A Participatory Approach to Data Collection in the Plastic Waste Management Sector: A Case Study of Surabaya

Introduction

One of the key barriers to improving waste management globally is the lack of access to quality, reliable data to inform decision making, especially in developing nations¹. This is often due to inadequate infrastructure, technology, resources², and unwillingness to accurately capture data due to perceived risks or ineffective incentives. Both quantitative and qualitative data are crucial for supporting better decision making and driving change. Only with reliable data and actionable insights can policy-makers and stakeholders understand issues and opportunities, and implement appropriate solutions in waste management systems³.

In Surabaya, collecting qualitative or quantitative data related to plastic waste flows is even more challenging because of the complex and diverse array of stakeholders across both informal⁴ and formal waste management sectors⁵. Existing data is difficult to access as parties are generally unwilling to share them because of the perceived (or real) risks associated. Stakeholders from the informal sector often do not recognise the importance of waste data, or are unable to gather reliable data from their operations due to limited capacity.

Ocean Plastic Prevention Accelerator (OPPA⁶) is building a social innovation ecosystem to address ocean plastic leakage within Indonesia. Surabaya is the first OPPA pilot project location. Given the difficulty of collecting data regarding plastic waste flows in Surabaya at scale and with confidence, OPPA decided to focus its efforts on designing a tool to facilitate collecting reliable qualitative data from the various stakeholders in the local waste management system. This tool was developed with the objective of having the potential to be replicated in other cities in Indonesia and nearby countries in order to increase the quality and quantity of data available to plastic waste management actors across South and South-east Asia.

In light of these challenges and requirements, OPPA explored a participatory approach to waste data collection, specifically by designing a research tool in the form of a “board game”; a time-tested medium that has proven its effectiveness at engaging participants, creating an atmosphere of trust, and facilitating meaningful discussion⁷. This decision was also based on the success of participatory approaches to data collection in other fields with similar limitations and challenges and participatory data collection as an approach to encourage shared ownership of decision-making⁸ in the field of development⁹.

OPPA collaborated with a local design company to create a workable version of the board game and conducted a test run with many of the local waste management sector stakeholders at a workshop. This board game was received well by participants, with many thinking fondly of the experience and the insights collected during the process.

This case study will analyse and explain the process behind the development and testing of the board game, lessons learned, the observed effectiveness of the participatory approach to qualitative waste data collection in Surabaya, and how OPPA had taken those lessons to improve on the original design.

What Are Participatory Approaches and Why Use Them?

Participatory approaches vary depending on the context in which they are used, but in general, the core tenets of participatory approaches are inclusivity and consideration for the opinions and concerns raised by the participants and other stakeholders that might be affected by a given project or program¹⁰.

In the context of waste management systems, participatory approaches can be defined as any initiative aimed at learning about the perspectives of the various stakeholders in (or affected by) the system, by directly engaging them in an exercise that nurtures participation.

OPPA, as part of The Incubation Network, strongly believes in the criticality and involving local stakeholders in the development of plastic waste management solutions, and participatory approaches offered a way to explore the perspectives of these stakeholders, each of whom had a unique understanding of the local system, based on their different positions in it. The different perspectives — when discussed, compared and contrasted, during and after the exercise — offer valuable insight into the dynamics shaping the system. These insights, and the relationships developed through the exercise, have proved crucial for OPPA’s efforts to develop effective and relevant solutions to the waste management problems in Surabaya.

The Board Game

The first version of the board game was developed with two main objectives:

1. To obtain and/or verify data on the waste material flows through the system, and factors that influence these flows
2. To facilitate discussion between participants, through which insights could be gleaned about influential dynamics (e.g. the fluctuation of pricing and demand, or the dominance of a particular ethnic group over part of the system) and potential responses to change.

Data Verification Workshop

The inaugural version of the board game was tested during the Data Verification Workshop conducted by OPPA in Surabaya in March 2019. The OPPA team invited eighteen participants, all of whom represented key stakeholders from the Surabaya waste management system, to participate in the workshop. The participants came from (and/or represented) the municipal government, the informal waste collectors, recycling companies, SMEs in the system (e.g. aggregators), startups, and NGOs.

At this point in time, the OPPA team referred to the board game as a prototype — a preliminary version developed to test the concept and explore different functions or components. The three components tested through the workshop (with accompanying questions) were:

1. Waste Flow Mapping & Data Verification
   How effective is the exercise for waste flow mapping and verifying the data that OPPA already has?
2. Problem Identification and Analysis
   How useful is the exercise for initiating and mediating insightful discussion about problems?
3. Solution Exploration
   How useful is the exercise in helping to explore potential solutions and responses?

Learning and Insights

Waste Flow Mapping & Data Verification

The board game exercises helped to verify and importantly, to bring more nuance to data that had been collected by OPPA during their efforts to map the Surabaya waste management system. Stakeholders from different parts of the system had different ideas about how things worked, or why they did not. This expanded the team’s understanding of material flows and stakeholders, but importantly it also achieved this for participants, enabling new ideas to emerge from the discussions that followed. For example, one of the representatives from the recycling industry discussed obtaining their feedstock directly from the central waste bank, rather than going through intermediaries. They said this would allow them to reduce operating costs and allow them to obtain and process more plastic waste.

This illustrated to the OPPA team that the parts of the complex waste management system were unclear even for those working in it, and emphasised the importance of having as many parts represented as possible, especially the informal collectors, who play a crucial role.

Problem Identification and Analysis

However, the representation of different parts of the system also brought challenges: When reviewing findings and discussing potential problems, the power differentials in the room became very apparent — as stakeholders vehemently denied that some problems existed, while attributing blame for others, and effectively ending the discussion. The denial of problems by powerful stakeholders appeared to leave others unwilling to raise concerns, and so potentially fruitful discussions about possible solutions could not take place.

While unfortunate, this incident was very insightful. It provided OPPA with direct experience of potential/(or an example of) the power dynamics in the plastic waste management system in Surabaya, which they had previously only heard about through data collection. With this, OPPA was able to adapt their approach to discussing problems and making proposals, to take these dynamics into account.

Solution Exploration

On the other hand, focusing on solutions (i.e. potential initiatives and programs that OPPA was considering, and ideas from the participants) energised the group and enabled them to explore a range of scenarios through discussions. This provided OPPA with valuable feedback on the solutions, and helped to identify potential partners for future efforts.

The workshop proved that each component was effective, but some more so than others, and some in ways that were not intended. With insights from observation and participant feedback, a number of revisions of the original prototype of the board game were undertaken. These changes focus on the board game as a means of exploring perspectives and solutions, rather than identifying and analysing problems.

“Interesting, because it (the board game-waste flow map) was done/arranged together, that we completed each other to fill the information gap there (in the waste flow map). Facilitating discussions. ” → Nurul (Operational Manager of Surabaya Central Waste Bank)

“It was good, it (the board game) facilitated the discussion, information gathering, opened up broader thinking about solutions that can be done together. What I remember the most was when there was a small debate related to the flow of recycling plastic waste with the industry and the waste bank community.” → Winardi Litanto (Founder of Peduli Sungai Surabaya Foundation)

Conclusion

The board game proved an effective means to verifying and building on the data collected, gaining insight into system dynamics, exploring solutions, and building relationships. However, it was less effective in supporting the identification and analysis of problems in the system, aside from the potentially problematic dynamics it shed light on. Most importantly, it established valuable connections with a diverse group of stakeholders that OPPA has drawn on throughout the design and implementation of its programs, to increase engagement and ensure effectiveness.

The board game appeared to foster increased trust and willingness to cooperate among the participants — this may be crucial in encouraging increased cross-sector collaboration in the Surabaya plastic waste management system. In addition, the novelty of the exercises left a lasting impression on participants — many continued to raise ideas that emerged, and to discuss the board game, more than 12 months later.

The second iteration of the board game is currently being developed. As of July 2020, it has not undergone a trial run yet. Nevertheless, it has been redesigned based on the feedback and findings from the first version, and it is OPPA’s goal to continually refine and improve on this promising concept and eventually realise its full potential as a highly accessible and effective research tool for developing economies to collect relevant and actionable data.

In summary, taking a participatory approach to data collection in the waste management system can be effective not only for deepening understanding, but also for building relationships and laying the foundations for cooperative efforts to address problems. The findings outlined in this case study are not necessarily confined solely to the context of Surabaya or even Indonesia. It is possible that similar results may be replicated in other countries across South and South-east Asia as this method relies only on the willingness of local stakeholders to engage.

With that in mind, it may be beneficial to modify the participatory research tool to cater to the context and preferences of different countries for better engagement with the local stakeholders.

Appendix

The Ocean Plastic Prevention Accelerator (OPPA) is a social innovation ecosystem builder powered by The Incubation Network that’s supported by SecondMuse, The Circulate Initiative (TCI), Global Affairs Canada (GAC), Alliance to End Plastic Waste (AEPW) and more.

References

1. https://sci-hub.si/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10163-004-0117-y
2. https://scihub.wikicn.top/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10163-008-0231-3
3. https://scihub.wikicn.top/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0956053X12004205
4. The informal waste sector consists of the waste recycling activities of scavengers and waste pickers who extract recyclable and reusable materials from mixed waste (https://scihub.bban.top/10.1016/j.habitatint.2005.09.005) before selling them to aggregators or directly to recycling plants. Informal sector entrepreneurs or enterprises do not pay taxes, have no trading license and are not included in social welfare or government insurance schemes (Haan, Coad, & Lardinois, 1998).
5. The formal sector consists of the businesses, enterprises and economic activities that are monitored, protected and taxed by the government (Retrieved from https://www.reference.com/business-finance/difference-between-formal-informal-sectors-aab0ae9eb69681af )
6. A team under Secondmuse that seeks to create a collaborative network for innovative solutions to address challenges in the local waste management system and recycling sector.
7. https://scihub.wikicn.top/https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137402141_23
8. https://scihub.wikicn.top/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090023311001134
9. A participatory approach was used in the context of veterinary epidemiology in developing nations with the goal of analysing animal disease problems and evaluating disease control policies. The study concluded that participatory approaches do help to engage livestock-rearing communities, lead to greater understanding of their animal disease problems and as a result, better policies for solving those problems.
10. https://academic.oup.com/heapol/article/15/3/332/573311
11. https://www.participatorymethods.org/page/about-participatory-methods