Wollega University

College of Business & Economics

Department of Public Administration and Development Management
PhD in Development studies

A seminar paper

On

Municipal Solid Waste Management and challenges in Cities: The case of

cities and towns of Ethiopia.

By
GIRMA KUSA JARA

(ID. No.WU1403672)

Advisor: Dr. Kannan Ambalam

(Associate Professor of Public Administration)

April, 2023

Nekemte, Ethiopia
 Municipal Solid Waste Management and challenges in Cities:

The case of cities and towns of Ethiopia.

Seminar I (PhDDS941)

By

Girma Kusa Jara (ID. No: WU1403672)

Submitted to: Dr. Kannan Ambalam

(Associate Professor of Public Administration)

A Seminar paper Submitted to the Department of Public Administration and

Development Management, College of Business and Economics, Wollega
University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Award of a PhD
Degree in Development Studies

April, 2023

Nekemte, Ethiopia
Acknowledgements

It is the grace, mercy, charity, forgiveness, help and kindness of the almighty God that made me
still alive, achieve this success and strength and to go through all the difficult time. While there
are several people who have helped me in one way or another to achieve the completion of this
seminar paper, it would have not been possible without the guidance, support and expertise of
my seminar paper advisor Dr. Kannan Ambalam (Associate Professor of Public
Administration at Wollega University). So, I would like to begin by thanking for his
constructive guiding and outstanding help with this seminar.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all the people who helped me to prepare this
seminar report. I would not be able to prepare this seminar paper without those people from
whom I got ideas, support and guidance.

I would like to acknowledge all the respondents who shared their experiences and provided
necessary support for my seminar paper.

Similarly, I would not forget to have due regards to different scholars and authors for review of
literature as mentioned in the reference section. Finally, I stretched my thanks to all who have
assisted me in my career to take this position.

i
Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................i

Table of Contents .................................................................................................... ii

List of Tables ........................................................................................................... iv

List of Figure..............................................................................................................v

Acronyms ................................................................................................................ vi

Abstract .................................................................................................................. vii

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1

2. Concepts, Definition, and Nature of Municipal Solid Waste.......................2

3. Characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste .....................................................3

3.1. Physical characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste ..........................................4

3.2. Chemical characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste ........................................4

4. Classification of Municipal Solid waste .........................................................4

4.1. Classification of solid waste based on their sources of original ......................4

4.2. Classification of solid waste based on their physical nature ............................5

5. Functional Elements of Municipal Solid Waste Management ....................6

5.1. Waste Generation .............................................................................................6

5.1.1. Waste Generation by Country Income Level..................................7

5.2. On site Handling, Storage and Processing .......................................................9

5.3. Collection..........................................................................................................9

5.4. Transfer and Transport ...................................................................................10

5.5. Processing & recovery ....................................................................................11

ii
5.6. Disposal ..........................................................................................................13

6. Current Status of Municipal Solid Waste Management in Ethiopia ........14

6.1. Current Waste Generation and in Emerging Cities of Ethiopia:- ..................14

6.2. Municipal Solid Waste Management Practices in Ethiopia ...........................15

6.3. Challenges of Municipal Solid Waste Management in Ethiopia ...................15

6.4. Drawbacks in Present Solid Waste Management Services ............................18

7. Conclusion.......................................................................................................19

References ................................................................................................................. i

iii
List of Tables
Table 1:Waste Generation by Country Income Level ...............................................7
Table 2:Waste Generation Per Capita by Region ......................................................8
Table 3:MSWG rates in some different towns and cities of Ethiopia .....................14

iv
List of Figure
Figure 1: Summary of municipal solid waste management challenges in
Ethiopia ...................................................................................................................17

v
Acronyms

EFEPA- Ethiopian Federal Environmental Protection Authority

ISWA- International Solid Waste Association

MSWM - Municipal Solid Waste Management

NGO - Nongovernmental Organization

OECD - Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

PADM- Public Administration and Development Management

SNNPR- South Nation Nationality Peoples Regions

SWM - Solid Waste Management

UN - United Nations

UNDP - United Nations Development Bank

UNEP - United Nations Environmental Programme

UNIDO - United Nations Industrial Development Organization

WB –World Bank

WHO - World Health Organization

vi
Abstract

This seminar paper was aimed to study the MSWM and challenges in cities and towns of
Ethiopia. Solid waste management is one among the basic essential services provided by
municipal authorities in the country to keep urban centers clean. In Ethiopia, huge waste
generation and unbalanced management have exacerbated the issue. With rapid urbanization,
the situation is becoming critical. A number of possibilities, including environmental, social, and
economic activities are disturbed by Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM). From the
review of different empirical researches related to the topics, the findings revealed that the
average rates of solid waste generated by households in cities & towns of Ethiopia are ranged
from 0.25 to 2.03 kg/capita/day. This seminar paper identified that the current Ethiopian MSWM
is mainly focused on the collection, transport, and disposal of solid waste; however, the
implementation of the functional elements is still weak. The systems applied are unscientific,
outdated and inefficient; population coverage is low; and the poor are marginalized; Lack of
policy enforcement, weak capacity, public awareness, and minimal cooperation among
stakeholders were the main challenges. MSWM challenges in Ethiopia have been seen as
increased in recent decades and are affecting daily life. Therefore, these findings need to be
increasing the awareness of the community on the strategies that support the reduction of solid
waste, such as waste separation at source, buying products that use less packaging, buying in
large quantities to reduce packaging, using reusable rather than disposable materials, using
their own shopping bags, such as those made of cloth and recyclable materials, minimizing and
composting food waste, and, if possible, feeding animals. Therefore, future research should
address the integrated sustainable solid waste management that aims to protect and enhance
public health, the environment, and material and energy recovery through the promotion of
environmental quality, sustainable consumption, and production to transform solid waste
management opportunities into a circular economy & practices in Ethiopia.

Keywords: municipal solid waste management; challenges; practices

vii
 1. INTRODUCTION

The inappropriate municipal solid waste management has a serious and hazardous impact on a
wide range of areas. Garbage thrown in the street or in open spaces creates a public health
hazard, while waste dumped near rivers, wetlands and streams contaminates the water supply.
Rubbish that is burned in the open rather than disposed properly creates pollution and releases
toxic fumes into the environment. Non- biodegradable materials thrown into open drains make
their way into the drainage system, clogging canals and damaging infrastructure. The hazards
posed by the dumping of untreated hospital and industrial waste are even greater, with the release
of pathogens and toxic compounds posing a severe threat not only to human life but also to
plants and animals.

Thus, Improper management of municipal solid waste may result to in consequences such as
pollution, low aesthetic values and economic losses, unpleasant odor, risk of explosion in landfill
areas, as well as groundwater contamination because of leachate percolation and all these
challenges result due to failures of the municipal solid waste management. All of these problems
are common in different towns and cities of Ethiopia, where vast quantities of solid waste remain
uncollected in the streets, along major roads, in empty plots of land, in governmental and non-
governmental institutions, downhill slopes and in illegal dumps.

In order to solve this problems, Ethiopia has a policy of environment that actively promotes the
diversion of waste away from landfill through prevention, reuse, recycling and recovery (FDRE,
1997) and solid waste management proclamation in order to ensure that all citizens live in a
clean and healthy environment(FDRE 2005 Solid Waste Management Proclamation- 9.Pdf, n.d.).
However, the response to this policy and proclamation has been slow, with all general and
hazardous waste generated from landfill. Waste generation in Ethiopia has been on a rising trend.
In contrary Key issues include poor collection services, immoral SWM activities, illegal
dumping, poor waste management and non-enforcement of existing waste regulations are main
constraints. Aware of these challenges; how much the national and municipal governments are
advocating for a trend towards waste minimization, reuse and recycling under the National
Waste Management Strategy? How much the awareness of the people bits the ground? How
many of the people have taken the responsibility to keep their surroundings clean? The problem

1
stated above raised these questions that in turn initiate the researcher to assess the challenges and
management of municipal solid waste generated in cities and towns of Ethiopia. Therefore, this
seminar paper was aimed to investigate the MSWM and challenges in cities and towns of
Ethiopia. In order to achieve the objectives of the study the researcher assessed factors that
challenges the municipals in managing solid waste management appropriately by adopting
methodology of reviewing available documents of reputable journals as well as theoretical and
empirical literature review related to the topics.

2. Concepts, Definition, and Nature of Municipal Solid Waste

According to the United Nations Environment Program, the Basel Convention on the Control of
Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal 1989 Art. 2(1), “Wastes”
are substances or objects which are disposed of or are intended to be disposed of or are required
to be disposed of by the provisions of national law (Voinov Kohler, 2017). Solid waste - can be
defined as “any garbage, refuse, sludge, and other discarded solid materials resulting from
industrial, commercial, agricultural operations, and community activities, but does not include
dissolved materials” (U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, 1995 cited in Samuel, 2006,p.5). In
short “it is anything that is neither liquid nor gas and is discarded as unwanted” (2005 Solid
Waste Management Proclamation- 9.Pdf, n.d.) (Federal Negarit Gazeta of Ethiopia, proclamation
number 513 of 2007). Municipal solid waste (MSW) is solid waste generated by households
and apartments, commercial establishments, industries, and institutions. The composition of
MSW is broad and contains both organic and inorganic components. Some portion of MSW may
be considered hazardous and poses potential threats to public health. Municipal solid waste
management (MSWM) is a multidisciplinary activity that includes administrative activities and
solid waste management practices such as the control of waste generation, storage, collection,
transfer and transport, processing, and disposal of solid waste (Hirpe & Yeom, 2021). It is
generally defined as the wastes generally in and usually collected by a municipality. As the
world hurtles toward its urban future, the amount of municipal solid waste (MSW), one of the
most important by-products of an urban lifestyle, is growing even faster than the rate of
urbanization (Hoornweg & Bhada-Tata, 2012).

2
The extreme growth of urbanization on one side brought modernization, economic growth, and
strong interrelation among world community. On the other hand, it possesses many challenges
that are difficult to manage locally and globally in that challenges municipal solid wastes are the
very common (Solomon, 2018). With increasing volumes and changing waste compositions,
MSW has become a global challenge with public health, environmental, social, and economic
costs. Developing countries face complex issues in MSW management (MSWM) ranging from
policy and governance to capacity and cost recovery, attracting private sector expertise and
investment, and integrating informal actors in the sector (World Bank Group, 2020).

Improper management of municipal solid waste has been reported by several researchers in
different cities of the developing countries like in Nigeria (Orhorhoro & Oghoghorie, 2019), in
South Africa (Nyika et al., 2019), in India (Nandan et al., 2017) in Bangladesh (Ahsan et al.,
2014) and in Turkey (Berkun et al. 2005). Poor management of municipal solid waste may result
to in consequences such as pollution, low aesthetic values and economic losses due to failures in
recycling and composting valuable components of the municipal solid waste. According to Mor
et al. (2006) improper management of municipal solid waste may result in serious urban, sanitary
and environmental problems such as unpleasant odor, risk of explosion in landfill areas, as well
as groundwater contamination because of leachate percolation.

3. Characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste

For effective and efficient management of solid waste generated in a particular city, adequate
knowledge and data about the characteristics of solid waste is essential. In order to decide or
determine types of facilities required for solid waste management, best disposal options, and
projecting future needs requires precise information about quantities, compositions, densities,
moisture content and calorific value of solid waste produced in a city (Rushbrook, 1999 in
G/tsadkan,2002). These characteristics of Municipal Solid Wastes are broadly categorized
into two: Physical characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste & Chemical characteristics of
Municipal Solid Waste.

3
 3.1.Physical characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste

Information and data on the physical characteristics of solid wastes such as density of waste,
Size of Waste constituents, field capacity of municipal solid waste, Permeability of
compacted wastes, and Compressibility which is the degree of physical changes of the
suspended solids or filter cake when subjected to pressure -are important for the selection and
operation of equipment and for the analysis and design of disposal facilities (Tuprakay et al.,
2014).

3.2.Chemical characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste

Knowledge of the classification of chemical compounds and their characteristics is essential

for the proper understanding of the behavior of waste, as it moves through the waste
management system. According to Tuprakay et al., (2014), USDA and USCC, (2002])
chemical characteristics of solid wastes are described as it includes moisture content,
Calorific value, volatile solid, ash content, CHNSO contents and pH, Nitrogen, Phosphorus
and Potassium (N-P-K), total Carbon, C/N ratio, while Bio-Chemical characteristics include
Lipids, carbohydrates, proteins, natural fiber, and biodegradable factor. And Toxicity of
Municipal Solid Waste characteristics that include heavy metals, pesticides, insecticides,
Toxicity test for Leachates (TCLP), etc. are also categorized under the chemical properties.

4. Classification of Municipal Solid waste

In order to categorize what exactly municipal solid waste constitutes, there have been
different attempts of categorization based on numerous classification criteria. Some of those
criteria are source from which solid waste emanates, and nature of solid waste components
(Edelman, 1997 cited in G/Tsadkan, 2002).

4.1.Classification of solid waste based on their sources of original

Domestic solid wastes: generated from household activities such as food preparation,
cleaning, fuel burning, old cloths, furniture, obsoleteness wastes and equipment, packaging,

4
newsprint, and garden wastes. In developing countries, food waste and ashes dominate
households‟ solid waste.

Commercial wastes: waste from shops, offices, hotels, restaurants, etc and typically
consisting packaging materials, office supplies and food wastes. In low income countries
food markets contribute the largest proportion of commercial waste.

Institutional wastes: waste from schools, hospitals, clinics, government offices, military
bases etc, and comprise hospital and clinical wastes including potentially infectious and
hazardous materials.

Industrial wastes: composition of industrial waste depends on the kind of industries

involved. It consist food waste from kitchens, and canteens, packaging materials, plastics,
papers and metal items.

Street sweepings: dust, soil, paper, etc. In developing countries street sweeping also include
fruit and vegetable residues, household wastes dumped along roads, drain cleanings, animal
manure and plant remains.

Construction and demolition wastes: its composition depends on type of construction

materials used, but it typically includes soil, brick, stone, concrete, ceramic materials,
wood, packaging materials and the like.

Agricultural Waste: agricultural waste otherwise called agro-waste is comprised of animal

waste (manure, animal carcasses), food processing waste (only 20% of maize is canned and
80% is waste), crop waste (corn stalks, sugarcane bagasse, drops and culls from fruits and
vegetables, pruning‟s) and hazardous and toxic agricultural waste.

4.2.Classification of solid waste based on their physical nature

Garbage is a waste type consisting of everyday items that are discarded by the public.
"Garbage" can also refer specifically to food waste, as in a garbage disposal.

5
 Ashes solid waste is the by-product produced from the combustion of municipal solid
waste. Incineration is the commonly used practice for managing the increasing production of
municipal solid waste (MSW).

“Combustible waste” means the organic content of solid waste, including paper,
cardboard, cartons, wood, boxes, excelsior, plastic, textiles, bedding, leather, rubber, paints,
yard trimmings, leaves, and household waste, all of which will burn.

“Noncombustible waste” means inorganic content of solid waste, including glass,

metal, tin cans, foils, dirt, gravel, brick, ceramics, crockery and ashes.

Putrescible wastes are those decompose easily and generated by growing, handling,
preparation, cooking and consumption of food. These kinds of wastes tend to be more
abundant during the summer (rainy) seasons.

Non-putrescible wastes do not decompose easily; they may or may not be combustible.
Because they do not break down, they persist in the environment and are often the cause of
nuisance and aesthetic problems.

5. Functional Elements of Municipal Solid Waste Management

There are six functional elements in the activities associated with the management of solid
wastes from the point of generation to final disposal site. These are: Waste generation, On-site
handling (sorting, storage and processing), Collection, Transfer and transport, Processing &
recovery, and Disposal.

5.1.Waste Generation

Waste generation is calculated as the total amount of waste from different sources at a specific
time and place. Waste generation is closely linked to the level of economic activity in a
country and reflects society's production and consumption patterns. Municipal solid waste
generation per capita is simply calculated as the amount of MSW generated divided by the
population with MSW collection(Kawai & Tasaki, 2016). Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) is
6
usually expressed in terms of kilograms per capita per day. The unit of measure is easily
applicable for household waste where the per capita value can be directly multiplied by the
population to obtain the total amount.

5.1.1. Waste Generation by Country Income Level

Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) generation is unavoidable phenomena in any Economic levels
and population size. However, the amount of solid waste generated may be directly affected
by the wealth of society. The average per capita waste generation amounts for the various
income groups reflect the income level of the countries (World Bank Group, 2020). High-
income countries produce the most waste per capita; while low income countries produce the
least solid waste per capita (Hirpe & Yeom, 2021). The high, upper-middle, lower-middle,
and low income designations are somewhat inaccurate as these classifications are country-
wide, and in several countries average national affluence can be very different from average
affluence of the urban populations.

Table 1:Waste Generation by Country Income Level

Country Income Level Waste generation per capita(kg / capita/day)

Lower Upper Average
boundary Boundary
High Income Level 0.70 14 2.1
Upper middle Income Level 0.11 5.5 1.2
Lower middle Income Level 0.16 5.3 0.79
Lower Income Level 0.09 4.3 0.60
Source :(Orhorhoro & Oghoghorie, 2019)

Table 1 shows current waste generation per capita by income level, indicating the lower
boundary and upper boundary for each region, as well as average kg per capita per day of
waste generated within each group according to country income level.

5.1.2. Waste Generation by Region

The World Bank has presented current and future forecasts for various regions of the world. This
is a global waste generation trend by speculation from 2016–2050, which will double in 2050
(Kumar & Agrawal, 2020). According to Waste Generation Projections 2025 regionally, it is

7
estimated that in developing countries, the per capita waste per day is estimated at 0.65 kg
compared with 2.2 kg in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
(Orhorhoro & Oghoghorie) countries. , 2019). Compared with the global average waste
production of 0.74 kg cap − 1 day − 1, the daily waste production rate of sub-Saharan Africa
(SSA) countries is the lowest in the world by 0.46 kg cap − 1 day − 1. Countries (OECD)
produce 572 million tons of solid waste annually. The per capita values range from 1.1 to 3.7 kg
per person per day at an average of 2.2 kg / capita / day. In the South Asian region (SAR),
approximately 70 million tons of waste are generated annually, with per capita values ranging
from 0.12 to 5.1 kg per person per day and an average of 0.45 kg / capita / da (Hoornweg et al.,
2013 as quoted in (Orhorhoro & Oghoghorie, 2019). The annual waste production in the East
Asia and Pacific (EAP) Region is approximately 270 million tons per year, with per capita values
ranging from 0.44 to 4.3 kg per person per day and an average of 0.95 kg / capita / day. In East
and Central Asia (ECA), the average annual waste production is at least 93 million tons. The per
capita waste generation ranges from 0.29 to 2.1 kg/ person/day, with an average of 1.1
kg/capita/day. In Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) the amount of waste produced
annually in the region is 160 million tons, with values per capita ranging from 0.11 to 5.5 kg /
capita / day, and an average of 1.1 kg / capita / per day. . In the Middle East and North Africa
(MENA), solid waste production is 63 million tons per year. Individual waste production is 0.16
to 5.7 kg / person / day, and averages 1.1 kg / capita / day (Hoornweg et al., 2013 as reported in
Orhorhoro & Oghoghorie, 2019).

Table 2:Waste Generation Per Capita by Region

Region Annual waste Waste Generation per Capita(kg/capita/day)

generation Lower Upper Boundary Average
(tones in Boundary
million)
Sub-Saharan Africa 62 0.09 3.0 0.65
East Asia and the Pacific 270 0.44 4.3 0.95
Eastern and Central Asia 93 0.29 2.1 1.1
Latin America and the Caribbean 160 0.11 5.5 1.1
Middle East and North Africa 63 0.16 5.7 1.1
OECD 572 1.10 3.7 2.2
South Asia Region 70 0.12 5.1 0.45
Source: (Hoornweg et al., 2013 as cited in (Orhorhoro & Oghoghorie, 2019)

8
Table 2 shows current waste generation per capita by region, indicating the lower boundary and
upper boundary for each region, as well as average kg per capita per day with annual of waste
generated within each region.

5.2.On site Handling, Storage and Processing

Onsite solid waste handling is defined as the separation, storing, collection, reusing or
recycling, processing and preparing for final disposal of solid waste materials to reduce their
effect on health, environment and aesthetics(Bantigegn et al., 2020). This functional element
constitutes activities associated with handling, storage, and processing of solid wastes at
point of generation. Waste handling involves activities associated with management of
wastes until they are placed in storage containers for collection. It also encompasses
movement of loaded containers to point of collection. Storage refers stock up of wastes as
soon as they are generated. There are two types of storage activities at source. The first one
is temporary storage done at household level as a part of their hygiene. The second type is
communal solid waste storage system on public solid waste containers prepared by
municipality. While processing at source involves activities such as waste composting and
separation of solid wastes for reuse and recycling.

5.3.Collection

Collection involves the process of picking up of wastes from collection points, loading them in to
a vehicle, and transporting it to processing facilities, transfer stations or disposal site. In most
municipal solid waste management systems, cost of collection accounts a significant portion of
total cost. For instance, “in industrialized countries collection accounts about 60-70% of total
cost and 70- 90% in developing and transition countries” (UNEP, 1996). Collection is
structurally similar in developing, transition, and industrialized countries, but there are important
technical and institutional differences in implementation. In most cases, industrialized countries
have more efficiency and effectiveness than developing ones in terms of their approach of
collection, role of municipal governments, private sector participation, and demographic and
social factors relevant to collection. In developing countries, collection often involves a face to
face transaction between generator and collector. The level of service is low, and generators

9
often have to bring their wastes long distances and place it in containers. As a result many
collection activities in developing countries carried out by informal sectors (UNEP, 1996).

According to the Global Review of Solid Waste Management of World Bank (Ram & Kumar,
2021), there are four basic methods of solid waste collection described as follows:

i. Community bin they are placed in convenient locations where community members
carry waste and throw it in. This method is comparatively cheaper than other methods,
and most widely adopted method in western countries. For this method to be adopted
it is important that bins are covered, aesthetic, attended regularly, kept clean, easy to
handle, and separate bins are provided.

ii. Curbside collection homeowner is responsible for placing containers to be

emptied at the curb on collection day and for returning empty containers to their
storage location until the next collection.

iii. Block collection:- collection vehicles arrive at a particular place or a set day and
time to collect waste from households. Households bring their waste containers and
empty directly into the vehicle. This method requires a higher homeowner cooperation
and scheduled service for homeowner collaboration.

iv. Door to door collection waste is placed at doorstep at a set time when waste
collector arrives. In this method, collector of waste has the responsibility to collect
waste separately. This method is very convenient for households, however requires
homeowner cooperation.

5.4.Transfer and Transport

These activities are associated with transfer of wastes from public storage facilities to collection
vehicle and the subsequent transport of wastes to disposal site. Transfer refers to movement of
waste or materials from primary collection vehicle to a secondary, larger and more efficient
transport vehicle. When location of final disposal site is at a long distance from points of
collection, transfer stations may be used. With respect to transfer stations, “there are two basic
modes of operation: direct discharge and storage discharge. In storage discharge refuse is first
10
emptied from collection trucks in to a storage pit or to a large platform. While in direct discharge
station, each refuse truck empties directly in to larger transport vehicles” (Meenakshi, 2005).

5.5.Processing & recovery

The main technological options available for processing/treatment and recovery of MSW are
composting, vermicomposting, anaerobic digestion bio-methanation, incineration, gasification
and pyrolysis, plasma pyrolysis, production of Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF), also known as
pelletization and sanitary landfilling/landfill gas recovery. Not all technologies are equally good.
Each one of them has advantages and limitations.

Composting is the decomposition of organic matter by microorganism in warm, moist,

aerobic and anaerobic environment. Farmers have been using compost made out of cow dung
and other agro-waste. The compost made out of urban heterogeneous waste is found to be of
higher nutrient value as compared to the compost made out of cow dung and agro-waste.
Composting of MSW is, therefore, the most simple and cost effective technology for treating the
organic fraction of MSW. Its application to farm land, tea gardens, fruit orchards or its use as soil
conditioner in parks, gardens, agricultural lands, etc., is however, limited on account of poor
marketing.

It is simple and straightforward to adopt, for source separated MSW. It does not require large
capital investment, compared to other waste treatment options. This method, however, is not
very suitable for wastes that may be too wet and during heavy rains open compost plants have to
be stopped. Land required for open compost plants is relatively large.

Vermicomposting: - Vermicomposting is the natural organic manure produced from the

excreta of earthworms fed on scientifically semi-decomposed organic waste. Normally,
vermicomposting is preferred to microbial composting in small towns as it requires less
mechanization and it is easy to operate. It is, however, to be ensured that toxic material does not
enter the chain which if present could kill the earthworms.

Anaerobic Digestion and Biomethanation: - Biomethanation is a comparatively well-

established technology for disinfections, deodorization and stabilization of sewage sludge,
farmyard manures, animal slurries, and industrial sludge. Its application to the organic fraction of
11
MSW is more recent and less extensive. It leads to bio-gas/power generation in addition to
production of compost (residual sludge).

This method provides a value addition to the aerobic (composting) process and also offers certain
other clear advantages over composting in terms of energy. This method is suitable for kitchen
wastes and, other putrescible wastes, which may be too wet and lacking in structure for aerobic
composting. It is a net energy-producing process (100–150 kWh per ton of waste input). A
totally enclosed system enables all the gas produced to be collected for use.

Incineration :- This method, commonly used in developed countries is most suitable for high
calorific value waste with a large component of paper, plastic, packaging material, pathological
wastes, etc. It can reduce waste volumes by over 90 per cent and convert waste to harmless
material, with energy recovery. The method is relatively hygienic, noiseless, and odorless, and
land requirements are minimal. The plant can be located within city limits, reducing the cost of
waste transportation.

This method, however, is least suitable for disposal of chlorinated waste and aqueous/high
moisture content/low calorific value waste as supplementary fuel may be needed to sustain
combustion, adversely affecting net energy recovery. The plant requires large capital and entails
substantial operation and maintenance costs. Skilled personnel are required for plant operation
and maintenance. Emission of particulates, SOx , NOx, chlorinated compounds in air and toxic
metals in particulates concentrated in the ash have raised concerns.

Pelletization: - Pelletization of municipal solid waste involves the processes of segregating,

crushing, mixing high and low heat value combustible waste material and solidifying it to
produce fuel pellets or briquettes, also referred to as Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF). Refuse-
derived fuel (RDF) is a fuel produced from various types of waste such as municipal solid waste
(MSW), industrial waste or commercial waste. The RDF pellets can be conveniently stored and
transported long distances and can be used as a coal substitute at a lower price. The process,
however, is energy intensive and not suitable for wet MSW during rainy season. If RDF
fluff/pellets are contaminated by toxic/hazardous material, the pellets are not safe for burning in
the open or for domestic use.(Rezaei et al., 2020)

12
Sanitary Landfills and Landfill Gas Recovery: - Sanitary landfills are the ultimate
means of disposal of all types of residual, residential, commercial and institutional waste as well
as unutilized municipal solid waste from waste processing facilities and other types of inorganic
waste and inert that cannot be reused or recycled in the foreseeable future(African Development
Bank, 2011).

Its main advantage is that it is the least cost option for waste disposal and has the potential for
the recovery of landfill gas as a source of energy, with net environmental gains if organic wastes
are landfilled. The gas after necessary cleaning can be utilized for power generation or as
domestic fuel for direct thermal applications. Highly skilled limitation of this method is the
costly transportation of MSW to far away landfill sites. Down gradient surface water can be
polluted by surface run-off in the absence of proper drainage systems and groundwater aquifers
may get contaminated by polluted leachates in the absence of a proper leachate collection and
treatment system.

5.6.Disposal

This is final functional element in solid waste management system. Disposal activities are
associated with final dump of solid wastes directly to a landfill site. Today disposal of
wastes by land filling or land spreading is the ultimate fate of all solid wastes whether they
are residential wastes, or residual materials from materials recovery facilities. “However, in
most developed countries this method is officially banned allowing only sanitary landfill for
final disposal. Because sanitary landfill is not a dump it is an engineered facility used for
disposing of solid wastes on land without creating nuisances or hazards to public health and
environment” (Techobanglous, 2002). “Though it is the most common technology around
the world, conventional and environmental unfriendly methods such as open burning, open
dumping, and non-sanitary landfill can still be used as disposal method” (UNEP,2009).

13
 6. Current Status of Municipal Solid Waste Management in Ethiopia

6.1.Current Waste Generation and in Emerging Cities of Ethiopia:-

Municipal solid waste management in Ethiopia is different from place to place. Waste
management in Addis Ababa city is fundamentally di/fferent from other emerging cities of
Ethiopia. There has been no form of waste management in emerging cities until very recently.
By contrast, the World Bank (World Bank Group, 2020) estimated the municipal solid waste
generation rate in Ethiopia to be 6 million tons/year in 2015 and is predicted to rise to 10
million tons/year by 2030 and 18 million tons/year by 2050. A previous study (Hoornweg &
Bhada-Tata, 2012) projected a total municipal solid waste generation rate in Ethiopia by 2025
at about 0.65 kg/capita/day (19,690 tons/day, or about 7.18 million tons/year). Moreover,
studies conducted in Ethiopian towns and cities showed that the average rate of solid waste
generated by households ranged from 0.23 to 2.03 kg/capita/day (Hirpe & Yeom, 2021). A
study conducted in 15 towns/cities of the following five regional states of Ethiopia such as
Amhara, Oromia, Tigray, Somali and South Nations and Nationalities people of Ethiopia
regions and Addis Ababa city administration indicated that the overall solid waste generation
rate was ranged 0.17 kg/capita/day to 2.03 kg/capita/day. Table 2 shows the details of
municipal solid waste generation (MSWG) rates in different towns and cities in Ethiopia.

Table 3:MSWG rates in some different towns and cities of Ethiopia

Region/ City Town/City MSWG Source
administration (kg/Capit
a/Day)

A/A City Addis Ababa 0.45 (Mohammed et al., 2017)

Administration
Oromia Burayu 0.288 (Ferede, 2018)
Chiro 0.30 (Umer et al., 2019)
Jimma 0.34 (Fetene et al., 2018)
Laga Tafo 0.43 (Assefa, 2017)
Bishoftu 0.48 (MmoNigatua, 2020)
Robe 0.26 (Erasu et al., 2018)
Amhara Dassie 0.45 (Cheru, 2011)
Bahir Dar 0.45 (Tassie Wegedie, 2018)
Debre Birhan 0.25 (Abera Kebede, 2017)
Tigray Mekelle 0.268 (Marsie. et al., 2017)

14
 SNNP Hawassa 0.43 (Molla et al., 2015)
Dilla 0.48 (Fereja & Chemeda, 2022)
Wolaita Sodo 0.47 (Goa & Sota, 2017)
Hosa‟ina 2.03 (Abiot et al., 2012)

Somali Region Jigjiga 0.49 (Dimtse, 2016)

6.2.Municipal Solid Waste Management Practices in Ethiopia

Over the last few decades, several studies have been conducted on MSWM in Ethiopian
towns and cities. Since 2001, most municipalities in Ethiopia have become aware of the
negative consequences of poor solid waste management that affects the environment, human
health, and municipal services (Hirpe & Yeom, 2021). This has led to MSWM practices in
many Ethiopian towns and cities. However, some studies have shown that MSWM practices
vary among all urban centers in Ethiopia(Wandira Ayu Bertin, 2017) depending on the
awareness of the municipalities and their capacity for solid waste management Current
Ethiopian MSWM is mainly focused on the collection, transport, and disposal of solid
waste; the implementation of the functional elements is, however, still weak(Ram & Kumar,
2021). Similarly, a study conducted in Bangladesh (Ahsan et al., 2014) Mozambique
(Solomon, 2018), and Nigeria (Orhorhoro & Oghoghorie, 2019) indicated that, similar to
most developing countries, waste is collected from generation sources and transferred to
ultimate disposal sites. This indicates that sustainable solid waste management strategies,
such as prevention, reduction, reuse, recycling, and final disposal in many Ethiopian towns
and cities, require attention from the government because the solid waste handling,
recycling, and performance of disposal systems remain very poor in Ethiopia [(Hirpe &
Yeom, 2021). In short, the implementation of the basic functional elements of a solid waste
management system in Ethiopia is weak (Hirpe & Yeom, 2021). Hence, the whole MSWM
system in Ethiopia should be improved and replaced by sustainable MSWM; however, open
burning and dumping, waste collection, and final disposal require critical attention from the
government.

6.3.Challenges of Municipal Solid Waste Management in Ethiopia

Municipal solid waste management in Ethiopia is a major environmental problem affecting the
daily lives of people, particularly in urban areas. This seminar paper reviewed the existing

15
literature on MSWM in Ethiopia and it identified the main challenges of urban areas. Solid waste
management is a cross-cutting issue that impacts many social and environmental aspects
(including the economy) of the country(“Glob. Waste Manag. Outlook,” 2016). It has a strong
relationship with global challenges such as environmental pollution, climate change, public
health, and sustainable production and consumption. According to the study by Guerrero et
al.(Guerrero et al., 2013), increasing waste generation, budget issues, lack of cross-sectorial
linkages, and waste handling systems were the challenges faced in MSWM in several developing
countries. Similarly, the EFEPA State and Outlook of the Environment (2017) revealed that the
main challenges of MSWM in Ethiopia stem from unplanned historical patterns in several towns
and cities, little public awareness of solid waste management, inappropriate waste disposal
methods affecting the environment and human health, limited access to waste collection services,
limited awareness about and application of formal waste recycling, and limited public and
private investment in solid waste management. Additionally, the lack of effective enforcement of
policies and legislation, fewer financial resources, inadequate infrastructure, a lack of skilled
workers, and few managerial commitments are the other major challenges faced by MSWM in
Ethiopian towns and cities (Wandira Ayu Bertin, 2017). Moreover, at the community level, the
country lacks proper awareness and education regarding waste prevention, reduction, reuse, and
recycling, and there is little information on composting and energy recovery from solid waste
(Edwards, 2010).

However, despite some legal frameworks in place, several cities in Ethiopia continue to face
municipal solid waste management challenges. These challenges may range from generating a
large amount of waste to an inappropriate waste disposal system. According to a recent study
conducted by Gelan (2021) in Addis Ababa, the challenges include a lesser emphasis on MSWM
by the government, the scarcity of land to perform different activities concerning solid waste
management, particularly for temporary storage and disposal sites, financial scarcity, the lack of
solid waste collection and transportation infrastructure, and the lack of skilled human resources.
In addition, (Hirpe & Yeom, 2021) stated that the MSWM systems in Ethiopia are irregular in
collection and transportation, inadequate at waste prevention and collection coverage, inefficient
from technical aspects, weak at the enforcement level of solid waste management policy and
legal frameworks, and sometimes the presence of political interference in solid waste
management. Additionally, other challenges in solid waste management for Ethiopian urban
16
areas include weak cooperation among stakeholders (particularly government and private
companies), a lack of regular monitoring and evaluation, a lack of effective planning and
implementation, and weak public participation (Regassa et al., 2011). Figure 1 shows that the
details of municipal solid waste management challenges in Ethiopia, particularly challenges
regarding policy/legal frameworks, institutional, technical, financial, social, and political aspects.

Source: (Gelan et al., 2021 as cited in Hirpe & Yeom, 2021)

Figure 1: Summary of municipal solid waste management challenges in Ethiopia

The very serious problems municipal solid waste management stated by Solomon (2018) include
lack of regular frequency of waste collection and transport service, lack of financial resources
and equipment, poor socio-economic status of the residents, lack of plan (short, medium and
long term plan), poor community participation and cooperation, poor cooperation among
government offices, socio- cultural and religious effects, rapid urbanization and information gaps
and low level public awareness. These problems, among others, are expected to hold back the
effective performance of SW management services in cities and towns of Ethiopia.

17
 6.4.Drawbacks in Present Solid Waste Management Services

1. No Storage of Waste at Source: - There is no practice of storing the waste at source in a

scientifically segregated way. Citizens have not been educated to keep domestic, trade, and
institutional bins for storage of waste at source and stop littering on the streets.
2. No System of Primary Collection from the Doorstep: - There is no public system of
primary collection from the source of waste generation. The waste discharged here and there
is later collected by municipal sanitation workers through street sweeping, drain cleaning,
etc. Street sweeping has, thus become the principal method of primary collection.
3. Irregular Street Sweeping: - Even street sweeping is not carried out on a day-to-day basis
in most cities and towns in Ethiopia. Generally commercial roads and important streets are
prioritized and rest of the streets are swept occasionally or not swept at all. Generally, no
sweeping is done on Sundays and public holidays and a back log are created on the next
working day. The tools used for street sweeping are generally inefficient and out - dated. For
instance, the broom with a short handle is still in use forcing sweepers to bend for hours
resulting in fatigue and loss of productivity. Traditional handcarts/tricycles are used for
collection, which do not synchronize with the secondary storage systems. Waste is deposited
on the ground necessitating multiple handling. There are no uniform yardsticks adopted for
street sweeping. Though, some states/cities have prescribed work-norms, these are not very
scientific. Most of the cities allocate work to sanitation workers on ad hoc basis. The work
distribution ranges between 200 metres to 1000 metres of street sweeping each day. Some
sanitation workers are found under worked while some overburdened.
4. Waste Storage Depots: - As waste is collected through traditional handcarts/tricycles that
can carry only a small quantity of waste at a time, there is a practice to set up depots for
temporary storage of waste to facilitate transportation through motorized vehicles. Generally,
open sites or round cement concrete bins, masonry bins or concrete structures are used for
temporary bulk storage, which necessitates multiple handling of waste. Waste often spills
over which are both unsightly as well as unhygienic.
5. Transportation of Waste: - Transportation of waste from the waste storage depots to the
disposal site is done through a variety of vehicles such as bullock carts, three-wheelers,
tractors, and trucks. A few cities use modern hydraulic vehicles as well. Most of the transport
vehicles are old and open. They are usually loaded manually. The traditional transportation
18
 system does not synchronize with the system of primary collection and secondary waste
storage facilities and multiple manual handling of waste results.
6. Processing of Waste: - Generally no processing of municipal solid waste is done in the
country. Only a few cities have been practicing decentralized or centralized composting on a
limited scale using aerobic or anaerobic systems of composting. In some towns un-
segregated waste is put into the pits and allowed to decay for more than six months and the
semi-decomposed material is sold out as compost.
7. Disposal of Waste: - Disposal of waste is the most neglected area of SWM services and the
current practices are grossly unscientific. Almost all municipal authorities deposit solid waste
at a dump-yard situated within or outside the city haphazardly and do not bother to spread
and cover the waste with inert material. These sites emanate foul smell and become breeding
grounds for flies, rodent, and pests. Liquid seeping through the rotting organic waste called
leachate pollutes underground water and poses a serious threat to health and environment.
Landfill sites also release landfill gas with 50 to 60 per cent methane by volume. Methane is
21 times more potent than carbon dioxide aggravating problems related to global warming.

7. Conclusion

In this seminar paper, an overview of the municipal solid waste management and challenges
in Ethiopia were presented depending on critical reviewing of empirical research and
reputable journals related to the topic. Then, based on the findings of this literature review,
the following conclusions were drawn. Now a time, waste is a global issue and needs some
sustainable technical regulations. If not properly dealt with, waste poses a threat to public
health and the environment. Thus, waste management is one of the essential utility services
underpinning society in the 21st century, particularly in urban areas. It is a basic human need
and can also be regarded as a „basic human right‟. It concerns everyone. Despite this, the
public and political profile of waste management is often lower than other utility services. In
the absence of waste regulations and their rigorous implementation and enforcement, a
generator of waste will tend to opt for the cheapest available course of action. For example,
household solid waste may be dumped in the street, on vacant land, or into drains, streams or
other watercourses, or it may be burned to lessen the nuisance of accumulated piles of waste.
Even though Ethiopia has adopted environmental policy, municipal solid waste management

19
proclamations, and other related regulations, its implementation and enforcement are not
well practiced in the country. The implementation of MSWM policies and legislations in
Ethiopia requires integrated enforcement to achieve sustainable solid waste management.
Specific technical guideline frameworks (separation at the source, waste prevention,
reduction, reuse, and recycling; converting waste to energy) were not available to bring
sustainable MSWM at all levels of government. Even in recent times, the volume of waste
generation in many Ethiopian cities has seen an increase due to the migration from rural to
urban areas and industrialization (Workineh Mengesha F. & Dereje D. Chemeda 2022).

The increase in solid waste volume and an unbalanced waste management system have led
to degradation in environmental quality and an increased harmful to public health. However,
solid waste collection in many capital cities was found to be more efficient, whereas solid
waste management in many small towns was inefficient and sometimes non-existent.
Moreover, sustainable solid waste management practices, such as the prevention and
reduction of waste generation, reuse, recycling, composting, and energy recovery from
waste were found to be inefficient because MSWM in Ethiopia is mainly focused on the
collection, transport, and disposal. Additionally, open burning and dumping are the most
commonly practiced solid waste disposal systems in many towns and cities in Ethiopia.

In short, the implementation of MSWM practices in Ethiopia presents numerous challenges

encountered include: illegal dumping, poor condition of waste workers, lack of private
sector and community involvement, lack of legal framework enforcement, financial
constraints, a lack of skilled human resources, infrastructure constraints, and the low public
awareness of solid waste management (Teshome et.al., 2022). Additionally, minimal
cooperation among MSWM stakeholders, weak planning and implementation of solid waste
management, especially the low priority given for solid waste management in many cities of
Ethiopia have contributed to the issue.

Hence, institutional capacity building and effective enforcement of legal frameworks are
crucial in improving the MSWM system in Ethiopia. Additionally, it is suggested that some
technical regulations, such as the volume–based waste fee system and waste charge on the
producers of hard-to-recycle products to reduce solid waste generation are important.

20
Moreover, it is essential to sort the solid waste at the households‟ and community bin level
into food waste, plastics, paper and cardboard, glass and metals, and non-recyclable waste
categories, which helps to reduce the amount of solid waste and to encourage reusing,
recycling, and composting strategies.

Furthermore, increasing the awareness of the community on the strategies that support the
reduction of solid waste, such as waste separation at source, buying products that use less
packaging, buying in large quantities to reduce packaging, using reusable rather than
disposable materials, using their own shopping bags, such as those made of cloth and
recyclable materials, minimizing and composting food waste, and, if possible, feeding
animals. Therefore, future research should address the integrated sustainable solid waste
management that aims to protect and enhance public health, the environment, and material
and energy recovery through the promotion of environmental quality, sustainable
consumption, and production to transform solid waste management opportunities into a
circular economy practice in Ethiopia.

21
References

Abera Kebede, A. (2017). Household Solid Waste Generation Rate and Onsite Handling Practices in
Debre Berhan Town, Ethiopia. Science Journal of Public Health, 5(1), 31.
https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjph.20170501.14
Abiot Abera Aydamo, Akhila S. Nair & Zuberi, M. . (2012). Household solid waste generation rate and
physical composition analysis: Case of Hosa’ina city, SNNPRS, Ethiopia Abiot Abera Aydamo,
Akhila S. Nair & Zuberi, M.I. 2(1), 22–28.
Ahsan, A., Alamgir, M., El-Sergany, M. M., Shams, S., Rowshon, M. K., & Daud, N. N. N. (2014).
Assessment of Municipal Solid Waste Management System in a Developing Country. Chinese
Journal of Engineering, 2014, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/561935
Assefa, M. (2017). Solid Waste Generation Rate and Characterization Study for Laga Tafo Laga Dadi
Town, Oromia, Ethiopia. International Journal of Environmental Protection and Policy, 5(6), 84.
https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijepp.20170506.11
Bank, A. development. (2011). Ethiopia Solid Waste & Landfill. 1(5), 8.
Bantigegn, M., Motbainor, A., & Mekonnon, T. (2020). Onsite Proper Solid Waste Handling Practices
and Associated Factors Among Condominium Residents in Debre-Markos Town , East Gojjam
Zone , North West Ethiopia : A Community Based Cross-Sectional Study. United International
Journal for Research & Technology (UIJRT), 01(06), 1–11.
https://www.academia.edu/download/61994587/UIJRTV1I6000120200204-27890-13j87ru.pdf
Dimtse, D. (2016). Solid waste management in Jijiga, Somali Region : baseline survey factsheet. RC /
HoAREC Consortium, 010, 6.
Edwards, S. (2010). Ethiopian Environment Review. Forum for Environment, Addis Ababa, 1, 1–232.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:Ethiopian+Environment+Review
#3
Erasu, D., Feye, T., Kiros, A., & Balew, A. (2018). Municipal solid waste generation and disposal in
Robe town, Ethiopia. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association, 68(12), 1391–1397.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2018.1467351
Ferede, Z. M. (2018). Assessment of Domestic Solid Waste Management in Burayu City Zerihun Mekuria
Ferede Master of Science Addis Ababa Science and Technology. June.
Fereja, W. M., & Chemeda, D. D. (2022). Status, characterization, and quantification of municipal solid
waste as a measure towards effective solid waste management: The case of Dilla Town, Southern
Ethiopia. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 72(2), 187–201.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2021.1923585
Fetene, Y., Addis, T., Beyene, A., & Kloos, H. (2018). Valorisation of solid waste as key opportunity for
green city development in the growing urban areas of the developing world. Journal of
Environmental Chemical Engineering, 6(6), 7144–7151.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2018.11.023
Gelan, E. (2021). Municipal Solid Waste Management Practices for Achieving Green Architecture
Concepts in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Technologies, 9(3), 48.
https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies9030048
Global Waste Management Outlook. (2016). In Global Waste Management Outlook.
https://doi.org/10.18356/765baec0-en
Goa, E., & Sota, S. S. (2017). Generation rate and physical composition of solid waste in Wolaita Sodo

i
 Town, southern Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management, 10(3), 415.
https://doi.org/10.4314/ejesm.v10i3.11
Guerrero, L. A., Maas, G., & Hogland, W. (2013). Solid waste management challenges for cities in
developing countries. Waste Management, 33(1), 220–232.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.09.008
Hirpe, L., & Yeom, C. (2021). Municipal solid waste management policies, practices, and challenges in
ethiopia: A systematic review. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(20).
https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011241
Hoornweg, D., & Bhada-Tata, P. (2012). What_Waste_Global_Review_2012. World Bank, Washinton
DC.
Kawai, K., & Tasaki, T. (2016). Revisiting estimates of municipal solid waste generation per capita and
their reliability. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 18(1), 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-015-0355-1
Marsie., G., Hayelom., A., & Birega, G. (2017). Existing and Future Msw Generation Nexus Population
and Gdp Growth, the Case of Mekele City, Ethiopia. International Journal of Advanced Research,
5(1), 1012–1020. https://doi.org/10.21474/ijar01/2845
MmoNigatua. (2020). Household Solid Waste Disposal and its Management Practice in Bishoftu Town in
the case of Bishoftu town , Oromiya Regional state , Ethiopia in By NigatuaMamo Advisor :
FikaduGurmessa ( Phd ). October.
Mohammed, A., Elias, E., Science, E., & Ababa, A. (2017). solid waste management environmental
impacts in Addis Ababa city. Research Article, 4(1), 194–203.
Molla, A., Bekele, D., & Abegaz, T. (2015). Municipal Solid Waste Characterization and Generation
Rate Determination with Future Projections for Integrated Waste Management Plan of Hawassa
City.
Nandan, A., Yadav, B. P., Baksi, S., & Bose, D. (2017). Recent Scenario of Solid Waste Management in
India. WSN World Scientific News, January.
Nyika, J. M., Onyari, E. K., Mishra, S., & Dinka, M. O. (2019). Waste Management in South Africa.
October, 327–351. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-0198-6.ch014
Orhorhoro, E. K., & Oghoghorie, O. (2019). Review on Solid Waste Generation and Management in Sub-
Saharan Africa: A Case Study of Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental
Management, 23(9), 1729. https://doi.org/10.4314/jasem.v23i9.19
Ram, C., & Kumar, A. (2021). Municipal Solid Waste Management: Recent Practices.
Nanobiotechnology for Green Environment, 1–25.
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/9780367461362-2/municipal-solid-waste-
management-chhotu-ram-amit-kumar%0Ahttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ayantika-Banerjee-
2/publication/349024385_Microbiological_Degradation_of_Organic_Pollutants_f
Regassa, N., Sundaraa, R. D., & Seboka, B. B. (2011). Challenges and Opportunities in Municipal Solid
Waste Management: The Case of Addis Ababa City, Central Ethiopia. Journal of Human Ecology,
33(3), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/09709274.2011.11906358
Rezaei, H., Panah, F. Y., Lim, C. J., & Sokhansanj, S. (2020). Pelletization of refuse-derived fuel with
varying compositions of plastic, paper, organic and wood. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(11), 1–
11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114645
Solomon, S. (2018). Current Solid Waste Management Practices and Problems in Woliata Sodo Town,
Southern Ethiopia. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management, 22(7), 1097.
https://doi.org/10.4314/jasem.v22i7.17

ii
Structural, T. (n.d.). Situational Analysis of Urban Sanitation and Waste Management SITUATIONAL
ANALYSIS OF URBAN SANITATION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT. March 2015.
Tassie Wegedie, K. (2018). Households solid waste generation and management behavior in case of Bahir
Dar City, Amhara National Regional State, Ethiopia. Cogent Environmental Science, 4(1).
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311843.2018.1471025
Tuprakay, S. R., Suksabye, P., Menchai, P., & Tuprakay, S. (2014). The physical and chemical properties
of solid waste from water tourism. case study: Taling chan floating market, Bangkok, Thailand. WIT
Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 180, 103–111. https://doi.org/10.2495/WM140091
Umer, N., Shimelis, G., Ahmed, M., & Sema, T. (2019). Solid Waste Generation Rate and Management
Practices in the Case of Chiro Town, West Hararghe Zone, Ethiopia. American Journal of
Environmental Protection, 8(4), 87. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20190804.12
Voinov Kohler, J. (2017). The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of
Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal 1989. Multilateral Environmental Treaties, 331–342.
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783477210.v.32
Wandira Ayu Bertin, D. S. H. (2017). Assessment of Solid Waste Management Practices: a Case of
Masha Town, Southwestern Ethiopia. Arba Minch University In, 8(9), 1–58.
World Bank Group. (2020). An Evaluation of the World Bank Group’s Support to Municipal Solid Waste
Management, 2010–20. Ilo 2013, 1–39.

iii
Declaration

I, Girma Kusa Jara, Registration Number WU1403672 do hereby declare that this seminar paper
is my original work and that it has not been submitted partially; or in full, by any other person for
an award of a degree in any other university/institution for the award of any academic degree,
diploma, or certificate as well as that all sources of materials used for this seminar paper have
been duly acknowledged.
Brief quotations from this seminar paper are allowable without special permission, provided that
accurate acknowledgement of the source is made. Requests for permission for extended
quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head
of the PADM or the Dean of the college of Business & Economics when in his or her judgment
the proposed use of material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instance, permission
must be obtained from the author.

Name: Girma Kusa Jara

Signature: ----------------------
Place: Wollega University, College of Business & Economics, Department of Public
Administration and Development Management
Date of submission: March 13,2023

I approved this Seminar Paper to be presented to the Board of Examiners, for Defense
Examination.

Name of Advisor: Dr. Kannan Ambalam (Associate Professor of Public Administration at

Wollega University)

Signature-------------------------------------------- Date-------------------------------------

Institutional Affiliation: PADM

iv
Nekemte- Ethiopia, Wollega University, College of Business & Economics, PADM