UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI
SCHOOL OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
CHALLENGES OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL IN URBAN AREAS
CASE STUDY: DANDORA DUMPSITE
Patrick Mburu Kihara
B135/13067/2010
A project paper presented in partial fulfillment for the award of a diploma in Estate Agency and
Property Management
UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI
JUNE 2011
DECLARATION
I, PATRICK MBURU KIHARA, do hereby declare that this project is my original work and has
not been presented for an award in any other institution.
Signature……………………………….. Date…………………………
Kihara P.M
This project has been submitted with my approval as the University supervisor,
Signature……………………………… Date…………………………
Mrs. Catherine Kariuki
i
DEDICATION
This project is dedicated to my family who supported me financially and morally in the
undertaking of this diploma course.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I sincerely thank my classmates for their support which helped in the choosing and completion of
this research project.
I thank my family for their financial and moral support right from the start of this diploma
course.
I thank all my lecturers for all the knowledge they have shared during the duration of this course,
for their time and advice. Special appreciation goes to my supervisor Ms. Catherine Kariuki for
guiding me through this research project.
I thank God for being with me from the start to the end of the course.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
DECLARATION…………………………………………………………………………..…..i
DEDICATION………………………………………………………………………….….…..ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………..…..iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………………………….…iv
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………..….1
1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT………………………………………………………….…..…2
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY…………………………………………….….…………3
1.3 HYPOTHESIS…………………………………………………………………….....…….3
1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY………………………………………………….....……3
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY……………………………….……………….……...5
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………..……….….6
2.1 GLOBAL OUTLOOK……………………………………………………………..………7
2.1.1 Municipal Solid Waste Management in USA……………………………………..……7
2.1.2 Solid Waste Management in India………………………………………………..…....10
2.2 THE PLASTIC MENACE……………………………………………………...…………11
2.3 LAND USE AND PROPERTY VALUES………………………………………..………13
2.4 LOCAL OUTLOOK………………………………………………………………...….....13
2.4.1 Explaining poor performance……………………………………………………..……14
2.5 METHODS OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL……………………………………........…21
2.6 SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEM………………………………….……...……………..25
iv
2.7 STATUTORY PROVISONS RELATING TO SOLID WASTE………………………….30
CHAPTER THREE: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
3.0 STUDY AREA…………………………………………………………………………….34
3.1 LOCATION…………………………………………………………………………..……35
3.2 HISTORY OF THE DUMPSITE…………………………………………….……………36
3.3 DATA COLLECTION…………………………………………………………………….36
3.4 RESIDENTS OF DANDORA ESTATE……………………………………………..……38
3.5 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL COMPANIES……………………………….………..……42
3.6 RECYCLING DEALER…………………………………………………….…….………42
3.7 THE LOCAL AUTHORITY…………………………………………………….…….…..43
3.8 OBSERVATIONS………………………………………………………….….……….….44
CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.0 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE STUDY……………………………………………..………48
4.1 TESTING OF THE HYPOTHESIS…………………………………………………...…..50
4.2 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………..….50
4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………………………………51.
4.4 AREAS OF FURTHER STUDIES……………………………………………………….51.
BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………….……..………..…….53
APPENDICES……………………………………………………..………………….…...…55
v
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Pollution is the introduction of harmful substances into the environment. Waste management is
the collection, transport, processing, recycling or disposal and monitoring of waste materials.
Solid waste means garbage or refuse. It is normally that which is not usable by the source
anymore. Solid waste has many sources, among them are: industries, households and hospitals.
When solid waste is not managed properly by the relevant stakeholders, it leads to pollution.
There are various classifications of pollution like air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution
and soil pollution just to mention a few.
There are various methods of dealing with waste and dumping is only one of them, and it is the
least preferred among all he other methods. Pollution is a major problem in the world. This is
because it is aggravated mainly by increase in population, industrialization and urbanization. Due
to the mentioned factors, proper ways of solid waste management should be used to ensure a
clean and safe environment for the inhabitants of an area. This also goes a long way in protecting
the environment.
With increasing population levels and the emergence of consumer oriented economies, rising
incomes, urbanization and rapid industrialization, the volumes of solid waste not only in Kenya
but also worldwide is bound to keep escalating. This reality is shocking noting the present state
of solid waste disposal especially in less developed countries. Presently only about 12.5% of
solid garbage is disposed off formally in less developed countries. (UN HABITAT, 2002)
As we continue to look at dumping, it is important to note that local authorities should come up
with carefully planned methods of ensuring that waste is disposed off in the correct manner. This
is particularly important in areas with high population densities. On the other hand, households,
1
industries, hospitals and other entities that generate waste should play a role in proper waste
management. This just shows how pollution is a problem caused by many hence should be dealt
with by not only one group of people.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Dumping is a major problem especially in highly populated cities and third world countries
where there are no legislations and structures to guide solid waste management. That means
countries the world over must manage their solid waste, otherwise if not managed properly it
poses a great threat to the environment. A good example is India which struggled with
management issues and population growth. USA is also dealing with solid waste management
issues mainly due to poor attitude towards landfills in peoples’ neighborhoods. The two
mentioned countries are just some of the countries that are affected.
Dumping in Kenya is a very major problem especially in urban areas and Nairobi, the highest
populated city in Kenya is a good example. Since population is a key factor that leads to
pollution, it goes a without saying that Nairobi is largely affected by pollution. Plastic bags are
the main problem. When plastic bags are improperly disposed, they block gutters and drains,
choke farm animals and marine wildlife and also pollute the soils as they gradually breakdown.
The bags when discarded can be filled with rainwater, offering ideal and new grounds for
malaria carrying mosquitoes.
In the city centre, collection of solid waste is done properly by the street cleaners. The
availability of bins along the streets also goes a long way in maintaining a clean city. Occasional
rounds by city council ‘askaris’ ensures that nobody goes around littering.
2
The above mentioned provisions are good but that is as far as it goes. As you move to the
outskirts of the city approaching residential areas, one sees clearly the pollution problem. This is
especially visible in the low and middle income neighborhoods such as Kariobangi, Dandora and
Umoja. Dumping has become so common that it is not shocking to see people from households
disposing off heaps of trash in broad daylight. Dandora is the most affected because the largest
dumpsite in Nairobi (Dandora dumpsite) is located there.
The rental values are affected as a result of the dumping and research from Carla and Greg,
(2005) has shown that rental values fall as a result of close proximity to a solid waste disposal
site
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1. To find out the effects the Dandora dumpsite has on the rental values of real estate in the
surrounding area.
2. To look at different beneficiaries of the Dandora dumpsite; mainly private companies that
are contracted to dispose off garbage at the site.
3. To propose better ways of solid waste management.
HYPOTHESIS
Improper solid waste management especially dumping in residential areas has a direct impact on
rental values.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Dandora dumpsite is located in Dandora estate. Its proximity to the residential buildings is
shocking. The research involved going to the dumpsite and look at the realities of the challenges
3
that are expected to face the residents of the estate. There was also a look at the challenges that
face the recycling companies. The target for the feedback needed will mainly come from the
residents of Dandora, especially those who live close to the dumpsite. Other residents who live in
Dandora but not so close to the dumpsite would also come in handy in providing their views on
the dumpsite location and what they think should be done to solve the problems that they face-as
far as the dumpsite is concerned. The research also sought to find out the type of rental properties
that exist. For example: are most of the buildings/flats single rooms, one bedroom or two
bedroom?
Research Design
The measurement methods included both qualitative and quantitative approaches. This is because
the study looked at, for example rental values, the condition of the dumpsite and how the
residents’ rate the services affiliated with the dumpsite. The questionnaires, observations and
interviews done attempted to look at why the quality of solid waste management is where it is.
Sampling Design
The target population of this study was mainly the residents of Dandora Estate especially those
that reside close to the dumpsite. The research also targeted recyclers, solid waste disposal
companies and the City Council of Nairobi.
Data collection
Data collection was done by the following main methods:
Observations: the observations were conducted by the researcher. This means that
observations were carried out without taking part in the activities of the people being observed.
4
Interviews: this was done with the solid waste disposal companies using the questionnaires. A
total of two waste disposal companies were interviewed. The two companies were chosen
randomly while at the location of the dumpsite; this was as the garbage trucks were leaving the
dumpsite. Interviews were conducted for the residents of Dandora. The interviews mentioned
were expected to be face to face interviews.
Questionnaires: questionnaires were handed out to the target population of this research. The
target population of this research was mainly the residents of Dandora Estate. The residents of
Dandora Estate through the questionnaire provided the information regarding the rental values of
various types of properties. The rest of the questionnaires were for the local authority, recycling
dealers and the solid waste disposal companies. The main questions were structured; however,
there were a few semi-structured and unstructured questions.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
Throughout the study, there will be ways shown of how to combat the problem of pollution
especially dumping. It will clearly show how far this problem goes. As we focus in on the case
study, the residents of Dandora need a solution to the problem that has been lingering for many
years.
Property owners also share the negative effects of the dumpsite as the residents of that area.
Dumping will only increase as the population also increases. This means that if no measures are
taken, the situation will only get worse in the Dandora area.
Implementation of the recommendations of this study would lead to a better way of managing
solid waste by the local authorities, private companies and even individuals in households.
5
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The issues of pollution have been talked about for a long period of time. A good number of
authors have written about this topic and even further on the topic of solid waste management.
There is therefore a substantial amount of literature on this topic. It is very clear that the amount
of solid waste produced will increase as time goes by due to population explosion and
urbanization. Although there has been some success in protecting the quality of the environment
in general, the challenge lies in waste management (Ryner, Schwartz, Wenger and Kohrell,
1995). There is a need to advocate for more environmentally sustainable methods of waste
disposal.
Solid waste disposal is a smaller topic in the grander topic of solid waste management. It refers
to what is done to the solid waste to get rid of it. Unmanaged disposal of waste affects human
health, causes economic losses and damages the physical and biological environment (UNEP,
2002). Solid waste management involves many other processes like garbage collection, recycling
and transport among others. This study will focus on solid waste disposal and the challenges it
poses on real estate, especially rental values.
Many governments in most countries worldwide have seen the need to legislate the process of
solid waste management through statutory provisions and by law. This is a bid to control and
regulate the various processes involved. The need to promote stakeholders involvement and
community empowerment in the area of solid waste disposal cannot be over-emphasized. This is
because most of the efforts of the local governments have not borne much fruit due to the many
setbacks encountered such as inadequate finances and mismanagement. Lack of access roads in
6
slums and informal settlements has also hindered the activities of local authorities in solid waste
disposal in these areas (Mbui, 1995).
According to (Hardoy et al, 2001), any city that claims to be successful should meet a
municipality of goals including:
•
Healthy living and working conditions for all its inhabitants.
•
Water supply, provision of sanitation, rubbish collection and disposal, drains, paved
roads and footpaths, and other forms of infrastructure and services that are essential for
health and important for a prosperous economic base available to all.
•
An ecologically sustainable relationship between the demand of consumers and
businesses and the resources, waste sinks and ecosystems on which they draw.
Achieving such goals implies an understanding of the links between the city’s economy and the
built environment, the physical resources on which they are located (soil, water resources and
climate) and the biological environment (including local flora and fauna) and how these are
changing. Such an understanding is important if environmental capital is not to be depleted
(Hardoy et al, 2001).
Global Outlook
Municipal Solid Waste Management in USA
Good waste management practices by local governments can significantly reduce energy
consumption (UN-HABITAT and UNEP, 2009). Although there are many countries that struggle
with solid waste management, focus will be on two study cases: United States of America and
India. These two countries form a good base for this study since India, for example, is a very
7
populated country and has a lot of informal settlements-both of which accelerate generation of
solid waste. USA on the other hand is a very organized country but its consumer behavior
generates a lot of waste. The problem is not the waste generation but the fact that nobody wants
the disposal to be around their area for reasons that will be discussed later on in this study. For
USA, we will look at municipal solid waste.
The collection and disposal of municipal solid wastes have long been major problems for
American municipalities. Today, it is no longer a problem but a business that has grown like any
other. There are millions of professionals who have entered into the waste handling and
recycling business. During 1970’s the annual cost of solid waste management in the US was only
5 billion but now it increased to alarming amounts (15 times). (Hosetti, 2006)
According to Hosseti (2006), the citizens of USA are regarded as the champions of wasting
natural resources and the country is also a champion of Science and Technology in the world.
The United States with only 4.6% of the world’s population produces about 33% of the world’s
solid waste, which is unwanted for the producers. The garbage (1.5%) produced by the
household is a significant problem in the country but the remaining 98.5% of the solid waste
produced in the USA comes from mining, oil and natural gas production, agriculture and
industrial activities used to produce goods and services for consumers. The Municipal Solid
Waste produced from homes and business communities and commercial centres is often called
garbage. The garbage produced in the year 1996 in the USA was enough to fill a bumper-tobumper convoy of garbage trucks encircling the globe almost eight times. This works out to be a
per capita of 680kg/person, which is two or three times more than in most of the developed
countries. It is five more than the garbage produced by every person in India. Out of the total
municipal solid waste produced in 1996 in the USA about 27% of the resources in the garbage
8
were recycled or composted and the remaining portion was hauled away and either dumped in
landfills (58%) or burned in incinerators and waste to energy plants (15%) at a cost of 40 billion
dollars (projected to rise 75 billion dollars by the end of 2005). The composition of municipal
solid waste in 2000 is as shown below
Table 2.1: Percentage of solid waste per material
MATERIAL
PERCENTAGE
Paper
37.4%
Yard Trimmings
12%
Food Scraps
11.2%
Plastics
10.7%
Metals
7.8%
Rubber/leather/textiles
6.7%
Glass
5.5%
Wood
5.5%
Others
3.2%
Source: Hosetti, 2006
Several municipal solid waste management practices such as source reduction, recycling and
composting can prevent or divert materials from waste stream. Source reduction involves
altering the design, manufacture or use of products or materials to reduce the amount of toxicity
of the substances thrown away. Recycling diverts components such as papers, plastics and metals
from the waste stream. In the solid waste hierarchy currently in the USA 30.1% of the municipal
solid waste is recovered and recycled or composted, 14.5% is burned at combustion facilities and
9
the remaining 55.3% is disposed off in landfills. Source reduction may be a successful option of
reducing waste generation. Practices such as grass cutting, and backyard composting, two sided
copying of white papers, and transport packaging reduction by the industries has yielded
substantial benefits through the source reduction. Source reduction prevents emissions of many
green house gases, reduces pollutants, saves energy, and reduces the need for new landfills and
combustion.
Solid Waste Management in India
Large scale environmental degradation began as forests were cut down and cities expanded and
new townships were established. In the following decades important major development projects
were launched. Roads were built, industries set up, agriculture developed and water resources
tapped. The rapid rate of population growth, urbanization, increasing industrial and agricultural
output caused increasing degradation of the environmental quality. Until 1980, the responsibility
of for conserving the environment and forests was divided among several central ministries. No
single agency was accorded with the authority to coordinate the environmental protection
activities. In 1981, several factors prompted the Government of India to establish a Ministry of
Environment and Forests and at the same time the department of environment were set up in all
states and union territories (Suresh, 2003)
Over the next few years, it is expected that India will over take China and become the most
populous country in the world. The rate of urbanization in India has been quite moderate during
the century; it has been doubling itself every 20 years. The problem of pollution and
environmental decay has emerged as a very serious outcome of urbanization. With increasing
population in urban areas the large cities exhibit a sorry picture with severe health impacts of
10
inadequate supply of water, sanitation, drainage, garbage, air pollution etc. according to various
reports more than 40% of the urban population in India live below the poverty live mostly in
slums of big cities. India disposes solid waste mainly by land filling, composting and open
burning of urban solid waste (Hosetti, 2006).
The Plastic Menace
Plastic bags account for 12.33%, 12.79% and 13.64% of the total amount of solid waste
produced in low, middle and high-income residential zones respectively. Nearly half of these are
composed of flimsy as well as thicker plastic bags. Plastic products are non-biodegradable and
once they are disposed off, they take an indefinitely long period to break down. On the other
hand, breakdown of plastics leads to pollution of soils. Incineration or burning of plastics emits
poisonous gases and fumes into the atmosphere leading to air pollution.
The government in its endeavor to bring under control the problem of solid waste disposal
should seek measures to cut down on the amount of solid waste produced countrywide.
Emphasis should be placed much more on the control of production of waste that is not
environmentally sustainable such as plastic bags.
Presently, nearly 100 million plastic bags are handed out each year by supermarkets alone
(UNEP, 2005). This is just a fraction of the total amount of plastic bags produced and used in the
country each year. The bags, many of which are so thin that they are simply thrown away after
one trip to and from the shop, have become a familiar eyesore in both rural and urban areas.
When plastic bags are improperly disposed, they block gutters and drains, choke farm animals
and marine wildlife and also pollute the soils as they gradually break down. The bags when
11
discarded can fill with rainwater, offering ideal and new grounds for malaria carrying
mosquitoes.
UNEP news release, 2005 noted that a ban on plastic bags less than 30 microns thick and a levy
on thicker ones are among a raft of proposals aimed at reducing the use of polythene bags and
also providing funds for more environmentally friendly carriers such as cotton and sisal bags.
The cash raised from the levy can also go towards setting up efficient and effective recycling
schemes (Ndoria, 2005).
According to Hosetti (2006), the situation in European countries as far as plastic waste is
concerned is as follows:
1. Total plastic consumption including virgin polymers and recycled granules continued to
increase, rising from 6% between 2000 and 2002. The significant growth occurred during
2002 (4.1%) and only 2% during 2000 to 2001.
2. The per capita consumption of virgin plastics in the Western Europe rose from 91.5kg to
94.8kg during the period 2000 and 2002.
3. In 2002 the total collectable waste recovered was 38%, it was 36% in 2000 and in
tonnage terms, it remained the same at 11%.
4. Mechanical recycling of plastic waste was 17% in 2000 and it increased to 22.5% during
2000 and 2002 in tonnage terms. There was significant increase in recycling of packaging
waste.
5. The energy was recovered from 4,411,000 tons of plastic waste in 2000. It increased to
4,688,000 tons in 2002. An increase of 6.8% was recorded. However, it is not
encouraging to note that the plastic waste going to landfills also increased a little bit.
12
Plastic consumption in the world is at an average annual growth rate of 7.5%. That brought all
solid polymers from 8 million tons in the world in 1960, to 160 million tons in 2000 and will
continue to increase reaching 300 million tons in 2010, estimated using a conservative annual
rate of 6.5%. The total world production/consumption of plastics, since the beginning at the turn
of the century has kept an average annual growth rate of 15% or doubling every ten years, until
1975 and when this trend was broken at the first oil shock occurred. The average growth rate of
plastics was 15% from 1960 to 1974, 8% thereafter from 1974 to 2000 (Hosetti, 2006)
Land use and property values
A solid waste disposal establishment may reduce both the nature and intensity of residential
settlements around the site.
(Carla and Greg, 2005) notes, for example, that 80% of the nation’s waste in West Virginia is
disposed in landfills. As the production of garbage increases each year, landfill sites are
diminishing. Because of the perceived devaluation resulting from the placement of landfills,
owners of property adjacent to landfills in West Virginia are allowed to demand for
compensation between 15-20% reductions of appraised value of the property. A contaminated
environment has thus been shown to have clear cut negative impact on the property values.
Local Outlook
Administration of urban areas in Kenya is the responsibility of local authorities and the Ministry
of Local Government. In 1991, there were 109 local authorities in Kenya. These are divided into
4 categories: 20 municipalities (including Nairobi); 22 town councils; 39 county councils; and 28
urban councils (Bubba and Lamba, 1991)
13
The problem plaguing the management of Nairobi’s urban services can be traced to both local
and central levels of government. Staff at both levels suffer from a lack of decision-making
authority, a lack of experience, a lack of accountability and heavy volumes of work due to understaffing (Smoke 1994).
Explaining poor performance
The poor solid waste management performance in Nairobi is attributable to many factors.
Expansion of urban, agricultural and industrial activities has generated vast amounts of solid and
liquid wastes that pollute the environment and destroy resources. Pollution problems are mainly
due to lack of appropriate planning, inadequate political will and governance, poor technology,
weak enforcement of existing legislation, as well as the absence of economic and fiscal
incentives to promote good practice, and lack of analytical data concerning volumes and
compositions of waste substances is also lacking. Some of these factors are briefly discussed
below.
1. Weakness in NCC
The City Council of Nairobi (CCN) and the Central Government (particularly the Ministry
of Local Government and the provincial administration in the office of the president) are
often clashing, duplicating roles, and causing confusion. Moreover policy makers (CCN
councilors) are generally poorly educated and lack any power to discipline CCN workers.
The mayor, who is elected by the councilors, must facilitate their corrupt deals to keep the
seat. Consequently, mismanagement, corruption, laziness, and general chaos have become
the hallmarks of the CCN. CCN by-laws, prohibiting illegal disposal of waste, specifying
14
storage and collection responsibilities for solid waste generators, and indicating the
council’s right to collect solid waste management charges are not adequately
implemented. The central government has also failed to play its oversight role effectively.
This dysfunctional local administrative system has led to decline in the efficiency of CCN
operations.
2. Rapid population growth and urbanization
Nairobi, like other developing world cities, is characterized by rapid population growth and
urbanization. The city has a population of about 3 million people who are generating substantial
amounts of solid waste. In addition, the city is surrounded by 4 satellite towns that are also fast
growing and do not have waste disposal facilities. The CCN budgets enormous amounts of funds
on recurrent and development expenditures on solid waste management but the problem still
persists.
3. Lack of Solid Waste Management policy and framework
Solid waste management problems in Nairobi are largely a result of lack of a waste management
policy and framework that would aim at improving the standards, efficiency and coverage of
waste from “Cradle-to-Grave.”
Before the enactment of Environmental Management and Coordination Act (1999), local
authorities (LAs) had monopoly control over sanitation and solid waste management services in
Kenya, largely under Local Government Act (CAP 265) and Public Health Act (CAP 242). The
former empowers LAs to establish and maintain municipal solid waste management services
while the latter requires them to provide the services. The acts, however, neither set standards for
15
the service nor require waste reduction or recycling. In addition, the acts do not classify waste
into municipal, industrial and hazardous types or allocate responsibility over each type.
The community and CBOs play only a small role in solid waste management because they are
not integrated into the formal system. Policies on community based solid waste management
services, in addition, have been lacking although the situation is changing. Current policy, for
instance, emphasizes development of environmental partnerships with stakeholders, including
promotion of environmental NGOs and CBOs (Republic of Kenya, 2000)
Considerable progress has been made with respect to the policy and legal/regulator framework
for SWM over the last few years, however. Thus EMCA (1999) allocates considerable property
rights as far as various aspects of environmental management are concerned. The most important
of these is the right to clean environment allocated to the citizens. The citizens can now compel
polluters, including indiscriminate solid waste dumpers, to pay for the damage or nuisance
caused. In reality, however, the cost of litigation (both in terms of finances and time) makes it
difficult for most of the citizens to exercise this right.
Other important rights are those allocated to NEMA, for example, with respect to licensing
(through lead agencies such as local authorities) of waste disposal facilities. Institutional
weakness in NEMA and the lead agencies also affect the effectiveness with which this right has
been exercised.
4. Unregulated private sector participation
In general, the private companies are operating in open competition purely on a willing-buyerwilling-seller basis. They simply obtain a business license and start offering solid waste
collection services, without vetting or regulation. For most of them service commences once a
16
client completes (often name and address only) and signs a form prepared by them, which then
becomes the only “contract.” The forms specify the monthly charge, the frequency of the
collection service, and the storage facilities to be supplied by the company. Because of
increasing competition and cases of unsatisfactory service, moreover, some of the firms include
(in the form) a promise to refund the money for unsatisfactory service. Some of the “contracts”,
especially those involving small companies, are usually verbal. They are short term. The
“contracts” have no provision for sanctions and there is no legal framework for the companies to
deal with payment defaulters or for the clients to secure legal redress when service quality is
unsatisfactory. The wronged party simply walks out of the relationship. Some of the private
companies, however, retaliate for the non-payment. There are no bylaws specifying the rights
and obligations of their clients, or specifying the standards that must be observed.
Encouragingly, the CCN has developed a policy document that will provide for the involvement
of private sector investors in solid waste management when it is implemented.
5. Low rate of waste recovery and recycling
Recycling, including of the products such as papers, used clothes, and metals, is becoming
increasingly popular. A kilogram of old newspapers sells for between Kshs.15 to Kshs.27 while
old tires go for Kshs.50-300 depending on the degree of wear and tear, and size. Organic wastes
are also increasingly being recycled to produce compost products. For example, CBOs managed
by women are recycling market waste from Korogocho Market to produce organic manure for
sale.
17
The percentage of solid waste that is recovered from the Municipal point of view is only 8
percent of the recyclables and 5 percent of the compostable, however. There is recovery going on
in the industries but the rate is unknown. Composting by groups has potential but the groups are
facing a number of constraints, the most important of which is procurement of land to conduct
the business. Another problem is lack of a stable market for the recovered materials, especially
for wastepaper and compost. Thus, for example, the self help activities of the Mukuru project
earned Kshs.1.55 million in 1996 from the recovery of 1018 tons of materials per year.
While there is considerable potential in recycling, there is a problem of recyclables being
contaminated by un-recyclable wastes. In addition, there is no policy on recycling in the country,
which has led to the practice of some recycling companies importing waste materials and to the
exploitation of waste pickers by middlemen and recycling firms. Industry operators encourage
the setting up of recycling schemes (such as for aluminium cans, bottles, and polythene
materials) to improve environmental conditions while also generating incomes to the poor.
With that in mind, focus will now be in ways in which solid waste should be disposed.
According to Kuria, (2007) the waste hierarchy refers to the “3 Rs” reduce, reuse and recycle,
which classify waste management strategies according to their desirability in terms of waste
minimization. The waste hierarchy remains the cornerstone of most waste minimization
strategies. The aim of the waste hierarchy is to extract the maximum practical benefits products
and to generate the minimum.
18
Figure 2.1: Waste Hierarchy
Source: Internet
PREVENTION
most favoured option
MINIMIZATION
REUSE
RECYCLING
ENERGY RECOVERY
DISPOSAL
least favoured option
Prevention can also be linked to reduction where it involves the change in design, purchase and
use of materials to reduce their amount or toxicity even before they become part of waste.
According to Hosetti, (2006) a broad range of activities can be undertaken by the households to
reduce the waste at the source itself. They include:
19
1. Redesigning products or packages so as to reduce the quantity of materials and their
toxicity by substituting lighter materials and lengthening the life of the products and to
postpone their disposal.
2. Using packages that reduce the amount of damage or spoilage of the products.
3. Reducing amount of products or packages through modifications.
4. Reusing the products or packages already manufactured.
5. Managing non- product organic wastes (food scraps and yard trimmings) through
backyard composting or other on-site alternatives to disposal.
All the above mentioned steps are important because control of dumping starts by control of
solid waste generation.
Reuse of products and packages delays the time of disposal, when the items are used for a
long time. This practice will reduce the generation of waste. When a product is used for a
long time, presumably purchase and use of new product is also delayed by reducing the
consumption. (Hosetti, 2006)
Recycling is also a good way of handling waste because it ensures that waste that is
recyclable leaves the waste stream. Maximum amount of recyclables come from commercial
sector. Old metal containers and office papers should routinely be collected from commercial
establishments and taken for recycling.
When it comes to disposal, this is where the challenge lies in the management of solid waste.
There are various ways of disposal of waste that have different pros and cons. Some of the
methods of disposal are as follows:
20
1. Littering
This is where dumping is done along the streets, open spaces and along riverbanks. In most
cases it is an illegal practice and is done by householders, and other private organizations at
night (Ndoria, 2005). This method is easy but it leads to creation of unsightly scenes, great
clean-up expenses and leads to resource wastage (Miller, 1986)
2. Open Dumps
According to Ndoria, (2005) an open dump is a land disposal site where solid waste is deposited
in designated areas and left uncovered with little or no regard for control of scavengers or for
aesthetics, disease, air pollution and water pollution problems. They are usually easy to manage
and have relatively low investment and operational costs. They can be put into operation within a
short period of time and receive all kinds of wastes. Open dumps however are unsightly and
cause air pollution when wastes are burned to reduce their volumes. Open dumps lead to
contamination of ground water through leachate and runoff.
Ecologically valuable marshes and wetlands may be erroneously considered useless and filled as
open dumpsites. If this method is not combined with a resource recovery system, it leads to
resource wastage. It is also difficult to obtain sites for open dumps due to public opposition
(Miller, 1986)
3. Incineration
Incineration is the controlled burning of wastes at high temperatures in a facility designed for
efficient and complete combustion. By definition, complete combustion involves the conversion
of all carbon to carbon dioxide, hydrogen to water, and sulphur to sulphur dioxide. The by
21
products of incineration are ash, gases, and heat energy. Wastes are burned for one or more of
the following reasons: volume reduction, destruction of certain chemicals or alteration of
chemical, destruction of pathogens, or energy recovery (Rhyner, Schwartz, Wenger and Kohrell,
1995).
Since one of the by-products of incineration is heat energy, the incineration system can be
combined with a resource recovery facility where the heat energy can be used to heat water for
domestic homes. According to Ndoria, (2005) it is however expensive to set up combustion
facilities and the combustion process emits toxic fumes which can only be moderated by
expensive air purifiers. The ash from incinerators is loaded with metals and harmful compounds,
which should be disposed off in secure landfills. Incineration without resource recovery leads to
wastage of energy and materials unless it is augmented with a recycling and resource recovery
facility.
4. Composting
Composting is a biochemical degradation of the organic fraction of the solid wastes having
humus like final products that could be primarily used as soil conditioner. The first significant
development in composting as a systemized process took place for the first time in India in 1925,
when process involving the anaerobic degradation of leaves, refuse, animal manure and sewage
sludge were placed in pits. These materials were placed in layers and the pit wall conserved
some of the heat of degradation, resulting in high temperature than composting carried out in the
open. This process took approximately six months to produce usable compost. Composting of
organic materials can significantly reduce waste stream volume; it reduced the space in landfills.
When compost is mixed with soil, it promotes a proper balance between air and water balance in
22
the resulting mixture, helps to reduce soil erosion and serves as a slow release fertilizer.
Different techniques and stages are adopted for the composting process in various parts of the
world.
5. Resource Recovery
This is where solid waste is not put to direct disposal but the recyclable or reusable materials are
sought out, cleaned, or re-processed and used for the original or for other purposes. This
approach is highly acceptable to the public as it reduces waste of resources. It can also act as a
source of income from the sale of salvaged metals, plastics, and glass as well as recovered
energy (Ndoria, 2005).
This approach extends the life of the available open dumps and landfill sites. High initial and
operational costs are however involved. A market must also be sought for the recovered
materials and the energy produced. Costly maintenance and repairs are also involved and skilled
operators are required (Miller, 1986). Resource recovery can have two approaches:
•
High Technology Approach
This is where large centralized resource recovery plant shreds and automatically separates mixed
urban waste to recover glass, iron, aluminium, and other valuable materials, which are sold to
manufacturing industries for recycling. The remaining paper, plastics, and other combustible
wastes can be incinerated to produce steam, hot water or electricity. The incinerator residue
including particulates removed to prevent air pollution can be used to reclaim damaged land as
landfill sites or can be processed into blocks, bricks and other building materials (Miller, 1986).
23
•
Low Technology Approach
This involves source separation i.e households and businesses place their waste material such as
glass, paper, metals, and food scraps into separate containers. Compartmentalized city collection
trucks, private haulers, or voluntary recycling organizations pick up the segregated waste, clean
them if necessary and sell them to scrap dealers, composting plants or manufacturers. Studies in
the U.S show that source separation takes only 16 minutes a week for the average American
family (Miller, 1986)
One should be keen to note that incineration and open dumping are the most common methods
used by households to get rid of waste in urban areas. This is especially true in Nairobi where
more than 50% of the population lives in poorly planned residential areas.
6. Landfills
A landfill is a slightly upgraded version of the open dump. Here waste is put on or in the ground
and covered with earth keeping air pollution and vermin population down (Wright, 1996).
Landfills are however forms of land waste disposal sites located with little if any regard for
possible pollution of groundwater and surface water due to runoff and leaching (Miller, 1986). A
sanitary landfill on the other hand is a land waste disposal site located to minimize water
pollution from runoff and leaching. Waste is spread in thin layers, compacted and covered with
fresh layer of soil each day to minimize pests, disease, air pollution and water pollution problems
(Miller, 1986)
24
Landfills produce leachate and gases. Leachate is the contaminated liquid that results from the
percolation of water through a landfill. The origins of the liquid are rainfall, moisture, and other
liquids contained in the wastes deposited in the landfill, and by-products of decomposition.
Another consideration in designing a landfill is the need to control landfill gases produced by the
anaerobic decomposition of the organic wastes. If leachate leaves a landfill it poses a threat to
groundwater. Groundwater protection is accomplished by maintaining a sufficiently thick soil
layer between the waste and the groundwater and installing a liner at the bottom of the landfill
with a full leachate collection system (Rhyner, Schwartz, Wenger and Kohrell, 1995). The gas
produced in landfills can be captured and used as a source of energy. This is a significant means
to reduce carbon emissions and is the type of project where the carbon emissions are fairly easily
traded (UN-HABITAT and UNEP, 2009). The Mtoni Dumpsite in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania is a
good example where a landfill gas recovery system is used.
Solving the problem
1. The Role of Private Investors in Solid Waste Disposal
Due to the fact that the public sector has not been effective in solid waste disposal due to the
factors which inter-alia includes mismanagement and financial constraints, this implies that the
private sector has a role to play in this field. There is an assumption that the private sector will
provide efficient services since they need to survive in their business and will also take a step
towards resource recovery in a bid to maximize their returns. Privatization will also create
incentive for better use of solid wastes such as composting to make plants nutrients and soil
builders. The privatization approach will also give room for differentiation and decentralization
of waste management and thus the disposal activities. This can be effected by having different
25
contractors for various zones or small-scale groups within certain neighborhoods (Syagga, 1992).
It is however important to note that the private sector is already involved in solid waste disposal.
In fact when it comes to the Dandora dumpsite, they are the main transporters of solid waste.
In Nairobi for instance, solid waste management has been portrayed as a huge business. Solid
waste collection, performed on a larger scale by private companies began to evolve in Nairobi
during the past 14 years. Presently, industry sources estimate that there are about 500 private
companies involved in waste haulage within Nairobi, consisting primarily of single truck
operators. These private waste collectors mainly collect waste from certain industries,
commercial premises and private homes. The three largest solid waste management firms are
BINS, Kenya Refuse Handlers and Domestic Refuse Disposal. These three firms offer selective
waste collection and disposal services relying mainly on dumping with very limited incineration
and consulting services. The increasing number of investors who are attracted to the industry will
instigate competition, which will ultimately lead to efficiency and effectiveness in the provision
and delivery of this service (Ndoria, 2005). That said, the private sector is already involved in
solid waste management and they do a good job where the local authority has failed-that is in
collection and disposal of solid waste.
Prior to the springing up of the private industry, the only institutions involved in solid waste
management were the local authorities and councils as well as the Ministry of Health. These
bodies were and still are charged with implementing the Public Health Act and the Local
Government Act, which provide for street cleaning and sanitation (Ndoria, 2005).
According to Ndoria, (2005), there are various approaches to privatization of solid waste
management and they include:
26
•
Contracting: This involves collection, transportation and disposal of wastes by private
firms under contract from a municipality. Here, the contractor owns equipment,
employees and manages the operations. The local government however needs to regulate
and control the activities of the private contractors to make sure they adhere to the
contractual duties, rights and obligations which should be in line with statutory
provisions as pertains to socially, economically and environmentally sustainable solid
waste management.
•
Private subscriptions (open competition): It is usually employed where the government
body does not provide municipal solid waste management services. It involves little
regulation from the public body. Several private firms may be found operating in one
area and the distinguishing feature is that private firms are paid directly by customers.
The level of service is determined as an agreement between customers and the collectors.
There is therefore no common program for all firms for example on collection times and
days. Customers have opportunities of selecting the firms they want.
•
Franchise: This involves local authorities giving a private firm an exclusive license to
serve a particular area. The city has to be divided into zones and each zone given to a
qualified private firm to offer it with services. Here the private firms pay a license fee to
the government. The private firms then charge their customers appropriate fees to cover
their costs of services. The local governments retains the responsibility to monitor the
operations of the private firms including some regulations on user charges, receive
complaints from the public and retains the right to renew or revoke the license in
27
accordance with a pre-established criteria. Customers are not given the opportunity to
select the firm they want. There is lack of competition and the costs involved here are
higher than the cost of contracting by the public body.
2. The Role of Community Based Organizations (CBOs)
According to Kuria, (2007), CBOs are informal institutions that are formed by members of a
community to address a need such as a park, sports facility or community centre. Sometimes
these organizations respond to deplorable environmental conditions in their locality by initiating
solid waste management operations mainly primary collection and street cleaning. Community
based urban waste management involves neighborhood communities, households, community
based organizations and small, informal enterprises engaged in collection and disposal, re-use
and recycling of waste materials. Recent research on urban solid waste management in
developing countries shows that community participation in waste management yields several
benefits such as: proper disposal of waste in special bins outside the homes; reduction in the
quantity of refuse dumped in rivers, on streets or burned; and reduction of odour generated from
uncontrolled dumping of refuse in the neighborhood. Other benefits include empowerment of
residents for active participation in municipal affairs, noticeable decline in childhood disease,
increased use of toilets and public lavatories, and a drop in the number of children begging near
dumpsites.
3. The Role of the Government in Solid Waste Disposal
Due to high population and economic activity concentration in urban areas, the waste generated
cannot be disposed of effectively on an individual basis. This calls for the need that both the
28
central and local governments play their roles effectively either as providers, enablers or as
partners in solid waste management to ensure that sanitary disposal of all the waste generated is
achieved.
According to Ndoria, (2005), the following are some of the policy approaches, which the
government should seek not only to adapt but also put measures in place to ensure that they are
pursued and to see to it that legislations relating to them are enforced.
•
Promote waste paper and plastics recycling by reducing taxes on paper bailers, shredders,
alligator shears, granulators etc.
•
Promote manufacture of products from wastes such as roofing tiles, fencing posts and
advocate for their use in the local and export market.
•
Ensure the availability of steel recycling equipment such as crushers, shredders, choppers
in the local market at affordable prices by cutting down on the custom duty and other
taxes charged on such equipments.
•
Making composting equipment and bio-digesters available in the local market and
advocate for their use.
•
Environmental consulting and assessment to build municipal and corporate capacity and
ensure prompt dissemination of information to all the stakeholders in waste disposal.
•
Promote community awareness and empowerment to ensure their active participation in
solid waste disposal.
•
Establishing environmental management systems and software for government and
industry.
29
It is important to note that other governments in other countries have enacted laws to this effect.
Rwanda is a good example-plastics papers are banned.
With that in mind, the following are some of the statutory provisions that relate to solid waste:
Environmental Management and Coordination Act (1999)
In recognition of the potential negative impacts that may arise in the natural environment and the
built environment as a result of unordered dumping of wastes, section 87 (1) requires that no
person shall discharge or dispose off any waste whether generated within or outside Kenya, in
such a manner as to cause pollution to the environment or ill health to any person.
The act also recognizes the role of EIA in designation of sites for waste disposal. In the Second
Schedule Section 58 (1) and (4), it is required that sites for solid waste disposal should not be
allocated without preparation of an EIA document and its subsequent approval by NEMA.
Further, Section 58 (2) requires that the project proponent should undertake or cause to be
undertaken at his own expense an EIA study and prepare a report on the same. Any project
proponent be they government, public corporations, private companies or individuals should
conform to this requirement. Section 58 (5) requires that EIA studies be conducted by and
reports prepared by individuals, experts or a firm of experts authorized by NEMA.
Physical Planning Act (1996)
Section 3 (a) brings out the accumulation of refuse or waste on any land as a change of user
thereof. It further defines development to mean the making of any material change in the use or
density of land, which for the purpose of this act is classified as a class A development. In
30
accordance with this section, dumping or disposal of solid waste on any piece of land can be
considered as a form of development on such land.
Section 36 on the other hand states that if in connection with a development application a Local
Authority is the opinion that a proposal for industrial location, dumping sites, sewerage
treatment, quarries or any other development activity will have injurious impacts on the
environment, the applicant shall be required to submit together with the application form, an EIA
report. This goes a long way in identifying solid waste disposal facilities as having adverse
effects on the environment amidst other forms of developments.
The Local Government Act CAP 265
Part XI Section 160 (a) requires that every municipal council, town council and every urban
council shall have the power to establish and maintain sanitary services for the removal and
destruction of, or otherwise dealing with all kinds of refuse or effluents and where any such
service is established to compel the use o such service is established to compel the use of such
service by any persons to whom the service is made available.
Local Authorities should therefore endeavour to establish and maintain solid waste disposal
projects such as dumping sites, landfills and incinerators and ensure that every form of waste
generated either by private or public organizations is properly disposed off in these facilities.
They should also establish and effect enforcement mechanisms to ensure that people adhere to
these statutory provisions and that the defaulters are subsequently brought to book (Ndoria,
2005).
31
The Public Health Act CAP 242
This is an act of parliament to make provision for securing and maintaining health. It defines an
environment nuisance to include the emission from premises of water, gases and smoke which
could be regarded as injurious to health. Solid waste is an originator of environmental nuisance
when it’s handled and disposed of using methods which are not sanitary because it produces
doors on decomposing, and fumes when burnt, which poses threats to human health.
Section 116 empowers every Local Authority to take all lawful, necessary and reasonably
practical measures for maintaining its districts at all times in clean and sanitary condition, and
preventing the occurrence therein of, or for remedying or causing to be remedying, any nuisance
or condition liable to be injurious or dangerous to health, and to take proceeding at law against
any person causing or responsible for the continuance of any such nuisance or conditions.
Solid waste leads to the pollution of surface and ground water through suspensions and leachate
respectively. Section 129 of the act states “local authorities are responsible for taking the
necessary measures to prevent any pollution dangerous to health of any supply of water, which
the public within its districts has the right to use.”
The Constitution of Kenya
In Chapter 5 section 69, the constitution states that in obligation in respect of the environment
the state shall (among other obligations):
•
Ensure sustainable exploitation, utilization, management and conservation of the
environment and natural resources, and ensure the equitable sharing of the accruing
benefits.
32
•
Encourage public participation in the management, protection and conservation of the
environment.
•
Eliminate processes and activities that are likely to endanger the environment; and
•
Establish systems of environmental impact assessment, environmental audit and
monitoring of the environment.
That is just some of the literature that discusses issues related to solid waste management.
The Kenyan legislation however is not strict on environmental issues like pollution.
33
CHAPTER THREE: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
Study area
The Dandora Site and Service Scheme was started as a low income housing project and the first
large scale attempt by the Kenyan Government and the City Council of Nairobi to implement a
low cost solution to the shelter needs of the urban poor. It was identified in 1971 and planning
started in 1972. The project was to be augmented and implemented by the Government of Kenya
through the City Council of Nairobi in collaboration with the World Bank, International bank for
Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), and the International Development Agency (IDA).
Among the loan requirements by the donor agencies was formation of Dandora Development
Committee in 1975, which was later in 1978 renamed as the Housing Development Department
(HDD) within the City Council of Nairobi. The Housing Development Department was
mandated to implement not only the Dandora project but also all similar low-income housing
developments in Nairobi.
The funding of the project was 55% from the World Bank and 45% from the government. The
foreign contribution consisted of US $8 million loan and a further US $8 million from the
International Development Agency credit. The project targeted people with income between
Kshs.300-2000 per month and the majority of these were the unemployed and those in the
informal sector.
Among the objectives of the scheme was to prepare and service 6000 residential plots of 100-160
metres squared with individual water and sewerage connections, access to roads, security streets
lightings and refuse collection services at an estimated cost of Kshs.211 million. The
implementing agency had also to construct wet cores and demonstration units for the serviced
34
plots. Other objectives of the Housing Development Department were operation and
administration of material loan funds, construction of community facilities such as schools,
health centres, sports complexes and community centres, construction of access roads to the
project’s site and ensure impartiality in the selection of prospective plots tenants according to the
set criteria.
The project was carried out in two phases namely phase I which consisted of Residential Areas
2,3,4,5 and the centre spine of community facilities to be originally developed over a period of 4
years. The overall structure layout plan of the site was designed to minimize public lands and
infrastructure investments per serviced area and to maximize individual responsibility in the
development of the serviced plots.
Location
The Dandora Site and Service Scheme is located in Embakasi constituency in the Eastern
Extension zone of the City of Nairobi bordering Kariobangi south and Korogocho regions. Prior
to implementation of the scheme, the area was part of the plains that extended from Ruaraka and
Kasarani to Embakasi and beyond to the Athi plains. The site is about 10Km from the city centre
and covers about 700 acres of land.
The area is accessible by road and rail and links to the city centre and other employment zones
such as the Industrial Area, Kariobangi light industries and Ruaraka Export Processing zones and
other industries. It borders the Nairobi and Gitathuru rivers to the western and northern sides
respectively.
35
The major access road is through Komarock Road, which connects to Thika Road and Juja Road
and to the city centre. Komarock Road is also linked to the sites’ central spine road. The
residential areas are located on the northern and southern sides of the central spine, which runs
from the west to the east of the site.
History of the dumpsite
Dandora was meant to be fully residential area but when the project stalled phase 6 had not been
constructed but the plots were allocated to individuals. The population of Nairobi was rising fast
and Dandora had available empty quarries which then became the location of dumping in
Nairobi. The area that the dumpsite occupies was supposed to be phase 6 Dandora Estate. The
site has ever since been used as the main dumping area for solid waste in Nairobi.
Data collection
The data presented in this chapter was collected by an array of methods. The main one was by
use of questionnaires which were complimented by interviewing. This method of collecting
information for the questionnaires was because most people were in their daily activities and it
was hard to convince them to spare time to fill the questionnaires as they thought it would be
complicated. Observation was also made during the fieldwork. Photographs are used to capture a
sample of the situation in Dandora.
There were 4 categories of questionnaires that were prepared for the collection of data. They are
as follows:
1. Questionnaire to the recycling company/dealer
2. Questionnaire to Residents of Dandora Estate
36
3. Questionnaire to the local authority
4. Questionnaire to the solid waste disposal company
The table below shows the number of questionnaires issued as per the categories of
questionnaires and the number of questionnaires that were given back
Table 3.1: Table showing categories and number of questionnaires issued
Category of questionnaire
Total number issued
Total number returned
Recycling company/Dealer
1
1
Residents of Dandora Estate
43
40
Local Authority
1
1
Solid Waste Disposal Company
2
2
TOTAL
47
44
Source: Field study 2011
One recycling dealer was chosen because it was the one located closest to the dumpsite and it
was the only one cited. The two solid waste disposal companies were chosen since they are the
main solid waste disposal companies noted. Most of the questionnaires were given to the
residents of Dandora Estate because they are the ones that are most affected by the state of the
dumpsite. People from the dealers, local authority and solid waste disposal companies are only in
their line of work hence may not share the same opinions of the residents of Dandora Estate. The
high number of returned questionnaires can be attributed to the fact that most of the
questionnaires were filled through interviews due to the time constraints.
37
Residents of Dandora Estate
In the questionnaire, the residents were asked the type of property in which they live in. the pie
chart below shows the types of property in which the residents of Dandora live in.
Types of properties in Dandora Estate
12%
Single
Double
51%
30%
One Bedroom
Two bedroom
7%
Figure 3.1: Pie chart showing types of properties in Dandora
From the pie chart it is clear that half of the properties that the interviewees live in are single
room units. This is not a surprise since Dandora Estate was from the word go was established as
a low income housing scheme and it has retained that state over the years. A double is two single
rooms in one. They are not very popular in Dandora because people would prefer to get a one
bedroom house rather than a double roomed house because the prices almost the same.
The table below shows the average amount of rent charged as per the respective type of
properties that people live in. The average amount of rent will be calculated from the total
number of questionnaires received per type of property.
38
Table 3.2: Table showing average amount of rent per type of property
Type of Property
Average amount of rent(KSH per month)
Single
2,290
Double
3,700
One Bedroom
3,192
Two Bedroom
7,480
Source: Field Study 2011
It is clear now that most people opt for single rooms because they are cheap and readily
available. The average amount of rent paid for a double is higher than a one bedroom because the
availability of double is scarce as compared to the availability of one bedroom units.
Collection of waste
100% of all the residents of Dandora Estate reported that waste was collected from where they
live on a weekly basis. The price for the collection differs from place to place.
State of the dumpsite
In the questionnaire the residents were asked how they rated the state of the dumpsite between
good and poor. Below is a pie chart showing their response between good and poor.
39
State of the dumpsite
13%
Good
Poor
88%
Figure 3.2: Pie chart showing the state of the dumpsite
From the pie chart it is clear that a huge majority of the residents of Dandora saw that the state of
the dumpsite was poor, that is 88%. Their main reason was that it was an eyesore and the
nuisance from the smoke from the dumpsite. From those who rated the state as poor, 95% of the
preferred if the dumpsite was relocated to an area where there is the population density is low.
The remaining 5% said that it should either be fenced, properly managed or setting up of a
recycling plant at the current site.
The section of the population interviewed that said the state was good said that it was better off
than nothing. They also stated that the state was good because the waste from their household
was picked up in an orderly manner.
When asked what the main disadvantage of the dumpsite was, majority of the people cited that
the smoke from the dumpsite was the major issue-especially those who live close to the
dumpsite.
40
Rental values in relation with distance from the dumpsite
The table below shows the average amount of rent paid per type of property depending on their
distance from the dumpsite.
Table 1.3: Rental values according to the type of property and distance from the dumpsite
RENTAL VALUES IN KSHS
800metres and
900m-1km
1.5-2km
Beyond 2km
closer
Single
2,450
2,425
2,325
2,233
Double
3,500
5,000
2,600
2,600
One bedroom
3,067
2,800
2,600
4,266
Two bedroom
10,000
8,000
7,000
9,000
Source: Field study 2011
The information relayed on the above table will help to find out whether the hypothesis of the
project is correct. The main aim of the project of was to find out whether proximity to the
dumpsite has an effect on the rental values of the properties in Dandora Estate. It is clear from
the figures that proximity to the dumpsite does not necessarily reflect a great difference on the
rental values of the properties. In fact those nearer the dumpsite seem to be paying more on
average. This is can be attributed to the housing shortage in urban areas.
Solid Waste Disposal Companies
41
Representatives from two waste disposal companies were interviewed. The companies are
Simple Garbage and BINS. The representative from Simple Garbage was interviewed through a
phone call while the representative from BINS was interviewed on the dumpsite as he was
carrying out his activities.
From the questionnaires returned, BINS dealt mainly with industrial waste while Simple
Garbage dealt with waste from residential and commercial properties. Both companies collect
waste on a daily basis from their clients.
Although the companies are allowed to dispose the waste in the dumpsite, they both said that
they do not get support from the government. They both said that the main challenge in their line
of work was maintenance of the vehicles that transport the waste to the dumpsite. They did not
have a problem with the idea of the relocation of the dumpsite.
Recycling dealer
The interviewee had her own dealership that dealt with glass bottles. She chose to deal with
bottles because it is relatively easy compared to the other materials. She also cited that
competition for dealing with glass bottles was low.
She gets the materials (glass bottles) from the dumpsite. The waste pickers sell the bottles to her
which she then packs in sacks according to the size and colour. From there she sells the bottles to
a recycling company at a small profit.
She also mentioned that she does not get the support of the government or from the NonGovernmental organizations. Her main challenge in the line of work was looking for the glass
42
bottles because it sometimes involves going to the dumpsite. Last but not least she cited that the
location of the dumpsite was important because of her nature of business.
The Local Authority
The officer from the City Council of Nairobi that was interviewed was located at the office next
to the weighing bridge. From the information received, the quantity of the waste dumped in the
dumping site is 700 tons per day but mentioned that the weight on Sunday’s was slightly lower
but did not say by how much.
He said that the location of the dumpsite was chosen because of the availability of an open space
(i.e Quarry). When asked whether there were any land use conflicts in the area, he was quick to
point out that the location of the site was on land that was allocated to individuals. Therefore the
issue of dumping waste in a location meant for residential use of land causes a lot of conflicts.
He attributed littered roads, blocked roads and low occupancy rates next to the dumpsite as
results of the dumpsite. It is also important to note that I did not observe any empty units. He
however indicated that blocked sewer lines were not as a result of the dumpsite. His final
remarks were that the dumpsite should be fenced. He said that relocation of the dumpsite was not
a sustainable way of dealing with the dumping site. This was a reaction towards my comment
that most of the residents interviewed would prefer if the dumpsite was relocated.
Observations
Observations were made and information captured by help of the photos below.
43
Plate 1: Garbage next to a garage in Dandora.
Source: Field study 2011.
Despite the location of the dumpsite, people carry on with their day to day activities.
44
Plate 2: A residential building right next to the dumpsite
Source: Field Study 2011
Encroachment is one of the main threats that they dumpsite brings about. The buildings that
neighbor the dumpsite are the most vulnerable to encroachment.
45
Plate 3: Garbage dumped next to the road.
Source: Field Study 2011
Littered roads is a common sight in Dandora since the vehicles that transport waste to the
dumpsite are not covered hence waste falls from the vehicles as they move along the road.
Littered roads are also caused by the wind that blows the waste from the dumpsite to nearby
roads.
46
Plate 4: Road drainage systems blocked by waste
Source: Field Study 2011
As the wind blows, some of the waste especially light weight polythene bags end up at the road
drainage system and is trapped by flowing water. The waste plus water form a thick paste of
“mud” that blocks the road drainage system.
47
CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Through the field work and literature review a lot of issues-both negative and positive have been
highlighted. This chapter shows the findings of the research project and gives a way forward to
be followed by various stakeholders to ensure that the negative issues are addressed.
Main findings of the study
1. The people most affected by the dumpsite are the residents of Dandora Estate. This is
because the main disadvantages of the dumpsite as mentioned earlier are the smoke and the
littered roads. The residents of Dandora have to deal with the eyesore that the litter causes on
the roads and in their compounds. It was also found out that the smoke is normally very
dense in the early hours of the morning. The biggest concern in regards to the smoke was
from mothers who have young children always inhaling the smoke. Other parents were also
concerned for their young kids who always stray off to the dumpsite to look for recyclable
materials to sell.
2. Single rooms are the most common type of accommodation for the residents of Dandora
estate. From the data presented in chapter 3 it is clear that most of the properties are single
rooms (51% of all the residents interviewed). This is mainly attributed to history of the
Estate. It started as a residential area for low income earners hence the properties put up were
to meet this demand for housing. The properties have since remained as they have been from
the beginning.
48
3. The state of the dumpsite is poor. There is no orderly manner of the waste disposal in the
dumpsite. Waste is not sorted out but instead it is placed in heaps on top of the waste
deposited on earlier occasions.
4. The distance from the dumpsite does not have a direct impact on the rental values of the
properties in Dandora Estate. This can be attributed to the shortage in housing in Nairobi
especially for the low income earners. The people who get houses in Dandora do not
necessarily choose where to live since one is limited to what is available. The variations of
prices for the same type of property are mainly caused by the condition of the property and
the building material the property is made of.
5. The main nuisance caused by the dumpsite is the smoke and the garbage littered along the
roads. It seems that if these two problems did not exist, few people would mind about the
dumpsite.
6. Garbage collection facilities for the residents of Dandora are excellent. 100% of everybody
interviewed said that garbage from their household was collected weekly at a small fee.
7. Private waste disposal companies benefit a lot from the dumpsite. This is because the private
companies are the main transporters of solid waste to the dumpsite.
8. Dealers who collect recyclables also benefit from the dumpsite. This is because their main
work entails collecting the recyclables and selling them to recycling companies or dealers.
49
Testing of the hypothesis
“Improper solid waste management especially dumping in residential areas has a direct impact
on rental values.”
Through the literature review (Carla and Greg, 2005), the case study showed that improper solid
waste management led to a decline in values of the nearby properties. According to the data
presented in table 3.3 (chapter 3), the hypothesis of this study as stated above is null. In Dandora
Estate, proximity to the dumpsite does not affect the rental values of properties.
Conclusion
The state of solid waste management in Nairobi is wanting and Dandora dumpsite is a good
example. Proper management by the City Council of Nairobi would drastically improve the
situation from where it currently is 700 tons are transported to the dumpsite on a daily basis with
no measures in place to ensure that this amount is reduced.
With urban population growing by the day, the government needs to look for a long term
solution to disposal of solid waste in urban areas. Relocation to other areas such as Ruai is not
sustainable since there is the factor that the birds that scavenge at the dumpsite pose a risk to low
flying planes form the nearby Jomo Kenyatta International Airport.
Recommendations
For the state of solid waste management urban areas to improve, a lot of planning should be
made and implemented. Most of the recommendations will fall on the government since handling
issues associated with urban area population growth lay on them.
I hereby give the following recommendations:
50
1. The government should enact legislation that will help achieve the following:
•
Make it expensive for manufacturers that produce plastic bags that are less than 30
microns thin. This should be a measure to ensure that plastic bag manufacturers make
thicker plastic bags that can be reused or recycled.
•
Encourage the setting up of recycling companies by providing incentives to interested
parties.
•
Punish heavily anybody disposing solid waste in an area that is not designated for solid
waste disposal.
2. The government should educate the public on the preferred ways of handling waste and
encourage methods like waste reduction and reuse of materials.
3. The government should make sure that locations for landfills are carefully chosen and
Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out before the site can be used as a landfill.
4. The government should abolish open dumps as a method of disposing solid waste and move
towards other solid waste disposal methods such as sanitary landfills and incinerators with
energy recovery.
5. The government should support groups that help in proper solid waste management. A good
example is groups that deal with composting of degradable waste.
Areas of further study
It is proposed that technology should be applied in solid waste management as in other sectors
towards providing a solution to save the current solid waste situation.
In view of this, this study suggests the following areas for further research and study:
51
1. Feasibility studies for sanitary reclamation of open landfills such as the Dandora dumpsite.
2. Strategic measures to promote the sisal and cotton industry toward providing an alternative
packaging and shopping bags in the place of the non-biodegradable and environmentally
unsustainable plastic and polythene products.
3. Role of intermediate transfer stations in sustainable solid waste management.
52
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bubba, N and Lamba, D(1991), Urban Management in Kenya, Environment and Urbanization.
Carla Dickstein and Greg Sayre (2005), Socio-economic Impacts of Landfills in West Virginia
(Internet).
Government of Kenya, Environmental Management and Coordination Act, No.8 of 1999 Laws
of Kenya.
Government of Kenya, Local Government Act, Cap 265, Laws of Kenya.
Government of Kenya, Public Health Act, Cap 242, Laws of Kenya.
Government of Kenya, Physical Planning Act No.6 of 1996.
Hardoy Miller GT (1986), Environmental Science, An Introduction, U.S.A
Hosetti, BB (2006), Prospects and Perspectives of Solid Waste Management, New Age
International Publishers, New Delhi, India.
Mbui, PM (1995), Role of Community Participation in Residential Solid Waste Management,
M.A Thesis, University of Nairobi.
Ndoria, CW (2005), Solid Waste Disposal and its Effects on the Socio-Economic Environment
in Residential Estates, A Case Study of Dandora Estate in Nairobi.
Rhyner CR, Schwartz LJ, Wenger RB and Kohrell MG (1995), Waste Management and
Resource Recovery, CRC Press, Florida U.S.A
53
R.K Wright et al (1996), Environmental Science, Fifth Edition, Prentice Hall U.S.A
Smoke, P (1994), Local Government Finance in Developing Countries, The Case of Kenya,
Nairobi: Oxford University Press
Suresh, V (2003), Urbanization in India, India Vision 2020.
Syagga, PM (1992), Problems of Solid Waste Management in Urban Residential Areas in Kenya,
University of Nairobi.
UNEP (2002), African Environmental Outlook, Past, Present and Future Perspectives, UK
Earthprint Limited.
54
Appendix 1
Questionnaire to the residents of Dandora Estate
Name of respondent……………………………………………………………………..……….
Date……………………………………………
1. What is the type of building/flat which you live in?
Single room[ ]
One bedroom[ ]
Two bedroom[ ]
Other[ ]
If other
specify………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………
2. How far or far do you live from the dumpsite?
Near (500 metres or closer) [ ]
or
Far(beyond 500 metres) [ ]
3. What is the rental value of the flat/building you live in?
Below 2500[ ]
2500[ ]
3500[ ]
Above 3500[ ]
If below 2500 or above 3500, specify
amount………………………………………………………..
4. Is the waste from your household collected?
Yes[ ]
No[ ]
If yes, how is it collected and what is the monthly cost?
...........................................................
………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………..
5. How is the state of solid waste disposal in Dandora and Dandora dumpsite?
Good[ ]
Poor[ ]
6. What do you think should be done to the dumpsite?
…………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………....................
55
Appendix 2
Questionnaire to the recycling company/dealer
Name of company dealer…………………………………………………………………
Date………………………………..
Name of
respondent…………………………………………………………………………………
1. What recycling material do you mainly deal with and why the choice?
................................……………………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………………….
2. How do you get the materials for recycling?
…………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
3. Do you get support from:
Government
N.G.Os
Yes[ ]
Yes[ ]
No[ ]
No[ ]
If yes, what kind of support?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
……..………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………….
If no, what do you think the government and the N.G.Os should do to support such
entities?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………..…………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………..
4. What is your main challenge as recyclers?
………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………..
56
Appendix 3
Questionnaire to the solid waste disposal company
Name of company……………………………………………………………………
Date……………………………………………
Name of respondent………………………………………………………
1. Who are your main clients?
Residential properties[ ]
Industrial properties[ ]
Commercial properties[ ]
2. How often do you collect waste?
Daily[ ]
Weekly[ ]
Fortnightly[ ]
3. How much do you charge for your services per month?
………………………………………………………..
4. What is your main challenge in the line of your work of solid waste disposal?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………….……
5. Do you get support from the government?
Yes[ ]
No[ ]
6. What is your opinion of the Dandora dumpsite?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
57
Appendix 4
Questionnaire to the local authority
Name of department……………………………… Date…………………………………….
Name of respondent………………………………………………………………………………..
1. How much (in terms of quantity) do you transport to the Dandora dumpsite each day?
…………………………………………………………………………………..
2. What factors were used to choose the location of the dumpsite?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………...
3. Are there any land use conflicts in Dandora caused by the dumpsite?
Yes[ ]
No[ ]
If yes, which ones are they?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………....
4. In your own opinion, are the following negative impacts of dumping present in Dandora as
a result of the dumpsite?
Roads littered with waste
Yes[ ]
No[ ]
Blocked roads
Yes[ ]
No[ ]
Blocked sewer lines
Yes[ ]
No[ ]
Low occupancy rate next to the dumpsite
Yes[ ]
No[ ]
5. What do you think should be done to the dumpsite?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………....................................
58