Urban solid waste management Urban water supply system Village Environmental Officer World Bank

Water Environment Federation World Health Organization Water pollution control Water quality World Trade Organization World Wildlife Fund Young coyote


Examination of publications in the field of engineering shows that practically all of the technologies utilized for protecting environmental resources and preventing environmental degradation have been developed in the affluent industrialized countries (ICs) without significant contributions from the developing countries areas and regions of the world. This is because their advanced economic status has enabled the ICs to reach levels of understanding on the need for protecting environment, and has given them the funds to study and develop the feasible technologies needed for controlling environmental degradation and the funds to finance design/construction/operation of the protection control facilities.

By the mid-twentieth century, the ICs had progressed sufficiently to begin implementation of the desired control programs, especially in the basic sanitary engineering fields of urban water supply, wastewater management, and food sanitation, plus beginning efforts for tackling other key problems including solid wastage management, air pollution control, noise control, and radioactive emissions control. Then came the impact of World War II, which initiated a great increase in research and development (R&D) in all aspects of environmental engineering, so much so that of the total arena of information on environmental engineering technology, it is estimated that more than 90 percent has been generated in the second half of the twentieth century. Moreover, while this environmental technology developed by the ICs was relatively simple and labor-intensive before World War II, the emphasis of the subsequent R&D has focused on minimization of labor by replacing this with hi-tech equipment that is readily operated only by trained professionals. And the overall IC effort has included progressively improving programs for furnishing the needed training. In the U.S. the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) established in the 1960s (built on the earlier federal environmental engineering program

History operated by the U.S. Public Health Service) had a leadership role in the "U.S. Environmental Movement" with a budget believed to exceed the governmental budgets of all other countries combined, and this remarkable effort has been further enhanced by very significant extra investments by U.S. state and local agencies and by the U.S. private sector. The result is, in the United States (and somewhat similarly in other ICs) the approach to resolving environmental degradation problems has become very hi-tech, with the level of technology continuing to increase.

Problem of Developing Countries

What is the situation in the DCs, as related to the context of environmental technology development in the ICs, keeping in mind that the bulk of the world's population, land area, and environmental resources are located in the DC regions? An important point here is that the IC developments were essentially focused as would be expected on IC problems, with little, if any, attention to the fate of environment in the DCs. However, development of the U.S. environmental movement in the years immediately following World War II (stemming from the new role of the United States as a truly rich country) led to the UN/Stockholm/1972 Conference, which established a global effort funded by the ICs for assisting the DCs for protecting DC environments, including establishment of UNEP, and led to establishment of National Environmental Protection Agencies (NEnPAs) in virtually all DCs, either as an environmental ministry or branch or affiliate of existing ministries, intended to function together with existing National Economic Planning Agencies (NEcPAs) (already established with World Bank assistance) to promote continuing assistance to DCs to promote economic development (E1 development), but without sufficient attention to protecting environmental resources (E2 protection) as needed to promote sustainable development.

Examination of what has actually happened to the DC environments since the beginning of the "International Global Environmental Movement" in 1972 shows that the expectations for protection of DC environmental resources have not happened. Indeed, as shown by the UN Brundtland Report of 1987141, DC environmental degradation over the period 1972 to 1987 actually exceeded the total of all historically previous degradation. This was due to (1) rapid growth of population and industries in the ICs resulting in increasing demands for import timber and other environmental resources from the DCs, (2) rapid development of new technologies, making it increasingly much easier to extract and export these resources, and (3) matching realization by DC decision makers that allowing such rapid extraction and export furnished much money for their immediate goals of remaining in office72'82'83. In this context the newly established DC/NEnPAs found that achieving meaningful environmental protection could not be done in emulation of role models like U.S. EPA, because of lack of basic will by DC governments to resolve the degradation problem58. Hence, the NEnPAs had, compared to say, U.S. EPA, relatively very low budgets and staff without experience in how to proceed to protect environment under DC conditions. Moreover, their efforts were undermined by the lack of will by the governments to enforce the recommendation of the NEnPAs for environmental protection (e.g., the environmental protection measures specified in a project's Environmental Impact Assessment.

Summary of DC Problem

A summarization of the typical DC situation is given in the paper, "How Asian Development Bank can Improve Their Technology Transfer Operations for Water/ Sanitation Projects in Developing Countries"94, which is quoted here as follows

(a) Require post-construction monitoring of performance of the systems which are built. This is basic standard engineering practice which together with periodic performance monitoring is routine in the ICs, to determine how effective the investment is, and what needs to be done to improve planning/design practices so the system will become more effective. Despite this fundamental fact, the MDBs have persistently refused to require performance monitoring, hence the MDB staff have not found out how to improve their practices in guiding DC project planning/design. Such monitoring will reveal deficiencies in design and in provisions for O&M, so that practices can be progressively improved73.

(b) For each type of sector investment (water supply, sewerage, air pollution control, etc.), discontinue common MDB practice of allowing systems to be designed which follow IC design criteria and matching environmental standards, and figure out for each sector for the particular DC what the appropriate/affordable environmental standards and matching design criteria should be, in recognition that the monies available to the DC will be only a fraction of that spent in the ICs for managing the same problem. This is crucial but cannot be done by "Environmental Generalists" or "Engineer Generalists" but can be done only by skilled sanitary engineers knowledgeable both in IC practices and how to modify these to suit DC conditions. Many of the MDB project staff with whom the author has worked have not had the needed skills in appropriate IC vs. DC practices.

(c) Ensure that the recommended system is realistic with respect to the O&M limitations in the DCs. Most IAA projects have not done this but have pretended to do it. The Feasibility Study reports commonly include a chapter on O&M which simulates IC practices, even though the writers know the DCs cannot/will not implement it. This practice is not only counterproductive but is grossly unprofessional. The reason for the malfunctioning and wastage mentioned above sometimes is poor design, but even with good design the system often will not function effectively due to lack of adequate O&M. Usually the DC governments (and the IAA sponsors) are not aware of this because of the lack of performance monitoring. Sometimes the DC officials involved may insist on including components in the project which shouldn't be there (such as a highly mechanized sewage treatment plant). Never mind, their "money need" must be accommodated, but they take only a part of the total project budget. The goal is to see to it that the remaining money isn't frittered away but will produce a useful project. The existing syndrome is that "corruption" takes a sizeable slice, but the DC can live with that. The need is not to let the rest of the money get frittered away.

(d) The MDBs and other IAA sponsors have done a very poor job in technology transfer to DC personnel. The best/cheapest way to achieve effective TT (technology transfer) is to utilize the actual project for this purpose. But the way the MDBs et al. structure the budget, while the overall project team includes both expat experts and DC participants as assistants, the project budget has no funds for enabling the expat experts to use the project for TT purposes45. So the expats use the DC-ers to do tasks without explanation of the "why" of the tasks. The MDBs et al assume the TT will "rub off' on the DC participates in the project implementation process, but this doesn't happen—It's not that easy. The need is to increase the project budget for the expats by about 10 percent to enable the expat experts to have the time to utilize the project for training purposes.

(e) The MDBs should recognize that Environmental Technology has been developed primarily in the ICs, but in the DCs, because of the non-money making nature of most environmental/sanitary infrastructures, the DC governments/universities are generally not knowledgeable on appropriate sanitary engineering design technology. Often the practitioners and university professors have only academic backgrounds in affluent IC practices and are not at all capable of doing the judgment thinking needed for making the IC to DC changes. This applies also to most MDB/IAA staff and most DC staff because they have not had the needed apprenticeship72. The result is the poor design noted in Items (b)(c) above. How to correct this very basic problem? Several approaches are feasible:

(e.1) Incorporate technology transfer into the investment project program as noted in Item (d) above.

(e.2) Prepare textbooks or manuals on appropriate DC design criteria (and matching environmental standards), which can guide DC/IAA designers to produce a project which works, such as done by H. Ludwig et al. for the Municipal Sewerage Sector105, which to the author's knowledge, is the only environmental engineering design textbook yet produced which is actually appropriate for DC application. As noted in its Preface, this Sewerage textbook is "just for starters," to illustrate this approach. Similar textbooks are needed for all sectors (municipal water supply, highways, ports, etc.) so that projects in all sectors will be economically-cum-environmentally sound.

(e.3) Established graduate training programs on IC versus DC design practices for all types of investment, to ensure appropriate design practices (and matching environmental standards) for all types of environmentally-sensitive projects, leading to university graduate degrees in Economic-cum-Environmental (E-c-E) Development in the DCs, to be attended by both DC and IAA personnel99. This approach is the most basic—to give attention to the need for E1-cum-E2 project design for all sector projects as part of the graduate education program. The MDBs should take the lead to establish at least one such university program, somewhere in a qualified university. No existing graduate university now does this, not even the Asian Institute of Technology in Bangkok nor the UN university program in Japan.

(e.4) Promote establishment of an Environmental Engineering Journal, i.e., a professional magazine in which each issue will feature projects that discuss specific examples or case studies of illustrative DC projects which explain how IC practices were modified to suit DC conditions.

(e.5) Furnish copies of selected IC textbooks/manuals, which, despite their IC origins, nevertheless can be very useful to DC practitioners (who with rare exceptions cannot afford to buy them), translated into the local DC language163. One example is the American text, "Standard Methods for Analysis of Water and Wastewaters"2, which is a virtual "bible" on this subject, which is useful per se in both ICs and DCs. If done this simple stop alone should greatly improve water and wastewater management technology in the DCs, hence remarkably high benefits at low cost.

(e.6) Send DC staff for training, not "observing," with U.S./IC organizations. Most MDB-sponsored projects of this type amount to what may be called "observation junkets." What is needed (and the author has used this approach repeatedly) is to assign the DC individual to be an additional working team member in an organization doing what he wants to learn to do. For example, if the DC-er wants to learn about regulatory permit systems for WPC (water pollution control), assign him to be a temporary extra member of the WPC permit section staff of one of the California State Regional Water Quality Control Boards. This not only achieves real world training but doesn't require the organization to whom the individual is assigned to make any special preparations. The best agencies for this purpose in my view in the environmental engineering field are the California Regional Boards for regulation procedures, and the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts for management of liquid and solid wastes.

(e.7) Plan Technology Transfer projects, not in the usual way as a single event operation, but spread this over a period of training series with enough time between to permit the student to absorb the lessons from each session45. The IAAs like the single-event approach because it "saves" travel costs, without realizing that their approach is not effective. Might as well cancel the project and save all of its cost.

(e.8) Use retired expat experts to give hands-on training, where a single expert, say in community water supply systems, visits each of say 10 systems every month. The big advantage of this approach is that the expert catches the DC-er at the moments when he has a serious problem, hence listens carefully to the expert's advice. This is far superior to use of academic classroom textures.

Make much more effective use of the Private Sector, both by means of turnkey projects and by use of contracts limited to O&M, especially for projects in water supply and sanitation. This subject is discussed in some detail in the section on Urban Water Supply Systems (UWSSs).

Purpose of This Chapter

This chapter is devoted to Item e.2, namely the furnishing of design guidelines, with matching environmental standards, which are appropriate for design of DC environmental engineering systems. Experience over the past several decades on many DC projects has shown72 that the lack of such guidelines is often the major reason for failure of investments in DC environmental engineering systems. This experience shows that if the project is designed so that it is not suitable for DC/O&M, it is doomed to failure at the outset—and a large percentage of IAA-sponsored projects are in this category. However, if the project is designed to suit DC conditions, there is a good chance that it will actually be operated and effectively utilized, despite the many problems already noted. What the DC practitioner critically needs (the same for his IAA adviser) is a "cookbook" type of manual that can be copied (despite the practitioner's lack of training/experience), just as a novice cook can make an edible cake using a cookbook, and environmental lab technicians can do acceptable BOD testing of wastewaters even with limited training.

To sum up, the essential purpose of this chapter is to illustrate how the design information given in the other chapters, which is essentially IC-oriented, can be properly modified to be applicable for use in DCs. The objective is to enable DC (and IAA) practitioners to make valuable use of this sixth edition of Environmental Engineering. Note not only that almost all existing textbooks/ manuals are intended for IC use, but also, the same applies to the articles in the magazines/journals published by professional organizations such as ASCE, AWWA, and WEF. The technologies described in these articles are much beyond the affordability of most DCs now and in the foreseeable future112.

Specific Subjects Included in This Chapter

Of the various technological fields discussed in the sixth edition of Environmental Engineering, this chapter includes discussion of the major sanitary/environmental engineering fields of urban water supply, urban sewage management, industrial waste management, urban solid waste management, urban hazardous waste management, urban air pollution control, megacities, urban slums, urban sanitation, rural sanitation, public health, and water resources, together with discussion of the related subjects of environmental governance, environmental impact assessment, emergencies management, environmental technology transfer, development planning, global warming, and the future of global environmental issues.

Key Constraints in Environmental Engineering Practice in DCs The purpose of this section is to illustrate the key constraints involved in applying environmental engineering technology in DCs (as distinguished from ICs).

Limited DC Expertise in Environmental Technology This problem is illustrated in Figure 4.1, which shows that many, if not most, DC/ET professionals have limited actual apprenticeship experienced in working under the guidance of ET experts, and moreover their academic training is often IC-oriented72. This explains the need for "cookbook" versions of design textbooks/manuals for use by DC practitioners (and their counterparts in the IAAs).

Appropriate DC Design Criteria/Environmental Standards This problem is illustrated in Figures 4.2 and 4.3. Review of the development of environmental engineering design criteria (and matching environmental standards) in the ICs shows that these have steadily increased over the decades along with increasing

FIGURE 4.1 Role of apprenticeship in development of expertise

FIGURE 4.1 Role of apprenticeship in development of expertise

Organic Gardeners Composting

Organic Gardeners Composting

Have you always wanted to grow your own vegetables but didn't know what to do? Here are the best tips on how to become a true and envied organic gardner.

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment