218
A. K. Yadav and S. Dash
Table 1 Key performance indicators of SWM
1 Key performance
indicators
UoM
Target Actual
(2016–17) (2017–18) April–June
(2018–19)
a. HHs/waste
generators coverage
in operational area
No.
17,500 4467
14,650
17,406
b. Mohalla committees
formed
No.
22
89
100
c. HHs providing
segregated waste
No.
17,500 3976
12,450
14,922
d. HHs adopting home
composting/cluster
composting
No.
17,500 131
2209
2226
e. HHs providing
service charge
No.
17,500 4422
12,892
15,048
2 Environmental
efficiency
parameters
a. Biodegradable
waste collected
MT
479.88
1001.98
261.32
b. Recyclable waste
collected
MT
91.00
275.50
77.7
c. Waste going to
landfill
MT
136.00
296.43
53.38
d. Total waste
handled
MT
706.88
1573.90
392.40
e. Compost produced
MT
115.4
198.304
25.62
3 Cost efficiency
parameters
a. Cost/kg of waste
collected
Rs./kg 2
3.31
3.71
5.11
b. Revenue/kg of
waste collected
Rs./kg 2
1.59
3.16
4.70
A total of 861 households were selected through stratified random sampling for
questionnaire survey, and 14 waste collectors were selected for personal interviews.
The primary research was done to have in-depth understanding of the issues and
triangulation of data obtained through MC records and project records (data reviewed
till March 2018). The overall data obtained through primary survey is presented in
Table 3. As per the primary survey, 69.3% of the households are providing segregated
waste, and 98.3% of the households are paying user fee, against 85.72% households
providing segregated waste and 88.52% paying user fee, respectively, as per MC and
project records.
A. K. Yadav and S. Dash
Table 1 Key performance indicators of SWM
1 Key performance
indicators
UoM
Target Actual
(2016–17) (2017–18) April–June
(2018–19)
a. HHs/waste
generators coverage
in operational area
No.
17,500 4467
14,650
17,406
b. Mohalla committees
formed
No.
22
89
100
c. HHs providing
segregated waste
No.
17,500 3976
12,450
14,922
d. HHs adopting home
composting/cluster
composting
No.
17,500 131
2209
2226
e. HHs providing
service charge
No.
17,500 4422
12,892
15,048
2 Environmental
efficiency
parameters
a. Biodegradable
waste collected
MT
479.88
1001.98
261.32
b. Recyclable waste
collected
MT
91.00
275.50
77.7
c. Waste going to
landfill
MT
136.00
296.43
53.38
d. Total waste
handled
MT
706.88
1573.90
392.40
e. Compost produced
MT
115.4
198.304
25.62
3 Cost efficiency
parameters
a. Cost/kg of waste
collected
Rs./kg 2
3.31
3.71
5.11
b. Revenue/kg of
waste collected
Rs./kg 2
1.59
3.16
4.70
A total of 861 households were selected through stratified random sampling for
questionnaire survey, and 14 waste collectors were selected for personal interviews.
The primary research was done to have in-depth understanding of the issues and
triangulation of data obtained through MC records and project records (data reviewed
till March 2018). The overall data obtained through primary survey is presented in
Table 3. As per the primary survey, 69.3% of the households are providing segregated
waste, and 98.3% of the households are paying user fee, against 85.72% households
providing segregated waste and 88.52% paying user fee, respectively, as per MC and
project records.