My rundown for Chapter 7 will be quite short as it mostly goes into detail the various roles in the formal and informal recycling chain in Hyderabad, how they work together and whether the current system is sustainable. From the “bottom” up we have, Waste Pickers, (Street and Dump), Retail Traders, Itinerant  Buyers, WholeSale Buyers and finally the entrepreneurs and businesses that take recycled goods, remake, reuse and/resell them back into the market place. As one might be able to predict the lower down on the totem pole of this chain you go, the harsher and more insecure the working conditions. Also, this decline also coincides with a marked difference in the education and social standing (caste) of the workers involved.

These different roles within the waste supply chain have developed an interesting if often times unstable relationship with one another. Half the participants in this process of recycing function semi-legally (Retail Traders, Itinerant Buyers and Waste Pickers), while the other half (Whole Salers and Entrepreneurs), though they pay taxes and require work permits, conveniently ignore labor laws in order to cut down on costs. That being said, within the informal activities of the waste management stream, there are unwritten laws that appear to be followed on a regular basis. There is the concept of “tied” and “untied” work which binds waste pickers and retail traders to those entities higher up the chain, but which can provide a measure of  social security not available to workers from the state.

Tied work, means that a waste picker or retail trader collects for only one buyer, but in return the buyer pays out loans against the workers wages in times of illness or other crisis. Also, depending on the type of worker, working tied to a specific buyer can offer a measure of financial security in that a relationship of trust grows over time. Untied work means that a worker collects recyclables for many different buyers. This also has advantages in certain cases as one has more option for selling wares. The downside being, the worker has no access to the small security of a buyer’s loans.

The system of recycling in Hyderabad seems to be working for now, despite the fact that the lower one gets in the chain the more social stigma and resistance there is to individual workers. Waste pickers and retail traders are often harassed by police and residence who see them more as vermin than as useful laborers in the battle against dirty streets. As I mentioned in the previous post, some of that harassment has eased up in cases where workers are backed and supported by NGOs that take the initiative to educate and spread awareness about the importance of waste pickers, but harassment is still a huge problem – particularly for women in this field, who have to deal with sexual harassment and the theft of their collected recyclables more than the men do.  There is no government support for the recycling industry in Hyderabad ( as of the publication of the article that this is referencing). It’s importance it simply seen as secondary to health and sanitation, so it hasn’t received as much appreciation or attention.

Chapter 6 (Chapter 5 was specific to Nairobi) goes into detail about the recycling chains in Hyderabad and other parts of India as well as how changes in this delicate system can wreak havoc on the most vulnerable of its actors (i.e. waste pickers)

While recycling programs and their importance are widely accepted (if not always executed) in the United States and other developed nations, the same is not so for much of the developing world. The focus in countries like India has been on reducing health hazards to people which necessitates getting waste out of cities as quickly as possible, leaving little opportunity for the separation of inorganic material, and their recycling. Once again, the private sector as risen up to meet this challenge to some extent, however recycling companies don’t have the same support from the government as other waste management sectors. The reason why isn’t clear from the article, but it does go on to say that with limited government support, the private sector contribution to recycling is limited to small, informal enterprises that live or die by shifts in the market for recyclables.

It’s odd that the private sector gets little attention for recycling from the government, since according the article, the private sector does way more to divert the waste flow than either public or NGO’s combined.

The success or failure of the recycling industry in India depends on several factors:

• -Import fees and the relative costs of raw materials vs. recycling costs
• -Availability of alternative employment
• -Whether waste is “mixed” or readily accessible.

Which brings us to the economic distinction between “mixed”and “unmixed” waste. Unmixed waste is more valuable, as it requires less separation and cleaning before being processed into new materials. The challenge in India is to incentivize households to separate their trash to make this process more viable long term. The reason for this problem is, again, not elaborated on in the article, but I would take a guess that it comes down to awareness as well as understanding the financial and social benefit of doing so.

The article goes into further detail on the roles of itinerant traders, dealers and wholesalers in the recycling process. While employees are economically vulnerable at all stages, most of the pain of an economic crisis is felt by the waste pickers. Often, the only social security they have is provided in the form of informal credit during times of illness or death of a family member given to them by dealers and traders, which in turn creates dependency. However, cooperation between NGO’s, the government and local communities has lead to some positive changes in the perception and treatment of waste pickers who are predominantly women and children. Awareness of their role in the waste management system has decreased harassment by police and locals. A small improvement, but an an improvement none the less. The cooperative efforts by local communities, NGOs and governments in recycling, for the time being, seem to only benefit small areas and haven’t been tested in citywide initiatives

One interesting shift is that as private companies have taken over the role of door to door waste collection, there is predictably less trash on the street, however, less income for waste pickers who have relied for so long on the abundance of discarded waste in the streets to make their living.

While steps have been taken to improve the working and living conditions of waste pickers, their low status in society is still a barrier for better recognition. Also, the various actors involved in these waste management chains seem to be struggling to unite under one banner fully due to their differing reasons for wanting to make changes (social justice, cleaner living environment, ecological). As an outsider looking in, it’s easy for me to scratch my head and wonder why those differing reasons matter if the goals are essentially the same.

In short, while waste-to-energy set ups seem to be gaining steam in cities across India, albeit with some resistance, formal, government supported recycling remains elusive.

Chapter 4 (5): ‘Trial and Error in Privatization; The Case of Hyderabad Solid Waste Management’, essentially goes into greater detail on various topics from the previous chapter (See previous post). A thorough breakdown of the organizational structure within MCH, the socio-economic background of its employees (as well as the employees of private contractors) and a long survey of said employees’ perception and level of satisfaction with their respective jobs and employers is discussed. Despite the great disparity in job security, safety and pay between public and private employees I am once again surprised by the level of satisfaction both sides have for their jobs. I think though, this is where the evidence of my own socio-economic privilege shines through. I could never imagine a life where, relatively speaking, working long hours, doing dangerous work that doesn’t even pay enough to survive is still better than whatever work situation I had before. I’ve had low paying, demeaning jobs for sure, but there is just no comparison. It is humbling and worth remembering.

Which isn’t to say that the conditions that the Hyderabad Kamatans and Kamatees (SWM workers) work in should be considered acceptable. The situation for female workers is particularly bad, often working overnight shifts in the dark; always in danger of violence.  Both men and women working in the private sector risk their health everyday. Since much of the work is done manually, without the aid of trucks with hydraulic lifts, employees often suffer from back pain and injuries. For public employees, their benefits allow them sick leave and medical insurance, but for the private sector, they must endure the pain or miss a day’s pay.

While much is being done to improve the actual service area and quality of waste management, nothing is being done to improve the quality of labor conditions and while labor unions exist and have quite a lot of influence in the public sector, once again, private contractors (though on paper they allow their employees to form unions) take great pains to avoid employing union members.

Most of the article deals in data and numbers, something that is very useful for me in understanding the big picture.

__________________________

On another note, being an Illustrator it’s nearly impossible for me to engage in any project without trying to find a way to work with visual representation. I have been thinking about poster designs related to waste management for a while. However, I don’t trust myself to know enough about what appeals to the majority of Indians in order to communicate a message effectively. I’ve seen some amazing social justice campaigns coming out of India that fell flat because the message that was intended was not the one received.

I plan on exploring this issue with my artwork in the coming months. It may never be appropriate as a tool for change but perhaps it will start a dialogue.

In addition to that, as soon as this latest round of snow melts, I am going to start a simple photo project for this blog. Whenever I go out for a walk, if I happen upon a piece of trash I make a point of picking it up and disposing of it. It’s something that started soon after I returned from India last year. It’s a compulsion now. Sometimes I can ignore it, if it’s paper, but plastic of any kind drives me crazy.

So, I want to start a project called “One Piece” wherein each time I go for a walk, I photograph and and throw out at least one piece of trash. It’s my hope to encourage other people to do so. It’s such an easy thing to do. Not a bag of trash, just one piece.

-Ashley

(See previous post for article title/author/editors.)

Chapter three goes into great depth about the MCH’s VGDS program (Voluntary Garbage Disposal Scheme) and also mentions the ‘Clean and Green Andhra Pradesh Campaign’  (1998). Most of the chapter is an outline of the various departments within MCH and their (intended) function but also examines the effectiveness of various SWM strategies (Up until publication, 2004).  I learned about the gaps in the public system and how many of them are filled by private contractors.

The article details the process of waste management from the source(s) (Households, industries, hospitals etc)from beginning to end and describes how the process of collection at each location varies. This was interesting for the purposes of comparison – not just within India but also for when I eventually begin work on researching my own municipality’s procedures.

I also learned about Selco International Limited – a company that turns 200 tonnes of waste a day into pellets that are used as a coal substitute. It doesn’t go into much detail but I’d like to learn more about the environmental effects of burning those pellets, so I have earmarked it for later.

Two parts of the chapter I found most interesting addressed the pros and cons of the contract system vs. the public system including in what ways the private system fails it’s employees in both safety standards, job security and pay. Despite this, the study reviewed for the chapter reports that by-and-large employees in the private sector are satisfied with their jobs – which to me just says a lot about how bad it was before. The public system pays more, and employees get more benefits, but there is little monitoring (due to lack of funds) and residents reported that service through the public system was not as efficient or reliable. Oddly, on the other hand, MCH goes to great lengths to monitor the private contractors and they have the power to deal out consequences and cancel contracts if anything goes wrong. I find it odd that the public system is willing to monitor contractors but not their own. Perhaps this is related to the fear that private companies (being for-profit) might be more likely to take advantage of residence? I don’t know. Another interesting part of the public/private dynamic is that contracts with the city are set up in such a way that it limits a contracting company’s ability to invest in new equipment like trucks or new cleaning technologies to make things more cost effective. With 10 month contracts, there it’s not worth the financial risk to buy new trucks and invest in workers, since contracts can be canceled too quickly.

In many ways, the system in Hyderabad works well. It appears to be better managed than the municipalities in Delhi or Mumbai, at least from what I have read so far. Still, a troubling trend remains. Slums and people living in unregistered parts of the city still receive very poor SWM services. So poor, in fact that much of the work that is done there is funded by …of all things, the British Government (working through local welfare organizations)

The main problem that seems to be plaguing the MCH is that outside the small fee collected for the VGDS program, there is no cost recovery for the SWM services. Suggesting a tax raise is too politically dangerous so it isn’t addressed. And so the MCH does what it can with funds from the national government of India the state government and their own pockets.

This week I’m tackling a much longer text (over 300 pages) so I’ll be taking it in small chunks over the next few weeks. I’m going chapter by chapter, so you should see at least a few summaries from me this week. The text is titled, ‘Solid Waste Management and Recycling: Actors, Partnerships and Policies in Hyderabad, India and Nairobi, Kenya’ edited by Isa Baud, Johan Post and Christine Furedy.

Technically I started with Chapter 2 for this book since Chapter 1 is an introduction. Chapter 2: Collection, Transportation and Disposal of Urban Solid Waste, tracks the history of privatization of social services such as SWM in India (And Kenya, but for the purposes of my research I’m just looking at India specifically). It follows India’s emphasis on industrialization after independence, the failure of heavily regulated, state run services and the call for privatization, which the prevailing theory being that private enterprise could serve the growing population better than the disorganized and overly bureaucratic central government.  Like other articles I’ve read addressing privatization of SWM services, the article addresses the pros and cons of such a system.

Interestingly, despite the government resistance to privatization (seen as a challenge to strong government authority and a threat to social welfare), at the time of the article’s publication (2004) the government was also hesitant to work with local CBOs and other local organizations even though they (At least on the small scale) have proven extremely successful financially. The article blames this resistance to the prevailing view that working with such organizations isn’t the way (Westernized) modern cities are run, hinting at one of the many lingering effects of Imperialism in India – The idea that “The West Does It Best”. Governments also fear that working with such informal institutions will make setting health codes and standards impossible making it impossible to prosecute any mishandling of services. These strong local organizations are thus under utilized.

The article also addresses how the emphasis in SWM in India remains on improving public health, not environmental awareness and how the leap has not been made to link the two as two sides of the same issue. Public health feels (to local governments) a responsibility well within their jurisdiction, whereas the multitude of environmental issues is easier to distance oneself from. Also, there is the not-so-secret fact that environmental regulations and standards cost money to implement and maintain, cutting down the bottom line (initially) and restricting economic growth – something that India has been trying to increase rapidly since the end of the 1980s. Public health maintenance also costs money, but Waste-to-Energy initiatives and sale of compost materials offset the cost and are actually the primary reasons private companies get involved in waste management in the first place. What ultimately exists is a conflict of interest between healthy environmental practices and economic growth.

The article lists 5 different types of privatization (Though does not provide a definition. I will make a point of looking them up this week):

• -Divestiture
• -Contracting
• -Concession
• -Franchise
• -Open Competition

Of these, Contracting and Franchise are listed as most commonly used in waste management.

There is also an exploration of the difference between ‘Collective Goods’ and ‘Private Goods’. Collective goods or services are those that are available to all and are difficult to deny access too (Police force, firemen, street cleaning). Private goods are held by individuals and their access can be restricted to anyone who (for example) can’t pay for them. Herein lies a delicate balance when it comes to waste management. If it’s purely privatized, companies can deny services to those who cannot afford them because private companies are for-profit ventures. Want someone to take your trash away at the end of the week but don’t have the cash? It’s going to stay out front your house indefinitely or until the government spends the funds itself to clean up, leading to an uneasy relationship between all three parties – Government, Private Company and Local.

Phew. And that’s just the first (second) chapter.

-Ashley