Recycling, Waste and Development

Frank AckermanTufts University, USA

International Conference on“Asian Megacities and Global Sustainability”

Science Council of JapanTokyo, November 11, 2004

First, Two Apologies1. For our election

49% of us are just as unhappy as you are!

2. For speaking to this conference with so little knowledge of Asian cities

I hope I can draw some useful lessons and parallels from what I do know

Recycling and PovertyWhat is the role of recycling in the Asian megacities of the 21st century?Poverty makes recycling look too easy!

Low-income people willingly collect many discarded materials for resale

What happens when incomes rise?Urban waste expands and changes Poverty no longer forces people to recycleNew methods are needed for recovery of valuable waste materials

Low Wages and Waste RecoveryAt low enough wages, many wastes will be recoveredIn Tokugawa Japan, human night soil was collected to fertilize farms

Result: cities were very cleanLess labor-intensive fertilizers became available in the early 20th century

Suddenly Tokyo had a waste disposal problem, initially ”solved” by ocean dumping

Sendai, Japan, 1954. Collection of human waste for fertilizer briefly resumed in the years of postwar poverty.

Poverty leads to many forms of recycling – some worse than othersValuable materials can be recovered by digging through landfillsPublic health effects of landfill scavenging are dreadfulChild labor is often involved

Pictured here: Brazil

Scavenging

Recycling – or Hard Labor?

If wages are low enough, even the biggest ships can be manually “recycled”(pictured here: Bangladesh)

Wages vs. Materials Prices

When wages rise, will plastic bags still be collected and transported this way in Beijing?

US economic history:Labor time required to buy materials, 1830-1969

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1820 1840 1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980

Ratio of wholesale prices to average US manufacturing wage (1890-1969) or urban unskilled labor wage (1830-1889).

Min

utes

of l

abor

at a

vera

ge w

age

Cotton sheeting (1 yard)Nails (1 pound)

Are Aluminum Cans Litter?Aluminum beverage cans are worth about US $.01 per canMexico: there are no aluminum cans on the streetsUS: 39 states have no deposits on beer and soft drink containers

In these states, aluminum cans are often found in street litterUS: 11 states have deposits on beverage containers, usually $.05.

In these states, there are no aluminum cans on the streetsConclusion: incomes (and deposits) determine whether aluminum cans are waste

At Mexican incomes, people will collect cans for $.01 At US incomes, people will collect cans for $.05 but not for $.01

The Development of WasteAs incomes rise, urban solid waste increases in quantity – and changes in composition

Food waste is a declining fraction of the waste streamManufactured goods, especially paper, make up a growing fraction of waste

Fewer wastes are recovered through market forces alone

At high enough incomes, even aluminum becomes wasteSome new products have low market value (plastics) or create hazards for recycling (electronics, chemicals)

The result is a growing waste management problem

Paper Waste and National Income Level

4%

15%15%20%

34%36%

Low income Middle income High incomesource: World Bank, "What a Waste: Solid Waste

Management in Asia"

Pape

r as

frac

tion

of s

olid

was

te

19952025

The Importance of Paper

Most of the material collected by US recycling programs consists of paper products

Most of the revenue of US recycling programs comes from selling recovered paper

Should paper be recycled or incinerated?Some studies suggest environmental impacts are similar for burning or recycling paper (landfilling is worst)Climate change impacts are better for recycling, due to increased carbon sequestration in forests

US Recycling Programs (1996)

0

200

400

600

800

U.S. Bergen Seattle

lbs

per c

apita

PaperOther

Greenhouse Gas Reduction from Recycling (per capita, 1996)

0

100

200

300

400

U.S. Bergen Seattle

kg C

equ

ival

ent p

er c

apita

PaperOther

Two Wrong Views of “High-income Recycling”

Recycling does not solve a crisis of disposal capacity or costs

In most places, there is no capacity crisis to be solvedRecycling often costs a little more than waste disposal

Recycling is not an expensive luxuryEstimates of huge costs are based on analysis of very inefficient programs – or on miscalculations and exaggerationsRecycling costs only a little more than disposal

People Want to RecycleUS recycling programs cost $21 per household per year more than waste disposal (early 1990s average)US and European studies find people are willing to pay more than this for recycling

Cancellation of recycling programs to save money (attempted in New York City and Washington) has been very unpopular, programs have been restored

Most people believe the environmental benefits of recycling are worth the modest costsRecycling rates increase with higher income and population density

The Challenge of Modern Recycling

Poverty offers one road to recyclingEconomic development will block this road – creating new wastes and removing old incentives for recycling

Is there another road? Can we recover valuable materials from waste without being poor?

As Asian cities develop, they will quickly come to face the problems of “high-income waste streams”and the need for modern recycling