By Anjalee Bhuyan
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this research paper is to determine how industrialized and developing nations can improve waste management strategies for better health outcomes. Methods: Two comparative case studies were conducted in this experiment, one on low income developing countries and one on high income industrialized countries, controlling for GDP per capita in each study. The countries Tanzania and Nepal were chosen for the first study, and the United States and Australia were chosen for the second study.
Results: Tanzania and Nepal both experienced similar waste management issues stemming generally from a lack of economic sustainability and public awareness. The US and Australia experienced similar waste management problems, such as unsustainable waste generation, and efficient hazardous waste handling.
Conclusions: Developing countries should focus on increasing public awareness on practices that create public health risk, create a national waste management strategy with local government roles in place, and implement sustainable management. Industrialized countries should increase public awareness of source reduction and the reuse of materials, more responsibly handle hazardous waste exports, and adopt sustainable management strategies on a larger scale.
Introduction
Developing and industrialized nations both deal with health problems stemming from a lack of effective waste management. Particulate matter(PM), chemicals, heavy metals, and sewage release from improper waste treatment can contribute to respiratory and cardiovascular health deterioration, and the spread of infectious disease. Efficient waste management strategies exist, but these methods are often considered too time consuming, labor intensive, culturally insensitive, or financially unsustainable for large scale implementation. In the interest of achieving greater health outcomes, industrialized nations should focus on waste management strategies that responsibly handle waste and limit total output, while developing nations should learn from the history of industrialized nations, to create and implement environmentally and economically sustainable waste management policies.
Section I – Categories of Waste and Current Management Methods
Waste can be differentiated by composition and the treatment method necessary for proper disposal. Municipal Solid waste(MSW) is a common type of waste, produced extensively in both urban and rural settings. MSW can be classified as garbage consisting of food waste, product packaging, appliances and other items that households, schools, hospitals and businesses typically discard.1 The components and generation rate of MSW vary between different regions, often correlating with the level of economic development. In some regions, construction and demolition waste, industrial waste, some hazardous wastes(ex. lightbulbs, batteries), and even sewage are treated as MSW. Lower and middle income countries tend to produce a higher percentage of organic MSW, in some cases up to 70% of MSW consisting of organic content.2 The World Bank predicts that as countries experience population growth and economic development, MSW generation will increase from about 2.01 billion tons to 3.40 billion tons annually by 2050. Higher income countries typically generate over 1.0 kilograms/capita/day of solid waste, while developing countries generate relatively less MSW.3
Open dumping is a common form of MSW management in developing nations that has led to adverse environmental and health consequences. Uncontrolled waste disposal, can make landfill gas and runoff, odor, and the attraction of vermin serious issues. Often in urban areas, especially coastal cities such as, Mumbai or Manila, the lack of available land has led to the uncontrolled dumping of waste into the ocean.2 Open burning also occurs prevalently in developing countries, as well as in industrialized countries in the form of backyard burning. A study conducted in 2014 found that PM emissions contributed to 8% of total PM emissions in India, 22% in China, 33% in Bangladesh, and 69% in Pakistan.4 In addition to PM emissions, open burning releases dioxins, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons(PAH), carbon monoxide, and ash.5 According to the World Bank, over 90% of solid waste is openly burned or dumped without regulation.6 Mismanaged waste can lead to fires, and the contamination of air and water, creating severe health threats. Landfills are a common form of waste management that presents a high risk for contamination if landfill sites are constructed unsustainably or mismanaged. Successful landfills can act as storage containers for harmful waste and the products of waste degradation, such as leachate. Large and small scale incineration is also practiced as a method of incinerating waste and recovering heat from the combustion process. In developing countries, the process is seen as costly and unsustainable as an effective waste management practice. Incineration has also received criticism over the emission of gaseous pollutants and presence of unburned inorganic matter.7 In industrialized nations like the United States(US), incineration plants have largely been shut down, or fitted with air pollution systems to prevent air contamination.8
Sewage can be classified as separate from MSW, referring specifically to wastewater and excrement, most efficiently handled using a sewer system and treatment facility. Sewage can carry water pollutants ranging from nutrients, metals, solids, toxins, and pathogens that can deteriorate water quality. In industrialized countries such as the US, the Clean Water Act(CWA) provides guidelines for specific organizations such as, the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) and U.S. Coast Guard to regulate sewage treatment.9 In some developing countries, effective sewage treatment facilities remain largely unavailable, or unregulated. The risks of mismanaged wastewater include the spread of pathogen through contaminated drinking water and contact with wastewater, which can lead to gastrointestinal, respiratory and skin problems.10 According to the WHO, 2.0 billion people do not have access to toilets and latrines, and 673 million people practice open defecation.11
Industrial waste includes discarded materials that have been produced through an industrial or manufacturing process. The common methods for disposing MSW waste, including dumping, landfilling, and incineration, are largely the same practices used for industrial waste disposal.7 In the US, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System regulates point sources for water pollution, like industry, specifically focusing on mining, oil and gas, pesticide users, and animal feeding operations.12 Without regulation, rapid industrialization can lead to air and water population, causing negative health consequences for vulnerable populations. In China, rapid industrialization after the 1970s led to widespread pollutant discharge, including heavy metal and non-metallic materials, creating health risks especially for lower income populations due to water pollution.13
Agricultural waste contains crop residues, animal wastes, pesticides and other agricultural chemicals. Agricultural residues include field residue left over from crop harvests, and process residue left over from crop processing. These residues can be recycled as animal fodder, or used for soil management and even manufacturing. Field burnings allow for the quick disposal of crop residue, but has been banned in some countries due to the release of harmful air pollutants. Residues such as corn stover, rice husks and sugar cane all have potential to be converted into biofuel through effective combustion, but in practice are often burned inefficiently.7 Some countries also use methods of anaerobic digestion to create biogas for cooking, and use the leftover liquid wastes for fertilizers.12 When managed ineffectively, agricultural residues and chemicals can contaminate waterways, leading to the ingestion of contaminated drinking water, creating potential carcinogenic risk.14 15
Hazardous waste consists of non-biodegradable wastes, such as plastics, nuclear waste, glass and toxic wastes. These materials are dangerous in nature, and when handled improperly can lead to the spread of disease, or fires. Radioactive waste in particular can be corrosive, cause explosions upon reaction with water or air, and have lasting damage on individuals. Appropriate management of hazardous waste includes separation, and typically incineration, landfilling , gasification, or recycling depending on the kind of waste.7 One example management includes the U.S. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which controls the recycling, storage, disposal and treatment of hazardous waste in the country.16 Rapid development in agriculture, industry, commerce, and health care facilities has led to an increased generation of hazardous waste. Access to more chemicals, and a higher volume of hazardous waste makes waste management difficult, especially in developing countries. In some regions, industrial, biomedical, and agricultural sludges are openly dumped, or burned, leading to the uncontrolled release of harmful materials into waterways or the air.7 Often developing countries carry the burden of dealing with exported waste, and residual waste from manufacturing processes, and suffer from the environmental impact. While industrialized nations have access to advanced technologies and regulatory procedures to deal with waste, developing countries processes are often unregulated, simplistic and environmentally hazardous.17 PVC waste is one example of hazardous waste that is exported to developing countries dumpsites, where it is typically incinerated due to the lack of effective management capacity.7
Section II – Health Consequences
Ineffective waste management leads to environmental pollution, which poses a range of public health risks. Pollutants from fires, industry, agriculture, and construction sites can release harmful emissions of particulate matter(PM) into the air. PM refers to the combination of liquid and solid droplets found in air, from dust or soot on an macroscopic level, to particles invisible to the naked eye on the microscopic level.18 Measuring PM concentration levels is a common method of assessing health effects from exposure to ambient air pollution. PM10 and PM2.5 are classified as inhalable particles with a length of 10 and 2 microns respectively, that can penetrate deeply into the lungs and enter the bloodstream, having severe effects on the cardiovascular, respiratory and cerebrovascular systems.19 Exposure to airborne chemicals such as, ozone at ground level, which is produced from industry and vehicle emissions, increases mortality. Nitrogen dioxide(NO2), a major component of aerosols, can lead to airway inflammation, and is released through combustion processes. Sulfur dioxide(SO2), in high concentrations also inflames the respiratory tract, in addition to increasing the probability of cardiac disease.20 Both short term and long term exposure to ambient air pollution directly reduces lung function, can cause adverse birth outcomes from maternal exposure, and has potential effects on the neurological development of children.19The WHO estimates that ambient air pollution was linked to about 4.2 million premature deaths globally in 2016 from conditions such as, heart disease, lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and acute respiratory infection in children. Lower and middle income countries, especially in regions of South East Asia carry the burden of up to 91% of those premature deaths.20
Water pollution is also a major contributor to adverse health effects caused by improper wastewater management. Human and animal fecal waste, when introduced into waterways without treatment, can cause a range of health defects. The ingestion of contaminated drinking water provides a transmission pathway for water-borne pathogens and cause gastrointestinal issues due to the spread of bacteria, viruses and microbes. Contact with wastewater can cause skin and eye infections, and the inhalation of water droplets can also result in respiratory infection in high exposure situations. Contaminated drinking water can lead to diarrheal disease and the transmission of life threatening diseases including cholera, typhoid and infectious hepatitis. The issue of fecal-oral transmission through drinking water is especially prevalent in lower income regions of developing countries, creating risk especially for vulnerable populations.21 Annually, 525,000 children die due to diarrhea, out of about 1.7 billion cases globally, largely due to improper sanitation and unsafe drinking water.22 As of 2017, 2.0 billion people did not have access to toilets or latrines, and about 673 million of these people practiced open defecation, often into open bodies of water.11 Contaminated runoff from agricultural materials such as, manure and other fecal waste, and direct access of livestock to waterways can also lead to hazardous conditions.21Farmers often irrigate farmland with wastewater, with about 10% of the world’s population consuming food irrigated with untreated wastewater.11 This can lead to both direct health effects on farmers exposed to contaminated water and health risk for consumers.23
Rapid industrialization and urbanization also increases the risk for contaminated drinking water from the generation and discharge of heavy metals, for example, lead(Pb), mercury(Hg), and cadmium(Cd). Heavy metals can cause environmental instability, are difficult to degrade, and easily accumulate. Long term exposure to heavy metals has adverse health effects on the immune, nervous, and endocrine systems, and may cause cancer.15 These metals are readily absorbed, accumulated, and biomagnified by the human body, resulting in different poisoning effects. Industrial, agricultural and domestic pollution can all be contributors to the harm of water quality.24 A study in Nigeria in 2015 showed that the past and current usage of pesticides like DDT has contributed to the current presence of DDT in river sediments. Locals risked non-cancerous and cancerous effects from ingestion, while children were considered high risk for non-dietary exposure.14 Hexachlorocyclohexane and arsenic, found in agricultural pesticides both have carcinogenic risks upon ingestion and inhalation of soil sediment in the air and drinking water. 15
Section III – Options for Change
Effective waste management strategy reduces the harmful effects of pollutants on the environment, leading to better health outcomes. Practices like uncontrolled open dumping leads to the degradation of environmental resources and threatens human health. For example, in July 2000 the Quezon City open garbage dump in Manila, which reached up to seven stories in height, killed hundreds of people when it collapsed.2 Countries can handle waste more efficiently by implementing safe and sustainable methods to handle waste, in addition to reducing the amount of waste produced. Waste management includes the collection, transport, processing and recycling, or disposal of waste. This includes a system for classifying, sorting, treating and processing materials accordingly. In countries where open dumping is prevalent, or most waste is thrown into unmonitored landfills, regulation needs to take effect. Collection services are often provided by government authorities or private industries, but in some developing countries there is no formal system in place. Education and awareness are vital in promoting the establishment of waste management systems in developing countries, and discouraging improper disposal.7
Sanitary landfills are one option for developing countries to dispose of large quantities of MSW using relatively flexible and simple technology.25 These landfills protect the surrounding environment from contaminants by monitoring groundwater contamination and landfill gas emissions. Regulations are used to ensure that landfills are built in sustainable geological areas to prevent land contamination, collection and removal systems of leachate are in place, and other monitoring practices are implemented to reduce odor, control pests and protect public health.1 Sanitary landfills in the long term are generally an unsustainable solution due to their high maintenance costs, but represent one possible strategy to limit environmental pollution. Composting presents a more sustainable way for countries to manage organic wastes like food scraps, yard materials, and manure. After collecting and subjecting these materials to conditions that help naturally break down the waste, the resulting compost can be used as a natural fertilizer.26 Certain microorganisms can also be introduced to the waste to facilitate decomposition, or worms can be used in a practice called vermicomposting. Composting, when properly implemented, can reduce the production of green-house gas emissions, both from the minimal onsite emissions and the lack of need for intensive transportation and processing.27
Certain waste treatment methods such as, combustion, gasification, landfill gas recovery and anaerobic digestion can also be used to create biomass energy. In developing countries, dry agricultural waste is often combusted for heating and cooking, and can also be burned to produce electricity. Fermented wet biomass like manure, sewage sludge, and food wastes can produce usable fuel and fertilizer. In anaerobic digestion, microorganisms are used to digest waste, producing combustible methane gas and quality fertilizer. Prior to landfilling, treating biodegradable waste using anaerobic digestion followed by composting creates a source of renewable energy out of discarded wastes.7 Anaerobic digestion of domestic wastewater could also be a sustainable replacement for costly aerobic sewage treatment facilities. The International Water Association has already developed Anaerobic Digestion Model Number 1(ADM1) to aid developing countries in anaerobic digestion modeling for wastewater.28Utilizing non-recyclable waste for energy generation has both the benefits of reducing landfill gas, and limiting the need for energy from fossil sources, which generates carbon emissions. In the United States, the Clean Air Act of 1970 held MSW incineration facilities to new standards for the uncontrolled burning of waste. The economic hurdles to build a MSW combustion plant to produce renewable energy are large and require time to construct, however the environmental effects are worth the investment.29 New technologies are emerging to create renewable energy from non-biodegradable materials, like plastics, which are difficult to dispose efficiently. Plastic pyrolysis allows for the thermal decomposition of polymers has been researched as a method of producing hydrocarbon fuel. The method would dispose of hazardous plastic materials, in addition to providing a more sustainable substitute for fossil fuels.1
Simple practices such as, source reduction, reusing materials and recycling can also make waste management more feasible. Source reduction includes simple actions like buying used or reusable items, products with less packaging, and repairing products instead of buying new. Using products to their fullest extent saves energy, is less costly, prevents pollution, and reduces the amount of landfilled waste.30 Recycling also benefits the environment by collecting and processing waste to be turned into new products. This practice helps conserves natural and other valuable resources and prevents pollution. An effective recycling system must be able to sort, clean and process waste into usable materials for manufacturing. Steel, aluminum and some plastics are examples of non-biodegradable wastes, that when recycled can be used again, instead of taking up space in landfills.30
Section IV – Methodology
Two comparative case studies were conducted to determine the similarities, differences, and patterns between waste management practices in industrialized and developing nations. Using this data, generalizations were made about the issues countries at different stages of development face, and what practices are most feasible and efficient. The case studies were split into a study of high income countries, and low income countries, controlling for GDP per capita. The countries Tanzania and Nepal were chosen for the low income case study, since their respective GDP per capita in 2018 were 1,051 USD and 1,026 USD, respectively.31 The countries the United States and Australia were chosen for the high income case study, since their respective GDP per capita were 62,641 USD and 60,596 USD, respectively.31 For each country, the type of waste produced, current management strategies, environmentally related health issues and actions to improve management strategies were assessed individually. Using GDP per capita as the dependent variable, the waste management practices and health outcomes in the developing and industrialized countries were compared in separate studies to make recommendations for countries at each respective state of development.
Section V – Comparative Case Study I: Developing Countries
Tanzania
Tanzania is a developing country located on the Eastern Coast of Africa with a GDP per capita of about 1,051 USD as of 2018.31 The country’s Human Development Index(HDI) of 0.538, is among the lowest recorded indexes as of 2017, indicating the strong need for continued improvement on the current standard of living.32 Tanzania produced about 0.535 kg/capita/day of waste in 2016 and about 70% of total waste output was openly dumped.3 In the country’s largest city, Dar es Salaam(DSM), the majority of waste produced includes biodegradable wastes such as, food waste, and yard waste.33 In 1991, the city was producing about 1400 tons of waste, 5% of which was collected for disposal. The uncontrolled waste poses serious health risks like an increase in vermin and disease, especially in a warm climate region like Tanzania.34
Usually local governments are responsible for establishing a waste collection system, however in cities of developing countries, like DSM, solid waste collection has been privatized due to ineffective action from the public sector. Still, there is a disparity between which communities receive collection service, with higher income area near the city center receiving service, but lower income, newly developed, and further to reach areas lacking service. Service providers depend on collection fees to fund the collection and transport of waste, in addition to worker wages and expenses. The great lack in awareness among households, who are uninformed as to who is providing collection services and whether it is necessary to pay fees for collection, makes it difficult for the private sector to provide effective waste collection.35
About 26.7% of Tanzania’s GDP is agriculturally based, resulting in a large amount of urban and rural farmland.36Wastewater irrigation is a common practice used by farmers in Tanzania to provide essential nutrients and water for crop growth, making up for low soil fertility. However, the prevalence of unsafe irrigation practices, lack of training and of regulations pose serious public health risks for the country. Untreated wastewater can contain pathogens, salts, and heavy metals, that can cause toxicity in irrigated crops, and expose farmers to health risks from contaminated water.37 Wastewater management is an issue Tanzania faces both in agriculture and in terms of sewage treatment. Limited access to improved latrines in the country forces people to use shared latrines and practice open defecation, sometimes directly into waterways. The lack of sanitation, especially in rural regions, in shared latrines leads to suffering from infectious diseases, like typhoid and cholera. The country also faces cultural norms and taboos about the use of shared latrines, a general lack of awareness of good hygiene and the issue of women’s safety.38
Tanzania does not produce a large amount of industrial waste, but in DSM, the country’s industrial capital, industrial management strategies are needed. Most industrial waste in the city comes from food and beverage industries, with source industries and private contractors handling waste collection and disposal. Industries in the city have for the most part, responsibility installed wastewater treatment systems, however most industrial waste is dumped in landfills without being segregated and treated separately, and the rest is dumped at unassigned sites.39
Several initiatives have sought to improve Tanzania’s waste management strategy. The High Impact Waste Management system was implemented in DSM, plotting the best locations for recycling, separating, composting, and incinerating plants, in addition to landfills. In comparison to the current system, this improvement is expected to significantly reduce GHG emissions and minimize the need for landfills. 39 KIWODET, a composting initiative organized by a community based organization in DSM, sought to create a composting operation for commercial organic waste. Due to land tenure issues, and a lack of support for municipal authorities the operation failed.40 The locally based initiative shows promise for sustainable waste management, possibly through a more multifaceted approach in the city, and in the country at large.
Nepal
Nepal is a developing country in South Asia, located along the southern side of the Himalayan mountain ranges, between China and India. The country had a GDP per capita of about 1,026 USD as of 2018, and had a HDI score of 0.574 in 2017, just barely considered in the moderate range for standard of living.31 32 Nepal produced around 0.167 kg/capita/day of waste in 2016, which is relatively low, however most of the waste produced is mishandled.3 Nepal’s waste composition primarily includes food waste, cardboard and paper, and plastics, about 70% of which is biodegradable.41About 60% of total waste output is unaccounted for, the rest of which is dumped into landfills.3 In Kathmandu, the urban center of Nepal, the presence of discarded waste on the streets and open dumps creates unhygienic conditions, increasing the presence of foul odor, pests, and risk for the spread of infectious disease.41 In 2016, an estimated 3% of total waste generated in municipalities located in the city was openly burned.42 In addition to vehicle emissions, MSW burning generated excessive PM concentrations, leading to health impacts like chronic respiratory disease and heart disease. 43
In Kathmandu, Nepal’s densely populated urban center, Solid Waste Management(SWM) services were largely introduced due to private sector involvement. The private sector has helped increase expenditures on waste collection, however limited additional investments have been made to create an effective disposal system due to a lack of funding. Improper handling of the collection, transport and disposal of solid waste can contaminate the land and pose serious health risks from water and air pollution. Operating without increased public awareness or government regulations limits the effectiveness of SWM.41 The Kathmandu Municipal Corporation(KMC) has had difficulty funding proper incineration and landfilling methods. The Bagmati river, which runs through Kathmandu valley, has been subject to a huge source of environmental contamination from nearby poorly developed landfills lacking proper lining, resulting in a deterioration of river quality.41 The Gokarna landfill, located on the banks of the Bagmati and Bishnumati rivers, was a sanitary landfill designed in 1986 as a governmental measure to control solid waste. The landfill faced major pushback from local people, since it posed threats to public health due to inadequate infrastructure, pest control, and groundwater contamination due to leachate runoff. Upon closure of the major disposal site, people began to openly dump solid waste on the river bank, creating direct contamination of the waterway. Outside of Kathmandu valley, there are no other sanitary landfills in Nepal, resulting in primarily open dumping in fields and on riverbanks and open field burning. 44
Around 25% of Nepal’s GDP is attributed to agriculture and most of the Nepalese population lives in rural areas, depending on agriculture for their livelihood.45 In the urban and sub urban regions of Kathmandu valley, wastewater irrigation helps farmers cope with seasonal water availability, providing a nutrient rich source of water for crop growth right outside the city. The quality of wastewater ranges from dilute wastewater to raw sewage, resulting in health impacts on farmers from exposure. National guidelines for wastewater use in agriculture are unavailable, resulting in about 80% of the agricultural land surrounding Kathmandu subjected to informal irrigation, some of which is directly irrigated with sewage. 46
In a study of Kathmandu’s metropolitan area, about 50% of households had access to a combined sewer system, with a large proportion of households still using septic tanks, half of which drain directly into rivers. Open sewage systems contaminate drinking water and increase the risk of disease transmission.47 Most of the population has access to either improved sanitation facilities, or shared facilities, but 15% of the population has no access to sanitation facilities, and resort to open defecation.48 Open defecation is most widely practiced in rural regions, and has been linked to causing diarrhea in children due to inadequate sanitation.10 Even with access to latrines, some communities still practice open defecation, due to personal preferences, societal practices and cultural norms. The country faces an issues of sanitation awareness and gender equity in latrine usage.28
Nepal does not generate large quantities of industrial or hazardous waste, however the small quantity produced is improperly handled. In Kathmandu valley, most industrial wastewater comes from the wool processing and dying industries, which can produce acidic wastewater, or wastewater with high metal concentrations. Domestic and industrial wastewaters are collected in the same network and limited information is available on the effectiveness of industrial wastewater treatment.44 The country faces issues with lead and pesticide poisoning due to unsafe handling procedures, such as burning or burying pesticides in fields, and combining hazardous wastes with MSW.44 Hospital and laboratory wastes are dumped into KMC waste bins without segregating wastes. Due to the lack of funding for safe disposal procedures, and awareness of the risk of toxic contamination, syringes and vials increase waste handlers risk of infection and increase general exposure to disease.43
In Kathmandu, the KMC has adopted private sector participation(PSP) as a strategy for more effective waste management. Significant efforts have been made to increase private sector and other voluntary involvement in SWM, and increasing funds have been allocated towards public awareness initiatives.43 Testing has also occurred to improve domestic wastewater treatment in Nepal using anaerobic digestion. The ADM1 model has been used to simulate domestic wastewater treatment in Kathmandu, and determine the feasibility of an anaerobic digestion operation in rural areas. The model depicts progress in moving towards more sustainable management of wastewater.28
Results
Although Tanzania and Nepal are distinctive in many different ways, from culture and climate, to population density, both developing countries face similar issues in waste management strategy. Both countries produce relatively small amounts of waste in global comparison, but have serious issues with managing all categories of waste. Open dumping has become a huge problem, inviting the spread of vermin and disease, especially in urbanized regions such as Dar es Salaam and Kathmandu. While biodegradable waste makes up more than half of total waste output in both countries, neither country has effectively implemented sustainable waste management strategies such as composting or anaerobic digestion. Tanzania’s lack of strong public sector involvement and the introduction of waste management by the private sector, is also very similar to the situation in Nepal. In both countries, the private sector continues to struggle to provide waste management, due to a lack of public awareness. There is a large gap in public awareness, not just on the open dumping of trash, but also on open defecation. Even with some access to latrines, both countries face cultural pushback and sanitary issues involving sanitary facilities. The lack of sewage management has led to the spread of disease and water contamination.
A large portion of both countries is agricultural, which leads to further commonalities between agricultural waste handling. Wastewater irrigation has become a significant problem due to the lack of training, public awareness, and regulations, creating serious public health risks both for farmers and consumers. Both countries are not heavily industrialized, but still produce some hazardous and industrial wastes in urban centers. The lack of appropriate segregation and treatment of waste will continue to emerge as a major problem as both countries grow and further industrialize without the capacity for effective disposal. Tanzania seems to be further along in addressing waste management issues, having already established a privatized management system in Dar es Salaam, created a High Impact Waste Management System, and experimented with composting. Nepal still has a significant issue with open burning, and is still struggling to find the balance between privatized and public waste management. Both countries’ overall seem to face the same underlying issues of economic sustainability and public awareness.
Section VI – Comparative Case Study II: Industrialized Countries
United States
The United States(US) is a heavily industrialized country in North America, with a GDP per capita of around 62,641 USD as of 2018.31 The US generated about 2.243 kg/capita/day in 2016, making the country one of the largest contributors towards total global waste output.3 The components of waste generated is diversified, consisting mostly of paper and cardboard, food waste, yard waste and plastics. Over half of generated waste is disposed of in landfills, 35% is recycled, and around 12% is incinerated.3
Total waste production has increased from 88.1 million tons, to 267.8 million from 1960 to 2017.49 Over this time period, the recycling rate also increased from 6% to 35%, and the percentage of landfilled waste decreased form 94% to 52%.49 As of 2004, 64% of MSW landfills were owned by the public sector with the remaining sites operated by private owners. Landfills contribute to ambient air pollution, releasing primarily methane and carbon dioxide into the environment.50A study in 1992 on six US cities found a correlation between sulfur dioxide and PM 2.5 concentrations, and emergency visits and hospitalizations due to asthma. The study also found a correlation between air pollution and excess mortality.51Leachate from landfills can also contain harmful contaminants such as, industrial chemicals, prescription pharmaceuticals and animal or plant sterols, that when released into the environment creates health risks from exposure.52
The US Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), provides extensive regulation on landfill infrastructure, waste segregation, landfill emissions, and leachate management. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act(RCRA) also grants the EPA authority to manage hazardous waste generation, treatment, storage and disposal, in addition to providing guidelines for the management of non-hazardous waste.53 Hazardous wastes are managed using the RCRA’s mixture rule, that states any mixture containing a proportion of hazardous waste must be segregated for proper treatment. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC) monitors radioactive waste disposal practices from mining, nuclear power generation, and other industrial processes. 54
The EPA’s Clean Water Act of 1972 regulates the discharge of pollutants into US waterways, and set the standard for water quality in the country. Households connect to municipal systems or septic systems and are not allowed to discharge waste directly into waterways, while industrial and municipal facilities may obtain permits.55 The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to establish the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for pollutants that could harm the environment or cause health risks. PM, ozone, lead, and sulfur dioxide are all examples of pollutants which have been assigned standards.56 A study by the American Lung Association in 2017 noted that even in cities that met the standards for short-term particle pollution, there is a greater risk for premature death from PM exposure. Researchers noted that about 34,000 deaths could be prevented by reducing annual PM pollution by 1 µg/m3.57 The EPA also provides extensive guidelines for chemical, emission, and wastewater management for agricultural and industrial wastes.58 59
The EPA has made significant progress in tightening regulations on waste management domestically, but issues such as, ocean dumping and exporting waste to countries has yet to be fully resolved. The 1972 Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act officially regulates the dumping of chemical and industrial wastes, sewage sludge and other potentially hazardous wastes to human health or the environment. Most materials directly dumped in the ocean by the US today include uncontaminated sediment, and regulations have limited the volume and toxicity of dumped waste.60 In 2010, an estimated 275 million tons of plastic waste was generated worldwide, 4.8 to 12.7 million of which ended up in the ocean.61 Coastal countries, especially in the Asia-Pacific region, such as, China and Indonesia are considered the highest contributors to ocean dumped waste.62 However, the US is responsible for the generation of a significant proportion of this waste. As the quantity of hazardous waste in the US grows and regulations tighten, exporting waste for disposal in developing countries has become a cheaper route to waste disposal.63 Higher income countries export plastic waste for recycling and further processing, but often the waste management systems in developing countries are incapable of carrying out these processes, resulting in unsustainable dumping or burning.64 In late 2017, China introduced a ban on imports of plastics solid waste.65 In the half year before the import ban was enacted, the US shipped about 380,000 tons of plastic waste to China, reducing this amount to about 30,000 tons after the ban.66 Plastic waste exports were then diverted to other Southeast Asian countries, such as Malaysia, continuing a cycle of improper regulation and management.64
In regards to switching to domestic sustainable solutions, the US has made some, but limited progress towards sustainable solutions for waste management. In 2017, about 139.6 million tons of MSW were landfilled, while 34 million tons were combusted for energy recovery, depicting the feasibility but relatively small proportion of energy recovery in practice.49In 2013, recycling and composting prevented the disposal of 87.2 million tons of waste, preventing the release of 168 million tons of CO2 emissions from polluting the air.1 The EPA has made clear that source reduction, in addition to recycling, composting and energy recovery are practices the US should be increasingly implementing. The EPA’s website contains various resources for individuals, households and businesses to learn more about recycling and composting, in addition to promoting source reduction.1
Australia
Australia is an industrialized country located on the Oceania continent between the Indian Ocean and South Pacific Ocean, with a GDP per capita of about 60,596 USD as of 2018.31 The country produced about 1.545 kg/cap/day in 2016, making it one of the largest contributors towards global waste output.3 About half of generated waste is food waste, around 20% is metal, and 17% of waste includes paper and cardboard. Just under half of domestic waste is landfilled, about 42% is recycled, and around 10% is incinerated.3
The National Waste Policy(NWP) is the national framework for waste management in Australia, outlining the responsibilities of businesses, governments, communities and individuals. Private operators typically control waste infrastructure and landfills while local governments collect MSW and operate transfer stations.67 In 2016, Australia generated about 67 million tons of waste, and has experienced a general upward trend in total waste generation in comparison to the preceding 10 years. Within this time frame the recycling and resource recovery rates have also been on an upwards trend, with metals recycled at the highest rate, 90%, followed by paper and cardboard at 60%.67 The National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme, run by the Australian government, has allowed for 290,000 tons of TV and computer e-waste to be recycled. This has successfully resulted in a recovery rate of 90% of materials annually in addition to preventing hazardous wastes from entering landfills.68 Increased recycling rates and efforts to limit waste generation has begun to decrease the proportion of waste directly dumped in landfills, even with substantial population growth.67
Australia’s National Clean Air Act helps regulate air quality on a national level, but states and territories are responsible for monitoring and assessing air quality in their respective regions. The country’s air quality is relatively good in comparison to global standards.69 Similarly, water quality management strategies are provided by the government at a national level through the National Water Quality Strategy, but local governments and regional organizations are responsible for water management. Guidelines are available for drinking water, sewage control, urban wastewater and wastewater reuse.70 The country does face some water pollution issues from industrial and agricultural waste and runoff, despite regulation. Excess fertilizer and pesticides affect waterways. The Australian Marine Conservation Society(AMCS), Australia’s national charity dedicated to the protection of marine life, highlights the threat of chemical pollution on deteriorating environmental conditions in the Great Barrier Reef.71
Australia has a large amount of mining operations, resulting in the possibility of contamination from waste runoff. A study in 2017 on a legacy mining site in Maldon, Victoria, Australia found high levels of mercury and arsenic in soil, that could contaminate waterways from rainfall runoff, and threaten public health. Currently, regulations are in place for mining operations, but old shut down mining operations still have potential to harm public health.72 Dietary exposure to heavy metals such as cadmium and lead through vegetable crops can also have harmful effects on human health. In a study in 2004 in New South Wales, metal contamination in soil and vegetables was attributed to smelting activities nearby, indicating the need for more conservative guidelines.73 Radioactive waste produced in Australia is typically low level waste handled by numerous disposal sites around the country. The national Radioactive Waste Management Act of 2012 proposed a set of six national facilities to more efficiently handle domestic and some international radioactive waste, set to open in 2020.74
Under the Sea Dumping Act of 1981, the government regulates the dumping of waste at sea, effectively keeping marine pollution from dumping at a minimum.75 Australia has a history of exporting waste to other countries, and continues to ship waste, a significant portion of which ends up in the ocean. In 1995, Australia dumped over 1450 tons of hazardous waste in India.2 Most waste is currently exported to countries like Indonesia, Vietnam, India and China, and includes primarily cardboard, paper, metals, and plastics.76 In January 2020, Australia exported almost 257,000 tons of waste, a significant amount, but also a 35% reduction in weight from the previous month. More specifically, metal scraps and hazardous waste exports have been reduced.76 This reduction in exports is largely attributable to the Council of Australian Government’s waste export ban. By July 2024, unprocessed glass, mixed plastics, used tires, polymer plastics and unsorted paper and cardboard are all expected to be banned from being exported.77
Australia has been taking serious initiative to improve waste management. The NWP Action Plan aims to increase total waste recovery to 80%, increase recycling rates, and reduce total waste output per person by 2030.78 The Australian Packaging Covenant Organization also has a target goal of making all Australian packaging 100% recyclable by 2025.79 Additionally, the National Food Waste Strategy is another government initiative, with a target goal of halving all of Australia’s food waste production by 2030.79 Australia has also moved towards a future in bioenergy by encouraging the use of biomass as an energy source. Most of Australia’s current bioenergy is produced from bagasse, wood waste and gas capture from landfills and sewage facilities, which is monitored by the government. 80
Results
The United States and Australia have very similar waste management issues, but differ in solution implementation. In both countries, the public sector has a huge role in providing guidelines and regulations on waste management, air and water pollution. The private sector is also involved in certain areas such as landfill operation and collection services. While biodegradable waste accounts for a large portion of total waste output in both countries, sustainable management has not overcome the need for landfill or incineration methods. The US and Australia have steadily increased recycling rates, however Australia has a higher rate, and seems to be investing in more efforts to increase recycling rates. Additionally, public awareness efforts have been focused on source reduction and the reuse of items to combat increasingly unsustainable levels of waste. Energy recovery from landfills, sewage gases and biomass has become more widely practiced in both countries as an alternative to current management strategies.
Australia and the US as industrialized nations with high levels of waste production, both have a history of exporting large quantities of waste abroad. This practice has often led to ocean dumping and public health risks for developing nations. Australia has created the waste export ban to limit total waste exports, and prevent hazardous waste dumping on other countries. The NWP in Australia has depicted a strong desire to move towards sustainable waste management. In comparison, the EPA has implemented strict regulations to prevent domestic public health risks, but has not made concerted efforts towards adopting sustainable waste strategies. The difference in composition of waste affects some methods in which the US and Australia handle waste differently. Australia produces more metals, and should focus on recycling initiatives and export regulations for these materials specifically. Australia also produces a higher proportion of food waste than the US, which indicates higher incentive for composting for sustainable management. The US faces more issues with air pollution with Australia, which is an issue the US specifically will have to focus on changing. Both countries generally face the same issues of unsustainable waste production and the effective handling of hazardous wastes.
Section VII – Recommendations and Conclusions
The developing countries case study highlighted a number of problems that Tanzania and Nepal, countries with comparable GDP per capita, face in waste management. The first step these countries should take is to improve public awareness and education on issues such as, open dumping and burning, open defecation and general sanitation. While NGOs and the private sector may contribute towards the generation of public awareness, the government should take a more significant role in establishing guidelines and regulations for waste management practices that endanger public health. At the community level, local governments should take more of a role in ensuring regulations are followed in a way that coincides with cultural values. An increase in public awareness would aid the second step, of establishing a national waste management strategy. The government should provide standardized procedures for practices such as, waste collection, sewage treatment and agricultural irrigation to make waste handling safe. In both Tanzania and Nepal, waste management is characterized by a mixture of some public and private sector involvement. To provide adequate funding, the private sector should be given a large role in the collection and treatment of wastes. However, the government should provide standards and regulations for waste management to legitimize the private sector’s role. This would incentivize the private sector to continue providing waste management by making dues easier to collect, while also holding the private sector more accountable for their actions. The final step would be to build on the national waste management strategy by focusing on sustainability in the early stages of development. Most of the waste produced in Tanzania and Nepal includes biodegradable materials that could be broken down through composting or anaerobic digestion. These countries should explore sustainable options from the start. Especially as population growth and urbanization increase and diversify waste production, having sustainable waste management in progress will prevent future problems.
The industrialized countries case study examined and compared the waste management strategies of the US and Australia, countries with similar GDP per capita. Both countries have heavily regulated domestic waste management policies and produce a large proportion of total global waste output. The first and most important step involves increasing public awareness. Unlike developing countries who should increase public awareness on practices that directly contribute to public health risks, industrialized nations should focus on sustainability. Households, businesses and industries should practice source reduction, and make concerted efforts to reuse or recover used materials for other purposes. Australia has set a number of sustainability goals focused on source reduction that align with this increase in public awareness, however the US has made limited progress towards real development goals in sustainability. The next step would be to focus on the management of hazardous waste. Industrialized countries ship tons of waste to developing countries for treatment and disposal without responsibly ensuring proper disposal has occurred. Australia has already worked on policy goals to limit the quantity and contents of exported hazardous waste. In addition to limiting the amount and types of hazardous waste exported, industrialized countries should work with the local government importing the waste to ensure waste is disposed of efficiently. If developing countries do not have the facilities to manage the waste, industrialized countries should either invest in the developing country’s capability for proper disposal, or export waste elsewhere. This would protect the environment and the public health of the people in developing nations. In order to limit waste generation and exports, more sustainable solutions should be implemented in the third step. Industrialized countries have become accustomed to unsustainable waste management strategies, such as landfill dumping. Shifting to alternative strategies on a large scale will be difficult, but not impossible with government intervention. Composting and anaerobic digestion are simple sustainable waste management strategies, that should be used as a more efficient method of disposing of large quantities of biodegradable waste. Energy recovery and biofuel generation are also sustainable options worth exploring on a larger scale.
Although these recommendations are derived from the management strategies of specific countries, they can be generalized for the purposes of developing and industrialized countries. While countries differ in government, climate, and culture among many distinctions, nations at similar stages of development are similar in their current approaches to waste management and their capability of implementing certain strategies. Developing countries should focus primarily on public awareness to reduce direct public health risks. A national waste management strategy, with local government obligations would be the next step in developing a waste management sector covering collection, treatment, and disposal. Lastly, developing countries have the opportunity to focus on sustainability from the start, and prevent dealing with the issues industrialized countries face today. Industrialized countries should also primarily emphasize public awareness, but on the subject of integrating sustainability into the country a whole. The government, private sector, and local communities should all develop a sense of responsibility for waste generation. Industrialized countries exporting waste should also responsibly oversee how exported waste is handled and make policy changes, or investments accordingly. Finally, industrialized nations should make a difficult change in habit, and implement sustainable waste management strategies. Developing and industrialized countries can both improve on waste management, however different strategies should be prioritized depending on a country’s stage of development.
Anjalee Bhuyan is a junior at the University of Pennsylvania studying International Relations.
References
[1] EPA. (2016, March 29). Municipal Solid Waste. Retrieved from
https://archive.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/web/html/
[2] UNESCAP. (1999). Types of waste. Introduction to types of waste (pp. 170-194). Retrieved from https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/ CH08.PDF
[3] The World Bank Group. (2020). What a Waste 2.0. Retrieved from
http://datatopics.worldbank.org/what-a-waste/
[4] Wiedinmyer, C., Yokelson, R. J., & Gullett, B. K. (2014). Global Emissions of Trace Gases, Particulate Matter, and Hazardous Air Pollutants from Open Burning of Domestic Waste.
Environmental Science and Technology. Retrieved from ACS Publications
database.
[5] EPA. (2019, March 29). Human Health. Retrieved from https://archive.epa.gov/
epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/web/html/health.html
[6] World Bank Group. (2019, September 9). Solid Waste Management. Retrieved from
https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/brief/solid-waste-management
[7] Demirbas, A. (2011). Waste management, waste resource facilities and waste
conversion processes. Energy Conversion and Management, 52(2), 1280-1287.
Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[8] EPA. (2019, December 9). Energy Recovery from the Combustion of Municipal Solid
Waste (MSW). Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/smm/
energy-recovery-combustion-municipal-solid-waste-msw
[9] EPA. (2018, November 5). Vessel Sewage Discharge. Retrieved from 8.
https://www.epa.gov/vessels-marinas-and-ports/vessel-sewage-discharges
[10] Bhatt, N., & Budhathoki, S. S. (2019). What motivates open defecation? A
qualitative study from a rural setting in Nepal. PLOS Biology. Retrieved
from PLOS database.
[11] WHO. (2019, June 14). Sanitation. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/news-room/
fact-sheets/detail/sanitation
[12] EPA. (2017, October 4). Industrial Wastewater. Retrieved from
https://www.epa.gov/npdes/industrial-wastewater
[13] Wang, Q., & Yang, Z. (2016). Industrial water pollution, water environment
treatment, and health risks in China. Environmental Pollution, 218,
358-365. Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[14] Ogbeide, O., & Tongo, I. (2016). Assessing the distribution and human health
risk of organochlorine pesticide residues in sediments from selected
rivers. Chemosphere, 144, 1319-1326. Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[15] Dong, W., & Zhang, Y. (March 2020). Health risk assessment of heavy metals and
pesticides: A case study in the main drinking water source in Dalian,
China. Chemosphere, 242. Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[16] EPA. (2020, February 19). Learn the Basics of Hazardous Waste. Retrieved from
https://www.epa.gov/hw/learn-basics-hazardous-waste
[17] Ilankoon, I., & Ghorbani, Y. (2018). E-waste in the international context – A
review of trade flows, regulations, hazards, waste management strategies
and technologies for value recovery. Waste Management, 82, 258-275.
Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[18] EPA. (2018, November 14). Particulate Matter (PM) Basics. Retrieved from
https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/particulate-matter-pm-basics
[19] WHO. (2020). Ambient air pollution: Health impacts. Retrieved from
https://www.who.int/airpollution/ambient/health-impacts/en/
[20] WHO. (2018, May 2). Ambient (outdoor) air pollution. Retrieved from
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/
ambient-(outdoor)-air-quality-and-health
[21] World Health Organization. (2004). Guidelines for Drinking- water Quality (3rd
ed., Vol. 1). Retrieved from ProQuest database.
[22] WHO. (2017, May 2). Diarrhoeal disease. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/
news-room/fact-sheets/detail/diarrhoeal-disease
[23] Moriarty, P., Butterworth, J., & Van Koppen, B. (2004). Beyond domestic: Case
studies on poverty and productive uses of water at the household level.
[24] Singh, U. K. (2017). Pathways of heavy metals contamination and associated human
health risk in Ajay River basin, India. Chemosphere, 174, 183-199.
Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[25] Annepu, R. K. (2012, January). Sustainable Solid Waste Management in India. Columbia University Earth and Engineering Center.
[26] Stanley, A., & Turner, G. (2010). Composting. Teaching Science, 56(2). Retrieved
from Gale in Context: Science database.
[27] Chan, Y. C., & Sinha, R. K. (2010). Emission of greenhouse gases from home
aerobic composting, anaerobic digestion and vermicomposting of household
wastes in Brisbane (Australia). Retrieved from Waste Management and
Research database.
[28] Lohani, S. P., & Wang, S. (2016). ADM1 modeling of UASB treating domestic
wastewater in Nepal. Renewable Energy, 95, 263-268. Retrieved from
ScienceDirect database.
[29] Panda, A. K., & Signh, R. K. (2010). Thermolysis of waste plastics to liquid
fuel: A suitable method for plastic waste management and manufacture of
value added products—A world prospective. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 14(1), 233-348. Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[30] EPA. (2020, January 15). Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. Retrieved from
[31] GDP per Capita (current US $) (World Bank, Comp.). (219). Retrieved from
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?most_recent_value_desc=true
[32] United Nations Development Programme (Ed.). (2017). Human Development Reports.
Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI
[33] Chinamo, E. B. M. (2003). An overview of solid waste management and how solid waste collection benefits the poor in the city of Dar es Salaam. Solid waste collection that benefits the poor, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, Collaborating Working Group on Solid Waste Management in Low and Middle-Income Countries (CWG).
[34] Kassin, S. M., & Ali, M. (2006). Solid waste collection by the private sector:
Households' perspective—Findings from a study in Dar es Salaam city,
Tanzania. Habitat International, 30(4), 769-780. Retrieved from
ScienceDirect database.
[35] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2020). Tanzania at a glance. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/tanzania/fao-in-tanzania/tanzania-at-a-glance/en/
[36] Kihila, J., & Ktei, K. M. (2014). Wastewater treatment for reuse in urban agriculture; the case of Moshi Municipality, Tanzania. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 72-75, 104-110. Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[37] Massa, K. (2017). Contributing to the debate on categorizing shared sanitation
facilities as 'unimproved': An account based on field researchers'
observations and householders' opinions in three regions, Tanzania. PLOS
One.
[38] Mbulgwe, S. E., & Kaseva, M. E. (2006). Assessment of industrial solid waste
management and resource recovery practices in Tanzania. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, 47(3), 260-276. Retrieved from ScienceDirect
database.
[39] Lyeme, H. A., & Mushi, A. (2017). Implementation of a goal programming model for
solid waste management: a case study of Dar es Salaam – Tanzania.
IJSMDO, 8. Retrieved from https://www.ijsmdo.org/articles/smdo/abs/
2017/01/smdo160008/smdo160008.html
[40] Oberlin, A. S. (2011). Community level composting in a developing country: case
study of KIWODET, Tanzania. SAGE Journals.
[41] Pokhrel, D., & Viraraghavan, T. (2005). Municipal solid waste management in
Nepal: practices and challenges. Waste Management, 25(5), 555-562.
Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[42] Das, B., & Bhave, P. V. (2018). Estimating emissions from open burning of
municipal solid waste in municipalities of Nepal. Waste Management, 79,
481-490. Retrieved from ScienceDirect database.
[43] Alam, R., & Chowdhury, M. A.I. (2008). Generation, storage, collection and
transportation of municipal solid waste – A case study in the city of
Kathmandu, capital of Nepal. Waste Management, 28(6), 1088-1097. Retrieved
from ScienceDirect database.
[44] Rutkowski, T., & Raschid-Sally, L. (2007). Wastewater irrigation in the
developing world—Two case studies from the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal.
Agricultural Water Management, 88(1-3), 83-91. Retrieved from
ScienceDirect database.
[45] Statista. (2019). Distribution of gross domestic product (GDP) across economic
sectors Nepal 2018 from https://www.statista.com/statistics/425750/
nepal-gdp-distribution-across-economic-sectors/
[46] Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., CEMAT Consultants Ltd.(2000) Urban Water Supply Reforms in the Kathmandu Valley. Completion Report.
[47] Nepal Ministry of Health & Population. (2017). Annual Report Department of Health Services 2073/74 .Kathmandu
[48] Budhathoki SS, Bhattachan M. Eco-social and behavioural determinants of diarrhoea in under five children of Nepal: A framework analysis of the existing literature.(2016) Trop Med Health.
[49] EPA Office of Air and Radiation. (2014, June). Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.
[50] Masoner, J. R., & Kolpin, D. W. (2015). Landfill leachate as a mirror of today's
disposable society: Pharmaceuticals and other contaminants of emerging
concern in final leachate from landfills in the conterminous United States.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.
[51] Dockery, D. W., & Pope, C. A. (1993). An Association between Air Pollution and
Mortality in Six U.S. Cities. New England Journal of Medicine. Retrieved
from https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199312093292401
[52] EPA. (2019, August 15). Summary of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/
summary-resource-conservation-and-recovery-act
[53] EPA Web Archive. (n.d.). RCRA Hazardous Waste Identification. Retrieved from
https://archive.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/web/pdf/hwid-spec.pdf
[54] EPA. (1994, August). Radioactive Waste Disposal An Environmental Perspective.
Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-03/documents/
000003ob.pdf
[55] EPA. (2019, March 11). Summary of the Clean Water Act. Retrieved from
https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act
[56] EPA. (2016, December 20). NAAQS Table Criteria Air Pollutants. Retrieved from
https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs-table
[57] American Lung Association. (2020, April 20). Particle Pollution. Retrieved from
https://www.lung.org/clean-air/outdoors/what-makes-air-unhealthy/
particle-pollution
[58] EPA. (2019, October 30). Laws and Regulations that Apply to Your Agricultural
Operation by Farm Activity. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/agriculture/
laws-and-regulations-apply-your-agricultural-operation-farm-activity
[59] EPA. (2017, February 2). Industrial Waste Management. https://www.epa.gov/smm/guide-industrial-waste-management
[60] EPA. (2020, April 29). Learn About Ocean Dumping. Retrieved from
https://www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/learn-about-ocean-dumping
[61] Jambeck, J. R., & Geyer, R. (n.d.). Plastic waste inputs from land into the
ocean. AAAS Science. Retrieved from
https://science-sciencemag-org.proxy.library.upenn.edu/content/347/6223/768
[62] Statista. (2020, February 12). The Countries Polluting The Oceans The Most.
Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/chart/12211/
the-countries-polluting-the-oceans-the-most/
[63] Law and Policy in International Business (Vol. 21). (1989). Retrieved from
Biddle Law Library database.pg. 247-248.
[64] Greenpeace Southeast Asia. (2018, November). The Recycling Myth. Retrieved from https://www.greenpeace.org/southeastasia/publication/549/the-recycling-myth/
[65] World Trade Organization. (2017, October). China's import ban on solid waste
queried at import licensing meeting. Retrieved from https://www.wto.org/
english/news_e/news17_e/impl_03oct17_e.htm
[66] Wang, T. (2019, July). Weight of U.S. plastic waste exports by country 2017-2018
Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/892470/
us-exports-plastic-waste-by-country/
[67] Australia Department of the Environment and Energy. (2018, November).
National Waste Report 2018. Retrieved from
https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/
7381c1de-31d0-429b-912c-91a6dbc83af7/files/national-waste-report-2018.pdf
[68] Australia Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. National
Television and Computer Recycling Scheme. Retrieved from
https://www.environment.gov.au/protection/waste-resource-recovery/
television-and-computer-recycling-scheme
[69] Australia Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. Air
quality. Retrieved from https://www.environment.gov.au/protection/
air-quality
[70] Australian Government Initiative. Guidelines for water quality management . Retrieved from https://www.waterquality.gov.au/guidelines
[71] Australian Government Initiative. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park . Retrieved from https://www.waterquality.gov.au/projects-initiatives/great-barrier-reef
[72] Abraham, J., & Dowling, K. (2018). Assessment of potentially toxic metal
contamination in the soils of a legacy mine site in Central Victoria,
Australia. Chemosphere, 192, 122-132. Retrieved from ScienceDirect
database.
[73] Kachenko, A. G. (2006). Heavy Metals Contamination in Vegetables Grown in Urban
and Metal Smelter Contaminated Sites in Australia. Water, Air and Soil
Pollution, 169(1-4), 101-123. Retrieved from ProQuest database.
[74] Parliament of Australia. Radioactive waste management . Retrieved from https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook45p/RadioactiveWaste
[75] Australia Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. (2008) Dumping waste at sea. Retrieved from https://www.environment.gov.au/marine/publications/factsheet-dumping-wastes-sea
[76] Pickin, J., & Donovan, S. (2020, April). Exports of Australian waste-derived products and wastes in January 2020.https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/b8e1d4ad-e619-40e5-a4b7-ef0010d554df/files/waste-export-summary-january-2020.pdf
[77] Australia Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. Waste Export Ban. Retrieved from https://www.environment.gov.au/protection/waste-resource-recovery/waste-export-ban
[78] Australia Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. National Waste Policy. Retrieved from https://www.environment.gov.au/protection/waste-resource-recovery/national-waste-policy
[79] Australia Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. Australian Packaging Covenant. Retrieved from https://www.environment.gov.au/protection/waste-resource-recovery/plastics-and-packaging/packaging-covenant
[80] Australia Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. (November 2019) Bioenergy from wood waste. Retrieved from https://www.agriculture.gov.au/forestry/industries/bioenergy-from-wood-waste
