Bernsteins A

7/27/2019 Bernsteins A

1/25


2/25

2

UZBEKISTAN

SOLID WASTE CONDITIONS -1997

UZBEKISTANSOLID WASTE CONDITIONS IN TASHKENT - 1997


3/25

3

UZBEKISTAN

SOLID WASTE CONDITIONS IN TASHKENT - 1997

UZBEKISTANSOLID WASTE CONDITIONS IN TASHKENT - 1997


4/25

4

UZBEKISTAN

SOLID WASTE CONDITIONS IN TASHKENT - 1997

UZBEKISTANSOCIAL ASSESSMENT FINDINGS - 1997

Figure 5. Fir st Priority Environmental Problem

Most Important Problems

* - including traff ic and congestion;

noise; and hazardous waste

Household

Resp o n ses

28

95 6

45

7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Household

Resp o n ses

Air Pollution

Unsafe Drinking

Water

Insufficient WaterSupply

Inadequate

Sanitation

Inadequate MSWM

Other*

Num ber s In di cat e Pe rc ent age s


5/25

5

UZBEKISTAN

SOCIAL ASSESSMENT FINDINGS - 1997

Figure 8. Household Satisfaction with Solid Waste Service

Reasons for

Dissatisfaction

Most Important Factors

H o u s e h o l d

R e s p o n s e s

47

42

21

3031

3

0

10

20

30

40

50

H o u s e h o l d

R e s p o n s e s

Inf r equent

C o l l e c t i o n

I r r egular

C o l l e c t i o n

L o c a t i o n o f

Container

Waste Lef t on

Gr ound Af ter

C o l l e c t i o n

Unsani tar y

Condi t ions at

Container

Other

Numb ers Indi cat e Pe rce nta ges

34 %

66 %

S a ti s fi e d N ot S at is fi ed

UZBEKISTANSOCIAL ASSESSMENT FINDINGS - 1997

Figure 9. Willingness to Pay 15 Sums

Household

Responses

61

33

6

0

10

2030

40

50

60

70

Household

Responses

Lack ofTrust

No Money

Other

Numbers Indicate Percentages

Reasons for

Unwillingness

70%

30%

Yes No

Most Important Factors


6/25

6

SOCIAL ASSESSMENT IN MSWM

NEED FOR SOCIAL ASSESSMENT IN MSWM

INVESTMENTS

WHAT IS SOCIAL ASSESSMENT?

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES IN MSWM

NEED FOR SOCIAL ASSESSMENT IN MSWMINVESTMENTS

Planning effective and sustainable MSWM investmentsrequires an understanding of the needs and preferences ofa wide range of stakeholders regarding service delivery,costs, and corresponding social impacts.

The specific local and country context defines the MSWMneeds of a society and the extent to which users identifywith, take ownership of, and contribute either in cash or in-kind to its systems and facilities.

Stakeholders should provide feedback on issues related tothe provision, use, location, and design of solid wastefacilities as well as level of service, service provider, relatedlocal institutions, willingness and ability to pay increasedtariffs, and means for tariff collection.

Those managing the system should ensure that investmentsaddress users objectives, needs, and expectations.


7/25

7

NEED FOR SOCIAL ASSESSMENT IN MSWM

INVESTMENTS

SA establishes a framework for public

participation appropriate to local conditionsto help reach consensus on many aspects of

MSWM, including proposed facility sites.

The SA can help identify social monitoringindicators and participatory procedures to

assess the social impacts of MSWMinvestments.

WHAT IS SOCIAL ASSESSMENT?

SA is a type of analysis undertaken by the Borrower as part ofproject design to assess the social feasibility of an investmentproject.

SA is made up of analytical, process, and operationalelements, combining:

(a) Analysis of context and social issues, along with

(b) Participatory process of stakeholder consultations andinvolvement, to provide

(c) Operational guidance on developing a project design,

implementation, and monitoring and evaluation framework

[Social Analysis Sourcebook, World Bank, 2003]


8/25

8

WHAT IS SOCIAL ASSESSMENT

Within the context of a World Bank project, socialanalysis is the responsibility of the task team. If dataare not sufficient for carrying out the analysis, theBorrower will be asked to carry out an SA.

SA is the responsibility of the Borrower and animportant instrument for obtaining data necessary foradequate social analysis for an investment, and formonitoring implementation progress.

The Borrower usually will hire a team of local socialscientists and ensures that the results of SA activitiesinform and refine subsequent activities and contributeto an overall understanding of the roles and priorities ofdifferent stakeholders.

WHAT IS SOCIAL ASSESSMENT

Quantitative and Qualitative Methods and Tools

Collection and review of secondary data

Household surveys

Socio-economic surveys

Semi-structured interviews

Focus group discussions

Willingness-to-pay surveys

Service monitoring survey

Participant observation

Participatory stakeholder workshops


9/25

9

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES IN MSWM

Five Points of Social Inquiry

Stakeholders Social Diversity and Gender Institutions, Rules, and Behavior Public Participation Social Risks

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: Stakeholders

Who are the main stakeholders in the MSWMsystem? Which individuals and groups need to beinvolved and how?

What are the relationships between stakeholdersand what are possible sources and consequencesof conflicting interests among them.

What may prevent stakeholders from fulfillingtheir responsibilities in managing wasteresponsibly?

Whose capacity needs to be built to enable them toparticipate?


10/25

10


Local Level: municipal authorities,solid waste agency, politicians

User Groups: residential (all types),commercial, institutional, industrial,medical facilities

Waste Workers: employees ofMSWM service, waste pickers,municipal sweepers, privatesweepers, domestic workers, janitors

National Level: relevant Ministries(Public Works, Local Government,Public Health, Finance, Environment)

Vulnerable Groups: residents livingnear waste facility sites, women orchildren responsible for disposing ofhousehold waste, waste pickers

Waste Recycling Industry: regionalindustries, city level main dealers,neighborhood dealers, hawkers

NGOs: local environmental groups,church groups, youth groups

CBOs: local groups responsible formanaging neighborhood services

Private Sector: private enterprisesthat use recyclables, private wastecollection firms, chambers ofcommerce

Other Stakeholders: tradeassociations having an interest inany aspect of MSWM; media;educational institutions


User Preferences, Needs, and Perceptions

What aspect of the existing MSWM system bothersusers the most?

Are service users currently satisfied with theirexisting solid waste collection points?

Where do households and other stakeholdersprefer to take their garbage to be collected? Howfar will they walk to their preferred collectionpoint?


11/25

11

Typical Multi-Story Apartment Buildings in Tashkent

Secured Collection Point in Tashkent - 2003


12/25

12



13/25

13


SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: Social Diversity andGender

Poverty

Are there any social groups consistently excludedfrom the formal solid waste service?

Will the poorer neighborhoods be adverselyaffected by or excluded from the new or improvedservices?

What is the nature and extent of informal solidwaste picking?

How will the investment affect waste pickers?


14/25

14

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: Social Diversity and

Gender

Waste pickers are often among the poorest of thepoor. They are vulnerable because they have fewassets and few alternative livelihood options iftheir earnings from waste picking are threatened.

The majority are independent and self-employed,so they have no social security or organizationalsupport to help them through difficult times.

Waste pickers may be of any age. Many childrenscavenge to supplement the family income. Others

are abandoned and are simply trying to survive.Many older people also scavenge. In manycountries, more women scavenge than men. Oftenthey are single mothers, who bring their childrento work with them.


Changes in collection and disposal practices ofsolid waste management systems can profoundlyaffect waste pickers and their livelihoods

Programs can be developed for improving theincome, working and living conditions, andproviding access to social services.

Doing this effectively requires a full understandingof the situation of waste pickers, their motivations

for doing this work, their occupational and livingconditions, and the organizational frameworkwithin which they work and live.


15/25

15

INFORMAL WASTE PICKING IN TASHKENT - 1997

ORGANIZED WASTE PICKERS IN TASHKENT - 2002


16/25

16

ORGANIZED WASTE PICKERS IN TASHKENT - 2003

ORGANIZED WASTE PICKERS IN TASHKENT 2003


17/25

17

RECYCLING CENTER NEAR MAIN LANDFILL

RECYCLING CENTER NEAR MAIN LANDFILL


18/25

18


Willingness and Ability to Pay

What is the current tariff and payment levels?

What tariff level is needed to justify investment?Are beneficiaries willing and able to pay thisamount?

Are users willing to pay more to maintain currentservice level?

What measures will be taken to ensure that thepoor are subsidized? Would population be willingto pay in kind?


19/25

19

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: Social Diversity and

Gender

Gender, Age, Ethnicity

If women are responsible for household wastedisposal, will their role in carrying householdwaste to bins placed in public places be hinderedin cultural settings where womens presence inpublic is discouraged?

Are there any political or ethnic issues associatedwith sharing a waste disposal site?

What role do children play in the MSWM system?

NON-SECURED COLLECTION POINT IN TASHKENT


20/25

20

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: Institutions, Rules,

and Behavior

What are current waste generating practices ofhouseholds; formal and informal industries;commercial enterprises; and institutions?

Are service users aware of the need to managesolid waste better? How do they perceive andinteract with their MSWM authorities?

If the government is not providing an effectiveservice, to whom do consumers turn for help?

Does the municipal agency provide information and

respond to complaints?

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: SOCIAL RISKS

Health Risks

Refuse collection workers and waste pickers are directlyexposed to excreta-related pathogens and intestinal parasiteswhen they handle contaminated refuse. Indirect health effectsresult from the breeding of flies, rats, and other disease vectorsat dump sites, open garbage heaps, and waste-filled drains.

Those living close to dump sites would also have additionalrisks associated with exposure to toxic substances orhazardous materials that may enter the MSW stream.

Municipal workers also are affected by high rates of workerillness and absenteeism due to poor hygienic conditions and the

proliferation of disease carrying pests at open dumps.


21/25

21

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: Social Risks

NIMBY (Not in My Backyard) Syndrome

How is the public included into the site selection and planningprocesses?

Will the public be consulted in all facility siting decisions?

Do local EA regulations require adequate public participation?

TRANSFER STATION IN TASHKENT


22/25

22




23/25

23

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: Social Risks

The World Banks safeguard policies are effective vehicles foridentifying and addressing three significant social risks:

OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement. Triggered in casesinvolving involuntary taking or expropriation of land forpurpose of siting a solid waste facility.

OP/BP 4. 10 - Indigenous Peoples. Triggered in the event theBorrower and the Bank determines that indigenous peoples arepresent in, or have collective attachment to the proposed solidwaste facility site. This can be a free-standing assessment orpart of a broader environmental assessment process.

OP/BP 4.11- Physical Cultural Resources. Triggered if theBorrower or the Bank identifies potential impacts on physicalcultural resources during baseline data collection phase of EA.

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES: PARTICIPATION

The SA incorporates two types of participation: participation of poor and

vulnerable groups, and participation of the broader group of stakeholdersin planning service levels; siting facilities; and/or introducing new technical,financial, or institutional aspects.

What means are currently available to involve broad stakeholderparticipation in planning, implementing, or monitoring investments?

What kind of waste related information is currently provided or neededby the public? What kind of public education is needed?

Is the publics role one of passive recipients of information, or are theyable to play a more active and consultative role in designing theircommunitys MSWM system?

How will the results of participatory activities be incorporated intoproject design and implementation.


24/25

24

SOCIAL IMPACT MONITORING

MSWM investments often are justified on the basis oftheir meeting peoples needs; improving the livingconditions of poorer communities and the workingconditions of waste management workers; andimproving incomes by encouraging re-use, wastereduction, and re-cycling.

Social impact monitoring provides critical informationon results on the ground, and shows whether plannedoutcomes are met, and if necessary, identifiesmeasures needed to achieve them.

TASHKENT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSA CONTRIBUTIONS

Demonstrated to Mayor that the public viewedMSWM as a priority and would pay more

Allowed project preparation to proceed

Influenced technical specifications of bins

Influenced design of collection points

Influenced location of transfer station

Influenced closure of one in-city landfill

Increased awareness of waste picker issues

Contributed to successful projectimplementation


25/25

WORLD BANK RESOURCES

Toolkit: Social Assessment andPublic Participation in MSWM (2004)

http://www.worldbank.org/urban/uswm/socialassesstoolkit.pdf

Social Analysis Sourcebook, World

Bank (2003)

Documents

Bernsteins A