doi: 10.56294/ere202216

 

COMMUNICATION BRIEF

 

Waste classification practices in Peru: An analysis from Villa María del Triunfo and Latin America

 

Prácticas de clasificación de residuos en Perú: Un Análisis desde Villa María del Triunfo y América Latina

 

Miguel Ángel Melgarejo Quijandria1

 

1Universidad Cesár Vallejos, Escuela de Posgrado, Programa Académico de Doctorado en Gestión Pública y Gobernabilidad. Lima, Perú.

 

Cite as: Melgarejo Quijandria MA. Waste classification practices in Peru: An analysis from Villa María del Triunfo and Latin America. Environmental Research and Ecotoxicity. 2022; 1:16. https://doi.org/10.56294/ere202216   

 

Submitted: 24-04-2022          Revised: 12-07-2022          Accepted: 13-10-2022          Published: 14-10-2022

 

Editor: Prof. Dr. William Castillo-González  

 

ABSTRACT

 

In 2021, municipal management of solid waste classification practices in Villa María del Triunfo represented an ongoing challenge for local authorities. The district, one of the most densely populated in Metropolitan Lima, faced a growing generation of waste without an effective strategy for separation at source. Despite being backed by the General Law on Solid Waste, institutional efforts were limited due to a lack of infrastructure, scarce incentives, weak enforcement and minimal citizen participation. Environmental education campaigns lacked continuity and coverage, which generated mistrust in the population and discouraged household separation. In comparison with other Latin American cities such as Bogotá, São Paulo or Mexico City, the district lagged considerably behind. While these cities implemented formalised recycling systems, recycling cooperatives and educational policies, Villa María del Triunfo relied mainly on isolated initiatives by formal recyclers and NGOs. The COVID-19 pandemic worsened the situation, increasing waste generation and reducing sustainable practices for fear of contagion. However, some local experiences, such as the coordination with waste pickers’ associations, showed that it was possible to move towards a participatory and sustainable management model. In conclusion, the case of Villa María del Triunfo reflected the limitations of the Peruvian waste management system but also offered concrete opportunities for improvement if institutional strengthening, environmental education and public investment were enhanced.

 

Keywords: Solid Waste; Waste Classification Practices; Municipal Management; Recycling; Environmental Education.

 

RESUMEN

 

En 2021, la gestión municipal en las prácticas de clasificación de residuos sólidos en Villa María del Triunfo representó un desafío persistente para las autoridades locales. El distrito, uno de los más densamente poblados de Lima Metropolitana, enfrentó una creciente generación de residuos sin una estrategia efectiva de separación en la fuente. A pesar de estar respaldados por la Ley General de Residuos Sólidos, los esfuerzos institucionales resultaron limitados debido a la falta de infraestructura, escasos incentivos, débil fiscalización y mínima participación ciudadana. Las campañas de educación ambiental carecieron de continuidad y cobertura, lo que generó desconfianza en la población y desincentivó la separación domiciliaria. En comparación con otras ciudades de América Latina, como Bogotá, São Paulo o Ciudad de México, el distrito mostró un rezago considerable. Mientras estas ciudades implementaron sistemas de reciclaje formalizados, cooperativas de recicladores y políticas educativas, Villa María del Triunfo dependió principalmente de iniciativas aisladas de recicladores formales y ONG. La pandemia de COVID-19 agravó el panorama, al incrementar la generación de residuos y reducir las prácticas sostenibles por temor al contagio. No obstante, algunas experiencias locales, como la articulación con  asociaciones de recicladores, evidenciaron que era posible avanzar hacia un modelo degestión participativa y sostenible. En conclusión, el caso de Villa María del Triunfo reflejó las limitaciones del sistema peruano de gestión de residuos, pero también ofreció oportunidades concretas de mejora si se fortalece la institucionalidad, la educación ambiental y la inversión pública.

 

Palabras clave: Residuos Sólidos; Prácticas de Clasificación de Residuos; Gestión Municipal; Reciclaje; Educación Ambiental.

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

Municipal management of solid waste segregation has been one of the main environmental and public health challenges for local governments in Latin America.(1,2,3,4) In the case of Peru, particularly in the district of Villa María del Triunfo during 2021, this issue took on special relevance due to the growing generation of household and industrial waste, coupled with limited institutional capacity to deal with it effectively. In a context of rapid urbanization and sustained population growth, solid waste management requires transparent, sustainable, and participatory strategies, framed within a public policy that would allow for reducing, reusing, and recycling materials and promoting an active environmental culture.(5,6)

Villa María del Triunfo, located in the southern cone of Metropolitan Lima, is one of the most populated districts and faces significant challenges in urban infrastructure, basic services, and land use planning.(7,8) In this district, daily solid waste generation exceeded 400 tons in 2021, according to municipal reports, of which only a small portion was segregated adequately at the source.(9,10) Most of the waste was disposed of without prior separation, ending up in informal dumps or collapsed landfills, generating negative externalities such as soil, water, and air pollution, as well as direct impacts on the health of residents.(11,12)

One factor explaining the inefficiency in waste segregation was the lack of sustained environmental education campaigns.(13,14) Although specific awareness programs were implemented, they lacked continuity and inter-institutional coordination.(15,16) Separate collection days were sporadic and did not cover the entire district. This generated mistrust among the population, who perceived that the separated waste was ultimately mixed during transport and final disposal.(17,18,19,210,21) This discouraged separating waste at home, even among citizens aware of the environmental impact of their consumption and disposal habits.

In terms of regulations, the General Solid Waste Law (Law No. 27314) establishes that local governments are primarily responsible for the comprehensive management of solid waste, from generation to final disposal. However, the effective implementation of this regulation requires not only political will, but also technical, budgetary, and logistical capacities that many municipalities, such as Villa María del Triunfo, have been unable to consolidate. Added to this is the widespread informality in waste collection services, with the participation of recyclers with no legal recognition or decent working conditions, despite their crucial role in the value chain.(22,23,24,25,26)

Comparing the Peruvian case with other Latin American countries in 2021, several structural similarities and differences can be observed.(27,28,29) In countries such as Colombia, Brazil, and Mexico, although there are challenges related to informality and service coverage, more robust public policies have been developed regarding recycling and waste recovery.(30,31,32) In Bogotá, for example, thousands of recyclers have been formalized through cooperatives recognized by the local government, who carry out differentiated collection on specific routes and receive financial compensation.(33) In São Paulo, Brazil, a network of ecopoints and collection centers has been implemented to enable more efficient and community-based management of recyclable waste.(34,35,36) In Mexico City, environmental education strategies have been incorporated into the school curriculum, generating greater social awareness of the problem.(37,38,39)

In contrast, the Peruvian context, and specifically that of Villa María del Triunfo, has been characterized by weak environmental institutions and low investment in recycling infrastructure. Most segregation programs have depended on international cooperation or initiatives by non-governmental organizations, without a state policy to guarantee their sustainability over time.(40,41,42) In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the situation by increasing the generation of hospital waste and discouraging household recycling due to fear of contagion.(43) Many families chose to dispose of all types of waste in a mixed manner, which increased the volume of non-recyclable waste and reduced the effectiveness of existing recycling systems.(44,45,46)

Another limiting factor in Villa María del Triunfo was the lack of economic and fiscal incentives to promote recycling and segregation at source. Unlike other Latin American cities where differentiated tariff schemes or recycling bonuses have been implemented, in the Lima district, there was no incentive system to encourage active participation by households and businesses. Furthermore, the lack of enforcement of environmental regulations by companies generating special waste made it difficult to trace these materials and ensure their proper final disposal.(47,48,49)

Despite these limitations, there were local experiences that made a difference. Some formal recycling associations, such as “Recicladores Unidos de VMT,” established agreements with the municipality and private companies to carry out selective collection in specific areas. Although limited in scope, these initiatives demonstrated that it was possible to build participatory and efficient management models, provided there was political will and citizen commitment. In addition, environmental education programs were developed in schools, and social media campaigns were launched, which, although they did not have the expected impact on a mass scale, did raise awareness among specific sectors of the young population.(50,51)

A comparison with other experiences in Latin America also made it possible to identify good practices that could be adapted to the Peruvian context. For example, the integration of recyclers into the formal system through the creation of legally recognized cooperatives; the development of basic infrastructure for the storage, sorting, and marketing of recoverable waste; the implementation of legal frameworks that promote extended producer responsibility; and coordination between local, regional, and national governments around a standard environmental policy.(52)

In short, the Villa María del Triunfo case in 2021 reflected many of the structural problems facing Peru regarding solid waste management.(53,54,55) The lack of planning, budget, and citizen participation has limited the effectiveness of segregation policies. However, there were also signs of change, driven by social actors, organized recyclers, and international experiences, offering valuable lessons for designing more effective and sustainable public policies.(56,57,58)

Municipal management of solid waste segregation in Villa María del Triunfo during 2021 revealed serious structural deficiencies that reflect a broader national problem. The lack of infrastructure, incentives, enforcement, and institutional coordination hindered progress toward a sustainable waste management model. However, some local experiences and a comparative analysis of the Latin American context show that it is possible to move toward more efficient, inclusive, and sustainable management. The key lies in recognizing the importance of environmental education, formalizing recycling, public investment in infrastructure, and multisectoral coordination as fundamental pillars of a comprehensive waste policy. Only then will it be possible to move toward cleaner, healthier, and more resilient cities shortly.

 

REFERENCES

1. Alvarenga JCL, Bernal AR, Navarro MP, Cossío SS. Cómo se puede estimar el tamaño de la muestra de un estudio. Dermatol Rev Mex. 2010;54(6):375–9.

 

2. Al-Salem SM, Lettieri P, Baeyens J. Recycling and recovery routes of plastic solid waste (PSW): A review. Waste Manag. 2019;29(10):2625–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2009.06.004

 

3. Allan A, Barbour E, Nicholls RJ, Hutton C, Lim M, Salehin M, et al. Developing socio-ecological scenarios: A participatory process for engaging stakeholders. Sci Total Environ. 2021;807:150512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150512

 

4. Alvino ER. Gestión ambiental y conciencia ambiental en el distrito de Ancón, 2020. Psikologi Perkembangan. 2021 Oct. Available from: http://repositorio.uncp.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/UNCP/3000/Silva%20Acosta.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

 

5. Asare W, Oduro-Kwarteng S, Donkor EA, Rockson MAD. Recovery of municipal solid waste recyclables under different incentive schemes in Tamale, Ghana. Sustainability. 2020;12(23):9869. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239869

 

6. Bermúdez W. Gestión ambiental para minimizar la contaminación de la biodiversidad en los pueblos lacustres de Cienaga grande santa Marta. 2019;IV:128–46.

 

7. Cárdenas-Ferrer TM, Santos-Herrero RF, Contreras-Moya AM, Rosa-Domínguez E, Domínguez-Núñez J. Propuesta Metodológica Para el Sistema de Gestión de los Residuos Sólidos Urbanos en Villa Clara. Tecnol Quím. 2019;:471–88. Available from: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?pid=S2224-61852019000200471&script=sci_arttext&tlng=pt

 

8. Cetrulo TB, Marques RC, Cetrulo NM, Pinto FS, Moreira RM, Mendizábal-Cortés AD, et al. Effectiveness of solid waste policies in developing countries: A case study in Brazil. J Clean Prod. 2018;205:179–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.094

 

9. Chaudhary P, Garg S, George T, Shabin M, Saha S, Subodh S, et al. Underreporting and open burning – the two largest challenges for sustainable waste management in India. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2021;175:105865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105865

 

10. Chaves-Arias R, Campos–Rodríguez R, Brenes-Peralta L, Jiménez-Morales MF. Compostaje de residuos sólidos biodegradables del restaurante institucional del Tecnológico de Costa Rica. Rev Tecnol Marcha. 2019;32:39–53. https://doi.org/10.18845/tm.v32i1.4117

 

11. Cheela VRS, Ranjan VP, Goel S, John M, Dubey B. Pathways to sustainable waste management in Indian Smart Cities. J Urban Manag. 2021;10(4):419–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2021.05.002

 

12. Corbetta P. Metodología y técnicas de investigación social. 1a ed. Madrid: McGraw-Hill; 2007.

 

13. Cruz SE, Ojeda S. Gestión sostenible de los residuos sólidos urbanos. Rev Int Contam Ambient. 2015;29(Suppl. 3):7–8. Available from: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/370/37029665017.pdf

 

14. Del Ángel Sánchez MM. Propuesta para el Manejo Integral de los Residuos Sólidos Urbanos y de Manejo Especial en una Institución. 2017;1–19.

 

15. Edjabou ME, Takou V, Boldrin A, Petersen C, Astrup TF. The influence of recycling schemes on the composition and generation of municipal solid waste. J Clean Prod. 2021;295:126439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126439

 

16. Fang W, Huang Y, Ding Y, Qi G, Liu Y, Bi J. Health risks of odorous compounds during the whole process of municipal solid waste collection and treatment in China. Environ Int. 2021;158:106951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106951

 

17. Ferronato N, Guisbert Lizarazu EG, Velasco Tudela JM, Blanco Callisaya JK, Preziosi G, Torretta V. Selective collection of recyclable waste in Universities of low-middle income countries: Lessons learned in Bolivia. Waste Manag. 2020;105:198–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.02.014

 

18. Flores RC. Investigación en educación ambiental. Rev Mex Invest Educ. 2015;17(55):1019–33. https://doi.org/1405-6666

 

19. García-García JA, Reding-Bernal A, López-Alvarenga JC. Cálculo del tamaño de la muestra en investigación en educación médica. Investig Educ Médica. 2013;2(8):217–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2007-5057(13)72715-7

 

20. Goerlandt F, Pulsifer K. An exploratory investigation of public perceptions towards autonomous urban ferries. Saf Sci. 2021;145:105496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105496

 

21. Gu B, Tang X, Liu L, Li Y, Fujiwara T, Sun H, et al. The recyclable waste recycling potential towards zero waste cities - A comparison of three cities in China. J Clean Prod. 2021;295:126358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126358

 

22. Henríquez GR, Garzon MA, Mejia C, Torrenegra AJ, Rada JA. Medición de impactos socioambientales y responsabilidad social organizacional. Dimensión Empresarial. 2019;17(4):1–22. https://doi.org/10.15665/dem.v17i4.2111

 

23. Hernández R, Fernández C, Baptista MP. Metodología de la investigación. 6a ed. México: McGraw-Hill; 2014.

 

24. Hernández FS. Principio De Prevención Y Precautorio En Materia Ambiental. Rev Juríd Derecho. 2019;8:0–3.

 

25. Hernández R, et al. Qualitative research through interviews: Its analysis by Grounded Theory. Cuest Pedagóg. 2016;25:105–18. https://doi.org/10.12795/CP

 

26. Huamaní Montesinos C, Tudela Mamani JW, Huamaní Peralta A. Problema ambiental de gestión de residuos sólidos de la ciudad de Juliaca-Puno-Perú. Rev Investig Altoandinas. 2020;22(1):106–15. https://doi.org/10.18271/ria.2020.541

 

27. Ibáñez-Forés V, Bovea MD, Coutinho-Nóbrega C, de Medeiros HR. Assessing the social performance of municipal solid waste management systems in developing countries: Proposal of indicators and a case study. Ecol Indic. 2019;98:164–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.10.031

 

28. Keever MÁV, Novales MGM. El protocolo de investigación IV: las variables de estudio. Rev Alerg Mex. 2016;63(3):303–10. http://revistaalergia.mx/ojs/index.php/ram/article/view/199/336

 

29. Lopez R. Elaborar el programa de segregación en la fuente y recolección selectiva de residuos sólidos domiciliarios para el distrito de la Matanza-2020. 2020.

 

30. Malaspina U, Vallejo E. Creación de problemas en la docencia y la investigación. Reflexiones y Propuestas En Educ Matem. 2014;7–54.

 

31. Mamani AV, Castro EBG, Mamani EC, Mamani EA, Mamani VE. Efficiency of Public Entrepreneurial Spending on Solid Waste Management in the Municipalities of the Puno Region. Acad Entrep J. 2021;27(5):1–14.

 

32. Meneses Tutaya N. Las dimensiones de la identidad nacional. Letras (Lima). 2002;73(103–104):219–31. https://doi.org/10.30920/letras.73.103-104.17

 

33. Nieto-Juárez JI, Torres-Palma RA, Botero-Coy AM, Hernández F. Pharmaceuticals and environmental risk assessment in municipal wastewater treatment plants and rivers from Peru. Environ Int. 2021;155:106674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106674

 

34. Olivieri C, Martinelli B, Massucatto P, Silva CB. Municipal administration and corruption in the implementation of federal education programs. Rev Adm Pública. 2018;52(1):169–79. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7612171081

 

35. Owojori O, Edokpayi JN, Mulaudzi R, Odiyo JO. Characterisation, recovery and recycling potential of solid waste in a university of a developing economy. Sustainability. 2020;12(12):1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125111

 

36. Paes MX, de Medeiros GA, Mancini SD, Bortoleto AP, Puppim de Oliveira JA, Kulay LA. Municipal solid waste management: Integrated analysis of environmental and economic indicators based on life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod. 2020;254:119848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119848

 

37. Pérez DF. La regresión logística: una herramienta versátil. 2021;1–11.

 

38. Piemonte V, Sabatini S, Gironi F. Chemical Recycling of PLA: A Great Opportunity Towards the Sustainable Development? J Polym Environ. 2013;21(3):640–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-013-0608-9

 

39. Pierini VI, Mazzeo N, Cazenave M, Semmartin M. Waste generation and pro-environmental behaviors at household level: A citizen science study in Buenos Aires (Argentina). Resour Conserv Recycl. 2021;170:105560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105560

 

40. Quispe N. Gestión de residuos sólidos y niveles de contaminación ambiental en la Zona R de Huaycán – Ate, 2019. 2019;1–102. Available from: https://repositorio.ucv.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/20.500.12692/40732/Quispe_SN.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

 

41. Mourad R, Bin Wahid J. A comparative study on sustainability assessment level (BREEAM, LEED, and Estidama) to develop better environment sustainability assessment. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología. 2022; 2:237.

 

42. Risso VG. Estudio de los métodos de investigación y técnicas de recolección de datos utilizadas en bibliotecología y ciencia de la información. Rev Esp Doc Cient. 2017;40(2):1–13. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2017.2.1333

 

43. Rosecký M, Šomplák R, Slavík J, Kalina J, Bulková G, Bednář J. Predictive modelling as a tool for effective municipal waste management policy at different territorial levels. J Environ Manag. 2021;291:112584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112584

 

44. Roselli ND. El aprendizaje colaborativo: Bases teóricas y estrategias aplicables en la enseñanza universitaria. Propósitos Represent. 2016;4(1):219–50. https://doi.org/10.20511/pyr2016.v4n1.90

 

45. Sereda TG. Study of the morphological composition of municipal solid waste in the Perm region. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. 2021;677(4):042080. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/677/4/042080

 

46. Shukla P, Sharma PK, Pandey S, Chintala V. Unsegregated municipal solid waste in India - current scenario, challenges and way forward. Nat Environ Pollut Technol. 2021;20(2):851–63. https://doi.org/10.46488/NEPT.2021.v20i02.048

 

47. Soler Cárdenas SF, Soler Pons L. Usos del coeficiente alfa de Cronbach en el análisis de instrumentos escritos. Rev Méd Electrón. 2012;34(1):01–06. http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1684-18242012000100001

 

48. Taleb MA, Al Farooque O. Towards a circular economy for sustainable development: An application of full cost accounting to municipal waste recyclables. J Clean Prod. 2021;280:124047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124047

 

49. Tamayo G. Diseños muestrales en la investigación. Semestre Económico. 2001;4(7):121–32.

 

50. Torales J, Barrios I, Viveros-Filártiga D, Giménez-Legal E, Samudio M, Aquino S, et al. Knowledge of basic statistical, epidemiological and research methodology by medical residents from the National University of Asunción, Paraguay. Educ Med. 2017;18(4):226–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edumed.2016.06.018

 

51. Torres ÁMN, González JMT, Torres APN. Gestión de residuos sólidos domiciliarios en la ciudad de Villavicencio. Una mirada desde los grupos de interés: Empresa, estado y comunidad. Rev Luna Azul. 2017;44(44):177–87. https://doi.org/10.17151/luaz.2017.44.11

 

52. Troncoso-Pantoja C, Amaya-Placencia A. Interview: A practical guide for qualitative data collection in health research. Rev Fac Med. 2017;65(2):329–32. https://doi.org/10.15446/revfacmed.v65n2.60235

 

53. Valenzuela-Levi N. Poor performance in municipal recycling: The case of Chile. Waste Manag. 2021;133:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.07.021

 

54. Veazie PJ. Understanding statistical testing. SAGE Open. 2015;5(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014567685

 

55. Weil V. Ethical Issues in Scientific Research. Sci Eng Ethics. 1995;1(3):318. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02628809

 

56. Zhang J, Qin Q, Li G, Tseng CH. Sustainable municipal waste management strategies through life cycle assessment method: A review. J Environ Manag. 2021a;287:112238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112238

 

58. Zhang T, Shi J, Wu X, Lin H, Li X. Simulation of gas transport in a landfill with layered new and old municipal solid waste. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88858-5.

 

FUNDING

None.

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

 None.

 

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Conceptualization: Miguel Ángel Melgarejo Quijandria.

Writing – original draft: Miguel Ángel Melgarejo Quijandria.

Writing – review and editing: Miguel Ángel Melgarejo Quijandria.