Comparative Analysis and Future Perspectives

Understanding how and which are the frontiers of the systems analysis is essential to select appropriate systems engineering models and assessment tools capable of achieving the management goals of SWM. The models and assessment tools shown so far have been used for analyzing a variety of SWM systems all over the world. They can be applied by considering the type of waste, time, spatial coverage, and aspects from technical, environmental, ecological, energy, economic, and social viewpoints. To broaden the SWM context, in several cases, the coverage was extended to other types of municipal waste, like sewage sludge (in case of ORWARE sustainable assessment model) and industrial waste (MIMES/WASTE model). Some models may focus on specific waste streams, such as packaging waste (CBA, SM), WEEE and specific WEEE, such as TV and refrigerators (FM, SoEA), and waste materials like paper waste (LCA, SA), plastic waste (MFA, SM), hazardous household waste (SD), and organic waste (SD, SA). Overall, the trend analysis clearly indicates that emphasis has been placed upon the systems engineering models to system assessment tools during the 1990s. However, during the 2000s, system assessment tools have gained prominence, mainly due to LCA and SA models. Fig. 2.2 and Fig. 2.3 confirm this observation. Both chorological summaries reveal a fast growth of the applications of those systems engineering models and system assessment tools in late 1990s and early 2000s.

0 10 20 30 40 50

1970s and before 1980s 1990s After 2000

Number of articles

CBA FM SM OM IMS

Fig. 2.2 Trends in the number of publications concerning systems engineering models in the past four decades

70

Varying temporal scales addressed by different models or tools result in significant traits across differing applications. MFA used to be applied to reflect environmental effects from one year to 1,000 years. A similar application was carried out using SA models from 20 years to 500 years period. Yet, handling the shorter time frame of 1 to 15 or 20 years can be seen in most forecasting models of solid waste generation. There are some cases in which the time scales are ignored completely, like EIA and MIS.

0 10 20 30

1970s and before 1980s 1990s After 2000

Number of articles

MIS/DSS/ES SD MFA LCA RA EIA SEA SoEA SA

Fig. 2.3 Trends in the number of publications concerning systems assessment tools in the past four decades

In RA, however, the time scales are fully dependent on the type of risk to be assessed. On the other hand, spatial scales are considered in a more homogenous way among the developed models presented. Local scales referring to municipalities and districts, regional scales referring to metropolitan complexes, and national and international scale can be used solely for policy analysis in differing models. IMS, MFA, SD and SEA are models or tools without considering local scale due to different features. An MFA has, at least, a regional scale;

otherwise, it would not be able to cover all the elements needed for the assessment in the regional SWM system. MFA models were even applied at the international level for scenario development. LCA models may deal with environmental impacts based on differing scales from global to regional. These environmental impacts are related to global warming, euthrophication, acidification, climate change, tropospheric ozone, and ecological toxicity.

SEA models may also consider new elements like production of residue and use of space. Yet all of the system assessment tools stand alone as a single tool to tackle a particular type of issue that could be useful with reference to a specific policy and decision-making.

71

From a socioeconomic point of view, many CBA, SM, OM and IMS have considered capital and operational costs and associated benefits. Forecasting models may include some socio-economic factors, such as household family size, occupation, education level, employment level, and average income features associated with population. The social aspects considered are the most heterogeneous one at least in dealing with the sustainability issue. To be specific, the intergeneration externalities are very difficult to address by a general CBA framework. It might be implicitly considered through the public participation, such as EIA, SEA and MCDM. Human health effects, which could be also considered as an environmental aspect, can be considered by LCA, MFA and RA. Overall, the publication statistics across systems engineering models and system assessment tools can be summarized chronologically by Figures 1 and 2 below. The summary reveals that more systems assessment tools appeared in the last decade whereas most systems engineering models were developed in 1990s.

Many models developed in 1990s have severe drawbacks as pointed out by Morrissey and Browne (2004). These include: 1) Most models considered economic and environmental aspects, but very few of them considered social aspects. For a SWM to be sustainable, it needs to be environmentally effective, economically affordable and socially acceptable. Yet almost none of the models being developed before the year 2000 considered the intergenerational effects. 2) None of them considered the complete waste management cycle, from the prevention of waste through to final disposal. Most were only concerned with refining the actual MCDM technique itself or to compare the environmental aspects among waste management options (recycling, incineration, and disposal). 3) Another identified weakness of the previous models before the year 2000 is that no model considers the involvement of all relevant stakeholders, including the government agencies, the local communities, the industrial experts, waste generators, and the formal and informal sector service providers.

Shmelev and Powell (2006) also reviewed these previous waste management models and concluded that most models do not have a holistic view over the SWM system, they tend to focus on a single problem and they are not very useful to decision makers. What is missing in a sound modeling technique for solving regional SWM problems is an all-inclusive approach, which inevitably has a large number of possible solutions. Consequently, these drawbacks could limit the power of systems analysis, and new driving forces appeared to be necessary within the 21^st century. These influences led to the consideration of climate change effects, energy crisis, and the scarcity of resources as new waste management targets imposed on nations, complying with more demanding environmental regulations and emphasis on green technology, all of which may be needed in future SWM planning. Gaps in knowledge as to

72

how to make the true system integration and system synthesis between system engineering models and system assessment tools are obvious. With such an assessment of research needs, it is expected that sound system integration and system synthesis with an all-inclusive approach will be carried out in the next decade.

2.7 CONCLUSIONS

The development of systems analysis models or tools for SWM systems over the last few decades was fully reviewed in this paper. Fourteen main categories of models and tools were clearly classified and discussed, including CBA, FM, SM, OM, IMS, MIS/DSS/ES, SD, MFA, LCA, RA, EIA, SEA, SoEA and SA. Overall, the system engineering models and tools developed in the early stages are SM, OM, FM, and CBA, followed by IMS, where market-based instruments and regulatory requirements were gradually considered in the decision making. With the later emphasis on the concept of sustainability later, these tools, such as MFA, LCA, RA, SD, SEA, SoEA and EIA with the specific applications of MIS/DSS/ES, collectively or separately, promote the sustainable planning and management of SWM.

Nevertheless, the models or tools described have individual limitations and none of them has considered the complete vision of the whole waste management cycle, from prevention of waste through to final disposal, except the LCA. While improving these decision-making techniques, we suffer from being time and data consuming with respect to a varying boundaries set for different models and/or tools at differing technical, environmental, economic and social aspects. Ideal solution procedures normally yield a balance between simplifications of the analysis and the soundness of capturing the essential features resulting in additional complications in systems analysis for SWM. Future systems analysis requires conducting interdisciplinary and policy-relevant research relating to SWM systems, with the emphasis on enhancing the sustainability of systems challenged by rapid changes of societal environment and/or extreme events of global climate change. IMS will be applied on different scales in combination with different assessment tools, such as LCA, more often. Gaps in knowledge as to how to create true system integration and system synthesis between system engineering models and system assessment tools are obvious. With such an assessment of research needs, it is expected that sound system integration and system synthesis with an all-inclusive approach will succeed in the next decade. All of the efforts will certainly allow risk-informed, forward-looking, cost-effective, and environmentally benign decision making to be developed.

73 2.8 REFERENCES

Abu-Qdais, H., Hamoda, M. F., and Newham, J. 1997. Analysis of residential waste at generation sites. Waste Management and Research, 15(4), 395-406.

ADEME. 2008. Déchets – Financement du service public d‘élimination des déchets. Agence de l‘Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l‘Energie. Available at:

http://www2.ademe.fr/ servlet/KbaseShow?sort=-1&cid=96&m=3&catid=17432.

Accessed December 12, 2008.

AEA Technology. 1998. Computer-based models in integrated environmental assessment – Technical report 14. European Environmental Agency.

Alcamo, J., and Kreileman, G. 1996. Emission scenarios and global climate change protection. Global Environmental Change, 6(4), 305-334.

Alcamo, J., Henrichs, T., and Rösch, T. 2000. World water in 2025 – global modelling scenarios for the World Commission on Water for the 21^st century. Report A0002, Centre for Environmental Systems Research, University of Kassel. Kassel, Germany.

Alcamo, J., Kreileman, G.J.J., Bollen, J.C., van der Born, G.J., Gerlagh, R., Krol, M.S., Toet, A.M.C., and de Vries, H.J.M. 1996. Baseline scenarios of global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 6(4), 261-303.

Alidi, A. 1998. A goal programming model for an integrated solid waste management system.

Arabian Journal of Science and Engineering, 23(1B), 3-16.

Anderson, L.E., and A.K. Nigam, A.K. 1967. A mathematical model for the optimization of a waste management system, ORC 67–25, Operations Research Center, University of California at Berkeley.

Anderson, L. 1968. A mathematical model for the optimization of a waste management system. SERL Report. Sanitary Engineering Research Laboratory, University of California at Berkeley.

Anex, R., Lawver, R., Lund, J., and Tchobanoglous, G. 1996. GIGO: spreadsheet-based simulation for MSW systems. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 122(4), 259-262.

Bach, H., Mild, A., Natter, M., and Weber, A. 2004. Combining socio-demographic and logistic factors to explain the generation and collection of waste paper. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 41(1), 65–73.

Badran, M.F., and El-Haggar, S.M. 2006. Optimization of municipal solid waste management in Port Said – Egypt, Waste Management, 26(5), 534-545.

Baetz, B. 1990. Optimization/simulation modeling for waste management capacity planning.

Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 116(2), 59-79.

Baetz, B., Pas, E., and Neebe, A. 1989. Trash management: sizing and timing decisions for incineration and landfill facilities. Interfaces, 19(6), 52-61.

Banar, M., Cokaygil, Z., and Ozkan, A. 2009. Life cycle assessment of solid waste management options for Eskisehir, Turkey. Waste Management, 29(1), 54-62.

Batool, S.A., and Ch, M.N. 2009. Municipal solid waste management in Lahore city district, Pakistan. Waste Management, 29(6), 1971-1981.

Batool, S.A., and Chuadhry, M.N. 2009. The impact of municipal solid waste treatment methods on greenhouse gas emissions in Lahore, Pakistan. Waste Management, 29(1), 63-69.

Bhargava, H.K. and Tettelbach, C. 1997. A web-based decision support system for waste disposal and recycling. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 21(1), 47-65.

Barker, A., and Wood, C. 1999. An evaluation of EIA system performance in eight EU countries. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 19(4), 387-404.

Barlishen, K. and Baetz, B. 1996. Development of a decision support system for municipal solid waste management systems planning. Waste Management and Research, 14(1), 71-86.

74

Basri, H., and Stentiford, E. 1995. Expert systems in solid waste management. Waste Management and Research, 13(1), 67-89.

Baumann, H., Ekvall, T., Eriksson, E., Kullman, M., Rydberg, T., Ryding, S.-O., Steen, B., and Svensson, G. 1993. Miljömässiga skillnader mellan återvinning/återanvändning och förbränning/deponering (Environmental differences between recycling/reuse and incineration/landfill). FoU No 79, Stiftelsen Reforsk, Malmö, Sweden (in Swedish).

Becker, C., Hegemann, M., Morstadt, S., and Striegel, K.-H. 2007. Automatic reporting based on a central data base in North Rhine-Westphalia/Germany – first step: the digital waste disposal atlas. Proceedings Sardinia 2007, Eleventh International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium. CISA, Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre, S. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy.

Beigl, P., Gamarra, P., and Linzner, R. 2005. Waste forecasts without ‗rule of thumb‘:

improving decision support for waste generation estimations. Proceedings Sardinia 2005, Tenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium. CISA, Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre, S. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy.

Beigl, P., Lebersorger, S., and Salhofer, S. 2008. Modelling municipal solid waste generation:

a review. Waste Management, 28(1), 200-214.

Beigl, P., and Salhofer, S. 2009. Comparison of ecological effects and costs of communal waste management systems. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 41(2), 83-102.

Belfiore, F., Toma, A., D‘Aprile, L., Marella, G., Musmeci, L., and Beccaloni, E. 2005. A national framework for risk assessment of landfills. Proceedings Sardinia 2005, Tenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium. CISA, Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre, S. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy.

Belgiorno, V., de Feo, G., della Rocca, C., and Napoli, R. 2003. Risk assessment of solid waste landfill. Proceedings Sardinia 2003, Ninth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium. CISA, Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre, S.

Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy.

Benítez, S., Lozano-Olvera, G., Morelos, R., and de Vega, C. 2008. Mathematical modeling to predict residential solid waste generation. Waste Management, 28(S1), S7-S13.

Berger, C., Savard, G., and Wizere, A. 1999. EUGENE: an optimization model for integrated regional solid waste management planning. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, 12(2/3), 280-307.

Bergsdal, H., Stromman, A., and Hertwich, E. 2005. Environmental Assessment of Two Waste Incineration Strategies for Central Norway. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 10(4), 263-272.

Bhargava, H., and Tettelbach, C. 1997. A web-based decision support system for waste disposal and recycling. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 21(1), 47-65.

Bhat, V. 1996. A model for the optimal allocation of trucks for solid waste management.

Waste Management and Research, 14(1), 87-96.

Birge, J., and Louveaux, F. 1997. Introduction to Stochastic Programming. Springer. NY.

Birge, J., and Louvenaux, F. 1988. A multicut algorithm for two-stage stochastic linear programs. European Journal of Operational Research, 34(3), 384-392.

Björklund, A., and Finnveden, G. 2007. Life cycle assessment of a national policy proposal – The case of a Swedish waste incineration tax. Waste Management, 27(8), 1046-1058.

Björklund, A., Bjuggren, C., Dalemo, M., and Sonesson, U. 2000. Planning Biodegradable Waste Management in Stockholm. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 3(4), 43-58.

Björklund, A., Dalemo, M., and Sonesson, U. 1999. Evaluating a municipal waste management plan using ORWARE. Journal of Cleaner Production, 7(4), 271-280.

Boardman, A., Greenberg, D., Vining, A., and Weimer, D. 2001. Cost-Benefit Analysis.

Concepts and Practice. Prentice Hall, Inc. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

Bodner, R., Cassell, A., and Andros, P. 1970. Optimal routing of refuse collection vehicles.

Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division, 96(SA4), 893-903.

75

Boelens, J., and Olsthoorn, A.A. 1998. Software for Material Flow Analysis. In: P. Vellinga, F. Berkhout and J. Gupta: Sustainable sustainability. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 115-130.

Börjeson, L., Höjer, M., Dreborg, K.-H., Ekvall, T., and Finnveden, G. 2006. Scenario types and techniques: towards a user‘s guide. Futures, 38(7), 723-739.

Bote, T., Nilausen, L., Kjeldsen, P., Andersen, K., and Andersen, L. 2003. Danish guidelines for investigation and risk assessment of gas producing landfills. Proceedings Sardinia 2003, Ninth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, CISA, Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre, S. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy.

Bovea, M., and Powell, J. 2006. Alternative scenarios to meet the demands of sustainable waste management. Journal of Environmental Management, 79(2), 115-132.

Bovea, M.D., Powell, J.C., Gallardo, A., and Capuz-Rizo, S.F. 2007. The role played by environmental factors in the integration of a transfer station in a municipal solid waste management system. Waste Management, 27(4), 545-553.

Boyle, C. 1995. Integrated waste management: A knowledge-based decision support system prototype for developed and developing countries. ETD Collection for McMaster University.

Brisson, I. 1997. Assessing the waste hierarchy – a social cost-benefit analysis of municipal solid waste management in European Union. AKF – Danish Institute of Governmental Research. Available at: http://www.akf.dk/udgivelser_en/container/2005/

udgivelse_157/. Accessed November 11, 2008.

Brodie, G., and Waters, C. 1988. Integer linear programming formulation for vehicle routing problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 34(3), 403-404.

Brunner and Rechberger. 2003. Practical Handbook of Material Flow Analysis. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA.

Bruvoll, A. 1998. The costs of alternative policies for paper and plastic waste. Statistical Central Office (Statistisk sentralbyrå), Oslo.

BSC. 1990. About the by-product exchange. The Catalan by-product exchange (Borsa de Subproductes de Catalunya – BSC). Available at: http://www.subproductes.com/p-02a.htm. Accessed December 10, 2008.

Burelle, J. and Monterrat, C. 1985. Mechanization of the collection of household refuse and data processing follow-up in the City of Paris. Waste Management and Research, 3(2), 119-126.

Buttol, P., Masoni, P., Bonoli, A., Goldoni, S., Belladonna, V., and Cavazzuti, C. 2007. LCA of integrated MSW management systems: Case study of the Bologna District. Waste Management, 27(8), 1059-1070.

Cai, Y.P., Huang, G.H., Lu, H.W., Yang, Z.F., and Tan, Q. 2009. I-VFRP: An interval-valued fuzzy robust programming approach for municipal waste-management planning under uncertainty. Engineering Optimization, 41(5), 399-418.

Calabrese, E. J. and Kenyon, E. M. 1991. Air Toxics and Risk Assessment. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, USA.

Cangialosi, F., Intini, G. L., Notarnicola, M., and Stellacci, P. 2008. Health risk assessment of air emissions from a municipal solid waste incineration plant – A case study. Waste Management, 28(5), 885-895.

Caruso, A., Colorni, A., and Paruccini, M. 1993. The regional urban solid waste management system: a modelling approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 70(1), 16-30.

Chanchampee, P., and Rotter, S. 2007. Material flow analysis as a decision support tool for waste management in growing economies. Proceedings Sardinia 2007, Eleventh International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium. CISA, Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre, S. Marguerita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy.

Chang, N.-B., 2008. Economic and policy instrument analyses in support of the scrap tires recycling program in Taiwan. Journal of Environmental Management, 86(3), 435-450.

76

Chang, N.-B. 1989. Solid waste management system planning with environmental quality constraints. MSc Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.

Chang, N.-B., Chang, Y.-H., and Chen, H.-W. 2009. Fair fund distribution for a municipal incinerator using GIS-based fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(1), 441-454.

Chang, Y. C., Chang, N.-B., and Ma, G. D., 2001. Internet web-based information system for handling scrap vehicles disposal in Taiwan. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 6(4), 237-248.

Chang, N.-B. and Chang, Y. H. 2001. Optimal shipping strategy of solid waste streams with respect to throughput and energy recovery goals of incineration facilities. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 18(3), 193-214.

Chang, Y., and Chang, N.-B. 1998a. Optimization analysis for the development of short-term solid waste management strategies using presorting process prior to incinerators.

Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 24(1), 7-32.

Chang, N.-B., Chang, Y.-H., and Chen, Y. 1997b. Cost-effective and equitable workload operation in solid-waste management systems. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 123(2), 178-190.

Chang, N.-B., Chen, Y., and Wang, S. 1997a. A fuzzy interval multiobjective mixed integer programming approach for the optimal planning of solid waste management systems.

Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 89(1), 35-60.

Chang, N.-B. and Davila, E., 2008. Municipal solid waste characterization and management strategy for the Lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas. Waste Management, 28(5), 776-794.

Chang, N.-B., and Davila, E. 2007. Minimax regret optimization analysis for a regional solid waste management system. Waste Management, 27(8), 820-832.

Chang, N.-B., and Davila, E. 2006. Siting and routing assessment for solid waste management under uncertainty using the grey mini-max regret criterion. Environmental Management, 38 (4), 654-672.

Chang, N.-B., Davila, E., Dyson, B., and Brown, R. 2005. Optimal design for sustainable development of a material recovery facility in a fast-growing urban setting. Waste Management, 25(8), 833-846.

Chang, S.-Y., and Li, Z. 1997. Use of a computer model to generate solid waste disposal alternatives. Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management, 24(1), 9-18.

Chang, N.-B., and Lin, Y. 1997a. Optimal siting of transfer station locations in a metropolitan solid waste management system. Journal Environmental Science and Health, A32, (8), 2379-2401.

Chang, N.-B., and Lin, Y. 1997b. Economic evaluation of a regionalization program for solid waste management in a metropolitan region. Journal of Environmental Management, 51(3), 241-274.

Chang, N.-B., and Lin, Y.-T. 1997c. An analysis of recycling impacts on solid waste generation by time series intervention modeling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 19(3), 165-186.

Chang, N.-B., Lu, H., and Wei, Y. 1997c. GIS technology for vehicle routing and scheduling in solid waste collection systems. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 123(9), 901-910.

Chang, N.-B. and Lu, H. Y., 1997. A new approach for long term planning of solid waste management systems using fuzzy global criterion. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, A32(4), 1025-1047.

Chang, N.-B., Pan, Y., and and Huang, S. 1993b. Time series forecasting of solid waste generation. Journal of Resource Management and Technology, 21(1), 1-10.

Chang, N.-B., Parvathinathan, G., and Breeden, J. 2008. Combining GIS with fuzzy multicriteria decision-making for landfill siting in a fast-growing urban region.

Journal of Environmental Management, 87(1), 139-153.

77

Chang, N.-B., Schuler, R. E., and Shoemaker, C. A. 1993a. Environmental and economic optimization of an integrated solid waste management system. Journal of Resource Management and Technology, 21(2), 87-100.

Chang, N.-B., Schuler, R. E., and Shoemaker, C. A. 1993a. Environmental and economic optimization of an integrated solid waste management system. Journal of Resource Management and Technology, 21(2), 87-100.

In document Municipal solid waste management system: decision support through systems analysis (Page 93-119)