Social and Environmental Aspects of the Zero Waste Theory Along with its Industrialization - Literature review Example

Introduction Waste management becomes a part of contemporary society as people continue to produce more waste either compostable or non-compostable. Although globalisation contributes to the socio-economic development, the increasing consumerism that comes along with globalisation is also considered one of the drivers of the augmenting, unmanaged wastes. For instance, in Africa, globalisation contributes to the rise of multinational companies, which in turn advances economic development, increases urban population, and consumption (Achankeng, 2003, p.7). Specifically, the increase in consumption and production also drive the increase in waste generation, and this creates environmental and health problems in the local and national-level waste management (Achankeng, 2003, p.7). The health detriment of unmanaged waste advances the urgency of waste management, hence, making it an essential part of international, local, and community-based clean-up programs. The accumulation of consumer wastes in highly urbanised areas may lead to health problems including persistent illness, which may escalate due to poverty and lack of effective, environmental and health care systems (McMichael, 2000, p.1120). For instance, the accumulation of plastic and plastic-based wastes in sewers gutters and canals may cause water toxicity and stagnation, which in turn becomes breeding grounds for bacteria and insects. Disease outbreaks will then inflict the physical and financial aspects of the society bringing its populace to suffer from waste mismanagement. To address waste-related health and environmental issues, several theories emerge to provide explanation and solution to the increasing rate of unmanaged waste. Specifically, this review explores the principles and application of ZWT as a waste management theory, particularly in relation to its use in solving the existent health problems in Nairobi and Ghana, Africa. This review also traces the origins and historical development of ZWT, as well as its critics and contribution to the community and national-level waste management. The Zero Waste Theory (ZWT) The Zero Waste Theory (ZWT) is more than just an initiative in reducing the actual waste; however, it is an idea aimed at changing the consumption and waste disposal behavior of people. In fact, Khan and Islam (2012, p.185) mention that ZWT principles are firmly grounded on the concept “mass cannot be created or destroyed,” and the most appropriate method in maximising mass is to transform by-products into reusable, new products. Relatively, Khan and Islam (2012, p.185) highlight the aim of ZWT in attaining “100% recyclable” products through ensuring that the raw materials for production are reusable and that production residues may be reshaped to form other usable products. For instance, national and international government authorities and NGOs encourage the use of renewable energy sources and recyclable raw materials in business operations to reduce pollution (UN Human Settlements Program, 2010, p.22). This is also essential in attaining sustainable development, particularly in resolving poverty, health, and environmental issues. Historical Background Henry Ford and George W. Carver conceived the first principles of ZWT in 1930’s, when they saw the emerging necessity to leverage land productivity in addressing food and poverty concerns, particularly in putting value in all of the land’s produce. For instance, Carver sees the opportunity to regenerate land arability through using manure and dead leaves, barks, and trunks as soil fertiliser (Ferrell, 2002, p.1). Carver’s research stretched on to include organic paint and crop rotation to reduce waste without asking for patent protection for his discoveries (Ferrell, 2002, p.1). He also reports that Henry Ford also had the same passion for waste management and reduction, particularly in his automobile production through maximising his raw products and residues. For instance, Ford researched on the use of soybeans in his automobile production, including patenting a soy oil-based finish in automobile parts, such as gear shift knobs (Ferrell, 2002, p.1). Even in their simple perception of resource conservation, Carver and Ford initiate the viability of product recycling and reusing, which eventually became the foundations of ZWT. On the other hand, several researches emerge to refine Carver and Ford’s ideas of waste management through product reusing and recycling, the most significant of which was started by Paul Palmer in 1970s-2000s through his Zero Waste Systems and Getting to Zero Waste book. In explaining his work, Palmer (n.d.) states that Getting to Zero Waste explores the finer points of waste reduction through product recycling, and the said process is taken in the context of environmental advocacy instead of merely a solution to solid waste issues. For instance, Palmer (n.d.) highlights the growing commercialisation of garbage recycling wherein organisations aim to make money out of recyclable by-products instead of controlling their consumption. The need to bring ZWT concepts back to its environmental protection and conservation roots grows more urgent as people begin to suffer the health detriment of their excesses, such as plastic solid wastes (Derraik, 2002, p.842). For instance, the pollution that comes along with improper waste disposal grips developing countries, particularly in Western African countries, including Nigeria and Ghana, wherein waste disposal systems, strategies, and policies fail to consider the environmental and health-related aspects of waste disposal (Edoho & Dibie, 2000, p.38). For example, Remigios (2010, pp.233-34) states that the rationale of waste management strategies in African countries rests mainly on the necessity of gathering wastes together without necessary, arriving at strategies that could effectively make use of those wastes. Consequently, this review focuses on the specific ZWT concept applied by the GrassRoots Recycling Network and Cradle-to-Cradle. The GrassRoots Recycling Network (GRRN). The GrassRoots Movement emerges with the GRRN, an NGO established by Bill Sheehan. Primarily, both the movement and organisation aim to revolutionise the usage of wastes as resources. With its 30 years of operation, the primary goal of GRRN is to eliminate incinerators and landfills through promoting the use of non-toxic and organic raw materials to avoid the accumulation of non-renewable and non-recyclable materials (GrassRoots Recycling Network (GRRN), n.d.). In the GrassRoots Movement’s ZWT theory, Connett and Sheehan (2001, p.5) mention that waste reduction starts from the people’s desire to limit their consumption, particularly of non-renewable and non-recyclable products. Connett and Sheehan (2001) also highlight the individual and collective efforts that must be done to attain the goals of ZWT; endeavoring towards a clean and sustainable society requires collaboration between industries and communities wherein both share equal responsibility for their actions. Connett (n.d.) explains that GRRN applies the environmental aspects of ZWT, such as “design for sustainability, clean production, and extended producer responsibility.” To design sustainable waste management strategies is to endeavor environmental recovery and welfare; it requires acceptance of the inevitability of waste and the necessity of reducing and reusing wastes to avoid the overwhelming danger of pollution. Relatively, Pauli (2010, pp.7-8) states that creating sustainable businesses and purchasing behaviors give way to more jobs and increase in market share. Specifically, this is applicable in resolving plastic solid waste issues wherein landfills are either filled with non-renewable and toxic plastic or burned through incinerators that emitting poisonous emissions. For instance, Lithner (2011, p.2) mentions that plastic waste management strategies in developing countries often fail because of the limited landfill spaces while there are not enough funds to support recovery programs and recycling sites. This situation pushes companies and communities to resort to piling up and burning plastic wastes instead of reusing those materials. The Cradle-to-Cradle Design (CTC). Another significant derivation of the ZWT theory is the Cradle-to-Cradle design wherein the primary cause of waste accumulation is the failure to utilise by-products and wastes materials. In the context of waste reduction, CTC and GRRN have paralleled concepts of waste minimisation through recycling and reusing waste materials. According to Braungart, et al. (2006, pp.1-2), the primary aim of CTC is to alter the “linear progression” of materials such that wastes may no longer be considered wastes; instead they are just new forms of resources that may be used to create new products. Specifically, in outlining the specific concepts of CTC, McDonough and Braungart (2002, pp.17-20) state that the said theory focuses on redesigning the production system from cradle-to-grave to cradle-to-cradle implying that by-products and wastes should return to the environment naturally through decay. This strategy gives room for environmental regeneration, considering that wastes are perceived as either new resources or fertilisers. Another significant aspect of the CTC is its goal toward a lesser ecological footprint and environmentally sustainable economy through the usage of less toxic, if not degradable products. Braungart, et al. (2006, p.2) contend that this strategy gives room for “eco-effectiveness, extended productivity and recyclability, rematerialisation, and extended product lifespan.” In applying CTC in business operations, it is perceived that products are more eco-friendly without risking corporate aims and product value. The perceived capacity of CTC to recreate wastes and to promote a life-nurturing business production makes it a viable option for those countries aiming to minimise or more likely eradicate environmental and health problems (McDonough & Braungart, 2003, p.13). Further, McDonough and Braungart (2003, p.14) highlight the productivity of recreating wastes to make other forms of products. This process relates to the preference of rematerialisation over dematerialisation wherein reusing and recreating by-products are perceived as more productive than allowing wastes, particularly toxic ones, to stay and degrade in the environment. Significance Environmental and health concerns threaten socio-economic development as those issues, oftentimes, come in conflict with sustainability and business expansions. Relatively, it is likely that pursuing environmental sustainability and maximising the use of resources, even those considered wastes, is part of environmental protection and exercise of personal and social responsibility. In fact, Lehmann (2011, pp.156-57) states that waste management theories are essential in understanding the interplay between urbanisation, health and environment, consumption, and waste management. Waste management theories, such as the ZWT and its derivations, including the GRRN and CTC, are useful in designing appropriate waste management strategies that could address the issue effectively, which includes diminishing wastes entirely. Further, the rise of health and environmental issues poses limits to the usage of natural resources, particularly those involving long-term environmental consequences. Aside from its environmental implications, wastes mismanagement also puts to risk the health of the people, considering that sites wherein wastes accumulate will eventually become breeding grounds for bacteria and insects. For instance, Mangizvo (2012, pp.49-50), in his study of waste management in Alice, South Africa, states that plastic is the most prevalent of all wastes. He also observed that the accumulation of plastic solid wastes in drainage systems and streams contaminates the water, which leads to the contamination of potable water sources (Mangizvo, 2012, pp.49-50). Relatively, the urgency of creating effective waste management strategies, particularly to resolve plastic solid waste issues, seeks to address the people’s need for a more healthy and sustainable environment regardless of the pursuance of socio-economic development (Al-Salem, et al., 2009, p.2626). Contemporary Literature Existing literatures on ZWT focus more on the refinement and application of its principles, particularly of recycling and reusing aspects either through CTC or GRRN. For instance, the use of ZWT theories in resolving waste management issues in African countries, particularly in Ghana and Nigeria, lies mainly in the implementation of infrastructures and recovery sites that take charge of remaking and recycling plastic wastes (United Nations Environment Programme Chemicals, 2002, pp.3-4). For instance, contemporary studies and applications of the ZWT focus on finding solutions to segregate renewable and non-renewable wastes (Tsiboe & Marbell, 2004, p.7), as well as avoiding the use of non-renewable raw materials, before this end up in garbage sites (Ogwueleka, 2009, p.176). Further, Wahab (2012, p.22) states that local communities, as well as local and international organisations applying the principles of ZWT, put emphasis on the value-laden aspect of the said strategy. Specifically, waste management programs put emphasis on the participation of citizens and business organisations in waste management wherein every stakeholder in the community takes part in the implementation of cleanup and recycling programs. Challenges and Critiques The most persistent criticism against the ZWT is the idealistic and seemingly unrealistic view of waste reduction, considering that the said theory relies on changing the purchasing and disposing behavior of individuals. Questions on the actual viability of the ZWT arise along with persistent health and environmental concerns in various developing nations, particularly in Ghana and Nigeria. According to Zaman and Lehmann (2011, p.81), the challenges in the application of ZWT, principally in attempting to transform developing and highly industrial cities in “zero waste cities,” include the lack of funds to support and sustain recycling sites, the lack of committed participation from stakeholders, and the persistent use of toxic materials due to high levels of consumerism. Relatively, Ashraf (2000, p.7) contends that it is necessary to design plastic recycling system that efficiently transforms plastic wastes into reusable products. He also argues that although the usage of technology goes against the CTC concept of rematerialisation, it is still essential in optimising non biodegradable products, which include plastics. Recommendations Considering the findings of the literatures, this review offers two recommendations for further research. First, it is beneficial to raise the environmental awareness of the people, particularly in relation to their waste disposal and consumer behavior. A positive attitude toward the environment and a desire to promote environmental welfare are essential in promoting the waste management programs, taking into account that wastes are products of human consumption (Wienaah, 2007, p.26). Raising public awareness on the hazards of waste accumulation motivates people to consider the environmental impact of their daily activities. Second, communities and organisations adapting the ZWT principle may also consider formulating short-term and long-term goals and sharing share them to the public. This suggestion aims to address doubts on the actual viability of ZWT in resolving waste management crisis. Thus, although resolving such a crisis is a long process, both citizens and business organisations may be constantly reminded on the long-term benefits of their collective efforts (Bahri, 2005, p.86). For instance, developing a unified approach to resolve the waste-related crisis is beneficial to all stakeholders, bearing in mind that stakeholders may have the assurance of help and inspiration from their fellows. This corresponds to the value of personal responsibility and collaboration, particularly in community-level waste management programs. Impact on Development This review sheds light on the conceptual development of ZWT, particularly on the application of ZWT theories in NGOs and government efforts, to resolve waste disposal issues. As there are different strategies in implementing those concepts, this paper attempts to contribute insights concerning the plastic, solid waste management in African cities, including Ghana and Nigeria. For instance, this research derives insights from the existing waste collection and recycling strategies conducted by the public sectors in Nigeria (Ogu, 2000, p.105), as well as with the curbside and communal waste collection process in Ghana (Asase, et al., 2009, p.2781). This paper is perceived to contribute to the presentation of the viability of waste management strategies as applied in African countries. In relation to the development of ZWT, this review serves as a starting point in investigating the viability and benefits in applying ZWT principles in actual waste management policies, particularly in addressing the accumulation of plastic solid wastes in specific African countries. As this study elaborates the derivations of ZWT, which includes the GRRN and CTC, this paper is expected to differentiate the subtle differences between the two theoretical derivations. Further, to substantiate the concepts uncovered, this paper also discusses specific examples as demonstrated in the existent application of those theories. This research also intends to promote the social and environmental aspects of ZWT along with its industrialisation and conflict resolution aspects. Conclusion The literatures pertaining to Zero Waste Theory provide a reasonable explanation and solutions to waste management issues in Africa, particularly in managing plastic wastes in Ghana and Nairobi. This review considers the historical development of ZWT, which includes the diverse interpretation of such idea as presented by the GRRN and Cradle-to-Cradle theorists. For instance, this paper found out that GRRN focuses on the recycling and reusing aspect of waste management while the Cradle-to-Cradle principles focus on remaking the production system so as to design products whose raw materials may degrade in the environment naturally. However, although the concepts of ZWT seem highly effective, in retrospect, only a few countries applying the said procedure succeeded in reducing plastic wastes. For instance, lack of enthusiasm, environmental awareness, and funds are among the foremost challenges that hinder the effective application of ZWT theories, particularly in developing countries. This results to the slow and seemingly absent progress in the waste management programs of those countries. Conclusively, with the contributions of this literature review, it can be hoped that societies can develop the most appropriate waste management strategy that could address environmental and social issues. References Achankeng, E., 2003. Globalization, urbanization and municipal solid waste management in Africa. In: AFSAAP (African Studies Association of Australasia and the Pacific), 26th Conference on Africa on a Global Stage: politics, history, economics, and culture. Adelaide, South Australia 1-3 October 2003. AFSAAP: South Australia. Al-Salem, S.M. Lettieri, P. & Baeyens, J., 2009. Recycling and recovery routes of plastic solid waste (PSW): a review. Waste Management, 29, pp.2625-2643. Asase, M. Yanful, E.K. Mensah, M. Stanford, J. & Amponsah, S., 2009. Comparison of municipal solid waste management systems in Canada and Ghana: a case study of cities of London, Ontario, and Kumasi, Ghana. Waste Management, 29, pp.2779-2786. Ashraf, G.S., 2000. Environmental waste management and plastics recycling-an overview. Ph. D. London: Brunel University. Bhari, G., 2005. Sustainable management of plastic bag waste: the case of Nairobi, Kenya. Master’s Thesis. Sweden: Lund University. Braungart, M. McDonough, W. & Bollinger, A., 2006. Cradle-to-cradle design: creating healthy emissions - a strategy for eco-effective product and system design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, pp. 1337-1348. Connett, P., n.d. Zero waste: a key move towards a sustainable society. (Our Projects article) [Online] Available at: http://www.americanhealthstudies.org/zerowaste.pdf [Accessed 11 January 2013]. Connett, P. & Sheehan, B., 2001. A citizen’s agenda for Zero Waste: a United States/Canadian approach (Greenpeace Publication) [internet] Italy: Greenpeace (Published October 12, 2001) Available at: http://www.greenpeace.org/italy/Global/italy/report/2005/12/citizen-agenda-zero-waste.pdf [Accessed 11 January 2013]. Derraik, J.G.B., 2002. The pollution of marine environment by plastic debris: a review. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 44, pp.842-852. Edoho, F. & Dibie, R., 2000. Executing environmental policy and waste management in Ghana and Nigeria. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 2 (2), pp.38-70. Ferrell, J., 2002. George Washington Carver and Henry Ford: pioneers of zero waste. [Online] Available at: http://www.zerowaste.org/publications/PIONEERS.PDF [Accessed 9 January 2013]. GrassRoots Recycling Network (GRRN), n.d. Who we are (GRRN article) [Online] Available at: http://www.grrn.org/page/who-we-are [Accessed 11 January 2013]. Khan, M.M. & Islam, M.R., 2012. Zero waste engineering. Salem: Scrivener Publishing. Lehmann, S., 2011. Optimizing urban material flows and waste management streams in urban development through principles of Zero Waste and sustainable consumption. Sustainability, 3, pp.155-183. Lithner, D., 2011. Environmental and health hazards of chemicals in plastic polymers and products. Ph. D. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg. Mangizvo, R.V., 2012. The incidence of plastic waste and their effects in Alice, South Africa. Online Journal of Social Sciences Researches, 1 (2), pp.49-53. McDonough, W. & Braungart, M., 2002. Cradle-to-cradle: remaking the way we make things. New York: North Point Press. McDonough, W. & Braungart, M., 2003. Toward a sustaining architecture for the 21st century: the promise of cradle-to-cradle design. UNEP Industry and Environment, 26 (2), pp.13-16. McMichael, A. J., 2000. The urban environment and health in a world of increasing globalization: issues for developing countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 78 (6), pp.1117-1126. Ogu, V.I., 2000. Private sector participation and municipal waste management in Benin City, Nigeria. Environment and Urbanization, 12 (2), pp.103-117. Ogwueleka, T.C., 2009. Municipal solid waste characteristics and management in Nigeria. Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering, 6 (3), pp.173-180. Palmer, P., n.d. Getting to zero waste (Getting to zero waste article) [Online] Available at: http://www.gettingtozerowaste.com/ [Accessed 15 January 2013]. Pauli, G., 2010. The blue economy, 10 years, 100 innovations, 100 million jobs. New Mexico: Paradigm Publications. Remigios, M. V., 2010. An overview of the management practices of solid waste disposal sites in African cities and towns. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 12 (7), pp.233-239. Tsiboe, I. A. & Marbell, E., 2004. A look at urban waste disposal problems in Accra, Ghana. Master’s Thesis. Denmark: Roskilde University. United Nations Environment Programme Chemicals, 2002. Sub-Saharan Africa: regional report. Switzerland: UNEP Chemicals. United Nations Human Settlements Habitat, 2010. Solid waste management in the world’s cities: water and sanitation in the world’s cities 2010. London: Earthscan. Wahab, S., 2012. The role of social capital in community-based urban solid waste management: case studies from Ibadan Metropolis, Nigeria. Ph. D. Ontario: University of Waterloo. Wienaah, M.M., 2007. Sustainable plastic waste management-a case of Accra, Ghana. Master’s Thesis. Stockholm: TRITA-LWR. Zaman, A.U. & Lehmann, S., 2011. Challenges and opportunities in transforming a city in a “Zero Waste City.” Challenges 2, pp.73-93. Read More