chapter 3 research methodology about solid waste management

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 07 November 2024

Governance of rural solid waste under a multi-subject governance model

• Dongshi Sun 1 ,
• Ling Hao 2 &
• Danlan Xie 3  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  27111 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Environmental economics
• Environmental impact
• Psychology and behaviour
• Sustainability

Rural solid waste (RSW) exhibits distinct characteristics compared to municipal solid waste (MSW), such as dispersed distribution, long governance chains, and low recycling value, making it unsuitable to apply the same management measures as MSW. Government-led RSW management results in excessive administrative costs, and the inherent characteristics of RSW reduce market enthusiasm for its management. To address these issues, this paper integrates the “ multi-subject governance “ model with RSW management and establishes a systematic evaluation index system for RSW governance. Utilizing the Best-Worst Method (BWM), key factors were identified. Utilizing the VIKOR method, representative provinces in China were used as case studies to validate the scientific nature of the evaluation indices. The research findings indicate that the multi-subject governance model is an effective approach for RSW management. Key factors influencing RSW management effectiveness include various governmental measures, waste sorting, and a long-term multi-subject governance mechanism. Case analysis reveals a strong correlation between the level of economic development and the effectiveness of RSW management. However, constructing a government-led, multi-subject collaborative urban-rural interconnected RSW management model can effectively address RSW management issues in economically underdeveloped areas. This research provides innovative solutions for RSW management, contributing to high-quality and sustainable development in rural areas.

Introduction

Rural solid waste (RSW) represents a significant source of environmental pollution in rural areas. Its effective management is crucial for the health of rural residents and the safety of the rural ecological environment. RSW is characterized by several distinctive features: firstly, the rural areas are vast and sparsely populated, leading to non-centralized waste distribution. Secondly, the variety and volume of RSW are increasing annually, thereby enhancing its destructive impact. Thirdly, the recyclable value of RSW is relatively low compared to municipal solid waste (MSW), complicating the establishment of a closed-loop waste supply chain in rural settings 1 , 2 .

These characteristics, coupled with inadequate management infrastructure and low environmental awareness among residents, significantly complicate the governance of RSW. For underdeveloped countries and regions, rural waste has become a substantial threat to environmental safety. For instance, according to 2023 statistics from China, nearly a quarter of RSW has not been appropriately managed, leading to common issues such as disorderly waste dumping, open-air burning, and garbage buildup near villages. These unmanaged wastes not only breed pathogens and spread diseases but also contaminate the soil, groundwater, and surface water.

Countries around the world have adopted different management models for rural solid waste. The United States primarily employs a model where the government supports the contracting out of waste treatment services. Waste collection and transportation are undertaken by multiple small-scale companies, and waste management is entirely market-driven. In terms of waste management facilities, a “government-funded, privately operated” model has been implemented, which has been successful in the US 3 . A survey conducted across over 300 local communities has shown that private contracting saves approximately 25% of costs compared to direct government service provision 4 . Germany, concerned about the uncontrollable commercial activities of private entities, adopts a government-led model while encouraging the participation of social organizations and the public in waste management 5 . Japan applies lean production concepts to rural waste governance, promoting precise recycling and processing to ensure maximum waste recycling. In Japan, rural waste management costs are primarily covered by farmers’ payments, with the government providing financial support for waste recycling projects 6 .

These practices from developed countries, although varying in governance philosophies, share commonalities such as encouraging the participation of multiple subjects in rural waste governance, coordinating relationships between these subjects through incentive mechanisms, and making scientific planning tailored to the rural development realities of each country. However, many underdeveloped countries and regions have yet to find a rural waste governance model suited to their national conditions. Restricted by economic development levels and environmental consciousness, these areas cannot merely replicate the governance models of developed nations but need targeted reforms addressing existing critical problems.

Previous research has predominantly focused on the management of municipal solid waste (MSW). Extensive studies have been conducted on waste categorization, policy implementation, and the construction of recycling supply chains 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 . Additionally, there have been specialized studies on medical waste, plastics, discarded electrical appliances, and other special urban wastes 3 , 13 , 14 , 15 . RSW governance often replicates findings from MSW management, frequently overlooking issues like inconvenient waste transport and incomplete recycling systems in rural areas. The multi-subject governance (MSG) model, an extension of “multi-centric” governance approaches, represents an essential pathway for the modernization of public-interest environmental governance since it helps in addressing insufficient government supervision or capability deficits 16 , 17 . The MSG model has been predominantly applied to fields like population planning, education, and air pollution, with a lack of systematic research on its application in RSW governance 18 , 19 , 20 . The multiple subjects under the MSG model have differing interest considerations, which may lead to the failure of government regulation and market operation. Existing research has not yet discussed how to identify the barriers in the RSW governance system and thus design effective coordination mechanisms to address them.

This paper constructs an evaluation index system for RSW governance under the MSG model. It determines the weight of influencing factors, identifies bottlenecks, addresses blind spots across the emission-management-supervision process of RSW governance, and designs coordination mechanisms to ensure efficient collaboration among all subjects. Since system performance evaluation and factor weight measurement are typical areas of study within Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM), this paper compares the applicability of various MCDM methods, selecting the Best-Worst Method (BWM) for model construction. The effectiveness of the research findings is verified through case studies on RSW governance in different regions of China. This study explores strategies for RSW governance under the MSG model, contributing to the theoretical and practical enhancement of waste governance systems. Through the application research of the MSG model, the division of responsibilities among multiple subjects within the RSW governance system can be clarified. This model optimizes the environmental governance coordination mechanism, addressing government functional “blind spots.” It guides all sectors of society to participate in rural waste management in an orderly and effective manner.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section two provides a literature review, which summarizes the research findings on rural waste management and MSG, and presents the initial indicator framework for evaluating rural waste management. Section three introduces the research methodology. Section four identifies the key factors in RSW governance. Section five designs a coordination mechanism based on the computational results, and compares the results with previous research. Section six presents the research conclusions and outlines future research directions 14 .

Literature review

Current situation and cause analysis of rsw problems.

With the rapid development of rural society and the increasing living standard of rural residents, lifestyle changes have led to a continuous increase in both the quantity and variety of domestic waste 21 . The methods of handling domestic waste by rural residents mainly include recycling, landfilling, open-air burning, and dumping in open areas 22 . It found that about 78% of rural populations resorting to open dumping for solid waste disposal 23 . Li et al. noted that reckless dumping of solid waste has polluted approximately 100,000 square kilometers of China’s agricultural land 24 . Zeng et al. found that the environmental pollution caused by RSW is characterized by dispersed distribution, wide-ranging pollution sources, and high governance costs, which pose great challenges to the governance of RSW 25 .

Some scholars have analyzed the reasons for the RSW problems. Yu et al. suggested that inadequate funding, lack of appropriate technology or effective operational assurance mechanisms are prominent problems in RSW management 26 . Xu et al. posited that insufficient government legislation and inadequate supervision affect the effectiveness of RSW governance 27 . Wang et al. emphasized that the convenience of waste collection facilities significantly influences the behavior of rural residents 22 . Li et al. contended that insufficient environmental awareness and lack of participation in waste management among rural residents is another major factor contributing to the RSW problem 28 .

Due to constraints of economic and social conditions in rural areas, RSW treatment has long been a vexing issue. With the increasing emphasis on environmental governance, progress has been made in recent years in rural waste treatment and recycling 29 , 30 , but challenges and issues persist.

The importance of the subjects’ action in RSW governance model

RSW governance involves multiple subjects, each playing distinct roles. As more people become aware of environmental issues, the models for RSW governance are continually being updated and improved. Previously, most scholars tended to study the RSW governance model from a single perspective, such as only considering the government 31 or rural residents 28 . These RSW governance models can solve some of problems, but cannot comprehensively address all problems. Some scholars have gradually realized the importance of different subjects in the RSW governance process, and comprehensive consideration is needed in the design of RSW governance models. Li et al. found that a multi-subject governance model can significantly enhance the efficiency of rural residents’ participation in domestic waste management 32 . Scholars have primarily categorized the subjects into three groups: the government, rural residents, and other social organizations (Kuang and Lin 2021; Wei and Jin 2020; Yin, et al. 2024).

The government plays a pivotal and driving role in RSW governance. Cao noted that the government, as the primary operator of RSW management, provides institutional safeguards through policies, legal provisions, and administrative regulations 33 . Agya et al. suggested that RSW management requires government investment in infrastructure, which is currently insufficient and should be strengthened 34 . Wang et al. found that village officials play a crucial role in RSW governance with their organizational and mobilization capabilities 35 .

Beyond the government’s leading role, rural residents, as the primary contributors to both agricultural and domestic activities, are also major producers of solid waste. Their attitudes and behaviors are crucial in the practical management of rural waste. Liu et al. found that most rural residents do not use the solid waste control measures recommended by the government 36 . Xu et al. observed that most rural residents have a poor environmental consciousness and still hold the belief that environmental sanitation is the government’s responsibility 27 .

Other social organizations participate in rural waste management through technological innovations and the provision of equipment, thereby playing a significant role by offering technical support and material assistance. Gabriel et al. emphasized the importance of environmental organizations in RSW governance 37 . Shadbahr et al. highlighted that research institutions can aid RSW governance by developing technologies 38 . Yin et al. found that introducing social capital into RSW governance can address the government’s fiscal constraints 39 . As rural environmental governance practices continue to progress, the unilateral governance model can no longer meet the needs of the new era. Some scholars believed that corporates’ involvement in waste governance can enhance efficiency. Park et al. integrated the governmental mechanism and the market mechanism by introducing an agency system to reform the existing public service provision model. They suggest that RSW governance could adopt a market-led model where the outcome depends on the interplay between government and business 40 . Sun et al. believed that by adopting the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model, achieving efficient resource recovery management of RSW 41 . Wang et al. emphasized that delegating decision-making power to multiple subjects within a common institutional framework can lead to a more efficient, equitable, and sustainable provision of public goods 42 .

Although many solutions have been proposed for RSW governance, it still faces many challenges and issues, necessitating a collaborative effort to establish an effective operational framework that supports long-term RSW governance. Although scholars have proposed various multi-subjects’ governance models, current research lacks a comprehensive and effective evaluation system to assess governance effectiveness. Therefore, it is crucial to establish a evaluation system for RSW governance systems.

Evaluation of RSW governance systems

The evaluation of RSW governance systems has long been a focus of scholarly attention. Scholars from various disciplinary backgrounds have conducted thorough investigations into different aspects of RSW governance systems, approaching the subject from a range of perspectives. Darban et al. suggested constructing evaluation indicators for the system based on rural residents’ attitudes toward RSW governance. These indicators include residents’ satisfaction with governmental waste regulation and the effectiveness of organic and solid waste segregation 43 . Aguirre constructed evaluation indicators for RSW governance based on the current management status, focusing on the management of social institutions, the efficiency of legal enforcement, economic support, environmental education, and citizen participation 44 . Sun further refined the evaluation index system for the logistics performance of RSW collection and transportation 45 . Huang performed an audit evaluation of RSW governance from four perspectives: infrastructure construction, diverse participation in domestic waste management, financial investment in waste governance, and government support 46 .

Constructing an evaluation system for RSW governance systems from a multi-subject governance perspective helps focus on the weak links and core issues. After summarizing and synthesizing numerous literatures, various evaluation indicators for RSW governance systems involving multi-subject governance are selected and integrated, and categorized into different dimensions based on their meanings. This paper constructs the framework of the initial evaluation indicator system from five dimensions: (i) Institution, (ii) Personnel, (iii) Logistics, (iv) Processing, (v) Support, with specific descriptions of each indicator provided in Table A1(Appendix).

Methodology

The research design received approval from the Ethics Committee of the School of Information and Business Management at Dalian Neusoft University of Information. In strict compliance with the Helsinki Declaration, our study was conducted following all pertinent guidelines and regulations. Informed consent was obtained from all subjects, who were all duly informed about the purpose of the study and assured of the survey’s anonymity. The outcomes of this research will be exclusively utilized for scientific purposes, with a firm commitment to maintaining the confidentiality of personal information.

The Delphi method

Considering the advantages and disadvantages of the Delphi method, this paper uses the Delphi method to optimize the Prototype decision-making structure to address the non-systematic issues arising from summarizing indicators solely through literature research.

The procedures of the Delphi method conducted in this study are shown in Fig.  1 :

Procedures of the Delphi method.

Best-worst method (BWM)

BWM is a type of MCDM (Multi-Criteria Decision-Making) method. Compared to other methods, its advantage lies in obtaining consistent results with a small amount of information. The evaluation index system for RSW management under the multi-subject governance model is a theoretical exploration, with some information being difficult to collect or accurately quantify. The application of the BWM method can effectively circumvent this issue.

The implementation steps of the BWM method are as follows:

Step One: Criteria Identification.

Identify a comprehensive list of criteria that are essential to the decision-making process.

Step Two: Best and Worst Criteria Selection.

Select the most critical (best) and the least critical (worst) criteria from the list.

Step Three: Best Criterion Evaluation.

Evaluate the preference of the best criterion over all other criteria using a scale from 1 to 9, creating a Best-to-Others (BO) vector \({a_{Bj}}\) , where \({a_{Bj}}\) indicates the preference of the best criterion B over criterion j.

Step Four: Worst Criterion Evaluation.

Assess the preference of all criteria over the worst criterion on a scale from 1 to 9, resulting in an Others-to-Worst (OW) vector \({a_{jW}}\) , where \({a_{jW}}\) indicates the preference of criterion j over the worst criterion W.

Step Five: Optimization of Criteria Weights.

The optimal relative weights \(\left( {w_{1}^{ * },w_{2}^{ * }, \cdots ,w_{n}^{ * }} \right)\) could be calculated by the min–max model, We transferred the min–max model into the linear programming model (1) as follow:

In this model, \({\xi ^L}\) can be directly considered to be an indicator of the consistency of comparisons. Values of \({\xi ^L}\) close to zero reflect a high level of consistency.

Step Six: Composite Weight Calculation.

Calculate the composite weight \(\left( {W_{1}^{ * },W_{2}^{ * }, \cdots ,W_{n}^{ * }} \right)\) for each criterion, integrating its relative weight with its significance within the decision-making context.

\(W_{i}^{ * }={N_j}*w_{i}^{ * }(i=1,2,3 \ldots n;j=1,2,3 \ldots m;n>m)\)

Where \({W_i}\) refers to the composite weight of criterion i , \({N_j}\) refers to the weight of criterion i relative to the corresponding aspect j , and \({w_i}\) is its relative weight.

The VIKOR method (Vlsekriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje) can be viewed as an upgrade of the TOPSIS method. Additionally, in the VIKOR method, decision-makers can determine the importance of each criterion according to their own needs, thus more comprehensively balancing the weights and priorities of different criteria.

The general procedures of the VIKOR method are as follows:

Step One: Determine the group utility value and individual regret value for each evaluation alternative, which can be expressed by the following equations:

\(\:{U}_{j}^{+}\) and \(\:{U}_{j}^{-}\) represent the positive ideal solution and the negative ideal solution for each attribute, respectively. Pi ​ represents the weighted distance of the scheme from the ideal solution, which is used to measure the group utility value of each alternative; Qi ​ represents the maximum weighted distance of the alternative from the ideal solution, reflecting the individual regret measure for each alternative.

Step Two: Calculate the compromise measure index value Ri ​ for each alternative, using the following formula:

\(\:\rho\:\) ( \(\:\rho\:\in\:\) [0,1]) is the compromise ranking coefficient representing the weight of group utility, while 1 −  ρ is the weight of individual regret. In this paper, ρ is set to 0.5, it means the decision is made through negotiations and based on a consensus that group utility and individual regret are equally important.

Step Three: Rank the alternatives in descending order based on the obtained values of Pi ​, Qi ​, and Ri ​. This means that the lower the Ri ​ value, the better the performance of the alternative.

Step Four: Determine the compromise solution and the constraints that need to be satisfied. If the following two constraints are met, the alternative \(\:{A}_{i}^{\left(1\right)}\) ​ with the smallest Ri ​ value and the best rank is recommended as the compromise solution and the optimal alternative among all alternatives.

Constraint 1: Test for acceptable advantage. The difference between \(\:{A}_{i}^{\left(1\right)}\) )​ and \(\:{A}_{i}^{\left(2\right)}\) can be accepted by the decision-maker if it meets the constraint \(\:{R}_{i}^{\left(2\right)}-{R}_{i}^{\left(1\right)}\) > DR, where DR = 1/(m − 1), and \(\:{R}_{i}^{\left(2\right)}\) corresponds to the value of \(\:{A}_{i}^{\left(2\right)}\) in the second-best alternative.

Constraint 2: Test for acceptable stability in multi-attribute group decision-making. Having passed the test for Constraint 1, a further test will be conducted, focusing on the acceptable stability of the best-ranked alternative \(\:{A}_{i}^{\left(1\right)},\:\) which means that \(\:{A}_{i}^{\left(1\right)}\) ​ with the optimal \(\:{\text{R}}_{\text{i}}\:\) value ranking must also rank first in the or/and value rankings. If both Conditions 1 and 2 are satisfied, the obtained compromise solution is considered stable in the decision-making process.

If any of the aforementioned conditions are not met, further rules must be applied to obtain a compromise solution, including:

If Condition 1 is satisfied but Condition 2 is not, both \(\:\:{A}_{i}^{\left(1\right)}\:and{\:A}_{i}^{\left(2\right)}\) are considered compromise solutions.

If Condition 2 is satisfied but Condition 1 is not, the compromise solution is determined by the maximum value of \(\:{A}_{i}^{\left(M\right)}\) , satisfying \(\:{R}_{i}^{\left(M\right)}-{R}_{i}^{\left(1\right)}\) <1/(m-1).

Empirical study

The formal decision structure.

Recent research has begun to extend from urban sustainable development to rural sustainable development. China has undergone urbanization and population concentration over the past 30 years. Rural exodus and the aging of the rural population have led to insufficient supervision of RSW. Coupled with high costs and difficulties in waste treatment, RSW has become one of the major problems affecting the ecological environment in China’s rural areas. Using China as a case study has representative significance for the global study of RSW management.

Section 2 of this paper confirms the prototype decision-making structure of RSW management under the multi-subject governance model through a literature review. Considering the differences in the years of the literature and the research perspectives of various scholars, we used five experts with rich experience as well as strong theoretical backgrounds in waste management, reverse logistics, and rural economy for this case study, as is shown in Table  1 .

Step One: We distributed the prototype decision-making structure to the experts and gathered their feedback through survey questionnaires and face-to-face discussions.

Step Two: The experts were asked to score each index on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating a greater necessity for the index. In Table A2(Appendix), we calculated the mean, variance, and CDI value for each index based on the experts’ scores. The results show that the CDI values of some indices exceed 0.1, indicating that the experts did not reach a consensus on the selection of these indices.

Step Three: The expert group provided explanations for the scores of the indices with significant discrepancies and re-scored these indices. After multiple rounds of repetition, the CDI values for each criterion were all below 0.1, indicating that the expert group had reached a consensus on all the indices. Meanwhile, upon deliberation by the expert group, it was suggested that indices with a mean score below 6 be eliminated. The formal decision-making structure is shown in Table  2 .

Identifying key factors

In this paper, we follow the BMW process to calculate the absolute weight of each index. and described the workflow of experts, using Expert I as an example.

First, Expert I selected the most important and the least important aspects from the five aspects in the formal decision-making structure. He then assigned scores ranging from 1 to 9 according to their importance from low to high. The results are shown in Table  3 .

Second, expert I selected the most and the least important factors in Aspect A and also scored the Best-to-others (BO) and others-to-worst (OW) on a scale of 1–9. The results are shown in Table  4 . He applied the same process to Aspect B-E. The results are shown in Table A3-A6(Appendix).

Finally, we used model (1) in Sect. 3 to calculate the relative weights and target values. Their absolute weights were calculated, as shown in Table  5 .

The work of Experts II, III, IV, and V follows the same procedure as that of Expert I. We collected the computational results and calculated the geometric mean of the results from the different experts to obtain final weights. We ranked the factors in descending order and obtained the key factors as shown in Table  6 . The results showed that the first eight items were critical factors: D4, C1, E4, E7, D3, E5, E6, and C3.

Assessing the RSW management to provinces

In order to further analyze and evaluate the management of RSW in China, this paper selects representative provinces from four regions of China: Heilongjiang, Gansu, Zhejiang, and Sichuan. Heilongjiang is an old industrial base in Northeast China but has recently experienced severe outmigration in the rural areas. Zhejiang, located in the eastern region, is an economically developed province and the birthplace of China’s e-commerce industry. Sichuan, in the southwest region, is a populous province with a high rural population ratio. The province has complex terrain and is frequently affected by natural disasters such as earthquakes, leading to an underdeveloped logistics network. Gansu Province, situated in the northwest, has a relatively lower economic level compared to the other selected provinces, a low population density, and a well-developed animal husbandry industry. These four provinces differ significantly in terms of economic development levels, industrial layout, and rural population density. By selecting these provinces as cases for study, we can compare the differences in RSW management at various stages of development and provide optimized solutions for RSW management based on key factors.

We reinvited a group of five experts familiar with the RSW management situations of the four provinces to use the formal decision-making structure (Table  2 ). The experts rated the RSW indicators of the four provinces using the Likert scale, and the calculated average values were used to derive the Decision Matrix, as shown in Table  7 .

We normalized the above Decision Matrix and calculated the values of the group utility \(\:{P}_{i}\:\) and individual regret \(\:{Q}_{i}\:f\) ollowing the VIKOR procedures. The results are shown in Table A7(Appendix). We calculated the VIKOR index for each alternative(Ri), as shown in A8(Appendix).

We ranked the alternatives by sorting the \(\:{P}_{i}\) , \(\:{Q}_{i}\) , and Ri values in decreasing order such that the best rank is assigned to the alternative with the smallest VIKOR value. The results are three ranking lists. Table  8 presents the ranking lists for the alternatives based on the \(\:{P}_{i}\) , \(\:{Q}_{i}\) , and Ri values.

This paper evaluates the RSW management performance of four representative provinces in China based on the constructed RSW management evaluation index system. The final performance rankings from best to worst are Zhejiang > Liaoning > Sichuan > Gansu. Zhejiang Province leads significantly in RSW management performance, while Gansu Province lags, highlighting the importance of economic development. In economically developed areas, the logistics network for RSW is relatively complete, and advanced logistics facilities provide fundamental support for RSW management. Additionally, Zhejiang Province has invested substantially in rural environmental protection and management over the past three years, making its top performance unsurprising.

Although rural areas in Liaoning Province face severe population loss, they have systematically addressed RSW issues through the “multi-subject governance” model, which ensures social participation. This model has resulted in a better performance than that of Sichuan, which has stronger economic conditions. The above finding indicates that while RSW management effectiveness is influenced by regional economic conditions, it is not entirely constrained by economic development. Comprehensive consideration of external conditions and regional issues, along with innovation in management models and targeted responses to key factors, is crucial for effective RSW management.

Discussion and implications

This paper uses the BWM for weight calculation to rank the key influencing factors in RSW management. The top 8 key factors, in descending order of importance based on their weights, are: D4 > C1 > E4 > D3 > E7 > E5 > A1 > C3. The following conclusions can be drawn based on the identification results of the key factors:

Based on the identification of key factors, it can be determined that D4, Diversified management approaches, is the factor with the highest weight, a conclusion similar to previous research findings 2 . However, from the proportional distribution of key factors, it is evident that Aspects D and E have the highest proportions among the key factors, and these factors are closely related to the “multi-subject governance” model. Whether dealing with RSW or MSW, it is crucial to recognize that waste is essentially a misplaced resource. This perspective ensures environmentally friendly and economically sustainable waste management. By employing diverse treatment methods, the potential value of waste can be deeply explored, making D4 a very reasonable key factor.

In the array of diverse treatment methods, landfilling, and incineration, despite causing some resource wastage, are fundamental measures in many countries to protect rural areas from waste pollution and should be used as the final means of RSW management under government leadership. Other treatment methods, such as recycling and biomass power generation, require the government to actively guide research institutions, manufacturing enterprises, power companies, and even financial institutions to participate in technology development and promotion to continuously optimize RSW management effectiveness 2 , 47 . However, the involvement of multiple entities can easily lead to coordination failures or dishonest practices within an immature supply chain system. To address this, integrating government administrative measures and market incentive mechanisms is necessary to achieve diversified coordination, making E4(Multi-subject coordination long-term mechanism) also a critical factor in RSW management.

Aspect C (Logistics) has always been the most critical aspect in MSW management 45 , 48 , but in RSW management, only C1(Waste sorting standards)and C3(Logistics linkage management) are key factors. The reason lies in the difference between the supply chains: MSW operates with a responsive supply chain, while RSW utilizes an efficient supply chain. Due to the relatively concentrated and large-scale emissions of MSW, efficiency is crucial in its management, with the logistics system being the key determinant of processing timeliness. In contrast, RSW has lower emission volumes and concentration, making operational costs and processing efficiency the focal point of its management. C1 can reduce RSW processing costs, while C3 ensures the most cost-effective and environmentally controlled conditions through appropriate transport routes and batch processing. Thus, RSW management focuses more on C1 and C3 rather than the entire logistics system.

D3(Centralized waste management), E7(Urban-rural integrated operation model), and E5(Infrastructure construction) are factors with similar weight rankings, acting as characteristic influencing factors in RSW management, differing significantly from MSW management. These three factors exhibit strong synergy. Firstly, in sparsely populated rural areas where solid waste emissions are dispersed, adopting D3 can help reduce operational costs. However, designing measures for D3 must be done with caution, as overemphasis on D3 measures can lead to significant pressure on county-level entities involved in RSW management. To address this, large-scale, high-capacity institutions with relatively simple methods may be required for RSW management. Secondly, the allocation of resources and the smooth flow of RSW during transit require calculating and predicting RSW flow volumes to plan and configure E5 and E7 accordingly.

E6 (Enterprise participation) is not identified as a highly weighted key factor in MSW management as in many other studies 41 , which reveals the significant differences between MSW management and RSW management. Market mechanisms are not a panacea for RSW management. The notion of “government inefficiency, market efficiency” does not apply to RSW management. Due to the dispersed pollution sources, extensive coverage, and small quantities, RSW is intertwined with agricultural production, rural livelihoods, and ecosystems. The market cannot integrate multiple subjects’ participation effectively, and RSW currently lacks substantial economic value, resulting in insufficient market enthusiasm for its management.

Implications

From the above research, it can be concluded that the MSG model is an advanced and scientific management approach for RSW governance, particularly suitable for economically underdeveloped areas. Due to the lack of advanced waste treatment technologies, adequate waste treatment facilities, and an efficient waste logistics system, economically underdeveloped areas can only address the core issues of low profitability and dispersed distribution in RSW governance through the MSG model. The following section will propose measures for implementing RSW governance under the MSG model, based on the results of key factor identification and case analysis.

In RSW governance, D4 (Diversified management approaches) and E4 (Multi-subject coordination long-term mechanism) are two interrelated key factors. Due to the characteristics of RSW, the development of D4 requires collaboration among waste management agencies, manufacturing enterprises, and rural residents. Waste management agencies need to adopt diversified governance methods and acquire supporting equipment; manufacturing enterprises should view waste management agencies as a crucial procurement channel for raw materials to effectively close the reverse supply chain of RSW; rural residents need to perform proper waste sorting to reduce supply chain costs.

Considering the significant proportion of public welfare actions in RSW governance, these three subjects clearly lack the motivation to implement the aforementioned actions, which means the multi-subject governance system cannot entirely rely on market coordination and must be government-led. Through multi-subject coordination long-term mechanisms (E4) such as subsidies, taxation, regulation, and administrative penalties, the government can help establish collaborative relationships among multiple subjects. In the initial stages of collaboration, the government may need to integrate research institutions and financial organizations through targeted policies to provide necessary technical and financial support for RSW governance. As the collaboration among multiple subjects gradually becomes smoother, RSW governance approaches will become more diverse and reasonable, increasing supply chain profitability. A ‘ratchet effect’ will emerge among the subjects, at which point the government can gradually introduce market competition mechanisms to eliminate ‘stagnant’ enterprises within the supply chain, thereby accelerating the optimization of the RSW supply chain.

In the early stages of RSW governance reform, attention must be paid to the principal-agent problem between the government and waste management enterprises in economically underdeveloped areas. The core objective of the government is environmental protection, while the core objective of enterprises is profit, which can lead to dishonest practices and low-quality waste management. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce supervision mechanisms among the multiple subjects and establish a comprehensive interest linkage mechanism.

RSW is an efficiency-oriented supply chain; therefore, special attention must be paid to managing supply chain costs. C1 (Waste sorting standards), D3 (Centralized waste management), and C3 (Logistics linkage management) are the primary methods for reducing costs. Firstly, it is essential to conduct awareness campaigns and training for rural residents on RSW classification and the 3R actions (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle). Secondly, due to the dispersed distribution of RSW, it is necessary to encourage rural residents to organize RSW collection on a village-by-village basis. Since a majority of rural residents have ample free time and are sensitive to income, low-cost incentives can be provided to villages that achieve good results in waste classification and centralized collection, and a small portion of the subsidies previously allocated to waste management agencies can be reallocated for this purpose. For waste management agencies, centralized and properly classified RSW can significantly reduce processing costs, so a slight reduction in processing subsidies will not affect their motivation. At the same time, attention should be paid to establishing proper supervision mechanisms to avoid a vicious cycle where ‘the more the government invests, the more waste is generated, and the less effective the governance becomes.’ Thirdly, during the logistics linkage management process, such as temporary storage and centralization of RSW, special care must be taken to prevent well-sorted RSW from being mixed again. It is essential to reasonably design the frequency of waste collection and the logistics routes based on climate conditions and other factors to reduce logistics costs.

Based on regional conditions, the E7 (Urban-rural integrated operation model) should be designed with a scientific division of labor according to waste treatment methods. A multi-subject governance model not only requires effective collaboration among enterprises involved in RSW governance but also necessitates coordination among different levels of administrative units. This is because waste management at the village and town levels typically can only handle basic landfill and burning processes. For RSW that needs to be recycled and reused, villages and towns usually lack the complete processing equipment required, necessitating the transfer and centralized treatment of RSW. Therefore, it is essential to plan the governance methods in advance based on the type of waste. It is also important to configure waste treatment facilities and select the locations for key processing nodes based on geographical proximity, thereby constructing a hierarchical RSW management system of ‘village collection, town transfer, and city treatment.

In the current RSW governance, most countries still adopt a government-led model represented by standardization and indexation, lacking the participation of market and social forces. This model is inefficient and unsustainable. However, the characteristics of RSW lead to the lack of market interest in participating in RSW at the current technological level. To address this dilemma, this paper explores the compatibility of the “multi-subject governance” model with RSW governance and draws the following research conclusions:

This paper organizes various factors affecting RSW governance and constructs an evaluation index system for RSW within the multi-subject governance model, providing theoretical support for innovative RSW governance models.

This paper uses the Best-Worst Method (BWM) to rank the indicators affecting RSW governance effectiveness, confirming key factors such as D4 (Diversified management approaches), C1 (Waste sorting), and E4 (Multi-subject coordination long-term mechanism). It discusses the effective implementation paths of the multi-subject governance model in different rural development contexts, considering the interaction effects between key factors. The strategy emphasizes the effective management of implementation costs while focusing on the refined management of key factors.

Using four provinces in China with different characteristics as case studies, this paper evaluates the effectiveness of RSW governance, ranking the RSW performance of the four provinces from high to low as Zhejiang, Liaoning, Sichuan, and Gansu. The evaluation results indicate that RSW governance is closely related to the regional economy. However, by formulating reasonable countermeasures based on the existing conditions of regional RSW governance and combining key factors with regional bottlenecks, it is possible to construct a “multi-subject governance” model that fits regional characteristics, thereby significantly improving RSW governance effectiveness.

RSW governance is an issue that encompasses both public welfare and economic aspects influenced by comprehensive factors such as regional economy, governance technology level, and governance model. Therefore, RSW governance is a dynamic process that requires continuous optimization of governance strategies according to changes in internal and external conditions. The evaluation index system constructed in this paper is designed for the current state of RSW under existing conditions and is a static index system. Moreover, the multi-subject governance model cannot address the problems of all economies. This model is essentially a “balanced solution” between government-led and fully market-regulated models, though it has certain application limitations. First, the implementing country must possess a high level of waste treatment technology and be capable of effectively managing MSW. The management of RSW is more complex than that of MSW; without extensive experience in MSW management, it becomes challenging to establish an effective RSW governance system. Second, the country must have a governance philosophy centered on sustainable development. The establishment of an RSW governance system, particularly in its initial stages, relies heavily on the government’s coordination and management capabilities, as well as on economic incentive mechanisms. If the focus is solely on the economic benefits of RSW, there may be a lack of motivation to engage in RSW governance. Third, the model must be tailored to regional conditions and residents’ living habits. For instance, in areas with significant urban-rural distances or in regions where logistics are hindered during the winter, it is essential to coordinate local RSW governance with centralized management and to enhance the construction of temporary storage facilities for valuable RSW. Therefore, the localization and integration of the multi-subject governance model will be the focus of further research.

Data availability

All data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Vinti, G. & Vaccari, M. Solid waste management in rural communities of developing countries: An overview of challenges and opportunities. Clean. Technol. Environ. Policy . 4 (4), 1138–1151 (2022).

Article   Google Scholar  

Rahmawati, E., Amir, A. & Sukarno, T. D. Rural waste management model in creating an inclusive economy . in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science . IOP Publishing. (2023).

Milbrandt, A. et al. Quantification and evaluation of plastic waste in the United States. Resour. Conserv. Recycl . 183 , 106363 (2022).

Dawkins, R. Private contracting and citizen attitudes toward local government. Urban Affairs Rev. 57 (5), 1286–1311 (2021).

Neumayer, E. German packaging waste management: A successful voluntary agreement with less successful environmental effects. Eur. Environ. 10 (3), 152–163 (2000).

Martins, A. O., dos, F. E. V., Anjos & Silva, D. O. The lean farm: Application of tools and concepts of lean manufacturing in agro-pastoral crops Sustainability , 15(3): p. 2597. (2023).

Cui, T., Su, X. & Zhang, Y. Study on compulsory classification management and behavior synergy of municipal solid waste. Sustainability . 13 (11), 6265 (2021).

Ao, Y. et al. Identifying the driving factors of rural residents’ household waste classification behavior: Evidence from Sichuan, China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl . 180 , 106159 (2022).

Mu, D. & Zhang, S. The impact of reward–penalty policy on different recycling modes of recyclable resources in residential waste. Sustainability . 13 (14), 7883 (2021).

Wilts, H., Gries, N. V. & Bahn-Walkowiak, B. J. S. Waste Manage. Resource efficiency—The need Policy Mixes 8 (7): 622. (2016).

Google Scholar  

Chintapalli, P. & Vakharia, A. J. The waste management supply chain: A decision framework . Decis. Sci. (2023).

Wibowo, N. et al. Strategies for improving the e-waste management supply chain sustainability in Indonesia (Jakarta). Sustainability . 13 (24), 13955 (2021).

Singh, N., Ogunseitan, O. A. & Tang, Y. Medical waste: Current challenges and future opportunities for sustainable management. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52 (11), 2000–2022 (2022).

Ganguly, R. K. & Chakraborty, S. K. Plastic waste management during and post Covid19 pandemic: Challenges and strategies towards circular economy. Heliyon . 10 (4), e25613 (2024).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Fetanat, A., Tayebi, M. & Shafipour, G. Management of waste electrical and electronic equipment based on circular economy strategies: Navigating a sustainability transition toward waste management sector. Clean. Technol. Environ. Policy . 23 , 343–369 (2021).

Jiang, Y. Multi-subject cooperative participation in rural governance research. Open. J. Soc. Sci. 9 (3), 218–227 (2021).

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Yin, J. et al. An inexact two-stage multi-objective waste management planning model under considerations of subsidies and uncertainties: A case study of Baotou, China. J. Clean. Prod. 298 , 126873 (2021).

Allain-Dupré, D. The multi-level governance imperative. Br. J. Politics Int. Relat. 22 (4), 800–808 (2020).

Yin, C., Gu, Y. & Zhao, G. Effects of shared governance and cost redistribution on air pollution control: A study of game theory–based cooperation. Environ. Sci. Pollut Res. 30 (17), 49180–49196 (2023).

Tamtik, M. & Colorado, C. Multi-level governance framework and its applicability to education policy research-the Canadian perspective. Res. Educ. 114 (1), 20–44 (2022).

Huang, K. et al. Domestic solid waste discharge and its determinants in rural China. China Agric. Econ. Rev. 5 (4), 512–525 (2013).

Wang, F. et al. Compliance with household solid waste management in rural villages in developing countries. J. Clean. Prod. 202 , 293–298 (2018).

Boateng, S. et al. Comparative analysis of households solid waste management in rural and urban Ghana. Journal of Environmental Public Health, 2016. (2016).

Li, P., Liu, J. & Wei, C. A dynamic decision making method based on gm (1, 1) model with pythagorean fuzzy numbers for selecting waste disposal enterprises. Sustainability . 11 (20), 5557 (2019).

Zeng, C. et al. Public perceptions and economic values of source-separated collection of rural solid waste: A pilot study in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl . 107 , 166–173 (2016).

Wen, Y. F. & Hou, X. and H.X. bo, The current situation and counter measures of rural residential environment in the New Era. J. Zhengzhou Univ. 51(03): pp. 64–68 + 159. (2018).

Xu, D. et al. Impact of perceived environmental regulation on rural residents’ willingness to pay for domestic waste management. J. Clean. Prod. 412 , 137390 (2023).

Sheng, L. & Ma, J. Village clans and rural households’ willingness to participate in domestic waste governance: Evidence from China. J. Clean. Prod. 425 , 138951 (2023).

Ding, Y. et al. A review of China’s municipal solid waste (MSW) and comparison with international regions: Management and technologies in treatment and resource utilization. J. Clean. Prod. 293 , 126144 (2021).

Cong, H. et al. Co-processing paths of agricultural and rural solid wastes for a circular economy based on the construction concept of zero-waste city in China. Circ. Econ. 2 (4), 100065 (2023).

Fernando, R. L. S. Solid waste management of local governments in the Western Province of Sri Lanka: An implementation analysis. Waste Manag . 84 , 194–203 (2019).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Li, Z., Song, L. J. A. E., Humanities & Research, S. S. Discussion Mechanism Public. Participation Community Gov. 4 (1): 110–110. (2023).

Hua, C. J. Research on rural domestic waste disposal under the perspective of rural revitalization . Chongqing Soc. Sci. 2019 (06): pp. 44–54 .

Agya, B. A., Rückert, A. & Dornack, C. Effectiveness of traditional solid waste management system of rural communities: A case study in the Kwahu east district, Ghana. Environ. Challenges, : p. 100869. (2024).

Wei, W. & Jin, X. Current research and prospect on rural household trash management in China. Ecol. Econ. 36 (11), 195–201 (2020).

Liu, A. et al. Rural residents’ awareness of environmental protection and waste classification behavior in Jiangsu, China: an empirical analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ Health . 17 (23), 8928 (2020).

Weber, G. et al. The role of environmental organisations on urban transformation: The case of waste management in Esporles (Mallorca). J. Clean. Prod. 195 , 1546–1557 (2018).

Shadbahr, J. et al. Impact of waste management and conversion technologies on cost and carbon footprint—Case studies in rural and urban cities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 168 , 112872 (2022).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Yin, Q. et al. Promoting the resource utilization of agricultural wastes in China with public-private-partnership mode: An evolutionary game perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 434 , 140206 (2024).

Park, S. & Moon, M. J. Fixing big government or feeding private contractors? Empirical evidence from the case of municipal solid waste management. Aust J. Publ Admin . 82 (1), 116–132 (2023).

Sun, Y. & Li, C. Effects of circular-agriculture economic measures on environmental conservation and socioeconomic development. J. Clean. Prod. 379 , 134685 (2022).

Wang, L. et al. A review of the challenges and application of public-private partnership model in Chinese garbage disposal industry. J. Clean. Prod. 230 , 219–229 (2019).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Darban Astane, A. & Hajilo, M. Factors affecting the rural domestic waste generation. Glob J. Environ. Sci. Manag Environ. Q. Int. J. 3 (4), 417–426 (2017).

Aguirre, M. S. I. C. V. Environmental Audit of Solid Waste Management in Granada City, Nicaragua. (2020).

Sun, Y. Performance evaluation of rural domestic waste collection and transportation in Xuzhou. South. China Agric. 14 (30), 191–193 (2020).

Huang, Y. L. Study on the Management of Rural solid waste in Lai shui County in the construction ofBeautiful Village . (2018).

Han, Z. et al. Influencing factors of domestic waste characteristics in rural areas of developing countries. Waste Manag . 72 , 45–54 (2018).

Ogwueleka, T. Municipal solid waste characteristics and management in Nigeria. J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng. 6 (3), 173–180 (2009).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Information and Business Management, Dalian Neusoft University of Information, Dalian, 116023, China

Dongshi Sun

School of Foreign Languages, Dalian Neusoft University of Information, Dalian, 116023, China

College of Artificial Intelligence and E-Commerce, Zhejiang Gongshang University Hangzhou College of Commerce, Hangzhou, 311508, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, D. S.; Data curation, L. H.; Formal analysis, D. X.; Resources, D. S.; Supervision, D. S.; Writing—original draft, D. X. and L. H.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Danlan Xie .

Ethics declarations

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.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

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.

Sun, D., Hao, L. & Xie, D. Governance of rural solid waste under a multi-subject governance model. Sci Rep 14 , 27111 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-78732-5

Download citation

Received : 17 July 2024

Accepted : 04 November 2024

Published : 07 November 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-78732-5

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

• Rural solid waste
• Multi-subject governance
• The best-worst method

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Solid Waste Management - Recent Advances, New Trends and Applications

Solid Waste Management

Submitted: 06 May 2023 Reviewed: 29 May 2023 Published: 09 July 2023

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1001980

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Solid Waste Management - Recent Advances, New Trends and Applications

Pengzhong Li

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

190 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

In many countries of the world, especially underdeveloped countries, the practice of solid waste management is inefficient. Solid waste management has become a difficult environmental issue. Due to poor waste handling practices, many environmental and health issues arise. In this regard, many countries are trying to find ways to deal with the problem of solid waste. This chapter is an overview of solid waste management practices knocking the waste minimization techniques that play an important role in eliminating environmental problems. In developing countries, the practice of waste handling for infectious and non-infectious waste is of mixed type. Such mismanagement of solid waste paves the way for environmental pollution, leading to adverse effects on human health. Various factors such as poor policies, inefficient organizations, lack of financial support and poor governance, are the major constrains in safe waste management. Therefore, it is considered difficult to manage the recovery and safe disposal of solid waste. This study shows that there should be an appropriate organizational configuration for the separate treatment of different types of solid waste. For this, the authorities concerned must be strengthened financially and in skilled manpower for a good management of solid waste with a good recovery of resources.

• solid waste
• health problems
• waste disposal
• waste management

Author Information

Nazish huma khan *.

• Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Swabi, Pakistan

Mohammad Nafees

• Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Peshawar, Pakistan

Tooba Saeed

• Department of Chemistry, Bacha Khan University Charsadda, Pakistan

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

Majority countries of the world are facing the issue of solid waste management. Initially it was thought that all the waste coming from household and animal wastes are solid waste. Later on it was proved that all the waste generated as a result of catastrophic events as well as construction and demolition sites are considered to be solid waste [ 1 ]. But solid waste are any materials that are being generated as a result of our daily activities, such as packages, bottles, leftovers, newspapers, equipment, gadgets, batteries, and colors [ 2 ]. Solid Waste Management (SWM) is becoming a global challenge throughout the world because of overpopulation and change in consumption patterns [ 3 ]. Improper disposal of solid waste causes variouse environmental problems like soil, water and air pollution as well as surface and ground water contamination. Decomposition of organic waste causes greenhouse gases into atmosphere [ 4 ]. While many health issues are also related to improper disposal of solid waste. The management of solid waste requires interdisciplinary links between politics, planning, geography, economics, public health, sociology, engineering, and materials science [ 2 ]. Integrated solid waste management is a process which is completely based on 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle), with the goal of reducing the amount of waste that must be disposed of while maximizing material and energy recovery from waste, Figure 1 [ 1 ].

Integrated SWM system [ 5 ]. The poor policies of transportation, energy, and waste management causes one in eight deaths worldwide in 2012, being related to air pollution [ 6 ].

Growing economies and populations in emerging nations like China, India, and Brazil have produced enormous amounts of solid waste that need to be managed [ 7 ,  8 ]. A number of these nations desire an advanced sustainable solid waste management system that supports better source material sorting and high recycling rates, but they do not have the necessary SWM capabilities to balance their sustainable development objectives [ 9 ]. Among the developed countries, the amount of waste generated in the United States was 88.1 million tons in 1960, later on it was increased up to 250 million tons in 2008 [ 10 ]. While in developing countries, the practice of solid waste management is inefficient. In Pakistan, there is no adequate waste collection and disposal system. All types of waste (industrial, municipal, hospital, etc.) are treated in the same way. The solid waste generation rate in Pakistan is calculated at 70,715 tonnes per day. In total, about 51–69% of solid waste is collected daily in Pakistan, while the rest of the waste is burnt or illegally dumped [ 11 ].

Urbanization and overpopulation is the root cause of increasing waste. By 2025 there will be 8 billion of world’s population reach, out of which 5 billion will be living in cities [ 12 ]. Similarly, the rapid population growth, ongoing urbanization, and the expansion of commercial, industrial, and service activities in Iran have increased waste production, which has caused a significant issues including environmental contamination [ 13 ]. Most MSWs in many nations are landfilled, while facilities for waste treatment including composting and incineration of wastes are rarely employed [ 14 ]. Solid waste management is important with the goals to plan strategies to address the health, environmental, esthetic, land-use, resource, and economic issues that arise from improper waste disposal [ 3 ]. The responsible team is municipal authority working at local level. Due to lacking of resources, the majority of municipalities do not collect the increasing level of waste. SWM is essential for conserving urban landscapes, people’s health, and cities’ reputations. It is important to support the waste colleting authority and all issues associated with the collection and disposal of solid waste because the situation will get worse over time due to the high rate of urbanization [ 15 ].

1.1 Types of solid waste

Solid waste is of different type, depending upon the sources from which it is generated, Table 1 [ 4 , 5 ]. These wastes carry two main types including hazardous and non-hazardous waste. Hazardous waste includes metals (Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, etc.), chemicals, sharp objects, paints and is difficult to reuse or recycle. While non-hazardous waste includes food waste, paper, plastic, tin metals, glass, wood, etc. that can be recovered in a conventional solid waste management system [ 11 ]. The majority of waste generated by industries, hospitals and laboratories is considered hazardous while waste from commercial areas and municipal waste is not hazardous to health. Depending on the nature of the type of waste, treatments or appropriate disposal are required as a management strategy [ 5 ].

Sources and types of solid waste.

1.2 Adverse health impacts

The effects of solid waste on health may vary based on a number of factors, including the type of waste management practices, the traits and behaviors of the population exposed, the period of Interventions for exposure, prevention, and mitigation. The health consequences included mortality, neonatal outcomes, cancer, respiratory illnesses, gastroenteritis, vector-borne infections, cardiovascular disorders, and mental health issues [ 16 ]. Vegetable peels, common household waste, medical waste, e-waste, etc. are all thrown away. Decomposition of the waste results in the release of numerous noxious gases, which draw numerous mice and other pests to the area and create major health dangers. Due to the unscientific and unsanitary way of life of the people of Garia, Kolkata, individuals frequently suffer from diseases like diarrhea, malaria, and dengue. While certain health effects may be rapid, clear to see, and directly related to the exposure to solid waste, others may be occult, long-lasting, and difficult to identify to a specific type of trash. The four groups-model represents the health implications easier to understand, Figure 2 [ 17 ]. The model shows the mechanism of improper waste disposal and its health impacts on human health. Such diseases are infections and chronic effects. The responsible sources for health diseases are improper disposal of hazardous type of waste such as sharps etc.

Poor SWM and adverse health impacts [ 17 ].

2. Waste management practices

The adoption of integrated sustainable waste management techniques that are based on a comprehensive, multifaceted, and multi-stakeholder approach to the design and operation of MSW management systems. The 3Rs principles, prioritizing actions in accordance with the waste pyramid hierarchy, and embracing life-cycle thinking are all crucial components of this, Figure 3 . This practice of waste management is quite easy and cheap. While being encouraged by contemporary waste management strategies, reuse, and recycling, composting, and safe disposal through landfills are usually not carried out. A significant fraction of waste generated in underdeveloped nations is not recycled. The only problem is the improper and unsafe disposal of unwanted items. It is challenging to recycle or compost due to the lack of waste recycling. Due to this, a large amount of solid waste in developing nations is dumped in open areas and frequently burned [ 17 ].

Safe disposal to minimized residual waste [ 18 ].

The existence of laws and policies controlling waste management and the extent to which they are enforced, the amount of funds sources, and the type and amount of waste generated all have an impact on the differences in waste management methods. The final disposal is frequently at an open dumping site on the outskirts of the city, with collection frequently occurring near the source or temporary dumping site. Truckloads of wastes are usually dumped at dump sites, which are typically large open spaces or water channel. Dumped waste is searched for usable and recyclables items by the scavengers or it is frequently burned to minimize the bulk [ 17 ]. Solid waste composition is complex due to inadequate solid waste sorting at any level and may contain industrial, medical, electronic, and human waste deposited on the same open grounds where all the other municipal waste is dumped [ 19 ].

2.1 Landfill technology

The process of properly disposing of biodegradable and non-biodegradable wastes in a landfill (set apart and away from locality) is known as landfilling. In many nations, landfilling has been the traditional and most profitable method of waste disposal [ 20 ]. Due to its low cost and labor-intensiveness, landfilling is preferable to incineration and recycling of municipal solid waste. Additionally, by using its landfill gas and leachate for energy production, a consolidated landfilling can also generate income [ 20 ]. However, due to improvements in recycling, composting, incineration, and energy recovery technologies, landfilling of municipal solid waste decreased from 89% in 1980 to less than 53% in 2014 in the USA [ 20 ]. According to the type of waste, such as household waste, toxic chemicals, biohazards, biomedical wastes, radioactive wastes, as well as building, demolition, and restoration wastes, different landfills and remediation facilities are located in different areas. There is no proper landfill system for the safe disposal of solid waste in underdeveloped countries such as Pakistan. The practice of solid waste disposal is in open land areas or in the nearby areas of water channels. This not only opens a pathway for soil and water contamination but also lead to severe health issue to the scavengers (birds, animals, human). There are the following categories according to the type of solid waste which is to be refused, Table 2 . These types of waste area generated from different sources as mentioned in the table.

Categories of solid waste disposal.

2.2 Bioreactor landfills

Anaerobic bioreactor landfills, an anaerobic bacteria transform biodegradable wastes into volatile fatty acids, which are subsequently converted into landfill gases like CH 4 and CO 2 . Organic wastes are degraded anaerobically to produce leachate and landfill gases by a number of sequential processes, including hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis, methanogenesis, anaerobic oxidation, and fermentation [ 20 ].

Aerobic bioreactor landfills speed up the breakdown of waste by supplying aerobic bacteria with excess oxygen. The aerobic bacteria generate energy by oxidizing organic molecules, which primarily produces CO 2 and water. Aerobic degradation happens more quickly than anaerobic degradation because aerobic bacteria reproduce more quickly as a result of aerobic respiration, which is more efficient at generating energy than anaerobic respiration. By adding air to the soil layers and waste matter, aerobic bioreactor landfills promote aeration. Methanogenesis and CH 4 synthesis in landfills are lowered from starting levels of 60 to 10% within 7–10 days while anaerobic bacteria development is slowed [ 20 ].

Landfills with semi-aerobic bioreactors provide partially oxygen-deficient environments that promote the growth of both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. According to this, methanation, hydrolysis, and fermentation likely occur simultaneously, albeit depending on the oxygen level, aerobic and anaerobic reactions may compete. The corresponding aerobic and anaerobic microbes may also locate in the landfill’s most advantageous microbiome niches. In semi-aerobic bioreactor landfills, air is transmitted through the waste layer from the bottom of the landfill, whereas air is injected into the aerial space of aerobic bioreactor landfills. Air can naturally circulate through the leachate collecting pipes in some designs [ 20 ].

3. Thermal chemical conversion

This is a process of conversion solid waste into energy by thermal decomposition of waste material [ 18 ]. There are various ways for treating solid waste, and choosing the best one relies on the kind of waste, the amount of land that is available, and the cost of disposal, Figure 4 [ 4 ]. These are as follows.

Treatment techniques of solid waste.

3.1 Incineration

It is a controlled combustion process for producing gases and residue including non-combustible material by burning solid wastes at high temperatures of around 1000°C and above in the presence of excess air (oxygen) [ 4 , 18 ]. The ability to employ the incine ration process to reduce the original amount of combustible MSW by 80–90% is one of its most alluring aspects [ 4 ]. Solid waste incineration typically produces 65 to 80 percent thermal energy. Stoker and fluidized bed furnaces are the two types that are most frequently used. Advantages: they are energy efficient, odorless as well as noiseless; disadvantages: Dioxin formation, SOx and NOx emissions, and particle creation; expensive; requires skills during its handling [ 18 ]. In undeveloped countries, majority of incineration plants are non-functional and hazardous waste is discarded and handled like non-hazardous type of waste.

3.2 Compaction

All the collected wastes are compressed and break into small pieces for further operations [ 4 ].

3.3 Pyrolysis

This is an endothermic process. Solid wastes are burned at the temperature range between 400 and 1000°C. Syngas, char and oil are produced as a result of pyrolysis [ 4 ] and a mixture of combustible gases CO, CH 4 and H 2 [ 18 ]. The feedstock for high-quality pyrolysis products should consist of a certain type of waste (plastic, rubber, electronics, electrical waste, wood waste, etc.). Several earlier research that focused more on the pyrolysis process itself than on the potential economic applications of the pyrolysis products reported on the pyrolysis of specific types of waste. Recently, pyrolysis has drawn interest in especially for recycling discarded tyres in order to recover oil, wire, carbon black, and gas.

3.4 Gasification

The temperature ranges between 1000 and 1400°C and less amount of oxygen of required [ 21 ]. Pyrolysis and gasification is more preferable and favorable process of treating MSW than incineration. Due to its lower impacts on environment. These processes use less energy for the reduction of waste up to 95% than incineration. Advatages: Syngas and slag are produced, while sulfuric acid is obtained from sulfur containing waste [ 18 ]. Disadvantages: it produces highly toxic polyhalogenated organics as a product, high amount of coal is required [ 18 ].

3.5 Composting

This is a process of aerobic biological decomposition of organic waste under controlled conditions, such as temperature, humidity, and pH. The indigenous microorganisms (thermophile and mesophile) transform organic matter into compost, a stable product [ 21 ]. The resulting compost functions as a soil conditioner and has uses in landscaping, agriculture, and horticulture [ 22 ]. Due to the gradual involvement of microorganisms during the breakdown process, composting is a “batch” process. Composting is a safe and ecofriendly process [ 21 ].

3.6 Hydrothermal carbonization

Carbonization is a relatively new thermal conversion method that turns solid waste into carbonaceous residues by heating it to a temperature between 180 and 350 C in a water-based environment (i.e., hydrochar). This process is exothermic in nature, moisture-rich waste materials are used, and energy requirements to run the device are low. But it is a costly method [ 18 ].

4. Waste management system

Industrial Symbiosis/Inhouse waste handling: In this techniques, waste of one industry is used as a resource of production in another industry. For examples, waste wood of match industry is utilized as a resource in Chip-board industry. While waste of paper mill is used in packaging industry for packing of eggs, fruits and vegetables etc. [ 23 ].

Industrial waste management system

Littering/unmanaged waste Handling

Return system: used cans or bottles are returned to the company or industries for its reuse after the recycling of their respective waste ( Figure 6 ).

Hazardous waste management system

Public or private Municipal Waste Management System [ 25 ].

A model of WM system [ 5 ].

SWM model for return system [ 24 ].

5. Challenges to solid waste management (SWM)

There are the following challenges which come across the SWM.

5.1 Waste generation and characterization

Waste generation rate is directly depending upon the population of an area. People disposed of their waste openly or discarded inappropriately. The most meaningful way of waste management is to educate people to reduce waste. Because of the modern era industries and institutions are going towards modern food packaging which itself is a big problem leading towards the generation of waste [ 26 ]. Solid wastes are characterized in terms of corrosive, ignitability, reactive and toxicity [ 4 ] and are also categorized on the basis of biodegradable, nonbiodegradable, organic inorganic and natural wastes [ 26 ].

5.2 Lack of funding

Overpopulation has necessitated the provision of sophisticated infrastructure for urban areas, and landfill selection is essential. Dumping zones are the main issue in dumping sites and a lack of government funding for urban local governments (ULBs) to effectively manage generated solid waste. We lack the facilities necessary to conduct a suitable process for SWM, due to lack of funding [ 26 ].

5.3 Lack of awareness

Govt, do not taking entrust towards the awareness programs of locality and their participatory approach towards SWM. The modern techniques of SWM should be adopted on large scale by adopted nations [ 18 ].

5.4 Institutional setup

There is less interaction between the federal and state governments causes a delay in reporting information from one to the other, which delays proper implementation at the sub-national level. Major barriers include a lack of collaboration with urban municipal governments for specific action plans and a weak implementation of policy [ 26 ].

5.5 Segregation of waste

Solid wastes contain every type of material when they are openly dumped. We need properly managed and scientific system for their safe disposal. Improper waste segregation is hazardous and causes serious health problems [ 21 ].

5.6 Involvement of other sectors

Many organizational sectors were established to improve the process of collecting MSW and source segregation it, but due to societal ignorance these approaches are ignored [ 26 ]. Rag-pickers might be employed by the organized sector to increase MSW collection efficiency and source segregations. Nevertheless, this enormous potential has gone untapped because there aren’t enough recycling industries and people do not accept recycling.

6. Solid waste management and sustainable development goals (SDGs)

The importance of maintaining health and protecting the environment through proper solid waste management in cities has increased because of seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (17SDGs). The SDG agenda promotes higher reuse and recycling as well as decreased waste generation. It mentions SDGs 3 (ensure people’s health and promote well-being), 6 (water and sanitation), 11 (make cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable), and 13 (combating climate change and its impact) [ 17 ]. SDG-11 is closely related to solid waste management: “percentage of solid waste that is well-managed and collected on a regular basis.” Yet, just like all prior social development programmes, operationalization and implementation may be where the problem lies. The management of solid waste is not mainstreamed, is funded poorly, and has never met expectations in many developing nations [ 27 ].

7. Conclusion

The mechanism of collection of solid waste and its safe disposal is a generic environmental problem worldwide. In this respect, the 3Rs-principle is considered to be the cheapest and most efficient way for solid waste management. In the majority of developing countries, there is no system for waste recovery at the collection and disposal sites. The recycling potential is not satisfactory. The practice of open burning of plastic and rubber items is the most common practice that causes air pollution. The waste management control mechanism is limited. Due to the lack of treatment facilities, people generally face unhygienic environments. Therefore, proper management must be done for solid waste management strategies.

Abbreviation

• 1. Memon MA. Integrated solid waste management based on the 3R approach. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2010; 12 :30-40
• 2. Arıkan E, Şimşit-Kalender ZT, Vayvay O. Solid waste disposal methodology selection using multi-criteria decision making methods and an application in Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2017; 142 :403-412
• 3. Marshall RE, Farahbakhsh K. Systems approaches to integrated solid waste management in developing countries. Waste Management. 2013; 33 (4):988-1003
• 4. Alam P, Ahmade K. Impact of solid waste on health and the environment. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Green Economics (IJSDGE). 2013; 2 (1):165-168
• 5. Srivastava R, Krishna V, Sonkar I. Characterization and management of municipal solid waste: A case study of Varanasi city, India. International Journal of Current Research and Academic Review. 2014; 2 (8):10-16
• 6. Soltani A, Sadiq R, Hewage K. Selecting sustainable waste-to-energy technologies for municipal solid waste treatment: A game theory approach for group decision-making. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016; 113 :388-399
• 7. Bao Z, Lu W. Developing efficient circularity for construction and demolition waste management in fast emerging economies: Lessons learned from Shenzhen, China. Science of the Total Environment. 2020; 724 :138264
• 8. Bui TD, Tseng JW, Tseng ML, Lim MK. Opportunities and challenges for solid waste reuse and recycling in emerging economies: A hybrid analysis. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2022; 177 :105968
• 9. Browning S, Beymer-Farris B, Seay JR. Addressing the challenges associated with plastic waste disposal and management in developing countries. Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering. 2021; 32 :100682
• 10. Yousefloo A, Babazadeh R. Designing an integrated municipal solid waste management network: A case study. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2020; 244 :118824
• 11. Khan NH, Nafees M, Saeed T, Rahman KU, Bashir A. Organizational setup for solid waste management record keeping. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences. 2021; 40 (1):60-68
• 12. Menikpura SNM, Sang-Arun J, Bengtsson M. Assessment of environmental and economic performance of waste-to-energy facilities in Thai cities. Renewable Energy. 2016; 86 :576-584
• 13. Shirazi M, Samieifard R, Abdoli M, Omidvar B. Mathematical modeling in municipal solid waste management: Case study of Tehran. Journal of Environmental Health Science & Engineering. 2016. DOI: 10.1186/s40201-016-0250-2
• 14. Harijani A, Mansour S, Karimi B, Lee C. Multi-period sustainable and integrated recycling network for municipal solid waste. A case study in Tehran. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2017; 151 :96-108
• 15. Louise Bjerkli C. Governance on the ground: A study of solid waste Management in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 2013; 37 (4):1273-1287
• 16. Vinti G, Bauza V, Clasen T, Medlicott K, Tudor T, Zurbrügg C, et al. Municipal solid waste management and adverse health outcomes: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18 (8):4331
• 17. 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. Archives of Public Health. 2016; 74 (1):1-11
• 18. Das S, Lee SH, Kumar P, Kim KH, Lee SS, Bhattacharya SS. Solid waste management: Scope and the challenge of sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 228 :658-678
• 19. Needhidasan S, Samuel M, Chidambaram R. Electronic waste–an emerging threat to the environment of urban India. Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering. 2014; 12 :1-9
• 20. Nanda S, Berruti F. Municipal solid waste management and landfilling technologies: A review. Environmental Chemistry Letters. 2021; 19 :1433-1456
• 21. Srivastava V, Ismail SA, Singh P, Singh RP. Urban solid waste management in the developing world with emphasis on India: Challenges and opportunities. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology. 2015; 14 :317-337
• 22. Singh RP, Singh P, Araujo AS, Ibrahim MH, Sulaiman O. Management of urban solid waste: Vermicomposting a sustainable option. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2011; 55 (7):719-729
• 23. Khan NH, Nafees M, Saeed T, Khan A, Bashir A. Industrial Symbiosis and industrial waste Management in Wood-Based Industries. Journal of Industrial Pollution Control. 2018; 34 (2):2152-2158
• 24. Sharif N, Pishvaee M, Aliahmadi A, Jabbarzadeh A. A bi-level programming approach to joint network design and pricing problem in the municipal solid waste management system: A case study. Resources, Conservation & Recycling. 2018; 131 :17-40
• 25. Christensen T, editor. Solid Waste Technology and Management. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2011. ISNB: 978-1-405-17517-3
• 26. Venkiteela LK. Status and challenges of solid waste management in Tirupati city. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2020; 33 :470-474
• 27. Haylamicheal ID, Desalegne SA. A review of legal framework applicable for the management of healthcare waste and current management practices in Ethiopia. Waste Management & Research. 2012; 30 (6):607-618

© The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Edited by Pengzhong Li

Published: 20 December 2023

By Boniface Yeboah Antwi and Ammishaddai Ofori-Nyarko

127 downloads

By Yasemin Tabak

120 downloads

By Ayo Adeniran, Lorato Motsatsi, Sijekula Mbanga, Em...

186 downloads

IntechOpen Author/Editor? To get your discount, log in .

Discounts available on purchase of multiple copies. View rates

Local taxes (VAT) are calculated in later steps, if applicable.

Support: [email protected]

Solid waste management for sustainable development

A study of solid waste management for sound environmental development in hambantota municipal council (hmc) in sri lanka..

Methodology

When doing a social research, it is important to thoroughly describe which method is used in order to make it accessible for the readers and to be able to process it in scientific manner (Teorell & Svensson, 2007, p.54).  The Research method is a supporting subject which is used to accomplish in a variety of research paradigm in many academic disciplines (Kumar, 2010, p.18).  It is a system of models, procedures and techniques used to find the result of a research problem (Panneerselvam, 2004, p.2).  According to Henn et al (2006, p.21), the research method encourages the researcher to investigate a particular research area from a variety of different types of data, analyze these data using different techniques and interpreting the results from a variety of different positions. However, Choices about the method are a matter of rummaging in the tool bag for the best equipment for the task in hand (Roger, 2009, p.32).  Finding these best tools was necessary to carry out the research in order to precede the study successfully.

A methodology for any research study is designed in a very cautions manner and by careful examination of the related literature (Khan, 2011, p.70).  Hence, the researcher could identify many different factors related to research objectives and questions of the study with the reviewed literature in the previous chapter. Based on those readings the researcher developed the methodology which include finding the research problem, creating research questions, formatting the theoretical framework in a pre-empirical stage; while designing method, data collection, data analyzing and data interpretation in the Empirical stage (see figure 5).

Source: Author Edited by using Punch (1998, p.42)

Mixed Method Strategy

The first step of developing the methodology was to decide the research strategy. According to World Health Organization (WHO, 2001, p.9), the selection of a research strategy is the core of a research method and is probably the most important decision the researcher has to make. Research strategy is the general orientation to the conduct of social research (Bryman, 2012, p.34). Many researchers focus on using a qualitative research strategy or quantitative research strategy for their studies. Nevertheless, in some situations, a second research method can be added to the study to provide an enhanced understanding of some phase of the research and enhance a primary method so that the research objectives can be best address in the study (Creswell & Clark, 2011, p. 10).

As this study focus on how Solid Waste Management (SWM) practices impact on sound environmental development, the researcher decided to use a mixed method strategy. Mixed method strategy integrates quantitative and qualitative research in a single project (Bryman, 2012, p.628). The mixed method approach collects and analyzes data, integrates the findings and draws inferences by using both qualitative and quantitative approaches in a single study (Taskkori & Creswell, 2007, p.4). However, the research largely relied on the qualitative approach which is sequentially followed by a quantitative approach within the entire research process. The decision towards a mixed method developed because the two methods together result in a better understanding of the problem of the study (Heise-Biber & Leavy, 2008, 365). Especially, the Research Questions were suited for mixed methods as one data source was insufficient to answer all questions. According to Creswell & Clark (2011, p. 8), one type of evidence may not tell the complete story, or the researcher may lack confidence in the ability to address the problem. Therefore, using mixed methods provided an opportunity to conduct the research with confidence.

At the outset of selecting the approach, the researcher needed to know advantages of mixed methods. These advantages can be used to convince readers about the value of mixed methods (Creswell & Clark, 2011, p. 12). The mixed method provided strengths that equalize the weaknesses of both qualitative and quantitative approaches.  It provided more relevant data to answer the research problem than using either qualitative or quantitative approaches alone. Moreover, a mixed method approach is likely to increase the acceptance of findings and conclusions. Yet, some disadvantages were identified with this method. When data collection methods are duplicative, the costs for gathering information were essentially doubled. Same time as pointed out by Roberts (2000), it was problematic with the possible statistical measurement limitations of qualitative data when it has been quantitized as the result is moving in the same line.

Case Study Design

“Research design essentially refers to the plan or strategy of shaping the research” (Henn et al, 2006, p.46). It is a procedure plan that is adopted by the researcher “to answer questions validly, objectively, accurately and economically” (Kumar, 2011, p. 94). A research design is a statement of the object of the inquiry and the strategies for collecting the evidences, analyzing the findings and reporting those (Singh & Nath, 2007, p.154).  As pointed out by Khan, (2011, p. 69), selection and formulation of a proper research scheme is very important and essential for the successful accomplishment of a research.

This study was conducted under case study design. As Stake (1995) cited in Bryman (2012, p.66), a case study research is concerned with the complexity and the particular nature of the case in the research question.  The design involves detailed and intensive analysis of the case (Bryman, 2008). It is related to the criteria that are employed when evaluating social research and build a frame work for the generation of evidence that is suited both to a certain set of criteria and to the research question in which the investigator is interested (Bryman, 2012, p.45).  In this Study, the benefit of conducting a case study was that it enabled an examination of the impact of SWM on Sound Environmental Development in Hambantota Urban Council (HUC). The case study investigated the practice of SWM, perspectives of local population about SWM and impact of SWM for sound environmental development.  However, SWM practices are highly contextual. Therefore, this case study will not necessarily find the same findings as a similar case study in another social setting.  As Bryman (2012) stated, the purpose of the case study is not to make generalizations, but rather to generate theoretical assumptions on the basis of the findings of that particular case.

3.1.  Research design .

3.2.  Data Collection Methods

3.3.  Sampling Method .

3.4.  Data analysis

3.5.  Ethical consideration.

References:

Boyatzis, R.E. (1998). Transforming quantitative information: thematic analysis and code development. SAGE publication.

Bryman (2008) Social Research Methods (3rd ed.), New York: Oxford university Press.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods, 4th edition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cargan, L. (2007). Doing social research. Rowman & Littlefield publication.

Creswell, J.W., (2011). Designing and conduction mixed method research. SAGE publication.

Daly, Kellehear, & Gliksman (1997). The public health researcher: A methodological approach. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press. pp. 611–618.

Devi, L. (1998) Areas and tools of social research. Anmol publication.

Henn, M. Weinstein, M & Forard , N. (2006) A short introduction to social research. New Delhi: Vistaar publication

Kemper, A. E; Stringfield , S. & Teddlie , C.(2003) mixed methods sampling strategy in social science research in Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie,C.(ed) Handbook of mixed method in social and behavioral research. London: Saga publication

Klenke, K (2008). Qualitative research in the study of leadership. Emerald group publication: Bingle publication Kumar, R. (2010) Research Methodology: A Step by Step Guide for Beginners, 3rd Ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd

Kumar, R., (2011). Research methodology: A step by step guide for beginner. Sage publication.

Neuman, L.W. (2007). Social research method: qualitative and quantitative methods. 6th Ed .Pearson education

Onwuegbuzie, J.A. & Tebblis, C. (2003) ‘A frame for analyzing data in mixed method research. In, Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (Ed) Handbook of mixed method in social and behavioral research. Saga publication.

Punch, F.K. (1998) introduction to social research: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Saga publication

Roberts, C.W. 2000 A Conceptual Frameworks for Quantitative Text Analysis. Quality and Quantity. http://www.public.iastate.edu/~carlos/papers/q&q2000.pdf Accessed on 2013/ 11/ 24.

Sing, Y.K & Nath, R., (2007). Research Methodology. APH Publication

Vartanian, T.P. (2010).  Secondary Data Analysis. Oxford University Press

WHO (2001). Health research methodology: a guide for training in research methods. WHO publication.

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Different Waste Management Methods, Applications, and Limitations

• First Online: 08 February 2022

Cite this chapter

• Bahram Barati 4 ,
• Fatemeh Fazeli Zafar 4 &
• Shuang Wang 4  

1552 Accesses

3 Citations

Approximately, half a ton of waste is produced per person annually; thus, waste management is essential to avoid environmental issues. The waste management system encompasses the entire set of activities related to treating, handling, recycling, or disposing of waste materials. This chapter aims to represent the history of waste management, as well as the current commonly used methods for waste management, together with their pros and cons. The commonly applied methods, including sanitary landfill, composting, safe disposal of biomedical wastes, recycling of industrial CO 2 emissions, incineration of hazardous wastes, sludge recycling in the cement industry, direct combustion of sludge, wastewater treatment, and construction waste recycling, are discussed. In this chapter, the problems associated with landfills, such as lack of efficient systems for gas utilization from the landfill and lack of proper leachate management and recycling CO 2 from industrial flue gas and wastewater treatment methods, are more highlighted. Also, the need for law enforcement to control the negative environmental impacts properly is highlighted.

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
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Conventional and Emerging Practices in Hazardous Waste Management

Municipal Waste Management: Current Research and Future Challenges

Global perspective of municipal solid waste and landfill leachate: generation, composition, eco-toxicity, and sustainable management strategies

Ahmad A, Mohd-Setapar SH, Chuong CS, Khatoon A, Wani WA, Kumar R, Rafatullah M (2015) Recent advances in new generation dye removal technologies: novel search for approaches to reprocess wastewater. RSC Adv 5:30801–30818. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4ra16959j

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Akinade OO, Oyedele LO, Bilal M, Ajayi SO, Owolabi HA, Alaka HA, Bello SA (2015) Waste minimisation through deconstruction: a BIM based Deconstructability Assessment Score (BIM-DAS). Resour Conserv Recycl 105:167–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.10.018

Article   Google Scholar  

America N (2010) ISWA key issue paper on waste prevention, waste minimization and resource management. Africa (Lond) 2007

Google Scholar  

Anil I, Gunday ST, Bozkurt A, Alagha O (2020) Design of crosslinked hydrogels comprising poly(vinylphosphonic acid) and bis[2-(methacryloyloxy)ethyl] phosphate as an efficient adsorbent for wastewater dye removal. Nanomaterials 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10010131

Anjaneyulu Y, Sreedhara Chary N, Samuel Suman Raj D (2005) Decolourization of industrial effluents—available methods and emerging technologies—a review. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 4:245–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-005-1246-z

Auerbach DI, Caulfield JA, Adams EE, Herzog HJ (1997) Impacts of ocean CO 2 disposal on marine life: I. A toxicological assessment integrating constant-concentration laboratory assay data with variable-concentration field exposure. Environ Model Assess 2:333–343. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019029931755

Azam K, Raza R, Shezad N, Shabir M, Yang W, Ahmad N, Shafiq I, Akhter P, Razzaq A, Hussain M (2020) Development of recoverable magnetic mesoporous carbon adsorbent for removal of methyl blue and methyl orange from wastewater. J Environ Chem Eng 8:104220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2020.104220

Ban ZH, Keong LK, Shariff AM (2014) Physical absorption of CO 2 capture: a review. Adv Mater Res 917:134–143. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.917.134

Barati B, Zeng K, Baeyens J, Wang S, Addy M, Gan S, El-Fatah Abomohra A (2021) Recent progress in genetically modified microalgae for enhanced carbon dioxide sequestration. Biomass Bioenerg 145:105927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2020.105927

Block C, Van Caneghem J, Van Brecht A, Wauters G, Vandecasteele C (2015) Incineration of hazardous waste: a sustainable process? Waste Biomass Valorization 6:137–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-014-9334-3

Bobicki ER, Liu Q, Xu Z, Zeng H (2012) Carbon capture and storage using alkaline industrial wastes. Prog Energy Combust Sci 38:302–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2011.11.002

Borhani TN, Wang M (2019) Role of solvents in CO 2 capture processes: the review of selection and design methods. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 114:109299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109299

Bösenhofer M, Purgar A, Winter F (2015) The role of fluidized bed technology for waste to energy, its current status and potential—an Austrian perspective. In: 22nd FBC Finland

Cao B, Sun Y, Yuan J, Wang S, Gong X, Barati B, Zheng A, Jiang D, Hu Y, Yuan C, He Z (2020) Co-pyrolysis characteristics of polysaccharides-cellulose and the co-pyrolyzed compound distributions over two kinds of zeolite catalysts. Int J Energy Res 44:6350–6362. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.5360

Cao Q, Sang L, Tu J, Xiao Y, Liu N, Wu L, Zhang J (2021) Rapid degradation of refractory organic pollutants by continuous ozonation in a micro-packed bed reactor. Chemosphere 270:128621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128621

Chapman N, Hooper A (2012) The disposal of radioactive wastes underground. Proc Geol Assoc 123:46–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2011.10.001

Chen H, Lin H, Zhang P, Yu L, Chen L, Huang X, Jiao B, Li D (2021) Immobilisation of heavy metals in hazardous waste incineration residue using SiO 2 –Al 2 O3–Fe 2 O 3 –CaO glass-ceramic. Ceram Int 47:8468–8477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.11.213

Cucchiella F, D’Adamo I, Gastaldi M (2017) Sustainable waste management: waste to energy plant as an alternative to landfill. Energy Convers Manag 131:18–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.11.012

Darda SA, Gabbar HA, Damideh V, Aboughaly M, Hassen I (2021) A comprehensive review on radioactive waste cycle from generation to disposal. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 329:15–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-021-07764-2

Davoli E, Fattore E, Paiano V, Colombo A, Palmiotto M, Rossi AN, Il Grande M, Fanelli R (2010) Waste management health risk assessment: a case study of a solid waste landfill in South Italy. Waste Manag 30:1608–1613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2009.10.013

Demirel B, Scherer P (2008) The roles of acetotrophic and hydrogenotrophic methanogens during anaerobic conversion of biomass to methane: a review. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 7:173–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-008-9131-1

Dharmaraj S, Ashokkumar V, Pandiyan R, Halimatul Munawaroh HS, Chew KW, Chen WH, Ngamcharussrivichai C (2021) Pyrolysis: an effective technique for degradation of COVID-19 medical wastes. Chemosphere 275:130092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.130092

Ding Z, Yi G, Tam VWY, Huang T (2016) A system dynamics-based environmental performance simulation of construction waste reduction management in China. Waste Manag 51:130–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.03.001

Esa MR, Halog A, Rigamonti L (2017) Developing strategies for managing construction and demolition wastes in Malaysia based on the concept of circular economy. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 19:1144–1154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-016-0516-x

Farrelly DJ, Everard CD, Fagan CC, McDonnell KP (2013) Carbon sequestration and the role of biological carbon mitigation: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 21:712–727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.12.038

Fatemi S, Imaninasab R (2016) Performance evaluation of recycled asphalt mixtures by construction and demolition waste materials. Constr Build Mater 120:450–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.05.117

Fitzgerald GC (2013) Pre-processing and treatment of municipal solid waste (MSW) prior to incineration. Waste Energy Convers Technol. https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857096364.2.55

Fivga A, Dimitriou I (2018) Pyrolysis of plastic waste for production of heavy fuel substitute: a techno-economic assessment. Energy 149:865–874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.02.094

Foroutan R, Mohammadi R, Farjadfard S, Esmaeili H, Saberi M, Sahebi S, Dobaradaran S, Ramavandi B (2019) Characteristics and performance of Cd, Ni, and Pb bio-adsorption using Callinectes sapidus biomass: real wastewater treatment. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:6336–6347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-04108-8

Gavilan RM, Bernold LE (1994) Source evaluation of solid waste in building construction. J Constr Eng Manag 120:536–552. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(1994)120:3(536)

Geng H, Du P, Zhang Z, Yao L, Cao K, Li S, Sheng P (2018) Architecting Bi 2 S 3 /graphene quantum dots/TiO 2 photoelectrodes for aqueous Cr(VI)/methyl orange removal. Mater Lett 214:146–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2017.11.126

Goetz SA, Nguyen DT, Esser-Kahn AP (2016) Surface modification of carbon black nanoparticles enhances photothermal separation and release of CO 2 . Carbon NY 105:126–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2016.03.053

Gunter WD, Gentzis T, Rottenfusser BA, Richardson RJH (1997) Deep coalbed methane in Alberta, Canada: a fuel resource with the potential of zero greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Convers Manag 38:217–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0196-8904(96)00272-5

Han D, Tong X, Currell MJ, Cao G, Jin M, Tong C (2014) Evaluation of the impact of an uncontrolled landfill on surrounding groundwater quality, Zhoukou China. J Geochem Explor 136:24–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2013.09.008

Herzog H, Drake E, Adams E (1997) CO 2 capture, reuse, and storage technologies. Initiatives 1–70

Holkar CR, Jadhav AJ, Pinjari DV, Mahamuni NM, Pandit AB (2016) A critical review on textile wastewater treatments: possible approaches. J Environ Manag 182:351–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.090

Hopewell J, Dvorak R, Kosior E (2009) Plastics recycling: challenges and opportunities. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 364:2115–2126. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0311

Hu S, Barati B, Odey EA, Wang S, Hu X, Abomohra AEF, Lakshmikandan M, Yerkebulan M, Esakkimuthu S, Shang H (2020) Experimental study and economic feasibility analysis on the production of bio-oil by catalytic cracking of three kinds of microalgae. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 149:104835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2020.104835

Hu Y, Li J, Wang S, Xu L, Barati B, Cao B, Wang H, Xie K, Wang Q (2021) Catalytic fast hydropyrolysis of seaweed biomass with different zeolite catalysts to produce high-grade bio-oil. Process Saf Environ Prot 146:69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2020.08.019

Huang B, Wang X, Kua H, Geng Y, Bleischwitz R, Ren J (2018) Construction and demolition waste management in China through the 3R principle. Resour Conserv Recycl 129:36–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.029

Huang Q, Yang Y, Pang X, Wang Q (2008) Evolution on qualities of leachate and landfill gas in the semi-aerobic landfill. J Environ Sci 20:499–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(08)62086-0

Hunsinger H, Jay K, Vehlow J (2002) Formation and destruction of PCDD/F inside a grate furnace. Chemosphere 46:1263–1272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(01)00256-9

Huth T, Porder S, Chaves J, Whiteside JH (2012) Soil carbon and nutrient changes associated with deforestation for pasture in Southern Costa Rica. Biotropica 44:661–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2012.00863.x

Ibrahim Khalil M, Francaviglia R, Henry B, Klumpp K, Koncz P, Llorente M, Emoke Madari B, Muñoz-Rojas M, Nerger R (2020) Strategic management of grazing grassland systems to maintain and increase organic carbon in soils. CO 2 Sequestration 1–20. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84341

Ibrahim Z, Amin MFM, Yahya A, Aris A, Umor NA, Muda K, Sofian NS (2009) Characterisation of microbial flocs formed from raw textile wastewater in aerobic biofilm reactor (ABR). Water Sci Technol 60:683–688. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2009.440

Idumah CI, Nwuzor IC (2019) Novel trends in plastic waste management. SN Appl Sci 1:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-1468-2

Idzorek J (1991) Municipal solid waste incineration. Munic Waste Combust 111

Jansson C, Wullschleger SD, Kalluri UC, Tuskan GA (2010) Phytosequestration: carbon biosequestration by plants and the prospects of genetic engineering. Bioscience 60:685–696. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2010.60.9.6

Jaseela PK, Garvasis J, Joseph A (2019) Selective adsorption of methylene blue (MB) dye from aqueous mixture of MB and methyl orange (MO) using mesoporous titania (TiO 2 )–poly vinyl alcohol (PVA) nanocomposite. J Mol Liq 286:110908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.110908

Jones PT, Geysen D, Tielemans Y, Van Passel S, Pontikes Y, Blanpain B, Quaghebeur M, Hoekstra N (2013) Enhanced Landfill Mining in view of multiple resource recovery: a critical review. J Clean Prod 55:45–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.05.021

Kabirifar K, Mojtahedi M, Wang C, Tam VWY (2020) Construction and demolition waste management contributing factors coupled with reduce, reuse, and recycle strategies for effective waste management: a review. J Clean Prod 263:121265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121265

Kamaraj M, Srinivasan NR, Assefa G, Adugna AT, Kebede M (2020) Facile development of sunlit ZnO nanoparticles-activated carbon hybrid from pernicious weed as an operative nano-adsorbent for removal of methylene blue and chromium from aqueous solution: extended application in tannery industrial wastewater. Environ Technol Innov 17:100540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2019.100540

Kelly KE, Silcox GD, Sarofim AF, Pershing DW (2011) An evaluation of ex situ, industrial-scale, aqueous CO 2 mineralization. Int J Greenh Gas Control 5:1587–1595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.09.005

Klara SM, Srivastava RD, McIlvried HG (2003) Integrated collaborative technology development program for CO 2 sequestration in geologic formations—United States Department of Energy R&D. Energy Convers Manag 44:2699–2712. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(03)00042-6

Koivisto E, Erlund R, Fagerholm M, Zevenhoven R (2016) Extraction of magnesium from four Finnish magnesium silicate rocks for CO 2 mineralisation—Part 1: Thermal solid/solid extraction. Hydrometallurgy 166:222–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hydromet.2016.07.005

Kumar S, Chiemchaisri C, Mudhoo A (2011) Bioreactor landfill technology in municipal solid waste treatment: an overview. Crit Rev Biotechnol 31:77–97. https://doi.org/10.3109/07388551.2010.492206

Lackner KS (2003) A guide to CO 2 sequestration. Science (80) 300:1677–1678. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1079033

Lackner KS (2002) Carbonate chemistry for sequestering fossil carbon. Annu Rev Energy Environ 27:193–232. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.27.122001.083433

Lal R (2008) Carbon sequestration. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 363:815–830. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2185

Lee KE, Morad N, Teng TT, Poh BT (2012) Development, characterization and the application of hybrid materials in coagulation/flocculation of wastewater: a review. Chem Eng J 203:370–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2012.06.109

Lemus R, Lal R (2005) Bioenergy crops and carbon sequestration. CRC Crit Rev Plant Sci 24:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352680590910393

Liang CZ, Sun SP, Li FY, Ong YK, Chung TS (2014) Treatment of highly concentrated wastewater containing multiple synthetic dyes by a combined process of coagulation/flocculation and nanofiltration. J Memb Sci 469:306–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2014.06.057

Liu Q, Zhou Y, Lu J, Zhou Y (2020) Novel cyclodextrin-based adsorbents for removing pollutants from wastewater: a critical review. Chemosphere 241:125043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.125043

Lu JW, Zhang S, Hai J, Lei M (2017) Status and perspectives of municipal solid waste incineration in China: a comparison with developed regions. Waste Manag 69:170–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.04.014

Luo Z, Wang E, Sun OJ (2010) Soil carbon change and its responses to agricultural practices in Australian agro-ecosystems: a review and synthesis. Geoderma 155:211–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.12.012

Mais L, Vacca A, Mascia M, Usai EM, Tronci S, Palmas S (2020) Experimental study on the optimisation of azo-dyes removal by photo-electrochemical oxidation with TiO 2 nanotubes. Chemosphere 248:125938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.125938

Makarichi L, Jutidamrongphan W, Techato K-a (2018) The evolution of waste-to-energy incineration: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 91:812–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.088

Manchisi J, Matinde E, Rowson NA, Simmons MJH, Simate GS, Ndlovu S, Mwewa B (2020) Ironmaking and steelmaking slags as sustainable adsorbents for industrial effluents and wastewater treatment: a critical review of properties, performance, challenges and opportunities. Sustainability 12:1–47. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052118

Mao Y, Wu H, Wang W, Jia M, Che X (2020) Pretreatment of municipal solid waste incineration fly ash and preparation of solid waste source sulphoaluminate cementitious material. J Hazard Mater 385:121580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.121580

Marzouk M, Azab S (2014) Environmental and economic impact assessment of construction and demolition waste disposal using system dynamics. Resour Conserv Recycl 82:41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.10.015

Menegaki M, Damigos D (2018) A review on current situation and challenges of construction and demolition waste management. Curr Opin Green Sustain Chem 13:8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2018.02.010

Metting FB, Smith JL, Amthor JS, Izaurralde RC (2008) Science needs and new technology for increasing soil carbon sequestration 1. Soil Carbon Sequestration Potential Land use options for enhanced C sequestration at the landscape and regional scales include protection and selective management of native ecos. Clim Change 5:11–34

Mishra S, Tiwary D, Ohri A, Agnihotri AK (2019) Impact of Municipal Solid Waste Landfill leachate on groundwater quality in Varanasi, India. Groundw Sustain Dev 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100230

Mondal MK, Balsora HK, Varshney P (2012) Progress and trends in CO 2 capture/separation technologies: a review. Energy 46:431–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.08.006

Mourad M (2016) Recycling, recovering and preventing “food waste”: competing solutions for food systems sustainability in the United States and France. J Clean Prod 126:461–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.084

Nanda S, Reddy SN, Mitra SK, Kozinski JA (2016) The progressive routes for carbon capture and sequestration. Energy Sci Eng 4:99–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/ese3.117

Narayana T (2009) Municipal solid waste management in India: from waste disposal to recovery of resources? Waste Manag 29:1163–1166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2008.06.038

Neczaj E, Okoniewska E, Kacprzak M (2005) Treatment of landfill leachate by sequencing batch reactor. Desalination 185:357–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.04.044

Nogia P, Sidhu GK, Mehrotra R, Mehrotra S (2016) Capturing atmospheric carbon: biological and nonbiological methods. Int J Low-Carbon Technol 11:266–274. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlct/ctt077

Oppelt ET (1987) Incineration of hazardous waste a critical review. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 37:558–586. https://doi.org/10.1080/08940630.1987.10466245

Papari S, Bamdad H, Berruti F (2021) Pyrolytic conversion of plastic waste to value-added products and fuels: a review. Materials (Basel) 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14102586

Penders-van Elk NJMC, Hamborg ES, Huttenhuis PJG, Fradette S, Carley JA, Versteeg GF (2013) Kinetics of absorption of carbon dioxide in aqueous amine and carbonate solutions with carbonic anhydrase. Int J Greenh Gas Control 12:259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.10.016

Pham L, Hargreaves R (2003) Sustainability and the building code of Australia

Pisupati SV, Tchapda AH (2015) Thermochemical processing of biomass. Adv Bioprocess Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17915-5_15

Post WM, Amonette JE, Birdsey R, Garten CT, Izaurralde RC, Jardine PM, Jastrow J, Lal R, Marland G, McCarl BA, Thomson AM, West TO, Wullschleger SD, Metting FB (2009) Terrestrial biological carbon sequestration: science for enhancement and implementation. Geophys Monogr Ser 183:73–88. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GM000753

Qureshi MS, Oasmaa A, Pihkola H, Deviatkin I, Tenhunen A, Mannila J, Minkkinen H, Pohjakallio M, Laine-Ylijoki J (2020) Pyrolysis of plastic waste: opportunities and challenges. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 152:104804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2020.104804

Raghab SM, Abd El Meguid AM, Hegazi HA (2013) Treatment of leachate from municipal solid waste landfill. HBRC J 9:187–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2013.05.007

Raven JA, Falkowski PG (1999) Oceanic sinks for atmospheric CO 2 . Plant Cell Environ 22:741–755. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3040.1999.00419.x

Reinhart DR, McCreanor PT, Townsend T (2002) The bioreactor landfill: Its status and future. Waste Manag Res 20:172–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X0202000209

Ritzkowski M, Stegmann R (2012) Landfill aeration worldwide: concepts, indications and findings. Waste Manag 32:1411–1419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.02.020

Sakai SI, Hiraoka M (2000) Municipal solid waste incinerator residue recycling by thermal processes. Waste Manag 20:249–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0956-053X(99)00315-3

Samer M (2015) Biological and chemical wastewater treatment processes. Wastewater Treat Eng 1–50. https://doi.org/10.5772/61250

Scarlat N, Motola V, Dallemand JF, Monforti-Ferrario F, Mofor L (2015) Evaluation of energy potential of municipal solid waste from African urban areas. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 50:1269–1286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.067

Shafiq I, Shafique S, Akhter P, Yang W, Hussain M (2020) Recent developments in alumina supported hydrodesulfurization catalysts for the production of sulfur-free refinery products: a technical review. Catal Rev Sci Eng 00:1–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/01614940.2020.1780824

Sharma HB, Vanapalli KR, Cheela VS, Ranjan VP, Jaglan AK, Dubey B, Goel S, Bhattacharya J (2020) Challenges, opportunities, and innovations for effective solid waste management during and post COVID-19 pandemic. Resour Conserv Recycl 162:105052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105052

Shen LY, Tam VWY (2002) Implementation of environmental management in the Hong Kong construction industry. Int J Proj Manag 20:535–543. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(01)00054-0

Shi B, Hu J, Peng H, Ishizuka S (2018) Effects of internal flue gas recirculation rate on the NO x emission in a methane/air premixed flame. Combust Flame 188:199–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2017.09.043

Singh NB, Nagpal G, Agrawal S, Rachna (2018) Water purification by using adsorbents: a review. Environ Technol Innov 11:187–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2018.05.006

Singh R, Budarayavalasa S (2021) Solidification and stabilization of hazardous wastes using geopolymers as sustainable binders. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 23:1699–1725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-021-01245-0

Singh RP, Tyagi VV, Allen T, Ibrahim MH, Kothari R (2011) An overview for exploring the possibilities of energy generation from municipal solid waste (MSW) in Indian scenario. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 15:4797–4808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.071

Slack RJ, Gronow JR, Voulvoulis N (2009) The management of household hazardous waste in the United Kingdom. J Environ Manag 90:36–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.03.007

Slatni I, Elberrichi FZ, Duplay J, Fardjaoui NEH, Guendouzi A, Guendouzi O, Gasmi B, Akbal F, Rekkab I (2020) Mesoporous silica synthesized from natural local kaolin as an effective adsorbent for removing of Acid Red 337 and its application in the treatment of real industrial textile effluent. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:38422–38433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08615-5

Sonune A, Ghate R (2004) Developments in wastewater treatment methods. Desalination 167:55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2004.06.113

Sözen S, Olmez-Hanci T, Hooshmand M, Orhon D (2020) Fenton oxidation for effective removal of color and organic matter from denim cotton wastewater without biological treatment. Environ Chem Lett 18:207–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-019-00923-8

Strobel R, Waldner MH, Gablinger H (2018) Highly efficient combustion with low excess air in a modern energy-from-waste (EfW) plant. Waste Manag 73:301–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.06.049

Subramanian PM (2000) Plastics recycling and waste management in the US. Resour Conserv Recycl 28:253–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-3449(99)00049-X

Sun R, Ismail TM, Ren X, El-Salam MA (2016) Influence of simulated MSW sizes on the combustion process in a fixed bed: CFD and experimental approaches. Waste Manag 49:272–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.12.019

Tasneem K (2014) Beneficial utilization of municipal solid waste incineration ashes as sustainable road construction materials 2004–2019

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2019) Overview of greenhouse gases. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases . Accessed 10 Jul 2021

van Heek J, Arning K, Ziefle M (2017) Reduce, reuse, recycle: Acceptance of CO 2 -utilization for plastic products. Energy Policy 105:53–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.02.016

Veetil SP, Mercier G, Blais JF, Cecchi E, Kentish S (2015) Magnetic separation of serpentinite mining residue as a precursor to mineral carbonation. Int J Miner Process 140:19–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.minpro.2015.04.024

Verma M, Brar SK, Tyagi RD, Surampalli RY (2015) Carbon sequestration via mineral carbonation: overview and assessment. Carbon Capture Storage Phys Chem Biol Methods 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413678

Wadhawan S, Jain A, Nayyar J, Mehta SK (2020) Role of nanomaterials as adsorbents in heavy metal ion removal from waste water: a review. J Water Process Eng 33:101038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2019.101038

Wagner TP, Raymond T (2015) Landfill mining: case study of a successful metals recovery project. Waste Manag 45:448–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.06.034

Wainaina S, Awasthi MK, Sarsaiya S, Chen H, Singh E, Kumar A, Ravindran B, Awasthi SK, Liu T, Duan Y, Kumar S, Zhang Z, Taherzadeh MJ (2020) Resource recovery and circular economy from organic solid waste using aerobic and anaerobic digestion technologies. Bioresour Technol 301:122778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.122778

Waldner MH, Halter R, Sigg A, Brosch B, Gehrmann HJ, Keunecke M (2013) Energy from waste—clean, efficient, renewable: transitions in combustion efficiency and NO x control. Waste Manag 33:317–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.08.007

Wang S, Jiang D, Cao B, Qian L, Hu Y, Liu L, Yuan C, Abomohra AEF, He Z, Wang Q, Zhang B (2018) Bio-char and bio-oil characteristics produced from the interaction of Enteromorpha clathrate volatiles and rice husk bio-char during co-pyrolysis in a sectional pyrolysis furnace: a complementary study. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 135:219–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2018.08.030

Wang S, Shang H, Abomohra AEF, Wang Q (2019) One-step conversion of microalgae to alcohols and esters through co-pyrolysis with biodiesel-derived glycerol. Energy Convers Manag 198:111792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.111792

Wang J, Yao J, Wang L, Xue Q, Hu Z, Pan B (2020a) Multivariate optimization of the pulse electrochemical oxidation for treating recalcitrant dye wastewater. Sep Purif Technol 230:115851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2019.115851

Wang S, Zhao S, Uzoejinwa BB, Zheng A, Wang Q, Huang J, Abomohra AE-F (2020b) A state-of-the-art review on dual purpose seaweeds utilization for wastewater treatment and crude bio-oil production. Energy Convers Manag 222:113253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113253

World Health Organization (2018) Healthcare waste. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/health-care-waste

Wissing F, Wirtz S, Scherer V (2017) Simulating municipal solid waste incineration with a DEM/CFD method—influences of waste properties, grate and furnace design. Fuel 206:638–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.06.037

Wiszniowski J, Robert D, Surmacz-Gorska J, Miksch K, Weber JV (2006) Landfill leachate treatment methods: a review. Environ Chem Lett 4:51–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-005-0016-z

Woodward R (2004) The organisation for economic cooperation and development. New Polit Econ 9:113–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/1356346042000190411

Yang C, Xu W, Nan Y, Wang Y, Hu Y, Gao C, Chen X (2020) Fabrication and characterization of a high performance polyimide ultrafiltration membrane for dye removal. J Colloid Interface Sci 562:589–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2019.11.075

Yang Y, Yue B, Yang Y, Huang Q (2012) Influence of semi-aerobic and anaerobic landfill operation with leachate recirculation on stabilization processes. Waste Manag Res 30:255–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X11413328

Yang Z, Lü F, Zhang H, Wang W, Shao L, Ye J, He P (2021) Is incineration the terminator of plastics and microplastics? J Hazard Mater 401:123429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123429

Zhang X (2018) Microalgae removal of CO 2 from flue gas. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.26617.77929

Zhang Y, Wang L, Chen L, Ma B, Zhang Y, Ni W, Tsang DCW (2021) Treatment of municipal solid waste incineration fly ash: state-of-the-art technologies and future perspectives. J Hazard Mater 411:125132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125132

Zhang Z, Borhani TN, Olabi AG (2020) Status and perspective of CO 2 absorption process. Energy 205:118057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118057

Zhang Z, Cai J, Chen F, Li H, Zhang W, Qi W (2018) Progress in enhancement of CO 2 absorption by nanofluids: a mini review of mechanisms and current status. Renew Energy 118:527–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.11.031

Zhang Z, Li Y, Zhang W, Wang J, Soltanian MR, Olabi AG (2018) Effectiveness of amino acid salt solutions in capturing CO 2 : a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 98:179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.09.019

Zhang Z, Wang B, Sun Q, Zheng L (2014) A novel method for the preparation of CO 2 sorption sorbents with high performance. Appl Energy 123:179–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.02.012

Zhu Z, Liu D, Cai S, Tan Y, Liao J, Fang Y (2020) Dyes removal by composite membrane of sepiolite impregnated polysulfone coated by chemical deposition of tea polyphenols. Chem Eng Res Des 156:289–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2020.02.001

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Energy and Power Engineering, Jiangsu University, Jiangsu, 212013, China

Bahram Barati, Fatemeh Fazeli Zafar & Shuang Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuang Wang .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chengdu University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Abd El-Fatah Abomohra

Qingyuan Wang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Barati, B., Zafar, F.F., Wang, S. (2022). Different Waste Management Methods, Applications, and Limitations. In: Abomohra, A.EF., Wang, Q., Huang, J. (eds) Waste-to-Energy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91570-4_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91570-4_2

Published : 08 February 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-91569-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-91570-4

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