Cargando…

Ranking Canadian waste management system efficiencies using three waste performance indicators

Three waste management system (WMS) efficiency indicators are adopted to systematically assess WMS efficiency in Canada from 1998 to 2016. The study objectives are to examine the temporal changes in waste diversion activities and rank the performance of the jurisdictions using a qualitative analytic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mensah, Derek, Karimi, Nima, Ng, Kelvin Tsun Wai, Mahmud, Tanvir S., Tang, Yili, Igoniko, Sotonye
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9937868/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36808539
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25866-0
_version_ 1784890519892000768
author Mensah, Derek
Karimi, Nima
Ng, Kelvin Tsun Wai
Mahmud, Tanvir S.
Tang, Yili
Igoniko, Sotonye
author_facet Mensah, Derek
Karimi, Nima
Ng, Kelvin Tsun Wai
Mahmud, Tanvir S.
Tang, Yili
Igoniko, Sotonye
author_sort Mensah, Derek
collection PubMed
description Three waste management system (WMS) efficiency indicators are adopted to systematically assess WMS efficiency in Canada from 1998 to 2016. The study objectives are to examine the temporal changes in waste diversion activities and rank the performance of the jurisdictions using a qualitative analytical framework. Increasing Waste Management Output Index (WMOI) trends were identified in all jurisdictions, and more government subsidiaries and incentive packages are recommended. With the exception of Nova Scotia, statistically significant decreasing diversion gross domestic product (DGDP) ratio trends are observed. It appears that the increases in GDP from Sector 562 were not contributing to waste diversion. On average, Canada spent about $225/tonne of waste handled during the study period. Current spending per tonne handled (CuPT) trends are decreasing, with S ranging from + 5.15 to + 7.67. It appears that WMSs in Saskatchewan and Alberta are more efficient. The results suggest that the use of diversion rate alone to evaluate WMS may be misleading. The findings help the waste community to better understand the trade-offs between various waste management alternatives. The proposed qualitative framework utilizing comparative rankings is applicable elsewhere and can be a useful decision support tool for policy-makers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9937868
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99378682023-02-21 Ranking Canadian waste management system efficiencies using three waste performance indicators Mensah, Derek Karimi, Nima Ng, Kelvin Tsun Wai Mahmud, Tanvir S. Tang, Yili Igoniko, Sotonye Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Research Article Three waste management system (WMS) efficiency indicators are adopted to systematically assess WMS efficiency in Canada from 1998 to 2016. The study objectives are to examine the temporal changes in waste diversion activities and rank the performance of the jurisdictions using a qualitative analytical framework. Increasing Waste Management Output Index (WMOI) trends were identified in all jurisdictions, and more government subsidiaries and incentive packages are recommended. With the exception of Nova Scotia, statistically significant decreasing diversion gross domestic product (DGDP) ratio trends are observed. It appears that the increases in GDP from Sector 562 were not contributing to waste diversion. On average, Canada spent about $225/tonne of waste handled during the study period. Current spending per tonne handled (CuPT) trends are decreasing, with S ranging from + 5.15 to + 7.67. It appears that WMSs in Saskatchewan and Alberta are more efficient. The results suggest that the use of diversion rate alone to evaluate WMS may be misleading. The findings help the waste community to better understand the trade-offs between various waste management alternatives. The proposed qualitative framework utilizing comparative rankings is applicable elsewhere and can be a useful decision support tool for policy-makers. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-02-18 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9937868/ /pubmed/36808539 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25866-0 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Research Article
Mensah, Derek
Karimi, Nima
Ng, Kelvin Tsun Wai
Mahmud, Tanvir S.
Tang, Yili
Igoniko, Sotonye
Ranking Canadian waste management system efficiencies using three waste performance indicators
title Ranking Canadian waste management system efficiencies using three waste performance indicators
title_full Ranking Canadian waste management system efficiencies using three waste performance indicators
title_fullStr Ranking Canadian waste management system efficiencies using three waste performance indicators
title_full_unstemmed Ranking Canadian waste management system efficiencies using three waste performance indicators
title_short Ranking Canadian waste management system efficiencies using three waste performance indicators
title_sort ranking canadian waste management system efficiencies using three waste performance indicators
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9937868/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36808539
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25866-0
work_keys_str_mv AT mensahderek rankingcanadianwastemanagementsystemefficienciesusingthreewasteperformanceindicators
AT kariminima rankingcanadianwastemanagementsystemefficienciesusingthreewasteperformanceindicators
AT ngkelvintsunwai rankingcanadianwastemanagementsystemefficienciesusingthreewasteperformanceindicators
AT mahmudtanvirs rankingcanadianwastemanagementsystemefficienciesusingthreewasteperformanceindicators
AT tangyili rankingcanadianwastemanagementsystemefficienciesusingthreewasteperformanceindicators
AT igonikosotonye rankingcanadianwastemanagementsystemefficienciesusingthreewasteperformanceindicators