Municipal Solid Waste Management in Asia: A Comparative Analysis

C. Visvanathan and J. Trankler

Environmental Engineering & Management, School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian
Institute of Technology, P. O. Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand
Email: visu@ait.ac.th

Abstract

The present scenario of municipal solid waste management (MSWM) in four study
countries of Asia – namely China, India, Sri Lanka and Thailand is highlighted
comparing technical, economic, legal and, health issues. An overview of various aspects
of the municipal solid waste (MSW) is provided comprising all domestic and non-
hazardous wastes in the urban areas of the above countries with emphasis on the
generation and composition of MSW, management needs, collection systems practiced,
transportation and disposal systems used. The collections systems and their lacunae, the
recycling practiced with respect to the involvement of the government and the private
sectors are underlined. Disposal methods in India and Thailand find mention in
particular for landfill and incineration. Other issues taken up are the effects on MSW due
to cultural aspects and climatic variations. Further to that it is reflected on the public
awareness and participation of the community in MSWM as well as the involvement of
the NGOs and the private sector. Finally, the emerging trends with respect to the
integrated solid waste management (ISWM) have been discussed.

1. Introduction

Solid waste management (SWM) is an integral part of the urban environment and
planning of the urban infrastructure to ensure a safe and healthy human environment
while considering the promotion of sustainable economic growth. Rapid economic
growth by industrialization of the developing countries in Asia has created serious
problems of waste disposal due to uncontrolled and unmonitored urbanization [1]. The
problem is further aggravated by the lack of financial as well human resources trained in
SWM practices in the sphere of collection, transportation, processing and final disposal.
Whereas aspects like recycle, reuse and recovery of the solid waste is grossly demand
and supply driven or disorganized in most cases. In this scenario, the responsible persons
or agencies concerned with the public health and environment protection face the crisis of
ineffective MSWM. The waste generated in the developing countries is similar in
composition, the variation between regions being dictated by the climatic, cultural, and
industrial, infrastructural and legal factors. The four study countries of Asia used for the
comparative study have been chosen due to the large population in China and India with
wide geographical variations while Sri Lanka and Thailand represent newly industrialized
nations. In 2001, China had an economic growth of 7.3% in 2001, India 5.9%, Sri Lanka
4.9% and Thailand 4.6% [2]. All the four countries are experiencing a rapid economic
growth and urbanization. The MSWM systems practiced in those countries reviewed are
representative cross-section of Asian regions with respect to climatic and socio-economic
variations.

1
1.1 Significance of MSWM
Asia is witnessing a rapid increase in urban population with about 35 percent of its
total population residing in urban areas and the annual growth in urban population is
nearly 4 percent. China’s policy of urbanization intends to increase urban population
from 30 to 50 percent by the year 2010. It is anticipated that by 2025, about 52 percent of
the Asians would be living in urban areas causing a major shift in the distribution of the
population as well as the expansion of the urban boundaries [3]. This significant urban
growth as compared to the developed countries as indicated in Figure 1 would put even
more pressure on the partially existing MSWM infrastructure. The rapid economic
growth has improved the standards of living of the urban dwellers thus enabling them to
change their pattern of consumption of goods. This has been creating a higher per capita
waste generation rendering the existing MSWM system ineffective and hence has put on
the risk of massive failure.

100%
1970
80% 2000
2025
60%

40%

20%

0%
Africa Asia Europe North
America

Figure 1. Comparative increase of urban population.

1.2 Failures associated with MSWM

The associated problems in MSWM in Asia are basically inadequate institutional
facilities to deal with the problem arising out of shortage of expertise, financial resources
legal and administrative enforcement of environmental regulations, many of which do not
conform to the need of the time. Coupled with this is the lack of public awareness and
environmental ethics that results in uncontrolled solid waste disposal. Most of the
developing countries are aware of this gigantic problem related to MSWM. The financial
factor is a major constraint leading to the current negligence of sector in urban
infrastructure. Part of the financial deficit is the insufficient fee structure and inadequate
financing from central funds rather than through the contributions of the polluters. Lack
of sufficient awareness at the grassroots level of the waste generators adds to the problem
of littering. As a result there is a serious threat to public health due to environmental
pollution. A study of the MSWM issues in the four countries has highlighted the main

2
technical factors associated with solid waste from its generation to the composition,
collection and transportation, and final disposal systems with the headway made in
recycle, reuse and recovery of the valuables.

2. Technical issues

In considering the chief technical operations involved in MSWM, the guidelines on

the methods applied are based on the technically advanced nations and their regulations,
which may not be amenable to the conditions of the developing countries [4]. The
associated environmental and public health risks play a key role in designing the
operations that can vary based on the technical, climatic and socio-economic set up of the
developing countries. The MSW generated in the study countries vary accordingly.
However, the most important aspects in the solid waste issues are waste minimization at
source and extensive reuse, recovery and recycle of materials carried out mainly by the
informal sectors. Whereas in all study countries, very little attention is given to the final
disposal.

2.1 Solid waste generation

Solid waste generation in the study countries is based on the economic development,
density of population, size of the urban habitation and consumption rate of commercial
goods. The per capita generation of solid waste in Asian cities is given in Figure 2 which
indicates a range of 0.2 to 1.7 kg/day. This is mainly due to economic disparity among
the population especially with regard to China which has a wide range based on the
economic status and population density. The urban population is over 38 percent and the
waste generation has been increasing over the years [5]. Similarly, the urban population
of India is 28% though the figure for waste generated is based on estimates from the
volume. The higher level of waste generation in Sri Lanka is due to increased
consumption patterns as well as the movement of the people from the rural areas to urban
centers. In Thailand over 23% of the population is urban and its rate of economic growth
causes the higher value in waste generation per capita per day. As indicated the waste
generated is primarily biodegradable that is usually dumped on barren land or non-
engineered landfills.
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
kg/day.person

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
China India Sri Lanka Thailand

Figure 2. Waste generation per capita per day.

3
2.2 Waste composition and variations
The inter-related factors contribute to different patterns of waste composition. The
variation for the four study countries is given in Figure 3.

90 Ash & others = 40.3 Rubber/leather = 1.6

Coal ash = 5.7 Textile = 3.5 Textile = 2.6
80 Brick/pottery = 5.5 Glass = 2.1 Glass/stone/can = 5.2
70 Glass = 2 Leather = 0.8 Wood = 4
60 Fiber = 3.9 Others = 4.1
1
Wood = 7.8
(%)w/w

50
Others = 1.5
40
30 Glass = 0.3
20 2 Others = 1.5
3 4
10 5
0
China India Sri Lanka Thailand

(1) Food w aste (2) Miscellaneous (3)Paper (4)Plastics (5)Metal

Figure 3. Comparison of organic and inorganic components of the MSW.

Looking at the composition of the waste generated in these countries, one can
conclude that the biodegradable portion dominates the bulk of MSW. Generally the
biodegradable portion is mainly due to food and yard waste, typical of the developing
countries whereas the developed regions have a higher paper and cardboard content [6].
The composition dictates the technology needed for waste processing prior to disposal. In
most of the countries composting would be the most appropriate technology for such
waste reducing it almost by half. Incineration would not be a suitable option due to the
extreme moisture content and accordingly a low calorific value, too low for a self-
sustaining incineration. The waste composition from India indicates a comparable lower
food but higher inorganic (ash and dust) content. The lower values for paper, glass and
plastic are due to the intensive collection and scavenging by informal waste collectors
[7]. China has also higher ash content, which is due to the geographical location in the
temperate latitudes and common use of raw coal. Thailand on the other hand has an
increasing trend in plastic and paper - an impact of the progressing industrialization and
urbanization with a growing GDP [5].

2.3 Collection and transport

Generally speaking, waste collection service does not reach the entire population of
the urban centers. On the other hand people are not aware of the facilities provided,
resulting in uncollected waste, which can exceed 20 - 50% [8]. The collection ratio varies
from city to city and the systems are either inadequate or inefficient. Most of the
collection systems range from the use of small and impoverished metal or plastic
containers or enclosures and waste platforms to well-monitored bins, which are grossly
inadequate. The transport systems include a great variety of vehicles. If more efficient
collection trucks are under operation the age of the fleet in general is old and their

4
availability is low. This hampers the overall collection process as up 50% of the trucks
might not be working due to lack of spare parts or continuous breakdown. Further to that
collection crews increase their income by scavenging the waste thus reducing the
collection efficiency. Storage bins are either in short supply or collection is not adequate
to cause spilling and littering about. There are hardly any transfer stations, which can
collect and handle the waste for systematic disposal. The basic problem emanates from
the lack of technical expertise that is able to direct the MSW collection and transport
systems. The key factor of a poor collection performance is inadequate resources and
attention of the government while the authorities lack to comprehend the complications
that arise out of solid waste pollution.

2.4 Resource recovery and recycling

Proper MSWM would call for material recovery and recycling, reuse and reduction of
the solid waste. Scavenging of the recoverable materials takes place in urban areas, which
ultimately reaches the recycling units in several steps through the scrap and waste
dealers. Despite the health hazards, the resource recovery by scavengers, rag pickers and
itinerant waste collectors begin right at the household level with specific items. Recycling
of wastes has increased from 10 to 22% since 1990 to 1998 in the Asia Pacific region [9].
This has been prompted by the involvement of the local authorities, NGOs and other
environmental organizations that have initiated the recycling projects. Two cases in Sri
Lanka and Thailand have been discussed below.
In Maharagama (Sri Lanka), the Ministry of Forestry and Environment (MoFE) has
encouraged 2,300 households to separate paper and cardboard, plastic, glass and metal at
the source effectively reducing the quantity of waste collected for final disposal. The
recovered materials are sent to the industries utilizing them. MoFE, local authorities and
NGOs have used the example set in this municipality as a cornerstone to encourage
similar activities in other places [10].
In Thailand, a private venture M/S Wongpanitch Group Company has developed to a
recycling tycoon based on a junk shop business established by the family several decades
ago. That company has an estimated throughput of more than 100,000 tons with branches
all over Thailand as well as other companies franchising its system. It buys a great variety
of materials for processing in its own recycling units. It sells the recycled materials
locally and even exports them. The business of junk shops has its tradition and registered
companies work intensively on the recycling market [11].
Likewise, China has a high potential of recycling scrap metals, rubber, plastic and
glass as every year, about US$ 3.6 billion worth of recyclable materials are wasted [5]. In
India, recycling and reuse is practiced effectively reducing the per capita waste
generation. Unsoiled paper cardboards, plastics, glass and metal scraps are readily
marketable and the itinerant collectors begin the recovery from door to door while the rag
pickers and scavengers make a living out of selling recyclable material either from the
waste enclosures, platforms or the open dumps despite the risks due to health hazards.
Recycling has in some parts, especially the urban centers of the countries reviewed a
strong participation of the local people due to the value of the materials. The level in
which recyclables are segregated manually at source or at the involved recycling
companies is astonishing. The reduction of waste arriving at the disposal site might be
accounted for 30 to 45%.

5
2.5 Processing and disposal
Proper disposal of MSW is a necessity to minimize environmental health impacts and
degradation of land resources. In developing countries, MSW is commonly disposed of
by transporting and discharging in open dumps, which are environmentally unsafe.
Systematic disposal methods are composting, landfilling and incineration. Looking at the
most common disposal methods in the study countries indicate the share of open
dumping to be 90% in India, 85% in Sri Lanka, 65% in Thailand and 50% in China
(Figure 4). The so-called landfill is mostly covering refuse in the dumpsite by soil neither
with proper technical input nor with treatment of the emerging emissions to water, air and
soil.

90
80
70
(%) MSW

60
1
50
40
2
30
20
3 4 5
10
0
China India Sri Lanka Thailand

(1) Open dumping (2) Landfilling (3) Composting (4) Incineration (5) Others*

Figure 4. MSW disposal methods practiced in study countries [9].

2.5.1 Composting
Composting is an integral part of the waste processing and disposal systems. As
observed from Figure 3, the higher biodegradable portion of MSW calls for the use of
composting technique, which is being practiced in small scale. This is due to the
economic strictures, lack of awareness and basic technical know-how in most urban
areas. Two most common methods for the composting of waste are windrow composting
and vermiculture. Examples of each system are discussed below.
In India, M/S Excel Industries Ltd has set up its “bio-organic soil enricher” plants at
Kolkata, Bangalore and other places with capacities of 35 to 500 tons per day. It has a
distinct “build-own-operate” basis for its plants in coordination with the local or state
agencies enabling an efficient running system. The Celrich compost generated is
marketed through Excel’s network for its own agro-chemicals throughout India thus
effectively reducing the use of chemical fertilizers by the farmers for growing sugarcane,
grapes and bananas. The overall cost of production per ton is US$ 25 to 30 while the
market value is US$ 33.5 to 42 per ton. Excel is planning to setup more composting
plants for municipal and agro-industrial wastes. It has also provided its technical
cooperation to its counterparts in Sri Lanka for windrow composting under Colombo
Municipal Council. Following the example set by Excel, other private entrepreneurs and

6
 NGOs have taken up bio-waste composting ventures in other parts of India. Though
manual composting was practiced in many places in India, technical problems due to the
lack of space and bio-waste segregation has discouraged the use [7].
In Thailand, 10% of the MSW is composted and one of the methods applied is the
vermicomposting using tiger worms to reduce the biodegradable in Barommatrilokanat
21 community. Domestic refuse is separated at source into organic matter, recyclables
and general garbage. The organic matter is collected and brought to the community
composting center made of circular cement and/or brick enclosures where tiger worms
are used to convert the bio-waste. It takes about 3 to 4 months for one batch to
decompose into compost rich in humus, which is used to improve the soil porosity in
clayey soil. The compost provides additional incomes to the community as it can be sold
for US$ 125 per ton [11].

2.5.2 Landfill
The final disposal of MSW is landfill occurs at three categories, which are:
1 Open dump or open landfill, which is the most common for all developing countries
whereby the refuse is simply dumped in low lying areas on open land and the waste,
is tipped haphazardly.
2 Semi-controlled or operated landfills are those in which at a designated site, the
dumped refuse is compacted and daily topsoil cover is provided to prevent nuisance.
Every kind of waste municipal, industrial or clinical/hospital waste is dumped without
segregation and is not engineered to mange the leachate discharge and emissions of
landfill gases.
3 Sanitary landfills are those practiced in the developed countries with facilities for the
interception of the leachate generation and its treatment using a series of ponds and it
has arrangements for the control of gases from waste decomposition [12].
Among the three, sanitary landfilling is an engineered system which is the best option
taking into account the likely environmental impacts by the MSW with respect to the
pollution of air, water and soil. However, this kind of comparable secure system is
scarcely found in the region.

2.5.3 Incineration
Incineration of the solid takes a low profile in the waste disposal system practiced in
the study countries, which is similar in most developing countries. The main constraints
are the high capital, operation and maintenance costs involved. As indicated in Figure 3,
the major portion of the MSW is biodegradable with relatively high moisture content; the
calorific value (CV) of the waste is low. Figure 5 shows the CV of the MSW from four
countries, which indicates, an average value of 3,000 to 4,500 kJ/kg of waste that cannot
sustain combustion. Hence it is found that the technology is unsuitable unless the bio-
wastes are separated at the source and the calorific value is suitable for the purpose. In
specific cases like the clinical and hospital wastes incineration has to be applied which
for example is widely used in facilities in Thailand.

7
 6000

5000

4000

kJ/kg
3000

2000

1000

0
China India Sri Lanka Thailand

Figure 5. Calorific value range of MSW in study countries [5, 7, 10, 11].

3. MSWM issues

In Asia, there are two major issues for the management of MSW, which are basically
cultural issues and climatic factors that play a vital role.

3.1 Cultural issues

As discussed above the recovery of the usable items like cloth bags, glass bottles, and
metal containers occurs at the household level by the itinerant collectors who generally
pay a nominal amount for the material or provide a useful material in exchange. This is
found at the middle and lower income levels of the populace of which there is a vast
majority. This helps in reducing the quantity of refuse generated but prompts gross
negligence on the part of the generators inducing littering and unmonitored disposal. At
the level of the waste collection systems, the rag pickers and the scavengers would litter
the garbage around the bins or enclosures causing nuisance which in most cases is
neglected by the collection system for transport.

3.2 Climatic factors

Climatic factors play another crucial role in the MSWM as in Asia most of the
countries lie in the tropical or sub-tropical zone with a long wet season, and heat and
humidity causes the MSW to be of higher moisture content thus increasing the weight of
the refuse. In addition, high humidity with heat causes the organic portion of the waste to
decompose quickly that causes problems in handling and disposal, which directly affects
the environmental health of the waste workers and the inhabitants in the surroundings.
Further to that the climatic condition necessitates a daily collection cycle, making the
collection system even more expensive. The monsooning effect with intense precipitation
is seen in south, southeast and east Asia with the wet season ranging from 5 months to
almost throughout the year especially in the equatorial regions.

8
4. Stakeholders and public participation

There is a wide range of stakeholders - individuals, organizations and groups both in

the formal and informal sector - involved and concerned with MSWM as generators,
regulators and legislators. Waste management strategies can only be effective if all the
stakeholders work in tandem for a successful venture. The gradual changes in the
environmental policies and guidelines with increase in human resources in the field
through education and training have initiated the process of effective management.
However, the main barriers are lack of financial resources for the MSWM sector,
regulations and their enforcement, and community awareness, involvement and
participation. Community participation is of utmost importance as generators of the solid
waste.

4.1 Public awareness and participation

As generators of MSW, the public must be aware of the hazards posed by ineffective
management of the refuse. Hence the government, environmental organizations and
others groups are required to play a key role in bringing about this awareness through
role play in the MSWM programs which in turn creates a sense of ownership among the
individuals thus developing keen interest for shouldering responsibilities. Unless the
public are involved throughout the MSWM programs by the implementing agencies,
awareness cannot be achieved. Once the public comprehend and acknowledge the main
constraints and challenges in the system, participation can be noticed in forms like:
• Voluntary involvement in MSWM campaigns;
• Following of rules and regulations concerning waste disposal;
• Willingness to pay adequate fees and charges;
• Source separation and effective use of the facilities; and
• Voicing any environmentally unethical behavior on the part of the public or the
government.
One such example of the public participation is the work done by Seth Sevana (NGO)
in Sri Lanka for 1,280 families in Moratuwa area who are encouraged to separate the
waste at source in their households that enabled the NGO to establish small scale
composting units and biogas generation, recycling of paper, and sharing of information
within the network for the benefit of the community. Community Environmental
Initiatives Facility (CEIF) is funding this pilot project. With the success of this project,
the NGO hopes to extend the system to about 8,000 families making the project an
example [10].
Another example is the involvement of the Women Federation in China which
encouraged its members, particularly mothers who took out their children for cleaning the
litters and encouraged them to plant greenery every month [5].

4.2 Community participation

Participation by the whole community for the MSWM program is essential to bring
about changes in the management with respect to source segregation, recovery of
reusable and recyclables and storage of the garbage prior to collection. One such vivid
example of a successful venture is the “Garbage for Eggs” Project in Klong Toey slum
area of Bangkok in which eggs were provided by the Environmental Conservation Group

9
in exchange for the recyclable materials like glass and plastic bottles, plastic bags, and
paper/boxes collected and deposited. This project was initiated by a group of 25 residents
of 70 Rai Community in 1997 after a serious flooding of the slum area. It took 8 months
for the removal of garbage from sewers and canals that caused the flooding. The sale
proceeds of the materials were further used to exchange eggs for the next batch such that
the project became a self-sustaining one. Similar projects were extended to other 23
communities in Bangkok [11].

4.3 Private sector participation

Private sector has played an important role in the MSWM as witnessed in the study
countries. This comprises formal and informal sectors. Looking at the formal sector,
Chennai in India and Colombo in Sri Lanka have initiated the privatization of MSW
collection. The Chennai Corporation had issued a global tender in 1999 for privatized
collection of municipal solid wastes in some zones. CES-ONYX, a French multi national
company was given the waste removal contract for a period of seven years. The company
is paid, based on the amount of waste transported to the two dumping grounds (Perungudi
and Kodingaiyur). Approximately 1,000 tons of garbage is cleared per day in Chennai.
The rate fixed is Rs. 648/- (US $ 12.5) per ton. The operation is mechanized, with
movable bins, one-ton autos, and mechanical loaders [7].
The Colombo Municipal Corporation (CMC) has engaged the Burns Environmental
Technologies (Pvt.) Limited (BETL) for two sanitary districts and Abans Environmental
Services to handle fifty percent of the waste collection of the city. The CMC pays a
tipping fee of Rs. 550/ton (US $ 5.7) with 5 percent annual increment and the contract is
signed between CMC and BETL for processing and final disposal for a period of 25
years. BETL is operating the modern composting plant, which is the single largest MSW
unit in the country that manages about 800-900 tones of garbage per day. Initially BETL
with the technical cooperation of Excel Industries, India established a 600 MT/day plant.
The composting facility does not accept hazardous, industrial and liquid wastes (sewage
sludge) [10].
Privatization, a more economic approach is considered as one option to improve the
collection operation. Other attempts look into the operation of landfills and treatment
facilities. Nevertheless, these endeavors are all based on the municipalities’ direct
payment to private companies. A self-financing system would be the next objective of
privatization. Legal possibilities are given and future actions are under consideration.

4.4 Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)

The NGOs play a crucial role in reaching the communities helping to create
awareness about the environmental impacts associated with the disposal of wastes. A
well-organized environmental program by NGOs can initiate motivation for involvement
in the MSWM program thus ensuring a continuous participation. They can also ensure a
user-fee based waste disposal system that would enable the continuity of operation. One
example of such an initiative is by a local NGO called Muskan Jyoti Samiti (MJS) in
Lucknow, India, which was established in October 1994. Through its SWM initiative
called SWASTI, MJS serves a population of over 100,000 in nearly 20,000 households,
which includes 20,000 persons living in 22 of the 460 slums in Lucknow city. MJS
employs 235 people, including 215 garbage collectors and rag-pickers. It operates 250

10
handcarts, 210 rickshaw trolleys and 5 tractor trolleys. MJS has also started SWM work
in the cities of Kanpur, Allahabad and Varanasi [13].

4.5 Role of informal sector

In the informal sector, there are the individuals, families, groups and small enterprises
that carry out unregistered and unregulated activities [14]. The waste workers are
motivated by the income from the sale of the wastes and work as scavengers, collectors
and sweepers despite health hazards. The nature of their involvement in MSWM makes it
difficult to integrate. However, their contribution to the system is not neglectable, if it
could be institutionalized by providing them with organizational and technical support.
This could be achieved by the formation of co-operative societies and micro enterprises.
Scavenging and waste collection is unavoidable in the developing countries due to the
economic condition of these people and can help in the recovery of the resources for sale
to the recycling units.

4.6 MSWM and economy

Solid waste generation depends on the economy of the people and per capita
generation increases with the level of income of the family or individual. The correlation
is shown in Figure 6. Studies have indicated that for every Indian Rs. 1000 increase in
income the solid waste generation increases by one kilogram per month. It is a common
observation that with an increase of economic growth the waste generation grows in an
equal manner. Growth and waste generation has not been decoupled in both the
developing and the industrialized world.

40
Waste Generated (kg / m onth)

35

30

25

20

15

10

5 6. Correlation of per capita income with waste generation

Figure
0
2,200 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

Average Income (Indian Rupees / month)

To effectively manage the MSW systems, adequate financial resources are required.
As of the study period, there is a lack of information regarding the MSWM costs with the
concerned authorities thereby leading to underestimating the budget requirements causing

11
a shortfall in the system. Actually real costs of all environmental endeavors in the region
cannot be allocated as they are subsidized by central and local funds and the accounting
system is not in place. Accordingly the cost information about MSWM is always a rough
estimate. In Sri Lanka, only a small fraction (3.15%) of the total budget outlay for the
Local Authority is earmarked for MSWM, of which more than four-fifths are for
collection and transport while less than one fifth is available for processing, disposal and
overheads of the management. This is clearly illustrated by Figure 7. The situation is
similar for almost all developing countries of Asia as can be concluded from other study
countries.

> 80 %
3 - 15 %

20 %

Total Budget of Local Authority Collection and Transportation

Others
SWM budget

Figure 7. Total budget allocations for MSWM in Sri Lanka.

5. Future outlook

The study of four countries provides a striking degree of similarity in MSWM.

Biodegradable wastes comprise more than 50% of the waste stream, which could easily
be diverted away from the landfill enabling a lesser volume. The bio-waste could
effectively be used for resource recovery by composting, headway for which is being
made in all of the study countries. Unless an effective system is initiated by incorporating
the integrated solid waste management (ISWM) system, the reduction in the
environmental deterioration cannot be achieved.

5.1 Integrated solid waste management (ISWM)

ISWM provides a framework for the development of a sustainable MSW service,
which can take place with the use of a range of collection, transport and treatment
options; active involvement of the stakeholders, the MSW system and the industry for
product design. The aspects that are involved in the management of the waste would be:
1. Economic aspects that take into account adequate resources to enable a sustainable
MSWM system which does not collapse due to the lack of funds and not be an
economic burden to the society. It should apply the “Polluter Pays Principle” for the

12
 waste generators; and provide technical and financial assistance for the private and
community participation.
2. Environmental aspects should consider the technical aspects with adequate storage,
transport, and disposal facilities to ensure that a negative impact to the environment is
avoided by way of creating nuisance and aesthetic problems in the short run and
emission of landfill gases and discharge of leachate causing air, water and soil
pollution in the long run.
3. Social aspects make people aware of waste reduction, reuse and recycle benefits as
well as environmental health benefits of cleanliness and impacts arising out of lack of
MSWM system. Active involvement of the government and private organizations and
NGOs would pave way in this sphere.
4. Institutional arrangements would call for the administrative and legal setup with law
enforcement machinery for the implementation of the program to ensure
effectiveness. The government should strengthen the capacity of the SWM bodies
with education, training and infrastructural support.

6. Conclusion

From the study of MSWM in the four countries, waste composition in Asia is broadly
similar differing slightly due to climatic and cultural variations. The system adopted for
collection, transportation and disposal is also similar but unique to Asia, unlike in the
developed countries where the MSWM is formalized. This uniqueness is attributed to the
waste composition, involvement of the informal sector, voluntary groups, private
organizations, NGOs, and community based organizations (CBOs), and rapid
privatization of collection, transportation and processing systems. Composting is seen as
a major processing system for almost one half of the waste which is biodegradable and
can be enhanced with economically friendly source separation techniques like in the
developed countries. The recent trends in technological development for MSWM systems
in Asia cannot be effective by direct transfer of technology from the west without
adapting it to suit the situation in Asia. The major lacuna in the allocation of resources for
the MSWM in Asia which does not encompass the entire SWM scenario requires
immediate attention of the governments and civic organizations to curtail the growing
environmental problems. The present scenario of MSWM which is undergoing rapid
changes towards the incorporation of the ISWM could pave way for sustainable urban
environment in Asia with effective inputs in economic, environmental and social aspects
with adequate institutional arrangements.

References

[1] International Solid Waste Association & United Nations Environment

Programme (ISWA & UNEP). Waste Management, ‘Industry as a partner for
sustainable development’. ISBN: 92-807-2194-2, 2002.
[2] World Bank. Data by country, 2003.
http://wwww.worldbank.org/data/countrydata/countrydata.html as of March 2003.

13
[3] World Bank. What a Waste: Solid Waste Management in Asia Urban
Development Sector Unit East Asia and Pacific Region, May 1999.
http://www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/urban/publicat/whatawaste.pdf as of
September 2003.
[4] Zurbrugg, C. The Challenge of Solid Waste Disposal in Developing Countries,
SANDEC News, EAWAG, No. 4, 1999.
[5] National Research Institute (NRI), China. Municipal Solid Waste Management in
China. Country Report, 2003.
[6] Dhussa A.K and Varshney A.K. Bio Energy News, ‘Energy Recovery from
Municipal Solid Waste - Potential and Possibility’, UNDP, Vol.4, No. 1, 2000.
[7] National Research Institute (NRI), India. Municipal Solid Waste Management in
India. Country Report, 2003.
[8] United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). State of the Environment,
South Asia 2001, ISBN: 92-807-2037-2, 2001b.
[9] United Nations (UN). State of the Environment in Asia and the Pacific, United
Nations Publication, New York, ISBN: 92-1-120019-9, 2000.
[10] National Research Institute (NRI), Sri Lanka. Municipal Solid Waste
Management in Sri Lanka. Country Report, 2003.
[11] National Research Institute (NRI), Thailand. Municipal Solid Waste Management
in Thailand. Country Report, 2003.
[12] Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H and Vigil, S. Integrated Solid Waste
Management, ‘Engineering Principles and Management Issues ’ McGraw – Hill,
Inc. New York. ISBN 0-07-06-3237-5, 1993.
[13] Water and Sanitation Program – South Asia. Profits from Waste: An NGO-led
Initiative for Solid Waste Management in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India, 1999.
http://www.wsp.org/pdf/sa-lucknow.pdf
[14] Schubeler, P. Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management in
Low-Income Countries, UNDP/UNCHS (Habitat)/ World Bank/SDC
Collaborative Programme on Municipal Solid Waste management in Low-Income
Countries, 1996.

14