Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Waste Management 28 (2008) 1688–1695

www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman

Household solid waste characteristics and management

in Chittagong, Bangladesh
a,*
Mohammad Sujauddin , S.M.S. Huda a, A.T.M. Rafiqul Hoque a,b

a
Institute of Forestry and Environmental Sciences, Chittagong University, Chittagong-4331, Bangladesh
b
Laboratory of Ecology and Systematics (Plant Ecophysiology Section), Faculty of Science, Biology Division, University of the Ryukyus,
Okinawa 903-0213, Japan

Accepted 26 June 2007

Available online 12 September 2007

Abstract

Solid waste management (SWM) is a multidimensional challenge faced by urban authorities, especially in developing countries like
Bangladesh. We investigated per capita waste generation by residents, its composition, and the households’ attitudes towards waste man-
agement at Rahman Nagar Residential Area, Chittagong, Bangladesh. The study involved a structured questionnaire and encompassed
75 households from five different socioeconomic groups (SEGs): low (LSEG), lower middle (LMSEG), middle (MSEG), upper middle
(UMSEG) and high (HSEG). Wastes, collected from all of the groups of households, were segregated and weighed. Waste generation
was 1.3 kg/household/day and 0.25 kg/person/day. Household solid waste (HSW) was comprised of nine categories of wastes with veg-
etable/food waste being the largest component (62%). Vegetable/food waste generation increased from the HSEG (47%) to the LSEG
(88%). By weight, 66% of the waste was compostable in nature. The generation of HSW was positively correlated with family size
(rxy = 0.236, p < 0.05), education level (rxy = 0.244, p < 0.05) and monthly income (rxy = 0.671, p < 0.01) of the households. Municipal
authorities are usually the responsible agencies for solid waste collection and disposal, but the magnitude of the problem is well beyond
the ability of any municipal government to tackle. Hence dwellers were found to take the service from the local waste management ini-
tiative. Of the respondents, an impressive 44% were willing to pay US$0.3 to US$0.4 per month to waste collectors and it is recommended
that service charge be based on the volume of waste generated by households. Almost a quarter (22.7%) of the respondents preferred 12–
1 pm as the time period for their waste to be collected. This study adequately shows that household solid waste can be converted from
burden to resource through segregation at the source, since people are aware of their role in this direction provided a mechanism to assist
them in this pursuit exists and the burden is distributed according to the amount of waste generated.
Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction population was only 4.33% of the total population. Since

Industrially developed countries produce large quanti-
ties of wastes. On the other hand, developing countries gen-
erate less solid waste (SW) per capita because of their lower
purchasing power and the consequent lesser consumption
(Cairncross and Feachem, 1993). Bangladesh, being a den-
sely populated country, is undergoing rapid urbanization
and a huge number of rural people are migrating to urban
areas each year (Salequzzaman, 2000). In 1951, the urban
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +880 31682696.
E-mail address: mohammad.sujauddin@gmail.com (M. Sujauddin).
then the rising trend of migration has continued reaching
around 24% by the year 2001 (Enayetullah et al., 2005).
One of the directly related consequences of population
growth is the increase in waste generation. The migration
is creating unplanned urbanization and slum development,
and these areas produce a lot of unmanageable quantities
of SW in all major cities (Dhaka, Chittagong, Rajshahi,
Khulna, Sylhet and Barisal) of Bangladesh (Salequzzaman
et al., 2001). However, the total SW contribution from a
large population is detrimental to environmental and sani-
tation conditions. Thus, solid waste management (SWM)
has become a major concern for the cities and towns of

0956-053X/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2007.06.013
 M. Sujauddin et al. / Waste Management 28 (2008) 1688–1695
Bangladesh. SW is irreparably degrading the urban envi-
ronment and placing a serious threat to the natural
resources and consequently holding back equitable sustain-
able development (Kumar and Bhowmick, 1998). Munici-
pal authorities are responsible for SWM in Bangladesh.
SWM in municipalities operates under the conservancy
wings executed by Chief Conservancy Officer (CCO) under
the direct supervision of the Mayor/Chairman of the city
corporations. The most important task of these authorities
is to manage the waste properly to keep the city clean and
healthy. However, municipal services in most cities and
towns are already over-burdened and simply cannot cope
with the growing demand owing to insufficient manpower
and materials, resulting in unhygienic and filthy living con-
dition in the neighborhood (Enayetullah et al., 2005; Hasan
and Chowdhury, 2005).
According to available statistics, 16,380 tons of waste
are produced in Bangladesh per day (Anonymous, 2004).
Dhaka, the capital city, generates approximately 4500 tons
of waste per day (Hasan and Chowdhury, 2005), but Dha-
ka City Corporation (DCC) can pick up and dispose only
42% of the SW generated (Salequzzaman et al., 1998).
Practically, the city corporations have failed to manage
the SW of this increasing population, mainly because of
lack of financial support and willingness to pay (WTP)
for overall sustainable SWM policies. But WTP for com-
munity-based waste management in some areas of some
cities is highly successful (Salequzzaman et al., 2001). Chit-
tagong is the second largest city of Bangladesh with a sub-
stantial, self-sustaining economic base (GOB, 2003). It had
been a municipal city since 1863 and was upgraded first
into a Municipal Corporation and finally became a City
Corporation in 1990 (CDA, 1992). The average generation
of solid waste in the urban areas of Chittagong is 1550 tons
per day (Sinha, 2006). Of this, the quantity of household
solid waste (HSW) generated is much higher than the
amount of waste generated by industries and health sectors
(Anonymous, 2000). Among the different types of solid
wastes, residential or household waste represents about
30% of the overall municipal waste stream and the urban
residents generate two to three times as much SW as their
fellow rural citizens in Asia (World Bank, 1999). The SW
generation of the urban areas in Chittagong city is increas-
ing proportionately with the growth of its population,
which is posing a serious threat to the management and
disposal system.
A considerable amount of research work on SWM has
already been conducted in Bangladesh (Salequzzaman
et al., 1998, 2001; Salequzzaman, 2000; Ahmed and Rah-
man, 2000; Alam et al., 2002; Hasan and Chowdhury,
2005; Enayetullah et al., 2005; Rahman et al., 2006; Sinha,
2006). However, no study to investigate the effect of the
socioeconomic level of householders on MSW quantities
and composition has yet been undertaken. The objectives
of the study were, therefore, to make a move in the system-
atic study of residential or household solid waste manage-
ment (HSWM), leading to quantification of the amount of
1689
waste generated from the residential area, determination of
its composition, correlation of waste quantity with relevant
socioeconomic parameters of the households, and consid-
eration of the management practices so as to identify the
problems and future prospects.
2. Methodology
The study was conducted at Rahman Nagar Residential
Area under Chittagong City Corporation (CCC) of Ban-
gladesh. There are 41 wards (administrative areas) in
CCC (Rahman et al., 2006). The study area is under ward
number 8 and has a population of about 3500 residents; it
was selected purposely for the research. The study was con-
ducted from May to October 2006, to understand the
quantitative and qualitative aspects of residential solid
waste generation. The methodology followed for the per-
formance of research tasks involved a review of the related
literature, definition of the problem, clarification of study
objectives, design of the survey plan, implementation of
the personal interview survey, establishment of the mea-
surement of sample household daily solid waste and waste
classification by type, processing of the survey data, analy-
sis of the data and evaluation of findings, and finally, prep-
aration of the final report.
At the outset of the major field work, a reconnaissance
survey was conducted in March 2006 to identify the socio-
economic status and solid waste generation scenario of the
study area, especially the sources and sub-sources from
where the SW is generated, to observe the physical compo-
sition of the study area and to collect information regard-
ing quantity and quality of SW. A structured questionnaire
was designed, pre-tested, and modified to collect household
level data on socioeconomic and daily solid waste traits. In
addition, the questionnaire included a number of attitudi-
nal questions aimed at examining the households’ aware-
ness and attitudes toward the problem of urban SW.
Data were also collected through both direct observations
and interviews with household members, the City Corpora-
tion Office and members of a local committee (Greenland
Welfare Committee), which is responsible for the collec-
tion, transportation and disposal of HSW in the study area.
Based on the reconnaissance survey carried out and
following Rahman et al. (1999), the whole study area was
classified into five different socioeconomic groups on
the basis of the household’s monthly income: low socio-
economic group (LSEG) (monthly income < Tk. 5000) (1
US$ = BDT 70), lower middle socioeconomic group
(LMSEG) (monthly income between Tk. 5000 and Tk.
10,000), middle socioeconomic group (MSEG) (monthly
income between Tk. 10,000 and Tk. 20,000), upper middle
socioeconomic group (UMSEG) (monthly income between
Tk. 20,000 and Tk. 50,000) and high socioeconomic group
(HSEG) (monthly income above Tk. 50,000).
Fifteen households from each group were randomly
selected and thus a total of 75 households were studied
out of 450 households in the study area. During the ques-
1690 M. Sujauddin et al. / Waste Management 28 (2008) 1688–1695

tionnaire survey, polythene bags (similar size and with par- employed members. The average family age was 30.11
ticular coding of the respondent) were supplied to each years and the mean age of the respondents was 43.14 years.
household to place their residential wastes. Collected Years of schooling of the family and the respondents were
wastes from each household within the poly bag were found to be 8.84 and 8.05 years, respectively. Almost 56%
weighed and recorded. Then the wastes within each bag of the respondents were tenants and the remaining 44%
were segregated and each segregated item was weighed sep- were the owner of the land. The mean duration of stay of
arately and recorded. The same job was conducted each dwellers was found to be 3.09 years (Table 2). Similar types
day for each of the 75 households. During segregation, col- of socioeconomic parameters were analyzed by Koushki
lected wastes from each bag were spread on clean plastic and Al-Khaleefi (1998) in Kuwait. In their study, they
sheets and the wastes sorted by hand, following the meth- placed emphasis on socioeconomic parameters such as
odology of Enayetullah et al. (2005): family size, family employment, family income, car owner-
ship, education of the head and age of the head.
 Paper = paper/book/printed materials
 Pack = packaging materials
3.2. Waste generation
 Can = can/jar/tin/metals
 Plastic = plastic/polythene/rubber
For determination of waste generation rate, sample
 Textile = textile/rags/jute
wastes were collected and processed from different house-
 Glass = glass/ceramic
holds of different SEGs. Table 3 shows the estimation of
 Vegetable = vegetable/food waste
SW generated by an average household per day in the
 Rocks = rocks/dirt/miscellaneous
study area. The analysis of the 75 sample observations in
 Wood = wood/grass/leaves
the study area indicates that an average household in the
Rahman Nagar Residential Area generated 1.3 kg of
wastes per day. It also reveals that the rate of waste gener-
3. Results and discussion
ation varies in the different SEGs studied. The trend is
gradually increasing with the increase of income among
3.1. Socioeconomic factors
the socioeconomic groups. For this reason, the waste gen-
eration rate by an average household was found to be
A number of socioeconomic variables may affect the
0.36 kg/day (minimum) by the LSEG and 3.15 kg/day
quantity of solid waste generated each day by a household.
(maximum) by the HSEG because of their high purchasing
These include religion, family size, family employment, age,
power and consequently high consumption practices.
education, land status and duration of stay. Tables 1 and 2
Table 4 reveals that the residential waste generation rate
present the descriptive statistics for these variables.
by a person in the study area was 0.25 kg/day. The study
The data in Table 1 indicate that 90.7% respondents
area comprises a population of almost 3500 persons.
were found to be Muslim and the rest (9.3%) were Hindu.
According to this study, almost 875 kg of solid waste was
The average sample household had 3.39 persons and 1.77
generated per day in the study area. However, it is esti-
mated that the per capita waste generation rate in six major
urban areas of Bangladesh viz. Dhaka, Chittagong, Raj-
Table 1 shahi, Khulna, Sylhet and Barisal was 0.56 kg, 0.48 kg,
Frequency, mean and standard deviation of sample household (hh)
0.3 kg, 0.27 kg, 0.3 kg and 0.25 kg, respectively (Enayetul-
characteristics
lah et al., 2005). The World Bank (1999) explained that res-
Variable name Frequency Percent Cumulative percent
idential solid waste represents about 30% of the overall
1. Religion municipal waste stream in Asia. According to that report,
Muslim 68 90.7 90.7
the residential waste generation rate of Bangladesh was
Hindu 7 9.3 100.0
0.15 kg/person/day. With the pace of time, the waste is
2. Family size (persons/hh) increasing proportionately with the growth of population.
1 2 2.7 2.7
2 5 6.7 9.4
Probably owing to this, the per capita waste generation rate
3–5 37 49.3 58.7 stated by The World Bank (1999) differs from the per
6–8 24 32.0 90.7 capita waste generation found in the study area, one of
>8 7 9.3 100.0 the representative residential areas of Bangladesh.
Mean = 3.39 (persons/hh), standard deviation = 0.853 (persons/hh)
3. Family employment (persons employed/hh)
1 37 49.3 49.3 3.3. Physical composition of HSW
2 23 30.7 80.0
3 10 13.3 93.3 Composition of solid waste depends upon a number of
4 5 6.7 100.0 factors such as food habits, cultural traditions, socioeco-
Mean = 1.77 (persons employed/hh), standard deviation = 0.924 (persons nomic status and climatic condition (Enayetullah et al.,
employed/hh)
2005).
 M. Sujauddin et al. / Waste Management 28 (2008) 1688–1695 1691

Table 2 level (9%). Rocks/dirt/miscellaneous; glass/ceramic;

Frequency, mean and standard deviation of sample household (hh) wood/grass/leaves; paper/book/printed materials and plas-
characteristics
tic/polythene/rubber were found to be 6%, 5%, 3%, 3% and
Variable name Frequency Percent Cumulative percent 2%, respectively. In urban areas of Bangladesh, SW has a
1. Age (years) very high organic content that varies from 70–85% (Anon-
Average family age ymous, 2004). Enayetullah et al. (2005) also found that
<20 7 9.3 9.3
20 to <30 29 38.7 48.0
food and vegetables were dominant (66.65%) among all
30 to <40 31 41.3 89.3 sorts of wastes in Bangladesh.
40 to <50 7 9.3 98.7 The percentage of vegetable/food waste was found to be
> =50 1 1.3 100.0 the highest in all of the SEGs. Among them, LSEG was the
Mean = 30.11 (years), standard deviation = 8.25 (years) highest (88%) and HSEG was the lowest (47%) in produc-
Age of the respondent ing vegetable/food waste. The trend of vegetable/
< =25 4 5.3 5.3 food waste generation was found to be increasing from
26–35 24 32.0 37.3
the HSEG towards the LSEG. The opposite trend was
36–45 20 26.7 64.0
46–55 16 21.3 85.3 recorded in the case of can/jar/tin/metals. In the case of
56–65 7 9.3 94.7 packaging materials, the highest percentage (14%) was
66–75 2 2.7 97.3 found in the HSEG and the lowest percentage (3%) in
>75 2 2.7 100.0 the LSEG. Both the MSEG and UMSEG were found to
Mean = 43.14 (years), standard deviation = 13.41 (years)
contribute the same percentage (5%) of packaging materi-
2. Education als (Table 5).
Average no. of years in school Other than these, the rocks/dirt/miscellaneous category
0–5 15 20.0 20.0 was found to be the highest (10%) in HSEG. Both
>5 to 10 29 38.7 58.7 plastic/polythene/rubber (3%) and glass/ceramic (6%) were
>10 to 12 13 17.3 76.0 recorded as highest in UMSEG and wood/grass/leaves was
>12 to 14 10 13.3 89.3
>14 8 10.7 100.0
recorded as highest (4%) in HSEG. The highest percentage
Mean = 8.84 (years), standard deviation = 3.94 (years) of paper/book/printed materials (4%) was recorded in
MSEG, and the highest percentage of textile/rags/
Years of Schooling of the respondent
< =5 23 30.7 30.7 jute (2%) was found both in MSEG and UMSEG
>5 to 10 26 34.7 65.3 (Table 5).
>10 to 12 10 13.3 78.7 The above discussion reveals that a huge portion of the
>12 to 14 7 9.3 88.0 solid waste was compostable in the study area. The compo-
>14 9 12.0 100.0
stable portion of HSW includes food, vegetable, rags, jute,
Mean = 8.05 (years), standard deviation = 3.71 (years)
wood, grass, leaves, etc. (Enayetullah et al., 2005). The
3. Land status compostable and non-compostable (paper, packaging
Land owner 33 44.0 44.0 materials, can, jar, tin, metals, plastic, polythene, rubber,
Tenant 42 56.0 100.0 glass, ceramic, rock and dirt) portions of HSW in the study
area were recorded at 66% and 34%, respectively (Table 5).
4. Duration of stay (years)
<1 6 8.0 8.0 Enayetullah et al. (2005) showed that a substantial portion
1 to <5 30 40.0 48.0 (69–77%) of SW in the urban areas of Bangladesh was
5 to <10 17 22.7 70.7 compostable. The large organic concentration in urban
10 to <15 4 5.3 76.0 solid waste indicates the necessity for frequent collection
15 to <20 9 12.0 88.0
and removal. This also suggests the good potential for recy-
> =20 9 12.0 100.0
Mean = 3.09 (years), standard deviation = 1.535 (years) cling of organic waste.

3.4. Relationship between the quantity of SW and

Table 5 indicates the physical composition of SW vary-
ing with different SEGs. All of the nine different items of
waste (viz. paper, packaging materials, cans, plastic, tex-
tiles, glass, vegetable, rocks and wood) segregated during
the study varied considerably among the SEGs. Of them,
seven different items (packaging materials, cans, plastic,
glass, vegetable, rocks and wood) were varied significantly
(p < 0.05) among different SEGs. Vegetable/food waste
was found to be the highest (62%) and textile/rags/jute
was found to be the lowest (1%). Both the can/jar/tin/met-
als and packaging materials were found to be at the same
socioeconomic factors
Correlation analysis was employed to identify the degree
of association between the two factors since the socioeco-
nomic factors affect the daily quantity of SW generated
by households.
The generation of HSW was found to be positively cor-
related with family size (rxy = 0.236, p < 0.05), which
means families with more individuals generate a larger
quantity of solid waste per day (Fig. 1). The education level
(average number of years in school) of the family
(rxy = 0.244, p < 0.05) was also found to be positively cor-
1692 M. Sujauddin et al. / Waste Management 28 (2008) 1688–1695

Table 3 ing higher education generate a lesser quantity of SW each

Solid waste generated by an average household per day day. But, interestingly enough, the trend was totally reverse
Socioeconomic groups Number of hha studied WGRb (kg/hh/day) in nature in the study area. A positive correlation was also
LSEG 15 0.36 found between the income (rxy = 0.671, p < 0.01) and the
LMSEG 15 0.89 generation of SW, which reveals that families earning more
MSEG 15 0.97 per month have the tendency to generate a larger quantity
UMSEG 15 1.10
HSEG 15 3.15
of SW each day (Fig. 3). Waste generation was found to be
gradually increasing with the increase of income per month
Total 75 1.3 (avg.)
by the different socioeconomic groups.
LSEG = low socioeconomic group; LMSEG = lower middle socioeco-
nomic group; MSEG = middle socioeconomic group; UMSEG = upper
middle socioeconomic group and HSEG = high socioeconomic group. 3.5. Household attitudes regarding the management of HSW
a
hh = household.
b
WGR = waste generation rate. Household support is essential to the effectiveness of any
program aimed at minimizing SW at its source. A well-
Table 4 informed and concerned public greatly facilitates program
Solid waste generated per person per day implementation and ensures its success. The reverse holds
Socioeconomic Number of persons WGRa (kg/person/
true for an ill-informed or unconcerned public (Koushki
groups studied day) and Al-Khaleefi, 1998). The responses of the sample house-
LSEG 61 0.08
holds to a number of attitudinal questions are shown in
LMSEG 64 0.20 Tables 6 and 7.
MSEG 82 0.17
UMSEG 91 0.18
HSEG 85 0.55 3.5.1. Existing management system of the study area
Total 383 0.25 (avg.)
Greenland Welfare Committee, a local organization,
was found to be responsible for the collection, transporta-
LSEG = low socioeconomic group; LMSEG = lower middle socioeco-
nomic group; MSEG = middle socioeconomic group; UMSEG = upper
tion and disposal of waste in the study area. Of the respon-
middle socioeconomic group and HSEG = high socioeconomic group. dents, 80% were taking the service from the local waste
a
WGR = waste generation rate. management initiative. Among the households who take
this service, 61.3% were satisfied with the service and
18.7% opined that they were not satisfied. A large percent-
related with the generation of SW. This reveals that the age (54.7%) of the sample households stated that the pay-
higher the level of education of the family member, the lar- ment made to the waste collector for the service was
ger the quantity of SW generated each day (Fig. 2). It is quite reasonable; 25.3% opined that the payment was not
usually expected that a family consisting of members hav- reasonable (Table 7).

Table 5
Physical composition of HSW generated by different socioeconomic groups
Socioeconomic groups Waste category (%)
Non-compostable Compostable
Papera Packb Canc Plasticd Glassf Rocksh Textilee Vegetableg Woodi
LSEG 3 3 0 2 1 2 1 88 0
LMSEG 3 4 2 1 4 2 1 83 0
MSEG 4 5 4 2 5 2 2 76 0
UMSEG 2 5 9 3 6 1 2 70 2
HSEG 3 14 15 2 5 10 0 47 4
Generation of waste per day by all SEGs 3 9 9 2 5 6 1 62 3
LSEG = low socioeconomic group; LMSEG = lower middle socioeconomic group; MSEG = middle socioeconomic group; UMSEG = upper middle
socioeconomic group and HSEG = high socioeconomic group.
a
Paper = Paper/Book/Printed materials.
b
Pack = Packaging materials.
c
Can = can/jar/tin/metals.
d
Plastic = plastic/polythene/rubber.
e
Textile = textile/rags/jute.
f
Glass = glass/ceramic.
g
Vegetable = vegetable/food waste.
h
Rocks = rocks/dirt/miscellaneous.
i
Wood = wood/grass/leaves.
 M. Sujauddin et al. / Waste Management 28 (2008) 1688–1695 1693

3.5.2. Attitude of households towards SWM

2.5000
The study reveals the willingness by the respondent in a
residential area to pay to the waste collector. Almost 44%
of the respondents opined they were willing to pay Tk.
2.0000

Mean Total Fresh Weight (Kg)

20 to Tk. <30 (1 US$ = BDT 70) to the waste collector
per month (Table 7).
Of the sample respondent households, 22.7% stated that
they expect the waste collector to come to their residents 1.5000

between 12 pm and 1 pm to collect their waste; 21.3% pre-

fer 10–11 am and 14.7% prefer 9–10 am as the preferred
collection time (Table 7).
As to the question on the place for dumping the waste, a
large percentage of the sample households (80%) were
found to dispose their waste through the waste collector.
Almost 11% of the households dispose their waste to open
places and 7% throw the waste into drains. Only 1% of the
household dispose their waste in their own compound
(Table 7).
By far the largest percentage of the sample households
(56%) were of the opinion that the responsibility of SWM
lay entirely with municipality; 17.3% thought the local
committee is enough to manage the waste problem in a res-
idential area, 17.3% stated that the SWM system could be
geared up by being a commercial venture, and 9.3% of the
respondent households opined that the main responsibility
for SWM would be the individual (Table 7).
The respondent households were asked about their self-
role in waste management. The interesting finding is that
about 29.3% of them stated that they would segregate the
waste items if sufficient toolkits are supplied to them, while
12% of households stated that they often try to reuse or
recycle their waste by their own indigenous techniques
before its final dumping. A large percentage of sample
households (42.7%) have opined that their role in SWM
is limited to contributing in the collection system. The rest
1.0000
0.5000
0.0000
0-5 >5-10 >10-12 >12-14 >14
Average No. of Years in School
Fig. 2. Generation of HSW based on average years of schooling of
household.
(16%) think they could dispose their waste at least to the
distance of a bin or to the waste collector if they are asked
(Table 7).
All of the sample household respondents were asked to
mention the most severe problem relating to SWM in the
study area. The majority of the respondents indicated that
bad odor (41%) is the most severe problem, others stated
that open dumping on the roadside (33%) causes serious
problems while walking along the roadside, 12% of the
respondents opined that due to the dumping of waste,
the natural flow of drainage is obstructed which later
causes flooding during the rainy season, and another 7%

2.0000

3.0000
Mean Total Fresh Weight (Kg)
Mean Total Fresh Weight (Kg)

1.5000

2.0000

1.0000

1.0000

0.5000

0.0000
0.0000 <Tk. 5000 Tk. 5000 to Tk. 10000 Tk. 20000 >= Tk
< Tk. 10000 to < Tk to < Tk 50000
1 2 3 to 5 6 to 8 >8
20000 50000
Family Size (person/ household ) Income (BDT)

Fig. 1. Generation of HSW based on family size. Fig. 3. Generation of HSW based on family income (1 US$ = BDT 70).
1694 M. Sujauddin et al. / Waste Management 28 (2008) 1688–1695

Table 6 of respondents thought irregularity in the collection sys-

Frequency distribution of sample household’s opinions on residential solid tem, both by the local service and the municipality, is the
waste
most severe problem regarding SWM.
Variable name Frequency Percent Cumulative percent Municipalities or city corporations of Bangladesh have
1. Willingness to take service from local waste management initiative failed to manage SW properly in the urban areas due to
Willing to take service 60 80.0 80.0 limitations of existing logistic support and manpower, cor-
Not willing to take service 15 20.0 100.0
ruption, lack of WTP for public services and others (Sale-
2. Satisfaction regarding the service quzzaman et al., 2001). However, sustainable management
Satisfied 46 61.3 61.3
can be accomplished with the collaboration of different
Not satisfied 14 18.7 80.0
Do not take service 15 20.0 100.0 concerned NGOs, local communities and private sector
groups. The study conducted at the Rahman Nagar resi-
3. Rationality of payment
dential area showed that most households (61.3%) were
Rational 41 54.7 54.7
Not rational 19 25.3 80.0 satisfied with the service given by a local organization.
Don’t know 15 20.0 100.0 Thus, local organization or community based organization
(CBO) is the best option for the sustainable SWM in differ-
ent residential areas of Bangladesh.

Table 7 4. Conclusion
Frequency distribution of sample household’s opinions on residential solid
waste
SWM refers to all activities pertaining to the control,
Variable name Frequency Percent Cumulative collection, transportation, processing and disposal of waste
percent in accordance with the best principles of public health, eco-
1. Willingness to pay (Tk) nomics, engineering, conservation, aesthetics and other
<20 10 13.3 13.3 environmental considerations. Its scope includes all atten-
20 to <30 33 44.0 57.3
30 to <40 6 8.0 65.3
dant administrative, financial, legal, planning and engineer-
>40 11 14.7 80.0 ing functions (Salequzzaman et al., 2001). To achieve the
No comment 15 20.0 100.0 objectives of SWM and to overcome the SWM problems
2. Expected time for waste collection in Bangladesh, community-based solid waste management
Before 9 am 3 4.0 4.0 has to be sustainable (Salequzzaman et al., 2001). The sce-
Between 9 am and 10 am 11 14.7 18.7 nario of SWM is deteriorating in Bangladesh (Hasan and
Between 10 am and 11 am 16 21.3 40.0 Chowdhury, 2005). It is very difficult to handle the large
Between 11 am and 12 pm 7 9.3 49.3
volume of waste in different cities and towns, due to the
Between 12 pm and 1 pm 17 22.7 72.0
Between 1 pm and 2 pm 3 4.0 76.0 uncontrollable migration of rural people to urban areas
Between 2 pm and 3 pm 2 2.7 78.7 in search for a better life. The waste generation rate is being
After 3 pm 1 1.3 80.0 increased in the residential areas of Bangladesh. The study
No comment 15 20.0 100.0 showed the per household waste generation rate is 1.3 kg
3. Place for dumping per day and 0.25 kg per person per day. This finding varies
Open place 8 10.7 10.7 from the value (0.15 per person per day) that was recorded
To waste collector 60 80.0 90.7 by The World Bank (1999). Therefore the general commu-
Throwing into drains 5 6.7 97.3
In own compound of house 1 1.3 98.7
nity, which is the most important stakeholder in waste
Covered dustbin 1 1.3 100.0 management activities, must also take an active part in
solving the problems by modifying their behavior patterns
4. Responsibility of SW management
Municipality 42 56.0 56.0 for proper SWM. For example, they need to exert disci-
Local committee 13 17.3 73.3 pline in separating waste (in situ segregation of domestic
Commercial venture 13 17.3 90.7 waste), using containers properly, and exercising environ-
Self role 7 9.3 100.0 mentally friendly purchasing habits. Poly bags or covered
5. Self-role in SW management small bins/containers of different colors and shapes should
Collection 32 42.7 42.7 be placed at every household.
Segregation 22 29.3 72.0 Physical composition of the waste shows that there is a
Reuse/recycle 9 12.0 84.0
Disposal 12 16.0 100.0
mixture of different types of components, with a significant
portion (66%) of them being compostable. The high
6. Severe problem related to SW
organic content indicates the necessity for frequent collec-
Bad odor 31 41.3 41.3
Open dumping on roadside 25 33.3 74.7 tion and removal, as well as having a good prospect of
Waste in drains 9 12.0 86.7 organic waste recycling through composting.
Irregular collection 5 6.7 93.3 The study has revealed that the households that have
No problem 5 6.7 100.0 larger earnings generate more waste. But usually, in the
(1 US$ = BDT 70). case of waste collection, all types of socioeconomic groups
 M. Sujauddin et al. / Waste Management 28 (2008) 1688–1695
are charged the same amount of payment. The charge of
waste collection and disposal should be fixed according
to the quantity of waste generated.
Most of the households (80%) in the study area were
found to take collection service from the local organization
and were highly satisfied. On the other hand, the majority
of the respondents (56%) thought that the responsibility of
SWM is vested on municipal authorities, but municipalities
or city corporations cannot collect and dispose more than
50% of the total waste generated in Bangladesh (Hasan
and Chowdhury, 2005). Therefore the study recommends
initiation and enhancement of community-based solid
waste management practices at each and every location in
the municipalities with close collaboration of government,
as well as of other national and international organiza-
tions. Eventually this will help reduce environmental pollu-
tion and health hazards significantly in the cities and towns
of Bangladesh.
The objectives of the study were largely met, giving what
may be considered as baseline data on the solid waste situ-
ation in the residential areas of Bangladesh. This should
lead to a better understanding of the solid waste manage-
ment problems in Bangladesh. A waste stream assessment
is not a one-time activity. As management programs are
implemented, periodic waste stream assessments will be
required to identify successful protocols as well as areas
needing improvements. Furthermore, seasonal or temporal
variations make it imperative that the waste stream assess-
ment be carried out in widely contrasting seasons (Sha’Ato
et al., 2007). Thus, it is recommended that this study be
repeated during all of the seasons, to give a more complete
picture of the household solid waste situation.
Acknowledgement
This study would not have been possible without the
assistance and support of Mr. Mohammad Mosharraf
Hossain (Doctoral Student, Tamiya Lab, JAIST, Ishikawa
923-1292, Japan). We would like to thank all anonymous
reviewers for their inspiring and constructive comments on
the paper. We also would like to thank Mr. Mainul Hasan
Chowdhury (Assistant Professor, Department of English,
Chittagong University, Bangladesh) for his valuable sugges-
tions to improve the English language of this manuscript.
References
Ahmed, M.F., Rahman, M.M., 2000. Solid Waste Management: Water
Supply & Sanitation – Rural and Low Income Urban Communities.
ITN – Bangladesh, Center for Water Supply and Waste Management,
BUET, Dhaka, Bangladesh with contribution from IRC, International
Water and sanitation Center, Delft, The Netherlands.
1695
Alam, A.K.M.M., Saha, S.K., Rahman, M.M.S., 2002. Aspects of solid
waste management – A case study at Nirala Residential Area, Khulna.
In: Ahmed, M.F., Tanveer, S.A., Badruzzaman, A.B.M. (Eds.),
Bangladesh Environment. Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon (BAPA),
Dhaka-1207, Bangladesh, pp. 698–711.
Anonymous, 2000. Waste management and recycling in Bangladesh.
Aborjona O Paribesh (Bengali Version) 4, 22–23.
Anonymous, 2004. Country Paper Bangladesh, SAARC Workshop on
Solid Waste Management. Department of Environment (DOE), Waste
Concern, ITN-BUET, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 19p.
Cairncross, S., Feachem, R.G., 1993. Environmental Health Engineering
in the Tropics: An Introductory Text, second ed. John Wiley & sons,
UK.
CDA (Chittagong Development Authority), 1992. Preparation of Struc-
tural Plan, Master Plan and detailed Area Plan for Chittagong
(UNDP/UNHS Project No. BGD/88/052). Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Enayetullah, I., Sinha, A.H.M.M., Khan, S.S.A., 2005. Urban Solid
Waste Management Scenario of Bangladesh: Problems and Pros-
pects. Waste Concern Technical Documentation, Dhaka, Bangla-
desh, 18p.
GOB, 2003. Banglapedia: national encyclopedia of Bangladeshi. In: Islam,
S. (Ed.), Asiatic Society of Bangladesh, Nimtali, Dhaka, Bangladesh,
pp. 491–515.
Hasan, G.M.J., Chowdhury, M.A.I., 2005. Municipal waste management
and environmental hazards in Bangladesh. Pakistan Journal of
Biological Science 8 (6), 921–928.
Koushki, P.A., Al-Khaleefi, A.L., 1998. An analysis of household solid
waste in Kuwait: magnitude, type, and forecasting models. Journal of
the Air & Waste Management Association 48, 256–263.
Kumar, P.D., Bhowmick, G.C., 1998. Solid waste management – the
obvious answer. In: Roy, D. (Ed.), Environment Management
with Indian Experience. A.P.H. Publishing Corporation, New
Delhi, p. 173.
Rahman, M.M., Hossain, M.D., Badruzzaman, A.B.M., Ali, M.A.,
Rahman, M.M., 1999. Characterization of municipal solid waste and
preliminary environment impact assessment of collection and disposal
wastes in Dhaka City. Bureau of Research, Testing and Consultation
(BRTC), BUET, Dhaka.
Rahman, M.A., Alam, M.S., Al-Amin, M., 2006. Segregation of biode-
gradable solid waste of Chittagong metropolitan area based on specific
physical and chemical properties. Pakistan Journal of Biological
Sciences 9 (3), 460–464.
Salequzzaman, M., Murtaza, M.G., Saroar, M., 1998. Evaluation Study
on Municipal Solid Waste Management Project in Khulna City,
PRODIPAN, Shaheb Bari Road, Khulna 9203, Bangladesh.
Salequzzaman, M., 2000. Perceptions of vehicle air pollution in Khulna,
Bangladesh. In: Proceedings of the Habitus 2000, Conference in Perth,
Western Australia, September 05–09.
Salequzzaman, M., Awal, M., Alam, M., 2001. Willingness to pay:
community based solid waste management and its sustainability in
Bangladesh. In: Proceedings of the International Conference ‘The
Future is Here’, RMIT, Melbourne, Victoria, January 15–19.
Sha’Ato, R., Aboho, S.Y., Oketunde, F.O., Eneji, I.S., Unazi, G., Agwa,
S., 2007. Survey of solid waste generation and composition in a rapidly
growing urban area in central nigeria. Waste Management 27 (3), 352–
358.
Sinha, A.H.M.M., 2006. Community Based Solid Waste Management
Through Public-Private Community Partnerships: Experience of
Waste Concern in Bangladesh. Paper presented in 3R South Asia
Expert Workshop, Katmandu, Nepal.
World Bank, 1999. What a Waste: Solid Waste Management in Asia,
Washington DC, USA, p. 43.