research article intraurban analysis of domestic solid

Research ArticleIntraurban Analysis of Domestic Solid Waste DisposalMethods in a Sub-Sahara African City

Oluwole Samuel Ojewale

Department of Urban and Regional Planning Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife Nigeria

Correspondence should be addressed to Oluwole Samuel Ojewale samueloluwole09gmailcom

Received 17 August 2014 Revised 10 November 2014 Accepted 23 November 2014 Published 18 December 2014

Academic Editor Brajesh Dubey

Copyright copy 2014 Oluwole Samuel Ojewale This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons AttributionLicense which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properlycited

The study examined the influence of socioeconomic attributes of residents on domestic solid waste disposal methods in Lagosmetropolis Nigeria Primary data for the study were obtained through questionnaire administered on residents in Eti-Osa IkejaandMushin Local Government Areas (LGAs) representing the lowmedium and high densities respectively into which the sixteenLGAs in Lagos metropolis were stratified One out of every four wards in each LGA was selected for survey From a total of 15275residential buildings in the ten wards one out of every forty buildings (25) was selected using systematic random samplingwhere a household head was sampled Information obtained includes the residential characteristics and the disposal methodsEnquiries into the socioeconomic attributes of the residents showed that 599 were high income earners and 766 had attainedtertiary school education This study concluded that six disposal methods were common in the study area Furthermore throughmultinomial logistic regression the influence of socioeconomic characteristics of residents (density income age of respondentseducational status and length of stay) on domestic solid waste disposal methods varied significantly in Lagos metropolisThe studyestablished that most of the solid waste disposal methods utilized by residents in Lagos metropolis were not environment-friendly

1 Introduction

The rapid urbanization experiencing in the cities of theworld has accentuated for a plethora of environmental chal-lenges within the different residential spheres These prob-lems include urban sprawl decaying inner-city inadequatehousing crime and congestion among others Of pertinentattention is the problem associated with waste managementthat is taking unprecedented complex dimension in thecities of developing nations From engineering to behavioralscience how waste can be properly managed has become agermane issue via several studies [1ndash4]

An elaborate definition of the term waste embracesall unwanted and economically unusable by-products orresiduals at any given place and time and any other matterthat is discarded into the environment [5 6] This definitionsuggested that what constitutes waste must occur in such avolume concentration constituency or manner as to causea significant alteration in the environment Thus apart fromwaste being an unwanted substance that is discarded theamount of it and the impact it makes on the environment

also become important considerations in defining wasteEvents of the late 20th and early 21st centuries indicate thatwaste in whatever form or classification solid liquid ortoxic has become amajor consequence ofmodernization andeconomic development [7] Notably the solid form of wasteis fast becoming a menace in both developed and developingnations [8 9]

As observed by past study [10] in countries aroundthe world one major environmental problem that confrontsmunicipal authorities is solid waste management The studyposited that city governments and dwellers are confronted bymounting problems regarding the solid waste generationTheobservation is in tandem with the assertion of other studies[11 12] that in third World cities between one-third andone-half of the solid wastes generated remain uncollected Inhigh-income countries the issues associated with solid wasteusually centre on the difficulties and high cost of disposingthe large quantity of solid waste generated from differentsources Extant study [13] posited that of striking concernare themanagement problems associated with the solid wasteemanating from domestic sources

Hindawi Publishing CorporationJournal of Waste ManagementVolume 2014 Article ID 193469 7 pageshttpdxdoiorg1011552014193469

2 Journal of Waste Management

The management of domestic solid waste is one of thehuge challenges of the urban areas of all sizes From megaci-ties to the small towns it is always in the top five of the mostchallenging problems for city managers [12] Independentstudies [14ndash16] noted that the disposal of domestic solid wastegenerated is particularly problematic in cities of developingcountries In this regard Nigeria is not exempted as evidencesabound that the problems associated with poor domesticsolid waste disposal are daily realities in most Nigerian cities

The disposal of solid waste is the ultimate stage in solidwaste management system influenced by factors such ascharacteristics of waste to be disposed cost considerationavailability of disposal site cost of labour and technicalimplication of methods of disposal [17] Past studies estab-lished that the disposalmethods often utilized include the useof sanitary landfill composting incineration and pyrolisisThese methods are commonly used in developed countries[18ndash20]

There are other solid waste disposal methods mainlyemployed in developing nations [17 21ndash23] These methodsinclude the use of designated and incidental open spacesdumping of waste into drain during and after rainfall onriver banks beside road and burning and burying Othersinclude the use of uncompleted building vacant land andcollection by government refuse van private waste managersand cart pushers These methods are considered both naiveand dangerous as they are environmentally unfriendly [24ndash27] Based on the above the available methods of solid wastedisposal are investigated in Lagos metropolis in this study

Therefore this study is different from the above empiricalstudies because it attempted to provide answer to theseresearch questions Is there any significant difference in thesolid waste disposal methods utilized by residents withinthe residential neighborhoods of Lagos metropolis To whatextent can the socioeconomic attributes of residents influ-ence their methods of solid waste disposal in MetropolitanLagos Successfully providing answers to these questionswill be pivotal to suggesting feasible measures to addresschallenges associated with domestic solid waste disposal inLagosmetropolis a city regarded as one of the fastest growingmegacities in the world Thus the study aimed at examiningthe influence of socioeconomic attributes of residents onthe choice of solid waste disposal methods utilized in Lagosmetropolis Nigeria This is with a view to provide informa-tion that can enhance solid waste management

2 Materials and Method

Lagos is situated within latitudes 6∘231015840N and 6∘411015840N andlongitudes 2∘421015840E and 3∘421015840E The physical growth anddevelopment of Lagos are tied to its expanding economicand political roles which aided by its rapid and explosivepopulation growth has been phenomenal The state has apopulation of 17 million with approximately 85 living in thecity of Lagos making it one of the most urbanized regionsin Nigeria The population density of the state is about4193 persons per square km However in the built-up areasof Metropolitan Lagos the average density is over 20000persons per square kmThe rate of population growth is about

600000 per annumwhich is ten times faster than that ofNewYork and Los Angeles [28]

Lagos metropolis is the economic and financial capitalof Nigeria With a total of 9996 km2 in land area themetropolis is made up of 16 Local Government Areas (LGAs)[29] Eti-Osa LGA has the largest land area of 29910 km2the second and the third largest are Ojo and AlimoshoLGAs with 182 km2 and 1378 km2 respectively The totalpopulation that made up the metropolis has the largestconcentration at Alimosho LGA (2047026) while the secondand third in terms of population size are Ajeromi-IfelodunLGA (1435295) and Mushin LGA (1321517) [30]

Data for this study were from primary and secondarysources The primary data was sourced through question-naire administration and actual measurement of householdsolid waste generated in the study area Through multistagesampling technique the 16 Local Government Areas (LGAs)within Lagos metropolis were stratified into low mediumand high density areas In this study a LGAwith a populationof 20ndash10000 personskm2 was regarded as low density whilemedium and high density have 10001ndash20000 personskm2and above 20000 personskm2 respectively Simple randomsampling technique was used to select Eti-Osa Ikeja andMushin areas from the low medium and high densityareas respectively The three selected LGAs were furtherstratified into existing electoral wards as recognized by theIndependent National Electoral Commission (INEC) [31]

Information obtained from INEC showed that there werefourteen electoral wards inMushin LGA while Ikeja and Eti-Osa LGAs have ten (10) wards each One out of every four(4) wards in each LGA was selected through simple randomsampling without replacement Thus ten (10) political wardswere surveyed There were 15275 residential buildings inthe selected political wards with 8996 3780 and 2499 inthe high medium and low densities respectively Systematicrandom sampling technique was adopted in selecting one outof every forty buildings (25)

Using this method a total of 384 buildings were sampledwith a household head targeted in each building for question-naire administration Information obtained from residentsincludes their socioeconomic attributes andmethods of solidwaste disposal

3 Results and Discussion

The socioeconomic attributes of the residents were con-sidered important for this study The frequency as well aspercentage distribution of the variables examined acrossthe different residential densities is summarized in Table 1Income of respondents is a strong determinant of themannerwith which residents of any given community manage theirsolid waste In this study the income groups for householdheads were based on the income classification adapted frompast study using the Lagos State Civil Service minimumwage as the benchmark [32 33] Therefore household headswho earn 118780ndash150000 were regarded as low incomeearners (LI) and 150001ndash1100000 were referred to asmiddle income earners (MI) while the high income earners

Journal of Waste Management 3

Table 1 Socioeconomic characteristics of residents in the study area

Variables High Medium Low TotalFreq () Freq () Freq () Freq ()

Income classification118780ndash150000 (LI) 12 53 8 85 mdash mdash 20 52150001ndash1100000 (MI) 88 384 46 489 mdash mdash 134 349Above 1100000 (HI) 129 563 40 426 61 100 230 599

Age of residents19ndash30 years 32 140 5 53 12 197 49 12831ndash55 years 167 729 69 734 35 574 271 70656 and above 30 131 20 213 14 230 64 167

Educational statusPrimary school 1 04 4 42 mdash mdash 5 13Secondary school 51 223 30 319 4 66 85 221Tertiary school 177 773 60 639 57 934 294 766

Length of stay1ndash10 years 149 650 67 713 47 77 263 68511ndash25 years 78 341 25 266 14 230 117 30526ndash40 years mdash mdash 2 21 mdash mdash 2 05Above 40 years 2 09 mdash mdash mdash mdash 2 05

Note Freq means frequency

(HI) earn above 1100000 Low residential density had thelargest proportion of respondents with high income Thisgroup accounted for 100 Residents in the high andmediumresidential densities with high incomewere 563 and 423respectively Also the analysis of the residents that weremiddle income earners was 489 and 384 in the mediumand high densities respectivelyThis study posited that 599of the residents in Lagos metropolis were high incomeearners

The age of the household headsin the identified residen-tial densities of Lagos metropolis was grouped into threeThese were 19ndash30 years (the youths) 31ndash55 years (the youngadults) and 56 and above (the adults) [34 35] This studyestablished that 706 of respondents in Lagos metropo-lis were young adults The youth and adult respondentsaccounted for 128 and 167 respectively However anal-ysis of the age distribution of residents within the iden-tified residential densities revealed that young adults weredominant in the three residential densities This age groupconstituted 729 734 and 574 respectively in the highmedium and low residential densities Next in descendingorder were the adults This group of respondents accountedfor 131 213 and 230 in the high medium and lowresidential densities respectively

Information on the educational status of respondents inthe study area indicated that 766 of the respondents hadtertiary educational qualification while 221 had secondaryschool qualification However across the three residentialdensities majority of the respondents in the high andmedium densities had tertiary educational qualificationThisaccounted for 773 and 934 The highest proportion ofrespondents with secondary school qualification was 223and 319 in the high and medium densities respectively

The number of years a respondent has been living in thearea was also investigated This is referred to as the length ofstay The number of years a household has been living in anarea was therefore categorized into four that is 1ndash10 years11ndash25 years 26ndash40 years and above 40 years [33] Enquiryinto this socioeconomic attribute showed that 685 of therespondents had lived in their residential area for 1ndash10 yearsHowever analysis of the age distribution of residents withinthe identified residential densities revealed that 341 266and 23 of the respondents had lived for 11ndash25 years in thehigh medium and low residential densities respectively

31 Analysis of Domestic Solid Waste Disposal Methods in theStudy Area As shown in Table 2 six major disposal methodswere common in the study areaThe use of accredited privatesector participation (PSP) accounted for 259 of disposalmethods in high 261 in the medium and 386 in thelow density areas Similarly as a form of social service andenvironmental management initiative provided by the LagosState Government 162 105 and 272 of the residents inthe high medium and low densities respectively indicatedthat they often disposed their solid waste in Lagos StateWasteManagementrsquos (LAWMA) refuse facility Despite the abovefindings the study still established that indiscriminate wastedisposal was prevalent in Lagos metropolis This assertionis premised on the fact that (219 211 and 227) ofthe residents disposed solid waste on the road in the highmedium and low densities respectively a proportion as highas 165 and 18 of the residents dumped waste in the drainduring rainfall

Burning as a form of disposal practice accounted for 84and 115 in the high and medium densities respectivelyThe dumping of waste on open space was a practice found


Table 2 Solid waste disposal methods in the different residential densities

Disposal methods High Medium Low TotalFreq () Freq () Freq () Freq ()

Burning 28 84 23 115 mdash mdash 51 823LAWMAlowastlowast refuse facilities 54 162 21 105 24 272 99 159Accredited PSPlowastlowastlowast 86 259 52 261 34 386 172 277Sometimes on the road 73 219 42 211 20 227 135 218Dump in the drains during rainfall 55 165 36 180 mdash mdash 91 147Nearby open space 36 108 25 125 10 113 71 115Total 332 100 199 100 88 100 619lowast 100lowastThis exceeded number of questionnaires administered because residents adopted more than one method of disposallowastlowastLAWMAmeans Lagos State Waste Management AgencylowastlowastlowastPSP means private sector participation

Table 3 Multinomial logistic regression model of association between solid waste disposal methods and socioeconomic characteristics ofresidents

ParametersBurning LAWMA refuse facilities Accredited PSP

Exp(120573) 95 CI for Exp(120573) Exp(120573) 95 CI for Exp(120573) Exp(120573) 95 CI for Exp(120573)Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper

Residential densitiesLow 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdashMedium 000 000 mdash 666 356 1246 1707 910 3202High 396 214 733 405 228 719 1643 951 2839

Income groupLow income 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdashMiddle income 2616 922 7423 745 335 1659 2693 1181 6140High income 727 386 1366 2320 1248 4312 1037 576 1866

Age group19ndash30 (youths) 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash31ndash55 (young adults) 000 000 mdash 467 177 1233 629 238 166356ndash65 (adults) 1248 544 2866 582 257 993 1716 858 3432

School educational statusPrimary school education 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdashSecondary school education 000 000 mdash 401 038 4195 1619 160 16339Tertiary school education 606 278 1317 505 257 993 1522 794 2917

Length of stay1ndash10 years 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash11ndash25 years 000 000 mdash 1650E9 000 mdash 950 058 1557426ndash40 years 000 000 mdash 1120E9 000 mdash 1160 069 19635Model 1205942 (minus2log likelihood) 34713 49883 49638119873 51 99 172

in all the three residential densities It however accountedfor 108 125 and 113 of all the disposal methods inthe high medium and low residential densities respectivelyThe disposal of waste on vacant plots of land was commonin places where landholders were yet to develop such land Itcan be deduced from Table 2 that dumping of waste in run-off water especially during the rainy season was a means ofdisposal which in the high and medium densities accountedfor 165 and 18 This analysis confirmed that most of thesolid waste disposal methods utilized by the resident in Lagosmetropolis were not environment-friendly

Based on the above this study examined the influenceof certain socioeconomic variables on the disposal methodsemployed by residents This was determined through Multi-nomial Logistic RegressionAnalysis as shown onTables 3 and4The statistical technique was employed because categoricalvariables were to be analyzed Each of the solid waste disposalmethods was selected as dependent variables Five othersets of variables were the predictors These are residentialdensity income group age group educational status andlength of stay Fifteen categories were further derived fromthese variables residential density was classified into ldquolowrdquo



ParametersRoadside Dumping in the drains Nearby open space


Residential densitiesLow 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdashMedium 364 190 697 364 190 697 190 087 415High 3670 2029 6637 3670 2029 6637 1086 639 1845


Age group19ndash30 (youths) 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash31ndash55 (young adults) 543 196 1505 543 196 1505 225 076 66556ndash65 (adults) 479 225 1022 479 225 1022 759 377 1530

School educational statusPrimary school education 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdashSecondary school education 3534 348 35902 3534 348 35902 1456 222 9526Tertiary school education 478 242 944 478 242 944 584 302 1132

Length of stay1ndash10 years 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash 1000 mdash mdash11ndash25 years 1322 081 21685 1322 081 21685 1825E9 000 mdash26ndash40 years 716 042 12190 716 042 12190 2036E9 000 mdashModel 1205942 (minus2log likelihood) 49341 36350 47450119873 135 91 71

ldquomediumrdquo and ldquohighrdquo income had three groups as well ldquolowrdquoldquomediumrdquo and ldquohighrdquo while the age group was divided into19ndash30 (youths) 31ndash55 (young adults) and 56ndash65 (adults)[32] Others were educational status of residents from whichthree categories were derived thus primary school educationsecondary school education and tertiary education andlastly residentsrsquo length of stay was categorized into 1ndash10years 11ndash25 years 26ndash40 years and above 40 years [33]Six major solid waste disposal methods were identified inLagos metropolis The summary of the Multinomial LogisticRegression Analysis on each of the disposal methods is thuspresented

Among the residents the likelihood of burning as adisposal methodwas peculiar to all the categories of the inde-pendent variables The model 1205942 (minus2log likelihood) = 34713was significant at 0001 confirming that there was a significantrelationship between burning as a waste disposal method andthe independent variables Residents in the high density hadan odd ratio of 395 2616 was associated withmiddle incomecategory and the adults with age range of 56ndash65 years andresidents with secondary school education were 1248 and606 times more likely to utilize this disposal method

The model fitting information of 1205942 (minus2log likelihood) =49883 significant at 0001 established that a significantrelationship also existed between the dependent and inde-pendent variables Among the residents the likelihood of

using LAWMA refuse facilities as a disposal method wastewas peculiar to all the categories of the independent variablesResidents in the medium density had an odd ratio of 6662320 was associated with high income category and theadults (56ndash65 years) and residents with tertiary educationwere 582 and 505 times more likely to utilize this receptaclewhile residents who have lived for 26ndash40 years were 1650times more likely to utilize LAWMA facilities as a solid wastedisposal method

The model 1205942 (minus2log likelihood) = 49638 significantat 0001 established that a significant relationship existedbetween the dependent and independent variables Thelikelihood of using accredited PSP as a disposal method waspeculiar to all the categories of the independent variablesResidents in the medium density had an odd ratio of 17072693 was associated with middle income category and theadults (56ndash65 years) and residents with secondary schooleducation were 1716 and 1619 times more likely to use thisreceptacle while residents who have lived for 26ndash40 yearswere 1160 times more likely to make use of this receptacle

Among the residents the likelihood of dumping solidwaste on the roadside as a disposal method was peculiar toall the categories of the independent variables The model1205942 (minus2log likelihood) = 49341 was significant at 0001 con-firming that there was a significant relationship between thedependent variable and the independent variables Residents


in the high density had an odd ratio of 3670 743 wasassociated with high income category and the adults withage range of 31ndash55 years and residents with secondary schooleducation were 543 and 3534 times more likely to use thisdisposal method while residents who have lived for 11ndash25years were 1322 timesmore likely tomake use of this disposalmethod

The model 1205942 (minus2log likelihood) = 49341 significantat 0001 established that a significant relationship existedbetween the dependent and independent variables Thelikelihood of dumping household solid waste in the drainsas a disposal method was peculiar to all the categories ofthe independent variables Residents in the high density hadan odd ratio of 3670 743 was associated with high incomecategory and the young adults (31ndash55 years) and residentswith secondary school education were 543 and 3534 timesmore likely to resort to this adverse disposal method whileresidents who have lived for 11ndash25 years were 1322 timesmorelikely to make use of this receptacle

The model fitting information of 1205942 (minus2log likelihood) =47450 significant at 0001 established that residents in thehigh density had an odd ratio of 1086 795 was associatedwith high income category and the adults (56ndash65 years)and residents with secondary school education were 759and 1456 times more likely to resort to this deleteriousdisposal method of dumping in nearby open space whileresidents who have lived for 26ndash40 years were 2036 timesmore likely to make use of this disposal method It couldbe concluded from the foregoing that significant relationshipexisted between the solid waste disposal methods and withthe socioeconomic of residents in Lagos metropolis Thestudy further posited that most of solid waste disposalmethods utilized in Lagos metropolis were not environment-friendly This was confirmed by 562 of the respondents

4 Conclusions

This study concluded that six major disposal methods werecommon in the study area Furthermore the influence ofsocioeconomic characteristics of residents (density incomeage educational status and length of stay) on domesticsolid waste disposal methods varied significantly in Lagosmetropolis

Consequently this study suggests a consistent publicenlightenment and environmental sensitization for all cit-izens This type of education should present the benefitsand dangers attached to making the environment clean andotherwise It should also be an avenue through which resi-dents would be educated on their roles in achieving a cleanand healthy living environment through healthy solid wastedisposal methods National Orientation Agency (NOA)government agency such as Lagos State Waste Manage-ment Agency (LAWMA) Lagos State Ministry of Environ-ment Federal Ministry of Environment and Local Gov-ernment Authorities can also collaborate with other non-governmental organization and citizen group such as CitizenAdvisory Group [17] to develop modalities for informedenvironmental sensitization Such enlightenment initiativesbecome highly imperative as majority of the respondents in

the study area confirmed that significant proportion of solidwaste disposal methods utilized in Lagosmetropolis were notenvironment-friendly

Conflict of Interests

The research being reported in this paper emanated fromEffect of Residential Characteristics on Household SolidWaste and Street Litter Management in Lagos MetropolisNigeria a MSc degree thesis submitted by the authormdashOluwole Samuel Ojewalemdashto the Department of Urban andRegional Planning Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-IfeNigeria on 17th of July 2014 The terms of this arrangementhave been reviewed and approved by the Board of ExaminerObafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife Nigeria on 4th ofAugust in accordance with its policy on objectivity inresearch

References

[1] A O Afon ldquoInformal sector initiative in the primary sub-system of urban solid waste management in Lagos NigeriardquoHabitat International vol 31 no 2 pp 193ndash204 2007

[2] H A Arafat I A Al-Khatib R Daoud and H ShwahnehldquoInfluence of socio-economic factors on street litter generationin the Middle East effects of education level age and type ofresidencerdquo Waste Management amp Research vol 25 no 4 pp363ndash370 2007

[3] F Contreras S Ishii T Aramaki K Hanaki and S ConnorsldquoDrivers in current and future municipal solid waste manage-ment systems cases in Yokohama and BostonrdquoWaste Manage-ment and Research vol 28 no 1 pp 76ndash93 2010

[4] A M Kayode and F K Omole ldquoSome socio-economic fac-tors affecting solid waste generation and disposal in Ibadanmetropolis Nigeriardquo Journal of Environmental Issues and Agri-culture in Developing Countries vol 3 no 1 2011

[5] A Gilpin Dictionary of Environment and Development JohnWiley amp Sons Chichester UK 1996

[6] O Oresanya ldquoWaste control measures and responsibility of awaste manager within the framework of recent managementmethods and development in municipal and industrial wastesrdquoin Proceedings of the Workshop on Effective Waste Managementin Nigeria The Nigerian Society of Engineers Lagos NigeriaApril 1998

[7] I A Tsiboe and E Marbell A look at Urban waste disposalproblem in Accra Ghana [Masters thesis] Roskilde UniversityRoskilde Denmark 2004 httpwwwrucdkenresearch

[8] F Contreras S Ishii T Aramaki K Hanaki and S Con-nors ldquoDrivers in current and future municipal solid wastemanagement systems cases in Yokohama and Bostonrdquo WasteManagement amp Research vol 28 no 1 pp 76ndash93 2009

[9] D Musademba S Musiyandaka A Muzinda B Nhemachenaand D Jambwal ldquoMunicipal solid waste (MSW) managementchallenges of Chinhoyi town in Zimbabwe opportunities ofwaste reduction and recyclingrdquo Journal of Sustainable Develop-ment in Africa vol 13 no 2 2011

[10] Asian Productivity Organization ldquoSolid waste managementissues and challenges in Asiardquo Report of the APO Surveyon Solid-WasteManagement 2004-05 Environmental Manage-ment Centre Mumbai India 2007


[11] J Post and N Obirih-Opareh ldquoPartnerships and the publicinterest assessing the performance of public-private collabora-tion in solid waste collection in Accrardquo Space and Polity vol 7no 1 pp 45ndash63 2003

[12] UN-HABITAT Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Develop-ing Countries 2010

[13] M U Nwachukwu ldquoSolid waste generation and disposal ina Nigerian city an empirical analysis in Onitsha MetropolisrdquoJournal of Environmental Management and Safety vol 1 no 1pp 180ndash191 2009

[14] R Girling Rubbish Dirt on Our Hands and Crisis Ahead EdenProject Books Transworld Publishers London UK 2005

[15] UNHABITAT and ECA-CEA ldquoThe state of African citiesa framework for addressing urban challenges in AfricardquoHS103608 E 2008

[16] D Awunyo-Vitor I Shaibu and G S Jasaw Urban HouseholdsrsquoWillingness to Pay for Improved Solid Waste Disposal Servicesin Kumasi Metropolis Ghana Department of AgriculturalEconomics Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Tech-nology Kumasi Ghana 2010

[17] A O Afon Solid waste management in selected cities of OyoState [PhD dissertation] Department of Urban and RegionalPlanning Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife Nigeria 2005

[18] M A Nwachukwu H Feng and J Alinnor ldquoAssessment ofheavy metal pollution in soil and their implications within andaround mechanic villagesrdquo International Journal of Environ-mental Science and Technology vol 7 no 2 pp 347ndash358 2010

[19] M Alhassan and J Mohammed ldquoHouseholdsrsquo demand for bet-ter solid waste disposal services case study of four communitiesin the new Juaben Municipality Ghanardquo Journal of SustainableDevelopment vol 6 no 11 2013

[20] M Kumar and N Nandini ldquoCommunity attitude perceptionand willingness towards solid waste management in Bangalorecity Karnataka Indiardquo International Journal of EnvironmentalSciences vol 4 no 1 2013

[21] A O Afon ldquoIntra-urban differentials in solid waste disposalpractice in Ogbomoso Nigeria implication for environmentaleducationrdquo Nigerian Journal of Construction Technology Man-agement vol 9 no 1 pp 1ndash17 2008

[22] O I Nwachukwu N I Chidi and K O Charles ldquoIssues ofroadside disposal habit ofmunicipal solid waste environmentalimpacts and implementation of soundmanagement practices indeveloping country lsquoNigeriarsquordquo International Journal of Environ-mental Science and Development vol 1 no 5 pp 409ndash418 2010

[23] K S Njoroge M S Wokabi K Ngetich and N M KathurildquoInfluence of informal solid waste management on livelihoodsof urban solid waste collectors a case study of Nakuru Munic-ipality Kenyardquo International Journal of Humanities and SocialScience vol 3 no 13 2013

[24] P Rushbrook and M Pugh ldquoSolid Waste Landfills in middleand lower income countries A technical guide to planningdesign and preparationrdquo World Bank Technical Paper 425Washington DC USA 1999

[25] K A Ayuba L A Manaf A H Sabrina and S W N AzminldquoApplication of an integrative approach for municipal solidwaste management assessment towards adopting a conceptualmodel for efficient and sustainable solid waste managementrdquoJournal of Environment and Earth Science vol 3 no 7 2013

[26] S Mohapatra ldquoTechnological options for treatment of munic-ipal solid waste of Delhirdquo International Journal of RenewableEnergy Research vol 3 no 3 pp 682ndash687 2013

[27] K Vasanta and Priyasauni ldquoSustainable municipal solid wastemanagement strategies need of PPP model for agrardquo AsiaPacific Journal of Marketing amp Management Review vol 2 no5 2013

[28] Canadian International Development Agency Towards a LagosState Climate Change Adaptation Strategy Building NigeriarsquosResponse to Climate Change (BNRCC) Project Commissionerof Environment Lagos State Nigeria 2012

[29] K A Aderogba M Oredipe S Oderinde and T AfelumoldquoChallenges of poor drainage systems and floods in LagosMetropolis Nigeriardquo International Journal of Social Sciences andEducation vol 2 no 3 2012

[30] Lagos State Government Digest of Statistics Issued by Lagosbureau of statistics Ministry of Economic Planning and BudgetThe secretariat Alausa Ikeja Lagos Nigeria 2011

[31] IndependentNational Electoral CommissionReport on the 2011General Elections Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC) 2011

[32] C Ezeah Analysis of barriers and success factors affecting theadoption of sustainable management of Municipal Solid Wastein Abuja Nigeria [PhD thesis] University of Wolverhampton2010 httpcorekmiopenacukdownloadpdf1933162pdf

[33] G B Faniran Residentsrsquo perception of the monthly environ-mental sanitation exercise in Ibadan Metropolis Nigeria [MScthesis] Department of Urban and Regional Planning ObafemiAwolowo University Ile-Ife Nigeria 2012

[34] Vanguard Newspaper Lagos Ratifies New Salary Package 2011[35] World Health Organization WHO Library Cataloguing-in-

Publication Data World Health Organization 2011

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of



EcosystemsJournal of


MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of


Marine BiologyJournal of


Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in


Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of



Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics


Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of


BiodiversityInternational Journal of


ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of


The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


ClimatologyJournal of


The management of domestic solid waste is one of thehuge challenges of the urban areas of all sizes From megaci-ties to the small towns it is always in the top five of the mostchallenging problems for city managers [12] Independentstudies [14ndash16] noted that the disposal of domestic solid wastegenerated is particularly problematic in cities of developingcountries In this regard Nigeria is not exempted as evidencesabound that the problems associated with poor domesticsolid waste disposal are daily realities in most Nigerian cities

The disposal of solid waste is the ultimate stage in solidwaste management system influenced by factors such ascharacteristics of waste to be disposed cost considerationavailability of disposal site cost of labour and technicalimplication of methods of disposal [17] Past studies estab-lished that the disposalmethods often utilized include the useof sanitary landfill composting incineration and pyrolisisThese methods are commonly used in developed countries[18ndash20]

There are other solid waste disposal methods mainlyemployed in developing nations [17 21ndash23] These methodsinclude the use of designated and incidental open spacesdumping of waste into drain during and after rainfall onriver banks beside road and burning and burying Othersinclude the use of uncompleted building vacant land andcollection by government refuse van private waste managersand cart pushers These methods are considered both naiveand dangerous as they are environmentally unfriendly [24ndash27] Based on the above the available methods of solid wastedisposal are investigated in Lagos metropolis in this study

Therefore this study is different from the above empiricalstudies because it attempted to provide answer to theseresearch questions Is there any significant difference in thesolid waste disposal methods utilized by residents withinthe residential neighborhoods of Lagos metropolis To whatextent can the socioeconomic attributes of residents influ-ence their methods of solid waste disposal in MetropolitanLagos Successfully providing answers to these questionswill be pivotal to suggesting feasible measures to addresschallenges associated with domestic solid waste disposal inLagosmetropolis a city regarded as one of the fastest growingmegacities in the world Thus the study aimed at examiningthe influence of socioeconomic attributes of residents onthe choice of solid waste disposal methods utilized in Lagosmetropolis Nigeria This is with a view to provide informa-tion that can enhance solid waste management

2 Materials and Method

Lagos is situated within latitudes 6∘231015840N and 6∘411015840N andlongitudes 2∘421015840E and 3∘421015840E The physical growth anddevelopment of Lagos are tied to its expanding economicand political roles which aided by its rapid and explosivepopulation growth has been phenomenal The state has apopulation of 17 million with approximately 85 living in thecity of Lagos making it one of the most urbanized regionsin Nigeria The population density of the state is about4193 persons per square km However in the built-up areasof Metropolitan Lagos the average density is over 20000persons per square kmThe rate of population growth is about

600000 per annumwhich is ten times faster than that ofNewYork and Los Angeles [28]

Lagos metropolis is the economic and financial capitalof Nigeria With a total of 9996 km2 in land area themetropolis is made up of 16 Local Government Areas (LGAs)[29] Eti-Osa LGA has the largest land area of 29910 km2the second and the third largest are Ojo and AlimoshoLGAs with 182 km2 and 1378 km2 respectively The totalpopulation that made up the metropolis has the largestconcentration at Alimosho LGA (2047026) while the secondand third in terms of population size are Ajeromi-IfelodunLGA (1435295) and Mushin LGA (1321517) [30]

Data for this study were from primary and secondarysources The primary data was sourced through question-naire administration and actual measurement of householdsolid waste generated in the study area Through multistagesampling technique the 16 Local Government Areas (LGAs)within Lagos metropolis were stratified into low mediumand high density areas In this study a LGAwith a populationof 20ndash10000 personskm2 was regarded as low density whilemedium and high density have 10001ndash20000 personskm2and above 20000 personskm2 respectively Simple randomsampling technique was used to select Eti-Osa Ikeja andMushin areas from the low medium and high densityareas respectively The three selected LGAs were furtherstratified into existing electoral wards as recognized by theIndependent National Electoral Commission (INEC) [31]

Information obtained from INEC showed that there werefourteen electoral wards inMushin LGA while Ikeja and Eti-Osa LGAs have ten (10) wards each One out of every four(4) wards in each LGA was selected through simple randomsampling without replacement Thus ten (10) political wardswere surveyed There were 15275 residential buildings inthe selected political wards with 8996 3780 and 2499 inthe high medium and low densities respectively Systematicrandom sampling technique was adopted in selecting one outof every forty buildings (25)

Using this method a total of 384 buildings were sampledwith a household head targeted in each building for question-naire administration Information obtained from residentsincludes their socioeconomic attributes andmethods of solidwaste disposal

3 Results and Discussion

The socioeconomic attributes of the residents were con-sidered important for this study The frequency as well aspercentage distribution of the variables examined acrossthe different residential densities is summarized in Table 1Income of respondents is a strong determinant of themannerwith which residents of any given community manage theirsolid waste In this study the income groups for householdheads were based on the income classification adapted frompast study using the Lagos State Civil Service minimumwage as the benchmark [32 33] Therefore household headswho earn 118780ndash150000 were regarded as low incomeearners (LI) and 150001ndash1100000 were referred to asmiddle income earners (MI) while the high income earners
















































4 Conclusions






References









































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics





























































4 Conclusions






References









































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics












































Journal of












Volume 2014

Advances in









Geophysics














research article intraurban analysis of domestic solid

Documents