See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/319604047

The Case of Brazil’s Municipal Solid Waste Management:

Residents’ Perceptions

Article  in  The International Journal of Environmental Sustainability · January 2017

DOI: 10.18848/2325-1077/CGP/v13i03/1-14

CITATIONS READS

0 446

5 authors, including:

Benxiang Zeng Flávio de São Pedro Filho

Freelance Universidade Federal de Rondônia
83 PUBLICATIONS   1,525 CITATIONS    144 PUBLICATIONS   101 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jayashree Patil-Dake Valeria Arenhardt

K. P. B. Hinduja College of Commerce, Mumbai Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia de Rondônia (I…
4 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS    18 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Inovação do Arranjo Físico na Operação De Transporte Rodoviário: Um Estudo de Caso em Porto Velho (Brasil) View project

A case study on reducing call drops through Spectrum auctions: An Empirical Cross National Investigation View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Flávio de São Pedro Filho on 15 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 VOLUME 13 ISSUE 3

The International Journal of

Environmental
Sustainability

_________________________________________________________________________

The Case of Brazil’s Municipal

Solid Waste Management
Residents’ Perceptions
BENXIANG ZENG, FLÁVIO DE SÃO PEDRO FILHO, MAYANA VERA SOUSA,
JAYASHREE PATIL-DAKE, AND VALERIA ARENHARDT

ONSUSTAINABILITY.COM

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
www.onsustainability.com
ISSN: 2325-1077 (Print)
ISSN: 2325-1085 (Online)
doi:10.18848/2325-1077/CGP (Journal)
First published by Common Ground Research Networks in 2017
University of Illinois Research Park
2001 South First Street, Suite 202
Champaign, IL 61820 USA
Ph: +1-217-328-0405
www.cgnetworks.org
The International Journal of Environmental Sustainability
is a peer-reviewed, scholarly journal.
COPYRIGHT
© 2017 (individual papers), the author(s)
© 2017 (selection and editorial matter),
Common Ground Research Networks
All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of
study, research, criticism, or review, as permitted under the
applicable copyright legislation, no part of this work may be
reproduced by any process without written permission from the
publisher. For permissions and other inquiries, please contact
support@cgnetworks.org.
Common Ground Research Networks is a member of Crossref.
EDITOR
David Humphreys, The Open University, UK
MANAGING EDITOR
Caitlyn D’Aunno, Common Ground Research Networks, USA
ADVISORY BOARD
Dang Van Bai, Ministry of Culture and Information, Vietnam
Michael Cameron, University of Waikato, New Zealand
Richard M. Clugston, Center for University Leaders for a
Sustainable Future, USA
John Dryzek, University of Canberra, Australia
Steven Engelsman, Rijksmuseum voor Volkenkunde, The Netherlands
John Fien, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia
Amareswar Galla, International Institute for the
Inclusive Museum, Australia
Suzanne Grant, University of Waikato, New Zealand
Steve Hamnett, University of South Australia, Australia
Olaf Gerlach Hansen, Danish Cultural Institute, Denmark
Charles Hopkins, York University, Canada
David Humphreys, The Open University, UK
Lily Kong, National University of Singapore, Singapore
Jim McAllister, Central Queensland University, Australia
Helena Norberg-Hodge, The International Society for
Ecology and Culture (ISEC), UK
Peter Phipps, RMIT University, Australia
Spencer S. Stober, Alvernia University, USA
Douglas Worts, Toronto, Canada
Lyuba Zarsky, Middlebury Institute of
International Studies at Monterey, USA
REVIEWERS
Articles published in The International Journal of Environmental
Sustainability are peer reviewed by scholars who are active participants
of the On Sustainability Research Network or a thematically related
Research Network. Reviewers are acknowledged in the corresponding
volume of the journal. For a full list of past and current Reviewers,
please visit www.onsustainability.com/journals/editors.
ARTICLE SUBMISSION
The International Journal of Environmental Sustainability
publishes quarterly (March, June, September, December).
To find out more about the submission process, please visit
http://onsustainability.com/journals/call-for-papers.
ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING
For a full list of databases in which this journal is indexed,
please visit www.onsustainability.com/journals/collection.
RESEARCH NETWORK MEMBERSHIP
Authors in The International Journal of Environmental Sustainability
are members of the On Sustainability Research Network or a
thematically related Research Network. Members receive
access to journal content. To find out more, visit
www.onsustainability.com/about/become-a-member.
SUBSCRIPTIONS
The International Journal of Environmental Sustainability
is available in electronic and print formats. Subscribe to gain
access to content from the current year and the entire backlist.
Contact us at support@cgnetworks.org.
ORDERING
Single articles and issues are available from the
journal bookstore at www.cgscholar.com/bookstore.
HYBRID OPEN ACCESS
The International Journal of Environmental Sustainability
is Hybrid Open Access, meaning authors can choose to
make their articles open access. This allows their work to
reach an even wider audience, broadening the
dissemination of their research. To find out more, please visit
www.onsustainability.com/journals/hybrid-open-access.
DISCLAIMER
The authors, editors, and publisher will not accept any legal
responsibility for any errors or omissions that may have been
made in this publication. The publisher makes no warranty,
express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.
 The Case of Brazil’s Municipal Solid Waste
Management: Residents’ Perceptions
Benxiang Zeng,1 Charles Darwin University, Australia
Flávio de São Pedro Filho, Federal University of Rondônia, Brazil
Mayana Vera Sousa, Federal University of Rondônia, Brazil
Jayashree Patil-Dake, K.P.B. Hinduja College, India
Valeria Arenhardt, Federal Institute of Rondônia, Brazil

Abstract: The disposal and treatment of solid waste have been global concerns, especially regarding urban areas. Many
people debate the balance between economic development and environment protection. Sustainability is always an issue
which attracts attention from not only researchers but also from governmental organizations and the public, either in
developed or developing countries. How do the public in developing countries perceive sustainability? Taking the city of
Porto Velho in Brazil as an example, this article analyzes the perception of local residents on the management of
municipal solid waste to inform governmental decision-making on sustainable practice. Using a sustainability indicator
matrix, this study investigates local people’s perceptions of sustainability issues regarding municipal management of
solid waste. It identifies key issues including residents’ awareness of sustainability and their attitudes toward municipal
solid waste management. Local residents are generally aware of the importance of solid waste management and know
about selective waste collection and recycling in general. The findings suggest that, although they are not satisfied with
current policies and waste management practices in this regard, local residents want to contribute positively to a
sustainable waste management system and that a collaboration between stakeholders, including residents, industries,
governments, and researchers is required to remedy current problems such as lack of information and failures in policy
implementation in municipal solid waste management.

Keywords: Residents’ Perspectives, Sustainability, Municipal Solid Waste, Waste Management

Introduction

W hile globally realizing the conflict between environmental protection and economic
development in a contemporary era, there has generally been a division between the
developed and developing economies in prioritizing the environmental protection over
economic development on an international scale. For developed countries, mature productive
economies allow for environmental protection programs. But for others including emerging
economies, which are struggling to compete in the global marketplace to catch up to advanced
economies, there is a trend to give priority to economic development. The debate and division are
not just from politicians, governments, industries but also from the public. There is conflicting
evidence about the public’s perspective toward environmental management and sustainability
especially in developing world.
Waste management has always been an important issue in the discussion of sustainability.
Today, it is increasing all over the world due to population growth, industrialization, and
urbanization. Solid waste is the result of everyday processes and can be considered as anything
without use or importance for the production systems and for society (Mesquita Sartori, and
Fiuza 2011). Municipal solid waste (MSW) management in particular faces great challenges.
Because the quantities of MSW are rapidly increasing everywhere many national governments
are confronted with various problems in waste management, notably in urban areas. The
2.5 billion tonnes or so of MSW that was generated worldwide in 2000 is expected to reach 5.3
billion tonnes by 2030 (Ahmad 2015). Mexico City, one of the largest cities in the world,

1
Corresponding Author: Benxiang Zeng, Northern Institute, Charles Darwin University, PO Box 795, CDU Alice
Springs Campus, Alice Springs, NT 0871, Australia. email: benxiang.zeng@cdu.edu.au

The International Journal of Environmental Sustainability

Volume 13, Issue 3, 2017, www.onsustainability.com
© Common Ground Research Networks, Benxiang Zeng, Flávio de São Pedro Filho,
Mayana Vera Sousa, Jayashree Patil-Dake, Valeria Arenhardt, All Rights Reserved
Permissions: support@cgnetworks.org
ISSN: 2325-1077 (Print), ISSN: 2325-1085 (Online)
http://doi.org/10.18848/2325-1077/CGP/v13i03/1-14 (Article)
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

generates about 10,000 tonnes of waste each day (Sivakumar 2010), while Bahrain generates
more than 4,000 tonnes per day (Ahmad 2015). Moreover, in many parts of the world, there is no
suitable land available for new landfills to dispose of MSW (Suleman, Simon, and Richard
2015).
In developing countries, the issues are even more serious. According to Peterson (2009), in
developing countries, although many municipalities spend a large proportion of their available
operational budget on solid waste management services, 30 to 60 percent of all MSW is
estimated to be uncollected and less than 50 percent of the population is served. As one of
biggest developing countries in the world, Brazil has been facing challenges in waste
management which are posing fundamental issues of sustainability. Previous studies have
suggested that MSW management is always a big challenge in the Brazilian economic
development (e.g., Carmo, Freitas, and Vale 2011; Jacobi and Besen 2011; Silva, Pedro Filho,
and Silva Neto 2014). However, it is less known how the public (especially local communities)
perceive the waste management and associated sustainable issues in developing countries,
compared to those in developed countries. In response, this study aims to use a case study on the
stakeholders’ perspectives on MSW management in Brazil to understand the people’s attitude
toward the sustainable development policies and so as to inform governmental policy-making,
industrial practices and residents’ participation. We hoped to provide further evidence about
MSW management in developing countries.
We chose the city of Porto Velho, capital of the state of Rondônia, as an example for case
study. Porto Velho is located in northern Brazil and is part of the Amazon region, where there is
an ample biodiversity. The economy of Porto Velho is less developed compared to many other
cities and regions in Brazil. The motivation of rapid development relying heavily on local
resources has been creating many concerns on environmental conservation and sustainable
growth. Therefore, researching the sustainability in regional development in this region is urgent
and important not only for the city and province but also for the entire Amazon region and the
whole country. According to Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE 2011), the
city’s population is approximately 500,000; social indicators make it clear that only 19.3 percent
of the domiciles have proper sanitation with a water supply, a general network of sanitation or
septic tanks, and direct or indirect waste collection. MSW management is one of the concerns of
the city. Previous studies suggest that many issues are associated from different perspectives with
MSW management in Porto Velho. From a political perspective, the instability and lack of
durability of the government policies in general (Silva 2013) and the failure to implement
infrastructure policies dealing with socio-environmental issues in particular (Gonçalves et al.
2014) have affected MSW policy-making and implementation. Oliveira and Barba (2011)
suggest that the communities should introduce the separation of waste, aluminum cans in
particular, to sell the metal or exchange it for some financial return. In fact, the aluminum cans
collected as municipal waste are easy to transport and separate, having distinctive features from
other kinds of waste. However, Oliveira and Barba (2011) also found that local communities are
not sufficiently informed regarding MSW reuse and/or recycling practices. Carmo, Freitas, and
Vale (2011) analyze collective models associated with MSW management and suggest that a
social inclusion approach would benefit local sustainability with regard to either waste reduction
or economic gain from waste management.
Based on the case study of Porto Velho, this study investigates the perceptions of
stakeholders on the sustainable management of municipal waste and seeks to answer the
following question: How do people in Porto Velho perceive the sustainable management of
municipal solid waste? For this purpose, first the specific elements and dimensions of
sustainability are identified through theoretical and conceptual reviews; then different scenarios
are set in a questionnaire to collect residents’ perceptions; and finally the collected data and
information are analyzed to inform discussion and draw some conclusions to feed in to the
policy-making and implementation of MSW in the city in question.

2
 ZENG ET AL.: THE CASE OF BRAZIL’S MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Conceptual and Theoretical Review

Sustainability and Its Dimensional Elements

Among many definitions of sustainability, the one most commonly cited comes from the World
Commission on Environment and Development. This definition outlines sustainability as
progress that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their needs” (WCED 1987, 16). For the purpose of the present research, we
apply the concepts of sustainability adopted in waste management studies by Cardoso, Passos,
and Carneiro (2015), Almeida et al. (2015), and Fernandes (2011) (seen in Table 1), which focus
on multidisciplinary issues and link to the ability to continuously provide products and services
without affecting the environment.

Table 1: Conceptual Views of Sustainability among Selected Authors

Authors Concepts of Sustainability Applied in Their Work
It is related to the way of life in which the subject must meet his/her current
Cardoso, Passos, and needs, while seeking to maintain the capacity to generate and sustain the
Carneiro (2015) needs of future generations, reconciling human development with
environmental conservation.
It refers to the relationship between economic growth, human development,
Almeida et al. (2015)
and environmental quality.
It is based on the specification of ecological functions, especially in the
Fernandes (2011) ability of the environment to supply the productive systems with natural
resources and absorb the waste products of this process.

The triple bottom line is commonly applied to describe and assess sustainability. Caiado,
Quelhas, and Lima (2015) and Silva, Pedro Filho, and Silva Neto (2014) suggest that while the
interaction of environmental, social, and economic dimensions provides the core of
sustainability, such interaction also possibly creates some negative impacts; it risks creating
impractical, unbalanced, and intolerable relationships among environmental, economic, and
social dimensions, where either economic development alone is the focus or economic
exploitation does not offer adequate compensation to ensure the quality of life for the population.
More practically, in their specific analyses of sustainability, some studies have further
developed this triple bottom line approach into a measurement matrix which includes more
specific dimensional elements (e.g., Mendes 2009; Santiago and Dias 2012; Silva, Souza, and
Leal 2012). Santiago and Dias (2012) structure such a matrix to describe and measure the
different dimensions of sustainable MSW management. This matrix consists of 1) political,
2) technological, 3) economic/financial, 4) ecological/environmental, 5) knowledge, and 6) social
inclusion dimensions as indicators.

Stakeholders’ Perception on MSW Management

Today, MSW management is a major concern mainly because of the associated environmental
problems. In this regard, Mesquita, Sartori, and Fiuza (2011) argue that the goal for solid waste
management is to eliminate negative environmental impacts through a set of attitudes, covering
for example behavior, procedures, and purposes. Jacobi and Besen (2011) indicate that MSW
management must engage the cooperative participation of a broad range of stakeholders,
including governments, industries, and communities, in the whole process from developing
strategies of waste reduction to encouraging and practicing the reuse and recycling of waste.
Ahmad (2015) believes that none of the groups affected by MSW can be relied on to tackle
the problem of MSW alone. Collaboration is necessary from all stakeholders, including residents,
industries, governments, and academics; understanding their perspectives is critical to engage
them in efficient waste management practices. If stakeholders’ perceptions, concerns, and

3
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

attitudes toward waste management system-related practices and even facilities are neither well
understood nor underestimated, governmental efforts in waste management could be failing and
even opposed by the stakeholders (De Feo, De Gisi and Williams 2013).
Longe, Longe and Ukpebor (2009) examined the structure of the household waste
management system in a local governmental region in Nigeria. Their study suggested that the
public perceived solid waste management system as an irregular and inefficient system, while
they were willing to pay for waste management services. However, the willingness-to-pay
(WTP) varies from different socio-economic groups, and the environmental education would
enhance the WTP in general. Longe, Longe, and Ukpebor’s (2009) study addressed the
importance of private operators in the solid waste management system.
The survey by Purcell and Magette (2010) in Dublin revealed that the majority of residents,
regardless where they live, were satisfied with their waste management service. Many responses
were also significantly related to the respondents’ demographic profile (e.g., education level,
type of accommodation, age, etc.). The surveys also demonstrated that waste management
initiatives designed for one area of the city could ignore the needs of other areas.
The perception of stakeholders including local residents would have significant influence on
the policy-making and implementation of MSW management. The analysis by Dias (2015)
suggests that the stakeholders who participate in or are affected by waste management form one
of the three important dimensions in the management of solid waste. Andretta et al. (2014) argue
that the importance of stakeholders’ perceptions is closely related to the capacity of their
involvement in activities related to environmental sustainability. There are different ways to
gauge stakeholders’ perceptions. It is important to select suitable components or dimensions and
measurements, and it also depends on different scenarios and the interpretation of results by
researchers (Gomes and Almeida 2015).

Methodology
This study aims to investigate residents’ perspectives on MSW management, which provide more
social and cultural evidence for governments, industries, and communities in policy-making and
MSW management practices. It is a descriptive study applying a qualitative methodology. A case
study in the city of Porto Velho was conducted on the basis of face-to-face interviews with a
semistructured questionnaire survey. The questionnaire consisted of fourteen statements (rather
than questions) about waste management and related policies and practices in the city (Table 2).
The questionnaire allowed the respondents to express their opinions and their own understanding
and knowledge of waste management in their city. Based on that, the respondents were requested
to nominate the extent to which they “agree” or “disagree” with the fourteen statements.

Table 2: Statements Included in the Questionnaire

Statement No. Statement Description
1 I know what selective collection is.
2 The municipality has a system of selective collection.
3 I select the garbage for collection.
4 The garbage can be used as raw material for handicrafts.
5 The garbage can be used as raw material for industry.
6 The government is responsible for garbage collection.
7 Enterprises are responsible for garbage collection.
8 People, government, and enterprises are responsible for
garbage collection.
9 Currently, there are collectors to handle material for
recycling and reuse.
10 I am informed that new models of collection and
treatment of waste will be implemented in the city.
11 Currently, the collected garbage after treatment is used
as raw material by industry.

4
 ZENG ET AL.: THE CASE OF BRAZIL’S MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

12 There are cooperatives of garbage collectors in the city.

13 Only waste collectors are responsible for waste
recycling in the city.
14 I am informed, or have been trained, or received
guidance on waste management.

We delivered the face-to face interviews with a selected sample group in June 2015. With a
limited research budget and time constrains, the sample group was small. As per Marshall et al.
(2013), the qualitative case study targeting the local residents’ opinions, the sample size can be
small but workable to make sensible analysis. Siegel and Castellan (1988) suggest that small
samples of qualitative data can be analyzed using nonparametric statistical techniques. The
sample group consisted of forty-seven randomly selected individuals representing different
stakeholders who collaborated with this research, under ethical protocols of free acceptance and
agreement. These individuals were asked about their perspectives on municipal solid waste
management according to the questionnaire described above. The answers from the successful
interviews were collated and analyzed, including their opinions/understanding of the issues and
their agreement levels with the statements. Whenever necessary, a five-point Likert scale system
was used to rate the levels of agreement/disagreement (i.e., Totally Agree, Partially Agree,
Indifferent, Partially Disagree, and Totally Disagree). The information was tabulated using
Microsoft Excel software which allowed us to conduct content analysis and build the graphics for
the logical presentation and cross-dimensional analysis.
The sample households well represented the city’s population profile: 28 percent of the
families had four family members or fewer; 67 percent of them had secondary education or
below; and 38 percent of them earned a monthly household income of $410–820 USD.

Analytical Framework: A Dimensional Sustainability Framework for

MSW Management
The objective of the present characterization is to demonstrate the theoretical concepts that
supported the preparation of the study in order to highlight the interrelationships between the
rhetorical and structural aspects of the text (Oliveira and Queiroz 2015). Santiago and Dias
(2012) apply the conception of characterization of waste management and configure the
relationship between different dimensions and components of sustainability (Figure 1).

Dimensions Sustainability

1. Political 1. Regulation

2. Technological 2. Processing
Environment

3. Economic 3. Resources

4. Environmental 4. Management

5. Knowledge 5. Education

6. Social inclusion 6. Inclusion of actors

Interrelation
Figure 1: Interrelation of the Sustainability Measurements in MSW Management
Source: Adapted from Santiago and Dias (2012)

5
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

This study adapts the characterization approach for use in the scenario of the city of Porto
Velho. Based on the framework reported by Santiago and Dias (2012), this study developed the
descriptive context responding to the relevant dimensions of sustainability embedded in MSW
management (Table 3). The description of dimensions is used for our data analysis and
discussion of the results. It is important to notice that this table only provides the description of
each dimension, with no intention to discuss the specific measurements of the dimensions in this
study.

Table 3: Characterization of the Dimensions of

Sustainability in Solid Waste Management
Dimensions Description
Principles of the regulatory and normative nature of solid waste
Political management aimed at directing decisions, as national and international
guidelines, for the management of waste
Use of suitable technologies for waste processing, complying with the
Technological
principles of sustainability
Financial resources available for the management of municipal solid waste
Economic
from its origin to its destination, noting its viable application
Relationship between the waste and the environment, focusing on the
restriction of the use of non-renewable resources, disposal of waste (reuse,
Environmental
recycling and treatment) and preservation of the bio-absorption capacity of
ecosystems
Educational processes of learning and social awareness, involving the
Knowledge problematic aspects of solid waste management, functioning as a basis for
other principles
Interaction and inclusion of social actors directly related to solid waste
(such as collectors of recyclable material), providing decent conditions so
Social Inclusion
that they may carry on their business, with a view to the generation of
employment and income
Source: Adapted from Santiago and Dias (2012)

Residents’ Perceptions of the Sustainable Management of MSW

Residents’ Responses Organized by Dimensions of Sustainability

The participants responded to all fourteen statements, expressing their understanding and
opinions about the statements and identifying the extent to which they agree about the
statements. Using the Likert Scale (see Table 4), it is clearly suggested that an overwhelming
majority of respondents were generally aware of the selective collection of solid waste (more
than 70%); they understood that MSW could be recycled or reused (more than 83%) and that the
government should take responsibility for managing MSW with the collaboration of industries
and communities (more than 87%). However, a large proportion of the respondents admitted that
they did not sort solid waste for selective collection (more than 45%) and that they generally had
not been informed of updated MSW management policies (more than 50%) nor been assisted to
become involved in MSW management (more than 70%).

6
 ZENG ET AL.: THE CASE OF BRAZIL’S MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Table 4: Perception of Sustainability by Dimensions

Answers* Dimensions**
Statement
TA PA I PD TD Pol Tec Env Eco Kno Soc
1 70% 11% 0% 0% 19%
2 23% 19% 11% 11% 36%
3 13% 23% 13% 6% 45%
4 83% 13% 4% 0% 0%
5 68% 15% 13% 4% 0%
6 54% 22% 0% 13% 11%
7 17% 24% 2% 22% 35%
8 87% 6% 4% 2% 0%
9 41% 15% 24% 9% 11%
10 13% 11% 20% 7% 50%
11 19% 15% 28% 13% 26%
12 28% 21% 23% 11% 17%
13 21% 2% 15% 30% 32%
14 9% 13% 4% 4% 70%
* TA – Totally Agree, PA – Partially Agree, I – Indifferent, PD – Partially Disagree, TD – Totally Disagree
** Pol – Political, Tec – Technological, Env – Environmental,
Eco – Economic, Kno – Knowledge, Soc – Social Inclusion

Some statements in the questionnaire can be categorized into more than one dimension of
sustainability (for example, Statement 10 can be categorized into “Technological,”
“Ecological/Environmental,” and “Political” dimensions). Given that many of these statements
are interrelated, we conducted a cross-statement analysis to check the relationship of different
dimensions.

Political Dimension

To analyze the perception of the political dimension of sustainability regarding MSW

management, three statements were included and related (i.e., Statements 2, 10, and 13). Figure 2
shows these incidences.

Figure 2: Perception of Sustainability at the Political Dimension

Note: TA – Totally Agree, PA – Partially Agree, I – Indifferent, PD – Partially Disagree, TD – Totally Disagree

7
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Approximately 36 percent of the respondents are not aware of the lack of selective collection
of MSW, and 50 percent do not have information about new models of collection and treatment
of wastes planned by the municipality. Moreover, a firm attitude can be observed regarding the
responsibility of the waste pickers, since 32 percent of respondents totally disagreed and 30
percent partly disagreed that this task was not appropriate for waste pickers. It is suggested that
members of local communities believe that the responsibility for recycling and reuse belongs to
other stakeholders than the waste pickers alone, but they have not noticed the changes and/or
implementation in the municipality of current public policies, such as the selective collection,
recycling, and structural industrialization of municipal waste. The result supports the finding of
Silva (2013), which claims that governmental public policies are politically unstable and that the
governance lacks technical expertise.

Technological Dimension

Four statements were included to analyze the perception regarding the technological dimension
(i.e., Statements 2, 4, 5, and 10). This assesses the perceptions of individuals regarding the use
and initiatives in technology for the management of MSW for sustainability purpose. Figure 3
shows these incidences.

Figure 3: Perception of Sustainability at the Technological Dimension

Note: TA – Totally Agree, PA – Partially Agree, I – Indifferent, PD – Partially Disagree, TD – Totally Disagree

Approximately 75.5 percent (average of TA of Statements 4 and 5) of the respondents

understand that MSW could be reused as raw material for industry and elaboration of handicrafts.
But 36 percent are not aware of the municipality’s system of selective collection and that it
should be the first step in the process. Around 50 percent of the respondents are not aware of any
proposed change to new models of collection and treatment of MSW or the technology needed
for the reuse of it. This finding is consistent with what is noted by Feitosa et al. (2010):
technologies have not been judged as sufficiently important in the management of waste.

Economic Dimension

For this dimension, three statements were analyzed (i.e., Statements 4, 5, and 11). This
dimension seeks to evaluate the perception of respondents regarding the economic/financial
factors in the sustainable management of solid waste. The incidences of this dimension are
shown in Figure 4.

8
 ZENG ET AL.: THE CASE OF BRAZIL’S MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Figure 4: Perception of Sustainability at the Economic Dimension

Note: TA – Totally Agree, PA – Partially Agree, I – Indifferent, PD – Partially Disagree, TD – Totally Disagree

Approximately 75.5 percent of the sample is already aware of MSW as raw material which
can after treatment become a new product. They perceive that there are potentials in generating
economic and financial benefits, although specific measurements and economic analysis are
obviously needed to support this perception. In line with this result, Oliveira and Barba’s (2011)
study suggests that recycling waste to get some financial return is the only economic/financial
purpose noted in sustainable solid waste management. However, this study also suggests that
most people do not see this recycling being substantially practiced by local industries; they do
not observe this transformation taking place in the municipality.

Environmental Dimension

The analysis of ecological/environmental dimension involved Statements 2, 3, 9, and 10. Most

respondents consider the municipality neither to have performed any form of selective collection
nor to have put any effective system in place (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Perception of Sustainability at the Environmental Dimension

Note: TA – Totally Agree, PA – Partially Agree, I – Indifferent, PD – Partially Disagree, TD – Totally Disagree

There are 56 percent (between TA and PA) of the respondents who have noticed there are
collectors taking responsibility for the collection and disposal of recyclable material. But around
50 percent of the respondents do not perceive the municipality as any form of informing about
the new models of collection and treatment being used or that will be implemented.

Knowledge Dimension

The knowledge dimension analyzed six statements, namely, Statements 1, 6, 7, 8, 11, and 14.
Figure 6 shows the collected information.

9
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Figure 6: Perception of Sustainability on the Dimension of Knowledge

Note: TA – Totally Agree, PA – Partially Agree, I – Indifferent, PD – Partially Disagree, TD – Totally Disagree

In the first instance, it should be noted that 70 percent of the respondents claimed that they
had had no training or even guidance regarding MSW management. This perception may be
related to other dimensions affected by the knowledge of the individual on the treatment and
disposal of solid waste. It is important to notice that 87 percent of the respondents agree that is a
responsibility of everyone, from the people, government, and enterprises for MSW collection
(Statement 8). This means that everyone should be part of the process, and each part should
contribute in its own way to make it work. In addition, the relationship between the belief that
collection is not on the responsibility of companies and the disagreement about the routing of
waste as raw material to industries may derive from people’s ignorance of systems such as
reverse logistics.

Social Inclusion Dimension

Four statements (8, 9, 12, and 13) were included to analyze the social inclusion dimension.
Figure 7 depicts the results obtained.

Figure 7: Perception of Sustainability at the Dimension of Social Inclusion

Note: TA – Totally Agree, PA – Partially Agree, I – Indifferent, PD – Partially Disagree, TD – Totally Disagree

While there are more than half of respondents (Statement 9: TA+ PA = 56%; Statement 12:
TA + PA = 49%) realizes that there are waste collectors or cooperatives practicing MSW
management, a majority of respondents perceive the MSW management should not be only
responsibility of waste collectors (Statement 13: PD + TD = 62%), but a joint responsibility of
government, businesses, and residents (Statement 8: TA + PA = 93%). This supports the finding
by Carmo, Freitas, and Vale (2011) that suggests the social inclusion with regard to the

10
 ZENG ET AL.: THE CASE OF BRAZIL’S MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

interaction and inclusion of social actors such as waste collectors and other stakeholders is
important.

Discussion: Cross-dimensional Implications

It is important for governments and other stakeholders to understand the local communities’
perceptions from different angles. Most respondents understand that MSW can be reused or
recycled (Statements 4 and 5) and are familiar with “selective collection” (Statement 1), but they
do not actually practice it (Statement 2). They are also not sure if there is a related MSW
management mechanism such as a selective collection system (Statement 3). The relationship
between these results indicates a logical sequence: they do not practice selective collection
because no system is in place to support it.
Regarding the responsibility for waste logistics, people have noticed that waste collectors
engage in recycling and reuse (Statement 9), but most of the respondents do not think it to be the
collectors’ responsibility alone (Statement 13); many people are not sure if there are many waste
collectors’ cooperatives (Statements 11 and 12), therefore more social inclusion and
collaboration between different stakeholders (Statement 8) is needed. Government coordination
is important to establish such a system of shared responsibility. It is worth noting the prevailing
sense of indifference regarding waste collection as raw material for industry following its
treatment; this implies a lack of knowledge about the processes of recycling and reuse.
Remarkably, most respondents have no information about new models in the collection and
processing of waste. They are not informed or have never participated in training or guidance on
waste management (Statements 10 and 14). Most of them believe that waste management is the
government’s responsibility (Statement 6) but are not quite sure what responsibility the industry
should take (or have taken) as well (Statement 7). These may reveal a failure to share municipal
information and/or a violation of regulations related to new models and the collection and
treatment of MSW. There is a widespread view that these collectors are not the only ones
responsible for the recycling of waste in the municipality who would have taken on this function
in the absence of public policies. The MSW management policy and practice will be successful
only when all stakeholders are engaged and involved.
This study is focused on the local perspectives. It only discusses how local residents
perceive the MSW management and related sustainability issues. However, it is important to
understand the complexity of MSW issues (for example, either recycling or reducing MSW)—
not just its potential economic, environmental, social, and political benefits but also possible
costs. As suggested by many researchers, the quantitative research involving economic/financial
returns and costs measurements such as input-output analysis (e.g., Sobrinho 2013) and
efficiency assessment (e.g., Daly 1974) is important. It is critical to generate such quantitative
information either at a macro level such as a national level or at a micro level such as a city level
or even a community level to support efficient policy-making. It is a call for more comprehensive
research into MSW management, including quantitative methods applying more numeric
information such as “how much” economic benefits/costs and “how many” kilograms or tonnes
of waste collected and so on. The sample size must be bigger so that a quantitative analysis can
be done properly and representatively.

Conclusions
This study draws an aggregate summary of local residents’ understanding and perception of
waste management policies and practices and related sustainable issues. In Porto Velho, a
majority of people show a basic understanding of waste recycling but they do not have much
awareness of the current policies in this regard or knowledge of related MSW management.
This study identifies some key issues from the residents’ perspective, supporting the claims
suggested by previous studies (e.g., Carmo, Freitas, and Vale 2011; Oliveira and Barba 2011;

11
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Silva 2013). Residents’ awareness of sustainability and their attitudes toward municipal solid
waste management are important for the government’s MSW management policy-making and
also influential on the implementation of such policies and on the operational practice of
industries in the city. Local residents are generally aware of the importance of solid waste
management and have a general knowledge of both selective waste collection and rubbish
recycling. This suggests that although they are not satisfied with current policies and waste
management practices in this area, local residents want to positively contribute to a sustainable
waste management system. It also suggests that collaboration among residents, industry,
governments, and academics would be needed to remedy current problems such as the lack of
information and failures in policy implementation in MSW management. It is important to
explore further the perception of all other stakeholders in future studies in which it is required to
collect more data points from the private MSW collectors, government body, and different
industries.
It is suggested that in Porto Velho, local communities have an understanding of sustainable
issues and would like to contribute positively to sustainability in social, economic development.
It provides another piece of evidence that in developing countries people are getting more and
more aware of and involved in sustainability in some ways. However, compared to those in
developed countries, they seem not to have sufficient knowledge to participate in actively and
because of their economic situation it seems for them to be less willing to financially contribute
to it. It is obviously that there are strong demands for skill training, knowledge sharing, and
information communication, due to residents’ less available information and relatively lower
education, compared to those in developed countries. On the other hand, from the public
perspective, the governmental role has to be strengthened regarding infrastructure building,
institutional arrangements, and education and information provision to tackle sustainable issues.
In developing countries, basic infrastructure, a flexible waste management system, and public
awareness and participation are likely to be more urgent in solid waste management in urban
areas. A further study comparing developing countries with developed countries is necessary to
clarify these issues.

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to acknowledge the University of Beira Interior (UBI), Faculty of Social
Science and Humanities, Business and Economics Department, Estrada do Sineiro, 6200-209,
Covilhã, Portugal. They would also like to sincerely thank the anonymous reviewers for their
valuable comments and suggestions on previous versions of the article.

REFERENCES
Ahmad, R. 2015. Waste Management Perspectives for Bahrain. Accessed April 20, 2016.
http://www.ecomena.org/waste-bahrain.
Almeida Jr., S. L. O., T. K. R. Ibdaiwi, L. F. D. Lopes, and V. M. F. Costa. 2015. “Process of
Selective Collection of Solid Waste: A Case Study of Sustainability in the City of Santa
Maria/RS.” Holos 3: 148–65.
Andretta, V., M. R. De Freitas, R. L. G. Macedo, E. B. Ferreira, and N. Venturin. 2014.
“Analysis of the Perception and Environmental Complexity of Professionals of an
Ecotourism Course.” Revista Agrogeoambiental [Journal of Agriculture, Geography and
Environment] 6 (2): 51–58.
Backes, D. S., J. S. Colome, R. H. Erdmann, and V. L. Lunardi. 2011. “Focus Group as a
Technique of Collection and Data Analysis in Qualitative Research.” World Health 35
(4): 438–42.

12
 ZENG ET AL.: THE CASE OF BRAZIL’S MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Caiado, R. G. G., O. L. G. Quelhas, and G. B. A. Lima. 2015. “Performance Evaluation in

Organizational Sustainability: Adaptation Proposal of the Method of Process Analysis.”
Electronic Magazine of Systems & Management 10 (2): 270–85.
Cardoso, S. M. O., K. K. Passos, and R. O. Carneiro. 2015. “Environmental Sustainability: The
Awareness Level of Dentistry Students about Biosecurity and the Risks Posed by
Improper Disposal of Solid Waste.” Medical and Biological Sciences 14 (1): 57–63.
Carmo, G. G., G. A. Freitas, and C. R. V. Vale. 2011. “Management of Recyclable Solid Waste
Developed in the Association of Recyclable Materials Collectors of Vila Princesa in the
City of Porto Velho.” XV Latin American Conference of Scientific Initiation and XI
Latin American Conference of Post Graduate Studies, University of Vale do Paraíba,
2011.
Daly, H. E. 1974. “The Economics of the Steady State.” The American Economic Review 64 (2):
15–21.
De Feo, G., S. De Gisi, and I. D. Williams. 2013. “Public Perception of Odour and
Environmental Pollution Attributed to MSW Treatment and Disposal Facilities: A Case
Study.” Waste Management 33 (4): 974–87.
Dias, S. M. 2015. “Rethinking the Relationship between Waste Pickers, Integrated and
Sustainable Management of Solid Waste and Development.” Tessituras 3 (1): 294–306.
Feitosa, A. S., C. F. Silva, G. F. Silva, and R. M. Silva. 2010. “Analysis of Energy Production
and Use of Biogas in the Landfill of the City of Porto Velho.” INTERTECH'2010:
Engineering and Technology Education Innovating for Growth, 7-10 March, 2010,
Ilhéus, Brazil.
Fernandes, B. P. M. 2011. “Eco-development, Sustainable Development and Green Economy: In
What Sense Has Alternatives to the Traditional Development Paradigm?” Development
and Environment 23: 109–20.
Gomes, A. A., and V. G. Almeida. 2015. Solid Waste Management and Its Importance in Event
Planning Seeking for Sustainability. Accessed September 25, 2015.
https://www.metodista.br/revistas/revistas-ipa/index.php/folio/article/viewFile/208/192.
Gonçalves, K. S., A. S. P. Siqueira, H. A. Castro, and S. S. Hacon. 2014. “Environmental
Vulnerability Indicator in the Western Amazon: The Case of the City of Porto Velho,
Rondônia, Brazil.” Science & Public Health 19 (9): 11–22.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatistica (IBGE). 2011. Synopsis of the 2010 Population
Census. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE.
Jacobi, P. R., and G. R. Besen. 2011. “Solid Waste Management in Sao Paulo: The Challenges of
Sustainability.” Advanced Studies 25 (71): 135–58.
Longe, E., O. Longe, and E. Ukpebor. 2009. “People’s Perception on Household Solid Waste
Management in Ojo Local Government Area, in Nigeria.” Journal of Environmental
Health Science & Engineering 6 (3): 201–08.
Marshall, B., P. Cardon, A. Poddar, and R. Fontenot. 2013. “Does Sample Size Matter in
Qualitative Research? A Review of Qualitative Interviews in is Research.” Journal of
Computer Information Systems 54 (1): 11–22. doi:10.1080/08874417.2013.11645667.
Mendes, J. M. G. 2009. “Dimensions of Sustainability.” Santa Cruz Colleges Journal 7 (2): 1–
10.
Mesquita, E. G., H. J. F. Sartori, and M. S. S. Fiuza. 2011. “Solid Waste Management: A Case
Study on Campus.” Construindo, Belo Horizonte 3 (1): 37–45.
Oliveira, D., and C. H. Barba. 2011. “Environmental Education on Waste: A Case Study in Porto
Velho.” Research & Creation 10 (1): 21–30.
Oliveira, J. R. S., and S. L. Queiroz. 2015. “Elaboration of a Map of Characterization of the
Scientific Text: Theoretical References and Applications Highlighted.” Research in
Science Teaching 20 (1): 142–66.

13
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Pedro Filho, F. S. 2013. “Paradigms and Strategic Perspectives for the Indigenous Ecotourism in
Rondônia.” Virtual Booklet of Tourism 13 (2): 227–52.
Pedro Filho, F. S., E. P. Rossoni, and G. A. Da Silva. 2011. “Production Management Focused
on Sustainable Social Technologies in Amazon.” Proceeding of The 26th International
Conference on Solid Waste Technology and Management 1: 372–82.
Peterson, C. 2009. Waste Management Perspectives in Developing Countries. Accessed August
17, 2016. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCARBONFINANCE/Resources/MSW
.DevelopingCountry.ISWA.Paper%2820Jul09%29.pdf.
Purcell, M., and W. L. Magette. 2010. “Attitudes and Behaviour towards Waste Management in
the Dublin, Ireland Region.” Waste Management 30 (10): 1997–2006.
Santiago, L. S., and S. M. F. Dias. 2012. “Matrix of Sustainability Indicators for the Management
of Municipal Solid Waste.” Engenharia Sanitária E Ambiental [Sanitary and
Environmental Engineering] 17 (2): 203–12.
Siegel, S., and N. J. Castellan Jr. 1988. Non-parametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences.
2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Silva, R. C. P. 2013. Quality of Life in Porto Velho, Rondônia: Prospects for Regional
Development. PhD thesis in Sustainable Development. Brazil: Federal University of
Pará.
Silva, A. S., J. G. Souza, and A. C. L. Leal. 2012. “Sustainability and Its Dimensions as the Basis
for Quality of Life.” Geography in Acts 12 (1): 22–42.
Silva, J. B., F. S. Pedro Filho, and J. M. Silva Neto. 2014. “Deconstruction of the Sanitary
Landfill Concept and the Management of Solid Waste in Western Amazon.” The
Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management 16 (1): 26–30.
Sivakumar, R. 2010. Introduction to Environmental Science and Engineering. 2nd ed. New
Delhi: Tata-McGraw Hill.
Sobrinho, G. V. 2013. “‘Cradle-to-Grave’ Sustainability: Extension of Input-Output Models to
Municipal Solid Wastes and to Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility in
the Retail Sector.” Ambiente & Sociedade [Environment & Society] 16 (4): 21–42.
Suleman, D., M. Simon, and A. Richard. 2015. “Residents’ Perceptions and Attitudes towards
Urban Solid Waste Management in the Berekum Municipality, Ghana.” Oguaa Journal
of Social Sciences 7 (2): 25–37.
World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). 1987. Our Common Future
(Report of World Commission on Environment and Development). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Benxiang Zeng: Senior Research Fellow, Northern Institute, Charles Darwin University, Alice
Springs, Northern Territory, Australia

Flávio de São Pedro Filho: Professor of Environmental Management, Federal University of

Rondônia, Porto Velho, Rondônia, Brazil; Coordinator, GEITEC – Research Group on
Management of Innovation and Technology, Porto Velho, Rondônia, Brazil

Mayana Vera Sousa: Master’s Student of Management, Federal University of Rondônia, Porto
Velho, Rondônia, Brazil

Jayashree Patil-Dake: Assistant Professor, Economics Department, K.P.B. Hinduja College,

Mumbai, India

Valeria Arenhardt: Professor, Federal Institute of Rondônia, Porto Velho, Rondônia, Brazil

14
The International Journal of Environmental
Sustainability is one of three thematically focused
journals in the family of journals that support the
Sustainability Research Network—its journals, book
imprint, conference, and online community. The
journal focuses on sustainable ecosystems, urban
environments, agriculture, energy systems, water
use, atmospheric quality, and biodiversity.

In addition to traditional scholarly papers, this journal

invites presentations of sustainability practices—
including documentation of case studies and exegeses
analyzing the effects of these practices.

The International Journal of Environmental Sustainability

is a peer-reviewed, scholarly journal.

ISSN 2325-1077

View publication stats