Table 1 of timeline of waste management in Borås and Mashhad

Table 1 shows at least three major differences in waste management system in Mashhad and Borås which are: Different views about the importance of training in projects; Ineffectiveness of sorting from origin in Mashhad; and different amount of landfill in Mashhad and Borås.

Process Map

Figure 1 illustrates main processes (product realization) in Mashhad waste management system. Solid lines represent those activities which are managed by ROOMM since dashed lines are managed or executed by traditional system or unknown methods. It can be understood from the mentioned process map that, there are unorganized activities in all groups. There is no confirmed information about the volume of waste treatment and disposal beside the ROOMM borders.

Figure 1 of process map for main processes in Mashhad waste management system (see the PDF file)

A main group of activities are conducted by traditional waste collectors who are active many years before establishment of ROOMM. Traditional waste collectors are newly called “waste finders” disturb the system by buying solid waste from citizens and even ROOMM employees, or they steal solid waste from waste boxes before arriving the special truck for collecting (2009d). Another group is including those industries, citizens and shops which are interested to deliver waste to ROOMM, but they are not covered by the system due to different reasons such as lack of resources or conflict in municipality laws. This group has their own waste treatment method which is mainly non standard disposal. The third group is including those who have their own waste treatment system such as hospitals, special industries and agricultural system. There is also a wide group of waste which is not processed under controlled conditions including some hazardous waste such as batteries, lamps and electronic wastes. New facility has been established for storing electronic devices but there is no treatment predicted.

Uncovered activities by ROOMM as well as high amount of landfill highlight several opportunities for new projects in Mashhad, but success in new project is mainly dependent to understanding the present situation.

Stakeholders’ Analysis

Stakeholders’ analysis has been used as a management tool since last decade (2004a) and represents the process of identification and mapping all individual, organizations and factors which are affecting on or affecting by the system. This process is including identification of stakeholders’ needs and integrating or consideration of their needs and expectations into strategies of the organization or the system.

There are different approaches into identification of stakeholders. Some researchers believing, stakeholders shall be considered based on their power and its effect on the system such as Eden and Ackerman (2004a), but some other believing to identification of broader range of stakeholders regardless their power such as Nutt and Backoff (2004a). Stefan Book represents a group of stakeholders in addition to powerless stakeholders, as “silent stakeholders” such as environment, laws and culture and suggests considering them into analysis. Stakeholders’ analysis typically consisted of the following steps: Identify stakeholders (Brainstorming; Understand stakeholder needs and interests; Classify them into meaningful groups; Compare or Stakeholder Mapping; Prioritize, balance, reconcile or synthesize the stakeholders; Integrate stakeholder needs into the strategies of the organization and into its actions (2009a).

Identification of stakeholders in Mashhad waste management system has carried out by reviewing different source of information and brainstorming on the system to find all stakeholders including those referred to “silent stakeholders” as Stefan Book. Table 2 shows a list of stakeholders in Mashhad waste management system. The table also lists stakeholders groups and basic needs of each stakeholder. General terms used as stakeholders’ needs have different meaning for each stakeholder, but during the step for integrating the needs into strategies shall be deployed into specific terms.

Table 2 of stakeholder list and their needs in Mashhad waste management system

Stakeholders’ Mapping

Interest/ power matrix has been proposed by Gardner et al (2004a) and describes the general model for stakeholders mapping. Each stakeholder is classified based on their interest as well as their power to waste management system. This model gives basic information about the situation of stakeholders in waste management system.

Table 3 represents interest/ power matrix for waste management system in Mashhad based on stakeholders’ list in table 2 and process map in figure 1. Information supporting the matrix content has been gained through various methods such as public information provided by ROOMM, interview with stakeholders involved and other sources. Black color stakeholders are those which has been considered in waste management system, compare to blue color stakeholders which have not been considered fully and red one which have been neglected. Table 3 basically shows that consideration of stakeholders into waste management system in Mashhad is based on stakeholders’ power and stakeholders with low power has not been considered fully even though they showed high interest to waste management system in Mashhad.

Table 3 of power/ interest model for stakeholders in Mashhad waste management system

Discussion

Analysis of power / interest matrix (table 3) and process map (figure 1) highlights some dependencies with important aspects in Mashhad waste management timelines (table 1)

Mashhad and Borås have followed different approaches in training of household for sorting from origin. Whereas Borås has started the training some years before establishing the first treatment plant (2007b), Mashhad has started this activity about 3 years after establishment of ROOMM (2009c). Although there are many reasons for this approach such as short term planning for ROOMM, but the root cause of all potential reasons goes back to neglecting or underestimation of citizens and their role in waste management system. This problem has been understood by ROOMM and all groups of citizens including households, school students and tourists are trained by different methods and approaches.

Although the training of households have been started with delay in Mashhad but the project covers only 6% of collected waste (2009d). In addition to seasonal increase in amount of waste due to tourist, there are other reasons for ineffectiveness of the project. Traditional waste collectors steal or buy recyclable waste from citizens before arriving ROOMM’s vehicles to collecting them. When reviewing the power/ interest matrix, it is easy to understand that this group of stakeholder and their needs have not been considered in ROOMM strategies. Review of ROOMM actions and strategies reveals that traditional waste collectors (or “waste finders” as ROOMM) are considered as disturbing factors which shall be deleted from the system or shall be organized under ROOMM supervision. All efforts for removing or organizing waste finders have not been successful and ROOMM is competing with them all the time (2009d). Due to lack of interaction and group problem solving with urban city planners, no solution has been proposed by urban planners and architects for sorting from origin, something like waste shooting systems, locked waste boxes and waste pipes in Borås. Power/ interest matrix in table 3 shows weak interaction between city planners and traditional waste collectors as highly interested stakeholders.

Another important aspect of waste management system in Mashhad is high amount of landfill compare to Borås. Again, table 3 shows that environment has not been considered as a main stakeholder, even though environment protection organization has been considered as a main stakeholders and ROOMM have a close collaboration with this organization (2009d). There are no national or regional laws or instructions at environment protection organization regarding reduction in landfill, setting targets or deadlines for landfills or any limitation for biodegradable waste (2009e). Compare to Mashhad waste management system; Borås goes beyond national laws and EU landfill (2007b) directives which forces their members to limit diverting waste into landfill by measurable targets.   

Table 4 lists visions for Borås and Mashhad as well as some key performance indicators. Whereas the waste management system in Borås has SMART indicators and measurements clearly consider environment; indicators and measurements in Mashhad focus on the system efficiency. These types of measurements and indicators show that environment have not been considered by waste management system in Mashhad. Although waste management system in Mashhad may has gone beyond requirements of environment protection organization.

Table 4 of visions and indicators in Mashhad and Borås waste management system (2009c)

Figure 2 and 3 are illustrating stakeholders’ power and importance in Mashhad and Borås waste management systems based on a ranking approach (1 to 4). These two models are showing the different patterns for stakeholders in Mashhad and Borås. Without consideration of the method for ranking the stakeholders in two mentioned systems, they show significant differences between stakeholders’ power and importance in Mashhad and Boars.

Whereas international protocols and organizations have strong power in waste management system in Borås, they have very low power to affect on waste management system in Mashhad. This difference can be traced in actions in both cities, for example Borås system is reporting their efforts for reducing the total carbon dioxide emission not only in Borås, but also in different countries. But there is only one report about burning methane gas emitted from landfill site in Mashhad to decrease the green house effect of methane. This action is not reflected in strategic plans, measurements and indicators.

Another considerable difference could be seen for investors and banks in Mashhad which hold higher power due to their types (mostly governmental) and the weak role of private sector in investing in waste treatment methods. This is important for those projects which need powerful investors or financing.

Another difference also can be traced for official employees in Mashhad and Borås. Official employees in Mashhad affect on the system through holding more authority for policy making, target setting and suppliers’ control, since these power in Sweden comes from top level law makers and municipalities, and high level collaboration between academic and research centers.

Figure 2 of graph for stakeholders’ power in Mashhad (Blue) and Borås (see the PDF file)

Similar pattern can be seen for stakeholders’ importance. Due to tax laws in Sweden, importance of tax payers as well as subscribers who pays charges for waste management in Borås is higher than Mashhad. Although the waste collecting process consumes 30 million USD in Mashhad, there is no clear relation between tax payers and cost of waste management system. The proposal for receiving 10% of annual municipality tax for waste management was rejected by Iranian parliament (2009d).

Another significant difference in importance graph comes from religious institution and costumes. The importance of religious stakeholders in Mashhad is so high that they can stop methods conflicting with basic religious rules in Islam, for example the location of landfill area, mixing of food residue and other waste, type of treatment for residue of animal in poultry industry such as blood and method for inhalation of vagrant dogs. The similar situation does not exist in Borås.

Figure 3 of graph for stakeholders’ importance in Mashhad (Blue) and Borås (see the PDF file)

CONCOLUSION

Review of activities during the implementation and development of waste management system in Mashhad as well as application of stakeholders’ analysis to finding the reason for ineffective projects in Mashhad shows strong dependency between ineffectiveness of the projects and poor stakeholders’ analysis. All ineffective projects show that whenever the involved stakeholders have not been identified or their needs have not been considered in planning, the project has consumed more time and has given insufficient result. Comparison of similar project in Mashhad and Borås confirm this claim such as those where waste management system has considered all potential stakeholders.

Sustainable waste management systems are environmental oriented systems. Due to this fact, environment with all dimensions (weather, water, wild life and so on) and all levels (urban, local, national and global) shall be considered as independent stakeholders, although NGO’s and environmental organizations may act as powerful stakeholders. Neglecting the environment in Mashhad has reduced the importance of more sustainable waste treatment methods instead of landfill.

Providing a clear frame for target setting based on real needs is the main advantage of stakeholders’ analysis which brings up all involved stakeholders with an understandable level of importance. Application of this tool helps policy makers to ensure that all legitimate needs has been considered in waste management projects and set SMART targets which cover all stakeholders’ requirements and expectations.

Stakeholders’ analysis ensures planners whether all relevant factors have been identified. This advantage comes from classification of all information including data and scatter news during stakeholders’ analysis. Stakeholders’ analysis provides an easy to understand frame for gathering, classification and analysis of scatter data and news which are neglected basically in scientific case studies and feasibility studies but they may affect on the project during its implementation and development. In addition the output can be linked to risk assessment as verified inputs.

Stakeholders’ analysis facilitate comparing and ranking of all parameters in a contest. Power, importance, legitimacy, urgency, or any other dimensions of stakeholders can be easily ranked and compared with each other. The common steps during stakeholders’ analysis which are based on brain storming in different levels of involved people ensuring that overestimation or underestimation has not been happened. This advantage can be used in bench marking of successful project for implementation in different area.

This tool facilitates the identification of possible actions for diverting threads to opportunities. The use of this tool highlights the role of each stakeholder in the system and make easy to identify opportunities to use their power for the system performance. Evaluation of all stakeholders in a unique contest makes it more effective.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Authors thank all managers and employees in recycling organization of Mashhad municipality and Borås energy och miljö AB which provided information and materials for preparing this article. Authors also thank the department of industrial engineering at University of Borås for supporting this research

REFERENCES

12 Manage, T. e. (2009a). Stakeholder Mapping. Retrieved June 2009, from 12 Manage, The executive fast track: http://www.12manage.com/methods_stakeholder_analysis.html

Brunner, P. H., & Fellner, J. (2007a). Setting priority for waste management strategies in developing countries. Waste management & research , 234-240.

Bryson, J. M. (2004a). What to do when stakholder matter, Stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public management review , 21-53.

Damghani, A. M., Savarypour, G., Zand, E., & Deihimfard, R. (2008a). Municipal solid waste management in Tehran: Current practises, opportunities and challenges. Waste management, Elsevier , 929-934.

Faircloth, P., & Swansan, H. (2004b). Regional solid waste management project in mashregh and maghreb countries; Country report- Jordan (Final). Mediterranean environemntal technical assistance programme, World BANK.

Folz, D. H. (2004c). Service quality and benchmarking the performance of municipal services. Public administration review, 209-220.

Guidance note on how to do takeholders analysis of aid projects and programmes. (1995a, July). Retrieved June 2009, from euforic: http://www.euforic.org/gb/stake1.htm#intro#intro

Heidrich, O., Harvey, J., & Tolin, N. (2009b). Stakeholder analysis for industrial waste management systems. Waste management, Elsevier , 965-973.

Johansson, A., Blomqvist, E., Ekvall, A., & Gustavsson, L. (2007b). Report: Waste refinery in the municipality of Borås. Waste Management & Research , 296-300.

Kazemi, K. A. (2008b). Problems and reasons for ineefectiveness of private sector in urban waste management (Persian Language). 4th National conference on waste management (pp. 1-4). Mashhad: Recycling organization of Mashhad municipality.

Kurian, J. (2006). Stakeholder participation for sustainable waste management. Habitat International, Elsevier , 863-871.

Mashhad, M. R. (2009c). Annual Booklet: Mashhad, Khorasan Razavi, Iran: ROOMM.

Mohamadi Fardi, H. (2008c). Waste management system modeling of Tehran, EIA study of different MSW management models by using WAMPS model. Borås, Västergötland, Sweden: University of Borås.

Municipality, R. O. (2009d, June). Recycling organization of Mashhad municipality (Persian). Retrieved 2009, from Recycling organization of Mashhad municipality (Persian): www.roomm.ir

Municipality, R. o. (2009e). Waste management law (Persian language). Retrieved June 11, 2009, from Recycling organization of Tehran Municipality: http://www.tehran.ir/Default.aspx?tabid=7718

Rousta, K. (2008d, April). Municipality solid waste management and evaluation on the Borås system. Borås, Västergötland, Sweden: University of Borås.

Smith, L. W. (2000, Dec). Project clarity trough stakeholder analysis. Retrieved June 2009, from software technology support center: http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2000/12/smith.html

Snel, M., & Ali, A. M. (1999). Stakeholder analysis in local solid waste management schemes. London: Water and environmental health at London and Loughborough.