Waste Wise Cities Tool - en 3
Waste Wise Cities Tool - en 3
Waste Wise Cities Tool - en 3
Foreword
In our rapidly urbanizing world, the crisis in waste infrastructure. In Nairobi, Kenya, the host city of UN-
management and plastic pollution is a reflection of Habitat headquarters, we have worked with Nairobi City
our unsustainable lifestyles. We are consuming and County Government in applying the Waste Wise Cities
producing at a rate that boggles the mind. Tool – which led to the development of the Nairobi City
County Sustainable Waste Management Action Plan
With 2 billion people lacking access to solid waste 2020-2022.
collection and 3 billion people without access to
controlled solid waste disposal facilities, urban dwellers, The 2030 Agenda and the SDGs highlight waste
especially in low to middle income countries, are management with different targets and indicators
exposed to severe threats to public health due to the measuring the waste management performance both at
mismanagement of solid waste. However, if our waste municipal and national level (SDGs 11.6, 12.3, 12.4, 12.5
is managed appropriately and effectively, it will be a and 14.1). Measuring SDG Indicator 11.6.1, “Proportion
resource for a prosperous circular economy, creating of municipal solid waste collected and managed in
green jobs and enhancing the livelihood and income for controlled facilities out of total municipal solid waste
the urban poor. At the same time, we can reduce the use generated, by the city”, provides critical information
of natural resources and protecting our environment. and parameters to establish better waste and resource
management strategies that will help cities to create
Knowing the risks of mismanaging solid waste and business, employment and livelihood opportunities, and
the potential of sustainable waste management, many transition towards a circular economy.
cities are eager to find solutions for the ever-increasing
mountains of waste. That is why I launched the Waste UN-Habitat is mandated to develop the monitoring
Wise Cities programme on World Habitat day 2018 methodology for SDG indicator 11.6.1 and has worked
together with His Excellency, President Uhuru Kenyatta closely with relevant UN agencies such as UN Statistics
of Kenya, with a call to action to address the global Division and UN Environment, as well as prominent waste
waste management challenges and strive towards management experts and environmental statisticians
the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In the from all over the world. These common efforts have
past two years more than 170 cities have taken up the led to the development of the Waste Wise Cities Tool, a
call and dedicated themselves to sustainable waste diagnostic tool that cities apply to assess their municipal
management. solid waste management performance and use as basis
for sustainable solid waste management planning.
However, without basic data on municipal solid waste
generation and management, many cities and countries This publication will be valuable for policy makers,
are not able to make evidence-based decisions. I recall municipal engineers, independent service providers,
that when I was Mayor of Seberang Perai in Malaysia, planners, consultants, researchers and other
about 40% of the municipal revenues were going professionals engaged in designing solid waste
towards waste management. This meant that we could management systems in cities lacking up-to-date data.
not allocate funds for parks, road works, healthcare,
or public transport. Once we were able to map and It is my hope that fact-based data on municipal solid
understand better where waste was generated and how waste assessed with this tool will guide evidence-based
it was managed, we were able to reduce the overall planning and lead to effective and efficient solid waste
cost of waste management. Eventually, we managed collection systems, enhanced local resource recovery
to reduce the share of the city’s budget to 20% as the and controlled waste disposal, thereby improving the
rate of recycling increased from 15% to 56%. Data is key quality of life for urban residents and eventually achieve
to allow cities to identify effective policy interventions the New Urban Agenda as well as the SDGs in the waste
and allocate limited resources to build the right kind of sector.
iii
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Acknowledgements
Preparation of this publication was funded by the The draft methodology was piloted in Nairobi, Mombasa,
Ministry of the Environment, Japan through African Kenya and Mahé, Seychelles with a strong support from
Clean Cities Platform, the German Federal Ministry for local government officials including: Veska Kangogo
the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear (Nairobi City County Government), Isaac Muraya (Nairobi
Safety’s International Climate Initiative (IKI) through the City County Government), Hibrahim Nyakach (Nairobi
Urban Pathways Project, and the Norwegian Agency for City County Government), Patricia Akinyi (Nairobi City
Development Cooperation through the UN Environment County Government), Dr Godffrey Nato (Mombasa
Programme and the Global Partnership on Marine Litter County Government), Dr June Mwajuma (Mombasa
for the Marine Litter Hotspot Identification and Waste County Government), Moses Mkalla (Mombasa County
Management Infrastructure Gap Identification project. Government), Amar Jumaan (Mombasa County
Government), Flavien Joubert (Government of Republic
The substantive preparation was led by UN-Habitat’s of Seychelles), Rahul Mangroo (Government of Republic
waste team within the Urban Basic Services Section of Seychelles) Michael Labonte (Government of Republic
working with experts from Wasteaware, Eawag, and of Seychelles) and Brian Quarte (Government of Republic
the University of Leeds. Principal authors/editors are of Seychelles).
Nao Takeuchi (UN-Habitat), Imanol Zabaleta (Eawag)
and Andrew Whiteman (Wasteaware). Andre Dzikus This publication benefited from consultations with
(UN-Habitat), Debashish Bhattacharjee (UN-Habitat) and reviews by eminent researchers and solid waste
and Graham Alabaster (UN-Habitat) provided overall management experts including: Kees Baldé (UNU),
guidance for the publication. Authors were supported Steffen Blume (GIZ), Karin Blumenthal (EU), Jillian
by contributors and reviewers comprising of Donatien Campbell (UNEP), Ludgarde Coppens (UNEP), Diana
Beguy (UN-Habitat), Steffen Blume (GIZ), Francesca Gheorghiu (Green Partners/RWA), Ellen Gunsilius (GIZ),
Calisesi (UN-Habitat), Dr Josh Cottom (University of Myriam Linster (OECD), David Marquis (UNEP), Michael
Leeds), Eric DesRoberts (USAID), Kartik Kapoor (UN- Nagy (UNECE), Marcus Newbury (UNSD), Aditi Ramola
Habitat), Nele Kapp (UN-Habitat), Hiroshi Kato (EXRI), (ISWA), Reena Shah (UNSD), Reka Soos (Green Partners/
Kosuke Kawai (National Institute for Environmental RWA) and Tatiana Terekhova (BRS Secretariat).
Studies, Japan), Kishori Kedlaya (USAID), Joyce Klu
(Wasteaware), Eiko Kojima (JICA), Laurie Krieger This publication is dedicated to the memory of Manus
(USAID), David Marquis (RWA), Ikuo Mori (EXRI), Robert Coffey, a thinker, designer, creator and innovator in
Ndugwa (UN-Habitat), David Newby (DNA), Clementine municipal solid waste management. Manus was
O'Connor (UNEP), Setsuko Oya (USAID), Dr Tom Quested principal author of the UN-Habitat 2010 publication
(WRAP), Dr Anne Scheinberg, (Springloop Cooperative Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing
U.A.), Vijdan Şengör (Wasteaware), Dr Costas Velis Countries, which remains to this day essential reading
(University of Leeds), Professor David. C. Wilson for practitioners working towards the Sustainable
(Imperial College London/independent consultant), and Development Goals.
Dr Christian Zurbrügg (Eawag).
iv
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Contents
Foreword iii
Acknowledgements iv
List of Acronyms vi
Summary 1
Introduction 3
The Problem 3
Waste Wise Cities – Supporting Cities to Achieve SDGs related to Waste 4
The Sustainable Development Goals and Waste Management 4
Waste Wise Cities Tool and the SDG indicator 11.6.1 6
What the Waste Wise Cities Tool can achieve: 7
Key Definitions 10
References 57
Annexes 59
v
Waste Wise Cities Tool
List of Acronyms
vi
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Summary
Chapter 1 introduces the global challenge of Chapter 3 takes readers through the parameters and
waste management touching upon the necessity of formulas for MSWM assessment for SDG indicator
standardized methodology to assess municipal solid 11.6.1. The chapter explains the conceptual model
waste management performance and increasing behind the methodology and it also outlines the
capacity development needs in data collection at necessary data points with formulas.
the municipal level especially in the low and middle-
income countries. It also introduces what can be Chapter 4 takes the readers through the 7 steps of
achieved through the application of Waste Wise Cities the Waste Wise Cities Tool: preparation; household
Tool, showing the case study in Mombasa, Kenya. MSW generation and composition; non-household
MSW; MSW received by recovery facilities and control
Chapter 2 provides definitions of key terminologies level of recovery facilities; MSW received by disposal
and new concepts used for the calculation of the SDG facilities and control level of disposal facilities; waste
indicator 11.6.1. It also provides the ‘ladder of control composition at disposal facilities; calculating food
level’ of waste management facilities, which will be waste, recycling, and plastic leakage..
a guideline for operational improvements of different
waste management facilities. The ‘ladder of waste Data forms and tools are available to support each
collection services’ introduced here also is a new step. Collected data can be entered into an automated
concept to measure population with ‘access to waste WaCT Data Collection Application (DCA) workbook
collection services’ an important indicator in relation and submitted to UN-Habitat’s Waste Wise Cities
to poverty eradication. Programme.
1
Waste Wise Cities Tool
2
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Introduction
2 Billion the waste
Tonnes sector
is predicted to account
8-10%
of municipal solid waste
were generated in 2015
The Problem
The global scale of urbanization and economic growth The quantity of waste generated grows with socio-
are creating a potential “time-bomb” regarding the economic development, and as the population in cities
waste we generate in the world. If not addressed now, become denser, acute public health and environmental
the significant negative impact on human health and problems become more commonplace. Poor waste
the environment will be felt by nations at all levels of management results in agglomeration of uncollected
development. An estimated 2 billion tonnes of municipal waste, the build-up of rodent and insect populations,
solid waste (MSW) are being generated annually, and this open waste burning with concomitant impacts on public
number is expected to grow to 3.4 billion tonnes by 2050 health and pollution of air, soil and water. Furthermore,
under a business-as-usual scenario (World Bank, 2018). unmanaged and mismanaged waste is the main source
Uncontrolled disposal sites are already a major source of marine plastic pollution.
of Greenhouse Gases (GHG), and if we continue on the
current path the waste sector, particularly food waste, is On the other hand, waste management offers great
predicted to account for 8-10% of global anthropogenic opportunities: resource recovery lessens the dependency
GHG emissions by 2025. Additionally, every year at least on resource imports and reduces natural resource
8 million tonnes of plastic find its way into the world’s extraction; it enhances livelihoods and income for the
oceans (Jambeck et al., 2015). urban poor through new business models; and improves
quality of life for urban citizens.
3
Waste Wise Cities – Supporting litter (14.1). In addition, two closely related targets look
Cities to Achieve SDGs related to at domestic material consumption and material footprint
(8.4 and 12.2). Consequently, a sustainable waste
Waste management can contribute to the achievement of a
UN-Habitat launched Waste Wise Cities on World Habitat number of SDGs.
Day in 2018 with a call to action to tackle the global
challenge of waste management. Waste Wise Cities A variety of indicators exist to monitor progress towards
has four key action areas namely: 1) knowledge and achieving each SDG target. Each indicator was assigned
best practice sharing; 2) waste data and monitoring; 3) a so-called custodian agency, as well as partner
education and advocacy and 4) finance and bankability agencies. Custodian agencies are United Nations bodies
support. Waste Wise Cities aims to support cities (and in some cases, other international organizations)
and local governments in achieving the Sustainable responsible for compiling and verifying country data
Development Goals related to waste and as well as in and metadata, and for submitting the data, along with
implementing the New Urban Agenda. regional and global aggregates, to the United Nations
Statistics Division (UNSD). UN-Habitat is for example the
The Sustainable Development custodian agency of SDG Indicator 11.6.1 “Proportion
of municipal solid waste collected and managed in
Goals and Waste Management controlled facilities out of total municipal solid waste
generated, by the city”. UN-Habitat has worked on the
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its development of the monitoring methodology for this
17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted indicator coherent with other waste statistics systems
by the United Nations in September 2015. Several targets in the world. This has crystalized into the current “Waste
were set out to address waste management, material Wise Cities Tool” (WaCT).
efficiency and the impact of waste on the environment.
12 6
11 7
10 9 8
4
Waste Wise Cities Tool
5
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Assessing and monitoring SDG indicator 11.6.1 SDG indicator 11.6.1 quantifies parameters that will
“Proportion of municipal solid waste collected and help cities and countries to better manage resources,
managed in controlled facilities out of total municipal mitigate and prevent environmental pollution, create
solid waste generated, by the city”, provides critical business, employment and livelihood opportunities, and
information for cities and countries to establish better shift towards a circular economy. The methodology to
waste and resource management strategies. So monitor SDG indicator 11.6.1 provides guidelines for
far, reliable data and information on municipal solid ladders for MSW collection services and control level
waste generation and management is lacking globally, of waste management facilities, and aims to bring
especially in low- and middle-income country cities. standardized definitions, nomenclature and techniques
Where data exists, it is often generated based on to MSW data collection.
international comparisons, without having been validated
in the local context. Waste Wise Cities Tool - Step by Step Guide to
Assess a City’s MSWM Performance through SDG
A global data collection and publication system through indicator 11.6.1 Monitoring guides readers through the
the UNSD/UNEP Questionnaire on Environment Statistics steps to assess the environmental performance of a
has collected data on MSW collection and treatment municipal solid waste management (MSWM) system
for about 20 years. Data has been received from about (SDG 11.6.1), food waste generation (SDG 12.3.1) and
160 to 170 countries, covering both national and city resource recovery systems (SDG 12.5.1) in cities.
levels. However, the response rate for the UNSD/
UNEP questionnaire is hovering around 50% and data The Waste Wise Cities Tool (WaCT) consists of seven
completeness and quality remain a challenge, especially steps to guide cities on how to collect data on MSW
for developing countries. This indicates that it is critical generated, collected, and managed in controlled
to improve the availability and accessibility of waste facilities. The tool provides a household survey guide
statistics and increase training for collection of data and for estimating total MSW generation, a questionnaire to
capacity development on the ground. investigate the MSW recovery chain and criteria to check
the environmental control level of waste management
This paucity of evidence-based data hinders the facilities in the city. In the last step onward linkages to
development of waste management strategies and other SDG indicators are elaborated and an assessment
constrains investment decision-making in infrastructure using a Waste Flow Diagram (WFD) is introduced. The
and service expansion, leading in many countries to WFD is a separate but complementary methodology
insufficient or absent MSW management services. Poor to the Waste Wise Cities Tool. It uses rapid and
MSW collection and management trigger severe threats observation-based assessment for mapping waste flows
to public health and pollute air and water. Furthermore, and quantifying plastic leakage from MSW management
uncollected, and mismanaged waste is the main source systems (GIZ et al., 2020).
of marine plastic pollution.
6
Waste Wise Cities Tool
The Waste Wise Cities Tool has been field-tested in Nairobi (Kenya), Mombasa (Kenya) and Mahé Island (Seychelles).
It has been developed in parallel with the Waste Flow Diagram, a tool which enables estimation of plastic waste
emissions to the environment.
The first figure below depicts the results from the SDG 11.6.1 assessment in Mombasa, a Kenyan coastal city of 1.2
million inhabitants. Results show that about 708 t/day of MSW is generated, of which 56% is collected and 5% is
managed in controlled facilities. Around 308 t/day remain uncollected.
Based on this data and using the WFD plastic leakage is estimated to be 3.7 kg per person/year. The second figure
below breaks down and categorises the sources and pathways of plastic leakage as identified with the two tools.
7
Waste Wise Cities Tool
The assessment was followed by a local stakeholders workshop, which identified key intervention areas
and service/infrastructure investment gaps. Workshop attendees included stakeholders from the waste
management chain such as local government officials, environmental regulators, collection service operators,
disposal facility managers, formal and informal recyclers, representatives of manufacturers and residents, and
many more. The following figure shows the future waste flow envisioned by participants during the workshop in
Mombasa.
Source Separation and Collection capacity Infrastructure Investment (composting, MRFs, RDFs, etc) Disposal operation
Environmental Awareness expansion (more vehicles improvement
Raising and Education and introduction of
transfer stations)
Licensing of CBOs
Composting or
Wet Waste anaerobic digestion Soil Improvement and gas
60% (530t) Un-recoverable fraction of MSW
100t
Mombasa County & Private
Collection Companies
Private Recycling
Waste Generators Cleaning CBOs Companies
880 t/day Dry Waste 50t Products and raw material
40% (350t)
Fuel
Material Recovery Facilities
Cement Companies
Refuse Derived Fuel Factory
300t
8
Waste Wise Cities Tool
9
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Key Definitions
MSW Municipal Solid Waste includes waste generated from: households, commerce and
trade, small businesses, office buildings and institutions (schools, hospitals, government
buildings). It also includes bulky waste (e.g. white goods, old furniture, mattresses) and
waste from selected municipal services, e.g. waste from park and garden maintenance,
waste from street cleaning services (street sweepings, the content of litter containers,
market cleansing waste), if managed as waste. The definition excludes waste from
municipal sewage network and treatment, municipal construction and demolition waste..
Generation Total MSW Generated by the City is the total MSW generated by the population and their
economic activities within the defined system boundary.
Collection Total MSW Collected refers to the amount of MSW generated that is moved from the point
of generation, such as specific addresses or designated collection points, to facilities where
the waste is recovered or disposed, regardless of collection modality (e.g., by municipal
governments, non-state actors or informal sector). The remaining share of MSW generated
is considered “uncollected”.
The proportion of Population with Access to Basic MSW Collection Services is the
proportion of the population who receive waste collection services that are either basic,
improved or full, defined by the service ladder of MSW collection service. It considers
aspects of frequency, regularity and proximity of the collection points (Table 1). This aspect
is measured under the SDG indicator 11.6.1 assessment but it is reported through a different
indicator, SDG 1.4.1. on access to basic services.
10
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Specific addresses
Recovery facilities
Residue Recyclables
Designated
collection
points Disposal facilities
Recyclables
Proportion MSW MSW Residue
recovered
Table 1: The definition of the sub-indicator ladder of service
received by level. received by from
of MSW from
recovery disposal recovery
collected disposal
Service Level facilities facilities Definitionfacilities
facilities
Door-to-door A designated collection point
Full »» Basic frequency and regularity »» Within 200m distance
Point
»» of Generation
Without major littering »Point
» of Recovery
Basic frequency&and
Disposal
regularity
»» Separation in three or more fractions »» Without major littering
»» Separation in three or more fractions
Improved »» Basic frequency and regularity »» Within 200m distance
Specific addresses Control
»» Without major littering »» Basic frequency and regularityLevel
»» Separation in two fractions »» Recovery
Without facilities
major littering
»» Separation in two fractions
Residue Recyclables
Basic »» Basic frequency and regularity »» Within 200m distance served
»» Without major littering »» Basic frequency and regularity
»» No Separation
Designated »» Without major littering
collection »» No Separation
points Disposal facilities
Limited »» Without basic frequency and regularity. »» Within 200m distance but no basic
»» With major littering frequency and regularity or
»» Further than 200m distance.
Recyclables
Proportion MSW MSW »» Residue
With major littering
recovered
received by received by from
of MSW from
No »» Receiving norecovery
waste collection disposal
service recovery
disposal
collected facilities facilities facilities
facilities
Specific addresses
Recovery facilities
11
Residue Recyclables
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Recovery Recovery means any operation the principal result of which is waste serving a useful purpose
by replacing other materials which would otherwise have been used to fulfil a particular
function, or waste being prepared to fulfil that function, in the facility or in the wider economy
Recovery system is, for the purposes of the WaCT assessment, a grouping of a number of
different activities and facilities that are undertaking recovery processes.
Point of entry into recovery system is the first discernible location where a facility within the
recovery system receives waste containing potentially recoverable materials. It excludes the
transfer of materials between recovery facilities within the system.
Recovery facilities include any facilities with recovery activities defined below including
recycling, composting, incineration with energy recovery, materials recovery facilities (MRF),
mechanical biological treatment (MBT) facilities, etc.
Material Recovery Facility (MRF; or materials reclamation facility, materials recycling facility,
multi re-use facility) is a specialized recovery facility that receives, separates and prepares
recyclable materials for marketing to further processors or end-user manufacturers.
Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facilities are a type of recovery facility that
combines an MRF with a form of biological treatment such as composting or anaerobic
digestion.
Incineration with Energy Recovery is the controlled combustion of waste with energy
recovery.
Recycling is defined under the UNSD/UNEP Questionnaire and further for the purpose of
these indicators as “Any reprocessing of waste material in a production process that diverts
it from the waste stream, except reuse as fuel. Both reprocessing as the same type of
product, and for different purposes should be included. Recycling within industrial plants
i.e., at the place of generation should be excluded.” For the purpose of consistency with the
Basel Convention reporting and correspondence with EUROSTAT reporting system, Recovery
operations R2 to R12 listed in Basel Convention Annex IV, are to be considered as ‘Recycling’
under the UNSD reporting for hazardous waste.
12
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Recovery chain usually involves several steps of the recycling industry which purchase,
process and trade materials from the point a recyclable material is extracted from the
waste stream until it will be reprocessed into products, materials or substances that have
market value. In many low and low-to-middle income countries, this involves waste pickers,
intermediate traders, apex traders and end-of-chain recyclers/recoverers.
Waste pickers extract recyclable materials from the waste stream to support their livelihood,
selling materials into the recovery system.
Intermediate traders receive materials from both formal and informal recyclable collection
systems (including waste pickers), store and prepare these materials for onward trading to
apex traders.
Apex traders receive materials from intermediate traders or directly from both formal and
informal recyclable collection systems (including waste pickers), store and prepare these
materials for onward trading to end-of-chain recyclers/recoverers.
End of chain recycler/recoverer receives materials from apex traders or direct from both
formal and informal MSW collection systems and processes them into materials and
products that have value in the economy either through recycling, incineration with energy
recovery, or other recovery process.
Formal
End-of-Chain
Recyclers/Recovers
Apex Traders
Intermediate Traders
Waste Pickers
Informal
13
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Disposal Disposal means any operation whose main purpose is not the recovery of materials or energy
even if the operation has as a secondary consequence the reclamation of substances or
energy.
Disposal Facilities refer to sites which are regularly used by the public authorities and private
collectors, regardless of their level of control and legality, for the disposal of waste. Such
sites may or may not have an official recognition, a permit or a license. Disposal sites may be
managed in either a controlled or uncontrolled manner. The definition excludes unrecognized
places where waste is deposited occasionally in small amounts which public authorities may
clean up from time to time.
Landfill is the deposit of waste into or onto land. It includes specially engineered landfill
sites and temporary storage of over one year on permanent sites. The definition covers
both landfills at internal sites, i.e. where a generator of waste is carrying out its own waste
disposal at the place of generation, and at external sites.
Control MSW Managed in Controlled Facilities refers to MSW collected and transported to recovery
level and disposal facilities that are operated under basic, improved or full control according to the
Ladder of waste management facilities’ control level (Table 2). The Ladder can be used as
of MSW a checklist for assessing the level of control of a particular recovery or disposal facility. The
recovery facility should be classified by going through the decision-making tree attached in Annex 7.
and Note that the emphasis is on operational control rather than engineering/design. A facility
that is constructed to a high standard, but not operated in compliance with Level 3 (or above)
disposal standard is not regarded as a controlled facility.
facilities
14
Waste Wise Cities Tool
CONTROL
Category Landfill Site
LEVEL
Security »» Physical boundary surrounding the site and supervised access control 24/7
Water and leachate »» Site engineering preventing surface and groundwater ingress into the landfill
control »» Functioning leachate containment and management
Slope stabilization »» Slopes stabilized, including erosion control, to mitigate risk of landslide
»» Waste deposited in clearly defined operational areas with strict management
Waste handling,
control
compaction and
»» Waste layered and compacted promptly
cover
»» Daily and intermediate cover applied
Fire control »» Zero evidence of burning of waste on the surface of the landfill
Full
Control Landfill gas
»» Landfill gas controlled with utilization where practicable
management
Staffing »» Site staffed full-time with professionally qualified personnel
Recording »» Functional weighbridge in use with recording waste quantities by waste types
»» EHS measures implemented in accordance with professional risk assessment
Environment Health and operating plan
and Safety (EHS)_ »» Showering and sanitary facilities
»» Environmental monitoring system in place with annual reporting capability
»» Site development and operational filling plan in place
Site planning
»» Post closure plan in place
Security »» Physical boundary surrounding the site and supervised access control
»» Site engineering preventing surface water ingress into the landfill
Water and leachate
»» Measures taken to prevent seepage of untreated leachate into surface and
control
groundwater
Slope stabilization »» Slopes stabilized, mitigating risk of landslide
Waste handling, »» Waste deposited in supervised operational area
compaction a nd »» Waste layered and compacted promptly
cover »» Waste periodically covered
Improved Fire control »» Zero evidence of burning of waste on the surface of the landfill
Control Landfill gas
»» Landfill gas controlled, including venting or flaring
management
Staffing »» Site staffed with trained personnel
»» Functional weighbridge in use with data for each delivered waste load
Recording
recorded in a register
»» Procedures in place to ensure heath and safety of workers
EHS »» Toilets and hand washing stations
»» Environmental monitoring system in place with annual reporting capability
Site planning »» Operational filling plan in place
15
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Security »» Boundary and access control allowing single point of supervised access
Water control »» Perimeter drainage maintained around the site
Slope stabilization »» Slopes stabilized, mitigating risk of landslides
»» Waste trucks directed to specific operational area of disposal
Waste handling,
»» Heavy mechanical equipment reliably available
compaction and
»» Waste layered and compacted within the specific operational area
cover
Basic »» Some use of cover material
Control Fire control »» Zero evidence of burning of waste on the surface of the landfill
Staffing »» Site staffed during operational hours
Recording »» Functional weighbridge in use
»» Basic personal protective equipment in use
EHS
»» Toilets and hand washing stations
Site planning »» Site drawing showing landfill boundary and filling area in place
Security »» Some access control to limit unauthorised dumping
Waste handling and »» Heavy mechanical equipment available for minimum levelling and
compaction compaction
Limited Fire control »» Limited evidence of burning of waste on the surface of the landfill
Control
Staffing »» Staff checking the site regularly
Recording »» Waste deliveries recorded
EHS »» Basic personal protective equipment in use
Security »» No access control
Staffing »» No staff
Recording »» No recording
16
Waste Wise Cities Tool
CONTROL
Incineration (with or without Energy Recovery)
LEVEL
»» Registered and licensed/permitted facility
Identity
»» Clearly marked boundaries
Security »» Physical boundary surrounding the site and supervised access control 24/7
»» Engineered facilities with process control
»» Continuous monitoring and recording of operating parameters and emissions
»» Flue gas controls compliant with applicable environmental standards
Standards »» Process controls and instrumentation systems routinely calibrated
»» Asset management and maintenance plans in place
»» Evidence of maintenance according to the maintenance plan
»» Emissions periodically sampled and tested by external laboratories
Full Circularity »» Facility has energy recovery and utilization
Control
»» Effluents are managed in compliance with applicable environmental
standards when effluents are generated
Residues
»» De-ashing and flue gas treatment residues managed in compliance with
applicable environmental standards
Fire control »» Fire prevention and control measures in place
Staffing »» Staffed with professionally qualified personnel
»» EHS measures implemented in accordance with professional risk
EHS assessment and operating plan
»» Showering and sanitary facilities
Records »» Incoming and outgoing materials weighed and recorded in a register
»» Registered facilities
Identity
»» Clearly marked boundaries
Security »» Physical boundary surrounding the site and supervised access control
»» Facility is engineered with process control
»» Continuous monitoring of operating parameters and emissions
»» Facility have flue gas treatment system
Standards
»» Monitoring systems routinely calibrated
»» Maintenance plan or documented maintenance schedules in place
»» Evidence that equipment is well maintained
Improved Circularity »» Facility has energy recovery and utilisation
Control
»» Effluents are discharged to a permitted discharge point when effluent is
generated
Residues
»» Solid residues are disposed at facility designated for incineration residues
disposal
Fire control »» Fire extinguishers available on site
Staffing »» Site has sufficient number of trained staff for level of operation
»» EHS measures implemented for all people on site
EHS
»» Toilets and washing stations
Records »» Incoming and outgoing materials weighed and recorded in a register
17
Waste Wise Cities Tool
»» Registered facilities
Identity
»» Distinguishable boundaries
»» Facility is engineered with process control
»» Operating parameters (temperature, smoke etc) are continuously monitored
and recorded
Standards
»» Facility has some form of flue gas control
Basic »» Monitoring systems are occasionally calibrated
Control »» Evidence that equipment is well maintained
»» Effluents are discharged to a permitted discharge point when effluent is
generated
Residues
»» Solid residues are disposed at facility designated for incineration residues
disposal
»» Personal protective equipment in use
EHS
»» Water for hand washing
Identity »» Distinguishable boundaries
»» Operating parameters are logged
Limited Standards
»» Some evidence that equipment is maintained
Control
»» Personal protective equipment in use
EHS
»» Water for hand washing
Identity »» Unregistered facilities with no distinguishable boundaries
No »» No operation standards in place
Standards
Control »» No evidence that equipment is maintained
EHS »» No EHS measures in place
CONTROL
Other Recovery Facilities
LEVEL
»» Registered/licensed facility
Identity
»» Clearly marked boundaries
Security »» Physical boundary surrounding the site and supervised access control 24/7
»» Engineered facilities with process control
Standards »» Environmental pollution control compliant to applicable environmental
standards
»» Extracted materials delivered into recycling/recovery markets
Full Circularity »» Nutrient value of biologically treated materials utilized in agriculture/
Control horticulture when organic waste is processed
Residues »» Residues managed in accordance with applicable environmental standards
Fire control »» Fire prevention and control measures in place
Staffing »» Staffed with professionally qualified personnel
»» EHS measures implemented in accordance with professional risk
EHS assessment and operating plan
»» Showering and sanitary facilities
Records »» Incoming and outgoing materials weighed and recorded in a register
18
Waste Wise Cities Tool
19
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Formality The Formality of MSWM activities is an important aspect to take into consideration when
conducting the SDG 11.6.1 assessment. MSWM activities are carried out by formal and informal
of MSWM economic units, both public and private, and by generators for the purpose of the prevention,
collection, transportation, recovery and disposal of waste.
Informal waste management refers to individuals or enterprises who are involved in private
sector recycling and waste management activities which are not sponsored, financed,
recognised, supported, organised or acknowledged by the formal solid waste authorities,
or which operate in violation of or in competition with formal authorities (Scheinberg et al.,
2010). Informal units are assumed to abide by local waste-related laws and regulations when
it is in their interests to do so.
20
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Concept Model
Figure 3 summarizes the elements measured by SDG Recovery or disposal facilities can be categorized
indicator 11.6.1. The MSW generated by the city is as either ‘controlled’ or ‘uncontrolled’ depending on
either collected or uncollected, and the collected MSW the operational measures put in place to minimize
is delivered to recovery or disposal facilities. Recovery the environmental, health and safety impacts from
facilities generate residues that are sent to disposal the facilities. When both recovery and disposal occur
facilities. In many cities, recyclables are also recovered within the same facility, it is necessary to evaluate the
from disposal facilities and brought back into the control level of the recovery and disposal operations
recycling value chain. independently of each other.
MSW received by
CONTROLLED recovery
Recovery Facilities
MSW Received by
facilities
Residue
MSW received by
UNCONTROLED
To t al M SW G e n e rat e d b y t h e cit y
recovery facilities
Total MSW Collected
Residue Recyclables
MSW received by
recovered from
CONTROLLED disposal disposal facilities
facilities
MSW Received by Disposal
Facilities
Uncollected waste
21
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Formulas
SDG indicator 11.6.1 is calculated as follows:
SDG 11.6.1 = Total MSW collected and managed in controlled facilities ( t/ day ) X 100 ( % )
Total MSW generated ( t/ day )
SDG 11.6.1 = Total MSW collected and managed in controlled facilities ( t/ day ) X 100 ( % )
Total MSW generated ( t/ day )
SDG 11.6.1. b = Total MSW collected and managed in controlled facilities ( t/ day ) X 100 ( % )
Total MSW generated ( t/ day )
Data collected for the assessment of SDG indicator 11.6.1 can contribute to estimating SDG indicator 12.3.1.b on
Food Waste Index, by providing household food waste generation per capita, through the below formula. Further detail
is elaborated in Step 7.
Step 4, which maps the material recovery flow through interviews with recovery facilities, can provide input data for
SDG indicator 12.5.1 National Recycling Rate, by providing the city's recovery rate.
Data collected for SDG indicator 11.6.1 can also be used to estimate a city’s plastic leakage when combined with
additional field observations guided by the WFD (GIZ et al., 2020), introduced in Step 7.
City Plastic Leakage = Total plastic leakage to water systems ( kg/ year )
Total Population
Data points
The data points required to calculate SDG indicator 11.6.1 include:
22
Waste Wise Cities Tool
These data also help cities to identify the proportion of the multiplication of the total population by per capita
MSW that remains uncollected. MSW generation from households. Non-household MSW
generation also needs to be estimated. The detailed
A. Total MSW generated by the city
methodology for doing this is provided in Steps 1, 2 and 3.
MSW is waste generated by households, as well as
B. Total MSW collected
similar waste from non-household sources, such as
businesses, schools, offices, supermarkets, restaurants, Total MSW collected is the amount of MSW generated
hotels, hospitals, etc. It also includes bulky waste (e.g. that is moved from the point of generation, such as
old furniture, mattresses) and wastes from selected specific addresses or designated collection points, to
municipal services, e.g. park and garden maintenance, facilities where the waste is recovered or disposed.
and street cleaning services (street sweepings, the
content of litter containers, market cleansing waste). When measuring total MSW collected there is a risk of
MSW does not include waste from municipal sewage double counting concerning the residue or rejects from
networks and wastewater treatment facilities, as well recovery facilities, and the amount of waste reclaimed
as construction and demolition waste from commercial from disposal facilities going to recovery. Therefore,
building contractors. these amounts need to be deducted from the sum of
waste received by both recovery and disposal facilities.
For cities that do not yet have reliable data on MSW The residue from recovery facilities is assumed to go to
generation from households, it can be estimated through either disposal facilities or other recovery facilities.
Recyclables
MSW MSW Residue
recovered
received by received by from
from
recovery disposal recovery
disposal
facilities facilities facilities
facilities
Proportionn
of MSW 100 (%)
collected
Non -
Total PCGR of household
Population HH waste MSW
generation
Steps 4 and 5 provide detailed methodology on how to facility. The facility’s control level is the category (full,
collect this data. improved, basic, limited and none) where it checks the
most boxes. Note that the emphasis is on operational
C. Total MSW managed in controlled facilities
control rather than engineering/design control. A facility
MSW managed in controlled facilities refers to MSW that is engineered and constructed to a high standard,
collected and transported to recovery and disposal but not operated in compliance with Level 3 (or above)
facilities with basic, improved or full control according to standard is not regarded as a controlled facility.
the Ladder of waste management facilities' control level.
Steps 4 and 5 provide detailed methodology on how to
The Ladder can be used as a checklist for assessing collect this data.
the level of control of a particular recovery or disposal
1
Note that MSW collected for recovery includes mixed MSW, commingled recyclables or recoverable fractions extracted from MSW
23
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Total
Uncollected Total MSW Total MSW
MSW Generated Collected
24
Waste Wise Cities Tool
25
Waste Wise Cities Tool
26
Waste Wise Cities Tool
STEP 1: PREPARATION
1.1 Gain political and senior management endorsement
and support The following points should be taken into account when
establishing the expert team:
It is important to gain the city’s Mayor or top officials’
support for the assessment. This will facilitate the »» Language: make sure that at least one person
different approval procedures and necessary resource from the expert team speaks the main local
mobilization within the city government. Make sure the language/dialect fluently, and that the survey
intended purpose and significance of the assessment helpers cover the range of local languages/
for the improved environmental management in the dialects prevalent in the survey area.
city is well communicated and gain political and
senior management endorsement before starting the »» Mobility: ideally most survey helpers should be
assessment. based in the local areas where the assessment
will be conducted.
1.2 Establish a working team
The whole assessment requires waste sampling from »» Field visits: the expert team, possibly
10 households for 8 days in 9 survey areas (15 survey accompanied by City officials, will have to
areas for mega cities2), which means waste from 90 conduct field visits to waste management
households (150 households for mega cities) needs facilities (recovery and disposal). Distance,
to be collected for 8 days. To implement this operation accessibility and comfort of travel can greatly
smoothly, establish a working team of 20-30 survey vary.
helpers who are dedicated full-time for 8-10 days, led
by 2-3 well trained experts dedicated for a combined »» Environmental health and safety: make sure
total of about 6 working weeks per city. Members that the survey team is briefed from the outset
of the expert team need to be trained and familiarize on EHS safeguards and procedures and
themselves with the methodological steps, and should provide the necessary tools, including personal
have a good understanding of MSWM systems, both protective equipment (PPE). --
concepts and flows.
1.3 Prepare tools and equipment
A 1 or 2-day workshop should be organized to train the The assessment requires waste sampling through
selected 20-30 survey helpers on the methodological visits to 10 households each from 3 survey areas (5
steps, the purpose and importance of the assessment, survey areas for mega cities) from 3 income groups (or
the detailed survey requirements and environment, household types), as well as waste composition analysis
health and safety (EHS) procedures. at the points of waste generation and disposal. The items
to be made available are listed in Step 2 and Step 6.
² Urban agglomerations having over 10 million inhabitants, "World Urbanization Prospects, The 2018 Revision" (PDF). UN DESA. Last access 18 June 2020. p. 55
27
Waste Wise Cities Tool
PREPARATION
BUDGET FOR AND ORGANIZE FOR
hiring an tools
expert equipment
team
for 6 working
weeks
human
resources
for mobilizing 20-30
transport/ people
fuel
28
Waste Wise Cities Tool
29
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Preparation is of critical importance for the smooth approximately 6 working weeks, human resources cost for
conduct of the survey. The budget items required include mobilizing 20-30 people for an 8-10 day survey, as well as
hiring an expert team for a combined total period of tools, equipment and transport/fuel for survey activities.
30
Waste Wise Cities Tool
3. If your city has more than 300,000 inhabitants, If the data is neither available nor up to date, use the
‘Population of Urban Agglomerations with proxy to determine MSW generation from non-household
300,000 Inhabitants or More’ data is available sources (see Step 3).
every two years from ‘Urban Agglomerations’
page at UN Department of Economic and Social
Affairs Population Dynamics’ World Urbanization
Prospects website.
31
Waste Wise Cities Tool
32
Waste Wise Cities Tool
33
Waste Wise Cities Tool
• Option A: the simplest way is the lottery nearest to the top left corner of the cell and
method, where each household in the income visit ground floor upwards in the case of high-
group is assigned a unique number and the storey buildings. If not successful, move to the
sample households are selected from this next door and so on, always making sure you
thoroughly mixed list. This way, each household do not exit the cell of the grid.
has an equal chance of being selected as
subject. • Option D: in the case of cities where
households with different income levels are
• Option B: let a computer do a random selection interspersed and it is difficult to clearly identify
from your list of all households in the selected “areas” of low, middle and high income, use
neighbourhood. housing types to stratify your sampling areas
instead. Obtain a map with the scale of 1:5,000
• Option C: obtain a map of the city with larger and overlay a 1cm x 1cm grid over the map.
scale than 1:2,500 and overlay a grid of 1cm x Select 30 cells randomly and identify one
1 cm over the map. Each cell represents a 25 household per income level according to the
m x 25 m piece of land on the map. Assign one housing types indicated in the table below.
number to each cell and randomly select 30
cells per survey area. One household per each
cell will be the random sample of household.
Once in the field, be consistent on how you
select your sample household from each cell.
For example, always start from the households
Low/ informal Slums, apartments with single rooms (apartments mud house,
settlements
Rent less than 5% of GDP per capita
34
Waste Wise Cities Tool
3. Prepare informed consent letter from municipal government explaining the purpose of the survey, how
the information will be used and requesting the consent of households to participate in the survey. This
can be shown, read to and signed by the selected households for waste sampling to obtain their consent,
understanding and cooperation. Annex 1 provides an example letter.
4. Prepare the survey team, equipment, and transport: The below table shows the number of survey team
members, transport for collected waste samples and other items needed per survey area and in total.
The following table provides the list of compulsory personal protective equipment (PPE) required to conduct the
waste composition survey. This is a basic requirement, and the list can be added to according to the specific
situational requirements. The use of PPE is particularly important when the survey is conducted in a COVID-19
situation.
35
Waste Wise Cities Tool
5. Mark each liner bag with the house number and letter denoting the neighbourhood, the survey date and
survey area. The bag will contain the waste generated in that household on the written date. Do not note the
householder’s name, in order to protect the confidentiality of the people who have kindly agreed to participate
in your survey.
6. Print recording sheets and prepare the WaCT Data Collection Tool: Print the forms included in Annex 2 of this
document and download the WaCT Data Collection Application (DCA) and Data Collection Manual (DCM) from
the Waste Wise Cities website. Check for updated versions and make sure you are using the latest version.
Carefully read the instructions on how to access and use the WaCT DCA so you can open and use the file.
7. Find a location for the waste amounts and composition measurement: According to the estimate of the
volume of daily collected waste from the households, choose a site where you can store waste and conduct
the measurement of waste as well as the composition survey. Ideally, this site should be flat and covered,
have enough space, be accessible by vehicle, have access to water for drinking and washing purposes and
offer protection from pests.
36
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Day 0: Deploy survey team for each survey area with marked liner bags, and distribute four linerbags with
the dates of day 1, 2, 3 and 4 to each household. It is important to gain the household’s consent
and cooperation by explaining the purpose of the survey. Once the householder has agreed to
participate, ask them to store all the waste generated that day at home in the respective bag and
not to give any materials (e.g. recyclables) to anyone outside the home.
Day 1: Use this day to check whether all the survey households have been identified, to overcome any
problems or gaps, and to initiate the non-household waste survey (Step 3)
Day 2: Weekend
Day 3: Weekend
Day 4: The survey teams collect the bags of day 1, 2 and 3 (filled) while distributing the two liner bags
of day 5 and 6 to each household. Bring the collected waste to the identified location for sample
measurement. Before beginning with the weighing and sorting, it is important to discard the day 1
samples, as these might contain waste generated before the start of the survey, which would distort
the data. Measure the weight of waste generated on day 2 and 3 separately, following the below
steps:
a. First, weigh the collected bags from each household (for each day) separately and record
the weight in the sheet (Annex 2). Weigh an empty bag and deduct the weight of the bag
from each sample weight. Remember, there is no need to weigh the bags from day 1, and
these should already have been set aside.
b. Prepare the buckets labelled with the 12 sorting categories around the thick plastic sheet.
1. Kitchen/canteen 7. Glass
2. Garden/park 8. Textiles/shoes
3. Paper & cardboard 9. Wood (processed)
4. Plastic – film 10. Special wastes
5. Plastic – dense 11. Composite products
6. Metals 12. Other
37
Waste Wise Cities Tool
c. After making sure that the individual sample weights per household per day have been
recorded, open the bags and spread the waste on the plastic sheet. You can mix the
samples together at this point, as the composition is an average for the whole sample (i.e.
not per household per day).
d. Sort the waste into the 12 categories. Annex 4 contains a sorting guideline.
e. Weigh each fraction and record it in the sheet (Annex 3). Remember to subtract the weight
of the empty container from the total weight.
Day 5: Use this day to follow-up and cross check on the household sampling, overcome any problem or gaps, and
conduct non-household waste survey (Step 3)
Day 6: The survey teams collect the bags of day 4 and day 5 (filled) and provide the labelled bags for day 7 and 8
to each household. Process the collected waste following the same steps done on Day 4.
Day 7: Use this day to follow-up and cross check on the household sampling, overcome any problem or gaps, and
conduct non-household waste survey (Step 3)
Day 8: Use this day to follow-up and cross check on the household sampling, overcome any problem or gaps, and
conduct non-household waste survey (Step 3)
Day 9: The survey team collects the bags of day 6, 7 and 8 (filled) and repeats the same steps as on Days 4 and 6
38
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Note:
If the climate does not allow households to store the waste for three days, arrange more frequent waste
collection to obtain the 8 days waste samples. Make sure to discard the 1st sample.
Important:
Remind households not to sell or take out recyclables so that the genuine total waste generation in the
household can be properly captured.
39
Waste Wise Cities Tool
In some cases, you might need to collect the generated waste every day from the households. For such cases, use the
following schedule:
Note: if you are able to store the collected samples in a cool and secure area, protected from flies, pests and animals,
you may be able to weigh bags and conduct the waste composition surveys in accordance with the three times weekly
schedule (Table 9) while still collecting waste bags daily from households.
40
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Figure 6: How to estimate household MSW generation per capita for a household
2. Add population data for each income group: Enter population data for each income group into WaCT DCA, then
the automated excel sheet will provide total household solid waste generation in your city. This is calculated by
multiplying the calculated per capita household waste generation per income level, by the population of each
income level. All these are summed up to calculate the total household waste generation.
41
Waste Wise Cities Tool
42
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Three approaches can be used to calculate the amount of MSW generated by non-household sources, option b) will
be explained in more detail in this step.
Conduct waste sampling from non-household If there are no reliable business licensing
MSW sources through random sampling, data available or no resources to conduct a
similar to the household waste survey. This comprehensive survey, use a proxy to estimate
approach yields more accurate results, but it is the MSW generation from non-household
more resource intensive. sources. This guide recommends the use of a
proxy of 30%5 to estimate MSW generated by
non-household sources. See more details in sub
step 3.1.
Conduct interviews with non-household MSW
sources and their waste collection service
providers to get approximate amounts of
generated waste. This approach is less
resource intensive, but the results are less
accurate than option a) and it is recommended
to take when you have reliable business
licensing data. See more details from sub step
3.2 to 3.5.
5 UN-Habitat conducted a research on the proportion between household and non-household waste generation using the historical data of OECD countries. This suggested about 30% of total
MSW is generated by non-household sources and 70% by households. However, further study is needed to improve the sensitivity of this proxy to different City situations.
43
Waste Wise Cities Tool
3.1 Using the proxy for non-household MSW 2. Identify premises for interview: After selecting
the 9 survey areas (15 for mega cities) for the
Where the proxy is being used for estimation of the household survey in Step 2, identify 2 hotels,
total waste from non-household sources, the following 2 restaurants, 2 schools, 2 offices, 1 shopping
formulas can be used. mall/supermarket, 1 market and 1 hospital
per survey area. Choose premises that are
representative of the survey area.
a) Total MSW= 70% from households+30% from non
household sources 3. Prepare questionnaire for interview: Both the
premises generating MSW, as well as their
contracted collection companies need to be
Total MSW from households interviewed. You can find model questionnaires
b) Total MSW =
70% in Annex 5.
Table 11: Suggested units for aggregation of generations rates in premises and institutions
44
Waste Wise Cities Tool
5. Interview waste collection service providers: 3.5 Calculate MSW generated by non-household sources
When interviewing premises, ask which waste
collection service providers they have contracted. 1. Calculate per unit waste generation from
Interview these collection companies (per phone different premises: Once the data from all the
is sufficient) and ask how much waste they premise types and public spaces is collected,
collect from the said premise. You can find model enter data into the WaCT DCA.
questionnaires in Annex 5.
2. Estimate total MSW generated by non-
3.4 Obtain waste data from public spaces
household sources: Enter the total number
1. Identify responsible entity/department for public of units (chairs, rooms, students, employees,
space cleaning: Identify responsible entity or stalls, beds, square metres) derived from the
department for public space cleaning in your city. business licensing data and public space data
into WaCT DCA to obtain total MSW generation
2. Obtain data related to waste from public per day from each premise and total MSW
spaces including: 1) average collected tonnage generated from non-household sources.
of waste daily, 2) approximate square meters
of the cleaned area for the collected tonnage
of waste. Also obtain the total sqm of public
spaces in the city.
45
Waste Wise Cities Tool
46
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Recyclables
Proportion MSW MSW Residue
recovered
received by received by from
of MSW from
recovery disposal recovery
collected disposal
facilities facilities facilities
facilities
Residue Recyclables
Designated
collection
points Disposal facilities
Recyclables
Proportion MSW MSW Residue
recovered
received by received by from
of MSW from
recovery disposal recovery
collected disposal
facilities facilities facilities
facilities
47
2. Categorise the recovery facilities in the list: level of control of the recovery facilities at the
according to the key definitions of recovery, point of entry of materials into recovery facilities.
identify “Intermediate Traders”, “Apex traders” Ask the facility managers what quantities of
and “End of Chain Recyclers/Recoverers”. It is different materials they receive from the MSW
possible that there are no end of chain recyclers/ stream daily, from where they receive the
recoverers for specific materials in the city, with materials, whether from multiple small operators,
apex traders exporting the material for further collection systems, or other recovery facilities. If
processing. the answer is another recovery facility then you
can be sure that you have not yet identified the
3. Determine the system boundary and priority first point of entry into the recovery system, and
interviews: sketch out the recovery system in you need to go and interview the other recovery
the city identifying each of the recovery facilities facility identified. Note that in some cases a
that you would like to interview. Note that the recovery facility may be the first point of entry for
focus of data collection (for the purposes of the some materials, but not for others, so make sure
WaCT) is on the facilities that are the first point to keep your data sets for different materials and
of entry into the recovery system for each of build up a comprehensive picture of the recovery
the MSW/materials streams. Depending on the system.
complexity of the recovery system in the city, and
the time (and budget) you have available for the 3. Quantifying rejects from the recovery system:
assessment, select a number of interviews to key Not all the materials that enter the recovery
recovery facilities that will allow you to profile the system will be recycled or recovered; some
recovery system in sufficient detail. “rejects” will leave the system and need to be
disposed of as waste. The WaCT uses a proxy
4.2 Arrange visits and interviews with identified
estimate for materials loss within the recovery
recovery facilities
system of 10%. A proxy estimate is sufficient for
1. Establish contact with the key recovery facilities the purpose of the WaCT assessment because
through phone call or email and set up an a more detailed and accurate assessment
appointment for a site visit and an interview. can take considerable time (and budget) and
Permission from the authorities may be required distracts attention away from understanding the
for visiting the recovery facilities, and when quantities and level of control at the point of entry
on-site the survey team should comply with the into the recovery system. If you have sufficient
necessary health and safety procedures. Make resources to profile the materials losses through
sure you plan for this in advance. the whole recovery system (value chain) then
that information will help you identify detailed
2. Interview identified recovery facilities face-to- interventions. ,However, for the purpose of the
face using the questionnaire in Annex 6. The WaCT assessment this level of detail is not
focus is on identifying how much recyclable strictly necessary.
material is entering the recovery system, and the
48
Waste Wise Cities Tool Waste Wise Cities Tool
49
Waste Wise Cities Tool
40%
Dumpsites receive
of World’s Waste
50
Point of Generation Point of Recovery & Disposal
Waste Wise Cities Tool Waste Wise Cities Tool
Specific addresses
Recovery facilities
Residue Recyclables
Recyclables
Proportion MSW MSW Residue
recovered
received by received by from
of MSW from
recovery disposal recovery
collected disposal
facilities facilities facilities
facilities
Specific addresses
Recovery facilities
Residue Recyclables
Designated
Control
collection Level
points Disposal facilities
52
Figure 10: waste density measurement method
53
Waste Wise Cities Tool
file:///C:/Users/Lusaba/Downloads/shutterstock_1276551055.jpg file:///C:/Users/Lusaba/
Downloads/shutterstock_1276551055.jpg
54
STEP 6: WASTE COMPOSITION AT DISPOSAL FACILITIES
This step provides the instructions to measure the Thick plastic sheet (at least 5 x 5)m 2
composition of waste at disposal facilities. The waste
Waste containers or bags (60 L) 24
composition survey takes one or two days.
Scissors 2
6.1 Preparation Brooms 2
1. Recruit and train workers: for the composition Camera/smart phone 1
survey around 15 workers are needed. If there are
many waste pickers working at the disposal site, Table 13: Necessary PPE Composition Analysis Disposal Site
consider hiring some of them. All workers should Items Quantity
be trained properly on the aim of the composition Hat or cap (sun and dirt 1 per survey team member
survey, the main steps and the health and protection)
safety procedures. Since sorting waste can be Glasses (eye protection) 1 per survey team member
hazardous, personal protective equipment (i.e.
Masks 1 per survey team member
gloves, masks and boots) must be used, avoid per day
dehydration and take adequate breaks. Give
Long sleeve shirts 1 per survey team member
clear instructions that if any medical or other
Thick gloves 1 pair per survey team
hazardous waste is spotted in the sample, the
member
sorting procedure must immediately stop.
Apron (stomach protection) 1 per survey team member
2. Acquire necessary equipment: Table 12 Long pants 1 per survey team member
shows the main items that are required for Rubber boots 1 pair per survey team
characterizing the waste at a disposal site. This member
includes a basic PPE requirement which can Hand sanitizer 2
be added according to the specific situational Disinfectant 2
requirements. The use of PPE is particularly Soap 2
important when the survey is conducted in a
First aid kit, including eye 1
COVID-19 situation. Check with the disposal bath
facility in advance whether they have some or all
of these items, and whether there are additional 3. Prepare site for the survey: find a place where
requirements for fluorescent jackets, protective you can store and handle a sample of around 200
hats, and protective shoes (e.g. steel toe cap and – 300 kg of waste. Ideally, this site should be flat
soled boots).When working on a disposal facility, and covered, have enough space, be accessible
always take great care to ensure that your survey to vehicles, and have access to water for drinking
team strictly follows health and safety protection and washing purposes and offer protection from
requirements. pests. Cover the surface with a thick tarpaulin, on
top of which the waste sample will be deposited.
Table 12: Items required for a waste composition survey per survey group
6.2 Waste sampling and composition analysis
Items Quantity
1. Number of samples: for this assessment
Pencil and notebook At least one person
a minimum of 3 trucks per income level
noting
(low, medium and high) service areas (or
Recording sheet 3
correspondingly from different household-type
Standing/ hanging weigh scale (up 1 service areas) needs to be sampled.
to 100 kg)
Shovels 8
55
2. Select trucks for waste sampling: before • Divide the waste layer into four parts:
selecting a truck for sampling, check with the ABCD (see Figure 11 left).
truck drivers (or the disposal facility manager)
from which area the truck is delivering the waste. • From those four portions, discard two
Make sure only trucks containing purely MSW opposing quarters, say B and D.
are sampled. Take a 200-300kg sample from the
truck. Direct the driver to safely park alongside • Mix the remaining two quarters.
the tarpaulin. Deposit (either through hydraulic
or manual unloading) the sample on top of the • Repeat the quartering process once more.
tarpaulin. Be extremely careful to ensure that the The derived sample will be approximately
truck emptying process is safely completed, and one quarter of the size of the original
that no one is in proximity to the falling waste as sample, around 50-70 kg.
it is being unloaded.
3. Quartering technique: once you accumulated the 4. Sort the waste: Prepare labelled containers and
MSW sample of 200-300 kg you need to derive a sort the sample of 50-70 kg into 12 categories in
representative sample of around 50-70 kg for the the respective container (see Figure 11 right):
analysis. The most commonly used technique for
1. Kitchen/canteen 7. Glass
this is called “The Quartering Technique”:
2. Garden/park 8. Textiles/shoes
• First mix the waste sample as thoroughly 3. Paper & cardboard 9. Wood
as possible. You can use your shovels for 4. Plastic – film 10. Special wastes
this. 5. Plastic – dense 11. Composite products
6. Metals 12. Other
• Then spread out the waste on the surface
so that it forms a flat layer. 5. Weigh the waste fractions: weigh each fraction in
their containers and record the weight. Remember
to subtract the weight of the empty container
from your results.
56
Waste Wise Cities Tool
An estimated 820
million people do not
have enough to eat
(WHO, 2018)
Parameters of SDG indicator 11.6.1 are closely linked two separate indicators. Sub-indicator 12.3.1.a, food loss
with other waste SDGs (12.3 on food waste and 12.5 on index, focuses on food losses that occur from production
recycling). Additionally, the WaCT has been developed up to (and not including) the retail level. It measures the
in parallel with the Waste Flow Diagram (WFD) for the changes in percentage losses for a basket of 10 main
estimation of potential plastic leakage from the MSWM commodities by country in comparison with a base
systems. The WaCT also generates input for assessment period. Sub-indicator 12.3.1.b, food waste index, focuses
of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions with the on retail and consumption levels.
Solid Waste Emissions Estimation Tool (SWEET).
Data collected for the assessment of SDG indicator
This step introduces these different SDG indicators, the 11.6.1 can contribute to estimate SDG indicator 12.3.1.b
WFD and SWEET, for which data produced by WaCT and Food Waste Index, by providing household food waste
SDG indicator 11.6.1 can be utilised. generation per capita through the below formula..
Per capita household food waste generation=
7.1 Food waste Per capita MSW generation rate (kg/cap/d) x proportion of food waste
Food waste is one of the core global issues for us to
achieve sustainable production and consumption pattern
7.2 Recycling
by 2030. Currently, total food waste for the edible parts
of “primary product equivalents” amounts to 1.3 billion Recycling is a central pillar in the transition towards
tonnes (FAO,2013), while an estimated 820 million a circular economy which governments and private
people do not have enough to eat (WHO, 2018). Not sector work together in order to create long term,
only are the resources that went into creating uneaten sustainable economies. In many ways, recycling is seen
food wasted, but when food waste goes to landfill sites, as a final effort to effectively utilize resources after
it decomposes without access to oxygen and creates people try to both reduce their consumption and find
methane, which is 24 times powerful in greenhouse gas more efficient processes in production. Recycling is a
effect than CO2. vital way to reduce the environmental impact of natural
resource extraction, which is rapidly damaging natural
SDG 12.3 calls for a halving of food waste at retail and ecosystems. By investing in recycling and transforming
consumer level and reduce food losses along production already extracted resources, economies can make
and supply chains. SDG target 12.3 has two components, significant strides in decoupling economic growth from
food loss and food waste that should be measured by resource use.
57
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Step 4, which collects data on the quantity of materials Both, the WaCT and the WFD, were developed in
entering the recovery system through interviews with harmony. The data collected in Steps 1-6 provides
recovery facilities, can provide data necessary for SDG direct input for the WFD. The WFD was developed in
indicator 12.5.1 National Recycling Rate. cooperation by GIZ, the University of Leeds, Eawag-
Sandec and Wasteaware. The tool and detailed guidance
The recovery system combines different types of are available here: https://plasticpollution.leeds.ac.uk/
recovery activity, including recycling, incineration toolkits/wfd/
with energy recovery and other recovery processes.
Recycling is a recovery process that is defined as “Any
7.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Air Pollution
reprocessing of waste material in a production process
that diverts it from the waste stream, except reuse as Municipal solid waste is a significant source of methane
fuel”. Thus the materials destined for recycling can be and black carbon, two short-lived climate pollutants. As
differentiated from the materials destined for recovery, the third largest man-made source of methane, waste
by understanding the destination of those materials. contributes to climate change and ozone pollution. Open
waste burning and the use of polluting collection vehicles
For the purpose of consistency with the Basel emit black carbon, a key component of particulate matter
Convention reporting and correspondence with (PM2.5) air pollution. When unsustainably managed,
EUROSTAT reporting system, Recovery operations R2 waste is also a breeding ground for toxins and microbes
to R12 listed in Basel Convention Annex IV, are to be that contaminate the air, soil, and water.
considered as ‘Recycling’. The questionnaire for recovery
facilities in the Annex 6 can be integrated into national The emissions of methane and black carbon from a
recycling monitoring system by national government, city can be quantified using the Solid Waste Emissions
which can in turn to be used to report on SDG 12.5.1, by Estimation Tool or SWEET. Information collected using
providing city recovery rate. the WaCT can be used to populate SWEET.
58
Waste Wise Cities Tool
59
Waste Wise Cities Tool
References
1. Jambeck et al (2015) Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 13 Feb 2015: Vol. 347, Issue 6223,
pp. 768-771
2. GIZ, University of Leeds, Eawag-Sandec, Wasteaware (2020). User Manual: Waste Flow Diagram (WFD): A rapid
assessment tool for mapping waste flows and quantifying plastic leakage. Version 1.0. Principal Investigator:
Velis C.A. Research team: Cottom J., Zabaleta I., Zurbruegg C., Stretz J. and Blume S. Eschborn, Germany. Obtain
from: https://plasticpollution.leeds.ac.uk/toolkits/wfd/
4. Wilson et al. (2015) ‘Wasteaware’ benchmark indicators for integrated sustainable Waste management in cities.
Waste Management 35, 329–342.
5. Wilson et al (2014) User Manual for Wasteaware ISWM Benchmark Indicators Supporting Information to: Wilson
et al., 2014 – doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2014.10.006
6. World Bank (2018) What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050
60
Waste Wise Cities Tool
61
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Annexes
Annex 1: Sample introduction letter
LETTER OF INTRODUCTION
Name of signatory
Position
Name of organisation/local
government
62
Waste Wise Cities Tool
This form should be used for both household surveys (Step 2) and disposal facility surveys (Step 6). Print one of
these sheets for each survey area (total 9 sheets), and for the disposal facility composition survey (total 3 sheets).
Survey Area: Composition Composition Composition Sum Average
analysis 1 analysis 2 analysis 3 (kg) (kg)
Categories (kg) (kg) (kg)
1.Kitchen/ canteen waste
2. Garden/ park waste
3. Paper & cardboard
4. Plastics - film
5. Plastics - dense
6. Metals
7. Glass
8. Textiles & shoes
9. Wood (processed)
10. Special wastes
Total
63
Waste Wise Cities Tool
• Packaged food
Separate as far as possible,
e.g. eggshells in plastic packaging: put the egg shells to “1: Kitchen/canteen waste” and the plastic packaging to
“5: Plastics – Dense”
• Hazardous waste
Handle with care! Do not drain! Keep in packaging and classify content and packaging as “10: Special Wastes”
Empty packaging is not any longer considered hazardous, thus classify it according to the packaging material.
64
Waste Wise Cities Tool
4 Plastics - film
Biscuit wrappers; Cling film; Frozen food bags; Packaging plastic film;
Cellotape; Garden sheets; Non-packaging film; Plastic bags; waste
liner bags;
etc.
5 Plastics - dense
6 Metals
Packaging for carbonated drinks;
Shoe polish cans; Tinned food; Aerosols (deodorant, perfume,
hairspray); Aluminium foil sheets;
Other food/non-food/pet food containers;
Bike parts; Building materials; Car parts; Cutlery; Keys; Metal shelves;
Nails; Paper clips; Plumbing; Pots and pans; Radiators; Ring pulls;
Safety pins; Screws; Tools; Locks;
etc.
7 Glass
65
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Clothes
Balls of wool; Blankets; Carpets; Cloths; Cords; Curtains;
Household soft furnishings and upholstery; Mats; Pillow cases; Rags;
Ropes; Rugs; Sheets; Threads; Towels;
Shoes (incl. flip-flops);
etc.
9 Wood (processed)
10 Special wastes
11 Composite products
12 Other
e.g.
inert (Boulders; Bricks; Gravel; Pebbles; Sand; Soil; Stones; Ceramics,
Clay plant pots; Crockery; Stone/ceramic floor and wall tiles; Vases);
Nappies/diapers;
Rubber;
Light bulbs (all kinds)
66
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Survey area :
Type of business and size (tick the box on the left and provide the size (add other categories and change the unit of
size depending on your business permit system)
Type Size
Hotels # of rooms
Restaurant # of chairs/customers
Supermarket Sqm
Shop Sqm
Market # of stalls
Shopping malls Sqm
School # of pupils
Office # of employee
Hospital # of beds
Q1. How much MSW do you generate per day (especially important in hospitals, we don’t need to know biomedical or
hazardous waste)?
kg/day
Do not know
City government
Commercial waste collector Name: ________________________________
contact number: )
Q1. How much waste do you collect from the above premise and how often?
( kg per day(s))
67
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Telephone / Email :
Q1. Which category in the recovery value chain below best describes your operation?
End-of-chain recycler/recoverer who receives materials from apex traders or directly from both formal
and informal MSW collection systems and processes them into materials and products that has value
in the economy either through recycling, incineration with energy recovery, or other recovery process.
Apex trader who receive materials from intermediate traders or directly from both formal and informal
recyclable collection systems (including waste pickers), store and prepare these materials for onward
trading to end-of-chain recyclers/recoverers .
Intermediate trader who receive materials from both formal and informal recyclable collection
systems (including waste pickers), store and prepare these materials for onward trading to apex
traders.
Q2. Which recyclable material(s) do you handle? Please tick all that apply.
Other (Specify: )
Q3. For each of these recoverable/recyclable materials you receive from the MSW stream(s), please provide how
much you source from which suppliers and/or cities. (use a separate line for every combination of material,
trader and source city):
Table Q3
Recyclable Name of supplier Type of supplier* Amount you Source City Point of entry into
material (where applicable) source (kg/d) recovery system (Y/N)**
* “Type of supplier” includes 1) MSW collection system, 2) Many small suppliers (e.g. waste pickers), 3) Intermediate traders
and 4) Apex traders
** “Point of entry into recovery system” is YES (Y) if the material is received from any person, trader or facility that is NOT
itself being included in the survey programme. If the person, trader or facility that the materials have come from is already
included in the survey programme then the answer to the “Point of Entry” query should be NO (N). If NO is checked here,
please ensure that for this material, the actual point of entry to the recovery system has been identified. This column should
be filled by surveyor, not answered by recovery facilities.
68
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Q4. For each of these recoverable/recyclable materials you receive from non-MSW stream (s), please provide how
much you source from which companies.
Table Q4
Recyclable material Name of supplying company Amount you receive (kg/d)
Q5. From the total amount you receive, how much do you estimate has been collected informally*?
*The informal sector refers to individuals or enterprises who are involved in private sector recycling and waste management
activities which are not sponsored, financed, recognised, supported, organised or acknowledged by the formal solid waste
authorities, or which operate in violation of or in competition with formal authorities (Scheinberg et al., 2010)
Q6. What share of the total material recovered in your city do you reckon you process?
Q7. Please tell us how much residue/rejects are generated during your recovery process in tonnes per day and
where the residue is transported.
Table Q7
Material description Destination Amount you generate (t/d)
69
Waste Wise Cities Tool
Annex 7: Decision making tree for determining control level of waste management facilities
To determine the level of control of your waste management facilities you can use the following decision-making
trees.
2. If the answer is “Yes” jump directly to the question number indicated. If the answer is “No” jump directly
to the question immediately below.
LANDFILL
Question Next Question
Yes No
Is there a physical boundary surrounding the site and
Security F1 F2 I1
supervised access control 24/7
Does site engineering prevent surface and groundwater
F2 F3 I2
Water and ingress into the landfill
leachate control Is there functioning leachate containment and
F3 F4 I3
management
Are the slopes stabilised, including erosion control, to
Slope stabilisation F4 F5 I4
mitigate risk of landslide
Is waste deposited in clearly defined operational areas
F5 F6 I5
Waste handling, with strict management control
compaction and
F6 Is waste layered and compacted promptly F7 B5
cover
F7 Is daily and intermediate cover applied to waste F8 I7
Is their zero evidence of burning of waste on the surface
Fire control F8 F9 L3
of the landfill
Landfill gas Is landfill gas controlled, including utilisation where
F9 F10 I9
management practicable
Is it staffed full time with professionally qualified
Staffing F10 F11 I10
personnel
Does the site have a functional weighbridge in use,
Records F11 F12 L3
recording waste quantities by waste types
Are EHS measures implemented in accordance with a
F12 F13 I12
professional risk assessment and operating plan
Environment,
Health and Safety F13 Are there showering and sanitary facilities F14 I13
(EHS)
Is an environmental monitoring system in place with
F14 F15 B13
annual reporting capability
Is there a site development and operational filling plan
F15 F16 I15
in place
Site planning
End >> Improved
F16 Is there a post closure plan in place End >> Full Control
control
Is there a physical boundary surrounding the site and
Security I1 I2 B1
supervised access control
Does site engineering prevent surface water ingress into
I2 I3 B2
Water and the landfill
leachate control Are measures taken to prevent seepage of untreated
I3 I4 B3
leachate into surface and groundwater
Slope stabilisation I4 Are the slopes stabilised, mitigating risk of landslide I5 L2
70
I5 Is waste deposited in a supervised operational area I6 B4
Waste handling,
compaction and I6 Is waste layered and compacted promptly I7 B6
cover
I7 Is waste periodically covered I8 B7
Is their zero evidence of burning of waste on the surface
Fire control I8 I9 L3
of the landfill
Landfill gas
I9 Is landfill gas controlled, including venting or flaring I10 B9
management
Staffing I10 Is the site staffed with trained personnel I11 B9
Functional weighbridge in use with data for each
Records I11 I12 B10
delivered waste load recorded in a register
Are procedures in place to ensure the health and safety
I12 I13 B11
of workers
EHS I13 Are there toilets and hand washing stations I14 L5
Is an environmental monitoring system in place with
I14 I15 B13
annual reporting capability
End >> Improved
Site planning I15 Is there an operational filling plan in place B13
control
Is there boundary and access control allowing single
Security B1 B2 L1
point of supervised access
Is there any perimeter drainage maintained around the
Water control B2 B3 L2
site
Slope stabilisation B3 Are the slopes stabilised, mitigating risk of landslide B4 L2
Are waste trucks directed to a specific operational area
B4 B5 L2
of disposal
Waste handling, B5 Is there heavy mechanical equipment reliably available B6 L2
compaction and
cover Is waste layered and compacted within the specific
B6 B7 L2
operational area
B7 Is there some use of cover material B8 L2
Is their zero evidence of burning of waste on the surface
Fire control B8 B9 L3
of the landfill
Staffing B9 Are staff on site during operational hours B10 L4
Records B10 Is there a functional weighbridge in use B11 L5
B11 Are there toilets and hand washing stations B12 L6
EHS
B12 Are basic personal protective equipment in use B13 End >> No control
Is there a site drawing showing the landfill boundary and End >> Basic End >> Limited
Other B13
filling area Control Control
Is there some level of access control to limit
Security L1 L2 End >> No control
unauthorised dumping
Is there heavy mechanical equipment available for
Waste handling, L2 L3 End >> No control
minimum levelling and compaction
compaction and
cover Is there only limited evidence of burning of waste on the
L3 L4 End >> No control
surface of the landfill
Staffing L4 Do staff check the site regularly L5 End >> No control
Records L5 Are waste deliveries recorded L6 End >> No control
End >> Limited
EHS L6 Are basic personal protective equipment in use End >> No control
Control
INCINERATION
Question Next Question
Yes No
F1 Is the facility registered and licensed/permitted F2 I1
Identity
F2 Does the site have clearly marked boundaries F3 B2
Is there a physical boundary surrounding the site and
Security F3 F4 I3
supervised access control 24/7
F4 Is the facility engineered with process control F5 L3
Is there continuous monitoring and recording of
F5 F6 I5
operating parameters and emissions
Does the facility have flue gas controls compliant with
F6 F7 I6
applicable environmental standards
Are process controls and instrumentation systems
F7 F8 I7
Standards routinely calibrated
Are there asset management and maintenance plans in
F8 F9 I8
place
Is there evidence of maintenance according to the
F9 F10 I9
maintenance plan
Are emissions periodically sampled and tested by
F10 F11 I10
external laboratories
Circularity F11 Does the facility have energy recovery and utilisation F12 B8
If effluents are generated, are they managed in
F12 F13 I11
compliance with applicable environmental standards
Residues
Are de-ashing and flue gas treatment residues managed
F13 F14 I12
in compliance with applicable environmental standards
Fire control F14 Are fire prevention and control measures in place F15 I13
Is it staffed full time with professionally qualified
Staffing F15 F16 I14
personnel
Are EHS measures implemented in accordance with a
F16 F17 I15
EHS professional risk assessment and operating plan
F17 Are there showering and sanitary facilities F18 I16
Are incoming/outgoing materials weighed and recorded End >> Basic
Records F18 End >> Full control
in a register control
I1 Is the facility registered I2 L1
Identity
I2 Does the site have clearly marked boundaries I3 B2
Does the site have boundary and supervised access
Security I3 I4 B3
control
I4 Is the facility engineered with process control I5 L2
Is there continuous monitoring of operating parameters
I5 I6 B4
and emissions
I6 Does the facility have flue gas treatment system I7 B5
Standards
I7 Are monitoring systems routinely calibrated I8 B6
Is there a maintenance plan or documented
I8 I9 B7
maintenance schedules
I9 Is there evidence that equipment is well maintained I10 L3
Circularity I10 Does the facility have energy recovery and utilisation I11 B8
If effluents are generated, are they discharged to a
I11 I12 L5
permitted discharge point
Residues Are solid residues disposed at facility designated for
I12 incineration residues disposal according to applicable I13 L5
environmental standards
Fire control I13 Are fire extinguishers available on site I14 B10
Does site have sufficient number of trained staff for level
Staffing I14 I15 B10
of operation
I15 Are EHS measures implemented for all people on site I16 B11
EHS
I16 Are there toilets and hand washing stations I17 B11
Are incoming/outgoing loads weighed and recorded in End >> Improved End >> Basic
Records I17
a register control control
B1 Is the facility registered B2 L1
Identity
B2 Does the site have distinguishable boundaries B3 End >> No control
B3 Is the facility engineered with process control B4 L2
Are operating parameters (temperature, smoke etc)
B4 B5 L2
continuously monitored and recorded
Standards
B5 Does the facility have some form of flue gas control B6 L3
B6 Are monitoring systems occasionally calibrated B7 L3
B7 Is there evidence equipment is well maintained B8 L3
Waste Wise Cities Tool
X1 FULL CONTROL
X2 IMPROVED CONTROL
X3 BASIC CONTROL
X4 LIMITED CONTROL
X5 NO CONTROL
74
Waste Wise Cities Tool
75
Waste Wise Cities Tool