Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers URBAN-WASTE Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers URBAN-WASTE This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers 1 innovation programme under grant agreement No 690452-2 Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers URBAN-WASTE Heading 1 Grant Agreement No: WASTE-6a-2015 690452 Project Acronym: URBAN-WASTE Project Title: Urban Strategies for Waste Management in Tourist Cities Horizon 2020: Eco-Innovative Strategies: “Waste: a resource to recycle, reuse and Funding scheme: recover raw materials” Project Coordinator: Government of Canary Islands Start date of the project: 01/06/2016 Duration of the project: 36 months Contractual delivery date: 31/05/2019 Actual delivery date: 29/05/2019 Contributing WP: WP 7 Dissemination level: Public Authors: Erneszt Kovacs (ACR+) Contributors: Jean – Benoit Bel, Susan Buckingham, Christian Fertner, Gertrud Jørgensen, Javier Lopez, Gudrun Obersteiner, Sebastian Gollnow, Maxime Kayadjanian Abstract This is one of the key deliverables of the project which comes at the end of its lifetime. It is a part of Work Package 7, which in fact has the objective to ensure the project’s afterlife and enhance its replicability potential. The Guidelines for City Managers have its own objective to deploy the project’s output outside and beyond the project consortium itself. The Guidelines summarises and work and results achieved through Work Packages 2 (Urban Metabolism) and 3 (Mobilisation of Stakeholders) during the initial phase of the project, as well as Work Packages 4 (Development of Eco-Innovative Strategies and) and 6 (Implementation and Monitoring). Work Package 7 (Impact Assessment), which this particular deliverable belongs to, plays an important role in the Guidelines, as the deliverable also reports on the environmental, social and economic assessments. Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers 2 Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers URBAN-WASTE List of abbreviations ACR+ Association of Cities and Regions for Sustainable Resource Management CE Consulta Europa UCPH University of Copenhagen MSW Municipal Solid Waste BOKU University of Agricultural Sciences Vienna GWP Global Warming Potential MSW Municipal Solid Waste LCA Life Cycle Analysis CoP Community of Practices CBA Cost-benefit Analysis PPP Public-Private Partnership tCO2eq Tonnes of CO2 equivalent MNCA Metropole Nice Cote d’Azur Document History VERSION DATE EDITOR MODIFICATION V1 19 May 2019 Erneszt Kovacs Chapter 1 and 2 added V2 20 May 2019 Erneszt Kovacs Chapter 3 added V3 21 May 2019 Jean - Benoit Bel Review V4 24 May 2019 Jean - Benoit Bel Chapter 4 added V5 25 May 2019 Erneszt Kovacs Review V6 27 May 2019 Erneszt Kovacs Chapter 5 added V7 28 May 2019 Erneszt Kovacs Chapter 6 and 7 added Final version 29 May 2019 Jean - Benoit Bel Document reviewed Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers 3 Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers URBAN-WASTE Contributors NAME COMPANY CONTRIBUTIONS INCLUDE Jean Benoit Bel ACR+ Chapter 5, reviews Christian Fertner, Gertrud UCPH Chapter 7 Jørgensen Susan Buckingham CE Chapter 4 Javier Lopez CE Parts of Chapter 3 Gudrun Obersteiner BOKU Parts of Chapter 2 Sebastian Gollnow BOKU Parts of Chapter 2 Maxime Kayadjanian ORDIF Annex: Measure forms Chapter 6: Social and economic Trine Bjorn Olsen AU impact Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers 4 Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers URBAN-WASTE Table of Contents 1. Preface ................................................................................................................................. 6 2. Understanding the impact of tourism processes on waste arisings and waste management .................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Understanding waste management data as function of tourism activities ............................................... 8 2.2 Spatial structure and grouping of the pilots ........................................................................................ 8 2.3 Waste generation resulting from tourist activities ................................................................................ 9 2.4 Defining the baseline scenario ........................................................................................................ 14 2.5 90Key conclusions based on the assessments of existing waste management practices and occurrences ........ 17 3. Mapping, identification and the involvement of key local stakeholders in the community-based development of eco-innovative measures ..................................................... 19 3.1 Benefits of community-based decision making ................................................................................. 19 3.2 Identification of local stakeholders and setting up the decision-making process ..................................... 20 3.3 Running the decision-making process through Communities of Practices.............................................. 22 4. Guidelines for gender equality and gender sensitivity in waste minimisation projects in tourist cities ................................................................................................................................... 27 4.1 Why gender mainstream waste? .................................................................................................... 27 4.2 What did the baseline data tell us about gender sensitivity in the pilots? ............................................... 28 4.3 How participating pilots became more gender aware ......................................................................... 29 5. Defining the eco-innovative strategies and their monitoring ......................................... 31 5.1 Creating business models and setting up public – private partnerships ................................................. 31 5.2 Monitoring the implementation phase ............................................................................................. 37 6. Measuring the environmental, social and economic impact of eco-innovative strategies 39 6.1 Understanding the comparisons and methodologies .......................................................................... 39 6.2 Prevention of disposable products .................................................................................................. 42 6.3 Prevention, reuse and recycling of organic waste............................................................................... 44 6.4 Increasing selective collection ......................................................................................................... 48 7. Replication potential of URBAN-WASTE strategies ......................................................... 51 7.1 Learning from whom? ................................................................................................................... 51 7.2 How to replicate? ......................................................................................................................... 52 7.3 What to replicate? ........................................................................................................................ 52 8. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 54 ANNEX I: Eco-innovative Measure Forms ..................................................................................... 56 Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers 5 Guidelines for City Managers and Policy Makers URBAN-WASTE 1. Preface These Guidelines were drafted and published in order to support city managers and policy makers in replicating the URBAN-WASTE strategies in tourist cities. The Guidelines summarise the work that the project consortium done over the last 3 years including the initial mapping and identification of local stakeholders involved in waste management and tourism processes, community-based decision making, implementation of eco-innovative measures and the final environmental, social and economic impact assessments. These guidelines will allow city managers, including decision and policy makers, to understand the underlying liaisons between tourism and waste management processes and enable them to recreate some of the URBAN-WASTE processes in order to improve their local waste management practices and adapt them to their local tourism patterns. Europe’s cities are some of the world’s greatest tourism destinations. The socio-economic impact of tourism is extraordinary in terms of jobs it creates, the contribution to local economies and much more, but it brings at the same time a range of negative externalities, including high levels of unsustainable resource consumption and waste production. In comparison with other cities, tourist cities have to face additional challenges related to waste prevention and management due to their geographical and climatic conditions, the seasonality of tourism flow and the specificity of tourism industry and of tourists as waste producers. Over the last three years, URBAN-WASTE supported policy makers in answering these challenges and in developing strategies that aim at reducing the amount of municipal waste production and further support re- use, recycle, collection and disposal of waste in tourist cities. While doing so, URBAN-WASTE adopted and applied the urban metabolism approach to support