Little Rock city board asked to consider five-year schedule of solid waste rate increases – The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Proposal for Solid Waste Rate Adjustment in Little Rock Aligned with Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

City officials in Little Rock have received a formal proposal detailing a five-year schedule for adjusting solid waste service rates. This strategic initiative is presented as a critical measure to ensure the financial sustainability of municipal waste services and to directly advance the city’s commitment to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning urban sustainability, environmental protection, and responsible resource management.

Alignment with SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

The proposed rate schedule is fundamentally linked to achieving Target 11.6 of the SDGs, which calls for reducing the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, with a special focus on municipal waste management. The increased revenue is designated for:

• Modernizing waste collection and disposal infrastructure.
• Improving the operational efficiency of sanitation services.
• Ensuring the long-term viability of waste management systems to serve a growing urban population sustainably.
• Investing in technologies that minimize the environmental footprint of landfills and waste processing facilities.

Contribution to Broader SDG Framework

The proposal’s impact extends across multiple interconnected SDGs, positioning the rate adjustment as a comprehensive tool for sustainable development. The plan is structured to support the following goals:

1. SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production): By securing funding, the city can expand programs aimed at waste reduction, recycling, and composting, directly addressing Target 12.5, which seeks to substantially reduce waste generation.
2. SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation): Enhanced funding ensures the proper containment and management of solid waste, preventing the contamination of local water sources and soil, thereby safeguarding public health and aquatic ecosystems.
3. SDG 13 (Climate Action): A well-funded waste management system can implement measures to capture landfill gas (methane), a potent greenhouse gas, and promote recycling, which reduces energy consumption and emissions associated with producing new materials.
4. SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth): The rate schedule provides financial stability for the municipal sanitation department, securing jobs and ensuring safe working conditions for employees in this essential public service sector.

The Five-Year Strategic Implementation

The proposal outlines a phased, five-year implementation to allow for gradual adjustment and strategic allocation of resources. This long-term approach is designed to:

• Provide predictable funding for capital improvements and operational needs.
• Facilitate long-range planning for the integration of innovative and sustainable waste management solutions.
• Align the city’s fiscal policy with its environmental and social responsibilities as outlined in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

   The article, despite its brevity, directly connects to the following Sustainable Development Goals:

   • SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

     This is the most directly relevant SDG. The article discusses a proposal for “solid waste rate increases” presented to “Little Rock officials.” This action is a core component of municipal governance and urban environmental management, which are central to creating sustainable cities.

   • SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

     The management of “solid waste” is an integral part of the lifecycle of products and consumption patterns. Implementing rate increases for waste services is a policy tool that can influence consumption behavior and encourage waste reduction, aligning with the principles of responsible consumption.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

   Based on the discussion of solid waste management, the following specific targets can be identified:

   • Target 11.6

     “By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management.”

     The article’s entire focus on a “proposal for a five-year schedule of solid waste rate increases” is a direct action related to the “municipal and other waste management” component of this target. It represents a city’s effort to sustainably fund and manage its waste systems.

   • Target 12.5

     “By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse.”

     While the article does not explicitly mention waste reduction, a “solid waste rate increase” is a financial mechanism that can incentivize residents and businesses to generate less waste to control their costs. This policy, therefore, serves as an indirect tool to encourage waste reduction, contributing to this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

   The article does not mention official SDG indicators, but it implies mechanisms and metrics for measuring progress:

   • Indicator for Target 11.6: Municipal Strategy for Waste Management Financing

     The “proposal for a five-year schedule of solid waste rate increases” itself acts as an indicator. It demonstrates that the city of Little Rock has a strategic plan for the financial sustainability of its waste management services. This plan is a crucial prerequisite for ensuring the effective and controlled management of municipal solid waste, which is measured by official indicator 11.6.1 (Proportion of municipal solid waste collected and managed in controlled facilities).

   • Implied Indicator for Target 12.5: Per Capita Solid Waste Generation

     The success of the “rate increases” in contributing to Target 12.5 would be measured by tracking the amount of solid waste generated per capita in Little Rock over the five-year period. A decrease in this metric would indicate that the financial incentive is successfully encouraging waste reduction among the population.

Summary of Findings

Source: arkansasonline.com