Brief on Research Presented at the Scenarios Workshop

Brief on Research Presented at the Scenarios Workshop

held in Chennai on 11-12 March, 2013

Table of Contents

Law and Policy: Barriers to the Informal Sector in SWM by Avni Rastogi......

Findings on Bulk Waste Producers in Chennai by Harsha Anantharaman......

Municipal Solid Waste Management – Role of the Informal Sector by Jency Samuel (with research inputs from Helen Sha Diana)

Law and Policy: Barriers to the Informal Sector in SWM

By Avni Rastogi

In working towards integration of the informal waste workers into a more formal structure which recognises the contribution of the waste sector to the recycling industry and improves working conditions for the workers, it is imperative to recognise the barriers that stand in the way of achieving this aim.

This document touches on the salient policy documents and procedures with relevance to the informal sector in waste management as evidence to barriers to the informal sector.

The Informal Sector in National Policy and Related Planning Documents

The National Environment Policy, 2006[1](NEP) is an attempt to strike a balance between improving quality of life, the finiteness of natural resources and social justice. The policy pinpoints industrial and solid waste as the main causes of soil pollution and provides an action plan for addressing the issue. The action plan suggests “strengthening the capacities of local bodies for segregation, recycling, and reuse of municipal solid wastes, recognizing inter-alia the positive impacts it may have on the welfare of safai-karamcharis, and setting up and operating sanitary landfills, in particular through competitive outsourcing of solid waste management services” and “giving legal recognition to, and strengthen the informal sector systems of collection and recycling of various materials, in particular enhance their access to institutional finance and relevant technologies.”

This National Action Plan for Climate Change, 2010[2](NAPCC) is categorised into eight Missions. One of the eight Missions is the ‘National Mission on Sustainable Habitat’. A part of this Mission is to address solid waste management to make it sustainable.The NAPCC stresses the provision in the NEP for giving legal recognition to the informal sector, which it recognises as the “backbone of India’s highly effective recycling system”. One of the guiding principles of the NAPCC is also “Protecting the poor and vulnerable sections of society through an inclusive and sustainable development strategy, sensitive to climate change.”

The NEP and NAPCC are exceptional in their recognition of the informal sector and the need for inclusive growth. The planning documents prepared by the Ministry of Urban Development in furtherance of these policies however have fallen short on this count. For example, the Plan for Implementation of National Mission on Sustainable Habitat (2011), the National Sustainable Habitat Standards for Municipal Solid Waste Management (Nov 2011) and the Guidance Note on Solid Waste Management at a Regional Level, all suggest public private partnerships and the use of technology, relegating to the side-lines the provisions relating to the informal sector. This stands true for the JnNURM or Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission[3]as well.

The MSWM Rules, 2000 and State Administration and Laws

In the case of Almitra H. Patel v. Union of India[4] the Supreme Court appointed a committee headed by Mr. Asim Burman to look into urban solid waste management. The result of the work of the Burman Committee was the passage of the Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000 (referred to as MSWM Rules)[5]. While part of the terms of reference of the Asim Burmon Committee appointed by the Supreme Court was to “examine and suggest ways to improve conditions in the formal and informal sector for promoting eco-friendly sorting, collection, transportation, disposal, recycling and reuse,” and the Report recognises, albeit briefly, their contribution to recycling, the Rules make no reference to the informal sector at all. This could be an indication of the low priority accorded to the informal sector in waste management by the executive government.

The Commissionerate of Municipal Administration, the Government of Tamil Nadu has, in its role as the enforcement agency for the MSWM Rules for the small municipalities in the State, formulated a “Ready Reckoner for MSWM by Urban Local Bodies, 2008”[6]. This document insinuates that the waste pickers are responsible for emptying the dustbins on the street and spreading waste around but also suggests that waste pickers be organized as Self Help Groups with the assistance of NGOs to assist in door-to-door collection and segregation at source in neighbourhoods and at transfer stations.

This can be seen as a classic case of the attitude of the government to waste-pickers in the prevailing situation, but thankfully, addresses what it sees as a problem in an inclusive manner.

The Chennai Municipal Corporation Act of 1919[7], represents the greatest hurdle to the work of the waste pickers and the informal waste industry today. Section 199 provides that anything in a corporation dustbin becomes the property of the Corporation. This criminalises the very work of the waste pickers and exposes them to harassment and suspicion by the police and citizens.

Section 287 read with Schedule VI requires licenses from the corporation for the use of premises for dealing with rags, paper, gunny bags, second hand clothes, etc. in any way– storing, packing, processing, manufacturing, cleaning, etc. This requirement would apply to the scrap dealers who purchase from waste-pickers, and others, and channelize waste paper, plastics, and metals to the recycling industry. The procedure for acquiring a license is that an application, available at the Public Relations Office at the Corporation for Rs. 10/- requires to be filled in and submitted with a number of supporting documents, including an NOC from the neighbourhood. This procedure, especially getting a ‘No Objection Certificate’, can stand in the way of waste workers from climbing the hierarchy established in the informal waste business.

There is unfortunately an absence of the informal sector in the conception of the legal and policy framework, and where the informal sector is referred, it is to the disadvantage of the informal workers. Beneficial provisions are not in concrete, binding terms but only as recommendations. This attitudinal barrier to the informal may be a result of insufficient information which we aim to provide over the scope of this project.

Current Practices as Barriers to Informal Waste Workers

The Chennai Corporation has been exempted from the applicability of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 by Government Order dated 8.7.1999. What this means is that all workers employed by the Corporation for conservancy work are on daily wage, contract basis and no addutional permanent workers are employed.

The main difference between contract workers and permanent workers is in terms of duration of employment and salary and allied benefits. The permanent workers are entitled to provident fund, superannuation benefit fund, pension, medical benefits, etc. On the other hand a contract worker is paid a daily wage for the days he works and nothing else. The financial implication for the Corporation is much higher in the case of permanent workers and the savings much higher in the contract model. This is illustrated by the table below.

As per the tenders advertised on the State Government Tender portal between 1st February and 8thMarch 2013, there have been 13 tenders in this period for a ‘supply’ of a total of 5672 daily wage labourers for solid waste management. The tenders varied in duration from 45 days to 1 year. For contracts ranging from a 45 days to 3 months, the cost to the Corporation per day per worker is even lower than in case of contracts of longerdurations.

Based on the tender values, duration of contract and number of workers tendered for, as well as interviews with waste-pickers and Corporation conservancy workers, we did a rough calculation of the monthly and daily earnings and the cost to the Corporation per day per worker. This is presented below.

Permanent Workers / Daily Wage Workers (short term) / Daily Wage Workers (long term) / Waste-pickers
Monthly Earnings / 13 – 15000/- / 5000/- / 6,500/-*
Daily Earnings / 433 – 500/- / 192/-** / min. 250/-
Per day per worker cost to CoC / 500 - 576/-
(NOT inc. PF & benefits) / 235/-*** / 295 /- / (in negative for the reduction in waste in dump sites)

In practice the waste workers employed on a daily wage basis get paid a lesser amount than is evident from the tender value.

The matter of the greatest concern from this analysis is that this model of daily-wage contractual labourers could actually be resulting in the growth of the number of informal sector waste pickers, since the incentives are higher. In fact, the current model works better even for the Corporation of Chennai in terms of the reduced financial implication and the benefits that they get from the reduced waste as a result of the waste-pickers work. This is one of the primary reasons that there is a need to bring about a shift in the attitude of the Corporation – solid waste management is the duty of the Corporation and must be seen as such. It is a service it provides to the city and its citizens. It must not be viewed as a profit-making, expense-reduction venture.

In addition to the above, another barrier that results from the current tendering practices of the Corporation is the process itself. The tender requires the fulfilment of certain criteria to be considered. This includes experience of 1 year certified by the employer (usually specific to a government body, port authority, railways, etc.), a minimum turnover, and financial statements from the last 3 years. It is unlikely that any organisation of informal workers would be in a position to satisfy any of these requirements. In addition, the bidding process is complicated, with all the documents being in English and a number of forms, etc. The process itself prevents the informal sector from participating on an equal footing with private contractors who have been in the business for years.

Combined with the lack of organisation of waste-pickers we have observed among waste-pickers and the absence of belief that things could be better, we are faced with very difficult barriers to plan for and overcome to bring about a transformation of the waste sector in Chennai.

Findings on Bulk Waste Producers in Chennai

By Harsha Anantharaman

The presentation on Bulk Waste Producers in Chennai, made on the 12th of March was centred on the questions of a.) Nature of waste produced. b.) Quantities of waste produced. and c.) Current practices in waste management and/or disposal.

Six categories of BWPs were identified in advance, namely, hotels, restaurants and eateries, educational institutions, residential complexes and gated colonies, office complexes and high traffic public areas. A number of respondents were surveyed in each category.The findings are summarised below.

The types of waste generated fall broadly into three categories, organic waste (mainly food waste), recyclable waste (mainly paper, plastic and glass) and garden waste. Hotels, restaurants and educational institutions with canteens were seen to produce a high amount of organic waste. Office complexes also produced some food waste but had paper wastes as their main waste output. Residential complexes saw a very varied waste output drawing from all three categories. Plastics and paper waste were documented as being created in all cases and form a high proportion of waste generated in high public traffic areas (railway stations, airport etc). One of the high public traffic areas surveyed was a major vegetable market which produces a large amount of organic waste daily as well as some packaging waste.

The table below outlines the information obtained on quantities of waste generated by various BWPs.

Observations on current practices:

The majority of respondents reported depending exclusively on the Corporation of Chennai (CoC) for disposal, in many cases subverting the fee payment system. The CoC has recently attempted to impose a fee for removal of waste on hotels, restaurants, kalyana mandapams (wedding halls) etc. This has faced opposition from these groups.

The wide variation in recycling practices seen within categories of BWPs indicates that recycling and other preferred SWM practices are feasible but are not being undertaken in many places where they can/should be.

Finally, a roadmap for intervention in this sector was outlined advocating the mandating of source-segregation, in situ management of organic waste (space permitting) and decentralized segregated waste processing in resource recovery parks for identified BWPs, starting with the larger ones proceeding to others. Such an intervention was deemed timely and necessary as BWPs are estimated as contributing to over 30% of Chennai's daily waste output as the figure below shows (Source: National Productivity Council, New Delhi. Final Report for Up-gradation of MSW Dump Sites of Corporation of Chennai).

Municipal Solid Waste Management – Role of the Informal Sector

By Jency Samuel

(with research assistance from Helen Sha Diana)

The field research carried over a two-week period gave a picture of the role of the informal sector in Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM).

The people involved, their profiles and their productive capacity are given here.

The diagram shows how waste paper marts act as the nodal points of the informal recycling industry– as the collection and distribution centres.

Waste Pickers:

Waste picking is their means of livelihood. Men, women and children are involved in this. They are unaware of their role in urban waste management. Many of them belong to the dalit communities and are uneducated. Many of them, in particular the ones who ran away from home, got into waste picking based on the friendships developed and also after unsatisfactory stints at small jobs. While many of them are platform dwellers, some live in rented houses.

Waste pickers earn a minimum of Rs 250 / day. They collect and earn more around festivals, especially Ayudha Pooja. They are familiar with plastic and paper grades that fetch more money.

Besides the common observations among the waste pickers in neighbourhoods and landfills as mentioned above, the waste pickers in landfills work more than twelve hours, with their day beginning at 5 am. Most of them carry their lunch to the landfills so that they need not walk the long distance out of the site and use that time more productively. Respondents were open to being a part of any inclusive MSWM program.

Waste pickers in neighbourhoods are not keen to be incorporated into formal workforce, as the present mode of work gives them freedom and flexible timings; and they aware that they earn more than private conservancy workers.

Platform dwellers face police harassment when thefts are reported in their locality. Not all shops buy from them since the recyclables collected from garbage bins need to be cleaned.

Conservancy Workers

A sizeable number belongs to Adi Andhra / Arunthathiyar community. Most of them live in rented houses in LIG / EWS neighbourhoods. Workers with private contractors earn nearly half of what their counterparts employed by the Corporation of Chennai do. Each worker earns a minimum of Rs 30 / day from the recyclables that they recover from the bins. Some are educated up to primary level and send their children to school.

Itinerant Buyers

Many of them came into this business following family members / people from their native place who were already into it. On an average they earn a minimum of Rs 300 /day. Most live in rented houses. Many are educated up to primary level and send their children to school. Not all waste paper marts buy from them as their profit margin is less.

Waste Paper Mart Owners

Many were itinerant buyers before setting up shop. A majority of them do not buy from waste pickers and conservancy workers, as the wares need to be cleaned for which they do not have the place and resource. They prefer to buy directly from residents and small commercial establishments. Many work from and live in rented premises. They cart their collections every day / once or twice a week depending on the volume and space for stocking.

They are subjected to police interrogations when they inadvertently buy stolen goods.

Productive Capacity

There are likely to be a minimum of 15000 waste pickers in Chennai. On an average a person collects about 12 kg of paper and 11 kg of plastic.

An NGO working in the waste sector estimates itinerant buyers at a minimum of 3000. They are able to buy about 25kg of paper, 3 kg of plastic and 5kg of metal every day.

Based on the approximate number of waste paper mart owners’ associations, their membership and the number of shops that is not members of said associations, a conservative number of 10000 waste paper marts can be said to operate in Chennai. Our research indicates that the waste paper marts in all could be handling 1000 metric tons (mt) of paper and 3000 mt of plastic (the latter is said to be higher) every day.

General Observations

There are fewer waste paper marts in HIG neighbourhoods. The number of shops is more in densely populated areas. Generally the shops are found on the interior roads and bye lanes, given the traffic and high rent on arterial roads. The number of shops is more in mixed localities where residences and commercial establishments such as workshops, small time manufacturers are equal in number.

Itinerant buyers and waste pickers generally have fixed routes / localities, covering a 5km radius. Waste pickers seem to have a good rapport with the shop owners who buy from them.