
Life and Death in the Landfill - There is a Better Way
By Neil N. Seldman
© Institute for Local Self-Reliance,
Washington, DC.
November 2000
The Quezon City Landfill Tragedy
On 10 July as many as 500 scavengers died in one of
Metro Manila's teeming landfills. Intensive rains
loosened a hill of municipal solid waste that
collapsed on top of shanties and burst aflame. The
victims, who made their livings by sorting through
trash for recyclable items, were at the lowest rung of
Philippine society.
From one to three million people live and work as
landfill scavengers in the Southern Tier. These hard
working people can recycle more than 50% of the solid
waste generated by the cities on a daily basis.
Without this small army of women and child labor,
cities could not function. Yet, workers get no wages,
no benefits and, needless to say, no respect.
Furthermore, they rarely receive police protection and
organized crime elements freely expropriate hard-won
surpluses.
So uniform are the conditions in landfills throughout
the Southern Tier that social scientists have
documented common dreams among child scavengers and
landfill dwellers in a wide variety of countries and
cultures. The children dream of being buried up to
their mouths and nostrils in slowly rising garbage.
In these dreams, the children are helpless to
extricate themselves because their hands and legs are
immobilized.
Although the Manila tragedy was far more dramatic than
is typical, deaths and maimings among scavenger
populations are everyday occurrences in municipal
landfills serving Asian, African, and Central and
South American urban areas. When disease and
demoralization are added to the accidents, a vision of
the daily realities of scavengers throughout the
world, is complete. Yet, remarkably, within the dumps
people struggle and succeed to create community. The
landfill dwellers carve out streets, build homes and
schools, and start small businesses.
Political Economy of Landfills
This situation in Southern Tier urban landfills is no
aberration of economic policy; rather it is a direct
result of past and current policies supported by
international finance agencies, local governments, and
businesses in these distressed economies. The
dismantling of traditional economies and changes in
land-ownership patterns brought about by imposing
market economies forced millions of people off the
land and into cities.
The urban landfills are the staging grounds for the
transition of the workforce from its traditional rural
skills into an industrial workforce. Generations pass
through. The landfill offers the rare opportunity for
immediate food, shelter and a way to establish oneself
in new circumstances. Among the discards of the
government, business, and residential sectors a way of
life presents itself. Some migrants remain forever.
All of this activity takes place in the burgeoning
'informal sector' of Southern Tier economies.
Generally, there are no government or private sector
services in the landfill.
Policies for Change Not Progress
Unfortunately, the policy direction of international
agencies and governments of Southern Tier countries is
moving in the wrong direction. There are two thrusts
to this policy. The first is to eliminate the urban
landfills, which are eyesores and sources of pollution
in the midst of the urban metropolis. For example, in
one Southern Tier megacity of 8 million in South
America, the policy called for the construction of a
new landfill in a virgin green valley just three miles
from center city. Barbed wire and machine gun turrets
were planned to keep the scavenging hordes at bay.
The plan did not consider the costs of increasing the
waste stream by some 50% and hauling the waste to the
new landfill. Nor were the costs of widening and
hardening roads, and maintaining them, in order to
support trucks and trailers.
The second thrust to current policy is to build large
incinerators. These are the very same technologies
that have been rejected by most U.S. and European
urban planners due to successful efforts by grassroots
groups which have called attention to increased
economic and pollution costs of incineration as
compared to recycling, composting, waste reduction and
landfill systems. The success of this grassroots
movement has literally driven the incinerator
companies to market their wares in Southern Tier
cities.
These $500 million facilities incur operating costs
that are four times the costs of recycling, composting
and landfill systems. The capital is used to destroy
the very materials needed to sustain the scavenging
populations. Furthermore, these incinerators pollute
the air and create toxic ash that must be landfilled.
Taiwan is scheduled to have 35 such incinerators.
Fifteen have already been built. Bangkok and Manila
are scheduled for similar rings of incinerators
surrounding the cities.
An active citizens' movement in these cities has now
been linked to U.S. and European anti-incinerator
coalitions. The plans for incineration in Southern
Tier megacities are not going unchallenged. Key
organizations involved in this international movement
are Greenpeace International, Multinational Resource
Center, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives,
the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, and the
GrassRoots Recycling Network.
A Better Way
It is not commonly known that the conditions in
Southern Tier landfills are completely and immediately
redeemable; and future human and environmental
exploitation is avoidable. Many landfill scavengers
maintain an entrepreneurial spirit. They create
informal landfill-based enterprises and strive to
become part of the mainstream economy. They generate
surpluses and invest their capital. Scavengers in many
landfills have formed collection cooperatives where
cooperation extends beyond the enterprise to shelter,
childcare, food gathering and protection. But
organized crime cripples many small businesses by
confiscating earnings and surpluses.
Many landfill dwellers suffer for their lack of
mobility, a circumstance forced upon them by organized
crime. At a landfill for a South American megacity,
the dwellers are met at the landfill gate and paid a
fraction of the value for their materials, compared to
the price they could receive for delivering materials
directly to industrial firms just a few miles away.
Organized crime elements prevent the residents from
bettering themselves. If scavengers purchase trucks,
criminals destroy them. In one incident, a small
brick structure that housed a precious corrugated
baler had its roof destroyed. Then the baler was
disabled.
If scavengers were fairly compensated for their labor
and the stranglehold of criminal elements was removed,
small businesses would flourish. Investment in
equipment and trucks would increase efficiency and
productivity. The scavengers could join the formal
economy.
The transformation of the landfill economy would
contribute toward social and environmental justice, as
well. Children would be freed from labor and go to
school. Environmentally-sound methods will replace
crude and environmentally dangerous methods. Urban
infrastructure afforded the scavengers will reduce
infectious diseases and other health related
expenditures.
The Cost of Change
For every million people living in a Southern Tier
urban area, there are one thousand scavengers, about
half living in the landfill. To rationalize the
current system of chaos in these urban landfills,
immediate and direct investments must be made.
The fastest growing cost sector in Southern Tier
cities is waste management with projected costs
expected to increase exponentially; from $15 billion
in 2000 to $100 billion by 2030. These dollars could
be a source of economic growth, rather than ever
deepening economic and social costs. A costly sector
of the economy can be transformed into a highly
productive and sustainable sector.
A typical system of urban landfills serving a megacity
of 10 million people would require an investment of
$8-10 million to eliminate the squalor and to open
access for the scavengers to the mainline economy of
the city. This investment would yield such an
increase in productivity that children could be
eliminated from the workforce. Workers would be able
to afford schooling for their young. If scavenger
enterprises were formalized and entered the tax rolls,
the infrastructure for adequate shelter and community
(roads, schools, clinics and recreation areas) could
be afforded, as well.
Essential investments in worker productivity include
equipment such as boots, gloves, basic hand tools,
conveyor belts that allow workers to sort through
materials without constant stooping and bending, and
vehicles which give enterprises the ability to move
materials to markets. Balers and sorting equipment
would allow workers to prepare materials for market.
Establishment of local enterprises could allow the
landfill dwellers to add value to recovered materials.
For example, workers could clean and sanitize glass
bottles for reuse in plants adjacent to the landfill.
Through vermicomposting - the use of worms to hasten
the composting process - landfill dwellers could
produce quality topsoil and marketable crops of worms.
New relationships can emerge between scavengers and
their cities. Prior to the 1949 Communist Revolution
in China, Shanghai's scavengers were among the most
downtrodden in the world. Within five years, however,
these scavengers evolved into industrial leaders.
Their efforts to build the Shanghai Resource Recovery
Company with its matrix of collection, processing and
manufacturing earned them the highest praise from
their municipality. On a micro level, similar
achievements have been realized. In San Paolo,
Brazil, corporate investment in local scavenger
operations has had dramatic results. By providing
access to tools and carts, scavengers have been
transformed into local merchants. They are accepted
and respected within their communities.
Conclusion
Where there is civilization, there is scavenging. But
the conditions of scavenging, and the economic and
social relations between these essential industrial
workers and their society at large, do not have to be
mean and inhumane. They can be cooperative and sustainable.
|