Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Policy and operational constraints for the implementation ofcleaner production in Zambia

Levy Siaminwea,), Kazhila C. Chinsembub,1, Michelo Syakalimac

aUniversity of Zambia, Department of Mechanical Engineering, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, ZambiabUniversity of Namibia, Department of Biology, Private Bag 13301, Windhoek, NamibiacUniversity of Zambia, Department of Disease Control, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia

Accepted 20 December 2004

Abstract

This paper reports the findings of a study conducted to identify the appropriate policy strategies for cleaner production in

Zambia. Through direct consultation with industry and other stakeholders, it was observed that the major constraints that hinderedimplementation of cleaner production in the industry were financial problems, poor/weak enforcement of environmental laws, lackof knowledge, lack of awareness and lack of technical competence. Similarly, potential motivators for cleaner production in industry

were identified and included the macro-economic climate, economic reforms and policies, economic incentives, regulation andenvironmental leadership. In conclusion, the low levels of cleaner production adoption were mainly due to the lack of environmentalstandards in some industries, low levels of cleaner production awareness, limited understanding of commercial and economicbenefits of utilisation of cleaner production approaches, inadequate institutional arrangements for the promotion and im-

plementation of cleaner production and the lacklustre enforcement of existing environmental laws.� 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Cleaner production; Environment; Environmental policy; Zambia

1. Introduction

Globalisation has strengthened the significance ofenvironmental performance on companies’ market com-petitiveness. Because cleaner production (CP) is a pre-ventive way to deal with pollution and seeks to avoidwaste generation at source rather than treating thesymptoms of generated waste, it has emerged as one ofthe most important approaches to addressing globalenvironmental trends. Zambian industries have beennoted as having adverse impacts on the environment,partly because they use inefficient production technolo-gies and procedures or do not have pollution-abatement

) Corresponding author. Tel.: C260 1 293791; fax: C260 1 293792.

E-mail addresses: l.siaminwe@eng.unza.zm, siaminwe@yahoo.co.uk

(L. Siaminwe).1 Chinsembu was with the University of Zambia during the study.

0959-6526/$ - see front matter � 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.12.005

equipment [1,2]. This situation has been compounded bythe weakening economy and high production costs. Inaddition, despite a shortage of concrete data there isa general consensus that the widespread adoption of CPin Zambia remains a largely unfulfilled ambition. Themajor contributing factors to this slow uptake of CPinclude companies’ inability to change from convention-al technologies and strategies to environmentally soundtechnologies, a lack of incentives [3] and the non-availability of information depicting the commercialand environmental benefits of CP. The root cause ofindustry’s failure to respond to the need to switch toenvironmentally sound technologies is possibly becauseenvironmental issues in Zambia were the responsibilitiesof Government sector ministries [3], a strategy whichtended to obscure the significance, severity and cross-cutting nature of environmental issues in sustainableproduction and consumption from other stakeholders.

1038 L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

The government is now improving the situation byencouraging the integration of environmental manage-ment in all the sectors with the involvement of thestakeholders. This has presented an opportunity todevelop a model for new dimensions for CP policy inZambia that establishes environmental responsibility forall stakeholders.

Therefore, to encourage the widespread adoption ofCP by Zambian industries, a new fiscal and policy milieuthat combines the correct mix of regulatory frameworksand incentives is required. This study aims to providea vital contribution to this process.

2. Background

Since the publication of the Brundtland report in 1987,the result of theWorld Commission on Environment andDevelopment set up in 1983; there is now a generalconsensus that the economic growth has to be obtained inan environmentally sustainable manner. At the ‘‘EarthSummit,’’ e the United Nations Conference on Envi-ronment and Development (UNCED) held in June 1992in Rio e three declarations and two conventions wereapproved in which the importance of cleaner productionfor a sustainable development was highlighted. TheUnited Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange and the Convention on Biodiversity were signedby a majority of the nations attending the Conference.The Declaration of Rio on Environment and Develop-ment, Agenda 21 and the Declaration on PreservationandManagement of the Forests were also accepted at theRio conference by general consensus. These were the firstinternational agreements in which reference was made tosustainable development. Cleaner production and cleanertechnology were highlighted to be important tools toimplement a strategy towards sustainable development.In the Declaration of Rio on Environment and De-velopment, the development and transfer of cleanertechnologies were declared as one of the most importantaspects for achieving sustainable development.

To re-enforce commitment to cleaner production, theUnited Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) pre-pared the International Declaration on Cleaner Pro-duction after extensive consultation with diverse interestgroups [4]. This International Declaration is a voluntarybut public commitment to the strategy and practice ofCP and was launched in October 1998 at Phoenix Park,South Korea [4]. The UNEP Division of Technology,Industry and Economics (DTIE) maintain updates onthe Declaration and CP activities [4].

The Zambian government does recognise that theprotection, conservation and improvement of the envi-ronment are cardinal to achieving sustainable develop-ment [3]. In 1985, the government adopted the NationalConservation Strategy, which is the principal policyguiding the use and conservation of natural resources in

Zambia. In 1990, the Zambian Parliament, which is thelegislative wing of the government, passed the Environ-mental Protection and Pollution Control Act (EPPCANo. 12) which provided for the formation of theEnvironmental Council of Zambia (ECZ).

In 1992, ECZ was instituted and mandated to preventwater pollution, prevent air pollution, control thedischarge of waste, control the use, manufacture anddisposal of pesticides, control noise, conserve naturalresources, regulate Environmental Impact Assessments(EIAs) and govern the use of ionising radiation. Zambiahas also enacted several statutory instruments andstandards that amplify the provisions of the EPPCA.ECZ is the lead institution in the implementation ofenvironmental laws and policies in Zambia. ECZ hasalso embarked on the Industrial Pollution PreventionProgramme.

The Zambian government revisited the environmen-tal policy through the development of the NationalEnvironmental Action Plan (NEAP), in 1992. TheNEAP was completed in June 1994 with the followingas priority areas of major concern: deforestation, waterpollution and inadequate sanitation, soil degradation,air pollution especially in the copper mining towns andwildlife depletion. The NEAP [5] aims to integrateenvironmental concerns into the social and economicdevelopment process of the country.

The NEAP implementation strategy placed the pro-motion of clean technologies in industry as the numberone priority. The concept of CP was adopted in 1997 ata national workshop of stakeholders comprising envi-ronmental authorities, industries, academia and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). This led to thecreation of a CP programme for the industry in 1998 byECZ in partnership with the Zambia AssociationChambers of Commerce and Industry (ZACCI) andwith the assistance of the Norwegian Agency forInternational Development (NORAD). The programmewas aimed at training and encouraging industry toinvest in cleaner technology [3]. In terms of capacitybuilding in relation to the transfer of environmentallysound technology, this was again done by the ECZ/ZACCI CP programme. More than 50 companies’personnel have been trained under this programme [3].

Despite all these efforts targeted at reducing environ-mental degradation ensuing from industrial pollution,pollution of the environment by industrial effluents andemissions is still rife. Although it is not known exactlywhy industrial pollution is rife in Zambia, indicationsare that most of the industries are unable to reduce theamounts and toxicity of wastes because they use obsoleteand inefficient processing technologies, while others useraw materials that contain numerous toxic substances[1,2]. The problem of industrial pollution has also beenexacerbated by the widely acknowledged weaknesses ofthe conventional regulatory framework. The drawbacks

1039L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

of the regulatory structures and instruments haveseemingly encouraged the industries to remain indiffer-ent to production approaches that are benign to theenvironment.

It is now accepted that as long as the industries donot change to CP, they will continue to pollute theenvironment to the levels that threaten life and sustain-able development in Zambia. At present, this gloomyscenario is being propped up by the poor translation andimplementation of the NEAP. This was because oneof the reasons for developing the NEAP was based ona requirement by the World Bank for a NEAP asa prerequisite for International Development Associa-tion (IDA) loan funding [5] and inevitably resulted inthe government’s failure to promote change with regardto national strategies that embrace CP since its primaryfocus was on accessing donor funding. Therefore, toreverse this scenario, a well-articulated strategy for CPis imperative. Furthermore, quantitative data on theadoption of CP practices are not readily available inZambia. Equally, there are no data to indicate thesuccess of the ECZ/ZACCI CP programme. The factthat some companies have received training on CP doesnot allow any conclusions to be drawn about the rate ofadoption. Adequate data could be obtained througha survey of companies to identify the awareness and thefactors affecting the adoption of CP and this is preciselywhat this study was designed to achieve.

3. Goal and scope

This study was formulated to generate perspectivesthat would assist in the development of policy guidelinesintended to encourage increased adoption and use of CPin Zambian industries. The specific objectives of thestudy were to:

(i) determine the level of awareness of CP amongvarious actors in industry, government agencies,and NGOs;

(ii) assess levels of adoption of CP and to investigate thecommercial versus environmental impacts of CP;

(iii) identify obstacles hampering the adoption and useof CP technologies; and

(iv) determine regulatory frameworks, economic instru-ments, and other incentives that would encourageadoption and use of CP technologies.

3.1. Hypotheses

The study sought to test the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis oneResearch hypothesis (H1): Low levels of awareness ofCP strategies including the lack of understandingof commercial and environmental benefits of CP,

significantly contribute to the non-adoption of CP inindustry.Null hypothesis (H0): Low levels of awareness of CPstrategies, including the lack of understanding ofcommercial and environmental benefits of CP, do notsignificantly contribute to the non-adoption of CP inindustry.

Hypothesis twoResearch hypothesis (H1): CP technologies have signif-icantly more commercial and environmental benefitsthan conventional production technologies.Null hypothesis (H0): CP technologies do not havesignificantly more commercial and environmental bene-fits than conventional production technologies.

Hypothesis threeResearch hypothesis (H1): Lack of suitable legal frame-works, economic instruments and other incentives hassignificantly contributed to the slow adoption and use ofCP technologies in Zambian industries.Null hypothesis (H0): Lack of suitable legal frameworks,economic instruments and other incentives has notsignificantly contributed to the slow adoption and use ofCP technologies in Zambian industries.

Hypothesis fourResearch hypothesis (H1): Lack of appropriate institu-tional and organisational changes to support theimplementation of the NEAP has contributed to theslow adoption and use of CP technologies in Zambianindustries.Null hypothesis (H0): Lack of appropriate institutionaland organisational changes to support the implementa-tion of NEAP has not contributed to the slow adoptionand use of CP technologies in Zambian industries.

4. Methodology

The study was undertaken from October 2001 toApril 2002 for data collection and industry visitations inselected sites. It utilised a questionnaire survey, focusgroup discussions, a literature review and direct ob-servations during plant tours to collect both qualitativeand quantitative data. Following the completion of datacollection, analysis and report preparation, a publicworkshop was held in Ndola, one of the study areas, on26 July 2002 to present the findings and to receivecomments and criticisms. The workshop was chaired bythe Copperbelt province Deputy Permanent Secretaryand the City of Ndola Town Clerk and was attendedby representatives from companies, the community,NGOs, the Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry(MCTI), ECZ, ZACCI CP desk, Central Statistics Office

1040 L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

(CSO) and the Copperbelt Health Education project.The comments from the workshop were used to con-solidate the policy recommendations and to modify thefinal report [6].

4.1. Survey addressees

The study population included industries that hadreceived CP training from the ECZ/ZACCI CP pro-gramme. Other industries that had not receivedCP training were also included. Small, medium andlarge industries were gauged according to their pro-duction capacity, number of workers, investment size,etc., and included in the study. The study also includedother stakeholders such as government ministries,quasi-governmental agencies, NGOs and private sectoragencies.

Various industrial sectors were identified, namely:food/beverages/tobacco; metal/wood; chemical/rubber/plastics; paper/paper products; energy; textile/leather;concrete/cement/lime; and service [7]. The groupingof industrial sectors as indicated was based on thesimilarities of general environmental concerns in thesectors. Voluntary consent was also sought fromselected companies. Production managers, quality con-trol managers and environmental officers completed thesurvey data, while secondary data were collected fromthe CP desk at ZACCI and reports available fromvarious sources, including the Internet.

4.2. Study sites

Resources to cover a wide geographical area, moreindustries and stakeholders, limited the study. Siteselection for industrial visits was therefore, based onidentifying areas with a high concentration of industries.Since these are located in Lusaka, Kitwe and Ndola, thestudy was restricted to these three cities.

Lusaka is located in central Zambia, 15 degrees28 minutes south of the equator and 28 degrees16 minutes east of the Greenwich Meridian [8]. Lusakais the administrative capital of Zambia. It houses manyindustries that provide various goods and services, suchas administration, education, textiles, agriculture andfood processing, agrochemical, manufacturing, con-struction and engineering, water and sanitation, elec-tricity, wood processing, retail trade, transport andcommunication, banking, printing and publishing,broadcasting, small-scale mining and quarrying, etc.Thirty-one companies in Lusaka participated in thesurvey. Viewpoints were received from eight stakeholderinstitutions in Lusaka, which included the Ministryof Environment, Tourism and Natural Resources(METNR), Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry(MCTI), Zambia Investment Centre (ZIC), Small Enter-prises Development Board (SEDB), Zambia Revenue

Authority (ZRA), Lusaka Stock Exchange (LuSE),Zambia Bureau of Standards (ZABS) and ZambiaAssociation of Manufacturers (ZAM).

Kitwe is located at 12 degrees 54 minutes south of theequator and 28 degrees 7 minutes east of the GreenwichMeridian [8]. Kitwe is one of the industrial cities ofZambia and is located in the Copperbelt province.Kitwe has rich copper and cobalt deposits around theNkana mining area. Apart from copper mining andrefinery, other industries include textiles, metal, copperprocessing and electrical engineering, food processing,plastics and paints, banking, education, etc. Fifteencompanies in Kitwe participated in the survey.

Ndola is located at 13 degrees 0 minutes south of theequator and 28 degrees and 34 minutes east ofthe Greenwich Meridian [8]. Prior to the liberalisationpolicies of the 1990s, Ndola was the hub of industrialactivities in Zambia with industries ranging frommining, copper and oil refineries, agrochemicals, agri-culture and food processing, textiles, paints, wood pro-cessing, lime and cement works, printing and publishing,etc. Although a number of these companies closed downwith the advent of the liberalisation of market reforms,a good number continued to operate, albeit under verydifficult circumstances. Fourteen companies in Ndolaparticipated in the survey.

5. Survey findings and discussion of results

Although there is insufficient empirical data on CPpractices in Zambia, CP programmes are internationallywidespread and have led to a growth in internationalliterature on CP and related concepts [4,9e12]. UNEP,UNIDO and the OECD are pursuing CP initiativesin both developed and developing countries [11]. Fromthe numerous international studies and experiences,Gunningham and Sinclair [13] identified a numberof possible barriers, motivators and drivers to theadoption of CP at industry level. The availability ofthis vast literature simplified the design of the studyinstruments.

A total of 60 questionnaires were received, which wasconsidered satisfactory for the purposes of analysis.Quantitative data collected using the questionnaire wereentered into a data management and analysis softwarepackage, the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences(SPSS). Data summaries (case studies) and analysesusing descriptive statistics (cross tabulations and fre-quencies) were calculated using SPSS. Qualitativeinformation from semi-structured interviews was alsoscreened to identify themes relevant to the study. Theanalyses of the results, shortened in this summaryreport, are provided together with the presentation ofthe results.

1041L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

5.1. Waste monitoring and management

Waste characterisation is essential in developinga good waste management system [10]. By definition,wastes are items that are no longer of value and are to bedisposed off. In our study, we sought to assess whethercompanies took note of the environmental loading oftheir activities by paying attention to how much wastethey were generating and how it was dealt with.Although over 85% of the companies indicated the typeof waste they produced, only 35% provided informationon the quantities of their wastes. This shows that veryfew companies, in all industrial sectors surveyed, tookstock of the wastes they generated. This scenario makesit difficult to baseline the environmental performance,which could be used as a benchmark to monitor howcompanies were improving as they implemented envi-ronmental management systems.

In terms of the types of waste found in the surveyedcompanies, the majority were in the form of rawmaterials, cleaning materials and packaging materialsand, respectively, contributed 30%, 25% and 19%as percentages of the total waste generated. Theseconstituted 74% of the wastes prevalent in surveyedcompanies. Generally, these wastes are easy to managepractically if companies are interested in doing so. Thisunderscores the importance of waste monitoring.Gaseous emissions and chemicals contributed 13% each.The waste management employed was generally thetraditional approach involving landfills (38%), airdilution (air emissions) (34%) and sewers (25%). A smallproportion of wastes (3%) were incinerated, compostedor simply dumped (released in drainage and streams asopposed to sewers or as municipal garbage).

Considering that most of the waste was in the form ofraw materials, packaging materials and cleaning materi-als, the quantities of waste sent to landfills could easilybe reduced with the right environmental programmes(waste prevention at source) in place. This can easily bedone as demonstrated by the numerous case studiesCrampton [9] described.

5.2. Application of environmental management tools

The environmental management tools (EMTs)considered in the study were Environmental ImpactAssessment (EIA), Waste Minimisation Assessment(WMA), energy balances, and material balances. Ofthe 60 firms that responded, 35% conducted EIAs, 53%carried out WMAs, 32% and 57% performed energyand material balances, respectively. To understand thisdistribution of the EMTs in the industry, it is importantto take a historical perspective. Since 1992, the Zambiangovernment, through its environmental enforcementagency, the ECZ, has responded to the problem ofpollution through punitive environmental legislation

[14], regulation and pollution charges under the ‘polluterpays principle’. Because of this, environmental compli-ance has been regarded as a cost of doing business anda way to avoid litigation. Waste minimisation pro-grammes reduce the costs of compliance (which go upover time) and lower production costs. This explainswhy WMAs and material balances were more prevalentwhen compared to EIAs. The low showing of energybalances is largely due to the fact that most companieswere unaware of the environmental aspects of theiroperations and the fact that energy is often an areawhere substantial savings could be made with no capitalinvestment. Further, the absence of waste monitoringhas also contributed to this distribution.

Whilst the use of EMTs was appreciable, the pre-dominance of traditional approaches to waste manage-ment indicates inadequate application of the tools.Supporting this view, the majority of the waste foundwas in a form that could easily be reduced with the rightenvironmental programmes in place, but was insteadsent to landfills. If properly applied, these tools can leadto a more efficient use of resources and the identificationof ways to reduce or eliminate wastes at the source.

Related to the use of EMTs was the question of thelow levels of application of these tools. It is important tonote that Zambia has formulated many laws andregulations addressing environmental matters [14].These include one environmental law, eight resourceconservation laws and at least 24 laws of an adminis-trative nature. However, the provisions of these pieces oflegislation have not provided a framework that encour-ages waste reduction, reuse, recycling, recovery andresidual management, save for a few laws that have beenderived from the Forestry, Water and Wildlife sub-sector policies. This has led to the weak penetrationof EMTs in the industrial sectors. This is supported bythe fact that each of the constraining factors in theapplication of EMTs accounted for less than 30% as anobstacle (see Table 1). This implies that furtherpenetration of EMTs would be greatly enhancedby formulating a policy that encourages the adoptionof CP.

Table 1

Company counts indicating constraints in the application of environ-

mental management tools

Constraints EIA WMA Energy

balances

Material

balances

Totals

Financial problems 15 16 13 12 56 (26%)

Lack of technical

competence

7 8 7 7 29 (14%)

Lack of knowledge 16 16 15 14 61 (29%)

Insufficient return

on investment

6 4 5 5 20 (9%)

Poor/weak enforcement

of environmental laws

11 13 11 11 46 (22%)

1042 L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

Data in Table 1 indicates that the constraining factorsweighed the same for all environmental managementtools. The factor that most constrained the applicationof the studied EMTs was a lack of knowledgeaccounting for 29% of all responses followed byfinancial problems at 26% and poor/weak enforcementof environmental laws at 22%. These three factorsaccounted for 77% of all responses. A lack of technicalcompetence at 14% and insufficient return on invest-ment at 9% were not considered to be major constraints.Clearly, reliance on directive-based regulations wouldnot suffice. Instead, by using policy instruments thatshift responsibility from the government to the businesscommunity, it is more likely that an effective balancebetween the needs of economic profits and the require-ments of environmental protection will be achieved andthus, the innovation required to realise ecologicalsustainability will become apparent [15].

5.3. Levels of cleaner production awareness

It was imperative to assess how many companies wereaware of CP. Of the 60 companies surveyed, only 35(58%) indicated that they were aware of CP. The 42%unawareness level of CP re-enforces why many compa-nies were still relying on the traditional approaches ofwaste management by concentrating on pollutioncontrol and end-of-pipe abatement rather than uponpollution prevention at the source. It also confirms thatmany companies have yet to take matters of theenvironment seriously and the results only reflectindustry’s thinking that the environment is ancillary totheir industrial operations and subservient to commer-cial investment and profits. Many players in industryhave not yet grasped the understanding that the livingenvironment is the foundation of sustainable industrialdevelopment.

As for the other stakeholders, officials in theministries of Mines and Mineral Development, Com-merce, Trade and Industry and the Ministry of Tourism,Environment and Natural Resources were aware of CP.ZABS, and ZIC were also aware of CP, while ZRA andSEDB were not. The situation at SEDB was moreserious because officials there believed that SMEs didnot pollute the environment and therefore, did notrequire CP. This ignorance was partly attributed to thefact that officials from ECZ had never visited any of theSMEs under SEDB. At LuSE, officials were not eveninterested in environmental matters and CP. Amongthe NGOs, the Zambia Association of Manufacturers(ZAM), Environmental Conservation Association ofZambia (ECAZ), the Wildlife and EnvironmentalConservation Society of Zambia and the WorldwideFund for Nature were aware of CP strategies as a way ofreducing industrial pollutants.

The mistaken perception by SMEs under SEDB thattheir activities do not pollute the environment isworrying indeed, especially when SMEs are increasinglybecoming major players in the production sector. It isworth noting that SMEs face particular barriers toimplementing CP. They usually have less access to creditfor investments, information on clean technologies andsources of advice for dealing with complex regulationsand are confronted with a higher level of risk. Assistanceprogrammes should therefore, focus on helping SMEs toovercome these constraints. It should be the policy ofgovernment to assist these firms through increasedinformation dissemination and training, tapping NGOsto conduct technical assistance in CP and providingincentives for CP investments. Furthermore, noting that‘lack of knowledge’ ranked first as an obstacle to theapplication of EMTs (see Table 1), there is an urgentneed to create a strong knowledge base in order toaccelerate the understanding, appreciation and adoptionof CP in industry, no matter its size. The current sourcesof CP knowledge as revealed by this study are shown inTable 2.

ECZ was the most popular source of knowledgeabout CP. In fact, the role of ECZ as an agent of CPawareness was evident. It was observed that most of thecompanies that were aware of CP had been visited byECZ. This finding could be attributed to the fact thatenvironmental policy in Zambia is characterised by anemphasis on directive-based regulations and to someextent the success of the ECZ CP desk being hosted byZACCI [3]. It was also observed that the ECZ officialshad not visited any of the SMEs under SEDB and thiscould explain their ignorance about environmentalissues, in general, and about CP, in particular. ECZinspectors should therefore, include SMEs in theirmonitoring programmes. The ECZ/ZACCI CP pro-gramme should also include members of SEDB.Although the ECZ/ZACCI CP programme had re-corded a measure of success in propagating CPknowledge, the 44.3% response level for the ‘other’

Table 2

Sources where surveyed companies obtained information on cleaner

production

Source Frequency of

companies

Percent

frequency

ECZ 8 13.1

ECZ/ZACCI 7 11.5

ECZ/ZACCI/Internet 2 3.3

ECZ/learning institution 2 3.3

ECZ/Internet 2 3.3

ZACCI 4 6.5

ZACCI/learning institution 2 3.3

Learning institution 7 11.4

Othersa 26 44.3

a In-house training, magazines, news media and studies abroad.

1043L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

category (Table 2), and in view of the low levels ofawareness, suggests the need to have coordinatednation-wide CP programmes. As a corollary, the roleof the ECZ/ZACCI CP programme should be expandedand turned into a CP centre. Other countries in Africasuch as Tanzania, Zimbabwe, South Africa andEthiopia have operational CP centres [16,17].

5.4. Adoption of cleaner production techniques

Cleaner production options, as set out by UNEP [4]were used to assess the levels of CP adoption in thesurveyed companies. Table 3 gives the results obtained.Our findings revealed that the adoption of CP inindustries was low (42.6%). Levels of implementationof CP varied across industrial sectors (see Table 3).‘Good operating practices/good housekeeping’ wasa predominant CP option accounting for 41.7% of theimplemented CP options, because this requires little orno capital investment. This is also the case with the ‘on-site reuse and recycling’, which came in second placewith 27.8% implementation. This revelation was un-derstandable considering that the economic environ-ment in the country was not favourable to mostindustries. The respondents complained of limitedcapital coupled with a very unstable local currencyand as a result were mainly focusing on short-termsurvival strategies on a day-to-day basis. In fact, it wasobserved that the industrial sectors that implementedCP the most were those where massive investments tookplace as a result of privatisation or where technologychanges are necessary to improve operations in order tomeet mandatory industry standards. These included thechemical/plastics, food/beverages/tobacco and mining/metallurgical sectors, which did record high levels ofinvestment through the privatisation process.

The influence of ECZ on companies to implement CPoptions emerged. It was observed that industrial sectorsthat most implemented CP also indicated a high in-cidence of ECZ visitation, clearly demonstrated by thechemical/plastics and food/beverages/tobacco sectors.

A similar correlation was observed in the use of EMTsand CP awareness. The reason for this is mainly becauseECZ is the institution legally mandated to oversee theimplementation of environmental policies in Zambia.It may also be due to the fact that ECZ has been one ofthe principal promoters and implementers of the CPProjects in Zambia. In view of the limited resources andcapacity available to ECZ [14], we argue that environ-mental regulations will remain ineffective for some time.As an escape route, government policy on the environ-ment should therefore, gravitate towards non-confron-tational strategies that stimulate industry to adopt CP.

5.5. Constraints to implementing cleaner production

Despite the attractive environmental and commercialbenefits of CP, most companies have not implementedany CP option due to a number of constraints. It isimportant to understand that companies that pollute theenvironment do not want to do so because they areenvironmental sadists, but because they do not havethe capacity to overcome constraints that impede theimplementation of CP. Therefore, in order to direct thepolicy milieu in favour of CP, current and foreseeableconstraints that stand in the way of CP must beremoved. Table 4 gives the results of the barriersconsidered as constraints in adopting CP by the sur-veyed companies.

Two issues were considered in the implementation ofCP: (i) constraints to the further penetration of the CPapproach as presented by companies that have imple-mented CP and (ii) constraints to the implementation ofCP approach as presented by companies that had notimplemented CP. The results showed that the con-straints that hindered CP in industry were almostidentical irrespective of whether a company hadimplemented CP or not. This means that any policymeasures to remove barriers to CP in industries wouldbe the same in both the cases. From the results inTable 4, it suffices to say that these measures must focusmainly on addressing financial problems, poor/weak

Table 3

Company counts implementing cleaner production options across industrial sectors

Industrial sectors Change in raw

materials

Technological

change

Good operating

practices

Product

changes

On-site reuse

and recycling

Chemical/plastics 0 2 6 0 3

Concrete/cement 0 0 1 0 0

Energy 0 0 1 0 0

Food/beverages/tobacco 3 4 2 0 2

Metal/wood 0 0 1 0 1

Mining/metallurgical 0 1 3 0 2

Paper 0 0 0 0 1

Service 0 0 0 0 0

Textile/leather 1 0 1 0 1

Total 4 (11.1%) 7 (19.4%) 15 (41.7%) 0 (0%) 10 (27.8%)

1044 L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

enforcement of environmental laws, lack of knowledge,lack of awareness and lack of technical competence.

The high showing of poor/weak enforcement ofenvironmental laws (13% and 11% for the respectivecategories) confirms that the non-implementation ofCP in Zambia was due to the weak enforcement ofenvironmental regulations and standards by the ECZand supports the earlier observation of the link betweenECZ visitation and environmental activities in theindustry. In the ‘implemented CP’ category, the 10%for ‘unwillingness to change to CP’ is due to employee’sresistance to change, a view widely supported byliterature [13].

5.6. Prospects for cleaner production in Zambia

A major task confronting Zambia is moving the CPagenda to expand the vision, bringing the movementinto the mainstream as well as developing an integratedmanagement strategy. The prospects for CP are boundto improve once CP is institutionalised and incorporatedinto routine business. The main vehicle identified forachieving this was to establish National Cleaner Pro-duction Centres (NCPCs) [19]. The institutional struc-ture approach of NCPCs was to initially locate theCentres within existing institutions and add an advisoryboard to this structure [19]. The host institution concepthas allowed the NCPC programme to start and expandrapidly. If this approach was followed at the timeZambia initiated and/or implemented projects andprogrammes related to CP, then an NCPC was to beestablished within the existing national institution, theECZ. Instead, a national focal point approach wasemployed wherein ZACCI was used to host CP projectsby establishing a CP desk. This approach could havebeen used based on the following considerations [19]:

� CP was a new concept with only limited commit-ment paid to it by the government and industry;

Table 4

Barriers to implementing cleaner production

Barriers to CP Implemented

CP (%)

Not implemented

CP (%)

Financial problems 22 11

Lack of awareness 10 25

Lack of knowledge 13 17

No technical competence 6 12

Poor/weak enforcement

of environmental laws

13 11

No national CP policy 8 7

No company CP policy 2 7

CP options are too technical

to implement

4 4

Presence of subsidies 4 2

Insufficient return on investment 8 2

Unwillingness to change to CP 10 2

� environmental sustainability is not high on thepriority list of developing countries: job creationand economic development take precedence; and

� while governments are most likely to fund institu-tions controlled directly by them, there is a tendencyfor industry to look at government institutions assomething that is of limited use to them.

To date, the ECZ/ZACCI CP desk remains the onlynational focal point for CP activities. The low level ofCP adoption is an indication that the current arrange-ments were not effective. Moreover, the emphasis of theCP desk is mainly on the training programmes whilethe co-ordination and monitoring of the implementationof the NEAP still remains the responsibility of theMETNR. In order to improve the prospects for CP andto accelerate its uptake by industry, there is a need toexpand the activities of the CP desk to include in-plantdemonstrations or assessment, training, informationdissemination and policy advice. It is the authors’ view,that to achieve this objective, the CP desk must beconverted into an autonomous NCPC. The responsibil-ity for co-ordination and monitoring of the implemen-tation of the NEAP must also be moved from theMETNR to the NCPC so as to bring about the requiredco-operation between different ministries, institutionsand organisations.

In addition to having appropriate institutionalarrangements for the promotion of CP, industry mustbe willing to participate in and to implement CPinitiatives. The study revealed that about one-third ofthe companies believed they had very good prospects forCP. Targeted measures to aid companies in the adoptionof CP must be instituted in order to harness CPprospects. There is a wide range of available policyinstruments that governments may use to stimulate CPadoption [4]. However, it is imperative that the right mixof these instruments is matched with the prevailingcircumstances. The study considered policy measures,incentives and motivational aspects to determine whatmeasures would suit the Zambian environment.

5.6.1. Policy measures to improve prospects for cleanerproduction

Policy measures that would make the most effectiveimprovements towards the prospects of CP in industrywere investigated. Three options, ‘very good’, ‘fair’ and‘not good’, were provided to assess the importanceindustry placed on the proposed measures. The resultsobtained are shown in Table 5.

The inconsistencies in the number of responses forthe various policy measures are a reflection of industries’narrow interpretation or lack of clear understanding ofthe CP concept. Nonetheless, deductions could still bemade. The objective was to have improved prospects forCP as indicated under ‘very good’ category. Therefore,

1045L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

the policy measures that would most improve theprospects of CP included reducing international tradebarriers at 20% of the total, removing organisationalmonopolies at 18.7%, eliminating tariffs at 17.3% andprivatisation and liberalisation at 16%. These fourmeasures constituted 72% of the total. Inflation anddevaluation of the local currency would impact nega-tively on the prospects of CP. This means that the macroand micro-economic climate must be improved for theprospects for CP to become more favourable.

From these findings it was clear that the macro-economic climate, economic reforms and policies affectthe prospects for CP in Zambia. Inflation, barriers tointernational trade, tariffs, economic reforms likeprivatisation and liberalisation, industrial monopoliesand stock markets influence the prospects for CP.Careful implementation of these policies in favourof the local industries would tilt the balance in favourof CP. Furthermore, these findings corroborate those ofvon Amsberg [18] who stated: the influence that generaleconomic policies have on the adoption of CP, and thuspollution reduction, seems to clearly dominate the effectof specific initiatives that encourage the adoption of CP.

5.6.2. Incentives to improve prospects for cleanerproduction implementation

A set of possible incentives that would make thepolicy framework supportive and favourable to theCP concept was investigated. The results are shown inTable 6. Similar to policy measures, there were incon-sistencies in the number of responses for the variousincentives. The fairly strong showing of the ‘fair’category appears to indicate a lack of confidence by theindustry in their ability to implement CP. The observedlow levels of CP implementation and awareness supportthis view. Industries would be reluctant to recommendincentives that appear to disadvantage them, particularlyin the case of finances. Nevertheless, the ‘very good’category had a strong showing allowing for conclusivedeductions. Tax rebates on equipment for CP at 26.6%of the total was the most preferred incentive to improve

Table 5

Company counts’ ratings of policy related measures to improve

prospects for cleaner production

Policy measures Very good Fair Not good

Reducing international

trade barriers

15 8 1

Removing organisational

monopolies

14 9 1

Eliminating tariffs 13 8 0

Privatisation and liberalisation 12 11 0

Developing new stock markets 9 7 0

Increase prices of raw materials,

energy, water, etc.

6 4 1

Devaluation of Zambian Kwacha 3 1 0

Inflation 3 3 0

prospects for CP, followed by tax rebates on lesspolluting raw materials and supportive financing fortraining at 23.4% and 20.3%, respectively. Together,these three incentives constituted 70.3% of the total andwould therefore greatly enhance the prospects for CP.

The prospects for CP would also be greatly enhancedif the financial outlook to increase production andeconomic profitability were guaranteed. This is whymost of the companies indicated that incentives such astax rebates, access to credit, financial support for CPtraining and information technology would improvetheir prospects to adopt CP. Nonetheless, care must betaken to ensure that incentives are not given tocompanies that only want to maximise their profitswithout changing to CP.

5.6.3. Motivational factors to adopt cleaner productionIn order to achieve the desired paradigm shift e from

the reactive ‘cure’ approach to a proactive ‘prevention’approach e industry and other stakeholders must bewilling participants in the government’s drive to in-tegrate the CP strategies into the developmental process.Table 7 shows the results of the investigation as factorsthat would influence or motivate industry to adopt CP.The results are in agreement with the literature reviewfinding that regulation is the single most important

Table 6

Company counts’ ratings of preferred incentives to improve prospects

for cleaner production

Incentives Very good Fair Not good

Tax rebates on

equipment for CP

17 16 1

Tax rebates on less

polluting raw materials

15 10 0

Provide supportive

financing for training

13 13 0

Provide supportive

financing for information

technology

10 12 0

Preferential access to credit 9 11 1

Table 7

Motivating factors influencing decisions to implement cleaner pro-

duction

Motivating factor Percent frequency

of companies

Need for environmental

compliance

42.6

Provision of safe and

health working environment

39.3

Improve process efficiency 36.1

Desire to improve product quality 26.2

Market/customer demand 13.1

Desire to penetrate certain markets 6.6

1046 L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

driver of improved environmental performance [13].This means that prospects for CP could be improved ifenvironmental regulation was effectively enforced.

The figure of 6.6% for the ‘desire to penetrate certainmarkets’ shows the industries’ unawareness of worldtrends. This result also contradicts the ‘Reducing in-ternational trade barriers’ policy measure preference forimproved CP prospects (see Table 5). It is surprisingthat despite the world market trend towards ‘green’products requirements, the Zambian industries do notconsider this factor as an incentive to implement CP.This position could be a result of the fact that theconsumer market in which they operate does not preferCP or ‘green’ products, which is indicated by a paltry13.1% consideration for the ‘market/customer demand’as a factor for willingness to implement CP.

However, this finding does not spell doom for CP.Since most companies indicated they believed thatcapital/consumer markets could react positively if theircompanies adopted CP, raising consumer awarenesstowards ‘green’ products or services would enhance theshift to CP. Similarly, sensitising capital markets wouldalso encourage a change to CP. Furthermore, more thanhalf of the surveyed companies believed that theirreputation could be negatively affected if the publicwere informed that the company was a serious polluter.Here again, an incentive for CP through consumereducation on the benefits of environmental responsibil-ity by industry is evident. These measures could bestrengthened through informal strategies such as ratingsand environmental awards, which can offer effectivesynergy to conventional regulations.

5.7. Commercial and environmental impacts ofcleaner production

From the data collected during this study it wasevident that the mean number of times industriesdumped or released waste was reduced by 50% afterthe implementation of CP. The mean cost of productionwas also reduced by 50% after the implementation ofCP. Further, among industries that have implementedCP, 37.7% have reduced risks to workers’ health andsafety, 34.4% have recorded a decrease in the cost ofproduction, 24.6% have increased productivity and19.7% have improved relationships with the communityand consumers.

Nevertheless, not all respondents reported increasedcommercial profitability after implementing CP strate-gies. This was the case with two companies, whereprofits, respectively, remained the same and werereduced. In these two cases it was discovered that theeconomic cycles impacted negatively on them leadingto large opportunistic costs. It is also important toremember that this situation is not out of the ordinary.According to von Amsberg [18], CP has recently

received much attention because environmental auditsin many different companies have shown the existence ofample opportunities to implement measures that simul-taneously reduce waste and generate positive financialreturns (winewin solutions). However, it is important toemphasise that not all changes toward CP are financiallyprofitable. Even though many examples show that CPapproaches are more cost-effective than traditionalapproaches to pollution control, this is not applicablefor every sector and every individual case.

Therefore, CP should be viewed as a welcome additionto the menu of options for pollution reduction fromwhich the least-cost approach for a specific industry anda specific situation needs to be selected [18]. In the case ofZambia and many other developing countries, a separatefocus on CP appears justified since CP approaches haveoften been neglected in the past and expensive end-of-pipe treatment solutions have been applied in situationswhere low-cost CP solutions for pollution preventionwould have been available and would have beeneconomically and environmentally preferable.

6. Conclusions

This study formed the fulcrum upon which publicpolicy could be formulated to promote CP in Zambia.The key aspects of the study were to determine the levelsof awareness of CP among stakeholders, assess levels ofadoption of CP, investigate commercial and environ-mental impacts of CP, identify obstacles to adoption ofCP, and determine regulatory frameworks, economicinstruments and other incentives that can encourageadoption and use of CP technologies. The followingconclusions were drawn from the study:

1. A greater awareness and knowledge of commercialand environmental impacts of CP is likely totranslate into greater adoption and implementationof CP options.

2. CP options that require little or no capital invest-ments are readily adopted and implemented.

3. Industry evaluation by ECZ impact positively on theawareness and implementation of CP.

4. Public knowledge of a company’s environmentalperformance is likely to motivate companies toadopt and use CP technologies.

5. CP generally leads to productivity improvementsand higher environmental performance.

6. The use of environmental management tools im-proves prospects for CP in industry.

7. Economic stability and market ‘fairness’ providepowerful ingredients for CP prospects.

8. Industries are willing to adopt CP if correctincentives are put in place.

1047L. Siaminwe et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 1037e1047

9. Key potential benefits of CP seen by industry areenvironmental compliance, safer working environ-ment, improved processes and product quality.

The conclusions enabled our study hypotheses to betested. The following hypotheses were found to be valid:

� Low levels of awareness of CP strategies, includingthe lack of understanding of commercial andenvironmental benefits of CP, significantly contrib-ute to the non-adoption of CP in industry.

� CP technologies have significantly more commercialand environmental benefits than conventional pro-duction technologies.

� A lack of suitable legal frameworks, economicinstruments and other incentives has significantlycontributed to the slow adoption and use of CPtechnologies in Zambian industries.

� A lack of appropriate institutional and organisa-tional changes to support the implementation of theNEAP has contributed to the slow adoption and useof CP technologies in Zambian industries.

Acknowledgements

The government of the Republic of Zambia throughthe Ministry of Tourism, Environment and NaturalResources (MTENR), Environmental Support Pro-gramme (ESP) and Pilot Environmental Fund (PEF)funded this work. The PEF secretariat, especially Dr.Henry Sichingabula (Study Fund Advisor) and Mr.Greenwell Mukwavi (PEF Co-ordinator) are thankedfor administering the study. The staff, organisations andcompanies that participated and made this study asuccess are fully acknowledged.

References

[1] ECZ. Report on the state of the environment in Zambia; 1994.

[2] ECZ. Industrial pollution prevention programme workplan and

budget; May 1997.

[3] Zambia national report on the implementation of Agenda 21:

review of progress made since the United Nations conference

on environment and sustainable development in 1992. Available

on: http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/prep_process/

national_reports/zambia_natl_assess3008.pdf.

[4] UNEP, Division of Technology, Industry, and economics

(DTIE), web pages. Available on: http://www.uneptie.org/pc/cp/

ncpc/home.htm.

[5] The Republic of Zambia National Environmental Action Plan

(NEAP). Available on: http://www.usaid.gov/zm/Docs/so1/

NEAP_DOCUMENT.pdf; June 1994.

[6] Chinsembu KC, Siaminwe L, Syakalima M, Mudenda C. Pilot

Environmental Fund (PEF) study report No. 23 on: policy

strategies for cleaner production in Zambia. Prospects and

constraints; December 2002.

[7] CSO. Central Statistics Office and international financial statis-

tics; 1997.

[8] Chikuma V, Chileshe WMA, Pungwa L. Basic education resource

atlas for Zambia. Kenneth Kaunda Foundation; 1991.

[9] Crampton NJ. Preventing waste at the source. Lewis Publishers;

1999.

[10] Ciambrone DF. Environmental life cycle analysis. Lewis

Publishers; 1997.

[11] Aquatech. A benchmark of current cleaner production practices.

A report submitted to Cleaner Industries Section, Environmen-

tal Protection Group, Environment Australia. Available on:

http://www.deh.gov.au/industry/corporate/eecp/publications/pubs/

benchmar.pdf; September 1997.

[12] Aldrich JR. Pollution prevention economics: financial impacts on

business and industry. McGraw-Hill; 1996.

[13] Gunningham N, Sinclair D. ACEL final report on: barriers and

motivators to the adoption of cleaner production practices.

Available on: http://www.deh.gov.au/industry/corporate/eecp/

publications/pubs/barriers.pdf; 1997.

[14] ECZ. Report on the state of the environment in Zambia; 2001.

[15] Hobbs J. Cleaner production: the global challenge. Presented to

the Southern African Regional Conference on Cleaner Pro-

duction. Midrand, South Africa; 1998.

[16] Migiro CLC. Cleaner production regional perspectives: Africa

region industry and environment. United Nations Environment

Programme, Industry and Environment Quarterly Review

1996;19(3):48.

[17] Migiro CLC. Developments in Africa for promoting cleaner

production. Presented to the Southern African Regional Confer-

ence on Cleaner Production. Midrand, South Africa; 1998.

[18] Von Amsberg J. Latin America and the Caribbean Region World

Bank report on: policy approaches to promote cleaner production

in Argentina, Brazil and Chile; 2002.

[19] Report on the first Africa roundtable on cleaner production and

sustainable consumption. Available on: http://www.uneptie.org/

pc/cp/reportspdf/africa1-34.pdf and http://www.uneptie.org/pc/

cp/reportspdf/africa35-69.pdf.