gem santosh

8/2/2019 GEM Santosh

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gem-santosh 1/14

Solid WasteManagement- Public participation

Santosh Sabyasachi08ME01024



INTRODUCTION

Solid Waste: Solid Wastes are unwanted materials disposed of byman, which can neither flow into streams nor escape immediately into the

atmosphere. These non-gaseous and non-liquid residues result from various

human activities. These cause pollution in water, soil and air.

Solid Waste Management: The proper disposal of SW derived

from any source is dependent on management practices. A management

system must be developed and described that incorporates many diverse

factors. Those factors considered may include economics, engineering,

land use ordinances, environmental regulations, geography and sociology.

A Solid Waste Management (SWM) system that could optimize these

parameters would be designed based on figure below:



INTRODUCTION(continued):

Community/Public participation is the

sociological process by which residents organise themselves

and become involved at the level of a living area or aneighbourhood, to improve the conditions of daily life (water,

sanitation, health, education, etc.). It comprises various

degrees of individual or collective involvement (financial

and/or physical contributions, social and/or political

commitment) at different stages of a project. Since it implies

that residents set up management committees in charge of

equipment.



Why Public Participation:With Increase in the amount of Waste:

more litter and a dirtier town environment,

more street sweepers are necessary, more garbage collection trucks are necessary, larger garbage disposal sites are necessary, negative environmental impacts due to waste dumping grow more

serious, the cost for the environmental protection increases. an increase in the amount of solid waste management work, an increase in the solid waste management expense, and aggravated environmental problems

This makes it exceedingly difficult for a local authority to perform solidwaste management by itself.



Benefits:Towards project:

Improvement of

project design andeffectiveness.

Enhancement of theimpact andsustainability of

projects. Improvement of

project efficiency.

Towards Community:

Building localcapacities andcapabilities.

Involvement indecision-making.

Empowerment.



Public Participation Models: The Exclusionary Model: This model indicates that the

government or agency is the exclusive guardian of the people andany self-acclaimed representative of the public interest was anofficious meddler. Only competitors and other institutionalstakeholders were allowed to participate. This proved inappropriatefor risk-oriented decision-making. There may be some usefulness incases of rate hearings and public utility regulation.

The Confrontational Model: The Confrontational Model is

at the other end of the spectrum to the Exclusionary Model andresults from a stringent application of the Exclusionary Model. This isreally not a desirable model. It is not effective in addressing matters

of intense local interest but may be effective if activists can attractthe sympathy of a large number of other inactive members of public.It is a way of keeping certain topics or concerns on the publicagenda or getting agencies to revisit decisions already made.



The Adversarial Model: The Adversarial Model represents

a situation where all interested groups have a right to participateby submitting facts, evidence, views and arguments. The agencyassumes the role of neutral decision-maker. Based on courtroomadjudication, parties who may be represented by counsel areusually allowed testimony through experts. This is dominated bylawyers and the settlement presumes winners and losers.

The Due Consideration Model: The Due Consideration

Model is similar to the adversarial model except that the agency takes

a position prior to the public hearing and invites the public to comment

on their decision as well as on the issues generally. It does not adopt theprocedural protection of the Adversarial Model and so is less

burdensome. The agency is only required to give due consideration of

outsiders and explain its chosen action.



The Mediation Model: The Mediation Model requires that

representatives of groups meet together, often with the aid of a

mediator or facilitator, to present facts and arguments so as to reachan agreement on the ultimate result. The agency may participate in thediscussions and attempt to implement agreed solutions. Publicparticipation may be invited at this stage while Negotiators meet untilagreement is reached. This may be a useful approach in planningSWMPs as the relationship between government and residents is often

confrontational. The Advisory Committee Model: The Advisory Committee

Model is similar to Mediation Model except that it relies heavily onscientific and technological expertise. The Agency appoints acommittee of disinterested experts to advise on the technical issues andon a resolution. This model seems favoured by decision makers who are

not scientifically trained and who do not want to “take the heat”.Agency may lose control of the outcome but this may be reduced bychoosing experts for the 15 advisory committee whose views ontechnical issues will yield results that are in accordance with thedecision-maker’s policy preferences.



Public Education:

Public education provides: An opportunity for community members to obtain

information about community’s solid waste managementprogram;

A way for community members to express opinions and for community decision-makers to take these opinions intoconsideration; and

A source of information regarding opportunities for

participation in the program.



Designing an effective PublicEducation Program:

The main factors to consider in designing aneffective education program are:

Identifying goals and audiences.

Crafting a clear and useful message.

Choosing an outreach method.

Creating incentives and deterrents.



Public Participation Plan:The following areas should be considered as part ofthe Public Participation Plan:

The target group should be clearly identified from a stakeholders’assessment.

The most appropriate techniques should be employed to disseminate

information on the project. These include the media, surveys, brochuresand pamphlets, public displays, workshops for review of initial assessmentdocuments, model demonstrations, community advocates, advisorycommittees, etc.

Special attention should be paid to the planning and execution of townmeetings.

The monitoring indicators should be agreed and the monitoring andassessment of outcomes should be based on these indicators which may

include: number of attendees; number of questions and number ofpersons asking questions; value of the questions and ideas; adequacy offeedback at the meetings; level of information sharing; level of two waycommunication; Level of consensus; and conflict resolution.

Specific efforts should be made to address poverty reduction throughSWMP interventions.



The Social Analyst may make a qualitative assessment of theparticipation exercise but may want to attempt a quantitativeassessment based on assigning raw scores and weights to the indicators.It may be claimed that even the weights may be subjective.

An inventory of the issues to be addressed should be developed. Thefollow-up by the Project Promoters should be monitored by the socialanalyst who should keep track of the design changes required to addressthe issues. This will determine the extent of collaboration and

empowerment achieved.

The analyst may summarise the performance based on the extent towhich there was active listening by the project promoters based on anassessment at the meeting.

The analyst should make a report on the process which should be

available for reference during project implementation to assist in theaudit of the participation process.

Focus/target/community group discussions are key to publicparticipation



Conclusion: An appropriate Public Participation Plan should assist

in reducing social risk and overall project risk. Thereare lessons that un-resolved issues may result in public

protest and threaten development projects. SWMPsare complex projects which must be discussed innational fora in order to formulate, prepare andimplement efficient and efficacious SWMPs. Thelessons of experience must be learned andappropriate tools used to determine the best designfor future SWM projects. For waste management

projects to have a continuing impact, communityparticipation is a precondition and this entailsinvolving the community at different stages anddegrees of intensity in the project cycle.

gem santosh

Documents