1- WASTE MANAGEMENT AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Waste management is a cross-cutting issue impacting on many aspects of society and the economy. It
has strong linkages to a range of other global challenges such as health, climate change, poverty
reduction, food and resource security and sustainable production and consumption. The political case for
action is significantly strengthened when waste management is viewed as an entry point to address a
range of such sustainable development issues, many of which are difficult to tackle. Dai que o governo
mocambicano elaborou a lei 2014 de GRS

Environment and climate change Environmental Domain

Waste is a cross-cutting environmental issue in which a great many different strands interact. The local
environmental impacts of waste have already been discussed the focus here is rather on the global
impacts
of climate change.

Good governance Social Domain

A clean city in which solid waste management service is clearly effective is a healthful
and pleasant place for residents, attractive for tourists and a good place to do business
and attract inward investment in other words, a successful city. The GWMO cites
example studies in which the loss of tourist income from poor solid waste management was high, and
likely
more than the cost of implementing a modern SWM system. But the benefits go much further by
promoting a
sense of community and security, of belonging and of well-being.

Enterprise & creating sustainable livelihoods Economic Domain

Good waste and resource management also brings many positive benefits to society and the economy.
Many
recent reports have attempted to quantify the business benefits to industry of reduced resource
consumption,
improved resource efficiency and reduced costs of waste management

Sustainable Development Goals Integration

At the time of writing the GWMO, the action plan for the Post-2015 Development Agenda was in final
stages
of approval at the UN. Waste management is well embedded within the Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs), being included either explicitly or implicitly in more than half of the 17 goals (Table 1.1). So a
strong
argument can be made for the strategic importance of improving waste management, insofar as actions
here
will contribute to progress towards a range of SDG targets. Setting and monitoring global targets for
waste
management will thus contribute significantly to attaining the SDGs

COMO NOSSO PLANO DE GESTAO VAI AJUDAR A COMBATER AS MUDANCAS CLIMATICAS

The potential contribution of waste

management to climate change mitigation
Waste and resource management offers a number
of opportunities for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions across a wide range of industrial sectors.
However, there are peculiar challenges in estimating
and accounting for GHG emissions from waste and
resource management.
The approach adopted by many countries is to
report GHG emissions in accordance with the
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC), with emission sources broken down by
sector in keeping with recommendations issued by
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC). To avoid double counting, the economy
is divided into sectors, each with its own emission
sources. The waste sector includes solid waste
disposal on land (landfills), wastewater handling
(anaerobic digestion), waste incineration without
energy recovery and other (which is effectively
limited to composting).
Other components of waste management, including
transport, recycling, agricultural use of compost and
1 Topic Sheet prepared by David C. Wilson, with input from Natalia Reyna,
Imperial College London and Wolfgang Pfaff-Simoneit, KfW.
waste incineration with energy recovery, are reported
under other IPCC sectors.
Alternative methods often employ a life-cycle
approach in order to allow the inclusion of the effects
of waste management on other parts of the economy.
Whatever GHG accounting method is used for
waste management, the upstream-operatingdownstream
(UOD) generic framework2 allows the
system boundary to be specified for a particular
measurement. Indirect upstream accounts for
emissions associated with energy and material inputs.
Direct operating emissions include all unit operations
of waste management, from collection and transport
through recycling to treatment and disposal. Indirect
downstream includes savings and emissions from
energy substitution, material substitution and carbon
binding (sequestration).
A significant body of work has applied life-cycle
assessment (LCA) to GHG accounting for waste
management.3 LCA methods allow for the inclusion of
the benefits of materials recycling, organics recycling
and energy recovery, as such processes displace
the use of alternative sources of virgin materials or
energy, and thus also the GHG emissions associated
with their production and distribution (which the IPCC
would allocate to other sectors).
LCA methods can in principle be extended further
in order also to include the benefits of waste
prevention and reduction, such as the benefits of
avoiding producing products that would end up as
waste. However, in extending the methods this way,
delineating a system boundary that is consistent
becomes quite challenging.
Contributing to greenhouse gas mitigation
through waste and resource management1
Using a life-cycle approach, it has been
estimated that a 10 to 15% reduction in global
greenhouse gas emissions could be achieved
through landfill mitigation and diversion, energy
from waste, recycling, and other types of
improved solid waste management. Including
waste prevention could potentially increase this
contribution to 15 to 20%.
2.4.1 Integrated sustainable waste management (ISWM)
Developing a waste management system is complex. Experience suggests that, for a system to be
sustainable
in the long term, consideration needs to be given to:
All the physical elements (infrastructure) of the system, from waste generation through storage,
collection, transport, transfer, recycling, recovery, treatment and disposal.
All the stakeholders (actors) involved, including municipalities; regional and national governments;
waste
generators/service users (including industry, business, institutions and households); producers (those
who
put products on the market which become waste at the end of their life, including manufacturers, brand
owners, importers and others in the supply chain); service providers (whether public or private sector,
formal or informal, large or small); civil society and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) (which play a
variety of roles, including facilitating the participation of other parties); international agencies; etc.
All the strategic aspects, including the political, health, institutional, social, economic, financial,
environmental and technical facets.
The term integrated waste management has been widely used with a variety of meanings,17 but often
refers
only to integration across the physical elements. The concept of integrated sustainable waste
management

(ISWM),18 which explicitly brings together all three dimensions, is gradually becoming the norm in
discussion
of solid waste management in developing countries. In the GWMO, the primary analytical framework used
is a simplified form of ISWM, first developed for UN-Habitats Solid Waste Management in the Worlds
Cities
(2010). This is shown schematically in Figure 2.3 as two overlapping triangles.
The first triangle in Figure 2.3 comprises the three primary physical components (elements), each linked
to
one of the key drivers identified in Figure 2.2. These provide the necessary infrastructure for solid waste
management:
1. Waste collection: driven primarily by public health;
2. Waste treatment and disposal: driven primarily by environmental protection; and
3. The 3Rs reduce, reuse, recycle: driven by the resource value of the waste and more recently by
closing
the loop in order to return both materials and nutrients to beneficial use.
The second triangle focuses on the softer aspects of ISWM the governance strategies:
4. Inclusivity of stakeholders: focusing in particular on service users and service providers;
5. Financial sustainability: requiring the system to be cost-effective, affordable and well financed; and
6. Sound institutions and proactive policies: including both the national policy framework and local
institutions.
An integrated and sustainable waste managment system must address all technical (infrastructure)
and governance aspects to allow a well-functioning system that works sustainably over the long term.
As previous publications have tended to have a more technical focus, the GWMO has chosen to focus
primarily on issues of governance and finance.