waste is wealth: depending on how it is managed and utilized

Waste generation is directly linked to the size of population and the various activities undertaken by different categories of the population including large scale industries, small-scale industries, trading/ businesses, municipal, farming, household, schools and hospitals among others. Hence, it clearly means that waste generation will increase with increasing population growth. Studies indicate that each person in Kampala city produces 1 Kg of solid waste per day (Tenywa et al., 2007).

Further estimations rated solid waste generation in Kampala city at 0.2 metric tons per person per annually on average (Ngategize et al., 2001). Therefore, considering an urban population of 3.7 million people i.e. 13.4% of the total population (Uganda Population secretariat, 2007), it means that approximately 740,000 metric tons of solid waste are generated in urban areas per year. Of this, only 41% solid waste generated is disposed off properly (UNDP, 2005). The remaining 51% is left uncollected thereby ending up dumped in drainage and sanitary drainage channels, natural water courses, manholes, undeveloped plots and road sides among other unfit places (NEMA, 2004)

Waste Management in Uganda; Issues for Policy and Practice Change

This briefing paper is an output from a review of various documents and literature on waste management in Uganda and elsewhere. It is informed by Environmental Alert’s experiences and lessons generated through projects executed in partnership with various stakeholders in Kampala district, Uganda particularly Makyindye division, Kabalagala, Kasubi and Bwaise III and Makerere II parishes. These include: the Urban Food Security and Nutrition project for Kampala (1999-2004) i and the Sustainable Neighbors in Focus (SNF) project (2006 – 2009) i. It highlights key issues for waste management in urban areas of Uganda, clearly analyzing the underlying implications to livelihood and economic development. It also suggests practical proposals for policy and practice change in the context of waste management.

1

WASTE IS WEALTH Depending on how it is managed and utilized

Waste is a man-made substance in a given time and places which in actual structure and state is not useful to the owner and/or is an output without an owner and purpose. Waste may be in solid or liquid states.

August 2008

Pic illustrating definitions



FloodsA flood is the submerging with water of a normally dry area. Floods are caused by rainstorms, slow water run-off, earthquakes, broken dams, blocked water channels/trenches, underwater volcanic eruptions and tsunamis, or hurricanes (Think quest, 2000).

Flood MitigationFlood mitigation refers to the methods of reducing the effects of floods. Such methods may be structural solutions (e.g., reservoirs, levees) or nonstructural (e.g. land- use planning, early warning systems) (AMS, 2008).

Definition of terms and concepts Waste is a man-made substance in a given time and places which in actual structure and state is not useful to the owner and/or is an output without an owner and purpose. Waste may be in solid or liquid states.

Solid wastes refer to particles or materials which are no longer useful to their owners and which require to be discarded. They are movable objects, which have no direct use and or no ‘current’ market value or no use to the individual that they require to be disposed of. They are classified as organic/biodegradable and non-bio-degradable wastes.

Liquid waste refers to waste materials that contain free liquids. This includes waste water from industries, households; sewerage and leachates from land fill or garbage heaps.

Categorization of solid wasteUrban solid waste can be categorized into three main categories including the following:1. Municipal wastes – this comprises of domestic

waste, commercial refuse, institutional refuse, and solid wastes collected from streets and public places

2. Industrial wastes – this consists of refuse generated from industrial operations and by the solidification of liquid and gaseous effluent.

3. Building construction wastes – these are mainly inert wastes arising from demolition, excavation and construction activities.

4. Special waste – this includes waste from hospitals, slaughterhouses and chemical processing plants. These are hazardous, potentially toxic; requiring special handling, treatment and disposal.

Waste ManagementWaste management is the process by which products and by-products generated by business and industry are collected, stored, transported, treated, disposed of, recycled or reused in an effort to reduce their effect on human health or local aesthetics or amenity. Waste management is practiced by small businesses when they collect and sort their wastes, recycle their wastes, treat their wastes, dispose of their wastes or implement ways of reducing their waste (EPA, 2008).

2

W A S T E I S B E N E F I C I A L D E P E N D I N G O N H O W I T I S M A N A G E D A N D U T I L I S E D

August 2008

Waste generation in UgandaThe solid waste generated comprises of 73% 0rganic waste; 5.3% paper; 1.7% saw dust; 1.6% plastics; 3.1% metals; 0.9% glass; 8% tree cuttings and 5.5% street debris (Ngategize et al., 2001).

Additionally, waste generation is directly proportional to population increase hence, despite that high/medium income earners are fewer than low income earners, their per capita waste generated is more than double the quantities generated by high income earners (Table 1). However, the daily and annual waste generation for low income earners is more than double that for high income earners. This could be attributed to accumulation among low income earners settlements due to inadequacies in waste collection services.

Table 1. Domestic waste generation in Kampala city

Source: Tropical development company limited. A feasibility study for organic fertilizers

Economic advantages of proper waste management and implications to livelihoodsWaste is beneficial depending on how it is managed and utilized. For instance, some wastes in urban areas are converted into different resources such as metallic containers, which are collected by small-scale tin- smiths to make paraffin candles (tadoba), children toys, simple local measuring cans. Plastic and metallic wastes are collected for recycling both formally and informally. Plastic wastes have been turned into marketable products such as baskets, ornamental products and mats. Milk packaging (plastics) materials are used for porting seedlings by tree and flower nurseries. Some women groups make compost, wrapping paper and envelopes. Banana peelings and other plant leftovers are used as supplements feeds to the expanding urban and peri-urban dairy zero grazing system. Piggery in and around Kampala benefits from food leftovers from the formal and informal restaurants. The bones are collected, burnt, crushed and sold to industries like Ugachick, which make animal feeds (Nyakaana et al., 2006). Biodegradable waste can be used to make compost manure which can be used to improve crop productivity thereby contributing to household food security and incomes (EA, 2007).

Economic disadvantages of poor waste management and implications to livelihoodsCurrently waste management in urban areas is very poor, resulting in careless and indiscriminate open waste-space-dumping, which has created unsanitary conditions on the streets and alleys in urban centers. Such nuisance dumps lead to unpleasant odors and are fertile grounds as breeding sites for flies, vermin e.g. rats and other vectors. Improper disposal of waste contributes to disease epidemics (such as cholera, dysentery, diarhorea) and land degradation. This increases hospital bills and low food productivity leading to high household maintenance costs. They may also result in the pollution of both surface and ground water through the leachate draining and impairing the permeability of soils as well as blockage of drainage systems (NEMA, 1998). Studies in the Kasubi-Kawala area have established that the count of harmful Coliforms (1980 cfu/ml), Eschelica coli (540 cfu/ml) in protected springs far exceed the World Health Organization (WHO) thresholds (0 cfu/ml) (Table 2 and Table 3).

Category

High income

Medium income

Low income

Total

Estimated

Population (%)

5.30

16.8

77.9

100

Per capita

Waste (kg)

0.6

0.3

0.1

Daily

Waste

27.62 (15.9%)

43.78 (25.3%)

101.50

172.9 (58.7%)

Annual total

In (tons)

10.081

15.980

37.041

63.103

Studies show that high income earners generate more than twice the quantities of waste

generated by low income earners (Table 1)

3


August 2008

Table 2: Colony forming in various drainage channels and water tributaries in Kasubi-Kawala area

NB: WHO and national standards for coliforms and eschelica coli = 0 cfu/ml: Source: Tenywa et al., (2007). Annual report on waste and Flood management sub component of the Focus City – Building a Sustainable, Cohesive Community through Waste Recycling and Agro-Enterprises

Table 3: Colony forming in various springs and solid waste dumps in Kasubi-Kawala area

NB: WHO and national standards for coliforms and eschelica coli = 0 cfu/ml: Source: Tenywa et al., (2007). Annual report on waste and Flood management sub component of the Focus City – Building a Sustainable, Cohesive Community through Waste Recycling and Agro-Enterprises

Proper waste management results into creation of employment opportunities through turning waste

into valuable products that are sold to generate income, establishment of local support networks, reduced volumes of waste, reduced costs on waste

management, reduced disease prevalence, improved standards of living and consequently a health

environment.

Tributaries

GPS reading for Coliforms (cfu/ml)

GPS reading for Eschelica coli (cfu/ml)

Drainage channel


Tributary

stream2

22400

400

03/3

4960

Kiwunya

Mainstream

46300

5950

Main drainage channel W03/5

161000

Springs



Solid waste dumps



Tributary

stream1

28200

1110

03/2

400000

Tributary

stream3

10000

220

l03/4

17000

Protected

spring 03/1

1980

540

Communal dumping03/1

4600

150

Protected

spring 03/6

1420

150

Poor waste management is directly linked to floods particularly for the urban areas were communities (e.g. Kasubi, Makerere II and Bwaise III parishes in Kampala district) use drainage channels as waste disposal sites (Zake et al., 2007). It is very clear that impacts of floods are greater when the drainage channels are blocked and on the contrally, when they are unblocked, the flood water is drained. Overall, this increases the costs for treating water for public consumption and high costs for unblocking drainage channels. Sometimes blocked channels cause floods, which result into destruction of valuable property and disease epidemics, which have negative disastrous effects on peoples’ livelihoods.

4


August 2008

Channel for a

spring 03/8

1270

60

Floodplain & waste dumps S3

6400

40

Innovations for making charcoal briquettes (from banana peelings) for household energy conservation by Kasuubi

Community Development Association

Policy context/frameworks for waste management in Uganda

International and regional levels

1. Agenda 21 - program of action for sustainable development Agenda 21 is a comprehensive blue print for global actions for sustainable development into the

21st century. Uganda being a member of the United Nations is party and accountable to Agenda 21. It commits governments, United Nations organizations, development agencies, non governmental organizations and independent sector groups to implement programs and actions which would halt and reverse the negative impact of human behavior on the physical environment and promote and promote environmentally sustainable economic development in all countries. In the context of waste management, Agenda 21 presents Section 21 on environmentally sound management of solid waste, particularly highlighting program areas and associated strategies to be implemented by all countries to ensure proper waste management (Agenda 21, 1994).

2. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Biodegradable solid waste decomposition generates green house gases (GHS) such as Methane which

contributes to depletion of the thin layer (Ozone) that protects the earth from direct heat from the sun. Loss of this layer means that sun rays hit directly on the earth resulting in temperature raises which influence climate on the earth and these changes have manifest as global warming, prolonged droughts, and unreliable rainfall. However, Uganda is signatory to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) of the Kyoto Protocol. The UNFCCC provides an international framework for mitigating causes of climate change and its effects at both international and national level. For instance, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) makes it possible for companies or countries that have to reduce emissions under the Kyoto Protocol to invest in emission reduction projects in developing countries. It compensates countries which take actions tending to reduce carbon emissions thus leading to significant long-term investment; creation of employment opportunities and triggering transfer of technology thereby facilitating developing countries like Uganda to adopt climate-sensitive low carbon development paths. CDM projects cover many sectors, including sustainable energy production and use, waste treatment, reforestation and biofuels. However, in Uganda some opportunities under the CDM have been utilized under the energy production sector, for example the $4 Nyagak mini-hydro project (PEAP, 2004/5). There is need for exploring opportunities in the CDM to utilize the accumulated solid waste managed under the land fill at Kiteezi for energy production

3. Linking waste management to the Millennium Development goals (MDGs) Uganda subscribes to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of the United Nations Charter.

The targets under these eight goals respond to the world’s main development challenges and are anticipated to be achieved by 2015. The MDGs are drawn from the actions and targets contained in the Millennium Declaration that was adopted by 189 nations-and signed by 147 heads of state and governments during the UN Millennium Summit in September 2000. Addressing the challenges of waste management and flood mitigation should be linked to the MDGs because they directly and indirectly contribute to achievement of the targets under MDGs 1, 3, 6 and 7. Table 4. presents MDGs linked to waste management and also highlighting possible actions that should be done in order to contribute towards achieving them.

5


August 2008

Source: Zake et al., 2007. A Base Line Survey Report for the Sustainable Neighbors in Focus Cities Project, September 2007

National and Local levelsPolicies, laws, guidelines and practices for waste management in Uganda are still inadequate. Some of the policies and guidelines are embodied in various Environment and Natural Resource (ENR) policies which give urban authorities mandate to oversee collection and disposal of solid waste generated in their areas of jurisdiction. These include the following: the Environment Statute, 1995; Public Health Act, 1964; the Public Lands Act 1969; the Pharmacy and Pensions Act 1981; the Agricultural Chemicals Statute 1989; the National Wetlands Policy 1995; Natural Environment (waste management) Regulations 1999; the Local Government Act 1997; Kampala Solid waste management ordinances and Urban Agriculture ordinances. This multiplicity of policies and regulation refer to waste management in bits and pieces which provides room for contradiction and inconsistencies during policy implementation at both national and local levels. Additionally, even current government development programs rarely put waste management aspects into consideration e.g. health facilities, public markets, schools. Thirdly, there is lack of national and mutually supportive strategies for management of hazardous and non hazardous waste. Further more, there are limited appropriate technologies and practices for waste management. This is partly due to inadequate and fragmented research and poor information flow among stakeholders to inform policy formulation. Lastly, there is generally limited capacity among stakeholders (technocrats, extension agents, private sector) in addressing waste management issues.

This state of affairs has far reaching implications on community livelihoods and environment posing great health risks and environmental degradation yet properly managed waste is wealth and consequently improves livelihoods and has potential to contribute to national economic development. Therefore, solid waste management is an important area for consideration in the context of urban planning and environmental management. The Poverty Eradication Plan (PEAP) recognizes that waste management is almost non existent in Uganda. It denotes that for instance in Kampala, refuse is collected from only 20% of the population and only half of it is disposed in a proper way with the rest being dumped indiscriminately (PEAP, 2004/2005). Furthermore, little attention has been given to waste water disposal and storm drainage. Drainage is poor and limited to major roads and pathways

Table 4: Linking waste management and flood mitigation to implementation of the Millennium Development Goals

Possible waste management strategies contributing towards

achieving MDG

• Sorting waste to separate that which can be recycled or reused. This

can be sold for income generation by the urban poor

• Recycling organic waste for urban agriculture. This will increase

urban agriculture productivity thereby delivering to improved

household food security and incomes for the urban poor

• Supporting local institutions and innovators in waste management

• Proper waste management to prevent flooding hence destroying

breeding ground for malaria, bilharzia and cholera diseases

pathogens and germs

• Proper waste management including collection, sorting, recycling

and disposal for waste using appropriate technologies

• Development of guidelines for management of hazardous and non

harzsdous waste

• Development and implementation of by laws and ordinances to

MDG

MDG 1 for eradication of extreme

poverty and hunger

MDG 3 for promoting gender equity and

empowerment of women

MDG 6 for combating HIV/AIDS,

Malaria and other diseases

MDG 7 for ensuring environmental

sustainability

6


August 2008

resulting in floods causing high road maintenance costs and damage to buildings and property. The PEAP therefore commits the Government to provide financial resources to improve solid waste management and drainage (PEAP, 2004/2005).

However, the current PEAP review and development of the National Development Plan processes provides a window for articulation of waste management issues, their implications for livelihood and national growth and development and also appropriate strategies for addressing them.

Waste management in Uganda and implications to livelihood and economic development

Policy issuesThe following are key policy issues for consideration:(i) Limited resources allocation to waste management

There is limited resource allocation to support waste management and flood mitigation programs at both national and local level. At times the Central Government commitments to waste management in the city are not met! For instance, ‘the Central Government had earlier indicated to council its intention to fund the private contractors through provision of 2.8 billion shillings, but this fund was withdrawn’ (BFP, 2008-2009). This partly explains the poor waste management as depicted in the urban centers, for the private garbage collectors don’t collect the waste adequately because they are not well facilitated and or paid on time.

(ii) Discordant efforts in waste management by multiple players each undertaking an initiative here and there. Consequently there is limited sharing and exchange of lessons learnt and experiences and or limited synergies/linkages between stakeholders (development workers, policy makers, researchers and technocrats) resulting in duplication of efforts. As a result there is limited up scaling of appropriate technologies and also provision of contradicting information in regard to waste management.

(iii) Weak measures for monitoring environmental compliance to environmental standards and guidelines by the private sector (especially large scale and medium size industries). Hence few private sector have established cleaner production systems, which reduce the quantities of waste produced, and or treatment before release into the environment. Further more there is limited compliance ISO and other environment standards by the private sector. For instance, basic data obtained for fish factories, tanneries, mines, food and beverage, soap and detergent, and textile factories in Uganda indicate non-compliance to heavy metals and nutrients that are discharged into water bodies and onto land. The following industries lack waste water treatment facilities: Uganda Fish Packers, Fish Ways, Byansi Fish Factory, Gomba Fish Industries, Green Fields, Uganda Marines, Masese Fish, Freshwater Fish, Oak Wood Fish factory, Ngege Fish Factory, Tampa Fish Factory and Tropical Fish Factory, Nytil Textiles in Jinja, Phoenix Logistics in Bugolobi, Nile Diaries Jinja and Dairy Corporation (now called Sameer Agriculture and Livestock), Uganda Batteries, Papco Industry, Global paper limited, Uganda Leather Tanning in Jinja, (Tenywa, 2007).

This raises risk for contamination of the environment including air, soil and water bodies (channels, rivers and lakes), thereby resulting into health hazards (such as cancers, heart failures) among the communities. In particular cases, it increases the cost of waste water treatment by the National Water and Sewerage Cooperation (NWSC).

(iv) Limited political will concerning enforcement of waste management regulations and guidelines. This could partly be due to fear by politicians that enforcement of these regulations and guidelines will make them unpopular among the electorate. This subsequently undermines the efforts for proper waste management.

(v) Weak integration of waste management issues in different development sectors (e.g. health, industry and education). For example in the Education sector, waste management issues have been integrated

7


August 2008

in the education curriculum but this should be strengthen by committing financial resources under the UPE fund for schools to establish waste management facilities e.g. water, toilets among others. Construction of health centers at sub county and county levels should provide resources for adequate waste disposal facilities were as district health facilities should plan and allocate adequate resources for establishment of incinerators for disposing of hospital waste. Actually most local Government hospitals in the Country lack incinerators.

(vi) Weak harnessing and integration of technologies in waste management

Various waste management technologies, innovations and good practices are undertaken by different stakeholders. However, application of these technologies manifest in a form that particular ones are promoted and emphasized thereby undermining the benefits of synergy and integration of more than one technology, practice or innovations. For instance, the consideration of land fills as the only technology for waste management in urban areas, particularly in Kampala. Kampala City Council takes on the strategy of waste management in the city as direct collection, licensed private collection firms and monitoring them. In addition, they have embarked on community mobilization to control refuse generation at source. All the solid waste collected in the city is taken to Kiteezi land fill. Maintenance of this land fill during the financial year 2007-2008 was 145 million per month (BFP, 2008-2009). It is not surprising that all these funds are spent on the land fill management. This is partly because land fill as a technology for solid waste disposal and management has underlying economic, social and environmental challenges that should be dealt with. Addressing these challenges increases the cost of the technology and most of the time the environmental costs are not reflected in the landfill disposal.

Therefore, there is need for investment in integration of innovative technologies and or good practices along the waste management chain as opposed to emphasizing the land fill as the sole technology. Some of these technologies include those the reduce the volume of waste taken to the land fill through recycling or those that result in secondary benefits from landfill like utilizing methane from land fills to generate electricity among others.

(vii) Limited support to initiatives and innovations in waste management among individual innovators and community based organizations in Uganda. For instance for the year 2008/9, formation of and facilitation of village health committees, slum improvement and dissemination of innovative technologies are unfunded priorities under the Health and Environment Sector, KCC plans. Despite this, these particular stakeholders are undertaking various innovations and good practices as a way of coping with the challenging situation of poor waste management. Hence, the situation has stimulated them to think of new ideas of addressing the problem such as recycling, reusing, sorting and selling market waste to livestock farmers; sorting and composting market waste for urban agriculture; making of briquettes from cow dung, saw dust which, overall reduces and increases the quantity of waste and incomes generated respectively. Thus turning the environmental burdens into benefits. However, building on and supporting these initiatives and innovations in waste management would empower communities in addressing the waste generation challenges in Uganda especially in the urban setting while raising their household incomes.

Practice issuesThe following are key practice issues for consideration:(i) High population growth results in large quantities of wastes generated.

This posses greater challenges for proper waste management other wise it would result in related negative impacts of poor waste management and disposal as discussed earlier. However, these large quantities of waste burden can be exploited to generate incomes, energy and related benefits if innovative techniques and practices are employed in waste management at community, national,

8


August 2008

regional and international levels.

(ii) Limited waste disposal systems in urban centers and other public places hence lack of a complete system for waste management involving sorting, recycling and re-using, sanitation facilities. Additionally limited attention has been placed on the management hazardous waste by municipal authorities.

(iii) Ignorance and carelessness, culture/attitude of different stakeholders

Ignorance and poor attitudes in regard to waste, waste management and its implications to livelihood and environment among different stakeholders (such as masses/community, policy makers, private sector, leaders, CSOs, academia, industrialists, traders) is by far the biggest contributor to the careless behavior regarding waste management in Uganda. For instance, ‘it is seems normal for a passenger to throw rubbish on the street.’ This is partly due to inadequate sensitization and education of stakeholders about waste management aspect/issues and how they impact on their livelihood but also limited enforcement laws, regulations and guidelines in respect to waste management.

(iv) Poor product/waste handling and management along the marketing chain from the farm/industry/firm to the consumer. As a result a lot of waste is transferred to cities and urban centers, for instance in the meat industry, live cattle are transported from the village and slaughtered in the city; in the crop industry, farm produce such as bananas, pineapple, cassava are transported packed in materials that end up as waste in urban centre. This has implications of soil fertility depletion of rural agricultural land as a result of nutrient mining when the residue and related packing materials are transported to urban centers. Additionally, it increases the costs for waste management by urban authorities.

(v) Increased paving of compounds especially for houses/buildings in urban areas where cemented floors laid with bricks are used as opposed to use of natural grass. This means that water does not infiltrate into the soil resulting in accumulation and surface run off from hilly areas to low lands. Subsequently, there is a lot of erosion along the slopes and flooding in low lands where this water is drained. Flooding has the overall implications of stagnant water which facilitates the growth of mosquitoes thus increasing the risk of malaria infestation among communities. In certain instances the floods block the roads making transport and movement in the area difficult, for instance, ‘children from Kasuubi- Kawaala have been reported not going to school during the rain season as a result of roads being covered by floods.’

(vi) Housing structures without facilities for water harvesting. Many building or houses in Uganda lack facilities for harvesting and draining rain water yet they are made of corrugated iron sheets or tiles which provide opportunity for water harvesting if harnessed with gutters and tanks. However, others especially those in slums have poor structures which do meet the required standards for water harvesting. Some of the reasons for not constructing water harvesting facilities even on planned houses/building could be partly due to ignorance of the house owners/users of the rain water they are underutilizing or lack of funds to construct water harvesting and drainage facilities or lack of enforcement and monitoring of issued house plans by city authorities. Consequently, most of the rain water is not harvested/ drained resulting in increased runoff, soil erosion, siltation of roads, dust on roads and flooding in low lands. Alternatively, if rain water is harvested, it could save household expenses spent on water and also reduce on impacts of water as result of increased run off, flooding and costs for treatment of associated diseases (such as cholera, dysentery).

Recommendations for policy and practice changesThe following policy and practice actions should be considered by various stakeholders at different levels as presented in the Table 5.

9


August 2008

Stakeholders

Prime Ministers Office, Ministry of

Finance, Planning and Economic

Development, National Planning

Authority, Ministry of Water and

Environment, Ministry of Energy,

Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry

and Fisheries

Policy actions

The current PEAP review and development of the National

Development Plan should recognize waste management in urban

and rural areas as a critical issue that has implications for sustainable

livelihoods and national growth and development. It should lay

appropriate actions that ensure sustainable waste management

along the chain. Such strategies include those that reduce on waste

generation or those that manage waste on site through recycling

waste for transformation into useful products, enforcing penalties on

poor waste disposal, supporting initiatives and innovations in waste

management for household incomes generation and generation of

power from accumulated solid biodegradable waste accumulated in

the land fill at Kitezi.

Ministry of Water and Environment and

the National Environment Management

Authority

Ministry of Finance, Planning and

Economic Development, Ministry of Water

and Environment, Ministry of Energy,

Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry

and Fisheries, Civil Society Organizations;

National Environment Management

Authority


Authority, Civil Society Organizations,

Development Partners

Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban

Planning, Ministry of Local Government,

Local Governments and City Authorities

Ministry of Water and Environment

Ministry of Finance, Planning and

Economic Development; Ministry of Local

Government, Development Partners

The inadequacies and inconsistencies in the Environmental policies

and related policies in the context of waste management at both

national and local levels calls for a comprehensive national policy to

guide and streamline waste management in Uganda. These processes

should be initiated by the lead agencies in waste management sector.

Effective monitoring and implementation of waste management

policies, laws and programs at all levels

Capacity enhancement of key stakeholders (CBOs, innovators and

exemplary community members) for effective waste management.

Such capacity enhancement could take forms of trainings informed

by a need assessment (e.g. in appropriate technology, access to

information, resource mobilization) and or physical infrastructure for

effective delivery of the roles and mandates by the key stakeholders

Proper monitoring and enforcement of building and housing plans as

approved by city authorities to ensure that all provisions in the plans

are followed

Exploring modalities for redirecting flood water to specialized dams

where it can be filtered for other uses such water for production/

irrigation or construction among others

Increased resource allocation to waste management at national and

local government level

Table 5: Policy and practice actions for proper waste management in Uganda

10


August 2008

Stakeholder

Waste is wealth when managed well, however, proper waste management along the generation chain requires actions by everybody at different levels including household, community, national and international to take up their roles, responsibilities and obligations to contribute to sustainable positive impacts on community livelihoods and deliver the fundamental human right to a clean and healthy environment. Waste is wealth !!

Ministry of Water and Environment,

Ministry of Energy, Ministry of

Agriculture, Animal Industry and

Fisheries, Ministry of Education and

Sports, Civil Society, Media, Religious

Institutions, Cultural Institutions

Practice actionsContinuous sensitizing and training of key stakeholders and public on

issues of waste management and flood mitigation including gravity

of the waste/flooding problem, related policies/laws/programs/

rights but also the related impacts and potential benefits when

properly managed. The sensitization can be through radio, televisions,

newspapers, posters, drama, forum theater, popular magazines and

journals as informed by the targeted stakeholders

National Research Systems, National

Agricultural Research Organizations,

Ministry of Education and Sports,

Academic Institutions, Development

Partners


Authority, Urban Authorities; Uganda

National Council of Science and

Technology; Private Sector Foundation

Urban Authorities, Civil Society

Organizations, Private Sector

Civil Society Organizations; Leaders at

different levels

All government, private and public

institutions

All government, private and public

institutions

Support research on integrated waste management to come up with

appropriate technologies that are cost effective and user friendly

Supporting existing community initiatives/innovations in waste

management through provision of incentives/rewarding systems and

establishing mechanisms for maximizing benefits from the innovations

e.g. value addition, market access

Promoting and facilitating Civil Society and private sector (garbage

collectors) partnership and collaboration in waste management

Facilitating networking between Community Based Organizations

(CBOs) for sharing information and galvanizing common voice on

issues of waste management but also advocate for integration of these

issues in National and Local Government development plans

A change of attitudes among the Government and public to pave

compounds using natural grass which facilitates water infiltration;

and to establish water harvesting and drainage facilities for rain water

harvesting and utilization thereby reducing runoff and subsequent

flooding

Promoting the principle of recycling, sorting and reusing of waste in

government, private and public institutions

11


August 2008

About the AuthorBy Joshua Zake, Program Officer, Environment and Natural Resource at Environmental Alert, Land, Land use and Soils Program. P. O. Box 11259 Kampala, Uganda. Tel: 0414510215; Email: [email protected]; [email protected], Website: http://www.envalert.org

Selected References1. AMS (American Meteorology Society Glossary), (2008). http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/

browse?s=f&p=19 2. Agenda 21, (1994). Agenda 21: The United Nations Program of Action from Rio, New York, United

States of America 3. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), 2008, Ann Street Brisbane http://www.commerceqld.com.

au/docs/Eco_WasteMgmt.pdf 4. EA (Environmental Alert), 2007. National Study on Urban Agriculture in Uganda. Environmental Alert,

Kampala, Uganda5. Kaweesa Maria, (2005). Five years of implementing an urban food security and nutrition project.

Environmental Alert, Kampala, Uganda. Pp 616. NEMA, (2004). National Environment Management Authority. Draft guidelines for solid waste

management in Uganda, Kampala, Uganda7. NEMA, (1998). National Environment Management Authority. State of the Environment Report,

Kampala, Uganda8. Ngategize, P., Moyoni, Y. (2001). Solid waste management strategic plan for Mpigi district, Uganda9. Nyakaana J. B., Sengendo H., Lwasa H. (2006). Population, urban development and the environment

in Uganda; the case of Kampala city and its environs. Makerere University, Faculty of Arts, Kampala, Uganda

10. PEAP (Poverty Eradication Action Plan), 2004/2005. Ministry of Finance, Kampala, Uganda11. Tenywa, M, M., Nasinyama, G. and Sengendo, H., (2007). Annual report on waste and Flood

management sub component of the Focus City – Building a Sustainable, Cohesive Community through Waste Recycling and Agro-Enterprises. Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

12. Tenywa Gerald, 2007. New vision, Kampala, Uganda. http://allafrica.com/stories/200709260036.html13. Think quest, (2000). Forces of Nature. http://library.thinkquest.org/C003603/english/flooding/

whatsaflood.shtml 14. Uganda Population Secretariate, (2007), Kampala, Uganda15. UNDP, 2005. Uganda Human Development Report, United Nations Development Program, Kampala,

Uganda http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/upload/Uganda/Uganda%20HDR%202005.pdf 16. Zake J., Yawe A., Lutalo R., and Kaweesa M. (2007). A Base Line Survey Report for the Sustainable

Neighbors in Focus Cities Project. Environmental Alert, Kampala, Uganda.


i- The project aimed at increasing food security, nutrition, environmental health and household incomes among 600 households of the urban communities (Kaweesa, 2005)

ii- A 3-year project aims at improving urban livelihoods for poor Kampala communities through sustainable management and use of natural resources and enhanced institutional partnerships. It is implemented in partnership with Kampala City Council, Makerere University, International Centre for Tropical agriculture (CIAT), Urban Harvest, International Development Research Centre and International Water Management Institute (IWMI) and International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI).

Environmental Alert is a registered NGO in Uganda.

Head office: Plot 475/523 Sonko Lane, Kabalagala (behind Payless Suppermarket building), off Gaba Road; P. O. Box 11259 Kampala, Uganda;Tel: 256-41-510547 or 510 215Email: [email protected]: www.envalert.org

SNF, Kampala City Council, Plot 1-4, Apollo Kaggwa Rd, P.O. Box 281; Tel. 256-41-4257756Email: [email protected]

Sustainable Neighbourhoods in Focus Kampala project focuses on turning environmental burdens into livelihoods through waste recycling, agro-enterprise and a cohesive community

Layo

ut D

esig

n: G

rand

Bra

nd L

td

waste is wealth: depending on how it is managed and utilized

Environment

waste water

liquid waste

special waste

waste materials

domestic waste

concepts waste

waste epa

rganic waste