TRANSPOSITION OF RESOURCE EFFICIENCY REQUESTS INTO ANALYTICAL TOOLS FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT Andjelka Mihajlov a, Prof.PhD ChemEng. Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Serbia,
[email protected] a Environmental Ambassador for Sustainable Development
Abstract The paper aims at supporting and catalyzing further discussion (and possible options) how common waste management concept could be transformed by taking in account resource efficiency requests. In particular, this paper is positioning the issue of sustainability in front, talking dilemma of waste management as the (possible) wicked or wicked-like problem. Concluded reflections address some analytical tools for waste management, (still) not common in todays practice. Analysis presenting is supporting the importance of adequate and high-quality actions with reducing residual waste to a minimum, when moving towards circular economy.
Keywords: waste, waste prevention, waste infrastructure, wicked problem, wickedlike problem, resource efficiency, innovation, gaps in knowledge, circular economy
Background Supporting the sound management of waste means to develop a global outlook of challenges, trends and policies in relation to waste prevention, minimization and management, taking into account the materials life cycle [1]. In addition, this means an important contribution to building a green economy in the context of sustainable development [2, 3]. Background research base for this paper is presented previously [4] and concludes with the (future building) blocks: - The more waste is reclassified as a product, more natural resources will be saved - The more waste generation is prevented, the greater improvement in resource efficiency is acquired
-
The future meaning of the term “waste” will be substantially different in developed, countries in transition and developing countries (if the same path and timeline will remain in improving waste management options).
It is also essential to reinforce measures to be taken with regard to prevention as well as the reduction of impacts of waste generation and waste management on the environment. Finally, the recovery of waste should be encouraged so as to preserve natural resources. In the context of this paper it is important to point out that it is a challenge and opportunity to transform the resource efficiency agenda into global international strategy, in particular having in mind big differences in waste management practice and infrastructure, among others, between countries of global arena.
Waste management: a wicked or wicked-like problem? This research is inspired with an idea of positioning waste among wicked problems [5], i.e. waste shouldn’t be considered purely as an engineering or scientific problem – it must be addressed taking into account technical, environmental, social, regulatory and ethical aspects. A wicked problem [6] is a form of (social or cultural) problem that is difficult to solve because of: incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements. Based on these characteristics, is the waste management problem wicked? (Possible) thought analysis is presented, and systematically structured in Table 1. When looking at Table 1 we could assume that: 1. Waste is having some characteristics of a wicked problem 2. Waste is having some characteristics of a wicked-like problem 3. A wicked or wicked-like problem has some characteristics that waste doesn`t have. To note, that sustainability itself could be characterized as a wicked problem [5], but this is not discussed within this paper. The key to move waste from a wicked/wicked-like arena is to use appropriate up-todate tools to design environmentally friendly/sound and sustainable waste care [7]. It is the right place in this paper to point out the term up-to-date tools, by recalling research positions “who knows what technologies will be available in 40 years when today’s buildings and infrastructure become obsolete and turn into waste?” [8], and “due to the complexity of today’s goods, tomorrow’s recycling might turn out to be more difficult than anticipated” [8]. These reconfirm the background research outreach that creativity and knowledge based actions are the key for a sustainable world, and innovative approaches will make possible “short-cuts” (from dumping to waste prevention, for example) [4]. Differentiation (meaningless change) should not replace innovation. “New generation of system thinkers are needed” for lifecycle thinking driven innovation [9,10] to bridge “gaps in knowledge” [11,12].
Table 1 – Structured analysis of the waste as the wicked problem Wicked problem characteristics
No definitive formulation
It is hard, maybe impossible, to measure or claim success with wicked problems because they bleed into one another, unlike the boundaries of traditional design problems that can be articulated or defined; always occur in a social context. Solutions to wicked problems can be only good or bad, not true or false.
There is no template to follow when tackling a wicked problem, although history may provide a guide There is always more than one explanation for a wicked problem, with the appropriateness of the
Waste management related snapshots
Waste problems are hard to solve (not all hard-to-solve problems are wicked, only those with an indeterminate scope and scale). However, by “benchmarking” waste problem(s) we possibly determinate the scope and scale of the problem. Seams that in waste problems communication and coherence among diverse stakeholders are still a challenge. There are facts, data, studies and reports, but a coherent shared space for crafting and negotiating shared understanding is sometimes difficult to reach (for example to solve the problem - but not at the location next to our living/working place). The wickedness of the problem reflects the diversity among the stakeholders in the problem. It seems that in particular situations to waste solutions, applicable terms are "better," "worse," "good enough," or "not good enough." This opens the question: are we improving rather than solving waste issues; solutions to waste problems are simply intending to be appropriate (not right or wrong), supports by background research noted The waste hierarchy has been given legal force, consequently requiring a transition from end-of-pipe technologies towards an integrated management of resources. The advanced tools like life-cycle assessment move the issue of waste from a wicked problems perspective. It seems that more often there is no unique explanation of waste problems (for example see background research dilemmas). It will not be difficult to illustrate the interconnected quality of
Legend: yes Concluded reflection related to waste Wicked problem Wicked-like problem
no
explanation depending greatly on the individual perspective of the designer Every wicked problem is a symptom of another problem. No mitigation strategy for a wicked problem has a definitive scientific test because humans invented wicked problems and science exists to understand natural phenomena.
socio-economic political systems with waste problems, i.e. for example present how a change in education will cause new behavior in waste prevention and care. For waste, this diagnosis applies. Waste is a “symptom” of living models, GDP/poverty prevention, technology level, etc. Because of the role of design in developing waste infrastructure, designers (engineers, other professions) play a central role in mitigating the negative consequences of waste problems and positioning the more desirable directions. This mitigation is not an easy, quick, or solitary exercise and needs interdisciplinary collaboration – where waste management and governance science and research is positioning itself for decades, “moving” waste problems almost out of the wicked area. Waste related translation of this characteristic could be to built a landfill, for example, to see how it works. With a decade of designing landfills and waste management infrastructure, waste issues are moved from trying solutions with unintended consequences which are likely to spawn new (wicked) problems.
Offering a "solution" to a wicked problem frequently is a "one shot" design effort because a significant intervention changes the design space enough to minimize the ability for trial and error Every wicked problem is unique It is a fact that each waste problem is unique; however, general tools and tailored solutions could categorize waste issues as wicked-like. Having waste management alternative solutions are moving waste further from the wicked area. Designers attempting to For this criterion dilemma exist about the meaning, i.e. designers/managers/researchers addressing wicked or address a wicked problem must not wicked problems must be fully responsible. However, if waste care is incented to drive prices down, be fully responsible for their reproduce the same pattern of management over and over, innovate slowly, and create differentiation in actions. product and resources lines only through cosmetic changes and minor feature augmentations, waste issues could be considered as wicked-like.
Resource efficiency tools in waste management There are interesting studies, like the one putting forward the new concept of waste as an intermediate phase of production and services [13]. Waste has increasingly been seen with an economic value and with a significant role in supporting the decoupling of resource use from economic growth [14]. Post Rio+20 developing strategies are associated mainly with the green growth. Knowing that “green growth means promoting economic growth while reducing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, minimizing waste and inefficient use of natural resources,…..” and that jobs are green if they`re decent and minimize waste and pollution “ [1,3], it is important to accommodate minimization of waste and sustainable use of natural resources [15] in development strategies, in order to assure sustainability.
Figure 1. Addapted from [16]: target levels of the waste prevention in the life cycle of products The EU has a strong position globally in both waste management and recycling (Figure 1). EU waste model legislation, on the global scale, becomes visionary mission [17, 18]. Waste prevention is “measures taken before a substance, material or product has become waste” [19]. Waste prevention is at the top of the waste hierarchy, but progress toward it has so far been relatively limited. In addition, it is the issue of how to measure waste prevention [20]. Today we face today unpredictable challenges regarding waste management in the future. Addressing these challenges requires a systematic approach and life cycle thinking. In this paper, based on shared response options for resource use and waste, i.e. the linkages between waste management, life-cycle of product and material tools, as well as a cleaner production approach [21,22], author is underlining some of possible waste prevention tools (Table 2),contributing to move waste problems away from wicked and wicked-like areas.
Table 2. Possible waste prevention tools Apply integrated policies to enhance resource efficiency and to reduce waste generation. Have targets for resource efficiency and waste management. Undertake a material flow analysis; sustainable materials management across the entire life-cycle (including closing material loops); development of less materialintensive business models and removing market failures hampering re-use, recycling and recovery. Undertake a life cycle analysis. Undertake a chemical flow analysis. Properly address increasing scarcity of resources (the number of chemical companies affected by resource scarcity may triple by 2020). Implement and further develop cleaner production processes and products, including addressing the lack of/low reuse and recycling (90% of the products become waste within six months); eco-design, design of resource-efficient products that enable repair, re-use and recycling. Identify the hazardous substance to be phased out, on the basis of the precautionary principle. Internalizing the external costs of material extraction and processing, transport as well as waste disposal; international cooperation and technology transfer in the area of resource efficiency, re-use and recycling; international cooperation on combating illegal trade practices. Develop policies fostering innovation aiming at resource efficiency, re-use and recycling. Greening the economy and shifting to knowledge-based economic development models. Develop/adapt tools related to “urban mining” (WEEE,MSW, road dust, landfills) focused on sustainable resource and waste management. Facilitate substance phase-out with regulatory and economic incentives; incentives to increase re-use, recycling and recovery. Facilitate the transition towards cleaner production with social planning, involving workers and communities affected; develop new and innovative public-private partnerships among industries, governments, academia and other non-governmental stakeholders aiming to enhance the capacity and technology for environmentally sound waste management, including waste prevention. Address consumption patterns and the rebound effects. Actively disseminate information to the public and ensure their participation in decision-making. Provide training and technical and financial support. Provide better control and enforcement systems. Specific attention should also be given to valuating ecosystems, identifying the opportunities arising from waste management and recycling, and to develop footprint indicators to account also for imports [23].
Concluded reflections It is required to further improve tools in order to deal with the future waste management problems.
Vocabulary blocks/core words related to waste management, as the outreach of analysis presented are: Sound management of wastes- waste prevention - waste minimization - materials life cycle - resource efficiency - the future meaning of the term “waste” - waste management practice - waste management infrastructure - to move away from wicked/wicked-like problems - appropriate up-to-date tools - tomorrow’s recycling lifecycle thinking driven innovation - gaps in knowledge - integrated management of resources - unpredictable challenges - integrated waste management - circular economy. Moving towards circular economy means adequate collection and processing, high quality recycling, phasing out landfills (with taking in consideration thoughts presented in this paper), and reducing residual waste to a minimum.
Acknowledgements The research reported in this paper was partially initiated within the Serbian Ministry competent for Science funded Project Reference number 176019.
References 1. EEA 2013: Towards a green economy in Europe – EU environmental policy targets and objectives 2010-2050, EEA Copenhagen (2013) 2. Mihajlov A., H. Stevanović Čarapina, M. Tadic, J. Staudenmann, D. Stokić, R. Tsutsumi, A. Bassi, Study on Achievements and Perspectives towards a Green Economy and Sustainable Growth in Serbia, UNDP/UNEP, 2012 3.Green Economy 2013, researched by Kristina AtKisson, Edited by A.AtKisson, 2013 4.Mihajlov A., and H.Stevanovic-Carapina, Rethinking Waste Management within the Resource-Efficient Concept, INVITED KEY NOTE LECTURE, Conference Abstracts Book: 7th International Conference on Environmental Engineering and Management – ICEEM07 ( Integration Challenges for Sustainability/18-21 September 2013, Vienna –Austria), Politehnikum Publishing House – Romania, ISBN 978-973-621-418-9, pp 23-24 (2013) 5. Azapagic, A., Sustainable Production and Consumption: Integrating Environmental, Economic and Social Aspects of Sustainability, INVITED KEY NOTE LECTURE, Conference Abstracts Book: 7th International Conference on Environmental Engineering and Management – ICEEM07 (Integration Challenges for Sustainability/18-21 September 2013, Vienna –Austria), Politehnikum Publishing House – Romania, ISBN 978-973-621-418-9 (2013) 6. Rittel, Horst and Melvin Webber (1973) "Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning," Policy Sciences 4, Elsevier Scientific Publishing, Amsterdam, pp. 155-159. Also Reprint No. 86, The Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley, California. 7. Mihajlov A., The Basic Environmental Analytical Tools – Monograph, available in Serbian language as: Osnove analitickih instrumenata u oblasti zivotnesredine, Monografija podrzana od Ministarstva za nauku i tehnološki razvoj Republike Srbije i
Ministarstva za životnu sredinu i prostorno planiranje Republike Srbije u okviru realizacije projekta,, Publisher: University Educons, ISBN: 978-86-87785-13, 2010 8. Brunner, P.H., Cycles, spirals and liner flows, Waste Management and Research, 31(10), Supplement 1-2 (2013) 9.Investigating the role of design in the circular economy, Report 1/2013, RCA, London (2013) 10. Stevanovic-Carapina H., A.Mihajlov, Evaluation Criteria for Local Solid Waste Management Plans – Proposal Based on Case Study: Small And Medium Municipalities, ISWA World Congress 2013 CD Proceedings, ISWA World Congress, 7-11 October 2013, Vienna, full paper, session 56 11. Cost of Inaction on the Sound Management of Chemicals, UNEP (2013) 12. Mihajlov, A., Needs for Tailored Knowledge and Skill-Based Education for Sustainable Development: Balkan Environment Life Leadership Standards Courses, Chapter 10 In Leal Filho, W. (Ed), Sustainable Development at Universities: New Horizons. Peter Lang Scientific Publishers, Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, Brussels, New York, Oxford, Vienna 994 pp, ISBN 978-3-631-62560-6 , 2012 13.Atiq Uz Zaman and Steffen Lehmann, Development of demand forecasting tool for natural resources recouping from municipal solid waste, Waste Management and Research, 31(10), Supplement 17-25 (2013) 14. IEEP 2012: Running out of time? Stepping up action for Europe’s environment, IEEP, London, 2012 15. National Strategy for the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources of Serbia, available in the Serbian language as: Nacionalna strategija o odrzivom koriscenju prirodnih resursa I dobara, 2011 16. Dehoust G, D.Jepsen, F.Knappe, H.Wits, Foundation for a national waste prevention program, in: Krenert M and Sihler A (Eds), Abfaltag 2011Rohstoffsicherung duch Abfall verme idung und Recycling, Stuttgart, Oldenbourg, 2435, 2011 17. COM (2011) 21 18. EEA: Consumption and the Environment – 2012 update, Copenhagen 2012 19. Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC 20. Wiltsh H., National waste management programs: indicators on progress and barriers, Waste Management & Research, 30(9), Supplement 29-35 (2012) 21. Mihajlov A., H.Stevanovic-Carapina, Mining Waste Management within the frame of Waste Prevention Policy and Integral Pollution and Emission Control, CD Proc. of ISWA 2012 World Congress, 588:1-9, 2012 22. Staniskis J.K, Sustainable consumption and production: how to make it possible, Clean Techn.Environ. Policy, Berlin Heidenberg, October 2012 23 European Resource Efficiency Platforms (EREP), 2013
