Chapter I

Introduction
1.1 Preamble
Due to rapid urbanization, urban solid waste has become a great crisis in urban establishments. More
than half of the worlds population is living in urban areas or towns. United Nations Environmental
Program (UNEP) states that all over the world nearly 3,000 million people live in urban areas and
everyday approximately 160,000 people join them (GEO-2000, Global Environment outlook, 2000).
Today, almost 400 cities contain a million people or more, and about 70 percent of them are found in
the developing world. In the year 2025 worldwide urban population is expected to rise to 60 percent
and it is projected that 90 percent of this growth will occur in developing countries, especially in Asia
and Africa. Due to the devastation of rural economies and a gradual downsizing of agriculture, more
people are migrating to cities with the hope for a better life. Urban amenities such as job opportunities, education and health are the major reasons for rapid urban population growth in the developing
countries. As the population of the region is getting gradually urbanized, the number and size of the
cities are increasing (Cohen,2004) as well as the production rate of municipal solid waste (MSW).
MSW is defined as a waste which is generated by households, commercial enterprises such as offices,
hotels, supermarkets, shops, schools, institutions and municipal services such as street cleaning. This
MSW does not include the waste from mining, construction or destruction activities and industrial
manufactures. The rate of SW production is dependent on density of urban population, size of the urban habitation, consumption rate of commercial goods, income and lifestyles, its degree of industrialization, institutionalism and commercialism (Hope, 1998), geographical location, energy resources,
climate, living standards and cultural habits. However, with most cities/towns urbanizing rapidly
there has been a marked shift in the quantities and quality of waste generated across the country, in
turn contributing to a rising deficit between the demand for MSW management services and the current capacities among Urban Local Bodies to provide the same.
Waste Management includes, waste collection, transport, sorting, recycling or disposal, and monitoring of waste materials and includes the actors, people and organizations engaged in these processes.
According to a survey done by United Nations Development Programme (UNDP, 1997) in 151 cities
around the world, the second most serious problem that city dwellers face (after unemployment) is
insufficient solid waste disposal. Global waste management market report (2007) estimated that 2.02

billion tones of solid waste were generated in 2006 with seven percent annual increase since 2003.
The report further noted that from 2007 to 2011 global MSW increased by 37.3 percent with approximately 8 percent annual increase rate. The failure of municipal solid waste management (MSWM)
has resulted in serious health problems and environmental degradation. For instance, due to deficient
collection services, uncollected waste is dumped in the streets and in drains, thereby contributing to
flooding, breeding of insect and rodent vectors, and spreading of diseases. Furthermore, some collected waste is disposed off in uncontrolled dumpsites or burnt openly (Zhu et. al 2007). These have been
identified to cause environmental, economic, social and cultural problems.

A report by the World Bank estimates that solid wastes in urban areas of East Asia alone will increase
from 760,000 tons/day to 1.8 million tons/day within 25 years, while waste management costs will
almost double from US$ 25 billion to US$ 47 billion by 2025(The World Bank,2011). The SWM
sector, therefore, deserves careful attention for striking a balance between quality of service and cost
effectiveness. But due to institutional, regulatory, financial, technical, public participation
shortcomings and inadequate collection facilities most of the cities are facing difficulties in managing
the SWM problem.
Generally municipal authorities in developing countries collect their SW in limited areas especially
residential areas where rich people are located or where they find more political influence (Zurbrugg,
2003). As a result only some parts of the cities in developing countries are relatively clean. Slums or
low income settlements are usually not reached by certain methods of transport vehicles due to the
small roads, slopes and overcrowding. As if that is not bad enough, the municipal authorities dump
the waste close to slumps or common places where people in the low income bracket live making these areas very filthy. The reason for this may be that central municipal budget is not enough to cover
the entire city.

Since MSW is inextricably linked to urbanization and economic development, the nature and
components of MSW in India differs greatly ,when compared to MSW in other high-income
countries. The composition of MSW at generation sources and collection points in India is observed
to mainly consist of a large organic fraction (4060%), ash and fine earth (3040%), paper (36%)
and plastic, glass and metals (each less than 1%) (Gupta,1998). In India, the responsibility of waste
management lies with Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) due to the public and local nature of the service.

However, with most cities/towns urbanizing rapidly there has been a marked shift in the quantities
and quality of waste generated across the country, in turn contributing to a rising deficit between the
demand for MSW services and the current capacities among ULBs to service the same.In India,
segregation and storage of MSW at source is lacking and the decomposable and non-decomposable
wastes are often disposed off at a common communal dustbin/disposal centre. The collection
efficiencies are also seen to be poor, at around 70% in most Indian cities and continue to be
predominantly manual in nature.6 Transfer stations are rarely used and the same vehicle that collects
refuse from the individual communal bins is also responsible for taking it to the processing or the
disposal site. Collection and transportation activities constitute approximately 8095% of the total
budget of MSWM; hence, it forms a key component in determining the economics of the entire
MSWM system. On the contrary, disposal and treatment of waste is an under invested area and open,
uncontrolled and poorly managed landfills are a common feature across most Indian cities and towns.
The challenge of urban solid waste is particularly peculiar to developing countries, where resources
are limited but urbanization is occurring rapidly. In order to reduce the waste, developing countries
follow specific waste management or disposal methods. These methods include burning, composting,
incineration, land filling, reuse and recycling. Unfortunately, in most of the developing nations still it
is observed that waste is dumped in an uncontrolled manner without any environmental control
measures. Third world countries also have inadequate incineration facilities, although burning is used
to reduce the smell of dumped or uncollected waste in such nations. However, lots of wastes still
remain uncollected in public places and thus causes environmental and health problems to the people.
Economic problems and lack of awareness about the extent of the problem are some of the major
reasons for the SWM issues in developing countries. But it is clear that inadequate SWM system
create many socio cultural, economic and environmental problems including health problems. So
without giving serious attention to this issue, it is difficult to achieve sustainable development.
Therefore our long term goal is to review the SWM process and provide more insights about the
problem and its better management.
Presently in India the solid waste management model includes door to door collection of the solid
waste, street sweeping, Storage and transportation and integrated treatment and disposal in a broader
aspect. But the vital challenges that we are facing at present are lack of segregation and storage of
MSW at source and the decomposable and non-decomposable wastes are often disposed of at a

common dustbin/disposal centre. The collection efficiencies are also seen to be poor, at around 70%
in most Indian cities and continue to be predominantly manual in nature. Transfer stations are rarely
used and the same vehicle that collects refuse from the individual bins is also responsible for taking it
to the processing or the disposal site. Collection and transportation activities constitute approximately
8095% of the total budget of MSWM; hence, it forms a key component in determining the
economics of the entire MSWM system. On the contrary, disposal and treatment of waste remains an
under invested area and open, uncontrolled and poorly managed landfills which often results into
various negative externalities like severe health hazards are a common feature across most Indian
cities and town. Therefore, for conducting our research primarily we have concentrated on the Indian
city of Kolkata. Kolkata is one of the four metropolitan cities of India and capital of West Bengal.
The river Ganga is the principle waterway and forms the western boundary of the city. The region
contains numerous low- lying areas, marshes and wetlands. The Kolkata Municipal corporation
comprises nearly about 206.08 sq.Km and a population of 44,86,679 as per census of 2011. Waste
generation rate is 400-500 gpcd (gallon per capita per day). Quantity of municipal solid waste
generated in the city is 4000 ton per day. The collection, transportation and disposal of the waste is
primarily handled by contractual employees-about 15000 are engaged in street sweeping and door to
door collection. The predominant land use pattern of the city can be referred as mixed i.e mixed and
commercial. As the city never came up in a planned manner so it is tough to distinguish the regions of
the city according to land use pattern. 55% of the total waste generation is from the household and
45% is from commercial establishments. There are overall 252 markets in KMC area among which
96 privately registered, 23 KMC owned. In addition to these there are approximately 124 unregistered
markets in the KMC area. Though with time KMC has taken several steps towards a better
management of solid waste issue but still problems remain in the field of public awareness like
removal of flower garlands, plastic carry bags, solid waste tossed publicly and casually; piles of
refuse tumble down to the slopes of River edge. So, the better management of the solid waste should
be taken as top priority to improve daily collection, transportation and augmentation of the existing
capability of the solid waste management for the effective abatement of pollution and conservation of
the city environment and the river.So, far we have discussed the brief overview of the present
prevailing Govt. services in Indian urban centers and specifically in Kolkata. The prevailing Govt.
services though has been developed with time but still contains various loop-holes. So, our long term
goal is to develop an alternative model which will address the aforementioned issues. Many Indian

cities are gradually getting inclined towards the newer model that is the New Public Management
model or the Public Private Partnership model. Therefore, our aim of the study would be primarily to
check the feasibility of the alternative model for a better management of SWM issues.
Hence this research project will attempt to design an alternative model for the better and will evaluate
the acceptability of the model among the population.
1.2 Objectives of the study:
The study focuses on the following objectives:
1. To Design an outline of the framework for an alternative model for the better management of
solid waste.
2. To evaluate the willingness of people to pay for the alternative MSW Management system.
3. To analyze the effectiveness of the proposed alternative model.
1.3 Research questions:
In this present study we would like to search the answers for the following research questions:
A. Whether the proposed alternative model for solid waste management services is accepted by people

of Kolkata.
B. Whether people are willing to pay for the proposed alternative model of solid waste management
services and whether this willingness to pay is getting affected by socio-economic factors?
C. Whether the proposed alternative model is environmentally viable and cost effective in comparison
with the existing Models?

1.2 Data source and methodology:

The final report is primarily based on an well blend of existing literatures as well as quantitative and
qualitative analysis of data collected .The Existing literatures about the prevailing practices and
dimensions of solid waste management has been collected from the existing journal articles,
government websites. However, to have an effective deep insight into the alternative model we have
taken a two pronged approach. Our primary focus was on the determination of a mean willingness to

pay for the alternative model and the effect of various independent factors over the willingness to
pay. To accomplish that we need both primary and secondary data. The Secondary data has been
collected primarily from the archived record of Kolkata Municipal corporation whereas the first hand
primary data has been collected by conducting household interviews in different municipal wards of
Kolkata Municipal Corporation to elicit the information about maximum or average Willingness to
pay to contextualize the overall study in precincts of Solid waste management system of Kolkata
metropolitan area.

1.3 Chapter layout

The dissertation precisely includes six chapters including the present one. The second chapter deals
with the preliminary literature review- primarily the frameworks of solid waste management, The
models of management and their advantages and disadvantages. The third chapter talks about the
existing performances in India, their loopholes and a proposed alternative model for Kolkata
Municipal Corporation. The Fourth Chapter talks about the determination of average willing to pay
for the solid waste management service and how various independent factors affect the willingness to
pay. The fifth chapter will deal with the effectiveness of the model in terms of cost, environment
friendliness etc. The sixth chapter concludes the dissertation with summary of the major findings,
concluding remarks and scope for future measures.

Chapter II
Existing Frameworks of waste management systems
Waste is a major health hazard that undermines peoples right to a safe life. All forms of waste
municipal, bio-medical, e-waste, or industrial, if not treated and disposed carefully are a threat to the
health of people as well as the environment. Anaerobic degradation of waste at landfill sites produces
methane a greenhouse gas that is 20 times more harmful than carbon dioxide. Filth and garbage on
streets facilitate spread of diseases like malaria, plague; making a significant dent on a countrys
prospects of achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDG). Therefore the solid waste needs
and effective management system and the stakeholders for that are as follows.
2.1 Structural factors affecting waste management:
2.1.1 Institutions
A clear and well-defined institutional framework is important for SWM due to the complexity of the
WM system and the involvement of many actors (Da Zhu et al. 2008). Almost every developing
country has organizations responsible for SWM. The following table gives more information about
the responsible organization and the current situation of MSW in selected developing countries.
Table 2.1 Situation of Municipal Solid Waste Management in Developing countries.
Country

Responsible organization

Current situation

Current action

Afghanistan Water resource and environ- No strong waste man- Started developing legislation from
ment assistance authority.
Bangladesh

Nepal

2005.

Ministry of Forestry and envi- No separate policy for Preparing a comprehensive Solid
ronment.

Myanmar

agement legislation.

waste management.

Pollution control and cleaning The

regulations

waste management policy.

are No action.

department.

outdated.

Urban Local Bodies .

Fails to implement na- Spreading awareness about Waste

tional policy.

management.

Sri Lanka

Ministry Of Local Govern- No separate policy for The National Solid waste Manment and provincial councils.

solid waste

manage- agement Policy was devised in

ment until 2000.

2000. It was amended in 2008.

Provincial solid waste management
authority was established in 2007.

Source: Experience in Community Based Solid Waste Management in Sri Lankan Cities, 2009.
Several policies related to waste management is available at international, national and local levels,
for example, international Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes
and Other Matters (29 Dec 1972), Basel Convention on the Control of Trans boundary Movements of
Hazardous Wastes (22 Mar 1989).

2.1.2 Public and private actors in solid waste management:

Public sector refers to public own enterprises and/or institutions. In SWM the public sector actors
include Local Municipal Governments (LMG) or Local Government (LG) or urban authorities or city
cooperation (Ahmed & Ali, 2004). Public sectors in SWM get their responsibility by laws and
regulations or by policies related to environment protection or health (Schbeler 1996). The urban
authorities get their powers and obligations from the central government authority (Klundert &
Lardinois, no date). Public actors are controlled by laws enacted by central government authority.
Furthermore in SWM, the public sector do much of their works manually e.g. street sweeping,
transportation. The formal private sector include registered enterprises carrying out SWM services
e.g. collection, transport, disposal and recycling. The `formal private sector' can be define as private
sector corporations, institutions, firms and individuals, operating registered and/or incorporated
businesses with official business licences, an organized labor force governed by labor laws, some
degree of capital investment, and generally modern technology.

Both Public and private actors play an essential role in managing Solid waste but there may be a few
problems attached with them as well. Public actors face problem of funding to manage SW. So, their
incomes are often not enough to provide SWM services. Due to this reason they often fail to manage
SW in entire cities or have limitation in meeting public demand (Ahmed and Ali,2004).In general,
government appoints several laborers for SWM but due to lack of skills and training the public sector

still does not have a good workforce. As a result municipalities face problems to handle the problems.
Levine (1994) reported that in developing nations several municipalities have one mechanic for 10
15 vehicles. It is difficult to repair around 15 vehicles by one mechanic and if the municipality wants
to buy a spare part for vehicles they have to wait until they get permission from an upper manager.
Therefore, many vehicles take about 2 6 days for minor repairs (Levine, 1994).Ahmed and Ali
(2006) found in their research on SWM in developing nations that the public sector does not have the
skills or incentive to change the traditional mode of service delivery and therefore build partnership
with the private sector and citizens. So they have to do most of their works manually such as street
sweeping, loading and unloading and drain cleaning and generally needs a huge man power (Ahmed
& Ali, 2004). On the other hand, Commercial establishments, industrial enterprises and institutions
are also interested in waste management. Due to their interests they co-operate with government
and/or specialized private enterprises (Schbeler, 1996).The private sector is generally identified to
be better at design, construction, and operations. The strength of the private sector usually include
fast decision making approach and creativity in designing alternative strategies and the use of
technologies (Massoud et al. 2003).Literature shows that private sector have strong well trained
workforce and experienced workers.
Massoud and El-Fadel (2002, p.621) explain further the roles of private sector in this regard. Which
are as follows (1) improved performance of the public sector by employing innovative operation and
maintenance methods; (2) reduced and stabilized costs of providing services by ensuring that work
activities are performed by the most productive and cost effective means; (3) improved environmental
protection by dedicating highly skilled personnel to ensure efficient operation and compliance with
environmental requirements; and (4) access to private capital for infrastructure investment by
broadening and deepening the supply of domestic and international capital. Moreover, Gupta al
(1998) found that waste collection efficiency is a function of manpower and availability and transport
capacity. These two factors have a huge influence on SWM. Generally, the public sector faces
problems in these areas. The private sector generally has higher operating efficiency because of their
trained staffs, high quality vehicles and equipment which naturally give higher output and
productivity (Kaseva & Mbuligwe, 2005). In this way they can implement cost reduction approaches.
Asian Development Bank (2007) states that in case of private partners transparency in execution of
the project and carrying out of the services diligently generally results into smooth management of
the overall procedure.

2.2 Models of management:

2.2.1 Network Governance:
Network governance is complex and includes many different actors from different networks. Further
they always influenced decisions made by other actors who are in high level (Klijn & Teisman 2003).
In SWM several factors such as National government, local government or municipality, the private
actors, and ordinary people are involved. Each actor has a different strategy. For example,
municipalities have different strategies and the private sector has various strategies. Anyhow, under
this arrangement they have to agree on a common strategy which is accepted by all the actors.
Generally to manage the problems participation by all actors is important. In network governance to
handle the problem it is better to have good communication among the different actors which in turn
helps in the understanding of the situation and avoid mismanagement. Literature about SWM in
developing nations shows, normally there is no good communication or connection between the
actors involved. Due to lack of communication municipalities face problems to implement the policy
and most of the time this leads to failure of the project. Moreover, lawmakers make laws themselves
without first discussing with the people who are affected by the problems and municipalities and
waste administrators do not meet the public or lawmakers directly (Agamuthu et al, 2009). Due to the
connection of various actors network governance seems more complex. Because of the inter
connection among the actors, few actors cannot make decisions alone nor can they achieve the goals
without the support of the other actors (Klijn & Teisman 2003). Furthermore, networks are
characterized by a limited substitutability of resources, which ensures that sustainable social relations
are created between actors. Inter connection between these people are important to achieve the goals.

2.2.2 Public private partnership model:

NPM (New public management) or Public private partnership explains how management techniques
from the private sector are now being applied to public services and/or how government provides
services to the people (Levin, 2000). Samaratunge & Bennington, (2007, p. 15) describes The
public-sector reform movement known as New public management provides the theoretical
background for PPPs, but in reality the main driver for growth is that PPPs avoidance of limitations
on public sector budgets. Furthermore, they argue that PPPs must be seen within the overall context
of the public sector reform movement known as NPM, which encourages:

 Decentralization of government;
Output or performance-based measurement for public services;
Contracting-out public services to the private sector;
Privatization of public services.
2.2.3 Advantages of Public private partnership (PPP) Model
2.2.3.1 Reduction of the management cost
In general, developing nations allocate small budget for SWM and with this budget they can serve
less than 50 percent of the urban dwellers. PPP help to reduce pressure on local Government budget
by investing private finance. Researchers noted that private participation saves between 30 to 50
percent of the local government budget (Awortwi, 2004). PPP is an approach which reduces the cost
of waste management and improves quality of service (Massoud et al, 2003). For example, in Indian
studies about SWM revealed that PPP reduce the cost of waste management in Mumbai. Figure 2
indicates the comparison of net cost of waste management under Municipal Corporation and private
sector participation. The figure shows SW has been managed by private sector with low cost. (Rathi,
2006)

Figure 2: Comparison of net cost of waste management under two approaches in Mumbai, India 2000
2001.
2.2.3.2: Improvement of the services and benefits

PPP helps to improve the service and in addition to that also manages to get more benefits (from
recycling of the waste materials) from the waste. Most of the time the private sector tries to make
compost from the garbage for sale to generate income while municipalities just preoccupy themselves
with open dumping. Figure 3 shows benefits (value of recyclable materials) gained by Municipal
Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) and private sector. Figure 3 undoubtedly reveals that the
private sector gets more benefits from the waste. If the Municipal Government (MG) or private sector
gets more benefits from waste ( making compost or sanitary landfills), it helps to protect the
environment as well as peoples health.( Rathi,2006)

Figure 3: Benefits (average value of recyclable materials) get by MCGM and private sector(sources,
Rathi 2006)

2.2.3.3: PPP helps in collecting more waste

It is often seen that after cooperation with the private sector, municipalities are able to collect more
waste than before because the private sector invests more money and acquire improved technologies.
For example, in Sri Lanka, Colombo Municipal Corporation (CMC) has cooperated with the Burns
Environmental Technologies (Pvt.) Limited (BETL) for two sanitary districts and engaged with
Abans Environmental Services (AES) to collect half of the waste in the city. CMC signed a contract
with BETL for processing and final disposal for a period of 25 years. BETL is functioning with the
modern composting plant and they manage approximately 800-900 tons of waste daily (Visvanathan
&Trnkler, 2003 cited in NRI-SriLanka, 2003).

In Colombo, Sri Lanka, due to private sector participation in urban solid waste management
(USWM), in 2000, 45 percent of the waste was removed by the public sector and 55 percent of the
waste was removed by the private sector. Meantime, service areas have increased. However, studies
reveal that before municipal or private (formal) sector engaged in household waste collection, the
informal sector was involved in household waste collection. This means that waste collectors or
buyers buy some reusable or recyclable things such as cardboard, paper, plastics, and glass bottles
from householders to get money. Normally women (mother and daughter) are the ones interested in
selling such things to the buyers. Waste buyers go house to house to collect such waste. So
researchers noted that, in overall waste management process, the informal waste collectors and
recyclers plays an important role. But total the amount of waste collected by informal sector is
unknown. In some countries, PPP help to fill the service delivery gaps availing more labor and
vehicles. For example, in 1991 in the city of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania produced 1,400 tons of SW
daily but the municipality was only able to collect 5 percent of the garbage, but after collaboration
with the private sector, especially in 2005 and 2006 while the amount of waste generated increased to
around 2,500 tons per day, the municipality managed to collect 48 percentage of the total waste.
This study reveals that Tanzanias waste management ability increased with the involvement of
private companies in waste management (Kassim& Ali, 2006). In general most of the time,
municipalities cover only CBD (Central Business District). Researches show that PPP in SWM
increase service coverage area in several cities.
2.2.3.4: PPP makes the overall management smooth and efficient
PPP in SWM increases the efficiency. It helps to save time and energy because the private sector has
some technologies and equipment. For example, the SWM study in Nairobi shows that the Kenya
Refuse Handlers Limited (KRHL), Domestic Refuse Disposal Services Limited (DRDSL), and Bins
(Kenya) Limited have been licensed to clean the CBD and some residential areas especially in upper
class residential areas. After involvement of these private companies MSW collection and disposal
services worked more successfully and as result have enhanced the efficiency (Henry et al, 2006).
2.2.4: Potential Risks of Public Private Partnerships
There are a number of potential risks associated with Public Private Partnerships. They are as follows:
a) Development, bidding and ongoing costs in PPP projects are likely to be greater than for traditional
government procurement processes - the government should therefore determine whether the greater

costs involved are justified. A number of the PPP and implementation units around the world have
developed methods for analyzing these costs and looking at Value for Money.
b) There is a cost attached to debt While private sector can make it easier to get finance, finance
will only be available where the operating cash flows of the project company are expected to provide
a return on investment (i.e., the cost has to be borne either by the customers or the government
through subsidies, etc.)
c) Some projects may be easier to finance than others (if there is proven technology involved and/ or
the extent of the private sectors obligations and liability is clearly identifiable), some projects will
generate revenue in local currency only (eg. water projects) while others (eg. ports and airports) will
provide currency in dollar or other international currency and so constraints of local finance markets
may have less impact.
d) Some projects may be more politically or socially challenging to introduce and implement than
others - particularly if there is an existing public sector workforce that fears being transferred to the
private sector, if significant tariff increases are required to make the project viable, if there are signficant land or resettlement issues, etc.
e) There is no unlimited risk bearing private firms (and their lenders) will be cautious about accepting major risks beyond their control, such as exchange rate risks/risk of existing assets. If they bear
these risks then their price for the service will reflect this. Private firms will also want to know that
the rules of the game are to be respected by government as regards undertakings to increase tariffs/fair regulation, etc. Private sector will also expect a significant level of control over operations if
it is to accept significant risks.
f) Private sector will do what it is paid to do and no more than that therefore incentives and performance requirements need to be clearly set out in the contract. Focus should be on performance requirements that are out-put based and relatively easy to monitor.
g) Government responsibility continues citizens will continue to hold government accountable for
quality of utility services. Government will also need to retain sufficient expertise, whether the implementing agency and/ or via a regulatory body, to be able to understand the PPP arrangements, to
carry out its own obligations under the PPP agreement and to monitor performance of the private sector and enforce its obligations.

h) The private sector is likely to have more expertise and after a short time have an advantage in the
data related to the project. It is important to ensure that there are clear and detailed reporting requirements imposed on the private operator to reduce this potential imbalance. A clear legal and regulatory
framework is crucial to achieving a sustainable solution.

i)Given the long-term nature of these projects and the complexity associated, it is difficult to identify
all possible contingencies during project development and events and issues may arise that were not
anticipated in the documents or by the parties at the time of the contract. It is more likely than not that
the parties will need to renegotiate the contract to accommodate these contingencies. It is also possible that some of the projects may fail or may be terminated prior to the projected term of the project,
for a number of reasons including changes in government policy, failure by the private operator or the
government to perform their obligations or indeed due to external circumstances such as force
majeure. While some of these issues will be able to be addressed in the PPP agreement, it is likely
that some of them will need to be managed during the course of the project.

So, from the above discussion we can see the private sector helps the waste management to increase
their services in several ways. But, having said that public private partnership model does have a few
limitations as well. Many of them are alienable by proper financial analysis and proper monitoring.
So, weighing both the advantages and limitations we fill that by a careful monitoring we can mitigate
the shortcomings to a great extent and use Public Private partnership Model into solid waste management system successfully because With proper monitoring, PPP ensures innovation, efficiency
and improved level of services, together with compliance to environment, Health and safety- which
has lead many of the Indian cities to get inclined towards a PPP oriented model. As discussed above ,
because of the various loop holes related to the Government provided Waste management services in
Kolkata we would like to provide an alternative solution to that. So, our next chapter will deal with
the performance standard of the existing services, its shortcomings and our proposed alternative to
that.

Chapter III

The Proposed alternative model on the backdrop of the prevailing

waste management service in India
This chapter deals with performance standard of the existing waste management services and the
prevailing loopholes and factors responsible for those shortcomings in the Municipal Solid waste
Management in India. Therefore, to mitigate those shortcomings we have introduced an alternative
idea of solid waste management based on public private partnership model of waste managementpredominantly on the backdrop of Kolkata Municipal Corporation and a detailed discussion about of
the various aspects like the strategies for private sector participation and how the model may help in
reducing the loopholes in the prevailing performance of the solid waste management in Kolkata.
3.1 Existing performance standard:
Proper management of waste has been a critical aspect in urban areas, especially in mega cities which
are major centers of waste generation. Irregular collection or non-collection, transportation in open
vehicles, and environmentally unsafe methods of processing and disposal of waste are common features of a large number of urban areas across the country. According to the Report on Indian Urban
Infrastructure Report and Services published in 2011- While steps for improving service delivery
were initiated as early as 1963 with the Zakaria Committee setting service norms and standards in
urban services, poor implementation of the committees recommendations, owing to the presence of
weak enforcement mechanisms has led to the poor management and delivery of Municipal Solid
Waste services in Indian cities.
The public and the government were moved by the declining quality of waste management services
by the Surat Plague disaster in 1994. After the Surat disaster, Clean India campaigns highlighting
the pitiable conditions of hygiene and waste management in cities and towns were made by social
activists in 1994 and 1995, covering 30 cities and 60 towns. Subsequently, a Public Interest Litigation
(PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court of India, Almitra H. Patel Vs. Union of India (1996), seeking
adoption of hygienic waste management practices by the Urban Local Bodies(ULB).
The Supreme Court of India formed an Expert Committee in 1999 to provide recommendations for
improving waste management practices in Class I cities. Subsequently, the Ministry of Environment
& Forest introduced the MSW (Management & Handling) Rules in 2000, incorporating key recom-

mendations of the Supreme Court appointed Expert Committee. The MSW rules contained several
remarkable features, e.g., door-to-door collection, segregation of waste at source and scientific disposal of waste, among others. Further, the Supreme Court of India set 2003 as the target year for
compliance with the rules set by the ULBs. Prior to the announcement of MSW (M&H) Rules, 2000
there were hardly any standards to measure the quality of MSW management services provided by
the local bodies. In the absence of any law regarding the management of municipal solid waste, the
ULBs were not compelled to provide regular door to door collection of waste or for its scientific disposal. Another important landmark in the MSW space was the setting up of Service Benchmarks in
Urban Services by Ministry Of Urban Development in 2008.

3.1.1 Performance standards of the ULBs-solid waste management

A glance at the existing situation of service delivery standards across the ULBs points to the poor performance of almost all cities and towns in India. Despite several policy interventions e.g., announcement of MSW (Management & Handling) Rules, setting up of service benchmarks, provision of central and state government grants through JNNURM (Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission) outcomes have been largely unsatisfactory barring a few cities.
The Ministry of Urban Development undertook a pilot study in 2009 to assess the performance of 28
select ULBs representing different tiers of cities across different states. The cities were primarily divided into three tiers- Class IA, IB and IC according to population size. Class IC incorporated the cities where population was less than or equal to 1 million. Cities with population in the range of 1-5
million were included in Class IB list and cities with more than 5 million were included in Class IA
list. The study found that none of the ULBs performed at par with the service level benchmarks. The
Table 2.1 below summarizes the performance of the surveyed ULBs and highlights the poor service
delivery in terms of Collection and Transportation, poor segregation efficiency and unscientific disposal of wastes.

Table 3.1: MSWM Service Level Benchmarks and Average ULB Performance
Sr.No Performance Indicator
Service Level
Current Average
Benchmark
Performance
(in percent)
(in percent)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Household Coverage
Collection Efficiency
MSW Segregation
MSW Recovery
Scientific Disposal;
Cost Recovery
User Charges
Complaint Redressal

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

47.7
75.3
19.5
31.73
8.0
17.3
31.4
89.1

Source: Service Level Benchmarking Data book: Improving Service Outcomes 2008 09, Ministry of Urban
Development, Government of India.

Classifying the performance of the ULBs (Class IA, IB and IC) shows that performance on parameters such as waste segregation and scientific disposal of municipal waste is extremely poor irrespective of the city size. Cost recovery is relatively better in Class IB cities like Indore, Surat and Ahmedabad. Scientific disposal of waste is absent in Class IB and IC cities and it is practiced only in 2 of the
Class IA cities sampled. Household coverage is around 50% in all the three categories. Fig. 3.1 provides a comparative analysis of the sample of Class IA, IB and Class IC cities on all the parameters
Figure 3.1: Status of MSW Management Class IA, IB & IC Cities

Source: Based 0n data available in Urban Finance, Vol. 13(1), NIUA (2010)

3.1.2 Factors responsible for the poor service standard:

ULBs lack of commitment, poor financial health, untrained or inadequately trained work force and
lack of equipment are the main reasons for the incomplete coverage and unscientific processing &
disposal of waste in Indian cities and towns. However, with an increasing urban population, and a
changing socio-economic demographic profile, there is growing pressure on the ULBs to deliver
quality services to its citizens. This requires increasing the capacity of the ULBs for better management of MSW in their localities. Moreover adequate collaboration by the ULBs, with all the stakeholders, namely, households, rag-pickers, non-governmental organizations, private waste management companies, households, environmentalists and local leaders, in devising possible solutions to
the waste menace of the respective localities is an important factor for tackling the problem.
Further, most ULBs depend on central and state government grants for funds that are often inadequate, as the bulk of funds are absorbed by administrative expenses. Inadequate financial resources
from the ULBs internal sources, inadequate and untrained staff, obsolete or insufficient equipment
and lack of sufficient motivation to provide quality and timely services to people make the delivery of

reliable and affordable waste management services all the more complex. The resource gap for the
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) of municipal services in India alone was estimated to be around
` 32,143 Crore for the period 2005-10 (Mathur, M.P, 2007). In the following section we describe the
various factors and the sub-factors affecting performance across the solid waste management service
chain which consists of Initial stages like source segregation of the waste, collection and transportation and scientific processing and disposal.
3.1.2.1 Factors contributing to poor waste segregation system
I. Lack of public awareness about the need for waste segregation
Creating awareness about the importance of proper waste management is an area that has not received
adequate attention from policy makers in India. The principle of 3Rs Reduce, Reuse and Recycle is
rarely practiced at the individual household or commercial establishment level. Citizens are not aware
of the merits of waste segregation and scientific disposal of wastes. Even when citizens know that
waste should be segregated into bio-degradable and non-biodegradable components, they do not practise it as they are not informed of the social and economic repercussions associated with the mixing of
organic and in-organic waste with hazardous biomedical and electronic waste. Information, Education
and Communication (IEC) campaigns highlighting the criticality of MSW management have not been
undertaken at the required scale by ULBs (National Institute Of Urban Affairs, 2015).
3.1.2.2 Factors contributing to poor collection & transportation (C&T) system:
The following factors contribute to poor C&T system.
I. Unplanned and variable city features
A large number of cities and towns in India have developed in an unplanned way. The width of roads
and lanes vary significantly within and among cities. Therefore, C&T systems require meticulous
planning to ensure successful execution. The different urban profiles of cities and towns call for different systems for C&T. However, most of the ULBs practice a uniform C&T system for an entire
city/town, as a result of which inaccessible and marginal areas are not covered.
II. Inadequate equipment and inappropriate technology
Inadequate vehicles and equipments at the disposal of ULBs, primarily due to lack of financial resources, is often cited as a reason for poor service delivery. Faulty designs for waste C&T system
such as inappropriate size and placement of garbage bins, transfer stations, etc. has aggravated the
problem of overflowing waste and insufficient removal of waste from sites. The waste characteristic

in India is different from that of industrial countries as it contains a high proportion of bio-degradable
wastes that increase waste density. Hence, vehicles that operate with low-density waste in industrial
countries are not suitable or reliable for Indian conditions. The vehicles for transportation of waste
should be adapted to suit Indian conditions pertaining to waste density, lane width, etc.
III. Inefficient and untrained staff
Inefficiency, rather than inadequacy, of the existing staff results in poor coverage of MSW management services. For instance, Delhi has five health workers per 1,000 persons, more than double the
prescribed CPHEEO (Central Public Health & Environmental. Engineering Organization) norm of 2
health workers per 1,000 persons, but its household collection efficiency is only 4.2% (National Institute Of Urban Affairs, 2010). There is a need to increase the efficiency of the health workers in
order to improve the collection system of the ULBs.
IV.Non-integration of informal workers
Informal workers e.g., rag-pickers, waste collecting communities, etc. play a vital role in the collection, transportation & disposal of waste and compensate, to some extent, the inadequacy of the services provided by ULBs. Failure to integrate these workers in the MSW management mainstream
contributes to poor service delivery. The waste pickers often rummage waste bins and cause waste to
scatter around the bins. Items like plastic, metals and glass collected by waste pickers reduces the potential value of waste and also makes production of energy from waste unfeasible as plastic is an important ingredient of refuse-derived fuel used for generating electricity. These factors play a decisive
role if a ULB decides to set up an integrated waste management plant for extracting value from waste
as key waste elements like plastic and metals are siphoned by the informal waste workers.
3.1.2.3 Factors contributing to poor processing & disposal (P&D) System :
The following factors contribute to poor P&D system.
I. Insufficient fund allocation to processing and disposal
Open dumping of waste is the easiest way to dispose waste. Before the MSW (Management & Handling) Rules, 2000 were in force, ULBs were under no pressure to adopt scientific disposal practices.
However, despite the introduction of the MSW rules, the practice of open dumping is still rampant
in the country, with only a handful of ULBs having sanitary landfill facilities in place. The problems
encountered in the C&T segment of MSW management are reflected in the P&D segment as well.
Collection of un-segregated waste from source makes extraction of value costly or economically unfeasible in most cases. The Supreme Court Committee on Municipal solid waste in 1999 noted that

around 70-75% of the total expenditure on waste is spent on street sweeping; 20-25% on collection
and only 0-5% on disposal of wastes by the ULBs (National Institute Of Urban Affairs, 2015).
II. Lack of infrastructure and prudent planning
Moreover, Indias annual waste generation is projected to increase to approximately 260 MT by 2047
from the present 42 MT (GOTN &UNICEF, 2010). Therefore, waste management and handling capacity must be enhanced by the cities. The land required for disposing waste is also set to increase in response to the increase in waste generation. The report published by the Journal of environmental Biology in 2010 has reported that in Asian Developing nations land requirement for landfills has increased by 75% in a span of just 3 years from 2007 to 2010 and is further estimated to increase by
285% by 2030 if prudent waste management practices are not adopted at the earliest (Khajuria et al,
2010).
Due to all the above discussed factors we need an alternative model which will be able to take into
account the above factors and provide an efficient service system for waste management. As discussed in the previous chapter that the New Public Management Model or the Private public partnership model in Solid waste management has been a successful one in a few municipalities worldwide
so we can also try to implement this model in our Indian Set up. The rationale behind bringing in private sector participation in this sector is primarily to leverage efficiency, expertise and technical potential of the present Government controlled service . If the private sector provides higher standards
of waste management service at the same cost or provides equivalent service at a lower cost compared to the local administration, then private sector participation should be considered efficient. The
private sector has access to a wide range of technological alternatives that can be used for the processing of waste. Asnani (2005), mentions that ULBs in India spend somewhere around 10-50% of
their total expenditure on waste management services. Hence the issue is not always the paucity of
funds, but a lack of a professional approach to deliver services efficiently and in a cost-effective and
reliable manner. Table 3.1 compares the costs incurred to solid waste management services before
and after private sector participation and also mentions which part of the service has been the value
added one means helped to reduce the cost.

Table 3.1 Pre and Post Private Sector Participation in SWM in a few Cities/Towns
City/Town
Year
Cost Before Cost After PSP
Value Chain
PSP
` 000
` 000
1998
23843
27812
Sweeping
Nellore
1987
8000
2200
Primary Collection
Jamnagar
1994
700
350
Sweeping
Sriganganagar
1998
1164
770
Sweeping
Jabbalpur
1999
250
18
Transportation
Kamptee
300
1999
147
Transportation
Manmaad
Source: Compiled from Status of Water Supply, Sanitation and Solid Waste Management in Urban
India, Statistical Volume III, SWM 1999, National Institute of Urban Affairs (2005).
So, the above discussions show us the loop holes of the existing performance. To leverage this standard we need to chalk out strategies to accommodate the private sector into the existing model. The
following discussion will try to deal with the strategy.

3.2 Strategies for private sector participation

In this section the strategies to formulate the model has been discussed.

3.2.1 Selection of the Appropriate Solid Waste Management Model

Selection of the appropriate operating and financial model is an essential first step to improve solid
waste management services in a city. This, however, does not receive adequate attention in many cases. In this section, we discuss the parameters that should be considered while deciding the financial
and operational models for a solid waste management system. Next, based on the parameters, we describe which financial structure, and which operational model, would be best suited for a given city.
The choice of an appropriate waste management strategy would involve the evaluation of the basic
parameters listed in table 3.2:

Table3.2: Major determinants of financial and operational model of municipal solid waste management.

Determinants of Financial Model

Determinants of Operational Model

(Capital and Operational Expenditure/Income)

1. Quantity of waste generated

(Centralized or Decentralized Waste Management System)

1.Availability of land

2.

2. Composition of waste and Health Risk.

Central and State funds availability

3. Internal resource generation by

the urban local bodies

3. Market linkages

4. Financial and Human Resource

Capacity

4. Extent of Informal Workers engaged in

Collection of Waste

Source: Sustainable Waste Management in India, Annepu (2011).

The overall quantity of waste generation, ULBs internal resource generation potential, financial
health of ULBs and the availability of funds from higher tiers of the government influence the selection of the financial model of the waste management system.

3.2.1.1 Financial Model

The selection of the appropriate source of funds to meet capital and operational expenditure associated with the setting up of a solid waste management system depends on the following factors:
I.Waste Quantity
The quantity of waste generation and the characteristics of waste generated in a city or town is an important factor for adopting a particular system to manage the wastes. A city with large quantities of
waste generation requires a robust collection and transportation system with an adequate fleet of high
capacity transportation vehicles. Thus, a centralized approach might be more appropriate in these cases. Class IA cities in India currently generate 2,400 MT to 7,000 MT of waste daily and it is expected
to increase to 3,700 9,000 MT daily by 2031. The waste generation in Class IB and IC cities is relatively lower than that of the Class IA cities as observed in table 3.3 provided below.

Table3.3: Daily Waste Generation in Class I Cities in India

City

Daily Waste

City

Quantity

Daily Waste Quantity

2011 (TPD)

2011 (TPD)
3,344

Jaipur

1,362

Greater Kolkata

11,520

Ahmedabad

2,518

Chennai

6,118

Bhopal

877

Delhi

11,040

Visakhapatnam

1,194

Greater Mumbai

11,124

Imphal

72

Greater Hydera-

4,923

Kozhikode

429

Greater Bengaluru

bad
[Source : Sustainable Waste Management in India, Annepu (2011).]

The per capita waste generation varies within urban areas depending upon the degree of urbanization,
commercial and industrial activity and per capita income. Table 3.4 below classifies the cities and
towns based on the magnitude of per capita waste generation.

Table 3.4: Waste Generation in Cities in India

Sr.No
City/Town Category

Per Capita Waste Generation

1.

Population > 1 million

High

2.

Population < 1 million; and cities in North

Low

Eastern and J&K

II.Selection of the Financial Model

The two parameters, namely, quantity of waste generated and availability of central and state funds
for solid waste management, are largely dependent on the size of the city. Therefore, the other two
parameters, ULBs internal resource generation capacity and its financial health, determine the appropriate source of funds for capital and operational expenditure.

For large cities, with a population greater than a million inhabitants, the quantity of waste generated
is generally high and the central and state grants cover only up to 50% of the cost of the project. For
such large cities, if the financial health of the ULB is good, then all the capital expenditure can be met
through the ULBs financial resources. In case of poor financial health, some portion of the capital
expenditure might need to be financed by the private sector. The options have been summarized in
the following table.

Table 3.5: Strategy for large cities (Population > 1 million)

High internal resource

Good Financial Health of ULBs

Poor Financial Health of ULBs

CapEx: Central/ state grants + ULB

CapEx: Central/ state grants +

ULB + Private sector

generation capacity

Low internal resource

OpEx: Full cost recovery through user

OpEx: Full cost recovery

charges

through user charges

CapEx: Central/ state grants + ULB

CapEx: Central/ state grants +

ULB + Private sector

generation capacity

OpEx: ULB with partial cost recovery

OpEx: ULB with partial cost re-

user charges

covery through user charges

Ministry of Urban Development (2006). Modified JNNURM Guidelines UIG. Government of India

3.3 Selection of the operational model

Selection of a centralized or decentralized model of solid waste management is dependent on the following factors, as discussed below.

I. Availability of land
With such an enormous quantity of waste being generated on a daily basis, a centralized or regional
facility may be helpful since land for setting up multiple waste processing plants may not be available, particularly in metropolitan cities like Mumbai where land is not only scarce but also has a very
high opportunity cost. Smaller cities and towns may be better positioned to have decentralized waste
management systems since the quantity of waste generation is relatively low and the availability of
land is not as problematic as it is in large cities. It may also be possible to transport waste in smaller
capacity vehicles like hand-driven carts or tricycles.

There is a paucity of space for decentralized waste management systems at multiple locations in large
cities. in order to manage the entire waste generated in the megacities, waste processing plants of
1,000 sq. m each would be required at 1,500 to 3,000 locations(The Chartered Institution of Waste Management, 2010). However, the difference between the land requirement for centralized and decentral-

ized waste management plants is not significant. For instance, the integrated solid waste management
project at Guwahati has been allotted 1,60,536 sq. m of land for processing 300 MT of
waste(NIUA,2015). If the same quantity of waste were to be processed by setting up 150 facilities
with a 2 MT capacity, 1,50,000 sq. m of land would be required. However the Not in My Backyard
Syndrome may hinder the provision of so many locations for waste management systems. A city may
explore the decentralized system on a pilot basis to assess the response of the citizens to such systems.

II. Waste composition

The proportion of bio-degradable waste is high in the overall quantity of waste that is generated in
Indian cities and towns. The proportion of composts ranges between 50% and 57% in Indian cities
and towns. Table 3.6 displays the average waste composition region-wise. Composting or waste to
energy is therefore a good alternative for treatment of wastes. Both centralized and decentralized systems can be applied to produce compost. Further, the calorific value of wastes in India lies between
1,523 Kcal/kg to 2,341 Kcal/kg, which is higher than the minimum calorific value required for deriving energy from wastes.
Table3.6: Waste composition in India

Region

Compostables

Recyclables

Inert

Calorific Val-

(In Percent)

(in Percent)

(In percent)

ue
(Kcal/Kg)

Metros

50.89

16.28

32.82

1523

Other Cities

51.91

19.23

28.86

2084

East India

50.41

21.44

28.15

2341

North India

52.38

16.78

30.85

1623

South India

53.41

17.02

29.57

1827

West India

50.41

21.44

28.15

2341

Overall Ur-

51.3

17.48

31.21

1751

ban India
Source : Source: Sustainable waste Management in India, Annepu (2011).
III. Linkages backward & forward
Value in waste is the most important reason for private sector participation in this sector. Waste is
often said to be a misplaced resource. Application of traditional as well as innovative technologies
has made production of several goods from waste possible. Electricity, manure, bricks, biomethanation and other recycled products from plastic, metals, etc can be produced through the application of suitable technologies. The proceeds from their sale determine the commercial viability of
the waste management projects. However, the lack of backward and forward linkages in the form of
availability of the right quality and quantity of waste and a market for the goods produced from waste
have restrained scaling up of waste management projects. It is therefore important to understand the
market for each output produced and choose the right output mix for mitigating the revenue risks in
future. Waste-to-energy projects are not fit for decentralized systems due to feasibility issues.

IV. Extent of informal workers engaged in collection of waste

The City Development Plans (CDPs) prepared by the ULBs should also include an assessment of the
valorization of waste by informal workers engaged in the collection of recyclables. This would help
in estimating the actual quantity of waste generated in the city/town and the extent of recycling activity supported by the informal health workers. It may not be feasible for ULBs in cities with a large
number of workers engaged in rag-picking.

V.The operating model

Selection of the right operating model is driven by cost implications. While the area of land required
per ton of waste disposal does not vary significantly between centralized and decentralized models,
the availability of such land for decentralized systems in large, dense cities is likely to be low. Even if
land is available, its cost is likely to be prohibitive within large cities. Thus, if the cost of land, including the opportunity cost, is included in the capital expenditure required for the decentralized model, it
is likely to be higher than the capital expenditure required for centralized systems, especially due to
the economies of scale that are possible in the latter. The willingness of the community to actively
participate in the management of waste in their surroundings is also an important factor that influences the choice of the operational model. The operational expenditure in decentralized systems is
generally low due to the use of non-motorized vehicles like hand-held carts or tri-cycles employing
informal workers for C&T of wastes. Use of high density waste transportation vehicles to cover
greater distance between the waste processing facility and the collection centers involve higher operational expenditure. The table 3.7 gives an overall account of the proposed operating model.
Table 3.7: Operating Model
Centralized vs. Decentralized

Suitable when:

Solid Waste Management Systems Type

De-Centralized

1.Land sites for composting are available.

2. Large number of informal workers in existing
waste management system (rag-pickers).

3. High degree of organic content in waste.

4. Markets for compost are accessible.
5. Possible to manage health risks adequately.

Centralized

1. Health hazard of inefficient disposal is high.

2. Composition of waste allows high value extraction through use of technology, for e.g., wasteto-energy plants.
3. Land is not available close to the community for
decentralized model.
4. Significant economies of scale are possible

The above discussion makes it amply clear that the above plans should be chalked out to improve the
capacity, efficiency and cost effectiveness of the waste management model. Such a model will give
rise to a long term partnership with a private organization for initiating services like door to door collection, source segregation of the collected wastes and scientific disposals and processings.

3.4 The Proposed Alternative Model :

Our primary research field is based within the Kolkata Municipal Corporation area. Kolkata Municipal Corporation primarily follows the Network Governance Model. The primary problem in the Solid
waste management system of Kolkata is its collection efficiency, lack of segregation and unscientific
disposal and no proper processing technology. Therefore we are proposing an alternative model with
private sector participation which may increase the performance standards for present practices.

1. Collection and transportation of Household waste: The city has been divided into 15 Borough and 144 wards. Total Waste Generated in the city is nearly 4000 ton/day (KMC annual
report, 2015). On an average 350 collection vehicles work in the city per day. From the Annual report published by Kolkata Municipal Corporation we can get a clear picture about the
collection efficiency. In North Kolkata area which is predominantly the old Kolkata region
has the majority of private households. In North Kolkata region door to door collection is yet
not available. Here each locality has a public waste container- which is often not very well

maintained. The distance of the public waste container from the households also plays a critical role in waste collection. Often in the slum areas people witness roadside disposal of the
waste which works as a harbinger of various environmental and health hazards. In south Kolkata which is a relatively elite and high income area the problems are less but the picture is
not completely different. Therefore, we propose to make the collection of waste a completely
private affair which has already been initiated in a few wards of KMC on an Experimental basis. 70, private vehicles are already working within the system(KMC annual report, 2015).
As we have already seen in the previous discussions that inclusion of private service for collection of the wastes has increased the service efficiency in Most of the metro cities around
the globe-so that Kolkata can have a fair rise in collection service efficiency. The waste will
be collected from each household. In case of private households it will be a door to door collection and in case of housing societies it will be collected from the communal container (a
common point for dumping the household waste).
2. Source segregation of the waste: After Collection of the waste it will be assembled to a local
point where it will be scientifically segregated. One of the main shortcomings that Kolkata
presently faces is the non-segregation of the wastes. Primarily, the segregation of waste indicates the segregation of dry and wet waste which helps in further processing of the waste.
Presently Municipal Corporation in Kolkata has introduced Compactors to crush the waste
and to reduce its volume and to produce compost. But, due to the non-segregation of the waste
at source often non-biodegradable wastes cause serious problem to the compactor machine
and thereby hampering the waste management service.
3. Scientific Processing and disposal: In Kolkata the prevalent practice is to dump the crushed

wastes into the designated dumping grounds. It generally leads towards two kinds of problem.
First the capacities of the dumping grounds are fairly limited. So, if we want to continue the
dumping of the wastes then we need to search for more and more land to be used as dumping
ground. But, in an unplanned city like Kolkata availability of new lands to be used as dumping grounds are fairly limited. Moreover,such unscientific dumping of the wastes often lead to
serious environmental and health hazards. Therefore, gradually the solid waste management
service is adopting scientific processing and disposal of the residue. We propose one of the
most popular techniques of scientific processing of the wastes- Waste to energy facility which
is not only cost effective but environmentally safe as well-which will be further discussed in

the following chapters. This waste to energy facility can be developed in collaboration with a
private sector party where the private party will buy the crushed waste from Municipality or it
will collect the waste itself for which the municipality may give it a tipping fee and then the
waste will be used for generation of power which may be used for development of infrastructure and further the residue of the process can be used for infrastructure development like
road.
So, in this present chapter we have discussed the loopholes of the existing system and how
can we take measures to mitigate those loopholes. As, we talk about a private sector participation in the proposed Model which will take part in collection, transportation and scientific
processing and disposal therefore it will include some tipping fee . So , our following chapters will discuss about the willingness to pay that fee- will try to determine an average fee for
that service and how different independent factors affect the willingness to pay that fee.

Chapter IV

Determination of the willingness to pay for the proposed alternative

model and how socio economic factors
are affecting it in Kolkata
The goal is to turn data into information and information into insight--- Carly Florina
The accounts presented in chapter 3 talks in detail about the present performance standards, loopholes
into it and an alternative model for better solid waste management .It deals with the various aspects of
the model like its scope and parameters for formulation. Now , to go ahead with our study we would
like to focus on the data part to corroborate our study. As discussed above, we have already seen that
an effective Municipal solid waste management in inherently related with urbanization and
development of local economy and In India primarily the onus of the management lies on the urban
local bodies. Due to the prevailing Network Governance model in India waste management still lack
professionalism and scientific thinking. It lead us to introduce the Public Private partnership Model

for an effective collection, processing and disposal of the waste. Now, for deploying this kind of
service we need to do a valuation of the service by using contingent valuation method which is a
survey-based, stated preference, methodology that provides respondents the opportunity to make an
economic decision concerning the relevant non-market Goods.Values for the good or service are then
inferred from the induced economic decision.

Therefore, to conduct our study we have concentrated on the Indian city of Kolkata. The city is centered on latitude 22 degree 34 minute North and 88 degree 24 minutes East. Elevation ranges from
1.5 meter to 9.0 meter above the sea level. The city is divided in to 15 boroughs and 141 wards. For
the collection points about 380 vehicle (100 Registered KMC and 280 private vehicle) are used to
transfer waste to disposal site(KMC annual report, 2015).

On an average 97% of the total waste is transported to main disposal site Dhapa which is located at
the eastern side of the metropolitan area (KMC annual report, 2015). So, to mitigate the looming environmental and health hazards this study can be a potential weapon for the environmentalists.

The central part of the study is to conduct a survey to extract the Average willingness to pay for availing a better alternative waste management service by using arithmetic mean of all the responses about
willingness to pay and to determine the effect of a few independent factors on the willingness to pay
for the service and determining the effectiveness of the model in terms of environmental parameters
and Cost terms as well. To do that we have also elicited a few socio economic background information from the respondents

4.1 Description of the collected data

Primarily we collected two types of data-The primary and the secondary. Secondary data which dealt
with the prevailing practices and the minute details about the composition of the waste collected was
gathered from the Municipal Corporation data archive. The primary data which revolved around the
respondents acceptance of the proposed model and their satisfaction level regarding the present waste
management system was collected from a close ended survey.

4.1.1 Secondary data

Physical and chemical characteristics of city refuse
Refuse characteristics vary not only from city to city but even within the same city, as it depends on
factors such as the nature of local activities, food habits, cultural traditions, socio-economic factors,
climatic conditions, and seasons. The physical and chemical characteristics aid in deciding the desired
frequency of collection, precautions to be taken during transportation, and methods of processing and
disposal. Variation of physical composition and chemical characteristics of MSW in Kolkata during
1995, and 2010 are presented in the following tables.
Table1: Physical combination of the wastes,

Total
Recyclables
Compostable(2010
)
50.56
paper
plastic glass
6.07
11.48

50.56

4.88

0.34

Other including inerts

Met
-al

inert

0.19 29.6
37.96

Rubber
&
leather
0.68

rags
1.87

Tot
al
Wood- coco bone
en
-nut
matter
1.15
4.5
0.16

100

100

source: NEERI ,1995

Table2: Physical combination of the wastes NEERI,2010

Total
Compostable
50.56

50.56

Recyclables

Other including inerts

paper

plastic

glas
s

6.07

4.88

0.34 0.19

11.48

metal

Total

inert

Rubb- rag Wood- coco bon 100

er & s
en
-nut e
leather
matter
29.6
0.68
1.87 1.15
4.5
0.
1
6
37.96
100

Source: NEERI, 2010

Table 1 &2 shows an increasing trend for the biodegradable fraction, and also shows an increase in
the day-to-day use of plastic and paper. A decrease in the coal fraction is reflected due to an increase

in the utilization of domestic gas. The amount of paper and plastics, including materials such as food
containers and wrapping materials, is noted to be much lower than in developed countries such as the
USA (65%) and Western Europe (48%) (IGES, 2001). Waste in developing cities generally has a
high organic content (more than 50%) and a low energy value (around 3,3504,200 kJ kg1)
(CPHEEO, 2000). Biological treatment processes such as composting and biogasification are thus
well suited (IGES, 2001) for such wastes. The chemical characteristics listed in Table 3 show an increasing trend in moisture content. This is most likely due to the presence of a higher proportion of
fresh and unprocessed vegetable waste. Although the calorific value of waste has risen substantially
in the year 2010, it is still not in the range suitable for incineration. The calorific value reported is
on the higher side for the type of waste composition reported and should be further analyzed. The
carbon/nitrogen (C/N) ratio is within the ideal range (26 31) for composting (CPHEEO, 2000).
Table 3: Variation of chemical characteristics of waste in kolkata (NEERI, 2010)

Sr.
Parameter
Year 1995
No
1
Moisture
41.57
2
PH
6.33
3
Loss of ignition
46.78
4
Carbon
25.98
5
Nitrogen
.88
6
Phosphorus as p2O5
.58
7
Potassium as K2O
.93
8
C/N ratio
29.53
9
LCV value Kcal/Kg
2717
(All values are in percentage by dry weight basis except LCV and PH)

Year 2011
46
0.3
38.53
22.35
0.76
0.77
0.52
31.81
5028

4.2.2 Description of the primary data:

4.2.2.1 Sampling Framework:

The Sample responses for this study have been obtained by adopting stratified multistage sampling
scheme for selecting the wards, selecting the populations. However the selection of wards within the
official jurisdiction of Kolkata metropolitan area has been purposive and sample houses were randomly selected. We visited total 102 households and interviewed one member from each household.
Thus we gathered a total of 102 sample responses.

4.2.2.2 Socio-Economic profile of the Sample Collected

As discussed above we need to calculate an average willingness to pay for the proposed service and
how various independent factors are affecting the willingness to pay we have elicited the following
socio-economic information from the respondents.

a) Age: Age is one of the most important factors which may affect the willingness to pay for the
new services. It is generally perceived that with increasing age people get matured and their
responsibility towards the social or environmental causes usually increases. But there can be a
counter argument that after a certain age people tend to save more. SO there may be a negative impact on the willingness to pay for a newly implemented or yet to be proved successful
service.
The following 2 table gives an overall idea about percentage of respondents in each age group
and the maximum, minimum and average age of the same.
Table 4: percentage of respondents in each age group

Age
range
Percen
tage

<18

18-30

30-45

45-60

>60

10

15

35

42

Table 5: Maximum, Minimum and average age of the respondents

Age

Max

Min

Average

80

23

50.84

b) Years of Education: With increasing educational level people tend to be more aware about

their surroundings which might affect their willingness to pay for an upgraded service. The
following table gives an idea about the maximum, minimum and average years of education.
Table6: Maximum, Minimum and average years of education of the respondents

Max
Years of education 22

Min
0

Average
14.2

c) Occupation: The level of occupation is another determining factor of the willingness to pay.
General perception is with high ranking Job willingness to pay has a positive relationship. The

following table lists the occupation of the collected samples in an ascending order that is from
low ranking to high ranking job and also says the percentage of respondents under each category.
Table7: Percentage respondents in each occupation group
Daily
labor

Small
trader

Professional
Consultants

Private
employee

Government Retired
employee
Employee

32

12

14

22

15

d) Location: We have divided the location of the respondents into three categories. High income, low income and middle income where low income and high income area comprises of
28.4% of the total respondents and middle income area has nearly 43.13% of the total respondents.

e) Willingness to pay: As discussed above we also collected information that how many of the
total respondents are actually willing to pay for the newly proposed service and it was an open
ended question that how much would they pay. Nearly 70% of the total respondents were
ready to pay for the newly proposed services and maximum willingness to pay is Rs.1000
whereas minimum is 0. Average willingness to pay amounts to Rs.100.58.
Willingness to
pay

Max
1000

Min
0

Average
100.58

F ) Availability of Services: In a few wards of Kolkata Municipal Corporation some of the

services of the proposed model like door to door collection, source segregation which may affect the willingness to pay for the newly introduced model. The services have been introduced
in 15 wards among 141 wards of Kolkata municipal corporation.

We also had a few other important queries to judge the social awareness of the respondents.
1. Awareness about the Environment or health hazard caused by the disposed waste.

Only 30 % of the total respondents replied in an affirmative that they are aware or concerned about the potential harm that may be caused from the inadequate waste manage-

ment facility available whereas 70% of the respondents said either they are not aware or
not concerned about the potential harm caused by the same.

2. Satisfaction about the prevailing services:

Presently the scope of the Municipal waste collection in Kolkata includes collection of
wastes from a local or communal waste collection box and then transferring it to the local
transfer point. From the local transfer point the wastes are sent to Compactor stations to
mitigate the problem of open transfer points. There the wastes are crushed by the compactor to reduce their volume by 30% of its original volume. We asked the respondents
whether they are satisfied with the prevailing scope of the services. Table 7 illustrates the
result.
Table 7: Satisfaction about the prevailing service
Very
Satisfied
25

Reasonably Satisfied

Not satisfied at all

50

25

3. Dependable service provider :

Presently the waste management process in Kolkata Municipal area is entirely supervised
by the Municipal Corporation which in some cases like transportation and Composting includes a few outsourced contractual labor. So, we presented an idea of various supervisory
models before the respondents like only local government authority, private party or a collaboration of government authority and private party. The responses have been noted in
table8.
Table 8: percentage of respondents depending upon each service provider
Local
Government
authority
70

Private
party

PPP

Indifferent

16

10

With this brief description of the collected sample we will now proceed to the analysis

4.2 Factors affecting willingness to pay

In the previous section we have already measured the average willingness to pay. Now,
as it is a technique for valuing non-market services, it is known to be affected by many
Socio-economic factors . Kolkata is a home for diverse cultures, lifestyle, education and inCome level. Therefore, in this section we will see how the previously discussed socioEconomic variables affect the willingness to pay.

4.2.1 Variables used in the model

There are two types of variables used in the model- The dependent and the independent variable. The dependent variable is the willingness to pay. As discussed above we have taken 5 independent factors
Like 1) Age 2) Years of education 3) occupation 4) Location 5) Availability of services. The
independent variables can be further subdivided into Numerical and categorical variable. The
Age and Years of education are Numerical variable and Occupation, Location and Availability of services are categorical variable because their values are not in numbers. The occupation variable is further subdivided into 7 categories in increasing order of Income like 1) labor
2) small trader 3) retired person. 4) public sector job 5) private employee 6) Professional Consultant 7) government job. As discussed above the availability of services can have only two
options whether the ward under consideration receives the upgraded service or not. So, it has
been categorized as 1) yes 2) No.
Next, the location variable has been categorized into three different categories- high income
area, middle income and low income area. We have used two dummy variables Loc1 and
Loc2 to represent the location variable where D1 has been assigned value 1 for a high income
area and 0 otherwise. D2 has been assigned 1 for middle income area and 0 otherwise.

4.2.2 Regression Model

So, summarizing the above discussion we can formulate the regression model under consideration as follows:
Willingness to pay = X0 + X1(age) + X2 (years of education) + X3 (occupation) + X4 (Availability of services) + X5 (Loc1) + X6 (Loc2) + E
Where X1 .X6 are the coefficients of the variables whose sign will determine the direction of
the variables and the value of coefficients show the variation in willingness to pay for one unit
change in the independent variables. X0 is the intercept and E is the error term.

4.2.3 Result and analysis

Here, in our study we have used SPSS 20 software for conducting the Regression analysis.
The following path diagram of the regression analysis actually shows a conceptual model that
embodies the basic idea of regression analysis that is the determination of the effect of the
independent factors as discussed above on the willingness to pay. Table 10 gives us the result
of the analysis.
4.2.3.1 Path Diagram Created in SPSS:

Fig: 4.1 path diagram of regression analysis (source IBM SPSS 20)

Table10: Result of the regression analysis

Age
School
Loc1(D1)
Loc2(D2)
Occupation
Avail

Co-efficients

Standard Error

Critical ratio

-3.24(**)
-13.11(*)
145.84(***)
7.7
23.87(**)
-179.95(**)

1.18
5.46
42.31
34.51
8.8
70.44

-2.75
-2.4
3.45
0.22
2.71
-2.56

Significance(p)
0.01
0.02
0.000
0.82
0.01
0.01

R Square value .293

F-Statistic value 4.14 [ at .05 significance level and (6,95) degree of freedom]
Source: IBM SPSS 20.
From the above table we can see that the R square value of the proposed model has turned out to be
.293which Signifies that nearly 29% of the variations in the dependent variable (Willingness to pay)
around the sample mean of it is explained by the independent variables - which is again reasonably
good considering that we have used a Cross-sectional data.
Moreover the F-statistic value has come out to be 4.14 which is greater than the critical value.

So

we may reject the Null hypothesis and conclude that the model can significantly help us to predict the
willingness to pay.
4.2.3.2 The significant Independent variables:

1) Age: we can see a negative relationship between Age and willingness to pay which shows
with increase of age the willingness to pay goes down. In our sample more than 70% of respondents were above the age of 45 from when people generally start thinking about the post
retirement life and savings so after paying already imposed taxes perhaps one more payment
has not made them so much interested which we can take as possible explanation for this negative relationship.
The value of standard error also shows that 95% of the observations will fall between +1.18
-1.18 regression error from the regression line. This variable is also statistically signi-ficant (p value) which shows it has significant effect over willingness to pay.

2) School: This variable shows a negative relationship with the dependent variable. Predominantly

the highly educated people stay in the elite high income area where the services are relatively
better and many other graduates or post graduates too live in middle income area where people
depending more on government services. So, with increasing education we do get a negative
relation which is certainly opposite of the rationale but we can see that the magnitude of the
negative relationship is not very high which signifies that there are atleast some amount of
awareness among the respondents.

3)

Loc1: Loc1 variable has primarily been used for high income area. So, this variable can possi-

bly be explained this way that nearly 30% of the respondents were from high income area.
Most of the High income area respondents are at least average or above average educational
level. So, they are meant to be highly aware about the social, environmental affairs and regarding income also they should not face any problem. So, the positive relation is quite evident.
This variable is statistically significant as well.
.
4) Avail(Availability of services): Kolkata Municipal corporation has already started giving few
of the stated services in 7 of its wards on an experimental basis. Majority of the respondents
from those areas have flatly rejected the idea of any other mode of service and therefore any
more payment for that which is evident from the regression analysis as well. It not only has a
negative relationship with the willingness to pay but it has quite high negative value. So, the
availability of few of the stated services actually highly discourages people to opt for a fullfledged alternative model.
5)

Occupation: as discussed above the variable has been categorized in an ascending order of
income that is from lower income to higher income group. Now, with higher income people often become inclined towards a better service which has been adequately reflected in the test result. The variable has a positive relationship with the willingness to pay and it is quite significant as well statistically.

So, this present discussion talks about determining the willingness to pay for the waste management service and how the independent factors affect the willingness to pay for the service.
In the next chapter we will see how much effective the model under study is both from environmental perspective and from the cost effectiveness.

Chapter v

Environmental and cost effectiveness of the processing and

disposal of the waste
Inefficient waste management service does lead to serious health and environmental hazards. Even
though lack of proper collection and transportation service lead to piling up of the wastes which often
lead to foul smell and health and environmental hazards but the dominant contribution in health and
environmental hazard from solid waste comes from unscientific processing and disposal of the waste.
In chapter3 we have already seen that private sector participation has helped to reduce the cost of the
waste management service but along with that the scientific processing is yet to get the momentum in
India and it is affecting Indias environment and the health of the citizens immensely. So, scientific
processing and disposal of the waste has become a mandatory part of any efficient waste management
process. Therefore, we need to look into a both cost effective and environment friendly technique to
process and dispose the waste scientifically. After carefully studying a few successful waste
processing projects we are focusing primarily on processing the household waste into energy- a very
promising but yet to be properly explored concept of renewable energy. Scientific Waste management

and Processing is a specially designed process where we collect, segregate the waste at source,
transport it to the disposal site then process it scientifically.
Our model broadly looks after a few of society's budding challenges including:
1. Population growth - Safe, reliable waste disposal
2. Economic and environmental costs of action and non-action.
3. Long-term effects both on environmental quality and on the Earth's resources: materials, energy
and land.
5.1 Brief Overview of Waste to Energy facility:
Recycling takes place at the source and during the primary collection and transfer station process in
the various colonies. In addition to this during the segregation process recyclables such as metals,
large and hard plastics, glass, inert and rubber are being segregated and being sent back to the
recycling industry.
5.1.1 Preliminary regulations to comply with:
A WTE facility requires a site, first and foremost, that is properly zoned and near major roads,
highways, a utility substation, and has water, sewage and an appropriate industrial infrastructure.
Twenty-five acres is preferred, but some facilities are located on as little as 5 acres if trucks can line
up off site. Before construction can begin, a projects needs to secure the following:
1. Waste characterization in terms of composition, heating content, moisture, etc.
2. Site control through lease or ownership.
3. Proper zoning and/or land use conformance.
4. Environmental permits.
5. Utility interconnections.
6. Power purchase agreement including off-take guarantees.
7. Materials purchase agreements.
8. Ash disposal (landfill) capacity.
9. Waste supply commitments.
10. Acceptable credit worthiness of all project participants including the government, bank utility or
other - entity require to make financial guarantees.

11. Guarantees including governmental entities at the federal, state, and local levels.
12. Current cost of waste disposal.
13. Availability and cost of disposal alternatives.
Once the site and all contracts are secured, the facility may be financed and construction can begin.
The construction period lasts approximately 24-30 months(The Chartered Institution Of Waste
Management,2010)

Municipal Solid Waste is stored in a MSW pit / bunker which is maintained under negative pressure
to prevent bad smell odor escaping into the neighborhood.
During normal operation the furnace temperature is maintained at a minimum of 850 C(,The Chartered Institution Of Waste Management,2010)Feeding rate of waste inside the furnace is controlled by

steam requirement, according to steam requirement MSW feeding increases or decreases, air flow in
to the furnace also varies correspondingly for optimum combustion. If in any case this temperature
falls below 850 C, alarms will be activated and an auxiliary fuel automatically starts to maintain the
required temperature. Moreover, furnace monitoring cameras are usually installed to monitor the furnace area and to ensure complete combustion.

5.1.1.1

Emission Standards Regulation

The following table mentions the emission standards that has been fixed by Government Of India
in its Annual report published by Ministry of environment in 2011 is as follows:

Parameters
Concentration mg/Nm3
Particulate Matter
150
Nitrogen Oxides
450
HCI
50
Total Dioxins/furans
0.1ng TEQ/Nm3*
Volatile organic compounds in ash shall not be more than 0.01%
Source: Annual report, Ministry of Environment, 2011.

5.1.2 How Does the Waste To Energy facility Works:

a) Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) will be delivered to the Waste Management Company facility.
b) After arrival of trucks at the facility they will enter into an enclosed reception hall which is

under negative pressure to prevent bad smell odor going into the neighborhood. The sucked
air is being reused to enhance the combustion process.
c) The reception hall closes and hereafter the trucks will open and dump the waste in an enclosed area, after which it is transferred to a separation / segregation process where inert, plastics, rubber, glass and metals will be removed and sent back to the recycling industry.
d) The Refused Derived Fuel (RDF) MSW is than stored in a MSW pit / bunker where large
hydraulic cranes will be mixing the fuel to a homogenous fuel and by pressing the volume the
humidity level will be reduced and leachate will be removed through a drainage system, transferring it to a sophisticated leachate treatment facility;
e) The RDF is transferred to a combustion chamber with a pre drying zone, where selfsustaining combustion is maintained at extremely high temperatures.
f) We maintain the building around the tipping and bunker area under negative pressure and
use this air in the combustion process to control odor.
g) The heat from the combustion process boils water.
h) The steam from the boiling water drives a turbine that generates electricity.
I) Electricity is distributed to the local grid.
j) Ash from combustion is processed to be land filled or alternatively to produce bricks, to be
reused in road construction and/or road dividers etc.
k) All gases are collected, filtered and cleaned before hot air is being emitted into the
atmosphere.
Gas will be managed from the combustion process with state-of-the-art air pollution control
technology that operates at higher standards than the current emission standards in India;
Emissions will be controlled of particulate matter primarily through a bag-house (fabric
filter).

5.1.3 Post Combustion:

Generally, WTE residues can be differentiated into two fractions: The term fly ash refers to the fine
particles that are removed from the flue gas. However, usually the fly ash includes also residues from
other air pollution control devices, such as scrubbers. Fly ash typically amounts to 10-20% by weight
of the total ash.( The Chartered Institution Of Waste Management,2010)

The rest of the WTE ash is called bottom ash (80-90% by weight). The main chemical components of
ash are silica (sand, quartz), CaO, Fe2O3, and Al2O3 for a mass burn WTE plant. Usually the ash has
a moisture content of 22-62% by dry weight. The chemical composition of the ash depends strongly
on the original MSW feedstock and the combustion process(The Chartered Institution Of Waste Management,,2010).

WTE ash has been reused in construction since the early 70s. Common applications are subbase material, structural fill, and aggregate in asphalt or concrete. However, in the past, in a few cases
contaminant concentrations of fly ash exceeded the allowable threshold values. Ash reuse is therefore
restricted to proven processes in most of the countries. e.g. there are no nationwide standards
regarding the ash usage in the U.S. So, less than 5% of the WTE ash is beneficially used (compared
to bottom ash reuse of ~70% in Germany and ~90% in the Netherlands)(Knox,2005). The
government of Bermuda uses the entire WTE ash in concrete products for artificial reefs or shore
abatements(Knox,2005). The Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Council is therefore taking
an innovative approach towards our understanding and beneficial use of ash. An interdisciplinary and
inter-institutional research group will carry out a comprehensive project on reuse applications such as
engineered aggregate, cement blocks, asphalt abandoned mines, and concrete.

5.2 A Better Environmental Solution:

Scientists predict that if we stay on our current course we will irreversibly change our planet within the
next 30 years. Many Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports show that average temperatures in the arctic region are rising twice as fast as elsewhere in the world. The polar ice cap is shrinking at a rate of 9% every 10 years and some in the scientific community argue that at this pace, summer in
the arctic could be ice-free by the end
Of the century (IPCC,2007)

In January 2007, the United Nations Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued its
4th report. The major finding is that scientists are 90% certain that human activities over the last 50

years, such as the burning of fossil fuels, have led to global warming or climate change. These
findings are increasingly being brought into the mainstream in various ways, due in part to the increased attention on unseasonably warm weather across parts of the globe. There are numerous actions that nations can take to help slow the effects of global warming. Waste to Energy (WtE) offers a
solution that can have a direct positive impact beginning today.
scientific waste management and processing of the waste takes Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), i.e.
household trash, and transfers it into combustion chambers where it is burned at high temperatures
and reduced to 10% of its original volume(KMC Annual Report,2015). The heat generated from the
combustion chambers heats up water in steel tubes that form the walls of the combustion chambers.
The water is turned to steam and sent through a turbine that continuously generates electricity.
The Waste to Energy (WtE) industry has been in existence for over 25 years and has developed stateof-the-art technology making it one of the cleanest forms of energy generation(The Chartered
Institution Of Waste Management,2010). The advanced technology in combusting waste is the air

quality (emission) control system. Waste to Energy (WtE) facilities meet or exceed the strictest
standards and employ a multi-step process to achieve superior environmental performance.
While recycling is a preferred first step in the waste management process, not all waste can be
recycled. After recycling, there are two proven options for disposal: bury waste in a landfill or use the
advanced Waste to Energy (WtE) process to turn our growing amount of trash into clean, renewable
power.
WtE facilities provide communities with a clean source of power generation, minimal disturbance to
surrounding neighborhoods, and a safe and effective solution for managing local trash generation. In
communities where WtE facilities are located, the recycling rates are higher than the average level.
WtE alleviates the reliance on landfills and the long distance shipping of trash. Re-using household
waste to power generators decreases our dependence on fossil fuels and avoids the pollutants that
would have been emitted in its place. Following points, Briefly summarizes why waste to energy
facility in environmentally sound than the prevailing services.

5.2.1 Waste to Energy as a renewable source

The formal definition of the term renewable energy varies. The International Energy
Agency defines renewable energy as energy derived from natural processes that are replenished
constantly. Solar, wind, wave, hydropower, biomass, and geothermal energy are typically considered

renewable. In addition, the Ministry for New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) have included WtE
within the definition of renewable energy.
Those who support the claim that WtE should be considered renewable reference that there is a
tremendous amount of MSW remaining after reuse and recycling, even in locations with mature stateof-the-art waste management programs. This waste can serve as a long-term supply of fuel in WtE
facilities, as it will be replenished constantly for the foreseeable future and is consistently
replenished and all of the energy recovered by the WtE process preserves natural resources and
avoids secondary impacts from mining and the combustion of those resources.
The WtE process produces a combined ash, which is two of the by-products of the WtE process: the
bottom ash that remains after the combustion process and air pollution control residue. Combined ash
is considered non-hazardous. Bottom ash is reused in civil projects such as road construction and
fabrication of bricks.

5.2.2 Waste to Energy facility reduces greenhouse gases:

According to report published by US Energy Information Administration in 2015 WtE facilitates in
reducing Greenhouse gas emission in the following ways.
A) Reducing landfills which generate methane emissions (Methane is 20+ times more potent than
CO2)
B) Decreasing dependence on fossil fuel power plants and related CO2 emissions
C) Recycling metal thus reducing mining operations and associated emission
D) Reducing long-haul truck traffic to distant landfills..

5.2.3 Waste to Energy Facilities a better solution than landfilling

The following table gives an effective comparison between the two.
Landfill
As waste decomposes in a landfill, it
produces Methane.

Waste to Energy
No methane is produced from Waste to
Energy facilities, nor does the risk
exists to pollute the groundwater.

Methane is a greenhouse gas, mostly

emitted from decomposing waste in
landfills, which is 20 25 times the
potency of carbon dioxide and is
ranked as a dangerous contributor to
climate change.

Waste to Energy facilities avoid the

production of methane while producing
significantly more electricity from each
ton of waste compared to landfills.

Methane gases are also harmful for the

ozone layer. Thinning of ozone layer
increases the risk of skin cancer.

Further Green House Gas reductions

are realized by the avoidance of carbon
emissions from long-haul transportation
methods used to transport garbage to
distant landfills.

Keeping waste out of landfills means

more open space and less risk of leak-

Waste used as fuel in Waste to Energy

facilities is typically generated in the
surrounding area.

ing toxins into groundwater and releasing harmful air emissions.

The risk of ground water contamination Waste to Energy facilities also recycle
could be a public health hazard as the metal
that would have otherwise been land
groundwater could be used produce filled. In total, creating energy from waste is
drinking water.
simply a better solution

5.3 Waste To Energy: A better Economic Solution

Distinct ways of generating electrical power incurs significantly different costs. Generally the
calculations of these significant differences are made at the point of connection to a load or to
the grid. The costs are typically expressed in Kilowatt-hour or megawatt-hour. This type of
calculation assists policy makers, researchers and others to guide discussions and decision
making. In technical terms this incurred cost is referred as Levelized cost of
electricity (LCOE). It is calculated by accounting for all of a systems expected lifetime costs
(including construction, financing, fuel, maintenance, taxes, insurance and incentives), which
are then divided by the systems lifetime expected power output. It can also be referred as the

minimum value at which the energy to be sold so that it reaches the break-even point over its
lifetime. International Energy agency defines LCOE in the following way:

It

: investment expenditures in the year t

Mt : operations and maintenance expenditures in the year t

Ft : fuel expenditures in the year t
Et : electrical energy generated in the year t
r

: discount rate

: expected lifetime of system or power station

According to the above measurement parameters the Energy Information Administration Of

United states in their annual report of 2015 published the estimated costs to community for
various electricity generation technologies. They were estimated in USD/mwah. The table3
provides an effective comparison between the various technologies in terms of their cost to
community.
Table: 3 Comparison between electricity generation technologies

Power generating technology

Minimum

Average

Maximum

Municipal Solid waste

90

100.5

117.4

Conventional Coal

87.1

95.1

119

Advanced coal(Integrated Coal-Gasification Combined

106.1

115.7

136.1

Cycle)

Advanced coal with CCS(carbon capture and storage)

132.9

144.4

160.4

Solar PV

97.8

125.3

193.3

Solar Thermal

174.4

239.7

382.5

Source: Annual Energy Outlook,2015: US Energy Information Administration.(the values are in USD($)).
The above table shows how different technologies incur different costs for generating electricity. The
table provides a minimum, maximum and average LCOE because the costs used to vary depending
on the location or the size of the plant. It shows that the conventional coal may be the lowest
expenditure incurring technology but traditionally it has been accounted as one of the worst source of
environmental pollution. To mitigate those tradeoff, technologies like Integrated Coal gasification
combined cycle or clean coal and clean coal with carbon capture and storage has been introduced to
lower the carbon emission and other green-house gases. On the other hand the expenditure got
increased for these technologies. So, economically the municipal solid wastes are far cheaper in
generating power because it does not need any more chemical processing before getting utilized for
generation of power and it keeps the cost to community lower than most of the conventional power
generating technologies.
So, from the above discussion it becomes amply clear that waste to energy facility is an
environmentally sound and cost effective technique for scientific processing of the waste which
mitigate the environmental and other health hazards which would have been difficult to confront with
other conventional techniques at such a lower cost to community. Therefore, this discussion answers
our third research question successfully.

Chapter VI

Summary of findings, Conclusions and future measure

In the previous chapters an alternative model for solid waste management services, willingness to pay
for the same, how does it get affected by socio-economic factors and its effectiveness both on environmental parameter and cost in Kolkata Municipal area has been elaborately discussed. This chapter
is therefore devoted first to briefly outline the major observations of the entire ongoing discussion.
Thereafter the conclusion ,limitations of the study and any future implication will be notified at the
end of the discussion.

6.1 Major Findings:

At the inception of the study we kept a few research questions. We have tried to search the answers of
those questions throughout the study.
To answer the questions we have to had a prelude of the basic solid waste management systems existing presently. Chapter 2 primarily deals with this topic. It has elaborated the stakeholders of the system, their roles, the models of solid waste management and the pros and
cons attached with each model. It has actually pioneered our study to dig deep into the matter
to search for an alternative to mitigate the shortcomings. From the next chapters we have tried
to answer our research questions
Our first question was whether the alternative model will be accepted to the people of Kolkata. So, first in the chapter 3 we have introduced our proposed alternative model. As, our model
is specifically meant for Kolkata so before presenting the model we have discussed elaborately the existing performance and the factors contributing to the lackadaisical performance of
solid waste management services in India.

Due to the Loopholes in the existing system we therefore proposed a solid waste management
model which is based on public private partnership because from the above discussions it is
clear that PPP ensures innovation, efficiency and improved level of services, together with
compliance to environment, Health and safety.

While Kolkata Municipal Corporation does provide solid waste management service to the
residents but it is marred with serious performance drawbacks. Inadequate collection and
transportation is a regular issue which often lead to piling up of wastes on the roadside. But
the most serious issue which needs immediate attention is the absence of proper Source segregation, scientific disposal and processing of the wastes.

The wastes are regularly dumped into the dumping ground which is nearly saturated. It leads
to severe health and environmental hazards in the surrounding area. This lead us to introduce
waste to energy facility which will facilitate the scientific processing of the waste in an environmentally viable way.

The fourth chapter deals with the determination of willingness to pay and the how the socio
economic factors affect the willingness to pay for the services.
We have used a close ended questionnaire to elicit the responses of the respondents. We interviewed 102 people-one from each household. What we have found from the interview is that
majority of the people accepts that there is one or other drawbacks in the system be that piling
up of wastes, water logging due to inefficient collection and transportation etc.
Still 50% of the total respondents have actually said that they are fairly happy with existing
services. 25 % of the respondents said they were not at all happy the other 25% was very happy. One of the major finding was majority nearly 70% of the respondents are not concerned
about the health or environmental hazards caused by the in efficient services.

Perhaps this is the reason that even after pointing so many drawbacks in the system 70% of
the people still prefer a government controlled service.

So, after eliciting these responses we described our alternative solution which consisted of
both government and private participation. After describing the positive sides of the model
like scientific segregation and processing of the waste, majority of the respondents gave a go
ahead for the model.
But, as the private participation will include a tipping fee which lead a few people to backtrack. 75% of the respondents though were ready to pay a nominal fee for that service while
rest 25% got backtracked and the average willingness to pay finally turned out to be Rs.
100.58 So, even few people were not very sure about paying for the alternate service overall
the model was accepted by the respondents.

Regarding the next question- whether socio-economic factors affect the willingness to pay is
being dealt with at the latter half of the fourth chapter. From the previous discussions it is
clear that the statistically significant independent factors like age, years of education, occupation, location do affect the wiliness to pay. From a good R square value and F statistics we can
thus claim that our regression model is capable to predict the willingness to pay successfully.

The fifth chapter deals with the environmental viability and the cost effectiveness of the alternative model. From various reports ranging from Ministry of environment, Government of India to The chartered institutions of waste management it is fairly clear that waste to energy facility can be regarded as not only a renewable resource of power generation but as a green
technology as well because it reduces the carbon and greenhouse gas emissions.

Moreover, it is certainly a better option than the present disposal system i.e unscientific landfilling because land filling leads to not only green house gas generation but also lowers soil
fertility and increases erosion.

In addition to that this waste to energy facility is also cost effective. Though it is not the least
costly but it is certainly cheaper than the advanced techniques of power generation from the
conventional non-renewable sources like coal. In chapter 5 we can see that the least cost is incurred in power generation from convention coal which is nonrenewable and has serious
negative impact on environment. So, to do away with this tradeoff waste to energy is certainly
a better choice because advanced techniques like carbon capture and storage is available but it
increases the cost to community to a large extent. On the other hand in waste to energy facility
the cost to community gets again reduced to such a large extent that even after remaining
slight costly than the conventional coal method it actually reduces the cost to community to a
large extent.

Conclusion:
on the basis of the above discussions therefore we can claim that the research questions have been
thoroughly answered. So, as a concluding remark we can say Management of solid waste has been a
major challenge for the local governments. Lack of concerted effort to create awareness about a good
waste management practice and failure of the ULBs to provide this important municipal service to the
public are primarily responsible for development of a poor waste management system in the India.
The severity of the issue has increased due to rapid urbanization coupled with rising income levels
that could increase the problem of waste management manifold in the near future. By creating the required infrastructure for environmentally sustainable and cost-effective collection & transportation
system, recycling, processing & scientific disposal, it is possible to reduce the quantity of refuse
reaching landfills and also extract value from the waste. But This would require adequate planning
and adopting waste management solutions that suits the socio-economic and geographical profile of
the urban areas is particularly important. Lack of data is a major constraint towards this end. The
government and other stakeholders need to come together to address the data gap in terms of waste
quantity, composition among other aspects that would allow for informed decision making.

Future measure:
The private sector has been assisting the ULBs to improve the management of waste in some
segments of the MSW management. In some instances private sector participation has been able to
enhance cost efficiency of delivery of the MSW management services. There is a need to take the
public private partnerships to the next phase where such partnerships are based on a mature rationale.
The emphasis of PPPs should be to leverage the private sector efficiency so as to ameliorate the ways
in which waste is managed by the ULBs.
So, this present study has taken a small step towards that end. Worldwide few Metropolitan city corporations have successfully used the potential of the private sectors for leveraging the solid waste
management service efficiency. But as discussed above this alternative thinking is yet to gain its momentum in the developing nations of South East Asia. Our study focuses on deploying this alternative
model in one of the most important Metropolitan city of South Asia-Kolkata.
One of the main problem due to which the alternative Model is yet to gain traction is the lack of
awareness for which majority of the population still depends on the Government service with all its
shortcomings. Our primary emphasis was on to determine an average willingness to pay for the service and how various factors are affecting the willingness to pay. In addition to that we have also
tried to judge the cost efficiency and environmental benefits of the Model.
Lack of information is one of the primary impediments of this kind of research. We used contingent
valuation method doing the same. Where it is a known fact that though it is one of the most popular
method to establish a reliable estimate of the valuation of goods or services but at the same time it is a
stated preference method where the stated willingness to pay may exceed the true feelings of payment
for the same because the respondents only have a hypothetical description of the service which may
differ practically- in that case the valuation may also differ significantly.
The next important point about this study is its environment-friendliness. From the above discussion
it is pretty clear that Waste to Energy facility is pretty sound environmentally much less costly than
the other conventional techniques of waste processing. It would have been better if we could provide
a break-up of the cost structures of the two different approaches to show that how the costs are getting differentiated. We leave that matter as a future scope of the project to give a detail cost benefit
analysis of these two rival approaches-which may give rise an altogether different study for realizing

Waste to Energy facility towards a near perfect model where it could surpass even the traditional energy generation methods regarding cost effectiveness

References:

Agamuthu, P. et al. 2007. Sustainable Waste Management - Asian Perspectives. International

Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management (5 - 7 September 2007), Chennai, India.
15-26.

Ahmed, S.A. & Ali, M. 2004. Partnerships for solid waste management in developing
countries: linking theories to realities. Habitat International 28. 467479.

Annepu, R. K. (2012). Sustainable Solid Waste Management in India. Master of Science Thesis in
Earth
Resource Engineering, Earth Engineering Centre, Columbia University, (2012). Accessed from
(http://www.seas.columbia.edu/earth/wtert/sofos/Sustainable%20Solid%20Waste%20Management%
20in%20India_Final.pdf) (Accessed March, 2016)

Awortwi, N. 2004. Getting the fundamentals wrong: woes of public-private partnerships in solid
waste collection in three Ghanaian cities. public administration and development 24,
213224.
Breidenbach A.W. and Eldredge R.W. (1969) Research and Development for Better Solid Waste
Management BioScience, Vol. 19, No. 11 (Nov., 1969), pp. 984-988
Chatri, A.K & Aziz, A (2012). Public private partnership In solid waste management: Potential and
strategies

(retrievedfrom:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/186990/
ReportPPPMunicipalSolidWasteManagement270812.pdf)(accessed September,2015).
Gupta, S. et al. 1998. Solid waste management in India: options and opportunities. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling. 24:2, 137-154.
Hope, E.T. 1998. (ed.) Solid waste management: critical issues for developing countries.
canoe press, Jamaica.

Kaseva, M.E. &Mbuligwe, S.E. 2005. Appraisal of solid waste collection following private
sector involvement in Dar es Salaam city, Tanzania. Habitat International 29, 353366.
Kassim, S.M. & Ali, M. 2006. Solid waste collection by the private sector: Households
perspectiveFindings from a study in Dar es Salaam city, Tanzania. Habitat International
30, 769780.
Khajuria, A., Yamatoto, Y., and T. Morioka (2010). Estimation of municipal Solid Waste Generation
and Landfill Area in Asian Developing Country. Journal of Environmental Biology, 31(5), pp. 649654.

Klijn, E.H &Teisman, G.R (2003): Institutional and Strategic Barriers to PublicPrivate
Partnership: An Analysis of Dutch Cases, Public Money & Management, 23:3, 137-146.
Knox, Andrew (2005). An Overview of Incineration and EFW Technology as Applied to the
Management of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), University of Western Ontario.

Kolkata Municipal Corporation, (2015). Annual Report. Government Of West Bengal

Levine, S.C. 1994. Private Sector Participation in Municipal Solid Waste Services in developing
Countries (Vol. 1).The World Bank, Washington.

Mahalingam, A. (2010). Urban PPP Case Studies: Tamil Nadu. TNUDF, Government of Tamil Nadu.

Massoud, M.A., Fadel, M.E. &Malak, A.A. 2003. Assessment of public vs. private MSW
management: a case study. Journal of Environmental Management 69, 1524.

Ministry of Environment and Forests (2000). Municipal Solid Waste Management(Management &
Handling Rules, 2000). Government of India.

Ministry of Environment & Forests (2011). Report of the Committee set up to frame National
Sustainable Habitat Standards for the Municipal Solid Waste Management. Government of India.
Ministry of Urban Development (2006). Modified JnNURM Guidelines Urban Infrastructure and
Governance. Government of India

National Institute of Urban Affairs (2010). Benchmark for Efficient Services. Quarterly Newsletter,
13(1). Accessed from http://www.niua.org/Publications/newsletter/UF_ENG_JAN-MAR10.pdf
(Accessed April,2016)
Rathi,S. 2006. Alternative approaches for better municipal solid waste management in
Mumbai, India. Waste Management 26:10, 1192-1200.

Samaratunge, R & Bennington, L. 2002. New Public Management: Challenge for Sri Lanka.
Asian journal of public administration 24:01, 87-109.

Schbeler, P. 1996. Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management in LowIncome Countries. SKAT (Swiss Centre for Development Cooperation in Technology and
Management), Switzerland.
Sorg, T.J. Industrial Solid Waste Management. Water Pollution Control Federation), Vol. 44, No. 6,
Annual Literature Review (Jun., 1972), pp. 1107-1108

Sriprasert, E. and Dawood, N (2002). Requirements identification for 4D constraint-based

construction planning and control system. Proceedings of CIB W78 conference distributing

knowledge in building, Aarhus, Danmark

The Chartered Institution of Waste Management,2010. Energy from Waste: A good practice guide. Energy
from Waste Working Group UK: The Chartered Institution of Waste Management,

The World Bank, 2011. Urban Solid Waste Management.

(http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTURBANDEVELOPMENT/E
XTUSWM/0,,menuPK:463847~pagePK:149018~piPK:149093~theSitePK:463841,00.html)
Retrieved October,2015
UNICEF (2010). Successful Innovations in Solid Waste Management Systems: examples from Five
Local Bodies in Tamil Nadu. Government of Tamil Nadu, India.
Visvanathan &Glawe, 2006. Domestic Solid Waste Management in South Asian Countries A
Comparative Analysis. 3 R South Asia Expert Workshop (30 August - 1 September 2006).
Kathmandu, Nepal