Comparative Analysis of the Environmental Performance …
725
A trash can usability test, aimed to understand the behavior of users in relation to
solid waste management, was also performed at the UA. The UCh did not specify
the scope of the diagnosis made.
Regarding the environmental performance for this stage, the UA and UM reached
the highest values whereas the UNGS and UCh obtained similar values. In these last
two cases, no budget is allocated for the SWMPs. In particular, at the UNGS, the
program is not institutionalized.
5 Implementation of the SWMP
At the UM and UA, the stage of implementation reaches the whole campus (including
all the dependencies and faculties), whereas at the UNGS and UCh, the implementation of the SWMP is limited to some sectors of the campus. At the UNGS, the
implementation reaches four areas of activity, whereas at the UCh, the SWMP is
implemented by only one specific institute.
Within this stage, the number of separation categories varies. The UA and UNGS
separate their solid waste into three categories. At the UNGS, these three categories
are: recyclable waste, trash, and paper and cardboard, whereas at the UA, the categories are: paper, plastic containers and others (food leftovers, dirty paper, yerba
mate and packaging).
The UM separates the waste into the following categories: paper and cardboard,
pruning, plastic and aluminum, and inorganic waste. Finally, the UCh separates its
solid waste into five categories according to the area of activity: in offices, ordinary
hazardous waste (toners, batteries) and paper; in the cafeteria, organic waste; and
in intermediate spaces, paper, and aluminum and glass cans. The four universities
have in common the differentiated waste management of electrical and electronic
equipment, although in their countries there are no legal obligations to separate this
kind of waste.
6 Monitoring of the SWMP
The UNGS, UA and UCh carry out monitoring activities, oriented to know the performance of the program, with periodicity and established tools. The indicators associated with this stage (i.e. monitoring indicators) show that the UNGS and UA reach
the highest values, because they perform monitoring activities on a regular basis
(semi-annually and annually, respectively), and, in the case of the UNGS, by carrying out surveys to know the users’ perception of the SWMP. The UCh monitors the
SWMP, but does it intermittently and without an established methodology, while the
UM does not perform any monitoring activity.
725
A trash can usability test, aimed to understand the behavior of users in relation to
solid waste management, was also performed at the UA. The UCh did not specify
the scope of the diagnosis made.
Regarding the environmental performance for this stage, the UA and UM reached
the highest values whereas the UNGS and UCh obtained similar values. In these last
two cases, no budget is allocated for the SWMPs. In particular, at the UNGS, the
program is not institutionalized.
5 Implementation of the SWMP
At the UM and UA, the stage of implementation reaches the whole campus (including
all the dependencies and faculties), whereas at the UNGS and UCh, the implementation of the SWMP is limited to some sectors of the campus. At the UNGS, the
implementation reaches four areas of activity, whereas at the UCh, the SWMP is
implemented by only one specific institute.
Within this stage, the number of separation categories varies. The UA and UNGS
separate their solid waste into three categories. At the UNGS, these three categories
are: recyclable waste, trash, and paper and cardboard, whereas at the UA, the categories are: paper, plastic containers and others (food leftovers, dirty paper, yerba
mate and packaging).
The UM separates the waste into the following categories: paper and cardboard,
pruning, plastic and aluminum, and inorganic waste. Finally, the UCh separates its
solid waste into five categories according to the area of activity: in offices, ordinary
hazardous waste (toners, batteries) and paper; in the cafeteria, organic waste; and
in intermediate spaces, paper, and aluminum and glass cans. The four universities
have in common the differentiated waste management of electrical and electronic
equipment, although in their countries there are no legal obligations to separate this
kind of waste.
6 Monitoring of the SWMP
The UNGS, UA and UCh carry out monitoring activities, oriented to know the performance of the program, with periodicity and established tools. The indicators associated with this stage (i.e. monitoring indicators) show that the UNGS and UA reach
the highest values, because they perform monitoring activities on a regular basis
(semi-annually and annually, respectively), and, in the case of the UNGS, by carrying out surveys to know the users’ perception of the SWMP. The UCh monitors the
SWMP, but does it intermittently and without an established methodology, while the
UM does not perform any monitoring activity.