Thinking Globally, Acting Locally: Formalizing ... - SAGE Journals

6 downloads 0 Views 479KB Size Report
thousands of people make their living from material recovery (Liu et al.,. 2012), can ... for cities to be for all, and not fashioned after the image of the rich, the mighty ..... long, Accra became utterly filthy as residents, in order to avoid payment of dumping ... “dirty.” Additionally, city authorities in Kumasi spend over US$491,730.
Thinking Globally, Acting Locally: Formalizing Informal Solid Waste Management Practices in Ghana Martin Oteng-Ababio Department of Geography and Resource Development, University of Ghana, Legon

Ebenezer Owusu-Sekyere Department of Development Studies, University for Development Studies Wa

Samuel Twumasi Amoah Department of Environment and Resource Studies, University for Development Studies, Wa

ABSTRACT The changing volume and content of municipal waste has overwhelmed the containment capacities of city authorities to remediate the problem. This elusive enterprise has sparked as much dissatisfaction with the mad rush for foreign-based models as with the new conceptual interventions. Many have questioned why a monumental challenge still lingers on in spite of the “much-acclaimed” potentials of the new interventions. Our article extends the debate by focusing on the politics of solid waste management, and how it shapes environmental safety. Based on content analysis of earlier studies, complemented with key informant interviews, the article raises issues with emerging models, which overemphasize the role of foreign-based approaches against indigenously derived practices. Using our study outcomes, we argue that the development trajectories of most Ghanaian cities create specific contestations, which configure the informal sector and the built environment in unique ways. We demonstrate that the new models have hardly had visible success stories after two decades of experimentation because they are incompatible with the local development trajectories. Concluding, we caution that the problem will persist and potentiate a cyclical state of dissolution, unless those who eke out livelihood from the sector informally are recognized, valued, and taken into account in local economic development. Keywords: solid waste, informal waste collectors, formalization, Ghana Copyright © 2017 SAGE Publications www.sagepublications.com (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC and Melbourne) Vol 33(1): 75–98. DOI: 10.1177/0169796X17694517

76

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

Introduction The past decennium has seen a much-publicized resurgence of scholarly works in solid waste management (SWM). This increased interest is not only because of increasing waste generation due to rapid urbanization, economic development, and changing public consumption habits (Gutberlet, 2008), but because the “mountains of waste” remains an Achilles’ heel for most city authorities (Mohee & Bundhoo, 2015; Regassa, Sundaraa & Bizunesh, 2011). This contradicts the European Union (2010) admonition that managing waste should not endanger human health, harm the environment, or affect places of special interest. Indeed, Western-based studies suggest developed countries have managed their waste efficiently and effectively and are now focusing on maximizing resource recovery (Ali, 2010; Themelis & Kaufman, 2010). Contrary to that, countries in the global South continue to struggle with the waste challenges after years of experimentation with foreign-based models (Ali, 2010; Post & Obiri-Opareh, 2003). Particularly, the mismatched financial and human resources applied to SWM have long struggled to keep pace with the dynamics of an increasing population (Oteng-Ababio, 2015). In Ghana, there is a plethora of scholarly works from the academics (Oteng-Ababio, 2011; Owusu, Oteng-Ababio, & Afufu-Kotey, 2012; Owusu-Sekyere, 2014), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) (Brigden et al., 2008), research institutions (Blacksmith Institute, 2013; Institute for Statistical, Social and Economic Research [ISSER], 2009), and public institutions (EPA, 2002) highlighting the impact of improper SWM but remaining silent as to why the practice has become a norm. With the exception of Mensah and Larbi (2005) and Oduro-Kwarteng and Van Dijk (2013), most studies have mainly focused on the health and environmental implications of the practice. Even in cases where attempts have been made to understand the underlying politics, as in the case of Post, Broekema, and Obirah-Opareh (2003), Mensah and Larbi, (2005), and Oteng-Ababio, (2012), the overall objective has mainly been to “examine its contribution to SWM.” Typically, adherents of foreignbased models subscribe to the utopian thinking of them being a slim, easy to fire, and flexible entity, and the fact that their adoption provides better opportunities for solving the waste menace (Obiri-Opareh, 2003, p. 11; Wilson, 2007). Though quite significant in principle, the appropriateness and usefulness of the wholesale adoption of foreign-based strategies for managing waste in low-income, peri-urban, and rural areas in Ghana



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

77

can be questioned. Significantly, the socio-economic, spatial organization and internal structure of these settlements, described by Pieterse (2013) as “slum urbanism,” do not easily make smooth implementation of such borrowed models; hence, the waste challenge continues to generate thoughts, interest, and research (Owusu et al., 2012). In our opinion, the quest for inclusive, socially acceptable, economically efficient, and environmentally friendly SWM should be predicated with a nuanced understanding of the functioning of waste infrastructure and networks in our emerging cities—“slum urbanism.” We also have to strive for a synergy between foreign-based models and indigenously derived practices. That holds the key to how to make cities sustainable and go beyond the contradiction in the urban equation, where cities drive economic prosperity but also create biased environmental stresses and social exclusion (Grant & Oteng-Ababio, 2016). Our study assesses SWM approaches in Ghana from three perspectives. First, we examine the framework within the built environment that have benefited from the “new experiments.” Second, we examine the situation in low-income and peri-urban areas that serve as a “waste sink” for waste generated in core cities, and, finally, we present the situation in the rural fringe where strong cultural values and the spirit of togetherness have fostered a relatively clean and green environment. We argue that SWM can be enhanced if societal specific knowledge, norms, and beliefs are incorporated into borrowed policies. The article is arranged as follows: After the introductory paragraphs, the general theoretical underpinnings guiding the study, and the legislative and institutional framework in Ghana is discussed, followed by the research methodology. We then follow with the three case scenarios and, finally, what can be the best practice is suggested. Waste Hierarchy and its Institutional Protocols Prior studies show that some urban poor live and work in precarious conditions in low-income areas and around dumpsites (Oduro-Kwarteng & Van Dijk, 2013; Owusu et al., 2012), turning waste into wealth (Adama, 2012; Medina, 2010) and playing a very important role in proper recycling of a large quantum (about 95 percent by weight) of waste in reuse chain (Oteng-Ababio, 2014). Crucially, understanding, acknowledging, and appreciating these uncontrolled recycling activities, where tens of thousands of people make their living from material recovery (Liu et al., 2012), can offer reprieve from poverty (Grant & Oteng-Ababio, 2016). Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

78

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

These studies present waste as not only an attitude of indifference toward valuable natural resources, but also a serious economic and public health problem. It is from this perspective that our study is rooted on the conceptual development of an integrated waste management system involving different stakeholders and an enhanced environmental policy, endorsed and promoted by studies by van Vliet, Chappels, and Shove (2005) and Themelis and Kaufman (2010). They forcefully argued that for cities to be for all, and not fashioned after the image of the rich, the mighty, and the powerful, society must embrace the waste hierarchy concept as a roadmap to ensure sustainability. Such a management system has the ability to include social, political, environmental, human health, and economic implications of waste and aid to the establishment of a sustainable SWM system (Borthakur, 2015). The waste hierarchy is an internationally accepted order of prioritizing SWM based on its impacts on environmental sustainability (Themelis & Kaufman, 2010). At the apex of the hierarchy is waste reduction, which can be achieved by waste avoidance and minimization. For example, better product design and process can reduce waste. The hierarchy is a decision-making framework for minimizing the amount of material for final disposal while maximizing the value and benefits of products. As a system, it concedes that all human activities have an impact on the use of nonrenewable resources and on emissions, but encourages the use of available technology and financial resources to minimize the impact of waste generation (US-EPA, 2008). The success stories of developed countries are attributed to “strict” adherence to these tenets (Wilson et al., 2013). Conversely, most management practices in developing countries follow the “end-of-pipe approach” where generated waste is just disposed of in open dumpsites, the most reliable and economically viable disposal method so far (Daskalopoulous, Badr, & Roberts, 1998; Seadon, 2010). In Ghana, waste collection is serviced under either the house-to-house (HtH) and/or communal container collection (CCC) systems (Amoah & Kosoe, 2014; Oteng-Ababio, 2015). Studies indicate that the HtH system operates in affluent, low-density communities where infrastructure facilities are favorable, while the CCC is implemented in low-income, highly congested communities with poor road networks. Hence, waste in such impoverished communities often ends up in gutters, sewage drains, and streams as the limited containers are normally left unattended to for weeks (Oteng-Ababio, 2015; Oduro-Kwarteng & Van Dijk, 2013). Achieving such integrated management structure cannot be completed without recourse to exiting regulation. To put it simply, policy is essential



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

79

in development discourse. In Ghana, until the promulgation of National Environmental and Sanitation Policy (NESP) in 1999, sections of the Criminal Code of 1960—specifically Act 29—were the sole legislative instrument that sought to address indiscriminate disposal of waste (OtengAbabio, 2011). Today at the national level, many ministerial and public entities engage in a subtle competition in maintaining environmental sanitation. Table 1 summarizes some of the functions of these ministries, departments, and agencies (MMDAs). Though not exhaustive, it nonetheless depicts how these ministries are assigned responsibilities of establishing or facilitating the establishment of sectorial policies and guard their implementation and compliance. The experience so far indicates that these activities, though well intentioned, are not well coordinated at the ministerial levels as each ministry acts independently (see Oteng-Ababio, 2011). In 2010, the NESP was reviewed in congruence with the other social policies, focusing and outlining seven key areas and four distinct functions for the various assemblies (see Table 2). From Table 2, the new policy provides for a general assessment of the prevailing SWM strategies and urges city authorities to promulgate appropriate bylaws to abate the nuisance. Aside from that policy, there are others which indirectly regulate SWM. For example, the National Building Regulations, 1996 (LI 1630) stipulates that all buildings, either for residential and commercial use, shall have a facility for refuse disposal. Additionally, the Town and Country Planning Ordinances, 1944 (Cap 84); Vaccination Ordinance Cap 76; Food and Drugs Law 305b (1992); and Mortuaries and Funeral Facilities Act, 1998 (Act 563), all have legal provisions for environmental sanitation. Nonetheless, a closer look at the current policies depicts them as inadequate “cookie-cutter plans,” quite alien to the Ghanaian local context (Post & Obirih-Opareh, 2003). Significantly, the policies are premised on the assumption that the historical forces and mechanisms that have driven the successful evolution of SWM in developed countries can provide appropriate pathways in the global South. They remain loudly silent on the role of local knowledge and practices even though evidence abounds that the informal waste collector (Kaya Bola) has played and continues to play an important role, especially in the areas of reuse and recycling (Adama, 2012; Oteng-Ababio, 2010). Yet, under the current dispensation, the sector is not recognized; it operates in hostile and life-threatening environments, and participants are often regarded as nuisances, embarrassments, and criminals (Nzeadibe, 2015; Okut-Okuma, 2015). We see this as a major flaw in our current Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

– Through EPA, the guiding ministry accountable for formulating environmental laws and quality standards for the treatment, disposal as well as the design and location of sanitary landfills.

– Guiding institutions of the health sector have the regulatory authority that includes the sanitary aspects related to SWM, in which they intervene through regulatory activities and sanitary control. – They are in charge of issues pertaining to public and occupational health, hygiene, and sanitary surveillance related to solid waste collection, transportation, and final disposal.

MEST (EPA)

MOH

Healthcare Waste Management (EPA law 2002)

Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1994 (Act 490)

Local Government Act 1993 (Act 462)

Acts of Establishment

– Responsible for providing sanitation services to the community and is responsible for Local Government Act 1993 financing, administering, and operating SWM services. (Act 462) – Accountable for the operation of urban sanitation services, and here the specific function of regulating through ordinances and control of activities related to environmental sanitation, providing public sanitation service and promoting environmental education programs. – They are autonomous with capability of contracting and granting SWM services in their respective jurisdiction. Source: MLGRD (2010).

– Responsible for the general management of domestic waste and supervise the MMDAs. – The Act gives MLGRD three responsibilities to policy and planning; legislation on SWM; and regulation, monitoring, and enforcement of SWM activities.

MLGRD

MMDAs

Functions and Responsibilities of SWM

MDAs

Table 1. Institutional Structures for Managing Solid Waste in Ghana



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

81

Table 2. Solid Waste Aspects of Environmental Sanitation Policy (2010) Particular Areas of Policy

Policy Directives and Decision-making

Solid waste management by integrated waste management service

– All solid wastes generated in urban areas are regularly collected and disposed of in adequately controlled landfills or by other environmentally acceptable means Waste Management Department (WMD) – At least 20% of the solid waste collection service is done by individual Assembly and 80% provided by the private sector

Private sector involvement in solid waste collection

– Involve the private sector in the provision of waste collection services, and supervision of the private sector by the WMD – City is to be zoned into service areas, private companies to be given monopoly in a zone with population less than 15000 – Private sector shall operate within the policies, regulations, supervisory, and licensing arrangements set up by the public sector – Full cost recovery where possible

Environmental monitoring and public health education

– Monitoring environmental health standards and sanitary regulations – Educate the people on public, environmental, and sanitation issues

Legislation by laws enforcement and regulation

– Promulgate and enforcement of the by-laws on sanitation together with national laws – Strictly observing and enforcing environmental health standards and sanitary regulations – By-laws are to be enforced by the Environmental Health and Management Department of the Assembly

Source: MLGRD (2010).

policy arrangements that must be addressed because of the convenience, reliability, and the cost effectiveness of their operations. Methodology This study uses field observations, in-depth interviews and a review of archival records and scholarly literature, covering three regional capitals in Ghana—Accra, Kumasi and Wa. This was to seek insights from all the three Ghanaian geographical zones—the coastal savanna, the middle forest and the northern savanna zones. Complementary information was gathered from the academic works on such characteristics as waste collection, transportation, and disposal. The trained research team conducted in-depth interviews with public officials and environmental services providers in a conversational style, after reassurance about Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

82

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

confidentiality. The purpose of the interview was to understand available legal and institutional structures. We solicited 26 respondents’ appreciation of the SWM condition and how it can be improved. This was done by prompting historical recounts and positioning them in current experiences. The unstructured interviews sought responses on the following topics: daily collection routine; environmental concerns in the community; experiences with city authorities and service providers; level of satisfaction; and goals for the future. Probing followed within each of these main topics, according to respondents’ leads and focusing on domains such as relationships between city authorities, services providers, and beneficiaries. Discussions using the semi-structured interviews considered the following topics: positive and negative aspects of the current SWM policy; current challenges facing the industry; city authorities’ reactions to these limitations; and strategies for dealing with problems in the neighborhood. Most of the interviews took place in or around respondents’ offices, houses, or preferred location. Each interview took about one hour. The interviews were complemented with over seven years of extensive studies in the subject by the authors. These experiences added to the interviews provided a rich data to interrogate the environmental conditions of our research locations. The analysis of the data was influenced by existing, relevant theories and was based on ensuring sustainable SWM practices. Through thematically coding the data, trends and categories emerged, taking distinctive properties. The trends that emerged were repeatedly examined and revised for their accuracy. This procedure also enhanced easy identification of patterns, relationships, and processes. Waste Management Experiences in Ghana City-wide Experiences Traditionally, the Local Government Act 465 makes MMDAs responsible for SWM. For instance, the Accra City Council (ACC), established in 1898, has since performed such a duty with the assistance of few community sanitary inspectors (Acquah, 1958; Oteng-Ababio, 2015). However, with increasing population, economic prosperity, and corresponding increase in waste volume and content in the early 1990s, a policy shift toward private sector-led initiative and World Bank inspired policy became worth experimenting (World Bank, 1999). In principle, this was to overcome the failures inherent in public service delivery—too many



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

83

workers, lack of supervisors, and so on (Cointreau-Levine & Coad, 2000; Post et al., 2003). Since the inception of public–private partnership (PPP) in 1999, the concept has become so widely accepted that it is almost dangerous to question its validity. Indeed in 2001, the President of Ghana in a speech unequivocally stated: “[T]he partnership of private sector with the public sector is at the heart of our economic strategy. I have appointed a Minister specifically responsible for Private Sector Development. . . .” (Kufour, 2001, p. 5). Today, most local governments believe that if there is any hope for a “clean environment,” then PPP must be glorified, accepted, and implemented—without question, an entrenched position akin to, as ObengOdoom (2009) rightly puts it, the “god-man” relationship depicted in Things Fall Apart: “Beware Okonkwo!. . . . Beware of exchanging words with Agbala. Does a man speak when a god speaks? Beware!” (Achebe, 1967). Though the PPP concept has been adored almost to the point of worship for over two decades, yet, results so far sufficiently reveals a common sight unsanitary urban landscape (Amoah & Kosoe, 2014; Oteng-Ababio, 2015). Few examples will suffice: The pay-as-you-dump (PAYD) System In 1985, Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) introduced the PAYD system, the first ever waste financing policy intervention to arrest the waste menace. The policy objective was to generate additional income to complement the central government and city authorities’ efforts to ensure efficient SWM operations. With this system, residents using the CCC system were made to “pay-as-they-dump” their waste at designated skip sites. Before long, Accra became utterly filthy as residents, in order to avoid payment of dumping fee, dumped waste into open spaces, gutters, and so on. This was invariably the import of the model: Pay-as-you-dump or find an alternative dumping place. In 1991, government ordered the AMA to abandon the policy, since its objective was at the expense of the environment. Chagnon City and Country Waste Ltd The first international PPP model was the AMAs’ partnership with the Chagnon City and Country Waste Ltd (CCWL), between 1997 and 2000. AMA had then negotiated for a Canadian credit facility of about US$14.6 to purchase waste service equipment. Without recourse to procedure for awarding contracts, the assembly entered into a seven-year service Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

84

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

contract with CCWL and agreed an amount of US$30.28 per ton of waste collected and managed at the landfill site (Oteng-Ababio, 2010). After signing the contract, CCWL subcontracted to local contractors at US$5.20 per ton (payable in Cedis), thus making US$17 profit per ton of waste collected by local contractors. This nebulous contract was abrogated in 2000 when there was a change in government. Zoomlion Ghana Limited The abrogation of CCWL contract subsequently saw the birth of Ghanaian private companies including Zoomlion, Gh Limited. Surprisingly, Zoomlion in particular within four months of its establishment could parley itself into a “zillion-dollar entity” with a nationwide reach (MEF, 2012). This was due to the company’s ability to secure a guarantee for regular up-front district assembly common fund allocation nationwide. This “socialization of private risk” model was allegedly facilitated by the company’s politically savvy and extremely well connected ownership. This monopolistic “goldmine” was abrogated when there was another political changeover in 2008 (Oteng-Ababio, 2010). Currently, waste collection in most cities has been privatized, albeit practically none of the reports on beneficiary satisfaction have been encouraging. Awortwi (2004), for example, noted that only 25 percent of a sampled population in three cities indicated improvements in the quality of service from their service providers. Similarly, a World Bank (2014) report revealed that 70 percent of their respondents described the city as “dirty.” Additionally, city authorities in Kumasi spend over US$491,730 a month on waste collection and disposal (KMA, 2010), while those in AMA spend US$307,340 a month on waste haulage alone, with an extra US$163,910 on maintaining dump sites. Indeed, as of January 2014, AMA’s indebtedness to private service providers was over GH¢4.315 million (Oteng-Ababio, 2015). Meanwhile, widespread economic restructuring, rising unchecked urbanization, and joblessness have collectively ushered the growth of urban informal workforce. One such occupation, fast gaining popularity, is that of waste pickers—“Kaya bola”—who, using head pans, carts drawn by donkeys, or tri-motors, collect, sort, and recycle waste. In so doing, they help to clean the city streets and reduce carbon emissions (Chen, 2016). Yet they typically go unrecognized for their traditional skills, endurance, resourcefulness, and services, are often denied access to waste—the basis of their livelihood—and are not allowed to bid for



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

85

SWM contracts (Thieme, 2010). Knowingly, most local governments have used the formal sector participation as a common response to improper SWM, but Ghana’s experiences so far contradicts its spirit and purpose, which according to Oduro-Kwarteng and Van Dijk (2013) was to tackle market and government failures. What remains obvious, however, is that the incentive to preserve the environment has reduced and the costs of cleaning and recovery of contaminated sites have surged. The Peri-urban Interface In most cities, the peri-urban offers a “welfare-for-work” safety net and has emerged as a major hub for waste dumping and informal recycling for most economic migrants (Adama, 2012; Medina, 2010). These areas are devoid of any comprehensive SWM facilities program. Rather, relative land availability makes the zone potential “waste sinks” or “receptacles for unwanted items,” and their disassembly is causing environmental catastrophes. Typically, the conventional centralized management approaches fail to cover these areas, creating complex politics that govern such liminal boundary zones, particularly those beyond municipal boundaries (Swyngedouw, 1995). They harbor final disposal sites, which rarely receive treatment and are characterized by diverse land uses associated with a range of urban and rural livelihoods that generate significant waste. Meanwhile, improper SWM is not just a local public health issue (Brigden et al., 2008; Songsore, 2008), but also a global environmental problem because of the significant contribution of waste-related emissions to climate change (UNEP, 2009). Hence, such areas are in perpetual state of social and environmental tensions. In the words of Birley and Lock (1998), “the range of environmental health problems in peri-urban areas include those associated with both urban and rural living and, as a result, the peri-urban poor. . .get the worst of both worlds”—widespread pollution and deteriorated health conditions. While prior studies (e.g., Boadi & Kuitunen, 2004; Brigden et al., 2008; Songsore, 2008) have brought the zone’s health and environmental challenges to the fore, this is only part of the story. It captures the zone’s most visible geographical manifestations, but overlooks a large, well-organized recycling sector, involving multiple and diverse practices of recovery, reuse, repair, and refurbishment of metals and plastics. It overshadows situations where materials are collected and refined through various recycling hubs and smelters before being reintroduced into production, oftentimes at yet another location (Adama, 2012; Oteng-Ababio, 2012). Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

86

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

Typically, peri-urban zones are “boundary subjects,” active, yet dependent on the continuation of the core–periphery binary, and the latter is better understood as a multi-directional, multi-scalar, and contextual continuum. The zone is a competitive, confused, and confusing assemblage of strategic and lucrative, yet unrecognized activities, which forms part of the US$52 billion global recycling and re-export of retrievable metals industry (Baldé et al., 2015). In the words of BobMilliar and Obeng-Odoom (2014, p. 262), the informal economy (recycling) is “an employer, nuisance, and goldmine,” and reveals the urban dimension of both wasting and revaluing and the linked, but occluded ongoing geographies of constituent elements. On few occasions when peri-urban issues come under the radial of city authorities, they occur in a piecemeal fashion, which is usually triggered by the efforts of residents themselves or pressure from civil society (Owusu et al., 2012). The challenge relates mainly to power dynamics. The local authority whose responsibility it is to administer the area appears less enthusiastic and uncommitted for various reasons including insufficient finances. Similarly, local elected representatives who assume unbridled responsibilities also lack financial capacity to act. Meanwhile, the traditional authority, which had held the community together, fades away rapidly with increasing urbanization. This makes calls for peri-urban waste to be “seen,” “known,” and “appreciated” as part of diverse externalities of urbanism apt, especially when access to land is becoming a near impossibility, and when only peri-urban spaces provide such hope. Suffice to add that since less than 10 percent of municipal solid waste is currently officially recycled in Ghana (Oteng-Ababio, 2012) and indeed, in most developing countries (see Borthakur, 2015), activities at peri-urban zones offer the potential to move the largely untapped end-of-life material recovery into sustainable SWM and augment planetary resources. The informal waste pickers, with varied local names—kaya bola (Ghana) and kawariwalas (India)—are often skilled in identifying wastes with potential value and also explore the methodology to recover the valuables (Borthakur, 2015). They also have proper networking and communication to reach out for the resources (Raghupathy & Chaturvedi, 2013). This will not only support a more judicious use of resources but, more importantly, bolster local economic development by adding green jobs. The Rural Experiences While cities and peri-urban communities have not found themselves out of the woes of the waste, the situation in most rural communities presents



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

87

some respite having capitalized on their relatively sound indigenous, communal spirit. With local government authorities displaying virtually no role in SWM, rural residents have built on their local institutions and approaches to tame the waste menace, albeit, on a “shoe-string” budget. The decision-making at the institutional, community, and individual level is driven by informal rules and regulations that are not well documented, but that derive their backing from the ancestral spiritual realm. Table 3 presents the unique SWM functional structure in most rural areas. Without doubt, the chieftaincy institution plays a pivotal role in this agenda. The chiefs, installed to lead group of people with similar cultural identity, are revered as the lineal successors of their ancestors and their subjects feel beholden to them for their well-being. In conjunction with the chief priest, who is the spiritual head of the community, the chief and his elders set and interpret the SWM rules. In the words of Wahab (2010), the indigenous people have built-up tested knowledge systems through several years of experimentation, experiences, and intimate contact with the environment to deal with such local issues including waste. Characteristically, each household in a rural community is responsible for its generated waste and, therefore, it is a common practice for the woman of the house to sweep within and the surroundings and send the collected waste to the dumpsite, which the whole community manages through communal labor at a specific day in a mouth. Failure to participate in such communal activity attracts sanctions from the chief and by extension incurs the displeasure of the ancestors. These partly explain the near absence of waste crisis that not only creates health and serious aesthetic problem in large cities but also affects values of surrounding properties while waste in beaches, highways, and parks creates a negative externality for tourists in public areas. This observation is in stark contrast to the situation in urban centers where in the eyes of the public, managing waste is the responsibility of the “government,” a position that was unequivocally dispelled by the President of the republic of Ghana at the recent launch of National Sanitation Day (NSD) on 17 September 2014. He remarked, Sanitation is a public good and its impact affects everybody irrespective of one’s ethnic, political, religious or geographical background. What this means is that it is our collective responsibility as Ghanaians to take the needed measures to ensure that we live in a clean, safe and healthy environment.

The president’s call was timely, as a UN representative at the said launch unequivocally describes Ghana “among the 10 dirtiest countries in the Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

88

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98 Table 3. Organizational and Functional Structure in Relation to Rural Solid Waste Management

Institutions

Responsibility and Functions

1. District Assembly* (local government municipalities)

– SWM: sweeping, collection, transfer, final disposal – Drafting of long-term operational and final plans – Formulation of local regulations, ordinances – Sanctions for non-compliance and inadequate SWM – Rates and tariffs formulation and implementation

2. Traditional Authorities** (Chieftaincy Authority)

– Superintend and organize traditional festivals during which clean-up are organized (traditionally believed ancestral gods visit the community at night and therefore should be always kept clean) – Land is believed to bequeathed by the ancestors (spirits) who observe the behavior of the living and punish deviants

3. International Cooperation*** Organizations

– Provide external funds for sanitation and environmental projects – National and local technical advising – External and/or national funds management for environmental and sanitation projects

4. NGOs****

– Environmental education – Implement projects at a community level – Environmental awareness in public

5. Community Leaders/ Members*****

– Prohibit dumping and disposal of waste after dark – Ensure that days of rest—taboo days—when the land is expected to rest is respected – Dumping and disposal of waste in water services is prohibited and respected – Sweeping after dark is considered a taboo – Organize communal labor whose participation is compulsory – Using the dropping of organic waste (left over foods, peels of raw foods, among others) as compost for farming/feeding livestock

Sources: * MLGRD (2010), ** Danquah (1968), *** UN-HABITAT (2010), ****Greenpeace (2008), and ***** Adarkwa and Post (2001).

world.” This means government, with the cooperation of all, must re-double its efforts in clearing the “mountains of waste,” acquire and manage proper landfills, and reduce the incidence of littered streets and public places. The government role in this is crucial since, over the years, the impression has erroneously been created that public institutions are responsible for proper SWM (considered as a public good), and this is due mainly to how local governance of our towns and cities have evolved (Salifu, 2011). Discussions: In Search of Sustainable Practices Through in-depth interviews and review of the existing literature, this study adopts private sector participation lens to examine SWM outcomes



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

89

in the urban core, peri-urban, and rural communities in three Ghanaian cities as a means of suggesting sustainable waste management practices. While attaining a comprehensive SWM1 is undoubtedly an arduous task, our findings suggest most city authorities integrate the private sector more in the chain of SWM activities in order to circumvent some technical and financial limitations (Obiri-Opareh, 2002). Our findings further suggest that cities remain saddled with waste challenges in spite of the involvement of the formal private sector. Some countries spend between 20 percent and 50 percent of their internally generated funds on SWM, out of which 80–90 percent go into waste collection alone, yet only 40–70 percent waste is collected (UN-Habitat, 2010). According to a World Bank report (2014, p. 13), such unsightliness of waste reduces the attractive environment for investment and tourism which affects job creation and reduces new business opportunities. It is in this direction that we argue that it may be imperative for city managers “to go back into history” and interrogate our local management practices—routine inspection by environmental health units of assemblies and organization of communal labour, and so on. Indeed, considering that our local SWM practices, per our findings, have demonstrated local capacity, we opine the local authorities have the responsibility of insuring that service providers give adequate attention to informal participants to ensure our collective interest. Currently, two-thirds of urban dwellers lack access to proper SWM services, a precursor of environmental development. The government has ambitious commitments in this regard (e.g., Ghana vision, 2020); yet prior scholarship has not kept up with the policy ambitions. Our article operationalizes this policy perspective by examining the potential of a local knowledge-enabled approach, through integrating the formal and informal sectors to achieve this ambition. Our findings call into question the adequacy of the dominant financially focused, foreign-based model (which ignores local practices) and demonstrate the value of a new research agenda that explicitly responds to infrastructural and networks needs of today’s “slum urbanism.” Currently, the collection of waste in most high-density areas is mostly done by the unorganized waste picker who collects (and sometimes purchases) waste along with the other recyclable waste or scrap such as old newspapers, books, cardboards, plastics, ferrous-tin material items, and glass bottles from the consumer and sells it through small traders to the wholesaler who segregates and sorts out different types of waste material components and ultimately sells it to the recycler, dismantler, and disposer for reprocessing (Borthakur, Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

90

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

2015; Wath et al., 2010). We thus call for the re-alignment of formal approaches with existing knowledge and practices to ensure sustainability and longevity in SWM practices. On September 17, 2014 when an NSD campaign was launched in Accra, the Minister of the Local Government made a passionate remark: “If in the 21st century we have to really beg people not to litter and throw plastic from moving vehicles, then it tells you about the enormity of the problem we have at hand.” Perhaps, what eluded the minister is the fact that, historically, waste has been managed efficiently and continues to be managed effectively in most rural and peri-urban communities. Perhaps the search for sustainable practices must also look at our lived experiences, taking the characteristics of our cities into consideration—high densities, poor planning and infrastructure provisions, weak institutional settings, weak regulation implementations, poor public participation, and fragmented decision-making processes. We concur with the assertion by Oosterveer and Spaargaren (2010) that addressing environmental challenges requires an integrated approach that is not only modeled around the global North conditions—large-scale, high-technological, and grid-based systems—but should be combined with and respond to the needs of developing nations—small-scale, low-tech, and decentralized alternative options that are popular in local communities. This “locally-induced modernized mixtures” approach can improve accessibility of services to the urban poor and deprived residents, while strengthening flexibility and resilience. Our study re-affirms the fact that if urban poverty, inequality, and unemployment are to be reduced, urban informal workers, especially the working poor, need to be recognized, valued, and supported as economic agents who contribute to the economy and the society (see Chen, 2016). No amount of social or financial inclusion can make up for their exclusion from city plans and economic policies. This can take many forms. First, it may entail making individuals and households both legally and operationally responsible for the waste they generate and its management as pertains in most rural settings, but with modification to accommodate the urban dynamics. Additionally, a technology transfer strategy could be adopted to develop SWM skills and capacities, taking the peculiarities of our city internal structures and the nature of waste into consideration. Typically, the informal sector consisting of our traditional belief systems, bylaws, and practices as exemplified by the modus operandi of Kaya bolas could be incorporated in the formal system. More crucially, and as rightly noted by the Minister of Local



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

91

Government during the launch of the NSD for example, “[m]ost of the prescribed punishments in the laws are nothing to write home about. They are very old and the fines are very minimal and so we have to do something that will be punitive enough to reflect the current circumstances.” In challenging the wholesale adoption of foreign models to SWM, we optimistically believe it is possible to be politically committed to formal private sector initiatives and, at the same time, be open-minded to the well-tested, indigenously derived practices. Concluding Remarks Without doubt, Ghana is witnessing increasing population growth and prosperity. At the heart of the observed prosperity is an upsurge in urbanization, and by extension increases in the volumes and content of waste generation in need for efficient management practices. The problem here is that in seeking to learn from “the best experiences,” our local context and history are severally overlooked, though we believe the key to sustainability is inclusivity. Our study has shown that in spite of the efforts by city authorities to remediate the waste menace through the adoption of foreign-based models, the problem still remains a monumental challenge and, indeed, an elusive enterprise. This conclusion is evidenced by the volume of uncollected waste visible in public spaces and indiscriminate dumping with fatal flaws. This complicates or has dispelled widespread myths that developed economies, with enlightened technocratic management experiences, are the sole success stories. We have demonstrated that informal waste managers within the peri-urban zones in particular operate within a global network. Its elucidation shows how dual economies are enmeshed and span the core– periphery relationships. It demonstrates how the waste economy can act as a vehicle for sustainable livelihood creation, yet, it is still highly dependent on informal workers. The recycling potentials illustrate how informal workers are linked to city, regional, and national waste economy. Such activity unsettles notions of bounded varied dichotomies and essentially enjoins city authorities to keep multiple perspectives on formal and informal management practices in view simultaneously. This framing illustrates how the waste economy links informal and formal firms in mutually beneficial circuitry and the need to look beyond foreign models and integrate imported solutions with indigenously derived strategies. Clearly, the informal sector in the SWM chain of activities lack knowledge Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

92

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

of the processes of smelting and reprocessing, and, therefore, prefers to sell such scrap. Nevertheless, the activities presently operating in the sector need to be upgraded to provide a support system for the integrated facility. This would enable the authorities to bring the non-formal sector in the main stream of the activity and facilitate to ensure environmental compliances (Borthakur, 2015). As rightly noted by Chen (2016), despite this history of neglect and oversight, there are important changes afoot for the urban informal workforce in general. We have observed that, over the past year, the global community took significant steps to advance the cause of social and economic justice for the urban working poor (USDG, 2015). In September 2015, the global community renewed its commitment to “a more peaceful, prosperous and just world” by committing to the SDGs. Building upon but also expanding the Millennium Development Goals that preceded it, the Sustainable Development Agenda includes two new stand-alone goals that are of critical importance to the working poor. Goal 8 deals with inclusive sustainable economic growth and decent and productive employment, while Goal 11 focuses on inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable cities. If city authorities are to achieve the new SDG on cities, particularly Goal 11 “make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable” as one of the most important elements for a global transformation to sustainability in the post-2015 development agenda, then advancing on the effort-sharing between all stakeholders, to collectively achieve set targets, for conferring reliability and accuracy to the assessment of progress and putting into practice different level of monitoring with agreed common guidelines and methodologies becomes imperative. The article is optimistic that city authorities can achieve a transformational green urban environment, particularly in the area of SWM, but not until and unless they have been able to ensure concrete mechanisms and modalities for a true collaboration, coordination, and integration of all stakeholders (formal and informal). Perhaps most fundamentally, city authorities must ensure that the activities of informal waste pickers are not be destroyed or sacrificed on the altar of the process of formalization, neither are they denied access to waste as cities modernize. Rather, they deserve formal recognition as comprising of workers coming mainly from poor households trying to earn a living against great odds and, therefore, need protection and promotion in return for regulation and taxation (see also Chen, 2016). Achieving the goals set between 2016 and 2030



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

93

demands that urban informal workers, including waste managers, should be integrated and represented in both urban planning and policy-making processes. This requires recognition that most participants work privately in homes (as home-based producers) or in public spaces (as waste pickers)—not in factories, shops, or offices. As such, waste pickers need regulated access to waste and the right to bid for solid waste-management contracts, and the role of academic and research institutions in promoting and mainstreaming such partnerships and shared vision are critical in building such a national agenda. Note 1. Comprehensive SWM involves the articulated and interrelated set of regulatory, operative, financial, planning, administrative, social, educational, monitoring, supervision, and evaluative actions for waste management, from its generation to its final disposal in order to accomplish environmental benefits, the financial optimization of their management and their social acceptance, responding to the needs and circumstances of each location and region.

References Achebe, C. (1967). Things fall apart. London: Heineman. Acquah, I. (1958). Accra Survey: A Social Survey of the Capital of Ghana, formerly called the Gold Coast, undertaken for the West African Institute of Social and Economic Research, 1953–1956. Warwick Square, London: University of London Press. Adama, O. (2012). Urban governance and spatial inequality in service delivery: A case study of solid waste management in Abuja, Nigeria. Waste Management & Research, 30(9), 991–998. Adarkwa, K. K., & Post, J. (2001). The fate of the tree: Planning and managing the development of Kumasi, Ghana. Accra: Woeli Publishers. Ali, A. (2010). Wasting time on solid waste in developing countries. Waste Management, 30(8–9), 1437–1438. Amoah, S. T., & Kosoe, E. A. (2014). Solid waste management in urban areas of Ghana: Issues and experiences from Wa. Journal of Environment Pollution and Human Health, 2(5), 110–117. doi: 10.12691/jephh-2-5-3 Awortwi, N. (2004). Getting the fundamentals wrong: Woes of public-private partnerships in solid waste collection in three Ghanaian cities. Public Administration and Development, 24(3), 213–224. Retrieved February 1, 2017, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pad.301 Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

94

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

Baldé, C. P., Wang, F., Kuehr, R., & Huisman, J. (2015). The global e-waste monitor–2014. Bonn, Germany: United Nations University, IAS – SCYCLE. Birley, M. H., & Lock, K. (1998). Health and peri-urban natural resources production. Environment and Urbanization, 10(1), 89–106. Blacksmith Institute. (2013). The worlds’ worst 2013: The top ten toxic threats, clean-up progress, and on-going challenges. New York, NY: Blacksmith Institute and Green Cross. Boadi, K. O. & Kuitunen, M. (2005). Childhood diarrheal morbidity in the Accra Metropolitan Area, Ghana: socio-economic, Environmental and behavioral risk determinants. Journal of Health & Population in Developing Countries, 3, 23–45. doi: 10.12927/whp.2005.17646 Bob-Milliar, G., & Obeng-Odoom, F. (2014). The informal economy is an employer, a nuisance, and a goldmine: Multiple representations of and responses to informality in Accra, Ghana. Urban Anthropology and Studies of Cultural Systems and World Economic Development, 40(3–4), 263–284. Borthakur, A. (2015). Generation and management of electronic waste in India: An assessment from stakeholders’ perspective. Journal of Developing Societies, 31(2), 220–248. Brigden, K., Labunska, I., Santillo, D., & Johnston, P. (2008). Chemical contamination at e-waste recycling and disposal sites in Accra and Korforidua, Ghana. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International. Cointreau-Levine, S., & Coad, A. (2000). Guidance pack: Private sector participation in municipal solid waste management. Retrieved November 12, 2015, from https://www.amazon.com/Private-Sector-Participation-

Municipal-Management/dp/3908001900 Chen, M. (June 2016). The new urban agenda must prompt planners to recognize informal labour. Cityscope. Retrieved May 23, 2015, from http://citiscope.org/ habitatIII/commentary/2016/01/new-urban-agenda-must-prompt-plannersrec ognizeinformallabour?utm_source=Citiscope&utm_campaign=1eac50b0ddMailchimp_2016_01_08&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ce992dbfef1eac50b0dd-118043781#sthash.0MBNQZQU.dpuf Danquah, J. B. (1968). The Akan Doctrine of God. London: Frank Cass & Co. Daskalopoulos, E. O., Badr, O., & Probert. S. D. (1998). An integrated approach to municipal solid waste management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 24(1), 33–50. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). (2002). Ghana landfill guidelines. Accra: EPA. European Union. (2010). Making our cities attractive and sustainable: How the EU contributes to improving the urban environment. Retrieved February 28, 2012,



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

95

from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/wpcontent/

uploads/2011/08/Making-our-cities-attractive-and-sustainable.pdf Grant, R., & Oteng-Ababio, M. (2016). The global transformation of materials and the emergence of informal “urban mining” in Accra, Ghana. Africa Today, 62(4), 3–20. Gutberlet, J. (2008). Recovering resources e-recycling citizenship: Urban poverty reduction in Latin America Abingdon: Ashgate Publishing Group. ISSER (Institute for Statistical, Social and Economic Research). (2009). State of the Ghanaian economy. Accra: University of Ghana. KMA (Kumasi Metropolitan Authority). (2010). Data for purposes of planning waste management intervention programmes. Kumasi, Ghana: KMA. Kufour, J. A. (2001, July). Let’s not make room for indiscipline. A speech delivered between Accra. Accra Mail, Accra, Ghana. Liu, Q., Shi, S. J., Du, L. Q., Wang, Y., Cao, J., Xu, C., et al. (2012). Environmental and health challenges of the global growth of electronic waste. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 19(6), 2460–2462. doi: 10.1007/s11356–0120923-z Medina, M. (2010). Scrap and trade: Scavenging myths national oceanic and atmospheric administration. New York: Altamira Press. Mensa, A., & Larbi, E. (2005). Solid waste disposal in Ghana. WELLFACT sheet—Regional Annex in Developing Countries. Accra, Ghaana: WELL— Resource Centre Network. Retrieved February 1, 2017, from http://www.lboro. ac.uk/well/resources/fact-sheets/fact-sheets-htm/RSA%20Solid%20waste.htm MLGRD. (2010). National environmental sanitation strategy and action plan 2010–2015. Ghana: MLGRD. Mohee, R., & Bundhoo, Z. M. (2015). Current status of solid waste management in small island developing states: A revie. Waste Management, 243, 539–549. doi: 10.1016/j Nzeadibe, C. (2015). Moving up the hierarchy: Involving the informal sector to increasing recycling rates—A case study of Nigerian cities. In Romeela Mohee & Thokozani Somelane (Eds), Future directions in municipal solid waste management in Africa. Pretoria, South Africa: African Institute of South Africa. Obeng-Odoom, F. (2009).The future of our cities. Cities, 26, 49–53. Obiri-Opareh, N. (2002). Institutional arrangements and stakeholders’ perspectives of solid waste management in Accra. Accra, Ghana: NIRP. ———. (2003). Solid Waste Collection in Accra: The Impact of Decentralization and Privatization on the Practice of Service Delivery. A Study Conducted at the Amsterdam Research Institute for Global Issues and Development Studies (AGIDS), University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

96

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

Oduro-Kwarteng, S., & Van Dijk, M. P. (2013). The effect of increased private sector involvement in solid waste collection in five cities in Ghana. Waste Management & Research, 31(10), 810–893. Okut-Okumu, J. (2015). Solid waste management in Uganda: Challenges and options. In Romeela Mohee & Thokozani Somelane (Eds), Future directions in municipal solid waste management in Africa. Pretoria, South Africa: African Institute of South Africa. Oosterveer, P., & Spaargaren, G. (2010). Meeting social challenges in developing sustainable environmental infrastructures in East African cities (p. 242). Switzerland: Springer Books. Oteng-Ababio, M. (2010). Private sector involvement in solid waste management in the Greater Accra Metropolitan Area, Ghana. Waste Management & Research, 28(4), 322–329. ———. (2011). Governance crisis or attitudinal challenges: Collection, storage and transportation of solid waste in Ghana. In S. Kumar (Ed.), Integrated waste management (Vol. 1, pp. 3–22). Croatia: Intech Open Access Publishers, ISBN 978-953-307-469-6 ———. (2012). The role of the informal sector in solid waste management in the GAMA, Ghana: Challenges and opportunities. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 103(4), 412–425. ———. (2014). Rethinking waste as a resource: Insights from a low-income community in Accra, Ghana. City, Territory and Architecture, 1(10), 1–14. ———. (2015). Technology must seek tradition: Re-engineering urban governance for sustainable solid waste management in low-income neighbourhoods. In Romeela Mohee & Thokozani Somelane (Eds), Future directions in municipal solid waste management in Africa. Pretoria, South Africa: African Institute of South Africa. Owusu, G., Oteng-Ababio, M., & Afutu-Kotey, L. R. (2012). Conflicts and governance of landfills in a developing country city, Accra. Landscape and Urban Planning, 104(1), 105–113. Owusu-Sekyere, E. (2014). Scavenging for wealth or death? Exploring the health risk associated with waste scavenging in Kumasi. Ghana Journal of Geography, 6, 63–80. Pieterse, E. (2013). Grasping the unknowable: Coming to grips with African urbanism. In E. Pieterse & A. Simone (Eds), Rogue urbanism: Emergent African cities. Cape Town, South Africa: Jacana Media. Post, J., & Obirih-Opareh, N. (2003). Partnerships and the public interest: Assessing the performance of public-private collaboration in solid waste collection in Accra. Space and Polity, 7(1), 45–63.



Oteng-Ababio et al.: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

97

Post, J., Broekema, J., & Obirih-Opareh, N. (2003). Trial and error in privatisation: Experiences in urban solid waste collection in Accra (Ghana) and Hyderabad (India). Unpublished manuscript. Raghupathy, L., & Chaturvedi, A. (2013). Secondary resources and recycling in developing economies. Science of the Total Environment, 461, 830–834. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.05.041 Regassa, N., Sundaraa, R. D., & Bizunesh, B. (2011). Challenges and opportunities in municipal solid waste management: The case of Addis Ababa city, Central Ethiopia. Journal of Human Ecology, 33(3), 179–190. Salifu, L. Y. (2011). Access to improved waste services: Clearer and collective responsibility, innovation and value addition. National Workshop on Solid Waste Management, June 6–7, 2011, British Council, Accra, Ghana Seadon, J. K. (2010). Sustainable waste management systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(16–17), 1639–1651. Songsore, J. (2008). Environmental and structural inequalities in Greater Accra. Journal of the International Institute, 16(1), 8–9, 13. Swyngedouw, E. (1995). The contradictions of urban water provision: A study of Guayaquil, Equador. The Third World Planning Review, 17(4), 365–405. Themelis, N. J., & Kaufman, S. M. (2010). Improving methods on MSW measurement. BioCycle, 51(1), 34–37. Thieme, T. (2010). Youth, waste and work in Mathare: Whose business and whose politics? Environment and Urbanization, 22(2), 333–352. UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme). (2009). Developing integrated solid waste management plan training manual: Vol. 2. Assessment of current waste management systems and gaps therein. Osaka/Shiga, Japan. Retrieved November 12, 2015, from http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/ materials/ecycling/docs/app-1.pdf UN-Habitat. (2010). Solid waste management in the world’s cities. Nairobi: UNHabitat. US-EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2008). Electronic waste management in the United States (Report No. EPA530-R-08-009). Washington DC, US: US Environmental Protection Agency. USDG (Urban SDG) Campaign. (2015). Second urban sustainable development goal campaign consultation on targets and indicators: Bangalore outcome document. Retrieved May 23, 2015, from http://urbansdg.org/wpcontent/uploads/ 2015/02/Urban_SDG_Campaign_Bangalore_Outcome_Document_2015.pdf van Vliet, B., Chappells, H., & Shove, E. (2005). Infrastructures of consumption: Environmental Innovation in the utility industries London: Earthscan. Wahab, B. (2010). Indigenous knowledge and development process. In L. Popoola, D. Aremu, O. Olaniyan, R. Aiyede, & O. Ogunsanwo (Eds), 50 Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

98

Journal of Developing Societies 33, 1 (2017): 75–98

years of nationhood: Experience in, and prospects for sustainable development in Nigeria (pp. 167–210). Ibadan: Center for Sustainable Development, University of Ibadan. Wath, S., Vaidya, A. N., Dutt, P. S., & Chakrabarti, T. (2010). A roadmap for development of sustainable e-waste management system in India. Science of the Total Environment, 409, 19–32. Wilson, D. C. (2007). Development drivers for waste management. Waste Management & Research, 25(3), 198–207. Wilson, D. C., Rodic, L., Cowing, M. J., Whiteman, A., Stretz, J., & Scheinberg, A. (2013). Benchmark indicators for integrated & sustainable waste management. ISWA World Congress 2013, Vienna, October 7–9, 2013. World Bank (1999). International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, What a Waste, Solid: Waste Management in Asia. ———. (2014). Mobile cellular subscriptions (per 100 People). Retrieved September 24, 2014, from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.CEL.SETS.P2

Martin Oteng-Ababio is an associate professor in the Department of Geography and Resource Development and coordinator of the Urban Disaster Risk Reduction Programme in the University of Ghana at Legon. He received his PhD from the Department of Geography and Resource Development in 2007. His research interests include urban studies, urban environmental management, urban informality, crime, disaster risk reduction, and urban sustainability. In April 2015, he was the proud recipient of the 2013/2014 Best Researcher Award from the School of Social Sciences, University of Ghana, having won the Second Prize of the Japanese Award for Outstanding Research on Development in 2011and the Best Paper Award – Southern Africa Society for Disaster Reduction (SASDIR) Conference – 2012. He is currently working on a book on solid waste management in Ghana. Ebenezer Owusu-Sekyere holds a PhD in Geography and Resource Development. He is a Senior Lecturer and Director of the Center for Distance Education, University for Development Studies, Tamale. His research interests include urban studies, urban environmental management, and disaster risk management. [E-mail: [email protected]] Samuel Twumasi Amoah is a Lecturer at the Department of Environment and Resource Studies of the University for Development Studies − Wa Campus. He holds MSc. in Human Geography (Urban and Regional Development), and his specific research interests include urban and regional development, and urban environmental management.