Journal of Environmental Waste Management and Recycling

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +44 1518081136

Perspective - Journal of Environmental Waste Management and Recycling (2023) Volume 6, Issue 3

The benefits of integrated solid waste management systems.

Abubakar Khan*

Department of Environmental Sustainability, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Corresponding Author:
Abubakar Khan
Department of Environmental Sustainability
Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University
Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Received: 20-Apr-2023, Manuscript No. AAEWMR-23-97780; Editor assigned: 21-Apr-2023, PreQC No. AAEWMR-23-97780(PQ); Reviewed: 05-May-2023, QC No.AAEWMR-23-97780; Revised: 09-May-2023, Manuscript No. AAEWMR-23-97780(R); Published: 16-May-2023, DOI:10.35841/AAEWMR-6.3.143

Citation: Khan A. The benefits of integrated solid waste management systems. Environ Waste Management Recycling. 2022;6(3):143

Solid waste management (SWM) continues to dominate as a significant social group and governance challenge, particularly in urban areas engulfed by the high rate of growth and garbage generation. The role of SWM in achieving property development is stressed in many international development agendas, charters, and visions. For example, sustainable SWM will facilitate meet several United Nations’ property Development Goals (SDG), resembling guaranteeing clean water and sanitation (SDG6), making sustainable cities and comprehensive communities (SDG11), mitigating global climate change (SDG13), protective life ashore (SDG15), and demonstrating sustainable consumption and production patterns (SDG12). It conjointly fosters a circular urban economy that promotes reductions within the consumption of finite resources, materials employ and exercise for waste elimination, pollution reduction, value saving, and inexperienced growth [1].

However, not to mention economic growth, improved lifestyle, and consumerism, cities across the world can still face an amazing challenge of SWM because the world population is predicted to rise to eight billion by 2025 and to 9.3 billion by 2050, out of that around 70% are living in urban areas. In developing countries, most cities collect only 50–80% of generated waste when disbursal 20–50% of their budgets, of that 80–95% is spent on assembling and transporting waste. Moreover, several low-income countries collect as low as 10% of the rubbish generated in community areas, which contributes to public health and environmental risks, as well as higher incidents of looseness of the bowels and acute metabolism infections among people, notably children, living close to garbage dumps. Obstacles to effective municipal SWM embrace lack of awareness, technologies, finances, and smart governance [2].

Removing garbage from homes and businesses while not larger attention to what was then applied with its conjointly been the priority of municipal SWM in many cities of developing countries. In most developing countries, garbage collected from households is disposed of in landfills or dumpsites, the bulk of that are projected to achieve their capacities inside a decade. The unsustainable approach of selling or burning waste in associate degree open space, typically close to poor communities on the town edge, or throwing garbage into water bodies was an appropriate electric pig strategy. Similarly, several cities still use old-generation or poorly managed facilities and informal uncontrolled dumping or alfresco waste burning. Often, these practices have an effect on marginalized social teams close to the disposal sites. Moreover, this approach poses many property problems, as well as resource depletion, environmental pollution, and public health problems, resembling the unfold of communicable diseases [3].

However, ever since the arrival of the environmental movement in the 1960s, there has been a comprehensive appreciation of environmental and public health risks of unsustainable SWM practices. within the Nineteen Seventies and onward, SWM was a technical issue to be resolved victimization technology; hence, the stress and investments were placed on pickup equipment. though trendy technology will considerably cut back emissions of venturous substances, by the 1990s, that viewpoint modified once municipalities become unable to evacuate and lose garbage effectively while not the active involvement of service users and alternative stakeholders. the lack of the general public sector within the international South to deliver sufficient improvement of SWM, not to mention the pressure from the monetary establishments and other donor agencies, crystal rectifier to privatization policies at the tip of the decade. However, as privatization did not offer municipal SWM services to the poor and marginalized communities, this international thinking on addressing municipal SWM issues is changing [4].

A additional property waste management approach prioritizes practices resembling reduced production, waste classifications, reuse, recycling, associate degreed energy recovery over the common practices of landfilling, open dumps, and open incineration. This approach, that continues to be at an early stage however obtaining increased attention within the international South, is more comprehensive and setting-friendly and has less negative impact on human health and therefore the environment than the common practices. As such, there's a requirement to assess SWM practices within the international thereforeuth and therefore their impacts on setting and human health as a result of 90%. So far, there are some studies on the impacts of SWM practices on human health and the environment in the global regions [5].


  1. Abd Manaf L, Samah MA, Zukki NI. Municipal solid waste management in Malaysia: Practices and challenges. Waste Manag. 2009;29(11):2902-6.
  2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Saeed MO, Hassan MN, Mujeebu MA. Assessment of municipal solid waste generation and recyclable materials potential in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Waste Manag. 2009;29(7):2209-13.
  4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Guerrero LA, Maas G, Hogland W. Solid waste management challenges for cities in developing countries. Waste Manag. 2013;33(1):220-32.
  6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Hettiarachchi H, Meegoda JN, Ryu S. Organic waste buyback as a viable method to enhance sustainable municipal solid waste management in developing countries. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(11):2483.
  8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Zhang DQ, Tan SK, Gersberg RM. Municipal solid waste management in China: status, problems and challenges. J Environ Manag. 2010;91(8):1623-33.
  10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App