Reading last weeks; articles on human-centered design thinking and the drivers of social innovation, I found myself worrying about governments. Can a political environment where the focus is on staying in power ever foster innovation and the daring to step out of the box? Is it possible to brainstorm wildly and make decisions based on the inherent values of ideas rather than their proponents from within the constraints of governments? It seems unlikely but as McKinsey’s article explains, every organization—from private to non-profit to government will need to change and adapt. Even if governments can push some innovative ideas, the chances of a human centered design that takes into account all members of a community seems impossible. A government’s attempt to deal with waste in Toronto highlights some of these problems.
Arriving in Pittsburgh, I was surprised to find that recyclables are only gathered biweekly. In Montréal, our garbage was weekly while recycling happened twice a week. This little bit of policy changed the way Montréalers thought about trash.
The city of Toronto in recent years has attempted to take rethinking waste giant leaps further with a project that for its scale, ambition and potential for impact, I would consider a socially innovative service. After an embarrassing situation where closed landfills lead to Toronto exporting garbage to Michigan at hefty rates, the city developed a “Waste Diversion Task Force” assigned with the goal of diverting waste by 70% by 2010. (This goal was dropped down from the original 100% by 2010).
Along with traditional plastics, glass, papers recycling, the city set out to compost all organic waste produced by Toronto citizens. (Other cities, such as Seattle and San Francisco now have enforced composting programs, but Toronto’s was much larger and one of the first after Halifax and other small communities in Canada). Every single-family household and most multi-unit buildings have been equipped with a kitchen counter composter and a curb green bin for collection. Composting is mandatory for all locations where bins have been provided. Part of the ambitious plan allowed the composting of all food products, one plastic liner bag, diapers, and even plastic dog poop bags (for citizens convenience…so they wouldn’t have to empty the contents from the bag).[1]
Of course the program ran into problems. Private contractors cheated and brought garbage to landfills. These contractors caught in the act claimed that some organic waste gathered in Toronto is too riddled with plastics to be used or becomes too rancid by collection.[2] The allowance of some plastics to be sorted later for citizens’ convenience was probably a policy adopted based on city officials’ fear of resistance to the program. Some “green” people would already know how to compost while others would fight against the inconvenience and cost. Unfortunately, this consideration for convenience may have backfired. Some experts and press claimed that the quality of the compost was sub-par and not usable for crops as originally intended. Many point to the plastics problem as the cause of creating useless dirt, though the city claims they are capable of processing the plastic out.[3] Another blow was delivered to the program when consultants recommended that scaling back the project would benefit the city financially.[4]
I think Toronto’s innovative program and the obstacles it face illustrate some of the difficulties of innovative public policy, especially regarding the environment.
An element of the HCD process is built into governments—they’re supposed to listen to their constituents. If we accept that one of the major problems of the program is people failing to sort out plastic (the system is made to process some, not all), is this evidence of too much HCD? A program that doesn’t ask people to change too much? The HCD reading materials point out that it’s not about asking people what they think they need but observing their behavior and interaction with innovative new products and services to discover what they truly want. Did this program take this too much or too little into consideration? Did the program consider just city residents feelings re:composting or did they talk to farmers and landscapers about what they needed from the compost material?
In the end, Toronto found another landfill within Ontario’s borders. With the cost of shipping trash to Michigan eliminated, its hard to say whether a more expensive green initiative can survive. Both the McKinsey article and the HCD’s discuss how the more expensive option just isn’t an option in the future. But can we expect heterogonous groups of citizens and their governments to calculate long term environmental consequences alongside immediate tax increases into their cost-benefit analysis? The McKinsey article points out that when it comes to sustainability people are more likely to talk the talk then walk the walk. Also, given that this is the largest project of its kind in North America, was it designed as an example that could be expanded in scale? Other composting cities (albeit much smaller) have been selling their processed waste to farmers and other interested buyers, cutting some of the costs of operation.
Even if governments can innovate and can attempt some level of human focused design in planning their services, the constraints of the public purse and diversity of opinion are mighty obstacles. Environmental policy presents a whole other dilemma. Like we’ve seen with many of the social innovations we’ve discussed in class, the price has to be right in the present, not in the long run. It will be interesting to see whether Toronto’s green bin program can survive these challenges.
[1] http://www.toronto.ca/greenbin/background.htm
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/composting-dirty-diapers-yes-in-toronto/
[2] http://www.thestar.com/article/703661
[3] http://www.thestar.com/article/661902
[4] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/privatization-fears-much-ado-about-nothing/article2161917/
http://www.thestar.com/news/torontocouncil/article/1023242--recycle-less-save-more-suggests-consultant
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.