What is this tool intended for?

This guide is intended to help practitioners and planners conduct a structured, rapid feasibility Assessment to determine whether BSF biowaste conversion is likely to be a viable and sustainable solution in a specific geographical area. Rather than providing a simple yes/no answer, the guide generates a nuanced evidence base that identifies the specific opportunities and barriers relevant to a given context, allowing users to make informed decisions about whether, at what scale, and under which conditions a BSF project should proceed. It is explicitly Designed to be conducted before committing to capital investment in a BSF facility, serving as a structured pre-investment due diligence tool.

The guide covers all four key dimensions that determine BSF feasibility: (1) the legal and institutional environment governing BSF operations, substrate use, and product markets; (2) the quality, quantity, accessibility, and financial viability of available organic waste substrates; (3) management and operational suitability including climate conditions, land availability at different scales, and the existing knowledge base in the area; and (4) market opportunities and barriers for BSF-derived products, including animal Feed, frass, and carbon credits.

How does this tool work?

The guide is structured as a step-by-step methodology organized into four thematic sections, each containing numbered Assessment steps, explanatory text, scoring tables, and references to corresponding Annex tools. The Assessment begins with a preliminary step (Step 0) in which the user defines the spatial region to be assessed; the more clearly bounded the area, the more precise the Assessment outcomes.

The four sections then proceed as follows:

•        Section 1 – Legislation and Institutional Barriers and Opportunities: Users conduct structured key informant interviews using the Annex 1-1 questionnaire template covering farming and Feed regulations, waste management legislation, climate mitigation policies, and business and innovation Frameworks. They also score the country on the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index (10 categories, scored 1–190) using Annex 1-2, and interpret how scores affect BSF operations.

•        Section 2 – Substrate Quality, Availability and Accessibility: Users identify all potentially available organic waste substrates in the area using Annex 2-1 (a structured table spanning 18 waste source categories from agro-industry through sanitation and landscaping). Each substrate type is then scored on nine attributes using Annex 2-2: five processing attributes (seasonal reliability, nutritional suitability, water content, safety, and daily quantity) and five financial feasibility attributes (purity, competition of demand, price, ease of securing offtake agreements, and procurement ease), all on a 1–5 scale. Annex 2-3 guides users to rank and compare substrates and substrate mixtures to identify the most suitable options.

•        Section 3 – Management and Operational Aspects: Users assess climatic suitability using a three-tier scoring table (suitable / less suitable / unsuitable) based on average monthly temperature and humidity using Annex 3-1. They then evaluate land availability across small, medium, and large operational scales using a six-attribute scoring matrix in Annex 3-2 (plot size, existing buildings, proximity to substrate, cost, services, road access), assessed across three land use types. Finally, Annex 3-3 captures local history and experience with BSF through structured key informant interviews covering awareness, past impressions, knowledge-sharing platforms, expert availability, and willingness to share.

•        Section 4 – Market Opportunities and Barriers: Users assess customer perception and willingness to pay for BSF-derived products (larvae as Feed, frass as Fertilizer) through structured interviews with farmers, gardeners, and retailers using Annex 4-1. Potential market volume is estimated by sector (poultry, pig, fish, pets, Compost) using Annex 4-2. Market support mechanisms — including gate fees for waste management and greenhouse gas mitigation credit opportunities under national NDC Frameworks — are evaluated using Annex 4-3.

The guide is analogue and does not require Software. Data collection combines secondary document review with primary key informant interviews and focus groups, and the total estimated effort is 10–15 full-time-equivalent days.

Who might use this tool and with which types of stakeholders?

The guide is Designed primarily for:

•        Consultants and feasibility study teams commissioned to assess whether BSF is an appropriate waste management or circular economy solution in a specific city, district, or region.

•        NGOs and development organizations evaluating the suitability of BSF projects before initiating programming or funding proposals in a new country or operational area.

•        Project developers and entrepreneurs considering starting a BSF business in a new location, who need a structured framework for due diligence before making investment decisions.

•        Researchers and academics studying BSF adoption barriers and opportunities across different country contexts.

•        Government agencies and donors seeking to understand the preconditions for successful BSF sector development in a given country or region.

The Assessment process itself involves engaging a wide range of stakeholders as key informants: ministry officials from agriculture, environment, health, trade, and finance; local government representatives; waste management authorities; animal Feed producers and retailers; farmers and livestock keepers; and existing BSF operators in the country. The guide provides structured questionnaire templates for each of these stakeholder groups.

What stages of a process can this tool support?

This guide is specifically Designed for the pre-investment and pre-implementation stage of a BSF project. Its outputs directly Feed into subsequent planning steps, including:

•        Decision-making on whether to proceed with BSF project development in a given location, and at what scale.

•        Business strategy and planning: The substrate Assessment results indicate the potential scale of operations; the market Assessment informs the most viable business model (Feed and frass sales, waste management services, carbon credits, or self-use).

•        Policy engagement: The legislative Assessment identifies specific regulatory gaps, opportunities, and stakeholders to engage for enabling environment development.

•        Pilot Design: The operational and land Assessment results help identify suitable pilot sites and highlight the climate and infrastructure conditions that need to be addressed.

•        Funding and proposal development: The structured evidence base generated by the Assessment can directly support the development of project proposals and investment cases.

What skills, capabilities and resources are required to use this tool?

The guide requires no specialist Software and can be used by practitioners with general research and project development skills. Key competencies needed include: experience with qualitative data collection methods (key informant interviews, focus groups, document review); basic understanding of BSF biology and the BSF value chain (supported by the guide’s explanatory text); ability to navigate regulatory and policy documents; and familiarity with basic scoring and ranking exercises.

An estimated 10–15 person-days of full-time effort are required to complete the Assessment, combining desk-based secondary data collection with primary fieldwork. Access to the World Bank Ease of Doing Business database is needed for Section 1. The BSFL Substrate Navigator (available online) can supplement the nutritional suitability scoring in Section 2. No specific training is required before using the guide, though familiarity with the BSF sector and the companion CCAC/Eawag publications is helpful. An internet connection is useful for secondary data collection but is not required for the Assessment tools themselves.

Where can this tool be used?

The guide is globally applicable and is explicitly Designed to be adapted to any geographic context, from urban to rural, and from low- to higher-income country settings. However, its scoring criteria, default assumptions, and case examples are calibrated particularly to low- and middle-income country contexts, with a specific focus on sub-Saharan Africa (Uganda, Ethiopia, Côte d’Ivoire, Malawi) where the guide was developed and validated. The Assessment framework is most relevant in tropical and sub-tropical settings where BSF can thrive under ambient conditions, though it explicitly includes guidance for evaluating feasibility in less climatically suitable locations where infrastructure investment would be required.

The guide is applicable at any operational scale, from community-level small-scale BSF units through to medium and large commercial facilities, and provides distinct scoring matrices for each scale level in the land availability Assessment.

Case examples of where this tool has been used

The guide was developed and field-tested as part of the SWIFT project and the BUGS Africa project, with empirical contributions from partner organizations working in Uganda (Makerere University), Malawi (Mzuzu University; Soils Food and Healthy Communities), Côte d’Ivoire (ACEN Foundation), and other African contexts. The partners contributing to the guide represent a range of institutional types; research universities, NGOs, private sector BSF operators (Eclose, bio convision), and international policy organizations (CCAC, PREVENT Waste Alliance, GIZ), reflecting the multi-stakeholder validation process that shaped its Design. The guide is referenced in the BUGS Africa Operators Toolkit (CCAC, 2025) as the recommended first step for any entrepreneur or organization considering setting up a BSF facility.