SOLID WASTE SEGREGATION AS A STRATEGY FOR IMPROVED WASTE MANAGEMENT
Abstract
Solid waste management is an established environmental health challenge in most societies. The heterogeneousnature of municipal solid wastemakes its management particularly complex. Waste segregation which is key to proper solid waste management has not been adopted in the Nigerian society. Improper waste segregation could result in diarrheal diseases. The study was designed to assess solid waste segregation as a strategy for improved waste management in Okaka Community, Bayelsa State.
A quasi-experimental study was adopted and multistage sampling was used to select (30) households. A semi-structured, self-administered questionnaire comprising respondents‘ socio-demographic characteristics, 14-point knowledge scale and 14-point practice scale was used. The knowledge and practice scores were rated as poor (≤4), fair (4-8) and good (8).Jute sack bags without label or colour code were given to households to collect solid waste for 1 week. Wastes collected were characterised and weighed at pre-intervention. Thereafter, labelledcolour coded jute sack bags (Black for degradable and White for non-degradable waste) were provided and training on its use was conducted for 2 weeks for the households. The questionnaire was re-administered to the selected respondents‘ after intervention. Waste from the households were collected and weighed for 1 week as post-intervention SW segregation. Non-degradable waste was segregated, characterised and its components were weighed. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, and t-test at p꞊0.05.
Respondents‘ age was 28.6±2.6 years. Educational status of respondents‘ was non-formal (23.3%), primary (26.7%), secondary (20.0%) and tertiary (30.0%). Pre-intervention knowledge score of respondents‘ was 2.7±0.2 while the practice score was 2.2±0.1. Respondents‘ with poor and fair knowledge were 73.3% and 26.7%, while those with poor and fair practice were 70.0% and 30.0%, respectively. Pre-intervention SW segregated among the households were heterogeneous waste (5.0±0.5kg), metals (0.7±0.1kg), plastics (0.6±0.1kg), and glass (0.4±0.1kg). Respondents‘ score for good knowledge was 9.4±0.2 while the practice score was 10.0±1.4 after intervention. Respondents‘ knowledge score were good (64.3%) and poor (7.1%) while practice scores were good (93.3%) and poor (2.4%) after intervention. Respondents‘ scores were fair for knowledge (28.6%) and practice (4.3%) after intervention. Knowledge and practice score were significant at pre and post intervention. Waste segregated after intervention was degradables (2.2±0.6kg) and non-degradables (1.7±0.2kg). Components of non-degradable waste were nylon (0.4±0.1kg), metal (0.5±0.1kg), paper(0.4±0.1kg), plastic (0.2±0.1kg), glass (0.4±0.1kg), cloths(0.4±0.1kg), wood(0.5±0.1kg), shoes (0.6±0.1kg), e-waste (0.2±0.1kg), tetra-pack (0.2±0.1kg) and others (0.5±0.1kg).
The knowledge and practice of solid waste segregation were improved after intervention. A lot of advocacy is needed to establish waste segregation practice. Public enlightenment, creation of buy-back recycling centres, community participation and training is highly recommended.
Keywords:    Waste segregation; Non-degradable waste; Wastes characterization
Word count: 423
Table of Contents
BACKGROUND OF STUDY    
1.1    INTRODUCTION    
1.2    Statement of the Problem    
1.3    Justification of the Study    
1.5    Research Hypotheses    
CHAPTER TWO    
LITERATURE REVIEW    
2.1    What is Waste?    
2.2    Solid Waste    
2.3    Classification of Solid Waste    
2.4    Health Impacts of Improper Handling of Solid Waste    
2.4.1    Organic Domestic Waste    
2.4.2    Exposure To Hazardous Waste    
2.4.3    Waste From Agriculture and Industries    
2.4.4    Disposal of Hospital and other Medical Waste    
2.4.5    Waste Treatment and Disposal Sites    
2.4.6Recycling ..................................................................................................................................
2.4.7Occupational Hazards Associated with Waste Handling ....................................................
2.5Solid Waste Management .......................................................................................................
2.6Objectives of Waste Management .........................................................................................
2.7The Waste Management Hierarchy ......................................................................................
2.7.1Basic Principles of Waste Management ................................................................................
2.8Integrated Sustainable Solid Waste Management (ISWM) ................................................
2.8.1Principles of ISWM .................................................................................................................
2.8.2Using the Principles of ISWM in Analysis and Assessment ................................................
2.8.3Measures to take to make Waste Management Systems more Sustainable and
    Integrated…………………………………………………………………………………….
2.9Waste Segregation ...................................................................................................................
2.10Definition of a Household .......................................................................................................
2.11.1Practice of Household Waste Segregation ............................................................................
2.12Characterization of Waste for Segregation at the Household.............................................
2.13The Principles of Segregation ................................................................................................
2.14The Planning of Segregation ..................................................................................................
2.15Colour Coding of the Segregated Waste ...............................................................................
2.16The Packaging of the Segregated Waste ...............................................................................
2.17The Labelling of the Segregated Waste .................................................................................
2.18Planning of Segregation Points ..............................................................................................
2.19Information Needed for Planning Source Segregation ........................................................
2.20Modes of Separation at Source ..............................................................................................
2.20.1Customary Practices ...............................................................................................................
2.20.2Collectively Organized Systems ............................................................................................
2.20.2.1Reasons for Interventions under Organized Systems ...................................................
2.20.3Motivations at the Household Level .....................................................................................
2.20.4 Issues and Dilemmas ..............................................................................................................
2.20.5 Cost Concerns of Municipally-Organised Separate Collection
2.20.6 Municipally-Organised Collection vs. Existing Customary Operations
2.20.7 Special Problems of Organic Wastes
2.20.8 Incentives and Education
2.20.9 Overview of Separation at Source Case Studies
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1    Study Design and Scope
3.3    Study Population
3.4    Criteria for Selection
3.5    Sample Size Estimation
3.6    Sampling Procedure
3.7    Sampling Frame
3.8    Selection Criteria
3.8.1    Inclusion Criteria
3.8.2    Exclusion Criteria
3.8.3    Method(s) and Instrument(s) for Data Collection
3.8.4    Waste Segregation Materials
3.8.5    The Semi-structured Questionnaire
3.9    Validity and Reliability of Instruments
3.9.1    Validity
3.9.2    Reliability
3.10    Training of Field Assistants
3.11    Data Collection Process
3.11.1 Administration of Semi-structured Questionnaire
3.11.2 Pre-intervention Survey
3.11.3 Intervention
3.11.4 Post Intervention Evaluation
3.11.5 Waste Segregation (Assessment)
3.12    Field Supervision
3.13    Data Management and Analysis
3.14    Ethical Consideration
3.14.1 Informed Consent
3.14.2 Voluntariness
3.14.3 Confidentiality
3.14.4 Beneficence
3.14.5 Non-maleficence
CHAPTER FOUR
   RESULTS
4.1    Questionnaire Survey
4.1.1    Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
4.1.2    Knowledge of Respondents on Solid Waste Segregation
4.1.3    Attitude of Respondents to Solid Waste Segregation
4.1.4    Practice of Solid Waste Segregation
4.2    Comparison of Knowledge Attitude and Practice of Waste    Segregation at Pre-Intervention    
4.3    Comparison of Knowledge, Attitude and Practice at Pre-Intervention and Post-Intervention    
4.4    Waste Segregation    
4.4.1    Nature and Amount of Waste Segregated at Pre-intervention
4.4.2    Comparison of the Nature and Amount of Waste Segregated at Pre and Post-
Intervention    
DISCUSSION    
CHAPTER SIX    
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION    
6.1    Conclusion    
6.2    Recommendations    
CHAPTER ONE
BACKGROUND OF STUDY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Solid waste management as a core environmental health function has persistently cause challenges to many policy makers, professionals and societies in developing countries. Several factors have been attributed to this menace to public health importance and these include factors such as inadequate involvement of trained professionals such as environmental scientists, environmental health officers and environmental engineers in the process,lack of proper planning, urbanization and population growth, negative behaviour and attitudes of humans to solid waste management, poor funding of solid waste management programmes, inadequately trained personnel, lack of political will on the part of policy makers and apathy of trained professionals(Amadi, 2011).
Improperly managed waste from the household and communities is a serious health hazard which causes the spread of infectious diseases. Waste unattended to attracts flies, rodents, and organisms that cause prevalence ofdiseases (Amadi, 2009). Wet waste decomposes and releases bad odour, resulting in unhygienic conditions of immense public health risk e.g. the plague outbreak in Surat(Zamadar, 2010). Excessive Solid waste generated should be handled with utmost care and professionalism so as to ensure its efficient management (MSDU, 2006).

Municipal solid waste is heterogeneous and this makes its management complex but with a well-developed scientific systematic design, adequate public enlightenment, community participation and appropriate legislation put in place for solid waste segregation from the primary point of generation (source), solid waste reduction, re-use, recycling and recovery becomes a very easy task and the ―waste to wealth‖maxim iseasily achieved with minimal cost.
The large streams of solid waste generated in towns and cities could be re-used to generate substantial financial, environmental and social gains through waste recycling and or energy recovery(ICPE, 2004). But due to improper management plans and conservation, non-
existence recycling practices and absence of deliberate policies, potentially marketable solid waste materials are disposed at insanitary landfills (ICPE, 2004).
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The waste around theOkaka Community in Yenagoa Local Government Area of Bayelsa State and its environs, apart from being unsightly, destroys the aesthetic value of the environment and constitutes nuisance such as odour, traffic impediments, creates breeding ground for pests (rodents, vermin, vectors, etc.) and air and water pollution. Therefore, the urgent need for an efficient solid waste management strategy to address this menace that has defied all strategies of policy makers cannot be overemphasized. The issue becomes even more critical because an important step in solid waste management which is waste segregation at the source of generation has been overlooked. Waste segregation at the source of generation is key to efficient solid waste management it is the process that facilitates waste reduction and maximizes material recovery in the community towards achieving zero waste status.
1.3    Justification of the Study
Before the advent of man‘s technological advancement, waste disposal was not a significant problem since population was small and nature‘s carrying capacity to assimilate waste was high(Tchobanoglous et al.,1993; Ahmed and Ali, 2004). However, with the rapid development of cities around the world came an increase in the quantity of waste produced from human activities; this has caused a major waste disposal challenge to both developed and developing nations (WHO/UNAIDS, 2009). A United Nations Development Programme Survey Report of 151 major cities from around the world showed that inadequate solid waste disposal is the second most challenging problem facing most residents of cities after unemployment (Da Zhu et al., 2008). This situation is further aggravated as the population of many nations continue to increase as cities become rapidly urbanized, making it difficult for most municipal authorities to provide most of the basic sanitation services (Ogbonna et al., 2002; Ayotamuno and Gobo, 2004). The United Nations Statistic Division stated that Nigeria, with a population of about 140 million people and an
annual urban growth of 3.8%, has persistent solid waste management problems coupled with growing population (Walling et al., 2004). An average Nigerian generates about 0.49 kg of solid waste per day with 90% of the total burden of waste being generated by households and commercial centres(Sridhar et al.,2010).
Indiscriminate disposal and dumping of waste has become acommon practice in Nigerian cities. Municipal solid waste heaps are found in several parts of major Nigerian cities like Ibadan, Port Harcourt, Yenagoa, Warri, and even Okaka often blocking roads, alleys and pavements (Ayotamuno and Gobo, 2004). Most of the waste dumps are located close to residential areas, markets, farms, roadsides and creeks; with many human activities close to the dump sites, there is an increased threat to public health (Ogbonna et al., 2002). Generally, the uncollected solid wastes are left to decay and this produces foul odour that constitutes a source of environmental nuisance (Ofomata and Eze, 2001). Uncontrolled burning of refuse is another common method of waste disposal in Nigeria which has often led to fire outbreaks. Smoke, arising from such fires can reduce visibility and has been known to cause fatal vehicular accidents (Ofomata and Eze, 2001). The Okaka Community in Yenagoa Local Government Area of Bayelsa State is not left out. Thus, the management of solid waste in our cities, including Okaka, continues to pose serious challenges due to the non-application of the appropriate and environmentally sustainable waste management strategies and technologies as a result of financial and technological constraints (Golit, 2001).
1.4    Research Questions
1    What is the knowledge, attitude, and practice of waste segregation at the pre-intervention stage?
1.    What is the impact of training on the knowledge, attitude and practice of solid waste segregation?
2.    What is the effect of the provision of bags on the practice of solid waste segregation at source?
3.    What are the pre-intervention and the post- intervention variations in the nature, amount and management of solid waste?
1.5 Research Hypotheses
In confirming the impact of the different knowledge, attitudes, practices, trainings and provisions of bags and waste segregation practice at pre-intervention and post-intervention on waste segregation at the source of generation, the hypotheses to be tested and analysed using the data collected are;
•    there is no significant relationship between the knowledge, attitudes and practices and solid waste segregation at source;
•    there is no significant relationship between the training, knowledge, and attitude; and practiceof solid waste segregation at source;
•    there is no significant relationship between the provision of bags and solid waste segregation practices at source; and
•    there is no significant relationship between the pre-intervention and post-intervention variation of the nature, amount and management of solid waste.
1.6 Limitation of the Study
Most respondents were reluctant to attend training sessions. This resulted in a series of re-scheduled sessions for training that took time and resources.
1.7    Broad Objective of the Study
The main objective of the study is; to assess solid waste segregation as a strategy for improved waste management in theOkaka Community, of Bayelsa State.
1.8    Specific Objectives
The specific objectives of this work are to;
i.    assess the knowledge, attitude and practice of waste segregation at source at pre-intervention;
ii.    asses the effects of training on the knowledge, attitude and practice of waste segregation at source;
iii.    assess the effect of the provision of labelled colour coded bags on the practice of waste segregation at source; and
iv.    evaluate the pre-intervention and post-intervention training variation in the nature, amount and management of solid waste.