607430

research-article2015
WMR0010.1177/0734242X15607430Waste Management & ResearchSanjeevi and Shahabudeen

Original Article

Waste Management & Research

Optimal routing for efficient municipal

1­–11
© The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
solid waste transportation by using sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0734242X15607430

ArcGIS application in Chennai, India wmr.sagepub.com

V Sanjeevi and P Shahabudeen

Abstract
Worldwide, about US$410 billion is spent every year to manage four billion tonnes of municipal solid wastes (MSW). Transport
cost alone constitutes more than 50% of the total expenditure on solid waste management (SWM) in major cities of the developed
world and the collection and transport cost is about 85% in the developing world. There is a need to improve the ability of the
city administrators to manage the municipal solid wastes with least cost. Since 2000, new technologies such as geographical
information system (GIS) and related optimization software have been used to optimize the haul route distances. The city limits of
Chennai were extended from 175 to 426 km2 in 2011, leading to sub-optimum levels in solid waste transportation of 4840 tonnes
per day. After developing a spatial database for the whole of Chennai with 200 wards, the route optimization procedures have
been run for the transport of solid wastes from 13 wards (generating nodes) to one transfer station (intermediary before landfill),
using ArcGIS. The optimization process reduced the distances travelled by 9.93%. The annual total cost incurred for this segment
alone is Indian Rupees (INR) 226.1 million. Savings in terms of time taken for both the current and shortest paths have also been
computed, considering traffic conditions. The overall savings are thus very meaningful and call for optimization of the haul routes
for the entire Chennai.

Keywords
ArcGIS, route optimization, savings; solid wastes management, transport costs

Introduction Research on routing optimization

Worldwide, approximately US$410 billion is spent every year
(UNEP, 2013) to manage four billion tonnes (Chalmin and
Gaillochet, 2009) of municipal solid wastes (MSW). The Solid
Wastes in a year in India are likely to reach 260 million tons by
2047, which is more than five times the current level (Essaku,
2007). While the activities and responsibilities of city managements
that manage solid wastes increase, there is no corresponding
increase in budget allocations. With ever-shrinking budgets for
city managements, the essential need is to manage waste with
least cost (Rogoff et al., 2010). Transport cost alone comes to
more than 50% of the total costs incurred in Integrated Solid
Waste Management (ISWM) in major cities of the developed
world. However, in the developing countries (Ghose et al., 2006),
about 85% of the total costs is spent on collection and transport.
In the Corporation of Chennai (CoC), transport costs alone are
22% of the total costs (Annual Budget of the Corporation of
Chennai, 2014–2015). The Chennai city limits were extended
from 175 to 426 km2 in 2011, leading to sub-optimum levels in
solid waste management (SWM) of 4840 tonnes per day.
The initial SWM models are optimization based and most
dealt with minimizing costs (Berger C, Savard G and Wizere A,
1999, Gottingger HW, 1991 & Huang GH, Baetz BW and Patry
GG, 1994). In the present research, the authors review the appli-
cations of ArcGIS for cost-reduction opportunities in ISWM, by
identifying the optimal routing for transport of solid wastes, in a
demonstrative case of 13 city wards and one transfer station.
models using ArcGIS
Over the years, and starting with 2005, research papers appeared
regularly on the use of geographical information system (GIS)-
based applications on ISWM, and specifically the use of ArcGIS
for optimal routing. The authors have selected 17 useful case
studies, covering various cities across the world, wherein GIS
are used; these are listed in Table 1.
As early as 1993, Tsakiris and Salahoris used GIS for man-
agement of water distribution. Massie (1995) applied GIS in the
area of SWM and Chang et al. (1997) adopted Linear, Interactive,
and Discrete Optimizer (LINDO) and GIS technology for SWM
in a specific city in Taiwan. According to them, the GIS envi-
ronment provides better graphical implementation of routing.
According to Agha (2006), the collection process formed about
74% of the SWM cost and not much attention was paid to routing
issues. Agha (2006) studied an area in Gaza Strip of 7–8 km2, to
reduce the distance travelled by vehicles by 23.47%, leading to
a saving of US$1140 per month. Ghiani et al. (2005) used arc-
routing for determining the improved waste collection routes for
Department of Industrial Engineering, Anna University, India
Corresponding author:
V Sanjeevi, Research Scholar, Department of Industrial Engineering,
College of Engineering, Anna University, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy,
Chennai-600025, India.
Email: sanju0207@gmail.com
2 Waste Management & Research

Table 1.  List of case studies using GIS optimization tools.

Author Title Year City/ Country

Ghiani G, Guerriero F, Waste collection in southern Italy: solution of 2005 Italy
Improta G, Musmannod R a real-life arc routing problem
Badran MF, El-Haggar Optimization of municipal solid waste management in 2006 Port Said / Egypt
port Said – Egypt
Ghose MK, Dikshit AK, A GIS-based transportation model for solid waste 2006 Asansol / India
Sharma SK disposal – A case study on Asansol municipality
Agha SR Optimizing routing of municipal solid waste collection 2006 Gaza Strip
vehicles in Deir El-Balah – Gaza Strip
Apaydin O, Gonullu MT Route optimization for solid waste collection: Trabzon 2007 Trabzon / Turkey
(Turkey) case study
Apaydin O, Gonullu MT Emission control with route optimization in solid 2008 Izmir / Turkey
waste collection process: A case study
Lopez JV, Aguliar M, Optimizing the collection of used paper from small 2008 Madrid / Spain
Fernandez-Carrion S, business through GIS techniques: The Leganes case
Jimenez del Valle A (Madrid, Spain)
Kyessi A Tanzania GIS application in coordinating solid waste 2009 Dar es salaam /
collection: The case of Sinza neighbourhood in Tanzania
Kinondoni municipality, Dar es Salaam City, Tanzania
Ogwueleka TC Route optimization for solid waste collection: Onitsha 2009 Onitsha/ Nigeria
(Nigeria) case study
Thanh NP et al. GIS application for estimating the current status and 2009 Can Tho / Vietnam
improvement on municipal solid waste collection and
transport system: Case study of Can Tho city, Vietnam
Makan A, Manamis M, Solid waste management: case of collection and 2011 Azemmour /
Assobhei O, Loizidou M, vehicle routing problem in the city of Azemmour, Morocco
Mountadar M Morocco
Jamshidi A, Taghizadeh F, Sustainable municipal solid waste management (case 2011 Sarab / Iran
Ata D study: Sarab County, Iran)
Rodionov M, Toshihiko N Design of an optimal waste utilization system: A case 2011 St. Petersburg /
study in St. Petersburg, Russia Russia
Kanchanabhan TE, Abbas Optimum municipal solid waste collection using 2011 Pallavaram-
Mohaideen J, Srinivasan S, and geographical information system (GIS) and vehicle Chennai/ India
Lenin KSV tracking for Pallavaram municipality
Rajendra Kumar Kaushal, Municipal solid waste management in India- current 2012 India
George KV, Chabukdhara M state and future challenges: a review

Source: Authors listing from a collation of 387 studies.

a town in Southern Italy. Apaydin and Gonullu (2007) studied an
area of 40 km2 and identified the shortest path using commer-
cially available software and found that the distance could be
reduced by 4–59%. The transport cost was of the order of
US$0.07–0.21 per tonne-km.
The current cost for Chennai city is US$0.8–1.2 per tonne-
km. Karadimas et al. (2007) used, may be for the first time,
ArcGIS Network Analyst and examined an area of 1.34 km2 and
just one route in Athens, Greece and achieved a saving of 20% in
route length. Ogwueleka (2009) used extended capacitated Arc
Routing Problem and reduced 16.31% of the distance travelled.
Chalkias and Lasaridi (2009) used ArcGIS Network Analyst in
the Municipality of Nikea, Greece and reduced the distance of
vehicles travel by 5.5%. In Greece, the waste collection and
transport accounted for 70–100% of the total SWM cost. Chalkias
and Lasaridi (2009) developed a spatial database of the study
area and then applied ArcGIS. In the study of Chennai, the
authors have carried out similar study with the latest version
of ArcGIS10.2.2 in an area of 34.9 km2, in 13 routes (routes
connecting 13 wards with one transfer station).
Chennai and solid wastes
Chennai, earlier called Madras, and established as a Corporation
in the year 1688 by the East India Company, is one of the oldest
municipal corporations in India. To go back in history, according
to the first Census returns of India of 1871, the population of
Chennai was 432,000. It took nearly 70 years to double to
881,000 in 1941. The growth rate of population in 1941 stood at
2.017% a year, which was much higher than what it was in 1881
(0.209%). However, it took only two decades (1941–1961) for
Chennai’s population to double yet again. In 1961, the total popu-
lation of the city stood at 1.729 million. The spurt in population
was staggering during the first decade (1941–1951) registering
an annual increase at 6.064%. It tapered off during 1951–1961 to
a much lower level at 2.21% per annum, as if to accommodate the
Sanjeevi and Shahabudeen 3
Figure 1.  Location of Chennai in India.
unprecedented growth during 1941–1951. During 1961–1971,
the migration picked up again to boost the growth by 4.281% per
annum and catapulted the population yet again through a third
doubling in 30 years to 3.84 million in 1991. It went up to 4.95
million in 2001. According to Census 2011, the population of
Chennai Metropolitan Area (CMA) with 15 zones and 200 wards
was 7.1 million. Population growth of the megacity witnessed
ups and downs, with a good spurt at the beginning of the post-
independence era. The spurt in growth during 1961–1971 could
be attributed to rural–urban and urban–urban migration, both
from within Tamil Nadu and other states (Kumaran et al., 2013).
The present research is conducted in a part of the area governed
by the CoC or, administratively, called the CMA, which is the fourth
largest metropolitan city in India. The spurt in urbanization has led
to unplanned management of high-cost solid waste handling. It is
the capital of the State of Tamil Nadu and is located on the eastern
coast (12° 85’ N 80° 13’ E and 13° 23’ N 80° 34’ E), and covers an
area of 426 km2. The CMA’s location in India is shown in Figure 1.
Chennai consists of 1.4 million households and about 1136
notified slums. Chennai is divided into 15 administrative zones
and 200 city wards (Source: Corporation of Chennai, Annual
Budget 2014–2015).
4 Waste Management & Research

Table 2.  Name of the zones with attached ward numbers. dumping yards. The current flow of solid wastes from house-
holds and streets and the complex network of roads are shown
Zone Name of the zone Ward numbers
pictorially in the following solid wastes flow diagram in Figure 3.
I Thiruvottiyur    1 to 14 The diagram is self-explanatory. The architecture of MSWM
II Manali   15 to 21 shows clearly the four components of the SWM system, namely,
III Madhavaram   22 to 33
generation, collection, transport and disposal.
IV Tondaiarpet   34 to 48
However, collection and disposal of the garbage generated in
V Royapuram   49 to 63
VI Thiru-Vi-Ka Nagar   64 to 78 the city is less than 60%, and of the collected garbage, much is
VII Ambattur   79 to 93 dumped in wetlands (Pallikaranai, Perungudi) and in Kodungaiyur
VIII Anna Nagar   94 to 108 and also low-lying areas around the city. The shortage of
IX Teynampet 109 to 126 conservancy staff in the city Corporation and lack of pragmatic
X Kodambakkam 127 to 142 planning are the major reasons for the sad state of affairs
XI Valasaravakkam 143 to 153 (Kumaran et al., 2013).
XII Alandur 154 to 167
While the generation is at the residences, commercial estab-
XIII Adyar 170 to 182
lishments and streets, the collection is also from the same loca-
XIV Perungudi 168,169, and 183 to 191
XV Sholinganallur 192 to 200 tions; the transport of the municipal wastes is first to the garbage
bins using tricycles and wheel barrows, to transfer stations using
bulk-garbage open tippers (light and heavy motor vehicles) and
Table 2 provides the names of the various zones and the wards then from there to dumping sites using multi-axle vehicles, both
attached to each zone. The map giving details of zones, transfer light and heavy. The disposal is by open dumping, although
stations, dumping yards, and ward-centroids of CMA is presented some part of the collection is composted at select points in the
in Figure 2. metropolis. The current network design on the other hand is
Solid waste management is the one of the major activities of given in Figure 4.
the CoC. This process is, however, very tedious as it involves The network design conveys the fact as to how the wastes
collection of garbage generated at every house through various from the 200 wards of Corporation in the 15 administrative zones
means and then moving the wastes to the two disposal sites or are collected and transported, on a daily tonnage basis, to the 12
the dumping yards, geographically located at the northern most transfer stations and then disposed of at the two dumping sites
and southern most points of the CMA. All of the 200 city wards with different types of vehicles. Note the solid wastes from zones
are estimated to generate about 4840 tonnes of garbage a day. 1–3 (456 tonnes per day) and zones 14–15 (344 tonnes per day)
The composition of solid wastes generated is given in Table 3. are directly dumped at the dumping yards at Kodungaiyur and
Note that the inert and the organic together comprise 67% of all Perungudi, respectively. A total of 4041 tonnes per day are trans-
the wastes. ferred to 9 transfer stations from zones 4–13 and then disposed of
The high moisture content in the solid wastes of 27.6% com- at 1612 tonnes per day at the Kodungaiyur dumping site and at
pared with the global average of about 10% leads to complicated 2429 tonnes per day at the Perungudi dumping site. Thus, a total
handling of garbage in Chennai. of 4841 tonnes of solid wastes are collected, transported and
disposed of in the metropolitan city of Chennai every day. Low-
The solid waste flow and current network capacity vehicles are used to haul the garbage collected from the
households and street bins.
Over 19,390 workers are engaged in the sweeping, collection of Presently, there are 12 transfer stations in use in Chennai
wastes, managing and operating the transport operations in the and they were created over the last 30 years, mainly for two
MSWM of the CMA. Of the total work force, as many as 6900 reasons: (a) to store and ensure movement through large-
workers manually sweep all of the 31,000 roads of the metropolis capacity vehicles to reduce the cost of transportation; and
and the 5022 workers with tricycles collect the wastes. The (b) to store the fluctuating, day-to-day generation of the wastes
Corporation employees are engaged in sweeping the streets of the in the city. The solid wastes collected from the 200 wards are
metropolis at least once a day, using brooms, brushes, wheel bins, transferred through the 12 transfer stations to the two dumping
wheelbarrows and also long brooms. The collected wastes are yards. With multiple transfer stations, which were created
dropped into the waste bins along the streets, placed at regular over a period of time in the CMA, the most optimal operation
intervals and according to the needs of the city households. Yet, becomes more complex.
with rapidly increasing population in the metropolis, there is
always a shortage of bins.
Study area
The solid wastes are collected by workers in each of the 200
wards and then transported to transfer stations (the storage points For this research, however, only a part of the CoC was taken
for garbage) and then to the dumping yards. The wastes from the having a contiguous area of 34.9 km2, involving 13 routes con-
wards closer to the dumping yards are moved directly to the necting 13 ward-centroids and one transfer station.
Sanjeevi and Shahabudeen 5

Figure 2.  CMA: zones, transfer stations, dumping yards, and ward-centroids.

Table 3.  Composition of solid wastes in Metropolitan The wards numbering 170 to 182 were taken up for study.
Chennai. These wards move the solid waste to transfer station 12. These
Type of wastes %
12 wards generate 187.4 tonnes of garbage daily (4% of total
Chennai garbage). The ward-wise tonnes that are moved daily to
Inerts 34.90 transfer station 12 and the distance travelled are given in Table 4.
Organic 32.57
The transfer station 12 handles the entire 187.4 tonnes daily and
Food 8.10
Wood/timber 7.00 transports the garbage using multi-axle vehicles to the dumping
Paper 6.50 yard at Perungudi.
Consumable plastic 5.10 The current cost component of the 13 wards that we are
Rags and textile 3.10 optimizing is about (Indian Rupees) INR 128 per tonne (source:
Rubber/leather 1.50 Corporation of Chennai Annual Budget 2014–2015). This cost
Industrial plastic 1.20 comes to INR 8.76 million per annum.
Others 0.03
The existing road network of the study area covering all of the
Source: Corporation of Chennai 2013. 13 wards and the transfer station is given in Figure 5.
6 Waste Management & Research

Figure 3.  Architecture of solid waste management: CMA.

Legend: LMV, light motor vehicles; HMV, heavy motor vehicles; MAV, multi-axle vehicles.

Table 4.  Distance and garbage transported daily from 13

wards attached to transfer station 12.

Ward TS Garbage Current distance

number (tonnes per day) (km)
170 12 15.75 5.36
171 12 16.81 5.44
172 12 11.24 10.62
173 12 18.29 14.26
174 12 37.92 14.34
175 12 10.34 14.24
176 12 13.66 17.92
177 12 11.03 12.70
178 12 6.74 16.80
179 12 17.39 17.10
Figure 4.  Current network design: CMA.
180 12 11.79 17.30
181 12 8.46 18.04
Why GIS? 182 12 7.96 18.62
Total 187.37 (Weighted average) 13.60
GIS is a software, designed to allow users to collect, manage,
Source: Corporation of Chennai 2013.
analyse and retrieve large volumes of spatially referenced data
and associated attribute data collected from a variety of sources
(Ghose et al., 2006). GIS enables the reader to visualize, and The routing solver within the ArcGIS network analyst,
interpret data for a better understanding of relationships, trends namely, the route is based on the Dijkstra algorithm (Dijkstra,
and patterns. Massie (1995) adopted GIS for improving SWM 1959), which solves the single source, shortest path problem.
programs. This algorithm was modified to incorporate real-word transport
Sanjeevi and Shahabudeen 7
Figure 5.  Road network of a part of Chennai Metropolitan Area.
data such as one-way settings, turn restrictions, and junction
impudence. To identify the shortest path from a starting location
g to a destination s, Dijkstra’s algorithm keeps a set of junctions,
G, whose final shortest path from g has already been computed.
The algorithm repeatedly finds a junction in a set of junctions
that is the lowest path estimate, adds it to the set of junctions G,
and updates the shortest path estimates of all neighbours of this
junction that are not in G. The algorithm continues until the
destination junction S is added to G.
The primary data comprised different map layers of the case
study area. The layers are boundary (base map), road network,
ward locations, TS locations and dumping yards. The primary
data consist of both spatial and attribute information.
•• The ward location includes the location of wards taken as the
gravity location of the ward area. These are represented in
triangular features.
•• The road network consisting of four layers shows the four
different types of roads as part of the road network of the case
study area, which is represented as different line features on
the map.
•• Transfer stations and dumping yards are marked as red dots
with their names written in red colour.
•• The topology checks are done to identify the missing links
on all available routes and are rectified by visiting the actual
location.
•• ArcGIS is applied by giving the starting node g and the
ending node s. The algorithm identifies the shortest path
and provides the same on a GIS map, along with route
distance.
Case study and results
The main objective was to minimize the total collection dis-
tance. This in turn would automatically reduce collection cost
and time. For this research, only a part of the CMA area was
taken, measuring 34.9 km2, involving 13 routes connecting 13
ward-centroids and one transfer station.
The GIS provided all the available road connectivity between
all the required points. After applying ArcGIS, by giving the
starting nodes, i.e. various wards (170 to 182) one by one and the
ending node, i.e. the transfer station 12, the algorithm identified
the shortest path and provided the same on a GIS map, along
with route distance, for each of the desired links. The ArcGIS-
generated optimized routes were compared with the current
routes for all of the 13 wards to the transfer station TS12. For
each ward the current route length is tabulated with the ArcGIS
optimized routes length and the details are given for each link in
Table 5. The comparison of the current and ArcGIS route dis-
tance generate a saving of 9.93% of the haul distance and the
reduction in weighted average tonne-km is 10.05%. Similarly
8 Waste Management & Research

Table 5.  Current distance versus ArcGIS route (shortest path) distance (km).

Ward TS Garbage Current ArcGIS Savings in Savings Savings in Current Savings in

(tonnes per distance distance distance in km tonne- km tonne- tonne-km
day) (km) (km) (km) (percent) per day km (percent)
170 12 15.75 5.36 3.54 1.82 33.96 28.67 84.42 33.96
171 12 16.81 5.44 5.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 91.45 0.00
172 12 11.24 10.62 10.30 0.32 3.01 3.60 119.37 3.02
173 12 18.29 14.26 11.42 2.84 19.92 51.94 260.82 19.91
174 12 37.92 14.34 13.72 0.62 4.32 23.51 543.77 4.32
175 12 10.34 14.24 12.30 1.94 13.62 20.06 147.24 13.62
176 12 13.66 17.92 14.38 3.54 19.75 48.36 244.79 19.76
177 12 11.03 12.70 10.84 1.86 14.65 20.52 140.08 14.65
178 12 6.74 16.80 13.92 2.88 17.14 19.41 113.23 17.14
179 12 17.39 17.10 14.82 2.28 13.33 39.65 297.37 13.33
180 12 11.79 17.30 17.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 203.97 0.00
181 12 8.46 18.04 18.00 0.04 0.22 0.34 152.62 0.22
182 12 7.96 18.62 18.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 148.22 0.00
Total 187.37 182.74 164.60 18.14 9.93a 256.06 2547.33 10.05b
aWeighted average savings in km.
bWeighted average savings in tonne-km.
Source: ArcGIS computation.

Table 6.  Current time versus ArcGIS route (shortest path) time (minutes).

Ward TS Current time ArcGIS time Number of signalized Number of signalized Current ArcGIS Savings
at average at average intersections in intersections in route route in time
speed in speed in current route ArcGIS route time in time in (percent)
minutes: minutes: (cycle times in (cycle times in minutes: minutes:
seconds seconds minutes: seconds) minutes: seconds) seconds seconds
170 12 17:52 11:48 1 (01:30) 0 (00:00) 19:28 11:48 39.38
171 12 18:08 18:08 3 (03:30) 3 (03:30) 21:38 21:38 0.00
172 12 35:24 34:20 9 (10:30) 8 (06:00) 45:54 40:20 12.13
173 12 47:32 38:04 12 (09:00) 11 (09:00) 56:32 47:04 16.75
174 12 47:48 45:44 7 (08:00) 4 (04:00) 55:48 49:44 10.87
175 12 47:28 41:00 9 (12:00) 8 (10:30) 59:28 51:30 13.40
176 12 59:44 47:44 9 (10:00) 9 (10:00) 69:44 57:44 17.21
177 12 42:20 36:08 1 (01:30) 0 (00:00) 43:50 36:08 17.57
178 12 56:00 46:24 9 (09:00) 6 (06:00) 65:00 52:24 19.38
179 12 57:00 49:24 7 (08:00) 6 (06:30) 65:00 55:54 14.00
180 12 57:40 57:40 9 (09:00) 9 (09:00) 66:40 66:40 0.00
181 12 60:08 60:00 12 (15:00) 8 (11:00) 75:08 71:00 5.50
182 12 62:04 62:04 9 (10:30) 9 (10:30) 72:34 72:34 0.00
Total 609:08 548:28 94 (107:30) 79 (86:00) 651:44 634:28 11.48a
aWeighted average savings in minutes.

Source: ArcGIS computation and traffic data from Chennai Metropolitan Police.

the comparison of the current and ArcGIS route time generate a
saving of 11.48%.
The authors also collected data on traffic conditions to check
the impact in the time taken for the vehicles to cover the current
and shortest routes. As per the traffic department of Chennai
Metropolitan Police the average speed of heavy vehicles is 18
km h1. However, there is a change in the number of intersec-
tions between the current and shortest paths. The current and
revised timings are arrived at using the average speed of
vehicles and the number of intersections and taking only half
the signalling cycle times from green-to-green light. The
detailed time calculation is given for each link in Table 6.
The digitized maps giving the current and computed route
(shortest path) are given for selected wards where there is
relatively major difference between the current route distance
and optimal or ArcGIS route distance to the transfer station.
The route maps for wards 170 and 173 to transfer station are
given in Figures 6 and 7, respectively.
Sanjeevi and Shahabudeen 9

Figure 6.  Current route versus optimum route for ward 170.

Figure 7.  Current route versus optimum route for ward 173.
10 Waste Management & Research
Conclusion
In this case study, the GIS application was used for identifying the
optimum routes for 13 selected wards out of a total of 200 wards
in CoC. The GIS method used all the developed geographical data
such as road network, the various zone boundaries, location of
ward-centroids, location of transfer stations etc. Application of
ArcGIS for 13 wards with current daily garbage generation of
187.4 tonnes generated an annual saving of INR 880,000. As can
be seen in Table 5, the saving in one route is 34% and the saving
in distance travelled comes to 9.93% for the 13 wards under study.
If one applies the ward tonnages and respective ward distances,
the weighted average savings come to 10.05%.
The current generation of garbage from all of the wards
per year is about 1.8 million tonnes and the annual budgeted
expenditure is INR 226.1 million (source: Corporation of
Chennai, Annual Budget 2014–15).
As can be seen from Table 6, the savings in travel time of
vehicles come to 11.48%. The study clearly shows that using
ArcGIS to arrive at the shortest path and implementing the sug-
gested routes for all of the wards can bring in more efficiency.
Using the recommended (that is, the computed and mapped)
routes would give an annual saving of INR 22.72 million. Thus,
the overall savings are very significant.
The power of interactive analysis of GIS and tools enable the
researchers to carry out sensitivity analysis with many alterna-
tive scenarios. Even when the solid waste generation changes for
each ward, ArcGIS can be applied as and when needed. Future
work could focus on updating the traffic conditions in GIS and
suggest intelligent routes on a real time basis, based on traffic
conditions. The application of ArcGIS needs to be carried out for
all the 200 wards of the CMA, to achieve maximum savings for
the city as a whole, and to every major city in the world.
Suggestions for further studies
The optimization method for determining the optimum route
(shortest path) could be used by the Corporation authorities to
reduce cost and improve management. Similar studies need to be
done for other wards of CMA and for other municipalities, which
could release more funds for other development (infrastructural)
activities of the city Government and management.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, author-
ship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Agha SR (2006) Optimizing routing of municipal solid waste collection
vehicles in Deir El-Balah-Gaza Strip. The Islamic University Journal
(Series of Natural Studies and Engineering) 14: 75–89.
Apaydin O and Gonullu MT (2007) Route optimization for solid waste
collection: Trabzon (Turkey) Case Study. Global Nest 9: 6–11.
Apaydin O and Gonullu MT (2008) Emission control with route optimization
in solid waste collection process: A case study. Sadhana 33: 71–82.
Badran MF and El-Haggar SM (2006) Optimization of municipal solid waste
management in Port Said, Egypt. Waste Management 26: 534–545.
Berger C, Savard G and Wizere A (1999) EUGENE: an optimization model
for integrated regional solid waste management planning. International
Journal of Environmental and Pollution 12, 280–307.
Chalkias C and Lasaridi K (2009) A GIS based model for the optimization
of municipal solid waste collection: the case study of Nikea, Athens,
Greece. WSEAS Transactions on Environment and Development 5,
640–650.
Chalmin P and Gaillochet C (2009) Waste to Resource, An Abstract of
World Waste Survey, Cyclope, Veolia. Environmental Services, Edition
Economica, France.
Chang N-B, Lu HY and Wei YL (1997) GIS technology for vehicle
routing and scheduling in solid waste collection systems. Journal of
Environmental Engineering 123, 901–910.
Corporation of Chennai, Annual Budget 2014–2015 (2014) Government of
Tamilnadu, Chennai, India.
Dijkstra EW (1959) A note on two problems in connection with graphs.
Numerische Mathematik 1: 269–271.
Essaku S, swaminathan A, Karthikeyan PO, et al. (2007) Municipal solid
waste management in Chennai City, India. In eleventh international
waste management and landfill symposium, 1–5 October Cagliari, Italy.
Ghiani G, Guerriero F, Improta G, et al. (2005) Waste collection in
southern Italy: solution of a real-life arc routing problem. International
Transactions in Operations Research 12: 135–144.
Ghose MK, Dikshit AK and Sharma SK (2006) A GIS based transportation
model for solid waste disposal – a case study on Asansol municipality.
Waste Management 26: 1287–1293.
Gottingger HW (1991) Economic Models and application of Solid Waste
Management. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New York,
USA.
Huang GH, Baetz BW and Patry GG (1994) Grey dynamic programming
for solid waste management programming under uncertainty. Journal of
Urban Planning and Development 120: 132–156.
Jamshidi A, Taghizadeh F and Ata D (2011) Sustainable municipal solid waste
management (Case Study: Sarab County, Iran). Annals of Environmental
Science 5: 55–59.
Kanchanabhan TE, Abbas Mohaideen J, Srinivasan S, et al. (2011)
Optimum municipal solid waste collection using geographical infor-
mation system (GIS) and vehicle tracking for Pallavaram municipality.
Waste Management and Research 29: 323–339.
Karadimas Nikolaos V, Papatzelou K and Loumos VG (2007) Optimal solid
waste collection routes identified by the ant colony system algorithm.
Waste Management and Research 25: 139–147.
Kumaran TV, Joseph R and Gunaselvam R (2013) Chennai: A rural metropo-
lis in search of modernity. In: Misra RP (ed.): Urbanization in South Asia:
Focus on Mega Cities. Cambridge University Press India: New Delhi,
pp.173–198.
Kyessi AG and Mwakalinga V (2009) GIS Application in Coordinating
Solid Waste Collection: The Case of Sinza Neighbourhood in Kinondoni
Municipality, Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania. FIG Working Week, Surveyors
Key Role in Accelerated Development, Eilat, Israel, 3 May – 8 May,
pp. 1–19.
Lopez JV, Aguliar M, Fernandez-Carrion S, Jimenez del Valle A (2008)
Optimizing the collection of used paper from small business through GIS
techniques: the Leganes case, Madrid, Spain. Waste Management 28(2):
282–293.
MacDonald D (1996) Solid waste management models: A state of the art
review. Journal of Solid Waste Technology Management 23(2): 73–83.
Makan A, Manamis D, Assobhei O, et al. (2011) Solid waste management:
case of collection and vehicle routing problem in the city of Azemmour,
Morocco. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering
Management 6: 247–255.
Markovic D, Janosevic D, Jovanovic M, et al. (2010) Application method
for Optimization in Solid waste management system in the city of NIS.
Mechanical Engineering 8, 63–76.
Sanjeevi and Shahabudeen 11
Massie K (1995) Using GIS to improve solid waste management and
recycling programs. In: Proceedings of 1995 Environmental Systems
Research Institute (ESRI) User Conference, 22 May – 26 May, Palm
springs, California, USA, p. 18.
Ogwueleka TC (2009) Route optimization for solid waste collection: Onitsha
(Nigeria) case study. Journal of Applies Science and Management 13:
37–42.
Rajendra KK, Varghese GK and Chabukdhara M (2012) Municipal solid
waste management in India- current state and future challenges: a
review. International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
4: 1473–1488.
Rodionov M and Toshihiko N (2011) Design of an optimal waste utiliza-
tion system: a case study in St. Petersburg, Russia. Sustainability 3:
1486–1509.
Rogoff MJ, Lilyquist RE, Ross D, et al. (2010) Automated Waste Collection-
How to make sure it makes sense for your community. American Public
Works Association (APWA) Reporter 77(3): 44–48.
Thanh NP, Matsui Y, Ngan NVC, et al. (2009) GIS application for estimating
the current status and improvement on municipal solid waste collection
and transport system: Case study at Can Tho city, Vietnam. Asian Journal
of Energy and Environment 10: 108–121.
Tsakiris G and Salahoris M (1993) GIS technology for management of
water distribution networks. In: Cabrera E and Martinez (eds) Water
supply systems. Computation Mechanics Inc., Portsmouth, pp.361–378.
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) (2013) Taking the pulse of
the planet: connecting science with policy. UNEP Global Environment
Alert service (GEAS). Available at: http://www.unep.org/geas (accessed
25 September 2014).