research paper on solid waste management

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Environmental Sustainability Impacts of Solid Waste Management Practices in the Global South

Ismaila rimi abubakar.

1 College of Architecture and Planning, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam 31441, Saudi Arabia

Khandoker M. Maniruzzaman

2 Department of Urban and Regional Planning, College of Architecture and Planning, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam 31441, Saudi Arabia

Umar Lawal Dano

Faez s. alshihri, maher s. alshammari, sayed mohammed s. ahmed, wadee ahmed ghanem al-gehlani.

3 Department of Architecture, College of Architecture and Planning, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam 32141, Saudi Arabia

Tareq I. Alrawaf

4 Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Architecture and Planning, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam 31441, Saudi Arabia

Associated Data

No data were reported in this review article.

Solid waste management (SWM) is one of the key responsibilities of city administrators and one of the effective proxies for good governance. Effective SWM mitigates adverse health and environmental impacts, conserves resources, and improves the livability of cities. However, unsustainable SWM practices, exacerbated by rapid urbanization and financial and institutional limitations, negatively impact public health and environmental sustainability. This review article assesses the human and environmental health impacts of SWM practices in the Global South cities that are the future of global urbanization. The study employs desktop research methodology based on in-depth analysis of secondary data and literature, including official documents and published articles. It finds that the commonplace SWM practices include mixing household and commercial garbage with hazardous waste during storage and handling. While waste storage is largely in old or poorly managed facilities such as storage containers, the transportation system is often deficient and informal. The disposal methods are predominantly via uncontrolled dumping, open-air incinerators, and landfills. The negative impacts of such practices include air and water pollution, land degradation, emissions of methane and hazardous leachate, and climate change. These impacts impose significant environmental and public health costs on residents with marginalized social groups mostly affected. The paper concludes with recommendations for mitigating the public and environmental health risks associated with the existing SWM practices in the Global South.

1. Introduction

Solid waste management (SWM) continues to dominate as a major societal and governance challenge, especially in urban areas overwhelmed by the high rate of population growth and garbage generation. The role of SWM in achieving sustainable development is emphasized in several international development agendas, charters, and visions. For example, sustainable SWM can help meet several United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), such as ensuring clean water and sanitation (SDG6), creating sustainable cities and inclusive communities (SDG11), mitigating climate change (SDG13), protecting life on land (SDG15), and demonstrating sustainable consumption and production patterns (SDG12) ( https://sdgs.un.org/goals , accessed on 26 September 2022). It also fosters a circular urban economy that promotes reductions in the consumption of finite resources, materials reuse and recycling for waste elimination, pollution reduction, cost saving, and green growth

However, coupled with economic growth, improved lifestyle, and consumerism, cities across the globe will continue to face an overwhelming challenge of SWM as the world population is expected to rise to 8 billion by 2025 and to 9.3 billion by 2050, out of which around 70% will be living in urban areas [ 1 , 2 ]. In developing countries, most cities collect only 50–80% of generated waste after spending 20–50% of their budgets, of which 80–95% are spent on collecting and transporting waste [ 3 , 4 ]. Moreover, many low-income countries collect as low as 10% of the garbage generated in suburban areas, which contributes to public health and environmental risks, including higher incidents of diarrhea and acute respiratory infections among people, particularly children, living near garbage dumps [ 5 ]. Obstacles to effective municipal SWM include lack of awareness, technologies, finances, and good governance [ 6 , 7 , 8 ].

Removing garbage from homes and businesses without greater attention to what was then carried out with it has also been the priority of municipal SWM in several cities of developing countries [ 9 ]. In most developing countries, garbage collected from households is disposed of in landfills or dumpsites, the majority of which are projected to reach their capacities within a decade. The unsustainable approach of dumping or burning waste in an open space, usually near poor communities on the city edge, or throwing garbage into water bodies was an acceptable garbage disposal strategy. Similarly, several cities still use old-generation or poorly managed facilities and informal uncontrolled dumping or open-air waste burning. Often, these practices affect marginalized social groups near the disposal sites [ 10 ]. Moreover, this approach poses several sustainability problems, including resource depletion, environmental pollution, and public health problems, such as the spread of communicable diseases.

However, ever since the advent of the environmental movement in the 1960s, there has been a far-reaching appreciation of environmental and public health risks of unsustainable SWM practices. In the 1970s and onward, SWM was a technical issue to be resolved using technology; hence, the emphasis and investments were placed on garbage collection equipment [ 5 ]. Although modern technology can significantly reduce emissions of hazardous substances, by the 1990s, that viewpoint changed when municipalities become unable to evacuate and dispose of garbage effectively without the active involvement of service users and other stakeholders [ 5 ]. The inability of the public sector in the global South to deliver sufficient improvement of SWM, coupled with the pressure from the financial institutions and other donor agencies, led to privatization policies at the end of the decade. However, as privatization failed to provide municipal SWM services to the poor and marginalized communities, the current global thinking on addressing municipal SWM problems is changing.

A more sustainable waste management approach prioritizes practices such as reduced production, waste classifications, reuse, recycling, and energy recovery over the common practices of landfilling, open dumps, and open incineration [ 11 , 12 , 13 ]. This approach, which is still at an early stage but getting increased attention in the Global South, is more inclusive and environment-friendly and has less negative impact on human health and the environment than the common practices [ 14 , 15 , 16 ]. As such, there is a need to assess SWM practices in the Global South and their impacts on environmental and human health because 90% of the expected growth in the urban population by 2050 is expected to happen here. So far, there are a few studies on the impacts of SWM practices on human health and the environment in the global regions.

Therefore, this review article addresses this knowledge gap by assessing the negative impacts of the dominant SWM practices on human and environmental health. Section 2 presents the research methodology. Section 3 reviews the major SWM practices in the Global South and assesses the environmental and public health implications of SWM practices in the Global South cities. While Section 4 discusses the implications of the findings and proffers recommendations that could help authorities to deal with SWM challenges and mitigate public and environmental health risks associated with unsustainable SWM practices, Section 5 concludes the paper.

2. Materials and Methods

The present paper utilizes a desktop research method of collecting and analyzing relevant data from the existing literature, as utilized in some previous studies [ 17 , 18 ]. The method consists of three iterative stages shown in Figure 1 : (a) scoping, (b) collecting relevant literature, and (c) data analysis. Firstly, the scoping stage involves defining and understanding the research problem under investigation and setting the study scope and boundary. The scope of the paper is to explore human and environmental impacts of SWM practices toward policy and practical recommendations for a more sustainable SWM system, with the Global South as the study boundary. This stage also helped identify relevant keywords to search for during the literature review in the second stage.

The flow chart of the research method (Source: [ 18 ] (p. 4)).

The second stage involved identifying and collecting relevant literature from online sources. The researchers utilized Google Scholar and Scopus databases to identify peer-reviewed academic works (peer-reviewed articles, conference proceedings, and books) as well as the gray literature. The literature that satisfied the following three inclusion criteria was identified and downloaded: (1) It is related to the study’s objective; (2) it is in the English language; and (3) it was published within the last twenty years, although some old documents about established concepts and approaches were also accessed. The downloaded gray literature includes newspaper articles, statistics, technical reports, and website contents from international development organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations, and the World Bank.

In the last stage, the authors organized, analyzed, and synthesized the data collected from the literature. The downloaded works were organized according to the similarity of topics, even though some fit in more than one category. Then, each document was thoroughly examined, and themes concerned with SWM practices and their human and environmental impacts were collated, synthesized, and harmonized. Finally, the themes were summarized in Table A1 , Table A2 and Table A3 (see Appendix A ) and discussed. Implications and recommendations of the findings are then highlighted.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. solid waste management practices in the global south.

Global municipal solid waste (MSW) generation rose from 1.3 billion tons in 2012 to 2.1 billion tons (0.74 kg/capita/day) as of 2016, which by 2050 is expected to increase by 70% to reach a total of 3.40 billion tons or 1.42 kg/capita/day [ 19 ]. The per capita MSW generation varies among regions and countries. In the EU (European Union), it ranges from 0.3–1.4 kg/capita/day [ 20 ], and in some African cities, the average is 0.78 kg/capita/day [ 21 ]. In Asia, urban areas generate about 760,000 tons of MSW per day, which is expected to increase to 1.8 million tons per day or 26% of the world’s total by 2025, despite the continent housing 53% of the world’s population [ 22 , 23 ]. In China, the total MSW generation was around 212 million tons (0.98 kg/capita/day) in 2006, out of which 91.4%, 6.4%, and 2.2% were disposed of via landfilling, incineration, and composting [ 24 ]. In 2010, only 660 Chinese cities produced about 190 million tons of MSW, accounting for 29% of the world’s total, while the total amount of solid waste in China could reach at least 480 million tons in 2030 [ 25 ]. In China, industrial waste (more than one billion tons) was five times the amount of MSW generated in 2002, which is expected to generate approximately twice as much MSW as the USA, while India will overtake the USA in MSW generation by 2030 [ 26 ].

In Malaysia, while the average rate of MSW generation was about 0.5–0.8 kg/person/day, Kuala Lumpur’s daily per capita generation rate was 1.62 kg in 2008 [ 27 ], which is expected to reach 2.23 kg in 2024 [ 28 ]. About 64% of Malaysia’s waste consists of household and office waste, 25% industrial waste, 8% commercial waste, and 3% construction waste [ 29 ]. In Sri Lanka, the assessed mean waste generation in 1999 was 6500 tons/day or 0.89 kg/cap/day, which is estimated to reach 1.0 kg/cap/day by 2025 [ 30 ]. With a 1.2% population growth rate, the total MSW generation in 2009 was approximately 7250 tons/day [ 31 ]. In Ghana, the solid waste generation rate was 0.47 kg/person/day, or about 12,710 tons per annum, consisting of biodegradable waste (0.318), non-biodegradable (0.096), and inert and miscellaneous waste (0.055) kg/person/day, respectively [ 32 ].

Moreover, global SWM costs are anticipated to increase to about $375.5 billion in 2025, with more than four-fold increases in lower- to middle-income countries and five-fold increases in low-income countries [ 33 ]. Globally, garbage collection, transportation, and disposal pose a major cost component in SWM systems [ 19 ]. Inadequate funding militates against the optimization of MSW disposal services. Table 1 compares the everyday SWM practices in low-, middle- and high-income countries according to major waste management steps. The literature indicates that waste generation rates and practices depend on the culture, socioeconomic status, population density, and level of commercial and industrial activities of a city or region.

Common MSW management practices by country’s level of economic development (adapted from [ 34 ]).

3.2. Environmental and Public Health Impacts of SWM Practices in the Global South

• (a)  Weak and Inadequate SWM System

Many problems in the cities of the global South are often associated with a weak or inadequate SWM system, which leads to severe direct and indirect environmental and public health issues at every stage of waste collection, handling, treatment, and disposal [ 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ]. Inadequate and weak SWM results in indiscriminate dumping of waste on the streets, open spaces, and water bodies. Such practices were observed in, for example, Pakistan [ 35 , 36 ], India [ 37 ], Nepal [ 38 ], Peru [ 39 ], Guatemala [ 40 ], Brazil [ 41 ], Kenya [ 42 ], Rwanda [ 43 ], South Africa [ 44 , 45 ], Nigeria [ 46 ], Zimbabwe [ 47 ], etc.

The problems associated with such practices are GHG emissions [ 37 , 48 ], leachates [ 40 , 44 , 49 ], the spread of diseases such as malaria and dengue [ 36 ], odor [ 35 , 38 , 50 , 51 ], blocking of drains and sewers and subsequent flooding [ 52 ], suffocation of animals in plastic bags [ 52 ], and indiscriminate littering [ 38 , 39 , 53 ].

• (b)  Irregular Waste Collection and Handling

Uncollected and untreated waste has socioeconomic and environmental costs extending beyond city boundaries. Environmental sustainability impacts of this practice include methane (CH 4 ) emissions, foul odor, air pollution, land and water contamination, and the breeding of rodents, insects, and flies that transmit diseases to humans. Decomposition of biodegradable waste under anaerobic conditions contributes to about 18% and 2.9% of global methane and GHG emissions, respectively [ 54 ], with the global warming effect of about 25 times higher than carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions [ 55 ]. Methane also causes fires and explosions [ 56 ]. Emissions from SWM in developing countries are increasing due to rapid economic growth and improved living standards [ 57 ].

Irregular waste collection also contributes to marine pollution. In 2010, 192 coastal countries generated 275 million metric tons of plastic waste out of which up to 12.7 million metric tons (4.4%) entered ocean ecosystems [ 58 ]. Moreover, plastic waste collects and stagnates water, proving a mosquito breeding habitat and raising the risks of dengue, malaria, and West Nile fever [ 56 ]. In addition, uncollected waste creates serious safety, health, and environmental consequences such as promoting urban violence and supporting breeding and feeding grounds for flies, mosquitoes, rodents, dogs, and cats, which carry diseases to nearby homesteads [ 4 , 19 , 59 , 60 ].

In the global South, scavengers often throw the remaining unwanted garbage on the street. Waste collectors are rarely protected from direct contact and injury, thereby facing serious health threats. Because garbage trucks are often derelict and uncovered, exhaust fumes and dust stemming from waste collection and transportation contribute to environmental pollution and widespread health problems [ 61 ]. In India’s megacities, for example, irregular MSW management is one of the major problems affecting air and marine quality [ 62 ]. Thus, irregular waste collection and handling contribute to public health hazards and environmental degradation [ 63 ].

• (c)  Landfilling and Open Dumping

Most municipal solid waste in the Global South goes into unsanitary landfills or open dumps. Even during the economic downturn during the COVID-19 pandemic, the amount of waste heading to landfill sites in Brazil, for example, increased due to lower recycling rates [ 64 ]. In Johor, Malaysia, landfilling destroys natural habitats and depletes the flora and fauna [ 65 ]. Moreover, landfilling with untreated, unsorted waste led to severe public health issues in South America [ 66 ]. Based on a study on 30 Brazilian cities, Urban and Nakada [ 64 ] report that 35% of medical waste was not properly treated before disposal, which poses a threat to public health, including the spread of COVID-19. Landfills and open dumps are also associated with high emissions of methane (CH 4 ), a major GHG [ 67 , 68 ]. Landfills and wastewater release 17% of the global methane emission [ 25 ]. About 29 metric tons of methane are emitted annually from landfills globally, accounting for about 8% of estimated global emissions, with 1.3 metric tons released from landfills in Africa [ 7 ]. The rate of landfill gas production steadily rises while MSW accumulates in the landfill emissions. Released methane and ammonia gases can cause health hazards such as respiratory diseases [ 37 , 69 , 70 , 71 ]. Since methane is highly combustible, it can cause fire and explosion hazards [ 72 ].

Open dumping sites with organic waste create the environment for the breeding of disease-carrying vectors, including rodents, flies, and mosquitoes [ 40 , 45 , 51 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 ]. Associated vector-borne diseases include zika virus, dengue, and malaria fever [ 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 ]. In addition, there are risks of water-borne illnesses such as leptospirosis, intestinal worms, diarrhea, and hepatitis A [ 80 , 81 ].

Odors from landfill sites, and their physical appearance, affect the lives of nearby residents by threatening their health and undermining their livelihoods, lowering their property values [ 37 , 38 , 68 , 82 , 83 , 84 ]. Moreover, the emission of ammonia (NH 3 ) from landfill sites can damage species’ composition and plant leaves [ 85 ]. In addition, the pollutants from landfill sites damage soil quality [ 73 , 84 ]. Landfill sites also generate dust and are sources of noise pollution [ 86 ].

Air and water pollution are intense in the hot and rainy seasons due to the emission of offensive odor, disease-carrying leachates, and runoff. Considerable amounts of methane and CO 2 from landfill sites produce adverse health effects such as skin, eyes, nose, and respiratory diseases [ 69 , 87 , 88 ]. The emission of ammonia can lead to similar problems and even blindness [ 85 , 89 ]. Other toxic gaseous pollutants from landfill sites include Sulphur oxides [ 89 ]. While less than 20% of methane is recovered from landfills in China, Western nations recover up to 60% [ 90 ].

Several studies report leachate from landfill sites contaminating water sources used for drinking and other household applications, which pose significant risks to public health [ 36 , 43 , 53 , 72 , 75 , 83 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 ]. For example, Hong et al. [ 95 ] estimated that, in 2006, the amount of leachates escaping from landfill sites in Pudong (China) was 160–180 m 3 per day. On the other hand, a properly engineered facility for waste disposal can protect public health, preserve important environmental resources, prevent clogging of drainages, and prevent the migration of leachates to contaminate ground and surface water, farmlands, animals, and air from which they enter the human body [ 61 , 96 ]. Moreover, heat in summer can speed up the rate of bacterial action on biodegradable organic material and produce a pungent odor [ 60 , 97 , 98 ]. In China, for example, leachates were not treated in 47% of landfills [ 99 ].

Co-mingled disposal of industrial and medical waste alongside municipal waste endangers people with chemical and radioactive hazards, Hepatitis B and C, tetanus, human immune deficiency, HIV infections, and other related diseases [ 59 , 60 , 100 ]. Moreover, indiscriminate disposal of solid waste can cause infectious diseases such as gastrointestinal, dermatological, respiratory, and genetic diseases, chest pains, diarrhea, cholera, psychological disorders, skin, eyes, and nose irritations, and allergies [ 10 , 36 , 60 , 61 ].

• (d)  Open Burning and Incineration

Open burning of MSW is a main cause of smog and respiratory diseases, including nose, throat, chest infections and inflammation, breathing difficulty, anemia, low immunity, allergies, and asthma. Similar health effects were reported from Nepal [ 101 ], India [ 87 ], Mexico, [ 69 ], Pakistan [ 52 , 73 , 84 ], Indonesia [ 88 ], Liberia [ 50 ], and Chile [ 102 ]. In Mumbai, for example, open incineration emits about 22,000 tons of pollutants annually [ 56 ]. Mongkolchaiarunya [ 103 ] reported air pollution and odors from burning waste in Thailand. In addition, plastic waste incineration produces hydrochloric acid and dioxins in quantities that are detrimental to human health and may cause allergies, hemoglobin deficiency, and cancer [ 95 , 104 ]. In addition, smoke from open incineration and dumpsites is a significant contributor to air pollution even for persons staying far from dumpsites.

• (e)  Composting

Composting is a biological method of waste disposal that entails the decomposing or breaking down of organic wastes into simpler forms by naturally occurring microorganisms, such as bacteria and fungi. However, despite its advantage of reducing organic waste by at least half and using compost in agriculture, the composting method has much higher CO 2 emissions than other disposal approaches. In Korea, for example, composting has the highest environmental impact than incineration and anaerobic digestion methods [ 105 ]. The authors found that the environmental impact of composting was found to be 2.4 times higher than that of incineration [ 105 ]. Some reviews linked composting with several health issues, including congested nose, sore throat and dry cough, bronchial asthma, allergic rhinitis, and extrinsic allergic alveolitis [ 36 , 106 ].

4. Implications and Recommendations

As discussed in the section above, there are many negative impacts of unsustainable SWM practices on the people and the environment. Although all waste treatment methods have their respective negative impacts, some have fewer debilitating impacts on people and the environment than others. The following is the summary of key implications of such unsustainable SWM practices.

• Uncollected organic waste from bins, containers and open dumps harbors rodents, insects, and reptiles that transmit diseases to humans. It also produces odor due to the decomposition of organic wastes, especially in the summer, and leachates that migrate and contaminate receiving underground and surface waters.
• Open dumps and non-engineered landfills release methane from decomposing biodegradable waste under anaerobiotic conditions. Methane is a key contributor to global warming, and it can cause fires and explosions.
• Non-biodegradable waste, such as discarded tires, plastics, bottles, and tins, pollutes the ground and collects water, thus creating breeding grounds for mosquitoes and increasing the risk of diseases such as malaria, dengue, and West Nile fever.
• Open burning of MSW emits pollutants into the atmosphere thereby increasing the incidences of nose and throat infections and inflammation, inhalation difficulties, bacterial infections, anemia, reduced immunity, allergies, and asthma.
• Uncontrolled incineration causes smog and releases fine particles, which are a major cause of respiratory disease. It also contributes to urban air pollution and GHG emissions significantly.
• Incineration and landfilling are associated with reproductive defects in women, developmental defects in children, cancer, hepatitis C, psychosocial impacts, poisoning, biomarkers, injuries, and mortality.

Therefore, measures toward more sustainable SWM that can mitigate such impacts must be worked out and followed. The growing complexity, costs, and coordination of SWM require multi-stakeholder involvement at each process stage [ 7 ]. Earmarking resources, providing technical assistance, good governance, and collaboration, and protecting environmental and human health are SWM critical success factors [ 47 , 79 ]. As such, local governments, the private sector, donor agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the residents, and informal garbage collectors and scavengers have their respective roles to play collaboratively in effective and sustainable SWM [ 40 , 103 , 107 , 108 ]. The following are key practical recommendations for mitigating the negative impacts of unsustainable SWM practices enumerated above.

First, cities should plan and implement an integrated SWM approach that emphasizes improving the operation of municipalities to manage all stages of SWM sustainably: generation, separation, transportation, transfer/sorting, treatment, and disposal [ 36 , 46 , 71 , 77 , 86 ]. The success of this approach requires the involvement of all stakeholders listed above [ 109 ] while recognizing the environmental, financial, legal, institutional, and technical aspects appropriate to each local setting [ 77 , 86 ]. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) can likewise aid in selecting the method and preparing the waste management plan [ 88 , 110 ]. Thus, the SWM approach should be carefully selected to spare residents from negative health and environmental impacts [ 36 , 39 , 83 , 98 , 111 ].

Second, local governments should strictly enforce environmental regulations and better monitor civic responsibilities for sustainable waste storage, collection, and disposal, as well as health hazards of poor SWM, reflected in garbage littering observable throughout most cities of the Global South [ 64 , 84 ]. In addition, violations of waste regulations should be punished to discourage unsustainable behaviors [ 112 ]. Moreover, local governments must ensure that waste collection services have adequate geographical coverage, including poor and minority communities [ 113 ]. Local governments should also devise better SWM policies focusing on waste reduction, reuse, and recycling to achieve a circular economy and sustainable development [ 114 , 115 ].

Third, effective SWM requires promoting positive public attitudes toward sustainable waste management [ 97 , 116 , 117 , 118 ]. Therefore, public awareness campaigns through print, electronic, and social media are required to encourage people to desist from littering and follow proper waste dropping and sorting practices [ 36 , 64 , 77 , 79 , 80 , 82 , 91 , 92 , 119 ]. There is also the need for a particular focus on providing sorting bins and public awareness about waste sorting at the source, which can streamline and optimize subsequent SWM processes and mitigate their negative impacts [ 35 , 45 , 46 , 64 , 69 , 89 , 93 ]. Similarly, non-governmental and community-based organizations can help promote waste reduction, separation, and sorting at the source, and material reuse/recycling [ 103 , 120 , 121 , 122 ]. In Vietnam, for example, Tsai et al. [ 123 ] found that coordination among stakeholders and appropriate legal and policy frameworks are crucial in achieving sustainable SWM.

Fourth, there is the need to use environmentally friendly technologies or upgrade existing facilities. Some researchers prefer incineration over other methods, particularly for non-recyclable waste [ 44 , 65 ]. For example, Xin et al. [ 124 ] found that incineration, recycling, and composting resulted in a 70.82% reduction in GHG emissions from solid waste in Beijing. In Tehran city, Iran, Maghmoumi et al. [ 125 ] revealed that the best scenario for reducing GHG emissions is incinerating 50% of the waste, landfilling 30%, and recycling 20%. For organic waste, several studies indicate a preference for composting [ 45 , 51 , 75 ] and biogas generation [ 15 , 42 , 68 ]. Although some researchers have advocated a complete ban on landfilling [ 13 , 42 ], it should be controlled with improved techniques for leak detection and leachate and biogas collection [ 126 , 127 ]. Many researchers also suggested an integrated biological and mechanical treatment (BMT) of solid waste [ 66 , 74 , 95 , 119 ]. In Kenya, the waste-to-biogas scheme and ban on landfill and open burning initiatives are estimated to reduce the emissions of over 1.1 million tons of GHG and PM2.5 emissions from the waste by more than 30% by 2035 [ 42 ]. An appropriately designed waste disposal facility helps protect vital environmental resources, including flora, fauna, surface and underground water, air, and soil [ 128 , 129 ].

Fifth, extraction and reuse of materials, energy, and nutrients are essential to effective SWM, which provides livelihoods for many people, improves their health, and protects the environment [ 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 ]. For example, recycling 24% of MSW in Thailand lessened negative health, social, environmental, and economic impacts from landfill sites [ 89 ]. Waste pickers play a key role in waste circularity and should be integrated into the SWM system [ 65 , 89 , 101 , 137 ], even to the extent of taking part in decision-making [ 138 ]. In addition, workers involved in waste collection should be better trained and equipped to handle hazardous waste [ 87 , 128 ]. Moreover, green consumption, using bioplastics, can help reduce the negative impacts of solid waste on the environment [ 139 ].

Lastly, for effective SWM, local authorities should comprehensively address SWM challenges, such as lack of strategic SWM plans, inefficient waste collection/segregation and recycling, insufficient budgets, shortage of qualified waste management professionals, and weak governance, and then form a financial regulatory framework in an integrated manner [ 140 , 141 , 142 ]. Effective SWM system also depends on other factors such as the waste generation rate, population density, economic status, level of commercial activity, culture, and city/region [ 37 , 143 ]. A sustainable SWM strives to protect public health and the environment [ 144 , 145 ].

5. Conclusions

As global solid waste generation rates increase faster than urbanization, coupled with inadequate SWM systems, local governments and urban residents often resort to unsustainable SWM practices. These practices include mixing household and commercial garbage with hazardous waste during storage and handling, storing garbage in old or poorly managed facilities, deficient transportation practices, open-air incinerators, informal/uncontrolled dumping, and non-engineered landfills. The implications of such practices include air and water pollution, land degradation, climate change, and methane and hazardous leachate emissions. In addition, these impacts impose significant environmental and public health costs on residents with marginalized social groups affected mostly.

Inadequate SWM is associated with poor public health, and it is one of the major problems affecting environmental quality and cities’ sustainable development. Effective community involvement in the SWM requires promoting positive public attitudes. Public awareness campaigns through print, electronic, and social media are required to encourage people to desist from littering and follow proper waste-dropping practices. Improper SWM also resulted in water pollution and unhealthy air in cities. Future research is needed to investigate how the peculiarity of each Global South country can influence selecting the SWM approach, elements, aspects, technology, and legal/institutional frameworks appropriate to each locality.

Reviewed literature on the impacts of SWM practices in Asia (compiled by authors).

Reviewed literature on the impacts of SWM practices in South America (compiled by authors).

Reviewed literature on the impacts of SWM practices in Africa (compiled by authors).

Funding Statement

This research received no external funding.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.R.A. and K.M.M.; methodology, I.R.A., K.M.M. and U.L.D.; validation, I.R.A., K.M.M. and U.L.D.; formal analysis, I.R.A. and K.M.M.; investigation, I.R.A., K.M.M., U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A. and W.A.G.A.-G.; resources, I.R.A., K.M.M., U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A., W.A.G.A.-G. and T.I.A.; data curation, U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A. and W.A.G.A.-G.; writing—original draft preparation, I.R.A., K.M.M., U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A. and W.A.G.A.-G.; writing—review and editing, I.R.A., K.M.M. and U.L.D.; supervision, F.S.A. and T.I.A.; project administration, I.R.A.; funding acquisition, I.R.A., K.M.M., U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A., W.A.G.A.-G. and T.I.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest in conducting this study.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Introduction to Solid Waste Management

• First Online: 01 January 2022

Cite this chapter

• Hamidi Abdul Aziz 6 , 7 ,
• Salem S. Abu Amr 8 ,
• P. Aarne Vesilind 9 ,
• Lawrence K. Wang 10 &
• Yung-Tse Hung 11  

Part of the book series: Handbook of Environmental Engineering ((HEE,volume 23))

1108 Accesses

4 Citations

An increase in population growth, industrial development, and urbanization has led to increasing solid waste generation. Complications associated with solid waste can be dated back to ancient history. The waste produced and collected in an urban area is called municipal solid waste (MSW), mainly associated with the wastes produced from domestic, industrial, commercial, and institutional areas. The amount and composition of waste vary by country. New and effective strategies are generally needed to design urbanization models, and policies are required for effective solid waste management. All aspects of waste storage, collection, transportation, sorting, disposal, and related management are included in solid waste management. It does not stop after collection only, but what needs to be done with the wastes is part of the important aspects of the whole management protocol. Basic waste data are included in this chapter. These include their types, sources, quantity, and compositions. Next, the functional elements of the waste management system are discussed, which among others, includes the aspects of storage, collection, transportation, recovery and processing, composting, thermal treatment, and the final disposal. The legislation related to waste is also discussed, followed by the descriptions of the integrated solid waste management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Strategies for Municipal Solid Waste: Functional Elements, Integrated Management, and Legislative Aspects

A Review of the Long-Term Viability of Municipal Solid Waste and the Impact It Has on People

Waste Management: Challenges and Opportunities

Abbreviations.

Air Pollution Control Residues

American Society of Mechanical Engineers

Commercial and industrial

Construction and demolition

Cost-Benefit Analysis

Brominated flame retardants

Chlorofluorocarbons

Hydrochlorofluorocarbons,

Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental Protection Act

European Union

Humic and fulvic acids

Integrated solid waste management

Life Cycle Assessment

Municipal solid waste

Material Flow Analysis

Pneumatic waste conveyance system

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

Risk Assessment

Rubber Modified Asphalt

Strategic Environmental Assessment

Socio-economic Assessment

Sustainable Assessment

Solidification/stabilization

Tyre-Derived Aggregate

United Nations Environment Programme

United States

US Environmental Protection Agency

United Kingdom

Volatile fatty acids

American dollar

head/person or individual

USEPA-US Environmental Protection Agency. (2013). Waste-hazardous waste-waste minimisation [Online]. Available from http://www.epa.gov/waste/hazard/wastemin/index.htm . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

USEPA-US Environmental Protection Agency. (2021a). Criteria for the definition of solid waste and solid and hazardous waste exclusions [Online]. Available from https://www.epa.gov/hw/criteria-definition-solid-waste-and-solid-and-hazardous-waste-exclusions . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

USEPA-US Environmental Protection Agency. (2020). Advancing sustainable materials management: 2018: Tables and figures , November.

Google Scholar  

HKEPD-Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department. (2020). Monitoring of solid waste in Hong Kong Waste statistics for 2019 , Statistics Unit, Environmental Protection Department, Hong Kong, December 2020.

IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, the 2019 Refinement was considered in May 2019 during the IPCC’s 49th Session (Kyoto, Japan) and adopted/accepted on 12 May 2019 (Decision – IPCC-XLIX-9 – Adoption and Acceptance of 2019 refinement). Accessed online on 26 July 2020.

OECD-Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). Municipal waste generation and treatment [Online]. Available from. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=WSECTOR . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Eurostat. (2021). Municipal waste statistics [Online]. Available from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?%20title=Municipal_waste_statistics&oldid=343958%20 . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Kaza, S., Yao, L., Bhada-Tata, P., & Van Woerden, F. (2018). What a waste 2.0: A global snapshot of solid waste management to 2050 (Urban Development Series). World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1329-0 . License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO.

Book   Google Scholar  

UNEP-United Nations Environment Programme. (2017). Highlights Asia waste management outlook-Summary for decision maker . Nairobi, Kenya.

Abdel-Shafy, H. I., & Mansour, M. S. M. (2018). Solid waste issue: Sources, composition, disposal, recycling, and valorization . Egyptian Journal of Petroleum. (in press).

Buttol, P., Masoni, P., Bonoli, A., Goldoni, S., Belladonna, V., & Cavazzuti, C. (2007). LCA of integrated MSW management systems: Case study of the Bologna District. Waste Management, 27 (8), 1059–1070.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Hui, Z., AiHong, M., YanQiu, L., QingHai, L., & YanGuo, Z. (2014). An overview of characteristics of municipal solid waste fuel in China: Physical, chemical composition and heating value. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 36 , 107–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.024

USEPA-US Environmental Protection Agency. (2021b). Wastes-non-hazardous waste-industrial waste [Online]. Available from https://archive.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/web/html/index-5.html . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Pashkevich, M. A. (2017). Chapter 1 – Classification and environmental impact of mine dumps, author links open overlay panel. In Assessment, restoration and reclamation of mining influenced soils (pp. 1–32). Academic.

Collins, R. J., & Ciesielski, S. K. (1994). Recycling and use of waste materials and by-products in highway construction. In National cooperative highway research program synthesis of highway practice 199 . Transportation Research Board.

USEPA-US Environmental Protection Agency (1985). Report to Congress on wastes from the extraction and beneficiation of metallic ores, phosphate rock, asbestos, overburden from uranium mining, and oil shale. Report No. EPA/530-SW-85-033,

Bowdish, L. (2016). Trash to treasure: Changing waste streams to profit streams, U.S (p. 21). Chamber of Commerce Foundation.

Food & Water Watch. (2021). Factory farm map: What’s wrong with factory farms? [Online]. Available from http://www.factoryfarmmap.org/problems/ . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Palese, A. M., Persiani, A., D’Adamo, C., Pergola, M., Pastore, V., Sileo, R., Ippolito, G., Lombardi, M. A., & Celano, G. (2020). Composting as manure disposal strategy in small/medium-size livestock farms: Some demonstrations with operative indications. Sustainability, 2020 (12), 3315. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083315

Article   Google Scholar  

Quest. (2021). [Online]. Available from https://www.questrmg.com/2019/08/08/food-waste-statistics-the-reality-of-food-waste/ . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Simão, L., Hotza, D., Raupp-Pereira, F., Labrincha, J. A., & Montedo, O. R. K. (2018). Wastes from pulp and paper mills – A review of generation and recycling alternatives. Cerâmica, 64 (371).

Labfresh. (2021). [Online]. Available from https://labfresh.eu/pages/fashion-waste-index . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

USEPA-US Environmental Protection Agency. (2021c). Facts and figures about materials, waste and recycling- wood: Material-specific data [Online]. Available from https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-Fig.s-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/wood-material-specific-data . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Ed Suttie. (2004). Wood waste management-UK update, final workshop COST Action E22 ‘ Environmental optimisation of wood protection’ , Lisbon-Portugal, 22nd – 23rd March.

FPA. (2019). State of industry report, flexible packaging association , September 2019 [Online]. Available from https://www.packworld.com/home/news/15693115/fpa-publishes-2019-state-of-the-flexible-packaging-industry-report . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Scotia Bank. (2021). Global economics|Global Auto Report, January 27, 2021 [Online]. Available from https://www.scotiabank.com/ca/en/about/economics/economics-publications/post.other-publications.autos.global-auto-report.january-27-2021.html . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Statisca. (2019). U.S. paper products market value 2015–2025 , Statisca, November 2019 [Online]. Available from https://www.statista.com/statistics/1066665/us-paper-products-market-value/ . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Statisca. (2021). Waste statistics in Abu Dhabi Emirates , July 2020 [Online]. Available from https://www.statista.com/statistics/895550/uae-total-solid-waste-generated/ . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Poon, C. S., Yu, A. T. W., Wong, A., & Yip, R. (2013). Quantifying the impact of construction waste charging scheme on construction waste management in Hong Kong. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139 (5), 466–479. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000631 . hdl:10397/6714. ISSN:1943-7862.

Wang, Y., Zhang, X., Liao, W., Wu, J., Yang, X., Shui, W., Deng, S., Zhang, Y., Lin, L., Xiao, Y., Yu, X., & Peng, H. (2018). Investigating impact of waste re-use on the sustainability of municipal solid waste (MSW) incineration industry using energy approach: A case study from Sichuan Province, China. Waste Management, 77 , 252–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.04.003

European Commission. (2018). EU construction and demolition waste protocol and guidelines . Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs-European Commission [Online]. Available from https://ec.europa.eu/growth/content/eu-construction-and-demolition-waste-protocol-0_en . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

CIS-Construction Industry Scheme. (2021). GOV.UK [Online]. Available from https://www.gov.uk/what-is-the-construction-industry-scheme . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Yu, A., Poon, C., Wong, A., Yip, R., & Jaillon, L. (2013). Impact of construction waste disposal charging scheme on work practices at construction sites in Hong Kong. Waste Management, 33 (1), 138–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.09.023 . hdl:10397/6713. S2CID 20266040.

CIDB. (2008). Guidelines on construction waste management . Construction Industry Development Board Malaysia.

Forti, V., Baldé, C. P., Kuehr, R., & Bel, G. (2020). The Global E-waste Monitor: Quantities, flows and the circular economy potential . United Nations University (UNU)/United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR)-Co-Hosted SCYCLE Programme, International Telecommunication Union (ITU) & International Solid Waste Association (ISWA), Bonn/Geneva/Rotterdam.

Cho, R. (2018). What can we do about the growing e-waste problem ? General Earth Institute, August 27, 2018 [Online]. Available from https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2018/08/27/growing-E-waste-problem/ . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Agence nationale pour la gestion des déchets radioactifs. (2020). Édition 2018 de l’inventaire national des matières et déchets radioactifs l’Essentiel 2020 (p. 15). Agence nationale pour la gestion des déchets radioactifs, April 2020.

JAEA – The Japan Atomic Energy Agency. (2019). White paper on nuclear energy 2019 (p. 276). JAEA, August 2020 [Online]. Available from http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/about/hakusho/index_e.htm . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

World Nuclear Association. (2021). Storage and disposal of radioactive waste [Online]. Available from https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-waste/storage-and-disposal-of-radioactivE-waste.aspx . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Marine Conservation Society. (2019). Great British Beach clean 2019 report , November 2019.

Mohajerani, A., Burnett, L., Smith, J. V., Markovski, S., Rodwell, G., Rahman, T., Kurmus, H., Mirzababaei, M., Arulrajah, A., Horpibulsuk, S., et al. (2020). Recycling waste rubber tyres in construction materials and associated environmental considerations: A review. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 155 , 104679.

Morin, J. E., & Farris, R. J. (2000). Recycling of 100% cross linked rubber powder by high temperature high pressure sintering. Encyclopedia of Polymer Science and Engineering, 37 , 95–101.

ISRI. (2019). Recycling industry yearbook 2019 .

Macie, S., Justyna, K. L., Helena, J., & Adolf, B. (2012). Progress in used tyres management in the European Union: A review. Waste Management, 32 (10), 1742–1751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.05.010

Fazli, A., & Rodrigue, D. (2020). Waste rubber recycling: A review on the evolution and properties of thermoplastic elastomers. Materials, 13 , 782. Imbernon, L., & Norvez, S. (2016). From landfilling to vitrimer chemistry in rubber life cycle. European Polymer Journal, 82 , 347–376.

Saha, P. (2018). Rubber recycling: Challenges and developments . Royal Society of Chemistry.

Chatziaras, N., Psomopoulos, C. S., & Themelis, N. J. (2016). Use of waste derived fuels in cement industry: A review. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 27 (2), 178–193.

Mangi, S. A., Wan Ibrahim, M. H., Jamaluddin, N., Arshad, M. F., & Mudjanarko, S. W. (2019). Recycling of coal ash in concrete as a partial cementitious resource. Resources, 8 , 99. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources8020099

Dwivedi, A., & Jain, M. K. (2014). Fly ash-waste management and overview: A review. Recent Research in Science and Technology, 6 (1), 30–35.

Hannan, J. (2021). Chemical makeup of fly and bottom ash varies significantly; must be analyzed before recycled . ThermoFisher Scientific [Online]. Available from https://www.thermofisher.com/blog/mining/chemical-makeup-of-fly-and-bottom-ash-varies-significantly-must-be-analyzed-before-recycled/#:~:text=The%20European%20Coal%20Combustion%20Products,of%20fly%20ash%20at%2043%25.&text=The%20chemical%20makeup%20of%20fly,of%20the%20coal%20being%20burned . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Airquality news.com. (2021). Rule change sought on Air Pollution Control residues [Online]. Available from https://airqualitynews.com/2016/04/14/rule-change-sought-on-air-pollution-control-residues/#:~:text=What%20is%20Air%20Pollution%20Control,to%20a%20non%2Dhazardous%20landfill . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Karagiannidis, A., Samaras, P., Kasampalis, T., Perkoulidis, G., Ziogasa, P., & Zorpas, A. (2011). Evaluation of sewage sludge production and utilization in Greece in the frame of integrated energy recovery. Desalination and Water Treatment, 33 , 185–193.

IWA. (2021). Sludge production [Online]. Available from https://www.iwapublishing.com/news/sludge-production . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Yang, G., Zhang, G., & Wang, H. (2015). Current state of sludge production, management, treatment and disposal in China. Water Research . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2015.04.002

Chandler, A. J., Eighmy, T. T., Hartlen, O., Kosson, D., Sawell, S. E., van der Sloot, H., & Vehlow, J. (1997). Municipal solid waste incinerator residues (Studies in Environmental Science, International Ash Working Group) (Vol. 67). Elsevier Science.

UK Department for Business. (2020). Energy and industrial strategy, digest of UK energy statistics: renewable sources of energy (DUKES 6.4) , July.

Tinmaz, E., (2002). Research on integrated solid waste management system in Corlu Town . Master thesis, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey.

Recyclingbin.com. (2021). Recycling facts [Online]. Available from https://www.recyclingbin.com/Recycling-Facts#:~:text=Recycling%20Facts-,Paper,from%20the%20air%20each%20year . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Tchobanoglous, G. H., & Theisen, S. V. (1993). Integrated solid waste management: Engineering principle and management issue. International Ed . McGraw – Hill Book Co.

Wilson, D. C., Cowing, M. J., Oelz, B., Scheinberg, A., Stretz, J., Velis, C. A., Rodic, L., Masterson, D., Vilches, R., & Whiteman, A. D. (2014). ‘Wasteaware’ benchmark indicators for integrated sustainable waste management in cities. Waste Management, 35 , 329–342.

Waste Collection Report. ISWA Working Group on Collection and Transportation Technology. (2007) [Online]. Available from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Underground-Automated-Vacuum-Waste-Collection-for-(-Dixit-Rastogi/d8a662a748b2e1d19cb8f1962ef9d44b9ea21325 . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Chafer, M., Sole-Mauri, F., Sole, A., Boer, D., & Cabeza, L. F. (2019). Life cycle assessment (LCA) of a pneumatic municipal waste collection system compared to traditional truck collection. Sensitivity study of the influence of the energy source. Journal of Cleaner Production, 231 , 1122–1135. with permission from Elsevier.

Recycling Magazine. (2020). Best practices for construction waste management-trends, analyses, opinions and facts for the recycling industry. Recycling magazine 04/2020 [Online]. Available from https://www.recycling-magazine.com/ausgabe/recycling-magazine-04-2020/ . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

OECD. (2021). Municipal waste, generation and treatment . OECD-The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [Online]. Available from https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=MUNW# . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Parvez, N., Agrawal, A., & Kumar, A. (2019). Solid waste management on a campus in a developing country: A study of the Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee. Recycling, 2019 (4), 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling4030028

USEPA-US Environmental Protection Agency. (2021d). Sustainable management of food- types of composting and understanding the process [Online]. Available from https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/types-composting-and-understanding-process . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Odeh, A., & Al-Sa’ed, R. (2018). Evaluation of windrow composting pilots for domestic organic waste amended by horse manure and biosolids . In 6th Balkans Joint Conference and Exhibition, 7–9 November 2018, Expocity Albania, Tirana, Albania.

Michaels, T., & Krishnan, K. (2018). Directory of waste to energy facilities . Energy Recovery Council US, October 2018.

Tolvik Consulting Limited, UK. (2020). Energy from waste statistics- 2019, May.

Worldatlas. (2019). Largest landfills, waste sites, and trash dumps in the world [Online]. Available from https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/largest-landfills-waste-sites-and-trash-dumps-in-the-world.html . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Eunomia. (2021). Recycling-who really leads the world? Identifying the world’s best municipal waste recyclers [Online]. Available from https://resource.co/sites/default/files/World%20Recycling%20League%20-%20Full%20Report%20-%20FINAL.pdf . Accessed 22 Mar 2021.

Shehzad, A., Bashir, M. J. K., Sethupathi, S., & Lim, J. (2015). An overview of heavily polluted landfill leachate treatment using food waste as an alternative and renewable source of activated carbon. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 6 , 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2015.09.005

Aziz, H. A., & Ramli, S. F. (2018). Recent development in sanitary landfilling and landfill leachate treatment in Malaysia. International Journal of Environmental Engineering, 9 , 201–229. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijee.2018.10018737

Costa, A. M., de Souza Marotta Alfaia, R. G., & Campos, J. C. (2019). Landfill leachate treatment in Brazil – An overview. Journal of Environmental Management, 232 , 110–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.11.006

Pasalari, H., Farzadkia, M., Gholami, M., & Emamjomeh, M. M. (2019). Management of landfill leachate in Iran: Valorization, characteristics, and environmental approaches. Environmental Chemistry Letters, 17 , 335–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-018-0804-x

WHO. (2014). Safe management of wastes from health-care activities . WHO.

Emery, A., Davies, A., Griffiths, A., & Williams, K. (2007). Environmental and economic modelling: A case study of municipal solid waste management scenarios in Wales. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 49 (3), 244–263.

Wang, L. K., & Pereira, N. C. (1980). Handbook of environmental engineering, Volume 2, Solid waste processing and resources recovery (480 pages). The Humana Press.

Hung, Y. T., Wang, L. K., & Shammas, N. K. (2014). Handbook of environment and waste management: Land and groundwater pollution control (Vol. 2, 1091 pages). World Scientific.

Wang, L. K., Wang, M. H. S., Hung, Y. T., & Shammas, N. K. (2016). Natural resources and control processes (493–623 pages). Springer.

Hung, Y. T., Wang, L. K., & Shammas, N. K. (2020). Handbook of environment and waste management: Acid rain and greenhouse gas pollution control (Vol. 3, 770 pages). World Scientific.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Civil Engineering, Engineering campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Nibong Tebal, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia

Hamidi Abdul Aziz

Solid Waste Management Cluster, Science & Engineering Research Centre (SERC) Engineering Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Nibong Tebal, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia

Faculty of Engineering, Department of Environmental Engineering, Karabuk University, Karabuk, Turkey

Salem S. Abu Amr

Department of Civil Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

P. Aarne Vesilind

Lenox Institute of Water Technology, Latham, NY, USA

Lawrence K. Wang

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH, USA

Yung-Tse Hung

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hamidi Abdul Aziz .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Mu-Hao Sung Wang

Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA

is the United States federal government agency whose mission is to protect human and environmental health.

is the process of examining the anticipated environmental effects of a proposed project from consideration of environmental aspects at the design stage

is an American professional association that promotes the art, science, and practise of multidisciplinary engineering and allied sciences around the world.

is a systematic process that businesses use to analyse which decisions to make.

is a methodology for assessing environmental impacts associated with all the stages of the life cycle of a commercial product, process, or service.

is an analytical method to quantify flows and stocks of materials in a system.

is the analysis of social, cultural, economic, and political conditions of individuals, groups, communities and organizations.

is the process of identifying and analysing potential events that may negatively impact individuals or the environment and making judgements on the tolerability of the risk on the basis of a risk analysis.

is a systematic decision support process aiming to ensure that environmental and possibly other sustainability aspects are considered effectively in policy, plan, and programme making.

is the principal federal law in the United States governing the disposal of solid waste and hazardous waste, which was enacted in 1976.

is the leading environmental authority in the United Nations system.

are short-chain fatty acids composed mainly of C2–C6 carboxylic acids produced in the anaerobic digestion process, which does not need sterilization, additional hydrolysis enzymes, or high-cost pre-treatment step.

is typically a mixture of ash, carbon, and lime.

are mixtures of man-made chemicals that are added to a wide variety of products, including for industrial use, to make them less flammable.

are fully or partly halogenated paraffin hydrocarbons that contain only carbon (C), hydrogen (H), chlorine (Cl), and fluorine (F), produced as a volatile derivative of methane, ethane, and propane.

are compounds containing carbon, hydrogen, chlorine, and fluorine.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Aziz, H.A., Abu Amr, S.S., Vesilind, P.A., Wang, L.K., Hung, YT. (2021). Introduction to Solid Waste Management. In: Wang, L.K., Wang, MH.S., Hung, YT. (eds) Solid Waste Engineering and Management. Handbook of Environmental Engineering, vol 23. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84180-5_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84180-5_1

Published : 01 January 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-84178-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-84180-5

eBook Packages : Earth and Environmental Science Earth and Environmental Science (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Open access
• Published: 15 September 2021

Achieving sustainable development goals from the perspective of solid waste management plans

• K. M. Elsheekh   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7257-3201 1 , 2 ,
• R. R. Kamel 2 ,
• D. M. Elsherif 1 &
• A. M. Shalaby 2  

Journal of Engineering and Applied Science volume  68 , Article number:  9 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

17k Accesses

37 Citations

Metrics details

Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030 ad is one of the challenges and among the cross-cutting issues that countries around the world strive to achieve, despite it is not mandatory, to take control of the various negative environmental, economic, social, and urban impacts that threatened cities, in addition to benefits that are realized from achieving it. The research aims to promote the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals from the perspective of solid waste management (SWM) plans and programs, through analyzing and finding the interrelationship between SWM plans and programs and the related specific targets for each goal, in addition to using experts’ questionnaires to conclude the varying degrees of impact of SWM plans and programs at the level of 17 SDGs, which have been classified into groups, according to the most and the least affected by the SWM plans and programs. Where the goals of “sustainable cities and communities” and “good health and well-being” came in the lead of the goals; however, the goals of “quality education” and “peace, justice, and institutions” came in the tail of the goals that are affected by SWM plans and programs, according to the experts’ opinion.

Introduction

Rapid growth and urbanization processes in developing countries over the past decades have negatively affected cities, such as high rates of poverty and unemployment; problems related to providing infrastructure and social services, in addition to environmental problems and depletion of local resources; and other negative economic, social, and environmental impact be annexed on cities. Therefore, the need for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals appeared in all countries.

SDGs address not only the measurable changes in the well-being of people, economic development of countries, and better environment on the planet but also the means of how these changes shall be induced, in addition to enabling an environment of peace and security and rule of law and conditions for inclusion and participation [ 1 ]. All sectors of development can contribute to achieving SDGs, and every contribution, small or big, will make an impact on our world. Integrated solid waste management (ISWM) is one of the systems that can contribute to achieving 17 SDGs; it can act as a strong driver for achieving a wide range of specific target of goals, whether directly or indirectly.

The research focuses on the role of ISWM in achieving SDGs; it aims to observe the impact of solid waste management plans and programs on achieving the seventeen sustainable development goals and identifying the sustainable development goals that are the most/the least affected by solid waste plans and programs. The methodology of the research is based on two parts, the first part discussing “the concept of integrated solid waste management and “the role of SWM sector in achieving the SDGs” by analyzing the seventeen sustainable development goals from the perspective of solid waste management plans and programs. The second part is arranging the goals from the most affected by solid waste management to the least, depending on structured interviews and experts’ questionnaires for a diverse sample of 30 experts in this field from academics, researchers, and employees in local administrations.

The experts’ questionnaires were designed by 27 questions distributed into three sections; the first section included 8 questions at the level of “policies and general principles of the system,” the second section dealt with 10 questions at the level of “the solid waste management parties,” and the third section dealt with 9 questions at the level of “the technical stages solid waste management.” All the sections included the seventeen sustainable development goals. By transcribing the experts’ answers through 27 questions and by aggregating the number of times each goal was selected during each of the 27 questions and collecting them, it was possible to calculate the number of points collected for each goal through the use of Microsoft Excel. Accordingly, it was possible to arrange the goals from the most affected by solid waste management to the least.

The concept of integrated solid waste management

ISWM is used to refer to the management of the chain of processes, which starts with discharge/storage and extends through the collection, intermediate, treatment, and final disposal of all waste materials [ 2 ]. The core concept of ISWM has been developed out of the experience to address certain common problems with municipal waste management. The international agencies realized that improvements in waste management could not be achieved through a piecemeal approach. An integrated approach was required to reduce the increasing amount of waste that requires the proper collection, treatment, and disposal [ 3 ]. This integrated approach tries to take into account all the dimensions that may affect the solid waste management processes, in addition to taking into account all the actors and influencers on the solid waste management processes.

The role of SWM sector in achieving the SDGs

Considering SDGs, which encompass multiple sectors of urban governance. It can be seen that the interconnectedness and the basic interdependence between it and the solid waste management sector, where environmentally sound and integrated solid waste management programs and plans affect the achievement and improvement of many indicators of SDGs, whether that effect is directly or indirectly. “The environmentally sound management of waste touches on many vital aspects of development,” says Silpa Caza [ 4 ]. The next part deals with how the solid waste management sector affects the achievement of the SDGs, at the level of 17 goals.

Waste pickers and improve poverty rates

While it is known, millions of people in developing countries earn their living from recycling or reusing waste. Reliable statistical data are difficult, as waste pickers are mobile and their population may fluctuate by seasons. For example, Brazil’s official statistical system found over 229,000 people did this work in 2008 [ 5 ]. Many developing countries aim to determine the factors for successful informal sector integration in SWM systems to design measures for the integration of the informal workers in formal waste management strategies, which will have an impact on reducing poverty rates within this sector.

Organic waste and food security

Recycling of organic waste is a real opportunity to provide a large number of organic fertilizers that may improve the quality of crops and raise the rates of agricultural productivity in countries, thus supporting the provision of more safe and nutritious food throughout the year and reducing the proportion of the world population suffering from hunger. Only 13.5% of the world’s waste is recycled, and 5.5% turns into organic fertilizer [ 6 ]. This requires a greater effort to raise those rates and make greater use of them at the level of that goal.

SWM processes and ensuring a healthy life

The medical waste disposal system in developing countries is often subject to defects and faults. Under the pressure of crowded hospitals, workers make mistakes and get infected in return. Adopting the proper management of medical waste inside the health facilities, by incineration or sterilizing and shredding, can greatly reduce the transmission of infection and the transmission of pathogens.

In addition, garbage collectors are still exposed on a daily and continuous basis to the dangers of disease and infection as a result of improper practices of sorting and recycling this hazardous waste, especially many are pregnant and postpartum women within the garbage collectors communities, and to the dangers of premature death as a result of their abuse of sorting processes in the informal system and dealing with waste directly without taking precautionary measures to prevent the transmission of infection and disease.

Therefore, hepatitis C virus (HCV) is one of the most common diseases among litter collectors, which leads to their lives at early ages. Figure 1 shows a comparison between the population in Manshiyat Nasser (one of the largest garbage collectors communities in Egypt) and Greater Cairo by age groups. The available data indicate that the age group over 50 years old in Manshiyat Nasser is much lower compared to Greater Cairo, where the percentage in the Nasser facility is 8.4%, while the Cairo governorate is 14.3%, according to the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics [ 7 ], which reflects the low average age in the region. This confirms that the proper management of solid waste collection and sorting processes has a great impact on reducing disease rates.

The population in Manshiyat Nasser and Greater Cairo by age groups [the author]

Ensuring quality education for garbage collector communities

Looking at the garbage collectors’ communities in most developing countries, it can be seen the use of children significantly throughout the work system, which increases the cases of illiteracy, and children drop out of education in exchange for the temptations of financial return. As in Manshiyat Nasser, which represents one of the largest garbage collectors’ communities in Egypt, statistics indicate that the level of education in it is much lower if compared to Cairo, where the illiteracy rate in Manshiyat Nasser is 52%, while in Cairo it is 24.2%, according to the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics [ 7 ]. The illiteracy rate among females in Manshiyat Nasser is 59.6%, while in Cairo, it reaches 30.6% for males; the illiteracy rate in Manshiyat Nasser stands at 45.1%, while in Cairo governorate, it reaches 18.2% [ 7 ]. Figure 2 illustrates an approach between the ratios of the education in Manshiyat Nasser and Greater Cairo.

Educational levels ratios in Greater Cairo and Manshiyat Nasser [the author]

The previous data can be interpreted as an indication of the increasing rates of dropout from education with the advancement of age in one of the largest garbage collector communities in Egypt as a result of work requirements and the rise of child labor within the profession. The reduction of child labor and the provision of technical and vocational education for them, especially in developing countries, supports enrollment opportunities. In schools and learning for garbage collectors’ communities and family members of those in charge of this profession.

Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls in SWM

Women and girls are considered one of the main actors in informal SWM as they play a major role in the waste sorting stage, which is one of the most influential stages on health, as most of the sorting processes take place in the informal system inside residential spaces and residential streets [ 8 ], as shown in Fig. 3 that affects women’s health as women spend most of their time inside the home practicing this process, which makes them more vulnerable to serious diseases [ 9 ], in addition to the use of young girls in this process as well, which leads to an increase in the educational dropout rate among girls. This confirms the importance of the efforts made by civil organizations in Egypt such as the association for the Protection of the Environment (APE) and Youth Spirit Association (YSA) to spread awareness of the importance of adopting proper practices for sorting solid waste, as well as providing proper job opportunities based on solid waste recycling directed at women and girls and providing medical assistance to women who got infected, in addition to the inclusion of young girls in recycling schools that allow them to practice recycling for a paid fee while ensuring their continuation in the educational system.

Women and young girls sorting garbage in Manshiyat Nasser [ 8 ]

Dumping solid waste and provide clean water

Freshwater sources are exposed to pollution from a wide range of sectors, which threatens human health, as well as wildlife as a whole, and water pollutants include plastic garbage as well as invisible chemicals, in addition to direct discharges of factory waste. It ends up in lakes, rivers, streams, and underground water.

One-third of plastic waste ends up in the soil or freshwater. Plastic never degrades, but rather into tiny particles less than 2.5 mm in size known as nano-plastics, which break down further into nanoparticles (less than 0.1 μm in size) and that becomes part of the food chain. Fresh drinking water becomes contaminated with plastic particles, causing various diseases of cancer origin and hormonal disorder s[ 10 ]. For sure, reducing pollution caused by dumping hazardous wastes in or near waterways increases the chances of obtaining higher quality water.

Energy recover from solid waste

The scientific and technical development in dealing with solid waste has led to a review of the tons of waste that the city produces daily, and to look at it as alternative sources of energy. The concept of generating energy from waste is based on chemically treating solid waste to produce energy; waste is currently the third growing renewable energy source worldwide, after solar and wind. It also contributes, with biomass energy, to more than half of the renewable energy used globally [ 11 ]. This is what made many countries of the world strive in research and development and devising plans on a large scale to separate garbage and recycle it to convert it into energy.

Now, due to the tremendous development in the science of solid waste management and a large number of specialists in it, more than half of the garbage is incinerated and converted into liquid or gaseous fuels [ 10 ].

The informal sector in SWM and decent work for all

Informal employment remains a major challenge to the goal of providing decent work for all. In the SWM system, the percentage of informal employment is increasing in developing countries, which operates according to a framework that does not guarantee social insurance or safety standards, which requires improving the working conditions of the informal sector in the SWM system by integrating it within the formal framework of the system.

The utilization of the human resources of the informal sector in the SWM system and its accumulated experience in this field according to a framework that guarantees to improve the work environment and provide opportunities for decent work. It can support the promotion of economic growth by increasing the productivity rates of the several SWM sectors, by investing in solid waste recycling technology and maximizing the economic return by saving in the use of raw materials used in industries and replacing them with solid waste materials in different industries. These activities, industries, and small enterprises that are based on recycling operations of solid waste produce great decent job opportunities for the informal sector.

Recycling projects to stimulate industrialization and foster innovation

Small industries constitute the backbone of industrial development in developing countries [ 12 ], with a relatively small amount of investment and a domestic resource base. Small industries generate a great deal of employment and self-employment to which the SWM sector can contribute. Recycling materials is one of the processes that create opportunities for unlimited industries and small projects that stimulate innovation processes in various fields of industry, which depends on the output of sorting solid waste from plastic, glass, paper, or cloth and other recyclable materials, in addition to making use of organic waste to create opportunities for small projects that depend on the production of compost from well-separated organic waste. All of that can support growth and innovation processes in manufacturing.

Promoting social and economic inclusion for informal SWM communities

SWM sector could contribute to achieving economic and social integration within developing countries and reducing inequalities. As it is divided in many developing countries into two main systems, namely the formal and informal systems, each of them affects the economic growth processes to varying degrees. Therefore, the merger between the formal and informal SWM sectors will support the reduction of social and economic inequalities for all.

Many developing countries are making great efforts and multiple attempts and putting forward new policies to support the merging processes between the two systems because of the great economic and social benefits that this merging will bring. Some governments are trying to allay the concerns of the informal sector about bearing new tax and insurance burdens, as they try to add benefits to enjoy health care in addition to implementing appropriate systems of insurances and pensions in exchange for monthly installments. This enhances the ability to reduce social and economic inequalities within communities.

Sustainable SWM enhancing the quality of life

By looking at the services of SWM, there are two billion people without access to waste collection services globally, and 3 billion people lack controlled waste disposal facilities according to data collected between 2010 and 2018 ad [ 13 ]. This leads to a lack of indicators of quality of life for cities and the sustainability of local communities. Therefore, good practices for SWM through waste reduction, reuse, recycling, and exploitation in generating energy or safe disposal of it are an essential element in sustainable city management and improving the quality of life. “It is impossible to create a sustainable, livable city without rational solid waste management. It is no longer about technical solutions only. There are impacts on climate, health, and safety as well as important social considerations,” Vasquez stresses [ 14 ]. Therefore, there is an urgent need to invest in waste management infrastructure, including the opportunities to convert full landfills into green parks.

SWM and “sustainable consumption and production patterns”

ISWM contains many concepts related to reducing production and controlling consumption patterns such as moving towards the circular economy model which is based on recycling of materials and converting useful waste into resources. That supports the use of fewer natural resources in manufacturing processes. It can also be said that adopting the concept of extended producer responsibility which requires companies to collect and recycle the waste generated from their products is one of the applications of the green circular economy concepts.

In addition to many practices that are being developed to maximize the benefit from the generated solid waste, such as the MSWM Hierarchy (5Rs), which is considered a widely accepted guideline method on what is better for the environment, as it gives top priority to preventing waste generation in the first place then for reuse, recycling, energy recovery, and finally for final disposal. The importance of using the concept of hierarchy for managing solid waste (5Rs) is due to avoiding wasting an important economic value, which is recyclable waste and reducing the rates of environmental pollution.

Solid waste disposal and climate change measures

Greenhouse gasses such as methane emitted from solid waste are a major factor in air pollution and climate change. Many municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal facilities in developing countries are open dumpsites that contribute to air, water, and soil pollution, as well as greenhouse gas emissions. In 2016, 5% of global emissions were generated from solid waste [ 15 ]. This calls for the need to improve solid waste disposal in most parts of the world, as the safe disposal and the reduction of open burning of garbage are one of the most important climate change-related measures.

According to the statistics issued by the World Bank, the world generates 2.01 billion tons of MSW annually, and at least 33% of it is not managed in an environmentally safe manner. Without improvements in the SWM sector, emissions related to solid waste are probably to increase to 2.6 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2050 ad [ 16 ]. Environmentally sound management of solid waste will help reduce the spread of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere.

SWM and “conserve the oceans, seas, and marine resources”

The oceans constitute the largest ecosystem on the planet, and they produce about half of the oxygen we breathe and act as a climate regulator, they also absorb heat from the atmosphere and more than a quarter of the carbon dioxide that man makes, and carbon emissions lead to the accumulation of heat in the oceans and to changes in their chemical composition, which increases acidification. Reducing open burning can limit the diffusion of carbon dioxide. On the other hand, plastic waste is one of the biggest threats to the oceans. Global production of plastic reached more than 300 million tons in 2014. Much of this plastic has ended up in the oceans, where plastic waste accounts for 90% of marine debris, damaging wildlife and harming marine ecosystems [ 17 ]. The environmentally sound management of solid waste and its safe disposal, especially plastics, can reduce damage to the oceans.

SWM impact on land ecosystems

As a result of the rapid urbanization processes and the increase in the population, the solid waste sector is one of the important sectors with a significant impact on the health of ecosystems with their growth rates of waste. One of the aspects of preserving the ecosystems on the earth’s surface is the safe disposal of solid waste. and Adopting an integrated and sustainable SWM system, which takes care of reducing the amount of waste from the source according to a set of concepts related to such as the (3Rs), and (5Rs), in addition to the circular economy model, which are all widely accepted approaches and principles for waste management operations. The importance of using these concepts is due to the reduction of waste production, which supports the reduction of the need for land utilized for the sanitary burying of waste and using a lower amount of land sustainably and the reduction of the impact on the pollution of soil, water, and air.

Integrated SWM and institutional building strengthening

Given the ISWM, the institutional framework depends on delegating and distributing responsibilities and functions between central governments and local administrations, in addition to the partnership with the private sector, civil society organizations, and all actors in the system. This ensures that decisions are made in a manner that is responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative at all levels. Many developing countries have turned to the institutional framework based on the principle of decentralization because of its potential benefits as a result of its application in the processes of integrated solid waste management, such as improving economic efficiency, protecting local interests, enhancing citizen participation, and ensuring the availability of tools and methods to activate transparency and accountability to ensure that the costs of programs and projects are evaluated and then monitor the service delivery process.

Partnerships between different parties and sectors

The participation of multiple parties in the SWM system is one of the most important points that the system aspires to, as the transformation from the traditional government sector to the government as a partner by adopting multi-lateral partnerships such as the private sector, non-governmental organizations, and the local community has become inevitable and necessary for the success of the SWM system, also establishes partnerships with other sectors such as industry and trade. All of that is a result of the government sector in developing countries’ realization of its limited ability alone to meet the increasing demand for SWM services. And its need to benefit from the local and foreign experiences of the private sector, ensure the utilization of the human capital and the accumulated experiences of the informal sector, and the inclusion of the local community in identifying the actual needs and evaluating the services provided to it, all of that to support the improvement of the SWM system’s performance. Partnerships with donors also provide opportunities to support the system technically and financially. This supports the achievement of goal 17 by making use of the experiences gained from partnerships and their resource mobilization strategies.

Results and discussion

In view of the Egyptian case and its similarity with developing countries with regard to the solid waste management systems, the research committed to monitoring the impact of SWM plans and programs in developing countries on achieving SDGs through their specific related targets, as the research limitations.

Through the previous section, it became possible to analyze the possibility of achieving the SDGs from the perspective of SWM plans and programs, as it supports the achievement of a wide range of specific targets set within the 17 SDGs, whether directly or indirectly, starting with the development of the natural and urban environment by improving the quality of life for cities, maintaining the sustainability of local communities, reducing the individual negative environmental impacts of cities, and preserving the ecosystems on earth, and its ability to contribute to economic and social development by providing job opportunities. In addition to its support for building transparent institutional frameworks that guarantee partnerships with different sectors and various stakeholders as well. Table 1 deduced the contribution of SWM plans and programs to each of the 17 SDGs.

An expert questionnaire (30 experts) was designed to put the 17 SDGs in the order of the impact of SWM plans and programs on achieving it. The questionnaire included 27 questions distributed into three sections: policies and general principles of the system, the system parties, and the technical stages of the system. Figure 4 shows SDGs and the number of times each goal is chosen as a result of being affected by plans and programs for solid waste management. It is based on analyzing expert answers through 27 questions in the experts’ questionnaire.

SDGs and the lead of goals that are affected by SWM programs [the author]

By transcribing the experts’ answers through 27 questions, it is possible to note the following:

Goal 11: Sustainable cities and communities and goal 3: Good health and well-being goal are in the lead goals that are affected by SWM plans and programs.

Then, comes the second stage goal 9: Industry and innovation, goal 8: decent work and economic growth, and goal 12: Responsible consumption and production.

Then, the third stage goal 17: Partnerships for the goals, goal 15: Life on land, and goal 13: Climate action. Then comes the rest of the SDGs.

Goal 4: Quality education and goal 16: Peace, justice and institutions are representing the least affected goals by the SWM plans and programs, according to the experts’ opinion.

Conclusions

It was clear that there was an impact of solid waste plans and programs on achieving SDGs, in various degrees at the level of 17 SDGs, and the greatest impact appeared in the goals related to improving the quality of life and health in cities, in addition to the goals related to providing decent work for all, supporting industrialization and innovation, and improving production and consumption patterns, as well as addressing climate change, enhancing life on earth and supporting partnerships. While some goals appeared less affected by SWM plans and programs, such as the goal related to quality and equitable education for all and the goal related to establishing institutions subject to the issue. The future direction of research should be focusing on developing a framework for achieving goals 3 and 11 (the most affected by SWM) in Egypt from the perspective of SWM plans and programs.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available in the Google/forms repository [ https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1eDuL-tDf_xxOAKaDIUKiz8Qji6iGonwbQZHCmCgQc68/edit ].

Abbreviations

Solid waste management

• Sustainable Development Goals

Municipal solid waste

Refuse, reduce, reuse, repurpose, recycle

• Integrated solid waste management

Municipal solid waste management

Gurbo M (2017) Why are sustainable development goals important? The institute for development of freedom of information (IDFI) published article, available via: . https://idfi.ge/en/why_does_sdgs_matter . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Google Scholar  

Starovoytova D (2018), Solid waste management at a university campus (part 1/10): comprehensive-review on legal framework and background to waste management, at a global context, online published paper, J Environ Earth Sci, 8, no.4, p.71. Available via: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328747778_Legal_Framework_and_Background_to_Solid_Waste_Management . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Memon MA (2010) Integrated solid waste management based on the 3R approach. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag:7 Available via: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225707470_Integrated_solid_waste_management_based_on_the_3R_approach . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Kaza S, Yao LC, Bhada-Tata P, Van Woerden F (2018) What a waste 2.0: a global snapshot of solid waste management to 2050, published book, urban development. World bank, Washington, DC Available via: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/immersive-story/2018/09/20/what-a-waste-an-updated-look-into-the-future-of-solid-waste-management . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Book   Google Scholar  

Dias S (2011) Integrating informal workers into selective waste collection: the case of Belo Horizonte, Brazil, wiego policy brief (urban policies) no. 4

The world bank (2018), What a waste: an updated look into the future of solid waste management, how much trash is that?, online article, the world bank, IBRD.IDA, available via: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/immersive-story/2018/09/20/what-a-waste-an-updated-look-into-the-future-of-solid-waste-management . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Egypt in figures (2013), Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), Arab Republic of Egypt, available via: https://www.capmas.gov.eg/ . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Flavia C, Joos V (2010) Mokattam world’s largest recycling hub, research project, studio-Basel-contemporary city institute, p 136

Elsheekh K (2014) The environmental coexistence aspects in functional communities, analytical study of garbage area in Manshiyat Nasser, unpublished master thesis, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, p 145

Lamizana B (2013), Plastic planet: how tiny plastic particles are polluting our soil, un environment program, ecosystems and biodiversity, available via: https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/plastic-planet-how-tiny-plastic-particles-are-polluting-our-soil . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Ogola JS, Chimuka L, Tshivhase S (2011) Management of municipal solid wastes: a case study in Limpopo province, South Africa. In: Kumar S (ed) Integrated waste management, vol 1. InTech, Rijeka, pp 91–112

Banik S (2018) Small scale industries in India: opportunities and challenges. IJCRT (6, 1):337 Available via: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323756073_small_scale_industries_in_india_opportunities_and_challenges . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

United Nations (2019) The sustainable development goals report. Department of economic and social affairs, p 45 Available via: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2019.pdf . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

The World Bank (2018), What a waste: an updated look into the future of solid waste management, online article, the world bank, IBRD.IDA, available via: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/immersive-story/2018/09/20/what-a-waste-an-updated-look-into-the-future-of-solid-waste-management . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Kristanto GA, Koven W (2019) Estimating greenhouse gas emissions from municipal solid waste management in Depok, Indonesia. City Environ Interact 4:1 Available via: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590252020300088#bb0030 . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Article   Google Scholar  

Kaza S, Yao L C, Bhada-Tata P, Van Woerden F (2018), What a waste 2.0: a global snapshot of solid waste management to 2050, published book, urban development;. Washington, DC: World bank, P.xi., available via: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/immersive-story/2018/09/20/what-a-waste-an-updated-look-into-the-future-of-solid-waste-management . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Abalansa S, El Mahrad B, Vondolia G K, Icely J, Newton A (2020), The marine plastic litter issue: a social-economic analysis. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8677. Available via: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208677 . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

World Bank (2018) Atlas of sustainable development goals 2018: world development indicators. World bank, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1250-7 License: Creative Commons Attri-bution CC BY 3.0 IGO, P.70-76. https://olc.worldbank.org/system/files/Atlas%20of%20Sustainable%20Development%20Goals%20-%20Introduction.pdf . Accessed 1 Mar 2021

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

The research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or notfor-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Architecture, Housing and Building National Research Center (HBRC), Giza, Egypt

K. M. Elsheekh & D. M. Elsherif

Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt

K. M. Elsheekh, R. R. Kamel & A. M. Shalaby

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

KM was a major contributor in writing the manuscript and analyzed and interpreted the experts’ questioner data regarding the impact of solid waste management plans and programs on achieving sustainable development goals. DM contributed to identifying the experts to be interviewed. RR, DM, and AM contributed to the review of the experts’ questioner and the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. M. Elsheekh .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The authors declare that the manuscript is our original work. The ideas, views, innovations, and results presented in the above manuscript are totally ours unless otherwise referenced in the text. Works of others necessary for the development of ideas presented in this manuscript are clearly referenced within the text and accurately listed at its end. Also, the authors declare that they consent for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Elsheekh, K.M., Kamel, R.R., Elsherif, D.M. et al. Achieving sustainable development goals from the perspective of solid waste management plans. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 68 , 9 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s44147-021-00009-9

Download citation

Received : 16 April 2021

Accepted : 01 July 2021

Published : 15 September 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s44147-021-00009-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Decentralized solid waste management
• Merging informal SWM sector

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 05 January 2022

Household solid waste management practices and perceptions among residents in the East Coast of Malaysia

• Widad Fadhullah   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4652-0661 1 , 2 ,
• Nor Iffah Najwa Imran 1 ,
• Sharifah Norkhadijah Syed Ismail 3 ,
• Mohd Hafiidz Jaafar 2 &
• Hasmah Abdullah 1 , 4  

BMC Public Health volume  22 , Article number:  1 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

218k Accesses

149 Citations

10 Altmetric

Metrics details

Poor waste disposal practices hamper the progress towards an integrated solid waste management in households. Knowledge of current practices and perception of household solid waste management is necessary for accurate decision making in the move towards a more sustainable approach. This study investigates the household waste practices and perceptions about waste management in Panji, one of the sub-districts in Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia.

A stratified random sampling technique using a cross-sectional survey questionnaire was used to collect data. A total of 338 households were interviewed in the survey and data were analyzed using SPSS. Chi-square goodness of fit test was used to determine the relationships between categorical variables, whereas Chi-square bivariate correlation test was performed to observe the correlation between the perceptions of waste segregation with socio-demographic background of the respondents. The correlation between perception of respondents with the locality, house type and waste type were also conducted. Principal component analysis was used to identify grouping of variables and to establish which factors were interrelated in any given construct.

The results of the study revealed that 74.3 % of households disposed of food debris as waste and 18.3% disposed of plastic materials as waste. The study also showed that 50.3% of the households segregate their waste while 49.7% did not. About 95.9% of the respondents were aware that improper waste management leads to disease; such as diarrhea and malaria. There were associations between locality, age and house type with waste segregation practices among respondents (Chi-square test, p<0.05). Associations were also found between locality with the perception of improper waste management which lead to disease (Chi-square test, p<0.05). Principal Component Analysis showed that 17.94% of the variance has high positive loading (positive relationship) with age, marital status and, type of house.

This study highlights the importance to design waste separation programs that suit the needs of targeted population as a boost towards sustainable solid waste management practices.

Peer Review reports

Solid waste management (SWM) in the majority of developing countries including Malaysia is dominated by open dumping due to lower capital, operational and maintenance cost in comparison with another disposal method [ 47 ]. This non-sanitary and non-engineered approach are without appropriate liners, gas collection and leachate collection and treatment, thereby exposing the surrounding environment with multiple air, water and soil pollution issues [ 15 , 23 ]. The effects of the ineffective management of household solid waste on public health (Fig. 1 ) can be separated into physical, biological, non-communicable diseases, psychosocial and ergonomics health risks [ 6 , 51 , 77 ]. Contaminated soil, air and water provide breeding ground to biological vectors such as flies, rodents and insects pests. Many diseases are sequentially caused by these biological vectors, such as diarrhoea, dysentery, gastrointestinal problems, worm infection, food poisoning, dengue fever, cholera, leptospirosis and bacterial infection; irritation of the skin, nose and eyes; as well as respiratory symptoms [ 25 , 41 , 42 , 52 ]. Exposure to gases generated by landfill waste such as methane, carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide can produce inflammation and bronchoconstriction and can affect the immune cell. Hydrogen chloride and hydrogen fluoride released from the waste if deposited in the respiratory system, may cause cough, chest tightness and breathlessness [ 21 ].

Effect of ineffective household solid waste management on public health

Another category of health effects that can be closely related to household solid waste management is non-communicable diseases. Some studies estimated that the pollutions from the dumpsite might cause cancers (e.g. liver, pancreas, kidney, larynx) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma [ 8 , 31 , 51 ]. Other health effects under this category worth mentioning are birth defects, preterm babies, congenital disorders and Down’s syndrome [ 51 , 52 ]. Apart from physical and biological effects, inefficient household waste management can lead to psychosocial effects such as disturbing odour, unsightly waste, and thinking, cognitive and stress-related problems [ 6 , 51 , 52 , 74 , 77 ]. Ergonomics is the final category of related health effects that is worth mentioning specifically for the working community of household waste management (Fig. 1 ). The risk of ergonomic issues is related to body posture, repetitive movement and excessive force movement [ 6 ].

Majority of the solid waste generated in Malaysia composed of organic waste with high moisture content [ 43 ], hence, the handling and waste separation at source is the most critical step in waste management [ 62 ]. The increasing amount of waste generated annually is also intensified by lack of land for disposing waste, questioning the sustainability of the current municipal solid waste (MSW) practices of using landfills [ 46 ]. Nevertheless, the lack of success in public participation to manage the solid waste is primarily rooted by the NIMBY (not in my backyard) attitude and the public perception that solid waste is a local municipal problem is highly prevalent among Malaysians [ 3 ]. Thus, most of the existing waste segregation practices by waste-pickers are mostly done in the informal sector as means of livelihood for the poor and additional source of income. On the other hand, this practice causes serious health problems, aggravating the socio-economic situation [ 10 ].

In Kelantan, the common practice of waste disposal in rural and remote areas is by burying and burning of waste (Kamaruddin et al. 2016) while in urban or semi-urban areas, stationary waste storage containers are provided mainly at the sides of the main road. Kota Bharu Municipal Council (KBMC) is the local authority responsible in providing stationary waste storage container at collection site of waste within Kota Bharu district, collecting the solid waste approximately 3 times a week by compactor vehicles and transporting waste to the dumpsite located in Beris Lalang, Bachok [ 27 ]. However, the flaws of SWM in Kelantan lies primarily in inadequate bin and waste collection provided by local authorities, KBMC mainly constrained by financial issues (Rahim et al 2012). House to house waste collection is also hard to be implemented owing to narrow lanes and alleys which are mostly inaccessible [ 61 ] due to the development practice and geographical area in the state. Therefore, the locals’ resort to burying and burning their wastes within their house compound which has always been the practice since decades ago.

Household waste is one of the primary sources of MSW comprising of food wastes, paper, plastic, rags, metal and glasses from residential areas. Household waste is among the solid wastes managed by KBMC in Kota Bharu covering 15 sub-districts including Panji. Panji has the highest population compared to the other sub-district; therefore, assessment of household SWM among the residents is important to address their awareness and practices for planning an effective form of SWM. Some of the key factors influencing the effectiveness of SWM is by considering the size of the family, their income [ 67 ], level of education [ 19 ] and the location of household [ 1 ]. This factor is also supported by Shigeru [ 66 ] that the characteristics of households determine their recycling behavior and that sociodemographic conditions vary across municipalities. Socio-economic status and housing characteristics also affect the amount of municipal waste and how they manage it [ 20 ]. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the characteristics and needs of various households in designing a suitable waste management program.

Efficient SWM system is now a global concern which requires a sustainable SWM primarily in the developing countries. This study is another effort in gearing towards sustainable waste management practices in Malaysia which is also in line with the United Nation Sustainable Development Goals encompassing SDG3 Good Health and Wellbeing and SDG 12 Responsible Consumption and Production. So far, limited studies were reported in the East Coast of Malaysia, particularly in Kelantan on waste management practices at the household level [ 61 ] which is highly required to improve the current practices including finding the prospect of whether proper at source-sorting in households is feasible to be implemented. This study provides a case study in Panji, Kota Bharu concerning the current household characteristics and awareness of managing household solid waste in Kelantan. The findings are crucial for the waste authorities in the process of designing and providing an effective and specific action plan in the area.

Figure 2 shows the percentage of households by garbage collection facilities and median monthly household income (MYR) for the districts in Kelantan. Kota Bharu is the district with the highest median monthly household gross income and percentage of garbage collection facilities. Apart from Lojing, which is located in the highlands, Bachok, Tumpat and Pasir Puteh are the districts with the lowest percentage of garbage collection facilities within 100m of the households. Meanwhile, Bachok (34.9%), Pasir Mas (36.6%), and Pasir Puteh (38%) households are without garbage collection facilities. The figure described the problem with household solid waste management in Kelantan. The major issues contributing to the problem are due to insufficient financial resources, lack of human labor, and transportation [ 61 ]. In one of the rural area in Kelantan, it was found that the solid waste management is considered inefficient due to a lack of knowledge in proper waste handling and the importance of segregating waste properly as proper waste handling start at home (Abas et al. 2020).

Percentage of households by garbage collection facilities and median monthly household income (MYR) for the districts in Kelantan

Household SWM is not a new issue, thus, published studies were found using survey and questionnaires and fieldwork studies. Waste characterization process was carried out by Kamaruddin et al. (2016) in 4 landfills in Kelantan. Nevertheless, they did not cover household waste knowledge, attitude and practices. Abdullah et al. [ 1 ] surveyed the household’s awareness on privatization of solid waste management and their satisfaction of the services offered but did not cover the health implications. Saat et al. [ 61 ] surveyed the practices and attitude on household waste management with a small sample size of less than 30 which limits its applicability to other region. Our study aimed to improve these previous studies by covering a wider sample size from the largest sub-district in Kelantan, Malaysia. The objective of this study is to assess the household SWM practices and perceptions among the residents of Panji vicinity in Kota Bharu district, Kelantan. Specifically, the objectives are to assess household SWM practices and perceptions in the Panji sub-district, to determine the association between socio-demographic characteristics or other factors and practices in SWM at the household level and to determine the association between socio-demographic characteristics or other factors and perceptions in SWM at household level.

This study was conducted in Panji, Kota Bharu district, Kelantan, Malaysia (Fig. 3 ), located at the east cost of Peninsular Malaysia and has the highest population among the 15 sub-districts of Kota Bharu, the capital state of Kelantan. A total of 338 respondents were recruited in this study. The population of interest in this study involved residents in Kota Bharu district and considered only residents who have attained 18 years old and above. Sample unit is residents living in Kota Bharu district of more than a year and aged more than 18 years. The target population comprised all the households in Kota Bharu District (491,237); however, it is impossible to conduct a study with such a large number within a limited time period and inadequate financial budget. Therefore, a multi- stage random sampling technique was used in selecting the appropriate sample in order to evaluate the objectives of this study and to ensure that households in the districts had the same possibility of being included in the study (Dlamini et al., 2017). Initially, one district of Kelantan state (Kota Bharu) was selected out of 10 total districts. In the second stage, one sub-district of Kota Bharu District (Panji) was selected out of 15 total sub-districts. Eventually, 338 households were randomly selected as sample size. Convenient sampling was also used to select respondents due to time constraint and response obtained from target population. The localities involved were Kampung Tapang, Kampung Chempaka, Kampung Belukar, Kampung Panji, Taman Sri Iman, Taman Desa Kujid and Taman Bendahara.

Location of the study area in Panji, Kota Bharu district, Kelantan, Malaysia (Source:ArcGis Software version 10.2; source of shape file: Department of Drainage and Irrigation, obtained with consent)

Data collection

A survey was conducted from January to May 2018. The questionnaire was translated from English to Malay language and the translation was done back to back and validated by experts in environmental science and public health field. A pilot test was conducted with a small sample size of ~30 to determine the suitability of the items in the questionnaire and the time taken by respondents to complete the questionnaires (Dlamini et al. 2017). Respondents were interviewed based on a questionnaire adopted and modified from Asante et al. [ 9 ]. The questionnaire involved two phases; the first one was to determine the socio-demographic of the respondents, including gender, age, types of housing, religion, educational level, occupation and the number of occupants in the household. Part two was an assessment to determine the status of household management of solid waste. The questionnaire included both open and closed questions (Dlamini et al. 2017). The closed questions were designed for ease of answering by the respondents with the aim of collecting the maximum appropriate responses, whereas the open questions are intended to encourage respondents to provide further elaboration on certain questions. The reliability of Cronbach’s alpha test of this questionnaire was found to be acceptable (α=0.71). Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Ethic Committee of Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM/JEPeM/17100560).

Data analysis

Data were analyzed using IBM Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 24.0. Descriptive analyses were used to report the frequency and percentage of socio-demographic patterns, method of household waste disposal and perceptions of household toward waste management. Chi-square goodness of fit test was used to determine the relationships between categorical variables, which allow us to test whether the observed proportions for a categorical variable differ from the hypothesized proportions [ 24 ]. The null hypothesis of the Chi-Square test is that no relationship exists on the categorical variables in the population; they are independent. Chi-square bivariate correlation test was performed to observe the correlation between the perceptions of waste segregation with socio-demographic background of the respondents [ 29 ]. The correlation between perception of respondents with the locality, house type and waste type were also conducted. Principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted to identify grouping of variables and to establish which factors were interrelated in any given construct, where a set of highly inter-correlated measured variables were grouped into distinct factors [ 24 ]. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkim (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett's Test of Sphericity was performed to evaluate the data's suitability for exploratory factor analysis [ 69 ].

Socio-demographic Characteristics and Respondents Background in Panji sub-district

We first report descriptive statistics for all variables before discussing results from correlation analysis of socio-demographic factors and respondent’s background with household solid waste management (SWM) practices and perceptions. We then present the Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Table 1 represents the socio-demographic background and characteristics of the respondents in this study. Most of the respondents are from Kg. Belukar (N=125, 37%), followed by Kg. Panji (N=61, 18%), the rest are from Kg. Tapang (N=33), Kg. Chempaka, Taman Desa Kujid, Taman Sri Iman (N=30, respectively) and from Taman Bendahara (N=29). Majority of the respondents are female (N=182, 53.8%) and age between 35 to 49 years old (N=91, 26.9%). Most of the respondents have completed secondary education (N=194, 57.4%) and 31.1% have completed their degree or diploma (N=105). Majority of the respondents are married (75.7%), Muslim (97%) and earned between MYR 1000 to 2000 per month. About 32% of the respondents are self-employed and lived in a bungalow house type (30.5%). Most of the household consist of 4 to 6 occupants (53.6%). Majority of them cook at home (91.4%) on daily basis (68.6%). The Chi-square test shows that there is a significant difference among all categorical variables except for gender (χ 2 = 2.000, p = 0.157).

Proportion of Household Solid Waste Disposed by respondents in Panji Sub-District

Figure 4 represents the type of waste disposed of by respondents in the study. More than half (74.38%) of the waste disposed by household is food debris, followed by plastic waste (19.01%) and bottles (5.79%) while the rest accounts for 0.83%.

Types of waste disposed by household in Panji district

Household SWM practices and perceptions among respondents in Panji sub-district

Table 2 shows the household waste management practices and perceptions among respondents in Panji district. In terms of the household SWM practices, about 170 of the respondents (50.3%) segregate their waste at home while the remaining 168 respondents (49.7%) did not practice waste segregation at home. There is no significant difference between those who segregate waste at home and those who don’t (χ 2 =0.12, p=0.91). As shown in Fig. 1 and Table 2 , the major type of waste disposed by respondents are food (N=251, 74.3%). A significant difference was found among the different type of waste disposed (χ 2 =656.56, p<0.001). Out of the 338 respondents interviewed, 75.4% of the respondent themselves normally carries their household waste to the allocated bin or waste collection point provided by the local authority. Majority of the respondents (323 respondents) agree that the waste disposal site provided by the local authorities were appropriate (95.6%) relative to 15 respondents who disagree (4.4%). A significant difference was found between those who responded that appropriate waste disposal site was provided and those who do not (χ2=280.66, p<0.001).

Most of them also have the perception that proper waste management is important (99.7%). More than half (62.4%) of the respondent agrees that it is their responsibility to clean the waste in their residential area while 24.3% suggested that it is the responsibility of the district council. Another 3.3% suggested it is the responsibility of the community members followed by private waste operators (1.5%). The majority (95.9%) of the respondents suggested poor waste management can contribute to disease occurrence, whereas 2.7% suggested it does not cause diseases and another 1.5% were unsure if it causes any diseases.

In terms of the household SWM perceptions, 40.8% of the respondents have responded that other diseases than diarrhea, malaria and typhoid are related to improper waste management. This is followed by diarrhea (30.5%) and malaria (21.9%). Majority of the participants responded that they have awareness on proper waste management (92.9%) and 81.4% responded that cleanliness is the main factor which motivates them to dispose the waste properly. The chi-square test shows that all variables under respondents’ perception differ significantly from the hypothesized values (Table 2 ).

Relationship between socio-demographic characteristics, respondent’s background and household SWM practices (waste segregation practices)

Chi square analysis was performed to find out what factors contribute to waste segregation practices among the respondents (Table 3 ). Results indicate that waste segregation practice was correlated with the locality (χ 2 = 43.35, p<0.001). For instance, out of 29 respondents in Taman Bendahara, all of them segregate their waste (100%). This trend was also observed for Taman Desa Kujid where most of the respondents segregate their waste (22 out of 30, 73.3%). In contrast, most of respondents from the village, did not segregate their waste. For example, out of 125 total number of respondents in Kg Belukar, 53 of them segregates their waste (42.4%) while 72 of them did not (57.6%).

A significant correlation was found between waste segregation practice and age (χ 2 =11.62, p<0.001). Based on the age range of the total number of respondents, respondents at the age of 50-65 years old are those who segregated more than the rest (N=43) and those at the age of 35-49 are those who did not segregate their waste the most (N=52 in Table 3 ). The type of house was significantly correlated with waste segregation practice (χ 2 =12.73, p=0.03). The respondents who live in bungalow houses are those who segregate the most (N=58). Those who live in semi-detached houses also have more respondents (N=24) segregating their waste than those who did not (N=13). Meanwhile those who live in other type of houses, terrace, village and others have more respondents who did not segregate their waste (Table 3 ). Other variables, gender, education level, marital status, monthly income, occupation, the number of persons per household and the practice of cooking at home did not show any significant correlation with waste segregation practice (p>0.05, Table 3 ).

Relationship between respondent’s background and household SWM practices (the type of waste disposed) from the household in Panji sub-district

The chi-square test was also conducted to determine the relationship between socio-demographic characteristics, respondent’s background and the type of waste disposed. There is a significant correlation between locality with the waste type disposed in Panji district (Table 4 ). All localities showed that food waste was the major type of waste being disposed of from the households. A significant correlation was also found between respondents living in different house types with type of waste disposed. Most of the respondents who live in bungalows (N = 81) and other type of house (N = 78) disposed of food as the main waste from their households. Other characteristics were not significantly correlated with type of waste.

Correlation between respondents’ background (locality and/ or house type) and the perception in household SWM (appropriate site of household waste disposal provided by the local council and improper waste management contribute to disease occurrence)

Correlation analysis was also performed to determine what factors contribute towards the perception of household SWM in Panji district. No significant correlation was found between different locality with the appropriate waste disposal site provided (p = 0.152) as most of the locality has an appropriate disposal site (Table 5 ). There was also no significant relationship between type of house with appropriate disposal site provided by the local council (p=0.131). On the other hand, significant correlation was found between locality and the respondent’s perceptions on improper waste management which contribute to disease occurrence (p=0.042). Out of all localities, majority of the respondents from Kg Belukar has the perception that improper waste management contributes to disease occurrence (Table 5 ).

Principal component analysis (PCA)

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is a dimension-reduction tool that can be used to reduce a large set of variables to a small set that still contains most of the information in the original large set [ 24 ]. It converts a set of observations of possibly correlated variables (entities each of which takes on various numerical values) into a set of values of linearly uncorrelated variables called principal components [ 37 ]. This transformation is defined in such a way that the first principal component has the largest possible variance (that is, accounts for as much of the variability in the data as possible), and each succeeding component in turn has the highest variance possible under the constraint that it is orthogonal to the preceding components.

PCA in this study was performed to determine the variables that influence or related to waste segregation behavior among respondents. Table 6 highlight the PCA analysis to illustrate the component factors that influence waste segregation behavior among respondents in this study. Only 13 significant variables were highlighted in the table with the factor loading of more than 0.5. Only factor loadings value >0.5 are considered for selection and interpretation due to having significant factor loadings influence the acceptable KMO value that represent a significant correlation for the PCA model in the study. The PCA generates four principal components that represent 48.26% of the total variance in the variables dataset and produced an acceptable KMO value of 0.603 (more than 0.5). Bartlett’s test of sphericity showed that PCA could be applied to the data at the p< 0.001 level. This approved that the data met the requirements for factor analysis [ 24 , 69 ].

The component matrix produced in PCA showed that PC1 represents 17.94% of the variance with high positive loading (positive relationship) on age, marital status and, type of house (Table 6 ). This pattern indicates that age, married and type of house were the group that segregates their waste the most. This group of community can be proposed as the target to actively participate in waste management practices within the district. In contrast, locality and education have negative loading or negative relationship with the segregation activity. As a result, policy makers should increase educational activities on proper household waste practices and management related issues to minimize both the environmental and health impacts of household waste practices among the population.

PC2 represents 10.93% of the variance with high loadings on cooking at home and cooking frequency. This pattern implies that those who cook at home and frequently cook were among the most respondents who practice waste segregation. However, no consequences can be drawn about individual factors as these may have the opposite relationship to the observed factor in other components. Similar trend was observed for PC3 whereby 9.96% of the data variance has high loading on the perception of the respondents towards waste management. High loading was observed on perception that improper waste management contributes to disease occurrence and the cleanliness is the main element that motivates them to segregate. PC3 has high negative loading with monthly income. This result suggests that respondents with low income are those who segregate more.

Meanwhile, PC4 represents 9.42% of the data variance. Variables that have high positive loadings were the respondents who brought the waste to the communal bin themselves, indicating that this group of respondents are those who segregate more. High positive loading was also found on the perception that residents are among those responsible for cleaning the residential area. The number of persons living in a household has negative loading in PC4, indicating that the higher the number of people lives in the household, the lesser chances of them to segregate the waste.

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

a 4 components extracted.

b Only cases for which Practice of waste segregation = Yes are used in the analysis phase.

This study explores the behavioral perspective in view that the way people manage waste is associated with their attitude and perception. Individual perception is governed by their background and present situation, shaped by values, moods, socials circumstances and individual expectation (Kaoje et al 2017). The results of this study are discussed from three aspects: (1) characterization of household solid waste management practices and perceptions among respondents (2) correlation between socioeconomic and respondent’s background with waste segregation practices and (3) correlation between socioeconomic and respondent’s background with household waste management perceptions. One of the primary intentions of acquiring the respondent’s characteristics was to understand the correlation between level of involvement in household SWM practices and the characteristics of the respondents.

Food waste was found as the major type of waste disposed by the communities in Panji sub-district (Fig. 1 and Table 2 ). Food waste has high moisture content and causes smell, which subsequently attracts disease vectors, such as flies, mosquitoes and cockroaches, and the proliferation of rodents, such as rats and mice, which pose threats to public health [ 68 , 75 ]. Majority of the respondents were found to cook at home (N=309, 91.4%) and cook on a daily basis (N=232, 68.6%; Table 1 ) which suggests that composting should be incorporated as one of the main approaches for proper waste management practices in the community. Individual compost bin should be provided in each household coupled with adequate training on simple compost technique can be organized within the locality as a stage by stage process. Alternatively, community scale composting can be proposed to focus solely on food waste management which is currently a growing practice among Malaysians [ 38 , 56 ]. This approach is gaining attention because of their lower energy footprint, ease of operation, need for lesser resources, lower operation and maintenance costs which have higher chances of public acceptance [ 32 ]. Food waste is organic waste which can decomposed and degraded into organic matter [ 33 ], which in turn can be used by the public to fertilize their garden soil. Most importantly, the training should emphasize on the practicality and feasible option of composting which is otherwise seen as a time-consuming and burdensome process [ 33 ].

Composting is beneficial to the environment by reducing greenhouse gases emissions and improvement of soil quality when applied to land. Furthermore, it is also in line with the circular economy concept by closing the loop of the system [ 14 ]. On the other hand, there are issues pertaining to its quality such as the nutrient and trace metal content. So, sorting the waste at source play a crucial role in minimising these impurities and collection systems play a fundamental role in removing some pollutants from wastes, especially organic fraction of municipal solid wastes, and improving compost quality [ 13 ]. One way to overcome this is by accommodating the waste collection and composting facilities with easy and convenient measurement of these contents which may be accessible by the community. Community composting programs should incorporate not only the step-by-step procedure of how to do composting but at the same time introducing easy to use kit or techniques applicable to the public and community such as test strip to measure the nutrients and trace metal [ 11 ]. In addition, by adding composting accelerators, the nutritional quality of the compost can be overcome. This factor can be done by developing a manual for public use.

The case of local composting at homes reduces transportation and collection cost by decreasing the amount of domestic waste carried to centralized composting facilities [ 76 ]. At the same time, household waste contains impurities and are widely distributed which hinders the efficiency of centralized composting facilities in disposing them. Centralized composting facilities in Asia suffer from low compost quality and poor sales [ 32 ]. As a result, community composting system at a smaller scale is more convenient within this region.

Composting is linked to diseases such as Aspergillosis, Legionnaire’s disease, histoplasmosis, paronychia and tetanus. In the case of Aspergillosis and Legionnaire’s disease, it may cause higher potential risk in large scale composting facilities compared to the smaller scale composting at home due to massive handling and agitating process in the former [ 26 , 59 ]. Histoplasmosis have been associated with chicken manure used in composting, however it is not able to survive in a well-done composting process [ 39 ]. Therefore, disease spread can be minimised by having local composting at homes and community composting system at a smaller scale than centralized composting facility. The most important thing in minimising disease spread would be the practise of wearing gloves and face mask during this composting activity.

In this study, there was not much difference between the respondents who separated their waste and who did not (Table 2 ), which implies there is room for increasing the practice of waste segregation. Waste segregation practice is lacking in developing countries, most prominently in Asia ( [ 15 , 48 ]; Vassanadumrongdee and Kittipongvises 2018) and African continents (Dlamini et al. 2017; Yoada et al. 2014). Since respondents lack adequate knowledge on the critical importance of waste separation at source in general, the volume of municipal solid waste dumped in landfill sites are progressively increasing, thus jeopardizing the remaining landfill space at a faster rate than initially planned. Therefore, to alleviate this environmental problem in the developing countries in general and in Panji sub-districts, specifically, more focused and sustained public awareness programs, integrated with an enabling infrastructure, are required to change residents’ perceptions toward improved waste separation at source rates [ 49 ]. Additionally, the outcome of the waste segregation activities should be similarly emphasized and how waste minimization in the first instance, and waste segregation at source, will benefit and enhance the standard of living or life quality of households ([ 44 ]; Yoada et al. 2014 [ 49 ];).

The perceptions of the respondents towards waste management were generally good. About 99.7% reported that waste management is important, 62.4% report that it is the responsibility of them to manage waste (Table 2 ). Resident’s participation in waste management activities is one of the ways in maximizing the capture of source-segregated materials which can be facilitated by providing an associated infrastructure [ 58 ]. Nevertheless, there are still some respondents who felt that waste management is not their responsibility, but instead lies mainly on the district council, which highlights the general perception of some Malaysians that waste is a local municipal issue [ 46 ]. About 95.9% of the respondents were aware that improper waste management leads to sicknesses or diseases, which implies that most of the households were aware of the health implication of waste. The management of MSW in developing Asian countries is driven by a public health perspective: the collection and disposal of waste in order to avoid the spread of disease vectors from uncollected waste [ 5 ]. The perception of the remaining 2.7% that waste management does not cause disease and 1.5% who were unsure need to be changed by targeting this group as a follow up program focusing on waste management and health issues. The respondents also have adequate level of awareness and knowledge about proper waste management (92.9%). This high level of awareness is because of several reasons for properly disposing of waste, including cleanliness as the major factor (81.4%), followed by fear of illnesses (12.4%), and odor (6.2%).

Most of the respondents thought that improper waste management could lead to diarrhea and malaria (Table 2 ). Diarrhea and waste management is associated with environmental factors such as waste disposal mechanism. House-to-house waste collection has been shown to decrease the incidence of malaria compared to other waste collection method [ 7 ]. Hence, this implies the possibility of malaria incidence in areas which burn their waste and areas which are inaccessible by any waste collection. Other diseases could be related to typhoid, dysentery, cholera, respiratory infections and injury [ 42 ]. Proper waste management can lead to improvement in the quality of the environment and public health while, mismanagement of waste can be implicated with water, soil and air pollutions [ 1 ], breeding of mosquitos, which in turn, causes disease [ 15 , 68 ]. Although knowledge and awareness are acceptable among the respondents, this perception did not inculcate into waste segregation practices. In order to bridge the gap between awareness and behavior change, it is necessary for individuals to understand the importance of their role in how to do it and why it is important to do so [ 34 ]. More focused, detailed and continuous awareness and knowledge should be emphasized on this aspect specifically in the topics of environmental cleanliness, drainage systems, the recycling process in theory and practice, and a proper way to dispose of wastes [ 61 ].

Our findings have reported that socio-demographic factors (age, marital status) and respondents’ background (locality and house types) have influenced the household waste practices and perceptions in Panji sub-district (Tables 3 , 4 , 5 and 6 ). Age is associated with the maturity of the person which plays a significant factor in impacting their level of awareness on environmental health and sanitation ([ 12 , 17 ]; Meneses and [ 40 , 45 ]). The result of our study is consistent with the findings by Fan et al. [ 22 ] that older individuals prefer to engage more in waste sorting activities than young people in Singapore.

On the other hand, the number of children in the household may be a significant factor that influence waste separation. This for instance has been mentioned in Xu et al., (2017), where the intention of middle-aged adults towards behaving a more eco-friendly system was affected by critical social reference groups around them, such as the interaction with family or the motivation, especially children, and/or the consideration of the health situation of the whole family.

However, in other studies such as in Ittiravivongs [ 28 ] and Vassanadumrongdee & Kittipongvises (2018), socio-demographic variables became insignificant factors that influenced waste segregation participation. Knussen et al., [ 36 ] & White & Hyde [ 73 ] also indicate that the strongest variable influence participation in waste segregation program was past behaviour on regular source separation at home or recycling habit. Having waste separation in the office also could have positive influence on source separation intention, which is consistent with the study of Saphores et al. [ 64 ].

Considering number of children in the analysis is beyond the scope of this paper. Our result indicates that there is no significant difference in the waste segregation practice by the number of occupants in the household (χ 2 = 2.36, p = 0.31). For instance, the results show 54.2% of household with more than 6 occupants practice waste segregation, as compared to those who are not at 45.8%. This would suggest that the number of children in the house could be less influence on the waste segregation practice or vice versa. Future study may consider number of children in the family as one of the variables to be tested to confirm the hypothesis.

It was interesting to note that the types of housing in the case study were found to contribute heavily to the practices and perceptions of household waste management. Respondents who lived in bungalows (30.5%) and other type of houses than semi-detached, terrace and village (28.4%) are most likely to segregate their waste. Bungalows are associated with high income areas in Malaysia [ 53 ], which could be related to waste collection services are provided from these areas and possibly these households subscribe to this service. Potentially, these types of houses also have more space to be allocated for waste sorting than the other type of houses.

Other socio-demographic characteristics such as gender, education level and monthly income did not influence the practices and perceptions of the respondents. There were no significant associations between gender and waste segregation practices (χ 2 =0.596, p=0.440). Our finding is contrasting to the study by Ehrampoush and Moghadam [ 18 ] which reported that gender is likely to have an influence on the perceptions of household SWM. This view is supported by Mukherji et al. [ 48 ] who found that women, because of traditional gender roles associated with their household activities, have a closer engagement with waste management at household level.

The level of education has been reported as an important factor that could influence people’s perception of household waste management [ 40 ]. In this study, most of the respondents received their education until secondary school (57.4%), followed by diploma or degree (31.1%) but this did not influence their household SWM practices and perception (χ 2 =6.188, p=0.19), in particular waste segregation practice (Table 3 ). The poor average income of respondents is considered a very important variable that could influence people’s perception and attitudes negatively on solid waste management system (Parfitt et al. 1994 [ 40 ];). But, this is not the case in our study as economic consideration appears not to play a major role in the respondent’s perception as well as attitude to solid waste management practices (χ 2 =4.55, p=0.47).

The outcome from the PCA analysis showed that age, marital status and type of housing are the factors which contributed the most to waste segregation practices at home. Our finding agrees with the study by Vassanadumrongdee and Kittipongvises (2018) which found that age and family with children have a positive influence on respondent's source separation. Age was also a determinant factor in waste management practices in other studies [ 2 , 15 ]. With aging and married respondents, this could be highly related to the increasing sense of responsibility towards the environment and the importance of increasing the quality of life among household members. Types of housing could be related to either waste collection services were provided in these areas or that limited number of households subscribe to their service. Other studies in the literature have reported on the positive relationship between residence types and waste separation practices ([ 15 ]; Vassanadumrongdee and Kittipongvises 2018).

The high loadings on cooking at home and cooking frequency towards waste segregation practices indicate that these groups of respondents can be chosen for further interventions in terms of adopting proper waste management practices such as small-scale composting, recycling and waste minimization practices. The lifestyle of the respondents plays a significant role in the daily waste disposal practices in households (Yoada et al. 2014 [ 15 ];). The link between improper waste management practice and disease occurrence was also reported in studies in Ghana (Yoada et al. 2014 [ 2 ];). Their studies also reported that cleanliness was the main factor which motivates them to segregate the waste which is concurrent with the findings in this study.

Education is negatively related to waste segregation activity (Table 6 ), indicating that people with lower education are more willing to segregate their waste as compared to those with higher education. The likely reasons could be related to different lifestyle and time constraint to allocate purposely for waste sorting activities [ 15 ]. People with higher education level may be spending most of their time at the workplace, and not at home. However, more educational campaign should be promoted by emphasizing on the benefits of waste segregation activities. Sufficient knowledge, such as clear instructions provided in a communication and collection campaign, can increase the probability of waste separation behavior (Vassanadumrongdee and Kittipongvises S 2018).

The higher number of occupants living in the household is associated with a less likely chance of segregating the waste (Table 6 ). The result of our study is consistent with the study by Addo et al. [ 2 ] which reported that household sizes of 4 to 6 and above 7 were less likely to engage in the practice of waste management as compared to household size below 4 people. This is probably due to the household size tends to reduce the quantity of household waste and the practice of waste management. In contrast, studies by Osbjer et al. [ 54 ], indicate that waste management practice is associated with a higher number of people in the households, which could possibly be due to the need to handle waste generated by larger populations within the household.

One of the objectives of this study was to determine variables that influence waste segregation behavior among respondents. The PCA was adapted for this objective rather than correlation analysis for several reason. The correlation coefficient assumes a linear association where any linear transformation of variables will not affect the correlation. However, variables X and Y may also have a non-linear association, which could still yield a low correlation coefficient [ 30 ]. In addition, the correlation coefficient cannot be interpreted as causal.

It is possible that there is a causal effect of one variable on the other, but there may also be other possible explanations that the correlation coefficient does not take into account. Since several variables may influence respondent’s behavior on waste segregation activity at one time, the correlation coefficient analysis may not adequate to identify the significant variables and the connectivity between them accurately. Therefore, PCA was used to help us understand the connection between these variables as it can identify the correlation among the features efficiently.

There are thousands of features in the dataset that possible to highlight some trend or the influence of one factor to another. There are challenges to visualize the algorithm on all features efficiently especially when the performance of the algorithm may reduce with the bigger dataset. The PCA improve the algorithm performance by getting rid of correlated variables which don't contribute to the model and the analysis of the algorithms reduces significantly with less number of features. The Principal Components are also independent of one another. There is no correlation among them. It also reduces overfitting by reducing the number of features where it mainly occurs when there are too many variables in the dataset.

The scenario of the covid-19 pandemic contributes to a significant challenge in managing household waste management globally and specifically in developing countries. Waste management in the pandemic scenario requires consideration in SARS-CoV-2 transmission through MSW handling that includes survival time of the virus on the surfaces: population density and socioeconomic conditions [ 35 ]. In general, waste management phases (waste packing and delivering by the users; waste withdrawal; waste transport; and waste treatment) exposed the community and workers to direct contact with contaminated objects and surfaces; as well as contact with airborne droplets at a distance that may lead to the covid-19 [ 16 ]. Due to these reasons, waste management practices are designed to respond to the pandemic through changes in the collection system, allocation of treatment options, safety measure and priority separation, and functionality of circular economy strategies [ 72 ].

As a developing country, it is predicted that the effect of covid-19 on the waste management practices are more crucial due to the increase in disposable personal protective equipment at the household level and changes in eating habits, as a consequence of lifestyle disruptions and psychological stress due to lockdowns [ 4 , 55 ]. Developing countries have a higher risk of waste and wastewater contamination, leading to significant public health issues [ 71 ]. Inefficient waste management practices such as insecure landfills, lack of technical knowledge, scientific and economic resources, and lack of waste emergency policies produce severe consequences to the community and workers [ 63 , 65 , 71 ].

In order to improve the level of household solid waste management in the study area and Malaysia in general, it is important to empower the key drivers. The key drivers can be categorized as institutional-administrative, technological, economical, and social drivers [ 70 ]. A strong policy that implements direct regulation and enforcement; provide economic incentives or disincentives; and inform, interact and engage with the community are required [ 60 ].

Household solid waste management technologies that are being practised globally are landfilling, incineration, pyrolysis, Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF), gasification, and anaerobic digestion [ 57 ]. As a developing country that focuses on solid waste management through landfilling, it is important to put extra attention on: i. decentralization of household solid waste management; ii. segregation at the source; iii. hygienic and safe handling; iv. flammable landfilll gasses handling; v. soil salinity from compost application; vi. Sustainable landfill management; vii. alternative markets for energy products; and viii. Implementation of the “pay as you throw” system [ 50 ].

Practical Implications, Study Limitations and Future Perspectives

This study highlights that waste segregation practice among respondents are still low and food waste are mixed with other household waste. This study provides as a baseline data in the region where less study was emphasized.

Quantitative and qualitative approach were used in this study by adopting descriptive and statistical analysis to improve the significance of the issue. Despite the significance of some aspects of this study, further studies should be done to incorporate children and teenagers as the participants and a more detailed questionnaire incorporating detailed health implications. Apart from that, a cross-sectional survey using random sampling technique was used to assess the household SWM practices and perceptions among the residents. This study is also limited to only Panji sub-districts which requires a wider region to generalize the findings of the study. The survey questionnaires depend on self-reporting manner, which may be subject to bias. Further study is recommended to engage observation at houses or at the waste collecting points to complement the survey. Moreover, the association between household socio-economic factors and health implications were limited. Future study should address this factor for a more focused and sustained public awareness programs.

Conclusions

The study found that the waste segregation practice among respondents can be considered as low, where the number of respondents who segregate their waste was equivalent to those who did not, which implies there is room for improvement. The main component of solid waste generated at home was largely food debris that has the potential to be composted and plastics that can be recycled, which were mainly disposed without separation. The local solid waste management authority should focus on utilizing this organic waste through a larger scale and wider involvement of the locals in composting program. The growth of small-scale community-based waste composting can act as a potential start up venue in accelerating this program, without the necessity of extensive investment by the local authority. The authority in the study area has provided appropriate waste disposal sites, but there are also some that were disposed in inappropriate sites. Majority of the respondents were also aware that improper waste management can lead to diseases. Age, marital status and, type of house was found to be the group that segregate their waste the most, indicating that respondents which fall under this category can be the target for further intervention programs. This study suggests the local authorities to design waste separation programs that suit the needs of targeted population, to ensure high participation rate among the community. Marketing and campaigns should emphasize the positive perception and attitude towards waste separation at home and also negative perception of non-participants. This study may provide authorities in Malaysia with baseline information to set the future implementations of waste segregation activities in households. This study also suggests focusing on inculcating community involvement in doing waste separation at source, waste reduction and recycling as a habit and way of life. The local authority may facilitate this activity by providing bins to segregate wastes, establishing waste banks and recycling facilities at a wider scale than the scattered existing ones. Both a top-down and bottom-up approach should work hand in-hand to realize the sustainable solid waste management as a success.

Nevertheless, acknowledging the limitations of the current study, a more detailed and thorough study should incorporate a wider region, in-depth association of waste separation programs and health implications. Combining survey questionnaire with statistical analysis act as a stepping stone to expand the study by engaging the community in actual waste separation activities. This can be done by initiating a collaboration between the local authority, the leader in a community and the residents itself as a pilot study. In addition, the findings of this study will serve as baseline evidence and pave the way for other researchers and policymakers to conduct more rigorous studies on this arena.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are included within the supplementary material section.

Abbreviations

Statistical Package for Social Science

Solid Waste Management

municipal solid waste

not in my backyard

Kota Bharu Municipal Council

Sustainable Development Goals

Malaysian Ringgit

Principal component analysis

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkim

Refuse Derived Fuel

Abdullah Z, Salleh MS, Ismail KNIK. Survey of Household Solid Waste Management and Waste Minimization in Malaysia: Awareness, Issues and Practices. International Journal of Environmental & Agriculture Research (IJOEAR). 2017;3(12):38–48.

Google Scholar  

Addo HO, Dun-Dery EJ, Afoakwa E, Elizabeth A, Ellen A, Rebecca M. Correlates of domestic waste management and related health outcomes in Sunyani, Ghana: a protocol towards enhancing policy. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):615. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4537-8 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Agamuthu P, Fauziah SH. Challenges and issues in moving towards sustainable landfilling in a transitory country-Malaysia. Waste Manag Res. 2011;29:13–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X10383080 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Aldaco R, Hoehn D, Laso J, Margallo M, Ruiz-Salmón J, Cristobal J, et al. Food waste management during the COVID-19 outbreak: a holistic climate, economic and nutritional approach. Sci Total Environ. 2020;742:140524.

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Aleluia J, Ferrão P. Characterization of urban waste management practices in developing Asian countries: A new analytical framework based on waste characteristics and urban dimension. Waste Manag. 2016;58:415–29.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Aminuddin MSH, Rahman HA. Health risk survey for domestic waste management agency workers: Case study on Kota Bharu Municipal Council (MPKB), Kelantan. Malaysia Int J Environ Sci Dev. 2015;6(8):629.

Amoatey PK, Winter J, Kaemph C (2008) Solid Waste Disposal and the Incidences of Malaria: Any Correlation? Proceedings of the Second IASTED Africa Conference September 8-10, 2008 Gaborone, Botswana Water Resource Management (AfricaWRM 2008).

Ancona C, Badaloni C, Mataloni F, Bolignano A, Bucci S, Cesaroni G, et al. Mortality and morbidity in a population exposed to multiple sources of air pollution: A retrospective cohort study using air dispersion models. Environ Res. 2015;137:467–74.

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Asante KP, Kinney P, Zandoh C, Vliet EV, Nettey E, Abokyi L, et al. Childhood Respiratory Morbidity and Cooking Practices Among Households in a Predominantly Rural Area of Ghana. Afr J Infect Dis. 2016;10(2):102–10.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Aweng ER, Fatt CC. Survey of Potential Health Risk of Rubbish Collectors from the Garbage Dump Sites in Kelantan, Malaysia. Asian J Appl Sci (ISSN: 2321 – 0893). 2014;2(1):36–44.

Ayilara MS, Olanrewaju OS, Babalola OO, Odeyemi O. Waste Management through Composting. Challenges Potent Sustain. 2020;12, 4456:10.3390/su12114456.

Bradley CJ, Waliczek TM, Zajicek JM. Relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude of high school students. J Environ Educ. 1999;30(3):17–21.

Cesaro A, Belgiorno V, Guida M. Compost from organic solid waste: quality assessment and European regulations for its sustainable use. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2015;94:72e79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.11.003 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Chen T, Zhang S, Yuan Z. Adoption of solid organic waste composting products: A critical review. J Clean Prod. 2020;272:122712.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Choon SW, Tan SH, Chong LL. The perception of households about solid waste management issues in Malaysia. Environ Dev Sustain. 2017;19:1685–700.

Di Maria F, Beccaloni E, Bonadonna L, Cini C, Confalonieri E, La Rosa G, et al. Minimization of spreading of SARS-CoV-2 via household waste produced by subjects affected by COVID-19 or in quarantine. Sci Total Environ. 2020;743:140803.

Eagles PFJ, Demare R. Factors influencing children’s environmental attitudes. J Env Education. 1999;30(4):33–7.

Ehrampoush MH, Mogahadam MB. Survey of knowledge, attitude and practice of Yazd University of Medical Sciences students about solid wastes disposal and recycling. Iranian J Env Health Sci Eng. 2005;2(2):26–30.

Ekere W, Mugisha J, Drake L. Factors influencing waste separation and utilization among households in the Lake Victoria crescent. Uganda Waste Manag. 2009;29(12):3047–51.

Emery AD, Griffiths AJ, Williams KP. An in-depth study of the effects of socio-economic conditions on household waste recycling practices. Waste Manag Res. 2003;21(3):180–90.

EPQS (Expert Pannel on Air quality standards) (2009) Adendum to Guidelines for Halogens and Hydrogen Halides in Ambient Air. London; The stationary office.

Fan B, Yang W, Shen X. A comparison study of ‘motivation–intention–behavior’ model on household solid waste sorting in China and Singapore. J Clean Prod. 2019;211:442–54.

Fauziah SH, Agamuthu P. Trends in sustainable landfilling in Malaysia, a developing country. Waste Manag Res. 2012:1–8.

Field A (2009) Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. 3rd Edition, Sage Publications Ltd., London.

Gutberlet J, Uddin SMN. Household waste and health risks affecting waste pickers and the environment in low-and middle-income countries. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2017;23(4):299–310.

Huss A, Derks LAN, Heederik DJJ, Wouters IM (2020) Green waste compost as potential reservoirs of Legionella in the Netherlands. Clin Microbiol Infection 26 (2020) 1259.e1e1259.e3.

Idris A, Inanc B, Hassan M. Overview of waste disposal and landfills/dumps in Asian countries. J Mat Cycl Waste Manag. 2004;6(2):104–10.

Ittiravivongs A (2011). Factors Influence Household Solid Waste Recycling Behaviour In Thailand: An Integrated Perspective. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment. Volume 167, Pages 12. Paper 10.2495/ST110391.

Ismail SNS, Zainal Abidin E, Hashim Z, Rasdi I, How V, Praveena SM, et al. Disaster Debris Management during the 2014-2015 Malaysia Flood Incident. Mal J Med Health Sci. 2018;14(SP2):112–9.

Janse RJ, Hoekstra T, Jager KJ, Zoccali C, Tripepi G, Dekker FW, et al. Conducting correlation analysis: important limitations and pitfalls. Clin Kidney J. 2021;1–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfab085 .

Jarup L, Briggs D, de Hoogh C, Morris S, Hurt C, Lewin A, et al. (2002) Cancer risks in populations living near landfill sites in Great Britain. Br J Cancer. 2002;86:1732–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6600311 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Joshi P, Visvanathan C. Sustainable management practices of food waste in Asia: Technological and policy drivers. J Environ Manag. 2019;247:538–50.

Karim Ghani WAWA, Rusli IF, Biak DRA, Idris A. An application of the theory of planned behaviour to study the influencing factors of participation in source separation of food waste. Waste Manag. 2013;33:1276–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.09.019 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Kirakozian A. Selective Sorting of Waste: A study of Individual Behaviours. GREDEG WP No. 2014:2013–49.

Kulkarni BN, Anantharama V. Repercussions of COVID-19 pandemic on municipal solid waste management: Challenges and opportunities. Sci Total Environ. 2020;743:140693.

Knussen C, Yule F, MacKenzie J, Wells M. An analysis of intentions to recycle household waste: the roles of past behaviour, perceived habit, and perceived lack of facilities. J Environ Psychol. 2004;24:237e46.

Li L, Ararel E, Jeuland M. The drivers of household drinking water choices in Singapore: Evidence from multivariable regression analysis of perceptions and household characteristics. Sci Total Environ. 2019;671:1116–24.

Lim WJ, Chin NL, Yusof AY, Yahya A, Tee TP. Food waste handling in Malaysia and comparison with other Asian countries. Int Food Res J. 2016;23(Suppl):S1–6.

Londoño LFG, Leoń LCP, Ochoa JGM, Rodriguez AZ, Jaramillo CAP, Ruiz JMA, Taylor ML, Arteaga MA, Alzate MdPJ (2019) Capacity of Histoplasma capsulatum to Survive the Composting Process. Appl Environ Soil Sci. Volume 2019, Article ID 5038153, 9 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5038153 .

Longe EO, Longe OO, Ukpebor EF. People’s Perception On Household Solid Waste Management in Ojo Local Government Area in Nigeria. Iran J Environ Health Sci Eng. 2009;6(3):201–8.

Maheshwari R, Gupta S, Das K (2015) Impact of Landfill Waste on Health: An Overview. IOSR Journal of Environmental Science, Toxicol Food Technol 1(4): 17-23. e-ISSN: 2319-2402, p- ISSN: 2319-2399.

Mamady K. Factors Influencing Attitude, Safety Behavior, and Knowledge regarding Household Waste Management in Guinea: A Cross-Sectional Study. J Environ Public Health. 2016:1–9.

Manaf LA, MAA S, NIM Z. Municipal solid waste management in Malaysia: Practices and challenges. Waste Manag. 2009;29:2902–6.

Matter A, Dietschi M, Zurbrügg C. Improving the informal recycling sector through segregation of waste in the Household- The case of Dhaka Bangladesh. Habitat International. 2013;38:150–6.

Meneses G.D, Palacio AB (2005) Recycling behavior: A multidimensional approach. Environ Behav 37: 837–860.

Moh YCA, Manaf L. Solid waste management transformation and future challenges of source separation and recycling practice in Malaysia. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2017;116:1–14.

Moh YC, Manaf LA. Overview of household solid waste recycling policy status and challenges in Malaysia. Resourc, Convers Recycl. 2014;82:50–61.

Mukherji SB, Sekiyama M, Mino T, Chaturvedi B. Resident Knowledge and Willingness to Engage in Waste Management in Delhi. India Sustain. 2016;8:1065. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8101065 .

Mwanza BP, Mbohwa C, Telukdarie A. Levers Influencing Sustainable Waste Recovery at Household Level: A Review. Procedia Manufact. 2018;21:615–22.

Nanda S, Berruti F. Municipal solid waste management and landfilling technologies: a review. Environ Chem Lett. 2021;19(2):1433–56.

Ncube F, Ncube EJ, Voyi K. A systematic critical review of epidemiological studies on public health concerns of municipal solid waste handling. Perspect Public Health. 2017;137(2):102–8.

Norsa’adah B, Salinah O, Naing NN, Sarimah A. Community health survey of residents living near a solid waste open dumpsite in Sabak, Kelantan, Malaysia. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(1):311.

PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Omran AL, Mahmood A, Abdul Aziz H, Robinson GM. Investigating Households Attitude Toward Recycling of Solid Waste in Malaysia: A Case Study. Int J Environ Res. 2009;3(2):275–88.

Osbjer K, Boqvist S, Sokerya S, Kannarath C, San S, Davun H, et al. Household practices related to disease transmission between animals and humans in rural Cambodia. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(476):1–10.

Oyedotun TDT, Kasim OF, Famewo A, Oyedotun TD, Moonsammy S, Ally N, et al. Municipal waste management in the era of COVID-19: perceptions, practices, and potentials for research in developing countries. Res Glob. 2020;2:100033.

Petaling Jaya Municipal Council (MBPJ) (2010) Composting closing the loop at home. A household home composting program in Petaling Jaya Municipal Council. http://www.ecoideal.com.my/danidaurban/swmc/download/SWMC_CI_Composting%20at%20MBPJ.pdf .

Potdar A, Singh A, Unnnikrishnan S, Naik N, Naik M, Nimkar I. Innovation in solid waste management through Clean Development Mechanism in India and other countries. Process Saf Environ Prot. 2016;101:160–9.

Rispo A, Williams ID, Shaw PJ. Source Segregation and food waste prevention activities in high density households in a deprived urban area. Waste Manag. 2015;44:15–27.

Roca-Barcelo A, Douglas P, Fechta D, Sterrantino AF, Williams B, Blangiardo M, et al. Hansell AL (2020) Risk of respiratory hospital admission associated with modelled concentrations of Aspergillus fumigatus from composting facilities in England. Environ Res. 2020;183:108949.

Rodić L, Wilson DC. Resolving governance issues to achieve priority sustainable development goals related to solid waste management in developing countries. Sustainability. 2017;9(3):404.

Saat NZM, Hanawi SA, Subhi N, Zulfakar SS, Wahab MIA. Practice and attitude on household waste management in Tumpat and Kuala Krai, Kelantan. Res J Social Sci. 2018;11(1):14–7. https://doi.org/10.22587/rjss.2018.11.1.3 .

Samah MAA, Manaf LA, Ahsan A, Sulaiman WNA, Agamuthu P, D'Silva JL. Household Solid Waste Composition in Balakong City, Malaysia: Trend and Management. Pol J Environ Stud. 2013;22(6):1807–16.

Sarkodie SA, Owusu PA. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on waste management. Environ Dev Sustain. 2021;23(5):7951–60.

Saphores JDM, Ogunseitan OA, Shapiro AA. Willingness to engage in a proenvironmental behavior: an analysis of e-waste recycling based on a national survey of U.S. households. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2012;60:49e63.

Sharma HB, Vanapalli KR, Cheela VRS, Ranjan VP, Jaglan AK, Dubey B, et al. Challenges, opportunities, and innovations for effective solid waste management during and post COVID-19 pandemic. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2020;162:105052.

Shigeru M. Waste separation at home: Are Japanese municipal curbside recycling policies efficient? Resour Conserv Recycl. 2011;55(3):325–34.

Sujauddin M, Huda SMS, Hoque AR. Household solid waste characteristics and management in Chittagong. Bangladesh Waste management. 2008;28(9):1688–95.

Suleman Y, Darko ET, Agyemang-Duah W. Solid Waste Disposal and Community Health Implications in Ghana: Evidence from Sawaba, Asokore Mampong Municipal Assembly. J Civil Environ Eng. 2015;202. https://doi.org/10.4172/2165-784X.1000202 .

Tekler ZD, Low R, Chung SY, Low JSC, Blessing L. A Waste Management Behavioural Framework of Singapore’s Food Manufacturing Industry using Factor Analysis. Procedia CIRP. 2019;80:578–83.

Tot B, Srđević B, Vujić B, Russo MAT, Vujić G. Evaluation of key driver categories influencing sustainable waste management development with the analytic hierarchy process (AHP): Serbia example. Waste Manag Res. 2016;34(8):740–7.

Tripathi A, Tyagi VK, Vivekanand V, Bose P, Suthar S. Challenges, opportunities and progress in solid waste management during COVID-19 pandemic. Case Stud Chem Environ Eng. 2020;2:100060.

Van Fan Y, Jiang P, Hemzal M, Klemeš JJ. An update of COVID-19 influence on waste management. Sci Total Environ. 2021;754:142014.

White KM, Hyde MK. The role of self-perceptions in the prediction of household recycling behavior in Australia. Environ Behav. 2012;44:785e99.

Yang H, Ma M, Thompson JR, Flower RJ. Waste management, informal recycling, environmental pollution and public health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2018;72(3):237–43.

Yatim SRM, Arshad MA. Household Solid Waste Characteristics and Management in Low Cost Apartment in Petaling Jaya. Selangor Health Environ J. 2010;1(2):58–63.

Zhou X, Yang J, Xu S, Wang J, Zhou Q, Li Y, et al. Rapid in-situ composting of household food waste. Process Saf Environ Prot. 2020;141:259–66.

Ziraba AK, Haregu TN, Mberu B. A review and framework for understanding the potential impact of poor solid waste management on health in developing countries. Arch Public Heal. 2016;74(1):1–11.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to everybody who completed the questionnaires and to Miss Aisyah Ariff, Miss Zetty Hiddayah binti Zuharizam and Mr Wan Izulfikri bin Wan Mohd Roslan for assisting in data collection.

This study was financially supported by Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (Postdoctoral Fellowship SLAB) and Universiti Sains Malaysia. None of the funders were involved in the design of the study, in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in the writing of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Environmental and Occupational Health Program, School of Health Sciences, Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 16150, Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia

Widad Fadhullah, Nor Iffah Najwa Imran & Hasmah Abdullah

School of Industrial Technology, Universiti Sains Malaysia, USM, 11800, Penang, Malaysia

Widad Fadhullah & Mohd Hafiidz Jaafar

Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

Sharifah Norkhadijah Syed Ismail

Biomedicine Program, School of Health Sciences, Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 16150, Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia

Hasmah Abdullah

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

WF contributed in conceptualization and writing the manuscript. NINI collected the data, contributed to the literature review and execute the project. SNSI contributed in the formal analysis, methodology, data curation and the tables and figures. MHJ contributed to editing of the manuscript. HA contributed in supervision, project administration and planning. All authors have read and approved the final version of this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Widad Fadhullah .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Ethic Committee of Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM/JEPeM/17100560). Written informed consent was obtained from each participants, after the participants received adequate information from the research about the aim and procedure of the study. All the data obtained from the subjects was kept confidential for research purpose only.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

Authors report that there is no competing interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1., additional file 2., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Fadhullah, W., Imran, N.I.N., Ismail, S.N.S. et al. Household solid waste management practices and perceptions among residents in the East Coast of Malaysia. BMC Public Health 22 , 1 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-12274-7

Download citation

Received : 10 November 2020

Accepted : 22 November 2021

Published : 05 January 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-12274-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Households’ Practices and Perception
• Waste Segregation and Separation
• Principal Component Analysis
• Public Health
• Solid Waste

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• General enquiries: [email protected]

IEEE Account

• Change Username/Password
• Update Address

Purchase Details

• Payment Options
• Order History
• View Purchased Documents

Profile Information

• Communications Preferences
• Profession and Education
• Technical Interests
• US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333
• Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060
• Contact & Support
• About IEEE Xplore
• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Nondiscrimination Policy
• Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. © Copyright 2024 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.

Data on the Effects of Covid-19 Pandemic on the Quantity, Quality and Management of Solid Waste in Babol Hospitals

9 Pages Posted: 28 Aug 2024

Yousef Dadban Shahamat

Golestan University of Medical Sciences

Khadije Bakhshi

Gonabad University of Medical Sciences

Mostafa Javanian

Babol University of Medical Sciences

Mohammad Hadi Mehdinejada

Ahmad salehi, hosein ali asgharnia, hasan reza rokni, hosein faraji.

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Medical waste is about 1-2 % of urban waste, which is very important in terms of health. The aim this study is analyse the Effects of Covid-19 Pandemic on the Quantity, Quality and Management of Solid Waste in Babol Hospitals. In this regard, all 6 government hospitals were selected and investigated. Data were collected by the researcher using the standard checklist of the Environmental and Labor Health Center of the Ministry of Health. Finally, the obtained data were analyzed using Excel. The total solid waste produced by the studied hospitals before Covid-19 pandemic was 3019.9 kg/day, of which 51.7 % was ordinary waste, 43.25 % was infectious waste, 3.11 % was chemical waste, and 1.93 % was sharp pointed waste. The total solid waste produced in 2021 was 3053.2 kg/day, of which 35 % was ordinary waste, 59.31 % was infectious waste, 3.35 % was dangerous chemical medical waste and 2.3 % was sharp pointed waste. Given the large amount and the danger of infectious waste in the hospital, careful and continuous monitoring of the management of such waste will be necessary to ensure, maintain and increase the level of health of the personnel, patients and all referring to hospitals.

Keywords: Medical waste, Covid-19, Hospital, Babol

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Golestan University of Medical Sciences ( email )

Gorgan Iran

Gonabad University of Medical Sciences ( email )

Gonabad Iran

Babol University of Medical Sciences ( email )

Hosein faraji (contact author), affiliation not provided to ssrn ( email ).

No Address Available

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, global health ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Planetary Health eJournal

Environment & human health ejournal, health systems & hospital infrastructure ejournal.

• Open access
• Published: 26 August 2024

Solid health care waste management practice in Ethiopia, a convergent mixed method study

• Yeshanew Ayele Tiruneh 1 ,
• L. M. Modiba 2 &
• S. M. Zuma 2  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  985 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

66 Accesses

Metrics details

Introduction

Healthcare waste is any waste generated by healthcare facilities that is considered potentially hazardous to health. Solid healthcare waste is categorized into infectious and non-infectious wastes. Infectious waste is material suspected of containing pathogens and potentially causing disease. Non-infectious waste includes wastes that have not been in contact with infectious agents, hazardous chemicals, or radioactive substances, similar to household waste, i.e. plastic, papers and leftover foods.

This study aimed to investigate solid healthcare waste management practices and develop guidelines to improve solid healthcare waste management practices in Ethiopia. The setting was all health facilities found in Hossaena town.

A mixed-method study design was used. For the qualitative phase of this study, eight FGDs were conducted from 4 government health facilities, one FGD from each private health facility (which is 37 in number), and forty-five FGDs were conducted. Four FGDs were executed with cleaners; another four were only health care providers because using homogeneous groups promotes discussion. The remaining 37 FGDs in private health facilities were mixed from health professionals and cleaners because of the number of workers in the private facilities. For the quantitative phase, all health facilities and health facility workers who have direct contact with healthcare waste management practice participated in this study. Both qualitative and quantitative study participants were taken from the health facilities found in Hossaena town.

Seventeen (3.1%) health facility workers have hand washing facilities. Three hundred ninety-two (72.6%) of the participants agree on the availability of one or more personal protective equipment (PPE) in the facility ‘‘ the reason for the absence of some of the PPEs, like boots and goggles, and the shortage of disposable gloves owes to cost inflation from time to time and sometimes absent from the market’’ . The observational finding shows that colour-coded waste bins are available in 23 (9.6%) rooms. 90% of the sharp containers were reusable, and 100% of the waste storage bins were plastic buckets that were easily cleanable. In 40 (97.56%) health facilities, infectious wastes were collected daily from the waste generation areas to the final disposal points. Two hundred seventy-one (50.2%) of the respondents were satisfied or agreed that satisfactory procedures are available in case of an accident. Only 220 (40.8%) respondents were vaccinated for the Hepatitis B virus.

Hand washing facilities, personal protective equipment and preventive vaccinations are not readily available for health workers. Solid waste segregation practices are poor and showed that solid waste management practices (SWMP) are below the acceptable level.

Peer Review reports

Healthcare waste (HCW) encompasses all types of waste generated while providing health-related services, spanning activities such as diagnosis, immunization, treatment, and research. It constitutes a diverse array of materials, each presenting potential hazards to health and the environment. Within the realm of HCW, one finds secretions and excretions from humans, cultures, and waste containing a stock of infectious agents. Discarded plastic materials contaminated with blood or other bodily fluids, pathological wastes, and discarded medical equipment are classified as healthcare waste. Sharps, including needles, scalpels, and other waste materials generated during any healthcare service provision, are also considered potentially hazardous to health [ 1 ].

Healthcare waste in solid form (HCW) is commonly divided into two primary groups: infectious and non-infectious. The existence of pathogens in concentrations identifies infectious waste or amounts significant enough to induce diseases in vulnerable hosts [ 1 ] If healthcare facility waste is free from any combination with infectious agents, nearly 85% is categorized as non-hazardous waste, exhibiting characteristics similar to conventional solid waste found in households [ 2 ]. World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that appropriate colour-coded waste receptacles be available in all medical and other waste-producing areas [ 3 ].

Solid waste produced in the course of healthcare activities carries a higher potential for infection and injury than any other type of waste. Improper disposal of sharps waste increases the risk of disease transmission among health facility workers and general populations [ 1 ]. Inadequate and inappropriate handling of healthcare waste may have serious public health consequences and a significant environmental impact. The World Health Organization (2014) guidelines also include the following guidance for hand washing and the use of alcohol-based hand rubs: Wash hands before starting work, before entering an operating theatre, before eating, after touching contaminated objects, after using a toilet, and in all cases where hands are visibly soiled [ 4 ].

Among the infectious waste category, sharps waste is the most hazardous waste because of its ability to puncture the skin and cause infection [ 3 ]. Accidents or occurrences, such as near misses, spills, container damage, improper waste segregation, and incidents involving sharps, must be reported promptly to the waste management officer or an assigned representative [ 5 ].

Africa is facing a growing waste management crisis. While the volumes of waste generated in Africa are relatively small compared to developed regions, the mismanagement of waste in Africa already impacts human and environmental health. Infectious waste management has always remained a neglected public health problem in developing countries, resulting in a high burden of environmental pollution affecting the general masses. In Ethiopia, there is no updated separate regulation specific to healthcare waste management in the country to enforce the proper management of solid HCW [ 6 ].

In Ethiopia, like other developing countries, healthcare waste segregation practice was not given attention and did not meet the minimum HCWM standards, and it is still not jumped from paper. Previous study reveals that healthcare waste generation rates are significantly higher than the World Health Organization threshold, which ranges from 29.5–53.12% [ 7 , 8 ]. In Meneilk II Hospital, the proportion of infectious waste was 53.73%, and in the southern and northern parts of Ethiopia, it was 34.3 and 53%, respectively. Generally, this figure shows a value 3 to 4 times greater than the threshold value recommended by the World Health Organization [ 7 ].

Except for sharp wastes, segregation practice was poor, and all solid wastes were collected without respecting the colour-coded waste disposal system [ 9 ]. The median waste generation rate was found to vary from 0.361- 0.669 kg/patient/day, comprising 58.69% non-hazardous and 41.31% hazardous wastes. The amount of waste generated increased as the number of patients flow increased. Public hospitals generated a high proportion of total healthcare waste (59.22%) in comparison with private hospitals (40.48) [ 10 ]. The primary SHCW treatment and disposal mechanism was incineration, open burning, burring into unprotected pits and open dumping on municipal dumping sites as well as in the hospital backyard. Carelessness, negligence of the health workers, patients and cleaners, and poor commitment of the facility leaders were among the major causes of poor HCWM practice in Ethiopia [ 9 ]. This study aimed to investigate solid healthcare waste management practices and develop guidelines to improve solid healthcare waste management practices in Ethiopia.

The setting for this study was all health facilities found in Hossaena town, which is situated 232 kms from the capital city of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, and 165 kms from the regional municipality of Hawasa. The health facilities found in the town were one university hospital, one private surgical centre, three government health centres, 17 medium clinics, and 19 small clinics were available in the city and; health facility workers who have direct contact with generating and disposal of HCW and those who are responsible as a manager of health facilities found in Hossaena town are the study settings. All health facilities except drug stores and health facility workers who have direct contact with healthcare waste generation participated in this study.

A mixed-method study design was used. For the quantitative part of this study, all healthcare workers who have direct contact with healthcare waste management practice participated in this study, and one focus group discussion from each health facility was used. Both of the study participants were taken from the same population. All health facility workers who have a role in healthcare waste management practice were included in the quantitative part of this study. The qualitative data collection phase used open-ended interviews, focus group discussions, and visual material analysis like posters and written materials. All FGDs were conducted by the principal investigator, one moderator, and one note-taker, and it took 50 to 75 min. 4–6 participants participated in each FGD.

According to Elizabeth (2018: 5), cited by Creswell and Plano (2007: 147), the mixed method is one of the research designs with philosophical assumptions as well as methods of inquiry. As a method, it focuses on collecting, analyzing, and mixing both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study. As a methodology, it involves philosophical assumptions guiding the direction of the collection and analysis and combining qualitative and quantitative approaches in many phases of the research project. The central premise is that using qualitative and quantitative approaches together provides a better understanding of the research problems than either approach alone.

The critical assumption of the concurrent mixed methods approach in this study is that quantitative and qualitative data provide different types of information, often detailed views of participants’ solid waste management practice qualitatively and scores on instruments quantitatively, and together, they yield results that should be the same. In this approach, the researcher collected quantitative and qualitative data almost simultaneously and analyzed them separately to cross-validate or compare whether the findings were similar or different between the qualitative and quantitative information. Concurrent approaches to the data collection process are less time-consuming than other types of mixed methods studies because both data collection processes are conducted on time and at the same visit to the field [ 11 ].

Data collection

The data collection involves collecting both quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously. The quantitative phase of this study assessed three components. Health care waste segregation practice, the availability of waste segregation equipment for HCW segregation, temporary storage facilities, transportation for final disposal, and disposal facilities data were collected using a structured questionnaire and observation of HCW generation. Recycling or re-using practice, waste treatment, the availability of the HCWM committee, and training data were collected.

Qualitative data collection

The qualitative phase of the data collection for this study was employed by using focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews about SHCWMP. Two focus group discussions (FGD) from each health facility were conducted in the government health facilities, one at the administrative level and one at the technical worker level, and one FGD was conducted for all private health facilities because of the number of available health facility workers. Each focus group has 4–6 individuals.

In this study, the qualitative and the quantitative data provide different information, and it is suitable for this study to compare and contrast the findings of the two results to obtain the best understanding of this research problem.

Quantitative data collection

The quantitative data were entered into Epi data version 3.1 to minimize the data entry mistakes and exported to the statistical package for social science SPSS window version 27.0 for analysis. A numeric value was assigned to each response in a database, cleaning the data, recoding, establishing a codebook, and visually inspecting the trends to check whether the data were typically distributed.

Data analysis

Data were analyzed quantitatively by using relevant statistical tools, such as SPSS. Descriptive statistics and the Pearson correlation test were used for the bivariate associations and analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare the HCW generation rate between private and government health facilities and between clinics, health centres and hospitals in the town. Normality tests were performed to determine whether the sample data were drawn from a normally distributed population.

The Shapiro–Wilk normality tests were used to calculate a test statistic based on the sample data and compare it to critical values. The Shapiro–Wilk test is a statistical test used to assess whether a given sample comes from a normally distributed population. The P value greater than the significance level of 0.05 fails to reject the null hypothesis. It concludes that there is not enough evidence to suggest that the data does not follow the normal distribution. Visual inspection of a histogram, Q-Q plot, and P-P plot (probability-probability plot) was assessed.

Bivariate (correlation) analysis assessed the relationships between independent and dependent variables. Then, multiple linear regression analysis was used to establish the simple correlation matrices between different variables for investigating the strength relationships of the study variables in the analysis. In most variables, percentages and means were used to report the findings with a 95% confidence interval. Open-ended responses and focused group findings were undertaken by quantifying and coding the data to provide a thematic narrative explanation.

Appropriate and scientific care was taken to maintain the data quality before, during, and after data collection by preparing the proper data collection tools, pretesting the data collection tools, providing training for data collectors, and proper data entry practice. Data were cleaned on a daily basis during data collection practice, during data entry, and before analysis of its completeness and consistency.

Data analysis in a concurrent design consists of three phases. First, analyze the quantitative database in terms of statistical results. Second, analyze the qualitative database by coding the data and collapsing the codes into broad themes. Third comes the mixed-method data analysis. This is the analysis that consists of integrating the two databases. This integration consists of merging the results from both the qualitative and the quantitative findings.

Descriptive analysis was conducted to describe and summarise the data obtained from the samples used for this study. Reliability statistics for constructs, means and modes of each item, frequencies and percentage distributions, chi-square test of association, and correlations (Spearman rho) were used to portray the respondents’ responses.

All patient care-providing health facilities were included in this study, and the generation rate of healthcare waste and composition assessed the practice of segregation, collection, transportation, and disposal system was observed quantitatively using adopted and adapted structured questionnaires. To ensure representativeness, various levels of health facilities like hospitals, health centres, medium clinics, small clinics and surgical centres were considered from the town. All levels of health facilities are diagnosing, providing first aid services and treating patients accordingly.

The hospital and surgical centre found in the town provide advanced surgical service, inpatient service and food for the patients that other health facilities do not. The HCW generation rate was proportional to the number of patients who visited the health facilities and the type of service provided. The highest number of patients who visited the health facilities was in NEMMCSH; the service provided was diverse, and the waste generation rate was higher than that of other health facilities. About 272, 18, 15, 17, and 20 average patients visited the health facilities daily in NEMMCSH: government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres. Paper and cardboard (141.65 kg), leftover food (81.71 kg), and contaminated gloves (42.96 kg) are the leading HCWs generated per day.

A total of 556 individual respondents from sampled health facilities were interviewed to complete the questionnaire. The total number of filled questionnaires was 540 (97.1) from individuals representing these 41 health facilities.

The principal investigator observed the availability of handwashing facilities near SHCW generation sites. 17(3.1%) of health facility workers had hand washing facilities near the health care waste generation and disposal site. Furthermore,10 (3.87%), 2 (2.1%), 2 (2.53%), 2 (2.1%), 1 (6.6%) of health facility workers had the facility of hand washing near the health care waste generation site in Nigist Eleni Mohamed Memorial Comprehensive Specialized Hospital (NEMMCSH), government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centre respectively. This finding was nearly the same as the study findings conducted in Myanmar; the availability of hand washing facilities near the solid health care waste generation was absent in all service areas [ 12 ]. The observational result was convergent with the response of facility workers’ response regarding the availabilities of hand washing facilities near to the solid health care waste generation sites.

The observational result was concurrent with the response of facility workers regarding the availability of hand-washing facilities near the solid health care waste generation sites.

The availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) was checked in this study. Three hundred ninety-two (72.6%) of the respondents agree on the facility’s availability of one or more personal protective equipment (PPE). The availability of PPEs in different levels of health facilities shows 392 (72.6%), 212 (82.2%), 56 (58.9%), 52 (65.8%), 60 (65.2%), 12 (75%) health facility workers in NEMMCSH, government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres respectively agree to the presence of personal protective equipment in their department. The analysis further shows that the availability of masks for healthcare workers was above the mean in NEMMCSH and surgical centres.

Focus group participants indicated that health facilities did not volunteer to supply Personal protective equipment (PPEs) for the cleaning staff.

“We cannot purchase PPE by ourselves because of the salary paid for the cleaning staff.”

Cost inflation and the high cost of purchasing PPEs like gloves and boots are complained about by all (41) health facility owners.

“the reason for the absence of some of the PPEs like boots, goggles, and shortage of disposable gloves are owing to cost inflation from time to time and sometimes absent from the market is the reason why we do not supply PPE to our workers.”

Using essential personal protective equipment (PPEs) based on the risk (if the risk is a splash of blood or body fluid, use a mask and goggles; if the risk is on foot, use appropriate shoes) is recommended by the World Health Organization [ 13 ]. The mean availability of gloves in health facilities was 343 (63.5% (95% CI: 59.3–67.4). Private health institutions are better at providing gloves for their workers, 67.1%, 72.8%, and 62.5% in medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres, respectively, which is above the mean.

Research participants agree that.

‘‘ there is a shortage of gloves to give service in Nigist Eleni Mohamed Memorial Comprehensive Specialized Hospital (NEMMCSH) and government health centres .’’

Masks are the most available personal protective equipment for health facility workers compared to others. 65.4%, 55.6%, and 38% of the staff are available with gloves, plastic aprons and boots, respectively.

The mean availability of masks, heavy-duty gloves, boots, and aprons was 71.1%, 65.4%, 38%, and 44.4% in the study health facilities. Health facility workers were asked about the availability of different personal protective equipment, and 38% of the respondents agreed with the presence of boots in the facility. Still, the qualitative observational findings of this study show that all health facility workers have no shoes or footwear during solid health care waste management practice.

SHCW segregation practice was checked by observing the availability of SHCW collection bins in each patient care room. Only 4 (1.7%) of the room’s SHCW bins are collected segregated (non-infectious wastes segregated in black bins and infectious wastes segregated in yellow bins) based on the World Health Organization standard. Colour-coded waste bins, black for non-infectious and yellow for infectious wastes, were available in 23 (9.6%) rooms. 90% of the sharp containers were reusable, and 100% of the waste storage bins were plastic buckets that were easily cleanable. Only 6.7% of the waste bins were pedal operated and adequately covered, and the rest were fully opened, or a tiny hole was prepared on the container’s cover. All of the healthcare waste disposal bins in each health facility and at all service areas were away from the arm’s reach distance of the waste generation places, and this is contrary to World Health Organization SHCWM guidelines [ 13 ]. The observation result reveals that the reason for the above result was that medication trolleys were not used during medication or while healthcare providers provided any health services to patients.

Most medical wastes are incinerated. Burning solid and regulated medical waste generated by health care creates many problems. Medical waste incinerators emit toxic air pollutants and ash residues that are the primary source of environmental dioxins. Public concerns about incinerator emissions and the creation of federal regulations for medical waste incinerators are causing many healthcare facilities to rethink their choices in medical waste treatment. Health Care Without Harm [ 14 ], states that non-incineration treatment technologies are a growing and developing field. The U.S. National Academy of Science 2000 argued that the emission of pollutants during incineration is a potential risk to human health, and living or working near an incineration facility can have social, economic, and psychological effects [ 15 ].

The incineration of solid healthcare waste technology has been accepted and adopted as an effective method in Ethiopia. Incineration of healthcare waste can produce secondary waste and pollutants if the treatment facilities are not appropriately constructed, designed, and operated. It can be one of the significant sources of toxic substances, such as polychlorinated dibenzo-dioxins/dibenzofurans (PCDD/ PCDF), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), hexachlorobenzenes and polychlorinated biphenyls, and dioxins and furans that are known as hazardous pollutants. These pollutants may have undesirable environmental impacts on human and animal health, such as liver failure and cancer [ 15 , 16 ].

All government health facilities (4 in number) used incineration to dispose of solid waste. 88.4% and 100% of the wastes are incinerated in WUNEMMCSH and government health centres. This finding contradicts the study findings in the United States of America and Malaysia, in which 49–60% and 59–60 were incinerated, respectively, and the rest were treated using other technologies [ 15 , 16 ].

World Health Organization (2014:45) highlighted those critical elements of the appropriate operation of incinerators include effective waste reduction and waste segregation, placing incinerators away from populated areas, satisfactory engineered design, construction following appropriate dimensional plans, proper operation, periodic maintenance, and staff training and management are mandatory.

Solid waste collection times should be fixed and appropriate to the quantity of waste produced in each area of the health care facility. General waste should not be collected simultaneously or in the same trolley as infectious or hazardous wastes. The collection should be done daily for most wastes, with collection timed to match the pattern of waste generation during the day [ 13 ].

SHCW segregation practices were observed for 240 rooms in 41 health facilities that provide health services in the town. In government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres, SHCW segregation practice was not based on the World Health Organization standard. All types of solid waste were collected in a single container near the generation area, and there were no colour-coded SHCW storage dust bins. Still, in NEMMCSH, in most of the service areas, colour-coded waste bins are available, and the segregation practice was not based on the standard. Only 3 (10%) of the dust bins collected the appropriate wastes according to the World Health Organization standard, and the rest were mixed with infectious and non-infectious SHCW.

Table 1 below shows health facility managers were asked about healthcare waste segregation practices, and 9 (22%) of the facility leaders responded that there is an appropriate solid healthcare waste segregation practice in their health facilities. Still, during observation, only 4 (1.7%) of the rooms in two (4.87%) of the facilities, SHCW bins collected the segregated wastes (non-infectious wastes segregated at the black bin and infectious wastes segregated at yellow bin) based on the world health organization standard. The findings of this study show there is a poor segregation practice, and all kinds of solid wastes are collected together.

In 40 (97.56%) health facilities, infectious wastes were collected daily from the waste generation areas to the final disposal points. During observation in one of the study health facilities, infectious wastes were not collected daily and left for days. Utility gloves, boots, and aprons are not available for cleaning staff to collect and transport solid healthcare wastes in all study health facilities. 29.26% of the facilities’ cleaning staff have a face mask, and 36.5% of the facilities remove waste bins from the service area when 3/4 full, and the rest were not removed or replaced with new ones. There is a separate container only in 2 health facilities for infectious and non-infectious waste segregation practice, and the rest were segregated and collected using single and non-colour coded containers.

At all of the facilities in the study area, SHCW was transported from the service areas to the disposal site were transported manually by carrying the collection container and there is no trolley for transportation. This finding was contrary to the study findings conducted in India, which show segregated waste from the generation site was being transported through the chute to the carts placed at various points on the hospital premises by skilled sanitary workers [ 17 ].

Only 2 out of 41 health facilities have temporary solid waste storage points at the facility. One of the temporary storage places was clean, and the other needed to be properly cleaned and unsightly. Two (100%) of the temporary storage areas are not fenced and have no restriction to an authorized person. Temporary storage areas are available only in two health facilities that are away from the service provision areas.

Observational findings revealed that pre-treatment of SHCW before disposal was not practised at all study health facilities. 95% of the facilities have no water supply for hand washing during and after solid healthcare waste generation, collection, and disposal.

The United States Agency estimated sharp injuries from medical wastes to health professionals and sanitary service personnel for toxic substances and disease registry. Most of the injuries are caused during the recapping of hypodermic needles before disposal into sharps containers [ 13 ]. Nearly half of the respondents, 245 (51.5%), are recapping needles after providing an injection to the patient. Recapping was more practised in NEMMCSH and surgical centres, which is 57.5% and 57.5%, respectively. In government health centres, medium clinics, and surgical centres, the recapping of used needles was practised below the mean, which is 47.9%, 48, and 43.8%, respectively. This finding was reasonable compared to the study findings of Doylo et al. [ 18 ] in western Ethiopia, where 91% of the health workers are recapping needles after injection [ 18 ]. The research finding shows that there is no significant association P-value of 0.82 between the training and recapping of needles after injection.

Focus group participants ’ response for appropriate SHCWMP regarding patients ’ and visitors ’ lack of knowledge on SHCW segregation practice

“The personal responsibilities of patients and visitors on solid HCW disposal should be explained to help appropriate safe waste management practice and maintain good hygiene .” “Providing waste management training and creating awareness are the two aspects of improving SHCW segregation practice.” “Training upgrades and creates awareness on hygiene for all workers.”

Sharp waste collection practices were observed in 240 rooms in the study health facilities, and 9.2% of the rooms used disposable sharp containers.

Sixty per cent (60%), 13.3%, 8.24%, and 15.71% of the sharps containers in NEMMCSH, government health centres, medium clinics, and small clinics, respectively, were using disposable sharps containers; sharps were disposed together with the sharps container, and surgical centre was using reusable sharp collection container. All disposable sharps containers in medium and small clinics used non-puncture-resistant or simple packaging carton boxes. 60% and 13.3% of the disposable sharps containers in NEMMCSH and the government health centre use purposefully manufactured disposable safety boxes.

Needle sticks injury reporting and occurrence

A total of 70 injuries were reported to the health facility manager in the last one year, and 44 of the injuries were reported by health professionals. The rest of the injuries were reported by supportive staff. These injuries were reported from 35 health facilities, and the remaining six health facilities did not report any cases of injury related to work; see Tables 2 and 3 below.

Accidents or incidents, including near misses, spillages, damaged containers, inappropriate segregation, and any incidents involving sharps, should be reported to the waste-management officer. Accidental contamination must be notified using a standard-format document. The cause of the accident or incident should be investigated by the waste-management officer (in case of waste) or another responsible officer, who should also take action to prevent a recurrence [ 13 ]. Two hundred seventy-one (50.2% (CI: 45.7–54.6) of the respondents agree that satisfactory procedures are available in case of an accident, while the remaining 269 (49.8%( CI: 45.4–54.3) of respondents do not agree on the availability of satisfactory procedures in case of an accident, see Table  4 below. The availability of satisfactory procedures in case of an accident is above the mean in medium clinics, which is 60.8%. 132(24.4%) of the staff are pricked by needle stick injury while providing health services. Nearly half of the respondents, 269 (49.8%), who have been exposed to needle stick injury do not get satisfactory procedures after being pricked by a needle, and those who have not been stung by a needle stick injury for the last year. 204 (37.8%) disagree with the presence of satisfactory procedures in the case of a needle stick injury. In NEMMCSH, 30.2% of the research participants were pricked by needle stick injury within one year of period, and 48.8% of those who were stung by needle stick injuries did not agree upon the presence of satisfactory procedures in case of needle stick injuries in the study hospital. 17.9% and 49.5%, 24.1% and 60.8%, 7.6% and 50% of the respondents are pricked by needle sticks, and they disagree on the availability of satisfactory procedures in case of accidents, respectively, in government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centre respectively.

One hundred seventy-seven (32.7% (CI:29.1–37) respondents were exposed to needle stick injury while working in the current health facilities. One hundred three (58.1%) and 26 (32.9%) needle stick injuries were reported from WUNEMMCSH and medium clinics, which is above the mean. One hundred thirty-two(24.7% (95%CI:20.7–28.1) of the respondents are exposed to needle stick injury within one year of the period. Seventy-eight(30.2%), 17 (17.9%), 19 (24.1%), 15 (16.3%), 3 (18.8%) of the staff are injured by needle sticks from NEMMCSH, government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centre staffs respectively within one year of service.

The mean availabilities of satisfactory procedures in case of accidents were 321 (59.4% (CI:55.4–63.7). Out of this, 13.7% of the staff is injured by needle sticks within one year before the survey. Except in NEMMCSH, the mean availabilities of satisfactory procedures were above the mean, which is 50%, 60%, 77.2%, 66.3%, and 81.3% in NEMMCSH, government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres respectively.

Table 5 below shows that Hepatitis B, COVID-19, and tetanus toxoid vaccinations are the responses of the research participants to an open-ended question on which vaccine they took. The finding shows that 220 (40.8%) of the respondents were vaccinated to prevent themselves from health facility-acquired infection. One hundred fifty-six (70.9%) of the respondents are vaccinated to avoid themselves from Hep B infection. Fifty-nine (26%0.8) of the respondents were vaccinated to protect themselves from two diseases that are Hep B and COVID-19.

Appropriate health care waste management practice was assessed by using 12 questions: availability of colour-coded waste bins, foot-operated dust bins, elbow or foot-operated hand washing basin, personal protective equipment, training, role and responsibility of the worker, the presence of satisfactory procedures in case of an accident, incinerator, vaccination, guideline, onsite treatment, and the availability of poster. The mean of appropriate healthcare waste management practice was 55.58%. The mean of solid health care waste management practice based on the level of health facilities was summed and divided into 12 variables to get each health facility’s level of waste management practice. 64.9%, 45.58%, 49%, 46.9%, and 51.8% are the mean appropriate health care waste management practices in NEMMCSH, government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres, respectively. In NEMMCSH, the practice of solid healthcare waste management shows above the mean, and the rest was below the mean of solid healthcare waste management practice.

Healthcare waste treatment and disposal practice

Solid waste treatment before disposal was not practised at all study health facilities. There is an incineration practice at all of the study health facilities, and the World Health Organization 2014 recommended three types of incineration practice for solid health care waste management: dual-chamber starved-air incinerators, multiple chamber incinerators, and rotary kilns incinerators. Single-chamber, drum, and brick incinerators do not meet the best available technique requirements of the Stockholm Convention guidelines [ 13 ]. The findings of this study show that none of the incinerators found in the study health facilities meet the minimum standards of solid healthcare waste incineration practice, and they need an air inlet to facilitate combustion. Eleven (26.82%) of the health facilities have an ash pit to dispose of burned SHCW; the majority, 30 (73.17%), dispose of the incinerated ash and burned needles in the municipal waste disposal site. In one out of 11 health facilities with an ash pit, one of the incinerators was built on the ash pit, and the incinerated ashes were disposed of in the ash pit directly. Pre-treatment of SHCW before disposal was not practised at all health facilities; see Table  6 below.

All government health facilities use incineration to dispose of solid waste. 88.4% and 100% of the solid wastes are incinerated in WUNEMMCS Hospital and government health centres, respectively. This finding was not similar to the other studies because other technologies like autoclave microwave and incineration were used for 59–60% of the waste [ 15 ]. Forty-one (100%) of the study facilities were using incinerators, and only 5 (12.19%) of the incinerators were constructed by using brick and more or less promising than others for incinerating the generated solid wastes without considering the emitting gases into the atmosphere and the residue chemicals and minerals in the ashes.

Research participants’ understanding of the environmental friendliness of health care waste management practice was assessed, and the result shows that more than half, 312(57%) of the research participants do not agree on the environmental friendliness of the waste disposal practices in the health facilities. The most disagreement regarding environmental friendliness was observed in NEMMCSH; 100 (38.8%) of the participants only agreed the practice was environmentally friendly of the service. Forty-four (46.3%), 37 (46.8%), 40 (43.5%), and 7 (43.8%) of the participants agree on the environmental friendliness of healthcare waste management practice in government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres, respectively.

One hundred twenty-five (48.4%) and 39(42.4%) staff are trained in solid health care waste management practice in NEMMCSH and small clinic staff, respectively; this result shows above the mean. Twenty-seven (28.4%), 30 (38%), and 4 (25%) of the staff are trained in health care waste management practice in Government health centres, medium clinics, and surgical centres, respectively. The training has been significantly associated with needle stick injury, and the more trained staff are, the less exposed to needle stick injury. One hundred ninety-six (36.4%) of the participants answered yes to the question about the availability of trainers in the institution. 43.8% of the NEMMCSH staff agreed on the availability of trainers on solid health care waste management, which is above the mean, and 26.3%, 31.6%, 31.5%, and 25% for the government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centre respectively, which is below the mean.

Trained health professionals are more compliant with SHCWM standards, and the self-reported study findings of this study show that 41.7% (95%CI:37.7–46) of the research participants are trained in health care waste management practice. This finding was higher compared to the study findings of Sahiledengle in 2019 in the southeast of Ethiopia, shows 13.0% of healthcare workers received training related to HCWM in the past one year preceding the study period and significantly lower when compared to the study findings in Egypt which is 71% of the study participants were trained on SHCWM [ 8 , 19 , 20 ].

Three out of four government health facility leaders, 17 (45.94%) of private health facility leaders/owners of the clinic and 141 FGD participants complain about the absence of some PPEs like boots and aprons to protect themselves from infectious agents.

‘ ‘Masks, disposable gloves, and changing gowns are a critical shortage at all health facilities.’’

Cleaners in private health facilities are more exposed to infectious agents because of the absence of personal protective equipment. Except for the cleaning staff working in the private surgical centre, all cleaning staff 40 (97.56) of the health facilities complain about the absence of changing gowns and the fact that there are no boots in the facilities.

Cost inflation and the high cost of purchasing PPEs like gloves and boots are complained by all of (41) the health facility owners and the reason for the absence of some of the PPEs like boots, goggles, and shortage of disposable gloves. Sometimes, absence from the market is the reason why we do not supply PPE to our workers.

Thirty-four (82.92%) of the facility leaders are forwarded, and there is a high expense and even unavailability of some of the PPEs, which are the reasons for not providing PPEs for the workers.

‘‘Medical equipment and consumables importers and whole sellers are selective for importing health supplies, and because of a small number of importers in the country and specifically, in the locality, we can’t get materials used for health care waste management practice even disposable gloves. ’’

One of the facility leaders from a private clinic forwarded that before the advent of COVID-19 -19) personal protective equipment was more or less chip-and-get without difficulty. Still, after the advent of the first Japanese COVID-19 patient in Ethiopia, people outside the health facilities collect PPEs like gloves and masks and storing privately in their homes.

‘‘PPEs were getting expensive and unavailable in the market. Incinerator construction materials cost inflation, and the ownership of the facility building are other problems for private health facilities to construct standard incinerators.’’

For all of the focus group discussion participants except in NEMMCSH and two private health facilities, covered and foot-operated dust bins were absent or in a critical shortage compared to the needed ones.

‘‘ Waste bins are open and not colour-coded. The practice attracts flies and other insects. Empty waste bins are replaced without cleaning and disinfecting by using chlorine solution.’’ “HCW containers are not colour-coded, but we are trying to label infectious and non-infectious in Amharic languages.”

Another issue raised during focus group discussions is incineration is not the final disposal method. It needs additional disposal sites, lacks technology, is costly to construct a brick incinerator, lacks knowledge for health facility workers, shortage of man powers /cleaners, absence of environmental health professionals in health centres and all private clinics, and continues exposure to the staff for needle stick injury, foully smell, human scavengers, unsightly, fire hazard, and lack of water supply in the town are the major teams that FGD participants raise and forwarded the above issue as a problem to improve SHCWMP.

Focus group participants, during the discussion, raised issues that could be more comfortable managing SHCWs properly in their institution. Two of the 37 private health facilities are working in their own compound, and the remaining 35 are rented; because of this, they have difficulty constructing incinerators and ash removal pits and are not confident about investing in SHCWM systems. Staff negligence and involuntary abiding by the rules of the facilities were raised by four of the government health facilities, and it was difficult to punish those who violated the healthcare waste management rules because the health facility leaders were not giving appropriate attention to the problem.

Focus group participants forwarded recommendations on which interventions can improve the management of SHCW, and recommendations are summarised as follows:

“PPE should be available in quality and quantity for all health facility workers who have direct contact with SHCW.” “Scientific-based waste management technologies should be availed for health facilities.” “Continuous induction HCW management training should be provided to the workers. Law enforcement should be strengthened.” “Communal HCW management sites should be availed, especially for private health facilities.” “HCWM committee should be strengthened.” “Non-infectious wastes should be collected communally and transported to the municipal SHCW disposal places.” “Leaders should be knowledgeable on the SHCWM system and supervise the practice continuously.” “Patient and client should be oriented daily about HCW segregation practice.” “Regulatory bodies should supervise the health facilities before commencing and periodically between services .”

The above are the themes that FGD participants discussed and forwarded for the future improvements of SHAWMP in the study areas.

Lack of water supply in the town

Other issues raised during FGDs were health facilities’ lack of water supply. World Health Organization (2014: 89) highlights that water supply for the appropriate waste management system should be mandatory at any time in all health service delivery points.

Thirty-nine (95.12%) of the health facilities complain about the absence of water supply to improve HCW management practices and infection prevention and control practices in the facilities.

“We get water once per week, and most of the time, the water is available at night, and if we are not fetching as scheduled, we can’t get water the whole week”.

In this research, only those who have direct contact have participated in this study, and 434 (80.4%) of the respondents agree they have roles and responsibilities for appropriate solid health care waste management practice. The rest, 19.6%, do not agree with their commitment to manage health care wastes properly, even though they are responsible. Health facility workers in NEMMCSH and medium clinics know their responsibilities better than others, and their results show above the mean. 84.5%, 74.5%, 81%, 73.9% and 75% in NEMMCSH, Government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres, respectively.

Establishing a policy and a legal framework, training personnel, and raising public awareness are essential elements of successful healthcare waste management. A policy can be viewed as a blueprint that drives decision-making at a political level and should mobilize government effort and resources to create the conditions to make changes in healthcare facilities. Three hundred and seventy-four (69.3%) of the respondents agree with the presence of any solid healthcare waste management policy in Ethiopia. The more knowledge above the mean (72.9%) on the presence of the policy is reported from NEMMCSH.

Self-reported level of knowledge on what to do in case of an accident revealed that 438 (81.1% CI: 77.6–84.3%) of the respondents knew what to do in case of an accident. Government health centre staff and medium clinic staff’s knowledge about what to do in case of an accident was above the mean (88.4% and 82.3%), respectively, and the rest were below the mean. The action performed after an occupational accident revealed that 56 (35.7%) of the respondents did nothing after any exposure to an accident. Out of 56 respondents who have done nothing after exposure, 47 (83.92%) of the respondents answered yes to their knowledge about what to do in case of an accident. Out of 157 respondents who have been exposed to occupational accidents, only 59 (37.6%) of the respondents performed the appropriate measures, 18 (11.5%), 9 (5.7%), 26 (16.6%), 6 (3.8%) of the respondents are taking prophylaxis, linked to the incident officer, consult the available doctors near to the department, and test the status of the patient (source of infection) respectively and the rest were not performing the scientific measures, that is only practising one of the following practices washing the affected part, squeezing the affected part to remove blood, cleaning the affected part with alcohol.

Health facility workers’ understanding of solid health care waste management practices was assessed by asking whether the current SHCWM practice needs improvement. Four hundred forty-nine (83.1%) health facility workers are unsatisfied with the current solid waste management practice at the different health facility levels, and they recommend changing it to a scientific one. 82.6%, 87.4%, 89.9%, 75%, and 81.3% of the respondents are uncomfortable or need to improve solid health care waste management practices in NEMMCSH, government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres, respectively.

Lack of safety box, lack of colour-coded waste bins, lack of training, and no problems are the responses to the question problems encountered in managing SHCWMP. Two Hundred and Fifty (46.92%) and 232 (42.96%) of the respondents recommend the availability of safety boxes and training, respectively.

Four or 9.8% of the facilities have infection prevention and control (IPC) teams in the study health facilities. This finding differed from the study in Pakistan, where thirty per cent (30%) of the study hospitals had HCWM or infection control teams [ 21 ]. This study’s findings were similar to those conducted in Pakistan by Khan et al. [ 21 ], which confirmed that the teams were almost absent at the secondary and primary healthcare levels [ 20 ].

The availability of health care waste management policy report reveals that 69.3% (95% CI: 65.4–73) of the staff are aware of the presence of solid health care waste management policy in the institution. Availability of health care waste management policy was 188 (72.9%), 66 (69.5%), 53 (677.1%), 57 (62%), 10 (62.5%) in NEMMCSH, Government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centre respectively. Healthcare waste management policy availability was above the mean in NEMMCSH and government health centres; see Table  6 below.

Open-ended responses on the SHCWM practice of health facility workers were collected using the prepared interview guide, and the responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. All the answered questions were tallied on the paper and exported to Excel software for thematic analysis.

The study participants recommend.

“appropriate segregation practice at the point of generation” "health facility must avail all the necessary supplies that used for SHCWMP, punishment for those violating the rule of SHCWMP",

“waste management technologies should be included in solid waste management guidelines, and enforcement should be strengthened.”

The availability of written national or adopted/adapted SHCWM policies was observed at all study health facilities. Twenty eight (11.66%) of the rooms have either a poster or a written document of the national policy document. However, all staff working in the observed rooms have yet to see the inside content of the policy. The presence of the policy alone cannot bring change to SHCWMP. This finding shows that the presence of policy in the institution was reasonable compared to the study findings in Menelik II hospital in Addis Ababa, showing that HCWM regulations and any applicable facility-based policy and strategy were not found [ 22 ]. The findings of this study were less compared to the study findings in Pakistan; 41% of the health facilities had the policy document or internal rules for the HCWM [ 21 ].

Focus group participants have forwarded recommendations on which interventions can improve the management of SHCW, and recommendations are summarised as follows.

‘‘Supplies should be available in quality and quantity for all health facility workers with direct contact with SHCW. Scientific-based waste management technologies should be available for health facilities. Continues and induction health care waste management training should be provided to the workers. Law enforcement should be strengthened. Community healthcare waste management sites should be available, especially for private health facilities. HCWM committee should be strengthened. Non-infectious wastes should be collected communally and transported to the municipal SHCW disposal places. Leaders should be knowledgeable about the SHCWM system and supervise the practice continuously. Patients and clients should be oriented daily about health care waste segregation practices. Regulatory bodies should supervise the health facilities before commencing and periodically in between the service are the themes those FGD participants discussed and forward for the future improvements of SHCWMP in the study areas.’’

The availability of PPEs in different levels of health facilities shows 392 (72.6%), 212 (82.2%), 56 (58.9%), 52 (65.8%), 60 (65.2%), 12 (75%) health facility workers in NEMMCSH, government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres respectively agree to the presence of personal protective equipment in their department. The availability of PPEs in this study was nearly two-fold when compared to the study findings in Myanmar, where 37.6% of the staff have PPEs [ 12 ].

The mean availability of masks, heavy-duty gloves, boots, and aprons was 71.1%, 65.4%, 38%, and 44.4% in the study health facilities. This finding shows masks are less available in the study health facilities compared to other studies. The availability of utility gloves, boots, and plastic aprons is good in this study compared to the study conducted by Banstola, D in Pokhara Sub-Metropolitan City [ 23 ].

The findings of this study show there is a poor segregation practice, and all kinds of solid wastes were collected together. This finding was similar to the study findings conducted in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, by Debere et al. [ 24 ] and contrary to the study findings conducted in Nepal and India, which shows 50% and 65–75% of the surveyed health facilities were practising proper waste segregation systems at the point of generation without mixing general wastes with hazardous wastes respectively [ 9 , 17 ].

Ninety percent of private health facilities collect and transport SHCW generated in every service area and transport it to the disposal place by the collection container (no separate container to collect and transport the waste to the final disposal site). This finding was similar to the study findings of Debre Markos’s town [ 25 ]. At all of the facilities in the study area, SHCW was transported from the service areas to the disposal site manually by carrying the collection container, and there was no trolley for transportation. This finding was contrary to the study findings conducted in India, which show segregated waste from the generation site was being transported through the chute to the carts placed at various points on the hospital premises by skilled sanitary workers [ 17 ].

Observational findings revealed that pre-treatment of SHCW before disposal was not practised at all study health facilities. This study was contrary to the findings of Pullishery et al. [ 26 ], conducted in Mangalore, India, which depicted pre-treatment of the waste in 46% of the hospitals [ 26 ]. 95% of the facilities have no water supply for handwashing during and after solid healthcare waste generation, collection, and disposal. This finding was contrary to the study findings in Pakistan hospitals, which show all health facilities have an adequate water supply near the health care waste management sites [ 27 ].

Questionnaire data collection tools show that 129 (23.8%) of the staff needle stick injuries have occurred on health facility workers within one year of the period before the data collection. This finding was slightly smaller than the study findings of Deress et al. [ 25 ] in Debre Markos town, North East Ethiopia, where 30.9% of the workers had been exposed to needle stick injury one year prior to the study [ 25 ]. Reported and registered needle stick injuries in health facilities are less reported, and only 70 (54.2%) of the injuries are reported to the health facilities. This finding shows an underestimation of the risk and the problem, which was supported by the study conducted in Menilik II hospitals in Addis Ababa [ 22 ]. 50%, 33.4%, 48%, 52%, and 62.5% of needle stick injuries were not reported in NEMMCSH, Government health centres, medium clinics, small clinics, and surgical centres, respectively, to the health facility manager.

Nearly 1/3 (177 or 32.7%) of the staff are exposed to needle stick injuries. Needle stick injuries in health facilities are less reported, and only 73 (41.24%) of the injuries are reported to the health facilities within 12 months of the data collection. This finding is slightly higher than the study finding of Deress et al. [ 25 ] in Debere Markos, Ethiopia, in which 23.3% of the study participants had encountered needle stick/sharps injuries preceding 12 months of the data collection period [ 25 ].

Seventy-three injuries were reported to the health facility manager in the last one year, 44 of the injuries were reported by health professionals, and the rest were reported by supportive staff. These injuries were reported from 35(85.3%) health facilities; the remaining six have no report. These study findings were better than the findings of Khan et al. [ 21 ], in which one-third of the facilities had a reporting system for an incident, and almost the same percentage of the facilities had post-exposure procedures in both public and private sectors [ 21 ].

Within one year of the study period, 129 (23.88%) needle stick injuries occurred. However, needle stick injuries in health facilities are less reported, and only 70 (39.5%) of the injuries are reported to the health facilities. These findings were reasonable compared to the study findings of the southwest region of Cameroon, in which 50.9% (110/216) of all participants had at least one occupational exposure [ 28 , 29 ]. This result report shows a very high exposure to needle stick injury compared to the study findings in Brazil, which shows 6.1% of the research participants were injured [ 27 ].

The finding shows that 220 (40.8%) of the respondents were vaccinated to prevent themselves from health facility-acquired infection. One Hundred Fifty-six (70.9%) of the respondents are vaccinated in order to avoid themselves from Hep B infection. Fifty-nine (26%0.8) of the respondents were vaccinated to protect themselves from two diseases that are Hep B and COVID-19. This finding was nearly the same as the study findings of Deress et al. [ 7 ],in Ethiopia, 30.7% were vaccinated, and very low compared to the study findings of Qadir et al. [ 30 ] in Pakistan and Saha & Bhattacharjya India which is 66.67% and 66.17% respectively [ 25 , 30 , 31 ].

The incineration of solid healthcare waste technology has been accepted and adopted as an effective method in Ethiopia. These pollutants may have undesirable environmental impacts on human and animal health, such as liver failure and cancer [ 15 , 16 ]. All government health facilities use incineration to dispose of solid waste. 88.4% and 100% of the wastes are incinerated in WUNEMMCSH and government health centres, respectively. This finding contradicts the study findings in the United States of America and Malaysia, which are 49–60% and 59–60 are incinerated, respectively, and the rest are treated using other technologies [ 15 , 16 ].

All study health facilities used a brick or barrel type of incinerator. The incinerators found in the study health facilities need to meet the minimum standards of solid health care waste incineration practice. These findings were similar to the study findings of Nepal and Pakistan [ 32 ]. The health care waste treatment system in health facilities was found to be very unsystematic and unscientific, which cannot guarantee that there is no risk to the environment and public health, as well as safety for personnel involved in health care waste treatment. Most incinerators are not properly operated and maintained, resulting in poor performance.

All government health facilities use incineration to dispose of solid waste. All the generated sharp wastes are incinerated using brick or barrel incinerators, as shown in Fig.  1 above. This finding was consistent with the findings of Veilla and Samwel [ 33 ], who depicted that sharp waste generation is the same as sharps waste incinerated [ 33 ]. All brick incinerators were constructed without appropriate air inlets to facilitate combustion except in NEMMCSH, which is built at a 4-m height. These findings were similar to the findings of Tadese and Kumie at Addis Ababa [ 34 ].

Barrel and brick incinerators used in private clinic

Strengths and limitations

This is a mixed-method study; both qualitative and quantitative study design, data collection and analysis techniques were used to understand the problem better. The setting for this study was one town, which is found in the southern part of the country. It only represents some of the country’s health facilities, and it is difficult to generalize the findings to other hospitals and health centres. Another limitation of this study was that private drug stores and private pharmacies were not incorporated.

Conclusions

In the study, health facilities’ foot-operated solid waste dust bins are not available for healthcare workers and patients to dispose of the generated wastes. Health facility managers in government and private health institutions should pay more attention to the availability of colour-coded dust bins. Most containers are opened, and insects and rodents can access them anytime. Some of them are even closed (not foot-operated), leading to contamination of hands when trying to open them.

Healthcare waste management training is mandatory for appropriate healthcare waste disposal. Healthcare-associated exposure should be appropriately managed, and infection prevention and control training should be provided to all staff working in the health facilities.

Availability of data and materials

The authors declare that data for this work are available upon request to the first author.

Chartier, Y et al. Safe management of wastes from health-care activities. 2nd ed. WHO; 2014.

Tesfahun E, et al. Developing models for the prediction of hospital healthcare waste generation rate. Waste Manag Res. 2014;34(1):75–80.

Manzoor J, Sharma M. Impact of Biomedical Waste on Environment and Human Health. Environmental Claims Journal. 2019;31(4):311–34.

Article   Google Scholar  

Yves C, Jorge E, Ute P, Annette P, et al. Safe management of wastes from health-care activities. WHO 2nd ed. 2014.

OSHA. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Guidelines for Healthcare Waste Management. 2023.

Godfrey L, Ahmed M, et al. Solid waste management in Africa: governance failure or development opportunity?. Intech open. 2019.

Deress T, Jemal M, Girma M, Adane K. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of waste handlers about medical waste management in Debre Markos town healthcare facilities, northwest Ethiopia. BMC Res Notes. 2019;12(1):146.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sahiledengle B. Self-reported healthcare waste segregation practice and its correlate among healthcare workers in hospitals of Southeast Ethiopia. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):591.

Debalkie D, Kume A. Healthcare Waste Management: The Current Issue in Menellik II Referral Hospital, Ethiopia. Curr World Environ. 2017;12(1):42–52.

Debere MK, Gelaye KA, Alamdo AG, Trifa ZM. Assessment of the health care waste generation rates and its management system in hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2011. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(28).

Creswell JW. Research design qualitative, quantitative, & mixed method approach. 4th ed. SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2014.

Win EM, Saw YM, Oo KL, Than TM, Cho SM, Kariya T, et al. Healthcare waste management at primary health centres in Mon State, Myanmar: the comparisons between hospital and non-hospital type primary health centres. Nagoya J Med Sci. 2019;81(1):81–91.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

WHO. Safe management of wastes from health-care activities. 2nd ed. editor Chartier, Y et al. 2014. 

Richard B, Ben A, Kristian S. Health care without harm climate-smart health care series green paper number one. 2019.

Khadem Ghasemi M, Mohd YR. Advantages and Disadvantages of Healthcare Waste Treatment and Disposal Alternatives: Malaysian Scenario. Pol J Environ Stud. 2016;25(1):17–25.

Mohseni-Bandpei A, Majlesi M, Rafiee M, Nojavan S, Nowrouz P, Zolfagharpour H. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) formation during the fast pyrolysis of hazardous health-care waste. Chemosphere. 2019;227:277–88.

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Pandey A, Ahuja S, Madan M, Asthana AK. Bio-Medical Waste Managment in a Tertiary Care Hospital: An Overview. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(11):DC01-DC3.

Doylo T, Alemayehu T, Baraki N. Knowledge and Practice of Health Workers about Healthcare Waste Management in Public Health Facilities in Eastern Ethiopia. J Community Health. 2019;44(2):284–91.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hosny G, Samir S, Sharkawy R. An intervention significantly improve medical waste handling and management: A consequence of raising knowledge and practical skills of health care workers. Int J Health Sci.2018;12(4).

Khan EA, Sabeeh SM, Chaudhry MA, Yaqoob A, Kumar R. et al. Health care waste management in Pakistan: A situational analisis and way forward. Pak J Public Health. 2016;6(3).

Khan BA, Cheng L, Khan AA, Ahmed H. Healthcare waste management in Asian developing countries: A mini review. Waste Manag Res. 2019;37(9):863–75.

Debalkie D, Kumie A. Healthcare Waste Management: The Current Issue in Menellik II Referral Hospital. Ethiopia Current World Environment. 2017;12(1):42–52.

Banstola D, Banstola R, Nepal D, Baral P. Management of hospital solid wastes: A study in Pokhara sub metropolitan city. J Institute Med. 2017;31(1):68–74.

Debere MK, Gelaye KA, Alamdo AG, Trifa, ZM. Assessment of the HCW generation rates and its management system in hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. BMC Public Health. 2014;13(28):1–9.

Deress T, Hassen F, Adane K, Tsegaye A. Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice about Biomedical Waste Management and Associated Factors among the Healthcare Professionals at Debre Markos Town Healthcare Facilities. Northwest Ethiopia J Environ Public Health. 2018;2018:7672981.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Pullishery F, Panchmal GS, Siddique S, Abraham A. Awareness, knowledge, and practices on bio-medical waste management among health care professionals in Mangalore- A cross sectional study. Integr Med. 2016;3(1):29–35.

Google Scholar  

Ream PS, Tipple AF, Salgado TA, Souza AC, Souza SM, Galdino-Junior H, et al. Hospital housekeepers: Victims of ineffective hospital waste management. Arch Environ Occup Health. 2016;71(5):273–80.

Ngwa CH, Ngoh EA, Cumber SN. Assessment of the knowledge, attitude and practice of health care workers in Fako division on post exposure prophylaxis to blood borne viruses: a hospital based cross-sectional study. Pan Afr Med J. 2018;31.

Health care waste managemnt in pakistan. a situation analysis and way forward. Pakistan Journal of Public Health. 2016;6(3):35–45.

Qadir DM, Murad DR, Faraz DN. Hospital Waste Management; Tertiary Care Hospitals. The Professional Medical Journal. 2016;23(07):802–6.

Saha A, Bhattacharjya H. Health-Care Waste Management in Public Sector of Tripura, North-East India: An Observational Study. Indian J Community Med. 2019;44(4):368–72.

Pullishery F, Panchmal G, Siddique S, Abraham A. Awareness, knowledge, and practices on bio-medical waste management among health care professionals in Mangalore- A cross sectional study. Integr Med. 2016;3(1):29–35.

Veilla EM, Samwel VM. Assessment of sharps waste management practices in a referral hospital. Afr J Environ Sci Technol. 2016;10(3):86–95.

Tadesse ML, Kumie A. Healthcare waste generation and management practice in government health centers of Addis Ababa. Ethiopia BMC Public Health. 2014;14:1221.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the health facility leaders and ethical committees of the hospitals for their permission. The authors acknowledge the cooperation of the health facility workers who participated in this study.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Wachemo University College of Medicine and public health, Hossana, Ethiopia

Yeshanew Ayele Tiruneh

Department of Public Health, University of South Africa, College of Human Science, Pretoria, South Africa

L. M. Modiba & S. M. Zuma

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Dr. Yeshanew Ayele Tiruneh is a researcher of this study; the principal investigator does all the proposal preparation, methodology, data collection, result and discussion, and manuscript writing. Professor LM Modiba and Dr. SM Zuma are supervisors for this study. They participated in the topic selection and modification to the final manuscript preparation by commenting on and correcting the study. Finally, the three authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to submit the manuscript for publication.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yeshanew Ayele Tiruneh .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Tiruneh, Y.A., Modiba, L.M. & Zuma, S.M. Solid health care waste management practice in Ethiopia, a convergent mixed method study. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 985 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11444-8

Download citation

Received : 05 March 2023

Accepted : 14 August 2024

Published : 26 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11444-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Health care waste
• Waste management
• Private health facilities

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Sustainable waste management in japan: challenges, achievements, and future prospects: a review.

1. Introduction

1.1. importance of waste management, 1.2. relationship with sustainability, sustainable development, and the sdgs, 1.3. current waste issues, 2. materials and methods, 3. development of waste management in japan, 3.1. waste classification in japan.

• general waste;
• industrial waste;
• specially controlled waste.

3.2. Historical Background and Challenges

3.2.1. late 19th to early 20th centuries: meiji restoration, 3.2.2. 1945 to 1950s: post-war, 3.2.3. 1960s to 1970s: rapid economic growth.

• Modernization of waste disposal: this includes proper collection, transportation and disposal;
• Encourage reducing, recycling, and reusing possible waste materials;
• Raising awareness of and encouraging cooperation among citizens on correct waste segregation and disposal methods;
• Intensifying cleaning activities on roads and public facilities to maintain the overall aesthetic appearance of the city [ 28 ].

3.2.4. 1980s to Early 1990s: Rapid Economic Growth to the Bubble Economy

3.2.5. 1990s to 2000s: a sound material-cycle and low-carbon society, 3.2.6. 2010s up to current years: domestic and global challenges period, 4. current waste management situation in japan, 4.1. general waste, 4.2. industrial waste, 5. a sound material-cycle society and the 3rs, 5.1. fundamental plan for establishing a sound material-cycle society (2003), 5.2. second fundamental plan for establishing a sound material-cycle society (2008), 5.3. third fundamental plan for establishing a sound material-cycle society (2013), 5.4. fourth fundamental plan for establishing a sound material-cycle society (2018), 6. future prospects, 7. conclusions.

• Increase recycling rates: expanding public education campaigns, making recycling more convenient, and incentivizing recycling through rewards programs could help boost recycling participation and rates.
• Reduce single-use plastics: Japan generates a significant amount of plastic waste. Implementing stronger measures to discourage the use of disposable plastic items, such as bags, packaging, and takeout containers, could substantially cut down on plastic waste. This may involve bans, taxes, or requiring retailers to charge for plastic bags.
• Improve waste separation: Japanese municipalities often have complex waste separation rules which can lead to confusion and contamination of recyclables. Simplifying and standardizing separation categories across the country could make proper sorting easier for residents.
• Technological innovation is key to advancing Japan’s waste management sustainability and efficiency. Research into recyclable materials, digital technologies, AI, and Society 5.0’s vision of a human-centered future converges to create intelligent waste-processing solutions that facilitate recycling, reuse, and a more sustainable society.

Author Contributions

Institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Pongrácz, E.; Pohjola, V. Re-defining waste, the concept of ownership and the role of waste management. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2004 , 40 , 141–153. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Demirbas, A. Waste management, waste resource facilities and waste conversion processes. Energy Convers. Manag. 2011 , 52 , 1280–1287. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ayilara, M.S.; Olanrewaju, O.S.; Babalola, O.O.; Odeyemi, O. Waste Management through Composting: Challenges and Potentials. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 4456. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Das, S.; Lee, S.H.; Kumar, P.; Kim, K.H.; Lee, S.S.; Bhattacharya, S.S. Solid waste management: Scope and the challenge of sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 2019 , 228 , 658–678. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wojnowska-Baryła, I.; Kulikowska, D.; Bernat, K. Effect of Bio-Based Products on Waste Management. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 2088. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Holmberg, J.; Sandbrook, R. Sustainable development: What is to be done? In Policies for a Small Planet , 1st ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 19–38. ISBN 9780429200465. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thacker, S.; Adshead, D.; Fay, M.; Hallegatte, S.; Harvey, M.; Meller, H.; O’Regan, N.; Rozenberg, J.; Watkins, G.; Hall, J.M. Infrastructure for sustainable development. Nat. Sustain. 2019 , 2 , 324–331. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• United Nations. United Nations Summit on Sustainable Development, 25–27 September 2015, New York. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/conferences/environment/newyork2015 (accessed on 28 January 2023).
• Walker, T.R. (Micro) plastics and the UN sustainable development goals. Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 2021 , 30 , 100497. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zakari, A.; Khan, I.; Tan, D.; Alvarado, R.; Dagar, V. Energy efficiency and sustainable development goals (SDGs). Energy 2022 , 239 , 122365. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zorpas, A.A. Strategy development in the framework of waste management. Sci. Total Environ. 2020 , 716 , 137088. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Matsuto, T. Waste Problem in the SDGs Era from a Scientific Perspective ; Maruzen Publishing: Tokyo, Japan, 2019; p. 196. ISBN 978-4-621-30471-6. (In Japanese) [ Google Scholar ]
• Saitoh, Y.; Tago, H.; Kumagai, K.; Iijima, A. A Closer Look at Effective Intervention Methods to Reduce Household Solid Waste Generation in Japan. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 14835. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Geng, Y.; Zhu, O.; Doberstein, B.; Fujita, T. Implementing China’s circular economy concept at the regional level: A review of progress in Dalian, China. Waste Manag. 2009 , 29 , 996–1002. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sakai, S.; Ikematsu, T.; Hirai, Y.; Yoshida, H. Unit-charging programs for municipal solid waste in Japan. Waste Manag. 2008 , 28 , 2815–2825. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Baldassarre, B.; Schepers, M.; Bocken, N.; Cuppen, E.; Korevaar, G.; Calabretta, G. Industrial Symbiosis: Towards a design process for eco-industrial clusters by integrating Circular Economy and Industrial Ecology perspectives. J. Clean. Prod. 2019 , 216 , 446–460. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Umeda, H. Trends and future policy developments regarding resource efficiency and circular economy policies. J. Soc. Waste Resour. Recycl. 2016 , 27 , 252–259. (In Japanese) [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ministry of Environment (MoE). Waste Management and Public Cleansing Law. Law No. 137 of 1970 (Last Amended by Law No. 66 of 2001). Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/en/recycle/basel_conv/files/Waste_Management_and_Public_Cleansing.pdf (accessed on 8 March 2023).
• Japan Society of Waste Management. New Edition: Garbage Reader ; Chuohoki Publishing: Tokyo, Japan, 2003; p. 345. ISBN 978-4805844793. (In Japanese) [ Google Scholar ]
• Bureau of Environment: Tokyo Metropolitan Government. Types of Industrial Waste, 529-704-253. 2018. Available online: https://www.kankyo.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/resource/industrial_waste/about_industrial/about_01.html (accessed on 21 March 2023). (In Japanese)
• Waste Legislation Study Group. Case Studies and Explanations on Waste Control, Reduction, and Recycling ; Daiichi Hoki Publishing: Tokyo, Japan, 2001; ISBN 9784474600317. (In Japanese) [ Google Scholar ]
• Hosomi, M. The Edo period created the sound material-cycle society. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2015 , 17 , 2091. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ministry of Environment. History and Current State of Waste Management in Japan. 2014. Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/content/900453392.pdf (accessed on 10 July 2023).
• Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA); Japan Environmental Sanitation Center (JESC). Japan’s Experiences on Waste Management. March 2022. Available online: https://www.jica.go.jp/Resource/activities/issues/env_manage/ve9qi8000000gfy4-att/waste_managemen_en.pdf (accessed on 11 July 2023).
• Yokokawa, N. Re-emergence of Asia and the rise and fall of the Japanese economy in super long waves of capitalist world systems. J. Contemp. Asia 2020 , 50 , 194–227. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mekonnen, G.B.; Tokai, A. A historical perspective of municipal solid waste management and recycling system in Japan: Learning for developing countries. J. Sustain. Dev. 2020 , 13 , 85–101. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shevchenko, T.; Danko, Y. Progress towards a circular economy: New metric for circularity measurement based on segmentation of resource cycle. Int. J. Environ. Waste Manag. 2021 , 28 , 240–262. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Inamura, M. Waste Treatment Measures Initiated for the 1964 Olympic Tokyo Games. Waste Manag. Res. 2020 , 31 , 198–204. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fujikura, M. Japan’s Efforts Against the Illegal Dumping of Industrial Waste. Environ. Policy Gov. 2011 , 21 , 325–337. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Maruko, E.S. A War Against Garbage in Postwar Japan. Asia Pac. J. 2018 , 16 , 1–8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang, T. Analysis on the Influential Factors of Japanese Economy. E3S Web Conf. 2021 , 233 , 01156. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Turkman, A.; Goto, M. Present Status of Environmental Pollution in Japan. Ind. Environ. Crisis Q. 1994 , 8 , 129–139. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/26162255 (accessed on 4 August 2023). [ CrossRef ]
• Aoki-Suzuki, C.; Nishiyama, T.; Kato, M.; Lavtizar, V. Policies and Practice of Sound Material-Cycle Society in Japan: Transition Towards the Circular Economy. In Circular Economy Adoption: Catalysing Decarbonisation through Policy Instruments ; Ghosh, S.K., Ed.; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2023; pp. 37–66. ISBN 978-981-99-4802-4. [ Google Scholar ]
• Odeyemi, C.; Sekiyama, T. The Roles of Four Important Contexts in Japan’s Carbon Neutrality Policy and Politics, 1990–2020. Climate 2023 , 11 , 233. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mohammed, M.; Shafiq, N.; Elmansoury, A.; Al-Mekhlafi, A.-B.A.; Rached, E.F.; Zawawi, N.A.; Haruna, A.; Rafindadi, A.D.; Ibrahim, M.B. Modeling of 3R (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) for Sustainable Construction Waste Reduction: A Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 10660. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hara, K.; Yabar, H. Historical evolution and development of waste management and recycling systems—Analysis of Japan’s experiences. J. Environ. Stud. Sci. 2012 , 2 , 296–307. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Managing Post-Disaster Debris: The Japan Experience. p. 51. 2012. Available online: https://www.unep.org/ietc/resources/report/managing-post-disaster-debris-japan-experience (accessed on 4 August 2023).
• Asari, M.; Sakai, S.; Yoshioka, T.; Tojo, Y.; Tasaki, T.; Takigami, H.; Watanabe, K. Strategy for separation and treatment of disaster waste: A manual for earthquake and tsunami waste disaster management in Japan. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 2013 , 15 , 290–299. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ministry of Environment (MOE); Japan Society of Material Cycles and Waste Management (JSMCWM). Disaster Waste Management Guideline: For Asia and the Pacific. p. 26. 2018. Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/press/files/jp/110165.pdf (accessed on 10 August 2023).
• Onoda, H. Smart approaches to waste management for post-COVID-19 smart cities in Japan. IET Smart Cities 2020 , 2 , 89–94. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kondo, Y.; Moriguchi, Y.; Shimizu, H. CO 2 Emissions in Japan: Influences of imports and exports. Appl. Energy 1998 , 59 , 163–174. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Statistical Handbook of Japan, Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC), Japan. 2023. Available online: https://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/handbook/pdf/2023all.pdf (accessed on 11 August 2023).
• Ministry of Environment (MOE). Environmental White Paper: A Sound Material-Cycle Society and Biodiversity, 2022–2023. Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/policy/hakusyo/r05/index.html (accessed on 11 August 2023). (In Japanese)
• Japan Statistical Yearbook, Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC), Japan. 2024. Available online: https://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/nenkan/73nenkan/zenbun/en73/book/index.html#page=2 (accessed on 11 August 2023).
• Amemiya, T. Current State and Trend of Waste and Recycling in Japan. Int. J. Earth Environ. Sci. 2018 , 3 , 155. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Di Maria, E.; De Marchi, V.; Galeazzo, A. Industry 4.0 technologies and circular economy: The mediating role of supply chain integration. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2022 , 31 , 619–632. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ministry of Environment (MOE). The Fundamental Act for Establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society (act No110). 2000. Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/recycle/circul/kihonho/law.html (accessed on 15 August 2023). (In Japanese)
• Ministry of Environment (MOE). Japan’s Experience in Promotion of the 3Rs: For the Establishment of a Sound Material-Cycle Society. April 2005. Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/recycle/3r/en/approach/02.pdf (accessed on 15 August 2023).
• Premakumara, J.D.G. Building a Sound Material Cycle Society: Learning from Japan. Jpn. Environ. Q. 2022 , 30 . Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/en/focus/jeq/issue/vol30/index.html (accessed on 15 August 2023).
• Ministry of Environment (MOE). Fundamental Plan for Establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society. March 2003. Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/content/900453394.pdf (accessed on 17 August 2023).
• Ministry of Environment (MOE). 2nd Fundamental Plan for Establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society. March 2008. Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/content/900453384.pdf (accessed on 17 August 2023).
• Ministry of Environment (MOE). 3rd Fundamental Plan for Establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society. May 2013. Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/content/900453385.pdf (accessed on 17 August 2023).
• Ministry of Environment (MOE). 4th Fundamental Plan for Establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society. June 2018. Available online: https://www.env.go.jp/content/900453386.pdf (accessed on 17 August 2023).
• Yoshida, H.; Shimamura, K.; Aizawa, H. 3R strategies for the establishment of an international sound material-cycle society. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 2007 , 9 , 101–111. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Takiguchi, H.; Takemoto, K. Japanese 3R Policies Based on Material Flow Analysis. J. Ind. Ecol. 2008 , 12 , 792–798. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Arai, R.; Calisto Friant, M.; Vermeulen, W.J.V. The Japanese Circular Economy and Sound Material-Cycle Society Policies: Discourse and Policy Analysis. Circ. Econ. Sustain. 2023 , 4 , 619–650. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jones, T.E. Japanese Solid Waste Management (SWM): A Case Study of Yokohama’s G30 Waste Policy. An International Journal of Engineering Sciences, Special Issue of International Conference of Technology, Management and Social Sciences (ICTMS-15). 29–30 December 2015. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324574685_Japanese_Solid_Waste_Management_SWM_A_Case_Study_of_Yokohama%27s_G30_Waste_Policy (accessed on 20 August 2023).
• Altria, L. The Burning Problem of Japan’s Waste Disposal. Tokyo Review. 2019. Available online: https://tokyoreview.net/2019/07/burning-problem-japan-waste-recycling/ (accessed on 13 September 2023).
• Sarc, R.; Curtis, A.; Kandlbauer, L.; Khodier, K.; Lorber, K.E.; Pomberger, R. Digitalisation and intelligent robotics in value chain of circular economy oriented waste management—A review. Waste Manag. 2019 , 95 , 476–492. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Czekała, W.; Drozdowski, J.; Łabiak, P. Modern Technologies for Waste Management: A Review. Appl. Sci. 2023 , 13 , 8847. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cabinet Office. Society 5.0. Available online: https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/english/society5_0/ (accessed on 14 September 2023).
• UNESCO. Japan Pushing ahead with Society 5.0 to Overcome Chronic Social Challenges. Available online: https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/japan-pushing-ahead-society-50-overcome-chronic-social-challenges (accessed on 11 November 2023).
• Turner, C.; Oyekan, J.; Garn, W.; Duggan, C.; Abdou, K. Industry 5.0 and the Circular Economy: Utilizing LCA with Intelligent Products. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 14847. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• The Global Environmental Education Partnership (GEEP). Japan. Available online: https://thegeep.org/learn/countries/japan (accessed on 11 November 2023).
• Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). ESD (Education for Sustainable Development). Available online: https://www.mext.go.jp/en/unesco/title04/detail04/sdetail04/1375695.htm (accessed on 11 November 2023).

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Moshkal, M.; Akhapov, Y.; Ogihara, A. Sustainable Waste Management in Japan: Challenges, Achievements, and Future Prospects: A Review. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7347. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177347

Moshkal M, Akhapov Y, Ogihara A. Sustainable Waste Management in Japan: Challenges, Achievements, and Future Prospects: A Review. Sustainability . 2024; 16(17):7347. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177347

Moshkal, Madina, Yerlan Akhapov, and Atsushi Ogihara. 2024. "Sustainable Waste Management in Japan: Challenges, Achievements, and Future Prospects: A Review" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7347. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177347

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals