Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis to evaluate the stakeholders of a MSWM system – A pilot study of Maputo City

• Published in: Environmental development 2017-12, Vol.24, p.124-135
• Main Authors: dos Muchangos, Leticia Sarmento, Tokai, Akihiro, Hanashima, Atsuko
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Integrated sustainable waste management; Municipal solid waste management; Social network analysis; Stakeholder analysis
• ISSN: 2211-4645; 2211-4653
• DOI: 10.1016/j.envdev.2017.04.005

The decision-making for municipal solid waste management is a process that involves and affects several different stakeholders. In low-and-middle-income countries, this process is more complicated for the fact that not only it is not yet clear the role and position of those stakeholders, but also, their interactions often lack mutual understanding and characterised by being ineffective. In this study, we aim to demonstrate the value of combining the complementing stakeholder analysis (SA) and social network analysis (SNA), to add into the decision-making process to better the engagement and interaction of stakeholders in a municipal solid waste management system, in a case of Maputo City system. Resulting from the SA application, the main stakeholders were identified, and their roles, power and interest, and overall access to information, knowledge and satisfaction with the structure and functioning of the system were clarified. The SNA helped in mapping the existing connections concerning partnerships and collaborations and sharing of information. The findings suggest that though all stakeholders agree to the need for an improved and sustainable system, they fundamentally lack a unified approach. Decision-makers are required to develop strategies to improve the stakeholders’ connections and foster inclusiveness, while customising those strategies according to different types of stakeholders. •We identified 35 stakeholders and clarified their power and interest.•The general access to information, knowledge and satisfaction were evaluated.•Stakeholders’ connectivity networks were constructed.•Recommendations to ensure inclusivity and participation of stakeholders were added.