Urban Forum (2019) 30:115–131

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-018-9342-7

How Did Kachok Dumpsite in Kisumu City

Develop into a Crisis?

Frankline Otiende Awuor 1 & Belinda Nyakinya 2 & John Oloo 1,3 &
Michael Oloko 1 & Stephen Gaya Agong’ 1,3

Published online: 24 August 2018

# Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Abstract
Municipal solid waste management is one of Kenya’s most pressing environmental
problems evidenced by the many overflowing dumpsites with their associated envi-
ronmental and health hazards. Their growth is precipitated by the rapid urbanization
and changing lifestyles in the country. In Kisumu County, this problem is encapsulated
in Kachok dumpsite which is less than 2 km from the center of the central business
district of Kisumu City. This work chronicles and discusses the history of Kachok
dumpsite with the aim of highlighting its historical causation and policy implications to
remedy future crises. Data was collected through in-depth interviews of key informants,
observation, and reviews of the internet, and print media and analyzed through critical
and content analysis. Findings indicate that the dumpsite’s crisis was occasioned by the
failure of management to look for alternative land in time, failure to plan the site for
onsite waste handling and poor dumpsite and waste management. Policy recommen-
dations on dumpsite site location, dumpsite and solid waste management, and moni-
toring and evaluation of landfills have been suggested to avert future crises.

Keywords Kachok dumpsite . Kisumu City . Solid waste management . Municipal waste .
Historical causation . Sustainable landfills

* Frankline Otiende Awuor

frank.awuor@gmail.com

Belinda Nyakinya
bnyakinya@gmail.com
John Oloo
joloo013@gmail.com
Michael Oloko
moloko@jooust.ke
Stephen Gaya Agong’
sgagong@jooust.ac.ke

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

116 F. O. Awuor et al.

Introduction

Solid waste management in Kenya is a national crisis (Rotich et al. 2006) as there is no
urban area in Kenya that has successfully managed it. This is evidenced by the
unsightly heaps of waste in Kenya’s three cities of Nairobi, Mombasa, and Kisumu
besides in growing towns like Nakuru, Kisii, Eldoret, Kericho, and Kitale. Since the
new governance system of devolution began in 2013, many towns are experiencing fast
growth and with it the increased generation of solid wastes. This calls for sustainable
solutions supported by relevant policies, laws, regulations, guidelines, and adequate
financing mechanisms. If United Nations’ (2008) prediction that 70% of the world’s
population will be living in urban areas by 2050 is anything to go by, then solid waste
management will be a major problem to developing countries like Kenya. Already,
studies indicate the situation is worsening with increasing urbanization (Mbau 2015;
Mutungwa 2016; Ndumbu 2013). The state of affairs is such that politicians woo
voters’ support by promising to fix solid waste management (Apollo 2016). However,
when they get elected, they find that the problem is more complex than initially
anticipated. It remains therefore to be established where the difficulty lies in solving
the solid waste crisis. Notably, how did the solid waste crisis develop in the first place
when institutions charged with managing it were in existence?
Crises do not simply occur. They gradually develop from causative agents or situations
(Soifer 2009). While many researchers (Ogwueleka 2009; Rotich et al. 2006; Sibanda et al.
2017) acknowledge that waste management in developing countries is challenging, an
analysis of their development to inform planning for waste management in such countries
remains rare. Rather, studies concentrate on their health and environmental risks, waste
characterization, energy and materials recovery, composting, waste treatment, and safe
disposal. Whereas these thematic areas of solid waste management are important, it is the
argument of the current work that a chronology of their development demands more studies
to inform practice, offer solutions to developing crises, and as lessons to growing urban areas
so that they are dissuaded from following the same path. It is important to interrogate how
the common occurrence of overflowing dumpsites in urban areas and which are difficult to
close down do develop in Kenya and East Africa at large. This is because the very fact that
they usually grow beyond capacity, are in close proximity to sensitive areas (residential
buildings and public facilities), and are difficult to close down suggest that there is a problem
in the governance of solid waste disposal and disposal facilities. This work argues that is it
important to understand how these challenges develop and seek solutions that will sustain-
ably address them and avert future developments. In order to achieve this, this work has
taken Kachok dumpsite as a case study.

State of Dumpsites in East Africa and Beyond

Open dumpsites or commonly known as landfills are the norm of solid waste management
in East African countries. All solid waste disposal sites in Kenya are open dumpsites as can
be seen in Dandora in Nairobi, Mwakirunge in Mombasa, Gioto in Nakuru, Mwenderi in
Eldoret, and Kachok in Kisumu just to mention a few. Neither is the situation different in
Uganda with Kampala dumpsite in Kampala, Nkumba dumpsite in Entebe, and Mases in
Jinja nor is it better in Tanzania with Murriet dumpsite in Arusha, Buhongwa dumpsite in
Mwanza, and Pugu Kinyamwezi in Dar es Salaam which was designed as a sanitary landfill
How Did Kachok Dumpsite in Kisumu City Develop into a Crisis? 117

but turned into an open dumpsite. The same scenario is repeated in Nduba in Kigali Rwanda,
and Mubone in Buterere, Burundi. This solid waste predicament is not peculiar to East
Africa, but to the whole African continent and beyond. Examples of Agbogbloshie in
Ghana, Apete in Nigeria and Arlington Waste Disposal Site in South Africa, Al Akaider in
Jordan, Bantar Gebang near central Jakarta in Indonesia in Asia, and Alushta and Vinča in
Europe help to illustrate this crisis (International Solid Waste Association [ISWA] 2014).
All these landfills were established with a good objective to solve the problem of solid
waste management in urban areas. However, the irony is that over time, they have
encapsulated the problem of solid waste management in the same areas with serious
environmental, health, and social problems. More often than not, these dumpsites are
generally located within urban or peri-urban areas so as to cut costs on solid waste
transportation. Normally, they are not fenced. In such a state, control of access is impossible
resulting in great health ramifications on people accessing the dumpsites without protective
clothing to search for valuables like food and other recyclable and reusable items. Some of
these landfills have access roads but they are often not well maintained making controlled
dumping difficult (Sibanda, Obange and Awuor 2017). Additionally, solid wastes in these
landfills are mixed and waste volume management is usually by compaction and open
burning which usually do not solve the problem eventually giving way to overflows into
undesired areas. This then signals the maturation of a crisis that finds many responsible
authorities unprepared for it. At times, the concerned authorities are so unprepared to the
extent that their dumpsites are forcefully closed by court orders or relocation efforts are made
in such a manner as not to meet the country’s legal threshold, and hence stopped by court
orders. In case a new dumpsite is realized, they many a time follow the same crisis path
indicating that lessons were not learned in the previous case, or similar cases in other urban
areas. For instance, the history of dumpsites in Dar es Salaam is an illustrative story of this
sorry state of affairs with solid waste disposal in East Africa and Africa in general
(Environmental Resources Consultancy 2017).
The lifecycle of open dumpsites is that they are sited, opened for solid waste disposal,
closed down, and reclaimed as another site is located for the whole process to begin again.
With increasing population and expanding urban areas, this cycle will soon become
unsustainable. Even if land were available, the practice with dumpsite management in
Kenya foretells a history where crises like Kachok dumpsite will be replicated. While
Kenya’s National Environmental Management Authority recommends sanitary landfills as
opposed to open landfills, (NEMA, 2015), no municipal authority or city council has
established any so far. The intended first one in the country was to be established at
Mwakirunge in Mombasa but it too became an open dumpsite (Kigo 2018). Attempts to
establish one in Gikono in Murang’a County for Nairobi County and another in Ngong for
Kajiado County are already facing resistance (Kenya Television Network 2018; Kigo 2018).
These happenings therefore indicate that Kenya has a problem with solid waste governance.
Overflowing dumpsites which are difficult to relocate are not only a Kenyan problem, but a
global one with 40 % of the world’s solid waste ending up in such dumpsites (International
Solid Waste Association [ISWA] 2014).

The Current State of Kachok Dumpsite

Kachok dumpsite is located in Kisumu City, the third largest city in Kenya situated
on the western side of the Country and is the headquarters of the County
118 F. O. Awuor et al.

Government of Kisumu. The city sits at the tip of Winam gulf of Lake Victoria
(Fig. 1). Kachok dumpsite, a former quarry mine, is the city’s official solid waste
disposal site. It is located approximately 1.74 km radial distance from Kenyatta
sports ground which is within the central business district of the city (Chepkoech
2016). The dumpsite is approximately 2.7 ha in size and situated between Moi
stadium to the North and Nakumatt Mega City to the South (E-CUE Associates Ltd.
2014). Interview sources however indicated that the dumpsite area originally includ-
ed the area currently occupied by Nakumatt Mega City shopping complex which
would make it slightly more than twice its current size. Dumping began at the site
around 1975 with an objective to reclaim it but has continued to date where it now
overflows the site. According to Agong and Otom (2015), over two thirds of waste
at the site is organic, thus biodegradable. Plastics, polythene bags, broken glass, and
metallic cans comprise a larger portion of the remainder of the waste. Waste volume
at the site is largely managed by open burning and irregular compaction. However,
plastics, bottles, and metallic bottle tops and cans are often picked for recycling. In
spite of these measures, the waste heap continually grows in size causing an
increasing level of concern among different stakeholders. The crisis with Kachok
dumpsite is that it is overflowing, situated near offices, residential areas, a public
stadium, hotels, learning institutions, a river, and a shopping complex. In its location
and current state, it is an environmental and health hazard defeating the purpose for
waste disposal sites; which is to protect human and wildlife populations from health
hazards and the environment from degradation (National Environmental Manage-
ment Authority (NEMA) 2015; Rotich et al. 2005).

Data Collection and Analysis

This study used both primary and secondary data in drawing its conclusions.
Primary data was collected by observation and in-depth interviews targeting key
informants who have been deeply involved in the city’s waste management. These
key informants were purposefully selected and included a former mayor of Kisumu

LOCATION OF KACHOK DUMPSITE MAP OF KENYA

To Kakamega
To Busia

Kisumu Kachok Dumpsite

p
Kisumu

Nairobi
To Nairobi
Mombasa
Lake Victoria
LEGEND
Roads
Scale 1: 2,500,000
Kisumu County Boundary
To Homabay Lake Victoria
Kachok Dumpsite
Scale 1: 400,000

Fig. 1 Location of Kachok dumpsite

How Did Kachok Dumpsite in Kisumu City Develop into a Crisis? 119

municipality, current and a former director of environment of the city, a former

director of the department of environment at the County, a leading resident
businessman and philanthropist who has lived in the city from colonial times to
date, Kachok dumpsite manager, and two other staff members at the city’s
department of environment. A total of eight interviews, largely recorded as inter-
view notes, were made spread over the months of May and July 2017 and May
and June 2018. Some illuminating statements by the interviewees, however, were
recorded word for word during the interviews. Intervening periods of time allowed
the researchers to ruminate over the already undertaken interviews and identify
areas that required more investigations as new developments took place at the
dumpsite. The interviews were semi-structured and probed issues relating to his-
torical factors that have led to the existence of Kachok dumpsite crisis, interven-
tions taken to manage it, their successes, challenges, and failures. Observations
were made by the researchers, and being residents in the city and its suburbs, have
observed the growth and management practices of the dumpsite and solid waste in
the urban area in general. During this study in particular, observations were made
over a period of one and a half years (January 2017 to June 2018) and recorded as
pictures. Observations made prior to this study and which were relevant to this
investigation were retrieved from memory. Furthermore, all the authors have
undertaken several research activities on the dumpsite and solid waste management
in the city in general. Consequently, they have accumulated knowledge from their
observations. Secondary data was collected from various government and non-
government reports, and internet and print media about waste management in the
city, country, and region at large. All data was analyzed by content and critical
analysis drawing a chronological sequence of events leading to the crisis and
management initiatives so far undertaken. In the results and discussions section,
the former mayor is referred to as Mayor, the directors, whether former or current
and whether at the county or at the city level are simply referred to as director 1,
director 2, and director 3 to distinguish among them while maintaining confiden-
tiality. Similarly, for the same reasons, staff at the city’s department of environ-
ment, whether it is the dumpsite manager or the other two staff, are referred to as
staff 1, staff 2, and staff 3. However, the prominent businessman is referred to by
his occupation as businessman.

Results and Discussions

A Chronological History of Kachok Dumpsite

During colonial times, Kisumu town had few residents and most of the solid wastes
generated were managed by residents “within their compounds” by burning, feeding to
pets and livestock, and throwing in their kitchen gardens to decompose as manure
(Businessman, personal communication, July 31, 2017). Over time, however, as the
population of people in the town grew, centralized solid waste management also
expanded. In an interview with staff 2 (personal communication, July 27, 2017), it
was revealed that formal solid management in Kisumu began shortly after indepen-
dence under the town’s municipal council. Solid waste dumping then used to be
120 F. O. Awuor et al.

undertaken near the current Lwangni1 beach; a beach which is now famous with locals
and tourists who desire to eat freshly made fish. Dumping continued at the site and
“when the town council saw that the waste was polluting” Lake Victoria, it was shifted
“to the place where the National Library Services is now located” (staff 1, personal
communication, July 27, 2017). However, in 1975, when Kenya National Library
Services wanted to construct a library in Kisumu, dumping of solid waste was moved
to the current Kachok dumpsite, then just a quarry site, with an intention of rehabili-
tating it. Before 1975 though, as shared by director 3 (personal communication,
May 11, 2017), dumping at Kachok dumpsite had already “organically” began. “Some
people just started to dump their wastes there and the council later joined in.” Director 3
further indicated that this joining in was out of expediency and informally for there was
no study conducted to determine the site’s suitability for such a purpose. Nevertheless,
in 1990, the municipal council officially recognized Kachok as Kisumu’s solid waste
dumpsite and posted a dumpsite manager to oversee operations at the site.
With a dumpsite manager in place, certain management practices, which are
discussed later in the section titled “Kachok dumpsite management initiatives”, were
put in place to guide operations at the site and manage the waste volumes. It is during
this time also that a new stream of waste (i.e., plastics) was being introduced into the
country. Waste volumes were therefore increasing at an alarming rate at the site and
volume management was becoming necessary. Burning was consequently introduced
to manage the volumes. However, since the municipal solid waste dumped at the site
was (and still is) a mix of dry and moist organic matter, plastics, construction debris,
glass, and metallic objects, combustion was (and still is) only on the surface and did
(and still does) not serve to significantly reduce the volumes. As an aftermath, waste
volumes at the site continually increased (and still do to date). Thus, the management
practice failed to meet its objective.
Upon achieving the optimum reclamation of the quarry, the municipality should
have designed the site for waste reception, segregation, processing, treatments, and
disposal methods if a new site for waste disposal had not been determined. However,
these were not considered and waste continued to accumulate at the site in unsegregated
and a difficult to manage mix. “The deployment gave the title ‘dumpsite manager’ but
the officer did not have the technical expertise to manage the dumpsite.” (director 1,
personal communication, July 11, 2017). Consequently, with waste volumes increasing
and no new site for relocation, dumping continued beyond the intended period of time.
In 1999, the Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) was
passed. “Due to the standards stipulated in that Act,” (director 1, personal communi-
cation, July 11, 2017) there was a realization that Kachok dumpsite was becoming an
environmental hazard. By this time, waste was overflowing at the site and interview
data reveal that public health complaints were being raised. These prompted site
relocation efforts to begin in 2000. In 2008, the first relocation quarry mines were
identified in Kisian and behind the abattoir in Mamboleo. However, these were rejected
due to non-compliance to the Kenya Civil Aviation Authority (KCAA) regulations and
community resistance based on having a Kachok scenario replicated in their backyard.
National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) similarly could not approve

1
Lwangni is a Luo word which means a fly and is commonly used to refer to insects belonging to the family
Muscidae
How Did Kachok Dumpsite in Kisumu City Develop into a Crisis? 121

of the move indicating that it would lead to the contamination of ground water and
surface water flowing to Lake Victoria.
In 2014 under Kisumu Urban Project (KUP), a consulting firm Loggs Associates
was awarded a contract to conduct a study for a potential sanitary land fill (SLF).
Accordingly, potential sites for relocation were found at Kabonyo and Majiwa areas of
Nyando Constituency but their suitability was again contested by KCAA indicating that
they were lying along flight paths. A technical report from Water Resources Manage-
ment Authority (WRMA), currently Water Resources Authority (WRA) also indicated
that sanitary landfills at the sites were likely to lead to pollution of shallow wells and
surface water (L. victoria). Further search in 2015 headed by City Management in
collaboration with KCAA, Kenya Airports Authority (KAA),WRMA, NEMA, and
Kisumu County hydrogeologist, planner, and surveyor yielded four sites thought to be
suitable; two in Miwani, and one each at Kibigori and Chemelil of Kisumu County.
They agreed that the 30 acres quarry mine at Kibigori was the most viable site leading
to its purchase by the county. Even though the site was found to be technically suitable,
its economic viability as assessed by the donor Agence Française de Development
(AFD) was found to be unsustainable since it was 42 km away from Kisumu.
Therefore, the site would require 200 million per year in maintenance costs, an amount
that the county would not sustain. Furthermore, construction costs were in excess by
400 million of the stipulated budget of 600 million. The last difficulty with the site was
that the local community was politically incited to resist any attempts to relocate
municipal solid waste at Kachok dumpsite to their neighborhood. The donor finally
recommended that the county finds a suitable site within 20 km radius from Kisumu
City’s central business district. Since searches were not yielding such a site, Kisumu
Local Interactions Platform (KLIP) in 2016 initiated research activities to generate
scientifically backed and locally relevant interventions to help manage the site. This
was followed in early 2017 by a proposal by the City “to settle on onsite management”
(director 3, personal communication, May 11, 2017) due to the prolonged challenge in
getting an alternative dumpsite relocation site.
The proposal entailed improvement of access roads, drainage, gatehouse, site office,
sorting area, weighbridge, purchase of compactor and excavator, landscaping, leachate
treatment, sanitary facility, gas vents/pipes, and capping of inert waste. Kisumu Urban
Project gave no objection to this proposal and is currently being processed. On the
eighth of August 2017, Kisumu City elected a new governor who promised to relocate
Kachok dumpsite within 100 days in its Rapid Results Initiative-(RRI) (Omollo and
Nyabundi 2017; Owilli 2017). Correspondingly, exactly 90 days after being sworn in,
on November 18, the governor began the relocation of the 100,000 m3 volume of solid
waste dumpsite to a five-acre quarry in Kajulu ward of Kisumu County (Otieno 2017).
Nevertheless, this was not without some resistance from some politicians and local
community members who filed a suit (on the 27th of December) against concerned
authorities citing irregularities in tender award and lack of public participation with
environmental impact assessment report for the relocation (Odhiambo 2017). It also
indicated that the proposed site for relocation was only 200 m from river Kibos; a
distance which they argued was too close to prevent pollution of the river by the waste.
Following this petition, the relocation was temporarily suspended until its hearing on
the 18th of January 2018 when the court allowed for resumption of the relocation
(Odhiambo 2018a, b). Nonetheless, this did not last for long, for 2 weeks later, on the
122 F. O. Awuor et al.

2nd of February, another petition was filed in court citing the same charges in the
previous case with an additional mention that the relocation costs were exaggerated
(Ondari 2018). This petition was determined on the 12th of March 2018 giving the
Governor permission to again resume relocation of the dumpsite (Odhiambo and
Otieno 2018). Since then, a section of the dumpsite has been relocated and trees
planted on it as initial steps to developing a botanical park (Fig. 2). The other section
awaits relocation in the second phase of the project as it still receives fresh waste. Even
though a relocation site has been found, “it is only” meant “for receiving inert waste”
(staff 3, personal communication, May 17, 2018; Odhiambo 2018a, b). The challenge
of finding an appropriate site for fresh waste disposal, to receive the “300 metric tonnes
of solid waste per day” on average, still remains (County Government of Kisumu
2018). Currently, the city is pursuing “an 85 acre piece of land in Chiga” in the peri-
urban area of Kisumu with the hope that site studies will find it suitable and stake-
holders will approve of the intended use (director 2, personal communication, June 11,
2018). Whether this pursuit will be successful or not, what is important is that when a
suitable site will be found, it will remain to be seen whether the concerned authorities
will have learned their lessons from the history Kachok dumpsite. This chronological
history is summarized in Fig. 3.

Challenges in Addressing Kachok Dumpsite Crisis

The stated history indicates that attempts to relocate Kachok dumpsite were frustrated
by political incitement of local communities and inadequate budget for transportation
of wastes to one of the sites. This was occasioned by the large volumes of solid waste at
Kachok dumpsite and the long distance for relocation. Perhaps, if action had been
initiated early, waste volume would have been small enough to afford relocation to the
first suitable site. Additionally, if waste segregation at source had been a policy

Fig. 2 A section of Kachok dumpsite that has already been relocated and trees planted on it
How Did Kachok Dumpsite in Kisumu City Develop into a Crisis? 123

Crisis fully developed in 25 years Crisis management for 18 years and counting

Mar. ‘18 Court allows relocation again

Kisumu municipal council Kabonyo and Majiwa Feb. ’18 Court suspends relocation again
(KMC) starts dumping relocation sites
out of expediency rejected
Jan. ‘18 Court allows relocation
Relocation
efforts begin
Dec. ’17 Court suspends relocation
Organic
dumping by EMCA enacted
locals Nov. 17 Relocation to Kajulu begins

?
2008 2014 2015 2017/8
1975 1990 1999 2000
’18 Development of botanical park

KMC recognizes dumpsite.

’18 Search for disposal site continues
Kisian and Mamboleo
relocation sites
Dumpsite manager posted. rejected ’17 Onsite management

Waste volume management begins Miwani, Kibigori and

Chemelil relocation
sites rejected

Fig. 3 Summary of the chronological history of Kachok dumpsite from 1975 to June 2018

requirement for the inhabitants of the city, it is possible that waste volumes would not
have been a hindrance and little would be relocated to Kajulu. Indeed, sustainable solid
waste management systems have very little inert waste to dispose of in landfills. If
Pongrácz and Pohjola’s (2004) concept of waste is adopted, then any Kisumu City’s
waste disposal site would have a different history since waste disaggregation would
yield different waste streams. Reusable wastes will be sold for reuse, recyclables will be
sold for recycling, un-used materials will be reclaimed for use, organics will be
composted or used for biogas generation, and what cannot be subjected to any of these
processes will either be incinerated for energy reclamation or landfilled as will be
appropriate and possible.
The economic sustainability challenge as cited by the donor AFD could be ad-
dressed in two ways. The first one is by finding a suitable disposal area within 5–30 km
from the city’s greatest waste generation areas which are its residential and industrial
zones. Other studies indicate that this is the common practice for it reduces transpor-
tation costs (Allen 2002; Sener et al. 2011The donor AFD, however, recommended a
distance of 20 km from the city center, which is within the stipulated range. Even
though this is a recommended practice, it is noteworthy to point out that such areas
often lie in peri-urban areas of cities and are soon caught up with urban developments.
What follows then is people complaining that they are being negatively impacted by the
dumpsite, especially if it does not have a protected buffer zone. This was the case with
Kachok dumpsite in its location which was termed as occasioned “by lack of foresight
in considering surrounding establishments and the possibility of the town expanding in
the future” (Mayor, personal communication, May 8, 2017). In light of this problem, a
124 F. O. Awuor et al.

number of people (Central Pollution Control Board 2017; Ebistu and Minale 2013;
Government of South Australia 2000; Kharlamova et al. 2016) have recommended that
dumpsites have buffer zones, not only to residential and commercial areas (100–
3000 m), but also to public roads (100–1000 m), railways (1500 m), surface water
bodies (100–1000 m), public parks (300 m), airports (2000–20,000 m), and conserva-
tion areas (at least 500 m). The second way of solving the economic sustainability
challenge is by charging waste collection and disposal fees and selling recovered
materials from the dumpsite to supplement government budgetary allocations. Since
everybody is a waste generator, each should have corresponding responsibility on the
management of the wastes they generate. This principle of “pay as you throw” has at
least increased solid waste recycling activities at the household level in Sweden
(Dahlén and Lagerkvist 2010).
Another obstacle to addressing Kachok dumpsite crisis is lack of collective
political good will. While all politicians in the County agree that Kachok dumpsite
is a crisis, no one approves to relocation of the same in his or her constituency. There
is therefore political contradiction or lack of sincerity. While the reason for political
resistance is genuine and is the same that has been raised world over against similar
efforts, for example in the UK (British Broadcasting Corporation 2015), Sun Rice
City in Florida (STEMSchool 2010), and in Nakuru Kenya (Rop 2016), it is
important that efforts be directed at addressing the cause of such opposing forces.
Whereas some of those interviewed faulted NEMA for not securing land for solid
waste management for every county in the country or compulsorily acquiring suitable
private land where crises exist like in Kisumu, such legal provisions ought not to be
used to cover waste management deficiencies that need to be addressed. Directorates
of environment at the city and county levels must satisfy the public that they are
technically and financially able to handle municipal solid waste in a sustainable
manner that safeguards public health and the environment. It is the lack of this
confidence by the public that has been the root of political resistance. Since getting
alternative land for relocation has proved difficult for the concerned authorities in
Kisumu city, a solid waste disposal system that will require land for relocation every
other time is undesirable. In view of this fact, exploring sustainable landfills would
offer a lasting solution since after reclamation, they would be liable for reuse as
opposed to conventional landfills that would not be reused by the same user
(Mavropoulos and Kamariotakis (n.d.); Meltzer 2012; Westlake 1997). Even though
the concept of sustainable landfills is not yet fully developed, the current authors see
two possibilities for realizing it. The first option would require two landfills either on
one very large piece of land or on two different pieces of land. In this option, one
landfill would be active while the other would be reserved for use after the active one
will have reached its desired capacity. When the second one will be in use, the first
one will be reclaimed by processing the buried waste at an appropriate time into
desirable products, thus making it ready for reuse. The second option will only
require one landfill. After value recovery will have been made from all wastes
reaching the dumpsite as in the first option, what must necessarily be disposed will
be incinerated to ash and the ash used for making desirable products or buried as
landfill depending on safety considerations. Thus, there will be no need to continually
look for land to establish new open dumpsite facilities in a setting where land for such
users is increasingly becoming scarce.
How Did Kachok Dumpsite in Kisumu City Develop into a Crisis? 125

Causal Factors of Kachok Dumpsite Crisis

From the chronological history of Kachok dumpsite, a few factors can be extracted,
factors that caused the development of the crisis at the landfill. The first one is failure
to look for an alternative land for solid waste disposal in time so that once the site had
been optimally reclaimed, dumping would be relocated to the newly found site. The
second one is failure to design the site for onsite waste management seeing that no
alternative land for relocation was found in time. This lack of plan led to the third
factor which was ineffective dumpsite and waste management practices as discussed
in the next section. Thus, wastes increasingly accumulated causing the dumpsite to
develop into a crisis. This poor example of dumpsite and waste management led to
the fourth and final causal factor which is political and community resistance of
relocation efforts into their backyards. This opposition coupled with poor financing
has served to prolong the crisis longer that it could have existed. These four factors
summarize the historical causation of Kachok dumpsite crisis which has developed
within a period of 25 years (1975–2000). The 18 years after that have been geared
towards managing the crisis. These management initiatives, their successes, and
challenges are briefly discussed in the section that follows.

Kachok Dumpsite Management Initiatives

Since the posting of a dumpsite manager at Kachock dumpsite, several management

initiatives have been initiated to help manage waste volumes at the site as indicated in
the section titled “A chronological history of Kachok dumpsite.” These are briefly
highlighted in this section indicating their successes, challenges, and failures as may
apply.

Relocation

Attempts to relocate Kisumu city’s dumpsite have been met with technical challenges
in meeting site requirements and political and community resistance some of which
have ended in court cases. Success has, however, been partial for a relocation site has
only been found for “inert waste” (staff 3, personal communication, May 17, 2018).
Fresh wastes continue to be dumped at the site. The reasons driving relocation efforts
have been to curb the associated public health risks and to remove the unsightliness
from the city’s urban environment. Challenges with relocation have been scarcity of
suitable sites, high potential for air pollution from particulate matter, economic
unsustainability, and local community resistance. While in the past, solid waste
disposal sites have been chosen without consideration of environmental impacts
(Rotich et al. 2006), the current search has departed from this trend. Gains from this
effort have been the need to win political and local community confidence in the
ability of the directorate of the environment to efficiently and sustainably manage
solid waste, and how difficult it is to locate a site that meets the technical specifica-
tions required for a sanitary landfill. Previously, lack of technical considerations or
undue influence from various quarters had led the County to buy tracks of land
elsewhere which could not be used for the intended purposes.
126 F. O. Awuor et al.

Fencing

Since Kachok dumpsite became a crisis, waste has overflown the site into the neigh-
boring Moi Stadium compound. Waste paper and polythene bags have often been
blown of the site by wind, thus littering the neighborhood comprising of business
compounds, the stadium, schools, and a public road connecting Nairobi road and
Kakamega road. Fencing with iron sheets has temporarily confined waste within the
dumpsite though this has been short lived since the fence is often vandalized.

Compaction

Because of the increasing volumes of waste at the site, compaction has been necessary
to reduce it as is the practice in many landfills and dumpsites (Hazra and Goel 2009;
Ravindra et al. 2015). However, compaction has not been consistent due to frequent
mechanical compactor breakdowns and its high cost of maintenance, a phenomenon
which is common with waste management in Kenya (Rotich et al. 2006). Besides,
compaction is not a sustainable way of managing a solid waste dumpsite for there is a
limit beyond which any solid waste dumpsite under compaction will become a crisis.

Creation and Graveling of Access Roads

In order to access parts of the dumpsite which are far inside to avoid over dumping on
the front side, and to solve the sogginess of access roads, it has been necessary to create
and gravel access roads within the site. However, sometimes private waste collectors
dump waste on the very access roads, thus blocking them. Thus, continual opening and
graveling of these access roads is proving costly to the city management.

Sorting of Wastes at the Site

Since there is no law requiring waste generators to sort their wastes at source, waste
dumped at Kachok dumpsite is mixed up. This lack of adequate laws on sustainable
waste management has already been observed in other developing countries such as
Nigeria (Ogwueleka 2009) and Ghana where some are also out dated and poorly
enforced (Asase et al. 2009). Some street children, commonly known as waste pickers,
and even adults who are not street children, reclaim precious items at the dumpsite to
sell for a living. Consequently, some recyclable plastics, bottle tops, and metallic items
are retrieved from the site, thus reducing waste volumes. Food items in good condition
are also recovered for their consumption. However, the reduction in waste volume is on
a small scale to sustainably manage the site. This is because waste separation is done at
disposal and manually by hand which is very slow when compared to automated or
semi-automated segregation at a waste processing plant or manual separation at source
(Massoud et al. 2003; Safavi et al. 2010). Most recyclable plastics get at the site in too
bad a shape to be recovered. Furthermore, organics, which compose the bulk of waste
reaching the site (Agong and Otom 2015) are not recovered, thus adding to the
accumulation of waste at the site. Material recovery from waste is an area that has
great potential for entrepreneurship (Rogerson 2001) and as such might require more
attention from the city.
How Did Kachok Dumpsite in Kisumu City Develop into a Crisis? 127

Open Burning of Wastes at the Site

Burning is the oldest management strategy at Kachok dumpsite. While it does reduce
waste volumes, its effectiveness at the site is reduced by moist organic matter which
only chars rather than burn to ash. Additionally, the mixture of wastes dumped at the
site does not combust well in open burning as they would in an incinerator. There are
also complaints of air pollution from the neighborhoods, confirmed and even experi-
enced by some of the authors of this article, for they have lived near the site. Air
pollution from smoke and bad odor especially during the rainy season are public health
risks associated with open dumpsites and are evidenced by other studies (Bhada-Tata
and Hoornweg 2016; Wilson et al. 2006). Finances and technical capacity permitting,
incineration, while controlling for air pollution, is to be preferred to open burning of
municipal wastes.

Revenue Generation at the Site

There is a charge levied for dumping waste at Kachok dumpsite for revenue generation
towards the management of the dumpsite. However, efficiency in the collection of this
charge is wanting. Furthermore, some waste entrepreneurs object to its collection
arguing that they do not see the logic for its collection. Even if collection was efficient
and all waste entrepreneurs complied, the amount collected is not adequate for the
management of the site. Therefore, there is need to review waste management levies by
the city and private waste entrepreneurs for acceptability and sustainability of waste
management in the city.

Reduction of Flow of Wastes to the Site

Several private activities initiated within the city serve to reduce the flow of waste to
Kachok dumpsite. Such initiatives include (a) silage making, (b) waste to energy, (c)
composting, and (d) reclaiming recyclable plastic from waste bins within the city. The
city estimates that composting if done at a large scale has the potential to reduce 50% of
organic waste flowing to the dumpsite. If realized, this can have a significant impact in
checking the growth of Kachok dumpsite. Recently, the national government passed a
ban on single-use plastics after several failed attempts in 2005, 2007, and 2011. Its
impact on the growth of Kachok dumpsite, as well as other dumpsites in the country, is
yet to be observed. However, the country can be optimistic of success as she sees
Rwanda reap the benefits of a similar ban 13 years ago (K24 TV 2017; The Poverty-
Environment Initiative 2014), but also take care of the negative impacts of such bans as
witnessed in some countries like South Africa (Nhamo 2008).

Research

Kisumu Local Interactions Platform together with Practical Action is currently doing
research on solid waste management in the city. The study is seeking to collect data on
waste volumes and types, private waste actors, and their capacity to manage solid
waste, waste recycling activities, technologies used in waste management, collabora-
tions among private waste actors, willingness to pay for waste services, and the
128 F. O. Awuor et al.

challenges in solid waste management in the city with a view to informing management
and decision actions on the same. As a result, waste management issues are being
brought to the attention of stakeholders. Nonetheless, research is not robust enough to
address all issues because of limited funding.

Designing and Improvement of the Site

Since dumping began at the site, it has never been designed to handle solid waste.
However, efforts by the city have been directed in this direction and a design for a
waste management facility for the site has been drawn. However, implementation of the
plan is set back by lack of adequate finances for implementation and lack of clarity on
ownership of the site besides relocation efforts that are currently on-going. Moreover,
with the planned establishment of a botanical park at the site, a process that is already
underway (Fig. 2), the implementation of this plan will likely not see the light of day, at
least not at the site.

Conclusion and Recommendation

Even though many initiatives have been undertaken to address the crisis at Kachok
dumpsite, only partial success has been realized because of poor enforcement of
existing waste management laws, weak environmental institutions, inadequate laws
and regulations on waste management, poor attitude of the city’s inhabitants towards
waste, low technical capacity and staff members, under budgeting, poor political
goodwill, an unsustainable waste management system, and lack of accurate data on
waste issues to relevantly inform management decisions.
In order to avoid future crises of the same nature, it is recommended that policies be
put in place to (1) guide landfill site selection, and if possible, all such sites be mapped
to lessen efforts in future searches, if need be. This will help concerned authorities
know exactly what they are looking for in sites for landfills and avoid wastage of time
and resources in looking for and settling on sites that will be bound for rejection as
unsuitable. Additionally, such sites as will be required can be secured in advance to
avoid scarcity of the same in the future; (2) guide landfill design and management to
ensure best practices. Since dumping in landfills is usually haphazard, and if organized,
not as effective as would be desired, designing them for waste handling would greatly
improve the situation. Facilities and areas for waste segregation, recycling, weighing,
storing, cleaning, bailing, packing, and composting will be suitably sited to ensure
efficient operations. Moreover, provision for access roads, fences, and buffer zones will
be made. Safety of dumpsite staff will be catered for and dumpsite management
practices thought through before implementation; (3) guide which data on solid waste
should be routinely recorded, stored, and utilized appropriately. This will be handy in
accurately informing concerned authorities and investors on needed infrastructure and
viability and sustainability of certain waste disposal methods and technologies; (4)
guide monitoring and evaluation of waste disposal facilities so that their performance
can be determined. This will help in early detection of any crises that may be
developing; (5) guide staff capacity requirements for recruitment, training, and
retraining so that required competencies to handle solid waste management are found
How Did Kachok Dumpsite in Kisumu City Develop into a Crisis? 129

within the city council; and finally, (6) guide revenue generation and budgeting to
economically sustain solid waste management in the city. The undertaking of the first
four points will need money because good policies without resources to implement
them will not solve the city’s and nation’s solid waste management crisis. At best,
Kisumu city’s residents need to sustainably pay for the management of the wastes they
generate.

Funding This study was supported by Mistra Urban Futures through Kisumu Local Interaction Platform.
The specific project under which this study took place was the Socio-ecological TRACK.

References

Asase, M., Yanful, E. K., Mensah, M., Stanford, J., & Amponsah, S. (2009). Comparison of municipal solid
waste management systems in canada and ghana: a case study of the cities of London, Ontario, and
Kumasi, Ghana. Journal of Waste Management, 29, 2779–2786.
Agong, S., & Otom, A. (2015). Kisumu Urban Sustainable Development Goals (USDGs) targets and
indicators: the case of Kisumu. Available at: http://staging.mistraurbanfutures.org/
sites/default/files/usdgreport-kisumu_0.pdf.
Allen A. (2002). Attenuation: a cost effective landfill strategy for developing countries. In Engineering
geology for developing countries. Proc. 9-th congress. Durban, South Africa. 2002;156–157.
Bhada-Tata, P., & Hoornweg, D. (2016) Solid waste and climate change. In: State of the World. State of the
World. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Central Pollution Control Board (2017). Guidelines on the provision of buffer zone around waste processing
and disposal facilities.
Dahlén, L., & Lagerkvist, A. (2010). Pay as you throw: strengths and weaknesses of weight-based billing in
household waste collection systems in Sweden. Waste Management, 30(1), 23–31.
Ebistu, T. A., & Minale, A. S. (2013). Solid waste dumping site suitability analysis using geographic
information system (GIS) and remote sensing for Bahir Dar Town, North Western Ethiopia. African
Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 7(11), 976–989. https://doi.org/10.5897
/AJEST2013.1589.
E-CUE Associates Ltd (2014). Consulting services for undertaking decommissioning audit of Kachok of
Kachok Dump Site in Kisumu City—inception report.
Environmental Resources Consultancy (2017). From a sanitary landfill to a dumpsite. Pugu Kinyamwezi
community curse in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Unpublished report.
Government of South Australia (2000). Consultation draft.-guidelines for separation distances. Environment
protection authority.
Hazra, T., & Goel, S. (2009). Solid waste management in Kolkata, India: practices and challenges. Waste
Management, 29(1), 470–478.
Kharlamova M. D, Mada S. Y, Grachev V. A. (2016). Landfills: problems, solutions and deсision-making of
waste disposal in Harare (Zimbabwe). Biosciences, Biotechnology Research Asia, 13(1).
Massoud, M. A., El-Fadel, M., & Malak, A. A. (2003). Assessment of public vs private MSW management: a
case study. Journal of Environmental Management, 69(1), 15–24.
Mbau, S. N. (2015). Zero plastic waste for a healthier ecosystem: an assessment of sustainable of sustainable
waste management in Runda estate, Nairobi. Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi.
Mutungwa, M. F. (2016). Assessment of public-private partnership for solid waste management in Wote town,
Makueni county Kenya. Doctoral dissertation.
National Environmental Management Authority (2015). National solid waste management strategy.
Ndumbu, A. Z. (2013). Factors affecting public-private partnerships projects in solid waste management in
Mombasa County. Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi.
Nhamo, G. (2008). Regulating plastics waste, stakeholder engagement and sustainability challenges in South
Africa. Urban Forum, 19(1), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-008-9022-0.
130 F. O. Awuor et al.

Ogwueleka, T. C. (2009). Municipal solid waste characteristics and management in Nigeria. Journal of
Environmental Health Science and Engineering, 6(3), 173–180.
Pongrácz, E., & Pohjola, V. J. (2004). Re-defining waste, the concept of ownership and the role of waste
management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 40, 141–153.
Ravindra, K., Kaur, K., & Mor, S. (2015). System analysis of municipal solid waste management in Chandigarh
and minimization practices for cleaner emissions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 89, 251–256.
Rogerson, C. M. (2001). The waste sector and informal entrepreneurship in developing world cities. Urban
Forum, 12(2), 247–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-001-0018-2.
Rotich, K. H., Yong-sheng, Z., & Dong, J. (2006). Municipal solid waste management challenges in
developing countries-Kenyan case study. Waste Management, 26, 92–100 New York, N.Y.
Safavi, S. M., Masoumi, H., Mirian, S. S., & Tabrizchi, M. (2010). Sorting of polypropylene resins by color in
MSW using visible reflectance spectroscopy. Waste Management, 30(11), 2216–2222.
Sener, S., Sener, E., & Nas, B. (2011). Selection of landfill site using GIS and multicriteria decision analysis
for Beysehir Lake Catchment Area Konya, Turkey. Journal of Engineering Science and Design, 1(3),
134–144.
Sibanda, L. K., Obange, N., & Awuor, F. O. (2017). Challenges of solid waste management in Kisumu,
Kenya. Urban Forum, 28, 387–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-017-9316-1.
United Nations. (2008). World urbanization prospects: the 2007 revision. Department of Economic and Social
Affairs, United Nations, New York.
Westlake, K. (1997). Sustainable landfill—possibility or pipe-dream? Waste Management & Research, 15(5),
453–461.
Wilson, D. C., Velis, C., & Cheeseman, C. (2006). Role of informal sector recycling in waste management in
developing countries. Habitat International, 30(4), 797–808.
Apollo, S. (2016). Ranguma, Nyong’o clash over Kachok dumpsite. Daily Nation. Retrieved from http://www.
nation.co.ke/counties/kisumu/-Ranguma%2D%2DNyong-o-clash-over-dumpsite/1954182-3291994-
wvc95f/index.html.
British Broadcasting Corporation (2015). War on waste: the story of waste management in the United
Kingdom. [Video file] Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C6v_X_FtWI.
Chepkoech (2016). Garbage piles an eyesore in many town centres. Daily nation. Retrieved from:
http://mobile.nation.co.ke/lifestyle/Who-will-help-clean-up-counties/1950774-3303750-dfaxl7z/index.
html.
County Government of Kisumu (2018). Kisumu County Development. Retrieved from: https://www.kisumu.
go.ke/about-us/pillars-for-kisumu-county-development/.
International Solid Waste Association (2014). Waste Atlas: the world’s 50 biggest dumpsites: 2014 Report.
Leeds: Leeds University and ISWA [online], Retrieved from: http://www.atlas.d-waste.
com/Documents/Waste-Atlas-report-2014-webEdition.pdf.
K24TV (2017). How Rwanda has managed to effect ban on the use of plastic bags. [video file] retrieved from:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA65GWNlAxY.
Kenya Television Network (2018). Ngong residents decry construction of a mega dumpsite in their area of
residence. [video file]. Retrieved from: https://www.nation.co.ke/video/news/4146788-4394696-fu21
kpz/index.html.
Kigo, D. M. (2018). Landfill project managers, tell Kenyans it is not a dumpsite. Daily nation, Retrieved from:
https://www.nation.co.ke/oped/letters/tell-Kenyans-it-is-not-a-dumpsite/440806-4313122-uiv849z/index.
html.
Mavropoulos, A. & Kamariotakis, H. (n.d.). The concept of sustainable landfills.
Meltzer, S. (2012). Sustainable landfills. URBANTIMES. Retrieved from: http://urbantimes.co/2012/03
/sustainable-landfills/.
Odhiambo, H. & Otieno, K. (2018). Work begins to turn Nyanza’s biggest dumpsite into beautiful park.
Standard digital. Retrieved from: https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001272954/work-begins-to-
turn-nyanza-s-biggest-dumpsite-into-beautiful-park.
Odhiambo, H. (2017). High court suspends relocation of Kachok dumpsite in standard digital. Retrieved from:
https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001264294/high-court-suspends-relocation-of-kachok-
dumpsite.
Odhiambo, H. (2018a). Why infamous Kisumu dumpsite has refused to go away. Standard digital. Retrieved
from: https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001268893/why-infamous-kisumu-dumpsite-has-
refused-to-go-away.
Odhiambo, H. (2018b). Court gives Nyong’o green light to relocate controversial Kachok dumpsite. Standard
digital. Retrieved from: https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/business/article/2001266443/court-allows-
county-to-relocate-controversial-dumpsite.
How Did Kachok Dumpsite in Kisumu City Develop into a Crisis? 131

Omollo K. & Nyabundi, D. (2017). After popping champagne and giving flowery speeches, governor
Nyong’o gives his 10-point promise. Standard digital. Retrieved from: https://www.standardmedia.co.
ke/ureport/story/2001252405/after-popping-champagne-and-giving-flowery-speeches-governor-nyong-o-
gives-his-10-point-promise.
Ondari, Z. (2018). Dumpsite relocation. Kenya news agency. Retrieved from: http://kenyanewsagency.go.
ke/en/?p=121660.
Otieno, V. (2017). Kisumu County starts relocation of Kachok dumpsite in the daily nation. Retrieved from:
https://www.nation.co.ke/counties/kisumu/Kisumu-County-starts-relocation-of-Kachok-dumpsite/1954182-
4192538-14o3gonz/index.html.
Rop, R. (2016). Plans to relocate Gioto dumpsite in Nakuru shelved. Daily Nation. Retrieved from:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFZw1ovaeUg.
Rotich, K., Zhao, Y., & Dong, J. (2005). Municipal solid waste management challenges in developing
countries—Kenyan case study. Retrieved from: www.sciencedirect.com.
Soifer, H. D. (2009). What is a critical juncture? Permissive and productive conditions in historical causation.
APSA 2009 Toronto meeting paper. Retrieved from: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1451662.
STEMSchool (2010). SunSentinel reports the citizen opposition to a proposed dump site right next to
everglades. [video file] retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSkMC58FRG0.
The Poverty-Environment Initiative (2014). Rwanda bans plastic bags. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=58aBoXJARNQ.

Affiliations

Frankline Otiende Awuor 1 & Belinda Nyakinya 2 & John Oloo 1,3 & Michael Oloko 1 &
Stephen Gaya Agong’ 1,3
1
Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science and Technology, P. O Box 210, Bondo 40601, Kenya
2
Directorate of Environment, Kisumu City, County Government of Kisumu, P. O Box 2738,
Kisumu 40100, Kenya
3
Kisumu Local Interaction Platform, P. O Box 7750, Kisumu 40100, Kenya