The current state of SA’s waste sector

Reports dating back to 2007 and 2008 show that municipalities in South Africa are faced with four broad challenges, namely: financial management, equipment management, labour management, and institutional behaviour.

By Dr Suzan Oelofse*

These challenges manifest as the ineffective utilisation of municipal resources (financial, equipment, capacity), non-compliance with environmental legislation, no or poor levels of service delivery, and potential environmental and human health impacts.

The legal requirements for municipalities to provide refuse removal services have evolved and become more demanding over the years. Municipalities often refer to ‘unfunded mandates’ that have been added with the implementation of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act (No. 59 of 2008). The overlap of functions between districts and local municipalities has also been mentioned as a challenge that results in a lack of accountability, hampering solid waste management in small municipalities1 .

The South African waste sector has experienced a surge in waste regulation since the Act came into effect on 1 July 2009. The sector has moved from a situation of limited waste regulation to the current state, which advocates for moving waste up the waste management hierarchy, away from disposal, towards more sustainable alternative waste management options, with regulatory control instituted on most waste management activities. According to many, this increase in regulatory control has introduced a compliance burden, which has increased both operational and capital costs for the waste sector.

The cost of landfilling municipal solid waste is a case in point, which saw an increase associated with the introduction of new landfill barrier requirements. Experts in the design of landfills have indicated that the cost of compliance with the new requirements is close to double when compared to the Minimum Requirements of 1998.

The increase in the cost of landfilling in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. An increase in the cost of landfilling is important to make alternative treatment options more attractive and to encourage municipalities and industry to explore alternative waste management options towards ‘saving’ landfill airspace for residual waste (with associated higher disposal tariffs). The real problem is that compliance with the new requirements is generally not a priority for many municipalities.

A shortage of landfill airspace in Gauteng and the Western Cape was the main trigger that resulted in action towards waste diversion away from landfill to alternative waste treatment technologies (AWTT) in these provinces. For example, a ban on organic waste disposal in the Western Cape has seen an increase in investment in composting facilities, and the shortage of landfill airspace in Gauteng saw investment by the Gauteng Infrastructure Funding Agency in feasibility studies for AWTT in all three metros in Gauteng.

Municipalities perceive moving waste up the waste management hierarchy as an ‘unfunded mandate’. The Constitution of South Africa outlines the waste management mandate of municipalities as refuse removal, refuse dumps and solid waste disposal. A consequence of this situation is that municipalities are slow to initiate waste separation-at-source initiatives, resulting in only 7% of urban households and 2.6% of households in towns and rural areas showing regular recycling behaviour in 2015.

Common operational challenges faced by municipalities include littering, illegal dumping, service backlogs, service interruptions resulting from breakdowns associated with ageing vehicles, inadequate plant and equipment, and insufficient waste management infrastructure. Many municipal landfills are nearing the end of their designed lifespan; while the development of new infrastructure such as materials recovery facilities, buyback centres, and drop-off centres to divert waste away from landfill, and the introduction of sustainable AWTT options, are lagging behind.

Many municipal by-laws assign ownership of waste to the municipality, which hampers private sector involvement in waste separation-at-source initiatives and investment in infrastructure. The sharing of costs and benefits associated with the sale of recyclable materials is a sticking point that should be resolved to unlock these situations.

Municipalities spend between 20% and 50% of their annual budget on municipal solid waste management2, of which 50% to 90% is typically allocated to waste collection. The average operating and capital expenditure on solid waste per municipality in KwaZuluNatal in 2017/18 was R107 664 193 and R37 308 905 respectively3.

The costs of providing waste removal services vary significantly between municipalities, and nonpayment of waste services by residents and businesses therefore has a direct impact on a municipality’s ability to render services. In addition, municipalities are expected to provide services to poor households even if they cannot afford to pay.

Municipalities are in a position to recover the cost associated with waste collection and management services through the collection of rates and taxes, and by charging gate fees for the disposal of waste at landfills, but full cost accounting is not widely implemented. In addition, the Policy for the Provision of Basic Refuse Removal Services to Indigent Households requires municipalities to provide waste collection services to non-paying indigent households. This service is often financed through cross-subsidisation, by charging a higher collection fee in affluent areas, or by linking the tariff to the property size or value.

Therefore, households are unlikely to be willing to pay an additional fee for the collection of source-separated recyclables. Adding a service for the collection of source-separated waste is likely to increase the costs of collection, depending on the format of the collection system, but will also result in landfill airspace savings. In addition, investment in appropriate infrastructure and equipment to support waste diversion from landfill is required.

Government is looking to industry to support the development of capital infrastructure through private sector investment, but municipalities are reluctant to enter into public-private partnerships due to the complex administrative and legal processes required to establish such partnerships. Municipalities need to build the required capacity and competence to establish, manage and maintain partnership agreements to create an enabling environment for the much-needed investment in infrastructure.

In conclusion, it is clear that municipalities face many challenges, despite national policy and strategies providing the enabling environment for moving waste up the waste management hierarchy towards recycling and AWTT. To effect the required change, municipalities will have to get their house in order and create an enabling environment for private sector support and investment in recycling and AWTT infrastructure.

References:

1 Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) 2016. The state of basic service delivery in South Africa: In-depth analysis of the Community Survey 2016 data. Statistics South Africa. Pretoria. 120 pp. Report No. 03-01-22 2016. ISBN 978-0-621-45302-7

2 Dukhan, A., Bourbon-Séclet, C. and Yannic, N. (2012). Linking public and private action for sustainable waste management. Private Sector and Development, 15 (October): 9-11. https://issuu.com/objectifdeveloppement/ docs/magazine_proparco_psd15_uk

3 Municipal Demarcation Board (MDB) (2018). Municipal powers and functions capacity assessment 2018. National report: Executive summary

*Dr Suzan Oelofse is a principal researcher at the CSIR, with expertise in integrated waste management.