Farmer profit can be increased and air quality improved

Many cities in developing countries lack adequate drainage and waste management infrastructure. Consequently, city residents face economic and health impacts from flooding and waterlogging, which are aggravated by solid waste infiltrating and blocking drains. City governments have recourse to two strategies to address these problems: a) ‘hard’ infrastructure-related interventions through investment in the expansion of drainage and waste transportation networks; and/or, b) ‘soft’, low-cost behavioural interventions that encourage city residents to change waste disposal practices. This research examines whether behavioural interventions, such as information and awareness raising alongside provision of inexpensive street waste bins, can improve waste management in the city. We undertook a cluster randomized controlled trial study in Bharatpur, Nepal, where one group of households was treated with a soft, low-cost intervention (information and street waste bins) while the control group of households did not receive the intervention. We econometrically compared baseline indicators – perceived neighbourhood cleanliness, household waste disposal methods, and at-source waste segregation – from a pre-intervention survey with data from two rounds of post-intervention surveys. Results from analysing household panel data indicate that the intervention increased neighbourhood cleanliness and motivated the treated households to dispose their waste properly through waste collectors. The intervention, however, did not increase household waste segregation at source, which is possibly because of municipal waste collectors mixing segregated and non-segregated waste during collection. At-source segregation, a pre-requisite for efficiently managing municipal solid waste, may improve if municipalities arrange to collect and manage degradable and non-degradable waste separately.

Watershed management is critical for the sustainable supply of clean water to urban centers, particularly in areas of developing countries where large-scale infrastructure projects are costly to implement. In this paper, we discuss the potential for financing improvements in watershed services in the foothills of the Himalayas through Payments for Ecosystem Services. Through the use of a choice experiment to disentangle household preferences, we show that downstream water users are interested in improvements in water quality through source water protection. Households in Dharan municipality are willing to finance watershed management to the extent of USD 118,000 per year. These payments can be used to incentivize upstream households to decrease domestic livestock grazing, change agricultural practices and reduce open defecation to improve the drinking water quality and quantity in downstream areas. The estimated cost of these activities is less than $50,000 per year. Through discussions with local stakeholders, we propose a tri-partite institutional structure to facilitate transactions between downstream and upstream communities and to improve watershed services.

Complex challenges posed by climate change, biodiversity loss, and global inequality may require intertwined solutions forged through the frame of “Nature and equity.” This timely frame responds to growing calls for conservation to deliver fair outcomes to people and offers strategic value for meeting environmental goals. To clarify how and why approaches that support nature and equity may emerge, this commentary draws on conservation efforts in five different social and political settings. Building on practitioner experiences in Australia, Chile, Kenya, Peru, and Solomon Islands, it identifies a set of equity instruments that recognize local environmental knowledge, rights, and practices, strengthen marginalized voices, and promote fair outcomes, and the enabling conditions that facilitate their use. The article concludes by discussing critical considerations for enhancing nature and equity.