challenges of solid waste management in zimbabwe: a case … · environments as this result in...

Challenges of solid waste management in Zimbabwe: a case study of Sakubva high density suburb

JEWM


Mafume Pascaline Nyarai1, Zendera Willard2, Mutetwa Moses*3 and Musimbo Ngenzile4

1Department of Natural Resources, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Africa University, Box 1320, Old Mutare, Zimbabwe 2Department of Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Africa University, Box 1320, Old Mutare, Zimbabwe 3Alumni, Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Africa University, Box 1320, Old Mutare, Zimbabwe 4Department of Environmental and Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Solusi University, Box Solusi, Bulawayo

The objectives of the study were to assess the current status on household solid waste management challenges of collection and disposal. The research employed both quantitative (in form of questionnaires) and qualitative (in form of interviews) methodologies. Field visits and observations were done on residential areas and open dumpsites. The research found that there are lots of challenges that are faced by residents and these range from collection, methods of disposal and the involvement of other key stakeholders. The results revealed that the challenges in poor refuse collection were attributed to serious shortage of refuse equipment, and shortage of proper receptacles. Recycling strategies seemed to be nonexistent as revealed by low percentages of residents who practice it. Since council does not collect waste as often as it should, residents dispose waste through the traditional and unsustainable ways such as backyard incinerator, burying, burning and illegal open dumps. With rapid urbanization, the situation is becoming critical. It was recommended that councils should extend coverage to all areas, increase their refuse collection frequency, provide receptacles to residents and raise awareness campaigns on recycling and sustainable solid waste disposal. There is need for involvement by private sector and NGOs in solid waste management.

Keywords: Solid waste management, recycling, disposal, refuse equipment INTRODUCTION Municipal solid waste management has emerged as one of the greatest challenges facing environmental protection agencies in developing countries (Ogwueleka, 2009). Solid waste is generated by any activity such as food preparation, sweeping, cleaning and burning fuel, gardening and recreation (Medina, 2010). Municipal Solid Waste is generally defined as waste generated from homes, street sweeping, industries, institutions and

commercial areas which needs to be collected by or on behalf of local authority (Hester and Harrison, 2002).

*Corresponding author: Mutetwa Moses, Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Africa University, Box 1320, Old Mutare, Zimbabwe. Email: [email protected]

Journal of Environment and Waste Management Vol. 3(2), pp. 142-155, December, 2016. © www.premierpublishers.org, ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Research Article


Mutetwa et al. 143 In most countries the population is increasing hence causing many people to migrate to urban areas. Most urban areas especially in the sub-Saharan Africa, half of the solid waste generated is not collected. Waste in developing countries is rarely recycled but thrown in dump sites. This has posed serious health and environmental impacts. In low income countries, the situation is worse. Many cities and towns in developing countries are not adequately meeting their refuse collection obligations due to financial constraints (Mohee and Simelane, 2015; Senkoro, 2003). There is an observation that residents have resorted to illegal dumping of some solid waste in open spaces (Tevera et al., 2002). Researchers have carried out many researches to answer the question why there are variations of solid waste generation from place to place in quality of waste generated and quantity. Manyanhaire and Sango (2009) discovered that in Zambia, Chirundu and Marondera in Zimbabwe 15.62% to 72% of waste generated was vegetative components. In Zimbabwe’s cities and towns, solid waste management has reached crisis levels as there is now mismatch between planning and policy implementations and this is worsened by some financial problems experienced (Matowu and Tevera, 2002). It is estimated that each person produces over 1-1.5 kg of garbage a day and this accumulation of waste can lead to severe environmental degradation (Camille, et al, 2012). There are several key issues in developing countries on solid waste. Policies are required for long term planning which is realistic. Policies usually are made because of the arousal of solid waste problems. In developing countries there are limited resources in waste collection and inadequate storage facilities. No proper solid waste disposal facilities are available in developing countries (Government of Zimbabwe, 2007;Mangizvo, 2010;Muchandiona, 2013). The use of technology has been of much help in developing countries on waste disposal but inappropriate technological facilities are being used as well as the equipment. Developing countries do lack enough funds and end up using the equipment which will not be suitable for a certain task. Scavenging process is also a key issue in developing people are found searching through refuse for useful material. This process allows waste to stay in environments as this result in improper waste disposal. There is also knowledge which is insufficient on basic principles of waste management. In most urban cities of Zimbabwe the issue of solid waste management including refuse collection and disposal has been a controversial issue in the environment. Litter has become a common site along highways and in many urban and peri-urban communities in Zimbabwe. Waste management has collapsed, and this has triggered chaotic and rampant waste dumping, putting the health of

residents at great risk (Makwara and Magudu, 2013). Zimbabwe’s most solid waste generators often dispose uncollected waste at illegal dumping sites. In less economically developed countries most households do not recycle waste but simply find their way to the dumpsite (Akkucuk, 2015). Sakubva in Mutare amongst other Zimbabwean cities has had disease outbreaks as a result of improper refuse management. The objectives of the study are to investigate the challenges of solid waste management by assessing the frequency of solid waste collection in Sakubva. It also looks at the systems which are being used by residents in solid waste disposal. The study is going to establish the challenges on solid waste management being faced by Sakubva residential suburb which hinders sustainable development of the environment. For the concept of sustainable development to be understood, discussions concentrating on environmental impacts of solid waste should be raised in academic circles. This study allows the residents to give their own views on the management of waste within their environment to attain sustainable development and healthy environments. Through this research, there is a high chance of influencing the residents in terms of understanding that they have a significant role when it comes to solid waste management. Residents will also be able to understand that they have a huge responsibility when it comes to solid waste disposal in the environment. They will understand that it is not only the city council and municipality’s responsibility in solid waste disposal. The information will be used by city fathers at large in policy formulation on maintaining environmental sustainability for a safe environment. This research brings out the necessity of participation in the management of solid waste in many cities as it incorporates all stakeholders in the management of solid waste. These stakeholders include the Mutare city council, NGOs, Environmental Management Agency (EMA), ZINWA and other responsible organizations in solid waste management. MATERIALS AND METHOD Site Description and Experimental Design The research was conducted in Mutare District in Manicaland, located South-Eastern of Zimbabwe. Mutare is the third largest city in the country. It is also the capital of the Manicaland Province. It is the border city between Zimbabwe and Mozambique. The city has a tropical location but it has a temperate climate due to being located in a mountainous area. The study area has a variable climate from wet to semi-arid. The mean annual temperature of the area is 19⁰C and the mean annual rainfall is 818mm.


J. Environ. Waste Manag. 144

Figure 1. Map of Zimbabwe showing Districts of Manicaland Province and Mutare (Source, Google Maps accessed March 6, 2016)

Table 1. Summary of sampling procedure

Section of Suburb

Number of houses

Sample size (%) Sample size Sample interval

Chineta 188 5 9 21 Mawonde 426 5 21 20 Mazhambe 200 5 10 19 Muchena 400 5 20 20 Total 1294 20 60 80

N=60

There are more than 20 suburbs in Mutare having low, medium and high density suburbs. Sakubva is the oldest high density suburb in Mutare and it is characterized by high population growth and overcrowding. It was established in 1934 and it has a population density of nearly 209 people per square kilometer (Sigauke, 2007). The research design was based on the description of the challenges of solid waste management in Sakubva high density suburb of Mutare. This method was also used to evaluate the disposal systems of solid waste, residents’ perceptions on current solid waste management by Mutare city and the frequency of solid waste collection in Sakubva. The stratified sampling method was used in the research. The 39 sections in Sakubva with a total housing stock of 5 327. were taken as stratas. Four stratas were selected using convenience sampling determined by high rates of illegal waste dumping, high population density and the number of houses. The areas selected were Chineta, Mawonde, Mazhambe, and Muchena. Deliberate sampling or convenience sampling method was very

useful. The research used a sample size of 5% of the number of houses in the section were the investigation was conducted. Systematic sampling was then used to determine the households to issue copies of a questionnaire. Sampling interval (SI) was obtained by dividing the population (P) by the sample size (n) (SI= P/n). Every nth household unit from the sampling frame was selected. Table 1 above summarizes the sampling procedure. The units of measurement were residents, vendors and the Mutare city council. Two structured questionnaires were developed and elicited responses from interviewees provided the data required in the study. Two types of questionnaires were constructed by the researcher for the different groups including the residents and the city council. The questionnaires collected data through face to face interviews with residents of the Mutare two suburbs and the city fathers. The questionnaires were written in English and during administering them on respondents, translation to Shona was done when and where necessary.


Mutetwa et al. 145

Figure 2: Gender distribution of the respondents

Table 2: Age groups of respondents.

Measure of Central Tendency Age group (years)

Mean 25-34

Mode 25-34

Minimum <15

Maximum 50-64

Data Types and Data Sources In this research study, both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods were implemented. Quantitative data was gathered through the use of close ended questionnaires and the qualitative data through open ended questions. Open ended questions allowed the perceptions of residents on the current solid waste management by Mutare city. The study used both primary and secondary data. Primary data was obtained from the use of questionnaires which were administered to various residents of Sakubva high density. It was also obtained from the city council responsible with the collection of solid waste in Mutare urban. Observations were also used on some of the solid waste disposal systems used by the residents of Sakubva suburb. The information collected includes the systems used by residents in disposing waste as well as what they think and suggest in terms of solid waste management of the suburb. The city council provided information on the frequency of waste collection in the suburb including the equipment they use in the collection of solid waste in the suburb. Sources of secondary data used were published textbooks and journals on solid waste collection and disposal. This information on solid waste management was collected from the use of the internet, the city council and the library. Data Analysis and Presentation In this research the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used for data entry and analysis.

Data presentation analysis consists of examining, categorizing, tabulating or otherwise re-combining the evidence, to address the initial propositions of a study. Quantitative data was presented using descriptive statistics like percentages, means, tabulation, and frequency distribution. Graphs, tables and photographs will be used to present the outputs. RESULTS Data Obtained From Residents Demographic and Socio-economic characteristics of respondents Gender distribution: Figure 2 shows the gender distribution of the sample respondents in percentages of the sample population of Sakubva residents. This categorical variable is important in explaining decision making patterns in waste disposal at household level. Gender is a significant part of the study since most of the household chores are done by ladies and they are the ones who generate much of the waste. Of the 60 respondents, 53.3% were male and 46.7% were female. Age group of respondents: The age frequency distribution of the respondents from the sample population is shown in Table 2. The age of the respondents ranged from <15years to 64years. Most of the participants (36.7%) were in the age group 25-34years followed by 16-24years age group (23.3%).

53.3%

46.7%

Male Female



Table 3. Demographic and Socio-economic characteristics of respondents.

Variable Category Frequency(n=60) Percentage (%)

Marital status Never married Married

27 33

45.00 55.00

Education qualification

Below Grade7/Standard 6 Grade 7/Standard 6 O-Level A-Level Tertiary Certificate/Diploma University degree

3 8 24 13 6 6

5.00 13.33 40.00 21.67 10.00 10.00

Employment status

Employed formally Self-employed informally Unemployed but looking for work Student

19 17 15 9

31.67 28.33 25.00 15.00

Tenure status Owner/Purchaser Tenant Lodger Tied accommodation

19 16 16 9

31.67 26.67 26.67 15.00

Figure 3. Response of residents on frequency of waste collection

Marital status: Table 4 shows the marital status distribution of sample respondents in percentages of the sample population of Sakubva residents. The sample constituted respondents who were never married (45.0%), married (55.0%). Education qualification: The majority of the respondents (40.0%) went through the formal education up to O-Level while 21.67% attained A-Level certificate. A 13.33% of the respondents attained Grade7 or Standard 5/6 while 10.00% attained a tertiary certificate/dilploma the same as those with University degrees (Table 3). Employment status: Data pertaining to employment status of the respondents is show in Table 3. The employment status is important since it affects income and the ability to pay extra for the waste disposal when council fails. Most of the respondents are formally employed (31.67%) while the least percentage (15.00%) of the respondents are students. A total of 28.33% of the

respondents were self-employed informally while the remainder proportion of the respondents (25.00%) was unemployed but looking for work.

Accommodation status: Data pertaining to accommodation status revealed that most of the respondents (31.67%) own or have purchased the house they stay in, 26.67% are lodgers same as tenants while remainder (15.00%) use tied accommodation (Table 4).

Solid waste collection by Council

Frequency of waste collection: Data pertaining to council’s schedule on solid waste collection is shown in Figure 3. Most of the respondents (35.0%) reported that waste collection is irregular while those who reported no collection of waste were 21.7%. The proportion of the sample population who reported that waste collection was only 8.3%.

23.3%

11.7%

35.0%

21.7%

8.3%Once a week

Twice a week

Irregularly

Not collected

Everyday


Mutetwa et al. 147

Figure 4: Type of solid waste generated at household level

Table 4. Methods used in solid waste disposal.

Method Frequency (n=60)

Percentages (%)

Open dumping Burying Composting Burning Illegal dumping Collection by Council

30 27 29 36 29 34

50.0 45.0 48.3 60.0 48.3 56.7

Type of waste and Systems used by residents in solid waste disposal The assessment did not attempt to quantify the amount of waste generated by each household but rather sought to find out the type of waste generated per household (Figure 4). This study revealed that all of the households surveyed generate plastic and food wastes. Of the 60 households surveyed those who produce paper/cardboard waste constitutes 47.0% while those who generate glass wastes are 28.0%. Other waste generated is shown in Figure 4. Almost every household produce plastic waste probably because to a larger extent packaging of goods from shops, supermarkets and even butcheries predominately use plastic. From bread to margarine, meats, beverages, mealie meal etc plastic packages eventually ends up in trash cans at household level. On the other hand, every household cook some food and waste is generated in form of leftovers of too much food prepared. Waste is also generated from uncookable and/or unpreferred parts of the food being prepared which have to be cutoff and disposed during preparing a meal. Perishable food which is not cooked in time also contributes this waste. Like plastic, paper is used in packages as a result after

serving its purpose at the house it become waste. As for the other waste generated, the different activities that happen at the houses determine the type of waste being produced. At some households there are welding or carpentry activities which take place thus translating to metals and wood waste produced respectively. A lot of construction has resulted in builder’s rubble generation alongside with some electrical cables. Some of the electricals are coming from broken down household appliances such as stoves, geysers, DVD players, radios and electric irons, which are thrown away. Methods used in solid waste disposal by Sakubva residents are shown in Table 4. Burying is the least practised method (see, Plate1). Of the 60 sample residents only 45.0% dispose their waste by digging pits either in their yard or on open spaces and bury household waste. Other commonly practised method of disposal of waste at household level in Sabvuka is through illegal dumping of waste and 48.3% of the residents use this method (see, Plate 1). Thirty-four out of the 60 (56.7%) households surveyed effectively dispose waste generated at their houses through the council when it comes to collect solid waste from the residents. However, investigation

100%

28%

47%

25%

100%

5%10%

3% 2%

13%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%



Source, Photo by Author, 2016) Plate 1. Open dump

Source, Photo by Author, 2016 Plate 2. Vegetable garden fertilized by compost manure

revealed that the most frequently practised method of waste disposal by Sakubva residents is burning of waste. Although these methods are the least desired, the residents attributed the use of these methods to the delay by council to collect waste and/or non-collection at all. Residents who are using improper receptacles are illegally dumping their solid waste as their receptacles fill up before the one week period. Placestargeted mostly by illegal dumpers include vacant land, open spaces, unfenced housing stands awaiting development, storm water drains, market places, intersections of busy streets, road verges and areas of high waste generation with inadequate or no waste containers like informal settlements that sustain high population densities. These illegal open dumping often occurs mostly, but not exclusively, at night as a way of reducing chances of apprehension by municipal police officers. Respondents however, suggested that local authorities should earmark

certain areas within the communities as legal sites for solid waste collection for waste to be picked up by local authorities. These could be properly managed by providing for waste separation, fencing the area, and regularly disinfecting waste to reduce disease. This could reduce the costs of door to door collection of refuse and organize waste recovery and recycling in a safer manner. Composting is a marginally used method of waste disposal by residents. Only 48.3% of the residents compost some of their waste. In theory composting could reduce environmental pollution and provide fertilizers which can be used in lawns and backyard vegetable gardens (see, Plate 2). This compost fertilizer also could help improve agricultural production and improve soil structure which means it offers a longer term advantage over other non-compost mineral-based fertilizers. In practice, composting is not a widely employed technology. In spite of such initiatives, the quantity


Mutetwa et al. 149

Figure 5. Distribution of respondents regarding waste recycling

Table 5. Benefits from recycling solid waste.

Benefit Frequency (n=21) Percentage (%)

Monetary Reduced waste Aesthetic (beauty appearance) No benefit

4 21 14 5

19.0 100.0 66.7 23.8

currently being disposed of through composting is negligible owing to lack of markets for compost in the suburb. This is also attributed to the fact that urban agriculture is not vigorously pursued in the town and volumes of compostable waste generated at household level is low. Usually solid waste segregation enables easier recovery of waste at source and promotes recycling as the waste is already sorted out and volume reduced. Segregation is also vital in the management of hazardous waste from households, for instance disposal of batteries. only 36.7% of the residents separate waste at household level. This is normally done to recover some of the waste in form of plastic bags and plastic containers for reuse. Some of the respondents indicated that they separate household waste to facilitate for composting as well. Low levels of waste segregation were generally reported by households and cited various barriers to segregation of waste. Residents reported that waste segregation makes a mess around the house, takes too much room, takes much time and is too inconvenient among other reasons as well. Most of these barriers seem related to the inconvenience of doing this, indicating that encouraging this practice would need some incentives, to create awareness of the benefits of waste segregation, facilitate the practice, such as with receptacles and collection, and support its implementation through promotion by public health inspectors.

Although being the most promising method for conservation of natural resources only 48.3% of the residents recycle waste generated in their houses (Figure 5). The materials recycled largely comprise both paper and plastic bags and containers, and soap. On the other hand, because the recycling industry is still in its infancy compared to the manufacturing, the compensation for recyclable materials fluctuates a lot making it a less attractive venture for these residents. When the residents were asked further about the benefits they derive from recycling, their responses as follows (Table 6). Perceptions on Solid waste Collection and disposal The waste management system of Sakubva suburb of Mutare involves generation, storage, collection and disposal. The residents reported a high level of dissatisfaction with the council when it comes to solid waste collection and disposal. More than 85.0% of the respondents have reported a poor to very poor performance by the council in this regard (Figure 7). Households reported that they do not get support for accessing bins and have to buy these themselves. TARSC, (2010) also reported similar findings for Mutare residents in a study they conducted. One in eight households had access to bins as these are usually

65.0%

48.3%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

No (n=39) Yes (n=21)



Figure 6. Residents’ responses on quality of solid waste disposal by council

Figure 7. Residents’ responses on quality of solid waste disposal by civic organizations and NGOs

obtained when the civic organizations and NGOs do their clean-up campaigns in the area while a very small proportion indicated they get bins elsewhere (Figure 8). Slightly above 30.0% of the households rated satisfactory to excellent the quality of solid waste disposal done by civic organizations and NGOs. The significance of the private sector was poorly rated as most of the residents reported that they have not seen any private players (more than 65.0% - Don’t know) in solid waste disposal in their area (Figure 9). This could be a reflection of the council not being proactive in looking for partners to collaborate with in solid waste management or the partners are just not interested in waste disposal. Majority of the respondents use black plastic paper bins and hard plastic bins for waste collection at household level (see, Plate 3). However, the council does not

provide these receptacles to the residents. Some of the receptacles used include sacks, cardboard boxes, mealie-meal plastics and metal tins. In an earlier study by Muchandiona, (2013) he found that the coverage of receptacles for all cities was above 50.0%. Receptacles are important for successful recycling programs because they enable separation and sorting of different types of waste. However, the available receptacles were not even enough for storing unsorted waste and different types of solid waste Zimbabwe does not have an overall waste act that provides the essential legal basis for a consolidated waste management strategy in the country. However, there is a comprehensive legal framework that guides waste management in both urban and rural areas. A number of Acts of Parliament and regulations deal directly and indirectly with environmental pollution in

0.0

0.0

13.3

56.7

26.7

3.3

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Excellent

Good

Satifactory

Poor

VeryPoor

Don’t Know

% of total househlds (n=60)

6.7

26.7

20.0

21.7

10.0

15.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Excellent

Good

Satifactory

Poor

VeryPoor

Don’t Know

% of total househlds (n=60)


Mutetwa et al. 151

(Source, Photo by Author, 2016) Plate 3. Waste receptacles

Figure 5. Distribution of respondents on knowledge of legislation

general and waste management in particular. A number of ministries are involved in the administration of the Acts, but the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources takes overall responsibility and accountability. In addition to the Acts of Parliament and policies on waste management most local authorities have by-laws which they employ to effectively regulate activities in the areas under their jurisdiction. Data obtained by the researcher revealed that out of the 60 respondents 83.3% of the respondents were not aware of the regulations that governs solid waste disposal (Figure 5). However, all the respondents who are aware of the regulatory legislation to do with solid waste disposal none of them gave mention of any act suggesting that they only head of the existence of these regulations but do not know what it says.

Efficiency Levels Of Council’s Solid Waste Management Solid waste collection and disposal system The frequency and regularity of waste collection vary greatly in the town of Mutare. The refuse collection schedule shows that solid waste is collected daily in Sakubva. However, the senior hygiene officer reported that some of the schedules are not being met as the council is suffering from a lot challenges. Where no benefit from any formal waste collection service reaches the residents the communities experience high levels of illegal dumping and land pollution from the use of unsustainable practices as a way of disposing waste. These findings also concur with Masocha (2004) who reported that residents resort to illegal dumping and to

16.7%

83.3%

Aware of legislation Not aware of legislation



Table 6. Refuse equipment for solid waste management.

Equipment Functional No-functional Ideal

Refuse compactor Front-end-loader Tractor and trailer Dozer Landfill compactor Skip bins Skip trucks Weighbridge Incinerator Tipper trucks

1 1 1 1 0 10 0 0 1 1

2 1 - 1 0 20 0 0 0 3

3 1 2 1 1 30 2 1 1 5

Table 7. Household to Staff ratio and staff break down proportions for urban councils

(Source, Muchandiona, 2013)

burning of refuse when the council failed to collect refuse. Burning is not allowed as it causes further environmental pollution. The report by the senior hygiene officer is in agreement with Bartone, (2000) who argued that to improve solid waste management, there is need to enforce laws against illegal dumping and use the crude dumping system to dispose of their solid waste. This is whereby waste is tipped into a dump, which has very little on-site management. Open waste dumps are prime breeding sites for houseflies, rodents, mosquitoes, and other vectors of communicable diseases, such as fever,

dysentery, diarrhoea, cholera and malaria (Musademba et al., 2011). Illegal dumping is a criminal offence which can attract a fine from the Environmental Management Authority but residents dump their refuse at night. This has forced residents to use cardboard boxes and mealie-meal plastics which quickly filled up and overspill resulting in illegal burning and open space dumping. The use of plastic papers for bins has proved to be ineffective in solid waste management. Although they are cheap and easily available to the residents and light to lift up, they are not strong to hold waste or scrap metal and bottle


Mutetwa et al. 153 hence tear off easily. Plastic container/bins are the best option for household solid waste because of their durability. The municipal crew when they collect the waste from residents they take it to the landfill. The estimated quantity of waste collected per day is 30truckloads of 5.88 tonnes waste. Thus on average the crew collects 1.500 tonnes of waste per month according the hygiene officer. At the landfill bulldozers and front-end loaders are used to manage the waste by spreading it. Since not all waste is collected from the residents when it should, the efficiency of council is not at its best. This was reported to be attributed to poor performance of the town system, weak financial resource, which forces the municipal to rely on inadequate vehicles and fail to invest in solid waste infrastructure. In another study by Muchandiona (2013), he noted that the collection efficiency of municipal solid waste for Mutare urban council was 90.0%. However, the mean for the Zimbabwean urban councils of 63.9%, was low when compared to the mean for the world cities of 89.0% (UN Habitat, 2010). This shows that Zimbabwean urban councils were operating below the performance of international cities. 3.2.2 Major constraints Since 1998, when the national economy started to falter, the Municipality of Mutare has encountered a number of challenges including shortages of fuel, equipment, inadequate funds and insufficient labor force, which hamper efficient delivery solid waste management service. The prevailing unstable macro-economic environment characterized by critical shortages of foreign currency and political instability has resulted in poor performance of the municipal waste management systems throughout the country. Shortage of adequate refuse trucks There is lack of adequate and appropriate refuse trucks, which suit the high density nature of the waste produced in the suburb. The municipal has over time failed to achieve satisfactory waste collection level, which are met in other areas partly because of its reliance on inadequate trucks. The shortage of adequate vehicles also results in over use of those trucks that are currently functional resulting in high wear and tear, which are major causes of frequent breakdowns. Table 6 presents the results of the refuse equipment. Serious shortage of landfill equipment against the ideal number of landfill equipment is also leading to poor sanitary disposal of waste. The reason why the councils use open dumpsites and fail to bury refuse on daily basis in open dumpsites could be attributed to lack of landfill equipment. Mudzengerere and Chigwenya (2012) and Muchandiona, (2013) have also reported that this is a

problem facing other towns in the country. Blight and Mbande (1996) also highlighted the issue of equipment shortage and the use of old and inappropriate machinery which is inefficiency in the management of waste in many cities in developing countries. With these shortages, there was need to engage private players to assist in the collection of refuse. Inadequate human resource The critical shortage of sufficient personnel is also a major hindrance to the provision of a sustainable solid waste management system in the town. Although at the managerial level, the municipal has adequate skilled personnel who have relevant professional qualifications, the number of staff at the operational level is grossly inadequate. Currently, people who are employed in the waste management division of the council are 112 against a requirement of 225 people and only 4people work at the municipal dump. A study was done by Muchandiona, (2013) on the adequacy of manpower for solid waste management in the Zimbabwe.Table 8 presents four parameters; Households to Staff Ratio, Top management to Total staff Ratio, Middle management to Total staff Ratio and Labourers to Total staff Ratio. The mean Households to Staff ratio for the 22 urban councils was 911 and ranged from 208 to 7,690 as shown in Table 7. The wide range was due to Epworth which had only 6 workers to deal with solid waste management. The reason why Epworth had few workers was that it was not collecting refuse in residential areas. According to (Henderson, 2005) the international standard for Household to Staff ratio is between 150 to 200. Comparing the international standards with the Zimbabwean performance range of 208 to 7690, it showed that Zimbabwe had a serious shortage of refuse manpower. Similar studies in South Africa by DEAT (2007) revealed that the average Household to Staff ratio was 273. Comparing the South African average with the Zimbabwean average of 911, it showed that South Africa has a higher number of manpower than Zimbabwe. Shortage of manpower in Zimbabwe was as a result financial constrains. Table 7 also shows that the mean ratio of Top management/ Total refuse staff is 6% and ranged from 0 to 25%. Cities and municipalities had low top management to staffing ratio in the range of 0.3 to 3%. High Top management to Total staff ratio was common for urban towns. According to (Henderson, 2005) the optimum refuse staff break down is 10% Top management to Total staff ratio. Comparing the international best practice with the Zimbabwean Top management to Total refuse ratio of 6% it shows that Zimbabwean urban councils did not have adequate top management man power. Table 8 also showed that the average Middle management to Total staff ratio is 4%


J. Environ. Waste Manag. 154 and Laborers to Total refuse staff is 90%. According to Henderson (2005) the optimum staff breakdown is 25% for Middle management and 65% for Laborers. All the urban councils failed to reach the optimum international best practice of 25% for Middle management to Total refuse staff. The Laborers to Total refuse staff have an average of 90% for Zimbabwean urban councils which were above the international best practice. This implied that the composition of manpower in Zimbabwe had a bias towards laborers than the managerial level. Impact Of Solid Waste To Council Available literature (Kungnulskiti, 1990; Nath et al., 1991; Satterthwaite, 1993; Hunt, 1996;Khan and Mudassir, 1996; Eerd, 1997) shows that the direct handling of wastes can result in various infections and diseases and the worst affected are waste workers. In Zimbabwe as elsewhere in the developing world, it is difficult to quantify the health impacts of solid waste disposal because to date few studies have attempted to directly link disease outbreaks to unsanitary waste disposal. Nonetheless, some studies (e.g. Tevera et al., 2002) have highlighted that the failure by urban authorities to properly dispose of tonnes of solid waste undermine public health and the urban poor are the most vulnerable. In this study, the council has managed to get some economic benefits of USD$102,000.00 for the month of February 2016 alone. This suggests if solid waste disposal can be managed proficiently it can generate lots of monies for the council and also those who may want to participate as well. Social benefits derived from solid waste management include improvement of quality of life, reduced disease vectors and suppressing and preventing of disease outbreaks among others. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS This study revealed that solid waste quantities are ever increasing, but the problem faced by Mutare City Council to render effective and consistent solid waste collection and disposal services in Sakubva remains unabated. The main challenge identified included lack of cooperation and awareness by some residents, financial constraints, and poor enforcement of laws by the authorities. The study which was carried out in Zimbabwe on challenges of solid waste management systems came up with the following conclusions: Frequency of solid waste collection in residential areas of Sakubva high density suburb: Poor refuse coverage and collection in Sakubva was caused by inadequate equipment as the existing equipment was far from reaching the optimum levels. Inadequate human resources in the management of waste is also a major contributor of poor refuse collection services, as the figures were far from international best practices. Poor

refuse coverage and Collection efficiency was also poor because of lack of proper receptacles. Systems used by residents in solid waste disposal: The disposal of solid waste was far from being environmentally sustainable and most residents were using illegal open dumps, burning and burying of waste. Challenges in recycling were as a result of no separation of waste at source as evidenced by a critical shortage of receptacles, recycling reduce waste. Perception of residents on the current solid waste management by Mutare City: Council is not collecting waste as often as it should resulting in illegal dumps. Communication between council and residents is poor. Recommendations 1. The councils should increase equipment to meet the capacity of solid waste collection and disposal. 2. Councils should increase refuse human resources to optimum levels. 3. Councils should increase the number of proper receptacles to cover all areas. 4. Council should encourage recycling, through supplying residents with adequate receptacles, public campaigns and involving users in the planning and collection of waste. 5. Council is encouraged to promote reuse, recycle, compost, or recover materials for use as direct or indirect inputs to new products 6. Council should improve interaction with residents so that their efforts of waste management are clearly understood by residents. This can be done by increasing the visibility of the Public Health officers visiting the residents 7. Council to increase residents’ participation in solid waste management. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Our gratitude also goes to the Mr and Mrs Mafume for funding this research. We wish to extend many thanks to Mr T. Masaka for his assistance in the development of this paper. REFERENCES Akkucuk U (2016). Handbook of research on waste

management techniques for sustainability, IGI Global, U.S.A.

Bartone CR (2000), Strategies for Improving Municipal Solid Waste Management: Lessons from a Decade of WorldBank lending. Regional Conference ‘Partnership in Municipal Solid Waste Management, Cairo, 10-12 April 2000. World Bank, Washington, DC, USA.


Mutetwa et al. 155 Blight GE, Mbande CM (1996), Some Problems of Waste

Management in Developing Countries. Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management 23, no. 1, February, 19-27.

DEAT (2007) Assessment of the Status of Waste Service Delivery and Capacity at the Local Government Level. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism.

Eerd M (1997). Occupational Health Aspects of Waste Collection and Recycling: An Inventory Study in India, UWEP Working Documents 4 – Part II, Gouda,Waste, Calcutta.

Government of Zimbabwe (2007) Environmental management (Effluent and Solid Waste Disposal) Regulations 2007. Harare, Government printers.

Henderson CR. (2005) Handbook of Solid Waste Management, McGraw Hill.

Hester RE, Harrison RM. (2002) Environmental and Health Impact of Solid Waste Management Practices, Cambridge, UK.

Hunt C (1996). Waste Pickers in India: The occupation and its Health Risks, Environment and Urbanization, 8(2): 111-118

Khan I, Mudassir SM (1996). Enviromental Impact of urban sanitary landfills. ITPI Journal, (14): 17-22.

Kumar CR (2008). Research Methodology, APH Learning Private Corporation, New Delhi, India

Kungnulskiti N (1990). Public Health Aspects of a Solid Waste Scavengers Community in Thailand, Waste management and Research, 8 (2): 167-171.

Makwara E, Magudu S (2013). Confronting the Reckless gambling with people’s health and lives, Urban solid waste management in Zimbabwe, Europian journal of sustainable development (2):1 67-98.

Mangizvo R (2010). Illegal Dumping of Solid Waste in the Alleys in the Central Business District of Gweru, Zimbabwe Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, (12):2, 110-123.

Manyanhaire I, Sango I (2009). Analysis of Domestic Solid Waste Management in the Town of Chinhoyi.

Masocha M (2004) Solid Waste Disposal in Victoria Falls Town: Spatial Dynamics, Environmental Impacts, Health Threats and Social-Economic Benefits. Geography and Environmental Science. Harare, University of Zimbabwe.

Medina M (2010). Scavengers Cooperatives in Asia and Latin America :Resources , Conservation and Recycling.

Mohee R, Simelani T (2015). Future directions of municipal solid waste management in Africa, African Institute of South Africa, Pretoria South Africa.

Muchandiona A (2013). Challenges and Opportunities in Solid Waste Management in Zimbabwe’s Urban Councils. MSc thesis, University of Zimbabwe

Mudzengerere FH, Chigwenya A (2012) Waste Management in Bulawayo City Council in Zimbabwe: in Search of Sustainable Waste Management in the City Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, (14):1.

Musademba D, Musiyandaka S, Muzinda A, Nhemachena B, Jambwa D. (2011) Municipality Solid Waste (MSW) Management Challenges of Chinhoyi Town in Zimbabwe: Opportunities of Waste Reduction and Recycling Journal ofSustainable Development in Africa, 13 .2.

Nath KJ, Chakrabarty I, Kahali D (1991). Socio-economic and Health Aspects of Recycling of Urban Solid Waste Through Scavenging, 1987 – 1991, All India Institute of Hygiene and Public Health, Department of Sanitary Engineering, Calcutta.

Ogwueleka T (2009). Municipal Solid Waste Characteristics and Management in Nigeria, Abuja: University of Abuja.

Satterthwaite D (1993). The Impact on Health of Urban Environments, Environment and Urbanization, (5):107-113.

Senkoro H (2003) Solid Waste Management in Africa. A WHO/AFRO Perspective. CWR Workshop on Solid Waste Collection that Benefits the Urban Poor. Dares Salaam.

Sigauke E (2007). Analysis of domestic solid waste management system: A case of Sakubva high density surburb in the city of Mutare, Manicaland Province, Mutare, Africa University.

TARSC CFH (2010). Assessment of Solid Waste Management in Three Local Authorities in Zimbabwe. Training and Research Support Centre and Civic Forum on Housing.

Tevera D, Conyers D, Matovu D (2003) Solid Waste Management Practices in Eastern and Southern Africa: The Challenges and New Innovations in Urban Solid Waste Management. Intenational Development Research Centre, Canada.

Tevera D, Chimhowu, N, Chimbetete G Stambiso (2002). Urban Solid Waste Management in Zimbabwe, In Conyers D, Matovu G, Tevera D. (eds) The Challenges and New Innovations in Urban Solid Waste Management: Issues and Policy Options, Working Policy Document, MDP/IDRC, Harare.

Un Habitat (2010). Solid Waste Management in the World’s Cities Water and Sanitation in the World’s Cities, United Nations Human Settlements Programme, London • Washington, DC

Accepted 19 July, 2016. Citation: Mafume PN, Zendera W, Mutetwa M, Musimbo N

(2016). Challenges of solid waste management in Zimbabwe: a case study of Sakubva high density suburb. Journal of Environment and Waste Management, 3(2): 142-155.

Copyright: © 2016 Mutetwa et al. This is an open-access

article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are cited.