Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 10

Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Habitat International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint

Drivers for development of circular economy e A case study of Serbia


Marina Ili c*
c, Magdalena Nikoli
Faculty of Ecology and Environment, Cara Dusana 62-64, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Poor waste management in developing countries indicates that waste generation is mostly associated
Received 15 February 2016 with the economic status of a society, their weak economy-social factors affected by the absence of
Received in revised form proper environmental legislation, nancial management and administrative capacities. Over the years,
1 June 2016
increasing amount of waste without any treatment is mainly disposed of on the existing dumpsites in the
Accepted 2 June 2016
municipalities. This practice not allows the exploitation of resources from waste, and represents a huge
loss of resources and threat to the environment and human health. Therefore, this problem is very
complex and requires constant adjustment of the situation, uctuations and the needs and demands of
Keywords:
Municipal waste
innovative solutions. This paper is focused on the drivers that have the biggest impact on waste man-
Municipalies agement in Serbia and improvement of the system by changing the impact of the drivers. The objective is
Drivers for development of waste related to waste management drivers in the context of circular economy. This includes establishing
management baseline data on waste and assessment of the current waste management system, setting future goals,
Comparative analysis identication of issues, plans for integrated waste management and their implementation. The paper
Circular economy identies bottlenecks that restrict Serbians sustainable development, such as low levels of reuse,
Zero waste recycling and recovery of waste, shortage of advanced technology, signicant waste disposal amounts
and weak economic incentives. The comparison is made with the Municipality of Ljubljana approach to
Zero waste practice and circular economy. This analysis depicts real opportunities for more sustainable
and efcient waste management in the municipalities and suggests a step forward towards the inte-
grating best Zero Waste practices in the municipalities in developing countries.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction administrative capacities (Muniafu & Otiato, 2010). It should be


mentioned that increased demand of resources has led to great
Waste management is a challenge for the cities authorities in pressure on the environment and the need to shift from linear to
developing countries mainly due to very limited funds for the solid circular economy that will preserve the environment, increase the
waste management sector provided by the governments, the value of the products, enable new economic growth and employ-
absence of understanding the factors that affect the different levels ment opportunities, reduction or complete elimination of waste.
of waste management, the low levels of services quality required Minimisation of waste generation and material through recycling
for protection of public health and the environment and interde- and reusing of products, will create economic and environmental
pendence necessary to provide the entire handling system func- co-benets (EEA, 2016). Now Serbia has an opportunity to accel-
tioning (Guerrero, Maas, & Hogland, 2013; Ogawa, 1996). Poor erate the process of improving waste management, recognizing
waste management in developing countries indicates that waste market failures and bottlenecks already established in over thirty
generation is mostly associated with the economic status of a so- years long development of waste management systems currently in
ciety, their weak economiesocial factors affected by the absence of economically developed countries, which have followed a linear
proper environmental legislation, nancial management and model of the economy. It is in a circular economy overlapping
economic interests with the interests of sustainable waste man-
agement and environmental protection. Republic of Serbia needs to
Abbreviations: IWM, Integrated Waste Managemant; ISWM, Integrated Solid
identify and promote the sustainable nancial models that could
Waste Management; GNI, Gross national income; MSW, Municipal Solid Waste; cope with the demands of industrial waste, as a basis for the cir-
PET, polyethylene terephthalate; WHO, World Health Organization. cular economy (IC, 2015). A practical waste management system
* Corresponding author. aims to provide environmental sustainability, economic
E-mail address: magdalenanikolic3@gmail.com (M. Nikoli
c).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.06.003
0197-3975/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
192 M. Ilic, M. Nikolic / Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200

affordability and social acceptance for any specic region. With a During the mentioned period, 55% of waste has recycled, 7% com-
combination of waste streams, waste collection, treatment and posted, 1% incinerated and 38% landlled (Oblak, 2015b). The waste
disposal methods combined in an optimum way as a part of a single management sector in Ljubljana has been subjected to major
approach. IWM takes into consideration environmental, economic changes over the years, with these changes continuing to occur.
and social aspects of waste management, in another words, the Ljubljana generate a low amount of waste, 41% less than the EU
total system and looks for the best applicable treatment methods average, 61% of which was recycled or composted. Furthemore, the
mix to minimise economic costs and to maximize environmental quantity of recovered materials is increased by tenfold and the
protection and social benets. Thus, an IWM system will rather use amount of municipal waste landlled is reduced by 59% (Oblak,
resources in the most effective way than move up waste manage- 2015a). This signicant improvement is the result of the imple-
ment hierarchy (DAlessandro et al., 2012). This article presents the mentation of a Zero Waste Strategy. With the clearly set goals and
characteristics of the WM system in the Republic of Serbia in a persistence in implementation of established measures, Ljubljanas
format that incorporates the complexity of each component of waste management system produces excellent results. According
waste management practise. The paper is intended to contribute to achieved, Ljubljana has already provided tools and incentives in
lling the gap by proposing a guiding framework, which applica- line with the circular economy model. From economic and waste
tion and usefulness is illustrated with the experiences of concrete management perspectives, transition to a more circular economy
case-study from one municipality in the region. includes changes throughout waste value chains, adoption of new
The contributions of this article are threefold: rst, to depicts ways of turning waste into a resource (EUR-Lex, 2014).
real opportunities for more sustainable and efcient waste man- The city began with separate collection of paper, cardboard,
agement in the municipalities and suggests a step forward towards glass, other packaging and the residual waste in road-side con-
the integrating best Zero Waste practices in the municipalities in tainers in 2002. In 2006 city started to change the system intro-
Serbia; second, to establish baseline data on waste and assessment ducing a door-to-door collection of bio waste and 10.8% of which
of the current waste management system, setting future goals, was collected. Since 2008, ordinary containers have been replaced
identication of issues, plans for integrated waste management and with underground collection points. In 2012 the roadside con-
its implementation; and third, to identify bottlenecks that restrict tainers for paper and packaging was removed and the city started
Serbians sustainable development, such as low levels of reuse, collecting them door-to-door, with the same system as it started
recycling and recovery of waste, shortage of advanced technology, collecting biodegradable waste. As a result of Implementation of
signicant waste disposal amounts and weak economic incentives. separate collection in 2012, 41.48% of packaging and paper was
Identifying its restricting characteristics and understanding the collected. Quantities of separately collected fractions continued
implications will lead to better waste management performance. growing to 55% in 2013 and 61% in 2014 (Oblak, 2015b). This suc-
cess has been driven largely by direct and indirect of citizens asked
1.1. Example of best practice e zero waste instead of incineration to better sort their waste. Intensive communications campaigns
such was Get Used to Reuse initiative which, with the help of
A lot of recent interest has been paid to the waste management music, a video manifesto, workshops and urban interventions
globally, either arising from specic treaties to combat unemploy- present a combination of digital communication tools and personal
ment in developing countries (Ahmeda & Alib, 2004; Wilson, Velis, contacts with citizens has proven to be a successful formula (EC,
& Cheeseman, 2006), or from pollution resulting from inadequate 2016b).
waste management which is a major cause of diseases and affect
economic growth by increasing treatments cost and cleanup ac- 2. Presenting the framework
tivities (Joseph, 2006; Ekvall, Assefa, Bjo rklund, Eriksson, &
Finnveden, 2007; Permana, Towolioe, Aziz, Ho, 2015). Initiatives Circular economy is an opportunity for developing countries to
to improve waste management, require participation of both public come to its principles, to improve waste management through the
and private sectors (Kirama & Mayo, 2016). The municipalities have use of all sorts of materials contained in waste, and their intro-
a key role to play in supporting changes towards achieving a zero duction back into productive use in the economy, which will
waste society (Zotos et al., 2009). If society shift toward zero waste, signicantly contribute to more efcient use of resources, primarily
alternative material pathways like composting and recycling will as a material for energy purposes (IC, 2015). Moving towards a
become more attractive. Furthemore, recycling without compost- circular economy multiple steps have to be performed that include
ing cannot exist alone in a zero waste strategy, since bio and food economic interests with the interests of sustainable waste man-
waste makes up a portion of the waste which can be treated by agement and environmental protection. This analysis depicts real
composting. To make the best performance, operators must opportunities for more sustainable and efcient waste manage-
consider factors including source material selection, employees ment in the municipalities. Where governmental ofcials have
training, public awareness, simplicity of collection, and environ- better awareness and strong drivers to make changes, the actual
mental tradeoffs for different approaches to waste management ofcials understanding toward circular economy development is
(Hottle, Bilec, Brown, & Landis, 2015). higher. In another word, implementation and realization of circular
Slovenia has been investing in modern waste management economy development undoubtedly relies on municipal govern-
infrastructure since 2004 when this country became a member of ment ofcials awareness (Xue et al., 2010).
European Union. At the time, waste management system in Ljubl- Wilson (2007) list six broad groups of drivers for the develop-
jana was developed, and the national municipal waste manage- ment of waste management, including public health, environ-
ment plan included separate collection, regional mechanical mental protection, climate change, the resource value of waste,
biological treatment plants, and two incineration plants (Oblak, institutional and responsibility issues, and public awareness. They
2015a). However, Ljubljana manage to avoid incineration and were dened as groups of related factors that vary between
achieve the highest separate collection rates, high recycling and countries depending on local circumstances. Understanding that
composting rates and to reduce the amount of waste sent for one alone couldnt have inuence sustainable waste management,
disposal. Thus, average monthly waste management costs for but all related to the concepts of sustainable waste management.
households is among the lowest in Europe. In ten years Slovenia Taking into account the applicability of some drivers of solid waste
achieve to increase separate collection and decrease residual waste. management in every country, the focus is on other exclusive
M. Ilic, M. Nikolic / Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200 193

drivers as the starting points of each waste management scenario (a materials. GNI per capita is often considered an indicator of a
municipality, city or entire country) (Agamuthu, Khidzir, & Hamid, countrys standard of living. According to data from The World
2009). Specically, we presents a framework that describes several Bank, the GNI per capita in Serbia, converted to U.S. dollars using
drivers for development of waste management and show how the World Bank Atlas method, in 2012 was only 5.280 US$(WBG).
available data can be compered viewed through the appropriate set Thus, according to statistical data published on the website of the
of drivers. System analysis and strategies in place for waste man- Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia, average net salary in
agement can help to identify good and bad practise in local com- selected Municipalities in 2013 oscillated between 39,436 RSD in
munities that would contribute to a more sustainable waste Batocina (SORS, 2014). Net salary in Ljubljana, converted in RSD, is
management in Serbia. This study relates waste management 134,280 RSD (EC, 2016b). So this simple comparison posed
drivers to circular economy in a developing country context. The considerable challenges. In other words, rate of waste generation is
purpose of the study is to show that smaller municipalities can highly inuenced by economic activity of each municipality,
make a surprising amount of change realized in a short period of including the degree of industrial development, living standard,
time. From municipal waste management perspectives, current lifestyles, social environment, consumption and other inuence
lines of analysis include: a) Measuring and monitoring the Strategic factors of each particular community. Due to this reason the volume
Municipal Waste Management implementation. b) Updating and of generated waste can signicantly differ between the
analyzing municipal indicators as a tool to compare situations in municipalities.
different municipalities c) Municipal benchmarkng, in order to The data in Fig. 1 shows the variation of municipal waste gen-
compare Ljubljanas performance with selected municipalities in eration in Ljubljana Municipality and across the 12 selected mu-
Serbia d) Provides up to date information on the most relevant is- nicipalities in Serbia. It is clear that the amounts of generated
sues and show that municipalities of modest size and means have municipal waste differ. The deffernces between the data, big
lessons to offer. In particular, when developing circular economy, range clearly shows the correlation between economic prosperity
information is needed for effective planning, including selected and waste quantity. It is noted that Municipality Ljubljana is rate
drivers as a tool to achieve municipal waste management goals. the highest in terms of municipal waste generated per year.
For this purpose we identied several groups of drivers Municipalitiy Nis reached production of 67,943 t/year, and then
including basic driver, public health, resource management and municipalities Subotica and Pan cevo with 50,000 t/year. On the
economic-nancial capacity. It is very important to clear that other hand, municipality Bato cina shows low municipal waste
selected Indicators present a tool to compare situations in different generation, only 2945.17 t/year. The deffernces between the data,
municipalities. could be the absence of complete informations on waste quantities,
characteristics, especially content, and classication, so it is difcult
 Basic driver consist of two segments- Waste amount and waste to estimate waste volume in the Republic of Serbia (Proki c and
composition Mihajlov, 2012; Anthouli, Aravossis, Charitopouiou, Tot, & Vujic,
 Public health consist of one segment- Waste collection 2013).
 Resource management consist of one segment - Mate-rials re- By comparison, the Municipalities Subotica, Stara Pazova,
covery through recycling Grocka, Batocina, Gornji Milanovac and Nis include Slovenian
 Economic-nancial capacity consist of one segment - Tariffs for Ljubljana Municipality show similar waste volume per capita, in
households and industry average 0.9 kg/capita/day. Then, Pan cevo, Pozarevac and Zaje car in
average 1.5 kg/capita/day (see Fig. 2). Pointing to the fact that most
Responding to the IWM approach and keeping the above of the data from the municipalities compliant the international
background in view, the survey has been conducted to study the standards. With an exception of the of municipality Ca  cak with
current situation, major problems and activities related with 4.5 kg/capita/day, indicate that some data have to be checked. Due
managing municipal waste in 12 selected municipalities. The to different housing conditions in Serbian municipalities, volume
analysis is based on the available data from selected municipalities and composition of generated waste can signicantly differ be-
and the key features, problems, goals and the efciency of WM tween the municipalities (Batinic et al., 2011).
system in Serbia are reviewed and discussed.
3.2. Waste composition
3. Basic driver
The amount and composition of waste generated interpolate the
Basic driver annotate the correlation between economic pros- essential data needed for the planning of waste management
perity and waste quantity, straightforward relationships between practice. Thus, assessments of waste composition present rela-
the quantity of waste designated to the different components of the tionship between the level of afuence and the generation of total
waste generation and waste prevention (EC, 2014). Circular econ- MSW or a material-related fraction, and identify signicant effects
omy boost waste prevention through strict avoidance of waste of waste management activities on recycling quotas (Beigl,
generation, qualitative and quantitative reduction at source, and Lebersorger, & Salhofer, 2008). In Slovenia different waste frac-
reuse of products (Ayalon, Brody, & Shechter, 2013). Taking all of tions are collected separately, presenting an essential step towards
this into consideration, this unique driver serves as the starting a more sustainable economy. There are different containers/bins for
point, inuencing all the phases in a circular economy. Further- packaging, paper and glass packaging as well as bio-waste covered
more, it presents the basic data for forecasting sustainable waste by door-to-door collection (EC, 2016a). There is signicant evidence
management operations. of the impact of single-stream collection systems on material
quality with respect to recycling and its economic value. Scrap
3.1. Waste amount material quality is lower under single-stream collection than it is
under systems like container deposits, where materials are kept
The rst comparison is between the total amount of waste separate. There is a particular concern that glass shards and PET
generated and waste generated per capita in 12 municipalities. Due bottles can contaminate paper loads in a paper mill, and that glass,
to economic crisis in 1990s, the socioeconomic level of many people plastic and aluminum containers cross-contaminate each other
in Serbia was changed and resulted in less consumption of many (CRI, 2009).
194 M. Ilic, M. Nikolic / Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200

Fig. 1. Total municipal waste generated per year (t/year).

Fig. 2. Waste volume per capita.

Fig. 3. Waste composition in selected municipalities.


M. Ilic, M. Nikolic / Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200 195

Waste composition in Slovenian Municipality of Ljubljana and reach the entire population especially in rural areas. Percentage of
12 selected municipalities in Serbia is given in Fig. 3. population covered by waste collection services in the municipality
Fig. 3 illustrates the typical municipal solid waste composition is generally between 65% and 100% for urban areas with exception
(excluding hazardous waste) in 12 Municipalities in Serbia and in of Grocka which do not have service coverage in urban areas. Waste
Municipality Ljubljana. Across the 12 selected municipalities in collection service in the municipalities in Serbia covers between
Serbia, the highest proportion is made up of bio waste 52%, fol- 50% and 100% population in rural areas. The municipalities of
lowed by packaging waste 16% in almost all municipalities. In Smederevo, Zajecar and Pozarevac have nearly no service coverage
municipalities Smederevo, Smederevska Palanka, Zajecar and Nis in rural areas. This results in a huge loss of valuable raw materials.
PET and plastic bags contributes between 6.20% and 11%, followed However, the collection system of municipal solid waste covers 99%
by municipalities Subotica, Stara Pazova, Pan cevo, Pozarevac and population in both urban and rural areas of Ljubljana (EC, 2016a)
 
Ca cak between 0.4% and 5% of the total MSW, respectively. By (see Fig. 4). Separate waste collection is an essential step towards a
comparation, the highest proportion of paper and cardboard is in more sustainable economy and separating between glass, paper,
municipalities Smederevska Palanka, Pancevo and Zjecar with 9% metal, and plastic has become obligatory last year.
and the lowest in municipalities Ca  
cak and Pozarevac with 0.4%. Waste separation at source with 2-bin system for households is
The proportion of glass takes about 5% in municipalities Pozarevac, planned in Serbia, but still it is sporadically implemented, mostly in
Smederevska Palanka and Nis, than municipalities Smederevo with the areas of individual housing. In the urban areas with collective

3.9%, Subotica and Pancevo with 3%, Stara Pazova with 2% and Cacak housing and high density of population, containers on the streets
and Zajecar with only 1%. On the other hand, in the Municipality for separate waste collection of PET, aluminum and cardboard
Ljubljana main waste fraction was packaging waste with 42%, fol- packaging for recycling are planned (Ilic & Nikolic, 2016). The
lowed with 40.9% of paper, the proportion of bio-waste takes predominant system for collection in most of the cities includes
22.80% and glass 17.10% (EC, 2015). As can be seen major fraction of containers for residual waste e the containers are common for
the MSW in 12 Municipalities in Serbia was Bio waste. If Serbian recyclable, compostable and non-compostable waste (no segrega-
Municipalities was committed to a zero waste strategy, they would tion of waste is performed). Out of the twelve benchmarked mu-
enable for this extremely rich resource to be turned into compost or nicipalities in Serbia, the municipalities of Stara Pazova, Grocka,
to biogas. However, in most of the selected municipalities in Serbia Smederevska Palanka and Zajecar have no containers for recyclable
Bio-waste/organic waste mixed with the residual waste is disposed waste at all. However, Ljubljana implements a door-to-door
on the landll. Looking at the composition of the waste generated collection of four types of waste. In this municipality separately
in developing countries, one can conclude that the biodegradable collected waste accounted for 60% of waste collected/inhabitant.
portion dominates mainly due to food and yard waste, and higher The collection of paper, cardboard, packaging is provided by three
paper and cardboard content (Visvanathan & Tra nkler, 2003). colour bins for paper and cardboard. Waste separation and collec-
tion of residual waste and organic waste is provided by separate
4. Public health bins of different sizes (EC, 2015). Separate collection at source will
ensure high quality recycling, and present an essential step towards
In European union countries, public health is largely taken for a more sustainable economy. Also, poorly developed separate
granted and is no longer a major driver. However, public health is collection systems are linked to low recycling rates (EC, 2014).
emerged as a key driver for waste collection in nineteenth century,
and still remains a key driver in developing countries (Wilson, 5. Resource management
2007). According to Brunner & Fellner (2007) in developing
countries which spend 1e10 V capitae1 yeare1, the maintenance The environment provides both renewable and non-renewable
of human health still suffers due to inadequate waste management resource base, which functions as an input for the economy
practice, and thus protection of human health is one of the main (Andersen, 2007). An effective economic system addresses both
objectives of waste management. The Circular Economy bring environmentally and nancially benecial ways to plan and
health environment, protect public health through the mini- manage material resources (Su, Heshmati, Geng, & Yu, 2013). Ac-
misation of pollution as well as efcient use of recyclables before cording to De-min (2004) core of recycling economy is to use re-
become waste (Geng, Fu, Sarkis, & Xue, 2012). According to esti- sources circularly. One of the earlier attempts industrialization to
mation, 60% of generated waste in Serbia is collected on the orga- shows the importance of resources necessity for different sectors,
nized way for disposal (NWMS). In developing countries only found that increase in use of natural resources as raw materials had
30e70% of generated waste is collected and uncollected waste is a signicant impact on recycling in the future. There is a need
often disposed of into open dumps. Open dumping of waste pose therefore to evolve an efcient ecological cycle, based on reusing or
the biggest health risks (Ezeah, Fazakerley, & Roberts, 2013). Waste
recycling of glass, metal and paper (Ozarslan et al., 2011). Having
directly impacts public health, affects people through its an proper invested in the construction of recycling centres to increase the
management leading to waste accumulation which attracts disease diversion of organics and recyclables from landlls, Serbia enables
vectors (Vergara & Tchobanoglous, 2012). Ansorted waste is an essential change in the manner of waste management and
potentially infectious and cause respiratory illness from ingesting provide the raw material for the development of the recycling in-
or inhaling bioaerosols and volatile organics, dermatological dustry and allow public utility (Filipovi c and Obradovi c-Arsi
c,
problems from direct contact with contaminated material, that may 2012). Howewer, the recycling of municipal waste is not widely
led to the transmission of diseases like HIV and HVB infection practiced in Serbia. In fact, it is ten times lower than in the EU
(Ezeah et al., 2013; Ladu, Lu, & Osman, 2011). Thus, open dumps Member States (NEAS, 2011). Howewer, Serbia as EU membership
with mixed waste attract disease-carrying animals and increase candidate country, adopted the national Waste Management
health risk vulnerable individuals such as children (Wilson et al., Strategy 2010e2019. Beside the Law on waste management, the
2006). The environment is responsible for as much as 20% of the Law on Packaging and Packaging Waste (Ofcial Gazette of RS, no.
total burden of disease, and according to a WHO study published in 36/09, 88/10) is aimed to ensure the recycling of packaging waste in
2007, the burden of disease from environmental health risks is the most economically efcient manner, i.e. local recycled-material
estimated as 27% of the total burden of disease in Serbia (WHO, market on the territory of the Republic of Serbia. Despite signicant
2009). Generally speaking, waste collection service does not efforts to ensure progress in recycling, the greatest part of
196 M. Ilic, M. Nikolic / Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200

Fig. 4. Waste collection service.

packaging waste in Serbia is collected with municipal waste and there is lack of waste sorting-out process, no consideration for
disposed in the dumps. Only in some cities such as Ca cak, primary recycling wastes and no consideration for reusing wastes. However,
selection of packaging waste is organized. Out of twelve bench- Fig. 5 demonstrate that level of package waste recycling in Ljubljana
marked municipalities, only municipalities Cacak and Nis have is very high 39.5% (EC, 2014). Separate collection of individual
municipal collection programs which include recycling (Anthouli waste fractions, is a pre-condition for achieving high recycling
et al., 2013. Circular economy has its roots in industrial ecology, rates. Broadly speaking, high percentage of mate-rials recovery
whereas in a natural ecosystem there are no wastes but only through recycling in Ljubljana, can be seen as one current example
products (Preston, 2012). of implementing the concept of circular economy. Processing
The percentage of mate-rials recovery through recycling in municipal waste in the line with circular principles, could provide a
selected municipalities is presented in Fig. 5. major economic opportunity for municipalities (Ellen MacArthur
From Fig. 5 it can be concluded that input of materials and po- Foundation, 2013).
tential resources to the economy is very low and that the opposite
approach is a necessary prerequisite to the circulation of materials.
It can be seen that Serbian municipalities Grocka, Smederevo and 6. Environment
Smedervska Palanka have no packaging waste recycling. As shown
in the Figure, other municipalities with the highest recycling rate Residual materials discharged in the environment present the
 
are Pancevo with 11.2%, followed by Cacak (9.8%) and Zajecar (9.4%), loss of residual materials from the economic system (Andersen,
and the lowest in municipalities Batocina with 0.05% and Stara 2007), but also represent the pollution of the environment. The
Pazova and Po zarevac with 0.4%, in municipalities Nis, Gornji issue was related to low inevitable consequences of the practice of
Milanovac and Subotica recycling rate varies between 1% and 3.7%. waste disposal on the landlls, followed by technical standards,
It was found that actually with average of 4.1% recycling in 9 mu- focusing initially on leachate and gas control, refuse characteristics
nicipalities and no packaging waste recycling in 3 municipalities, and landlling operations (Wilson, 2007). An effective economic
system addresses both environmentally and nancially benecial

Fig. 5. The percentage of mate-rials recovery through recycling.


M. Ilic, M. Nikolic / Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200 197

ways to plan and manage material resources (Su et al., 2013). government, than fees, donations and other sources of nancing
Therefore, this driver focuse on protection of the environment (Law of Waste Management, RS Ofcial Gazette, nos. 36/2009 and
throughout the waste disposal methods practiced in municipalities 88/2010). Financial inows charging users for the collection and
and trought nancially benecial ways to use materials. Beside disposal of municipal waste is signicant economic instruments for
disposal as nal option, wide implemented waste treatment op- waste management. But, one of the major problem is low current
tions are composting and incineration (Dijkgraaf & Vollebergh, tariffs in municipalities. Three main reasons for low prices of waste
2004; Visvanathan & Tra nkler, 2003). At the same time bearing in collection and disposal can be identied: Reason of social nature, by
mind that primary goals are to foster implementation of integrated which the price of utility services is not economic category, but a
solid waste management systems and protect the environment. social, and by now has become a social fact. As such it has direct
Fig. 6 points out that the largest percentage of waste was implications the living standard of the population. The second
landlled. Recycling is presented as small percentage, as it can be reason is found in the character of the ownership of public com-
seen in the Fig. 5, while other treatment options are not yet panies. And the third problem would be low degree of collection
developed. In order to identify local practices of waste treatment, service charges from the economy. Thus, there are a low degree of
compared the treatment options in each municipality, it was found collection of charges for utility services that varies as per munici-
that waste disposal on the landlls dominates with 100% in all 11 palities e from 10% to 70% (National Waste Management Strategy
selected municipalities, while only the municipality of Stara Pazova 2010e2019). Regarding all above mentioned it is now clear that
is composting 30% of waste. Municipality Ljubljana is distinguished low current tariffs for waste collection, transport, treatment and
by 63% material waste recovery, and 37% waste disposal. During the disposal can hardly cover the costs of provision of a desirable and
last ten years, European commitments such as prevention of waste necessary quality of municipal waste management. Howewer, in
generation, re-use and maximum material recovery are being Slovenia revenues from the landll tax were increasingly used to
effectively fullled with the implementation of a Zero Waste build up recycling infrastructure. In line with implementation of EU
Strategy. Ljubljana is on its way towards a zero-waste society (EC, legislation, several changes in waste management were introduced
2016b). in recent years. Through changes to legislation, the commitment to
zero waste goals and introducing producer responsibility, tax sys-
7. Economic-nancial capacity tem have been established for collection and treatment of indi-
vidual types of waste, along with companies that ensure the proper
The main driver of waste management development in Serbia, management of such waste. The rate of the landll tax in 2010 was
Economy, can be divided into the availability of funds and budget of 11 EUR/t (EEA, 2013). Furthemore, the adoption of the Zero Waste
the local self-government and nancial inows charging users for strategy by Ljubljana in 2014, create a successful separate collection
the collection and disposal of municipal waste. Even though sig- system, further supported by implementation of pay-as-you-throw.
nicant work has been completed on implementation of national Innovative thinking and forming partnerships can alleviate some of
waste management strategy and realization of plans for waste the waste collection and disposal nancial costs. The introduction
management improvement, the nanacial resources has been of pay-as-you-throw disposal fees for residual waste while disposal
relatively limited. This means that, besides the regulations in waste of recyclables remains free or is offered at lower charges, has pro-
management, the nanacial resources are provided by the limited vide a nancial incentive for residents, which can in turn minimise
budget of the Republic of Serbia. Though, there are available sour- the amount of recyclables in residual waste. This system use re-
ces of funding for environmental protection from the earmarked sidual waste collection fees as source of funding. As a result,
budget, Serbia provides loans and grants for enterprises that have average waste management costs for households in Ljubljana less
been performing activities in waste management which contribute than 100 V per year are among the lowest in Slovenia (Oblak,
to the economic mechanism that changes and adapts to the oper- 2015b). Current tariffs for waste collection, transport, treatment
ation activities related to waste management (Pesic, Stankovic, & and disposal for hausholds and industry are presented in Table 1.
Milic, 2012). Furthermore, nancial resources are also provided Evidently this comparation shows that many of the municipalities
from the budget of the local self-government and funds of legal in Serbia have low tariffs for households, about 0.04 V/m2 in
entities operating under the public statute created by local self- average. Only Bato cina with 1.3 V/m2 and Grocka with 4 V/m2 have

Fig. 6. Waste treatment options.


198 M. Ilic, M. Nikolic / Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200

Table 1
Current tariffs for waste collection, transport, treatment and disposal (V/m2).

Households Industry

Ljubljana (Slovenia) 7.96 (V/monthly) /


Subotica (Serbia) 0.03 (for ats) (V/m2) 0.09 (V/m2)
0.04(for houses) (V/m2)
Stara Pazova (Serbia) 0.06 (V/m2) 0.2 (V/m2)
Pancevo (Serbia) 0.05 (V/m2) 0.06 (V/m2)
Grocka (Serbia) 4 (V/m2) 0.1/0.2/0.3(V/m2)
Smederevo (Serbia) 0.03 (V/m2) /
Pozarevac (Serbia) 0.03 (V/m2) 0.04/0.12 (V/m2)
Smederevska Palanka (Serbia) / /
Batocina (Serbia) 1.31 (V/m2) 0.22 (V/m2)
Gornji Milanovac (Serbia) 0.04 (withoutValue Added Tax) (V/m2) 0.07 (withoutValue Added Tax) (V/m2)
 
Cacak (Serbia) 0.03 (V/m2) 0.08(V/m2)
Zajecar (Serbia) 0.03 (for physical person(entity)) 0.14(for legal person (entity)) (V/m2) 41.5 (per tour)
55.3 (per tour)
Nis (Serbia) 0.03 (V/m2) 0.07 (V/m2)

the tariffs sufcient high for proper waste management service. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA,
Moreover, the Municipality of Gornji Milanovac have tariffs without grants), the French government (grant) and the European Union
Value Added Tax for both households and industry. Thus, munici- (grant) (RSWMOD, 2012). An important segment of the circular
palities Subotica and Zaje car have two different tariffs, Subotica economy is waste management, which plays an important role in
have one for houses and another little higher for ats and Zaje car job creation, reduction or complete elimination of waste. In line
have one for legal person (entity) and another lower for physical with this, the results showed that the rst step in establishing an
person (entity). In Table 1 the data show that current tariffs for integrated waste management in municipalities just to invest in
industry vary between 0.04 and 0.3 V/m2. Furthermore, munici- projects whose value amounts to tens of millions of euros. From this
pality Grocka have three different tariffs and municipality Zaje car it follows that the biggest incentive for the development of waste
calculate charges per tour. This comparation revealed that tariffs management in municipalities is precisely the drivers of the
differ widely as to how in the Municipality the tariff system was set. economy - nancial capacity, which has been identied as a driver
Also, it can be seed that Municipality Ljubljana residual waste and as a barrier. Environment and public health are the drivers that
collection fee of 7.96 V become sustainable source of funding. There inuence only after the successful implementation of the most
is no question that taxes must be part of this solution, bearing in inuential economy - nancial capacity.
mind that the landll tax revenue from municipal waste manage-
ment service goes to municipalities.
8. Conclusion remarks

7.1. Investment effects develop of circular economy in Waste management systems in the municipalities in Serbia vary
municipalities dramatically in terms of services provided, disposal rates, disposal
options and methodologies for measuring waste and recycling rates
Out of all analyzed municipalities in Serbia only municipality etc. Based on executed and comparative analysis of the obtained
 
Ca cak shows the beginning of the establishment of an integrated diagrams, the most frequently used treatment option of municipal
waste management system. The introduction and process optimi- waste continues to be a disposal of waste on the so-called illegal
zation of the primary selection of waste was through organized dumps and uncontrolled dumps. After disposal, the most common
collection of municipal waste from urban and suburban areas and form of waste treatment in municipalities is recycling. Application
 
80% rural areas. In the municipality Ca cak the primary selection of of specic options for the treatment of municipal waste in largely
packaging waste is under development, and primary selection depends on the economic indicators, and development of observed
currently covers 20% of its territory in individual households. Also, municipality. The bottlenecks that restrict Serbians sustainable
this municipality has one recycling yard with 11 licensed facilities development are low levels of reuse, recycling and recovery for
for recycling of packaging waste. Also, composting plant has been municipal wastes, shortage of advanced technology, signicant
 
built in Cacak with the capacity of 500 tons/year. In addition, the waste disposal amounts and weak economic incentives. Further-
municipal landll is closed, since 2012 the municipal waste has more, it was found that the biggest incentive for the development
been disposed of at a regional landll Duboko. It can be concluded of waste management in municipalities was precisely the economy
 
that the municipality Ca cak has provided conditions for the reliable driver. Environment and public health are the drivers that inuence
collection and disposal of municipal waste. It is evident that only after the successful implementation of the most inuential
improving the waste management system indicates a signicant economy - nancial capacity. This paper has shown explicitly how
improvement of the environment in the municipality, as well as the analysis of selected drivers can be applied for different parts of
elimination of existing health threats of the population. These waste management in Serbia. Also, enable progress in modernizing
projects matter, as there is strong evidence linking nancial ca- and improving the solid waste management sys-tem under all
pacity to waste management progress. Progress in this case is based kinds of circumstances.
on an established regional waste management system and the In 12 selected municipalities in Serbia the majority of waste
regional landll-built as part of a regional center for waste man- ends up in landlls as mixed waste. Slovenian Municipality Ljubl-
agement 9 municipalities, and closure of the existing dumpsite. The jana adopted a Zero Waste approach which led to successful
value of the investment amounts to 15 million euros. The invest- separate collection system, further supported by implementation of
ment is co-nanced by the nine municipalities, as well as the Eu- pay-as-you-throw. In order to advance towards a Circular Economy,
ropean Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD loan), NIP, Zero Waste Europe recommends to moving towards a resource
M. Ilic, M. Nikolic / Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200 199

efciency. To implement circular economy, reduce, re-use and Avaliable from http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/external/
municipal-waste-management-in-slovenia.
recycling activities should be encouraged, which will result in a
EEA Report No 2. (2016). Circular economy in Europe. Developing the knowledge base.
reduced waste quantity on the landlls and, at the same time, ISSN 1977-8449. http://dx.doi.org/10.2800/51444.
creation of green jobs. In line with this, consideration must be given Ekvall, T., Assefa, G., Bjo rklund, A., Eriksson, O., & Finnveden, G. (2007). What life-
to the following: cycle assessment does and does not do in assessments of waste management.
Waste Management, 27(8), 989e996.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2013). Towards the circular economy. Avaliable from
 Implementation of a door-to-door collection of four types of http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/
waste, with underground collection units to be provided. TCE_Report-2013.pdf.
EUR-Lex. (2004). Communication from the commission to the European parlament, the
 Separation at source results in higher quality recyclables council, the European economic and social commitie og the regions, towards a
entering the recycling stream high material recovery with a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe/* COM/2014/0398 nal *.
higher resource value. Avaliable from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uriCELEX%
3A52014DC0398.
 Innovative thinking and forming partnerships can alleviate Ezeah, C., Fazakerley, A. J., & Roberts, L. C. (2013). Emerging trends in informal sector
some of the waste collection and disposal nancial costs. The recycling in developing and transition countries. Waste Management, 33,
introduction of pay-as-you-throw disposal fees for residual 2509e2519.
Filipovi c, D., & Obradovi c-Arsi
c, D. (2012). Strategic approach to waste management
waste while disposal of recyclables remains free or is offered at planning in the Republic of Serbia- current situation and prospect. Bulletin of
lower charges, has provide a nancial incentive for residents, the Serbian geographical society, 4, 143e156.
which can in turn minimise the amount of recyclables in re- Geng, Y., Fu, J., Sarkis, J., & Xue, B. (2012). Towards a national circular economy
indicator system in China: An evaluation and critical analysis. Journal of Cleaner
sidual waste. This system use residual waste collection fees as
Production, 23(1), 216e224.
source of funding. Guerrero, A. L., Maas, G., & Hogland, W. (2013). Solid waste management challenges
for cities in developing countries. Waste Management, 33, 220e232.
This paper has suggested a novel approach for integrating best Hottle, T. A., Bilec, M. M., Brown, N. R., & Landis, A. E. (2015). Toward zero waste:
Composting and recycling for sustainable venue based events. Waste Manage-
Zero Waste practices in the municipalities in short period of time. ment, 38, 86e94.
Obtained results will be a good basis for waste managers for future Ilic, M., & Nikolic, M. (2016). Waste management benchmarking: A case study of
decisions and directions of waste management development. Serbia. Habitat International, 53, 453e460.
International Conference: Circular economy and waste management: Challenges
and perspectives for the republic of serbia ECO EXPO Fair: 19 to 20 . March
2015 Belgrade, Serbia. Available from: http://www.ecoexpo.rs/wp content/
References uploads/Me%C4%91unarodna-konferencija.pdf.
Joseph, K. (2006). Stakeholder participation for sustainable waste management.
Agamuthu, P., Khidzir, K. M., & Hamid, S. F. (2009). Drivers of sustainable waste Habitat International, 30, 863e871.
management in Asia. Waste Management & Research, 27, 625e663. Kirama, A., & Mayo, A. W. (2016). Challenges and prospects of private sector
Ahmeda, A. A., & Alib, M. (2004). Partnerships for solid waste management in participation in solid waste management in Dar es Salaam City, Tanzania.
developing countries: Linking theories to realities. Habitat International, 28, Habitat International, 53, 195e205.
467e479. Ladu, C. L. J., Lu, X., & Osman, A. O. (2011). Solid waste management and its envi-
Andersen, M. S. (2007). An introductory note on the environmental economics of ronmental impacts on human health in Juba town - South Sudan. Nature and
the circular economy. Sustainability Science, 2(1), 133e140. Science, 9(12), 27e35.
Anthouli, A., Aravossis, K., Charitopouiou, R., Tot, B., & Vujic, G. (2013). Opportunities Law of Waste Management, RS Ofcial Gazette, nos. 36/2009 and 88/2010. Law n
& barriers of recycling in balkan countries: The cases of Greece and Serbia. www. packaging and packaging waste (Ofcial Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, no.
eedsa.gr. www.seswa.rs. 36/09).
Ayalon, O., Brody, S., & Shechter, M. (2013). Household waste generation, recycling Muniafu, M., & Otiato, E. (2010). Solid waste management in nairobi, kenya. a case
and prevention. OECD studies on environmental policy and household behaviour for emerging economies. The Journal of Language, Technology & Entrepreneurship
greening household behaviour overview from the 2011 Survey: Overview from the in Africa, 2(1), 342e350.
2011 survey (p. 219). National Environmental Approximation Strategy for the Republic of Serbia. (2011).
Batinic, B., Vukmirovic, S., Vuji c, G., Stanisavljevi
c, N., Ubavin, D., & Vukmirovic, G. The ofcial journal of the republic of Serbia, No. 80/11.
(2011). Using ANN model to determine future waste characteristics in order to National Waste Management Strategy. (2010-2019). Ofcial gazette RS, No. 29/10.
achieve specic waste management targets- case study of Serbia. Journal of Oblak, E. (2015a). Case study #5,The story of Ljubljana. Avaliable from http://
Scientic & Industrial Research, 70, 513e518. eurorazvitie.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CS5-Ljubljana-English.pdf.
Beigl, P., Lebersorger, S., & Salhofer, S. (2008). Modelling municipal solid waste gen- Oblak, E. (2015b). Zero waste Slovenija. Avaliable from http://www.zerowasteitaly.
eration: A review,Waste Management, 28, 200e214. org/documenti/barletta/OBLAK_ZWSlovenia.pdf.
Brunner, P. H., & Fellner, J. (2007). Setting priorities for waste management stra- Ogawa, H. (1996). In Sustainable solid waste management in developing countries
tegies in developing countries. Waste Management and Research, 25, 234e240. paper was presented at the 7th ISWA international congress and exhibition, parallel
CRI. (2009). Understanding economic and environmental impacts of single-stream session 7, international perspective. Yokohama. Japan. October/November 1996.
collection systems. Avaliable from http://www.container-recycling.org/assets/
Ozarslan, D. D., Altay, C. M., Arabaci, A., Fatih Altay, H., H., F., & Sivri, N. (2011). Ef-
pdfs/reports/2009-SingleStream.pdf. fects of high economic importance of industrial branches on human life quality
D Alessandro, G., Gnoni, G. M., & Mummlo, G. (2012). Sustainable municipal solid and environment. International Journal if Electronic, Mechanical and Mecha-
waste management and recovery. In N. C. Madu, & C. H. Kuei (Eds.), Handbook of tronics Engineering, 2(1), 86e91.
sistainablility management (pp. 575e593). Singapore: World Scientic Pub- Permana, A. S., Towolioe, S., Aziz, N. A., & Ho, C. S. (2015). Sustainable solid waste
lishing Co.Ltd. management practices and perceived cleanliness in a low income city. Habitat
De-min, C. H. E. N. (2004). Core if recycling economy is to use resources circularly. International, 49, 197e205.
China Population, Resources and Environment, 2, 0e3. Pesic, A. P., Stankovi c, J., & Milic, J. V. (2012). Analysis of possibilities for recycling
Dijkgraaf, E., & Vollebergh, R. J. H. (2004). Burn or bury? A social cost comparison of industry development e Multi-criteria approach. Facta Universitatis, Series:
nal waste disposal methods. Ecological Economics, 50, 233e247. Economics and Organization, 9(2), 241e255.
EC e European Commission 2014. COM. (2014). 398 of 2.7.2014. Towards a circular Preston, F. (2012). A global redesign? shaping the circular economy. Energy, Envi-
economy: A zero waste programme for Europe. Brussels. Avaliable from http://ec. ronment and Resource Governance, 2, 1e20.
europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/circular-economy- Proki c, D., & Mihajlov, A. (2012). Contaminated sites. Practice of solid waste man-
communication.pdf. agement in a developing country (Serbia). Environment Protection Engineering,
EC e European Commission. (2015). Reference: 070201/ENV/2014/691401/SFRA/A2 38(1), 81e90.
assessment of separate collection schemes in the 28 capitals of the EU. Avaliable RSWMOD. (2012). Regional solid waste management project e Duuboko. Avaliable
from: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/studies/pdf/Separate% from http://www.misp-serbia.rs/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/FS-duboko-
20collection_Final%20Report.pdf. 2012-EN.pdf.
EC- European Commission. (2016a). Indicator_7_Ljubljana_2016.Application form for SORS. (2014). Statistical Ofce of the republic of Serbia. Avaliable from http://webrzs.
European green capital award 2016. Avaliable from http://ec.europa.eu/ stat.gov.rs/.
environment/europeangreencapital/wpcontent/uploads/2014/07/Indicator_7_ Su, B., Heshmati, A., Geng, Y., & Yu, X. (2013). A review of the circular economy in
Ljubljana_2016.pdf. China: Moving from rhetoric to implementation. Journal of Cleaner Production,
EC- European Commission. (2016b). Ljubljana European green capital 2016 EN. 42, 215e227.
Avaliable from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/wp- Vergara, E. S., & Tchobanoglous, G. (2012). Municipal solid waste and the envi-
content/uploads/2016/01/ljubljana_european_green_capital_2016.pdf. ronment:A global perspective. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour., 37, 277e309.
EEA. (2013). European environment agency, municipal waste management in Slovenia. Visvanathan, C., & Tra nkler, J. (2003). In Municipal solid waste management in Asia- a
200 M. Ilic, M. Nikolic / Habitat International 56 (2016) 191e200

comparative analysis, workshop on sustainable landll management 3e5 Xue, B., Chen, X. P., Geng, Y., Guo, X. J., Lu, C. P., Zhang, Z. L., et al. (2010). Survey of
December, 2003; Chennai, India (pp. 3e15). ofcials awareness on circular economy development in China: Based on
Wilson, C. D. (2007). Development drivers for waste management, waste management municipal and county level. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54(12),
& research, 25: 198e207.World health organization 2009. Environment and health 1296e1302.
performance review, Serbia. http://www.euro.who.int/. Zotos, G., Karagiannidis, A., Zampetoglou, S., Malamakis, A., Antonopoulos, I. S.,
Wilson, C. D., Velis, C., & Cheeseman, C. (2006). Role of informal sector recycling in Kontogianni, S., et al. (2009). Developing a holistic strategy for integrated waste
waste management in developing countries. Habitat International, 30, 797e808. management within municipal planning: Challenges, policies, solutions and
World Health Organization. (2009). Environment and health performance review, perspectives for Hellenic municipalities in the zero-waste, low-cost direction.
Serbia. Dostupno http://www.euro.who.int/. Waste Management, 29, 1686e1692.