Solid Waste Management

Public participation

Santosh Sabyasachi 08ME01024

INTRODUCTION
Solid
man, which can neither flow into streams nor escape immediately into the atmosphere. These non-gaseous and non-liquid residues result from various human activities. These cause pollution in water, soil and air. from any source is dependent on management practices. A management system must be developed and described that incorporates many diverse factors. Those factors considered may include economics, engineering, land use ordinances, environmental regulations, geography and sociology. A Solid Waste Management (SWM) system that could optimize these parameters would be designed based on figure below:

Waste: Solid Wastes are unwanted materials disposed of by

Solid

Waste Management: The proper disposal of SW derived

INTRODUCTION(continued):
Community/Public
sociological process by which residents organise themselves and become involved at the level of a living area or a neighbourhood, to improve the conditions of daily life (water, sanitation, health, education, etc.). It comprises various degrees of individual or collective involvement (financial and/or physical contributions, social and/or political commitment) at different stages of a project. Since it implies that residents set up management committees in charge of equipment.

participation is the

Why Public Participation:

With Increase in the amount of Waste:

more litter and a dirtier town environment, more street sweepers are necessary, more garbage collection trucks are necessary, larger garbage disposal sites are necessary, negative environmental impacts due to waste dumping grow more serious, the cost for the environmental protection increases. an increase in the amount of solid waste management work, an increase in the solid waste management expense, and aggravated environmental problems

This makes it exceedingly difficult for a local authority to perform solid waste management by itself.

Benefits:
Towards project: Improvement of project design and effectiveness. Enhancement of the impact and sustainability of projects. Improvement of project efficiency.

Towards Community: Building local capacities and capabilities. Involvement in decision-making. Empowerment.

Public Participation Models:

The
government or agency is the exclusive guardian of the people and any self-acclaimed representative of the public interest was an officious meddler. Only competitors and other institutional stakeholders were allowed to participate. This proved inappropriate for risk-oriented decision-making. There may be some usefulness in cases of rate hearings and public utility regulation. at the other end of the spectrum to the Exclusionary Model and results from a stringent application of the Exclusionary Model. This is really not a desirable model. It is not effective in addressing matters of intense local interest but may be effective if activists can attract the sympathy of a large number of other inactive members of public. It is a way of keeping certain topics or concerns on the public agenda or getting agencies to revisit decisions already made.

Exclusionary Model: This model indicates that the

The

Confrontational Model: The Confrontational Model is

 The

a situation where all interested groups have a right to participate by submitting facts, evidence, views and arguments. The agency assumes the role of neutral decision-maker. Based on courtroom adjudication, parties who may be represented by counsel are usually allowed testimony through experts. This is dominated by lawyers and the settlement presumes winners and losers.

Adversarial Model: The Adversarial Model represents

The

Model is similar to the adversarial model except that the agency takes a position prior to the public hearing and invites the public to comment on their decision as well as on the issues generally. It does not adopt the procedural protection of the Adversarial Model and so is less burdensome. The agency is only required to give due consideration of outsiders and explain its chosen action.

Due Consideration Model: The Due Consideration

 The

representatives of groups meet together, often with the aid of a mediator or facilitator, to present facts and arguments so as to reach an agreement on the ultimate result. The agency may participate in the discussions and attempt to implement agreed solutions. Public participation may be invited at this stage while Negotiators meet until agreement is reached. This may be a useful approach in planning SWMPs as the relationship between government and residents is often confrontational.

Mediation Model: The Mediation Model requires that

The

Model is similar to Mediation Model except that it relies heavily on scientific and technological expertise. The Agency appoints a committee of disinterested experts to advise on the technical issues and on a resolution. This model seems favoured by decision makers who are not scientifically trained and who do not want to take the heat. Agency may lose control of the outcome but this may be reduced by choosing experts for the 15 advisory committee whose views on technical issues will yield results that are in accordance with the decision-makers policy preferences.

Advisory Committee Model: The Advisory Committee

Public Education:
Public education provides:

An opportunity for community members to obtain information about communitys solid waste management program; A way for community members to express opinions and for community decision-makers to take these opinions into consideration; and A source of information regarding opportunities for participation in the program.

Designing an effective Public Education Program:

The main factors to consider in designing an effective education program are:

Identifying goals and audiences. Crafting a clear and useful message. Choosing an outreach method. Creating incentives and deterrents.

Public Participation Plan:

The following areas should be considered as part of the Public Participation Plan:

The target group should be clearly identified from a stakeholders assessment. The most appropriate techniques should be employed to disseminate information on the project. These include the media, surveys, brochures and pamphlets, public displays, workshops for review of initial assessment documents, model demonstrations, community advocates, advisory committees, etc. Special attention should be paid to the planning and execution of town meetings. The monitoring indicators should be agreed and the monitoring and assessment of outcomes should be based on these indicators which may include: number of attendees; number of questions and number of persons asking questions; value of the questions and ideas; adequacy of feedback at the meetings; level of information sharing; level of two way communication; Level of consensus; and conflict resolution. Specific efforts should be made to address poverty reduction through SWMP interventions.

The Social Analyst may make a qualitative assessment of the participation exercise but may want to attempt a quantitative assessment based on assigning raw scores and weights to the indicators. It may be claimed that even the weights may be subjective. An inventory of the issues to be addressed should be developed. The follow-up by the Project Promoters should be monitored by the social analyst who should keep track of the design changes required to address the issues. This will determine the extent of collaboration and empowerment achieved. The analyst may summarise the performance based on the extent to which there was active listening by the project promoters based on an assessment at the meeting.

The analyst should make a report on the process which should be available for reference during project implementation to assist in the audit of the participation process.
Focus/target/community group discussions are key to public participation

Conclusion:

An appropriate Public Participation Plan should assist in reducing social risk and overall project risk. There are lessons that un-resolved issues may result in public protest and threaten development projects. SWMPs are complex projects which must be discussed in national fora in order to formulate, prepare and implement efficient and efficacious SWMPs. The lessons of experience must be learned and appropriate tools used to determine the best design for future SWM projects. For waste management projects to have a continuing impact, community participation is a precondition and this entails involving the community at different stages and degrees of intensity in the project cycle.