urban Waste Management

http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/publications/insight/jan-01/4.asp

Urban Waste Management

The closure of existing open dumpsites and the introduction of sanitary landfill is an urgent priority everywhere in the developing world. Even where complementary disposal technologies such as composting or incineration (waste to energy plants) are practiced, a landfill is still required and is the backbone of any sustainable disposal system. Given the essential nature of the landfill for final disposal, and the lack of local experience and financial resources for introducing sanitary landfills, central government support in terms of technical assistance and access to financing is needed in many lower and middle income countries. Matching grants designed to encourage landfill investments and sustainable operations may be an appropriate instrument to consider, primarily because the environmental damages and benefits tend to spillover into neighboring municipalities and regions, or into underlying groundwater resources.

Climate Change and Air Pollution

Climate change and acidification are recognized as current or potential problems in both industrial and developing countries. Recently, a better understanding of how these two problems overlap and interact has emerged. First, greater combustion of fossil fuels increases the emissions of many acidifying pollutants as well as greenhouse gases. Second, changes in weather patterns stimulated by climate change will alter the intensity and distribution of acid deposition. Third and perhaps most important, because it complicates projections of climate change emissions of acidifying pollutants, especially sulphur dioxide, lead to the accumulation in the upper atmosphere of aerosols that partly mask the effects of greenhouse gases. The two important global issues addressed here climate change and acidification have the same underlying cause: a high level of economic activity that results in the emission of huge amounts of polluting substances into the atmosphere. Energy consumption in industrial regions has increased almost exponentially with the growth of population and economies.

Energy, Environment and Development

Energy is basic to development. They improve peoples’ productivity. In the aggregate, modern energy services are powerful engine of economic and social opportunity: no country has managed to develop much beyond a subsistence economy without ensuring at least minimum access to energy services for a broad section of its population. It is not surprising to find, therefore, that the billion who live in developing countries attach a high priority to energy services. On average, these people spend nearly 12% of their income on energy. More than five times the average for people living in OECD countries. As a "revealed preference", to use the economists’ jargon, energy services are high on the agenda of the world’s poorest people.

At the same time, the provision of energy services especially through the combustion of fossil fuels and biomass can create adverse environmental effects. In rich countries, much attention is directed to the regional and global consequences of fuel combustion, because many if the local effects have been controlled at considerable expense over the past half-century. In developing countries, the local environmental problems associated with energy use remain matters of concern that are as, or even more, urgent than they were in industrialized countries 50 or 100 years ago. Further, it is the poor who suffer most severely from such problems, because it is they who are forced to rely upon the most inefficient and polluting sources of energy services for lack of access to better alternatives.

urban env prob

What are Key Urban Environmental Problems? Extracted from: DANIDA Workshop Papers: Improving the Urban Environment and Reducing Poverty; December 5, 2000; Copenhagen, Denmark.

Defining urban environmental problems While there is now widespread agreement that urban environmental issues are important, there is little coherence in how international agencies and others define the urban environment and identify its critical problems. This is not just a semantic question, as it is intimately related to how and where funds are allocated and to who can expect to benefit from the resulting environmental improvements. Most of the confusion arises from the qualifier ‘environmental’ and what it should mean in an urban context. If urban environmental problems are defined and pursued too broadly, then almost all urban development initiatives can be labeled environmental. For example, Einstein’s oft-cited definition of the environment as ‘everything that is not me’, could be used to designate anything from better shopping facilities to better televisions as urban environmental improvement. But if urban environmental problems are defined too narrowly, many of the generalizations noted in the introductory paragraph cease to be true. For example, defining urban environmental problems as ‘the degradation of urban water, air and land’ excludes many of the environmental health problems suffered predominantly by the poor, as well as the extra-urban impacts that threaten regional and global sustainability. While both very broad and very narrow usage are common in the literature, when people complain of ‘environmental problems’ they are typically referring to damage to the physical environment, mostly caused by other people, and usually with harmful consequences for human welfare, either now or in the future. So common sense suggests that urban environmental problems are threats to present or future human well-being, resulting from human-induced damage to the physical environment, originating in or borne in urban areas. This definition includes: Localized environmental health problems such as inadequate household water and sanitation and indoor air pollution. City-regional environmental problems such as ambient air pollution, inadequate waste management and pollution of rivers, lakes and coastal areas. Extra-urban impacts of urban activities such as ecological disruption and resource depletion in a city’s hinterland, and emissions of acid precursors and greenhouse gases. Regional or global environmental burdens that arise from activities outside a city’s boundaries, but which will affect people living in the city It does not encompass: Problems in what are sometimes termed the ‘social’, ‘economic’ or ‘cultural’ environment. Natural hazards that are not caused or made worse by urban activity. The environmental impacts of urban activities that are of no concern to humans, either now or in the future. The table presents a wide range of city-related environmental hazards. Despite their diversity, all fall within the definition, provided the phrase ‘resulting from urban activities’ is itself interpreted broadly. Most are the unintended side-effects of human activity in cities. Some might more accurately be ascribed to a lack of preventive measures. In all examples, however, better urban practices and governance could help reduce the burdens, and it is this distinction that is most critical operationally. The urban environment in international development assistance By and large, the definition given above is consistent with the perspective on urban environmental problems taken by most international development agencies (a notable exception being the Dutch government’s DGIS, which explicitly includes the urban social environment as a focal area, alongside the urban physical environment). However, a review of a range of bilateral and multilateral donors suggests that several factors skew the operational definition of environment away from many of the central environmental concerns of the urban poor: Responsibility for taking the lead on environmental matters is often assigned to divisions that are not directly involved in urban development assistance on the grounds that the environment generally, and natural resources in particular, are primarily rural concerns. Such divisions are unlikely to have the knowledge or influence to promote urban environmental issues. Moreover, they have a tendency to define environment in natural resource management terms, which can easily lead to ignoring the environmental health issues that are of particular concern to the urban poor. National and local environmental agencies in recipient countries, the natural counterparts of environmental staff in development agencies, also tend to define their role as one of ‘protecting’ the environment and to view most of the environmental threats in low-income neighborhoods as beyond their mandate.   Broad definitions are employed to illustrate the importance of environmental issues but narrower definitions are used to construct environmental indicators, while still narrower definitions are typically employed to identify environmental programs and projects. Thus, for example: • It is routinely noted that millions of deaths every year from diarrhea and respiratory infections could be prevented by environmental improvements. • Statistics on household access to water and sanitation are only sometimes included in lists of environmental indicators. • The projects that target such improvements are generally infrastructure projects and are labeled as such (i.e. they are rarely part of a donor agency’s ‘environment’ portfolio). This can easily give the impression that environmental initiatives are responding to a far broader set of environmental concerns than they actually are, while at the same time ignoring environmental benefits that can come from ‘non-environmental’ initiatives.   Operationally, a distinction is often made between two different approaches to environmental improvement: investing in ‘stand-alone’ environmental initiatives and attempting to ‘mainstream’ environmental concerns into all development activities. It is generally held that ‘mainstreaming’ is ultimately more important. However, at least in its early stages, mainstreaming tends to define the environmental agenda in terms of reducing the environmental impacts of development in both urban and rural areas. Thus, in the urban context, the cross-cutting environmental goal is often expressed in terms of ‘protecting’ the environment or ‘preventing’ the degradation of urban water, land and air. Again, this can easily detract from the local environmental threats that are of particular concern to the urban poor.   Pressure from Northern environmentalists has been an important factor in convincing international development agencies to address environmental issues. Northern environmentalists are usually more concerned with regional and global issues involving the natural environment than with local environmental health burdens faced by the urban poor. Again, this reinforces a tendency to ignore the environmental threats facing the urban poor although it does put pressure on development agencies to address global environmental issues. As international and local interest and capacity to address urban environmental problems increases,new, more locally-driven environmental strategies are also emerging. Many cities in Europe and America, and increasingly in Latin America, Asia and Africa are experimenting with city-wide initiatives to address environmental problems. Bilateral and even more often multilateral donors have been supporting a number of these initiatives, often called Local Agenda 21s. There is still much to learn from these local initiatives, including perhaps how best to define urban environmental problems in their local context. Ultimately, while it may be useful to define urban environmental problems in the abstract, operationally it may be more important to respond to local initiatives in a coherent fashion, whether or not they fit some abstract definition.

SUMMARY: Range of city-related environmental hazards by scale and type SCALE TYPE OF HAZARD SOME SPECIFIC EXAMPLES (This list of examples is not intended to be comprehensive) Within house and its plot Biological pathogens Water-borne, water-washed (or water-scarce), airborne, food-borne, vector-borne, including some water-related vectors (e.g. Aedes mosquitoes breeding in water containers where households lack reliable piped supplied). Chemical pollutants Indoor air pollution from fires, stoves or heaters. Accidental poisoning from household chemicals. Occupational exposure for home workers. Physical hazards Household accidents – burns and scalds, cuts, falls. Physical hazards from home-based economic activities. Inadequate protection from rain, extreme temperatures. Neighborhood Biological pathogens Pathogens in waste water, solid waste (if not removed from the site), local water bodies. Disease vectors, e.g. malaria-spreading Anopheles mosquitoes breeding in standing water or filariasis-spreading Culex mosquitoes breeding in blocked drains, latrines or septic tanks. Chemical pollutants Ambient air pollution from fires, stoves....; also perhaps from burning garbage if there is no regular garbage collection service. Air and water pollution and wastes from ‘cottage’ industries and from motor vehicles. Physical hazards Site-related hazards, e.g. housing on slopes with risks of landslides; sites regularly flooded, sites at risk from earthquakes. Workplace Biological pathogens Overcrowding/poor ventilation aids transmission of infectious diseases. Chemical pollutants Toxic chemicals, dust...... Physical hazards Dangerous machinery, noise..... City (or municipality within larger city) Biological pathogens Pathogens in the open water bodies (often from sewerage); also at municipal dumps; contaminated water in piped system. Chemical pollutants Ambient air pollution (mostly from industry and motor vehicles; motor vehicles’ role generally growing); water pollution; hazardous wastes. Physical hazards Traffic hazards. Violence. 'Natural' disasters and their 'unnaturally large' impact because of inadequate attention to prevention and mitigation. Citizens’ access to land for housing Important influence on housing quality directly and indirectly (e.g. through insecure tenure discouraging households investing in improved housing, and discouraging water, electricity and other utilities from serving them). Heat island effect and thermal inversions Raised temperatures a health risk, especially for vulnerable groups (e.g. elderly, very young). Air pollutants may become trapped, increasing their concentration and the length of people’s exposure to them. City-region (or city periphery) Resource degradation Soil erosion from poor watershed management or land development or clearance; deforestation; water pollution; ecological damage from acid precipitation and ozone plumes; loss of biodiversity. Land or water pollution from waste dumping Pollution of land from dumping of conventional household, industrial and commercial solid wastes and toxic/hazardous wastes. Leaching of toxic chemicals from waste dumps into water. Contaminated industrial sites. Pollution of surface water and groundwater from sewage and surface runoff. Pre-emption or loss of resources Fresh water for city pre-empting its use for agriculture; expansion of paved area over good quality agricultural land. Links between city and global issues Non-renewable resource use Fossil fuel use; use of other mineral resources; loss of biodiversity; loss of non-renewable resources in urban waste streams. Non-renewable sink use Persistent chemicals in urban waste streams; greenhouse gas emissions, stratospheric ozone depleting chemicals. Overuse of 'finite' renewable Resources Scale of consumption that is incompatible with global limits for soil, forests, freshwater....

SOURCE: Satterthwaite, David (1999), The Links between Poverty and the Environment in Urban Areas of Africa, Asia and Latin America, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the European Commission (EC), New

urban eco n special features of ubran eco

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2997649

, disturbance, and heterogeneity: A framework for comparing urban and non-urban soils

http://www.ecostudies.org/reprints/Pickett_Cadenasso_09_Urb_Ecosys.pdf

Urban Ecosystem Analysis Identifying Tools and Methods

http://www.ias.unu.edu/binaries/UNUIAS_UrbanReport2.pdf



Acknowledgements
This report is based on the research conducted at the UNU/IAS as well as consultation with its partners at the
UNESCO–Man and the Biosphere Programme, the WHO–Healthy Cities Programme and scholars from various
institutions. A number of individuals who attended the Urban Ecosystems meetings jointly organized by UNU/IAS
and its partners contributed in many ways. A list of those individuals is given below (in alphabetical order):
Salvatore Arico, UNESCO–Man and the Biosphere Programme
Xuemei Bai, Yale University
Grant Boyle,UNU Institute of Advanced Studies
Peter Bridgewater, UNESCO–Man and the Biosphere Programme
Carlos Corvalan, World Health Organization
Shobakhar Dhakal, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
Peter Dogsé, UNESCO–Man and the Biosphere Programme
Ian Douglas, University of Manchester
Peter Droege, University of Sydney
Imura Hidefumi, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
Shinji Kaneko, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
Caroline King, United Nations University Centre
Amitabh Kundu, The Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi
A Latiff, Universiti Kebangsaan, Malaysia
Yok–shiu F Lee, University of Hong Kong
Muzaffar Malik, World Health Organization
Peter J Marcotullio, UNU Institute of Advanced Studies
Gordon McGranahan, International Institute for Environment and Development
Hisashi Ogawa, World Health Organization
Awais L Piracha, UNU Institute of Advanced Studies
Thomas Schaaf, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Jacob Songsore, University of Ghana
Takehito Takano, Tokyo Medical and Dental University
Takafusa (Sombo) Yamamura, Asia Pacific Network
Masatoshi Yoshino, United Nations University Centre
A H Zakri, UNU Institute of Advanced Studies
All errors and misinterpretations are the responsibility of the authors.
This report was prepared by:
Awais L Piracha and Peter J Marcotullio
For further information, contact:
United Nations University Institute of  Advanced Studies (UNU/IAS)
5–53–67 Jingumae, Shibuya–ku, Tokyo, 150–8304, Japan
Tel  +81-3-5467-2323, Fax  +81-3-5467-2324
Email  unuias@unu.edu, URL  http://www.ias.unu.edu




Contents.....................


Foreword
Executive Summary
1 Introduction
2 Background and Key Elements
2.1  Urban Ecosystems in the Context of Geographical Scale
2.2 Blending Socio–Economic and Bio–Physical Factors in Urban Ecosystems Analysis
3 Key Tools and Methods of Urban Ecosystem Analysis
3.1 Tools for Urban Ecosystems Analysis
3.2 Methods for Urban Ecosystems Analysis
4 Conclusion
Appendix: Concept Document on Urban Ecosystems
Bibliography..


Executive Summary


Environmental challenges faced by cities around
the world are more complex now than at any other
time in history. In many parts of the world, and
notably in the Asia Pacific, rapid economic growth,
decentralization, privatization, and related socio–
cultural changes are leading to the emergence of a
complex decision making environment. New concepts
and approaches are needed to find constructive
solutions to environmental issues. This paper focuses
on the emerging urban ecosystems analysis (UEA)
to highlight its merits and to point out new tools
and methods in which UEA can be applied to provide
useful information to decision makers.
We believe that crucial information for policy makers
includes the geographic scale of impacts from urban
environmental activities and linkages between socio–
economic, cultural and bio–physical factors. UEA can
help in both instances.
It is unlikely that UEA would have a single
methodology. Instead, we envision a comprehensive
array of guiding methods, tools and techniques to
choose from, so that unique situations can be dealt
with appropriately. Further, new combinations of
techniques are needed to assess the environmental
impacts of proposed policies, plans, and programmes.
In recent years, the availability of data and tools in
the environmental field has increased dramatically.
This means it is now feasible to conduct the
holistic analyses, which previously were difficult to
accomplish. Apart from a general increase in interest
in environmental protection, there are three factors
behind this availability. First, modeling and simulation
computer tools are becoming highly developed and
relatively easily available. Second, in recent years
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have emerged
as a powerful tool for conducting spatial analysis; GIS
is at the heart of environmental modeling. Third, the
availability of environmental data has increased over
the years. Substantial amounts of environmental data,
including GIS maps, are now available on the Internet.
We would like to point out that this paper is not
meant to be policy–prescriptive; it has been written
to be policy–relevant. While the contents of the
paper have been compiled in such a way that their
relevance to policy makers becomes clear, no direct
recommendations or policy prescriptions have
been made.

Sustainability Concepts Urban Ecosystems

http://www.gdrc.org/sustdev/concepts/23-u-eco.html


A. Definition
Urban ecosystems apply the ecosystem approach to urban areas. Urban ecosystems are dynamic ecosystems that have similar interactions and behaviours as natural ecosystems. Unlike natural ecosystems however, urban ecosystems are a hybrid of natural and man-made elements whose interactions are affected not only by the natural environment, but also culture, personal behaviour, politics, economics and social organisation.
B. Main Features
Urban areas act as population centres providing goods and services not only for its population, but also for populations worldwide. Urban ecosystems can no longer be considered as a separate entity to the environment as they have direct and indirect impacts on the immediate and wider environments. Many of the environmental problems faced today (eg global warming, water and air pollution and inadequate access to safe drinking water) can be traced back to cities and lifestyle choices. With urban population levels expected to reach 60% in the next 30 years and the majority of urbanisation to occur in developing countries, urban environmental management is being increasingly important.
Urban areas can not exist in isolation. They require inputs from, and waste assimilation functions of, other ecosystems. Ecological footprint analysis has shown that many cities require a productive land and sea area several times the city's size in order to support the population.
The urban ecosystem contains both individual and layered (nested) systems from three spheres: (a) the natural environment, (b) the built environment and (c) the socio-economic environment. In order to develop policies and programs that advance sustainable development and the equitable allocation of resources, each system within the urban ecosystem needs to be recognised as a living entity that constantly changes. This differs from the typical segregated and static management approach. Each system requires dynamic balancing and integration. In addition, the interdependencies and interactions between each system and between the urban ecosystem as a whole and other ecosystems need to be understood. Unhealthy urban ecosystems can lead to local and wider environmental degradation, social problems, economic decline, human health problems and further disconnection from nature.
Multidisciplinary in nature, urban ecosystem management requires a composite of social, environmental, economic and decision making tools and institutions that are flexible and can adapt quickly to changes in one or more systems.
The urban ecosystem approach encourages the alignment of cities to that of natural ecosystems where resources, process and products are used more effectively, creating less waste, requiring less input and viewing by-products as resources.
C. Case Studies and Examples
1. UNEP-IETC - The Ecosystems Approach to Urban Environmental Management
[See link below] 2. United Nations University - Urban Ecosystem Management
[See link below]
D. Target Sectors / Stakeholders
Governments, non-government organisations, research institutions, businesses, experts, decision makers, industry organisations and the community are primary stakeholders in the Urban Ecosystem concept.
E. Scale of Operation
Urban ecosystems cover an urban area.

Disturbances in the Urban Forest Ecosystem

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/fr/fr06800.pdf