This guidance was developed by the WWF Baseline & Monitoring Working Group in June 2021, to support cities as they identify key performance indicators to monitor and assess change over baseline conditions. The Monitoring and Evaluation plan closing aligns with the Baseline Assessment, and recommends third-party monitoring tools and internationally recognized guidelines.
Monitoring local waste streams is critical to developing sound city strategies. Gathering good data on the types and volumes of waste that are generated can help the city design suitable waste management programs, allocate resources to ensure appropriate collection infrastructure and scheduling, establish short and long-term targets for collection and diversion, and adapt as consumption patterns evolve. With good data, cities can better assess relevant technologies, applicable best practices given the local context, and identify strategic partners for service provisions.
Monitoring should be set as an on-going long-term process based on a series of repeated measurements made to detect the baseline condition and temporal changes in litter. Assessments use such information in a critical and contextualized way to design and evaluate the need for, and success of, public policies and mitigation measures.
The monitoring and evaluation approach should adhere to the Baseline Assessment methodology, as introduced in the Baseline Guidance, and as summarized below:
The Waste Flow Monitoring activities will replicate the Waste Flow Monitoring Assessment, using the same process, boundaries, level of resolution (low, medium, high) and using the same tools (Waste Wise Cities Tool, Waste Flow Diagram, Wasteaware Benchmark Indicators, or other).
Similarly, the Litter Monitoring activities will replicate the Litter Baseline Assessment, using the same process, boundaries, level of resolution (low, medium, high) and using the same tools. Prior to selecting your preferred litter monitoring tool, please consider the monitoring tool requirements listed below:
There are a host of monitoring tools available on the market, and with the many options on offer, it is important to consider the features of each tool in the context of your monitoring and evaluation approach, to ensure the selected tool meets your needs. Below, we include a brief comparative assessment of 3 tools according to some important criteria, but this table is not exhaustive, and can be used to compare and assess other tools as needed.
|
Debris Tracker |
Litterati |
Elippsis |
Citizen Science |
x |
x |
|
Open Source |
x |
|
|
Cost |
Free |
$$$ |
$$$ |
Replicability |
Free |
$$$ |
$$$ |
Developed and managed by non-profit research institute |
x |
|
|
Developed and managed by for-profit enterprise |
|
x |
x |
Database and mapping integration into PSC platform |
x |
|
|
Uses AI to identify litter items, and requires a photo upload and item verification |
|
x |
x |
Litter data can be uploaded automatically into a database in the field |
x |
x |
x |
Litter data can be uploaded into a database manually after a field visit, allowing for the use of traditional field forms should circumstances require (weather, lack of smart phone, etc.) |
x |
|
|
Localization - translation to local languages |
x |
|
|