SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL OF WASTE MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA: DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF AN INDEX BASED TOOL


SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL OF WASTE MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA: DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF AN INDEX BASED TOOL  

ABSTRACT

Decision makers are continuously in search of a comprehensive yet simple means of assessing solid waste management to make effective and informed decisions. This is particular so for situations like Nigeria where streets are full of waste, many households have no waste collection services and a high rate of vehicle and equipment breakdown is recorded. Assessment is also crucial at a time when many waste management authorities are trying to embark on new revolutionary contracts with the private sector. Solid Waste Management assessment is a complex multi-dimensional process, involving multiple criteria and multiple actors and the many components that make up the system. Although various options such as incineration, gasification and composting are available as a solution for waste management, these options also add to the complexity of the situation in determining most preferred alternatives and decisions. In this study, an in-depth investigation of solid waste management in Nigeria is conducted by quantifying sustainable development to develop an assessment tool. Sustainable development with respect to solid waste management was broken down into its aspects and factors that influence those aspects in a hierarchy of three levels according to the procedure of analytic hierarchy process. Solid waste management practitioners across five locations representing Nigeria's multiple ethnic groups and diverse cultures and the climatic zones as well as four work sectors were surveyed. Data was obtained from a paired comparison based questionnaire survey using Analytic Hierarchy Process. A function was derived that illustrates the potential of SD as a tool for solid waste management assessment. General agreement across sectors was recorded but significant differences exist between regions. The regional difference highlighted indicates context as highly influential. Quick response and cooperation of participants suggests sympathy towards female researcher while slow contact establishment was recorded in Lagos despite an alliance with an indigene of the region. The function derived was adopted to evaluate the solid waste management strategy in Kaduna metropolis of Nigeria using a case study methodology. The accomplished assessment has shown that waste management strategies can be evaluated with the tool developed in this study. An index of 0.457 was established from the evaluation that employed the use of indicators, scoring and normalisation. High scores assigned to indicators will result in a high index, which suggests an effective strategy.

CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE i

DEDICATION ii

AKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

DECLARATION iv

ABSTRACT v

CONTENTS vi

LIST OF FIGURES xiii

LIST OF PICTURES xiv

LIST OF TABLES xiv

OVERVIEW1

INTRODUCTION1

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT1

Solid waste management in Nigeria1

Legislation2

Solid waste generation and management elements2

Awareness and attitude3

Solid waste management assessment3

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT3

Sustainability assessment of solid waste3

RATIONALE AND AIMS OF STUDY4

METHODOLOGY5

Analytic Hierarch Process AHP5

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF LITERATURE AND QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY6

CASE STUDY7

Case study methods7

SUSTAINABLE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT8

LITERATURE REVIEW9

INTRODUCTION9

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT9

Waste management hierarchy10

Integrated solid waste management11

Waste generation11

Responsibility of managing solid waste12

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA12

Nigeria12

Waste management legislation14

Federal government14

Local and state government15

CURRENT SITUATION16

Waste generation and composition16

Temporary Storage18

Collection and transportation18

Resource recovery and recycling21

Waste treatment and disposal21

Private sector participation22

Formal private sector22

2.2.6.2 Informal private sector 23

2.4.6.3 Informal sector entrepreneurs 24

Awareness and Attitude25

Awareness25

Attitude26

Cost, Funding and facilities26

Cost and Funding26

Technologies – Machinery, equipment and skilled labour27

Waste type and composition27

Road conditions27

Cost27

Availability of spare parts and technical skills27

Servicing requirements and haulage distances27

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT OF SOLID WASTE28

Environmental sustainability29

Air and water quality29

Resource Conservation30

Administrative sustainability30

Policy30

Management31

Responsibility issues32

Technical issues32

Social sustainability33

Health33

Social acceptability and Stakeholder involvement34

Social equity34

Service quality34

Economical and financial aspects35

Cost35

Employment35

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT36

Cost benefit analysis, CBA36

Life cycle assessment (LCA)37

Multi-criteria analysis38

RESEARCH RATIONAL39

SCOPE OF STUDY41

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF RESEARCH41

Aims41

Objectives41

INTRODUCTION41

RESEARCH STRATEGY42

PILOT SURVEY43

Participants of the Pilot Survey43

Postal questionnaire survey – Pilot44

THE STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY45

Sampling techniques and population46

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)46

AHP – The procedure47

Hierarchical structure47

Pairwise comparisons48

Relative Weights – Eigen value method49

Aggregating Relative weights49

Expert choice software50

General application51

AHP application in solid waste management54

Participants54

QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY56

Rationale for structured questionnaire survey56

Participants cooperation57

Questionnaire construction59

3.6.1 Questionnaire sequence 60

STUDY LOCATIONS60

Abuja61

Kaduna62

Lagos62

Maiduguri62

Port-Harcourt63

DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS63

SUMMARY64

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF QUESTIONNAIRE AND LITERATURE SURVEY65

INTRODUCTION65

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT65

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL66

Sustainability assessment function67

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT ASPECTS68

Administrative aspect68

Environmental aspect69

Social aspect69

Economic aspect69

Aspects of sustainability assessment by sector70

Aspects of sustainability assessment by region71

FACTORS OF SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT72

Environmental factors72

Environmental factors by sector73

Environmental factors by region73

Administrative factors74

Administrative factors by sector75

Administrative factors by region76

Social factors77

Social factors by sector78

4.5.3.1 Social factors by region 79

Economic factors79

Economic factors by sector80

4.5.4.1 Economic factors by sector 81

SUMMARY83

CASE STUDY83

INTRODUCTION83

SCOPE OF CASE STUDY83

Study area83

System boundary85

Temporary storage87

Collection88

Transportation89

Treatment and final disposal90

DATA INVENTORY92

Flow of waste92

5.3.1 Availability of Data 95

INDICATORS95

Developing the index96

5.4 METHODS 97

Environmental indicators97

Air Quality Indicator - Particulate matter98

Water Quality Indicator - Leachate98

Resource Consevation Indicator - Waste generation98

Administrative indicators99

Policy Indicator – Policy quality99

Management Indicator – Waste Collection100

Responsibility Issues Indicator – Information dissemenation101

Technologies Indicator – Breakdown of Conveyance fleet101

Social indicators102

Health Indicator - Exposure to waste102

Quaility of Service Indicator - Stakeholder satisfaction103

Stakeholders Participation Indicator - Stakeholders Awareness103

Social equity indicator – inter & Intra-generational equity104

Economic indicators104

Employment indicator – Job Creation104

Total cost – Cost recovery105

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF CASE STUDY ANALYSIS106

The environmental indicators106

Air quality106

Water quality107

Resource conservation107

The administrative indicators107

Policy indicators108

Management indicators108

Responsibility issues indicators108

Technologies Indicators109

The social indicators109

Health110

Quality of service110

5.5.3.3 Stakeholders’ involvement 111

5.6.3.4 Social Equity Indicators 111

The Economic indicators111

Employment Indicator - Job creation112

Total cost Indicator – Cost recovery112

Application to index113

CONCLUSION113

SUMMARY114

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT116

INTRODUCTION116

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT TOOL116

Differences across regions117

THE SURVEY AND APPLICATION OF AHP118

Participation of waste management practitioners119

Questionnaire delivery119

Effects of gender and ethnicity of researcher120

APPLICATION OF SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL – CASE STUDY120

Data source120

The indicators121

Scoring and normalisation of indicators121

APPLICATION OF THE SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL121

SUMMARY122

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE WORKS123

METHODOLOGY124

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF QUESTIONNAIRE AND LITERATURE SURVEY125

CASE STUDY- KADUNA CITY125

GENERAL DISCUSSION127

FUTURE WORKS127

Application of the sustainability assessment tool127

Re-administrating the survey128

Baseline data128

SUMMARY129

REFERENCE 130

APPENDICES 152

APPENDIX 1 - MAIN QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY 153

APPENDIX 2 – PILOT QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY 158

APPENDIX 3 – WASTE MANAGEMENT LAWS 162

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Waste management hierarchy 10

Figure 2.2 Africa – Nigeria 14

Figure 3.1 Hierarchical structure of waste management Sustainability Assessment 47

Figure 3.2 Example of pairwise comparison 49

Figure 3.3 Map of Nigeria showing survey locations 63

Figure 4.1 Hierarchical diagram of the aspects and factors 67

Figure 4.2 Aspects of sustainability assessment by sector 71

Figure 4.3 Aspects of sustainability assessment by region 72

Figure 4.5.1.1 Environmental factors by sector ………………………………………………………….….., 73

Figure 4.5.1.2 Environmental factors by region 74

Figure 4.5.2.1 Administrative factors by sector 76

Figure 4.5.2.2 Administrative factors by region 77

Figure 4.5.3.1 Social factors by sector 78

Figure 4.5.3.2 Social factors by region 79

Figure 4.5.4.1 Economic factors by sector 80

Figure 4.5.4.2 Economic factors by region 81

Figure 5.1 Map of Nigeria – Kaduna highlighted 84

Figure 5.2 Map of Kaduna 85

Figure 5.3 Waste management system boundary 86

Figure 5.4 Flow of waste 94

Figure 5.5 Sustainability assessment hierarchy model 95

LIST OF PICTURES

Picture 2.1 Temporary storage at roadside, Kaduna by-pass 13

Picture 2.2 Transport of waste with wheel barrow 19

Picture 2.3 Transport of waste with push cart and destroyed landscape 20

Picture 2.4 Transport of waste with truck from communal disposal site 20

Picture 5.1.1 Temporary storage - waste at communal disposal site 87

Picture 5.1.2 Temporary storage - waste at communal disposal site 88

Picture 5.1.3 Temporary storage within a household in Kaduna 88

Picture 5.1.4 Transporting waste to temporary storage with cart and wheel barrow 89

Picture 5.1.5 Transporting waste with fuel based vehicles 90

Picture 5.1.6 Open burning at communal disposal site 90

Picture 5.1.7 Open burning at final disposal site 91

Picture 5.1.8 Final disposal site at outskirts of Kaduna city, Airport Road 91

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 waste composition of some Nigeria cities 17

Table 3.1 Studies employing AHP 53

Table 3.2 Survey locations and sectors 61

Table 4.1 Parameters Equation one 68

Table 5.1 Material flow 93

Table 5.2 Indicators 96

Table 5.3.1 Environmental indicators 106

Table 5.3.2 Administrative indicators 108

Table 5.3.3 Social indicators 110

Table 5.3.4 Economic indicators 111

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

The main challenge of managing solid waste in generally in developed countries has shifted from ensuring minimum damage to public health and environment to the manner in which discarded resources are to be handled such that future generations are not deprived of its value (Chandak, 2010). Developing countries on the other hand are still battling with the protection of human health and well-being while attempting to conserve resources (Brunner and Fellner, 2007). However, many of the developed countries are still unable to decouple waste growth from economic growth with resulting economic and environmental burden driving the need to increase effective waste minimization and management (Fatta and Moll, 2003; Desmond, 2006). This applies to many member countries in the European Union (Fatta and Moll, 2003). The following sections give an overview of the chapters in the thesis.

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

This section is an overview of Chapter 2 where literature on solid waste management especially in Nigeria is reviewed. The section also includes the review of literature on the methods used in assessing solid waste management strategies. Waste management is regarded as a public service where efficient collection and safe disposal of wastes are essential to public health and environmental protection (Cointreau-Levine, 1994). It has evolved from the simple transportation of waste to landfills to complex systems, including waste prevention and waste recycling as well as several waste treatment and landfill technologies (Salhofer et al., 2007). While developed countries have achieved the first aim of waste management of providing protection to human beings and the environment and are battling resource conservation, the health and well-being of humans still suffer from inadequate waste management systems in developing countries and the first objective still remains a main priority (Brunner and Fellner, 2007).

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA

In Nigeria, there is a steady increase in waste quantity and variety due to population growth and industrialisation (Imam et al., 2007) while the basic solid waste management system based on collection, transportation and disposal remains highly inefficient and ineffective, especially in the

urban centres (Ayotamuno and Gobo, 2004). Nigeria is the most populous and the tenth largest country in Africa with a population of over a hundred and fifty million people across a landmass of 923,768 square kilometres (WDI, 2010).

Legislation

Nigeria operates a three tiers system of government made up of federal, state and local government with distinct functions accorded to each tier based on constitution (Afon, 2007). The milestone Federal legislation on environmental protection in Nigeria was the decree 58 of 1988, which established the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (FEPA) to control the growing problem of waste management and pollution in Nigeria (Walling et al., 2004; Imam et al., 2008). Solid waste management is constitutionally the responsibility of the local government but the state government steps in to complement their efforts especially in state capitals such as Kaduna, Lagos and Port-Harcourt (Afon, 2007). Despite their effort, the solid waste management scheme in Nigeria is characterized by a system fraught with lack of accountability and refuse filled spaces, drains and roads (Dauda and Osita, 2003; Walling et al., 2004).

Solid waste generation and management elements

The estimated waste generated per person in a day is 0.49 kg with households accounting for 90% of the urban waste (Solomon et al., 2009). It has a high organic content consistent with waste generated in developing countries such as Ghana, China and Jordan and Palestine (Qdais, 2007; Al Khatib et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2010; Fobil et al., 2010). The composition of waste in Nigeria suggests a recyclable content of over forty percent with recycling rate estimated at 8-22%, carried out by the informal sector (Wilson et al., 2009). Other disposal options are open dumping, open burning and composting (Dauda and Osita, 2003; Imam et al., 2008; Ogwueleka, 2009).

The waste is temporarily stored within households or at communal disposal sites in various sizes of bins, bin bags, baskets, buckets and directly on the ground at communal sites (Abdullahi et al., 2008). Highly irregular collection of co-mingled waste is carried out by the state/local government directly, via contractors and/or informal waste managers (Sangodoyin, 1993; Agunwamba, 1998; Dauda and Osita 2003; Abdullahi et al., 2008; Imam et al., 2008). More than 50% of the population dispose waste at communal sites, which are basically open dumps (Dauda and Osita, 2003). Waste is typically transported by lorries, tippers, loaders, trucks, tractors, push carts and wheel barrows (Dauda and Osita, 2003; Afon, 2007; Imam et al., 2008). Collection and transportation accounts for between 70-80% of total waste management cost in Nigeria (UNDP, 1998) mainly funded by the

government. Irregular collection and transportation of waste is partly attributed to frequent breakdown of vehicles and inadequate facility and equipment (Dauda and Osita, 2003; Imam et al., 2008; Adewole, 2009).

Awareness and attitude

Generally poor attitude towards waste management is recorded in literature (Imam et al., 2008; Adewole 2009). The local and state government responsible for raising awareness on solid waste management issues often adopt seminars, conferences, workshops, training sessions as the most common techniques in creating awareness observed in the course of the survey in addition to environmental management topics included within junior secondary schools syllabus (Uhuo and Zavodska, 2010).

Solid waste management assessment

Solid waste management assessment is undertaken to measure performance of a scheme with the main aim of improving existing strategy and practices (Anschutz, 2004). The methodologies commonly used are generally based on three models – cost benefit analysis (CBA), life cycle assessment (LCA) and multi-criteria analysis (MCA) (Morrissey and Browne, 2004). All aspects of solid waste management are estimated in monetary terms in the case of CBA while LCA focuses on environmental impacts (Morrissey and Browne, 2004). MCA approaches are used to identify single most preferred options and/or to rank options in decision making while taking into account often conflicting criteria usually involving a wide range of multi-disciplinary stakeholders such as solid waste management (Mendoza et al., 1999; Qureshi and Harrison, 2001; Morrissey and Browne, 2004; Dodgson et al., 2009).

Sustainability assessment of solid waste

Modern waste management presents a high level of complexity that requires many aspects to be considered for suitable solution that encapsulates both the current state of the environment as well as its potential to provide support for future generations (Jha and Murthy, 2002). There is an apparent need to develop a comprehensive assessment method that enables identification of the present waste management status while giving stakeholders an insight into the problem and a platform for discourse.

Sustainable waste management emphasizes a shift from waste disposal to other waste management options that includes energy and material recovery, waste reduction and reuse in

addition to the aim of decoupling increase in waste generation from economic growth (Chung and Lo, 2003; Fatta and Moll, 2003; Desmond, 2006). There is an agreement across the environmental and waste management field on the basic principles and elements of the concept as well as many of the criteria used in characterising or measuring the system (Van de Klundert, 1996; Tammemagi, 1999; Chung and lo 2003; Lang et al., 2007).

To evaluate waste management systems sustainably, the issue of quantifying sustainable development arises, which requires transparent and reliable measurement that must generally be agreed upon by stakeholders (Jha and Murthy, 2002; Joseph, 2006; Lang et al., 2007). While the generic principles of sustainable development consist of social, environmental and economic aspects, the administrative aspect has been evaluated in many studies involving waste management (Van de Klundert, 1996; Van de Klundert and Anschutz, 2001; Chung and Lo, 2002 Hayward and Gaskin, 2005; Desmond, 2006).

The objectives for environmental sustainability are summarized as rational resource consumption and reduction of environmental pollution (Chung and Lo, 2003; Den Boer et al., 2007; Hung et al., 2007; Roussat et al., 2007; Imran et al., 2008). The administrative aspect encompasses policy, management, research and training, responsibility issues and technologies used to provide the waste management service (Van de Klundert and Anschutz, 2000; Walmsley et al., 2001). Social sustainability deals with ensuring human health and well-being in the present and future generations (Imran et al., 2008). Economically sustainable waste management takes into account all external costs into the total cost established for waste management (Imran et al., 2008).

RATIONALE AND AIMS OF STUDY

Solid waste management in Nigeria has received considerable attention mostly in the areas of waste quantity and quality (Sridhar et al., 1985; Adedibu 1988; Afon 2007; Afon and Okewole, 2007; Sha’Ato et al., 2007); a few on regulations and governance (Adedibu 1986; Oyelola and Babade 2008; Kalu et al., 2009; Nzeadibe 2010) and especially on the status of the existing strategy (Agunwamba, 1998; Dauda and Osita, 2003, Izugbara and Umoh, 2004; Ayotamuno and Gobo, 2004; Ajibade, 2007; Ajani 2008; Babayemi and Dauda, 2010); state of the environment

(Akeredolu 1988; Olukesusi, 1988; Bammeke and Sridhar, 1989; Baumbach, 1995; Aluko et al., 2003; Olaniyan 2007; Anake 2009) and fewer regarding perception and awareness (Babayemi and Dauda, 2010; Longe et al., 2009). While work on systematic assessment of current strategy is non- existent, Abdullahi et al. (2008) proposed an appropriate management strategy that included all stakeholder categories operating in the existing scheme including the highly controversial informal

sector. Where waste management is assessed, the approach employed is usually not based on any particular methodology and is strictly qualitative (Agunwamba, 1998; Longe and Williams 2008; Imam et al., 2008; Adewole, 2009).

Although most management of waste strategies including that of Nigeria ascribe to sustainability, assessing progress towards this goal commonly carried out by use of indicators varies widely with no consistent tool or framework for application (Desmond, 2006). Some assessment tools have been proposed in Europe and Asia that have incorporated the desired social and administrative aspects while integrating various stakeholder groups and levels (Desmond, 2006) with some having a bias towards a particular issue (Van de Klundert and Anschutz, 2000) and therefore not considering the system holistically.

The main aim of this study is to quantify sustainable development with regards to solid waste management in an attempt to develop an assessment tool. The aims include establishing the current situation of waste management in Nigeria by generating an index to demonstrate the sustainability of an existing waste management scheme in a particular city and thereby appraising the applicability of the sustainability assessment model established. The objectives identified in achieving these aims are discussed in section 3.1.2.

METHODOLOGY

The strategy adopted to achieve the aims of this study detailed in Chapter three is outlined in this section. It primarily involved a structured questionnaire survey administered to solid waste management practitioners across Nigeria over a period of eleven months. The main aim of the survey was to corroborate the suitability of the concept and its broken down aspects and factors for evaluating solid waste management schemes and to illustrate the varying significances of the aspects and factors. Relevant literature on waste management was reviewed to appraise assessment methods and the current state of solid waste management particularly in Nigeria, which identified sustainable development SD as a suitable concept to build the assessment tool. The structured questionnaire survey adopted analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as the research instrument to collect data from waste management practitioners.

Analytic hierarchy process, AHP

Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP was employed in this research to determine the preferences of practitioners on the issue of sustainable waste management. The AHP is a theory of measurement, originally devised by Saaty (1980) through pairwise comparisons and relies on the judgements of

practitioners or stakeholders to derive priority scales for factors of an issue or system (Saaty, 2008). As a multi-criteria technique, it has a practical nature that takes into account the complexity of different aspects and interests that are often conflicting due to diversity of its stakeholders within the waste management system (Zahedi, 1986; Leung, 1998). The priority scales measure elements in relative terms. The comparisons are made using a scale of absolute judgements that represent how much one element dominates another with respect to a given attribute. AHP is further discussed in section 3.3.2.

Data was analyzed using AHP technique with Expert Choice software and non-parametric statistical analysis – Kruskal Wallis using Minitab 15. The survey data was processed to identify significance of aspects and factors by individual stakeholders while descriptive statistics was used to establish the overall significances. The Kruskal Wallis analysis was applied to test for differences between the significances selected across sectors and locations for the aspects and factors.

Taking time and resources into account, five locations were deemed appropriate to represent the geographic locations in Nigeria. Diversity of opinion and approach among practitioners is further achieved by the four groups of practitioners identified – Central government; local/state government; private and academic sector. Section 3.3.8 presents a detailed discussion of the participant categories.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF LITERATURE AND QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY

The result and discussion of Chapter four presents the findings generated from the structured questionnaire and literature survey administered to eighty-seven solid waste management practitioners. Sustainable development is proposed from the literature survey as a concept to base the appraisal of solid waste management schemes and practices. The subsequent breakdown of the concept into measurable units is also suggested from review of literature. The result of the structured questionnaire survey designed to quantify sustainability as a means of assessing solid waste management is shown. The findings include corroborating sustainability development (SD) as an appropriate concept for building solid waste management assessment tool and its breakdown. The data collected from practitioners was analyzed to show the overall significance apportioned to each aspect and factor that was employed to derive a sustainability function to appraise waste management strategies. In addition, the weightings assigned by the five regions and four sectors are presented and significant statistical differences found mainly across the regions has been illustrated.

CASE STUDY

In Chapter five, the solid waste management scheme in Kaduna metropolis was appraised using the assessment tool developed in a case study analysis to evaluate the applicability of the tool. Kaduna, the capital of Kaduna state, is one of the largest cities in northern Nigeria ranked as the fourth most populous city with a population of 1,563,300 (Sanusi, 2010). It is one of the most important political, industrial and economic centres in Nigeria (Ojo, 1995; Okunola et al., 2007). It has been selected amongst the cities for establishing integrated solid waste management instituted by federal government (Hussain, 2008; Olaniyan et al., 2009).

The system boundary is defined by household and commercial waste from Kaduna metropolis over a period of one year. The solid waste management processes assessed included temporary storage, collection, transport, treatment and final disposal (den Boer, den Boer & Jager, 2007; Bjorklund et al., Cleary 2009). The data inventory analysis involved data collection and calculation procedures to quantify relevant inputs and outputs of the solid waste management scheme in Kaduna city where 0.5 kg per capita daily waste generation, was adopted (Dauda and Osita, 2003; Nabegu, 2010). Due to scarcity of reliable data, representative data from other waste management strategies similar to that of Kaduna metropolis are employed. Indicators were specified, scored, normalised and aggregated to generate an index. The indicators are derivatives of the factors specified in the solid waste management assessment tool. The data used was relatively available and practical to measure and record.

Case study methodology

The sustainability function (Equation one) of Section 4.3.1 was used to establish the index for Kaduna metropolis by applying data gathered from literature. Two indicators were specified for each factor and assigned a maximum score of 100 points each to maintain uniformity across assessment factors while ensuring all aspects are appraised. Maximum scores specified for particular indicators are generally based on studies carried out by international bodies mainly United Nations Environmental Program scoreboard specified for ASEAN region (UNEP, 2005). The scores determined for each indicator were inserted into the SI function and aggregated to derive the sustainability index for the case study. Generally, a normative orientation is adopted for awarding the scores with a defined threshold specified similar to the study of Lang et al. (2007) The environmental indicators employed include particulate matter, methane (CH4) emission, leachate quality, disposal rate, waste generation and material recovery. The administrative

indicators encompass quality of policy and its applicability under policy factor; created waste management agencies and their level of functionality within their jurisdiction under management factor; acceptance and awareness in the responsibility issue category and the resilience and maintainability of technologies used within the system. Social indicators assessed include health, satisfaction of users regarding the strategy in place, consistency of service, awareness and participation of all stakeholders and fairness of the strategy within this generation and between generations. The economic indicators are based on the wages available for waste management jobs and the total costs of waste management compared to what is generally charged by service providers.

SUSTAINABLE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Chapter six focuses on the solid waste management assessment tool developed and its applicability. The results obtained from the attempt at quantifying sustainable development with regards solid waste management using a questionnaire survey has established an equation based on four evaluative aspects and thirteen factors. Amongst the four aspects, administrative aspect was found to be the most significant aspect despite its absence as a generic principle of sustainable development in the past (McDougall et al., 2001; Chung and Lo, 2003).

The chapter also includes the differences in Importance recorded across the various sectors and regions although an overall function was determined. This is in addition to willingness of waste management practitioners to take part in the survey, the differences associated with mode of questionnaire delivery and effects of gender and ethnicity of researcher. The applicability of the assessment tool with regards to other situations or regions is also examined in addition to the Kaduna management strategy evaluated.

The next chapter, Chapter two, will cover the review of pertinent waste management literature with particular emphasis on Nigeria and the assessment methods applied to management strategies.

.

SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL OF WASTE MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA: DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF AN INDEX BASED TOOL



TYPE IN YOUR TOPIC AND CLICK SEARCH.




TESTIMONIES FROM OUR CLIENTS


Please feel free to carefully review some written and captured responses from our satisfied clients.

  • "Exceptionally outstanding. Highly recommend for all who wish to have effective and excellent project defence. Easily Accessable, Affordable, Effective and effective."

    Debby Henry George, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, USA.
  • "I saw this website on facebook page and I did not even bother since I was in a hurry to complete my project. But I am totally amazed that when I visited the website and saw the topic I was looking for and I decided to give a try and now I have received it within an hour after ordering the material. Am grateful guys!"

    Hilary Yusuf, United States International University Africa, Nairobi, Kenya.
  • "Researchwap.net is a website I recommend to all student and researchers within and outside the country. The web owners are doing great job and I appreciate them for that. Once again, thank you very much "researchwap.net" and God bless you and your business! ."

    Debby Henry George, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, USA.
  • "Great User Experience, Nice flows and Superb functionalities.The app is indeed a great tech innovation for greasing the wheels of final year, research and other pedagogical related project works. A trial would definitely convince you."

    Lamilare Valentine, Kwame Nkrumah University, Kumasi, Ghana.
  • "I love what you guys are doing, your material guided me well through my research. Thank you for helping me achieve academic success."

    Sampson, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
  • "researchwap.com is God-sent! I got good grades in my seminar and project with the help of your service, thank you soooooo much."

    Cynthia, Akwa Ibom State University .
  • "Sorry, it was in my spam folder all along, I should have looked it up properly first. Please keep up the good work, your team is quite commited. Am grateful...I will certainly refer my friends too."

    Elizabeth, Obafemi Awolowo University
  • "Am happy the defense went well, thanks to your articles. I may not be able to express how grateful I am for all your assistance, but on my honour, I owe you guys a good number of referrals. Thank you once again."

    Ali Olanrewaju, Lagos State University.
  • "My Dear Researchwap, initially I never believed one can actually do honest business transactions with Nigerians online until i stumbled into your website. You have broken a new legacy of record as far as am concerned. Keep up the good work!"

    Willie Ekereobong, University of Port Harcourt.
  • "WOW, SO IT'S TRUE??!! I can't believe I got this quality work for just 3k...I thought it was scam ooo. I wouldn't mind if it goes for over 5k, its worth it. Thank you!"

    Theressa, Igbinedion University.
  • "I did not see my project topic on your website so I decided to call your customer care number, the attention I got was epic! I got help from the beginning to the end of my project in just 3 days, they even taught me how to defend my project and I got a 'B' at the end. Thank you so much researchwap.com, infact, I owe my graduating well today to you guys...."

    Joseph, Abia state Polytechnic.
  • "My friend told me about ResearchWap website, I doubted her until I saw her receive her full project in less than 15 miniutes, I tried mine too and got it same, right now, am telling everyone in my school about researchwap.com, no one has to suffer any more writing their project. Thank you for making life easy for me and my fellow students... Keep up the good work"

    Christiana, Landmark University .
  • "I wish I knew you guys when I wrote my first degree project, it took so much time and effort then. Now, with just a click of a button, I got my complete project in less than 15 minutes. You guys are too amazing!."

    Musa, Federal University of Technology Minna
  • "I was scared at first when I saw your website but I decided to risk my last 3k and surprisingly I got my complete project in my email box instantly. This is so nice!!!."

    Ali Obafemi, Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida University, Niger State.
  • To contribute to our success story, send us a feedback or please kindly call 2348037664978.
    Then your comment and contact will be published here also with your consent.

    Thank you for choosing researchwap.com.