Organization
Coca-Cola Amatil is a company that produces, sells, and distributes the Coca-Cola trademark products and it operates in countries that include Australia, New Zealand, Indonesia, South Korea, Fiji, and New Guinea. The company partners with the worldwide largest beverage company, the Coca-Cola Company. The Coca-Cola company holds a portion of 32% of the Coca-Cola Amatil’s shareholdings.
The company produces and distributes a range of carbonated soft drinks and functional beverages, where many of the brands take the Coca-Cola company trademark such as Sprite, Fanta, Lift, and Powerade, The company also controls a range of their own products that include Kirks and Deep spring. In recent times the company has taken the lead in offering solutions to various drinking occasions and in such cases, they provide water, juice, and also low-calorie CDS. The company also participates in the manufacture and distribution of food and more especially SPC Ardoma.
The company operates within a wide variety of communities with a varied range of economies, languages, and cultures. Among the company’s objectives, the company aims at empowering the communities by providing employment opportunities, helps other companies to grow and it also supports the local suppliers and businesses. Therefore it is easy to conclude that the CCA company plays an important role in community development.
These are some of its roles in the community alongside the rewards that it offers its shareholders in terms of capital gains and also dividends. The CCA company’s roles in the community in return reinforce the company’s performance as it empowers the communities, improves business efficiencies of its customers, and also promotes the good relationship between the company and its stockholders (Sequeira 1987).
Given the nature of the company’s products, that is refreshments, the company’s products are always used in public places that include stadiums, events, and parks. During the consumption of CCA company products, there happens the possibility that the consumers might not carry the packaging and also the servicing containers with them because they are of less significance to them as the utility that they needed from them have been met. Therefore they leave the containers in the public places mentioned above and later pronounced as accumulated waste in the public places. This waste includes paper, plastic, and glass bottles.
The accumulation of this waste causes an environmental concern that is not liable to the company manufacturing and distributing the products. This situation is beyond the Coca-cola Amatil co-operate social responsibility because it’s beyond its operation. The environmental crisis is caused by the consumption of its products, but which can be attributed to the social irresponsibility of the consumers instead because they did not dispose of the waste at the right place in avoiding environmental pollution (Zessen 2004,).
The company whose products cause such pollution needs to take responsibility toward managing this waste were this more than the Co-operate Social responsibility. According to the legal understanding of Co-operate social responsibility, it implies the process in which a business takes account of its economic, social, and environmental impacts in the way in which it operates while focused on maximizing its benefits and minimizing its costs of operation.
The co-operate social responsibility is not enough to correct the mess of the company’s wastes in public places because it is only concerned with the way the products are produced in order to reduce the environmental pollution during the production process (Beat 1964). The Co-operate social responsibility considers less about the disposal of the products at the right place, thus it’s not a solution to correcting the pollution on public places that are caused by various companies’ products.
Co-operate social responsibility is not a concern with where the waste should be deposited but rather ensuring that the company’s operations protect the environment or minimize the waste into the environment. Co-operate social responsibility can also be perceived as an obligatory measure that the company takes in considering its interests and also the impact of their operations on the society in which they are operating.
The has been a rise in waste generation and accumulation in public places which poses a danger to the environment and the creatures. This can be perceived as a means of environmental pollution that is caused by human activities and which can be avoided. This scenario provides an incentive over which an intervention needs to be designed and this will involve coming up with a waste management system that is expected to keep pace with the changing demands (New south wales department of environment and conservation 2005).
The waste in public places is normally caused by the products that are produced by various companies after they have been used and more especially the containers in which these products were packed in or served. This situation calls for Public place recycling(PPR), which can be perceived as a material recovery system that is designed to collect the materials from the waste stream for recycling in public places that include stadiums, tourists sites, recreational sites, and also in transport sites. The Public place recycling can be carried out by government authorities, individual persons, companies or non-governmental organizations which are concern with the environment.
The past efforts of CCA company in public place recycling
CCA company has taken quite a number of steps towards solving the problem that is associated with the waste which accumulates in public places by its effort towards making the public place recycling available. This has been enhanced through the company working in conjunction with the councils and other organizations which manage the public places in making the public place recycling available and this started all way long from May 2004.
In 2006, the CCA company also diverted its efforts to their customers to implement public place recycling in venues that include parks, shopping centers, and public events. The company so far has made several attempts toward the public place recycling and they include the following; the company had a trial program at Sydney’s Fleek park, it assisted Taronga Zoo with recycling for their new food market that involved using a new signage system and a proportional campaign, the company launched a program at Thredbo Ski Village which incorporated a new signage system, the company organized the leverages brand coke activities to spread the public place recycling message such as the coca-cola lung in summer 2005, and also launched a trial program at Luna Park, Sydney.
Problem Statement
The participation of CCA in public place recycling is just a voluntary activity because there are no legal obligations that are tying the company to participate. The only concern of the government is the Co-operate social responsibility which is just meant to ensure the company is to promote the community development and also control its environmental pollution during their operations and particularly during the production that constitutes the manufacturing waste management.
Therefore the waste deposits in public places seem to be of less bother to the company legally, as this is an act of the consumers of the company’s products. The waste constitutes a wide range of products which include wastes also from other companies’ products thus blame can not be thrown to CCA alone but rather spread across all companies. Law is limited to urge companies to recycle the products because its difficult to trace the waste sources accurately by allocating the extend of pollution, which should be used as a measure on which company should involve in public recycling.
The main issue is to evaluate whether it is important for the CCA can invest in the project of public place recycling. The investment in the project means that the company should have to incur some economic sacrifice in ensuring that the public places are free from waste (Batty 2001).
The investment in the public place recycling will divert the resources which would have otherwise been used for further investments within the company or given out in the form of dividends to the shareholders of the company. The participation of CCA company in public place recycling implies that the company has to choose on either diverting the investments to public place recycling and losing the returns on those investments or ignoring investing in public place recycling and use the funds in paying out dividends to shareholders or reinvest to increase the capital base.
Another issue is the differentiation between corporate obligation and community responsibility. The company’s obligation is limited to the co-operate social responsibility where it’s expected to protect the environment just within its operations and the promotion of the community development. The community responsibility of cleaning the public places is entrusted to specific community authorities and in this case the councils, thus its participation in public place recycling is just an extra mile that is out of the company’s responsibilities in the community (Rusell L., 1999).
Pollution in Australia
Pollution is a long-term concern in Australia and this is evident in the extent to which the environment has been polluted. The environmental pollution in Australia constitutes all ranges of pollution including water and air pollution. The statistics from WWF show that Australians are the highest per capita greenhouse polluters in the developed world regardless of the current efforts put in place to control the emission of greenhouse gases that cause global warming.
The recent times the emission of greenhouse gases has become a global concern as it causes global warming. Global warming has an impact of increasing the earth’s temperature above the normal average temperature and also causes unexpected climate changes. The climate changes expose some locations in the world to experience extreme climate conditions which are certain to affect their activity schedules.
The excess emission of greenhouse gases in Australia compared to other developed world countries is attributed to the generation of electricity by the burning of high emission coal. The energy that is also generated from the burning of coal is not used efficiently in the sense that most of it are put in waste or not conversed as required, thus promoting the more burning of coal, which could have rather been reduced if the energy was used efficiently.
The emissions of the greenhouse gases in Australia are equivalent to the sum of emissions that arises from both the United Kingdom and France, and yet the two countries have a higher population level compared to Australia. This scenario implies that the emissions control in Australia has not been maintained to a desirable level relative to the achievements that have been attained by other developed worlds. This calls for the need to take a step toward controlling global warming.
The benefits of public place recycling
The public place recycling process involves the conversion of the already used materials into useful materials, and in this case, it will involve the process of collecting the used materials which are of less use to the customers and either reusing the items for the next session like in the case of the glass containers or remolding the waste materials in the manufacture of new containers in the case of plastics (Leach, Konicek and Shapiro 1992).
The process of recycling is likely to get rid of the materials which could have been otherwise been regarded as waste and pollutants of the environment. Public place recycling has the following benefits towards the reduction of global warming and energy conservation as given below:
Recycling is likely to reduce the energy consumption in the company that is recycling the materials. The company that is recycling will exempt itself from additional consumption of energy in the manufacture of new containers, otherwise, it will use the very containers which were used in the earlier dispatch into the market. In the case of Australia which involves the burning of coal to produce electricity for the production of these materials, the rate for the burning of coal will reduce because less energy will be required in the manufacturing process (Mawhinney 2002).
This will have a positive impact which will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases which is certain to reduce the possibility for the acceleration of global warming, hence recycling is required as a strategy for controlling global warming through reduced energy consumption (National Library of Australia 1997 ). This argument is valid on the basis that virgin materials are likely to consume more energy during the manufacturing process in the production of goods compared to the recycled materials because the recycled materials had undergone some production processes that do not need to be duplicated.
Another advantage with the use of recycled materials other than the use of virgin materials is that the manufacture of goods is that using the recycled materials requires less energy compared to the use of virgin materials and this is more evident in plastic materials. In the case of plastic materials, the recycling will either involve the washing of the containers and reusing them or it will involve the remolding of plastic into desirable items (Griffiths and Grant 1985).
The process is quite simple and less involving than when virgin materials were to be assembled to manufacture the goods. The assembling of new virgin materials will have to involves extra energy consumption including also the transportations costs for the materials from their sources of origin assuming that the transportation also involves the consumption of energy (Ralf and Bodo 2003). The reduced energy consumption in both the manufacturing process and the transportation of the materials will lead to the reduced emission of greenhouse gases into the environment, which is certain to reduce global warming.
Recycling is also important to support forestry because it will ensure that there are fewer materials on the ground which is a favorable condition for the survival of trees in parks and also in the forests. This is an advantage in the sense that there is a likelihood of more trees to survive and through the process of photosynthesis in the trees, carbon sequestration is certain to occur (Edwards and Turrent 2001).
Carbon sequestration is the process by which the substances capture carbon dioxide and in the process carbon dioxide normally combines with the substances to form a stable carbon compound. During the process of photosynthesis, the plants take in the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and combine it with water from the soil to form a carbon compound that forms part of the wood and also emits oxygen that is used by the animals for respiration (Sequeira and Freitas 1986).
Recycling, therefore, has a great role in ensuring that the trees survive, and through the process of photosynthesis, the trees are certain to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere hence a positive step toward the control of global warming.
Recycling is certain to reduce the number of landfills which are caused by the waste accumulated in public places (Testa 1997). The landfill materials and which are carbon-rich likely produce methane which is 21 times able to produce greenhouse which will contribute to global warming compared to carbon dioxide (Australian road research Board 1992,). Therefore the recycling in public places is necessary because it will remove the materials which could otherwise emit greenhouse gases which is certain to increase global warming, thus an important step toward the control of global warming.
The accumulation of waste in public places and more especially in the parks is likely to endanger the animals that are kept within the public places. The animals which are kept in the parks to attract either local tourists or international tourists might feed on the materials which are certain to affect their health negatively and in the long run the extinction of certain species in the environment.
The animals may also contract diseases that might arise due to the untidy environment. Public place recycling will promote the welfare of these animals and the other benefits that follow this action is that the authority responsible for tourism is likely to increase its revenue because the animals will be available for public viewing (Tebbe, Wasserman, Peet, Vatvars and Hayman 1982). The neatness of the park also improves the competitiveness of the park compared to other parks because the visitors will be feeling more at ease than when they were in dirty parks. Therefore public recycling is necessary to ensure that the park animals are safe and also the visitors feel at ease when they are within the environment of the public place in question.
The removal of waste from the stadiums and events will ensure the smooth running of activities within the stadium stadium or the site in which certain event. The smooth running of activities will be ensured because their will be no abstractions which may otherwise have been caused by the waste, where in this case the abstraction refers to the the odour that is certain to come from the accumulated waste and also the physical abstraction that are liable to causing injuries to the participants (Ralf and Bodo 2001). Therefore the removal of these waste through the public recycling will ensure that the public places provide an enabling environment that will ensure the smooth running of activities within the public places.
Undertaking public place recycling in places with a lot of waste is also advantageous because its certain to reduce the need for a large area for disposing waste because some of the waste is recycled back into use hence economical use of land as a resource (Port 2005). The recycling of the waste in places with a lot of waste and more especially in areas set for disposal of waste will reduce the amount of waste that is accumulated overtime in that site because a portion of the waste will be recycled into more useful items, which is certain to reduce the amount of waste that is accumulated in one given disposal area (Ken 1994).
Recycling in public places
Public place recycling implies the establishment of permanent systems in the places like parks, shopping centers, beaches, events and stadiums among other related places which is set to transform the waste accumulated in the public places into useful materials (Mason 1962). This process is normally an initiative that is given by the individual persons, various companies, Non governmental organisations and also the government agencies.
They take a step of reducing and recycling the waste that is accumulated in the public places as a means of conserving the environment (Martin 2001). This act of the recycling industry contribute in a great deal to the improvement of the environment’s sanity and this is attainable through the reduced greenhouse gas emissions, ensure the efficient use of energy and water, protection from physical injury and also conserving the non renewable virgin resources (Falk and Rudlin 1999).
The public recycling process in Australia and the consumers rationality
The public place recycling in Australia is best practised in Victoria and South Australian, where these are the best record holders. The recycling process is a community collective responsibility in which various parties are expected to participate and this starts with the consumption of the products which later result as waste. The consumers are certain to participate in the Public place recycling process if the necessary incentives are availed to them so as to dispose their waste in the right way in enabling the recycling entities to access the waste easily (Campbell, Konicek, Koscher, LaCorte and Waldoch 1993).
The best incentive is to make the bins available for the consumers, where this bins will act as the collection points for waste meant for recycling. However, this also depends on the rationality of the consumers in considering public place recycling as a necessary activity because they will only use the bins if they understand the logic behind the use of these bins (Beveridge Industry Environment Council 1999).
The easy to access the recycling facilities will also contribute to the effective use of the recycling facilities in achieving the purported purposes because the consumers will dispose their waste in bins with less commitment compared to the situation in which the consumer is expected to go for a longer distance to dispose their waste. Therefore the success for public place recycling depend mostly in the easy for the consumers to access the recycling facilities and also their rationality.
Reason on why should CCA company involve itself in Public Place recycling
There are a number of reasons on why the CCA company should actively participate in Public place recycling and they are given as below; The CCA company participation in recycling will enable the company to reduce the cost of operation, which is certain to increase the company’s profit margin and hence increased dividends to the stockholders. The reduced costs arise from a range of efficiencies that come with adapting the recycling process.
First, the recycling process will enable the company to reuse the materials which were used in the previous production and during the process of reusing the already used materials the demand for the virgin materials will reduce (Zhang 1986). The demand for the virgin materials will reduce because of the tedious and time consuming procures that are involved in bring the materials into the manufacturing site, thus making the use of recycled materials preferable compared to the virgin materials. It takes less time to convert the used materials into final products compared to the assembling of virgin materials to manufacture good during the production process (Edwards and Hyett 2004).
The cost of transport and transactional costs to avail the virgin materials are certain to be reduced because the amount of virgin materials required will reduce, thus a positive contribution towards improving the company’s profitability (Transportation Research council( USA) 2001). Secondly, the operation costs will be reduced through the reduced consumption of energy given that the recycled materials are likely to consume less energy compared to the virgin materials in the manufacture of goods (Sara 1993). This argument is based on the assumption that energy can be scaled down and measurable in monetary terms, therefore the less consumption of energy will lead to reduced costs of operation which imply increased profit margin (Cox, Fell and Thurstain-Goodwin 2003).
Water is also another basic input in the manufacturing sector and more especially in CCA as a beverage manufacturing company. The virgin materials are likely to consume more water in the manufacture of good compared to the use of recycled materials because they had passed some stages of production that do not need to be repeated when using the recycled materials. Therefore the use of recycled materials by CCA company will reduce the amount of water consumption in the manufacturing process, which is certain to reduce the bills emanating from the consumption of water. The already used water is normally lead into sewage and as a result of reduced amount of water consumption, the sewage management will be made easier which is likely to reduce the operation costs of the company (Edwards 2001).
The CCA company participation in Public place recycling can be perceived as an opportunity towards diversifying its operations into another industry because it is possible to enterprise the recycling operations to meet the demands of other small companies. The recycling process will involve the handling of a variety of waste that ranges from paper, glass,food and plastic materials. These materials can be used in various industries as inputs in the manufacture of finished goods which are of more importance than when the products are in the waste state (Salamanca 2003).
However this will work well if the CCA company lays a proper contacts with the demands of various small industries, so as to supply them with the materials after sorting out of the materials and recycling them to meet their demands, and also retaining the necessary and relevant materials to supplement the CCA company’s required inputs. Therefore investing in recycling is a source for further revenue that is certain to improve the company’s profitability thus promoting the relationship with the shareholders as their dividends will be assured after investing in recycling, thus it is not a non profit making project (Smith 1986 ).
The participation CCA in public place recycling will promote the company’s public image as a company that is socially responsible and also environmentally responsible. This will improve the company’s reputation and also competitiveness in the sense that most customers will come to know about the CCA company through its participation in recycling which acts also as a strategy for the company to advertise its products indirectly because the public anxiety will be provoked for the public trying to make inquiries about the company because its impacting their lives positively through its activities (Carmona 2003).
Given the nature of the CCA company’s products, they are among the most consumed products in the public places implying that the company’s products contribute to a large portion to the waste in public places. The excess accumulation of a certain product’s waste in the public place my provoke the authorities that are responsible with making the environment clean to put restrictions on the consumption of such products in public places as a policy for waste management. The imposing of such regulations is certain to affect the CCA products demand negatively more especially in public places which is potential market for the products other than any other place (Adeniyi 1985).
Therefore the CCA company should take a step towards recycling the waste caused by its products so as to avoid falling into the restrictions which are certain to arise from environmental authorities that are likely to affect the company’s demand which will lead to the company’s low productivity. Thus the CCA participation public place recycling can be perceived as marketing and sales strategy that will enable the sell of its products at the public places with a lot of easy without bruising shoulders with the environmental authorities.
Engaging the various stakeholders
There are a wide range of stakeholders whose efforts are needed for the success of the Company in participating in Public place recycling given the above benefits of the company investing in recycling. The main stakeholders include consumers, customers, Employees, communities, government, shareholders, suppliers, charitable group and community organizations, Non governmental organizations and also the CCA company itself.
The stakeholders are expected to offer enabling conditions for the success of this project. The consumers are expected to dump the waste in the recycling facilities provided. The customers of CCA company are expected to provide information to the CCA company management about the most appropriate spots over which the company should locate the recycling facilities and also should dump their waste in the bins (Ding and Langston 2000). The employees of the CCA company and more especially the ones working under the recycling department should execute their services effectively so as to enable the recycling process overall efficiency.
The communities in which the waste is produced should lay strategy on how to centrally locate the waste for easier recycling, that is to enable the easy accessibility of the waste. The government should give the necessary incentives to enable the recycling process that include all kinds of infrastructure (Wolfgang and Karel 2004). The shareholders are expected to guarantee the management an opportunity to participate in public place recycling because they are the owners of the company.
The suppliers are expected to give the company management the necessary informations which will be used in decision making over the running of the recycling operations because they are ones who are in the field more than the company management, and for this case the suppliers of the the CCA company products. The charitable organizations are expected to provide their support in the collection of waste from places that are not accessible by the company’s employees thus making the waste available for recycling (Wolfrey 2006). The non governmental organisations which are concern with the environment should partner with the CCA company in cleaning the public places.
Risk analysis of the project
The implementation of the project is associated to various risks which are certain to disable the achievements expected from the project. The project may fail if the laid down strategies are not observed or if the strategies are too rigid to adjust given the condition that the circumstances of operation might be changing from time to time which may require the continuous adjustments which are meant to make the project relevant, otherwise it may loose direction (Carnoma and Tiedel Steven 2002).
The changing conditions may include the reaction from potential competitors and restrictions imposed by environmental authorities among others. The project also run a risk of the main partners pulling back and this can be solved by the company becoming the main stakeholder in recycling with time so that the withdraw of any partners will have little significant effect on the overall recycling operations. Another risk is when the government may fail to give the necessary infrastructural facilities that will enable the efficient recycling process (Edwards and Turrent 1998 ). The required infrastructure include transport and security infrastructures which will ensure easy collection of waste and safety of the bins respectively (McCarthy 1997).
Another risk that faces the project is the inability of the shareholders to realize the importance of investing in the recycling project and this is likely to restrain the management effort in implementing the project. The best way forward to overcome the resistance is to first supply the shareholders with the information so as to enable them to make informed decisions about the projects as they may literally mistake it for just a means of diverting their resources into a non productive project. The project also runs a risk of it being interfered with the councils decisions which may either foster or tout the effort extended by the company to the implementation of the project (Nyle 2006).
Conclusions
Co-operate Social responsibility can be perceived as not the best alternative for the success of the company. Social responsibility only restrains the company to operate within certain obligations as prescribed by the government authorities during its operations. The company should engage in public place recycling because the returns on the projects are long lasting.
Recommendations
The CCA company should invest in Public place recycling, where the effort will appreciated by stakeholders and it should focus on bigger projects other than the small ones. The company’s success in this project will be enhanced by the company first setting up educational recycling adds campaign, which should aim at educating and creating awareness to the stakeholders. The CCA company should work alone and constitute the full investment so as to enable quick decision making.
Bibliography
Australia, 1997, Australia National Bibliography, National library of Australia, pp 215.
Australian Conservation Foundation, 2008, How do you care about climate change. Web.
Australian road research Board, 1992, Road and Transport Research: A journal of Australia and New Zealand Research, Australia Road research Board, pp. 83.
Adeniyi O., 1985, Misconceptions of selected ecological concepts held by some Nigerian students. Journal of Biological Education, pp. 316.
Batty S, 2001, Planning for a Sustainable Future, Spon Press, pp. 47.
Beat M., 1964, Solid Particles on the ground effects, Macmillan, pp 231.
Beveridge Industry Environment council (Tasmania), Public place recycling: Waste Audit 1999, pp. 13.
Carmona M, 2003, Public places-urban spaces; The dimension of Urban, Architectural press, pp. 262.
Carnoma M. and Tiedel Steven, 2002, Urban Design reader: The dimensions of Urban Design, Prentice-Hall, pp. 289.
Campbell D., Konicek B., Koscher B., LaCorte S. and Waldoch T., 1993, Children’s alternative conceptions about decomposition and the cycling of matter, New England Educational Research Organization. Portsmouth, pp 56.
Cox J., Fell D. and Thurstain-Goodwin M,. 2003, Red Man, Green Man , RICS Foundation, pp 47.
Ding G. and Langston C., 2000, Sustainable Practices in the Built Environment, Butterworth- Heinemann, pp96 Edwards B. and Turrent D. Sustainable Housing Principles and Practice, E & FN Spon, pp. 59.
Edwards B. and Hyett P.,2004, Guide to Sustainability, RIBA Companies Ltd, pp201.Edwards B. and Falk N. and Rudlin D., Building the 21st Century Home: The Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood , Architectural Press, pp 99.
Griffiths K., and Grant C., 1985, High school students’ understanding of food webs: Identification of a learning hierarchy and related misconceptions, Prentice-Hall, pp 216.
Ken D., 1994, The natural Habitar Garden, Clarkson potter publishers, pp 48.
Leach T., Konicek D. and Shapiro L., 1992, The ideas used by British and North American school children to interpret the phenomenon of decay: A cross-cultural study, American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, pp 24.
Liftshare solutions, 2007, Co-operate social responsibility. Web
Martin S., 2001, Strengthening Packaging Product Stewardship in Australia, Turramurra, pp 81.
Mason B. 1962, Meteorites, New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp160.
Edwards M., 2001, Non- Residential Beverage Container Recovery Feasibility Study, Chicago University press, pp 48.
Mawhinney M., 2002, Sustainable Development: Understanding the Green Debates , Blackwell Science, pp 123.
McCarthy J., 1997, End year Report, Fitzroy Football club, pp 17.
New south wales Department of environment and conservation, 2005, Better Practise for public Place recycling, Dept. of Environment and Conservation, pp 19.
Nyle S., 2006, Government role in environmental Conservation, Iron Pyrite Press, pp 48.
Port A., 2005, Historic Site Baseline Audit, SWSA, pp 106.
Salamanca P., 2003 Public Place Recycling , Athena Waste Management, pp 27.
Sustainability Victoria, 2008, Public Place recycling guidelines. Web.
Turrent D.,1998 , Sustainable Housing Principles and Practice , E & FN Spon, pp. 147.
Ralf S. and Bodo E., 2003, The benefits for public Place Recycling, Prentice-Hall, pp 280.
Ralf S. and Bodo E., 2001, Environmental concerns in Australia, MTN Press, 99 123.
Rusell L., 1999, Landscaping for wildlife in the Pacific Northwest, university of Washington press, pp 104.
Sara S., 1993, Restoring the ecology of Our Own Backyard, Houghston Mifflin company.
Sequeira M.,1987. Alternative conceptions about mould and copper oxide, Cornell University, pp 89.
Sequeira M. and Freitas M., 1986, Death and decomposition of living organisms: Toulouse, France. pp 86.
Smith E. 1986, Matter cycling in ecosytems. CA. pp 54.
Tebbe, F, Wasserman E., Peet W., Vatvars A. and Hayman, A., 1982, Composition of Elemental Sulfur in Solution, DIANE Publishing company, pp 76.
Testa M., 1997, The Reuse and recycling of Contaminated soil, CRC Press, pp 42.
The CCA official website, 2008, Public Place Recycling. Web.
Transportation Research council( USA), 2001, Transportation research record, Transportation research Board, pp 57.
Wallongong, 2008, Public Place recycling. Web.
Wolfrey J., 2006, Modern north America criticism and theory: A critical review, Edinburgh University Press, pp 104.
Wolfgang N., and Karel V., 2004, Recycling as a process of environmental conservation, DESM Press, pp 46.
WWF-Australia, 2007, 2010 and Beyond: Rising to the Biodiversity challenge. Web.
Zhang Y., 1986, The History of Science Society: Ancient Chinese Sulfur Manufacturing Processes, Oxford University press, pp 77.
Zero waste SA, 2008, Why Minimize waste. Web.
Zessen, E., 2004, Public place recycling as a strategy, Barcelona (Spain), pp 68.