mbare and Harare Based on findings from the key informant interviews with waste management staff and

review of key documents from the municipality’s waste department, the following are

key challenges being faced in solid waste management in Mbare and Harare:

Inadequate refuse receptacles;

Increased volumes of waste in 2010 attributable to improvement in the economy;

Ransacking of refuse bins by street kids and vagrants;

Sanitary lanes being fouled and filled with litter as they are not fenced or

manned;

High vehicle traffic volumes along main roads making some sanitary lanes and

properties inaccessible;

Inadequate refuse collection vehicles;

Long distance between refuse collection points and landfill disposal sites making

refuse disposal at these sites very expensive (for example the Pomona landfill

site if situated 12.66 kilometers from Mbare); and

Lack of community awareness on reducing, recycling and separation of waste.

The challenges noted above are consistent with some of the challenges noted in

Chapter 2 as waste management challenges confronting cities in developing countries.

Ogawa (2005), Manyanhaire et al.(2009), Masocha and Tevera (2003) and Zurbrügg

(2002) noted in their various studies that solid waste management systems in

developing countries in general face challenges that include low collection coverage,

irregular, inconsistent and inadequate collection services, crude open dumping, and

burning without air and water pollution control.

62

The various policy documents on waste management in Zimbabwe also confirmed the

existence of these challenges. For instance The Draft Strategic Document on Waste

Management of 2004, as noted in Chapter 3, identifies the problems of street kids and

ransacking of waste skips as some of the challenges in waste management in

Zimbabwe’s cities. The Science and Technology Policy of 2002 notes that general

environmental pollution is increasing and this is posing a great challenge to waste

management. Section 70 of EMA notes that minimisation and treatment of waste is

necessary to curb the growing challenge of increasing waste generation in Zimbabwe’s

towns and cities.

4.2.1.5 Effects of poor solid waste management in Mbare and Harare In Chapter 2, it was noted that some of the effects of poor solid waste management

included adverse effects on human health and the environment. Ramokate and Basu

(2009:444) noted that poor solid waste management may lead to transmission of

infectious diseases like HIV/AIDS and hepatitis B and C. Holmes (1994) and Taru and

Kuvarega (2005) noted that infectious diseases like dysentery, cholera, enteritis, typhoid

fever and lung ailments caused by dust from waste lumps were some of the negative

effects of poor solid waste management on human health.

When asked what they thought were some of the effects of poor solid waste

management in Mbare, respondents to the household survey mentioned outbreaks of

diseases like cholera, increase in disease vectors, ugly scenery, rodents and mice,

children playing with waste and waste lumps, children being cut by sharp objects

deposited in waste lumps as some of the negative effects of poor solid waste

management in Mbare. Residents also revealed that Mbare suffered recurrent cholera

outbreaks. This was also confirmed by the key informant interviews that revealed that

the City of Harare regarded Mbare as one of the endemic areas for cholera.

4.2.2 Waste composition and profile in Harare and Mbare This section elaborates on the waste profile of Harare and the neighborhood of Mbare.

63

4.2.2.1 Solid waste profile of Harare According to findings from the key informant interviews done with staff from the City of

Harare Waste Department, the city has an estimated population of 2.5 million. The city’s

per capita waste generation is estimated at 0.9 kilograms per person per day. The city’s

waste collection efficiency is estimated at 70%. The projected waste generation is

approximately 730 000 tons annually. Estimated collected waste is 511 000 tons per

year (City of Harare Department of Waste Management, 2011:1). These figures

correspond with figures elsewhere in developing countries, for instance the waste

collection efficiency of 70% (though this may be a bit high for Harare) agrees to the

findings of UNEP(2009) which show that 30-60% of solid waste in developing countries

is uncollected. From the key informant interviews with the city’s waste department staff

and review of internal documents from the waste department, the city’s solid waste is

estimated at 2,250,000 tons per year.

The following estimates in percentages are made about solid waste composition of

Harare: about 15,5% is rubbish, 6.5% food waste, paper 20%, plastics 20%, glass 5%,

agricultural 15%, construction 8%, metals 5%, textiles 2% and other 3%(City of Harare

Department of Waste Management, 2011:2). The key constituents of solid waste in

Harare correspond to what various literatures on waste management, reviewed in

Chapter 2, noted as key components of solid waste found in third world countries

(Cointreau–Levine, 1982; Dension and Ruston, 1990; Kemal, 2007; Mader, 2011;

Madewe and Madewe, 2006; Tchobanoglous et al, 1993; Puopiel, 2010; Kreith, 1994;

and Zerbock, 2003).

4.2.2.2 Solid waste profile of Mbare Based on key informant interviews and review of waste department statistics the

following estimates of solid waste in Mbare were established; 10% rubbish, 3% food,

12% paper, 14% plastics, 5% glass, 29% agricultural waste, 10% construction waste,

10% metals, 6% textiles, 0.5% other (City of Harare Department of Waste

Management, 2011). The above statistics indicate that more than 50% of Mbare’s solid

waste is organic materials (rubbish, food, paper, agricultural waste) and these figures

64

compare with those of other developing countries as noted in literature review, Chapter

2, where Zerbock (2003) contended that over 50% of solid waste in developing

countries is organic material. High composition of organic material in solid waste

justifies the use of composting as a sustainable method of managing organic waste as

noted by Puopiel (2010), UNEP (2009) and Zerbock (2003) unlike the system used in

Mbare where organic waste is transported together with other waste for final disposal in

“landfills” or illegal dumpsites. Composting is also a low-technology approach (Zerbock,

2003) suited to low income areas (Puopiel, 2010) like Mbare.

4.2.3 Comparison of solid waste composition between Mbare and Harare An interesting picture emerges when a comparison between waste composition for the

whole of Harare and that of Mbare is done. A graphical representation of the

comparison between solid waste constituents in percentages terms in Mbare and

Harare city was done as shown in figure 4.1 below and is followed by a brief discussion

on the picture painted by the graph and figures.

65

Figure 4.1: Comparison of solid waste composition between Mbare Township and greater Harare city

Rubbish Food Paper Plastic Glass Agric Constr Metal Texitiles Other

Mbare 10 3 12 13.5 5 30 10 10 6 0.5

Harare 15.5 6.5 20 20 5 20 8 5 2 3

10

3

1213.5

5

30

10 10

60.5

15.5

6.5

20 20

5

20

85 2 3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Perc

enta

ge o

f sol

id w

aste

Harare & Mbare solid waste comparison

Sources: City of Harare Department of Waste Management (2011) and Household survey.

Firstly, Mbare generates less waste percentage wise than the whole of Harare.

Percentages of Mbare’s rubbish, food, paper, and plastic waste were found to be much

lower than those of Harare. However, Mbare generates higher agricultural, construction,

metal and textile waste in percentage terms than Harare. The discussion below explains

the key findings.

4.2.3.1 Mbare generates less waste percentage wise compared to Harare Percentages of rubbish, food, paper and plastic waste compared to the total estimates

of Mbare solid waste are in general lower than percentages of the same wastes for

Harare relative the total estimates of Harare’s total solid waste. This could be due to the

fact that Mbare is one of the poorest areas in Harare and most of the households in

Mbare are low income so the level of rubbish, food, paper and plastic wastes they

generate are lower relative to other wastes when compared to the same statistics for

the whole of Harare that would include high income areas. Higher volumes of rubbish,

66

food, paper and plastic waste in higher income areas and lower volumes of rubbish

food, paper and plastic wastes in low income areas may be due to consumption habits

as higher income areas generally consume more, hence generate more waste in these

category types. This finding confirms to what was noted in Chapter 2 that waste

generation is dependent on consumption patterns (Manyanhaire et al., 2009:126).

4.2.3.2 Mbare generates more agricultural waste than Harare

Agricultural waste is about 29% of the Mbare’s solid waste while for Harare it is about

15% of the total estimate of the city’s solid waste. The reason for much higher

composition of agricultural waste in Mbare relative to the total estimate of the suburb’s

total solid waste can be attributed to the fact that Mbare hosts the biggest agricultural

produce market (Mbare Musika) in Harare and a lot of agricultural produce waste is

generated from the market. Residents of Mbare also use most of the open land for

illegal urban agriculture and waste from these agricultural activities finds its way into the

suburb’s waste streams.

4.2.3.3 Mbare generates more construction waste than Harare Construction waste constitutes a much higher percentage of the total estimate of

Mbare’s solid waste than it is as a constituent of the Harare’s total estimate of solid

waste. Mbare is one of the suburbs that were heavily affected by demolition of houses

and slums during the 2005 ‘Operation Restore Order’ (ORO) and some of the

construction/demolition waste has not been cleared. The findings regarding construction

waste in Mbare and Harare differ greatly from the study done by Madewe and Madewe

(2006) in Gweru town where they concluded that demolition waste constitutes between

30-50% of the Zimbabwe towns’ solid waste. As seen in the figures and tables above

construction/demolition waste constitutes only about 10% of Mbare’s solid waste and

8% of Harare’s solid waste total estimate. The reason for this huge difference may be

due to the time period between this study and that of Madewe and Madewe (2006).

Madewe and Madewe (2006) carried out their study hardly a year after the demolition

campaign, ORO, which started in May 2005. It may be that at the time of their study

67

most of the demolition wastes were not yet cleared in most urban areas that were

affected by these demolitions.

4.2.3.4 Mbare generates more metal and textile waste than Harare The composition of metal and textile waste is much higher as constituents of solid waste

in Mbare than they are as constituents of solid waste in Harare as a whole. This can be

due to the fact that Mbare has a booming informal metal and fabric industry and many

people do operate back-yard cloth making and metal crafting activities to supplement

their incomes. The differences in waste composition in Harare and Mbare call for

adoption of sustainable waste management approaches that pay attention to local

factors than the system used in Harare where the same waste management methods

are applied universally across the city.

4.3. Waste management strategies and awareness of policies among Mbare households: Survey results

This section will look at the key findings from the household survey. The section will

look at the socio-economic profile of survey respondents, waste management strategies

among Mbare households and residents’ awareness of polices on waste management.

As will be noted in the next sections residents generally have low incomes with an

average household income of USD$ 143.25. Mbare is generally overcrowded and the

waste management strategies used by residents are very basic and are characterised

by throwing of waste in overfilled skip bins, compacting, some composting, dumping of

waste on the roadside and open spaces and dumping of waste in Mukuwisi River. The

solid waste management services provided by the municipality are not adequate and

most residents are unable to pay for the services.

4.3.1 Socio-economic profile of respondents

This section elaborates on the socio-economic profile of the respondents of the survey.

Table 4.1 reflects on the age, level of education, household size, employment status,

and monthly income of the respondents.

68

Table 4.1 Socio-economic profile of survey respondents Categories N %

Age groups

18 to 29 years old 34 42.5 30 to 39 years old 15 18.75 40 to 49 years old 20 25 50 years and older 11 13.75 Total 80 100.0

Highest level of education

None 3 3.75 Primary school/ Junior school 6 7.5 Some secondary schooling 59 73.75 Completed secondary school (A level) 5 6.25 Vocational college 7 8.75 Total 100.0

Household size

Less than 5 people in household 10 12.5 Between 6 and 10 people in household 62 77.5 More than 10 people in household 8 10 Average household size 7.19 Total 80 100.0

Employment

Informal employment 62 77.5 Formal employment 3 3.75 Unemployed 12 15 Other (Housewife, pensioner, student) 3 3.75 Total 80 100.0

Income

$0 to $50 30 37.5 $51 to $150 19 23.75 $151 to $350 27 33.75 More than $351 4 5 Average monthly income in $ 143.25 Total 80 100.0

Source: Household survey.

The following notes relate to the socio-economic profile of the respondents:

4.3.1.1 Age groups

As shown in the table above, all respondents to the study survey were people of 18

years and above. From the household survey 42.5% of the respondents were in the 18-

29 years age group, 18.75% were in the 30-39 age group, 25% in the 40-49 age group,

13.75% were 50 years and older. These percentages suggest that the majority of Mbare

residents are young people between the 18 and 39 years old. Mbare attracts many

young people as it is located near the city centre and is home to many informal

business activities, the main agricultural market, and the biggest long distance bus

terminus in Harare. As mentioned in Chapter 1 and earlier sections of this chapter,

Mbare is a low income area as it is one of the poorest suburbs in Harare. It has a lot of

69

slum dwellings and overcrowded households comprising of many young people who

come to Harare and find residence in the township as they look for employment. The

young job seekers end up getting involved mainly in informal business and criminal

activities as formal employment opportunities in Harare are scarce and unemployment

levels in Zimbabwe are above 80%.

4.3.1.2 Highest level of education.

Most of the respondents to the household survey had at least completed secondary

education (73.75%) while only 3.375 had not received an education, 7.5% had gone as

far as primary school, 6.25% had completed advanced level education and 8.75% had

gone to vocational college.

4.3.1.3 Average household size.

The average household size based on responses from the survey respondents was

7.19. This is quite high and suggests that there is overcrowding in most households in

Mbare as the national average household number in Zimbabwe is 6. It was revealed

that in most flats and houses in Mbare more people than the expected number of

people to stay in those housing units were present. In Matererini and Matapi flats as

much as 9 people in some instances were staying in tiny flats that were originally built

for bachelor workers during the colonial era. In housing units in Ward 3 and National it

was revealed that in some cases more than three families were staying in one house as

owners of the houses rented out rooms to tenants to supplement their income. The big

household sizes coupled with lack of adequate waste receptacles provided by the

municipality are attributed to overflowing of waste in skip bins and disposing of waste

along the roadsides.

4.3.1.4 Employment

The majority of the respondents to the survey were informally employed (77.5%) while

only 3.75% were formally employed and 15% were unemployed. As mentioned earlier

Mbare hosts a lot of informal business activities. These activities range from agricultural

products vending, clothing, metal smith activities, and informal trading in other goods

70

and services. As noted in section 4.2 Mbare produces more agricultural, metal and

textile waste than the rest of Harare in percentage terms and this waste in mainly due to

these key informal business activities.

4.3.1.5 Income

Mbare is generally a low income area as mentioned in Chapter 1 and other sections of

this chapter. From the household survey 37.5% of respondents make a monthly income

between $0-$50, 23.75% make a monthly income between $51 and $150, 33.75%

make a monthly income between $151 and $350 and only 5% make a monthly income

of over $351. The average monthly income of the respondents is $143.25. Low incomes

in most developing countries as noted in Chapter 2 make solid waste management

unsustainable and collection services irregular. The low incomes in Mbare makes the

current solid waste management system untenable as it is based on “polluter pays”

principles yet most “polluters” in Mbare cannot afford to pay due to low income levels.

4.3.2 Solid waste management strategies of household survey respondents The solid waste generated in Harare is estimated to be 2 million tons per year (City of

Harare Department of Waste Management, 2011:2). The household survey revealed

that waste generation in Mbare had increased and this confirms to what was noted by

the municipality that waste generation in Harare in general had increased. During the

household survey, 37.5% of the respondents said that the waste they generated in the

past year had increased while only 6.3% said the waste they generated had not

changed and 56.3% said the waste they generated had gone down. These findings

confirmed the findings of Manyanhaire et al. (2006), Monahan (2004) and UNEP (2009)

who in their various studies as noted in Chapter 2 found out that the global rate of

municipal solid waste being generated was increasing.

4.3.3 Solid waste handling Waste handling is a key process within the solid waste management system. About

60% of respondents to the household survey viewed waste handling as a dirty and time

consuming exercise. Most of the respondents to the household survey as was also

71

confirmed with review of reports from the waste department are not aware of the

benefits of recovery, reuse and recycling of waste. Figure 4.2 below shows the most

common waste handling methods in Mbare mentioned by the respondents to the

household survey.

Figure 4.2: Waste handling methods in Mbare

29%

50%

4%

4% 13% Wrapping food in plastics or newspaper

Mixing variuos waste types

Shredding/grinding

Compaction

Seperation

Source: Household survey.

As shown in figure 4.2 above 50% of the respondents to the household survey said they

mixed various wastes in plastic bags, bins or skip bins. Mixing of waste can be

attributed to lack of knowledge on the benefits of recycling and also that most

households only have one bin to put their waste in and in cases where bins and other

receptacles are not supplied households tend to use one plastic bag to put their waste

and throw the mixed waste away. From the household survey 29% of the respondents

mentioned that they sometimes wrapped their food waste in paper or plastic before

disposing it in skips or bins, 5% of the households mentioned that they compacted

waste for it to fit in one bin provided. About 5% of the household survey respondents

also mentioned that they do separate waste as sometimes waste collection companies

come and collect cardboards and paper although this was not regular. Households also

separate bottles, plastics and cans as sometimes these are collected by informal waste

collectors who pay small amounts of money for these or households exchange the

72

recyclable waste with informal waste collectors for foodstuffs like eggs. The informal

waste collectors will then sale the recyclable waste to recycling companies. 4.3.4 Solid waste separation The study revealed that most households in Mbare do not separate their waste. Most of

the times waste is mixed and this makes any recovery, reuse and recycling difficult as

noted in Chapter 2. Only 31.3% of the respondents to the household survey said they

separated their waste while 68.8% said they do not separate their waste. Figure 4.3

below, a photograph taken by the author during field observations also confirms that

households in Mbare did little separation of waste at source as various waste types are

seen mixed in a skip bin. The findings of low levels of separation of waste at source also

confirmed findings by Tsiboe and Marbel (2004) in Chapter 2 who noted that while

source separation is very important in achieving solid waste reduction, separation was

not widely done in third world cities.

Figure 4.3 below shows mixed solid waste overflowing in a skip bin in Mbare, Matapi

area.

Figure 4.3: Mixing of solid waste

Source: Author, August 2011. Respondents to the household survey who separated their waste noted that they mainly

separated paper/cardboard boxes, plastics, cans, bottles and plastic containers. When

asked why they separated these materials some said they separated paper so that the

National Waste Paper Collection Company (NWPCC) that does paper recycling can

collect it during their occasional collection rounds and some residents separated paper

73

and card boxes so that they can use them for generating fire for cooking. Bottles, and

plastics containers are separated for reuse in the household or selling to informal waste

collectors who sale these to traders at Mbare Musika who in turn package food stuffs

like peanut butter and vegetables in these containers and plastics.

4.3.5 Solid waste collection From the household survey it was found out that residents use various types of

receptacles to collect waste that include skip bins, metal bins, plastic bins, mealie-meal

bags, cardboard boxes, and sacks. Figure 4.4 below shows the percentages of usage

of various receptacles based on the household survey.

Figure 4.4: Types of receptacles used by households in Mbare

24

14

19

15

23

4 10

5

10

15

20

25

30

Perc

enta

ge

Type of receptacles

Skip

Plastic bins

Meali meal bags

Sacks

Plastic bags

Cardbord boxes

Metal bins

Source: Household survey.

As shown in figure 4.4 above, the most common place of waste collection or receptacle

based on responses from the household survey is the communal skip bin (24%). Most

skip bins are situated in Matapi, Matererini, and Ward 3. The skip bins provide a

communal place of waste collection for residents who reside in the overcrowded flats of

this area. From observations it was noted that most of the skip bins were overflowing

with solid waste. Household survey respondents said the skip bins had gone for more

than three months without being collected. Residents end up throwing waste around the

74

overflowing skip bins. Figure 4.5, below is a photograph of overflowing skip bins in

Mbare taken during field observations.

Figure 4.5: Overflowing skip bins in Matapi area

Source: Author, August 2011.

Plastic bags are the next common waste receptacle used in Mbare (23%). Residents

who reside in houses around Mbare national area commonly use plastic bags as there

are shortages of formal receptacles supplied by the city council or other waste

collectors. Other informal receptacles used include mealie-meal bags (19%), sacks

(15%), and cardboard boxes (4%). Over crowdedness in Mbare leads to a situation

whereby supplied waste receptacles get filled within short periods of time. The problem

of shortage of receptacles for collection of waste is a very big challenge in many African

countries as also revealed in Chapter 2 by Puopiel (2010) in his studies in Ghana.

Failure by the City of Harare to provide adequate and standard waste receptacles’

shows that the council is even failing to adhere to its own by-laws. As noted in the

Chapter 3, under the city’s Waste by-laws of 1982, the council has an obligation to

supply standard and adequate waste receptacles to residents (City of Harare, 1981a).

4.3.6 Solid waste collection, transfer and transportation The study revealed that waste collection and transfer for final disposal at landfills was

done at different intervals within the suburb and the collection was irregular. During the

household survey 63.3 % of the respondents in Matapi area said “Not at all” in response

to the question on frequency of waste collection in their area while 27.6% in the same

75

area (Matapi) said “once a week” and 9.1% said “twice a week”. All (100%) respondents

in Materereni area said “Not at all” to the same question. This differs greatly to Ward 3

and National where 86% of the respondents said waste was collected once every week

and 14% of the respondents in the same areas said once in every two weeks. These

findings were also triangulated with field observations as streets in Ward 3 and National

area were observed to be cleaner than those in Matapi and Matererni which were

characterised by litter in most places on the ground and overflowing skip bins. By failing

to collect waste regularly the City of Harare is breaching its own by-laws of 1982 as

discussed in Chapter 3 the by-laws stipulate that domestic waste should be collected at

least once a week.

The problem of irregular collection of skip bins in Matapai and Matererini is a problem

facing most suburbs in Harare. According to its 2010 annual report, the City of Harare

had a total of 160 skip bins and only 5 functional skip trucks. This gave a ratio of 32 skip

bins per truck. Each skip bin was supposed to be emptied once in two days. To be able

to ensure that skip bins are emptied regularly the council needed more skip trucks (City

of Harare Department of Waste Management, 2011:10).

The findings in Mbare of low collection coverage, irregular, inconsistent and inadequate

solid waste collection services are consistent with findings of other studies (Ogawa

(2005), Manyanhaire et al. (2009), Masocha and Tavera (2003) and Zurbrugg (2002) in

third world cities as revealed in Chapter 2. By failing to provide adequate and regular

waste collection services in Mbare the municipality is breaching provisions of Section 9

of EMA that obligate the municipality to ensure adequate collection and monitoring of

solid waste as noted in Chapter 3.

4.3.7 Household views on paying for solid waste collection services

From the household survey 72.5 % of the respondents said that they were charged for

refuse collection while 22% said “no” as they do not know if they are charged for refuse

collection as they do not pay. Table 4.2 below shows a cross tabulation on residents’

responses on ability to pay for waste collection and reasons for paying or not paying.

76

Table 4.2 Residents ability to pay for refuse

Residents paying for refuse Reason

Total Afford(N) Can’t afford(N)

Yes 18 0 18

No 0 62 62

18 62 80

Source: Household survey.

A cross tabulation (Table 4.2 above) on responses of whether respondents were in a

position to pay versus the reasons why they responded in the manner they did showed

that only 18% of the survey respondents are in a position to pay refuse collection

charges while 62% said they can’t afford paying for refuse collection services. Polluter

ability to pay in a waste management system is very important for sustainability of such

a system as noted in literature review, Chapter 2. As was revealed in Chapter 3, EMA

embraces the polluter pays principles but the problem is that there are no mechanisms

or provisions obliging the municipality to plough back funds collected for waste

collection into the actual waste collection itself, leaving residents less willing to pay for

refuse services that are erratic and irregular.

4.3.7 Solid waste disposal

As noted earlier other places in Mbare have irregular collection of solid waste while

others do receive at least collections for final disposal once every week. The collection

of waste for disposal by the municipality workers and private organisations forms the

formal stream. However, given the inadequacy of waste collection services the illegal

steam of waste disposal is also evident. The survey revealed that Mbare residents

dispose their waste in various ways that include composting, burning, burying

underground, selling recyclable waste, dumping by the roadside and on open spaces

and dumping in Mukuwisi River. Figure 4.6 below is a pie chart showing the waste

disposal methods of interviewed households in percentage terms.

77

Figure 4.6: Other methods of waste disposal in Mbare

18%

29%

5%6%

16%

24%

2%

CompostingBurnBury undergroundSellDump on roadsideDump in open spaceDump in the River

Source: Household survey. From figure 4.6 above it can be seen that 18% of the respondents said they compost

their waste, 29% burn in open spaces, 5 % bury their waste underground, 6% sell some

of their waste, 16% dump some of the waste by the road side, 24% dump their waste in

open spaces and 2% dump some of their waste in Mukuvisi River. The findings of the

household survey were also triangulated with field observations where photographs

were taken to capture some of the waste disposal methods. Figure 4.7 below is a

pictorial showing the waste disposal methods captured during field observations.

78

Figure 4.7: Illegal disposal of waste in Mbare

Slides a and d, waste dumped in open spaces in Mbare; b, waste thrown through windows in Matapi flats; slide c, waste dumped by the roadside, slide e and f , burning of waste (Source: Author, August, 2011, except slide b (Chirisa and Mlambo, 2008)). The findings on waste disposal methods in Mbare confirm what was noted in Chapter 2

that some early methods that were used in the 1950s like dumping on land, burying

waste underground, burning, dumping in water (Tchobanoglous et al., 1993), dumping

on spaces and in gutters (Puopiel, 2010) and dumping in drains, and illegal dumping

sites (Momoh and Oladebeye, 2010) were still being used today in third world cities.

c d

e f

a b

79

4.3.9 Extent of household 3R practices Chapter 2 proposed a model of integrated sustainable solid waste management that

included a hierarchy of methods of reduce, recycling, composting, incineration and land

filling, with stakeholder participation playing a key role in all these methods. The model

of integrated sustainable solid waste management proposed in Chapter 2 was derived

from many literature and studies including Bartone (2000) and Puopiel (2010). As noted

in the literature review Puorideme (2010:8) defined integrated sustainable solid waste

management as a model that combines, “elements of waste prevention, recycling,

composting and disposal with active stakeholders’ participation which ensures efficient

and sustainable waste management”. The discussion that follows looks at the study

findings with regards to reduction, recycling, composting practices done by survey

respondents.

4.3.9.1 Waste reduction Respondents to the survey said that they take measures like cooking less food,

recycling and reusing some of their solid waste and composting in order to reduce

waste that is collected for final disposal. There were no deliberate actions or practices

by the municipality to promote source reduction of waste in Mbare. Various literatures

reviewed in Chapter 2, converged on the role and importance of source reduction in a

sustainable solid waste management system. Literature reviewed in Chapter 2 viewed

source reduction as actions performed to reduce volumes and toxicity of solid waste

before processing and disposal (Denison and Ruston, 1990; Kreith, 1994) and

reclaiming of packages and returnable bottles and containers (Puopiel, 2010). Reusing

of container bags, reducing buying habits, and reducing the use of disposable products

were indentified in Chapter 2 as some of the ways to reduce waste generation at source

(USPS, 2000). As noted in Chapter 3, the policies on waste management in Zimbabwe

are silent on source reduction or practical steps that can be followed by local authorities

or households to reduce waste.

80

4.3.9.2 Composting As noted in Chapter 2, composting involves biological decomposition of biodegradable

solid waste under controlled aerobic conditions to a state that is sufficiently stable and

palatable for handling (UNEP, 2009). Other scholars that include Puopiel (2010) and

Zerbock (2003) asserted that composting was a low income technology approach which

is sustainable and suited to low income areas like Mbare as composts do not require

expensive engineering and are easy and cheap to maintain. Findings from the

household survey revealed that some composting is done in Mbare by individual

households; however it is not systematic and is done at a very low scale. Only 36.3 % of

the household survey respondents said they do composting for instance. Given that

about 29% of solid waste generated in Mbare is agricultural waste there is scope for

composting as a good strategy to reduce waste. The EIA policy document, as revealed

in Chapter 3, noted composting as one of the prescribed activities under the

management of municipal solid waste but does not propose practical steps in which this

should be done.

4.3.9.3 Recycling and reuse Chapter 2 noted that many studies on solid waste management point to recycling as an

efficient and effective method of solid waste management. Momoh and Oladebeye

(2010) noted recycling as an effective waste reduction strategy. USEPA (1999) and

Kreith (1994) viewed recycling as presenting advantages of turning waste into money

generating materials, and reducing the need to claim more land in constructing landfills.

As noted in earlier sections recycling and reuse of solid waste is done in Mbare albeit at

a very low scale. When asked their thoughts about recycling and reuse of waste, 67.5%

of survey respondents said it was a good idea worth exploring while 3.8 % said they had

no idea and 28.75 said recycling should be discouraged. Some of the residents who

said recycling should be discouraged remarked that recycling of waste was dirty. These

responses showed that there was need for awareness campaigns on the benefits of

recycling and teaching residents on how recycling can be done in ways that will not

81

adversely affect their health. Table 4.3 below summarises respondents’ views on

recycling.

Table 4.3 Respondent feelings about recycling of waste Response N %

Good idea 54 67.5

Recycling should discouraged 23 28.75

No idea 3 3.75

Source: Household survey.

Recycling in Mbare is done by individual households who separate plastic containers,

bottles, and paper and either sale these to informal waste collectors, reuse these or sale

them to occasional formal waste collectors like Delta Beverages (for reusable empty

beverage bottles) or NWPCC (for paper that will be recycled at their plant in Granitesite

near Mbare). Plastics and plastic containers are sometimes cleaned up in Mukuwisi

River and sold to vegetable vendors at Mbare Musika to package vegetables for sale.

Paper and cardboard boxes are also used to generate fire for cooking. During field

observations the researcher encountered a group of scrap metal dealers who reuse

metal waste from abandoned cars and other objects made of metal and produce various

artifacts that are sold to some locals dealers who then re-sale them abroad. They said

on a good month they make profits ranging between $400 and $600. Figure 4.8 are

photos that show some of the artifacts and the waste produced in the process of making

these artifacts out of abandoned metal objects.

Figure 4.8: Reuse of metal waste in Mbare

Slide a. Author posing in front of some of the artifacts produced through reuse of metal waste in Mbare; slide b. scrap metal waste from reuse of metal waste. Source: Author, August, 2011.

a b

82

The EIA policy document as noted in Chapter 3 makes recovery and recycling of waste

as one of its prescribed activities but again like with composting the policy document

does not spell out practical steps with which this should be done.

4.3.10 Residents awareness of waste management policies In Chapter 2 it was noted that Lardinois (1996), Van de Klundert and Anschutz (1997),

and Rosario and Scheinberg (2004) deemed policy and legal frameworks as some of

the key aspects in a sustainable integrated solid waste management system. Residents’

awareness of the policies and laws governing waste management is key in ensuring

that residents are conscious of their roles and responsibilities in waste management in

their areas. During the household survey 82 % of respondents said they were not aware

of any policies and laws governing solid waste management in Mbare. Of those who

said they knew some policies and laws most of them only mentioned that they knew that

it was illegal to dispose waste in open areas and by the roadside. These findings of little

awareness of policies and laws governing waste management among residents also

confirmed the findings of Maseva (2005) and Practical Action Southern Africa (2006)

whose studies concluded that there have been poor communication of national policies

on waste management to local authorities in Harare, hence the lack of programmes of

action aimed at raising public awareness among residents on the existence of these

policies. As also noted in Chapter 3, one of the main weaknesses with regards to laws

governing waste management in Harare is lack of public awareness on the existence of

these laws.

4.4 Summary

This Chapter revealed that quantities of waste generated in Mbare are increasing and

this increase is not matched by the municipality’s limited waste collection activities. At

the same time one of the two “landfills” used for final disposal of solid waste by the City

of Harare was closed for solid waste disposal. The differences in waste profiles of

Harare and Mbare point to the need to adopt different waste management methods that

suit the peculiar circumstances of Harare’s suburbs, unlike the system that exists where

uniform approaches to waste management are used. The Mbare waste management is

83

close to the early approach which has elements of generation, collection, transfer and

transportation and final disposal at “landfills”. Very little attention is given to reduce,

recycling and reusing of waste. The system is unsustainable. Low incomes of the

residents also make it impossible for the residents to pay for waste they generate yet

the municipality emphasises on the “polluter pays principle”. Figure 4.9 is the author’s

schematic representation of the Mbare solid waste management system.

Figure 4.9: Elements of Mbare’s solid waste system

Source: Author’s construct based on findings from the Field Observations, Household Survey, and Key

Informant Interviews.

Generation (households, medical facilities,

businesses, informal businesses, Mbare Musika)

Food Agricultural Paper Plastics Metals Glass Rubbish Construction Textiles Other

Storage -Bins -Skip bins -Plastic bags

Collection -Municipal workers -Private companies -Informal waste collectors

Transportation -Municipal trucks -Private companies

Recovery -Households -collection crews -Scavengers

Reuse/Recycle -Households: plastics, containers, paper, cardboards, construction waste -Metal dealers: metal -Informal traders: plastic containers, bottles -Private companies: paper, cardboards, cans, bottles, scrap metals

Source separation -households Disposal

-Illegal dumping -Crude dumping -Burning -Composting -Landfill- “spread and compacting” -Dumping in Mukuwisi River

Environmental and health effects/risks -land, water, air, soil pollution, -unsightly scenes, -diseases vectors, -odors, pests, parasites, rodents, -children being harmed in illegal waste lumps

Irregular/non collection attracts pest and rodents

Waste scattering

Gases, leachate, litter, sharp objects

84

CHAPTER 5 : OVERVIEW OF MAIN RESEARCH FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction The main objective of this research study was to provide a case for the adoption of an

integrated sustainable solid waste management system as a strategy to manage solid

waste in Mbare Township. In order to achieve the research aim and objectives it was

important that an exploration and analysis of literature on solid waste be done as well as

an analysis of policies and laws governing solid waste management in Zimbabwe be

carried out. Chapter 2 explored various literatures on solid waste management and

established the paradigms in solid waste management that include the early

approaches, the contemporary approaches and the intergraded solid waste

management approach. Chapter 3 was a critical analysis of the laws and policies

governing solid waste management in Zimbabwe. It was found that Zimbabwe has a

comprehensive set of laws capable of leading to sustainable solid waste management

but poor implementation and enforcement of these laws is a key challenge militating

against the attainment of adequate and sustainable waste management. The chapter

also revealed that Zimbabwe lacks a national level policy on waste management which

is a very big challenge in attaining of sustainability in solid waste management. In

chapter 4, the focus of the study drifted from literature and policy analysis to the

empirical research findings on the nature, extent, challenges of solid waste and solid

waste management strategies in Mbare. The chapter also documented the existing solid

waste management system in the township.

This chapter will provide an overview of the main research findings on solid waste

management. This will be followed by recommendations to the local authorities in

Mbare on what needs to be done to attain a sustainable integrated solid waste

management system in the suburb. Recommendations at a national level on the need to

enforce laws on waste management and establishing a national level policy on waste

management are also given.

85

5.2 OVERVIEW OF THE MAIN FINDINGS OF THE RESEARCH This section briefly looks at some of the key findings of the study.

5.2.1 Unsustainable solid waste management system In Chapter 1 it was noted that many towns and cities in the developing world are faced

with the growing challenge of solid waste management as waste volumes are

increasing due to many factors that include rapid urbanisation, increase in population,

and use of use of non-biodegradable plastics and bottles (Maseva, 2005; and Kaseke,

2003). The increase in solid waste being generated as also noted in Chapter 1 was

being met with inadequate and crumpling solid waste management systems (Yedla,

2005; and Manyanhaire et al., 2009). As noted in Chapter 2, most solid waste

management systems in developing countries were failing to effectively address the

challenge of solid waste management as there were tendencies to stick to the early

waste management practices that were limited in scope to storage, collection and

disposal of waste without paying attention to strategies like source reduction, recycling,

reuse, and composting (Buclet, 2002; Gotoh, 1989; and Mader, 2011).

As noted in Chapter 4, the study revealed that the solid waste management system in

Mbare is inadequate and unsustainable. The current Mbare solid waste management

system leans more to what was indentified in Chapter 2 as early solid waste

management approaches where the system concentrates on storage, collection and

disposal (Buclet, 2002; Gotoh, 1989; and Mader, 2011). Elements of contemporary solid

waste management methodologies, noted in Chapter 2, that included source reduction,

sanitary landfills, composting, recycling and incineration (Denison and Ruston, 1990)

were also noted as present in Mbare though at a very minimum scale.

In Mbare waste volumes are increasing, waste is not separated or segregated while

collections, transfer and transportation of waste are inadequate and irregular. Methods

used for collection, transfer and transportation are rudimentary and present a great risk

to human health and the environment. Household incomes in Mbare are very low

86

making residents’ ability to pay for waste transfer and collection impossible yet the

municipality insists on “polluter pays” principles. Residents of Mbare dump waste on

streets, opens spaces, and Mukuwisi River among other illegal places. The provided

receptacles like skip bins are always overflowing as they are not adequate to serve an

overcrowded population. The waste that is eventually collected through the formal

stream is finally disposed of at Pomona “landfill” site which is poorly engineered and

lacks the basic requirements of a land fill as per the standards of EMA. The only other

“landfill”, Golden Quarry, is now full and closed for solid waste disposal. The Pomona

“landfill” is also far from most suburbs and is about 12.5 kilometers away from Mbare

making it difficult for the municipality to transport solid waste for disposal to this “landfill”

site regularly.

5.2.2 Inadequate resources In Chapter 2 it was noted that many authorities in urban areas of developing countries

face human resources, institutional, financial and social constraints and challenges that

affect their ability to adequately manage the problem of solid waste (Ogawa, 2005).

The study as noted in Chapter 4 revealed that the City of Harare is poorly resourced

with an inadequate budget for waste management. It has very few refuse transfer

trucks. According to its 2010 annual report for instance, the City of Harare has a total of

160 skip bins and only 5 functional skip trucks. This gives a ratio of 32 skip bins per

truck. Each skip bin is supposed to be emptied once in two days. To be able to ensure

that skip bins are emptied regularly the council needs more skip trucks. Part of the

reason why the municipality cannot generate revenue from refuse collection is that the

residents cannot afford to pay and more so the inability of the municipality to collect

refuse regularly means more and more residents would not pay even if they can afford.

5.2.3 Factors influencing solid waste management According to Pradhan (2008:132) as noted in Chapter 2, key factors that influence solid

waste management include: decision making process; public perception of the waste

87

problem; transparency of information sharing; and self-organised grass root level

organisations.

The study as noted in Chapter 4, revealed that decision making in the Mbare solid

waste management system is top-down with residents not knowing what the plans of

the municipality are with regards to waste management. Most of the residents in Mbare

perceive solid waste as a nuisance leading to multiplication of disease vectors and ugly

sites and most residents throw away waste at the most convenient and economically

possible place for them. There is also lack of transparency in information sharing by

local authorities. While the key informant interviews showed that there were some

campaigns done by local authorities to share information and educate communities on

waste management and policies, the household survey revealed that most of the

residents are unaware of the municipality plans regarding waste management and a

good number of respondents to the household survey did not even know the rates

(amounts of money) that were charged for waste collection in their communities. Most of

the respondents to the survey have not known or ever heard of waste management

policies or by-laws in their areas. The study revealed that there were some small and

very few organised groups of scavengers and informal solid waste collectors in Mbare.

NGOs and private companies who at times participated in clean up campaigns or

recycling activities were some identified organised groups. Scrap metal dealers and

informal traders were identified as some of the groups that constitute stakeholders in

the Mbare solid waste system.

5.2.4 Little practice of reduce, recycle and re-use principles In Chapter 2 it was noted that intergraded solid waste management systems based on

3R principles of reduce, reuse and recycling were success stories in some places in

India, China and Maseru, Lesotho (Puopiel, 2010). Key to this approach was waste

separation and segregation at source which is then followed by a hierarchy of methods

that include reducing, recycling, incineration and land filling of remaining waste (Baud

and Schenk, 1994; UNEP, 2009; and USEPA, 1999). In Chapter 3 it was noted that

various policies and laws that have a bearing on solid waste management in Zimbabwe

88

do make reference to 3R principles like the Environmental Impact Assessment Policy of

1994. However, as Maseva (2005) and Practical Action Southern Africa (2006) noted in

the same chapter, the policies do not proffer practical steps with which local authorities

managing waste can put these principles into practice.

As noted in Chapter 4, the study revealed that there was little reduction, reuse and

recycling practices being done in Mbare. Most of the waste is not separated at source

and those people that do separate waste do so in an unorganised manner or

occasionally separate bottles, cans, paper, and plastic for their own reuse or for

occasional collections by informal waste collectors or companies which do recycling.

Reduction of waste is done by some residents at a very low scale. Reusing of waste is

done, albeit at a small scale, and there is potential to encourage this. The most glaring

finding with regards to 3R principles and practices is that the local authorities do not

promote these actively and residents who practice the 3R principles do so at their own

accord. However, notwithstanding the earlier point noted where residents viewed waste

as a nuisance to be disposed of, a good number of respondents to the household

survey viewed recycling and reuse of solid waste as a positive thing capable of

generating income for the households and the majority of respondents to the household

survey said they wanted to be educated more on reuse and recycling of waste. Some

even said the municipality and NGOs should connect them to companies and people

who buy recyclable waste.

5.2.5 Lack of private actors and stakeholders participation

In Chapter 2 it was noted that success of innovative solid waste management systems

depends on participation of local government and other non-governmental players

(Adarsh, 1996). Mangkoedihardjo et al. (2007) and Van de Klundert and Anschutz

(1999) mention stakeholder participation as key in the sustainability and efficaciousness

of a solid waste management system. In Chapter 3 it was noted that various Acts and

policies on solid waste management in Zimbabwe do have in part components of

committee systems and stakeholder participation but these were not taken down to the

89

municipality levels. Harare municipality by-laws as documented in Chapter 3 allow for

private contractors to be hired by the council to do waste collections.

Chapter 4 revealed that in spite of the municipality admitting that they were poorly

resourced to manage waste efficiently and adequately there were no private players

contracted to collect waste. While the City of Harare acknowledges that waste

management greatly improved when three contracted private companies were collecting

waste prior to 2006 and admit that the termination of these companies’ contracts

compounded waste collection problems, there are still no private players being

contracted to participate in solid waste management. As the study revealed it seems

political bickering was the major barrier to entrance of private companies into solid

waste management in Harare. The few private companies like Delta Beverages and

NWPCC seem to collect solid waste as a social corporate responsibility and their

collection of solid waste is irregular and limited to deposit refundable bottles (for Delta

Beverages) and paper (for NWPCC).

Residents, informal waste collectors and other stakeholders are not involved in planning

and implementation of waste management plans in Mbare as revealed by findings in

Chapter 4. As mentioned earlier residents are viewed as mere consumers of waste

management services run by the local authorities and the role of residents is viewed as

that of paying for the service.

5.2.6 Policies and implementation

Lardinois (1996) and Van de Klundert and Anschutz (1999) as noted in Chapter 2

viewed the policy and legal frameworks as some of the sustainability aspects of a solid

waste management system. Arlosoroff (1991) also asserted as noted in Chapter 2 that

lack of proper governance structures and policy frameworks created problems in

effective solid waste management in developing countries.

Zimbabwe as a country has a comprehensive set of laws that if implemented properly

and enforced can ensure sustainable waste management as noted by Maseva (2005)

90

and Practical Action Southern Africa (2006) in Chapter 3. However, with regards to

policies, Zimbabwe as a country has no national level waste management policy and

this is one of the major problems making it difficult for the cities to manage waste

adequately as noted in Chapter 3 by Maseva (2005) and Government of Zimbabwe

(2004).

The analysis of policies regarding solid waste management in Zimbabwe (Chapter 3)

revealed the following weaknesses with the current policy regime in the country:

the policies fall short of providing practical steps needed to achieve their desired

goals;

Funding to implement steps outlined in the policies is difficult to get given the

economic challenges faced by local authorities and country at large;

The policies largely fail to consider communities as a resource as they ignore

communities’ potential role in the waste management;

The policies do not take the interests of small community enterprises into

consideration as they are biased more towards industrial development;

There have been poor and inadequate communication of the policies to local

authorities, hence lack of programmes of action geared at raising public

awareness among residents on the existence of these policies;

The policies are silent on integrated sustainable waste management and 3R

principles; and

There are no legal obligations on the part of local authorities to adhere to some

of these policies.

The study of laws that governed waste management in Zimbabwe (in Chapter 3)

revealed the following gaps in the laws:

Lack of enforcement of otherwise good laws that are potentially capable of

effectively dealing with the waste management problem;

Lack of public awareness on the existence of the laws and by-laws on solid

waste management; and

91

Gaps in provisions within the laws that limit obligations on enforcement and these

necessitate the need to amend some of the key laws on waste management.

The lack of public awareness of the policies and laws is confirmed by the study findings

in Chapter 4, as 82% of respondents to the household survey said they were not aware

of any laws and policies regulating solid waste management in Mbare. 5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS Having an integrated sustainable solid waste management system depends on a

multiplicity if factors but in the case of Mbare and Zimbabwe key among these factors

will be the political will to have such a system in place and buy-in from the residents. As

noted in the previous chapter and previous sections of this chapter buy-in from the

people, the residents of Mbare, may not be anticipated to be a challenge since the

people yearn for resolution of solid waste management problems in their township and

more so the majority of the respondents to the household survey take 3R principles and

practices as positive practices worth pursuing. The following sections will put forward

some recommendations on what needs to be done in order to have an integrated solid

waste management system in Mbare.

5.3.1 Reducing waste Key to a sustainable solid waste management system for Mbare is reducing amounts of

solid waste that are disposed of in illegal dumpsites, Mukuwisi river, roadsides,

receptacles, and eventually Pomona “landfill”. Clear goals must be set by the

municipality to divert waste from eventual disposal either in the legal or illegal streams.

The following concrete steps to achieving solid waste reduction are recommended:

5.3.1.1 Set a target of diverting solid waste that is to be disposed

The municipality should in its next five year plan set realistic targets to divert waste that

is disposed. A realistic target proposed will be at least 20%. This is attainable given that

major constituents of waste generated in Mbare include biodegradable waste like

92

agricultural produce waste and recyclable waste that includes paper, plastics and

metals.

5.3.1.2 Promote separation of waste at source

Education campaigns through road shows, distribution of information and

communication materials and radio/television programmes can be done to encourage

residents to separate their waste at source. These campaigns should be supported by

door-to-door visits and provision of adequate receptacles for households to put different

waste types in different receptacles. Separation of waste as noted in Chapter 2 is key to

any waste reduction strategy and recycling. The sustainability of a solid waste

management system in the long run depends on waste segregation and separation. It is

recommended that a three way waste segregation system be adopted in Mbare where

waste is segregated at source into biodegradable waste, recyclables and garbage.

Such waste segregation will help the municipal authorities and residents in choosing

appropriate final waste disposal options.

5.3.1.3 Improve collection and recovery of recyclables

Collection of recyclables and recovery of waste should be promoted. The informal

sector should be involved more and more and should be given incentives for collecting

recyclable materials.

5.3.1.4 Promote household composts

Campaigns should be done to promote the use of household composts to dispose of

biodegradable waste like food and agricultural material. Residents should be trained in

proper digging and managing of composts. Low input backyard gardens should also be

promoted to ensure that the compost materials are used to help the reproduction of food

and keep the cycle going.

5.3.2 Promotion of 3R practices Reducing, reusing and recycling of waste should be promoted and these are key

principles and practices in achieving a sustainable integrated solid waste management

93

system. A deposit refund system is recommended and it will greatly help in reducing

waste and ensure that waste produced by producers of certain goods becomes the

producers’ responsibility (Pradhan, 2008). As already noted in Mbare companies like

Delta Beverages buy back empty bottles and cans and pay consumers a deposit back

for the packages. Such a practice should be promoted and made compulsory to

producers who sale products to residents of Mbare whose packaging end up producing

waste. A recommendation is made that for products that are packaged in glass bottles,

plastic bottles, card board boxes, foil and plastics (like meal-meal) a certain percentage

for instance between 5-20% be charged as an deposit price refundable when

consumers bring back these packages to the producers after use of the products. This

system should be supported by collection cages erected and positioned at convenient

points and systems and mechanisms to quickly pay back the deposit refund in Mbare

should be established. Recycling of waste that includes paper, plastics, and metals

should be promoted and efforts to encourage recycling companies to operate in Mbare

should be put in place by the municipality. Public awareness campaigns on recycling

should also be carried out.

5.3.3 Communal composting Community level composts should be established and this will lead to great reduction of

waste eventually disposed of in landfills from Mbare. As noted in Chapter 4, a huge

percentage of solid waste generated from Mbare is organic and agricultural waste from

Mbare Musika which can easily be managed through the use of community composting.

The community composts will help a long way in reducing waste transportation costs

and will prolong the life-span of the Pomona landfill. With a proper three way system of

waste segregation in place, community composts will be very helpful in taking care of

food and agricultural waste that cannot be recycled. Employment can also be generated

for locals who will work at these compost sites. Community based composts are

generally easy to run and manage.

94

5.3.4 Regular collection of waste With proper segregation of waste and composting, regular collection of non-

biodegradable waste will be possible in Mbare. Collection of waste should be done at a

regular basis from door to door. Apart from relying only on municipal trucks, a cadre of

local waste collectors using carts and other simple methods of waste conveyance like

push-carts can be trained to collect waste on a daily basis from people’s door steps and

deposit this waste at communal collection points in skip bins which will then be emptied

by municipal trucks from time to time and for final disposal at Pomona “landfill”.

5.3.5 Waste disposal

Waste disposal at Pomona “landfill” should be done in a prescribed scientific manner

and the “landfill” should be improved and engineered in a way that complies with EMA

and international standards. The municipality needs to seek the support of the central

government and private players in order to improve the conditions and engineering at

Pomona “landfill” for it to comply with environmentally accepted standards of landfills.

5.3.6 More involvement of the private sector There is need for greater involvement of the private sector in solid waste management

in Mbare. The interest shown by NGOs and private companies in waste management

as revealed in Chapter 4 should be taken advantage of and be promoted. The

municipality should allow unrestricted access to Mbare by NGOs who want to help in

solid waste management campaigns or other waste related issues. Initiatives like the

deposit pay back system noted in section 5.3.3 can also help bring the private

companies that sale products that generate waste to be involved and be responsible for

waste linked to their products. The municipality should also reconsider the issue of

public-private sector partnerships in solid waste management and other services it

delivers in Mbare. The issue of contracting private companies to collect waste should be

re-looked at and reconsidered. The municipality may do well by contracting and

monitoring private companies collecting and transporting waste than itself trying to do

everything.

95

5.3.7 Greater involvement of community As noted in Chapter 4 planning and decision making on solid waste management in

Mbare is top-down and very little consultations are done with the residents. Little

community involved and little residents’ participation makes a solid waste management

system unsustainable. There is need to put in place mechanisms in Mbare to ensure

that greater community involvement is achieved in the Mbare solid waste management

system. A system of committees like the neighborhood advisory committees on solid

waste is recommended. These committees can be set at ward levels and can have

structures with responsibilities to oversee elements of solid waste in their wards like the

three stream waste segregation system, composting, public campaigns, collection and

transportation. The committees must also be involved in planning when the municipality

is doing its five year plans. The committees can also be the focal points for community

advocacy on environmentally sustainable waste disposal, and recycling campaigns.

Committees can also be communication mechanisms to inform the municipality, NGOs

and private players on waste problems in their areas and flagging out issues like

shortage of receptacles for instance.

5.3.8 Public campaigns and education

Public campaigns like clean up campaigns and public awareness on waste problems,

policies, laws and issues like 3Rs should be promoted. The municipality, NGOs and

private players can work together and do joint campaigns with established community

committees proposed in 5.3.7 above. The use of information, education and

communication materials like fliers and pamphlets will be helpful in these public

campaigns. Radio promotional campaigns can also be used. Community workshops

and door to door campaigns will also help and promote sustainable ways of waste

management practices and make the residents embrace practices like recycling.

5.3.9 Develop a long term integrated solid waste management plan In the long run the municipality needs to develop a proper long term integrated

sustainable solid waste management plan for Mbare which will be a key component of

96

the municipality’s five year plans. This plan needs to be properly budgeted for. Members

of the community, NGOs, private companies and other stakeholders need to be fully

involved in developing this plan.

5.3.10 Review existing laws and policies As noted in chapters 2, 3 and 4 legal and policy frameworks are key sustainability

aspects in an integrated sustainable solid waste management system. Zimbabwe as a

country needs to ensure that the laws that exist are fully implemented and enforced to

achieve sustainable waste management. The country needs to also engage in

processes of putting in place a national level waste management policy where

integrated sustainable waste management practices and principles are key components

of the policy. The current set of municipal by-laws and policies on waste management

should also encourage waste management entrepreneurship based of 3R practices.

This will enable taking of advantage of the social, environmental and economic benefits

that come with recycling, reuse and recovery of waste.

5.4 THE VALUE OF THE RESEARCH AND FUTURE POSSIBILITIES This research has provided some understanding into the profile of residents of Mbare,

the profiles and constituents of solid waste generated in Mbare and an understanding

into the current solid waste management system in Mbare. More importantly the

research has documented the Mbare solid waste management system which is

important in advocating for environmentally sustainable waste management practices.

There is not much literature documenting solid waste management systems in

Zimbabwe and this research contributes to literature on the subject.

The research will also contribute to the literature on analysis of laws and policies on

waste management in Zimbabwe which is another area which is not well documented in

solid waste management literature in the country. The research also contributes to the

global campaign on creating environmentally sustainable cities by advocating for the

adoption of an integrated solid waste management system based of 3R principles and

practices in a township of a developing country.

97

However, other studies looking at socio-economic, gender, geographical, hydrological

and environmental sustainability issues and factors of a solid waste management

system will be needed in the future to help in availing new avenues of knowledge and

understanding of solid waste management challenges in Mbare and establishment and

maintenance of an integrated solid waste management system.

98

List of references

Adarsh, K. 1996. Urban waste management: innovative practices in Shimla. South

Asian Conference of Mayors and Local Authorities. Shimla: Katmandu. 8-10 October

1996.

Agunwamba, J.C. 1998. Solid waste management in Nigeria: problems and issues.

Environmental Management, 25(2): 849-856.

Anschiitz, J. & Van de Klundert, A. 2000. The sustainability of alliances between

stakeholders in waste management. Using the concept of integrated sustainable waste

management. Working paper for UWEP/CWG.

Arlosoroff, S. 1991. Developing countries struggle with waste management policies.

Waste Management & Research, 9(1): 491-494.

Axinn, W. G. & Pearce, L. D. 2006. Motivations for mixed methods social research.

Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Baud, I. & Schenk, H. 1994. Solid waste management, modes, assessments, appraisals

and linkages in Bangalore. New Delhi: Manohar.

Bartone, C. R. 2000. Summary of the strategic planning guide to municipal solid waste

management. World Bank.

Beukering, P., Madhushree, S., Reyer, G. & Vijay, K. 1999. Analysing urban solid waste

in developing countries: a perspective on Bangalore, India. CREED Working Paper

Series No. 24. IIED. Amsterdam: London and Institute for Environmental Studies.

99

Bilitewski, B., Härdtle, G., Marek, K., Weissbach, A., & Boeddicker, H. 1997. Waste

management. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Boadi, K. O. & Kuitunen, M. 2005. Environment, wealth, inequality and the burden of

disease in the Accra metropolitan area, Ghana. International Journal of Environmental

Health Research, 15(3), 193-206.

Bryman, A. 2004. Social research methods. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University.

Bryman, A. & Bell, E. 2007. Business research methods. New York: Oxford University.

Buclet, N. 2002. Introduction. In Buclet (Ed.) Municipal Waste Management in Europe:

European Policy between Harmonization and Subsidiarity. London: Kluwer Academic.

Buenrosto, O. & Bocco, G. 2003. Solid waste management in municipalities in Mexico:

goals and perspectives. Resource Conservation and Recycling, 39: 251-263.

Centre for Environment and Development (CED). 2003. Study of the attitude and

perception of community towards solid waste management. A case study of

Thiruvananthapuram city-Phase II. Kerala: Kerala Research Programme on Local Level

Development.

Chenje, M. 2000. State of the environment: Zambezi basin. Harare: IUCN.

Chirisa, I. & Mlambo, N. 2008. Situating morality in the housing debate in Harare:

Caseof Matapi Hostels. Retrieved from:

http://ir.polytechnic.edu.na/bitstream/10628/180/1/Charisa%20%26%20Mlambo.%20Sit

uating%20morality%20in%20the%20housing%20debate%20in%20Harare.pdf.

[Accessed 10 October 2011].

100

City of Harare. 1979. Harare (Waste-Management) By-Laws, 1979 (Statutory

Instrument 477 of 1979). Harare: City of Harare.

City of Harare. 1981a. Harare (Waste Management) (Amendment) By-laws, 1981

(Statutory Instrument 127 of 1981). Harare: City of Harare.

City of Harare.1981b. (Anti-litter) By-laws, 1981 (Statutory Instrument 85 of 1981).

Harare: City of Harare.

City of Harare Department of Waste Management. 2011. 2010 Door-to-door refuse

collections report. Harare: City of Harare.

City of Harare Department of Waste Management .undated. Environmental

management workshop report. Harare: City of Harare.

Claggett, S., Hattie, S. & Watson, K. 1998. An integrated approach to sustainable solid

waste management. In E. Thomas-Hope (Ed.), Solid Waste Management: Critical

Issues for Developing Countries . Jamaica: Canoe Press. (pp. 271-277).

Cointreau-Levine, S. 1982. Environmental management of urban solid wastes in

developing countries: A project guide. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

Cointreau, S. 1984. Solid waste collection practice and planning in developing

countries. In J. Holmes (Ed.), Managing Solid Wastes in Developing Countries.

Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. (pp. 151-182).

Denison, R. A. & Ruston, J. 1990. Recycling and incineration. Washington D.C.: Island.

Dev, S. B. 2007. Application of 3R principles to solid waste management on the Asian

Institute of Technology (AIT) Campus. Masters of Engineering in Environmental

Engineering and Management. Thailand: Asian Institute of Technology.

101

Franklin, M. A. 2002. Solid waste stream characteristics. In G. Tchobanoglous and F.

Kreith (Eds.), Handbook of Solid Waste Management Second Edition. New York:

McGraw-Hill Handbooks.

Fudery, C. 1990. Social experts of solid recovery in Asian cities. BKK Environmental

Sanitation Information Centre, AIT.

Galishoff, S. 1998. Newark, the nation's unhealthiest city, 1832-1895. New Brunswick:

Rutgers University.

Ghana Innovation Marketplace (GIM). 2009. Waste Management Conference and

Exhibition: Great Hall, Knust, 11 -12 November 2009.

Gotoh, S. 1989. Solid waste management: a base for healthier metropolitan

development. Regional Development Dialogue, 10(3): xi-xii.

Government of Zimbabwe. 1994. Environmental impact assessment policy. Harare:

Government of Zimbabwe.

Government of Zimbabwe. 2002. Science and technology policy. Harare: Government

of Zimbabwe.

Government of Zimbabwe. 2003. Draft national environmental policy. Harare:

Government of Zimbabwe.

Government of Zimbabwe. 2004. National sustainable development strategy. Harare:

Government of Zimbabwe.

Government of Zimbabwe. 2006 .Draft waste management strategy. Harare:

Government of Zimbabwe.

102

Hardoy, J. E. 2001. Environmental problems in an urbanising world: finding solutions

for cities in Africa, Asia and Latin America. London: Earthscan.

Holmes, J. 1984. Management decisions in developing countries. In J. Holmes (Ed.),

Managing Solid Wastes in Developing Countries. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. (pp.

2-27).

Hope, K. R. & Lekorwe, M. H. 1999. Urbanization and the environment in Southern

Africa: towards a managed framework for the sustainability of cities. Journal of

Environmental Planning and Management, 42(6):837-859.

Jansson, S. D. O. 1997. Environmental profile of Namibia: Report prepared for the

Swedish International Development Authority (SIDA). Windhoek: SIDA.

Jerie, D. 2006. Analysis of institutional solid waste management in Gweru, Zimbabwe.

Eastern Africa Social Science Research Review, 22(1): 103-125.

Jin, J., Wang, Z. & Ran, S. 2006. Solid waste management in Macao: practices and

challenges. Waste Management, 26(1):1045-1051.

Johnson, B. & Onwuegbuzie, A. 2004. Mixed methods research: a research paradigm

whose time has come. Educational Research, 33(7): 14-26.

Johnson, B. & Turner, L. A. 2003. Data collection strategies in mixed methods research.

In Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie , C.(eds). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and

Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage. (pp 297-319).

Kaseke, M. 2005. The use of deposit refunds as pollution control policy in urban areas:

the case of Zimbabwe. Paper prepared for Accounting for Urban Environment

Workshop: Tanzania, 10-15 January 2005.

103

Kemal, M. 2007. Environmental cost benefit analysis of waste to energy recovery in

Nifas silk Lafto sub city Addis Ababa (as a component in the context of integrated solid

waste management). Master of Science degree in Environmental engineering. Addis

Ababa: Addis Ababa University.

Kollikkathara, N., Feng, H. & Stern, E. 2009. A purview of waste management

evolution: special emphasis on USA. Waste Management, 29(2):974-985.

Korfmacher, K.S. 1997. Solid waste collection systems in developing urban areas of

South Africa: an overview and case study. Waste Management and Research, 15(5):

477-494.

Komani, V. 2009. Turning waste into fertilizer. The Herald, 27 March: 7.

Klundert, A. 1999. Integrated sustainable waste management: the selection of

appropriate technologies and the design of sustainable systems is (only) a technical

issue. Paper prepared for the CEDARE/IETC Inter-Regional Workshop on Technologies

for Sustainable Waste.

Kreith, F. 1994. Handbook of solid waste management. McGraw Hill: USA.

Kutiwa, S., Boon, E. & Devuyst, D. 2010. Urban agriculture in low income households

of Harare: an adaptive response to economic crisis. Journal of Human Ecology, 32(2):

85-96.

Lardinois, I. 1996. Integrated sustainable waste management: concept and examples

from Latin America. Lecture at the seminar on Sustainable Urban Development in

Developing Countries, organised by WASTE, IIUE and NUHG. September 12 1996.

104

Lardinios, I. and Van de Klundert, A. 1997. Integrated sustainable waste management.

Paper for the Programme Policy Meeting Urban Waste Expertise Programme. April

1997. (pp.1-6).

Local Environmental Action Plan (LEAP). 2008. Workshop Report. Gweru: LEAP.

Madebwe, V. & Madebwe, C. 2006. Demolition waste management in the aftermath of

Zimbabwe’s Operation Restore Order (Murambatsvina): The case of Gweru, Zimbabwe.

Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 2(4): 217-221.

Mader, J. E. 2011. Applying the integrated solid waste management framework to the

waste collection system in Aguascalientes, AGS, Mexico. Masters of Arts degree in

Planning. Waterloo: University of Waterloo.

Mangizvo R.V. 2010. Illegal dumping of solid waste in the alleys in the central business

district of Gweru, Zimbabwe. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 12(2): 110-

123.

Mangkoedihardjo, S., Pamungkas, A., Ramadhan, A., Saputro, A., Putri D., Khirom I., &

Soleh M. 2007. Priority Improvement Of Solid Waste Management Practice In Java.

Journal of Applied Sciences in Environmental Sanitation, 2 (1): 29-34.

Manyanhaire, I.O., Sigauke, E. & Munasirei, D. 2009. Analysis of domestic solid waste

management system: a case of Sakubva high density suburb in the City Of Mutare,

Manicaland Province, Zimbabwe. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa,

11(2):126-141.

Maseva, C. 2005. A review of the legislative and policy framework for waste

management in Zimbabwe with special reference to Harare, Chitungwiza Municipality

and Epworth Local Board. Harare: Practical Action Southern Africa.

105

McDougall, F., White, P., Franke, M. & Hindle, P. 2001. Integrated solid waste

management: a life cycle inventory. Oxford: Blackwell Science.

Masocha, M. & Tevera, D. S. 2003. Open waste dumps in Victoria Falls town: spatial

patterns, environmental threats and public health implications. Geographical Journal of

Zimbabwe, 33(34): 9-19.

Masundire, H. & Sanyanga, R. 1999. Waste management in the Zambezi Valley: case

studies from Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Canada: University of Guelph.

Mensah, A. & Larbi, E. 2005. Solid waste disposal in Ghana. Retrieved from

www.trend.wastsan.net [Accessed on 15 July 2011].

Momoh, J. J. & Oladebeye, D. H. 2010. Assessment of awareness of attitude and

willingness of people to participate in household solid waste recycling programme in

Ado-Eketi, Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences in Environmental Sanitation.

Monahan, M. 2004. Municipal solid waste study. Cheshire County, New Hampshire.

Mouton, M., 2001. How to succeed in your master’s and doctoral studies. Pretoria: Van

Schaik.

Ogawa, H. 2005. Sustainable solid waste management in developing countries.

Retrieved from www.gdrc.org . [Accessed on 17 July 2011].

Parikh, J.K., & Parikh, K. 1997. Accounting and valuation of Environment, Economic

and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. New York: United Nations.

Parliament of Zimbabwe. 1924. Public Health Act (Chapter 15:09). Harare: Parliament

of Zimbabwe.

106

Parliament of Zimbabwe. 1976. Regional Town and Country Planning Act (Chapter

29:12). Harare: Parliament of Zimbabwe.

Parliament of Zimbabwe. 1988. Rural District Councils Act (Chapter 29:13). Harare:

Parliament of Zimbabwe.

Parliament of Zimbabwe. 1997. Urban Councils Act (Chapter 29:15)

Parliament of Zimbabwe. 1998. Water Act (Chapter 20:24). Harare: Parliament of

Zimbabwe.

Parliament of Zimbabwe. 2002. Environmental Management Act (Chapter 20:27).

Harare: Parliament of Zimbabwe.

Practical Action Southern Africa. 2006. Proceedings of the emerging issues in urban

waste management workshop: Harare 10 February 2006.

Pradhan, U. M. 2008. Sustainable solid waste management in a mountain ecosystem:

Darjeeling, West Bengal, India. Master of Natural Resources Management. Manitoba:

University of Manitoba.

Puopiel, F. 2010. Solid waste management in Ghana: the case of Tamale Metropolitan

Area. Master of Science in Development Policy and Planning. Kumasi : Kwame Krumah

University of Science and Technology.

Puorideme, D. 2010. Solid waste management in Wa, challenges and opportunities.

Master of Science in Development Planning and Management. Kumasi: Kwame

Nkrumah University of Science and Technology.

107

Ramokate, T. & Basu, D. 2009. Health care waste management at an academic

hospital: knowledge and practices of doctors and nurses. South African Medical

Journal, 99(06): 444-5.

Rathana, K. 2009. Solid waste management in Cambodia. Cambodia Institute for

Cooperation and Peace, Working Paper No. 27.

Rimberg, D. 1975. Municipal solid waste management. New Jersey: Noyes Data

Corporation.

Rosario, A. & Scheinberg, A. 2004. Integrated sustainable waste management in

Bangalore: lessons from the UWEP programme in India. Urban Waster Expertise

Programme.

Sachiti, R. 2010. Zimbabwe: Mbare Flats, time bomb. The Herald, 9 April 2010:4.

Seale, C. 2004. Researching society and culture. 2nd ed. London: SAGE.

Segosebe, E. M. & Van der Post. 1991. Urban industrial solid waste pollution in

Botswana: practice, attitudes and policy recommendations. Gaborone: University of

Botswana.

Trochim, W. M. K. 2006. Philosophy of research. Retrieved from:

http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/philosophy.php. [Accessed 28 September

2011].

Tanskanen, J. H. 2000. Strategic planning of municipal solid waste management.

Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 30:111-133.

Taru, P. & Kuvarega, A. 2005. Solid waste management. The case of Parirenyatwa

Hospital, Zimbabwe. Rev Biomed, 16:153-158.

108

Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H. & Eliason, R. 1977. Solid wastes: engineering

principles and management issues. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H., & Vigil, S. A. 1993. Integrated solid waste

management: engineering principles and management issues. New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Tsiboe, I. A. & Marbell, E. 2004. A look at urban waste disposal problems in Accra.

Denmark: Roskilde University.

Turan, N. G., Coruh, S., Akdemir, A. & Ergun, O. N. 2009. Municipal solid waste

strategies in Turkey. Waste Management, 29:465-469.

United Nations (UN). 1992. United Nations Conference on Environment and

Development, Agenda 21, Rio de Janeiro. United Nations.

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2007. Assessment of solid waste

management in Liberia. Post-Conflict and Disaster Management Branch in collaboration

with the Environmental Protection Agency: Liberia.

United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP). 2009. Developing Integrated Solid

Waste Management Plan Training Manual, Volume 2: Assessment of Current Waste

Management Systems and Gaps Therein. Osaka/Shiga : UNEP.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).1999. State and local

solutions to solid waste management problems. Retrieved from: http://www.epa.gov.

[Accessed on 20 July 2011].

109

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2002. Solid waste and

emergency response. Retrieved from: www.epa.gov/globalwarming, [Accessed 27 June

2011].

USPS 2000. Solid waste Management Plan for Thimphu City, Bhutan, Draft version,

April 2000 .Bhutan: Urban Sector Programme Support Secretariat.

Van de Klundert, A. & Anschutz, J. 1999. Integrated sustainable waste management:

the selection of appropriate technologies and the design of sustainable systems is not

(only) a technical issue. CEDARE/IETC Inter-Regional Workshop on Technologies for

Sustainable Waste Management. Alexandria, Egypt. July 1999.

Yedla, S. 2005. Modified landfill design for sustainable waste Management.

International Journal on Global Energy Issues, 23(1):93-105.

Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association (ZELA). 2003. Summary of the

Environmental Management Act (Chapter 20:27) for use by community groups. Harare:

ZELA.

Zerbock, O. 2003. Urban solid waste management: waste reduction in developing

nations. Retrieved from: www.cee.mtu.edu. [Accessed on 22 July 2011].

Zuilen, L. 2006. Planning of an integrated solid waste management system in

Suriname: a case study in Greater Paramaribo with focus on households. PhD thesis,

Ghent University.

Zurbrügg, C. 2002. Urban solid waste management in low-income countries of Asia:

how to cope with the garbage crisis. Presented for: Scientific Committee on Problems of

the Environment (SCOPE) Urban Solid Waste Management. Review Session: Durban,

South Africa, November 2002.

110

Appendices

Appendix A: Semi-structured interview guide for Mbare solid waste management household survey.

UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE, FACULTY OF ECONOMIC AND

MANAGEMENT SCIENCES, CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT

Topic: Integrated sustainable waste management as an alternative solid

waste management strategy in Mbare Township, Zimbabwe.

Household survey semi-structured questionnaire

This research is only for academic purposes and information obtained and answers given will be treated in strict confidence.

Thank you.

Location of house:……………………………………………………………………………

House Number and street: ………………….……………………………………………….

Interview date:………………………………………………………………………………....

Questionnaire number:……………………………………………………………………….

111

SECTION A

Background Information of Respondent

1. What is your age? (tick appropriate) 18-24

25-29

30-34

35-39

40-44

45-49

50-54

55+

2. What do you do to earn an income?

…………………………………………………………………………………………

3. Approximately how much money do you earn/generate in a month ($USD).

………………………………………………………………………………………....

4. What is your highest level of education None

Primary level

Junior level/ZJC

Secondary level/O level

112

Advanced level/A Level Vocational/Training college

Tertiary/degree

5. How many are you in your household?

…………………………………………………………………………………

113

SECTION B

Waste, Waste Generation, Separation, Disposal

6. What are the major constituents of the waste your household generated in the past year? Food

Rubbish

Ashes

Special waste

Plastics

Paper/cardboard boxes

Metals

7. How has the composition of waste you generate changed over the years?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

8. Do you separate your waste before disposal? If yes, how? Why?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

114

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

9. Where do you dispose of your waste?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

10. Are there skip bins in your area. How many metres are they from your house? How regular do you use them?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

11. Have you ever dumped your waste at unapproved places? If so, where and why?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

12. What are the other methods you use to dispose of your waste? Burn

Composite

Reuse

115

Bury underground Sell

Other

13. Explain the methods used in question 12 (as necessary):

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

116

SECTION C

Waste collection service

14. Which waste management institution has been collecting your waste since August 2010? (Tick appropriate, can be more than one option)

Institution Tick Name/Comment City of Harare

NGOs

Private company

Informal waste collectors/volunteers

Other

15. How many times is waste collected in a week in your area?

Frequency Tick Not at all

Once

Twice

Thrice

Four times

Five times Every day

If not any of the above, how often?

117

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

16. What is the mode of waste collection used in your area since August 2010?

Mode Tick Explain(how, e.g. refuse truck) Door-to-door

Communal

Other

17. Are you charged for waste collection?

……………………………………………………………………………………………..

18. If yes, how much do you pay per month?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

19. Are you in a position to pay the charges?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

20. If no, why?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

21. Do you know where collected waste is disposed?

118

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

22. Are you happy with the frequency and ways waste is collected in your area?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

23. In your opinion what are some of the things the local council need to do to improve waste collection in your area? (if you can mention at least 4).

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

119

SECTION D

Reduce, Reuse/Recycle, Composting

24. What do you do to reduce waste generated by your household?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

25. What do you think are some of the challenges you face in trying to reduce waste?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

26. What can the council or other institutions do to help your capacity to reduce waste generated by your household?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

27. What are your feelings on recycling/reusing waste?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

28. What type of waste, if any, do you recycle/reuse at present? (Type of waste and how it is re-used)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

120

29. Do you think there is potential to generate income from waste recycling?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

30. What can the council/government, NGOs and other institutions do to help you recycle waste?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

31. Do you do composting?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

32. If yes, what do you composite?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

33. How?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

34. What do you use the compost for?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

121

SECTION E

Stakeholders

35. Please list at least five most important stakeholders in waste management in your area

Name of Stakeholder

Interest (What you think they want in Mbare?)

Potential (What do you think they are able to bring to Mbare)

Current support(What are they currently doing)

What could they do in your opinion which they are not doing at present/ What you would want them to do?

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

122

SECTION F

Challenges in waste management

36. What do you think are five key challenges the local authorities are currently facing in solid waste management in Mbare?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

37. What do you think are some of the solutions to these challenges?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

123

SECTION G

Waste management policies and laws

38. List any waste management policies and/ laws you are aware of.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

39. What do you think are some of the problems with these laws/policies?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

40. What do you think can be done to solve these problems related to the laws and policies?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

124

SECTION H

Effects of poor solid waste management

41. What are some of the effects of uncollected solid waste in your area?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME

125

Appendix B: Semi-structured key-informant interview guide for Mbare solid waste management service provider interviews.

UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE, FACULTY OF ECONOMIC AND

MANAGEMENT SCIENCES, CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT

Topic: Integrated sustainable waste management as an alternative solid

waste management strategy in Mbare Township, Zimbabwe.

Service provider interview guide

This research is only for academic purposes and information obtained and answers given will be treated in strict confidence.

Thank you.

Position of respondent:………………………………………………..………………………………

Date of response: ………………….…………………….………………………………….

Questionnaire number:……………………………………………………………………….

126

SECTION A

Waste Generation

1. Approximately what is quantity of solid waste generated in Mbare in a day in tonnes?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

2. What is the quantity of waste generated per capita in a day in tonnes?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. List the common types of solid waste generated in the area # Type

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

v.

4. Do you separate solid waste before disposal? ……………………………………………………………………………………………

5. If yes to 4 above, explain how.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

127

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

6. If yes to 4, above why do you separate waste (list reasons)? # Reasons

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

v.

7. What are the main components of waste generated in the Mbare area (indicate percentages)

Type Percentage Plastic

Glass

Wood

Metals

128

Food waste

Special waste

Demolition/construction waste

Other

8. List solid waste generators in Mbare and put approximate percentages of waste generated

Solid waste generators Percentage of waste Households

Light industries

Agricultural produce vendors

Informal businesses

Shops

Hospital/ health facilities

Other 1 (name):

Other 2 (name):

129

SECTION B

Waste Collection

9. What are the modes of collection used and the number of times collection is done per week?

Mode of collection Number of Times per week

10. Who is responsible for waste collections?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

11. Does separation of waste happen at source ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

12. If yes to 11, above who does the separation and how is it done?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

130

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

13. Is there any organised scavenger force being used for collection?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

14. Is there any special arrangement for collection of toxic wastes ( eg, batteries, paints, solvents, medical waste). If yes, explain.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

15. What are the average total costs for waste collection per week? Indicate amount in USD$.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

131

16. List the key challenges you are facing in waste collection

# Challenge 1

2

3

4

5

132

SECTION C

Disposal

17. Where is waste collected in the area disposed?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

18. What is the distance covered to final disposal site in kilometers?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

19. Are there any problems associated with this distance? If yes, list them,

# Problems of distance 1

2

3

4

5

20. How do the problems affect your ability to dispose frequently at site?

# How distance affect frequency of disposal at site 1

2

3

4

5

133

21. List methods you use to manage the solid waste generated (tick appropriate).

Method Tick Approximately what percentage of total solid waste collected is managed this way?

Composting

Recycling

Incineration

Reduction

None

Other

22. Why do you choose the methods above to manage solid waste

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

134

SECTION D

Treatment

23. In there any treatment done to toxic waste (eg batteries)?

....................................................................................................................................

24. If yes, what type of treatment? Explain briefly.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

25. Is composting practiced?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

26. Is incineration used?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

If yes, is it done with energy recovery?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

If no, has the possibility been explored?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

135

SECTION E

Availability of waste management resources

27. Waste collection and disposal equipment

Equipment Number available (if known)

Number required

Dustbins

Skips

Tricycles

Motor cycles

Graders

Skip loaders

Compaction trucks

Roll on/Roll off trucks

Bulldozers

Road sweepers

Others:

28. Availability of qualified staff to manage waste

Personnel (Technical staff)

Number available (if known)

Qualifications

136

29. What is your annual budget for waste management in USD$

…………………………………………………………………………………………..

30. How do you finance the budget

Source of finance Percentage Government grant

Own revenue collection

Donations

Other:

31. Do beneficiaries of your waste management service pay fees?

………………………………………………………………………………………………..

32. What percentage of these fees is ploughed back to waste management?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

33. What problems are you facing regarding financing your waste management

budget if any?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

137

SECTION F

Role of education and Public participation

34. Do you carry out campaign to raise awareness on waste problems?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

35. If yes, please outline the type of campaigns and methodologies used?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

36. What impact has the campaigns had so far?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

37. Are there ways women and children are involved in the campaigns? If yes, explain.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

138

SECTION G

Policy and legislative framework

38. Which policies and laws influence you most in your work on waste management?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

39. What do you see as the gaps and weaknesses in policies and laws governing waste management ?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

40. What needs to be done to address these gaps and in policies and laws?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

139

SECTION H

Stakeholders

41. Please list for me at least five most important stakeholders in waste management in your area

Name of Stakeholder

Interest (What you think they want in Mbare?)

Potential (What you think they are able to bring to Mbare)

Current support (What are they currently doing)

What could they do in your opinion which they are not doing at present/ What you would want them to do?

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

140

SECTION I

Challenges

42. What are the five key challenges you are currently facing in solid waste management in Mbare?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

44. What do you think are some of the solutions to these challenges?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

141

Appendix C: Observation guide for Mbare for solid waste management study.

UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE, FACULTY OF ECONOMIC AND

MANAGEMENT SCIENCES, CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT

Topic: Integrated sustainable waste management as an alternative solid

waste management strategy in Mbare Township, Zimbabwe.

Observation guide

Observations

Is waste left on the street and vacant land? What are the main components of the waste dumped in the open? Is there waste dumped in alleys? Is there waste dumped in water bodies? Streams? How far is the waste lumps from homes Do people try to avoid the waste hips? Are there communal waste collection areas Are there waste scavengers on illegal waste disposal places Do children play around the illegal waste disposal sites Do dogs and other pets scavenge for food on these illegal waste heaps? Do people burn waste? Why? (maybe lack of regular collection) Photography will be used to capture some observations and where people’s

photographs are taken consent will be sought first and the use of photos in the dissertation will be acknowledged.

142

Appendix D: Centre for Development Support field work support letter