INCLUSIVE
CLIMATE ACTION
PARTICIPATORY
APPROACHES IN
SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT FOR
BULK WASTE
GENERATORS IN
BENGALURU
A BASELINE ASSESSMENT REPORT
This assessment report received generous support in funding from Porticus as
part of the C40 Cities Global Green New Deal Pilot Implementation Initiative.
The principal authors of the report are:
Authors
Saahas NGO & Saahas Zero Waste
Divya Tiwari
Annie Philip
Shanti Tummala
Angel Vinod
Priyanka Kesavan
C40 Cities
Akshatha Venkatesha
Contributors from C40
We are grateful to C40 colleagues for their valuable inputs and feedback:
Shruti Narayan, Jazmin Burgess, Josephine Agbeko, Benjamin John,
Ricardo Cepeda-Màrquez, Connor Muesen
Design and typesetting: Mitchelle Collette Dsouza
Sincere gratitude is extended to all the participants
(as detailed in Annexure 1) for their valuable insights during the stakeholder
engagement process, which have greatly enriched this report.
Acknowledgements
List of figures
List of abbreviations
Executive summary
Introduction
Waste and climate change
Approach and methodology
4.1 Baseline assessment and stakeholder engagement
4.2 Mapping of BWGs
Applicable legal and policy framework for the BWG ecosystem
5.1. Overview
5.2. Who are BWGs
5.3. Duties of BWGs
5.4. BBMP SWM bye-laws: Welfare, occupational safety and training
Overview of Bommanahalli zone
BWGs in Bommanahalli and their climate impact
7.1. Mapping of BWGs
7.2. GHG emissions by BWGs
Identification of stakeholders, their vulnerabilities and spheres of influence
8.1. Stakeholder identification
8.2. Vulnerability and power analysis
Stakeholder engagement using participatory approaches
9.1. Overview
9.2. Objectives of stakeholder engagement
9.3. Participatory approaches adopted in stakeholder consultations
Key findings from stakeholder engagement
10.1. Policy and enforcement
10.2. Criticality of source segregation
10.3. Capacity building opportunities
10.4. Risks and vulnerabilities associated with social inclusion
10.5. Necessity of recognition and job security
10.6. Financial viability of in-situ biodegradable waste management
10.7. Ancillary support
Recommendations
11.1. Policy
11.2. Capacity building of BBMP zonal ocials
11.3. Monitoring
11.4. Inclusion
11.5. Capacity building of BWGs and other support
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Table of contents
References
Annexure 1: Details of stakeholder engagement
Annexure 2: List of wards in Bommanahalli zone
Annexure 3: Roles and responsibilities of stakeholders in BWG ecosystem
5
6
7
9
12
15
15
16
17
17
18
19
19
21
22
22
25
27
27
30
34
34
34
35
37
38
39
40
43
45
45
46
48
49
49
50
51
52
53
55
57
58
5
Figure 1: System-based GHG inventory US (Domestic) emissions, 2006 12
Figure 2: Organization structure 21
Figure 3: Bommanahalli zonal map with ward spatial distribution 21
Figure 4: BWGs mapped in Hongasandra 23
Figure 5: BWGs mapped in HSR Layout 23
Figure 6: Ward-wise split of BWGs in 5 wards 24
Figure 7: Category-wise split of BWGs in 5 wards 24
Figure 8: Daily GHG emissions reduction due to processing of waste at city and zonal level 26
Figure 9: Estimated GHG emissions from transportation of waste 26
Figure 10: Categories of stakeholders in BWG ecosystem 27
Figure 11: Waste flow from BWGs 29
List of figures
6
AEE Assistant Executive Engineer
BBMP Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike
BWG Bulk Waste Generator
CAP Climate Action Plan
CBG Compressed Biogas
CPCB Central Pollution Control Board
GGND C40's Global Green New Deal
GHG Greenhouse Gas
HCF HSR Citizen’s Forum
HDPE High Density Polypropylene
ICA C40's Inclusive Climate Action
IEC Information, Education & Communication
IPCC International Panel on Climate Change
JC Joint Commissioner
JHI Junior Health Inspector
NGO Non-governmental Organisation
PET Polyethylene Terephthalate
RWA Resident Welfare Association
SE Superintendent Engineer
SWM Solid Waste Management
SWMRT Solid Waste Management Round Table
TPD Tons Per Day
List of abbreviations
7
Bengaluru, the capital of Karnataka, is
one of the fastest urbanising cities in
India and this rapid urbanisation has
resulted in various challenges in solid
waste management - lack of
infrastructure, limited capacities and
monitoring, inequitable working
conditions for the waste workers who
handle the city's waste. These challenges
also provide an unequivocal opportunity
to strengthen solid waste management
practices in a way that delivers both
social and climate benefits for the city
residents. Bengaluru joined the C40
Cities network in 2017 and the Bruhat
Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) -
which is the administrative authority for
the city - initiated the Climate Action and
Resilience Plan for Bengaluru (BCAP) in
2021 and is now in the advanced stages
of preparing its BCAP for adapting to
climate change impacts including
addressing concerns relating to waste
management. Bengaluru is the first city
in South West Asia to participate in
C40’s Global Green New Deal (GGND)
pilot implementation initiative led by
C40’s Inclusive Climate Action (ICA)
Programme.
1. Executive summary
For Bengaluru, under the GGND pilot, the C40
team in consultation with BBMP has identified
‘bulk waste management’ as an area with
potentially high impact with regard to driving
the inclusive climate action agenda. This is
primarily because of two reasons: firstly, bulk
waste management through its core idea of
on-site waste management contributes
significantly to climate action due to
decentralised management of biodegradable
waste and reduced transportation of waste to
processing facilities in the outskirts of the city.
Secondly, waste management in cities employs
a large workforce with many
vulnerable groups such
as waste collection
and processing sta and these groups are
more invisible when servicing bulk waste
generators (BWGs) compared to non-bulk
waste generators. BWGs are not serviced by
the BBMP but by private service providers,
hence they are more invisible and addressing
their inclusion becomes more challenging.
While BWGs contribute 35-40% of the city’s
waste and BBMP regulations mandate BWGs
to take responsibility for managing their
biodegradable waste, there are several gaps in
the capacity of the key stakeholders,
processes, implementation, enforcement and
monitoring of these regulations (CSE,2023).
8
This report presents an assessment of the gaps
and needs in bulk waste management with
respect to the policy, processes, capacities and
also the conditions and needs of the vulnerable
groups engaged in this system. It discusses
how collaborative and participatory eorts to
execute decentralised waste management
systems can accelerate prior work done in the
city with regard to BWGs, in an integrated and
inclusive manner while also addressing the
climate action needs.
Methodologically, the study adopted an
in-depth approach of analysing one zone in the
city, which involved identifying all types of
stakeholders in the BWG ecosystem of
Bommanahalli zone and thereafter, engaging
with them using dierent participatory tools. A
zonal focus helped reduce the impact of many
other extraneous factors such as the role of the
zonal administration, private service provider
services, overall hygiene and sanitation
conditions etc. A diverse set of stakeholders
including BBMP ocials such as Joint
Commissioner (JC), Superintendent Engineer
(SE), Assistant Executive Engineer (AEE) and
Junior Health Inspector (JHI), civil society
groups, service providers, waste collection
sta, contractors and waste processors were
identified.
During stakeholder engagement, participatory
tools such as semi-structured interviews, focus
group discussions and workshops
were especially eective for working with
vulnerable groups, understanding a situation
from the participants’ point of view and
developing action-oriented interventions
that are beneficial and acceptable to all
stakeholders. The participation of decision
makers, implementers (including those who
are vulnerable) and advocacy groups in the
dierent consultations allowed for
identifying challenges and opportunities for
BWG waste management practices to be
strengthened in a way that is inclusive and
equitable.
While the city maintains a ward wise database
of the BWGs, it is severely underestimated, and
no state or national inventory can provide the
number of total BWGs, the quantum of waste
generated by them and the amount of waste
processed onsite. Therefore, each city must
prepare an inventory of the existing BWGs
after scientifically mapping, identifying and
quantifying the waste generated and treated
(Sengupta, 2023). Hence, a detailed mapping
exercise of BWGs was done in 5 wards of
Bommanahalli Zone. This also helped in
assessing the climate action potential of the
interventions in the BWG ecosystem due to
onsite processing of biodegradable waste.
The findings from the study show that there is
a need for various stakeholders to work in
confluence to enforce existing policy
regulations while also bridging gaps in terms
of stakeholder capacities, implementation and
monitoring systems for BWGs and other
stakeholders in the ecosystem. While
significant work has been done in the
Bommanahalli zone in the past with respect to
source segregation, there is a need to build
capacities of the bulk waste generator
ecosystem in ways that expands the number of
BWGs who carry out onsite management of
biodegradable waste and are compliant to
regulations. This will reduce the load on the
city’s waste collection and processing systems
while also mitigating GHG emissions.
The findings also show that there is limited
support provided to ensure occupational
safety, fair wages, job security, ergonomic
safety equipment and access to welfare
measures across dierent groups of workers,
the most vulnerable being migrant workers.
Participants in the stakeholder consultations
identified challenges in implementing
decentralised waste management and barriers
to ensuring optimal enforcement and
monitoring systems for BWGs, while also
providing possible solutions and opportunities
for improving policy, implementation and
capacity building as part of the GGND pilot
implementation in Bengaluru.
9
2. Introduction
Rapid population growth and urbanisation
have resulted in low-income countries
struggling to cater to rising solid waste
management needs, with over 90% of waste
often disposed of in unregulated dumps or
openly burned (World Bank, 2022). In cities
across India, poorly managed waste serves as
a breeding ground for disease vectors,
contributes to global climate change through
methane generation and creates inequitable
and unsafe working conditions for sanitation
workers. It is estimated that Bengaluru
generates nearly 5,000 tons of solid waste
per day (KSPCB, 2021).
While a portion of the city’s waste is dealt
with by sanitation workers (pourakarmikas in
Kannada) on the city’s payroll, contractual
waste collection sta and informal workers
collect, sort and manage a large portion of
the waste that is generated daily, including
waste from bulk waste generators. These
workers are stratified by degrees of
vulnerability - those employed by the city
are supported by certain
regulatory
mechanisms and unions whereas informal
migrant workers employed by labour
contractors are at the lowest rung of the
pyramid, with low wages, no regulatory
support and a lack of job security (Raghavan,
2023). These working and economic
conditions result in increased vulnerabilities to
climate change; workers do not have access
to proper housing or health care that will
allow them to cope with extreme heat, floods
and other adverse eects of climate change
(Michael et al., 2017). Ironically, they play a
pivotal role in reducing emissions and
improving the city’s response to climate
change by diverting large quantums of BWG
waste from landfills.
As part of its extensive work to improve solid
waste management in Bengaluru, the BBMP
issued a notification in 2012 that provided a
clear definition of Bulk Waste Generator
(BWG)
1
while mandating them to take
responsibility for managing their
waste
Globally, annual
waste generation
is expected to
increase by 73%
from 2020 levels
to 3.88 billion
tonnes in 2050.
10
on-site or collaborate with approved service
providers for o-site waste management. This
initiative stood as a pioneering example, being
the first of its kind in the Indian waste sector.
Since this notification, Bengaluru has had an
enabling ecosystem with many citizen groups
and organisations providing critical support to
bulk waste generators in implementing source
segregation, providing community
composting solutions and other technical
expertise for decentralised waste
management. However, over a decade later,
there has been little progress in the eective
implementation of this notification even
though it has also been adopted in the
national regulatory framework of the SWM
Rules, 2016.
In the above context, C40 Cities partnered
with Saahas NGO to undertake a pilot study in
solid waste management on BWGs in the
Bommanahalli zone, to understand the
on-ground challenges and potential
opportunities to strengthen capacities and
support systems for improved solid waste
management by BWGs. The baseline
assessment was conducted using
participatory approaches adapted to suit
stakeholder consultations on SWM, with
extensive engagement of all the dierent
stakeholder groups that operate in the SWM
ecosystem in Bengaluru. In particular, there
was a
focus on engaging
with groups who are
marginalised, vulnerable
and excluded from
consultative or
decision-making
processes. The insights
compiled from all these
stakeholder engagements
The overarching objective of the GGND
pilot initiative is for cities to contribute
as world leaders to the transition to
net-zero and resilient economies by
ensuring that local climate policies and
initiatives are designed inclusively and
have equitable impacts.
The GGND pilot initiative has been
tailored to match the unique needs and
contexts of each city. In Bengaluru, this
means supporting targeted
engagement by the city to advance
inclusive climate action that will deliver
on the priorities of the CAP through
improved service delivery, planning,
governance and overcoming
socio-economic barriers through
upskilling and capacity building of
frontline workers (Junior Health
Inspectors and waste workers) and
zonal city ocials involved in
managing solid waste management by
BWGs.
1
Under the 2012 notice, “bulk waste generator” was defined as any commercial entity generating more than 10 KGs of waste per day or a
residential apartment complex with more than 50 units. Since then, BWG classification for residential category has been increased from 50 units
and above or 10 KGs of waste per day to 100 units. In case of commercial/institutional categories, it has been increased to 100 KGs of waste per
day and/or located in an area above 5000 sq mts.
have resulted in an
assessment that sheds
light on the challenges
that the city faces in
managing the waste
produced by BWGs,
highlights existing best
practices, and identifies
opportunities to improve
equity and capacity
building - all of which can
inform future action.
11
Objectives of the baseline assessment
To understand the current best practices, challenges and opportunities across the whole BWG
system, stakeholder consultations were carried out in one municipal zone of the city -
Bommanahalli, with the following objectives:
2
3
1
4
5
Develop a comprehensive
stakeholder map for the
BWG ecosystem and
conduct stakeholder
analysis with a focus on
assessing the
vulnerability, power and
influence of each group.
Identify gaps/barriers in
the existing processes
and understand
opportunities in the
BWG ecosystem using
participatory
approaches.
Provide recommendations to strengthen the inclusion
of waste sector workers in BWG ecosystem.
Conduct a detailed
BWG mapping exercise
in selected parts of the
Bommanahalli zone to
estimate the climate
action impact potential
of BWG interventions.
Identify specific training
needs of the municipal
sta and other key
stakeholders.
12
3. Waste and climate change
Globally, the waste sector typically accounts
for 3 to 4 percent of total Green House Gas
(GHG) emissions. However, this emission source
only considers direct emissions primarily from
landfill methane emissions and incinerators. In
contrast, a life-cycle perspective of materials
management-related GHG
sources encompasses
emissions from acquisition, production,
transportation, consumption and end-of-life
treatment which add up to almost 50% of the
total emission (EPA).
As per the United States Environmental
Protection Agency, half the global GHG
emissions stem from the extraction and
processing of materials, fuels, and food.
Mismanaged waste is also impacting current
ecosystems to sequester carbon. Plastic waste
equivalent to one garbage truck is dumped in
the ocean every minute across the world. This
plastic breaks down into microplastics and
contributes to climate change both through
direct GHG emissions
Figure 1: System-based GHG inventory US (Domestic) emissions, 2006
Provision of
goods
29%
Provision of
food
13%
Appliances
and devices
8%
Building HVAC and
Kughting Lighting
25%
Other
passenger
transport
9%
Local passenger
transport
15%
Infrastructure
1%
Materials Management
and indirectly by aecting ocean organisms.
Plankton sequesters 30-50 percent of carbon
dioxide emissions from anthropogenic
activities, but after it ingests microplastics,
plankton’s ability to remove carbon dioxide
from the atmosphere decreases (Bauman,
2019).
Direct waste management
related emissions are
primarily attributed to
waste dumping, burning,
incineration and
transportation.
Typically in
low-income countries, about 90% of the waste
ends up in open dumps or is burned in the
open (Kaza et al, 2018). Burning of waste in
the open leads to the production of some
very harmful climate
pollutants such as black
carbon and is responsible for
half of the visible
smog in cities like New Delhi.
The 20 year GWP (Global Warming Potential)
of black carbon is up to 5,000 times greater
than that of carbon dioxide
(Tsydenova &
Patil, 2021)
. Biodegradable waste, buried
under piles of waste generates methane and
carbon dioxide as it decomposes in anaerobic
conditions.
India has more than
3,100 landfills and large
dumpsites and it creates
more methane from
landfill sites than any
other country
, according to GHGSat,
which monitors methane via satellites.
Ghazipur is one of the biggest ones in Delhi,
which on a single day in March, was spewing
out more than two metric tons of methane gas
every hour which if sustained for a year, would
have the same climate impact as an annual
emissions from 350,000 cars in the United
States
(Sud et al, 2022).
Transportation of waste is another big
contributor to GHG emissions, which is
dependent on the type of vehicles deployed
and the distance travelled. With the NIMBY
(Not in My Backyard) phenomenon taking hold
and the lack of space within cities, waste is
being transported long distances for
processing and disposal. It is not uncommon in
a city like Bengaluru that waste could be
transported almost 80 km away from the point
of generation for processing and/or disposal.
The vehicles deployed for primary and
secondary collection are most likely
13
5
0
%
i
n
l
a
n
d
fi
l
l
/
d
u
m
p
e
d
/
b
u
r
n
t
As per
Annual Report
2020-21 on
Implementation of
SWM Rules,
2016 by CPCB
5
0
%
w
a
s
t
e
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
d
14
heavy-duty diesel ones that are often poorly
maintained and therefore generate significant
GHG emissions.
Furthermore, cities in many developing nations
faced with mounting waste management
challenges are opting for waste incineration as
the main solution to manage waste. It is often
incorrectly promoted as a green, renewable
source of energy. The energy equation in
incineration is not very attractive when fed
with mixed waste of low caloric value, which is
the case in India, where the fraction of
biodegradable waste is higher compared to
developed countries.
Further, the source segregation rates are also
better in many developed nations thus
providing higher calorific waste for
incineration. The GHG emissions from waste
incineration are 580g CO2eq/kWh (Zero
Waste Europe, 2019) compared to 52 grams of
CO2eq/kWh (UNECE, 2021) emissions from
rooftop solar electricity. GHG emissions of all
other renewable energy sources are also much
lower than that from waste incineration plants.
Hence, countries like India
that are in the process of
developing their waste
management
infrastructure must choose
more sustainable solutions
instead of getting tied
down wixth capital and
emission intensive waste
incineration.
The lock-in impact of such capital-intensive
projects has been detrimental in many
developed nations because it creates a
constant demand for high calorific value waste
while starving the recycling industry of
recyclables. Decentralised, in-situ waste
management by BWGs can be a low hanging
fruit in this journey of sustainable waste
management practices.
15
4. Approach and methodology
4.1. Baseline assessment and stakeholder engagement
Desk based research
The first step of the baseline assessment was desk-based research on
relevant regulations, various participatory approaches, documentation and
case studies on solid waste management interventions. This research served
as a foundation to map out potential stakeholders, their roles and their level
of engagement in the waste management ecosystem in Bommanahalli zone.
Through secondary research, we enlisted key government ocials,
community-based organisations, waste management entities, dierent types
of BWGs and other organisations that play a role in waste management by
BWGs in Bommanahalli zone. The involvement and participation of all these
diverse stakeholders are key to evolving an inclusive approach to address the
current gaps in the solid waste management of BWGs.
1
STEP
2
STEP
Stakeholder identification and mapping
A comprehensive and multi-dimensional stakeholder map for waste
management in Bommanahalli zone was developed by combining the
insights gained from secondary research and interviews. These interviews
further helped understand the process, especially the community-led
initiatives with respect to BWGs in this zone. It also helped enlist some
additional stakeholders who were not prominently featured in existing
literature, especially informal and vulnerable stakeholders. These informal
and vulnerable stakeholders are also socially and economically
disadvantaged and hence have a higher exposure to the impacts of climate
change
(Michael et al., 2017)
. To understand dierent dimensions of
vulnerability, a framework was developed that classified these groups based
on socio-economic conditions, nature of employment, demographic,
environmental and health conditions, among others. Using these parameters,
the stakeholders were assessed for vulnerability under the stakeholder map.
Development and execution of stakeholder engagement plan
After the identification of the stakeholders, a stakeholder engagement plan
was developed using dierent participatory approaches for 10 (out of 12)
stakeholder groups. These are a combination of decision-makers, direct
actors (including those who are vulnerable) and advocacy groups. In the
course of this project, community participatory appraisal tools and certain
participatory urban planning tools were reviewed and adapted for the study.
3
STEP
16
Keeping these factors in mind, the stakeholder consultations and use of dierent
participatory approaches were designed and adapted to suit each stakeholder group
and to accommodate diverse sub-groups within these groups. For example, focus
group discussions (FGD) were deployed to engage vulnerable groups who may be
reluctant to communicate openly in a workshop format. For stakeholders with diverse
interests and schedules such as service providers and waste processors,
semi-structured interviews were employed as they speak more freely in one-on-one
conversations. The multifaceted participatory approaches ensured the inclusion of each
stakeholder group in these
consultations, with special attention to reaching out to less empowered groups, to
document their concerns and suggestions. Gender diversity was also integrated as a
cross-cutting theme in the entire process to listen to the voices of the women as a
large number of them participate in BWG waste management.
In all, 5 stakeholder workshops and more than 25 semi-structured interviews were
carried out with over 120 participants. Details such as dates, engagement formats and
participants for these workshops and interviews are available in Annexure 1. By
creating safe spaces for stakeholders to openly share their experiences, opinions and
thoughts, more inclusive and equitable conversations were facilitated. Intentionally
listening and prioritising the experiences of those identified as most vulnerable in the
solid waste management value chain helped develop insights into their specific needs
and challenges. The consultations were further enriched by leveraging the resources of
various agencies and stakeholders working with BWGs for solid waste management.
4.2. Mapping of BWGs
Typically, BWG databases available with the
city administrators tend to be outdated and/or
incomplete. Given that this data is critical for
SWM planning, implementation of government
schemes such as Swachh Bharat Mission
(Urban) and Swachh Sarvekshan and
understanding the climate impact of the waste
generated by BWGs, the project included
mapping of BWGs in five wards in
Bommanahalli zone.
For geospatial mapping of BWGs, ward maps
were obtained from the BBMP and thereafter,
the field team along with the waste collection
sta, mapped BWGs during the collection
process using an online tool. The data from the
field survey was reviewed, corrected,
harmonised and fed into Google Maps to
create BWG maps. In addition, the waste
collected from the BWGs was weighed in some
cases and estimated in others (using the
number and capacity of the bins). This led to
the creation of a database of BWGs which
included name, location, category of BWG and
quantum of solid waste generated per day.
This database was thereafter used in
interactions with BBMP representatives (as a
part of stakeholder engagement) who found
these to be very useful in their planning and
budgeting of SWM activities. The waste data
was also used to calculate the GHG-related
climate impact due to onsite management of
waste by BWGs.
17
5.1. Overview
The legal and policy framework for solid waste
management in India has undergone significant
evolution in recent years, with a focus on
improving sanitation, cleanliness and waste
management.
Several key policies and
regulations have played a
pivotal role in shaping this
framework, including the
Swachh Bharat Mission
(Urban), Swachh
Sarvekshan, and Solid
Waste Management Rules,
2016.
The
Swachh Bharat Mission (Urban)
is a
flagship program launched by the
Government of India in 2014 with the primary
goal of making urban areas in India clean and
open-defecation-free. This mission
emphasizes the construction of toilets, solid
waste management infrastructure, and
behaviour change campaigns to promote
cleanliness and proper waste disposal.
Swachh Sarvekshan
is an annual nationwide
cleanliness survey and competition conducted
by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Aairs
in India. It aims to gauge the progress of cities
in maintaining cleanliness, adopting best
waste management practices, and fostering
behavioural change among citizens It also
ranks cities and towns based on various
parameters, including waste management
practices, sanitation infrastructure, and citizen
feedback.
For example, the indicators under Swachh
Sarvekshan 2023 for scoring and points in the
competition include:
• Benefits extended to all sanitary workers
include provision of personal protective
equipment, training on waste
management, linkages to government
schemes and recognition of workers at
ward level.
• Capacity building of all sta, from Sanitary
Inspector and above which includes
completion of 4 courses through
e-Learning platform of Swachh Bharat
Mission (U).
• Skill development training of sanitation
workers through e-Learning platform of
Swachh Bharat Mission (U).
• Bulk waste generators doing onsite
processing of wet waste or getting the
wet waste collected and processed by
private players authorised by the
municipality.
5. Applicable legal and policy framework
for the BWG ecosystem
In this context, cities that want to
perform well at Swachh Sarvekshan
2023 and its later editions would seek
to provide benefits to their sanitary
and waste workers, carry out capacity
building and training sessions and
encourage onsite management of wet
waste by bulk waste generators. This
can be leveraged to ensure
participation and cooperation of
BBMP representatives in carrying out
skill development and empowerment
training for dierent stakeholders in
the BWG waste value chain.
18
The regulatory framework for solid waste management and BWGs in India is at national, state and
municipality levels.
Solid Waste Management Rules 2016 (“SWM Rules 2016”) which are
framed under the Environment Protection Act, 1986
No specific law. Brief provisions with respect to management
of waste and sanitation in Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act,
1976 and Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964
Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Solid Waste
Management (BBMP-SWM) Bye-laws, 2019
(“BBMP SWM Bye-laws”)
National
State
Municipality
5.2. Who are BWGs
Residential BWGs
• Apartments • Multi-dwelling units • Gated communities housing greater than
100 Units
Commercial BWGs
• All commercial entities which generate on an average more than 100 kgs of waste
per day and/or are located in an area above 5000 sq mts.
Institutional BWGs
A •
Any government, religious, educational, corporate, industrial, academic, research
institution, campus, buildings occupied by the government departments or
undertakings.
•
Public sector undertakings or hospitals, nursing homes, markets, and milk sales.
• O
utlets dealing with timber and horticulture like yards, nursery, gardens, all of which
generates on an average more than 100 kgs of waste per day and/or located in an area
above 5000 sq mts.
and/or
B •
Any entity which carries out public outdoor events (trade fairs, public events,
entertainment events/shows, rallies, sporting events), irrespective of any quantity
of waste generated and area occupied.
Under the BBMP SWM Bye-laws, BWGs are divided into residential, commercial and institutional
and they are defined as:
19
5.3. Duties of BWGs
Under the BBMP SWM Bye-laws, BWGs are required to segregate solid waste at source of
generation into the following categories:
Source segregation
CONSTRUCTION
& DEMOLITION
BIODEGRADABLE
including garden and
horticulture waste
NON
BIODEGRADABLE
including bulky waste
and E-waste
DOMESTIC
HAZARDOUS
+
including sanitary
waste
Onsite management of
biodegradable waste
(
Processed through composting or
bio-methanation within the premises itself,
to the extent of space available)
Osite management of
biodegradable waste
(If space within the premises is not
available)
Authorised waste processor for collection, processing and disposal
of segregated solid waste (including non-biodegradable waste,
domestic hazardous wasteand sanitary waste) on mutually
agreed terms including fees for such services.
5.4. BBMP SWM bye-laws: Welfare, occupational safety and training
Under the BBMP SWM Bye-laws, BBMP is required to comply with the following:
1. Issue identity cards to pourakarmikas and other eligible waste workers.
2. With regard to pourakarmikas and other eligible waste workers, compliance with all labour and
welfare regulations, including wages, working hours, holidays, and statutory benefits like
provident fund, employee's state insurance, and maternity benefits.
Welfare and Occupational Safety
20
3. Provide regular medical check-ups for pourakarmikas
2
and other eligible waste workers to
monitor occupational diseases.
4. Ensure the provision of following protective equipment and facilities to pourakarmikas,
door-to-door waste collection sta, waste processing facility sta and and other eligible
workers:
Uniforms Protective
footwear
Reflective
jackets
Raincoats Hand
gloves
Masks
Other
appropriate
gears
Two pairs, once a year Once every two months
2
Street sweepers who collect street sweeping wastes and carry out cleaning of public places.
Under BBMP SWM Bye-laws, BBMP has the duty to provide the following:
1. Periodic training through reputable institutes or government agencies to educate
pourakarmikas and its other workers involved in handling and management of solid waste on
various topics relating to waste management.
2. Information to the public about composting, bio-gas generation, reuse and recycling and
decentralised processing of waste at a community level by conducting training classes,
seminars, workshops and Compost Santhes (markets or events promoting composting).
Training
21
6. Overview of Bommanahalli zone
Bommanahalli Zone is one of the zones located
in the south of the city and it is further divided
into 2 distinct divisions: Bommanahalli and
Bengaluru South. Each of these divisions
comprises 8 wards (which are proposed to be
further split into 27 wards in the future) and the
details of these wards are annexed as
Annexure 2.
With respect to management of solid waste,
the ocials at BBMP are split between the
head/central oce and at zonal levels. The
organisation structure below highlights the
ocials that are critical for the supervision and
monitoring of solid waste management
activities and processes at the head and zonal
oces.
In addition, there is also involvement of the
Health Department through Senior Health
Inspectors who are also responsible for
monitoring waste generators such as
restaurants and hotels from a hygiene
perspective.
Figure 3: Bommanahalli zonal map with ward spatial distribution
Uttarahalli
(184)
Vasanthpura
(197)
Yelchenahalli
(185)
Jaraganahalli
(186)
Puttenahalli
(187)
Konankunte
(195)
Anjanapura
(196)
Gottigere
(194)
Begur
(192)
Arakere
(193)
Bilekhalli
(188)
Bommanahalli
(175)
HSR Layout
(174)
Hongasandra
(189)
Mangammanapalya
(190)
Singasandra
(191)
Special Commissioner
Joint Commissioner
Superintendent Engineer
Assistant
Superintendent Engineer
SWM Junior Health
Inspector
Head/
Central
Oce
Zone
Level
Division
Level
Ward
Level
Figure 2: Organization structure
Map not to scale
22
7. BWGs in Bommanahalli and their
climate impact
It is estimated that almost
30-40% of solid waste in a city like Bengaluru
is generated by BWGs.
(CPHEEO, 2017)
Solid waste
generated
5000 TPD
Solid waste
(35% BWGs)
1750 TPD
200 kgs of
solid waste
per day
per BWG
Approximately
8,750 BWGs
=
Estimated for Bengaluru
7.1. Mapping of BWGs
As a part of this project, BWGs in 5 wards in Bommanahalli zone which included HSR Layout (Ward
174), Bommanahalli (Ward 175), Hongasandra (Ward 189), Mangammanapalya (Ward 190) and
Singasandra (Ward 191) were mapped. The BWGs were categorised into:
Apartment complexes
Residential
BWGs
Hotels, restaurants with and without seating, supermarkets,
tea shops/bakery/juice shops, marriage halls, oce buildings,
religious places & technology parks
Commercial
BWGs
Schools, colleges, government and private institutions
Institutional
BWGs
23
Figure 5: WGs mapped in HSR Layout
Figure 4: BWGs mapped in Hongasandra
24
The mapping exercise identified a total of 183 BWGs in five wards and it was estimated that they
generate approximately 42 TPD of solid waste. The graphs below illustrate the ward-wise and
category-wise bifurcation of BWGs across the five wards. By applying the extrapolation
methodology after removing outliers to encompass a broader scope of 16 wards, it can be
reasonably inferred that the entirety of the Bommanahalli zone comprises of over 447 BWGs,
thereby contributing to an approximate solid waste generation of 100 TPD.
Figure 7: Category-wise split of BWGs in 5 wards
Figure 6: Ward-wise split of BWGs in 5 wards
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Residential
BWGs
Commercial
BWGs
Institutional
BWGs
No. of BWGs
103
79
1
0
20
40
60
80
100
HSR Layout Singasandra Mangammanapalya Bommanahalli Hongasandra
88
46
22
15
12
No. of BWGs
25
7.2. GHG emissions by BWGs
Overall GHG emissions per ton of waste
managed at a city level are dependent on
multiple factors, most importantly the waste
composition. To get an estimate on the likely
contribution of the BWGs, data was taken
from a recent study done for the city of Ho
Chi Minn in Vietnam, using the IPCC
guidelines
(Verma RL, Borongan G., 2022)
.
The following section details the impact of
BWGs segregating their waste and managing
it within their premises as required by the
regulations.
(i) Impact of segregation and
biomethanation
Segregation would significantly improve the
recycling potential of non-biodegradable
waste. India has a large informal sector that
sorts and channelises non-biodegradable
waste for resource recovery. Further, waste
generated from residential BWGs or
commercial BWGs such as oces and/or
technology parks has a higher proportion of
cardboard, white paper and high-value plastic
waste such as PET and HDPE which has a
better value proposition and recycling rates.
Hence, the segregation of waste by BWGs is
especially important to ensure improved
resource recovery.
As per the US EPA
estimate, every ton of waste
recycled results in 2.89 tons of
CO2e reduction.
Apart from the recycling of
non-biodegradable waste, the segregated
biodegradable waste from BWGs can be
composted or sent to biogas plants. Waste
generated by restaurants, hotels and other
food joints is especially suitable for
anaerobic digestion in biogas plants.
As per the study done in China, the
GHG reduction of about 1 ton
CO2e (Zhang et al., 2020) was
estimated for 1 ton of food waste
diverted from landfills and
processed through anaerobic
digestion.
While reduction in GHG emissions due to
anaerobic digestion of biodegradable waste is
significant, it is challenging to operate
decentralised plants that have a capacity of
100 kg to 5 TPD in a financially and
operationally viable manner. Therefore, from a
GHG perspective, it is best to transport
biodegradable waste from BWGs to large
biogas plants where the gas can be deployed
26
Figure 8: Daily GHG emissions reduction due to processing of waste at city and zonal level
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Tons of CO2e
Due to
recycling
3
Due to anaerobic
digestion in
biogas plant
4
Due to processing of
biodegradable and
non-biodegradable wastes
1000
58
875
50
1875
108
3
Assuming, 20% of the waste generated by BWGs is the recyclable non-biodegradable waste.
4
Assuming 50% of the total waste generated by the BWGs is biodegradable, this translates into 875 TPD of biodegradable waste being
generated in Bengaluru and 50 TPD of biodegradable waste being generated in Bommanahalli Zone.
5
Beschkov, 2021 (Source: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/79776).
6
1 ltr of diesel generates 2.68 kg of CO2e. (Source: https://connectedfleet.michelin.com/blog/calculate-co2-emissions/) and the typical fuel
eciency is 3 km per ltr hence 0.893 kg of Co2e per km.
7
Assuming the waste needs to be transported 40 km one way. To haul 875 tons of waste, about 88 such trips would be deployed and they
would cover 7040 Km per day. This would translate into about 6 tons of CO2e of savings per day.
8
Assuming the waste needs to be transported 50 km one way. To haul 50 tons of waste, about 5 such trips would be deployed and they would
cover 500 Km per day. This would translate into about 0.4 tons of CO2e of savings per day.
as a replacement for fuel in the form of CBG
(used for cooking or transportation) instead of
the gas being used for electricity generation
which is not attractive from energy generation
(only 35% eciency
5
) or GHG perspective
(EPA, 2016)
. India’s energy neutrality is tied
with expanding solar and shifting to electric or
gas based transportation
(Jain, 2023)
. The
CNG infrastructure is getting ramped up with
plans to finally replace CNG with CBG. This
further tilts the scale in favour of CBG instead
of direct power generation from biogas.
(ii) Impact due to reduction in
transportation
The impact of on-site waste management in
terms of GHG emissions is also seen through
reduction in transportation. A typical
heavy-duty diesel compactor (most
compactors deployed have a 10-ton loading
capacity for transporting biodegradable
waste) generates about 0.893 kg CO2e per
kilometre
6
.
Bengaluru City Bommanahalli Zone
6 tons of CO2e
8
0.4 tons
of CO2e
7
Figure 9: Estimated GHG emissions from transportation
of waste
27
8. Identification of stakeholders, their
vulnerabilities and spheres of influence
8.1. Stakeholder identification
The landscape for the key stakeholders in BWG
ecosystem in Bommanahalli Zone, Bengaluru
can be grouped under four categories: Waste
Generators, Waste Collectors and Processors,
Regulators and Others, where some of these
groups have further levels/layers, such as in the
case of Waste Processors and BBMP. The
details of the stakeholders in the BWG
ecosystem in Bommanahalli zone are mapped
in Figure 10 below and their roles and
responsibilities are set out in Annexure 3.
• Residential
• Commercial
• Institutional
• BAF - Bangalore Apartment
Federations
• Civil Society Organisations
• BBMP - JHI
• BBMP - Senior
ocials
• Elected
Representatives
• Ward Contractor
• Service Provider/authorised
waste processor - O site
• Service Provider - In Situ
• Piggeries
• Product Sellers
Waste collection
and processing
sta
Figure 10: Categories of stakeholders in BWG ecosystem
Waste
Generators
Other
Interest
Groups
Regulators
Waste Collectors
and Processors
28
Residential
Residents Welfare Association (RWA) and/or Apartment
Owners/resident’s Association.
Commercial
Owners which could be individuals, proprietorships, partnerships,
companies etc.
Institutional
Depending on the type of institution such as educational, government,
religious etc., it could be the managing committee of such institution.
Under the BBMP SWM Bye-laws, BWGs are classified into “Residential”, Commercial”, and
“Institutional”. The key decision makers at these BWGs are the following:
(i) Waste Generators
These decision-makers decide on how the waste generated in their premises is managed i.e.,
on-site, o-site by service providers or through BBMP ward contractors. As evident from various
types of generators within BWGs, it is not a monolith group and their concerns, aspirations,
engagement and understanding of waste management vary significantly.
These are private entities that are implementers which collect and process the waste generated by
the BWGs, some of them are authorised while others are not. There are a variety of waste collectors
and processors as some only collect (such as Ward Contractor), some process waste on-site
through composting and/or biomethanation and finally, there are o-site processing and disposal
entities (both formal such as authorised waste processors and informal such as piggeries). Within
this group, there is a second level of stakeholders i.e., the group that handles the waste first hand
which are the following:
(ii) Waste Collectors and Processors
Primary waste collectors deployed by ward contractors and o-site vendors.
Housekeeping sta and waste workers who collect and process waste on-site.
Waste workers who process waste o-site.
This group of stakeholders are decision makers and enforcers who are responsible for formulating
the rules and policies on waste management and thereafter, enforcing these. In the BWG system,
this primarily consists of the municipality i.e., BBMP and the elected representatives such as the
mayor, ward councillors, members of the legislative assembly etc.
BBMP has also been split into two groups with a second level consisting of Junior Health
Inspectors (JHIs) as they are the frontline sta for monitoring SWM systems and enforcing related
regulations.
(iii) Regulators
This is an umbrella group covering advocacy groups such as civil society and community-based
organisations such as the HSR Citizen's Forum (HCF) and Solid Waste Management Round Table
(SWMRT) have carried out significant work in increasing awareness and building capacities of waste
generators and BBMP sta for source segregation and onsite management of biodegradable waste.
(iv) Other Interest Groups
29
The involvement of various stakeholders in waste collection and the flow of biodegradable waste
from generation to disposal is visually depicted in the figure below:
Residential
BWGs
Commercial
BWGs
Institutional
BWGs
Piggeries
Ward
contractors
On-site
processing
composting/
biogas
Authorised
service
providers/waste
processors
Unauthorised
vendors
PiggeriesDumping
BBMP processing
facilities/landfill
O-site processing
facilities
Figure 11: Waste flow from BWGs
30
8.2. Vulnerability and power analysis
The stakeholders in the BWG ecosystem
range from powerful decision makers such as
elected representatives, senior administrative
ocers to certain marginalised groups who
have been historically and presently excluded
from the decision-making processes.
Therefore, it was considered important to do
an assessment of the levels of vulnerability
and the power to influence among the
stakeholders. These assessments allowed for a
clear understanding of the dierence in equity
of power amongst these stakeholders and
their possible engagement in the study.
At the start of the study, 6 indicators were
considered to assess the vulnerability of the
stakeholders. However, as the project
evolved, the criteria for vulnerability of all
stakeholders was expanded to 15 indicators
to ensure inclusivity and equity within the
BWG ecosystem
(Srivastava, 2020;
Mohapatra, 2012; Michael et al., 2017)
.
A stakeholder has been rated as ‘High’ on vulnerability if the group satisfies 10 or more criteria
out of the 15 listed above. A stakeholder has been rated as “Medium” if the group satisfies 5-7
criteria out of the 15. A stakeholder has been rated as “Low” if the group satisfies 3 or fewer
criteria out of the 15. Each stakeholder was also assessed to gauge the power they have over
influencing change in the BWG ecosystem. This access to power determines their ability to
resolve existing issues with regard to BWGs.
Socio-
economic
indicators
• Income and poverty levels: Low income or living below the poverty line
• Education levels: Low educational attainment or lack of access to education
• Employment status: Contractual or impermanent nature of employment
• Housing conditions: Poor housing conditions
• Environmental degradation: Exposure to pollution
• Risk of occupational health concerns: High risk of Occupational Health
concerns
• Access to healthcare: Inability to/limited access to governmental and
private healthcare facilities and services
Environmental
and health
indicators
• Age: The very young and the elderly are more vulnerable
• Gender: Women are typically more vulnerable than men
• Migration status: Vulnerability is higher among migrant labour
Demographic
indicators
• Access to legal rights: Limited access to legal protections and rights
• Recognition: Lack of registration or recognition with regulatory authorities
• Protection from harassment: Absence or inadequacy of safety nets to
protect from work-related harassment
Institutional
and
governance
indicators
• Savings and assets: Lack of savings or assets to cope with economic shocks
• Access to financial information: Limited financial literacy and access to
banking services
Economic and
financial
indicators
31
Vulnerability Power to influence Low Medium High
Residential BWG represented by RWA
Generate biggest quantum of waste
among BWGs and have the power
to implement onsite biodegradable
waste processing facilities with no
outside influence.
• Inadequate safety nets for SWM
related harassment in some cases
Commercial / Institutional BWG represented by owners
Generate significant quantum of
waste among BWGs, have the
monetary resources and power to
implement onsite biodegradable
waste processing facilities with no
outside influence.
• Inadequate safety nets for SWM
related harassment in some cases
BBMP - JHI
JHIs are the front-end team for
enforcement of BWG regulations at
the ground level. Therefore, they are
the regulator that interacts with
BWGs continuously and can
influence their waste management
processes.
• Insucient Training
• Contractual nature of employment
• Limited access to legal protections
• Inadequate safety nets for work
related harassment
• Low income
• Limited access to legal protection
due to contractual nature of
employement
BBMP - Others
As the lack of enforcement has
emerged as a key issue based on
the analysis, senior ocials at
BBMP have been rated as the most
important stakeholder to influence
the BWG ecosystem
• Inadequate safety nets for work
related harassment in some cases
Service provider/authorised waste processor - O Site & onsite
With an enabling ecosystem, they
can oer waste handling and
processing services to BWGs. Their
influence is limited to professional
and holistic waste management
services to willing BWGs.
• Contractual nature of engagement
• Lack of registration given that the
empanelment system is in abeyance
• Exposure to mixed waste
32
Piggeries
One of the biggest disposal
destinations for biodegradable
waste generated by BWGs which
are completely unregistered,
unmonitored and regulated. Given
their vulnerability and invisibility,
they do not wield any power to
bring about systemic change.
• Lack of registration
• Low income
• Poor education
• Operating in the outskirts of the city
and challenging working hours
• Exposure to mixed waste
• Limited access to healthcare facilities
• Migrant labour
• Inadequate safety nets for work
related harassment
• Limited access to legal protections
• Limited financial literacy and access
to financial services
Ward contractor
To an extent, the ward contractor is
the channel through which the
regulations with respect to BWGs
are flouted because the
door-to-door system caters to
BWGs as well in some cases.
• Contractual nature of engagement
• Lack of registration to service BWGs
• Exposure to mixed waste
Waste collectors and o-site processing sta - ward contractor and
service providers/authorised waste processors
Waste collection sta implement
waste segregation and primary
collection.
Waste processing sta work on the
recovery of resources from waste.
They have no power to change
processes or systems in the BWGs
waste value chain
• Low income
• Poor education
• Contractual nature of employment
• Poor quality of housing
• Exposure to mixed waste
• Limited access to healthcare facilities
• Migrant labour
• Lack of registration
• Inadequate safety nets for work
related harassment
• Limited access to legal protections
• Lack of savings or assets
• Limited financial literacy and access
to financial services
Elected representatives
Significant on-ground change with
respect to SWM requires political
will and therefore, political buy-in is
crucial for enforcement of BWG
regulations.
• None
33
Waste management sta – onsite and housekeeping sta at BWGs
Housekeeping sta play an
important role in waste collection
and source segregation. On-site
waste management sta process
the waste. While they have an
important role in proper
segregation and ecient waste
processing, they do not have the
power to bring systemic change in
the BWG ecosystem.
• Low income
• Attainment of low education
• Contractual nature of employment
• Poor quality of housing
• Exposure to mixed waste (in some
cases)
• Primarily, women
• Limited access to healthcare facilities
• Limited access to legal protections
• Lack of savings or assets
• Limited financial literacy and access
to financial services
Figure 12: Vulnerability assessment and power analysis of stakeholders
Civil society & community-based organisations
They play a very important role in
behaviour change and capacity
building of BWGs
• Lack of recognition
• Lack of financial assets
As a result of these assessments, it is evident
that stakeholder groups who are the front-end
team that conducts waste management
operations at the BWG level such as waste
collection sta and housekeeping sta are the
most vulnerable. They also have very limited
power to influence systemic change in the
BWG ecosystem. On the contrary,
decision-makers and implementation agencies
who manage and govern the BWG ecosystem
such as elected representatives, and senior
personnel at BBMP and BWGs are not vulnerable.
The power to influence change also largely
rests with these least vulnerable groups of
decision-makers at BBMP, elected representatives
and BWGs. While the inputs of these groups
are consistently taken into account by virtue of
the power they enjoy, the inputs of the most
marginalised groups are not. Private service
providers exist as businesses in the BWG
ecosystem and are not very vulnerable;
however, they do not enjoy much power to
influence systemic change given that they
remain subject to SWM regulations and
policies of the regulators. In the absence of an
enabling environment such as enforcement of
BBMP SWM Bye-laws and regular monitoring
by the BBMP, it is challenging for the private
service providers to oer their services to
BWGs on a sustainable basis.
The vulnerability and power analysis assessment
not only served as a vital framework for
understanding the dynamics of the BWG
ecosystem but also informed the approach to
engage with these stakeholders. These
assessments amplify the need for participatory
approaches that create avenues for all
stakeholders to provide inputs, especially those
that are most invisible and unheard. While
these stakeholder groups may not be
very
influential in resolving a majority of issues
relating to waste management by BWGs, the
engagement was planned with them as a part
of the project due to their vulnerability. This
ensured insights for developing tailored strategies
and support mechanisms to address the unique
needs and challenges faced by each group.
34
9. Stakeholder engagement using
participatory approaches
9.1. Overview
In the context of solid waste management in
India, there is limited literature or
documentation available on deploying
participatory approaches to engage
stakeholders. Solid waste management is a
critical issue and traditional top-down
approaches have often proven ineective. As a
result, participatory approaches have emerged
as a promising methodology that actively
involves varied groups of stakeholders in the
decision-making processes.
The overall objectives of the stakeholder
engagement were the following:
• Documenting the current situation of waste
management by BWGs.
• Identifying current problems and
challenges.
• Identifying steps to improve the current
situation.
• Defining roles and responsibilities of the
dierent stakeholders in the improved
situation.
9.2. Objectives of stakeholder
engagement
Stakeholder workshop with BWG collection sta
35
9.3. Participatory approaches adopted in stakeholder consultations
A brief description of the key consultations is provided below:
The stakeholder consultation workshop was
initiated through a participatory tool called Life
Histories, which allowed participants to share
personal accounts of their experiences working
as JHIs and ease into the workshop. This was
followed by using Stratified Resource Mapping,
where they identified roles and responsibilities
relevant to themselves, BWGs and other
stakeholders.
For each of the stratified responsibilities
assigned to themselves, JHIs then formed
groups and worked on formulating a Constraint
Analysis where they identified and described
problems/constraints related to each of the
responsibilities in detail. Once resources and
constraints were identified, the JHIs formulated
a Solutions Matrix where they detailed the
possible ways and tools to mitigate the
identified constraints.
(i) Stakeholder consultation workshop with Junior Health Inspectors (JHIs)
“We started monitoring BWGs
recently and are therefore not
completely clear about the rules
relating to BWGs and our related
responsibilities. Having clarity
about the regulations and our
responsibilities would go a long
way in improving the confidence
with which we can approach the
BWGs and the eectiveness of our
monitoring”
- JHI, Bommanahalli
Stakeholder workshop with JHIs
36
The workshop for these two stakeholder
groups was carried out as Focus Group
Discussions (FGD) given the vulnerability of the
group and possible reluctance to communicate
openly in a workshop format. Each FGD was
guided by context setting and a list of
questions that allowed participants to provide
an in-depth understanding of the challenges
they face, the interventions required to address
them and their inputs on the prioritization of
certain interventions over others.
(ii) Stakeholder consultation workshop with waste collection sta and
housekeeping sta for BWGs
“We know that our work is critical to
the city, however, there is a lack of
recognition of it by the government
and the public. At the very least, we
should be given identity cards and
one day o in a week for our
well-being.”
- BWG collection sta
For residential & commercial BWGs as well as
BBMP ocials, given the diverse interests and
schedules of these stakeholders,
semi-structured interviews were conducted to
thoroughly document their inputs, as and when
participants were available within the duration
of this project. For service providers and civil
society groups, it was noted that these were
not homogenous groups and very divergent
work was being undertaken by individual
stakeholders in these two groups. As a result, it
was decided that semi-structured interviews
would be the most appropriate tool to capture
their distinct inputs on the BWG ecosystem.
(iii) Semi-structured interviews with residential and commercial BWGs, BBMP
ocials, service providers and civil society groups
“Our work is dignified because the
residents segregate their waste
properly and the RWA members
support us whenever there is a
problem in the waste management
system.”
- Housekeeping sta at a BWG
Stakeholder workshop with housekeeping sta at Salarpuria Serenity
37
10. Key findings from stakeholder
engagement
Stakeholder group outcomes/findings
BBMP
• Mapping of BWGs at scale
• Training and capacity building needs
• Need for reporting and monitoring formats
• Necessity of enforcing existing provisions
• Replicating existing best practices
• Enhancing collaboration between departments
• Limited knowledge of impact of SWM on climate change
JHIs
• Importance of defining roles & powers wrt BWGs
• Training and capacity building needs
• Improved administrative & political support
• Requirement for IEC campaign design & implementation
• Relevance of recognition & job security
• Limited knowledge of impact of SWM on climate change
Waste Collection
Sta
• Provision of identity cards, uniforms & safety equipment
• Demand for improved working conditions
• Enhancing access to quality healthcare & housing
• Relevance of recognition & job security
BWGs
• Importance of awareness & IEC
• Training and capacity building needs
• Development of market for compost
• Improved financial viability of in-situ biodegradable waste management
• Need for incentives and rebates
Civil Society
Groups
• Necessity of regular funding support
• Increased administrative & political support
• Enhanced collaboration with BBMP
• Training and capacity building needs
• Necessity of monitoring mechanisms
Service
Providers
This section provides the findings from the stakeholder consultation workshops and
semi-structured interviews conducted in the course of this study. The stakeholder engagement
sought to understand the diverse inputs of various stakeholders on the challenges they face, the
opportunities they foresee and the solutions that need to be devised or implemented to improve
the systems governing BWGs in Bommanahalli zone, Bengaluru.
38
10.1. Policy and enforcement
All stakeholders detailed the gaps in enforcement of policy and stressed on the need for robust
institutional mechanisms, specifically in the following areas:
There is a need for enforcing existing
provisions relating to management of waste by
BWGs under the SWM Rules, 2016 and the
BBMP SWM Bye-laws. Additionally, a range of
responsibilities can only be fulfilled by the
BBMP such as creating databases of BWG,
establishing roles and powers of JHIs with
regard to BWGs, instituting an eective
empanelment process for service providers and
for in-situ vendors and authorised waste
processors, ensuring the BBMP door-to-door
collection and processing systems does not
cater to BWGs, providing incentives/rebates
for BWGs carrying out in-situ waste
management, establishing internal reporting
systems for BWGs and service
providers/authorized waste processors and
ensuring on ground implementation such as no
dumping and burning of waste in the open.
(i) Enforcement of existing provisions
(ii) Need for collaboration
In addition, regular dialogue with political leaders could be maintained to share updates on solid
waste management systems and to seek their intervention in case of issues or bottlenecks that can
be resolved by them.
There are several areas of SWM where
collaboration between stakeholders could
prove eective. Some examples include:
• Increased coordination between dierent
departments like Bengaluru’s electricity
supply entity (BESCOM) for sharing
databases of waste generators and
mapping of BWGs,
• Karnataka State Pollution Control Board
(KSPCB) which provides permits and
conducts monitoring on dierent aspects
of urban infrastructure and waste,
• Collaboration with market associations
could increase enforcement of the
single-use plastic (SUP) ban,
• Collaboration with education institutions
could increase citizen involvement and
awareness,
• Collaboration with experts and NGOs could
increase capacity building and training
opportunities,
• Involvement of police could be considered
for enforcement of penalties for
non-compliance.
39
10.2. Criticality of source segregation
For any successful implementation of in-situ
biodegradable waste management and dignity
of work for any workers handling solid waste, a
crucial first step that was identified is
segregation of waste at source. When waste is
received with consistently high segregation
levels, stakeholders report an increased ability
to smoothly operate in-situ biodegradable
waste management, increased resource
recovery of non-biodegradable waste and
increased access to dignified and safer working
conditions. The level of segregation also
impacts the eciency of the waste processing
systems because contaminated waste creates
the need for additional infrastructure, human
resources and time that goes into sorting and
salvaging dierent waste types, in a waste
collection and processing system that is
already overloaded.
Certain stakeholder groups like commercial
BWGs were flagged for consistently providing
mixed waste and workplace injuries associated
with handling mixed waste that consists of
hazardous waste types (like broken glass,
metal, needles, etc.) were also reported. In
cases of contamination, the issue is often
plugged by providing awareness, printed
instruction sheets, refusing to collect mixed
waste, penalties, and strict enforcement of the
city’s legislation on solid waste management
among others.
40
Leading the way for in-situ composting
Salarpuria Serenity, a residential BWG with 200 apartments, is a model for in-situ composting
and worker welfare in Bommanahalli Zone after years of consistent resident interventions. A
group of residents at Salarpuria Serenity had a long-standing interest in waste management
and they fine-tuned their in-situ composting practices from 2016 to 2023. In 2016, in-situ
composting began with 2 composters(“Aaga” Composters from the brand Daily Dump), now
expanded to 24 which manages approximately 150 kgs of biodegradable waste generated
daily. They took several steps to ensure sustainable in-situ composting and these include
discontinuation of trash chutes to discourage dumping of mixed waste. New tenants receive
printed waste management instructions, and resident volunteers conduct awareness
campaigns and communication. Strict waste segregation into three categories is enforced,
and sta can reject mixed waste collection. A chain of command, involving RWA members
and building manager, addresses issues relating to source segregation and other complaints.
The aesthetic appeal of this composting unit, outdoor location and regular cleaning have
ensured a lack of smell, visibility and more know-how among the residents regarding the
composting process underway. The housekeeping sta also receive waste management
training, health checkups, protective gear, uniforms, and bonuses. Very importantly, the RWA
members ensure that a general sense of respect and gratitude is extended to the sta by all
residents. The limited space requirement, resident participation and worker welfare make this
an ideal replicable model for in-situ composting in residential BWGs.
10.3. Capacity building opportunities
In several stakeholder workshops, clear gaps in training and capacity building were identified and
opportunities to bridge these gaps were formulated by the participants.
(ii) Junior Health Inspectors (JHIs) in
the BBMP started monitoring BWGs
approximately 18 months back and their roles
and responsibilities concerning BWGs have not
been documented in writing. In addition, there
is limited knowledge of the BBMP SWM
Bye-laws, which along with a lack of clearly
defined roles and responsibilities results in an
inability to confidently enforce regulations.
Additionally, a lack of technical expertise in
in-situ biodegradable waste management
limits their ability to eectively monitor in-situ
biodegradable processing systems, provide
support and issue fines for defaulters among
others.
JHIs also highlighted that eective Information,
(i) In most residential BWGs, in-situ
interventions hinge on personal interest and
there is a need for building capacities, creating
awareness and building institutional processes
that ensure installation and continuity in
operating in-situ composting or biogas units,
irrespective of availability of persons with
personal interest in the matter. For residents
who have a personal interest in operationalising
in-situ biodegradable waste management,
there is a need for building their capacities in
terms of technical expertise, ability to
troubleshoot, and ability to engage with other
residents on matters related to SWM, among
others to ensure that they can continue to
champion in-situ biodegradable waste
management in their respective buildings.
41
sensitisation and training of BWGs, sharing
references of experts and vendors for in-situ
biodegradable waste management, ensuring
that collection and transportation is only done
by an authorized service provider, conducting
monitoring visits, documenting
non-compliance and understanding the
reasons for it, collecting data, issuing notices,
and fines can be done in a more conducive
environment.
Education & Communication (IEC) materials
could result in positive reinforcement of
SWM-related obligations and activities, as
opposed to enforcement only through
communicating notices, fines and penalties.
They detailed how well-designed IEC tools and
campaigns could establish lines of
communication between them and BWGs so
that a relationship is built and processes like
for support in establishing digital reporting
and monitoring systems for BWGs and
monitoring formats for data collection,
reporting, capacity building, monitoring and
evaluation of BWGs. In the absence of these
formats, stakeholders are unable to track
existing eorts, document challenges, plan for
the future and implement work with BWGs
eectively. There is also a need to strengthen
internal channels of communication within the
BBMP to ensure that there is adequate
planning, discussion, troubleshooting and
escalations, support required with regard to
BWGs.
(iii) For senior BBMP ocials, a diverse
job profile limits their ability to dedicate time
to build expertise in solid waste management.
They reported a need for capacity building on
all relevant legislation related to solid waste
management as well as a need for best
practices from other cities and countries to be
brought to their attention, so that these
practices may be replicated in their jurisdiction.
They also highlighted the need for experts who
could provide them with technical assistance
and advice with respect to waste management.
Several BBMP ocials also detailed the need
Stakeholder workshop with JHIs
42
(iv) For vendors and service
providers
, varied methods are reported for
transportation of waste, safety standards for
workers, waste processing and end
destinations for collected waste. There is a
need for training and capacity building on
maintaining adequate documentation, ensuring
occupational safety, leachate management and
verifying end destinations for processing of all
waste types.
(v) For waste management
personnel
, there is a need for on-the-job
training on topics such as operating a healthy
in-situ composting or biogas unit, collection of
waste in a segregated manner and eective
communication with waste generators.
(vi) Knowledge of climate
change:
Despite working in solid waste
management, across the stakeholder groups,
there is limited understanding of the climate
crisis and how GHG emissions from landfills are
aecting local, regional and global climates or
even the long-term direct and indirect impacts
of climate change.
Capacity building fosters
improved wet waste management
Over the past year, the HSR Citizens
Forum (HCF) and Swach Graha Kalika
Kendra (SGKK) has continuously
engaged the 100+ JHIs, field supervisors,
drivers and collection sta who work in
HSR Layout (Ward 174) on training,
capacity building and recognition. This
has resulted in robust waste collection
teams who are well-versed on dierent
waste types, source segregation and
collection of segregated waste. The field
supervisors are trained on how to
generate awareness, communicate with
residents who flout SWM regulations,
manner of escalation etc. JHIs have been
capacitated over time to actively engage
in troubleshooting, identifying
challenges and devising solutions.
Notably, the due recognition given to
this entire team has fostered a deep
sense of ownership amongst the sta
and a desire to sustain best practices in
SWM for door-to-door collection and for
BWGs. This has also resulted in HSR
Layout being one of the best performing
wards in Bengaluru in dierent editions
of Swachh Sarvekshan.
Meetings with ward contractor
43
10.4. Risks and vulnerabilities associated with social inclusion
suer regular harassment and extortion and
have little linkage to social support systems.
They are also not familiar with labour laws and
legal rights, do not know the local
language/culture, have limited political
representation, do not have adequate legal
documentation and are recruited through
labour contractors, who exercise significant
control over them. All these factors contribute
to their vulnerability and make them more
susceptible to exploitation and poor working
conditions, as compared to local labour. Along
with the collection sta, other stakeholder
groups also articulated the following concerns
with regard to their work and lives:
There are several issues with regard to the
working conditions and welfare of vulnerable
groups who handle waste collection at the
BWG level. These issues have long persisted
due to the system of contract labour and the
terms associated with contractual work. Of all
groups that work directly with waste, migrant
workers that are involved in handling of waste
are the most vulnerable in the entire BWG
ecosystem. These workers are critical to waste
the management system and play a crucial role
in the circular economy, whilst often being the
group most susceptible to the impacts of
climate change. They have limited access to
education and healthcare, live in poverty,
working overtime hours, they are not paid
wages commensurate with the number of
hours worked. There are no holidays and no
provision for paid leave for the entire year. The
participants stated that there should be a
reduction in their working hours and introduction
of a weekly paid leave. Along with fair wages
and leaves, they also stressed on the need to
provide recognition and legitimacy to their role
in the city’s waste collection, transport and
processing systems by issuing identity cards.
Conditions of work for BWG waste collection
sta are sub-optimal. Stakeholders like the
migrant BWG waste collection sta detailed
how long working hours (14-16 hours) handling
waste every day is debilitating and despite the
extent of work carried out by them, they have
no identification document and/or government
authorisation which provides proof and
legitimacy to their work. While they are
(i) Working conditions
wear out in a matter of weeks. Additionally,
there are no suitable uniforms provided to safely
work with waste - at present, waste comes in
direct contact with the worker’s body and
clothing. In the absence of adequate safety
equipment, workers have higher exposure to a
range of health hazards and grievous injuries.
There is a lack of personal protective equipment
that is functional and distributed at regular
intervals. Workers report that the rubber gloves
and gumboots issued to them are slippery,
reduce the speed at which they can work and
(ii) Safety equipment
waste collection. The collection sta are forced
to apologise or comply, in order to avoid
conflict and protect themselves. During night
shifts, they are frequently stopped and are
asked to provide identity cards to prove that
they are waste collection sta. Issuance
of identity cards can help combat
harassment and provide safety to these
workers.
There are several instances where migrant
BWG waste collection sta have been harassed
during working hours because they are migrant
workers, do not speak Kannada - the local
language and do not have work identification
cards. They are often looked down upon and
face verbal and physical harassment during
(iii) Workplace harassment
44
Stakeholder workshop with housekeeping sta at Indian Institute of Management, Bengaluru
occupational safety, considering their close
physical proximity to waste on a daily basis.
These stakeholder groups also report their
increased vulnerability in cases of medical
emergencies because government healthcare
(which is free/cheaper) requires considerable
paperwork and approvals. This results in them
opting for private clinics or hospitals which
causes them to rely on borrowing money from
friends, relatives and money lenders.
For both waste collection sta and
housekeeping sta, there are no provisions for
access to quality healthcare services for
themselves and their families. Additionally,
there are no regular medical checkups
provided by their contractors, which are
essential to ensure general well-being, early
detection of health issues and improved
(iv) Occupational health and access to
healthcare
neighbourhoods. As a result, they are required
to begin travelling to work extremely early in
the morning, in order to be able to make it in
time for their shift. They also report high rent,
inflated cost of utilities and in some cases
discrimination, wherein building owners express
unwillingness to rent out available houses to
them because of their work, caste or religion.
The stakeholder groups of waste collection
sta and housekeeping sta report that the
housing they can aord and have access to is
in dilapidated condition, while also being
several hours away from their place of work,
which is usually located in gentrified
(v) Access to proper housing
work their whole lives (because of a lack of
education), they would like to ensure that
their children receive a good education and
are qualified to work white-collar jobs, access
healthcare and live enriching lives. However,
a lack of quality education and support
systems leads them to believe that their
children might end up in similar manual labour
jobs to support themselves and their
families.
Some workers stated that they would like to
receive training that allows them to transition
to careers that generate more income while
others stated that they would continue to
work for the city’s waste collection system if
their income and working conditions were
improved. All the participants also
emphasised that while they might do manual
(vi) Barriers to equitable transition:
45
10.5. Necessity of recognition and job security
Despite strenuous working conditions and
critical nature of service being provided by
them, the migrant BWG waste collection sta
and housekeeping sta state that there is no
job security because they are contractual
employees who can be easily replaced. If they
make too many demands, fall sick or need to
travel home for emergencies, they lose their
job and are replaced with another worker by
the labour contractor. For JHIs, there is a
unanimous fear of losing employment if they
ask too many questions/flag issues, as they
are all contractual sta of the BBMP and not
on the municipality payroll. As a result of
being contractual sta, there are also no
incentives, benefits or upward mobility for
them in terms of promotions, salary hikes,
etc.
10.6. Financial viability of in-situ biodegradable waste management
There are various financial factors that have influenced the slow uptake of in-situ biodegradable
waste management:
(i) Costs of in-situ biodegradable
waste management
Various BWG stakeholders and service
providers have detailed how it is more
economical to opt for a service
provider/vendor who collects segregated
waste and processes and/or disposes it o-site.
The cost of infrastructure, sta salaries,
consumables, monitoring, troubleshooting,
dealing with complaints, storage, etc. in a
situation where there is no enforcement or
incentive from the BBMP is regarded as an
unnecessary expenditure and time
commitment. The push for in-situ
biodegradable processing is heavily contested
because the associated costs and lack of return
on investment do not make a strong case for
financial viability of in-situ systems.
(ii) Lack of market for compost
In addition, BWGs that successfully manage
in-situ composting report that there is no
market for the sale of the large quantities of
compost that they generate. This is because of
a range of issues; inability to aggregate
contacts of farmers, transportation costs for
farmers to move compost from the city to the
outskirts and varying compost qualities means
that ready compost is either distributed to
terrace gardeners or given away for free to
farmers who are willing to bear the
transportation costs. This results in compost
generating little or no revenue for BWGs that
carry out onsite composting.
(iii) No return of investment required
However, other stakeholders like BBMP ocials
contend that in-situ biodegradable waste
management does not have to be justified by
its financial viability and is simply the
responsibility of BWGs, enforceable by law.
They liken the requirement of installing in-situ
SWM similar to the requirement of installing
in-situ sewage treatment plants in all buildings
- it is waste management infrastructure that
needs to be maintained and operated, without
giving any returns on investment.
46
10.7. Ancillary support
While the BBMP’s own ocials and sta members can fulfil their roles with regard to BWGs, there
is a significant need identified for various forms of ancillary support:
Even in the presence of good laws and policies,
eective models of waste management for
BWGs, cooperative service providers /
authorised waste processors, enterprising
BBMP ocials and committed civil society
groups, a lack of political buy-in and support
can stall all eorts. Stakeholder inputs suggest
that local vendors, residents in residential
BWGs and owners at commercial BWGs
frequently use political alliance and pressure to
subvert the enforcement of BBMP SWM
Bye-laws. To ensure eective implementation
of at-source segregation, reducing black spots,
enforcing in-situ biodegradable waste
management, waste collection by authorized
service providers and enforcement of ban on
single-use plastic (SUP) items, there is a need
for support from senior leaders, both at
administrative and political positions. This
support is needed to rebu those trying to use
political alliances for personal gain and avoid
enforcement of BBMP SWM Bye-laws.
In certain wards of Bommanahalli Zone,
unequivocal support and interest from the local
Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) has
bolstered eorts for more transparent and
improved waste management systems. There is
a need for similar support to deter unethical
practices that result in waste dumping, burning
and other unscientific methods of waste
management.
(i) Political support
Even in cases where BWGs are interested in
installing in-situ biodegradable waste
management, they report operational and
technical issues like tenant-owner contentions,
inappropriate technology, insucient space to
install in-situ composting or biogas units and
issues of smell, flies and rodents in their
composting units because of lack of expertise.
Across Bengaluru, there is wide popularity of
24 hour composting machines and other
disproved technologies as well as a range of
vendors who provide substandard models of
in-situ biodegradable waste management. This
is further exacerbated by ocials who have
not been equipped to provide technical
expertise and the unavailability of a list of
verified vendors and service providers
published by the BBMP or KSPCB. There is a
need for technical support from experts to
improve existing onsite management systems
for technologies and processes.
The need for developing better waste
management facilities and residential building
infrastructure that by design encourages
communities to support these initiatives was
also strongly felt by the experts. Ideally, a
multidisciplinary team of practitioners with
deep knowledge of the waste sector along
with architects, designers, IT professionals,
government, homeowners, housekeeping sta
is best to ideate and create a new paradigm.
(Daily Dump, 2023).
In Bommanahalli Zone, some promising
models like the Swachgraha Kalika Kendra
(SGKK) learning centre have been able to
provide both a physical space for residents
and ocials to understand various active
in-situ composting models as well as technical
expertise on best practices, designing
roadmaps and plans, hand-holding the
implementation of in-situ composting,
troubleshooting, capacity building, etc.
(ii) Technical and design expertise
support
47
Community learning centre inspires widespread action
Swachgraha Kalika Kendra (SGKK) is an innovative SWM learning centre set up in a public
park in HSR Layout, that displays active community composting models and provides
training to BWGs and citizens alike. Initiated in 2018 by SWMRT with active support from
BBMP, Department of Horticulture, HCF and the local MLA, this learning centre engages
citizens on home composting, community composting for BWGs and gardening. There are 12
vendor models for community composting units on display so that BWGs may assess space,
quantity of waste, design, etc while picking the model that works best for their facility. The
learning centre sta actively compost in each of the 12 composting units, so that visitors can
see the process underway, note the lack of smell, understand technicalities, etc. Volunteers
and sta also provide expertise on in-situ composting for BWGs, making it considerably
easier for BWGs to move ahead with the procurement and implementation of these systems.
Additionally, free-of-cost sessions on home composting, volunteering activities, community
engagement, formal consultations for BWGs, etc all create a participatory ecosystem around
local, decentralised wet waste management. SGKK hosts exposure visits regularly for
students, employees at organisations, BWGs, government ocials from Bengaluru and other
cities, to display best practices in dealing with wet waste and inspire action.
Through training and capacity building of BBMP field sta, SGKK has managed to improve
segregation and in situ and home composting levels in HSR Layout. In addition, skilling
programs hosted at SGKK have resulted in young persons being trained as experts in in-situ
composting for BWGs and community awareness, with some also finding employment in the
SWM sector. The innovative use of shared, public spaces to mitigate climate change through
direct citizen engagement allows SGKK to show BWGs in-situ composting models that work,
provide expertise, involve the local community and generate jobs.
Community composting model at SGKK
48
11. Recommendations
A diverse set of significant challenges were
highlighted by dierent stakeholders during
various consultations and engagement in this
study. Therefore, to address this complex
problem of waste management by BWGs, it is
essential to adopt a phased approach. While
the overarching goal is to develop a
comprehensive waste management solution, it
is often impractical and resource-intensive to
tackle all challenges simultaneously. Therefore
the recommendations are specifically tailored
for the C40’s focus area which is inclusive
climate action with the understanding that
they are not intended to solve all the
challenges associated with BWGs at once.
The immediate priority is on building the
capacity of the key stakeholders and
improving visibility and inclusivity for
vulnerable groups such as waste collection
sta. This phased approach would allow for a
more targeted and manageable intervention
while laying the groundwork for a broader,
sustainable and equitable waste management
strategy.
Defining JHI roles
and responsibilities
• SWM & BWG related regulations
• BWG mapping tools &
monitoring formats
• Training on in-situ wet waste
management & technologies
• Solid waste management
and climate change
• Government schemes for
vulnerable groups
• Communication for awareness,
escalation, enforcing penalties
• IEC strategy and content
• Enable provision of identity
cards to BWG collection
sta
• Provision of
ergonomically designed
uniforms and PPE to
BWG collection sta
Policy
BBMP
capacity-
building
Inclusion
BWG
capacities &
operations
• Training and capacity building
to 10 BWGs on source segregation
& onsite wet waste management
• Handbook of in-situ
biodegradable waste management
• Pilots for onsite biodegradable
waste management with 3-5 BWGs
• Framework to monitor
BWGs by BBMP
• Framework for self reporting
by service providers and
authorised waste processors
Monitoring
49
11.1. Policy
JHIs' responsibilities will promote
transparency, accountability and
ownership in BWG waste
management because JHIs will
have a clear understanding of
their duties, reducing ambiguity in
their roles.
With well-defined
responsibilities, JHIs will be better equipped
and empowered to enforce waste
management regulations among BWGs,
provide support and carry out eective
monitoring. Clear and confident
communication from JHI would help improve
awareness among BWGs regarding their waste
management responsibilities which in turn,
could encourage greater compliance. Thus,
eective waste management, driven by
well-defined roles and responsibilities of JHIs
and their enforcement, would have a positive
impact on the environment, GHG mitigation
steps and public health.
JHIs are the frontline ocers who monitor
compliance by the BWGs. Given that the
written roles and responsibilities of JHIs do not
specify how they are supposed to fulfil this
duty they are at a loss and further, their
reporting managers are also unable to monitor
their output. It is recommended to define roles
and responsibilities for the JHIs in the
management of waste by BWGs in consultation
with the BBMP ocials.
Defining roles and responsibilities of JHIs is
also a crucial step in the process of
empowering them as many of them had
expressed a lack of confidence in dealing with
the BWGs. Empowerment in the context of
government ocials means giving them the
authority, knowledge, and resources to perform
their duties eectively and contribute to the
overall goals of the municipality specific to
waste management. The documentation of
Defining roles and responsibilities
11.2. Capacity building of BBMP zonal ocials
(i) Training / upskilling / capacity-building of JHIs
Stakeholder workshop with JHIs
50
From the JHI workshop, it was concluded that
the capacities of the JHIs need to be built so
that they can interact with and monitor BWGs
eectively. This includes being equipped to
direct BWGs to experts and vendors for in-situ
biodegradable processing, ensure that
collection and transportation are only done by
an authorised service provider, conduct
surprise site inspections, document
non-compliance and understand the reasons
for it, collect data, issue notices and fines,
escalate persistent non-compliance as required.
Training and capacity-building sessions for all
29 JHIs in Bommanahalli can be organised on
the following topics with customised training
materials focused on:
• BBMP SWM Bye-laws and all other relevant
legislations that apply to solid waste
management and BWGs.
• Clarity and training on their roles,
responsibilities and powers as JHIs with
respect to BWGs.
• BWG mapping tools and standard formats
for monitoring mechanisms for BWGs and
training on how to use these tools to collate
data, qualitative information, etc.
• Standard formats for awareness, escalation,
enforcing penalties and fines and training
on how to implement these.
• Training on in-situ composting/
biomethanation technologies, models,
vendors and processes.
• Training on the correlation between solid
waste management and climate change
and training on how to disseminate this
information.
• Financial literacy training which focuses on
government schemes that are beneficial to
waste collection and processing sta.
These capacity-building exercises can lead to
better compliance with regulations, improved
execution of roles, enhanced data
management, consistent enforcement,
sustainable waste management practices,
increased climate change awareness and better
access to government schemes for vulnerable
groups such as waste collection and processing
sta. These outcomes collectively contribute to
a more eective, resilient and inclusive BWG
waste management system in Bommanahalli.
At an individual level, JHIs are likely to acquire
skills and knowledge that not only enable them
to perform their roles more eectively but also
empower them in their professional
development.
(ii) Preparation and implementation of
IEC strategy and content
For BWGs, it is recommended that BBMP,
either by itself and/or through competent third
parties create multilingual content for building
awareness and bringing about behavioural
change among BWGs such as life cycle of
waste, source segregation and onsite
management of wet waste. This content
should be for dierent mediums such as handy
flip charts, posters, banners, short clips,
PowerPoint presentations etc. The IEC content
must also showcase best practices for waste
management by BWGs. BBMP must also
allocate appropriate budgets and ensure
regular monitoring and evaluation of the
eectiveness of IEC materials, activities and
interventions.
Such IEC content, if disseminated
by the JHIs, can lead to increased
awareness among more than 400
BWGs across Bommanahalli zone.
These initiatives could bring about behavioural
change, and a more informed and engaged
BWG community, contributing to the overall
enhancement of the waste management
system and a cleaner, more sustainable urban
environment in Bengaluru.
11.3. Monitoring
Under BBMP SWM Bye-laws, the ocers
authorised/nodal oce by BBMP have the
power to carry out various monitoring
activities including source segregation,
collection, transportation, processing and
disposal of solid waste, implementation of
ward micro plan, functioning of processing
facilities and generally, supervision
51
compliance of various provisions of SWM Rules
and BBMP SWM Bye-laws.
As highlighted above, there are currently no
consistent monitoring systems and formats to
oversee the BWG system. Therefore,
it is
recommended to develop formats
for the BBMP to notify and
monitor the BWGs, in-person and
virtually. Having standardised
formats for monitoring BWG
activities ensures consistency in
data collection and reporting
across dierent areas and periods.
Such consistent data enables
government ocials to make
informed decisions about resource
allocation, policy adjustments, and
intervention strategies.
It also
becomes easier to assess the performance and
impact of waste management initiatives
including social and environmental impact. If
this data is shared with the public, it can
facilitate public engagement, fostering
awareness and support for sustainable waste
management practices.
In addition, if feasible, a self-reporting format
for compliance with BBMP SWM Bye-laws by
service providers and authorised waste
processors can be uploaded/reported on a
common IT platform. This could include names
of the BWG, location, quantum of waste, how
waste is being managed, manpower details and
compliance with labour and environmental
regulations. Similar to the monitoring,
standardised self-reporting formats lead to
consistent and timely submission of data,
allowing for ecient monitoring, performance
assessment and decision-making by the city
authorities. It also promotes transparency and
accountability, encouraging compliance with
regulations and contractual obligations.
Reporting on manpower and compliance with
labour regulations also contribute to a safer
and more equitable environment for waste
workers by reducing the likelihood of
exploitation.
11.4. Inclusion
Under the BBMP SWM Bye-laws, BBMP is
required to issue ID cards, comply with labour
regulations for working conditions and provide
medical checkups and personal protective
equipment (PPE) to pourakarmikas and other
eligible waste workers in waste management.
The BWG collection sta do not seem to have
basic amenities for their work such as identity
cards, ergonomically designed uniforms and
personal protective equipment. It is
recommended that identity cards be provided
to these workers and conditions for these be
included in contractor agreements.
The
provisions of identity cards will
provide much-needed recognition
to the BWG collection sta and
protect them in cases of
work-related harassment.
This would
also be the first step towards having an
inclusive waste management system in
Bommanahalli. In addition, as a part of the C40
project, there can be provision of
ergonomically designed uniforms and personal
protective equipment as a one-time pilot
which the BBMP can scale if positive feedback
is received from the collection sta. Given the
limited access to healthcare for these workers,
this initiative could be beneficial because these
uniforms and personal protective equipment
could be the first line of defence against
occupational hazards relating to working with
waste.
52
11.5. Capacity building of BWGs and other support
(i)
Under the BBMP SWM Bye-laws, BBMP is
required to provide information to the public
about composting, bio-gas generation, and
decentralised processing of waste at a
community level by conducting training
classes, seminars, workshops and compost
santhes (markets or events promoting
composting). In this context and as per the
findings from the stakeholder engagement,
there is a need to provide training
and capacity building to BWGs on
the following:
• Source segregation, especially
among commercial BWGs
• In-situ biodegradable waste
management technologies and
vendors
The next phase of the project could consider
providing these training and capacity building
sessions to 10 BWGs of dierent types.
______________________________________
(ii) In this context,
it is recommended
that a handbook of in-situ
biodegradable waste management
technology providers be prepared
and published with support of the
BBMP, for the reference of the
BWGs in Bengaluru city.
Such a
handbook would equip BWGs with a
comprehensive directory of technology
providers specialising in in-situ biodegradable
waste management, enabling them to make
well-informed decisions. It would facilitate
vendor selection by presenting trustworthy
options, exploring competitive pricing,
streamlining the technology assessment
process, and ensuring compliance with local
regulations. By fostering the adoption of
sustainable waste management technologies,
this handbook would not only benefit more
than 8000 BWGs in Bengaluru but also
contribute to environmental preservation and
climate mitigation strategies.
______________________________________
(iii)
Pilots for onsite biodegradable
waste management, especially
onsite composting and/or biogas
units in 3-5 dierent types of
BWGs can be considered in the
next phase.
These pilots would assist in
evaluating the feasibility and eectiveness of
dierent waste management technologies and
practices, including potential challenges. They
could also provide valuable data and insights
into the performance, cost-eectiveness, and
environmental impact of dierent waste
management solutions. Most importantly,
pilots create opportunities for stakeholder
engagement and education, raising awareness,
bringing about behaviourial change and
building support for sustainable waste
management practices because practical
demonstrations of workable models have
proven to be far more successful for long-term
behavioral change than written documentation.
Stakeholder workshop with BWG collection sta
53
References
Bauman, B., & Bauman, B. (2022). How plastics contribute to climate change. Yale Climate Connections.
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2019/08/how-plastics-contribute-to-climate-change/
Beschkov (2021). Biogas Production: Evaluation and Possible Applications
https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/79776
Bulk Solid Waste Generators: A Step by Step Guidance for Urban Local Bodies to implement the Solid Waste
Management Rules, 2016 (2017)
Center for Science and Environment (2023). Solid Waste Management by Bulk Waste Generators: Challenges
and the Way Forward
Central Pollution Control Board (2021). Annual Report 2020-21 on Implementation of Solid Waste
Management Rules, 2016
CivicWell (2022). Participation tools for better community planning. https://civicwell.org/wp-content/uploads/
2022/01/Particition_Tools_for_Better_Community_Planning.pdf Government of Himachal Pradesh. (2017).
https://himachal.nic.in/WriteReadData/l892s/15_l892s/1499233403.pdf
Huun, K. (2020). Waste and its Contribution to Climate Change.
www.colorado.edu/ecenter/2020/12/10/waste-and-its-contribution-climate-change
Kamala Kanta Mohapatra (2012). Women Workers in Informal Sector in India: Understanding the Occupational
Vulnerability, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, Vol. 2 No. 21; November 2012.
https://www.shram.org/uploadFiles/20140729054441.pdf
Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) (2021). Annual Report Status Regarding Solid Waste
Management Rules, 2016.
Michael, Kavya and Deshpande, Tanvi and Ziervogel, Gina (2017), Examining Vulnerability in a Dynamic Urban
Setting: The Case of Bangalore's Interstate Migrant Waste Pickers (February 10, 2017).
https://ssrn.com/abstract=2924375 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2924375
Lithgow-Schmidt, D. (1969). Ladder of citizen participation.
Mitlin, D., & Satterthwaite, D. (2013). Urban poverty in the global south: Scale and nature.
Nakagawa, S., & Schielzeth, H. (2013). A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear
mixed-eects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4(2), 133-142. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860
Rahul Jain (2023). Greening India's Energy Mix With Compressed Biogas (CBG), Centre for Science and
Environment, New Delhi.
Ravi Srivastava (2020). Vulnerable Internal Migrants in India and Portability of Social Security and
Entitlements, WP 02/2020, Centre for Employment Studies Working Paper Series, Institute of Human
Development. https://www.ihdindia.org/Working%20Ppaers/2020/IHD-CES_WP_02_2020.pdf
54
Sud, V., Mogul, R et al. (2022, December 11). A trash heap 62 metres high shows the scale of India’s climate
challenge. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/10/india/india-bhalswa-landfill-pollution-climate-intl-hnk-dst
Semi-structured interview. Tools for Participatory Science.
http://s4s.wikidot.com/methods:semi-structured-interview
Sengupta, M. (2023). Improving bulk generators’ waste management can address India’s urban garbage
menace.
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/waste/improving-bulk-generators-waste-management-can-address-india
-s-urban-garbage-menace-91722
Srikar Raghavan (2023). Bengaluru’s Sanitation Workers Say No to the System’s Scraps.
https://inthesetimes.com/article/sweeping-changes-india-workers-migrants-union-strike-sanitation
The Indian Express (2022). Bengaluru: BBMP mandates bulk waste generators to process biodegradable waste
within their premises.
https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/bangalore/bengaluru-bbmp-bulk-waste-generators-biodegradable-was
te-7847909/
Tsydenova, N. & Patil, P. (2023, October 2). 6 reasons to blame plastic pollution for climate change. World
Bank Blogs. https://blogs.worldbank.org/endpovertyinsouthasia/6-reasons-blame-plastic-pollution-climate-
change
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (2022). Carbon Neutrality in the UNECE Region: Integrated
Life-cycle Assessment of Electricity Sources.
US EPA. (2023, August 22). Resources, Waste and Climate Change
https://www.epa.gov/smm/resources-waste-and-climate-change
US EPA (2016). Evaluating the Air Quality, Climate & Economic Impacts of Biogas Management Technologies.
Verma R.L., Borongan G. (2022). Emissions of Greenhouse Gases from Municipal Solid Waste Management
System in Ho Chi Minh City of Viet Nam. Urban Science. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci6040078
World Bank. (n.d.) Trends in Solid Waste Management.
https://datatopics.worldbank.org/what-a-waste/trends_in_solid_waste_management.html
Zero Waste Europe (September 2019). The impact of Waste-to-Energy incineration on climate.
Zhang, H., Liu, G., Xue, L., Zuo, J., Chen, T., Vuppaladadiyam, A. K., & Duan, H. (2020). Anaerobic digestion
based waste-to-energy technologies can halve the climate impact of China’s fast-growing food waste by 2040.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 277, 123490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123490
55
Annexure 1: Details of stakeholder
engagement
Date
Type of
stakeholder
Type of activity/
engagement
Details of
stakeholders
06/07/2023 JC (SWM) (transferred
during the project)
Meeting (in person) Mr. Parashuram
11/07/2023 Zonal JC (transferred
during the project)
Semi structured
interview (in person)
Mr. Krishnamurthy
22/06/2023
- 04/07/2023
Residential BWGs Semi structured
interviews (online)
Salarpuria Serenity
Adarsh Rhythm Apartments
Prestige Falcon City
30/06/2023
- 01/08/2023
Civil Society Groups Semi structured
interviews (online)
• Vasuki Iyengar, Solid Waste
Management Round Table,
Bangalore (SWMRT) and
Soil & Health
• BNS Ratnakar, HSR Citizens
Forum (HCF)
• Suresh Balasubramanian,
Swachgraha Kalika Kendra
(HCF)
• Sandhya Narayan and
Anuradha Govind, Solid Waste
Management Round Table,
Bangalore (SWMRT)
21/07/2023
- 21/08/2023
Service Providers/Product
Sellers/Authorized Waste
Processors
Semi structured
interviews (online)
• Malini Parmar, Founder,
Stonesoup
• Ravindra Karnad, Founder,
Marigold Composters
• Poonam Kasturi, Founder,
Daily Dump
• Marwan Abubaker,
Co-Founder, Hasiru Dala
Innovations Private Limited
• Nityanand Surendra, CEO,
Material Solutions for Green
Planet (MSGP) Infratech
Private Limited
02/08/2023 JC (SWM) (transferred
during the project)
Meeting (in person) Mr. Dharampal
09/08/2023 Ward Contractor &
Service Provider
Semi structured
interview (in person)
Roopesh Kumar
17/08/2023 &
19/08/2023
Housekeeping sta at BWG Stakeholder Workshop
(in person)
• 10 housekeeping sta of
Salarpuria Serenity which
included 9 women and 1 man
• 41 housekeeping sta of
IIM-B, including 20 women
and 21 men
56
Date
Type of
stakeholder
Type of activity/
engagement
Details of
stakeholders
23/08/2023 BBMP Junior Health
Inspectors (JHIs)
Stakeholder Workshop
(in person)
21 JHIs attended the workshop
which included 16 male and
5 female
26/08/2023 Commercial BWGs Semi structured
interviews (in person)
• Food Palace, supermarket
• Mughal Treat, restaurant with
seating
• White House, marriage hall
• Indiqube, oce space
• My Chicken, commercial shop
30/08/2023 BWG waste collection sta Stakeholder Workshop
(in person)
23 BWG waste collection sta
who were all male
02/09/2023 Zonal JC and AEE,
Bommanahalli
Stakeholder Workshop
(in person)
• Mr. Ajit M
• Ms. Nethra
11/09/2023 Zonal SE Bommanahalli Semi structured
interviews (online)
Mr. Mahadesh
12/09/2023 Chief General Manager,
Bengaluru Solid Waste
Management Company
Semi structured
interview (in person)
Basavaraj Kabade
12/09/2023 Technical Assistant to
Chief General Manager,
Bengaluru Solid Waste
Management Company
Semi structured
interview (in person)
Chitra Jayaramiah
12/09/2023 AEE, Bommanahalli Semi structured
interview (in person)
Ms. Nethra
57
Annexure 2: List of wards in
Bommanahalli zone
S.No.
Sub division Ward number Name of the ward
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Bommanahalli
Bommanahalli
Bommanahalli
Bommanahalli
Bommanahalli
Bommanahalli
Bommanahalli
Bommanahalli
Bengaluru South
Bengaluru South
Bengaluru South
Bengaluru South
Bengaluru South
Bengaluru South
Bengaluru South
Bengaluru South
174
175
186
187
188
189
190
193
184
185
191
192
194
195
196
197
HSR Layout
Bommanahalli
Jaraganahalli
Puttenahalli
Bilekhali
Hongasandra
Mangammanapalya
Arakere
Uttarahalli
Yelchenahalli
Singasandra
Begur
Gottigere
Konanakunte
Anjanapura
Vasanthpura
58
Annexure 3: Roles and responsibilities
of stakeholders in BWG ecosystem
In the table below, the stakeholders under the categories of “Waste Collectors and Processors” and
“Regulators” have been further bifurcated and described. The description along with examples,
roles and responsibilities of all the stakeholders involved in management of waste generated by
BWGs in Bommanahalli Zone have been listed in the table below.
1. Residential BWG represented by RWA (Resident Welfare Association)
Stakeholder description
RWA is typically an elected body that manages the activities in an
apartment complex.
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to solid waste
management (SWM)
• All decisions and budgets for SWM activities
• Enforcement of source segregation among households (as per
SWM Rules, 2016 and BBMP SWM Bye-laws)
• Onsite or o-site management of biodegradable waste along
with selection of service providers/contractor etc. (as per
SWM Rules, 2016 and BBMP SWM Bye-laws)
• Decisions on manpower for SWM activities in the premises
• Awareness, training and capacity building activities
2. Commercial/Institutional BWG represented by Owners
Stakeholder description
Owner
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Same as residential BWGs (as per SWM Rules, 2016 and BBMP
SWM Bye-laws)
• In addition, commercial BWGs have to enforce source segre-
gation by a larger floating population such as tourists, restau-
rant patrons, oce goers, students etc.
3. BBMP - JHI
Stakeholder description
There are 29 JHIs in Bommanahalli Zone, out of which 5 are
women and 24 are men. The BWG to JHI ratio in each of the
wards diers because it depends on the number of BWGs in a
ward, for example, the ratio is 42:1 (number of BWGs: number of
JHIs) in HSR ward where the BWG number and density is high and
15:1 in Bommanahalli ward where the number of BWGs are lower.
59
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Front end team of BBMP that directly interacts with BWGs
• Monitoring waste management by the BWGs (as per BBMP
SWM Bye-laws)
• Monitoring services provided by Waste Contractors and
Service providers/ Authorised Waste Processors (as per BBMP
SWM Bye-laws)
• Enforcement of BBMP SWM Bye-laws including reporting of
non-compliances to senior health inspectors and imposition of
spot fines and penalties. (as per BBMP SWM Bye-laws)
4. BBMP - Others
Stakeholder description
Central • Joint Commissioner (SWM)
• Bengaluru Solid Waste Management Company
Zonal • Joint Commissioner (JC, Bommanahalli)
• Superintendent Engineer (SE, Bommanahalli),
• Assistant Executive Engineer (AEE, Bommanahalli)
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Second level monitoring of waste management activities in the
zone including work of the JHIs
• Enforcement of BBMP SWM Bye-laws including imposition of
penalties
• To appoint and empower SWM marshals (as per BBMP SWM
Bye-laws)
• Awareness, training and capacity building activities (as per
BBMP SWM Bye-laws)
• Empanelment and authorisations of waste processors/service
providers and monitoring their operations (as per BBMP SWM
Bye-laws)
• Reporting and data management with respect to BWGs (as
per BBMP SWM Bye-laws)
• Appeal against levy of penalties is with the JC (as per BBMP
SWM Bye-laws)
5. Service Provider/authorised waste processor - O Site
Stakeholder description
Service providers/waste processors who collect from BWGs and
manage/process such waste at osite locations
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Registration with BBMP (as per BBMP SWM Bye-laws)
• Collection & transportation of waste from BWGs (as per BBMP
SWM Bye-laws)
• Processing of waste at non-BBMP facilities which are autho-
rised under environmental regulations (as per BBMP SWM
Bye-laws)
• Collection of service free from BWGs (as per BBMP SWM
Bye-laws)
• Periodic reporting of data to BBMP (as per BBMP SWM
Bye-laws)
60
6. Service provider / authorised waste processor / product sellers - Onsite
Stakeholder description
Service providers/waste processors who collect and process
biodegradable waste generated by BWGs within their premises
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Registration with BBMP for Service providers/waste proces-
sors (and not product sellers) (as per BBMP SWM Bye-laws)
• Collection and processing of biodegradable waste at the
premises (as per BBMP SWM Bye-laws)
• Collection of service free from BWGs (as per BBMP SWM
Bye-laws)
• Periodic reporting of data to BBMP (as per BBMP SWM
Bye-laws)
7. Piggeries
Stakeholder description
Informal unregistered vendors who operate piggeries and collect
biodegradable waste from BWGs such as hotels and restaurants
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Collection of biodegradable waste from BWGs such as hotels
and restaurants at no cost and/or very low rates
• Biodegradable waste is fed to pigs at the piggeries
8. Ward contractor
Stakeholder description
The contractor selected through the BBMP tender system that is
supposed to carry out door-to-door collection of waste from
non-BWGs in the ward
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Door-to-door collection of all waste streams from non-BWGs
and transportation of waste to processing and disposal sites
upon payment of tipping fee by BBMP (as per BBMP tender
conditions and contract with BBMP)
• Procurement of vehicles and manpower for the above services
(as per BBMP tender conditions and contract with BBMP)
9. Waste collectors and o-site processing sta - ward contractor and service
providers/authorised waste processors
Stakeholder description
Sta of the ward contractor and service providers/authorised
waste processors who are the primary collectors of waste from
BWGs
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Primary waste collection and informing BWGs on source
segregation
• Transportation of waste in a segregated manner
• Processing of waste at an osite location by sta of autho-
rised waste processors
61
10. Waste management sta – onsite and housekeeping sta set BWGs
Stakeholder description
Housekeeping sta and sta of the service providers/authorised
waste processors who process waste onsite
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Primary waste collection and informing BWGs on source
segregation by housekeeping sta
• Processing of biodegradable waste through onsite composting
and/or biomethanation systems
• Aggregation of non-biodegradable waste and thereafter,
sorting into dierent categories.
11. Civil society and community-based organisations
Stakeholder description
Non-profit and community-based organisations working in solid
waste management
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Inputs to policies and laws on waste management
• Public engagement through awareness and capacity building
programs
12. Elected representatives
Stakeholder description
Member of Legislative Assembly residing in Bommanahalli, Mayor
and Ward Councillors
Roles and responsibilities
with respect to SWM
• Formulate policies and laws on waste management
• Approval of bureaucrats appointed in senior SWM-related
roles including their transfers
• Provide inputs in selection of ward contractor and service
providers/authorised waste processors
• Approval of waste management activities/projects
62
