Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorJudy Layzer.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHowe, Caroline Louiseen_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.coverage.spatiala-ii---en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-09-19T21:45:52Z
dc.date.available2014-09-19T21:45:52Z
dc.date.copyright2014en_US
dc.date.issued2014en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/90204
dc.descriptionThesis: M.C.P., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, 2014.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (pages 51-54).en_US
dc.description.abstractRapid population growth, urbanization and increasing affluence have led to increases in consumption and waste generation in all Indian cities. The current system, a mix of informal recyclables collection and centralized waste collection by the formal sector with much garbage still disposed of in unlined landfills, is at a point of crisis. With waste generation far outpacing processing capacity, cities know they must invest in "improving" waste management systems, yet a key question is whether to invest in centralized or decentralized, formal or informal waste systems, or combine the strengths of both. This research asks what approach to waste management in India will increase stability, economic and environmental sustainability, and social benefit. To answer those questions, I conducted a case study of Pune, since the city has implemented centralized waste processing, followed by supporting informal sector collection and instituting decentralized collection. The diversity of its methods and the many challenges Pune has faced have allowed me to analyze the benefits, impacts and limitations of each of these approaches. For the case study, I conducted more than 50 interviews of city staff, waste pickers, waste picker cooperative staff, restaurant managers, and citizens. Based on this analysis, and comparison to other Indian cities, including Delhi and Bangalore, I have concluded that the best solution for most Indian cities is to build the capacity of the informal sector while also creating decentralized processing infrastructure to handle organics and non-recyclable waste. While this approach is challenging, it is possible, and I have created a set of recommendations in order to implement this effectively. These guidelines include the following: 1) conduct long-term planning across city departments to have proactive approach to waste generation; 2) focus on waste reduction and eliminate most non-recyclable and non-biodegradable waste streams; 3) invest in the capacities of the informal sector, including giving waste pickers space for sorting, more information on their rights, and support; 4) build decentralized waste processing systems for organics and non-recyclables that create benefits for and minimize impacts on host communities; and 5) site all facilities more equitably by building community consensus.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Caroline Louise Howe.en_US
dc.format.extent54 pagesen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectUrban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.titleBuilding stability through decentralization : the environmental, economic, and ethical argument for informal sector collection and decentralized waste processing in urban Indiaen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeM.C.P.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning
dc.identifier.oclc890371153en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record