The working title of the study is initially drafted as: Economics of Solid Waste Management focusing In particular, on the economical ways and methods of solid waste management and benefits to accrue in Kenya. The research will focus on urban centre especially Nairobi and its environs the paper discusses in detail the research proposal of the topic. Solid waste management is the polite term for garbage management, a system of handling the amount of garbage generated by human. In this research proposal, the background and problem of the study are presented; the objectives of the study are formulated. Here, vital concepts, questions and assumptions are stated. Finally, the methodology to be used is discussed.
2.0 Background of the Study
Waste management refers to the collection, transportation, processing, recycling and disposal of waste materials. These waste materials are solid, liquid, gaseous and even radioactive substances. Managing these human-generated wastes requires reducing their effect on health and the environment as well as recovering resources from it. There are existing waste management methods that include disposal methods, recycling methods and avoidance and reduction methods
Despite the fact that waste handling and transport varies from region-to-region, country-to-country, there are waste management concepts that are universally accepted and implemented. These are the waste hierarchy or the 3Rs (reduce, reuse and recycle), the extended producer responsibility (EPR) and the polluter pay principle. Consolidating the matter directed on the implementation of a solid waste management program in every region in every country. Solid waste management programs, in particular, are designed to better manage solid wastes for the purpose of protecting To make solid waste management system sustainable, energy and resource conservation and reduced environmental impacts are necessary to be considered The U.N.-Habitat guidelines mentioned the reduction of the present levels of waste generation and the increase in energy and materials recovery as important steps for the environmentally-sound waste management system The environmental and sanitary conditions of developing countries especially Kenya are becoming serious year by year and people are forced to live in such conditions due to poverty. Regardless of the size of the city the collection, transportation and disposal or dumping is insufficient and improper. Regarding solid waste management, the scope of problems is very wide and it involves others aspects to be considered directly or indirectly. These include, rate of urbanization, pattern and density of urban areas, physical planning and control of development, physical composition of waste etc. To identify the overall environmental burdens and to assess the potential environmental impacts, studies by NEMA and Ministry of Environment and Natural resources have been made and some steps taken but still we find that the problem continues to be compounded e.g. the introduction of a punitive tax to eliminate plastics proved to be an exercise in futility since it was argued that plastics is the most widely used packaging material and thus manufacturers would pass the extra cost to the consumers hence an increase in the standards of living. . With the help of this information as a tool, the solid waste management system has been evaluated over the years for effective and economical ways and benefits to the community Much of the collected waste finds its way in dumping grounds, open pits, ponds, rivers and agricultural land because of the lack of adequate disposal sites. As the urbanization and industrialization increase, the environmental degradation also advances which is causing economic loses.
Statement of the Problem
The key problem that will be addressed in this study is how appropriate existing economical instruments in place have been effective in control and management of solid waste management in Kenya. The following research questions will be given answer to in the research conducted
1. What are the findings of already conducted studies by the developed world societies about efficient solid waste management and overall benefits to the economy?
2. What are the economic instruments applicable in these developing countries and their comparison to the Kenyan situation?
3. What are the social, economic problems in the developing countries and their comparison to Kenya and also steps to mitigation of these problems as a result of inefficient solid waste management?
4 What are the different ground realities (e.g. conflicting interests of different actors) important to be considered in finding of the most feasible waste management option?
5 What policies or strategies are necessary to develop or improve to make integrated solid waste management system?
6What are the different sustainability indicators necessary for consideration to make this sector sustainable?
7 What are the economical instruments in place and their appropriateness to the Kenyan situation?
8 Are the people aware of these instruments and their roles in the implementation for successful management of solid waste in Kenya?
9 is there enough political goodwill from the government and especially Kenya and other development partner's e.g. U.N.E.P
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The broad objective of the report is to equip policymakers,
Planners and other stakeholders with the techniques and methodologies required to develop and apply appropriate economic instruments for solid waste management. Central to this project was the establishment of an effective multi-stakeholder process involving public sector institutions, the private sector, Universities, and civil society, among others, in order to ensure broad consensus and support for implementation of the final package of policy proposals. The aim of this research is to make a detailed assessment and evaluation study of solid waste management with respect to potential environmental and economical impacts. This help to develop an integrated solid waste management system that will be environmentally effective economic affordable and social acceptable. This will further ensure the quality of life now and for coming generations. This achieved by
1. To evaluate the social-economic-ecological potential for economic development
2. Based on above mentioned evaluation to identify the most efficient cost effective and least polluting waste management option from a system perspective
3. To identify the different actors their role and participation in policy and decision making process in solid waste sector
4. To develop life cycle assessment for different waste management s methods and procedures in terms of economic and environmental recovery
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This research will be a milestone for different stakeholders at national levels who will be interested to develop different waste management options and improve the existing ones with respect to overall environmental and economic impacts through;
1. Waste management practices will be optimized
2.Disposal options with new recovery for managing particular material streams will be examined and as a result of integrated, optimized and economic efficient waste management the benefits eg conservation ,creation of jobs ,provision of economic opportunities and reduction in the impacts of waste disposal will be realized
3environmental assessment reports on state of environment prepared
Organization and limitations of study
The scope of this study will be limited to data between 2000-2008 The focus This research in particular is descriptive and exploratory in approach. The exploratory purpose of this project is concentrating on the characteristics of economic instruments particularly their advantages and disadvantages as well as the direct and indirect affect and influence in the economic growth and success of the country's economy As such, it is but necessary to limit the scope of the study for future researchers' ease in using this study as a reference in their future academic endeavors that this research extensively or partly answers and the overall appropriateness and effectiveness of the type of advertising strategy used. Further, the study gives light on the specific functions of the instruments focusing on the roles in economic growth and success. Solid waste management instruments are often not mainstreamed into national policies and programmes and supported in the same way that say, urban electrification programmes are supported. For these instruments to be successful, they need to be underpinned by a national policy strategy and implemented through a national programme that is well resourced.Generally data on waste management both in rural and urban areas is very unreliable. There is need to work on establishing reasonable data bases for policy development and programme design purposes.Even with the suggested solutions to the solid waste management problems the overall system requires private financing institutions as well as the government to provide long term finance. schemes.
References Arena, U., Mastellone, M. L., Perugini, F. 2003. The Environmental Performance of Alternative Solid Waste Management Options: A Life Cycle Assessment Study. Chemical Engineering Journal 96:207-222. Batool, S. A., Chaudhry, N., Majeed,K. Accepted 2006. Economic Potential of Recycling Business in Nairobi, Kenya. Article in press. Waste Management xxx (2007) xxx-xxx. Chaya, W., Gheewala, S. H. 2006. Life Cycle Assessment of MSW to Energy Schemes in Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production, in Press. Denison, R.1996. Environmental Life-Cycle Comparisons of Recycling, Landfilling, and Incineration: A Review of Recent Studies. Annual Review of Energy and Environment 21: 191-237. Dijkema, G. P. J., Reutrb, M. A., Verhoef, E. V. 2000. A New Paradigm for Waste Management. Waste Management 20: 633-638. Diaz, R., Warith,
Arntzen, J.W. and Fidzani, N.H. (2000). "Human and Solid Waste Management in Urban Africa: A Case
Study of Accra, Gaborone and Harare", in Rietbergen-McCracken and Abaza (eds.) Economic
Instruments for Environmental Management, Earthscan Publications Ltd., London.
Bartone, C.R. (1991). "Keys to Success: Private Delivery of Municipal Solid Waste Services".
Infrastructure Notes, Urban No. UE-3, Transportation, Water and Urban Development Department,
World Bank.
Bartone, C.R. (1999). "Private Sector Participation in Municipal Solid Waste Management: Lessons from
LAC". Notes for the Course on Urban and City Management, Toronto, May 2-14, 1999.
EPHC (2002). "Plastic Shopping Bags in Australia", National Plastic Bags Working Group Report to
the National Packing Covenant Council, Environment Protection and Heritage Council, Australia.
Esho (1997). (cited in UNCHS "Chapter 5: Case Studies of Privatization of some Municipal Services").
Fehily Timoney & Company (1999). "Consultancy Study on Plastic Bags", prepared for Department of
the Environment and Local Government, Custom House, Dublin.
Gatheru, W. and Shaw, R. (eds.) (1998). Our Problems, Our Solutions: An Economic and Public Policy
Agenda for Kenya. Institute of Economic Affairs, Nairobi.
IDB (2003). "Economic Instruments for Solid Waste Management: Global Review and Applications
for Latin America and the Caribbean", Environment Network regional policy dialogue study series,
Inter-American Development Bank, Washington DC.
Ikiara M.M. (2002). "Access of Developing Country Urban Poor to Solid Waste Management (SWM)
Services: Role and Potential of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs)" Background Paper Prepared for
The Micro Infrastructure Project: Infrastructure Service Entitlements and Urban Poverty in Kenya.
Ikiara, M.M., Karanja, A.M. and Davies, T.C. (2004). "Collection, Transportation and Disposal of Urban
Solid Waste in Nairobi", in Baud, I., Post, J. and Furedy, C. (eds.), Solid Waste Management and
Recycling: Actors, Partnerships and Policies in Hyderabad, India and Nairobi, Kenya, Chapter 4,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
ISWA (International Solid Waste Association) and UNEP (2002). Waste Management: Industry as a
partner for sustainable development, ISWA and UNEP, United Kingdom.
JICA (1998). "The Study on Solid Waste management in Nairobi City in the Republic of Kenya",
Japan International Cooperation Agency.
King, Kenneth (1996). Jua Kali: Change & Development in an Informal Economy 1970-95. East African
Educational Publishers, Nairobi.
Kwach, O.H. and Antoine, P. (2000), "Mukuru Recycling Centre", UNCHS (Habitat) Report, July
LITERATURE REVIEW
INTRODUCTION
In designing environmental policy, it is not simply a question of choosing either economic instruments (EIs) or command and control strategies (CACs) but adopting harmonious balance of both. This chapter takes the discussion further by systematically building the rationale for EIs and indicating the extent by which they have been applied in solid waste management generally, economic instruments introduce more flexibility, efficiency and cost-effectiveness into solid waste management measures. Furthermore, they can stimulate development of pollution control technology and expertise in the private sector; provide government with a source of revenue to support waste management programmes; and eliminate a government's requirements for larger amounts of detailed Information needed to determine the feasible and appropriate level of control for each plant or product.
Specifically, in solid waste management, EIs can be used as a tool to:
• reduce the amount of waste generated
• reduce the proportion of hazardous waste in the waste generated
• segregate hazardous waste for special handling and disposal
• encourage recovery, reuse and recycling of wastes
• support cost-effective solid waste collection, transport, treatment and disposal systems
• minimize adverse environmental impacts related to solid waste collection, transport, treatment and disposal systems, and
• generate revenues to cover costs. (IDB, 2003)
Command and control strategy involves direct regulation along with monitoring and enforcement systems.
It generally requires the government to formulate the waste standards, to specify schedules for meeting the standards, permitting and enforcement procedures for facilities, liability assignment, and penalties for non-compliance. The major advantage of the command and control approach is that the regulator has a reasonable degree of predictability about how much pollution levels will be reduced.
The definition of economic instruments varies in the literature. However, there appears to be some general Consensus in the definition of an economic instrument as a policy, tool or action which has the purpose of affecting the behavior of economic agents by changing their financial incentives in order to improve the
Cost-effectiveness of environmental and natural resource management.
THEORETICAL LITERATURE
In order to ease the choice of economic instruments for specific solid waste management targets, a properly laid out menu is also important. Although the literature reveals a general agreement on key subcategories of economic instruments, there are still notable differences. We adopt the taxonomy of IDB
(2003), which groups EIs into three main categories: revenue raising, revenue providing and non-revenue Instruments.
Revenue raising instruments
These include the various kinds of user charges (levies or taxes) for the provision of collection,
transportation and final disposal services. These are directed at "internalizing" the externalities associated with the production, transportation and disposal of wastes. The revenue raised from such charges may then be earmarked for solving the specific problem for which the charge was levied. There are many examples of charges and taxes that fall under the category of revenue raising economic instruments (see Box 1).
Box 1: Revenue raising instruments
• Pollution charges, based on pollutant loading;
• Waste generation charges, based on waste quantities and degree of waste hazard;
• Waste user charges, based on collection and disposal services received;
• Waste tipping charges, to unload at transfer or disposal facilities;
• Product charges or fees to handle disposal of problem products, such as batteries, tyres and refrigerators;
• Disposal taxes, added to disposal charges to influence disposal choices;
• Pollution taxes, added to user charges to influence choices for pollution reduction;
• Eco-taxes, added to non-renewable energy production or fuels to influence energy demand and fuel choices;
• Presumptive taxes, based on presumed levels of pollution; and
• Renewable resource taxes, on virgin materials to influence demand for their use and motivate recycling of secondary materials.
Under this category are also subsidies and subsidy removal schemes which are meant to compensate for the cost of solid waste collection, transportation and disposal. In as much as subsidies find vast applications, they are especially desirable in situations where polluters cannot be easily identified. On the other hand, subsidy removal is aimed at discouraging production and consumption behavior that is harmful to the environment.
Revenue providing instruments
These include subsidies of different kinds that seek to directly reward desired behavior (waste reduction, improved management, or recycling) rather than penalize the behavior to be discouraged. Subsidies can be direct payments, reductions in taxes or other charges, preferential access to credit, or in-kind transfers like the provision of land or other resources. These instruments tend to reduce revenues available to the authorities. Examples of revenue providing economic instruments used in solid waste management are;
Box 2: Revenue providing instruments
• tax credits and tax relief, allowances on property taxes, customs duties, or sales taxes to motivate investment in waste
Management improvements;
• charge reduction, based on proof of recycling or reuse in reducing wastes requiring collection or disposal;
• Tax rebates, for pollution savings or energy efficiencies;
• Environmental improvement funds, established to support pollution reduction, resource protection, energy efficiency;
• Research grants, to stimulate technology development;
• Carbon sequestration funds, to encourage purchase of lands that rejuvenate air quality, sometimes as a trade-off by polluters;
• host community compensation, incentives given by host communities to accommodate waste transfer or disposal facilities;
• Development rights, long-term leases of land and development rights provided to private companies building waste
Treatment and disposal facilities, or to those finding remedy to and reclaiming old disposal sites.
Non-revenue instruments
These instruments, which include deposit-refund programmes, combine the incentive effects of charges (when a good is purchased and the deposit is made) and subsidies (when the good is returned or otherwise handled properly and the deposit is refunded) for the management of solid waste. Other incentive-creating Policies can include property rights based instruments a well as legal-/information based instruments.
Under this sub-category are found liability laws and performance bonds (which increase the financial cost of irresponsible waste handling or disposal); performance disclosure (in which information about the performance of a waste producer or handler affects its financial condition by affecting public standing); and general public education (to alter the demand for environmentally- improved waste management).
Creation or facilitation of markets is a measure relevant to all parts of the product and waste cycle.
Policies to promote more competitive markets in waste management services, instead of the usual direct public administration of waste management, can alter the incentives for participation in the provision of the services; the incentives of the public to rely upon the services, and the fiscal condition of public authorities. Experience with tendering long-term contracts to private service providers illustrates this type of economic instruments
Specific examples of non-revenue economic instruments used in solid waste
Management is provided in Box 3.
2.3 Use of economic instruments for solid waste management in Kenya
Solid waste management in Kenya has largely relied on command and control strategies, an approach that has proved to be inefficient as evidenced by the mountains of uncollected or illegally dumped solid waste.
The use of economic instruments for solid waste management is not well established although some instruments are used to a limited extent. These include user charges; financial instruments - subsidies and licenses; fiscal instruments - imports duty waiver; deposit-refund systems; property rights; institutional reforms and regulations. In addition, although the private sector has been participating in the service of waste collection, transportation and disposal without any policy or legal/regulatory provisions,the Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act of 1999 (EMCA, 1999) and policy development efforts by the Nairobi City Council (NCC) promise to make privatization a leading economic instrument for the management of solid wastes in the country. Part V Section 57, sub-section I of EMCA (1999) provides for "taxes and other fiscal incentives, disincentives or fees to induce or promote the proper management of the environment and natural resources or the prevention or abatement of environmental degradation". This is elaborated in subsection 2 that states that, "without prejudice to the generality of Sub-section (1) the taxes and fiscal incentives, disincentives or fees may include:
a) Customs and excise waiver in respect of imported capital goods, which prevent or substantially reduce
environmental degradation caused by an undertaking.
b) Tax rebates to industries or other establishments that invest in plants, equipment and machinery for pollution control, re-cycling of wastes, water harvesting and conservation, prevention of floods and for using other energy resources as substitutes for hydrocarbons;
c) Tax disincentives to deter bad environment behavior that leads to depletion of environmental resources or that cause pollution;
d) User fees to ensure that those who use environmental resources pay proper value for the utilization of such resources."
EMCA (1999) has, however, not been fully operationalized and some of these economic instruments have not been applied. Notably, though, the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) is spearheading efforts to operationalize the application of economic instruments.
In the remainder of this section, economic instruments that have been used in the management of solid wastes in the country are briefly reviewed, where possible highlighting the experience.
Box 3: Non-revenue economic instruments
• Product life cycle assessment, which predicts overall environmental burden of products and can be used in certification
Programmes;
• Deposit-refund, deposit paid and refund given upon product return for reuse;
• Take-back systems, where manufacturers take back used products or packaging; Procurement preferences, evaluation
Criteria adding points for products with recycled content or reduced resource demand;
• Eco-labelling, which notes product's recyclable content and whether product is recyclable;
• Recycled content requirements, laws and procurement specifications noting the precise recycled content required;
• Product stewardship, which encourages product designs that reduce pollution, includes the full cost of solid waste recycling and disposal reduces wastes and encourages recycling;
• Disclosure requirement, in which waste generators are required to disclose their pollution;
• Manifest systems, precise cradle-to-grave tracking of hazardous wastes;
• Blacklists of polluters, published lists enable consumers to consider whether to buy from polluting companies;
• Liability insurance, liability assurances by contractors and private operators;
• Bonds and sureties, guarantees for performance by contractors and private operators;
• Performance-based management contracting where oversight contractors commit to overall service improvements; and
• Clean City competitions which reward neighborhoods and cities that have improved cleanliness.
The private waste collectors charge a fee ranging between Kshs 200-600 per month per household,
To collect the waste twice a week. The firms provide polythene bags free of charge to the households to store the waste. The private waste collectors who serve the commercial/industrial sector provide a bulk Container at a fee of Kshs 2000 per big container per collection, and Kshs 250 per 200 litre drum and 70-litre polythene bag per collection respectively.
The main advantage of the user charge is that collection of revenue is relatively easy and cost effective forth council since the collection charges is tucked in the water bills. For the private waste collectors, the collection is made easy by the willingness to pay by the consumers, (households, commercial and Industrial enterprises).
There are many disadvantages too, however, with the way the user charge is currently designed.
These include:
• Being a standard charge, it does not target the amount and pollution content of waste generated.
• It does not encourage recycling because it has no provision for segregation of waste at source.
• Private sector waste collectors encourage the principle of exclusion because they target only those who are willing and have the ability to pay. They therefore target high and medium income estates. Even in these areas, there are still some people who cannot pay, which reduce the system's effectiveness.
EMPIRICAL LITERATURE
Revenue raising instruments
User charges
This is a commonly used instrument, which requires the waste generator to pay for the collection, transportation and disposal of the waste. It is a system used by both the City Council and private waste Collectors.
Table 1 illustrates some of the tariffs charged by Nairobi City Council for refuse collection.
Two issues are worth noting from the table. First, the charges are not based on weight or volume of waste.
Second, the levels of rates of tariffs enforced are way below the approved ones. All households that pay for
Water services also pay Kshs 40 a month for dustbin hire (waste storage facility and also its collection), whether or not they actually get the bin or the service.
Table 1: NCC SWM Tariffs, October 1997
The private waste collectors charge a fee ranging between Kshs 200-600 per month per household, to collect the waste twice a week. The firms provide polythene bags free of charge to the households to Store the waste. The private waste collectors who serve the commercial/industrial sector provide a bulk
Container at a fee of Kshs 2000 per big container per collection, and Kshs 250 per 200 litre drum and70-litre polythene bag per collection respectively.
The main advantage of the user charge is that collection of revenue is relatively easy and cost effective forth council since the collection charges is tucked in the water bills. For the private waste collectors, the collection is made easy by the willingness to pay by the consumers, (households, commercial and Industrial enterprises).
There are many disadvantages too, however, with the way the user charge is currently designed.
These include:
• Being a standard charge, it does not target the amount and pollution content of waste generated.
• It does not encourage recycling because it has no provision for segregation of waste at source.
• Private sector waste collectors encourage the principle of exclusion because they target only those who are willing and have the ability to pay. They therefore target high and medium income estates. Even in these areas, there are still some people who cannot pay, which reduce the system's effectiveness. There is also double payment for those served by the private sector waste collectors because the City Council has not adjusted the water billing system.
• Lack of adequate enforcement capacity has led to the situation where waste generators and private waste collecting companies dump waste in illegal dumps.
• Cost-revenue estimates by JICA (1998) show that, for both the Nairobi City Council and private waste collectors, operational costs are much higher than the benefits (excluding social and environmental benefits). In other words, the economic instruments used (such as fees for dustbins, tipping fees, and license fees) do not meet the principle of full-cost pricing and charging for environmental degradation in the management of wastes.
Revenue providing instruments
Licenses and import waiver
These instruments are not widely applied in the management of solid waste in the country. However, two types of these instruments, licenses and import duty waiver, are used. The private sector waste collectors register and pay a fee for a license, Kshs 10,000 annually, to enable them to operate their business in Nairobi. Duties for importation of pollution abatement machinery (which includes waste collection tippers, and treatment, recycling, and waste
minimization machinery) were waived in the Finance Act of 1994/95. Some of the private SWM firms do not seem to be aware of this waiver, however.
Non-revenue instruments
Deposit-refund system
A deposit refund system has been applied in the beverages industry. Consumers pay deposits for reusable glass bottles, which are refunded upon return of the bottles. This deposit ranges between Kshs.10 and25 for soft drink and beer bottles, respectively. The deposit refund system has been popular not only in Nairobi but also throughout Kenya because of its ease of administration, which involves collaboration with wholesalers, retailers and consumers.
Privatization
The private sector has entered the solid waste management sector largely in response to demand for improved services. With the exception of instances where the NCC has contracted a private company to offer waste collection, transportation and disposal in Nairobi's Central Business District, private participation occurs in an unregulated, unstructured, and informal manner. As an economic instrument, it is more accurate to conclude that privatization has only been minimally used in solid waste management.
OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE
From several Latin American case studies, IDB (2003) has identified a number of key factors for the successful implementation of economic instruments in the solid waste management sector. These provide important lessons for the development of an appropriate policy package to address plastic shopping bag waste in Nairobi, the task of Chapter 5. First, a policy on the development and use of economic instruments and empowerment of government staff to seek opportunities for implementing new economic instruments are critical. National policy guidelines on cost recovery measures, moreover, reduce political risk for local officials. Second, building on what already exists (through review and improvement) should be the priority.
Third, learning by doing is the way forward since many instruments will not be perfectly designed. An imperfectly designed instrument does not, in general, create any long-term problems. Where the Instrument is flawed, it is likely that public reaction, as well as the reaction of industry, will soon let Government knows that the instrument needs to be amended. And so,
imperfection is certainly more tolerable in the process of implementation than no action" (IDB, 2003: 29).
Fourth, there is need to establish a national commission to study and implement economic instruments The commission should include diverse professionals including economists, engineers, lawyers, and environmental scientists (from ministries responsible for environment, land, finance, and others, and fromthe private sector) and should apply multi-disciplinary approaches to carry out the economic analysis andenvironmental assessment of each economic instrument option before choice is made. The commission will, in addition, provide a focal point for development and technical assistance.
Fifth, in principle, user charges can encourage waste minimization and proper waste management throughout the product and waste cycle. However, the charges should be directly related to the volume, weight and type of waste, and that they need to be collectable. Inclusion of these charges in other public service bills has significantly improved collection.
Sixth, the use of taxes at the disposal stage to internalize the air, water and soil pollution effects of disposal has great potential but this requires that the municipalities have sufficient financial strength (which can be improved via better management of user charges) and stringent control of illegal dumping.
Seventh, revenue providing economic instruments such as tax credits, low-interest credit lines, accelerated depreciation and relief from custom duties can provide financial incentives for the private sector to invest in production changes that reduce hazardous substances, increase recyclability, generate less waste, and to participate in solid waste service delivery, including resource recovery. But these instruments must be carefully evaluated against revenue scarcity, and low efficiency in targeting. Where applicable, charges and market strengthening activities have advantages. Non-revenue instruments that strengthen liability for damage to the environment or public health could also be useful assuming the legal system is adequate.
Eighth, instruments that target areas of significant pollution loading and environmental consequences should receive priority.
Other design considerations identified by IDB (2003) include:
• Instruments that focus on long-term behavior modification should be implemented.
• New instruments should be introduced in step should be in tune with broader economic development objectives in terms of use of labor, energy and capital.
• Consideration should be given to how revenues from economic instruments will be used.
NOTICE
Tafadhali;"TOA VIATU"
Once again no services are offered with shoes on .Management reserves the right to admission.Heshimu floor PLEASE CLEAR WITH THE SECRETARY FIRST
By order
GOVERNOR OFFICE
KIAMBU COUNTY
KENYATTA UNIVERSITY
RESEARCH PROPOSAL ON APPLICABILITY OF ECONOMIC INSTRUMENTS ON
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN KENYA
BY
MACHARIA JAMES MURAGURI
K16/0408/2008
RESEARCH PROPOSAL SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE BACHELOR DEGREE IN ECONOMICS AND FINANCE
COURSE INSTRUCTOR: MRS PEREZ ONONO
