Efficiency Of Municipal Solid Waste Management: The Case Study of Bor Town Area, South Sudan

ASBTRACT The study sought to identify the existing methods of solid waste management and ascertain the effect of social and economic factors on efficiency of solid waste management. The study was carried out primarily through survey method and interview of Bor municipal council (BMC) and households in Bor Town. Inadequate dustbins supply was a major factor affecting waste disposal in Bor Town especially among the low class residential areas. The survey established that about 86.82 per cent of respondents have no access to dustbins for disposing their waste particularly those living in the low class residential area. This implies that respondents resorted to dumping waste in nearby drainage channels, by roadside, opened spaces and other unapproved ways of managing their domestic waste. Additionally, the dustbins ratio to population was very high (1: 276) compared to the maximum number of fifteen people to a dustbin (1:15). These include high populated areas lilce Arek, Achiengdier and Langbar. This goes to reaffirm the inadequacy of dustbins supply in the Bor vicinity. Indeed there was irregular or lack of routine collection of waste by Bor municipal council, especially in the low class residential areas in the Town. Waste collection was mostly carried out twice a week and in some areas like low class residential areas no collection took place. This resulted in people dumping their waste in opened spaces and in most cases burning was the alternative to final disposal at the landfill. Unlike the door-to-door collection which attracted a monthly charge of SSP 50 in the high class residential areas, the communal collection was carried out at no cost to the residents in all the low class residential areas. This is because respondents in these areas were not xvi requested to pay for waste collection though their monthly average monthly income (SSP 270) earned could support the payment. The landfill did not meet the requirement of a sanitary landfill and could therefore be correctly described as an open dump. The landfill had no gas recovery system and leachates collection system. The landfill too was sited near a settlement. Additionally, waste was not usually separated into their various components before final disposal. This led to burying of some valuable resources in the landfill which could have been otherwise re-used. More so, burning of waste occurred in the landfill. The waste management institution was unable to deliver efficient services as it was under resourced. Skips and dustbins for storing waste generated were woefully inadequate. In the whole of Bor Town there was no single skip that was supplied to the residents. However, about 450 skips were required by the municipality to be supplied to the low class residential areas. Also, about nine hundred and twenty six (926) dustbins extra were required to be supplied in the middle and high class residential areas in the Bor Town as against about one hundred and forty one (141) dustbins distributed. Equipment for waste transportation was also inadequate as there was only one truck but four (4) were required to ensure regular collection. Key words: Efficiency, Solid Waste Management, indicators, performance

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION .ii

APPROVAL iii

DEDICATION iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v

TABLE OF CONTENTS vi

LIST OF FIGURES xii

LIST OF TABLES xiii

LIST OF ACRONYMS xv

ASBTRACT xvi

CHAPTER ONE : INTRODUCTION 1

1.0 Introduction 1

1.1 Background of the Study 2

1.2 Problem Statement 4

1.3 Main Objective of the Study 4

1.3.1 Specific Objectives of the Study 5

1 .4 Research Questions 5

1.5 ScopeoftheStudy 5

1.5.1 Geographical Scope .5

1.5.3 Time Scope 5

1.6 Significance of the study 6

1.7 Definition of key tenns 6

CHAPTER TWO : LITERATURE REVIEW 7

2.0 Introduction 7

2.1 Conceptual frame work 7

2.2 Solid wastes management perspective at the global, regional and local level 8

2.3 Solid Waste Management Processes 9

2.3.1 Solid waste generation 9

2.3.2 Storage 10

2.3.3 collection 10

2.3.4 Transfer and transport 10

2.3.5 Processing and recovery 10

2.3.6 Disposal 10

2.4. Solid waste management 11

2.5. Efficient management of municipal Solid Waste 11

2.5.1 Source Reduction 13

2.5.2 Reuse 14

2.5.3 Recycling 14

2.5.4 composting 15

2.5.5 Land filling 15

2.6 Multi criteria decision analysis for solid wastc management 16

VII

2.6.1 Environmental Criteria .16

2.6.2 Socio - cultural Criteria 17

2.6.3 Technical Criteria 17

2.6.4 Economic Criteria 17

2.6.5 Stakeholders 18

2.7. General solid waste management situations in South Sudan 18

2.7.1 Solid Waste Management in Bor Town 19

2.7.1.1 Solid Waste Collection 19

2.7.1.3 What has been done and the gap 20

2.7.1.4 Key Issues 21

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 23

3.0 Introduction 23

3.1 The study area 23

3.2 Research design 25

3.3 Study’population 26

3.4. Sample size determination 26

3.5 Sampling procedure 27

3.6 Instrument for data collection 28

3.6.lquestionnaire 28

3.6.2 Interview 28

3.6.3 Field Observation 29

3.7 Validity and reliability 29

yin

3.8 Methods of data collection .30

3.8.1 Primary data collection 30

3.8.2 Secondary data collection 30

3.9 Methodology for characterization of solid waste 30

3.lODataanalysis 31

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 32

4.0 Introductions 32

4.1 Existing solid waste management practices 32

4.2 Socio - economic characteristics of the households 37

4.2.1 Distribution of respondents by Gender 37

4.3 Distribution of respondents by age 38

4.4: Concern for street cleaning and lifter 39

4.5 Educational level of the respondents 40

4.6: Employment status of the respondents 42

4.7: Income distribution of the respondents 43

4.3 Indicators to assess the capacity of waste management institution 45

4.4 Waste management systems in Bor Town 47

4.4.1 Municipal solid waste generation 47

4.4.2 Types and Composition of Solid Waste Generated 49

4.4.3 Solid Waste Collection 52

4.4.3.1 Door to door and curb side collections 54

4.4.3.2 Communal collection 54

ix

4.4.3.3 Regularity of Waste Collection .54

4.4 .4 Capacity of Waste Management Institutions (BMC) 55

4.4.4.1 Storage and transport equipment 55

4.4.4.2 Staffing of the municipality 58

4.4.4.3 Finances for Managing Waste 59

Institutional / legal frame work 60

4.4.4.5 Social, environmental, economic and management indicators of waste management

inBorTown 61

4.4.4.5.1 Social 61

4.4.4.5.2 Environment 64

4.4.4.5.3 Economic 65

4.4 Determining the link between efficiency of solid waste management and income levels

66

4.6 Summary of the key finding 68

4.6.1. Waste Disposal 68

4.6.2 Waste Collection 69

4.6.3 Final Disposal 69

4.6.4 Resources for Waste Management 69

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 71

5.0 Introduction 71

5.1 Conclusions 71

5.2 Recommendation 72

5.3 Issues for further research 74

REFERENCES .76

Appendix 1: Authorization Letter To Carry Out The Research In Bor Town 84

Appendix 2: Survey Questionnaire For Efficiency Of Solid Waste Management Practices In

South Sudan, Bor Town 85

Appendix 3: Interview Questions For Municipal Official 91

Appendix 4: Indicators for each aspect of solid waste management as detennined by Klundert

and Anschutz (1999) 95