Opinion: Financing waste management in Africa

From the newsletter

As Africa’s waste volumes grow, Christine Cherono, a circularity professional, argues that the continent’s circular economy ambitions are constrained by a persistent lack of financing for daily waste collection and operations, which are capital intensive. She calls for the adoption of sustainable funding models to ensure waste systems remain operational and financially viable.

• Ms Cherono is a waste systems and circular economy specialist at Zero Waste Communities, a platform offering weekly insights on Africa’s waste management and circular economy.

• “While trucks and infrastructure are visible investments, it is the collection that consumes the largest share of budgets. Collection happens every single day and generates no direct financial return. This is why sustainable waste financing is such a critical issue for Africa,” she says.

More details

By Christine Cherono

Waste management comes down to two major types of spending: capital expenditure and operational expenditure. Capital expenditure covers assets such as trucks, transfer stations and waste containers. Operational expenditure covers the recurring daily costs including wages, fuel, insurance and maintenance. While trucks and infrastructure are visible investments, it is the collection that consumes the largest share of budgets. Collection happens every single day and generates no direct financial return. This is why sustainable waste financing is such a critical issue for Africa. A UNEP 2024 study highlights that waste management systems face a significant and growing funding shortfall each year.

Kenya’s County Budget Implementation Reports for FY 2024/25 show the scale of garbage collection spending, with the capital Nairobi spending Ksh 1.81 billion. In some counties, trucks are even underutilized, yet they still incur fuel, maintenance and wage costs. The financial pressure remains constant regardless of efficiency levels. It is clear that collection is the most expensive component of waste management. Yet many external donors prefer to fund recycling plants, treatment facilities or landfills because they are tangible projects that can be measured and completed within a defined timeframe.

However, even when a new facility is built, the municipality still needs consistent daily funding to collect waste, transport it, operate the facility and pay staff. If those recurring costs cannot be met, the entire system weakens and the projects fail. The reality is, as the circular economy gains traction globally, the value of recyclable materials alone cannot cover the full costs of collection, sorting, processing and safe disposal. Without government financing, support from producer responsibility schemes, waste management remains financially unviable for local authorities.

For waste systems to be financially sustainable, they need skilled expertise, projects that can make money on their own, such as composting, recycling, or waste-to-energy, and steady support from both public and private funding, including targeted subsidies. Without stable financing, waste leaks into the environment, leading to long-term economic consequences such as public health costs, environmental degradation and damaged infrastructure.

Increased imports and a more complex waste stream

As imports grow, so does the volume and complexity of products entering the market, and eventually the waste they generate. While the Extended Producer Responsibility framework is intended to hold producers and importers accountable, public waste infrastructure has not kept pace. Much of it has not been upgraded and is struggling to manage both the scale and diversity of materials now entering the system.

At the same time, products are becoming more technologically advanced and chemically complex. This introduces more hazardous components into the waste stream. Recently, the Kenya Nuclear Regulatory Authority appeared before the Senate ICT Committee to propose that electronic waste containing nuclear or radiological components be regulated under the Nuclear Regulatory Act of 2019 rather than under conventional e-waste regulations. This signals how rapidly the risk profile of waste is evolving. There is also a policy paradox. If instruments such as Extended Producer Responsibility are implemented without careful design, costs can be transferred to consumers through higher prices. This can disproportionately affect low-income households.

The opportunity ahead

Sub-Saharan Africa generates significantly less municipal solid waste per capita than North America or Europe. In many countries, daily generation is below 0.5 to 1.0 kg per person compared to more than 2.0 kg in high-income regions. This lower baseline presents an opportunity. The region can avoid locking itself into the take-make-dispose model that wealthier economies are now trying to reverse. With rapid urbanization and population growth expected to substantially increase waste volumes, this is the moment to build sustainable financing models, digitize waste systems, strengthen recycling value chains and create green jobs.

Sub-Saharan Africa generates significantly less municipal solid waste per capita than high-income regions, giving the continent an opportunity to build more sustainable systems before waste volumes rise further with urbanisation and population growth. This is the moment to develop sustainable financing models, strengthen recycling value chains and integrate circular economy principles into urban development.

The costs of poor waste management are already visible through pollution, flooding, public health impacts and climate emissions. Waste management is not just a sanitation issue. It is an economic, industrial and public health priority that requires coordinated investment and long-term thinking.