Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/uawm20

Status, characterization, and quantification of

municipal solid waste as a measure towards
effective solid waste management: The case of
Dilla Town, Southern Ethiopia

Workineh Mengesha Fereja & Dereje Diriba Chemeda

To cite this article: Workineh Mengesha Fereja & Dereje Diriba Chemeda (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, DOI: 10.1080/10962247.2021.1923585

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2021.1923585

View supplementary material

Published online: 24 Sep 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3007

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uawm20
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION
2022, VOL. 72, NO. 2, 187–201
https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2021.1923585

TECHNICAL PAPER

Status, characterization, and quantification of municipal solid waste as a measure

towards effective solid waste management: The case of Dilla Town, Southern
Ethiopia
a,b
Workineh Mengesha Fereja and Dereje Diriba Chemedaa,b
a
Department of Chemistry, College of Natural and Computational Sciences, Dilla University, Dilla, Ethiopia; bEnergy and Environment Research
Center, Dilla University, Dilla, Ethiopia

ABSTRACT PAPER HISTORY

This study aims to assess the status of solid waste management (SWM) practice and to characterize and Received October 21, 2020
quantify the municipal solid waste as a measure toward effective management in Dilla town Southern Revised March 24, 2021
Ethiopia. Formal surveys of household residents and SWM operators using a structured questionnaire were Accepted April 19, 2021
conducted to gather data on the current waste management practices of the inhabitants. Repeated field
investigations, on-site waste segregation, characterizations, and quantification were conducted. The average
per-capita waste generation rate of residential households was found to be 0.475 kg/capita.day. The majority of
the waste was organic (68.40% by weight). The recyclable waste accounts 1.90% plastics and 1.50% paper by
weight. Whereas, other wastes account 0.30% metals, 0.30% glass, 0.50% leather and rubber, 19.60% inert,
0.96% textiles, and 6.90% miscellaneous by weight. The awareness of inhabitants on solid waste management,
poor household waste segregation practice, and disposing of an unsanitary landfill are revealing the main solid
waste management problems faced. Other SWM barriers include ineffective solid waste fee system, lack of
trained manpower, inappropriate collection routes; unavailability of collection vehicles, illegal solid waste
disposal, and inappropriate setting of community containers. From the results of this study, it can be concluded
that organic waste constituted a lion share of the solid wastes generated in the town. Hence, the municipality
can recover this waste by introducing integrated urban agriculture that might convert this waste to organic
fertilizer through composting. To boost SWM, creating public awareness, providing equipment, provision of
incentives and other financial policies, and other supplies currently lacking and inappropriate must be
provided. The municipal authorities of the town may use this work as a benchmark and might push
environmental protection authorities to reexamine the implementation of their policies and strategies with
relation to the human and environmental health of the town.
Implications: Nowadays, urban population is increasing in developing countries; led to generate an
enormous amount of municipal waste in the areas which make more complicate its management pose
environmental pollution and threat public health. Thus, to curve these problems this study finding will be
important for various policymakers and town municipality. This study may also serve as a benchmark for the
municipal authorities of Dilla town for whom the problem is still unseen and negligible, and can push
environmental protection authorities to re-examine the implementation of their policies and strategies with
regard to the wider issues of human and environmental health conditions of town inhabitants.

Introduction could dramatically increase and will reach up to 3.4 billion

Municipal solid waste generation is greatly accelerated in
quantity and altered in composition throughout the world,
particularly in developing countries (Erasu et al. 2018) as
a result of population increase, rapid urbanization, indus­
trialization, a booming economy, and the rise in the stan­
dard of living (Abdel-Shafy and Mansour 2018; Azam et al.
2020). According to the United Nations Environmental
Programme (UNEP) report, the estimated quantity of
municipal solid waste (MSW) generated worldwide is
1.7–1.9 billion metric tons in 2010 (UNEP 2010a). Future
predictions showed that the present waste generation rate
tons by 2050 (Kaza Silpa et al. 2018). For instance, in 2008,
Indian cities generate eight times more MSW than they did
in 1947 due to increasing urbanization and changing life­
styles (Sharholy et al. 2008). Thus, the increase in solid waste
generation rate put immense pressure on municipal services
(Ma and Hipel 2016; Odonkor S.T. et al. 2020).
The implementation of solid waste collection and dis­
posal systems, as well as solid waste management prac­
tices in developing countries, is ineffective (Erasu et al.
2018; Nigatu, Rajan, and Bizunesh 2011; Tewodros,
Arjan, and Fitsum 2008). For instance, the report of

CONTACT Workineh Mengesha Fereja workinehmengesha@gmail.com Department of Chemistry, College of Natural and Computational Sciences, Dilla
University, P. O. Box 419, Dilla, Ethiopia
Supplemental data for this paper can be accessed on the publisher’s website.
© 2021 A&WMA
188 W.M. FEREJA AND D.D. CHEMEDA
UNIDO in 2002, shows that in Abidjan, Ibadan,
Bujumbura, and Lome only 70%, 40%, 41%, and 37% of
solid waste were collected respectively (United Nations
Industrail Development Organization (UNIDO) 2002).
More than 50% of the collected waste is usually disposed
of through unsanitary landfills, and about 15% is pro­
cessed through unsafe and informal recycling (Chalmin
and Gaillochet 2009). A house-to-house collection system
of solid waste is very common, particularly in most devel­
oped nations. This phenomenon is very low in developing
nations due to several challenges including urban popula­
tion expansion, financial and other economic difficulties
(Awuah 2018; Bezama and Agamuthu 2019; Odonkor S.
T. et al. 2020). In low-income countries, collection alone
drains 80–90% of total waste management budget. Thus,
in most developing countries including Ethiopia, open
dumping and open burning continue to be the primary
method of MSW disposal (Chandak 2010).
In many Sub-Saharan African nations, waste collec­
tion systems are communal container collection meth­
ods that appear most dominant (Awuah 2018;
Lagerkvist, A. and Dahlen, L. 2019; Lloyd 2019). In this
kind of system, common containers are provided at
dedicated points within neighborhoods for households
to drop off their solid waste. And then the trash pickup
vehicles acquire these containers and empty off the trash
at the designated disposal site and return the containers
to their original locations. However, this waste pickup
method is faced with several difficulties, resulting in
uncollected. Thus, there is an overflow of waste ground
dumping at collection sites (Atkinson, Davila, and
Mattingly 2019). Therefore, siting of communal con­
tainers could pose threats to the environment and health
of the inhabitants.
In many towns here in Ethiopia, waste management
is poor and is dumped along roadsides and within the
open areas, which could be a potential to create a serious
Figure 1. Illegal waste dumping practices in Wallame River, Dilla town, Southern Ethiopia.
public health problem and wellbeing of the peoples
(Tewodros, Arjan, and Fitsum 2008). A similar phenom­
enon is happening in Dilla Town, Ethiopia. Improper
waste management in Ethiopia is a major environmental
concern in urban areas (Fereja, Tagesse, and Benti
2020). There are many initiatives taking place in
Ethiopia to improve the environmental health of the
town. Thus, Dilla town started its solid waste manage­
ment about one decade back but the service cannot meet
changing demands. As a result, the estimate of the
municipality shows the waste generated in the town is
not well collected, having carelessly disposed of. The
residents of the town to some extent are mobilized
from time to time to clean their immediate neighbor­
hoods. Nevertheless, all these efforts ended up with
limited success. The scattered solid wastes are common
in most parts of Dilla town. The piles of waste are
dumped illegally in open places, roadsides, sewerage
courses, and drainage channels and end up in the nearby
river (Figure 1). The solid wastes left uncollected every­
where are creating odors and make areas filthy and ugly
for living. This threatens the environment and spread of
disease, which creates risk to public health through
attracting insects and rodents (Francis-Xavier et al.
2018; Odonkor S.T. et al. 2020).
In Dilla town, besides the existing inefficiency in SWM,
the rise in solid waste generation and alteration in the
composition is the most challenging issue that creates
a serious burden on the town municipal services. This
waste is not being adequately managed, creating
a significant environmental and public health problem
particularly in the slum areas, where the residents have
less capacity to get hold of better services and are often
ignored by the official agencies (Onibokun et al. 1999;
UNEP 2009; World Bank 2011). To the best of our knowl­
edge, there is no report on the status of the inhabitants on
solid waste management practice, characterization, and

quantification of solid waste in Dilla town, Ethiopia. Hence,
to curve the above-mentioned problems and their adverse
effects need urgent attention. Therefore, this study aimed
to assess the status of municipal solid waste management
practices and to characterize and quantify solid waste as
a measure toward effective solid waste management: In the
case of Dilla town, Southern Ethiopia.
Materials and methods
A solid waste source sorting and separation was con­
ducted at the household level in selected Kebeles (smal­
lest administrative unit in Ethiopia) of Dilla town of
Ethiopia from November 2019 to July 2020 for the
collection of data on solid waste composition and gen­
eration rate and compliance level of separation of the
waste.
Study area
Dilla town is located in Southern Ethiopia at a distance
of 359 km from the capital city of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa,
on the way from Addis Ababa to Moyale, Kenya. It is
Figure 2. Location of the study area.
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION 189
located at 6° 22´ to 6° 42´ N and 38° 21´ to 38° 41´
E longitude with an altitude of about 1476 m a.s.l
(Figure 2). The mean annual daily maximum and mini­
mum air temperatures are 28.4 and 12.8°C, respectively.
According to the Dilla Town Administration Population
Affairs – DTAPA, 2016, the town has an estimated total
population of 130,000 (Dilla Town Administration
Population Affairs – DTAPA, 2016).
Determination of sample size
Sample size determination is an important step in any
sample study. The number of samples depends primarily
on the cost versus its utility and by considering resource
constraints and representativeness of the sample. There
are different statistical procedures to calculate the number
of sample at each confidence level. Usually, for solid waste
data, the confidence level is set at 80% or 90% (Cacadia
Consulting Group 2003). Hence, for this assessment,
a 95% confidence level is considered with a 0.05 allowable
error. According to the information obtained from Dilla
town administration socioeconomic profile (2015) and
Dilla town municipality, there are about 11,285 housing
units (N). Out of those, 90% (p) are residential houses and
190 W.M. FEREJA AND D.D. CHEMEDA
the rest 10% (Q) is nonresidential houses such as com­
mercial activities, offices, and institutions.
For the public survey, a sample size (n) of households
to participate in the study was determined using the
sampling formula, which was developed by Cochran
(1977), which has been widely applied by other research­
ers (Bartlett, Kotrlik, and Higgins 2001; Mesfin Assefa and
Muktar Mohammed 2017;; Tassie Wegedie K. 2018) with
the desired degree of precision for the general population.
In this case, the population variable (p) is the house unit
variable and is calculated using Equation 1.
NZ2 pQ
n¼ 2 (1)
d ðN 1Þ þ Z 2 pQ
Where n = sample size of housing units
p = Housing unit variable (residential houses),
Q = nonresidential houses (offices, schools, etc.) = 1 – p
N = Total number of housing units
Z = Standard normal variable and its value that cor­
responds to a 95% confidence interval equals 1.96
d = Allowable error (0.05)
Using Equation 1, the sample size of 138 households
was obtained. According to Aderajew et al. (2019), 10%
nonresponse rate has been added. The total sample size
considered for this study was 152 samples, which are quite
sufficient to obey the minimum sample size for the stan­
dard scientific study. For those waste generators other than
residential households, such as commercial centers, public
and private institutions, and street sweeping were consid­
ered as 20% of the total population (Matt Crowe and Gerry
Carty 1996).
Sampling technique
Regarding the sampling approach, a purposive random
sampling technique was administered. The town com­
prises 3 kefle ketema (containing more than 2 kebeles
with a medium level administrative unit of the town in
Ethiopia) and 9 kebeles. By employing a simple random
sampling approach, 3 kebeles were selected, one kebele
from each kefle ketema. The sample size was distributed
based on proportional allocation to the size of total
households in the respective kebele. Finally, a stratified,
purposive, and direct sampling technique was employed
to select the households. The 80/20 approach was used,
Table 1. Kebele’s and the number of households (HHs) included in the study.
Name of
Sr. No Sub-city Name of kebele’s Number of HHs included
1 Bedcha Woldena
2 Sessa Haroke
3 Haro Wallabu Hasedela
Total
the first stratification of waste generators where 80% of
the total waste could be generated by 20% of the gen­
erators. Hence, 80% of the total samples were selected
from those who generate a large proportion of waste.
This approach was followed to identify representative
samples from the entire commercial centers, institu­
tions, and street sweepings. Accordingly, the total sam­
ple selected was 108 commercial buildings; 24 public
and private institutions, and 10 street sweepings.
Kebeles and households included in the study
To gather primary data from Dilla town, the three kefle
ketema, namely Badcha, Sessa, and Hasedela were
included in the study. To reduce the cost of time and
energy, three kebeles were randomly selected; one kebele
from each kefle ketema (Weldina kebele from Badcha
kefle ketema, Haroke kebele from Sessa kefle ketema
and Hasedela kebele from Haro Wollabu kefle ketema)
and their household number are based on the population
size of each kebeles as presented in Table 1. These house­
holds were selected using proportional simple random
sampling. Accordingly, the specified 60 sample house­
holds were selected from Weldina kebele (Badcha kefle
ketema), 47 from Haroke kebele (Sessa kefle ketema), and
45 from Hasedela kebele (Haro Wollabu kefle ketema).
Data collection, sorting, and measurement
The individual householders of the study location were
visited to inform inhabitants about the survey and to receive
feedback on their willingness to participate in the study.
A formal survey for household residents and SWM operators
using a structured questionnaire was conducted to gather
data on the current waste management practices of the
inhabitants. A house-to-house interview was carried out by
the investigators and data collectors that had earlier been
trained on how to solicit responses on the designed ques­
tionnaire. Questionnaires were administered to obtain data
on waste management knowledge and reasons for willing­
ness to participate. For the sake of simplicity, we divide the
team into three; each contained 1 supervisor, 2 household
interviewers, 4 waste sorters, and one cart transporting the
wastes to the sorting site. The chosen households were earlier
trained for 2 days on waste collection, sorting, and
Sample size share (%) Response rate (%)
60 39.47 98.33
47 30.92 89.36
45 29.61 91.11
152 100 92.93%

separation. The coding of plastic bags was done using per­
manent markers with the same code given to the respective
households. The number of persons living in each selected
household, the floor area, and the number of customers of
commercial buildings and institutions were recorded on the
datasheet. Solid waste samples were taken from all inter­
viewed households and transported to selected sorting sta­
tions for waste segregation. Initial sorting of the waste was
carried out by the members of the households and further
sorting was done by the research team. 24 m2 hard plastic
sheets were placed on the floor to ease sorting.
Wastes collected from 152 households having a total
population of 851 were mixed to keep its homogeneity, and
finally sorting, characterization and weight measurement for
consecutive 8 days, as the first-day waste was not considered.
Care has been exercised to avoid the collection of large-sized
particles to reduce sampling bias. To this effect, large items
and bags containing waste category like khat waste (Catha
edulis), leftover locally known as geraba or leaves, and glass
were removed from the sample and set aside for weighing,
bypassing the sorting box. The fine particles were sieved
from the waste to assist ease sorting and reduce the fractions
which could otherwise be identified as inert. The sorted
wastes were further segregated into 9 major categories and
Weight of MSW generated at household
Per capita waste generation ¼
ðTotal number of persons in the householdÞðTotal number of generation daysÞ
analyzed by their weight as well as the percentage composi­
tion as described by Miezah K. et al. (2015).
These include:
(a) Organics – Food and fruits waste, vegetables and
plants, yard waste (grass trimmings), wood, and
animal droppings,
(b) Plastics – Polyethylene terephthalate (PET), high-
density polyethylene (HDPE), polyvinyl chloride
(PVC), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), poly­
propylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), other plastics,
(c) Paper – Cardboards, newspapers, office papers,
tissue papers, magazines, etc
(d) Metals – All kinds of metals such as scrap, cans/
Tins,
(e) Glass (Colored, Plain), every type of glass, etc
(f) Textiles- All kinds of textile wastes
(g) Rubber and leather – All kinds of rubber and
leather wastes
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION 191
(h) Inert – (Sand, fine organics, ash, and dust).
(i) Miscellaneous – (Construction and demolishing
waste, batteries, paints, and any other waste frac­
tion is not fit in other categories).
After sorting operations, the categorized waste has
been reweighted according to the waste category.
All weight measurements were done after regular
calibration and presented in gram (g) or kilogram
(kg). The sorted wastes were weighed using
a weighing balance (1–100 kg) and a Top Pan bal­
ance (China P090008, Hot pan) of varied capacities:
1 g, 2 g, 5 g, 10 g, 20 g, 50 g, 0.1 kg, 0.2 kg, 0.5 kg,
1 kg and 2 kg (Labotrix Group Limited, China). The
percentage of waste composition was calculated by
using Equation 2.
Percentage composition of waste fraction
Weight of separated waste (2)
¼ � 100
The total of mixed waste sampled
The per capita per day generation rate was determined
as per the total waste collected in a day and the separated
fractions using Equation 3.
(3)
Assessment of solid waste management practice of
inhabitants
The empirical data upon which the authors draw is
gathered through repeated (four times with in the
study period) periods of fieldwork were carried out.
Studies were conducted in January, February, June,
and July months. Employing a descriptive cross-
sectional research design, the study has adopted
a mixed research approach to assess the current solid
waste management practices in the study town since the
intention was to assess the practice of inhabitants on
solid waste management in Dilla town; the authors
selected all (three) kefle ketemas for the study.
Data were gathered from randomly selected indivi­
duals through oral interviews and questioners to obtain
data on waste management knowledge and to assess the
solid waste management practice of inhabitants. The 152
householders from whom the solid waste sample was
collected for characterization and quantification purposes
192 W.M. FEREJA AND D.D. CHEMEDA
were included for the oral interview and questioner. Key
informant interviews, focus group discussions, and field
observations were employed to collect the required pri­
mary data. For household surveys, well-structured ques­
tionnaires were employed which had both open and
close-ended questions. Eight key informants include
from head departments, staff members from the munici­
pality of the town, Environmental Protection, and Land
Administration Bureau, micro and small enterprise lea­
ders, and community representatives were incorporated
as key informant interviewees to generate better data
regarding solid waste management practices, and their
challenges. Those individuals were selected based on
their length of experience in solid waste management
and their life experience.
Four focus group discussions were made, each having
8–10 homogeneous members, to solicit the desired data
regarding the solid waste management system of Dilla
town as well as inhabitants experience regarding waste
disposal practices. Field observations, regarding the
method of solid waste accumulation sites (open spaces,
roadsides, drainage channels, and collection containers)
were conducted too and photos were taken.
Data analysis
The data were coded employing a standard template and
then analyzed using SPSS version 20 statistical software.
Data cleaning and analysis were carried out accordingly.
The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statis­
tics and presented in frequency, percentages, and graphs.
Mean and standard deviation were calculated from the
obtained data. The per capita waste generation rate in the
town was determined using descriptive analysis and waste
characteristics were displayed using charts, and tables.
Results and discussion
The solid waste generation rate of households
As shown in Table 2, the rate of waste generation was in
the range of 1.15–2.41 kg/household for the investigated
households. The average per-capita waste generation rate
Table 2. Average waste generation rate among residential households in Dilla town (n = 152) .
The average amount of SW
Name of Average household
S/N kebeles (weight in kg) (volume in L) size (persons)
1 Woldena 1.15 3.37 5.1
2 Haroke 1.24 5.29 4.36
3 Hasedela 2.41 5.96 4.86
Average 1.6 4.87 4.77
among residential households was found to be 0.475 kg/
capita.day and 1.290 L/capita.day, making the average
density of un-compacted waste (waste as collected) is
317 kg/m3. Out of the three kebele’s included in this
study, the solid waste generation rate from Woldena kebele
households was the highest producing 0.610 kg/capita.day
followed by Haroke kebele that generates 0.559 kg/capita.
day. The least generation rate recorded was in Hasedela
kebele with a per-capita waste generation rate of 0.255 kg/
capita.day, however, with a relatively dense waste (347 kg/
m3). The average household solid waste generation rate of
the town, when the waste generated from commercial
sources is taken into account is 0.613 kg/capita.day.
Thus, the solid waste generation rate (0.475 kg/capita.
day) of Dilla town is high as compared with other data
from towns in Ethiopia having almost similar status,
0.35 kg/capita.day from Bonga town (Mulu and Legesse
2005); 0.18 kg/capita.day from Bishoftu town (Mebrate
2005); 0.43 kg/capita.day from Gondar town (Sharma
et al. 2011) of Ethiopia and 0.233 Kg/capita.day for East
African cities developed by WHO (Birke 1999; Gebrie
2009) but, lower than Debre Berhan town, Ethiopia
(0.55 kg/capita.day) (Vikrant Tyagi et al. 2014). Almost
similar quantity of solid waste generation rate was
reported 0.46 kg/cap.day of LagaTafo Laga Dadi town,
Ethiopia (Assefa and Mohammed 2017).
The solid waste generation rate of commercial
sources
Results from commercial sources reveal that the solid waste
generation rate varies in a different category of commercial
type studied. The largest generators among the commercial
sources were hotels, restaurants, and cafeterias accounted
0.35 kg/customer.day, whereas other commercial sources
generated within the range of 0.007(Commercial complex)
to 0.035 kg/sq.m.day (supermarkets). The average solid
waste density of the commercial sources found was
211.03 kg/m3. However, their density considerably varies
from 57.67 kg/m3 among shopping complexes to
834.60 kg/m3 within juice houses.
In this study, the solid waste generation rate of the hotel
is comparable with the study reported in Phnom Penh city,
Average daily per capita generation of SW
Average density as
(in kg/capita. day) (in L/capita. day) collected (kg/m3)
0.610 0.73 326
0.559 0.41 227
0.255 1.15 398
0.475 1.29 317

Cambodia, whose generation rate was 0.33 kg/customer.
day (Mongtoeun Y. et al. 2014), and the city center of Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, 0.45 kg/customer.day (Mohamed et al.
2009). However, lower than the study done in Chittagong
city of Bangladesh where the hotel generation rate was
0.70 kg/customer.day (Hossain M. L. et al. 2013). The
solid waste generation rate of a commercial complex is
significantly lower than the study reported in Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia (0.013 kg/sq.m.day) but, a higher gen­
eration rate was reported in supermarkets (0.013 kg/sq.m.
day) (Osman Saeed, Hassan, and Mujeebu 2009).
According to the Dilla town tourism office, the town
accommodates about 287 service delivery units (hotels,
restaurants, and cafeterias/juice houses). In this study, it is
found that a single service delivery sector on average
serves 190.9 customers per day. Hence, from this service
delivery sector per day 106.73 kg of solid waste is gener­
ated in the town. The waste stream in hotels is also
characterized by the diversified type of waste items (9
major categories): organic (more of vegetable peelings,
yard waste, and a small quantity of wood), paper (normal,
coated, tissue, carton), Plastics (LDPE, PET, PVC, PP, PS,
and other plastic), rubber and leather, textile, glass, metal,
inert, and miscellaneous. However, all 9 types of waste
categories were already mixed at the source without any
practice of waste segregation. Among the solid waste
items generated in hotels, the dominant waste fraction is
organic, where hotels and restaurants account for 76%;
cafeterias/juice houses account for 97% of the generated
wastes are organic waste. Almost a similar finding was
reported by Mongtoeun Y. et al. (2014) in Phnom Penh
city, Cambodia, that restaurants and hotels produce 60%–
70% organic waste. Based on this finding, hotels, restau­
rants, and cafeterias/juice houses in Dilla town generate
25.33 tons of organic solid waste per day. The other
abundantly generated waste items among service delivery
sectors, particularly hotels, were plastics waste items.
Hotels alone in Dilla town on average generate 0.99 tons
of plastic waste daily where LDPE (plastic bags) and PET
(plastic bottles) were the two dominant plastic polymers
found in hotel waste streams.
The other sources of solid waste generators in the
commercial sector are supermarkets, boutiques, ladies’
beauty salons, and barbers, and other related shops.
According to the Dilla town investment and tourism
office, there are 457 retails in the town. It is found that
the average retail generates 0.021 kg of solid waste per
square meter per day. This sector, therefore, generates
nearly 3.35 tons of solid waste daily. Paper and carton
are the dominant waste category in the retail of com­
mercial complex, whereas hair is dominant in beauty
salons and barbers, reflecting the large amounts of
packaging used in the retails.
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION 193
Household solid waste characterization and
quantification
The generated solid waste was segregated to its composition
and then quantified. The result of the study shows that
household waste is an aggregate of all materials or
a heterogeneous mass of discarded materials ready for dis­
posal. A characteristic of solid wastes generated in Dilla town
was given in Figure 3. The solid waste generated from house­
holds in Dilla town was found to be dominated by organics
(68.4%) is easily biodegradable and can be managed at the
household or community level by introducing integrated
urban agriculture that might convert this waste to organic
fertilizer through compositing. This was followed by the
following order, inert material (19.6%), miscellaneous
(6.9%), plastic materials (1.9%), papers (1.4%), textiles
(0.96%), rubber and leather (0.5%), glass (0.3%), and metals
(0.3%). It is found that glass and metals are accounted the
least amount. Ashes are common types of waste, due to
excessive use of biomass fuels in Dilla town. In the waste
aggregate sticks and leaves were observed more frequently,
this might be due to Dilla town being a cash crop area, and
the younger peoples are frequently using the leaf of khat as
a stimulant. A similar observation was reported by Regassa,
Sundaraa, and Bogale (2011). This indicates that the waste
composition is geography-specific. Beside this, the waste
composition is also influenced by the economic context of
the households. “‘Greater wealth results in higher consump­
tion levels, thus generating more waste amidst changes in
waste composition’” (UNEP 2007).
As observed during the fieldwork, households having low
income have a high percentage of organic matter in the
household waste stream like food leftover, vegetable and
fruit peelings, onion seed coats. However, other component
wastes show a reverse trend. Paper, plastic, glass, and metal
fractions increase in the waste stream of middle- and high-
income households. This pattern in the waste composition is
attributed to high spending among better-off people on
packaging materials and much disposed. While low-
income households spend most of their disposable income
on the purchase of food items, most of which are consumed
(less wasteful in consumption) and a relatively high level of
recovery of valuable components such as scrap metals, plas­
tics, card boxes, and bottles for sale. As there is no legal waste
recycling company in the town, some of the recovered wastes
are either reutilized at the source or sold to itinerant buyers,
locally known as quraleos (persons who practice the
exchange of recycled waste for other goods). The composi­
tion of MSW varies from one municipality to another and
from country to country significantly. Hence, such variation
depends mainly on the lifestyle, economic situation, waste
management regulations, and industrial structure (Hussein
I. et al. 2018).
194 W.M. FEREJA AND D.D. CHEMEDA

Organics Organics

Plastics Plastics

Paper 0.9 Paper

5.1
0.96
2.6
6.9 Metals Metals
18.1
0.1
0.5 19.6
Glass 0.2 Glass
7.9
0.3
0.3 68.4 63.6 Textiles
Textiles
6.3
1.5
Rubber and Rubber and
1.9 leather leather
inert inert

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous

a b

Figure 3. Average household waste composition of Dilla town (a) (W/W%) and (b) (V/V) .

Status of solid waste management practice of Dilla
town
Solid waste sorting
Sorting of solid waste into different elements at the
source is an important part of solid waste management.
This can be to create waste management easy and sim­
ple. Besides waste management, waste sorting is an
activity that aims to get benefits out of waste. An attempt
was made to assess to what extent household waste
segregation (sorting) practice is. In Dilla town, solid
waste sorting at the source is a relatively new activity,
which has not become a common practice yet. The data
shows that the majority (94.1%) of the households cov­
ered by the study do not separate waste at the household
level and stored their waste without segregation. Only
5.9% of the households were practiced sorting at house­
hold level into different categories (Table 3). Study
shows that in Ethiopia having almost similar towns,
a high percentage of solid waste is not sorted at
Table 3. Waste sorting practice of Dilla town.
Waste sorting practice of Dilla town Frequency
Practice of sorting Yes
No
Total
The reason for not Lack of awareness
sorting Lack of sensitivity
Difficult and time taking
Little practical value
Total
a household level. For instance, a study conducted in
Jigjiga town 65.5% (Tewodros Manyazewal and Tesfaye
Walelgn 2019), in Asella town 72.8% (Gorfnesh Lema
et al. 2019), and in Dassie town 76% (Alie in 2015) did
not segregate solid waste at source. Similarly, research
conducted by Bizatu and Negga (2010), revealed that
about 66% of solid waste in Kersa town, Ethiopia, is
dumped in open space. Sorting of solid waste mainly
depends on public awareness. For instance, Nigatu,
Rajan, and Bizunesh (2011) found in their study of the
challenges and opportunities of solid waste management
in Addis Ababa City, about 70% of households’ segre­
gate their waste into different elements because the
awareness is relatively high. This implies that creating
public awareness is a key issue to enhance solid waste
segregation at source.
In Dilla town, waste sorting is comparatively set to
extend. However, the practice is extremely far below the
expected by Dilla town administration. The households
gave the explanation why they did not practice sorting at
source, including lack of awareness regarding the impor­
tance of waste sorting (44.1%), lack of sensitivity (23.0%),
Percent difficult and time-taking activity (17.1%), and little prac­
9 5. 9 tical value (15.8%). The interviews and individuals who
143 94. 1
152 100 participated in a focal group discussion disclose most
67 44. 1 households are not familiar with waste sorting. They
35 23. 0
26 17. 1
mentioned that some of the households are aware of the
25 15. 8 importance of segregation, but they are careless and mix
152 100 every type of wastes as one. This implies that there is an

attitudinal problem that exists among the households.
Hence, the community leader pointed out “there are
factors that shape the willingness to separate waste at
source: (1) it consumes an excessive amount of time, (2)
it needs more containers and this has a cost implication,
and (3) it requires more space in households. Nigatu,
Rajan, and Bizunesh (2011) reported that the above rea­
sons hinder waste sorting at the household level.
As there is no formal waste recycling activity in Dilla
town, informal slightly solid waste sorting activities were
made unknowingly mainly by poor peoples, since some
waste materials required/recovered for different pur­
poses. As the interviewers disclose, cans and scrap
metals are stored and sold by weight to people as qur­
aleos, and sold to factories for recycling. Organic wastes
like plant origin are sorted for reuse in gardens and as
fuel after the waste gets dried. Some households give the
waste away to their neighbors who use it for animal feed.
The manure is used on plaster walls and floors, and for
fuel when dried up, whereas the grass is fed to livestock.
In some households, vegetable and fruit peelings are
used as manure within back yard gardens or used for
animal feed. As indicated by participants during focus
group discussions, metals, plastic materials, worn-out
clothes, and shoes are potentially reusable materials. It
was observed that reusable materials are removed by
some households and by waste pickers during the col­
lection process and at the disposal site.
Solid waste storage
The waste should normally be stored at the source of
waste generation until collected for its disposal. Table 4,
shows that 46.7% of the total 152 respondent households
store their solid waste in sacks, 34.9% deposited in plastic
bags locally known as Madaberia. During the focus group
discussions, they disclose households use sacks and plastic
bags to store solid waste because of the cost-effectiveness,
availability, and suitability for holding and transporting
a large volume of solid waste. As Table 4 shows, 13.2% of
the households store their solid wastes in homestead
yards, open spaces, near roadsides, and vacant areas, in
open sewers, banks of rivers, and around buildings near
their homes. Others use carton boxes (3.9%) and metallic
barrel (1.3%) to store the solid waste they generate. This
Table 4. Materials used for storing household waste of Dilla town.
SN Waste item generated Frequency Percent
1 Sack 71 46.7
2 Plastic bags 53 34.9
3 Homestead yard 20 13.2
4 Carton box 6 3.9
5 Metallic barrel 2 1.3
Total 152 100
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION 195
makes the waste collection system difficult. The study
shows the households dispose 79.8% of solid waste in an
uncontrolled and unplanned dump sites (along the road­
side near residential buildings), which sprawls over an
outsized area and this affects the encompassing scenery
which makes the environment filthy. There is no habit of
waste storage; instead, the wastes are thrown on the
streets, treating the streets as a receptacle of waste. The
inefficiency of the open transfer stations creates major
problems to the environment; this puts the health of the
inhabitants at risk. And pollute the air by releasing green­
house gases and water runoff that ends up in the water
supply system.
Solid waste collection and transportation
As shown in Table 5, only 20.1% use communal collection
systems where waste generators bring their waste to collec­
tion points which could be containers or open places
including roadsides. Block collection accounts 13.8%
where waste generators are responsible for bringing their
waste to collection vehicles, and 9.9% of the households use
formal door–to–door collection service. The highest pro­
portion 55.9% of the solid waste from households thrown
away on the roadside and part of it can be collected by the
town municipality. In the town, there are two basic types
(human power and animal power) solid waste collection
systems are used. Concerning the collection using human
power, transportation of waste to the collection points
(transfer stations) or collection vehicles is made using
human labor. This is common among residents who can­
not afford to acquire door-to-door collection services.
Additionally, for communal and block collection, house­
holds use door-to-door service provided by two-wheeler
carts. Workers inform households to urge their solid waste
ready for the collection service so they collect the waste
using wheeled carts, with a donkey in front pulling the cart.
Since municipality collection vehicles cannot reach all
areas, households living around roadsides were the sole
beneficiaries of the block collection service. As Table 5
shows, the waste collection method of the town is usually
delivered through the waste generators delivering their
waste directly to collection points.
As one community representative disclosed, “the
municipal waste collection system has just one route
Table 5. Types of the solid waste collection system in Dilla town.
SN Waste collection system Frequency Percent
1 Communal collection 31 20.4
2 Block Collection 21 13.8
3 Formal door to door collection 15 9.9
4 Informal door to door collection/self-delivered 85 55.9
Total 152 100
196 W.M. FEREJA AND D.D. CHEMEDA
and the truck makes one trip per day to the ultimate
disposal site. It is also unable to stick to its collection
schedule”. The carts provide door-to-door solid waste
collection services to the households, but it is not as they
want. As one of the solid waste workers disclosed, ‘most of
the carts are old and can’t travel at the expected speed, as
a result, delay in collection and disposal process is com­
mon. Since, most of the streets did not design to permit
such collection vehicles to pass. Some streets are narrow,
sloppy, and slippery during the rainy season. In such
areas, the amount of waste increases and is rarely collected
particularly during the rainy season. During the interview,
some respondents have been stated that there is no door-
to-door collection service in their area due to inaccessi­
bility (awkward road surfaces and topography). As
observed during fieldwork, high-income residential
areas have more access to collection services than low–
income residential areas. In areas where motorized collec­
tion service does not reach, an animal-powered collection
system is commonly used. However, as the study house­
holds indicated, “there remains lack of support in low-
income residential areas as animal-driven carts do not
reach and collect wastes as needed, in that case, peoples
are forced to use human labor”. Variability in waste
collection frequency reduces confidence on waste collec­
tion service (Coffey and Coad 2010). As observed during
fieldwork, the number of waste containers is not enough,
and they are obliged to throw their garbage in open areas.
The current solid waste collection and transportation
system of the town is not as expected by the municipality
of the town. The study revealed that in Dilla town 58.3%.
of the households surveyed do not have access to the
regular collection of solid waste. Collection services are
more active and limited to mainly the open areas within
the town and the business area where they are able to
Figure 4. Current solid waste transfer station of Dilla town, Southern Ethiopia.
pay for the services. The situation is similar to the find­
ings of the African Development Bank (2002) which
were reported as the rate of waste collection across the
African continent varies from 20 to 80%. In conclusion,
in Dilla town, all generated wastes are not collected as
planned and required.
Solid waste transfer station
The availability of waste transfer stations is vital in the
solid waste management system. There are communal
containers in Dilla town but very limited areas. In areas
where there are no communal containers, inhabitants use
open places as transfer stations. Surprisingly, as one of the
key informants disclosed, “disposing of solid wastes in
open places and drainage systems is a common practice in
the town”. There is punishment on individuals who get
rid of waste in unauthorized areas but there is lack of
implementation. As a result, regulations do not seem to be
obeyed by the households as desired. Some transfer sta­
tions are often overflowing with uncollected waste
(Figures 4a, b). There is improper use of transfer stations
because the stinky smell of the waste has forced inhabi­
tants not to reach transfer places to dispose of waste
properly. Some households are choosing to burn solid
waste at precollection sites. This burning of waste pro­
duces toxic gases as well as smoke which have been led to
pose serious effects on the health of peoples (UN-
HABITAT 2012) and it has a contribution to climate
change through enhancing the concentration of green­
house gas in the atmosphere. Households burn even
biodegradable organic wastes (that should be composted).
However, as municipal solid waste workers indicated,
“the problem with compost in the town is that there is
low demand for the product”.

During the focus group discussion, the discussants
indicated that “the frequency of the solid waste collection
service provided by the municipality is very low as a result
of the limited number and existing vehicles getting old”.
This creates a large volume of solid waste on the road. As
one of the key informants indicated, “parts of the house­
hold wastes are carelessly dumped in open places before it
reaches to transfer stations”. On the other hand, even
wastes that are collected in different containers are not
timely transported to the disposal sites. The issues asso­
ciated with the limited carrying capacity of the munici­
pality tracks and downtime frequently caused by vehicle
problems. There is a limited number of communal con­
tainers and a low frequency of waste collection creates
heaping of waste in open space, sewers, and other places
particularly near residential areas. These conditions create
problems for the households, calling for the more efficient
and urgent arrangement of transfer stations’. The long-
distance covered or time spent to dispose of waste goes to
add up the dumping of waste in an illegal place. The
uncollected solid waste has often the common cause of
blocked sewerages which increases the chance of flooding
and vector-borne diseases (Achankeng 2003; Amy
Krystosik et al. 2020; Kumar M. and Prakash V. 2020;
Faiza M.T et al. 2019; Shaoli De and Biswajit Debnath.
2016) and reduces the esthetic value of green areas.
Solid waste final disposal
The solid waste disposal in Dilla town is through unsani­
tary landfills. Like in many developing countries, little
focus is given to the municipal solid waste collection
and management since there is lack of attention for
waste disposal. The current situation of Dilla town solid
waste transport system and final disposal was shown in
Figures 5a–c and 6 respectively. While collection would
help to remove waste from the generators, the collected
waste is often disposed of in open dumps without concern
for its environmental and public health impacts. The
common transport mode in the study town is open and
general-purpose trucks that transport and dump all types
of wastes together. Besides, the trucks are not convenient
Figure 5. Current Dilla town solid waste transport system.
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION 197
for workers during loading, lifting of wastes are done
manually. As one community representative put it,
“most often workers are not provided with protective
materials which expose workers to various diseases.”
Wastes on transit are commonly uncovered causing lit­
tering, odor, and esthetics problems. The municipality is
responsible for transporting wastes to the final dump site,
locally known as Wallame dumpsite. According to the
interview held with one of the key informants, “the main
challenge in the transportation of solid waste includes few
trucks, trucks that are very old, maintenance difficulties,
and negligence of drivers.” Wallame dumpsite is located
in an environmentally sensitive area; close to a valley. As
observed, Wallame dumpsite receives mixed wastes of
various origins (Figure 6). The waste dumps pose a real
effect on workers, waste pickers, and stray animals that
visit the sites. Most of the waste workers and scavengers
do not wear proper protective gear exposing them to
serious health problems.
Urban areas are supposed to have designated landfill
sites. However, in Dilla town, such landfill sites are absent.
Dilla dump site is a natural valley, and the roads are poorly
maintained brings significant risk to waste transport. The
trouble with this dumpsite is that there is not protected
from the surrounding environment and then the hazar­
dous chemicals and leachates that are released from the
dumpsite pollute downstream. Leachates from this dump­
site can flow into river and drainage channels as runoff
water and threats human health. Presently, waste manage­
ment disposal is very weak. This dumpsite operates beyond
its maximum capacity. The existence of plastic waste in the
upper layer reduces the biological degradation of organic
waste, which reduces the life span of the dumpsite and
increases the decomposition time of the waste. Valleys are
often the worst places for waste disposal operations,
because of difficulties in preventing the long-term contam­
ination of water resources from wastes that are tipped
down slopes into valleys, tend to pollute and offer little
opportunity for rehabilitation (UN-HABITAT 2012).
Residents that were interviewed blamed the inappropriate
disposal of MSW in path, riverside, and road reserves on
198 W.M. FEREJA AND D.D. CHEMEDA
Figure 6. Current Dilla town solid waste dumpsite.
the failure of the town municipality to provide appropriate
collection services. In general, there is no sanitary landfill or
controlled disposal site in Dilla town for waste disposal.
Solid waste even from the formal collection system is
transported to an open dumpsite which is located at
a distance of 5 km from Dilla town. Piles of solid wastes
are often found along roads, underneath bridges, in drai­
nage channels, and other open spaces.
A challenge to solid waste management
Certain deficiencies have been identified in the existing
solid waste management system of the town. This
includes in Dilla town, well–trained human resources
for solid waste management are scarce. People without
or with limited technical training in waste management
are simply assigned to handle it. There are limited num­
bers of service providers. The solid waste management
department uses different types of equipment (vehicles,
waste containers, and dust bins) for solid waste manage­
ment services. However, the problem is associated with
inadequacy and improper use of this equipment. One
serious problem that affects the solid waste management
system is the problem of vehicles. The town has a limited
number of municipal trucks and some of these trucks
served for many years. Because of this, most of the vehi­
cles are currently inefficient. The demand does not be
timely addressed, resulting in the growing problem of
waste management in the town. People are unable to
use the existing containers as they wish. Containers are
few and not evenly distributed. Besides, some of the con­
tainers are placed very close to residential houses, and
those residents living near the containers complain about
the stinking smell. As a result, the filthy areas where the
containers are placed continue to affect the public health
and the beauty of the town. As one of the key informants
put it, “‘people continue to use containers improperly
because of the stinky smell of the wastes that are left
uncollected for a long period.’”
One serious problem that affects the solid waste man­
agement system of the town is the absence of waste segre­
gation at the source. There are also other problems such as:
increasing the amount of dumping of waste into open
space and littering on the roadside finally end up to the
rivers, lack of standard transfer stations, solid waste collec­
tion service provided does not cover all solid waste gen­
erators. Collection services are limited to mainly business
areas and households that are willing to pay for the services.
Only a small fraction of wastes are collected through formal
and informal collection system, street–sweepers and waste
collectors are not provided with personal protective equip­
ment, emptying of community containers are irregular (no
fixed programme), waste collection is considered as the tax
of children and poor peoples. Households particularly
from slums, low-income areas, and local shopkeepers fre­
quently throw waste onto streets, and any available open
spaces causing excessive littering and clogging of drainage
systems. There is no treatment facility for municipal solid
waste, there exists no leachate or emission control of the
dumping site and the dumping site has no excavator or
compactor. The absence of an environmentally acceptable
landfill site that fulfills the standards provided in the envir­
onmental policies and laws concerning SWM in contem­
porary Ethiopia.
Some common causes for poor waste management
services in Dilla town are linked to lack of appropriate

government policy and legislation and its enforcement,
lack of strategic planning, lack of public awareness and
commitment, inadequate technical expertise, and failure
to develop the necessary human resources, and insuffi­
cient financial resources or inappropriate allocation of
available resources. The constitution of the Federal
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (Article 92.2) indicates
that “Government and citizens shall have the duty to
protect the environment.” However, in Dilla town, there
is no continuous education on solid waste management
and the legal system that governs the residents. Even
those who know the law, never act accordingly. This
affected the management system and created a negative
impact on the performance of waste management. There
is a problem with vehicles to dump the waste in due
course and this problem is serious, especially during the
rainy season. Carts and municipal trucks cannot move
as they want because the carts are old and road surfaces
are not reasonable. Hence, the waste that is expected to
be disposed of is not taken to the dumping site at the
fixed time frame. There is improper use of transfer
stations by some households. There is a lack of will
from the beneficiaries’ side to pay the fee the collection
service deserves. The absence of community participa­
tion is also a challenge for proper SWM.
Conclusion
The current study showed that the average per-capita
per day waste generation rate of Dilla town households
was 0.475 kg/capita.day. The organic fraction was the high­
est in the waste stream by weight followed by inert materi­
als. The solid waste generation found in the decreasing
order of organic > inert > miscellaneous > plastics > papers
> textiles > leather and rubber > metals = glass by weight
were obtained. Poor solid waste management has remained
one amongst the issues Dilla town continues to face. The
findings in this study showed that households have low
levels of awareness toward solid waste management and
associated problems, do not have adequate access to door-
to-door solid waste collection, and low solid waste collec­
tion frequency, illegal waste dumping and disposing of in
unsuitable landfill could have contributed to the reported
improper solid waste management practice. Thus, enhan­
cing the awareness of solid waste management at the com­
munity level, providing door-to-door solid waste collection
service, and providing the appropriate sanitary landfill are
found to be potential strategies to avoid the problems
associated with waste disposal in the nearby environment.
Providing equipment and facilities, provision of incentives
and other financial policies currently lacking and inap­
propriate must be provided. In addition, it is highly
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION 199
advisable to employ waste reduction measures like redu­
cing, reusing, and recycling. The work in this study shows
a promising strategy to obtain a comprehensive image of
SWM practice in the district and to convince policymakers
to give emphasis to the issue.
Acknowledgment
The authors are very thankful to the office of the Vice pre­
sident for Research and Technology Transfer of Dilla
University for financial support.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This work was supported by the Vice president for Research
and Technology Transfer of Dilla University [DU/018/18].
About the authors
Workineh Mengesha Fereja, is currently a staff member of
Chemistry Department and Vice Director of Energy and
Environment Research Center at Dilla University, Ethiopia. His
specialization is in Environmental Sanitation. He worked on envir­
onmental analysis, the physical-chemical behavior and partition­
ing of organic micro-pollutants in/between the different
environmental matrices. Mr. Fereja has been working research
on the application of the current technologies for the quantifica­
tion, prevention and remediation of environmental pollution
where the focus area is waste/wastewater treatment technology.
Part of his research results have been published in international
journal, 1. Journal of Applied Chemical Science International K.K.
Sivakumer, Workineh M. Fereja, & S.Mohalakshmi (2017).
Prosopisnjuliflora carbon and commercial activated carbon in
the pollutant reduction technology. 8(1): 1-5. 2. Journal of
Cogent Food & Agriculture Workineh Mengesha Fereja,
Wondimagegn Tagesse, and Girmaye Benti (2020). Treatment of
coffee processing wastewater using Moringa stenopetala seed pow­
der: Removal of turbidity and chemical oxygen demand. 6(1):
1816420, DOI:10.1080/23311932.2020.1816420. The experience
of the applicant is ranging from environmental analysis combine
preventive and remediation technology. So the manuscript sub­
mitted for publication is one of the projects among the research
activities in our lab group.
Dereje Diriba Chemeda, is currently a staff member of
Chemistry Department and coordinator of Energy and
Environment Research Center at Dilla University, Ethiopia.
His specialization is in Analytical Chemistry and
Environmental Science. He worked on environmental analysis,
water and wastewater treatment. Mr. Chemeda has been work­
ing research on the application of the current technologies for
the quantification, prevention and remediation of environmen­
tal contaminants where the focus area is waste/wastewater char­
acterization and treatment technology.
200 W.M. FEREJA AND D.D. CHEMEDA
ORCID
Workineh Mengesha Fereja http://orcid.org/0000-0002-
1080-5115
References
Abdel-Shafy, H. I., and M. S. M. Mansour. 2018. Solid waste
issue: Sources, composition, disposal, recycling, and
valorization. Review Egyptian J. Petroleum 27
(2018):1275–90. doi:10.1016/j.ejpe.2018.07.003.
Achankeng, E. 2003. Globalization, urbanization, and municipal
solid waste management in Africa, African Studies Association
of Australasia and the pacific. Conference Proceedings, African
on a Global Stage, University of Adelaide, Australia.
Aderajew, M., R. Martin, R. Sirak, G. Azage, and
T. Mulumebet. 2019. Urban health extension service utili­
zation and associated factors in the community of Gullele
sub-city administration, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Int.
J. Community Med. Public Health 6 (3):976–85.
doi:10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20190580.
African Development Bank. 2002. Study on solid waste man­
agement options for Africa. Canada.
Amy, K., G. Njoroge, L. Odhiambo, J. E. Forsyth, F. Mutuku,
and A. Desiree Labeaud. 2020. Solid wastes provide breed­
ing sites, burrows, and food for biological disease vectors,
and urban zoonotic reservoirs: A call to action for
solutions-based research. Front. Public Health. 7:405.
doi:10.3389/fpubh.2019.00405.
Assefa, M., and M. Mohammed. 2017. Solid waste Generation
Rate and Characterization Study for Laga Tafo Laga Dadi
Town, Oromia, Ethiopia. Int. J. Environ. Protect. Policy 5
(6):84–93. doi:10.11648/j.ijepp.20170506.11.
Atkinson, A., J. D. Davila, and M. Mattingly. 2019. The chal­
lenge of environmental management in urban areas.
London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780429439094.
Awuah, K. G. B. 2018. The role of urban planning in sub-saharan
Africa urban pollution management. Urban Pollut: Sci. Manage.
385–95. doi:10.1002/9781119260493.ch29.
Azam, M., S. S. Jahromy, W. Raza, N. Raza, S. S. Lee, K. Kime,
and F. Winter. 2020. Status, characterization, and potential
utilization of municipal solid waste as renewable energy
source: Lahore case study in Pakistan. Environ Int
134:105291. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2019.105291.
Bartlett, J. E., J. W. Kotrlik, and C. C. Higgins. 2001.
Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample
size in survey research. Inform. Techno. Learning. Perform.
J. 19 (1):43–50.
Bezama, A., and P. Agamuthu. 2019. Addressing the big issues in
waste management. London, Englan: SAGE Publications Sage
UK.
Birke, Y. 1999. Solid waste management in Ethiopia. Paper
presented on 25th WEDC conference in the Integrated
Development for Water Supply and Sanitation, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.
Bizatu, M., and Negga, B. 2010. Community based assessment
on household management of waste and hygiene practices
in Kersa Woreda, Eastern Ethiopia. Ethiop. J. Health Dev.
24(2).
Cacadia Consulting Group. 2003. Guidelines for waste char­
acterization studies in the State of Washington. Washington:
Washington State Department of Ecology.
Chalmin, P., and C. Gaillochet. 2009. From waste to resource,
an abstract of world waste survey, Cyclope, Veolia
Environmental Services, Edition Economica, France.
Chandak, S. P. 2010. Trends in solid waste management –
Issues, challenges, and opportunities presented at the
International Consultative Meeting on Expanding Waste
Management Services in Developing Countries, Tokyo,
Japan. 18–19.
Cochran, W. 1977. Sampling techniques. 3rd ed. New York,
USA: Wiley series in productivity and Applied mathemati­
cal statistics.
Coffey, M., and A. Coad. 2010. Collection of municipal solid
waste in developing countries. Nairobi-Kenya: UN-
HABITAT.
Dilla Town Administration Population Affairs. 2016.
Coordination and implementation core work process report.
unpublished. Dilla, Ethiopia.
Erasu, D., Feye, T., Kiros, A., and Balew, A., 2018. Municipal
solid waste generation and disposal in Robe town, Ethiopia.
Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association. 68
(12): 1391–1397.
Fereja, W. M., W. Tagesse, and G. Benti. 2020. Treatment of
coffee processing wastewater using Moringa stenopetala
seed powder: Removal of turbidity and chemical oxygen
demand. Cogent Food Agric. 6 (1):1816420. doi:10.1080/
23311932.2020.1816420.
Francis Xavier, M. K., D. Millar, and J. Tanguo. 2018. An
effective solid waste management and environmental sani­
tation diseases reduction module of Ghana-A case of the­
techiman municipal area, brong ahafo region. Ghana.
J. Environ. Toxicol. Stud. 3 (1). doi: 10.16966/2576-
6430.110.
Kassa, G. 2009. Management of domestic solid waste in
Bahirdar town: Operational analysis and assessment of con­
straints that affect solid waste management. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia: VDM Verlag.
Kassahun Tassie Wegedie. 2018. Households solid waste gen­
eration and management behavior in case of Bahir Dar City,
Amhara National Regional State, Ethiopia. Cogent Environ.
Sci. 4:1471025. doi:10.1080/23311843.2018.1471025.
Kaza, S., L. C. Yao, P. Bhada-Tata, and F. Van Woerden. 2018.
What a waste 2.0: A global snapshot of solid waste manage­
ment to 2050. Urban development. Washington, DC: World
Bank. © World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.
org/handle/10986/30317License:CCBY3.0IGO .
Kumar, M., and V. Prakash. 2020. A review on solid waste: Its
impact on air and water quality. J. Pollut. Eff. Cont. 8:252.
doi:10.35248/2375-4397.20.8.252.
Lagerkvist, A., and L. Dahlen. 2019. Solid waste generation and
characterization. In: Recovery of Materials and Energy from
urban wastes: A volume in the encyclopedia of sustainability
science and technology. 2nd ed., 7–20. New York, NY:
Springer.
Lema, G., M. G. Mesfun, A. Eshete, and G. Abdeta. 2019.
Assessment of status of solid waste management in Asella
town, Ethiopia. BMC Public Health 19 (1):1261.
doi:10.1186/s12889-019-7551-1.

Lloyd, J. S. 2019. Expanding safe waste management to public
health systems. Lancet 393 (10168):225. doi:10.1016/S0140-
6736(18)32622–9.
Ma, J., and K. W. Hipel. 2016. Exploring social dimensions of
municipal solid waste management around the globe:
A systematic literature review. Elsevier Publishing Ltd:
Waste Management. doi:10.1186/s12889-019-7551-1.
Manyazewal, T., and T. Walelgn. 2019. Solid waste manage­
ment practice and level of satisfaction from related services
among commercials and institutions in Jigjiga City,
Ethiopia. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Nat. Res. 21 (2). doi:
10.19080/IJESNR.2019.21.556057.
Mebrate, G. 2005. Analysis of types and quantity of solid waste
generated and of management methods practiced by the house­
holds of Debre-Ziet town, East Shoa, Abstract of all students
research projects, 83–84. Ethiopia: Jimma University.
Miezah, K., K. Obiri-Danso, Z. Kádár, B. Fei-Baffoe, and
M. Y. Mensah. 2015. Municipal solid waste characterization
and quantification as a measure towards effective waste
management in Ghana. Waste Manage. 46:15–27.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2015.09.009.
Mulu, T., and W. Legesse. 2005. Analysis of the type and amount of
Solid Waste generated and adopted Disposal Methods by the
Residents of Bonga City. Ethiop. J. Health Sci. 15 (2):157–65.
Nor Faiza, M. T., N. A. Hassan, R. Mohammad Farhan,
M. A. Edre, and R. M. Rus. 2019. Solid waste: Its implication
for health and risk of vector borne diseases. J. Waste Biomass
Manage. 1 (2):14–17. doi:10.26480/jwbm.02.2019.14.17.
Odonkor, S. T., K. Frimpong, and N. Kurantin. 2020. An assess­
ment of house-hold solid waste management in a large
Ghanaian district. Heliyon 6. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e03040.
Onibokun, A. G. 1999. Managing the monsters: Urban waste
and governance in Africa. Ottawa, Canada: International
Development Research Centre Ottawa.
Osman Saeed, M., M. N. Hassan, and M. A. Mujeebu. 2009.
Assessment of municipal solid waste generation and recyclable
materials potential in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Waste Manage.
29 (7):2209–13. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2009.02.017.
Regassa, N., R. D. Sundaraa, and B. Bogale. 2011. Challenges
and opportunities in municipal solid waste management:
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION 201
The case of Addis Ababa city, central Ethiopia. J. Human
Ecol. 33 (3):179–90. doi:10.1080/09709274.2011.11906358.
Shaoli, D., and B. Debnath. 2016. Prevalence of health hazards
associated with solid waste disposal- A case study of
Kolkata, India. Procedia Environ. Sci. 35 (2016):201–08.
doi:10.1016/j.proenv.2016.07.081.
Sharholy, M., K. Ahmad, G. Mahmood, and P. C. Trivedi.
2008. Municipal solid waste management in Indian cities-
A review, waste management. 28(2):459–67. doi:10.1016/j.
wasman.2007.02.008.
Sharma, H. R., T. Abebe, M. Admassu, T. Teshaye, T. Aseffa,
and M. Emana. 2011. Municipal solid waste management
and community awareness and involvement in manage­
ment and practice: An overview and a case study from
Gondar town of Ethiopia. Int. J. Environ. Waste Manage.
7 (3/4):294–304. doi:10.1504/IJEWM.2011.039470.
Tewodros, T., R. Arjan, and H. Fitsum. 2008. Household waste
disposal in Mekele city, Northern Ethiopia. Waste Manage.
28 (10):2003–212. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2007.08.015.
UN-HABITAT. 2012. Collection of municipal solid waste, key
issues for decision- makers in developing countries.
United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP). 2009.
Developing integrated solid waste management plan training
manual, 2: Assessment of current waste management systems
and gaps therein. Osaka/Shiga, Japan.
United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP). 2010a.
Framework of global partnership on waste management,
Note by Secretariat, UNEP. http://www.unep.or.jp/Ietc/
SPC/news-nov10/3FrameworkOfGPWM .
United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP). 2010b.
Waste and climate change - Global trends and strategy
framework. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11822/8648 .
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
(UNIDO). 2002. Annual report.
Vikrant, T., S. Fantaw, and H. R. Sharma. 2014. Municipal
solid waste management in Debre Berhan City of Ethiopia.
J. Environ. Earth Sci. 4 (5):2225–948.
World Bank. 2011. Urban environmental sanitation project,
staff appraisal report. Republic of Ghana: Africa Regional
Office.