Solid Waste management in Trivandrum Corporation: Citizen’s Perspective

Solid Waste management in Trivandrum Corporation: Citizen’s Perspective

Vinod. G                                                                                                                    Biju S K

Assistant Professor of Commerce                                         Assistant Professor of Commerce

 Government College for Women                                                       Government Arts College

Trivandrum, Kerala                                                                                      Trivandrum, Kerala

Abstract

The living environment is one of the important characters that determine the quality of mankind. The quality of life, to a large extent depends on the conditions of surroundings of their houses and also it’s accessibly to various facilities includes proper and scientific management of solid waste. Rapid urbanization during recent decades in the country has rise to a series of problems particularly overcrowding that affects the quality of life. Unsanitary conditions and lack of other facilities have made living conditions miserable in almost all large cities. Waste disposal is an immediate and critical issue for the community and ineffective or irresponsible disposal of solid waste pollutes the environment and pose health risk to public. Waste management technology like land filling and incineration are not a complete solution to this problem. No one wants a waste management site in his or her neighbourhood. Just as types of waste are changing, so must the attitude of people towards waste must change. This write up examine the attitude of citizen with regard to the issue of waste management and role of Urban Local Bodies.

1.     Introduction

            Indian cities have a striking similarity when it comes to heaps of garbage, overflowing waste bins and drains. The wastes in cities are managed by the respective Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), the collect and transport it to disposal sites. The limited revenues earmarked for the ULBs make them ill-equipped to provide for high costs involved in the collection, storage and proper disposal. As a result a substantial part of the ULBs solid waste generated remains uncollected and grows in heaps. Solid waste management is one of the important obligatory functions of not only ULBs but also of Rural Local Bodies (RLBs). Past studies show that this essential service is not officially and properly performed by the Local Bodies of Kerala resulting in many health and sanitation problems. It is observed that lack of financial resources, institutional weakness, improper selection of technology, transportation system and disposal options, public’s apathy towards environmental cleanliness and sanitation have made the service unsatisfactory.

2.      Waste – an alternative perspective

            It is a common knowledge that “waste is nothing but useful material at wrong place”. There is no material in this world, which is not useful in one way or the other. Also there is no material, which is created out of nothing. It is man’s ignorance that he considers certain things as waste and certain other thing as useful. Waste disposal is an immediate and critical issue for the community now and ineffective or irresponsible disposal of solid waste pollutes the environment and pose health risk to public. Waste management technology like land filling and incineration are not a complete solution to this problem. No one wants a waste management site in his or her neighbourhood. Just as types of waste are changing, so must the attitude of people towards waste must change. People now realize that the solution lies in.

3.      Waste and ULBs

                 An effective, efficient and suitable waste management system is still rare in Indian cities. The scenario is bad and nothing can be done unless the ULB themselves wake up to it and the public co-operates with the ULBs in ‘cleaning the city’ programs. The waste management problem has been approached from many angles in the past and several suggestions were made. However, waste is still a problem to contend with, so such type of researches are needed to aim at creating “zero waste city” by the active participation of ULB, community based organizations, NGO’s and citizen.            

4.       Statement of the Problem

               As per the study conducted by college of engineering, Trivandrum on the solid waste management system in Trivandrum; the whole system does not work properly due to poor technological management and political problems. As per their findings, Trivandrum ULB, on a daily basis collects an average of 200 tons of solid waste but the plant now has the capacity to treat only 150 tons of waste. Of these 200 tons of waste only 25-30% of the rest of waste is piled up as open dumps. Dumping the open place lead to fly breeding in uncovered piles of rotting refuse and the flies play a role in the mechanical transmission of airborne diseases. Piles of waste at landfill site also contain mosquito-breeds and may transmit dengue, yellow fever and viral infections. Piles of solid waste present a fire risk. Flammable waste materials when dumped together at a dump yard are a great danger at source. There are three natural streams originating within the plant area. The landfills are uncovered, and hence during rainy season rain waste get gets directly mixed with the waste. The leach ate from the landfills directly polluted streams join the Karamana River nearby which is another major source of pollution. It has lead to the closure of plant due to strong public protest. The State Government and ULB have initiated the waste by using to fill the railway platform and in unused quarries. Due to public protest could not move ahead. In this context operation stopped to collect solid waste from house hold/shops. People used to throw out the waste to public places. It burns the issue of spreading diseases, smell, flies etc. This context give rise to certain pertinent questions like, what is the intention of ULB in the disposal of wate?, What is the perception of people in the waste disposal of Trivandurm city?, What are the current practices of waste disposal? What is the awareness level of the activities of the Government?, hence the study.

5.      Objectives of the Study

1.     To analyse the problems faced by the people and shops in Solid Waste Management.

2.     To access the perception of people towards the Waste Management Perception of Trivandrum Corporation.

3.     To suggest the strategies for the improvement of Solid Waste Management System.

6.     Methodology

              The study has been conducted by using both the primary and secondary source of data. Primary data have been collected from a sample of 187 house hold and 13 shops from 11 wards in Trivandrum ULB. A structured interview schedule has been prepared and administered on them. In addition to this a personal interview done with the junior health inspector, Trivandrum ULB.

7.    Analysis and Discussions

The analysis has been made in three broader views for assessing the way of disposal of waste for getting a deep insight into the frequency method of disposal and problems faced in connection with the disposal of solid waste. The second view was to measure the perception of people of Trivandrum about the waste disposal management system maintained by the ULB and third was the awareness of different programmes of government in this regard.

Table 7.1

Frequency of waste disposal

Frequency	Total	Percentage
Daily	159	80
Fortnight	29	14
Twice in a weak	8	4
Weekly	4	2
Total	200	100

Source: primary data

               Table 7.1 states that 80% the respondents dispose the waste daily, this shows the good habit of cleanliness of natives in Trivandrum city. 14% of the respondents come under the category fortnight disposal of waste. Four percent of respondents dispose the waste twice in a weak and two percent of them dispose weekly.               

Table 7.2

Disposal method of recyclable waste

Methods	Total	Percentage
Burn it	62	36
Reuse it	11	6
Give to others who use it	42	25
Selling to the near junk shop	50	29
Discard in open places	6	4
Total	171	100

Source: primary data

               Table 7.2 represents that 36% of the respondents are carelessly burn the recyclable product. 29% of the respondents sell to the junk shop which is a good practice. 25% of them give to others which include private parties and corporation6% of them re use it. Only four percent discard it in public places which are a bad practice. Majority used to burn the waste. It is highly object able and has to pay sudden attention.

Table 7.3

Disposal methods of organic waste

Methods	Total	percentage
Use as compost	66	42
Feed to animals	17	11
Collected by corporation	27	17
Collected by private parties	9	6
Discarded in public containers	5	3
Discard in street/public places	13	8
Any other disposal method, specify	21	13
Total	158	100

            Source: primary data

                  The table 7.3 states that out of 74% of public who segregate the waste, 42% of them use their organic waste as compost, which is a good practice of using waste as wealth. 17% of them give to the corporation. This shows that corporation is successful in satisfying only a small portion of respondents. 13% of respondents adopt other methods like pipe composting; bio bin etc. 11% of respondents feed their organic waste to animals. 8% of them discard in street which is just against the ethics. 6%of them give their waste to private parties; it shows a good initiative from the part of private parties in managing waste in the city. 3% of them discard in public containers.                    

Table 7.4

Method adopted to dispose the waste

Method	Total	Percentage
Land filling	12	24
Dump in public place	10	20
Burning	17	32
Collected by corporation	12	24
Total	51	100

Source: primary data

              The table 7.4 reveals that out of 26% of the public who don’t segregate their daily waste. 32% of the respondents burn their daily generated waste. 24% of them landfill their waste as they have sufficient area to do so. Another 24% give to the corporation without segregation. 20% of the people carelessly dump their waste in public places. Majority of them burn their organic and non organic waste.                    

Table 7.5.

Awareness about the schemes adopted by the government

Opinion	Total	Percentage
Yes	178	89
No	22	11
Total	200	100

Source: primary data

                    The table 7.5 clarifies that 89% of the public are aware of the schemes adopted by the government for waste management such as pipe composting, bio bin, and bio gas plant. 11% of them are not at all aware of such things.  This shows that majority of the public are informed about the schemes to successful in educating them.                      

Table 7.6

Schemes adopted by people

Scheme adopted	Total	Percentage
Bio bin	2	2
Pipe composting	79	92
Bio gas plant	5	6
Total	86	100

Source: primary data

              According to the table 7.6 out of the 44% of those who adopt any of the schemes, majority of them adopt biogas plant as it need a larger area and cost as compared to other schemes. Only 2% adopt bio bin which shows the unreachability of this scheme

Table 7.7

Level of satisfaction of people who have adopted the scheme

Satisfaction	Total	Percentage
Highly satisfied	5	6
Satisfied	31	37
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	10	12
Dissatisfied	20	24
Strongly dissatisfied	18	21
Total	84	100

Source: primary data

              The table 7.7 suggests that out of 44% of the respondents who adopt any of the schemes, 43% of them are satisfied i.e., they have some containers to dump their waste within their residential area. Six percentages of them are highly satisfied with their practice apart from the majority of dissatisfaction. But they are unsuccessful in generating manure or gas from this, which was one of the major purposes of these schemes. 45% of them are dissatisfied from adopting the scheme, due to bad smell, worms, rates etc. and they had stopped using it. 12% of them are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied in adopting the scheme.

Table 7.8

Agency which provides fund for the installation

Source	Total	Percentage
Own source	8	10
Full by government	-	-
With subsidy	68	80
Any other	8	10
Total	84	100

Source: primary data

               Table 7.8 reveals that out of 44% of respondents who adopted any of the schemes, 80% of them installed with subsidy. 10% of them install with own source and another 10% use other source of fund for the installation.                      

Table 7.9

Reason for not adopting the scheme

Reasons	Total	Percentage
Lack of interest	31	28
Lack of area	60	55
Lack of awareness	14	12
Lack of finance	5	5
Total	110	100

                        Source: primary data

                   Table 7.9 reveals that out of 56% of the respondents who have not adopted the scheme, 55% of them don’t have the area for the installation of any scheme. 28% of them are not interested in installing. 12% of them are not aware about the installation and operation of such schemes. Five percentages of them don’t have the sufficient finance for the installation.           

Table 7.10

Agency which assists the waste management practices.

Agency	Total	Percentage
Own initiative	28	15
Corporation	132	68
Government	3	2
Residence association	11	6
Others	18	9
Total	192	100

Source: primary data

               Table 7.10 reveals the agency which assists the waste management practices in a particular locality. 68% of the respondents says that corporation is successful in assisting waste management in their locality. 15% of them are taking their own initiative in order to clean their locality. But nine percentages justifies there is private participation in the management of waste like Hindustan latex in some area. Six percentages of them clears that their residents association have an active role in the waste management practices. Two percentages of them reveal that government take initiative in doing so.

                                                Table 7.11

Whether ULB collect the waste

Opinion	Total	Percentage
Yes	53	27
No	147	73
Total	200	100

Source: primary data

               Table 7.11 states that corporation is not successful in collecting waste from 73% of the respondents. They had reach up to 27% of the respondent only. This shows the inability of ULB in fulfilling their duty.

Table 7.12

Awareness of public about the programs conducted by the Government

Programs	Total	Percentage
Suchithwa mission                                Yes                                                No	127 73	64 36
Malinya mukta keralam                        Yes                                                No	108 92	54 46
Solid waste management program        Yes                                                No	58 142	29 71
Total	600	300

Source: primary data

                From the table 7.12, we came to know the awareness of the public about the programs conducted by the government (suchithwa mission, malinya mukta keralam, solid waste management program).64% of the respondents are aware about the suchithwa mission and 36% of them are not aware about it.  54% of the respondents are aware about the malinya mukta keralam and 46%of them are not aware about it. 71% of the respondents are not aware the solid waste management program conducted by the government and only 29% are aware about it.      

Table 7.13

Sufficiency of awareness program

Perception	Total	Percentage
Highly agree	5	3
Agree	19	11
Neither agree nor disagree	31	18
Disagree	103	60
Strongly disagree	15	8
Total	173	100

Source: primary data

                The table 7.13 shows that 68% of the respondents are not satisfied about the awareness program conducted by the corporation.8% of them strongly disagree to this.18% have don’t have any opinion. 14% of them are in the view that the awareness program conducted by the corporation is sufficient.

Table 7.14

Satisfaction of people on the initiatives to decrease waste problem

Perception	Total	Percentage
Highly agree	1	1
Agree	50	25
Neither agree nor disagree	42	21
Disagree	74	37
Strongly disagree	33	16
Total	200	100

Source: primary data

The table 7.14 shows that 53% of them are dissatisfied about the corporation’s initiative adopted to decrease waste problem. 26% of them are satisfied about corporation’s initiatives. 21% of them are neither opined to the both above mentioned. 16% of them strongly dissatisfied to the statement. One percentage of them are highly satisfied with the initiative of corporation.

Table 7.15

Efficiency of Corporation in Cleanliness

Perception	Total	Percentage
Highly agree	2	1
Agree	35	18
Neither agree nor disagree	30	15
Disagree	80	40
Strongly disagree	53	26
Total	200	100

Source: primary data

                       The table reveals that the majority of the respondents i.e., 66% disagree with the opinion that the city is clean and corporation is doing their part successfully. Among them 26% are strongly disagreeing that corporation is efficiently working and city is clean. These categories are fully disappointed with the activities of corporation. 19% of individuals are agreeing that the city is clean. But only 1% of individuals are strongly agree with the statement that the city is clean when compared to other cities. Remaining 15% of individuals are neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the statement.

8.      Findings

        Only a small quantity of waste is generated from majority of the house or shop daily. This is because the number of members in each house is limited to 4-6.

·         80% of the population disposes the waste on the day itself. This shows a good waste management habit of the natives of Trivandrum city.

·         Major percentage of respondents are burning their recyclable product carelessly, it is highly objectionable and has to pay immediate attention.

·         A good amount of the population use their organic waste as compost, it is a better option when compared to other disposal methods.

·         32% of the populations who do not segregate the waste are adopting the method of burning to dispose both organic and non organic waste which is just against the ethics.

·         A good percentage of the population is aware of the schemes introduced by the government such as bio bin, pipe composting, bio gas plant etc. Out of this 56% of them are not willing to adopt any of the schemes.

·          Majority adopted pipe composting as the method of waste disposal. But other schemes such as bio bin and biogas plant are not implemented in household level due to lack of area and huge cost.

·         Even though a majority of the people are using pipe composting, higher percentage of them are using it properly due to lack of awareness and support from corporation. People who are highly dissatisfied with this method due to bad smell, generation of worms, increasing number of rats and also it is not fruitful.

·         Most of the people agree that the waste problem has mounted after the closure of vilapilsala plant. So it indicates that presence of a centralized plant is very much needed to reduce the quantity of waste in the city.

·         From survey it is revealed that the mismanagement of corporation and politics constitute the major reason behind the closure of vilapilsala plant.

9.     Suggestions for Improvement

9.1.            Preliminary Study:- While implementing techniques for the treatment of waste, they should conduct a preliminary study with regard to every aspect of the placement, climatic conditions, density of population etc. as the plant should be build in an effective way.

9.2.            Standardisation of the System:- The corporation should be systematic in their every initiative regarding the waste management i.e. starting from collection of waste, its transportation and its treatment also assigning trained manpower in each level of work. Also assign a supervisor over them to record their work efficiency.

9.3.            Segregation from the source:- Separate bin should be provided for organic and non organic waste while implementing bin system which make further disposal easy. Fine should charge for people who are disposing waste at bins or containers without segregation.

9.4.            Reporting System:- An appropriate reporting system in the form of management information system and decision support system should be developed and implemented.

9.5.            Popularisation:- Public involvement in waste management system should improve through different media like internet. And through this the corporation should receive opinion from the part of all stakeholders while implementing any plans or decision, because it is an important factor for the success of any sanitation activity.

10.  Conclusion

                 The living environment is one of the important characters that determine the quality of mankind. The quality of life, to a large extent depends on the conditions of surroundings of their houses and also it’s accessibly to various facilities includes proper and scientific management of solid waste. Rapid urbanization during recent decades in the country has rise to a series of problems particularly overcrowding that affects the quality of life. Unsanitary conditions and lack of other facilities have made living conditions miserable in almost all large cities. The analysis of the study shows that there is a need for a centralized or decentralized system of waste management and the people will co- operate with the new initiatives of corporation. The three stake holders, the Trivandrum Corporation, the workers in connection with waste management and the Citizen’s of the locality are very important in the effective waste management process. Because small slipshod may imbalance the total system of Waste Management. Most of the people now think that they too have major role to play in waste management programme, as they are the generators of waste. In this regard the Govt. and Corporation need to be more vigilant and citizens are to be educated on the schemes of waste management, reducing the quantity of waste generation and as far as possible to manage the waste in the source itself. If the Local Body can plan and implement a proper decentralised waste management system with the participation of all stake holders shall be an amicable solution to the problem.

Bibliography

·         Allwood, J. M., et.al., 2010: Material efficiency: A white paper. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55(3), 362-381.

·         Anastas, P., & Zimmerman, J. 2003: Design through the 12 principles of green engineering. Environmental Science & Technology, 37(5), 94A-101A. doi: 10.1021/es032373g

·         Armijo de Vega, C., et.al., 2008: Solid waste characterization and recycling potential for a university campus. Waste management (New York, N.Y.), 28, S21-6. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.

·         Atlantic Canada Electronics Stewardship,. n.d.: Responsible electronics recycling. Retrieved http://www.acestewardship.ca/ns/.

·         Barlaz, M., Loughlin, D., & Lee, N., 2003: Strengthening markets for recyclables: A worldwide perspective.

·         Bauld, J., 2008: Navigating to 60% diversion. 4th Canadian Waste Resource Symposium.

·         Bhatia S C, 2007: Wealth from waste, sc Bhatia , Atlantic publishers, New Delhi.

·         Bhatia S C., 2007:  Solid and hazardous waste management, Atlantic publishers and distributers ltd, New Delhi.

·         Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 1996:“Waste Audit Users Manual: A comprehensive guide to the waste audit process”.

·         Salahuddin Muhammed, 2011:  Waste Management in Urban Area-, BR publishers corporation, New Delhi

·         Study of the people perception and attitude towards solid waste management –phase 2 www.babu%20ambat.com

·         The Hindu, 2012:  Mediation on to end vilappil stir, The Hindu, Thiruvananthapuram – July 4.

·         The Hindu, 2012: Kochuveli calm as garbage trucks reach railway station, The Hindu, Thiruvananthapuram – October 12.

·         US Environmental protection agency, 1995: “Decision makes guide to Solid Waste Management” volume 2.

·         Vichitha V Kumar, 2011: “assessment of the solid waste management system in Trivandrum city”.

·         Waste management practices: literature review www.waste.com

·         www.corporationoftrivandrum.in/about-corporation

·         www.Corporationtrivandrum.in /solid waste-management

·         www.sanitation.kerala.govt.in

·         www.suchitwamission.com

·         www.thehindubusinessline.com

·         www.ventha.com/news/waste-disposal-inquarries-iqnities-protest-in-trivandrum